Quick Failover Algorithm in SCTP
draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-failover-02

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (tsvwg WG)
Authors Yoshifumi Nishida  , Preethi Natarajan  , Armando Caro  , Paul Amer 
Last updated 2013-10-21
Replaces draft-nishida-tsvwg-sctp-failover
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Experimental
Formats pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd None
IESG IESG state AD is watching
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD Martin Stiemerling
Send notices to tsvwg-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-failover@tools.ietf.org
Network Working Group                                         Y. Nishida
Internet-Draft                                        GE Global Research
Intended status: Experimental                               P. Natarajan
Expires: April 24, 2014                                    Cisco Systems
                                                                 A. Caro
                                                        BBN Technologies
                                                                 P. Amer
                                                  University of Delaware
                                                        October 21, 2013

                    Quick Failover Algorithm in SCTP
                   draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-failover-02

Abstract

   One of the major advantages in SCTP is supporting multi-homing
   communication.  If a multi-homed end-point has redundant network
   connections, SCTP sessions can have a good chance to survive from
   network failures by migrating inactive network to active one.
   However, if we follow the SCTP standard, there can be significant
   delay for the network migration.  During this migration period, SCTP
   cannot transmit much data to the destination.  This issue drastically
   impairs the usability of SCTP in some situations.  This memo
   describes the issue of SCTP failover mechanism and discuss its
   solutions which require minimal modification to the current standard.

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 http://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 April 24, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Nishida, et al.          Expires April 24, 2014                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             SCTP Quick Failover              October 2013

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions and Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Issue in SCTP Path Management Process  . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Existing Solutions for Smooth Failover . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.1.  Reduce Path.Max.Retrans  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.2.  Adjust RTO related parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Proposed Solution: SCTP with Potentially-Failed
       Destination State (SCTP-PF)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.1.  SCTP-PF Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.2.  Effect of Path Bouncing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.3.  Permanent Failover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.4.  Handling of Association Error Counter  . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  Socket API Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     6.1.  Peer Address Thresholds (SCTP_PEER_ADDR_THLDS) socket
           option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   7.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   8.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     9.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Nishida, et al.          Expires April 24, 2014                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             SCTP Quick Failover              October 2013

1.  Introduction

   The Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) [RFC4960] natively
   supports multihoming at the transport layer -- an SCTP association
   can bind to multiple IP addresses at each endpoint.  SCTP's
   multihoming features include failure detection and failover
Show full document text