TOC 
Diameter Maintenance andJ. Korhonen, Ed.
Extensions (DIME)TeliaSonera
Internet-DraftH. Tschofenig
Intended status: Standards TrackNokia Siemens Networks
Expires: August 28, 2008M. Arumaithurai
 University of Goettingen
 M. Jones
 Bridgewater Systems
 February 25, 2008


Quality of Service Attributes for Diameter
draft-ietf-dime-qos-attributes-05.txt

Status of this Memo

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

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.

This Internet-Draft will expire on August 28, 2008.

Abstract

This document extends the QoSFilterRule AVP functionality of the Diameter Base protocol and the functionality of the QoS-Filter-Rule AVP defined in RFC 4005. The ability to convey Quality of Service information using the AVPs defined in this document is available to existing and future Diameter applications where permitted by the command ABNF.



Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
2.  Terminology
3.  Diameter QoS Defined AVPs
    3.1.  QoS-Capability AVP
    3.2.  QoS-Profile-Template AVP
    3.3.  QoS-Resources AVP
    3.4.  Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP
    3.5.  QoS-Semantics
    3.6.  QoS-Parameters AVP
    3.7.  QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP
    3.8.  QoS-Flow-Direction AVP
4.  Semantics of QoS Parameters
5.  Examples
    5.1.  Diameter EAP with QoS Information
    5.2.  Diameter NASREQ with QoS Information
    5.3.  QoS Authorization
    5.4.  Diameter Server Initiated Re-authorization of QoS
    5.5.  Diameter Credit Control with QoS Information
6.  Acknowledgments
7.  IANA Considerations
8.  Security Considerations
9.  References
    9.1.  Normative References
    9.2.  Informative References
§  Authors' Addresses
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements




 TOC 

1.  Introduction

This document defines a number of Diameter Quality of Service (QoS) related AVPs that can be used in existing and future Diameter applications where permitted by the command ABNF. The Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP thereby replaces the QoSFilterRule, defined in RFC 3588 [RFC3588] (Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, “Diameter Base Protocol,” September 2003.), and the QoS-Filter-Rule, defined in RFC 4005 [RFC4005] (Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, “Diameter Network Access Server Application,” August 2005.).



 TOC 

2.  Terminology

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 [RFC2119] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.).



 TOC 

3.  Diameter QoS Defined AVPs

The following table lists the Diameter AVPs used by this document, their AVP code values, types and possible flag values.

                                                  +------------------+
                                                  |  AVP Flag Rules  |
+-------------------------------------------------|----+---+----+----+
|                          AVP  Section           |MUST|MAY|SHLD|MUST|
| Attribute Name           Code Defined Data Type |    |   | NOT| NOT|
+-------------------------------------------------+----+---+----+----+
|QoS-Capability            TBD    3.1  Grouped    |    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Profile-Template      TBD    3.2  Unsigned64 |    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Resources             TBD    3.3  Grouped    |    |M,P|    | V  |
|Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule  TBD    3.4  Grouped    |    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Semantics             TBD    3.5  Enumerated |    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Parameters            TBD    3.6  OctetString|    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Rule-Precedence       TBD    3.7  Unsigned32 |    |M,P|    | V  |
|QoS-Flow-Direction        TBD    3.9  Enumerated |    |M,P|    | V  |
+-------------------------------------------------+----+---+----+----+



 TOC 

3.1.  QoS-Capability AVP

The QoS-Capability AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and contains a list of supported Quality of Service profile templates (and therefore the support of the respective parameter AVPs).

QoS-Capability ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
                1* { QoS-Profile-Template }
                 * [ AVP ]



 TOC 

3.2.  QoS-Profile-Template AVP

The QoS-Profile-Template AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned64 and contains a vendor and a specifier field. The 64-bit value in the QoS-Profile-Template AVP is structured as shown below.

 0                   1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                           Vendor                              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                           Specifier                           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Vendor Field:

32 bits of IANA SMI Network Management Private Enterprise Code. The Vendor-ID 0x00000000 is reserved for IANA registered QoS profiles.

Specifier Field:

32-bit unsigned integer, representing the defined profile value.

An initial QoS profile template is defined with vendor field set to 0x00000000 and the specifier field set to 0. The initial QoS profile template is described in [I‑D.ietf‑dime‑qos‑parameters] (Korhonen, J., Tschofenig, H., and E. Davies, “Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with Diameter,” May 2009.). The registry for the QoS profile templates is created with the same document.



 TOC 

3.3.  QoS-Resources AVP

The QoS-Resources AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and includes a description of the Quality of Service resources for policing traffic flows.

QoS-Resources ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
                * [ Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule ]
                  [ QoS-Flow-State ]
                * [ AVP ]



 TOC 

3.4.  Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP

The Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and defines one or more traffic flows together with a set of QoS parameters that should be applied to the flow(s) by the Resource Management Function. This AVP re-uses the RADIUS NAS-Traffic-Rule AVP [I‑D.ietf‑radext‑filter‑rules] (Congdon, P., “RADIUS Attributes for Filtering and Redirection,” July 2007.) to describe traffic flows. At least either one of the NAS-Traffic-Rule or the QoS-Flow-Direction AVPs SHOULD be included.

Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
                             { QoS-Semantics }
                             { QoS-Profile-Template }
                             [ QoS-Parameters ]
                             [ QoS-Rule-Precedence ]
                             [ NAS-Traffic-Rule ]
                             [ QoS-Flow-Direction ]
                           * [ AVP ]



 TOC 

3.5.  QoS-Semantics

The QoS-Semantics AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Enumerated and provides the semantics for the QoS-Profile-Template and QoS-Parameters AVPs in the Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP.

This document defines the following values:

 (0): QoS-Desired
 (1): QoS-Available
 (2): QoS-Reserved
 (3): Minimum-QoS
 (4): QoS-Authorized



 TOC 

3.6.  QoS-Parameters AVP

The QoS-Parameters AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type OctetString and contains Quality of Service parameters. These parameters are defined in a separate document, see [I‑D.ietf‑dime‑qos‑parameters] (Korhonen, J., Tschofenig, H., and E. Davies, “Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with Diameter,” May 2009.).



 TOC 

3.7.  QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP

The QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned32 and specifies the execution order of the rules expressed in the QoS-Resources AVP. Rules with equal precedence MAY be executed in parallel if supported by the Resource Management Function. If the QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP is absent from the Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP, the rules SHOULD be executed in the order in which they appear in the QoS-Resources AVP.



 TOC 

3.8.  QoS-Flow-Direction AVP

The QoS-Flow-Direction AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Enumerated. It gives an indication of the direction the provided QoS information should be applied to. The QoS information can be applied to downlink flows or to uplink flows. The QoS-Flow-Direction AVP may be used in conjunction with the NAS-Traffic-Rule AVP. In a case conflicting definitions between the QoS-Flow-Direction and the NAS-Traffic-Rule, the QoS-Flow-Direction has precedence meaning the filter rules are applied only to the flows going to the direction indicated by the QoS-Flow-Direction AVP. In the absence of the QoS-Flow-Direction the default treatment is to both directions.

  Value | Name and Semantic
  ------+------------------------------------------------------------
    0   | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_BOTH - The QoS information in applied to
        | both downlink and uplink flows. This is also the default.
    1   | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_DL - The QoS information in applied to
        | downlink flows only.
    2   | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_UL - The QoS information in applied to
        | uplink flows only.



 TOC 

4.  Semantics of QoS Parameters

The QoS parameters carried in the QoS-Resources AVP may appear in different messages. The semantic of the QoS parameters depend on the information provided in the QoS-Semantics AVP which currently defines 5 values, namely QoS-Desired (0), QoS-Available (1), QoS-Reserved (2), Minimum-QoS (3), and QoS-Authorized (4).

The semantics of the different values are as follows:

Object Type    Direction   Semantic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
QoS-Desired     C->S       Please authorize the indicated QoS
QoS-Desired     C<-S       NA
QoS-Available   C->S       Admission Control at router indicates
                           that this QoS is available. (note 1)
QoS-Available   C<-S       Indicated QoS is available. (note 2)
QoS-Reserved    C->S       Used for reporting during accounting.
QoS-Reserved    C<-S       NA
Minimum-QoS     C->S       Indicates that the client is not interested
                           interested in authorizing QoS that is
                           lower than Min. QoS
Minimum-QoS     C<-S       The client must not provide QoS guarantees
                           lower than Min. QoS
QoS-Authorized  C->S       NA
QoS-Authorized  C<-S       Indicated QoS authorized

Legend:

  C: Diameter client
  S: Diameter server
  NA: Not applicable to this document;
      no semantic defined in this specification

Notes:

 (1) QoS-Available is only useful in relationship with QoS-Desired
     (and optionally with Minimum-QoS).
 (2) QoS-Available is only useful when the AAA server performs
     admission control and knows about the resources in the network.



 TOC 

5.  Examples

This section shows a number of signaling flows where QoS negotiation and authorization is part of the conventional NASREQ, EAP or Credit Control applications message exchanges. The signalling flows for the Diameter QoS Application are described in [I‑D.ietf‑dime‑diameter‑qos] (Sun, D., McCann, P., Tschofenig, H., ZOU), T., Doria, A., and G. Zorn, “Diameter Quality of Service Application,” March 2010.).



 TOC 

5.1.  Diameter EAP with QoS Information

Figure 1 (Example of a Diameter EAP enhanced with QoS Information) shows a simple signaling flow where a NAS (Diameter Client) announces its QoS awareness and capabilities included into the DER message and as part of the access authentication procedure. Upon completion of the EAP exchange, the Diameter Server provides a pre-provisioned QoS profile with the QoS-Semantics in the Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP set to "QoS-Authorized", to the NAS in the final DEA message.


 End                            Diameter                      Diameter
 Host                            Client                         server
  |                                |                                |
  |        (initiate EAP)          |                                |
  |<------------------------------>|                                |
  |                                | Diameter-EAP-Request           |
  |                                | EAP-Payload(EAP Start)         |
  |                                | QoS-Capability                 |
  |                                |------------------------------->|
  |                                |                                |
  |                                |            Diameter-EAP-Answer |
  |                           Result-Code=DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH |
  |                                |    EAP-Payload(EAP Request #1) |
  |                                |<-------------------------------|
  |          EAP Request(Identity) |                                |
  |<-------------------------------|                                |
  :                                :                                :
  :                      <<<more message exchanges>>>               :
  :                                :                                :
  |                                |                                |
  | EAP Response #N                |                                |
  |------------------------------->|                                |
  |                                | Diameter-EAP-Request           |
  |                                | EAP-Payload(EAP Response #N)   |
  |                                |------------------------------->|
  |                                |                                |
  |                                |            Diameter-EAP-Answer |
  |                                |   Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS |
  |                                |       EAP-Payload(EAP Success) |
  |                                |       [EAP-Master-Session-Key] |
  |                                |           (authorization AVPs) |
  |                                |  QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized) |
  |                                |<-------------------------------|
  |                                |                                |
  |                    EAP Success |                                |
  |<-------------------------------|                                |
  |                                |                                |

 Figure 1: Example of a Diameter EAP enhanced with QoS Information 



 TOC 

5.2.  Diameter NASREQ with QoS Information

Figure 2 (Example of a Diameter NASREQ enhanced with QoS Information) shows a similar pre-provisioned QoS signaling as in Figure 1 (Example of a Diameter EAP enhanced with QoS Information) but using the NASREQ application instead of EAP application.



   End                                             Diameter
   Host               NAS                            Server
    |                  |                              |
    |  Start Network   |                              |
    |  Attachment      |                              |
    |<---------------->|                              |
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |AA-Request                    |
    |                  |NASREQ-Payload                |
    |                  |QoS-Capability                |
    |                  +----------------------------->|
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                     AA-Answer|
    |            Result-Code=DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH|
    |                NASREQ-Payload(NASREQ Request #1)|
    |                  |<-----------------------------+
    |                  |                              |
    | Request          |                              |
    |<-----------------+                              |
    |                  |                              |
    :                  :                              :
    :          <<<more message exchanges>>>           :
    :                  :                              :
    | Response #N      |                              |
    +----------------->|                              |
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |AA-Request                    |
    |                  |NASREQ-Payload ( Response #N )|
    |                  +----------------------------->|
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                     AA-Answer|
    |                  |  Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS|
    |                  |          (authorization AVPs)|
    |                  |QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized) |
    |                  |<-----------------------------+
    |                  |                              |
    | Success          |                              |
    |<-----------------+                              |
    |                  |                              |

 Figure 2: Example of a Diameter NASREQ enhanced with QoS Information 



 TOC 

5.3.  QoS Authorization

Figure 3 (Example of an Authorization-Only Message Flow) shows an example of authorization only QoS signaling as part of the NASREQ message exchange. The NAS provides the Diameter server with the "QoS-Desired" QoS-Semantics AVP included in the QoS-Resources AVP. The Diameter server then either authorizes the indicated QoS or rejects the request and informs the NAS about the result. In this scenario the NAS does not need to include the QoS-Capability AVP in the AAR message as the QoS-Resources AVP implicitly does the same and also the NAS is authorizing a specific QoS profile, not a pre-provisioned one.



    End                                            Diameter
    Host               NAS                          Server
     |                  |                              |
     |                  |                              |
     |  QoS Request     |                              |
     +----------------->|                              |
     |                  |                              |
     |                  |AA-Request                    |
     |                  |Auth-Request-Type=AUTHORIZE_ONLY
     |                  |NASREQ-Payload                |
     |                  |QoS-Resources(QoS-Desired)    |
     |                  +----------------------------->|
     |                  |                              |
     |                  |                     AA-Answer|
     |                  |       NASREQ-Payload(Success)|
     |                  | QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized)|
     |                  |<-----------------------------+
     |  Accept          |                              |
     |<-----------------+                              |
     |                  |                              |
     |                  |                              |
     |                  |                              |

 Figure 3: Example of an Authorization-Only Message Flow 



 TOC 

5.4.  Diameter Server Initiated Re-authorization of QoS

Figure 4 (Example of a Server-initiated Re-Authorization Procedure) shows a message exchange for a Diameter server initiated QoS re-authorization procedure. The Diameter server sends the NAS a RAR message requesting re-authorization for an existing session and the NAS acknowledges it with a RAA message. The NAS is aware of its existing QoS profile and information for the ongoing session that the Diameter server requested for re-authorization. Thus, the NAS must initiate re-authorization of the existing QoS profile. The re-authorization procedure is the same as in Figure 3 (Example of an Authorization-Only Message Flow).




   End                                             Diameter
   Host               NAS                            Server
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                              |
    :                  :                              :
    :          <<<Initial Message Exchanges>>>         :
    :                  :                              :
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                   RA-Request |
    |                  |<-----------------------------+
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |RA-Answer                     |
    |                  |Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS  |
    |                  +----------------------------->|
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |AA-Request                    |
    |                  |NASREQ-Payload                |
    |                  |Auth-Request-Type=AUTHORIZE_ONLY
    |                  |QoS-Resources(QoS-Desired)    |
    |                  +----------------------------->|
    |                  |                              |
    |                  |                     AA-Answer|
    |                  |  Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS|
    |                  |          (authorization AVPs)|
    |                  | QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized)|
    |                  |<-----------------------------+
    |                  |                              |

 Figure 4: Example of a Server-initiated Re-Authorization Procedure 



 TOC 

5.5.  Diameter Credit Control with QoS Information

In this case the User is charged as soon as the Service Element (CC client) receives the service request. In this case the client uses the "QoS-Desired" QoS-Semantics parameter in the QoS-Resources AVP that it sends to the Accounitng server. The server responds with a "QoS-Available" QoS-Semantics parameter in the QoS-Resources AVP



                     Service Element
  End User            (CC Client)           B           CC Server
     |                     |                |                |
     |(1) Service Request  |                |                |
     |-------------------->|                |                |
     |                     |(2)  CCR (event, DIRECT_DEBITING,|
     |                     |     QoS-Resources[QoS-desired]) |
     |                     |-------------------------------->|
     |                     |(3)  CCA (Granted-Units, QoS-    |
     |                     |     Resources[QoS-Authorized])  |
     |                     |<--------------------------------|
     |(4) Service Delivery |                |                |
     |<--------------------|                |                |
     |(5) Begin service    |                |                |
     |<------------------------------------>|                |
     |                     |                |                |
     .                     .                .                .
     .                     .                .                .

 Figure 5: Example for a One-Time Diameter Credit Control Charging Event 



 TOC 

6.  Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Victor Fajardo, Tseno Tsenov, Robert Hancock, Jukka Manner, Cornelia Kappler, Xiaoming Fu, Frank Alfano, Avi Lior, Tolga Asveren, Mike Montemurro, Glen Zorn, Avri Doria, Dong Sun, Tina Tsou, Pete McCann, Georgios Karagiannis and Elwyn Davies for their comments.



 TOC 

7.  IANA Considerations

This specification requests IANA to assignment of new AVPs from the AVP Code namespace defined in RFC 3588 [RFC3588] (Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, “Diameter Base Protocol,” September 2003.). Section 3 (Diameter QoS Defined AVPs) lists the newly defined AVPs.

IANA is requested to allocate a registry for the QoS-Semantics. The following values are allocated by this specification.

            (0): QoS-Desired
            (1): QoS-Available
            (2): QoS-Reserved
            (3): Minimum-QoS
            (4): QoS-Authorized

A specification is required to add a new value to the registry. A standards track document is required to depreciate, delete, or modify existing values.



 TOC 

8.  Security Considerations

This document describes the extension of Diameter for conveying Quality of Service information. The security considerations of the Diameter protocol itself have been discussed in RFC 3588 [RFC3588] (Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, “Diameter Base Protocol,” September 2003.). Use of the AVPs defined in this document MUST take into consideration the security issues and requirements of the Diameter Base protocol.



 TOC 

9.  References



 TOC 

9.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-dime-qos-parameters] Korhonen, J., Tschofenig, H., and E. Davies, “Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with Diameter,” draft-ietf-dime-qos-parameters-11 (work in progress), May 2009 (TXT).
[I-D.ietf-radext-filter-rules] Congdon, P., “RADIUS Attributes for Filtering and Redirection,” draft-ietf-radext-filter-rules-03 (work in progress), July 2007 (TXT).
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, “Diameter Base Protocol,” RFC 3588, September 2003 (TXT).
[RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, “Diameter Network Access Server Application,” RFC 4005, August 2005 (TXT).


 TOC 

9.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-dime-diameter-qos] Sun, D., McCann, P., Tschofenig, H., ZOU), T., Doria, A., and G. Zorn, “Diameter Quality of Service Application,” draft-ietf-dime-diameter-qos-15 (work in progress), March 2010 (TXT).


 TOC 

Authors' Addresses

  Jouni Korhonen (editor)
  TeliaSonera
  Teollisuuskatu 13
  Sonera FIN-00051
  Finland
Email:  jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com
  
  Hannes Tschofenig
  Nokia Siemens Networks
  Otto-Hahn-Ring 6
  Munich, Bavaria 81739
  Germany
Email:  Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com
URI:  http://www.tschofenig.com
  
  Mayutan Arumaithurai
  University of Goettingen
 
Email:  mayutan.arumaithurai@gmail.com
  
  Mark Jones
  Bridgewater Systems
  303 Terry Fox Drive
  Ottawa, Ontario K2K 3J1
  Canada
Email:  mark.jones@bridgewatersystems.com


 TOC 

Full Copyright Statement

Intellectual Property