TCP Encapsulation Considerations
draft-pauly-tsvwg-tcp-encapsulation-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-07-02
Replaces draft-pauly-tcp-encapsulation
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html 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)
Network Working Group                                           T. Pauly
Internet-Draft                                                E. Kinnear
Intended status: Informational                                Apple Inc.
Expires: January 3, 2019                                   July 02, 2018

                    TCP Encapsulation Considerations
                 draft-pauly-tsvwg-tcp-encapsulation-00

Abstract

   Network protocols other than TCP, such as UDP, are often blocked or
   suboptimally handled by network middleboxes.  One strategy that
   applications can use to continue to send non-TCP traffic on such
   networks is to encapsulate datagrams or messages within in a TCP
   stream.  However, encapsulating datagrams within TCP streams can lead
   to performance degradation.  This document provides guidelines for
   how to use TCP for encapsulation, a summary of performance concerns,
   and some suggested mitigations for these concerns.

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 January 3, 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
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must

Pauly & Kinnear          Expires January 3, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft              TCP Encapsulation                  July 2018

   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.  Motivations for Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  UDP Blocking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  UDP NAT Timeouts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Encapsulation Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Multiplexing Flows  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Performance Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.1.  Loss Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       5.1.1.  Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       5.1.2.  Mitigation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.2.  Bufferbloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       5.2.1.  Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       5.2.2.  Mitigation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.3.  Head of Line Blocking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       5.3.1.  Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       5.3.2.  Mitigation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   TCP streams are sometimes used as a mechanism for encapsulating
   datagrams or messages, which is referred to in this document as "TCP
   encapsulation".  Encapsulation may be used to transmit data over
   networks that block or suboptimally handle non-TCP traffic.  The
   current motivations for using encapsulation generally revolve around
   the treatment of UDP packets (Section 2).

   Implementing a TCP encapsulation strategy consists of mapping
   datagram messages into a stream protocol, often with a length-value
   record format (Section 3).  While these formats are described here as
   applying to encapsulating datagrams in a TCP stream, the formats are
   equally suited to encapsulating datagrams within any stream
   abstraction.  For example, the same format may be used for both raw
   TCP streams and TLS streams running over TCP.

Pauly & Kinnear          Expires January 3, 2019                [Page 2]
Show full document text