One Way Latency Considerations for MPTCP
draft-song-mptcp-owl-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-06-16
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)
MPTCP                                                         F. Song 
Internet Draft                                               H. Zhang 
Intended status: Informational            Beijing Jiaotong University 
Expires: December 14, 2018                                    H. Chan 
                                                               A. Wei 
                                                  Huawei Technologies 
                                                        June 16, 2018 
                                                                   
 
                                                                          
                 One Way Latency Considerations for MPTCP 
                        draft-song-mptcp-owl-04

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), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
   
   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/. 

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2018. 

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
   (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. Code Components extracted from this
   document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
   ection 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
   

        
 
 
 
Song, et al.            Expires June 16, 2018                  [Page 1] 
 


Internet-Draft      OWL Considerations for MPTCP             June 2018 
        

Abstract 

   This document discusses the use of One Way Latency (OWL) for    
   enhancing multipath TCP (MPTCP). Several use cases of OWL, such as    
   retransmission policy and crucial data scheduling are analyzed. Two    
   kinds of OWL measurement approaches are also provided and compared.    
   More explorations related with OWL will be helpful to the    
   performance of MPTCP. 

Table of Contents 

        
   1. Introduction ................................................ 2 
   2. Conventions and Terminology ................................. 3 
   3. Potential Usages of OWL in MPTCP ............................ 3 
      3.1. Crucial Data Scheduling ................................ 3 
      3.2. Congestion control ..................................... 5 
      3.3. Packet Retransmission .................................. 6 
      3.4. Bandwidth Estimation ................................... 7 
      3.5. Shared Bottleneck Detection ............................ 7 
   4. OWL Measurements in TCP ..................................... 7 
   5. Security Considerations ..................................... 8 
   6. IANA Considerations ......................................... 8 
   7. References .................................................. 8 
      7.1. Normative References ................................... 8 
      7.2. Informative References ................................. 8 

        
1. Introduction 

   The terminal hosts and intermediate devices on the Internet are 
   basically equipped with more and more physical network interfaces. 
   The importance of interfaces that had been widely used for packet 
   forwarding at the end hosts had been confirmed [RFC6419].
   Moreover, to aggregate more bandwidths, to decrease packet delay and 
   to provide better services, the increased capacity provided by the 
   multiple paths created by multiple interfaces is leveraged. Unlike 
   traditional TCP [RFC0793], many transport layer protocols, such as 
   MPTCP [RFC6182] [RFC6824] enable the end hosts to concurrently 
   transfer data on top of multiple paths to greatly increase the 
   overall throughput. 

   Congestion control and loss recovery mechanism commonly use round-
   trip time (RTT) for data transmission. Yet the key issue of data 
Show full document text