IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [multipathtcp] Regarding rate control at a subflow level

Olivier Bonaventure <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be> Fri, 17 May 2019 10:00 UTC

Return-Path: <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049481200D6 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 May 2019 03:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uclouvain.be
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 qLkE93GDVYv3 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 May 2019 02:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR04-VI1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr80100.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.8.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34DBA120075 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 May 2019 02:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uclouvain.be; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=RS5mPDUH5JRkXW3LdFEquHToyxmP5YtHg+sKzQZ/Pus=; b=GXFKdwM9P1mICBNlmphizPofHcjD47T3eaXjvqD/lc1IG8ylKhaQkHl665H/Jh0g2ALvTY9/wJODyjDGsuPQyV1UDU0+GOGIgXgYxOv4jziMyZdUMUpa4eZqYCeqvS81w91V6I05n2k4KCiuwcDuNgfO26BgYOUSE9Wxs7N8VCU=
Received: from DB6PR0301MB2552.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.168.73.20) by DB6PR0301MB2216.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.168.53.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1900.17; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:59:54 +0000
Received: from DB6PR0301MB2552.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b8db:6688:3fed:f580]) by DB6PR0301MB2552.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b8db:6688:3fed:f580%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1900.010; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:59:54 +0000
From: Olivier Bonaventure <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
To: Nagesh shamnur <nagesh.shamnur@huawei.com>, "multipathtcp@ietf.org" <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
CC: Ashutosh prakash <ashutosh.prakash@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [multipathtcp] Regarding rate control at a subflow level
Thread-Index: AdUMWULM15YYbMauQ2OybE7pkHW5IQAPgMiA
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:59:54 +0000
Message-ID: <4f40e635-2a80-20ec-c991-8a7a61ef327a@uclouvain.be>
References: <4AC96705FB868F42B2075BA50F806DEB56995EF6@dggema524-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <4AC96705FB868F42B2075BA50F806DEB56995EF6@dggema524-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Reply-To: Olivier Bonaventure <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0457.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:a2::13) To DB6PR0301MB2552.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:4:5c::20)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [2001:6a8:3880:1335:f145:cf46:3839:5d85]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4602dd89-db77-4ecb-84e1-08d6daae693c
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DB6PR0301MB2216;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DB6PR0301MB2216:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DB6PR0301MB22166510B4AFE737678A3B58860B0@DB6PR0301MB2216.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0040126723
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(346002)(136003)(199004)(189003)(11346002)(6486002)(446003)(8676002)(81156014)(81166006)(46003)(6116002)(71190400001)(7736002)(73956011)(305945005)(2616005)(43066004)(66946007)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(71200400001)(229853002)(786003)(6436002)(476003)(68736007)(110136005)(486006)(316002)(99286004)(8936002)(66446008)(2906002)(6512007)(25786009)(76176011)(2501003)(6506007)(74482002)(256004)(36756003)(14444005)(386003)(5660300002)(52116002)(102836004)(31686004)(186003)(6246003)(478600001)(53936002)(3450700001)(14454004)(86362001)(4326008)(31696002)(413944005)(20673002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB6PR0301MB2216; H:DB6PR0301MB2552.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: uclouvain.be does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: QW2maFWoqjb+E5I2+fjpMHICnHc573ndOj6JVb0rmsVjhNJGpiRxgjCeZJt+ITwBbR/eSh5jbCyOw88ml2FPP2bksudiD3Gkyk6fTwcknxymP8asf2PKFoNbvsNv250fPFez1KHvxUnPweMNlax5jjSFqJww5CNWKJOKl/BecjRmek8K8Baw2aXfXXovzMQXFQIkTdG11PycBZEjr/keiYX9CXCfmhx/AoapbzbibLAGHF4ng6EuVL1VjNfevByk/YI9lB5Ef+QxBS96aWmOtPlDGp1Hi927whYqt3L+HoXBgXLzFNPHg8o/2ZNhPcg/t4yvRpyniL69+brXvk5cK+O8BflnuleCYSXAYlWY0DgfKVFsspF/EjDab03ZMWjS9K6hW+wRKHc+DRXprzVIYcAAsn0jf9pkEQeU0W1KcSU=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <034866039BBBBD4982F23246E1B8A55F@eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: uclouvain.be
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4602dd89-db77-4ecb-84e1-08d6daae693c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 May 2019 09:59:54.7445 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 7ab090d4-fa2e-4ecf-bc7c-4127b4d582ec
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB6PR0301MB2216
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/8IykPgZ0z8NgP8BNV_fYXMhqEDM>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Regarding rate control at a subflow level
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/multipathtcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 10:00:00 -0000

Dear Nagesh,
> 
>                  Greetings. In case of Mobile deployments of MPTCP, 
> though the data rates are getting cheaper, still it would be wise not to 
> run the cellular path to full limit but to throttle to a certain extent 
> considering cost in mind or if server wants to limit the client at 
> subflow level, then I couldn’t find the support for the same in the 
> specification. 

We have developed several prototypes that include this capability in the 
Linux kernel.

> So, while going through the discussion archives, could 
> only find that, the peer(server) can throttle the speed for the entire 
> connection by publishing a smaller receiver window rather than for a 
> particular subflow. I feel, it would be a good idea if the peers can 
> exchange this information using the control packets.

We could imagine an MPTCP option that provides the maximum rate on a 
per-subflow level, but I was wondering whether the use case is not to 
limit the bandwidth on the smartphone at the link level (i.e. multiple 
tcp connections or udp flows) and not at the subflow level. Could you 
precise your use case for the subflow level ?

Thanks


Olivier

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email