draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-02.txt   draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-03.txt 
Transport Area Working Group G. Fairhurst Transport Area Working Group G. Fairhurst
Internet-Draft University of Aberdeen Internet-Draft University of Aberdeen
Updates: 2474 (if approved) April 03, 2018 Updates: 2474 (if approved) May 07, 2018
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: October 03, 2018 Expires: November 06, 2018
IANA Assignment of DSCP Pool 3 (xxxx01) Values to require Publication of IANA Assignment of DSCP Pool 3 (xxxx01) Values to require Publication of
a Standards Track or Best Current Practice RFC a Standards Track or Best Current Practice RFC
draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-02 draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-03
Abstract Abstract
The Differentiated Services (Diffserv) architecture specifies use of The Differentiated Services (Diffserv) architecture specifies use of
a field in the IPv4 and IPv6 packet headers to carry Diffserv a field in the IPv4 and IPv6 packet headers to carry Diffserv
Codepoint (DSCP) values. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Codepoint (DSCP) values. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
(IANA) maintains a registry of assigned DSCP values. (IANA) maintains a registry of assigned DSCP values.
This update to RFC2474 changes the IANA assignment method for Pool 3 This update to RFC2474 changes the IANA assignment method for Pool 3
of the registry (i.e., DSCP values of the form xxxx01) to Standards of the registry (i.e., DSCP values of the form xxxx01) to Standards
Action, i.e., values are assigned through a Standards Track or Best Action, i.e., values are assigned through a Standards Track or Best
Current Practice RFC. The update also removes permission for Current Practice RFC. The update also removes permission for
experimental and Local Use of the Codepoints that form Pool 3 of the experimental and Local Use of the Codepoints that form Pool 3 of the
DSCP registry; Pool 1 Codepoints (i.e., DSCP values of the form DSCP registry; Pool 2 Codepoints (i.e., DSCP values of the form
xxxx11) remain available for these purposes. xxxx11) remain available for these purposes.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 03, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 06, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
skipping to change at page 2, line 24 skipping to change at page 2, line 24
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. The update to RFC2474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. The update to RFC2474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Revision Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix A. Revision Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Differentiated Services (Diffserv) [RFC2475] architecture The Differentiated Services (Diffserv) [RFC2475] architecture
(updated by [RFC3260]) provides scalable service differentiation in (updated by [RFC3260]) provides scalable service differentiation in
the Internet. Diffserv uses the six most significant bits of the the Internet. Diffserv uses the six most significant bits of the
former IPv4 Type of Service (TOS) octet or the former IPV6 Traffic former IPv4 Type of Service (TOS) octet or the former IPV6 Traffic
Class octet to convey the field, which is used to carry the Diffserv Class octet to convey the field, which is used to carry the Diffserv
Codepoint (DSCP). This DSCP value is used to select a Diffserv Per Codepoint (DSCP). This DSCP value is used to select a Diffserv Per
hop Behaviour, PHB. hop Behaviour, PHB.
skipping to change at page 3, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 5
this codepoint space has been divided into three pools for the this codepoint space has been divided into three pools for the
purpose of codepoint assignment and management (as shown in figure purpose of codepoint assignment and management (as shown in figure
1). Pool 1 comprises 32 codepoints [RFC2474]. These are assigned by 1). Pool 1 comprises 32 codepoints [RFC2474]. These are assigned by
Standards Action, as defined in [RFC8126]. Pool 2 comprises a pool Standards Action, as defined in [RFC8126]. Pool 2 comprises a pool
of 16 codepoints reserved for experimental or Local Use (EXP/LU) as of 16 codepoints reserved for experimental or Local Use (EXP/LU) as
defined in [RFC2474], and Pool 3 comprises 16 codepoints, which were defined in [RFC2474], and Pool 3 comprises 16 codepoints, which were
specified as "initially available for experimental or local use, but specified as "initially available for experimental or local use, but
which should be preferentially utilized for standardized assignments which should be preferentially utilized for standardized assignments
if Pool 1 is ever exhausted" [RFC2474]. if Pool 1 is ever exhausted" [RFC2474].
+------+------------------+ +------+-----------------+
| Pool | Codepoint Space | | Pool | Codepoint Space |
+------+------------------+ +------+-----------------+
| 1 | xxxxx0 | | 1 | xxxxx0 |
+------+------------------+ +------+-----------------+
| 2 | xxxx11 | | 2 | xxxx11 |
+------+------------------+ +------+-----------------+
| 3 | xxxx01 | | 3 | xxxx01 |
+------+------------------+ +------+-----------------+
Figure 1: Format of the field for codepoints allocated in the Figure 1: Format of the field for codepoints allocated in the
three IANA pools (where 'x' refers to either '0' or '1'). three IANA pools (where 'x' refers to either '0' or '1').
At the time of writing this document, 23 of the 32 Pool 1 codepoints At the time of writing this document, 22 of the 32 Pool 1 codepoints
have currently been assigned. have currently been assigned.
Although Pool 1 has not yet been completely exhausted, this document Although Pool 1 has not yet been completely exhausted, this document
changes the IANA registration policy of Pool 3 to assignment by changes the IANA registration policy of Pool 3 to assignment by
Standards Action, i.e., values are assigned by Standards Track or Standards Action, i.e., values are assigned by Standards Track or
Best Current Practice RFCs. The rationale for this update is a need Best Current Practice RFCs. The rationale for this update is a need
to assign codepoints for particular PHBs that are unable to use any to assign codepoints for particular PHBs that are unable to use any
of the unassigned values in Pool 1. of the unassigned values in Pool 1.
An example is the need to assign a suitable recommended default An example is the need to assign a suitable recommended default
skipping to change at page 4, line 30 skipping to change at page 4, line 30
NEW: which are utilized for standardized assignments (replacing the NEW: which are utilized for standardized assignments (replacing the
previous availability for experimental or local use). previous availability for experimental or local use).
It removes the footnote in RFC2474 relating to Pool 3: It removes the footnote in RFC2474 relating to Pool 3:
DELETE: "(*) may be utilized for future Standards Action allocations DELETE: "(*) may be utilized for future Standards Action allocations
as necessary" as necessary"
The new registry contents are shown in Figure 2. The new registry contents are shown in Figure 2.
Pool Codepoint space Assignment Policy Pool Codepoint space Assignment Policy
---- --------------- ----------------- ---- --------------- ------------------
1 xxxxx0 Standards Action 1 xxxxx0 Standards Action
2 xxxx11 EXP/LU 2 xxxx11 EXP/LU
3 xxxx01 Standards Action 3 xxxx01 Standards Action
Figure 2: Updated Assignment Policy for the DSCP Registry Note for Pool 2: "Reserved for experimental or Local Use"
Figure 2: Updated Assignment Policy for the DSCP Registry
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
Security considerations for the use of DSCP values are described in Security considerations for the use of DSCP values are described in
the RFCs that define their usage. This document does not present new the RFCs that define their usage. This document does not present new
security considerations. security considerations.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This section requests IANA to change the use of Pool 3 in the DSCP This section requests IANA to change the use of Pool 3 in the DSCP
registry and to manage this pool using a Standards Action assignment registry and to manage this pool using a Standards Action assignment
method. method.
This requests IANA to make the following changes to the This requests IANA to make the following changes to the
Differentiated Services field Codepoints (DSCP) Registry, made Differentiated Services field Codepoints (DSCP) Registry, made
available at [Registry]. available at [Registry].
This update does not modify the IANA registry text for Pool 2. This
pool continues to preserve the note shown in Figure 2.
The previous registry text: The previous registry text:
3 xxxx01 Experimental or Local Use May be utilized for future 3 xxxx01 Experimental or Local Use May be utilized for future
Standards Action allocations as necessary. Standards Action allocations as necessary.
is replaced with the following registry text: is replaced with the following registry text:
3 xxxx01 Standards Action. 3 xxxx01 Standards Action.
To manage codepoints in Pool 3, IANA is requested to create and To manage codepoints in Pool 3, IANA is requested to create and
skipping to change at page 5, line 52 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F. and D. Black, [RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F. and D. Black,
"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS "Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474, DOI Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474, DOI
10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998, <http://www.rfc- 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998, <http://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2474>. editor.org/info/rfc2474>.
[RFC3260] Grossman, D., "New Terminology and Clarifications for [RFC3260] Grossman, D., "New Terminology and Clarifications for
Diffserv", RFC 3260, DOI 10.17487/RFC3260, April 2002, Diffserv", RFC 3260, DOI 10.17487/RFC3260, April 2002,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3260>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3260>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B. and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, <https://www
.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[Registry]
IANA, "Differentiated Services Field Codepoints (DSCP),
https://www.iana.org/assignments/dscp-registry/dscp-
registry.xhtml", .
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-tsvwg-le-phb] [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-le-phb]
Bless, R., "A Lower Effort Per-Hop Behavior (LE PHB)", Bless, R., "A Lower Effort Per-Hop Behavior (LE PHB)",
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-02, June 2017. Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-02, June 2017.
[RFC2475] Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z. [RFC2475] Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z.
and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated
Services", RFC 2475, DOI 10.17487/RFC2475, December 1998, Services", RFC 2475, DOI 10.17487/RFC2475, December 1998,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B. and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, <https://www
.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[Registry]
IANA, "Differentiated Services Field Codepoints (DSCP),
https://www.iana.org/assignments/dscp-registry/dscp-
registry.xhtml", .
Appendix A. Revision Notes Appendix A. Revision Notes
Note to RFC-Editor: please remove this entire section prior to Note to RFC-Editor: please remove this entire section prior to
publication. publication.
Individual submission as draft -00. Individual submission as draft -00.
o This is the initial version of the document. o This is the initial version of the document.
o Advice in this rev. from Michelle Cotton on the IANA procedure. o Advice in this rev. from Michelle Cotton on the IANA procedure.
skipping to change at page 6, line 51 skipping to change at page 7, line 4
Working Group submission as draft -00 Working Group submission as draft -00
o Adopted by the TSVWG working group. o Adopted by the TSVWG working group.
Working Group submission as draft -01 Working Group submission as draft -01
o Fixed exploded acronyms. o Fixed exploded acronyms.
Working Group submission as draft -02 Working Group submission as draft -02
o Corrections after WGLC. o Corrections after WGLC.
Working Group submission as draft -03
o Corrections after TSVWG Shepherd Review.
Author's Address Author's Address
Godred Fairhurst Godred Fairhurst
University of Aberdeen University of Aberdeen
Department of Engineering Department of Engineering
Fraser Noble Building Fraser Noble Building
Aberdeen, AB24 3UE Aberdeen, AB24 3UE
Scotland Scotland
Email: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Email: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
URI: http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ URI: http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/
 End of changes. 18 change blocks. 
34 lines changed or deleted 43 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/