Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP
AshwoodsmithPeter <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com> Mon, 04 July 2016 13:44 UTC
Return-Path: <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0DE12D114; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 06:44:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.647
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gm1mnR113dAW; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 06:44:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D959112D0BA; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 06:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CSA40753; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 13:43:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from YYZEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.218.33.73) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 14:43:57 +0100
Received: from YYZEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.43]) by YYZEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.208]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 09:43:50 -0400
From: AshwoodsmithPeter <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>
Thread-Topic: [5gangip] [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP
Thread-Index: AQHR07rVXfzmaThsnkyAiJC5tHxhEaAIShBw
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 13:43:50 +0000
Message-ID: <7AE6A4247B044C4ABE0A5B6BF427F8E230952CF1@YYZEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <007601d1cd2f$3a8cad70$afa60850$@unizar.es> <576C060C.2070907@cisco.com> <00ab01d1d38d$17365060$45a2f120$@unizar.es> <6C1441C1-90C3-457B-8146-4869C9FE5929@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6C1441C1-90C3-457B-8146-4869C9FE5929@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.193.60.217]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.577A6820.007C, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.43, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 53bed70ace021666ba25ded75db6859d
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/SKUzt1UOonyxjgVUhqWMqIChBI0>
Cc: "5gangip@ietf.org" <5gangip@ietf.org>, José Ruiz Mas <jruiz@unizar.es>, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 13:44:13 -0000
Hey Dino, Queuing also happens when a UE is has been idle for a while and is being paged. On the header size issue, one of the complaints I've made about ICN/CCN etc. and 5G is the increased header sizes and the impact that this has on the most expensive resource (by a wide margin), the RF spectrum. Not much point optimizing all the relatively cheap wired links if the tax then goes up on the incredibly expensive wireless links. Finding a way to properly map multicast/broadcast to the natural RF multicast would seem like a smart thing to do to extend some of the bandwidth savings protocols like ICN/CCN give but there are challenges with this as each UE may have a different RF encoding (due to different channel conditions) and therefore require separate copies anyway. Cheers Peter -----Original Message----- From: 5gangip [mailto:5gangip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dino Farinacci Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:06 PM To: Jose Saldana Cc: 5gangip@ietf.org; José Ruiz Mas; LISP mailing list list; Anton Smirnov Subject: Re: [5gangip] [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP So I have been thinking about a compelling use-case for LISP header-compression and the super-framing feature (sorry for using my own term). I have been told that the Radio Access Network (RAN) tends to be sensitive to overlay solutions due to large headers. I have also heard that there seems to be queuing behavior for the base-stations that send to UEs (i.e. phones). The fact that queuing is happening while waiting for a handoffs to occur can be a good opportunity to pack IP packets into super-frames to send over the RAN. Using this solution means the eNodeB (base-station) and the UE (phone) would have to run LISP. I would like to hear comments from the WG. I have copied 5gangip to see if they have opinions. Dino > On Jul 1, 2016, at 4:38 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote: > > Hi again, Anton. > > I have just uploaded a new presentation including more ideas and also a section about backward compatibility: > > http://es.slideshare.net/josemariasaldana/header-compression-and-multi > plexing-in-lisp > > BR and thanks, > > Jose > >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: Anton Smirnov [mailto:asmirnov@cisco.com] Enviado el: jueves, 23 >> de junio de 2016 17:54 >> Para: Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>; lisp@ietf.org >> CC: 'José Ruiz Mas' <jruiz@unizar.es> >> Asunto: Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP >> >> Hi Jose, >> there is a theoretical aspect of the work (it's curious) and then >> there is a practical one. For the latter one - section "Backward >> compatibility" is conspicuously missing from the document. On the >> first glance, it looks like backward compatibility of the solution was not investigated. Is this correct? >> >> Anton >> >> >> On 06/23/2016 11:11 AM, Jose Saldana wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As you may know, we recently submitted a draft >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux/) >> with a proposal allowing bandwidth and pps reductions. >>> >>> The idea is to send together a number of small packets, which are in >>> the buffer of >> an ITR and have the same ETR as destination, into a single packet. >> Therefore, they will share a single LISP header. And this can be >> combined with ROHC (header compression). >>> >>> We have a running implementation, based on LISPMob >>> (https://github.com/Simplemux/lispmob-with-simplemux), which we have >>> used to run some tests >>> >>> This is a summary of the results. >>> >>> - When small packets (100 bytes) are sent, up to 63% of throughput >>> increase can >> be observed (in our example, we pass from 550kbps to 910kbps). >>> >>> - In the case of securing the LISP tunnel with IPSec, the increase >>> can be 935 >> (from 470kbps to 870kbps). >>> >>> You can find more detailed information in this presentation: >>> http://es.slideshare.net/josemariasaldana/header-compression-and-mul >>> ti >>> plexing-in-lisp >>> >>> Your feedback will be highly appreciated. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> The authors >>> >>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>> De: lisp [mailto:lisp-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de Jose Saldana >>>> Enviado el: miércoles, 04 de mayo de 2016 18:41 >>>> Para: lisp@ietf.org >>>> CC: 'Jose Ruiz Mas' <jruiz@unizar.es> >>>> Asunto: [lisp] New draft posted: >>>> draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> We have just posted this draft >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp- >>>> compress-mux/. >>>> >>>> Header compression and multiplexing in LISP >>>> draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00 >>>> >>>> Abstract >>>> >>>> When small payloads are transmitted through a packet-switched >>>> network, the resulting overhead may result significant. This is >>>> stressed in the case of LISP, where a number of headers are prepended >>>> to a packet, as new headers have to be added to each packet. >>>> >>>> This document proposes to send together a number of small packets, >>>> which are in the buffer of a ITR, having the same ETR as destination, >>>> into a single packet. Therefore, they will share a single LISP >>>> header, and therefore bandwidth savings can be obtained, and a >>>> reduction in the overall number of packets sent to the network can be >>>> achieved. >>>> >>>> A running implementation can be found here: >>>> https://github.com/Simplemux/lispmob-with-simplemux. I has been >>>> built as a fork of lispmob. >>>> >>>> The idea is very similar to what was published in this paper: >>>> http://diec.unizar.es/~jsaldana/personal/budapest_ICC_2013_in_proc. >>>> pd >>>> f >>>> >>>> Your feedback about the draft will be appreciated. >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance, >>>> >>>> Jose Saldana >>>> Julián Fernández Navajas >>>> José Ruiz Mas >>>> >>>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>>> De: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] >>>>> Enviado >>>>> el: miércoles, 04 de mayo de 2016 18:20 >>>>> Para: Jose Ruiz Mas <jruiz@unizar.es>; Jose Saldana >>>>> <jsaldana@unizar.es>; Julian Fernandez Navajas <navajas@unizar.es> >>>>> Asunto: New Version Notification for >>>>> draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt >>>>> has been successfully submitted by Jose Saldana and posted to the >>>>> IETF repository. >>>>> >>>>> Name: draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux >>>>> Revision: 00 >>>>> Title: Header compression and multiplexing in LISP >>>>> Document date: 2016-05-04 >>>>> Group: Individual Submission >>>>> Pages: 8 >>>>> URL: >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-m >>>>> ux >>>>> - >>>>> 00.txt >>>>> Status: >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux/ >>>>> Htmlized: >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Abstract: >>>>> When small payloads are transmitted through a packet-switched >>>>> network, the resulting overhead may result significant. This is >>>>> stressed in the case of LISP, where a number of headers are prepended >>>>> to a packet, as new headers have to be added to each packet. >>>>> >>>>> This document proposes to send together a number of small packets, >>>>> which are in the buffer of a ITR, having the same ETR as destination, >>>>> into a single packet. Therefore, they will share a single LISP >>>>> header, and therefore bandwidth savings can be obtained, and a >>>>> reduction in the overall number of packets sent to the network can be >>>>> achieved. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >>>>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>>>> tools.ietf.org. >>>>> >>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> lisp mailing list >>>> lisp@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lisp mailing list >>> lisp@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >>> > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ 5gangip mailing list 5gangip@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP AshwoodsmithPeter
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Ca By
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP AshwoodsmithPeter
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP julian
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Anton Smirnov
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Anton Smirnov
- [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [lisp] [5gangip] Bandwidth savings with LISP Jose Saldana