Skip to main content

SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements
draft-joras-sconepro-video-opt-requirements-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Matt Joras , Anoop Tomar , Abhishek Tiwari , Alan Frindell
Last updated 2024-05-21 (Latest revision 2024-05-17)
Replaces draft-joras-sadcdn-video-optimization-requirements
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-joras-sconepro-video-opt-requirements-00
Network Working Group                                           M. Joras
Internet-Draft                                                  A. Tomar
Intended status: Informational                                 A. Tiwari
Expires: 18 November 2024                                    A. Frindell
                                                    Meta Platforms, Inc.
                                                             17 May 2024

                SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements
             draft-joras-sconepro-video-opt-requirements-00

Abstract

   These are the requirements for the "Video Optimization" use-case for
   the SCONEPRO topic, which broadly speaking seeks to optimize video
   playback experience in mobile networks by cooperative communication
   between video content providers and the providers of network services
   to end users.

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 18 November 2024.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

   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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Video Optimization Use Case - Primary requirements  . . . . .   4
     2.1.  In-band cryptographic key establishment w/ standard
            crypto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Encryption and integrity protected  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  In-band key exchange  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.4.  Client-initiated  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.5.  Low frequency information/data exchange . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.6.  Data/Information flows from CSP mobile network to
            client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.7.  Scalable for potentially every video flow in a mobile
            network  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.8.  Works with QUIC and HTTP/3  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.9.  Network device in CSP mobile network: 4G/5G packet
            core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.10. Scalable solution for 4G and 5G mobile packet core from
            performance standpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Secondary requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Non-requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Information element requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   Video traffic is already 70% of all traffic on the Internet and is
   expected to grow to 80% by 2028.  New formats like short form videos
   have seen tremendous growth in recent years.  Both in developed and
   emerging markets video traffic forms 50-80% of traffic on mobile
   networks.  These growth trends are likely to increase with new
   populations coming online on mobile-first markets and the observation
   that unlike text content, video content consumption is not being
   limited by literacy barriers.  On the other hand, the electromagnetic
   spectrum is a limited resource.  In order to ensure that mobile
   networks continue functioning in a healthy state despite this
   incredible growth, communication service providers (CSPs) will be

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

   required to make infrastructure investments such as more licensed
   spectrum, cell densification, massive MIMO etc.  In order to flatten
   the rate of growth, CSPs in several markets attempt to identify and
   shape video traffic based on user data plans.  There are several
   problems with this kind of shaping:

   1.  Traffic detection and shaping for every flow is compute intensive
       for CSPs.  With distributed UPF (user plane function) in 5G
       mobile networks more nodes in CSP network may need to support
       traffic detection and shaping.

   2.  User mobility during the ongoing session, mainly with distributed
       UPF (user plane function) in 5G mobile networks may result in
       shpaing inaccuracies.

   3.  Traffic detection can have inaccuracies and these inaccuracies
       are expected to increase as the content delivery industry moves
       towards end-2-end encryption like TLS 1.3 and encrypted client
       hello (ECH).

   4.  The unpredictable behavior of traffic shapers used by CSPs
       confuse the bandwidth estimation and congestion control protocols
       being used within end-2-end video delivery sessions between
       content server and client.  This results in poor quality of
       experience (QoE) for the end user.

   5.  Content and Application Providers (CAPs) are designing algorithms
       to detect the presence of such traffic shapers to counter their
       detrimental effects.  These algorithms have their own
       inaccuracies in detection and add compute resources on the CAP
       side.

   A secure in-band data sharing interface between CSPs and CAPs can
   enable the CSPs to specify video traffic characteristics (that are
   suited to their radio access networks) to the CAPs.  CAPs can use
   this information to self-adapt their video traffic to conform to the
   specified characteristics.  Self Adaptation and Self limitation is a
   better alternative because CAPs have full context and ability to
   measure user QoE, which CSPs do not.  This approach has the potential
   to help CSPs manage the traffic on their cellular networks without
   incurring the cost and compute associated traffic detection and
   traffic shaping while making sure that end user QoE is not
   compromised which is win-win for both CSPs and CAPs.

   What follows are the primary, secondary, and non-requirements of a
   technical solution to this problem on the modern Internet.

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

2.  Video Optimization Use Case - Primary requirements

2.1.  In-band cryptographic key establishment w/ standard crypto

   A core requirement is encryption of the data being exchanged between
   the client endpoint and CSP network device endpoint.  In order to
   achieve this there needs to be a way to have a shared key.  This must
   be done with an in-band mechanism, since out-of-band mechanisms for
   key exchange are not scalable given the fanout of content providers
   to CSPs.

2.2.  Encryption and integrity protected

   A core requirement is the encryption and integrity protection of the
   data exchanged between the client and CSP network device endpoints.
   This is crucial to ensure the information cannot be passively
   observed or modified.  Further this encryption must be done with
   standard ciphers.

2.3.  In-band key exchange

   In order for encryption to be viable, the client and CSP network
   device endpoints must have a way to establish a shared key.  This
   mechanism must be done in-band with the network video flow, e.g. via
   a TLS handshake, so as to avoid the scalability and security problems
   of sharing keys via an out-of-band mechanism.

2.4.  Client-initiated

   What is minimally needed is a way for the client to establish a
   communication channel with a CSP network device, exchange the
   information, and then use that information to inform its video
   playback decisions.  This also allows for a client device to be aware
   that the exchange is happening (at least on initiation).

2.5.  Low frequency information/data exchange

   Video optimization requires a CSP network device to send the allowed
   data rate for a specific connection to the client endpoint during
   connection setup time and whenever there is a change in video policy
   for the subscriber.  Change in video policy configuration for a
   particular subscriber is typically triggered when the subscriber has
   exhausted its monthly or daily allowed data volume usage limit, i.e.
   at low frequency.

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

2.6.  Data/Information flows from CSP mobile network to client

   There are following two options w.r.t data flow direction to support
   video optimization use-case. 1.  From CSP mobile network to client
   endpoint 2.  From CSP mobile network to CAP server endpoint Both the
   options have pros and cons.  We are proposing option # i due to
   following reasons; 1.  Streaming video flows are predominantly
   downlink so information can be sent together with downlink packet.
   There is no need to wait for Uplink QUIC acknowledgements. 2.
   Communication between CSP mobile network to client endpoint happens
   over CSP infrastructure which is relatively more secure compared to
   infrastructure between CSP network device and CAPs’ server.

2.7.  Scalable for potentially every video flow in a mobile network

   This use case requires that potentially every video flow in a mobile
   network be able to utilize this feature.  Thus, it must be performant
   both for the network device and the mobile device utilizing it.

2.8.  Works with QUIC and HTTP/3

   HTTP/3 is being used widely as a delivery mechanism for video content
   by video content providers, and is a critical requirement to support.
   HTTP/3’s use of QUIC has convenient properties (notably in its use of
   UDP) that makes solutions in this space more convenient.

2.9.  Network device in CSP mobile network: 4G/5G packet core

   “Packet core user plane node” is the network device to share
   information with client endpoint.  These nodes are P-GW (PDN Gateway)
   and UPF(User Plane Function) for 4G and 5G mobile networks
   respectively.  The reasons behind the same are as follows; 1.  These
   nodes have access to subscriber policy via standard 3GPP interface to
   PCRF (Policy and Charging Rule Function).  2.  These nodes are co-
   located with PCEF (Policy and Charging Enforcement) which is supposed
   to enforce subscriber specific policy to data flows.  3.  Traffic
   detection function or DPI( Deep Packet Inspection) engine is
   integrated with these nodes to detect a specific flow/subscriber

2.10.  Scalable solution for 4G and 5G mobile packet core from
       performance standpoint

   To support video optimization use-case at scale, significant
   additional compute in the packet core should not be required.  This
   requirement has some dependency on following aforementioned
   requirements: 1.  As specified earlier in the document, due to low
   frequency information exchange requirement, there may not be a need
   for significant additional compute in the packet core to support this

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

   video optimization use-case’s requirements at scale. 2.  No need to
   support traffic shaping in the packet core.  This would also free up
   computational resources.

3.  Secondary requirements

   1.  Works with TCP video flows.

4.  Non-requirements

   1.  Non-HTTP video support.

   2.  Data flows from CSP mobile network device to CAP server

   3.  Fixed networks - Fixed network is out of scope at present, since
       most of the CSPs don’t do video flow shaping for fixed networks.
       If and when we include fixed networks in the scope, CSP network
       devices can be CMTS for Cable modem network or BNG for Fiber/DSL
       network.

5.  Information element requirements

   This section captures the requirements of information elements to be
   exchanged between CSP network device and client endpoint of the CAP
   application. 1.  The attributes of video data traffic specified in
   the information elements - shall be measurable by both CSPs and CAPs.
   2.  For a given video session the specification - shall ensure that
   CSP and CAP, albeit measuring independently, compute consistent
   attributes of the video data traffic. 3.  The attributes of video
   data profile - shall include an average or median video bit rate and
   a maximum video bitrate 4.  The information element - shall specify a
   methodology for computing median, maximum and average video bitrates
   including how to determine the time window for measuring these
   statistics

6.  Security Considerations

   This document has no security considerations.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

Authors' Addresses

   Matt Joras
   Meta Platforms, Inc.
   Email: matt.joras@gmail.com

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft  SCONEPRO Video Optimization Requirements        May 2024

   Anoop Tomar
   Meta Platforms, Inc.
   Email: anooptomar@meta.com

   Abhishek Tiwari
   Meta Platforms, Inc.
   Email: atiwari@meta.com

   Alan Frindell
   Meta Platforms, Inc.
   Email: afrind@meta.com

Joras, et al.           Expires 18 November 2024                [Page 7]