Path Aware Networking: Obstacles to Deployment (A Bestiary of Roads Not Taken)
draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-00
PANRG S. Dawkins, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Informational October 15, 2018
Expires: April 18, 2019
Path Aware Networking: Obstacles to Deployment (A Bestiary of Roads Not
Taken)
draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-00
Abstract
At the first meeting of the Path Aware Networking Research Group,
Oliver Bonaventure led a discussion of mostly-unsuccessful attempts
to exploit Path Awareness to achieve a variety of goals, for a
variety of reasons, over the past decade. At the end of that
discussion, the research group agreed to catalog and analyze these
ideas, in order to extract insights and lessons for path-aware
networking researchers.
This document contains that catalog and analysis.
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 April 18, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
Dawkins Expires April 18, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft What Not To Do October 2018
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. About this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. A Note for the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Architectural Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Summary of Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Template for Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Integrated Services (IntServ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.1. Reasons for Non-deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.2. Lessons Learned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Quick-Start TCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2.1. Reasons for Non-deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2.2. Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Triggers for Transport (TRIGTRAN) . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3.1. Reasons for Non-deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3.2. Lessons Learned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4. Shim6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.4.1. Reasons for Non-deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.4.2. Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.5. Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.5.1. Reasons for Non-deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.5.2. Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. Introduction
At IETF 99, the Path Aware Networking Research Group [PANRG] held its
first meeting [PANRG-99], and the first presentation in that session
was "A Decade of Path Awareness" [PATH-Decade]. At the end of this
discussion, two things were abundantly clear.
o The Internet community has accumulated considerable experience
with many Path Awareness ideas over a long period of time, and
o Although some Path Awareness ideas have been successfully deployed
(for example, Differentiated Services, or DiffServ [RFC2475]),
most of these ideas haven't seen widespread adoption. The reasons
for non-adoption are many, and are worthy of study.
Dawkins Expires April 18, 2019 [Page 2]
Show full document text