Transport Protocol Issues of In-Network Computing Systems
draft-kunze-coinrg-transport-issues-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Ike Kunze  , Klaus Wehrle 
Last updated 2020-09-08
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
COINRG                                                          I. Kunze
Internet-Draft                                                 K. Wehrle
Intended status: Informational                    RWTH Aachen University
Expires: March 12, 2021                               September 08, 2020

       Transport Protocol Issues of In-Network Computing Systems
                 draft-kunze-coinrg-transport-issues-02

Abstract

   Today's transport protocols offer a variety of functionality based on
   the notion that the network is to be treated as an unreliable
   communication medium.  Some, like TCP, establish a reliable
   connection on top of the unreliable network while others, like UDP,
   simply transmit datagrams without a connection and without guarantees
   into the network.  These fundamental differences in functionality
   have a significant impact on how COIN approaches can be designed and
   implemented.  Furthermore, traditional transport protocols are not
   designed for the multi-party communication principles that underlie
   many COIN approaches.  This document discusses selected
   characteristics of transport protocols which have to be adapted to
   support COIN functionality.

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 12, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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

Kunze & Wehrle           Expires March 12, 2021                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            COIN Transport Issues           September 2020

   (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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Flow granularity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  Advanced Transport Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.1.  Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     7.2.  Flow/Congestion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   10. Conclusion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   11. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   A fundamental design choice of the Internet is that the network
   should be kept as simple as possible while complexity in the form of
   processing should be located on end-hosts at the edges of the
   network.  This choice is reflected in the end-to-end principle which
   states that end-hosts directly address each other and perform all
   relevant computations while the network only delivers the packets
   without modifying them.  Transport protocols are consequently
   designed to facilitate the direct communication between end-hosts.

   In practice, the end-to-end principle is often violated by
   intransparent middleboxes which alter transmitted packets, e.g., by
   dropping or changing header fields.  Contrary to that, computing in
   the network (COIN) encourages explicit computations in the network
   which introduces an intertwined complexity as the computations on the
   end-hosts depend on the functionality deployed in the network.  It
   further challenges traditional end-to-end transport protocols as they
   are not designed to address in-network computation entities or to
   include more than two devices into a communication.  Some of these
Show full document text