Subject: [Tsvwg] New draft: Re-ECN: Adding Accountability for Causing Congestion to TCP/IP

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:16:14 +0100

tsvwg,

I've uploaded a new draft for consideration by tsvwg. It's the one Allison 
Mankin asked me to do in Paris, giving our alternative proposal for the use 
of the ECN nonce codepoints in the IP header:
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-00.txt>

Below are the citation details with a link to HTML format etc, and a note 
on why we are posting this now.

===========================================================================
Re-ECN: Adding Accountability for Causing Congestion to TCP/IP, Bob Briscoe 
(BT & UCL), Arnaud Jacquet and Alessandro Salvatori (BT), IETF 
Internet-Draft draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-00.html (Oct 2005). (27pp, 10 
refs, 5 figs)
<http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/B.Briscoe/pubs.html#retcp>

Abstract: This document introduces a new feedback protocol for explicit 
congestion notification (ECN), termed re-ECN. It arranges the ECN field of 
each packet so that, as it arrives at each router, the relative rates of 
each codepoint will give a truthful prediction of congestion on the 
remainder of the path. It also outlines mechanisms at the network edge that 
ensure the dominant selfish strategy of both network domains and end-points 
will be to set these codepoints honestly and to respond correctly to path 
congestion, despite conflicting interests. Although these mechanisms 
influence incentives, they use engineering mechanisms like throttling and 
dropping, rather than requiring changes to end-user pricing. The protocol 
can be deployed incrementally around unmodified routers without requiring 
changes to IP.

Authors' Statement: Status

    This document is posted as an initial Internet-Draft with the intent
    (at least that of the authors) to eventually progress to standards
    track.

    However, it proposes using the ECN codepoints currently set aside for
    the experimental ECN nonce.  The protocol proposed here aims to allow
    networks to be able to police cheating senders and receivers and to
    police neighbouring networks.  On the other hand, the ECN nonce aims
    to allow senders to detect cheating receivers.

    Although the proposed scheme addresses a much more pressing problem,
    compromises in its strength have had to be introduced in order to
    make it incrementally deployable.  We therefore seek the opinion of
    the Internet Community on whether the resulting strength is
    sufficient to warrant standards action.

Bob

____________________________________________________________________________
Notice: This contribution is the personal view of the author and does not 
necessarily reflect the technical nor commercial direction of BT plc.
____________________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                           Networks Research Centre, BT Research
B54/130 Adastral Park,Martlesham Heath,Ipswich,IP5 3RE,UK.   +44 1473 645196 

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg