[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-niemi-sipping-event-throttle) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 RFC 6446

Network Working Group                                           A. Niemi
Internet-Draft                                                   K. Kiss
Updates: 3265 (if approved)                                        Nokia
Intended status: Standards Track                               S. Loreto
Expires: March 3, 2012                                          Ericsson
                                                         August 31, 2011


   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for
                       Notification Rate Control
                draft-ietf-sipcore-event-rate-control-09

Abstract

   This document specifies mechanisms for adjusting the rate of Session
   Initiation Protocol (SIP) event notifications.  These mechanisms can
   be applied in subscriptions to all SIP event packages.  This document
   updates RFC 3265.

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 March 3, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 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



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.





































Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Definitions and Document Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1.  Use Case for Limiting the Maximum Rate of Notifications  .  5
     3.2.  Use Case for Setting a Minimum Rate for Notifications  . .  6
     3.3.  Use Case for Specifying an Adaptive Minimum Rate of
           Notifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     3.4.  Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Basic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   5.  Operation of the Maximum Rate Mechanism  . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.3.  Selecting the Maximum Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.4.  The Maximum Rate Mechanism for Resource List Server  . . . 11
     5.5.  Buffer Policy Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       5.5.1.  Partial State Notifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       5.5.2.  Full State Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     5.6.  Estimated Bandwidth Savings  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   6.  Operation of the Minimum Rate Mechanism  . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     6.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     6.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     6.3.  Selecting the Minimum Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   7.  Operation of the Adaptive Minimum Rate Mechanism . . . . . . . 16
     7.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.3.  Selecting the Adaptive Minimum Rate  . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     7.4.  Calculating the Timeout  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   8.  Usage of the Maximum Rate, Minimum Rate and Adaptive
       Minimum Rate Mechanisms in a combination . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   9.  Protocol Element Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     9.1.  "max-rate", "min-rate" and "adaptive-min-rate" Header
           Field Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     9.2.  Grammar  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     9.3.  Event Header Field Usage in Responses to the NOTIFY
           request  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   10. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   11. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   12. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


1.  Introduction

   The SIP events framework [RFC3265] defines a generic framework for
   subscriptions to and notifications of events related to SIP systems.
   This framework defines the methods SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY, and
   introduces the concept of an event package, which is a concrete
   application of the SIP events framework to a particular class of
   events.

   One of the things the SIP events framework mandates is that each
   event package specification defines an absolute maximum on the rate
   at which notifications are allowed to be generated by a single
   notifier.  Such a limit is provided in order to reduce network load.

   All of the existing event package specifications include a maximum
   notification rate recommendation, ranging from once in every five
   seconds [RFC3856], [RFC3680], [RFC3857] to once per second [RFC3842].

   Per the SIP events framework, each event package specification is
   also allowed to define additional throttle mechanisms which allow the
   subscriber to further limit the rate of event notification.  So far
   none of the event package specifications have defined such a
   mechanism.

   The resource list extension [RFC4662] to the SIP events framework
   also deals with rate limiting of event notifications.  The extension
   allows a subscriber to subscribe to a heterogeneous list of resources
   with a single SUBSCRIBE request, rather than having to install a
   subscription for each resource separately.  The event list
   subscription also allows rate limiting, or throttling of
   notifications, by means of the Resource List Server (RLS) buffering
   notifications of resource state changes, and sending them in batches.
   However, the event list mechanism provides no means for the
   subscriber to set the interval for the throttling.

   Some event packages are also interested in specifying an absolute or
   an adaptive minimum rate at which notifications need to be generated
   by a notifier.  This helps the subscriber to effectively use
   different trigger criterias within a subscription to eliminate
   unnecessary notifications but at the same time make sure that the
   current event state is periodically received.

   This document defines an extension to the SIP events framework
   defining the following three Event header field parameters that allow
   a subscriber to set a maximum, a minimum and an adaptive minimum rate
   of notifications generated by the notifier:





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   max-rate:  specifies a maximum number of notifications per second.

   min-rate:  specifies a minimum number of notifications per second.

   adaptive-minimum-rate:  specifies an adaptive minimum number of
      notifications per second.

   These mechanisms are applicable to any event subscription, both
   single event subscription and event list subscription.  A notifier
   compliant to this specification will adjust the rate at which it
   generates notifications.


2.  Definitions and Document Conventions

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] and
   indicate requirement levels for compliant implementations.

      Indented passages such as this one are used in this document to
      provide additional information and clarifying text.  They do not
      contain normative protocol behavior.


3.  Overview

3.1.  Use Case for Limiting the Maximum Rate of Notifications

   A presence client in a mobile device contains a list of 100 buddies
   or presentities.  In order to decrease the processing and network
   load of watching 100 presentities, the presence client has employed a
   Resource List Server (RLS) with the list of buddies, and therefore
   only needs a single subscription to the RLS in order to receive
   notifications of the presence state of the resource list.

   In order to control the buffer policy of the RLS, the presence client
   sets a maximum rate of notifications.  The RLS will buffer
   notifications that are generated faster than they are allowed to be
   sent due to the maximum rate and batch all of the buffered state
   changes together in a single notification.  The maximum rate applies
   to the overall resource list, which means that there is a hard cap
   imposed by the maximum rate to the number of notifications per second
   the presence client can expect to receive.

   The presence client can also modify the maximum rate of notifications
   during the lifetime of the subscription.  For example, if the mobile
   device detects inactivity from the user for a period of time, the



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   presence client can simply pause notifications by choosing a "max-
   rate" parameter that allows only a single notification for the
   remainder of the subscription lifetime.  When the user becomes active
   again, the presence client can resume the stream of notifications by
   re-subscribing with a "max-rate" parameter set to the earlier used
   value.  Application of the mechanism defined by RFC 5839 [RFC5839]
   can also eliminate the transmission of a (full-state) notification
   carrying the latest resource state to the presence client after a
   subscription refresh.

3.2.  Use Case for Setting a Minimum Rate for Notifications

   A location application is monitoring the movement of a target.  In
   order to decrease the processing and network load, the location
   application has made a subscription to a Location Server with a set
   of location filters [I-D.ietf-geopriv-loc-filters] that specify
   trigger criteria, e.g. to send an update only when the target has
   moved at least n meters.  However, the application is also interested
   in receiving the current state periodically even if the state of the
   target has not changed enough to satisfy any of the trigger criteria,
   e.g., has not moved at least n meters within the period.

   The location application sets a minimum rate of notifications and
   include it in the subscription sent to the Location Server. The "min-
   rate" parameter indicates the minimum number of notifications per
   second the notifier needs to generate.

   The location application can also modify the minimum rate of
   notifications during the lifetime of the subscription.  For example,
   when the subscription to the movement of a target is made, the
   notifier may not have the location information available.  Thus, the
   first notification might be empty, or certain values might be absent.
   An important use case is placing constraints on when complete state
   should be provided after creating the subscription.  Once state is
   acquired and the second notification is sent, the subscriber updates
   or changes the "min-rate" parameter to a more sensible value.  This
   update can be performed in the response to the notification that
   contains the complete state information.

3.3.  Use Case for Specifying an Adaptive Minimum Rate of Notifications

   The minimum rate mechanism introduces a static and instantaneous rate
   control without the functionality to increase or decrease the
   notification rate adaptively.  However, there are some applications
   that would work better with an adaptive minimum rate control.

   A location application is monitoring the movement of a target.  In
   order to decrease the processing in the application, the location



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   application wants to make a subscription that dynamically decreases
   the minimum rate of notifications if the target has sent out several
   notifications recently.  However, if there have have been only few
   recent notifications by the target, the location application wants
   the minimum rate of notifications to increase.

   The location application sets an adaptive minimum rate of
   notifications and include it in the subscription sent to the Location
   Server.  The "adaptive-min-rate" parameter value is used by the
   notifier to dynamically calculate the actual maximum time between two
   notifications.  In order to dynamically calculate the maximum time,
   the notifier takes into consideration the rate at which notifications
   have been sent recently.  In the adaptive minimum rate mechanism the
   notifier can increase or decrease the notification rate compared to
   the minimum rate mechanism based on the recent number of
   notifications sent out in the last period.

   The location application can also modify the "adaptive-min-rate"
   parameter during the lifetime of the subscription.

3.4.  Requirements

   REQ1:   The subscriber must be able to set a maximum rate of
           notifications in a specific subscription.

   REQ2:   The subscriber must be able to set a minimum rate of
           notifications in a specific subscription.

   REQ3:   The subscriber must be able to set an adaptive minimum rate
           of notifications in a specific subscription, which adjusts
           the minimum rate of notifications based on a moving average.

   REQ4:   It must be possible to apply the maximum rate, the minimum
           rate and the adaptive minimum rate mechanisms all together,
           or in any combination, in a specific subscription.

   REQ5:   It must be possible to use any of the different rate control
           mechanisms in subscriptions to any events.

   REQ6:   It must be possible to use any of the different rate control
           mechanisms together with any other event filtering
           mechanisms.

   REQ7:   The notifier must be allowed to use a policy in which the
           maximum rate, minimum rate and adaptive minimum rate
           parameters are adjusted from the value given by the
           subscriber.




Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


              For example, due to congestion reasons, local policy at
              the notifier could temporarily dictate a policy that in
              effect further decreases the maximum rate of
              notifications.  In another example, the notifier can
              increase the subscriber proposed maximum rate so that at
              least one notification is generated during the remainder
              of the subscription lifetime.

   REQ8:   The different rate control mechanisms must address corner
           cases for setting the notification rates appropriately.  At a
           minimum, the mechanisms must address the situation when the
           time between two notifications would exceed the subscription
           duration and should provide procedures for avoiding this
           situation.

   REQ9:   The different rate control mechanisms must be possible to be
           invoked, modified, or removed in the course of an active
           subscription.

   REQ10:  The different rate control mechanisms must allow for the
           application of authentication and integrity protection
           mechanisms to subscriptions invoking that mechanism.


4.  Basic Operations

4.1.  Subscriber Behavior

   In general, the way in which a subscriber generates SUBSCRIBE
   requests and processes NOTIFY requests is according to RFC 3265
   [RFC3265].

   A subscriber that wants to have a maximum, minimum or adaptive
   minimum rate of event notifications in a specific event subscription
   does so by including a "max-rate", "min-rate" or "adaptive-min-rate"
   Event header field parameter(s) as part of the SUBSCRIBE request.

   A subscriber that wants to update a previously agreed event rate
   control parameter does so by including the updated "max-rate", "min-
   rate" or "adaptive-min-rate" Event header field parameter(s) as part
   of a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY
   request.  If the subscriber did not include at least one of the "max-
   rate", "min-rate" or "adaptive-min-rate" header field parameters in
   the most recent SUBSCRIBE request in a given dialog, the subscriber
   MUST NOT include an Event header field with any of those parameters
   in a 2xx response to a NOTIFY request in that dialog.





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


4.2.  Notifier Behavior

   In general, the way in which a notifier processes SUBSCRIBE requests
   and generates NOTIFY requests is according to RFC 3265 [RFC3265].

   A notifier that supports the different rate control mechanisms MUST
   adjust its rate of notification according to the rate control values
   agreed with the subscriber.  If the notifier needs to lower the
   subscription expiration value or if a local policy or other
   implementation-determined constraint at the notifier can not satisfy
   the rate control request, then the notifier can adjust (i.e. increase
   or decrease) appropriately the subscriber requested rate control
   values.  The notifier MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted rate
   control values in a "max-rate", "min-rate" or "adaptive-min-rate"
   Subscription-State header field parameter of the subsequent NOTIFY
   requests.


5.  Operation of the Maximum Rate Mechanism

5.1.  Subscriber Behavior

   A subscriber that wishes to apply a maximum rate to notifications in
   a subscription MUST construct a SUBSCRIBE request that includes the
   "max-rate" Event header field parameter.  This parameter specifies
   the requested maximum number of notifications per second.  The value
   of this parameter is a positive real number given by a finite decimal
   representation.

      Note that the witnessed notification rate may not conform to the
      "max-rate" value for a number of reasons.  For example, network
      jitter and retransmissions may result in the subscriber receiving
      the notifications more frequent than the "max-rate" value
      recommends.

   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed maximum rate
   of notifications MUST include the updated "max-rate" Event header
   field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx response
   to the NOTIFY request.

   A subscriber that wishes to remove the maximum rate control from
   notifications MUST indicate so by not including a "max-rate" Event
   header field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx
   response to the NOTIFY request.

   There are two main consequences for the subscriber when applying the
   maximum rate mechanism: state transitions may be lost and event
   notifications may be delayed.  If either of these side effects



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   constitute a problem to the application that utilizes the event
   notifications, developers are instructed not to use the mechanism.

5.2.  Notifier Behavior

   A notifier that supports the maximum rate mechanism MUST extract the
   value of the "max-rate" Event header parameter from a SUBSCRIBE
   request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request and use it as the
   suggested maximum number of notifications per second.  This value can
   be adjusted by the notifier, as defined in Section 5.3.

   A compliant notifier MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted maximum
   rate of notifications in a "max-rate" Subscription-State header field
   parameter of the subsequent NOTIFY requests.  The indicated "max-
   rate" value is adopted by the notifier, and the notification rate is
   adjusted accordingly.

   A notifier that does not understand this extension will not reflect
   the "max-rate" Subscription-State header field parameter in the
   NOTIFY requests; the absence of this parameter indicates to the
   subscriber that no rate control is supported by the notifier.

   A compliant notifier MUST NOT generate a notification if the interval
   since the most recent notification is less than the reciprocal value
   of the "max-rate" parameter, except when generating the notification
   either upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE request, when the subscription
   state is changing from "pending" to "active" state or upon
   termination of the subscription (the last notification).

   When a local policy dictates a maximum rate for notifications, a
   notifier will not generate notifications more frequently than the
   local policy maximum rate, even if the subscriber is not asking for
   maximum rate control.  The notifier MAY inform the subscriber about
   such local policy maximum rate using the "max-rate" Subscription-
   State header field parameter included in subsequent NOTIFY requests.

   Retransmissions of NOTIFY requests are not affected by the maximum
   rate mechanism, i.e., the maximum rate mechanism only applies to the
   generation of new transactions.  In other words, the maximum rate
   mechanism does not in any way break or modify the normal
   retransmission mechanism specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261].

5.3.  Selecting the Maximum Rate

   Special care needs to be taken when selecting the maximum rate.  For
   example, the maximum rate could potentially set a minimum time value
   between notifications that exceeds the subscription expiration value.
   Such a configuration would effectively quench the notifier, resulting



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   in exactly two notifications to be generated.  If the subscriber
   requests a maximum rate that would result in no notification before
   the subscription expiration, the notifier MUST increase the maximum
   rate and set it to the reciprocal value of the subscription
   expiration time left.  According to RFC 3265 [RFC3265] the notifier
   may also shorten the subscription expiry anytime during an active
   subscription.  If the subscription expiry is shortened during an
   active subscription, the notifier MUST also increase the "max-rate"
   value and set it to reciprocal value of the reduced subscription
   expiration time.

   In some cases it makes sense to pause the notification stream on an
   existing subscription dialog on a temporary basis without terminating
   the subscription, e.g. due to inactivity on the application user
   interface.  Whenever a subscriber discovers the need to perform the
   notification pause operation, it SHOULD set the maximum rate to the
   reciprocal value of the remaining subscription expiration value.
   This results in receiving no further notifications until the
   subscription expires or the subscriber sends a SUBSCRIBE request
   resuming notifications.

   The notifier MAY decide to increase or decrease the proposed "max-
   rate" value by the subscriber based on its local policy, static
   configuration or other implementation-determined constraints.  In
   addition, different event packages MAY define additional constraints
   for the allowed maximum rate ranges.  Such constraints are out of the
   scope of this specification.

5.4.  The Maximum Rate Mechanism for Resource List Server

   When applied to a list subscription [RFC4662], the maximum rate
   mechanism has some additional considerations.  Specifically, the
   maximum rate applies to the aggregate notification stream resulting
   from the list subscription, rather than explicitly controlling the
   notification of each of the implied constituent events.  Moreover,
   the RLS can use the maximum rate mechanism on its own to control the
   rate of the back-end subscriptions to avoid overflowing its buffer.

   The notifier is responsible for sending out event notifications upon
   state changes of the subscribed resource.  We can model the notifier
   as consisting of four components: the event state resource(s), the
   Resource List Server (RLS) (or any other notifier), a notification
   buffer, and finally the subscriber, or watcher of the event state, as
   shown in Figure 1.







Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


                       +--------+
                       | Event  |
        +--------+     |Resource|     +--------+
        | Event  |     +--------+     | Event  |
        |Resource|         |          |Resource|
        +---.=---+         |          +---=----+
              `-..         |         _.--'
                  ``-._    |    _.--'
                       +'--'--'-+
                       |Resource|
                       |  List  |
                       | Server |
                       +---.----+
                           |
                           |
                        )--+---(
                        |      |       .--------.
                        |Buffer|<======'max-rate|
                        |      |       `--------'
                        )--.---(
                           |
                           |
                       .---+---.
                       | Event |
                       |Watcher|
                       `-------'


       Figure 1: Model for the Resource List Server (RLS) Supporting
                                Throttling

   In short, the RLS reads event state changes from the event state
   resource, either by creating a back end subscription, or by other
   means; it packages them into event notifications and submits them
   into the output buffer.  The rate at which this output buffer drains
   is controlled by the subscriber via the maximum rate mechanism.  When
   a set of notifications are batched together, the way in which
   overlapping resource state is handled depends on the type of the
   resource state:

      In theory, there are many buffer policies that the notifier could
      implement.  However, we only concentrate on two practical buffer
      policies in this specification, leaving additional ones for
      further study and out of the scope of this specification.  These
      two buffer policies depend on the mode in which the notifier is
      operating.





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   Full-state:  Last (most recent) full state notification of each
      resource is sent out, and all others in the buffer are discarded.
      This policy applies to those event packages that carry full-state
      notifications.

   Partial-state:  The state deltas of each buffered partial
      notification per resource are merged, and the resulting
      notification is sent out.  This policy applies to those event
      packages that carry partial-state notifications.

5.5.  Buffer Policy Description

5.5.1.  Partial State Notifications

   With partial notifications, the notifier needs to maintain a separate
   buffer for each subscriber since each subscriber may have a different
   value for the maximum rate of notifications.  The notifier will
   always need to keep both a copy of the current full state of the
   resource F, as well as the last successfully communicated full state
   view F' of the resource in a specific subscription.  The construction
   of a partial notification then involves creating a difference of the
   two states, and generating a notification that contains that
   difference.

   When the maximum rate mechanism is applied to the subscription, it is
   important that F' is replaced with F only when the difference of F
   and F' was already included in a partial state notification to the
   subscriber allowed by the maximum rate mechanism.  Additionally, the
   notifier implementation SHOULD check to see that the size of an
   accumulated partial state notification is smaller than the full
   state, and if not, the notifier SHOULD send the full state
   notification instead.

5.5.2.  Full State Notifications

   With full state notifications, the notifier only needs to keep the
   full state of the resource, and when that changes, send the resulting
   notification over to the subscriber.

   When the maximum rate mechanism is applied to the subscription, the
   notifier receives the state changes of the resource, and generates a
   notification.  If there is a pending notification, the notifier
   simply replaces that notification with the new notification,
   discarding the older state.







Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


5.6.  Estimated Bandwidth Savings

   It is difficult to estimate the total bandwidth savings accrued by
   using the maximum rate mechanism over a subscription, since such
   estimates will vary depending on the usage scenarios.  However, it is
   easy to see that given a subscription where several full state
   notifications would have normally been sent in any given interval set
   by the "max-rate" parameter, only a single notification is sent
   during the same interval when using the maximum rate mechanism
   yielding bandwidth savings of several times the notification size.

   With partial-state notifications, drawing estimates is further
   complicated by the fact that the states of consecutive updates may or
   may not overlap.  However, even in the worst case scenario, where
   each partial update is to a different part of the full state, a rate
   controlled notification merging all of these n partial states
   together should at a maximum be the size of a full-state update.  In
   this case, the bandwidth savings are approximately n times the size
   of the header fields of the NOTIFY request.

   It is also true that there are several compression schemes available
   that have been designed to save bandwidth in SIP, e.g., SigComp
   [RFC3320] and TLS compression [RFC3943].  However, such compression
   schemes are complementary rather than competing mechanisms to the
   maximum rate mechanism.  After all, they can both be applied
   simultaneously.


6.  Operation of the Minimum Rate Mechanism

6.1.  Subscriber Behavior

   A subscriber that wishes to apply a minimum rate to notifications in
   a subscription MUST construct a SUBSCRIBE request that includes the
   "min-rate" Event header field parameter.  This parameter specifies
   the requested minimum number of notifications per second.  The value
   of this parameter is a positive real number given by a finite decimal
   representation.

   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed minimum rate
   of notifications MUST include the updated "min-rate" Event header
   field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx response
   to the NOTIFY request.

   A subscriber that wishes to remove the minimum rate control from
   notifications MUST indicate so by not including a "min-rate" Event
   header field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx
   response to the NOTIFY request.



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 14]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   The main consequence for the subscriber when applying the minimum
   rate mechanism is that it can receive a notification even if nothing
   has changed in the current state of the notifier.  However, RFC 5839
   [RFC5839] defines a mechanism that allows suppressing a NOTIFY
   request or a NOTIFY request body if the state has not changed.

6.2.  Notifier Behavior

   A notifier that supports the minimum rate mechanism MUST extract the
   value of the "min-rate" Event header field parameter from a SUBSCRIBE
   request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request and use it as the
   suggested minimum number of notifications per second.  This value can
   be adjusted by the notifier, as defined in Section 6.3.

   A compliant notifier MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted minimum
   rate of notifications in a "min-rate" Subscription-State header field
   parameter of the subsequent NOTIFY requests.  The indicated "min-
   rate" value is adopted by the notifier, and the notification rate is
   adjusted accordingly.

   A notifier that does not understand this extension, will not reflect
   the "min-rate" Subscription-State header field parameter in the
   NOTIFY requests; the absence of this parameter indicates to the
   subscriber that no rate control is supported by the notifier.

   A compliant notifier MUST generate notifications when state changes
   occur or when the time since the most recent notification exceeds the
   reciprocal value of the "min-rate" parameter.  Depending on the event
   package and subscriber preferences indicated in the SUBSCRIBE
   request, the NOTIFY request sent as a result of a minimum rate
   mechanism MUST contain either the current full state or the partial
   state showing the difference between the current state and the last
   successfully communicated state.  If the subscriber and the notifier
   support the procedures in RFC 5839 [RFC5839] the complete NOTIFY
   request or the NOTIFY request body can be suppressed if the state has
   not changed from the previous notification.

   Retransmissions of NOTIFY requests are not affected by the minimum
   rate mechanism, i.e., the minimum rate mechanism only applies to the
   generation of new transactions.  In other words, the minimum rate
   mechanism does not in any way break or modify the normal
   retransmission mechanism.

6.3.  Selecting the Minimum Rate

   The minimum rate mechanism can be used to generate a lot of
   notifications, creating additional processing load for the notifier.
   Some of the notifications may also be unnecessary possibly repeating



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 15]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   already known state information to the subscriber.  It is difficult
   to provide generic guidelines for the acceptable minimum rate value
   ranges, however the subscriber SHOULD request for the lowest possible
   minimum rate.  Different event packages MAY define additional
   constraints for the allowed minimum rate values.  Such constraints
   are out of the scope of this specification.

   The notifier MAY decide to increase or decrease the proposed "min-
   rate" value by the subscriber based on its local policy, static
   configuration or other implementation-determined constraints.


7.  Operation of the Adaptive Minimum Rate Mechanism

7.1.  Subscriber Behavior

   A subscriber that wishes to apply an adaptive minimum rate to
   notifications in a subscription MUST construct a SUBSCRIBE request
   that includes the "adaptive-min-rate" Event header field parameter.
   This parameter specifies an adaptive minimum number of notifications
   per second.  The value of this parameter is a positive real number
   given by a finite decimal representation.

   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed adaptive
   minimum rate of notifications MUST include the updated "adaptive-min-
   rate" Event header field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request
   or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request.

   A subscriber that wishes to remove the adaptive minimum rate control
   from notifications MUST indicate so by not including a "adaptive-min-
   rate" Event header field parameter in a subsequent SUBSCRIBE request
   or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request.

   The main consequence for the subscriber when applying the adaptive
   minimum rate mechanism is that it can receive a notification even if
   nothing has changed in the current state of the notifier.  However,
   RFC 5839 [RFC5839] defines a mechanism that allows suppressing a
   NOTIFY request or a NOTIFY request body if the state has not changed.

7.2.  Notifier Behavior

   A notifier that supports the adaptive minimum rate mechanism MUST
   extract the value of the "adaptive-min-rate" Event header parameter
   from a SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request and
   use it to calculate the actual maximum time between two notifications
   as defined in Section 7.4.

   The "adaptive-min-rate" value can be adjusted by the notifier, as



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 16]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   defined in Section 7.3.

   A compliant notifier MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted adaptive
   minimum rate of notifications in an "adaptive-min-rate" Subscription-
   State header field parameter of the subsequent NOTIFY requests.  The
   indicated "adaptive-min-rate" value is adopted by the notifier, and
   the notification rate is adjusted accordingly.

   A notifier that does not understand this extension will not reflect
   the "adaptive-min-rate" Subscription-State header parameter in the
   NOTIFY requests; the absence of this parameter indicates to the
   subscriber that no rate control is supported by the notifier.

   A compliant notifier MUST generate notifications when state changes
   occur or when the time since the most recent notification exceeds the
   value calculated using the formula defined in Section 7.4.  Depending
   on the event package and subscriber preferences indicated in the
   SUBSCRIBE request, the NOTIFY request sent as a result of a minimum
   rate mechanism MUST contain either the current full state or the
   partial state showing the difference between the current state and
   the last successfully communicated state.  If the subscriber and the
   notifier support the procedures in RFC 5839 [RFC5839] the complete
   NOTIFY request or the NOTIFY request body can be suppressed if the
   state has not changed from the previous notification.

   The adaptive minimum rate mechanism is implemented as follows:

   1)  When a subscription is first created, the notifier creates a
       record ("count" parameter) that keeps track of the number of
       notifications that have been sent in the "period".  The "count"
       parameter is initialized to contain a history of having sent a
       "period * adaptive-min-rate" number of notifications for the
       "period".

   2)  The "timeout" value is calculated according to the equation given
       in Section 7.4.

   3)  If the timeout period passes without a NOTIFY request being sent
       in the subscription, then the current resource state is sent
       (subject to any filtering associated with the subscription).

   4)  Whenever a NOTIFY request is sent (regardless of whether due to a
       "timeout" event or a state change), the notifier updates the
       notification history record stored in the "count" parameter,
       recalculates the value of "timeout," and returns to step 3.

   Retransmissions of NOTIFY requests are not affected by the timeout,
   i.e., the timeout only applies to the generation of new transactions.



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 17]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   In other words, the timeout does not in any way break or modify the
   normal retransmission mechanism specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261].

7.3.  Selecting the Adaptive Minimum Rate

   The adaptive minimum rate mechanism can be used to generate a lot of
   notifications, creating additional processing load for the notifier.
   Some of the notifications may also be unnecessary possibly repeating
   already known state information to the subscriber.  It is difficult
   to provide generic guidelines for the acceptable adaptive minimum
   rate value ranges, however the subscriber SHOULD request for the
   lowest possible adaptive minimum rate value.  Different event
   packages MAY define additional constraints for the allowed adaptive
   minimum rate values.  Such constraints are out of the scope of this
   specification.

   The notifier MAY decide to increase or decrease the proposed
   "adaptive-min-rate" value based on its local policy, static
   configuration or other implementation-determined constraints.

7.4.  Calculating the Timeout

   The formula used to vary the absolute pacing in a way that will meet
   the adaptive minimum rate requested over the period is given in
   equation (1):

   timeout = count / ((adaptive-min-rate ^ 2) * period)              (1)


   The output of the formula, "timeout", is the time to the next
   notification, expressed in seconds.  The formula has three inputs:

   adaptive-min-rate:  The value of the "adaptive-min-rate" parameter
      conveyed in the Subscription-State header field.

   period:  The rolling average period, in seconds.  The granularity of
      the values for the "period" parameter is set by local policy at
      the notifier, however the notifier MUST choose a value greater
      than the reciprocal value of the "adaptive-min-rate" parameter.
      It is also RECOMMENDED that the notifier chooses a "period"
      parameter several times larger than reciprocal value of the
      "adaptive-min-rate" parameter in order to maximize the
      effectiveness of the equation (1).  It is an implementation
      decision whether the notifier uses the same value of the "period"
      parameter for all subscriptions or individual values for each
      subscription.





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 18]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   count:  The number of notifications that have been sent during the
      last "period" of seconds not including any retransmissions of
      requests.

   In case both the maximum rate and the adaptive minimum rate
   mechanisms are used in the same subscription the formula used to
   dynamically calculate the timeout is given in equation (2):


 timeout = MAX[(1/max-rate), count/((adaptive-min-rate ^ 2)*period)] (2)


   max-rate:  The value of the "max-rate" parameter conveyed in the
      Subscription-State header field.

   The formula in (2) makes sure that for all the possible values of the
   "max-rate" and "adaptive-min-rate" parameters, with "adaptive-min-
   rate" < "max-rate", the timeout never results in a lower value than
   the reciprocal value of the "max-rate" parameter.

   In some situation it may be beneficial for the notifier to achieve an
   adaptive minimum rate in a different way than the algorithm detailed
   in this document allows.  However, the notifier MUST comply with any
   "max-rate" or "min-rate" parameters that have been negotiated.


8.  Usage of the Maximum Rate, Minimum Rate and Adaptive Minimum Rate
    Mechanisms in a combination

   Applications can subscribe to an event package using all the rate
   control mechanisms individually, or in combination; in fact there is
   no technical incompatibility among them.  However there are some
   combinations of the different rate control mechanisms that make
   little sense to be used together.  This section lists all the
   combinations that are possible to insert in a subscription; the
   utility to use each combination in a subscription is also analyzed.

   maximum rate and minimum rate:  This combination allows to reduce the
      notification rate, but at the same time assures the reception of
      periodic notifications.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "min-rate" value lower than the "max-
      rate" value, otherwise the notifier MUST adjust the subscriber
      provided "min-rate" value to a value equal to or lower than the
      "max-rate" value.






Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 19]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   maximum rate and adaptive minimum rate:  It works in a similar way as
      the combination above, but with the difference that the interval
      at which notifications are assured changes dynamically.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "adaptive-min-rate" value lower than
      the "max-rate" value, otherwise the notifier MUST adjust the
      subscriber provided "adaptive-min-rate" value to a value equal to
      or lower than the "max-rate" value.

   minimum rate and adaptive minimum rate:  When using the adaptive
      minimum rate mechanism, frequent state changes in a short period
      can result in no notifications for a longer period following the
      short period.  The addition of the minimum rate mechanism ensures
      the subscriber always receives notifications after a specified
      interval.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "min-rate" value lower than the
      "adaptive-min-rate" value, otherwise the notifier MUST NOT
      consider the "min-rate" value.

   maximum rate, minimum rate and adaptive minimum rate:  This
      combination makes little sense to be used although not forbidden.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "min-rate" and "adaptive-min-rate"
      values lower than the "max-rate" value, otherwise the notifier
      MUST adjust the subscriber provided "min-rate" and "adaptive-min-
      rate" values to a value equal to or lower than the "max-rate"
      value.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "min-rate" value lower than the
      "adaptive-min-rate" value, otherwise the notifier MUST NOT
      consider the "min-rate" value.


9.  Protocol Element Definitions

   This section describes the protocol extensions required for the
   different rate control mechanisms.

9.1.  "max-rate", "min-rate" and "adaptive-min-rate" Header Field
      Parameters

   The "max-rate", "min-rate" and "adaptive-min-rate" parameters are
   added to the rule definitions of the Event header field and the
   Subscription-State header field in RFC 3265 [RFC3265] grammar.  Usage
   of this parameter is described in Section 5, Section 6 and Section 7.





Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 20]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


9.2.  Grammar

   This section describes the Augmented BNF [RFC5234] definitions for
   the new header field parameters.  Note that we derive here from the
   ruleset present in RFC 3265 [RFC3265], adding additional alternatives
   to the alternative sets of "event-param" and "subexp-params" defined
   therein.

      event-param     =  max-rate-param
                         / min-rate-param
                         / amin-rate-param
      subexp-params   =  max-rate-param
                         / min-rate-param
                         / amin-rate-param
      max-rate-param  =  "max-rate" EQUAL
                         (1*2DIGIT ["." 1*10DIGIT])
      min-rate-param  =  "min-rate" EQUAL
                         (1*2DIGIT ["." 1*10DIGIT])
      amin-rate-param =  "adaptive-min-rate" EQUAL
                         (1*2DIGIT ["." 1*10DIGIT])


9.3.  Event Header Field Usage in Responses to the NOTIFY request

   This table expands the table described in Section 7.2 of RFC 3265
   [RFC3265] allowing the Event header field to appear in a 2xx response
   to a NOTIFY request.  The use of the Event header field in responses
   other than 2xx to NOTIFY requests is undefined and out of scope of
   this specification.

      Header field      where proxy ACK BYE CAN INV OPT REG PRA SUB NOT
      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Event             2xx          -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   o


   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed value for
   maximum, minimum or adaptive minimum rate of notifications MUST
   include all desired values for the "max-rate", "min-rate" and
   "adaptive-min-rate" parameters in an Event header field of the 2xx
   response to a NOTIFY request.  Any of the other header field
   parameters currently defined for the Event header field by other
   specifications do not have a meaning if the Event header field is
   included in the 2xx response to the NOTIFY request.  These header
   field parameters MUST be ignored by the notifier, if present.

   The event type listed in the Event header field of the 2xx response
   to the NOTIFY request MUST match the event type of the Event header
   field in the corresponding NOTIFY request.



Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 21]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


10.  IANA Considerations

   This specification registers three new SIP header field parameters,
   defined by the following information which is to be added to the
   Header Field Parameters and Parameter Values sub-registry under
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters.

                                               Predefined
      Header Field         Parameter Name        Values      Reference
      -------------------- ---------------     ----------    ---------
      Event                max-rate            No            [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   max-rate            No            [RFCxxxx]
      Event                min-rate            No            [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   min-rate            No            [RFCxxxx]
      Event                adaptive-min-rate   No            [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   adaptive-min-rate   No            [RFCxxxx]

   (Note to the RFC Editor: please replace "xxxx" with the RFC number of
   this specification, when assigned.)

   This specification also updates the reference defining the Event
   header field in the Header Fields sub-registry under
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters.

      Header Name  compact   Reference
      -----------  -------   ------------------
      Event          o       [RFC3265][RFCxxxx]

   (Note to the RFC Editor: please replace "xxxx" with the RFC number of
   this specification, when assigned.)


11.  Security Considerations

   Naturally, the security considerations listed in RFC 3265 [RFC3265],
   which the rate control mechanisms described in this document extends,
   apply in entirety.  In particular, authentication and message
   integrity SHOULD be applied to subscriptions with this extension.

   RFC 3265 [RFC3265] recommends the integrity protection of the Event
   header field of SUBSCRIBE requests.  Implementations of this
   extension SHOULD also provide integrity protection for the Event
   header field included in the 2xx response to the NOTIFY request.
   Without integrity protection an eavesdropper could see and modify the
   Event header field; or it could also manipulate the transmission of a
   200 (OK) response to the NOTIFY request in order to suppress or flood
   notifications without the subscriber seeing what caused the problem.




Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 22]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   When the maximum rate mechanism involves partial state notifications,
   the security considerations listed in RFC 5263 [RFC5263] apply in
   entirety.


12.  Acknowledgments

   Thanks to Pekka Pessi, Dean Willis, Eric Burger, Alex Audu, Alexander
   Milinski, Jonathan Rosenberg, Cullen Jennings, Adam Roach, Hisham
   Khartabil, Dale Worley, Martin Thomson, Byron Campen, Alan Johnston,
   Michael Procter, Janet Gunn and Ari Keranen for support and/or review
   of this work.

   Thanks to Brian Rosen for the idea of the minimum and adaptive
   minimum rate mechanisms, and Adam Roach for the work on the algorithm
   for the adaptive minimum rate mechanism and other feedback.


13.  References

13.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              June 2002.

   [RFC3265]  Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific
              Event Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002.

   [RFC4662]  Roach, A., Campbell, B., and J. Rosenberg, "A Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for
              Resource Lists", RFC 4662, August 2006.

   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.

   [RFC5263]  Lonnfors, M., Costa-Requena, J., Leppanen, E., and H.
              Khartabil, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
              for Partial Notification of Presence Information",
              RFC 5263, September 2008.







Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 23]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


13.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-geopriv-loc-filters]
              Mahy, R., Rosen, B., and H. Tschofenig, "Filtering
              Location Notifications in the Session Initiation Protocol
              (SIP)", draft-ietf-geopriv-loc-filters-11 (work in
              progress), March 2010.

   [RFC3320]  Price, R., Bormann, C., Christoffersson, J., Hannu, H.,
              Liu, Z., and J. Rosenberg, "Signaling Compression
              (SigComp)", RFC 3320, January 2003.

   [RFC3680]  Rosenberg, J., "A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event
              Package for Registrations", RFC 3680, March 2004.

   [RFC3842]  Mahy, R., "A Message Summary and Message Waiting
              Indication Event Package for the Session Initiation
              Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3842, August 2004.

   [RFC3856]  Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.

   [RFC3857]  Rosenberg, J., "A Watcher Information Event Template-
              Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
              RFC 3857, August 2004.

   [RFC3943]  Friend, R., "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Compression Using Lempel-Ziv-Stac (LZS)", RFC 3943,
              November 2004.

   [RFC5839]  Niemi, A. and D. Willis, "An Extension to Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP) Events for Conditional Event
              Notification", RFC 5839, May 2010.


Authors' Addresses

   Aki Niemi
   Nokia
   P.O. Box 407
   NOKIA GROUP, FIN  00045
   Finland

   Phone: +358 50 389 1644
   Email: aki.niemi@nokia.com






Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 24]

Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control                August 2011


   Krisztian Kiss
   Nokia
   200 South Mathilda Ave
   Sunnyvale, CA  94086
   US

   Phone: +1 650 391 5969
   Email: krisztian.kiss@nokia.com


   Salvatore Loreto
   Ericsson
   Hirsalantie 11
   Jorvas  02420
   Finland

   Email: salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com


































Niemi, et al.             Expires March 3, 2012                [Page 25]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/