Tunneling Compressing and Multiplexing (TCM) Traffic Flows. Reference Model
draft-saldana-tsvwg-tcmtf-09

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2015-06-13
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf xml html
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Transport Area Working Group                                  J. Saldana
Internet-Draft                                    University of Zaragoza
Intended status: Best Current Practice                           D. Wing
Expires: December 14, 2015                                 Cisco Systems
                                                    J. Fernandez Navajas
                                                  University of Zaragoza
                                                              M. Perumal
                                                                Ericsson
                                                       F. Pascual Blanco
                                                          Telefonica I+D
                                                           June 12, 2015

 Tunneling Compressing and Multiplexing (TCM) Traffic Flows.  Reference
                                 Model
                      draft-saldana-tsvwg-tcmtf-09

Abstract

   Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing (TCM) is a method for
   improving the bandwidth utilization of network segments that carry
   multiple small-packet flows in parallel sharing a common path.  The
   method combines different protocols for header compression,
   multiplexing, and tunneling over a network path for the purpose of
   reducing the bandwidth.  The amount of packets per second can also be
   reduced.

   This document describes the TCM framework and the different options
   which can be used for each layer (header compression, multiplexing
   and tunneling).

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF 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 December 14, 2015.

Saldana, et al.         Expires December 14, 2015               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                     TCM                         June 2015

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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
   (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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Bandwidth efficiency of flows sending small packets . . .   3
       1.2.1.  Real-time applications using RTP  . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.2.2.  Real-time applications not using RTP  . . . . . . . .   4
       1.2.3.  Other applications generating small packets . . . . .   4
       1.2.4.  Optimization of small-packet flows  . . . . . . . . .   5
       1.2.5.  Energy consumption considerations . . . . . . . . . .   6
     1.3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     1.4.  Scenarios of application  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       1.4.1.  Multidomain scenario  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       1.4.2.  Single domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       1.4.3.  Private solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       1.4.4.  Mixed scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     1.5.  Potential beneficiaries of TCM optimization . . . . . . .  12
     1.6.  Current Standard for VoIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     1.7.  Current Proposal  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   2.  Protocol Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     2.1.  Models of implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     2.2.  Choice of the compressing protocol  . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       2.2.1.  Context Synchronization in ECRTP  . . . . . . . . . .  17
       2.2.2.  Context Synchronization in ROHC . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     2.3.  Multiplexing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     2.4.  Tunneling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       2.4.1.  Tunneling schemes over IP: L2TP and GRE . . . . . . .  19
       2.4.2.  MPLS tunneling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     2.5.  Encapsulation Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
Show full document text