From karagian@cs.utwente.nl Thu Jul 12 23:13:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE0121F8512; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:13:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.504 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.504 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zbI70ot-2lNs; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (exedge02.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.5.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A865F21F850D; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXHUB01.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.4.228) by EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.5.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.339.1; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 08:14:04 +0200 Received: from EXMBX04.ad.utwente.nl ([169.254.4.41]) by EXHUB01.ad.utwente.nl ([130.89.4.228]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.001; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 08:14:04 +0200 From: To: , Thread-Topic: main changes in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 Thread-Index: Ac1gvn5JlkkaAClTQ4i9+XfT3/jEgg== Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 06:14:04 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US Content-Language: nl-NL X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [80.60.223.107] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE445FEXMBX04adutwent_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [PCN] main changes in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 06:13:32 -0000 --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE445FEXMBX04adutwent_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, The 02 version of the RSVP-PCN draft has been submitted last week to the IE= TF, see below: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02.txt All comments received up to now are worked out! The main changes compared to version 02 version are: =3D> Main change 1: The draft is written in such a way that the following t= wo assumptions do not anymore apply! o) Assumption 1: More than one IEAs between same pair of PCN edge nodes sho= uld be supported, each of them using a different PHB-ID value Why?: A requesting individual flow has a higher chance to be admitted to an= IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state How? When IEA supported by a PCN-in= gress-node is in PCN-admission state, then based on local policy, requestin= g e2e RSVP session (individual flow) should be either rejected or mapped to= another IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state In particular, the IEA definition used in PCN is not modified. Moreover eac= h RSVP generic aggregated state is mapped/matched to only one IEA. o) Assumption 2: PCN-ingress-node should be able to reduce bandwidth of an = individual flow without terminating the flow Why?: flows will not be terminated unnecessary and at the same time the IEA= bandwidth is reduced to solve the severe congestion How?: When for IEA supported by PCN-ingress-node incoming traffic needs to = be reduced then: based on a local policy and for same IEA, selects a number of e2e RSVP sess= ions (individual flows) to be either terminated or reserved bandwidth of e2= e RSVP sessions (individual flows) is reduced. In particular, it is emphasized that the default manner of how the IEA ban= dwidth is reduced during flow termination is based on the description given= in the SM and CL edge behavior drafts. =3D> Main change 2: The open issue given on page 18 in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsv= p-pcn-01 is removed. According to the discussion that we had on the mailing= list, the First option was selected. The PCN objects of C-Type: RSVP-AGGR= EGATE-IPv4-PCN-CL-FLIDs or RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv6-PCN-CL-FLIDs MUST be carried= by the aggregated Resv message. =3D> Other changes: Terminology section is updated according to the last ve= rsions of SM and CL drafts. Some editorials are fixed. For more details on differences between draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-01 and dr= aft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02, please see: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 Comments are appreciated! Best regards, Georgios --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE445FEXMBX04adutwent_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

 

The 02 version of the RSVP-PCN draft has been submitted last week to the= IETF, see below:

 

http= ://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02.txt

 


All comments received up to now are worked out!
The main changes compared to version 02 version are:

 

=3D> Main change 1: The draft is written in such a way that the follo= wing two assumptions do not anymore apply!

 

o) Assumption 1: More than one IEAs between same pair of PCN edge nodes = should be supported, each of them using a different PHB-ID value
Why?: A requesting individual flow has a higher chance to be admitted to an= IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state How? When IEA supported by a PCN-in= gress-node is in PCN-admission state, then based on local policy, requestin= g e2e RSVP session (individual flow) should be either rejected or mapped to another IEA that is NOT in PCN-admi= ssion-state

In particular, the IEA definition used in PCN is not modified. Moreover = each RSVP generic aggregated state is mapped/matched to only one IEA.


o) Assumption 2: PCN-ingress-node should be able to reduce bandwidth of an = individual flow without terminating the flow
Why?: flows will not be terminated unnecessary and at the same time the IEA= bandwidth is reduced to solve the severe congestion
How?: When for IEA supported by PCN-ingress-node incoming traffic needs to = be reduced then:
based on a local policy and for same IEA, selects a number of e2e RSVP sess= ions (individual flows) to be either terminated or reserved bandwidth of e2= e RSVP sessions (individual flows) is reduced.

In particular, it is emphasized that the default manner of  how the= IEA bandwidth is reduced during flow termination is based on the descripti= on given in the SM and CL edge behavior drafts.

 

=3D> Main change 2: The open issue given on page 18 in draft-ietf-tsv= wg-rsvp-pcn-01 is removed. According to the discussion that we had on the m= ailing list, the First option was selected. The PCN objects of C-Type: = ; RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv4-PCN-CL-FLIDs or RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv6-PCN-CL-FLIDs MUST be carried by the
aggregated Resv message.

 

 

=3D> Other changes: Terminology section is updated according to the l= ast versions of SM and CL drafts.
Some editorials are fixed.

 

 

For more details on differences between draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-01 and= draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02,  please see:


http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02


Comments are appreciated!


Best regards,
Georgios

--_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE445FEXMBX04adutwent_-- From karagian@cs.utwente.nl Sat Jul 14 22:53:50 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E84B011E8088 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 22:53:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.241 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.241 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.745, BAYES_05=-1.11, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pHubIjOGiZDt for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 22:53:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (exedge02.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.5.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7946111E8072 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 22:53:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.4.229) by EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.5.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.339.1; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 07:54:28 +0200 Received: from EXMBX04.ad.utwente.nl ([169.254.4.41]) by EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl ([130.89.4.229]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.001; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 07:54:27 +0200 From: To: Thread-Topic: main changes in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 Thread-Index: Ac1gvn5JlkkaAClTQ4i9+XfT3/jEggBj5Tlm Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 05:54:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US Content-Language: nl-NL X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [80.60.223.107] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE478CEXMBX04adutwent_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [PCN] main changes in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 05:53:51 -0000 --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE478CEXMBX04adutwent_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, The 02 version of the RSVP-PCN draft has been submitted last week to the IE= TF, see below: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02.txt All comments received up to now are worked out! The main changes compared to version 02 version are: =3D> Main change 1: The draft is written in such a way that the following t= wo assumptions do not anymore apply! o) Assumption 1: More than one IEAs between same pair of PCN edge nodes sho= uld be supported, each of them using a different PHB-ID value Why?: A requesting individual flow has a higher chance to be admitted to an= IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state How? When IEA supported by a PCN-in= gress-node is in PCN-admission state, then based on local policy, requestin= g e2e RSVP session (individual flow) should be either rejected or mapped to= another IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state In particular, the IEA definition used in PCN is not modified. Moreover eac= h RSVP generic aggregated state is mapped/matched to only one IEA. o) Assumption 2: PCN-ingress-node should be able to reduce bandwidth of an = individual flow without terminating the flow Why?: flows will not be terminated unnecessary and at the same time the IEA= bandwidth is reduced to solve the severe congestion How?: When for IEA supported by PCN-ingress-node incoming traffic needs to = be reduced then: based on a local policy and for same IEA, selects a number of e2e RSVP sess= ions (individual flows) to be either terminated or reserved bandwidth of e2= e RSVP sessions (individual flows) is reduced. In particular, it is emphasized that the default manner of how the IEA ban= dwidth is reduced during flow termination is based on the description given= in the SM and CL edge behavior drafts. =3D> Main change 2: The open issue given on page 18 in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsv= p-pcn-01 is removed. According to the discussion that we had on the mailing= list, the First option was selected. The PCN objects of C-Type: RSVP-AGGR= EGATE-IPv4-PCN-CL-FLIDs or RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv6-PCN-CL-FLIDs MUST be carried= by the aggregated Resv message. =3D> Other changes: Terminology section is updated according to the last ve= rsions of SM and CL drafts. Some editorials are fixed. For more details on differences between draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-01 and dr= aft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02, please see: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02 Comments are appreciated! Best regards, Georgios --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE478CEXMBX04adutwent_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

 

The 02 version of the RSVP-PCN draft has been submitted last week to the= IETF, see below:

 

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02.txt

 


All comments received up to now are worked out!
The main changes compared to version 02 version are:

 

=3D> Main change 1: The draft is written in such a way that the follo= wing two assumptions do not anymore apply!

 

o) Assumption 1: More than one IEAs between same pair of PCN edge nodes = should be supported, each of them using a different PHB-ID value
Why?: A requesting individual flow has a higher chance to be admitted to an= IEA that is NOT in PCN-admission-state How? When IEA supported by a PCN-in= gress-node is in PCN-admission state, then based on local policy, requestin= g e2e RSVP session (individual flow) should be either rejected or mapped to another IEA that is NOT in PCN-admi= ssion-state

In particular, the IEA definition used in PCN is not modified. Moreover = each RSVP generic aggregated state is mapped/matched to only one IEA.


o) Assumption 2: PCN-ingress-node should be able to reduce bandwidth of an = individual flow without terminating the flow
Why?: flows will not be terminated unnecessary and at the same time the IEA= bandwidth is reduced to solve the severe congestion
How?: When for IEA supported by PCN-ingress-node incoming traffic needs to = be reduced then:
based on a local policy and for same IEA, selects a number of e2e RSVP sess= ions (individual flows) to be either terminated or reserved bandwidth of e2= e RSVP sessions (individual flows) is reduced.

In particular, it is emphasized that the default manner of  how the= IEA bandwidth is reduced during flow termination is based on the descripti= on given in the SM and CL edge behavior drafts.

 

=3D> Main change 2: The open issue given on page 18 in draft-ietf-tsv= wg-rsvp-pcn-01 is removed. According to the discussion that we had on the m= ailing list, the First option was selected. The PCN objects of C-Type: = ; RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv4-PCN-CL-FLIDs or RSVP-AGGREGATE-IPv6-PCN-CL-FLIDs MUST be carried by the
aggregated Resv message.

 

 

=3D> Other changes: Terminology section is updated according to the l= ast versions of SM and CL drafts.
Some editorials are fixed.

 

 

For more details on differences between draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-01 and= draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-pcn-02,  please see:


http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-tsvwg-= rsvp-pcn-02


Comments are appreciated!


Best regards,
Georgios

--_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F2CBE478CEXMBX04adutwent_-- From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Jul 18 17:12:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F03121F84D9; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:12:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.227 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.373, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QVJaunzUrjZh; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8478C21F84D6; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 5426D621A1; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:12:32 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120719001232.5426D621A1@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pcn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [PCN] RFC 6627 on Overview of Pre-Congestion Notification Encoding X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:12:18 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6627 Title: Overview of Pre-Congestion Notification Encoding Author: G. Karagiannis, K. Chan, T. Moncaster, M. Menth, P. Eardley, B. Briscoe Status: Informational Stream: IETF Date: July 2012 Mailbox: g.karagiannis@utwente.nl, khchan.work@gmail.com, Toby.Moncaster@cl.cam.ac.uk, menth@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de, philip.eardley@bt.com, bob.briscoe@bt.com Pages: 20 Characters: 47274 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pcn-encoding-comparison-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6627.txt The objective of Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) is to protect the quality of service (QoS) of inelastic flows within a Diffserv domain. On every link in the PCN-domain, the overall rate of PCN-traffic is metered, and PCN-packets are appropriately marked when certain configured rates are exceeded. Egress nodes provide decision points with information about the PCN-marks of PCN-packets that allows them to take decisions about whether to admit or block a new flow request, and to terminate some already admitted flows during serious pre-congestion. The PCN working group explored a number of approaches for encoding this pre-congestion information into the IP header. This document provides details of those approaches along with an explanation of the constraints that apply to any solution. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Jul 18 17:13:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3DEC11E81D0; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.931 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.931 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4fsLaDW5quXJ; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB57921F84E1; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 2976172E009; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:22 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120719001322.2976172E009@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:22 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pcn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [PCN] RFC 6660 on Encoding Three Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) States in the IP Header Using a Single Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP) X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:13:12 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6660 Title: Encoding Three Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) States in the IP Header Using a Single Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP) Author: B. Briscoe, T. Moncaster, M. Menth Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: July 2012 Mailbox: bob.briscoe@bt.com, toby.moncaster@cl.cam.ac.uk, menth@uni-tuebingen.de Pages: 24 Characters: 52230 Obsoletes: RFC5696 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pcn-3-in-1-encoding-11.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6660.txt The objective of Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) is to protect the quality of service (QoS) of inelastic flows within a Diffserv domain. The overall rate of PCN-traffic is metered on every link in the PCN- domain, and PCN-packets are appropriately marked when certain configured rates are exceeded. Egress nodes pass information about these PCN-marks to Decision Points that then decide whether to admit or block new flow requests or to terminate some already admitted flows during serious pre-congestion. This document specifies how PCN-marks are to be encoded into the IP header by reusing the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) codepoints within a PCN-domain. The PCN wire protocol for non-IP protocol headers will need to be defined elsewhere. Nonetheless, this document clarifies the PCN encoding for MPLS in an informational appendix. The encoding for IP provides for up to three different PCN marking states using a single Diffserv codepoint (DSCP): not-marked (NM), threshold-marked (ThM), and excess-traffic-marked (ETM). Hence, it is called the 3-in-1 PCN encoding. This document obsoletes RFC 5696. [STANDARDS-TRACK] This document is a product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Jul 18 17:13:19 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 113E221F85EA; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.231 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.231 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.369, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GlcuBAm9CF6A; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7517C21F85E4; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id EAC1872E034; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:33 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120719001333.EAC1872E034@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pcn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [PCN] RFC 6661 on Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Boundary-Node Behavior for the Controlled Load (CL) Mode of Operation X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:13:19 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6661 Title: Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Boundary-Node Behavior for the Controlled Load (CL) Mode of Operation Author: A. Charny, F. Huang, G. Karagiannis, M. Menth, T. Taylor, Ed. Status: Experimental Stream: IETF Date: July 2012 Mailbox: anna@mwsm.com, huangfuqing@huawei.com, g.karagiannis@utwente.nl, menth@uni-tuebingen.de, tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Pages: 33 Characters: 72258 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pcn-cl-edge-behaviour-14.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6661.txt Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) is a means for protecting the quality of service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv domain. The overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559. This memo is one of a series describing possible boundary-node behaviors for a PCN-domain. The behavior described here is that for a form of measurement-based load control using three PCN marking states: not- marked, threshold-marked, and excess-traffic-marked. This behavior is known informally as the Controlled Load (CL) PCN-boundary-node behavior. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification Working Group of the IETF. EXPERIMENTAL: This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Jul 18 17:13:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4A321F85DB; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.234 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.234 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.366, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UnQzc1PIsPm1; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF8621F85E4; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1612E72E034; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:45 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120719001345.1612E72E034@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:45 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pcn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [PCN] RFC 6662 on Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Boundary-Node Behavior for the Single Marking (SM) Mode of Operation X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:13:30 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6662 Title: Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Boundary-Node Behavior for the Single Marking (SM) Mode of Operation Author: A. Charny, J. Zhang, G. Karagiannis, M. Menth, T. Taylor, Ed. Status: Experimental Stream: IETF Date: July 2012 Mailbox: anna@mwsm.com, joyzhang@cisco.com, g.karagiannis@utwente.nl, menth@uni-tuebingen.de, tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Pages: 31 Characters: 67000 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pcn-sm-edge-behaviour-12.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6662.txt Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) is a means for protecting the quality of service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv domain. The overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559. This memo is one of a series describing possible boundary-node behaviors for a PCN-domain. The behavior described here is that for a form of measurement-based load control using two PCN marking states: not- marked and excess-traffic-marked. This behavior is known informally as the Single Marking (SM) PCN-boundary-node behavior. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification Working Group of the IETF. EXPERIMENTAL: This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Jul 18 17:13:44 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9852711E80E2; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.237 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tdupZ4VAKKAA; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9A411E81D9; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 4D6F872E093; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:56 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120719001356.4D6F872E093@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pcn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [PCN] RFC 6663 on Requirements for Signaling of Pre-Congestion Information in a Diffserv Domain X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:13:44 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6663 Title: Requirements for Signaling of Pre-Congestion Information in a Diffserv Domain Author: G. Karagiannis, T. Taylor, K. Chan, M. Menth, P. Eardley Status: Informational Stream: IETF Date: July 2012 Mailbox: g.karagiannis@utwente.nl, tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com, khchan.work@gmail.com, menth@uni-tuebingen.de, philip.eardley@bt.com Pages: 7 Characters: 15316 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pcn-signaling-requirements-08.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6663.txt Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) is a means for protecting quality of service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv domain. The overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559. This memo describes the requirements for the signaling applied within the PCN-domain: (1) PCN-feedback-information is carried from the PCN-egress-node to the Decision Point; (2) the Decision Point may ask the PCN-ingress-node to measure, and report back, the rate of sent PCN-traffic between that PCN-ingress-node and PCN-egress-node. The Decision Point may be either collocated with the PCN-ingress-node or a centralized node (in the first case, (2) is not required). The signaling requirements pertain in particular to two edge behaviors, Controlled Load (CL) and Single Marking (SM). This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From Martin.Stiemerling@neclab.eu Thu Jul 19 10:41:16 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC1F821F8802 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.529 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eXcYDua4gQRP for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C92E421F87E0 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:41:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98861018E6 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:45:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yAJIHp9kck1F for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:45:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ENCELADUS.office.hd (enceladus.office.hd [192.168.24.52]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C040D1018E4 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:45:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.7.0.105] (10.7.0.105) by skoll.office.hd (192.168.125.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:42:13 +0200 Message-ID: <500846EA.1080006@neclab.eu> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:42:02 +0200 From: Martin Stiemerling User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pcn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.7.0.105] Subject: [PCN] Closing the PCN Working Group X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:41:17 -0000 Hi all, The PCN working group has successfully finished its chartered work, as these RFCs have been published: - RFC 6627 - RFC 6660 - RFC 6661 - RFC 6662 - RFC 6663 Thank you to all contributors, draft authors and the chairs! The PCN working group is now closed, but the PCN mailing list will remain open. Thank you, Martin -- martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL Registered in England 283 From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Thu Jul 19 14:04:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pcn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F0C21F8685; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:04:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.596 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.596 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.003, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6xAoTEz006C8; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:04:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C0AF21F8680; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:04:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IESG Secretary To: IETF Announcement List X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.30p3 Message-ID: <20120719210457.19656.43119.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:04:57 -0700 Cc: pcn@ietf.org Subject: [PCN] WG Action: Conclusion of Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification (pcn) X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: PCN WG list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 21:04:57 -0000 The Congestion and Pre-Congestion Notification (pcn) Working Group in = the Transport Area has concluded. The IESG contact persons are Wesley = Eddy and Martin Stiemerling. The PCN working group has successfully finished its chartered work, as these RFCs have been published: - RFC 6627 - RFC 6660 - RFC 6661 - RFC 6662 - RFC 6663 Thank you to all contributors, draft authors, and the chairs! The PCN working group is now closed, but the PCN mailing list (pcn@ietf.org) will remain open.