Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Experimentation
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-06

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (tsvwg WG)
Last updated 2017-09-28 (latest revision 2017-09-20)
Replaces draft-black-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Reviews SECDIR will not review this version
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication (wg milestone: Jun 2017 - Submit ‘Explicit Con... )
Document shepherd Gorry Fairhurst
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-07-04)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Has a DISCUSS. Has enough positions to pass once DISCUSS positions are resolved.
Responsible AD Spencer Dawkins
Send notices to "Gorry Fairhurst" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - Actions Needed
IANA action state None
Transport Area Working Group                                    D. Black
Internet-Draft                                                  Dell EMC
Updates: 3168, 4341, 4342, 5622, 6679                 September 20, 2017
         (if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: March 24, 2018

         Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Experimentation
                draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-06

Abstract

   This memo updates RFC 3168, which specifies Explicit Congestion
   Notification (ECN) as a replacement for packet drops as indicators of
   network congestion.  It relaxes restrictions in RFC 3168 that would
   otherwise hinder experimentation towards benefits beyond just removal
   of loss.  This memo summarizes the anticipated areas of
   experimentation and updates RFC 3168 to enable experimentation in
   these areas.  An Experimental RFC is required to take advantage of
   any of these enabling updates.  In addition, this memo makes related
   updates to the ECN specifications for RTP in RFC 6679 and for DCCP in
   RFC 4341, RFC 4342 and RFC 5622.  This memo also records the
   conclusion of the ECN nonce experiment in RFC 3540, and provides the
   rationale for reclassification of RFC 3540 as Historic; this
   reclassification enables new experimental use of the ECT(1)
   codepoint.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on March 24, 2018.

Black                    Expires March 24, 2018                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             ECN Experimentation            September 2017

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  ECN Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Proposed ECN Experiments: Background  . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  ECN Nonce and RFC 3540  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Updates to RFC 3168 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Congestion Response Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Congestion Marking Differences  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  TCP Control Packets and Retransmissions . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.4.  Effective Congestion Control is Required  . . . . . . . .  11
   5.  ECN for RTP Updates to RFC 6679 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   6.  ECN for DCCP Updates to RFCs 4341, 4342 and 5622  . . . . . .  13
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
Show full document text