Re: [sip-overload] [dispatch] draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload

Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu> Tue, 04 March 2014 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <charles.newyork@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sip-overload@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-overload@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 553781A0295 for <sip-overload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:16:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 ITY4xL-spbo8 for <sip-overload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:16:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22c.google.com (mail-ob0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC711A01C1 for <sip-overload@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:16:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ob0-f172.google.com with SMTP id wm4so36912obc.31 for <sip-overload@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 12:16:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=3Um2tDtrkIa5eY3PrjhwCAgJo/aBIVdHxwNLNaNilWk=; b=hptKskhTGS+/6OVPVebV2lzceM7x1KaJlB8MNb6+Vi4Gaq3CTdUSEQkaAUM5F9XjNt VuLuTkXD4eMb+yEn0k+/V9dWW32lVf6k0CbiNE/nUm5X1fcSZKdeuJAwuZyQynEq+1wJ gCJYqTYJBySdCBsimb13C4SqusOgX9SF7EdPswjDO5vrHGOiULF11UURcEtj5jB9BVkf chgI28oRwHMZru79vktmnxcdDuvYUTe0vJQ0v2S1OTXxwhxUbzKesME/9e7KWKGQZ7QZ tVu2gzufyiOJnneG2SEoMTMAooqWySL3CrTps8ZsXrwvN2GeqPlVP0nITAHdDOYwSKVu 9DJg==
X-Received: by 10.60.94.52 with SMTP id cz20mr1217091oeb.43.1393964161143; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 12:16:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: charles.newyork@gmail.com
Received: by 10.182.55.106 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:15:40 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAPSQ9ZXvxc+tV2_Zd9e5LNf_UVrz9Tfp_sTVu-BC5pXB_RkUmg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPSQ9ZXvxc+tV2_Zd9e5LNf_UVrz9Tfp_sTVu-BC5pXB_RkUmg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 04:15:40 +0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: YrvdEIFwYDHwpZiP2AydwOUelh0
Message-ID: <CAPSQ9ZXaJFO-HAjTi6fkvLoy+xBOtPxWg_CvpbMF0ijNtSFLGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "sip-overload@ietf.org" <sip-overload@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122991aa7a62b04f3cd9214
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sip-overload/nLfmxlo8MmsJ6gUGkIQOKNNDDtc
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Arata Koike <koike.arata@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>, charles@cs.columbia.edu, hgs@cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [sip-overload] [dispatch] draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload
X-BeenThere: sip-overload@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Overload <sip-overload.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sip-overload>, <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-overload/>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-overload@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload>, <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 20:16:07 -0000

Dear all, I'd like to re-send the message below, and would appreciate very
much your opinions!

Charles


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I am writing about the draft
>
> A Mechanism for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Avalanche Restart
> Overload Control
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload/
>
> as a result of a discussion on the DISPATCH list suggesting that this
> draft may be in-scope of the SOC charter and could benefit from WG review,
> I would like to solicitate your kind opinion on whether the WG agrees on
> that and is willing to take on it as a possible WG deliverable.
>
> Some background discussion below for your reference. Thank you very much!
>
> Charles
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>;
> Date: Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload
> To: Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>;
> Cc: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>;, DISPATCH <
> dispatch@ietf.org>;
>
>
> I agree that the charter could be read to include this document.  We
> should confirm that the WG agrees, and is willing to take on the document.
>
> Charles, could you please start a thread on the SOC list?
>
> Thanks,
> --Richard
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>wrote:
>
>> If that is the case, I at least don't see the current charter excluding
>> the scope of this work from the sentence "The objective of the working
>> group is to develop mechanisms for SIP overload control. The problem
>> domain of SIP overload control can be split into overload control
>> between a user agent and a SIP server and overload control between SIP
>> servers.", as this work fits nicely into the "overload control between a
>> user agent and a SIP server" problem domain.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <
>> fluffy@cisco.com>; wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So the terminology for this is always a bit confusing. The Milestones
>>> are not typically considered part of the charter but if the WG wanted to do
>>> this work, they could add a Milestone without changing a charter. The
>>> question is does the Charter text cover this type of work.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 3:09 AM, Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>;
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Thanks Cullen for your comments,
>>> >
>>> > According to my understanding, the current charter description
>>> >
>>> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/soc/charter/
>>> >
>>> > does not seem to cover the goal of advancing this draft into a working
>>> group deliverable. Please correct me if I were wrong.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > Charles
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <
>>> fluffy@cisco.com>; wrote:
>>> >
>>> > This seems like a draft that could benefit from review in a WG. Can
>>> someone fill in a bit of the background of this draft in SOC. I’m not
>>> seeing why the SOC charter would need to be changed to do this work.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Feb 11, 2014, at 1:35 PM, Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>;
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Dear all:
>>> > >
>>> > > As advised by Richard Barnes, I am writing to seek opinion from you
>>> about this draft:
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload/
>>> > > A Mechanism for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Avalanche Restart
>>> Overload Control
>>> > >
>>> > > Abstract:
>>> > >    When a large number of clients register with a SIP registrar
>>> server
>>> > >    at approximately the same time, the server may become overloaded.
>>> > >    Near-simultaneous floods of SIP SUBSCRIBE and PUBLISH requests may
>>> > >    have similar effects.  Such request avalanches can occur, for
>>> > >    example, after a power failure and recovery in a metropolitan
>>> area.
>>> > >    This document describes how to avoid such overload situations.
>>>  Under
>>> > >    this mechanism, a server estimates an avalanche restart backoff
>>> > >    interval during its normal operation and conveys this interval to
>>> its
>>> > >    clients through a new Restart-Timer header in normal response
>>> > >    messages.  Once an avalanche restart actually occurs, the clients
>>> > >    perform backoff based on the previously received Restart-Timer
>>> header
>>> > >    value before sending out the first request attempt.  Thus, the
>>> > >    mechanism spreads all the initial client requests and prevents
>>> them
>>> > >    from overloading the server.
>>> > >
>>> > > The draft has been presented and discussed in IETF meetings since
>>> 2010, and generated interest among the community:
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> https://encrypted.google.com/search?as_q=draft-shen-soc-avalanche-restart-overload&as_sitesearch=www.ietf.org%2Fmail-archive%2Fweb%2F
>>> > >
>>> > > I am looking for your kind opinion on what should be the appropriate
>>> next step for this document:
>>> > >
>>> > > -- Should this draft be dispatched to SOC (and their charter
>>> amended)?
>>> > > -- Should this draft be processed as AD-sponsored?
>>> > > -- Should this draft be killed (if it is harmful)?
>>> > >
>>> > > Thank you very much.
>>> > >
>>> > > Charles
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > dispatch mailing list
>>> > > dispatch@ietf.org
>>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dispatch mailing list
>> dispatch@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>>
>>
>
>