Subject: [icnrg] Draft on how to identify equivalence classes of traffic in ICN - feedback please!

From: David Oran <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:35:08 +0200

Ilya Moiseenko and I have just published https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-moiseenko-icnrg-flowclass-00.txt. 

There has been some initial discussion in ICNRG on handling multiple traffic classes and “service tags” in ICN, and recently a general description of requirements for a “multi-service tag” was posted (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-icn-multiservtag/). This draft focused in a general way on how to indicate what service you wanted your ICN packets to get.

This draft does not address how you express your service requirements; rather it addresses how producers tell the consumers and routers/forwarders which packets should be “grouped together” into a equivalence class. The equivalence classes can be considered “flows” or not, depending on whether you want to think in terms of flows for ICN systems that provide location-independent, multi-path, multi-destination fetching of content objects.

We describe two different ways to to do this, either of which should work for either NDN or CCN. The two schemes have different security properties, and different properties on how these classes can be aggregated in order to achieve scalability.

We’d love to get feedback on the draft, and continue a discussion of the problem of how to identity equivalence classes (flows) in ICN.

Note: This draft is covered by some Cisco IPR, for which an IPR disclosure is being filed now. It will have the usual terms Cisco applies to standards-track work in the IETF.

For those of you who came to Berlin - safe travels!

DaveO.