Internet DRAFT - draft-deng-tls-tagging
draft-deng-tls-tagging
HTTPBIS Working Group L. Deng
INTERNET-DRAFT China Mobile
Intended Status: Informational Dapeng Liu
Expires: September 22, 2016 Dacheng Zhang
Alibaba
March 21, 2016
Use-cases for Traffic Tagging
draft-deng-tls-tagging-00
Abstract
This document discusses the motivation and use-cases for coding
third-party aware tags for content/source related information into
resource retrieval process for encrypted web traffic.
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), 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
Copyright and License Notice
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
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT <Use-cases for Traffic Tagging> Mar 21, 2016
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.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Motivating Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 Reverse Charging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1 Identifying the content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2 Identifying the source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4 Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1 On identifying the source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2 On tagging the encrypted traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT <Use-cases for Traffic Tagging> Mar 21, 2016
1 Introduction
The document discusses the motivation and use-cases for coding third-
party aware tags for content/source related information into resource
retrieval process.
2 Motivating Scenario
2.1 Reverse Charging
The dominating billing method is subscriber-oriented model, which is
used by the operator to charge the subscriber for the volume of or
expected bandwidth for the Internet traffic he consumes for a given
period of time (e.g. on a monthly basis). In practice, such model is
implemented by the network devices monitoring the flows targeted to
or originated from a given subscriber (e.g. local IP address).
However, reverse charging is becoming a desirable new billing method,
which is motivated from ICPs, who want to cooperative with the ISPs
to enable free-access to its content/service from the subscribers to
attract users, especially the mobile subscribers. The key to enable
such billing model is how to effectively distinguish the traffic
flows belonging to the same content/application which might be
comprised of complex groups of IP flows from others. The current
subscriber-based billing model is not very helpful in such scenario.
3 Requirements
3.1 Identifying the content
In order to improve the hit ratio and actively push the hot resources
to the local subscribers, the cache system need a succinct way to
learn the buffered contents and can judge the hot content according
to the actual content information.
3.2 Identifying the source
To enable flexible reverse charging, we need a third party
recognizable tag of the traffic for the charging GW located between
the client and server, which helps in recognition of its source and
billing model, and other features to enable other cultivated
transport services, e.g. QoS for selected content types for a given
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT <Use-cases for Traffic Tagging> Mar 21, 2016
ICP.
4 Challenges
4.1 On identifying the source
It is expected that tag for the source in the reverse charging case
is independent of IP address and above of IP layer, since source IP
is not working for CDN cases.
The tag is expected to also provide information about content type
for finer-grained charging policies, as the diversity of network
applications has high demand for the charging policy flexibility,
e.g. a single application may produce both video traffic and audio
traffic, which decides to promote its upgraded video service for free
while keeping its commercial voice service intact.
4.2 On tagging the encrypted traffic
Another big challenge for third-party resource tagging is encryption.
If the tag is added at the application layer and encrypted end-to-
end, that would block a cache or charging GW to retrieval the
embedded information.
4 Discussion
5 Security Considerations
TBA.
6 IANA Considerations
There is no IANA action in this document.
7 Acknowledgements
TBA.
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT <Use-cases for Traffic Tagging> Mar 21, 2016
8 References
8.1 Normative References
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 5]
INTERNET DRAFT <Use-cases for Traffic Tagging> Mar 21, 2016
Authors' Addresses
Lingli Deng
China Mobile
Email: denglingli@chinamobile.com
Dapeng Liu
Alibaba Inc.
Email: max.ldp@alibaba-inc.com
Dacheng Zhang
Alibaba Inc.
Email: max.ldp@alibaba-inc.com
<Deng, et al.> Expires Sep 22, 2016 [Page 6]
