One document matched: draft-kan-qos-framework-01.txt
Differences from draft-kan-qos-framework-00.txt
Internet Draft Zhigang Kan
Document: draft-kan-qos-framework-01.txt Jian Ma
Expires: December 2002 Nokia Research Center
July 2002
Two-plane and Three-tier Framework Structure for NSIS
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
This document proposes a "two-plane three-tier" framework structure
for NSIS signaling. In this framework the Access Networks are
connected with wired backbone through default routers. It is
assumed that one can do a competent job of network configuration &
provisioning in the backbone network, and just keeps backbone
Kan, Ma 1
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
networks stupid simple.Resource policies which are implemented in
inter-NSIS Domains and intra-NSIS Domain, NSIS Signaling and NSIS
negotiations are in the control plane. User data is transported in
the transport plane. COPS/Diameter is used for exchanging resource
policies.
Three-Tier NSIS signalings mean that NSIS signaling should be done
in three levels. The first level is Inter-NSIS Domain NSIS
signaling across neighboring NSIS Domains, and the second level is
Intra-NSIS Domain NSIS signaling inside each NSIS Domain while the
third level is end-to-edge NSIS signaling and end-to-end NSIS
signaling. The aggregate traffic crossing NSIS Domain borders is
served according to relatively stable, long-lived bilateral
agreements. End-to-end QoS support is achieved through the
concatenation of such bilateral agreements.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction..................................................3
1.1 Conventions used in this document.........................4
2. Terminology...................................................4
3. Two-plane framework...........................................6
3.1 Control Plane.............................................7
3.2 Transport Plane...........................................9
4. Three-tier NSIS signalings in control plane..................11
4.1 The first tier NSIS signalings...........................11
4.2 The second tier NSIS signalings..........................12
4.3 The third tier NSIS signalings...........................12
5. NSIS negotiation.............................................12
6. NSIS Signalings..............................................13
6.1 In-Band and Out-of-Band Signaling........................14
6.2 End-to-edge and End-to-end Signaling.....................14
6.3 An example NSIS Signaling protocol.......................14
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 2
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
1. Introduction
The current wisdom is that the existing circuit switched and 2G
(second generation) wireless systems will eventually evolve/morph
into an end-to-end IP platform that provides ubiquitous real-time
as well as non-real-time services based on 3G (third generation)
wireless IPv6 mobile networks. A NSIS framework that provides the
end-to-end QoS guarantees for the future network is worth studying.
The intention of NSIS framework structure is to provide a framework
for the integration of NSIS entities, NSIS signalings, NSIS
negotiations with the existing network infrastructures, and we try
to identify what NSIS should do in which part of the network, and
what NSIS entities should be added.
Although we donÆt consider exactly for what NSIS should signal
currently, and resource is a broad sence concept, anyway NSIS
should achieve end-to-end QoS guarantee to end users and achieve
resource management signaling mechanisms to network operators.
In the proposed NSIS framework there is a central server which has
global resource information of the whole NSIS domain, and several
local nodes which feed the local information to the central server;
and the NSIS signaling and user traffic transport are separated in
control plane and transport plane.
We assume that the existing QoS mechanisms can guarantee the
traffic transported to the right destination. The aggregate traffic
crossing NSIS Domain borders is served according to relatively
stable, long-lived bilateral agreements. End-to-end QoS support is
achieved through the concatenation of such bilateral
agreements.Things about transport plane is out of the scope of this
draft.
NSIS signaling should be done in three levels. The first level is
Inter-NSIS Domain NSIS signaling across neighboring NSIS Domains,
and the second level is Intra-NSIS Domain NSIS signaling inside
each NSIS Domain while the third level is end-to-edge NSIS
signaling and end-to-end NSIS signaling. The first two levels are
mainly about resource policies, so they can almost be done based on
existing protocols such as COPS, DIAMETER, etc..
End-to-edge and end-to-end NSIS signaling are considered as the
focus areas in this draft. These two types of singalings should
provide flexibility for different QoS session management that can
be either based on existing reservation or provisioning mechanisms.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 3
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
In order to have the common definitions with other drafts, some
terms are adopted from some drafts. Section 3 describes the two-
plane framework and its components. Section 4 explains three-tier
NSIS signalings. How the framework guarantees the end-to-end QoS
and the three-tier NSIS signalings are presented in Section 5.
1.1 Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in
this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
2. Terminology
Administration Domain (AD)
An AD has the same management methods, pricing
policies and so on. An AD belongs to an
administrative organization and an
administrative organization may have one or
more ADs. An AD includes a backbone and some
ANs that directly connect to the backbone.
Access Network (AN)
The AN represents the wireless and back-haul
infrastructure that provides MNs with wireless
access to the wired infrastructure. An AN
usually comprises a set of base stations and
base station controllers.
Backbone Network (BN)
The networks can be controlled and manageable
so the configuration and provision can be done
well in it.
Control Plane (CP)
Aggregate of network functionalities including
entities such as resource management mechanisms,
routing protocols, admission control, NSIS
signaling, and NSIS negotiation.
Default Router (DR)
A router through which the AN connects directly
to the backbone network and the traffic from AN
to backbone.
Mobile Node (MN)
MN is the device that allows users to
communicate, and also provides means of
interaction between users and the networks.
Traffic is generated/received by MN and may be
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 4
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
queued in the MN while waiting for
transmission/reception.
NSIS Domain (ND)
Administrative domain where an NSIS protocol
signals for a resource or set of resources.
NSIS Entity (NE)
the function within a node which implements an
NSIS protocol.
NSIS Initiator (NI)
NSIS Entity that initiates NSIS signaling for a
network resource.
NSIS Responder (NR)
NSIS Entity that terminates NSIS signaling and
can optionally interact with applications as
well.
NSIS Forwarder (NF)
NSIS Entity on the path between a NI and NR
which may interact with local resource
management function (RMF) for this purpose.
NSIS Forwarder also propagates NSIS signaling
further through the network.
Resource
something of value in a network infrastructure
to which rules or policy criteria are first
applied before access is granted. Examples of
resources include the buffers in a router and
bandwidth on an interface.QoS can be considered
a special example of resource.
Resource Management Function (RMF)
An abstract concept, representing the
management of resources in a domain or a node.
NSIS Domain Resource Management Agent(NDRM Agent)
There is one logical NDRM Agent in each ND. The
NDRM Agent has the global information about the
resources available in the whole ND. The
communications between the NDRM Agents is
through the COPS [RFC2748] protocol or Diameter
protocol. The NDRM Agent is responsible for
resource management mechanisms between the
neighboring NDs and responsible for resource
control mechanisms between the ANRM Agents.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 5
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
Access Network Resource Management Agent(ANRM Agent)
ANRM Agent is a separate logical entity and
maybe incorporated with the default router.
ANRM Agent has the local information about the
AN. The default router interacts with ANRM
Agent, if necessary, when the MN requests
certain degrees of resources in this AN. The
ANRM Agent is the entity for NSIS negotiation
and NSIS signaling between MN and the network
control system. The ANRM Agent decides what
resources are available for each default
router. Thus, the ANRM Agent is an intelligent
entity residing in the control plane. ANRM
Agents provide the local resource information
to NDRM Agent periodically. ANRM Agent
maintains a table that is then updated by NDRM
Agent periodically too. Based on this table,
ANRM Agent will tell the default routers how to
mark, police, shape, map, etc. the traffic
going through the default router.
The communications between the NDRM Agent and
ANRM Agents can be through the COPS protocol or
Diameter protocol, and the communications
between the ANRM Agent and the default router
can be through the COPS protocol or Diameter
protocol too.
Transport Plane (TP)
Aggregate of network functionalities where per-
packet activities such as packet forwarding,
queuing, conditioning and header editing occur
(Per-flow packet conditioning may require
interaction with control plane).
3. Two-plane framework
The separation principle for the design of a generalized NSIS
framework states that media transfer, control and management are
functionally distinct architectural activities [A92]. The principle
states that these tasks should be separated in architectural
frameworks; one aspect of separation is the distinction between
signalling and media-transfer; flows (which are isochronous in
nature) generally require a wide variety of high bandwidth, low
latency, non-assured services with some form of jitter correction;
on the other hand, signalling (which is full duplex and
asynchronous in nature) generally requires low bandwidth, assured-
type services with no jitter constraint.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 6
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
In the proposed framework the resource management mechanisms and
NSIS Signaling and NSIS negotiations are in the control plane, and
media-transfer is in the transport plane
In this draft we assume that one can do a competent job of network
configuration & provisioning in the backbone network, and per-class
flow QoS can be guaranteed perfectly by DiffServ, MPLS, whatever.
This may be enough in many cases. Just keeps backbone network
stupid simple. The most important parts of an NSIS domain would be
the ingress & egress nodes which are NSIS-ware, so an Intelligent
Edge should be formed between backbone network and access networks.
NDRM Agent is responsible for the resource management in each ND.
COPS or other protocols can be used for communications between NDRM
Agent and ingress & egress nodes.
Per-flow QoS can be graranteed in access network especiall Radio
Access Networks, so the intermediate routers and default routers
should be NSIS-ware.
3.1 Control Plane
The basic entities in control plane include NDRM Agents, ANRM Agent,
and NSIS entities which may be co-located with ingress & egress
routers, default routers. The tasks of control plane is to manage
reousrce and signal resource. How to manage resource is out of the
scope of this draft.
In the proposed framework, there is at least one NDRM Agents and
several ANRM Agents in a ND. ANRM Agents reside generally in the
edge of wired backbone networks that connect to wireless network
through default router, and ANRM Agent can work as a server or co-
loated with the default router.
The NDRM Agent retains the global resource information of the ND,
and informs ANRM Agents what to do for resource management. The MN
has the QoS signaling with ANRM Agent, and ANRM Agent has the QoS
signaling with NDRM Agent. The actual traffic generated by MN goes
through the default router. The NDRM Agent and ANRM Agents are in
control plane while the default routers are in transport plane. By
retaining the global resource information in NDRM Agent and
separating control plane and transport plane, the framework is
flexible, easy to add new services, and more efficient for mobile
environment.
Three-tier NSIS signaling means that NSIS signaling should be done
in three levels. The first level is Inter-NDRM Agent NSIS signaling
across neighboring NDRM Agents, and the second level is Intra-NDRM
Agent NSIS Signaling inside each ND, while the third level is End-
to-Edge NSIS signaling and End-to-end NSIS signaling.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 7
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
The signaling protocol can be COPS or Diameter or whatever between
NDRM Agents, between NDRM Agents and ANRM Agents.
Figure 1 is the overall picture of the control plane in the
framework. There are 2 NDs in this figure and ND1 has 2 ANs each of
which connects to the backbone and has a ANRM Agent.
+------------------------------------------+
+ +------------+ +
+ ND2 | NDRM Agent | +
+ +------------+ +
+-------------------- A ----------- -------+
|
COPS|Diameter First Tier
|
+-------------------- V -------------------+
+ +------------+ +
+ ND1 +-------->| NDRM Agent |<--------+ +
+ | +------------+ | +
+--- | ------------------------------ | ---+
| | Second Tier
COPS|Diameter COPS|Diameter
| |
+----- V ------------------------------ V --------+
+ +------------+ +------------+ +
+ | ANRM Agent | | ANRM Agent | +
+ +------------+ +------------+ +
+----- A ------------------------------- A -------+
| | Third Tier
COPS|Diameter COPS|Diameter
| |
+-------+ | +===============+ | +-------+
| +--+ | | + +---+ +---+ + | | +--+ |
| |BS| | V + +-| ER|---| ER|-+ + V | |BS| |
| +--+ +---+ + | +---+ +---+ | + +---+ +--+ |
| |DR |-------+ | | +-------| DR| |
| +--+ +---+ + +---+ +---+ + +---+ +--+ |
| |BS| | A + | R |---| R | + A | |BS| |
| +--+ | | + +---+ +---+ + | | +--+ |
+-------+ | +===============+ | +-------+
| |
End-to-Edge | Signaling End-to-Edge | Signaling
V V
+--+ +--+
|NI| <-------------------------> |NR|
+--+ End-to-end QoS Signaling +--+
Figure 1: Control Plane of the framework
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 8
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
3.2 Transport Plane
User traffic is transported in transport plane. The user data enter
the backbone network from AN through default router. How about the
backbone network in the transport plane?
As we know, for controlling the traffic there are two types of
Internet QoS: Integrated Services [IntServ] and Differentiated
Services. Integrated Services is based on resource reservation and
network resources are apportioned according to an application's QoS
requests, and subject to bandwidth management policy. Integrated
Services can guarantee QoS for per-flow traffic. Differentiated
Services is based on prioritization and network traffic is
classified and apportioned network resources according to bandwidth
management policy criteria. To enable QoS, classifications give
preferential treatment to applications identified as having more
demanding requirements. Differentiated Services can guarantee QoS
for per-aggregate traffic.
While the aggregated behavior state of the Differentiated Services
architecture does offer excellent scaling properties, the lack of
end-to-end signaling facilities makes such an approach one that
cannot operate in isolation within any environment. What appears to
be required within the Differentiated Services model is both
resource availability signaling from the core of the network to the
Differentiated Service boundary and some form of signaling from the
boundary to the client application [RFC2990].
In the proposed framework a kind of resource allocation protocol
for the per-flow traffic in the AN. When the traffic leaves the AN,
per-flow traffic is aggregated to form aggregate-flows in the
default router. Moreover Differentiated Service is selected in the
backbone network and the QoS for aggregate flows between NDs is
guaranteed by the other mechanisms [RFC2996], [FCFB99] and
[RFC2998]. Other QoS protocols such as MPLS [MPLS] can be selected
in the backbone network too.
Figure 2 is a picture about transport plane for end-to-end QoS
guarantee.
There are two mapping mechanisms in transport plane: Intra-ND
mapping and Inter-ND mapping. Because of different QoS mechanisms
in ANs and the backbone network, Intra-ND mapping mechanisms can
guarantee the traffic between ANs and backbone network with QoS
consistency. Inter-ND mapping mechanisms can guarantee the traffic
between ADs with QoS consistency.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 9
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
+-----------------------+ ------- -------
+--+ | +--+ +--+ | A A
|CN|<----->|BS| |BS| | | |
+--+ per | +--+ +----+ +--+ | per-flow |
flow +--------| DR |---------+ QoS |
+-A -+ guarantee |
| Intra-ND | |
AN | Aggregate-flow | |
| & Mapping V |
+= V ===========+ ------- |
+ +---+ +---+ + A |
+ | R |---| R | + | |
+ +---+ +---+ + | |
BackBone + ND2 | | + | |
+ +---+ +---+ + |
+ | R |---| R | + | End
+ +---+ +---+ + | |
+== A ==========+ | to
| | |
| Inter-ND | End
| Aggregate-flow |
| & Mapping | QoS
| |
+== V ==========+ |
+ +---+ +---+ + Aggregate G
+ | R |---| R | + flow u
+ +---+ +---+ + QoS a
BackBone + ND1 | | + guarantee r
+ +---+ +---+ + | a
+ | R |---| R | + | n
+ +---+ +---+ + | t
+== A ==========+ | e
| Intra-ND | e
| Aggregate-flow |
| & Mapping V |
+- V-+ ------- |
+--------| DR |---------+ A |
| +--+ +----+ +--+ | | |
AN | |BS| |BS| | per-flow |
| +--+ +--+ | QoS |
+--A---------------A----+ guarantee |
Per-flow | Per-flow | | |
V V | |
+--+ +--+ | |
|MN| |MN| V V
+--+ +--+ ------ ------
Figure 2: Transport Plane of the framework
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 10
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
4. Three-tier NSIS signalings in control plane
In [TWOZ99] a two-tier resource management model for the Internet
is proposed. The solution resembles the current two-tier routing
hierarchy and allows individual administrative domains to
independently make their own decisions on strategies and protocols
to use for internal resource management. We borrowed some ideas
from this paper and the three-tier NSIS signalings are proposed in
the framework.
The tenet of our design is what we call three-tier NSIS signalings.
By this term we mean that NSIS signalings should be done in three
levels. The first level is Inter-ND NSIS signalings across
neighboring NDs, and the second level is Intra-ND NSIS signalings
inside each ND, while the third level includes End-to-Edge NSIS
signalings and End-to-end NSIS signalings. Following the paradigm
of Internet Routing, each ND is free to choose whatever NSIS
signalings it deems proper for internal NSIS signalings as long as
its bilateral SLA with neighboring NDs are met.
These three NSIS signalings have different time cycle for signaling
actions. The first tier has the longer time cycle than the other
tiers. The third tier is based on per-flow time cycle.
4.1 The first tier NSIS signalings
While AN QoS can be fined grained (per flow), we require that
Inter-ND QoS agreements such as SLAs are made for the aggregate
traffic crossing NDs. Furthermore, Inter-ND agreements should
change infrequently at a larger time-cycle than that of individual
applications. These two requirements on Inter-ND agreements provide
substantial scaling characteristics by decoupling Inter-ND QoS
mechanisms from individual end-to-end flows. So the first tier NSIS
signalings occur between neighboring NDRM Agents in different NDs.
COPS or Diameter can be used for NSIS protocol, and actually SLAs
are signaled in this tier.
Note that the NBRM Agent contacts only its immediate neighbor for
all its traffic, although the traffic may head toward various final
destinations far away. It is the responsibility of the downstream
domain, after agreeing to carry the client traffic, to both
guarantee QoS internally as well as request QoS from the downstream
neighbors for the portions of the traffic that exit the domain.
As we know, end-to-end QoS is provided by the concatenation of
Intra-ND QoS mechanisms and bilateral SLAs between neighboring NDs.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 11
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
These agreements specify the amount of traffic belonging to
different classes that crosses links connecting adjacent NDs. To
ensure that the level of actual traffic is always lower than the
negotiated limit, the receiving domain polices incoming traffic,
dropping or demoting excess traffic. Knowing that offending traffic
will be policed, the sending domain in turn, shapes traffic so that
it always remains in profile.
4.2 The second tier NSIS signalings
The second tier NSIS signalings occur between NDRM Agent and ANRM
Agents in the same ND. COPS or Diameter can be used for NSIS
protocol, and actually the resources for aggregate flows from/to AN
are signaled in this tier.
ANRM Agents contact NBRM Agent to request certain about of
resources to cover for the aggregate high quality traffic leaving
the AN. Once the agreement is in place, ANRM Agent will tell
default router how to do the configuration, and individual
applications can request and use portions of the aggregate
allocated amount from the default router. When and if the allocated
resources are exhausted, the ANRM Agents may be able to re-
negotiate the agreement with its NBRM Agent, allocating a larger
amount of resources.
For example one of the purposes of Intra-ND resource provisioning
mechanisms is to check whether sufficient network resources are
available for traffic flowing through each AN and if so to allocate
domain resources for this traffic. Each ANRM Agent is responsible
for resource provisioning internally.
4.3 The third tier NSIS signalings
The third tier NSIS signalings includes End-to-Edge NSIS signaling
between MN and the default router which is NSIS-ware, and End-to-
End NSIS Signaling between MN and CN.
5. NSIS negotiation
Meeting resource guarantees in network systems is fundamentally an
end-to-end issue, that is, from application to application. In our
framework there is a NBRM Agent acts as the resource controller for
each NSIS domain. Neighboring NBRM Agents communicate with each
other to establish Inter-domain resources agreements such as SLAs.
The aggregate traffic crossing domain borders is served according
to relatively stable, long lived bilateral agreements. End-to-End
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 12
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
NSIS signaling support is achieved through the concatenation of
such bilateral agreements.
NSIS negotiation includes End-to-Edge NSIS negotiation based on
End-to-Edge NSIS signaling and end-to-end QoS negotiation End-to-
End NSIS signaling. End-to-Edge QoS negotiation happens between the
MN/CN and default routers. End-to-end QoS negotiation happens
between MN and CN.
When a MN moves to a foreign network and wants to communicate with
other nodes, it will negotiate with the foreign network through the
End-to-Edng NSIS signalings to guarantee some necessary resources
for its applications. If the foreign network cannot meet MN's
resource requirements, MN can decide whether or not enter this
network or re-negotiate with the network with degrading its
resource requirements. Moreover, the foreign network can decide
whether or not allow the MN to enter based on the current resource
conditions. The foreign network must inform MN the NSIS negotiation
results and this is called the response of NSIS.
If the foreign network allows the MN to enter, it will inform MN
the successful results through the End-to-edge NSIS signalings and
reserve required resources for MN based on some resource management
mechanisms. When MN leaves the network, the resources used by MN
will be released by MN itself or the network.
After MN is admitted to enter the foreign network, it will inform
CN of its resource requirements for an application through End-to-
End NSIS signalings. The CN will decide whether or not communicate
with this MN, and CN will inform MN the unsuccessful negotiation
result if CN cannot meet MN's NSIS requirements. Otherwise the CN
will negotiate with the network in which CN is locating based on
the MN's NSIS requirements. In some cases CN can meet MN's
requirements but network cannot. If the CN and the CN's located
network all can meet MN's QoS requirements, MN may communicate with
CN. Moreover CN and the CNÆs located network can modify the
resource requirements.
The procedures of NSIS negotiation has three phases: 1) the
negotiation between MN and its located network, 2) the negotiation
between MN and CN, 3) the negotiation between CN and its located
network. Phase 1 and phase 3 are called End-to-Edge NSIS
negotiation, and Phase 2 is called end-to-end NSIS negotiation.
The procedures of NSIS negotiation are dependent on what type of
NSIS Signaling protocols are used.
6. NSIS Signalings
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 13
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
6.1 In-Band and Out-of-Band Signaling
In-band signaling means that the path followed by the user data
packets is the same as the path followed by signaling messages. In
other words, the signaling and data paths are identical. In AN, in-
band signaling should be used.
Out-of-band signaling means that the path followed by signaling
messages might be different from the path used by the user data
packets. In the backbone network, out-of-band sigangling should be
used.
6.2 End-to-edge and End-to-end Signaling
End-to-edge signaling is initiated by a MN/CN, and is terminated by
the default router, or is initiated by the default router and is
terminated by a MN/CN. End-to-edge is a kind of in-band signaling,
and is used to reserve resource, state management.
End-to-end signaling is initiated by a MN/CN, and is terminiated by
a CN/MN. End-to-end signaling is a kind of out-of-band signaling,
and is used to take the resource request to the correspondent
nodes.
6.3 An example NSIS Signaling protocol
A suite of NSIS signalings protocol is necessary for NSIS
negotiation in order to guarantee per-flow end-to-end QoS. Although
RSVP is a popular QoS signaling, we build a new suite of QoS
signaling by extending the existing Moible IPv6 signalings other
than selecting RSVP based on the following factors:
1) the limitations of RSVP;
2) the existing Moible IPv6 mobility management signalings can be
extended for QoS negotiation, and doing so can integrate mobility
management within QoS negotiation.
The extended Mobile IPv6 signalings for QoS negotiation is divided
into two parts: edge QoS signalings and end-to-end QoS signalings.
Figure 2 shows the QoS signalings.
The stateless-based Differentiated Services [DiffServ] lack of QoS
response and there is no explicit negotiation between the
application's signaling of the service request and the network's
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 14
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
capability to deliver a particular service response. If the network
is incapable of meeting the service request, then the request
simply will not be honored. In such a situation there is no
requirement for the network to inform the application that the
request cannot be honored, and it is left to the application to
determine if the service has not been delivered. So our QoS
signaling can be a complement for DS.
The detailed design of the QoS signaling and the procedures of QoS
negotiation will be appeared in other draft.
References
[A92] Lazar, A.A., "A Real-time Control, Management, and
Information Transport Architecture for Broadband Networks", Proc.
International Zurich Seminar on Digital Communications, pp. 281-
295, 1992.
[ACH98] Cristina Aurrecoechea, Andrew T. Campbell, Linda Hauw. A
survey of QoS architectures, Multimedia Systems (1998) 6: 138û151
[APM91] APM Ltd (1991) ANSAware 3.0 Implementation Manual. APM Ltd,
Poseidon House, Castle Park, Cambridge CB3 0RD, UK Transport
Protocol. Comput Commun Rev 17 (5)
[CSZ92] Clark DD, Shenker S, Zhang L (1992) Supporting Real-Time
Appli-cations in an Integrated Services Packet Network:
Architecture and Mechanism. In: Proc. ACM SIGCOMM'92, pp 14-26,
Baltimore, Md., August 1992
[DiffServ]. IETF ôDifferentiated Servicesö working group. See
http://www.ietf.org/html-charters/diffserv-charter.html
[FCFB99] Baker, F., Iturralde, C., Le Faucher, F., Davie, B.,
Aggregation of RSVP for IPv4 and IPv6 Reservations, draft-baker-
rsvp-aggregation-01.txt (work in progress). Internet Draft,
Internet Engineering Task Force, December 1999
[IntServ] IETF ôIntegrated Servicesö working group. See
http://www.ietf.org/html-charters/intserv-charter.html
[IMT97] ITU-R Rec. M.687-2, "International Mobile
Telecommunications-2000 (IMT-2000)", 1997.
[LL73] Liu C, Layland J (1973) Scheduling Algorithms for
Multiprogramming in Hard Real Time Environment, J ACM
[MPLS] IETF ôMultiprotocol Label Switchingö working group. See
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mpls-charter.html and
http://www.ietf.org/ids.by.wg/mpls.html
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 15
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
[RAP] IETF ôRAPö working group. See http://www.ietf.org/html-
charters/rap-charter.html
[RFC2205] Braden, R., Ed., et. al., "Resource Reservation Protocol
(RSVP) -Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September
1997.
[RFC2748] Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Raja, R.
and A. Sastry, "The COPS (Common Open Policy Service) Protocol",
RFC 2748, January 2000.
[RFC2753] Yavatkar, R., Pendarakis, D. and R. Guerin, "A Framework
for Policy Based Admission Control", RFC 2753, January 2000.
[RFC2996] Bernet, Y., "Format of the RSVP DCLASS Object", RFC 2996,
November 2000.
[RFC2998] Bernet, Y., Yavatkar, R., Ford, P., Baker, F., Zhang, L.,
Speer, M., Braden, R., Davie, B., Wroclawski, J. and E. Felstaine,
"A Framework for Integrated Services Operation Over DiffServ
Networks", RFC 2998, November 2000.
[RFC2990] G. Huston. "Next steps for the IP QoS Architecture",
RFC2990, Novermber 2000.
[STA95] Stankovic et al. (1995) Implications of Classical
Scheduling Results for Real-Time Systems, IEEE Comput (Special
Issue on Scheduling and Real-Time Systems)
[TWOZ99] A. Terzis, L. Wang, J. Ogawa, and L. Zhang, A two-tier
resource management model for the Internet, in Proc.IEEE Global
Internet 99, Dec. 1999.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank all who have contributed to this paper, in
particular the authors of [TWOZ99] and our investigators in the
project.
Author's Address
Zhigang Kan
Nokia China R&D Center
Nokia House 1, No.11, He Ping Li Dong Jie,
Beijing,100013 PRC
Phone: +86-10-6539 2828-2829
zhigang.kan@nokia.com
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 16
draft-Kan-QoS-Framework-01.txt July, 2002
Jian Ma
Nokia China R&D Center
Nokia House 1, No.11, He Ping Li Dong Jie,
Beijing,100013 PRC
Phone: +86-10-6539 2828-2883
Jian.J.Ma@nokia.com
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain
it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied,
published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction
of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this
paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works.
However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such
as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet
Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the
purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the
procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process
must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages
other than English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on
an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Kan, Ma Expires December 2002 17
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 21:08:06 |