Communication Units Granularity Considerations for Multi-Path Aware Transport Selection
draft-tiesel-taps-communitgrany-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-06-27
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml 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)
TAPS Working Group                                             P. Tiesel
Internet-Draft                                               T. Enghardt
Intended status: Informational            Berlin Institute of Technology
Expires: December 29, 2017                                 June 27, 2017

  Communication Units Granularity Considerations for Multi-Path Aware
                          Transport Selection
                   draft-tiesel-taps-communitgrany-00

Abstract

   This document provides an abstract framework to reason about the
   composition of multi-path aware systems in a protocol-independent
   fashion.  It discusses basic mechanisms that are used in multi-path
   systems and their applicability to different granularities of
   communication units.  This document is targeted as consideration
   basis for automation of destination, path and transport protocol
   selection within the transport layer.

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 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 29, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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

Tiesel & Enghardt       Expires December 29, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       Communication Units Granularity           June 2017

   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.  Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.1.  Communication Units vs. Layering  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Abstract Hierarchy of Communication Units . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Object  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Stream  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  Association, Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.4.  Association Set, Flow Set (Flow-Group)  . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Mechanisms Used in Multi-Path Systems . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Destination Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Path Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.3.  Chunking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.4.  Scheduling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.5.  Transport Protocol Stack Instance Selection . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Cost of Transport Option Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Involvement of On-Path Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Conventions and Definitions

   The words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", and
   "MAY" are used in this document.  It's not shouting; when these words
   are capitalized, they have a special meaning as defined in [RFC2119].

2.  Introduction

   Today's Internet architecture faces a communication endpoint with a
   set of choices, including choosing a transport protocol and picking
   an IP protocol version.  In many cases, e.g., when fetching data from
   a CDN, an endpoint has also the choice of which endpoint instance,
   [I-D.pauly-taps-guidelines] calls these instances "Derived Endpoint",
Show full document text