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

Versions: (draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-prpolicies) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 RFC 7496

Network Working Group                                          M. Tuexen
Internet-Draft                          Muenster Univ. of Appl. Sciences
Intended status: Standards Track                           R. Seggelmann
Expires: November 30, 2014                  T-Systems International GmbH
                                                              R. Stewart
                                                          Adara Networks
                                                               S. Loreto
                                                                Ericsson
                                                            May 29, 2014


Additional Policies for the Partial Reliability Extension of the Stream
                     Control Transmission Protocol
                draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-prpolicies-03.txt

Abstract

   This document defines two additional policies for the Partial
   Reliability Extension of the Stream Control Transmission Protocol
   (PR-SCTP) allowing to limit the number of retransmissions or to
   prioritize user messages for more efficient send buffer usage.

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 November 30, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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



Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


   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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Additional PR-SCTP Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Limited Retransmissions Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Priority Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Socket API Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Data Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.2.  Support for Added PR-SCTP Policies  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.3.  Socket Option for Getting the PR-SCTP Status
           (SCTP_PR_STATUS)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.4.  Socket Option for Getting and Setting the PR-SCTP Support
           (SCTP_PR_SUPPORTED) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   The SCTP Partial Reliability Extension (PR-SCTP) defined in [RFC3758]
   provides a generic method for senders to abandon user messages.  The
   decision to abandon a user message is sender side only and the exact
   condition is called a PR-SCTP policy.  [RFC3758] also defines one
   particular PR-SCTP policy, called Timed Reliability.  This allows the
   sender to specify a timeout for a user message after which the SCTP
   stack abandons the user message.

   This document specifies the following two additional PR-SCTP
   policies:

   Limited Retransmission Policy:  Allows to limit the number of
      retransmissions.

   Priority Policy:  Allows to discard lower priority messages if space
      for higher priority messages is needed in the send buffer.





Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


2.  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 [RFC2119].

3.  Additional PR-SCTP Policies

   This section defines two new PR-SCTP policies, one in each
   subsection.

   Please note that it is REQUIRED to implement [RFC3758], if you want
   to implement these additional policies.  However, these additional
   policies are OPTIONAL when implementing [RFC3758].

3.1.  Limited Retransmissions Policy

   Using the Limited Retransmission Policy allows the sender of a user
   message to specify an upper limit for the number of retransmissions
   for each DATA chunk of the given user messages.  The sender MUST
   abandon a user message if the number of retransmissions of any of the
   DATA chunks of the user message would exceed the provided limit.  The
   sender MUST perform all other actions required for processing the
   retransmission event, like possibly adopting the congestion window
   and the retransmission timeout.  Please note that the number of
   retransmissions includes both fast and timer based retransmissions.

   The sender MAY limit the number of retransmissions to 0.  This will
   result in abandoning the message when it would get retransmitted for
   the first time.  The use of this setting provides a service similar
   to UDP, which also does not perform any retransmissions.

   The Limited Retransmissions Policy is used for data channels in the
   WebRTC protocol stack.  See [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] for more
   information.

3.2.  Priority Policy

   Using the Priority Policy allows the sender of a user message to
   specify a priority.  When storing a user message in the send buffer
   while there is not enough available space, the SCTP stack at the
   sender side MAY abandon other user messages of the same SCTP
   association with a priority lower than the provided one.  The
   algorithm for selecting the message being abandoned is implementation
   specific.

   After lower priority messages have been abandoned high priority
   messages can be transferred without blocking the send call (if used



Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


   in blocking mode) or the send call fails (if used in non-blocking
   mode).

   The Priority Policy can be used in the IPFIX protocol stack.  See
   [RFC7011] for more information.

4.  Socket API Considerations

   This section describes how the socket API defined in [RFC6458] is
   extended to support the newly defined PR-SCTP policies, to provide
   some statistical information and to control the negotiation of the
   PR-SCTP extension during the SCTP association setup.

   Please note that this section is informational only.

4.1.  Data Types

   This section uses data types from [IEEE.1003-1G.1997]: uintN_t means
   an unsigned integer of exactly N bits (e.g. uint16_t).  This is the
   same as in [RFC6458].

4.2.  Support for Added PR-SCTP Policies

   As defined in [RFC6458], the PR-SCTP policy is specified and
   configured by using the following sctp_prinfo structure:

   struct sctp_prinfo {
     uint16_t pr_policy;
     uint32_t pr_value;
   };

   When the Limited Retransmission Policy described in Section 3.1 is
   used, pr_policy has the value SCTP_PR_SCTP_RTX and the number of
   retransmissions is given in pr_value.

   For using the Priority Policy described in Section 3.2, pr_policy has
   the value SCTP_PR_SCTP_PRIO.  The priority is given in pr_value.  The
   value of zero is the highest priority and larger numbers in pr_value
   denote lower priorities.

   The following table summarizes the possible parameter settings
   defined in [RFC6458] and this document:









Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


     +-------------------+---------------------------+---------------+
     | pr_policy         | pr_value                  | Specification |
     +-------------------+---------------------------+---------------+
     | SCTP_PR_SCTP_NONE | Ignored                   | [RFC6458]     |
     | SCTP_PR_SCTP_TTL  | Lifetime in ms            | [RFC6458]     |
     | SCTP_PR_SCTP_RTX  | Number of retransmissions | Section 3.1   |
     | SCTP_PR_SCTP_PRIO | Priority                  | Section 3.2   |
     +-------------------+---------------------------+---------------+

4.3.  Socket Option for Getting the PR-SCTP Status (SCTP_PR_STATUS)

   This socket option uses IPPROTO_SCTP as its level and SCTP_PR_STATUS
   as its name.  It can only be used with getsockopt(), but not with
   setsockopt().  The socket option value uses the following structure:

   struct sctp_prstatus {
     sctp_assoc_t sprstat_assoc_id;
     uint64_t sprstat_abandoned_unsent;
     uint64_t sprstat_abandoned_sent;
   };

   sprstat_assoc_id:  This parameter is ignored for one-to-one style
      sockets.  For one-to-many style sockets this parameter indicates
      for which association the user wants the information.  It is an
      error to use SCTP_{CURRENT|ALL|FUTURE}_ASSOC in sprstat_assoc_id.

   sprstat_abandoned_unsent:  The number of user messages which have
      been abandoned, before any part of the user message could be sent.

   sprstat_abandoned_sent:  The number of user messages which have been
      abandoned, after a part of the user message has been sent.

   There are separate counters for unsent and sent user messages because
   the SCTP_SEND_FAILED_EVENT supports a similar differentiation.
   Please note that an abandoned large user message requiring an SCTP
   level fragmentation is reported in the sprstat_abandoned_sent counter
   as soon as at least one fragment of it has been sent.  Therefore each
   abandoned user message is either counted in sprstat_abandoned_unsent
   or sprstat_abandoned_sent.

   If more detailed information about abandoned user messages is
   required, the subscription to the SCTP_SEND_FAILED_EVENT is
   recommended.

   sctp_opt_info() needs to be extended to support SCTP_PR_STATUS.






Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


4.4.  Socket Option for Getting and Setting the PR-SCTP Support
      (SCTP_PR_SUPPORTED)

   This socket option allows the enabling or disabling of the
   negotiation of PR-SCTP support for future associations.  For existing
   associations it allows to query whether PR-SCTP support was
   negotiated or not on particular associations.

   Whether PR-SCTP is enabled or not per default is implementation
   specific.

   This socket option uses IPPROTO_SCTP as its level and
   SCTP_PR_SUPPORTED as its name.  It can be used with getsockopt() and
   setsockopt().  The socket option value uses the following structure
   defined in [RFC6458]:

   struct sctp_assoc_value {
     sctp_assoc_t assoc_id;
     uint32_t assoc_value;
   };

   assoc_id:  This parameter is ignored for one-to-one style sockets.
      For one-to-many style sockets, this parameter indicates upon which
      association the user is performing an action.  The special
      sctp_assoc_t SCTP_FUTURE_ASSOC can also be used, it is an error to
      use SCTP_{CURRENT|ALL}_ASSOC in assoc_id.

   assoc_value:  A non-zero value encodes the enabling of PR-SCTP
      whereas a value of 0 encodes the disabling of PR-SCTP.

   sctp_opt_info() needs to be extended to support SCTP_PR_SUPPORTED.

5.  IANA Considerations

   This document requires no actions from IANA.

6.  Security Considerations

   This document does not add any additional security considerations in
   addition to the ones given in [RFC4960], [RFC3758], and [RFC6458].
   As indicated in the Security Section of [RFC3758], transport layer
   security in the form of TLS over SCTP (see [RFC3436]) can't be used
   for PR-SCTP.  However, DTLS over SCTP (see [RFC6083]) could be used
   instead.  It should also be noted that using PR-SCTP for an SCTP
   association doesn't allow that association to behave more
   aggressively congestion-control wise than an SCTP association not
   using PR-SCTP.




Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


7.  Acknowledgments

   The authors wish to thank Gorry Fairhurst, Karen Egede Nielsen, Ka-
   Cheong Poon, Irene Ruengeler, Jamal Hadi Salim, and Vlad Yasevich for
   their invaluable comments.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC3758]  Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P.
              Conrad, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)
              Partial Reliability Extension", RFC 3758, May 2004.

   [RFC4960]  Stewart, R., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC
              4960, September 2007.

8.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3436]  Jungmaier, A., Rescorla, E., and M. Tuexen, "Transport
              Layer Security over Stream Control Transmission Protocol",
              RFC 3436, December 2002.

   [RFC6083]  Tuexen, M., Seggelmann, R., and E. Rescorla, "Datagram
              Transport Layer Security (DTLS) for Stream Control
              Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 6083, January 2011.

   [RFC6458]  Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., Poon, K., Lei, P., and V.
              Yasevich, "Sockets API Extensions for the Stream Control
              Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 6458, December 2011.

   [RFC7011]  Claise, B., Trammell, B., and P. Aitken, "Specification of
              the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the
              Exchange of Flow Information", STD 77, RFC 7011, September
              2013.

   [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel]
              Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data
              Channels", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-09 (work in
              progress), May 2014.

   [IEEE.1003-1G.1997]
              Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
              "Protocol Independent Interfaces", IEEE Standard 1003.1G,
              March 1997.



Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft         Additional PR-SCTP Policies              May 2014


Authors' Addresses

   Michael Tuexen
   Muenster University of Applied Sciences
   Stegerwaldstrasse 39
   48565 Steinfurt
   DE

   Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de


   Robin Seggelmann
   T-Systems International GmbH
   Fasanenweg 5
   70771 Leinfelden-Echterdingen
   DE

   Email: robin.seggelmann@t-systems.com


   Randall R. Stewart
   Adara Networks
   Chapin, SC  29036
   US

   Email: randall@lakerest.net


   Salvatore Loreto
   Ericsson
   Hirsalantie 11
   Jorvas  02420
   FI

   Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com
















Tuexen, et al.          Expires November 30, 2014               [Page 8]


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