IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Dynamic flow control for flooding

tony.li@tony.li Wed, 24 July 2019 17:48 UTC

Return-Path: <tony1athome@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1E3120112 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.558
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.091, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 mqUQgjSK0D8W for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A81B120059 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id f17so17317431pfn.6 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=APn+H+nCvnBCccyHo/hwJNnwmndj5c+1NcrMA6gJ9Ns=; b=FibrkvmcA92LLX8kzTL2nUoRILNv6M3QtorCsh4DgwfPCBFOBeXUEuOGZTjIteHdz3 LoOE4X29KUKY5a2gE5TIb0YBXRhD+ieRRkM0D62z8WbM8eivGTKdtSVv6OzXuMCpazrK ZzwAa36W6iZ8+XtrSUJNJODpPSxqJp34zNhgx0urJugv9DjdOncDrHqcmK/bhEy6TDr1 W5RJomicTCCn0/d5ragjNzEK5vAO4OHmU91P4YBW5OkEu1zQzx6qgdiCeN2Tq1IIzBNP w+Ooed8PGtivwXxmgvvm/obwj9X12Sw5qLmTYUfI+e0jqIY0r/N8K/YTnOODLOyvSEMu V+Ug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=APn+H+nCvnBCccyHo/hwJNnwmndj5c+1NcrMA6gJ9Ns=; b=fmv/hF9/TH/v9ZeAybOv3P9zA3XHlTKSX7y7WWixyIPzBxkZY/RT8FPb5s0sKbf5WX ORIz1PfBYKnmlXxFmUNqE2goLGVgg6M4Dhpw+ArNvZK2AVnnGcGSokjMeMzrpgZorQtk Hu3HnwAJ8GUs/qZNZbt4ZVSITZK5VwZt1EoawfxZFemWQVt3Ds06ivttJdWwrICFdTe2 TT1TwL8PSgaaM1gqDwWu531LXO5+rs8gnIzoZNkFhgQrbD6BuuwV4VQtzlCJsxK64loU s+/LSb0jMrIa9KpszVLvnlEmSIgliV5FLiHLxNaub2opXIFe+lPo2YRo+fS3qlWC6Vnk YUQQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUxclk4lzvMzCzsHPYa94QRk4ysGCGJ1lvLVe8c9Cqi5nmCm3B0 FxKvL/SJ9+IF6MMhXI2IBaY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwaiDXjl1+QqUtJvj5Nh6lEsoy8EczhzutCZqRi6SYpMvNTETs9ZLCar0Izoqk+CcCMaORuwQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:754d:: with SMTP id q74mr12142405pfc.211.1563990532781; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.22.228.115] ([162.210.130.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bg3sm42747666pjb.9.2019.07.24.10.48.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
From: tony.li@tony.li
Message-Id: <FDF430EB-D67C-4446-8BB8-47764A601687@tony.li>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C65AF367-F63A-4AC4-A708-082F5F11079A"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 10:48:51 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ER=0fe9dnSBipr4FUR=p04Skb4UBgZNZnkWvqvXTAYJMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
To: Robert Raszuk <rraszuk@gmail.com>
References: <CAMj-N0LdaNBapVNisWs6cbH6RsHiXd-EMg6vRvO_U+UQsYVvXw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMH02oUHtcJujparBVDo+-jS=WvYV50yVCgFsq=w=8BPMA@mail.gmail.com> <E2BBD860-327D-4601-9462-DB80CC0A4E13@tony.li> <CA+b+ER=0fe9dnSBipr4FUR=p04Skb4UBgZNZnkWvqvXTAYJMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/6K7yBd7HrPeqZ5HsCsc2H0kxKrA>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Dynamic flow control for flooding
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 17:48:55 -0000

Robert,

> The second part of the question was really about at what layer it makes most sense to provide this control loop. 


To me, the obvious thing to do is to make minor revisions to the protocol. We need to:

- Add a TLV so that the receiver can provide feedback. IMHO, this should be in IIH’s and PSNPs.

- Add text to modify the transmitters behavior.  In the presence of this TLV, the transmitter is released from 10589 compliance and may transmit (details TBD).

- Add text to modify the receivers behavior.  If you support this feature, then add the TLV, send PSNPs more frequently (rate & trigger TBD).


> Options seems to be: 
> 
> * Invent new or use existing link layer flow control (IEEE)
> * Reuse existing transport layer (TCP) 
> * App layer (QUIC or QUIC like)


All of these seem like massive overkill.


> I guess it would be useful to up front list on what type of media this must be supported as it may change the game drastically: 
> 
> * directly connected fiber p2p 
> * p2mp (via switch)
> * p2p over encapsulation 
> etc…


All of the above, plus legacy media too.  No reason why this doesn’t apply to 100BaseT.  Bandwidth is not the constraint.

Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email