Internet DRAFT - draft-bertz-dime-congestion-flow-attributes
draft-bertz-dime-congestion-flow-attributes
Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (DIME) B. Hirschman
Internet-Draft L. Bertz
Intended Status: Proposed Standard Sprint
Expires: August 11, 2014 February 2014
Diameter Congestion and Filter Attributes
draft-bertz-dime-congestion-flow-attributes-02.txt
Abstract
This document defines optional ECN and filter related attributes that
can be used for improved traffic identification, support of ECN and
minimized filter administration within Diameter.
RFC 5777 defines a Filter-Rule AVP that accommodates extensions for
classification, conditions and actions. It does not support traffic
identification for packets using Explicit Congestion Notification as
defined in RFC 3168 and does not provide specific actions when the
flow(s) described by the Filter-Rule are congested.
A Filter-Rule can describe multiple flows but not the exact number of
flows. Flow count and other associated data (e.g. packets) is not
captured in Accounting applications, leaving administrators without
useful information regarding the effectiveness or understanding of
the filter definition.
These optional attributes are forward and backwards compatible with
RFC 5777.
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 February 14, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
Copyright (c) 2013 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 Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. ECN-IP-Codepoint, Congestion-Treatment and Filter Attributes . 4
3.1. ECN-IP-Codepoint AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Congestion-Treatment AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Flow-Count AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Packet-Count AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. AVP Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
1. Introduction
Two optional Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) [RFC3168] related
AVPs are specified in the document. The first AVP provides direct
support for ECN [RFC3168] in the IP header and the second AVP
provides the ability to define alternate traffic treatment when
congestion is experienced.
This document also defines two optional AVPs, Flow-Count and Packet-
Count, used for conveying flow information within the Diameter
protocol [RFC6733]. These AVPs were found to be useful for a wide
range of applications. The AVPs provide a way to convey information
of the group of flows described by the Filter-Rule, IPFilterRule or
other Diameter traffic filters.
The semantics and encoding of all AVPs can be found in Section 3.
Such AVPs are, for example, needed by some ECN applications to
determine the number of flows congested or used by administrators to
determine the impact of filter definitions.
Additional parameters may be defined in future documents as the need
arises. All parameters are defined as Diameter-encoded Attribute
Value Pairs (AVPs), which are described using a modified version of
the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF), see [RFC6733]. The data types
are also taken from [RFC6733].
2. Terminology and Abbreviations
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119].
3. ECN-IP-Codepoint, Congestion-Treatment and Filter Attributes
3.1. ECN-IP-Codepoint AVP
The ECN-IP-Codepoint AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Enumerated and
specifies the Explicit Congestion Notification codepoint values to
match in the IP header.
Value | Binary | Keyword | References
-----------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 00 | Non-ECT (Not ECN-Capable Transport)| [RFC3168]
1 | 01 | ECT(1) (ECN-Capable Transport) | [RFC3168]
2 | 10 | ECT(0) (ECN-Capable Transport) | [RFC3168]
3 | 11 | CE (Congestion Experienced) | [RFC3168]
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
When this AVP is used for classification in the Filter-Rule it MUST
be part of Classifier Grouped AVP as defined in RFC5777.
3.2. Congestion-Treatment AVP
The Congestion-Treatment AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and
indicates how congested traffic, i.e., traffic that has Explicit
Congestion Notification Congestion Experienced marking set or some
other administratively defined criteria, is treated. In case the
Congestion-Treatment AVP is absent the treatment of the congested
traffic is left to the discretion of the node performing QoS
treatment.
Congestion-Treatment ::= < AVP Header: TBD >
{ Treatment-Action }
[ QoS-Profile-Template ]
[ QoS-Parameters ]
* [ AVP ]
Treatment-Action, QoS-Profile-Template and QoS-Parameters are defined
in [RFC5777]. The Congestion-Treatment AVP is an action and MUST be
an attribute of the Filter-Rule Grouped AVP as defined in RFC5777.
3.3. Flow-Count AVP
The Flow-Count AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned64.
It indicates the number of protocol specific flows. The protocol is
determined by the filter (e.g. IPFilterRule, Filter-Id, etc.).
3.4. Packet-Count AVP
The Packet-Count AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned64.
It indicates the number of protocol specific packets. The protocol
is determined by the filter (e.g. IPFilterRule, Filter-Id, etc.).
4. IANA Considerations
4.1. AVP Codes
IANA allocated AVP codes in the IANA-controlled namespace registry
specified in Section 11.1.1 of [RFC6733] for the following AVPs that
are defined in this document.
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| AVP Section |
|AVP Code Defined Data Type |
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
|ECN-IP-Codepoint TBD 3.1 Enumerated |
|Congestion-Treatment TBD 3.2 Grouped |
|Flow-Count TBD 3.3 Unsigned64 |
|Packet-Count TBD 3.4 Unsinged64 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
5. Security Considerations
The document does not raise any new security concerns. This document
describes an extension of RFC5777 that introduces a new filter
parameter applied to ECN as defined by [RFC3168]. It also defines a
new Grouped AVP that expresses what action to take should congestion
be detected. The Grouped AVP reuses attributes defined in RFC5777.
The security considerations of the Diameter protocol itself have been
discussed in RFC 6733 [RFC6733]. Use of the AVPs defined in this
document MUST take into consideration the security issues and
requirements of the Diameter base protocol.
6. Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Avi Lior for his guidance and feedback during
the development of this specification.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3168] Black, D., Floyd, S., and K. Ramakrishnan, "The Addition
of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", RFC
3168, September 2001.
[RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
"Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, October 2012.
[RFC5777] Korhonen, J., Tschofenig, H., Arumaithurai, M., Lior, A.
and Jones, M. Ed., "Traffic Classification and Quality of
Service (QoS) Attributes for Diameter", RFC 5777, February
2010.
Authors' Addresses
Lyle Bertz
Sprint
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Congestion and Filter Attributes February 2014
6220 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251
United States
EMail: Lyle.T.Bertz@sprint.com
Brent Hirschman
Sprint
6220 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251
United States
EMail: Brent.Hirschman@sprint.com
Hirschman, et al. Expires August 11, 2014 [Page 7]
