1 / 8

An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

This paper by Michael Menth introduces a new approach to admission control (AC) and flow termination (FT) using PCN-marked signaling. It discusses limitations of current methods like Controlled Load (CL) and Simple Marking (SM) which do not adequately function in legacy tunnels and require significant requirements. The proposed method operates independently of additional signaling protocols and ingress-egress aggregates. The paper outlines mechanisms for marking behavior, a regular check termination process, and the potential advantages of the new approach, emphasizing its effectiveness in maintaining flow control under varying conditions.

taro
Télécharger la présentation

An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination Michael Menth

  2. Outline • Motivation • Assumptions • Admission control using PCN-marked signaling • Regular check termination • Conclusion Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  3. Motivation • Why another edge behavior? • CL does not work with legacy tunnels, requires RFC6040 • SM requires significant traffic per ingress-egress-aggregate to work well • Both require additional signaling protocols • Both require ingress-egress-aggregates • Not defined how to realize them in different environments • Therefore, not clear how measurements can be performed • Both have problems with multipath routing Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  4. Assumptions • Marking behavior: same as in CL • Threshold-marking configured with PCN-admissible-rate • Excess-traffic-marking configured with PCN-supportable-rate • PCN encoding • Packet-specific dual marking (PSDM), works with legacy tunnels • Alternative: 3-in-1 encoding, requires RFC6040 • Path-coupled end-to-end signaling AC & FT decisionpoint Data End-to-end signalling Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  5. Admission ControlUsing PCN-MarkedSignalling • http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-menth-pcn-marked-signaling-ac(co-author Ruediger Geib) • http://atlas2.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/menth/papers/Menth08-Sub-8.pdf • Initial PATH messagegetsmarked (PM, ThM, ETM): block flow! • Initial PATH messageremains not-marked (NM): admitflow! AC & FT decisionpoint PATH PATH_TEAR AC & FT decisionpoint PATH RESV Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  6. Regular Check Termination – Mechanism • https://atlas2.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/menth/papers/Menth10-Sub-8.pdf(ideasupportedby Ruediger Geib) • Egressnode • Remembersmarkingofmostrecent packet foreachadmittedflow • Checks everyflow in periodicintervalsandsends RESV_TEAR ifmostrecent packet was marked Flow 0 Flow 1 Flow 2 Most recentpackets  Terminateflow 1! Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  7. Regular Check Termination – Performance • Regular check interval • : Flow terminationdelayfor PCN domain • Termination behaviorindependentof packet inter-arrival time & packet size • Fast termination • Even in thepresenceof packet loss • Does not needpreferential packet drops • Works withpreferentialdroppingofmarkedpackets Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

  8. Conclusion • Proposed AC and FT method independent of each other • Only new “PCN-marked signaling” AC may be used in CL-like environment • Only new “regular check” FT may be used in CL-like environment • Advantage of combination • No need for RFC6040 compliance • No need for additional PCN signaling protocol • No need for ingress-egress-aggregates • What to do with • PSDM encoding (WG document)? • Admission control based on PCN-marked signaling? • Regular check termination? • Options • Who supports ideas? • One or several informational docs? • If PCN is closed, may be finished in TSVWG Michael Menth – An Alternative Edge Behavior for PCN-Based Admission Control and Flow Termination

More Related