[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: April 21, 2011                                         Ericsson
                                                        October 18, 2010


   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for
                       Notification Rate Control
                draft-ietf-sipcore-event-rate-control-05

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.

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 April 21, 2011.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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 April 21, 2011                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     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
   7.  Operation of the Adaptive Minimum Rate Mechanism . . . . . . . 16
     7.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.3.  Calculating the Timeout  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   8.  Usage of the Maximum Rate, Minimum Rate and Adaptive
       Minimum Rate Mechanisms in a combination . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   9.  Protocol Element Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     9.1.  "min-interval", "max-interval" and "average-interval"
           Header Field Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     9.2.  Grammar  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     9.3.  Event Header Field Usage in Responses to the NOTIFY
           request  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   10. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   11. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   12. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23







Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


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; it is strictly an
   implementation decision whether batching of notifications is
   supported, and by what means.

   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 event notifications generated by the notifier:

   min-interval:  specifies a minimum notification time period (maximum
      rate) between two notifications, in seconds.







Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   max-interval:  specifies a maximum notification time period (minimum
      rate) between two notifications, in seconds.

   average-interval:  specifies an average maximum notification time
      period (adaptive minimum rate) between two notifications, in
      seconds.

   The requirements and model are further discussed in Section 3.  All
   these mechanisms are simply timer values that indicate the minimum,
   maximum and average maximum time period allowed between two
   notifications.  As a result of these mechanisms, a compliant notifier
   will adjust the rate at which it generates notifications.

   These mechanisms are applicable to any event subscription, both
   single event subscription and event list subscription.


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
   notification 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 ("min-interval" parameter), i.e. a minimum time
   interval between two notifications.  The RLS will buffer
   notifications that do not comply with the maximum rate and batch all
   of the buffered state changes together in a single notification only
   when allowed by the maximum rate.  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 the presence



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   client can expect to receive.  For example, with a "min-interval" of
   20 seconds, the presence application can expect to receive a
   notification no more frequently than every 20 seconds.

   The presence client can also modify the "min-interval" parameter
   during the lifetime of the subscription.  For example, if the User
   Interface (UI) of the application shows inactivity for a period of
   time, it can simply pause the notifications by setting the "min-
   interval" parameter to the subscription expiration time, while still
   keeping the subscription alive.  When the user becomes active again,
   the presence client can resume the stream of notifications by re-
   subscribing with a "min-interval" 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 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.

   In order to control the actual state, the location application sets a
   minimum rate ("max-interval" parameter), i.e. a maximum time interval
   between two notifications.

   The location application can also modify the "max-interval" parameter
   during the lifetime of the subscription.  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.  The "max-interval" parameter
   indicates to the notifier the maximum amount of time that should be
   allowed to elapse between NOTIFY requests containing complete state
   information.  Once state is acquired and the second notification is
   sent, the subscriber updates or changes the "max-interval" parameter
   to a more sensible value.  This update can be performed in the 200 OK
   response to the NOTIFY request that contains the complete state
   information.




Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


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 frequency adaptively.  However, there are some
   applications that would work better with an adaptive minimum rate
   control.  This section illustrates the tracking scenario.

   A tracking application is monitoring the movement of a target.  In
   order to decrease the processing in the application, the tracking
   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 tracking application wants
   the minimum rate of notifications to increase.

   The application sets an adaptive minimum rate ("average-interval"
   parameter), i.e. an average maximum time interval between two
   notifications.  The "average-interval" parameter value is used by the
   notifier to dynamically calculate the actual maximum time ("timeout"
   parameter) between two notifications.  In order to dynamically
   calculate the maximum time, the notifier takes into consideration the
   frequency at which notifications have been sent recently.  In the
   adaptive minimum rate mechanism the notifier can increase or decrease
   the notification frequency compared to minimum rate mechanism based
   on the recent number of notifications sent out in the last period.

   The tracking application can also modify the "average-interval"
   parameter during the lifetime of the subscription.

3.4.  Requirements

   REQ1:   The subscriber must be able to set a maximum rate ("min-
           interval" parameter) of notifications in a specific
           subscription.

   REQ2:   The subscriber must be able to set a minimum rate ("max-
           interval" parameter) of notifications in a specific
           subscription.

   REQ3:   The subscriber must be able to set an adaptive minimum rate
           ("average-interval" parameter), 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.




Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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
           "min-interval", "max-interval" and "average-interval"
           paremeters are adjusted from the value given by the
           subscriber.

              For example, due to congestion reasons, local policy at
              the notifier could temporarily dictate a policy that in
              effect increases the subscriber-configured minimum time
              period between two notifications.  In another example, the
              notifier can decrease the proposed minimum time by the
              subscriber to match it with the remaining expiry time left
              for the subscription.

   REQ8:   The different rate control mechanisms must address corner
           cases for setting the time periods between two notifications.
           At a minimum, the mechanisms must address the situation when
           the time between two notifications would exceed the
           subscription duration and should provide mechanisms 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 "min-interval", "max-interval" or "average-
   interval" Event header field parameter(s) as part of the SUBSCRIBE



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   request.

   A subscriber that wants to update a previously agreed event rate
   control parameter does so by including the updated "min-interval",
   "max-interval" or "average-interval" 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 "min-interval, "max-interval", or "average-interval" header field
   parameters in the most recent SUBSCRIBE request in a given dialog, it
   MUST NOT include an Event header field with any of those parameters
   in a 2xx response to a NOTIFY request in that dialog.

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 will
   comply with the value given in "min-interval", "max-interval" and
   "average-interval" parameters and adjust its rate of notification
   accordingly.  However, 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.


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 a
   minimum time interval between two consecutive notifications included
   in the "min-interval" Event header field parameter.  The value of
   this parameter is an integral number of seconds in decimal.

      Note that the witnessed time between two consecutive received
      notifications may not conform to the "min-interval" value for a
      number of reasons.  For example, network jitter and
      retransmissions may result in the subscriber receiving the
      notifications with smaller intervals than the "min-interval" value
      recommends.

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



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   A subscriber that wishes to remove the maximum rate control from
   notifications MUST indicate so by not including a "min-interval"
   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
   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 "min-interval" Event header parameter from a SUBSCRIBE
   request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request and use it as the
   suggested minimum time allowed between two notifications.  This value
   can be adjusted by the notifier, as defined in Section 5.3.

   A compliant notifier MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted minimum
   time interval in a "min-interval" Subscription-State header field
   parameter of the subsequent NOTIFY requests.  The indicated "min-
   interval" 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-interval" 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 notifications more frequently
   than the maximum rate allows for, except when generating the
   notification either upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE request (the first
   notification), when the subscription state is changing from "pending"
   to "active" state or upon termination of the subscription (the last
   notification).  Such notifications reset the timer for the next
   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 "min-interval" Subscription-
   State header field parameter included in the 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



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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 "min-interval"
   value.  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 in exactly two notifications to be generated.  If
   the subscriber requests a "min-interval" value greater than the
   subscription expiration, the notifier MUST lower the "min-interval"
   value and set it to the 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 lower
   the "min-interval" value and set it to the reduced 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 "min-interval" value
   to 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 maximum
   rate value by the subscriber based on its local policy, static
   configuration or other implementation-determined constraints.  The
   notifier MUST include the adjusted "min-interval" value in the
   Subscription-State header field's "min-interval" parameter in each of
   the NOTIFY requests.  In addition, different event packages MAY
   define additional constraints to the allowed "min-interval"
   intervals.  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.




Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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.

                       +--------+
                       | Event  |
        +--------+     |Resource|     +--------+
        | Event  |     +--------+     | Event  |
        |Resource|         |          |Resource|
        +---.=---+         |          +---=----+
              `-..         |         _.--'
                  ``-._    |    _.--'
                       +'--'--'-+
                       |Resource|
                       |  List  |
                       | Server |
                       +---.----+
                           |
                           |
                        )--+---(
                        |      |       .------------.
                        |Buffer|<======'min-interval|
                        |      |       `------------'
                        )--.---(
                           |
                           |
                       .---+---.
                       | 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:





Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


      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.

   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



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   notification.  If there is a pending notification, the notifier
   simply replaces that notification with the new notification,
   discarding the older state.

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 "min-interval" 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 a
   maximum time interval between two consecutive notifications included
   in the "max-interval" Event header field parameter.  The value of
   this parameter is an integral number of seconds in decimal.

   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed minimum rate
   of notifications MUST include the updated "max-interval" 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



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   notifications MUST indicate so by not including a "max-interval"
   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 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 sending only an etag
   instead of the full resource state in a notification if the state has
   not changed.

6.2.  Notifier Behavior

   A notifier that supports the minimum rate mechanism MUST extract the
   value of the "max-interval" Event header field parameter from a
   SUBSCRIBE request or a 2xx response to the NOTIFY request and use it
   as the suggested maximum time allowed between two notifications.

   The notifier MAY decide to increase or decrease the proposed minimum
   rate value based on its local policy, static configuration or other
   implementation-determined constraints.  A compliant notifier MUST
   reflect back the possibly adjusted maximum time interval in a "max-
   interval" Subscription-State header field parameter of the subsequent
   NOTIFY requests.  The indicated "max-interval" 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-interval" 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
   value in the "max-interval" parameter.  Depending on the event
   package and subscriber preferences indicated in the SUBSCRIBE
   request, the NOTIFY request sent as a result of a max-interval
   expiration MUST contain either the current full state or the partial
   state showing the difference between the current state and the last
   successfully communicated state.

   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.






Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


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 an average maximum time interval between two
   consecutive notifications included in a "average-interval" Event
   header field parameter.  The value of this parameter is an integral
   number of seconds in decimal.

   A subscriber that wishes to update the previously agreed adaptive
   minimum rate of notifications MUST include the updated "average-
   interval" 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 "average-
   interval" 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 adative
   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 sending only an
   etag instead of the full resource state in a notification 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 "average-interval" 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 7.3.

   The notifier MAY decide to increase or decrease the proposed
   "average-interval" based on its local policy, static configuration or
   other implementation-determined constraints.  A compliant notifier
   MUST reflect back the possibly adjusted time interval in an "average-
   interval" Subscription-State header field parameter of the subsequent
   NOTIFY requests.  The indicated "average-interval" 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 "average-interval" 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.



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   A compliant notifier SHOULD 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 7.3.

   The adaptive minimum rate mechanism is implemented as follows:

   1)  When a subscription is first created, the notifier creates a
       record that keeps track of the number of notifications that have
       been sent in the "period".  This record is initialized to contain
       a history of having sent one message every "average-interval"
       seconds for the "period".

   2)  The "timeout" value is calculated according to the equation given
       in Section 7.3.

   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 or a state change), the notifier updates the notification
       history record, 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.
   In other words, the timeout does not in any way break or modify the
   normal retransmission mechanism specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261].

7.3.  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 = (average-interval ^ 2) * count / period              (1)


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

   average-interval:  The value of the "average-interval" parameter
      conveyed in the Subscription-State header field, in seconds.

   period:  The rolling average period, in seconds.  The value of the
      "period" parameter is chosen by the notifier, however the notifier
      MUST choose a value greater than the value of the "average-
      interval" parameter.  The granularity of the values for the



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


      "period" parameter is set by local policy at the notifier.  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.

   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[min-interval, (average-interval ^ 2) * count / period] (2)


   min-interval:  The value of the "min-interval" parameter conveyed in
      the Subscription-State header field, in seconds.

   The formula in (2) makes sure that for all the possible values of the
   "min-interval" and "average-interval" parameters, with "average-
   interval" > "min-interval", the timeout never results in a lower
   value than the value of the "min-interval" 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
   "min-interval" or "max-interval" 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 frequency rate, but at the same time assures the
      reception of a notification every time the most recent
      notification exceeds a specified interval.




Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


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

   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 "average-interval" value higher than
      the "min-interval" value, otherwise the notifier MUST adjust the
      subscriber provided "average-interval" value to a value equal to
      or higher than the "min-interval" 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 "max-interval" value higher than the
      "average-interval" value, otherwise the notifier MUST NOT consider
      the "max-interval" 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 "max-interval" and "average-interval"
      values higher than the "min-interval" value, otherwise the
      notifier MUST adjust the subscriber provided "max-interval" and
      "average-interval" values to a value equal to or higher than the
      "min-interval" value.

      A subscriber SHOULD choose a "max-interval" value higher than the
      "average-interval" value, otherwise the notifier MUST NOT consider
      the "max-interval" value.


9.  Protocol Element Definitions

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

9.1.  "min-interval", "max-interval" and "average-interval" Header Field
      Parameters

   The "min-interval", "max-interval" and "average-interval" parameters



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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.

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    =/  min-interval-param
      subexp-params  =/  min-interval-param
      min-interval-param =   "min-interval" EQUAL delta-seconds

      event-param    =/  max-interval-param
      subexp-params  =/  max-interval-param
      max-interval-param =   "max-interval" EQUAL delta-seconds

      event-param    =/  average-interval-param
      subexp-params  =/  average-interval-param
      average-interval-param =   "average-interval" EQUAL delta-seconds


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 value for maximum, minimum or
   adaptive minimum rate of notifications can do so by including all
   desired values for the "min-interval", "max-interval" and "average-
   interval" 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.




Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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.


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                min-interval          No           [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   min-interval          No           [RFCxxxx]
      Event                max-interval          No           [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   max-interval          No           [RFCxxxx]
      Event                average-interval      No           [RFCxxxx]
      Subscription-State   average-interval      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.



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   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.

   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 and Janet Gunn 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",



Niemi, et al.            Expires April 21, 2011                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


              RFC 5263, September 2008.

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 April 21, 2011                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft             Event Rate Control               October 2010


   Krisztian Kiss
   Nokia
   323 Fairchild Dr
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   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 April 21, 2011                [Page 24]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/