[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00

RMCAT WG                                                        J. Gwock
Internet-Draft                                                 Line Plus
Intended Status: Experimental                          September 3, 2018
Expires: March 7, 2019


            Congestion Control based on Forward path Status
                       draft-gwock-rmcat-ccfs-00


Abstract

   This document describes CCFS(Congestion Control based on Forward path
   Status), rate adaptation scheme for interactive real-time media
   applications, such as video conferencing. CCFS manages forward path's
   status based on the estimated three major parameters - serving
   bitrate, queue delay and queue delay by cross traffics. Considering
   only forward path status minimizes the effects of backward path's
   network event such as congestion. It also is free from compatibility
   issues because it defines generalized feedback message and minimizes
   receiver's role.


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) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   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.



Table of Contents

   1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2 Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4 Detailed Description of CCFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     4.1 CCFS Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     4.2 Rxer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       4.2.1 Feedback message format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       4.2.2 Handle CCFS control messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.3 Txer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.3.1 Constants  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.3.2 Monitored time on txer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.3.3 Forward path bandwidth estimation  . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.3.4 Queue delay estimation and find increase pattern . . . . 10
       4.3.5 XQueue delay : Queue delay by external traffics  . . . . 10
       4.3.6 Handle by status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
         4.3.6.1 Control event  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
         4.3.6.2 Handle control event by status . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     4.4 CCFS Control messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
       4.4.1 Update feedback interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5 Implement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   6 Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   7 IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17









J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 2]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


1 Introduction

   Interactive real-time multi-media applications have a requirement
   that controls their transmitting rate to adapt to bandwidth changes
   and maintain low queuing delay over the network [RFC2914]. To solve
   this challenge, many metrics such as RTT, packet loss or ECN should
   be used to reason the current network condition.

   These real-time communication application can have two streaming path
   - forward path to send media and backward path to receive media.
   Moreover, each path is independent. For example, if congestion occurs
   in the backward path, their is no need to lower transmitting rate on
   the forward path. However if the RTT is used for congestion control,
   careful approaching is required because RTT could be affected by not
   only the forward path's latency but the backward path's latency.
   Although it is used to control transmitting rate, a metric or
   behavior such as RTT could be affected by backward path's status and
   lead to a wrong decision.

   CCFS uses metrics reflecting only the forward path's character in its
   algorithm to remove the effect of backward path's conditions.

   Moreover, CCFS is sender-based method to be free from compatibility
   issues. That is, coexistence of multiple CCFS sender versions are
   available because of performance or any other issues. To achieve
   this, passive behavior of CCFS receiver and generalized feedback
   mechanisms are defined in this memo.

2 Terminology

   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].


3 Overview

   There are two modules to carry out a CCFS - Txer and Rxer. The txer
   is an abbreviation for transmitter of CCFS and rxer means receiver of
   CCFS. The txer have a main active role to control transmitting
   bitrate by examining CCFS feedback messages from rxer. The rxer
   operates passively except when sending periodic CCFS feedback
   messages. The txer and rxer manage multiple RTP streams if they are
   able to share network paths. For example, if any RTP streams using
   same 4 tuple - source ip, source port, destination ip and destination
   port - would be associated with one txer and rxer.

   To start CCFS, the txer and rxer must complete CCFS negotiation. The



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 3]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   negotiation should be accomplished on an external channel before the
   associating RTP session is established.

   The rxer sends a periodic CCFS feedback message if CCFS feature is
   negotiated. The txer estimates various metrics, mainly 3 metrics -
   bottlenecked bandwidth, queue latency and queue latency from external
   traffics. Than, it makes a decision about the forward path's status,
   which is one of Default, Probing, Competing and Throttled. Txer
   operates based on the resulting forward path's status.

      Throttled status: detected the network queue is piling up. The
      current transmitting rate should lowered to empty the queue.

      Competing status: detected cross traffics. The current
      transmitting rate should be controlled to keep the queue latency
      within targeting queue latency.

      Probing status: The forward path's bottlenecked bandwidth may
      broader than the estimated bandwidth. The current transmitting
      rate should be increased to probe the bottlenecked bandwidth.

      Default status: does not belong to above 3 statuses. The current
      transmitting rate should be controlled to keep the queue latency
      within targeting queue latency.

   While the Probing status, the transmitting rate should be increased
   to probe available bandwidth. However, it can lead to congestion and
   this can harm the media quality. To minimize the side effects,
   sending redundant packets like FEC packets is recommended[I-D.ietf-
   dt-rmcat-adaptive-fec].





















J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 4]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


4 Detailed Description of CCFS

4.1 CCFS Negotiation

   CCFS must be negotiated before run. Defining the way of negotiation
   is beyond the scope of this document. It may use SDP negotiation[RFC
   4566] or an application defined protocol. However, parameters that
   should be decided from negotiation are described here.

   1. txer id (4 bytes): CCFS txer's ID should be decided. This is used
   as SSRC in RTCP messages used by CCFS. So this value should unique
   among transmitting RTP stream's SSRC.

   2. rxer id (4 bytes): Also, the rxer associated with the txer must
   have its own ID to use as SSRC in RTCP messages.

   3. feedback interval time: Rxer should know initial feedback interval
   time. This interval may be changed by the txer in the session.

   4. lower-layer protocol: RTP packets are sent on the UDP stack in
   most cases. However it may be sent on other transport layers
   dependding on the application requirement. A different congestion
   control mechanism for different lower-layer protocol stack is
   reasonable. To decide which congestion control mechanism should be
   used, both rxer's transport layer and txer's transport layer is
   needed. CCFS described in this memo supposes only UDP. However CCFS
   txer may be modified for other transport layers.


4.2 Rxer

   Rxer monitors received rtp packets and send feedback on every
   feedback interval. That is, a rxer uses only the periodic feedback
   mechanism. The feedback interval time can be changed by RTCP message
   sent by a txer.

   Rxer does not send feedbacks if it has not received any packets and
   has not sent a feedback before, even when the feedback interval time
   is passed. However, the rxer should periodically send feedbacks once
   it has started sending feedbacks even when there is no received
   packets for the last feedback interval because it could be an
   important signal.

4.2.1 Feedback message format

   CCFS feedback message has a similar design goal as the [I-D.ietf-dt-
   rmcat-feedback-message]. However, CCFS feedback message needs more
   specific information for the CCFS algorithm.



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 5]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |V=2|P|  FMT    |   PT = 205    |          length               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         SSRC (Rxer Id)                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         SSRC (Txer Id)                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                           Report Time                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |       Feedback Sequence       |      Monitored Time           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  SSRC of 1st media source                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |      Report packet count      |             end_seq           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |L|ECN|  Arrival time offset    | ...                           .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      .                                                               .
      .                                                               .
      .                                                               .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  SSRC of nth media source                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Report packet count      |             end_seq            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |L|ECN|  Arrival time offset   | ...                            |
      .                                                               .
      .                                                               .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The first 4 octets are the RTCP header, with PT=205 and FMT=CCFSFB,
   and next 4 octets are the SSRC of the packet sender. CCFS replaces
   SSRC with rxer id which should be obtained from the prior
   negotiation.

   Section 6.1 of [RFC4585] requires the RTCP header to be followed by
   the SSRC of the media source being reported upon. Txer id is located
   here instead of a specific RTP SSRC because this feedback message
   cannot designate one SSRC.

   And next 8 octets are a kind of the header of the CCFS feedback
   message. The report time is the time instant when this feedback
   message is generated. The value of the report time is derived from
   the same wallclock used to generate the NTP timestamp field in RTCP
   Sender Report (SR) packets. It is formatted as the middle 32 bits of
   an NTP format timestamp, as described in Section 4 of [RFC3550]. If



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 6]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   the rxer does not use NTP, it can be replaced with other measures
   such as system up time, but the corresponding txer should be
   informed.

   Feedback sequence is to feedback its own sequence and inform txer
   where the rtp packet loss has occurred when the rtp packet between
   feedback messages has been lost. And monitored time follows. The
   feedback interval can change with the txer's request.

   Then, report blocks are followed. A report block starts with the SSRC
   of that media source. The reporting rtp packet count and end sequence
   number of the reporting rtp packets are followed. Packet metric
   blocks of count indicated by report packet count are followed. Each
   packet metric block is 2 octets. The L, ECN and ATO fields are the
   same with the [I-D.ietf-dt-rmcat-feedback-message]

4.2.2 Handle CCFS control messages

   CCFS control message is a type of RTCP message sent by a txer. This
   RTCP messages should be defined if the txer requires for a specific
   feature. If the rxer receives understandable control messages, it
   should respond accordingly. If not, it should ignore and discard
   them.

4.3 Txer

   Txer keeps sent rtp packet array(txed_rtps) about rtp streams. The
   txed_rtps contains sent local timestamp, packet size, RTP seq number
   and ssrc.

   Txer estimates variable metrics when the feedback message is sent for
   each time rxer receives a feedback message. This means that all the
   estimated metrics are the past of backward one way latency ago but
   remove the effect of the backward path that is the feedback message's
   network path.

   It estimates forward path bandwidth, queue latency and queue latency
   from external traffics with the feedback message and txed_rtps in
   monitored time.

   And than it decides forward path status and targeting send rate based
   on the metrics and current status. The forward path status has four
   status and described in Section 3. Actually this status affects
   txer's logic in globally.

4.3.1 Constants

   Txer logic is described using pseudo code. For the simplicity, all



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 7]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   the constants used are listed up here.

        FwdBwEstWei = 0.9
        I_FwdBwEstWei = (1.0 - FwdBwEstWei)

        MaXQWei = 0.9
        I_MaXQWei = (1.0 - MaXQWei)

        TargetQDelay = 50msec
        TargetXQDelay = 50msec

        WndBrFract = 1sec

        TrigProbQDFractMax  = 0.8
        TrigProbBrFractMin  = 1.0
        TrigProbQMRangeMax  = 10msec
        TrigProbLossRtMax   = 0.02
        TrigProbECNRtMax    = 0.0

        TrigStopProbQDFractMin = 1.3
        TrigStopProbBrFractMin = 1.2
        TrigStopProbLossRtMax    = 0.0
        TrigStopProbECNRtMax     = 0.0

        TrigCompQDelayMin  = 200msec
        TrigCompQMRangeMi  = 100msec

        TrigStopCompQDelayMax = 100msec
        TrigStopCompQMRangeMax = 20msec

        TrigThroQDFractMin = 1.5
        TrigThroBrFractMax = 0.9

        Thro2CompQIncrTime = 1sec

        DfltQDFractLow = 0.5
        DfltQDFractHi  = 1.1
        DfltBrIncrRate  = 1.01
        DfltBrDecrRate  = 0.95

        CompTargetTxbwRate = 1.3
        ThroTargetTxbwRate = 0.5

        ProbingTime = 4sec

        CompQDFractLow = 0.5
        CompQDFractHi  = 1.0
        CompXQDFractLow = 0.8



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 8]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


        CompBrIncrRate = 1.02

4.3.2 Monitored time on txer

   When every time rxer receives a feedback message, txer calculates the
   monitored time that is matched with the monitored time on rxer. The
   latest end sequence in the feedback message is the base point of time
   to find out monitored time on txer.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   (latest_end_seq, ssrc) = find_out(fbm)
   sent_tstmp_end_seq = get_tstmp(txed_rtps, latest_end_seq, ssrc)
   end_tstmp = sent_tstmp_end_seq + fbm.ato(latest_end_seq, ssrc)
   bgn_tstmp = period_end_tmstmp - fbm.monitored_time
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   The fbm stands for feedback message and tstmp is time stamp of txer.
   First of all, find out the sent local time stamp(sent_tstmp_end_seq)
   of the latest rtp packet among the reported. And the monitored end
   time on txer sets as the ato time and sent_tstmp_end_seq.


4.3.3 Forward path bandwidth estimation

   The forward path's bandwidth is estimated based on received rate on
   the rxer.

      fwd_bw = tot_rxed_size / fbm.monitored_time

   The tot_rxed_size is sum of sent packet size that is found from
   txed_rtps with the reported ssrc and seq. If there are the lost
   packets, they should be excluded. CCFS updates esti_bw with the
   fwd_bw using moving average to remove outlier. Unfortunately the
   moving average calculation causes time penalty. Moreover, if wrong
   estimated value - too small or too large is used, it would affect
   esti_bw negatively. So, CCFS checks its validation to minimize the
   noise.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   if( status != Throttled &&
       (status == Competing && target_bw < fwd_bw && lost == 0) &&
       (sent_size > tot_rxed_size)
         || (sent_size == tot_rxed_size && target_bw < fwd_bw) )

       esti_bw = FwdBwEstWei*esti_bw + I_FwdBwEstWei*fwd_bw
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   First of all, the current status must not be throttled because target



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                  [Page 9]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   bandwidth shrinks during throttled status to empty queue. And if the
   current status is competing update esti_bw only if it fulfils the
   certain condition. After status check, sent_size should be larger
   than tot_rxed_size because it means the sent bitrate is about
   bottlenecked bandwidth or greater for the period. And if the current
   target bandwidth is underestimated, it updates esti_bw.

4.3.4 Queue delay estimation and find increase pattern

   CCFS uses LEDBAT[RFC6817]'s queue delay estimation to estimate
   forward path's queue delay. To do that, received timestamp have to be
   calculated for each packets using ATO field in the feedback message.
   And the queue delay is the minimum queue delay among the reported
   packet's estimated queue delays.

   The queue delay can not be exact but its relative values and pattern
   can be used as an important signal. CCFS finds out increasing pattern
   and its duration as follows.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   if( last_qdelay < qdelay )
       incr_count++

       if(incr_count == 1)
           incr_start_tstmp = end_tstmp

       incr_duration = end_tstmp - incr_start_tstmp;

       if(incr_count >= 3 && duration >= IncrMinDuration)
           is_increasing = true
   else
       incr_count = 0
       incr_start_tstmp = 0
       is_increasing = false


   last_qdelay = qdelay
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   Above logic can be replaced by others if it shows good performance.

4.3.5 XQueue delay : Queue delay by external traffics

   The queue delay by external traffics is calculated by subtracting
   expected queue delay of sent packets from queue delay.

      exp_qdelay = sent_size / esti_bw
      xqdelay = qdelay - exp_qdelay



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 10]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   The xqdelay could be negative because of an instant high sent_size or
   under estimated esti_bw. Moreover, the xqdelay can have outlier too.
   So, xqdelay applies a simple filter as follows.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   if (xqdelay > 0)
       if(maxq == 0.0) maxq = xqdelay
       else            maxq = MaXQWei*maxq + I_MaXQWei*xqdelay
   else
       maxq = 0.0
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

4.3.6 Handle by status

   Update transmitting rate (target_txbw) based on the calculated
   parameters.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   qd_fract = qdelay / target_qdelay
   br_fract = recved_size_wnd / sent_size_wnd
   xq_fract = 0.0

   if (maxq)
      xq_fract = xqdelay / TargetXQDelay
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   Above three fractions are used directly to check status and control
   send rate. The recved_size_wnd means that total received packet size
   for the last window time(WndBrFract) and the sent_size_wnd is the
   total sent packet size for the same time.

4.3.6.1 Control event

   Before controlling transmitting rate, a certain condition makes
   status change and CCFS defines this conditions as control event. The
   control event list and required condition are presented here.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
         Control Event    |              Conditions
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
     CTRL_NOTHING         | * default value
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
                          |1. qdelay > TrigCompQDelayMin
                          |   && qmrange > TrigCompQMRangeMin
     CTRL_START_COMPETE   |   && xq_fract > 0.0
                          |2. Throttled status
                          |   && incr_duration > Thro2CompQIncrTime
   --------------------------------------------------------------------



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 11]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


                          |status is not Probing
                          |   && is_increasing == false
                          |   && qd_fract < TrigProbQDFractMax
     CTRL_START_PROBING   |   && br_fract >= TrigProbBrFractMin
                          |   && qmrange < TrigProbQMRangeMax
                          |   && ecn_rate < TrigProbECNRtMax
                          |   && loss_rate < TrigProbLossRtMax
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
                          |is_increasing
                          |   && qd_fract > QDFractMinTrigThro
     CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE |   && br_fract < BrFractMaxTrigThro
                          |   && xq_fract == 0.0
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
                          |Competing status
                          |   && comp_duration > CompMaintainTime
     CTRL_STOP_COMPETE    |   && qdelay < QDelayMaxTrigCompStop
                          |   && qmrange < QMRangeTrigCompStop
                          |   && xq_fract == 0.0
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
                          |1. Probing status
                          |   && is_increasing
                          |2. Probing status
                          |   && qd_fract > TrigStopProbQDFractMin
                          |3. Probing status
     CTRL_STOP_PROBING    |   && br_fract > TrigStopProbBrFractMin
                          |4. Probing status
                          |   && ecn_rate >= TrigStopProbECNRtMax
                          |5. Probing status
                          |   && loss_rate >= TrigStopProbLossRtMax
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
     CTRL_RESOLV_THROTTLE | Throttled status
                          |   && qdFract < 1.0
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

4.3.6.2 Handle control event by status

   CTRL_START_COMPETE and CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE are important signals to
   react promptly irrelevant the forward status. So, extracted handlers
   are described as follows.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   do_start_compete():
       target_qdelay = TargetQDelay + TargetXQDelay
       target_txbw = esti_bw * CompTargetTxbwRate
       status = Competing
   return

   do_detect_throttle():



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 12]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


       thro_backup_target_txbw = esti_bw
       target_txbw = esti_bw * ThroTargetTxbwRate
       status = Throttled
   return
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   Comprehensive handling for each status may seem to be complicated.
   So, this document supplements the pseudo code with simple available
   status change diagram.

            +-------------------+                      +---------+
            |      Default      |<====================>| Probing |
            +-------------------+                      +---------+
              | ^        | ^                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              | |        V |                                |
              | |   +-----------+                           |
              | |   | Competing |<--------------------------+
              | |   +-----------+                           |
              | |        | ^                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              | |        | |                                |
              V |        V |                                |
            +-------------------+                           |
            |     Throttled     |<--------------------------+
            +-------------------+

   +----------------+
   | Default status |
   +----------------+
   Event: CTRL_NOTHING
       if(qd_fract < DfltQDFractLow && target_txbw < esti_bw)
           target_txbw *= DfltBrIncrRate
       else if(qd_fract > DfltQDFractHi)
           target_txbw *= DfltBrDecrRate

   Event: CTRL_START_PROBING
       prob_backup_target_txrt = esti_bw
       target_txbw = esti_bw + prob_bw
       prob_start_tstmp = curr_tstmp
       status = Probing

   Event: CTRL_START_COMPETE
       do_start_compete()




J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 13]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   Event: CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE
       do_detect_throttle()

   +------------------+
   | Competing status |
   +------------------+
   Event: CTRL_NOTHING
       if( qd_fract < CompQDFractLow ||
          (qd_fract < CompQDFractHi && xq_fract > CompXQDFractLow) )
           target_txrt *= CompBrIncrRate

   Event: CTRL_SOTP_COMPETE
        target_qdelay = TargetQDelay
        status = Default

   Event: CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE
        do_detect_throttle()

   +----------------+
   | Probing status |
   +----------------+
   Event: CTRL_NOTHING
       if(curr_tstmp - prob_start_tstmp > ProbingTime)
           status = Default
           target_txnw = prob_backup_target_txbw + prob_bw

   Event: CTRL_STOP_PROBING
       target_txbw = esti_bw
       status = Default

   Event: CTRL_START_COMPETE
        do_start_compete()

   Event: CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE
        do_detect_throttle()

   +------------------+
   | Throttled status |
   +------------------+
   Event: CTRL_RESOLV_THROTTLE
        target_txbw = thro_backup_target_txbw
        status = Default

   Event: CTRL_START_COMPETE
        do_start_compete()

   Event: CTRL_DETECT_THROTTLE
        thro_backup_target_txbw = esti_bw



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 14]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


        target_txbw = esti_bw * ThroTargetTxbwRate


4.4 CCFS Control messages

   If txer wants to implement a specific feature that needs rxer's help,
   it can send CCFS control messages. CCFS control message is a RTCP
   message with FMT=CCFSCTRL value.

       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |V=2|P|  FMT    |   PT = 205    |          length               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         SSRC (Txer Id)                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         SSRC (Rxer Id)                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |X|  CMT    |   Length          |          . . .                |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
      .                      Control Message Value                    .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   SSRC for media source is replaced with Rxer Id.

   Control message block is followed and it can be multiple. The X bit
   indicates there is a control message block following the current
   block.

   CMT is the control message type to inform rxer which control message
   value type should be used. If rxer does not understand the CMT, it
   can discard the message.

   Length is the octet size of the control message value.

   Control Message Value is different depending on the CMT value.

4.4.1 Update feedback interval

   Txer can change the feedback interval if need. This message doesn't
   need to be guaranteed so rxer won't send response message but applied
   feedback message have the updated monitored field value.

      CMT: 1
      Length: 2
      Control Message Value: Interval time(msec)

5 Implement



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 15]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   <TBD>


6 Security Considerations

   <Security considerations text>


7 IANA Considerations

   <IANA considerations text>


8 References

8.1 Normative References

   [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
              July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.

   [RFC4585]  Ott, J., Wenger, S., Sato, N., Burmeister, C., and J. Rey,
              "Extended RTP Profile for Real-time Transport Control
              Protocol (RTCP)-Based Feedback (RTP/AVPF)", RFC 4585, DOI
              10.17487/RFC4585, July 2006, <http://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc4585>.

   [RFC6817]  Shalunov, S., Hazel, G., Iyengar, J., and M. Kuehlewind,
              "Low Extra Delay Background Transport (LEDBAT)", RFC 6817,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6817, December 2012, <http://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc6817>.

   [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI
              10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC1776]  Crocker, S., "The Address is the Message", RFC 1776, DOI
              10.17487/RFC1776, April 1 1995, <http://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc1776>.

   [TRUTHS]   Callon, R., "The Twelve Networking Truths", RFC 1925, DOI
              10.17487/RFC1925, April 1 1996, <http://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc1925>.


8.2 Informative References



J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 16]


Internet Draft                    CCFS                       August 2018


   [RFC2914]  Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles", BCP 41,
              RFC 2914, DOI 10.17487/RFC2914, September 2000,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2914>.

   [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
              Description Protocol", RFC 4566, DOI 10.17487/RFC4566,
              July 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4566>.

   [RFC5513]  Farrel, A., "IANA Considerations for Three Letter
              Acronyms", RFC 5513, DOI 10.17487/RFC5513, April 1 2009,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5513>.

   [I-D.ietf-dt-rmcat-feedback-message]
              "RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Feedback for Congestion
              Control", <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtcore-
              cc-feedback-message-02>

   [I-D.ietf-dt-rmcat-adaptive-fec]
              "Congestion Control Using FEC for Conversational Media",
              <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-rmcat-adaptive-
              fec-03>

Authors' Addresses


   Jungnam Gwock
   Line Plus
   South Korea

   EMail: jungnam.gwock@linecorp.com





















J. Gwock                 Expires March 7, 2019                 [Page 17]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.128b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/