| < draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-01.txt | draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-02.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEAS Working Group A. Farrel, Ed. | TEAS Working Group A. Farrel, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft Old Dog Consulting | Internet-Draft Old Dog Consulting | |||
| Obsoletes: 3272 (if approved) July 13, 2020 | Obsoletes: 3272 (if approved) November 2, 2020 | |||
| Intended status: Informational | Intended status: Informational | |||
| Expires: January 14, 2021 | Expires: May 6, 2021 | |||
| Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering | Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering | |||
| draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-01 | draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-02 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes the principles of Traffic Engineering (TE) in | This document describes the principles of traffic engineering (TE) in | |||
| the Internet. The document is intended to promote better | the Internet. The document is intended to promote better | |||
| understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in IP | understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in IP | |||
| networks and the networks that support IP networking, and to provide | networks and the networks that support IP networking, and to provide | |||
| a common basis for the development of traffic engineering | a common basis for the development of traffic engineering | |||
| capabilities for the Internet. The principles, architectures, and | capabilities for the Internet. The principles, architectures, and | |||
| methodologies for performance evaluation and performance optimization | methodologies for performance evaluation and performance optimization | |||
| of operational networks are discussed throughout this document. | of operational networks are also discussed. | |||
| This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002. This document | This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002. This document | |||
| obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text in | obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text in | |||
| line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and | line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and | |||
| to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF. | to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF. | |||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 43 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 43 ¶ | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2021. | This Internet-Draft will expire on May 6, 2021. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.1. What is Internet Traffic Engineering? . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.1. What is Internet Traffic Engineering? . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.2. Components of Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 1.2. Components of Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 1.3. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 1.3. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 1.4. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 1.4. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 2.1. Context of Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2.1. Context of Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 2.2. Network Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 2.2. Network Domain Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 2.3. Problem Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 2.3. Problem Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 2.3.1. Congestion and its Ramifications . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 2.3.1. Congestion and its Ramifications . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 2.4. Solution Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 2.4. Solution Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 2.4.1. Combating the Congestion Problem . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 2.4.1. Combating the Congestion Problem . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 2.5. Implementation and Operational Context . . . . . . . . . 22 | 2.5. Implementation and Operational Context . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 3. Traffic Engineering Process Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 3. Traffic Engineering Process Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 3.1. Components of the Traffic Engineering Process Model . . . 23 | 3.1. Components of the Traffic Engineering Process Model . . . 22 | |||
| 4. Review of TE Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 4. Review of TE Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 4.1. Overview of IETF Projects Related to Traffic Engineering 24 | 4.1. Overview of IETF Projects Related to Traffic Engineering 23 | |||
| 4.1.1. Constraint-Based Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 4.1.1. Constraint-Based Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 4.1.2. Integrated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 4.1.2. Integrated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 4.1.3. RSVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 4.1.3. RSVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| 4.1.4. Differentiated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 4.1.4. Differentiated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 4.1.5. MPLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | 4.1.5. MPLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 4.1.6. Generalized MPLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | 4.1.6. Generalized MPLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 4.1.7. IP Performance Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 4.1.7. IP Performance Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 4.1.8. Flow Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 4.1.8. Flow Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
| 4.1.9. Endpoint Congestion Management . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 4.1.9. Endpoint Congestion Management . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
| 4.1.10. TE Extensions to the IGPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 4.1.10. TE Extensions to the IGPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| 4.1.11. Link-State BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 4.1.11. Link-State BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| 4.1.12. Path Computation Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | 4.1.12. Path Computation Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| 4.1.13. Application-Layer Traffic Optimization . . . . . . . 31 | 4.1.13. Application-Layer Traffic Optimization . . . . . . . 30 | |||
| 4.1.14. Segment Routing with MPLS encapsuation (SR-MPLS) . . 32 | 4.1.14. Segment Routing with MPLS encapsuation (SR-MPLS) . . 30 | |||
| 4.1.15. Network Virtualization and Abstraction . . . . . . . 33 | 4.1.15. Network Virtualization and Abstraction . . . . . . . 31 | |||
| 4.1.16. Deterministic Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | 4.1.16. Deterministic Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | |||
| 4.1.17. Network TE State Definition and Presentation . . . . 34 | 4.1.17. Network TE State Definition and Presentation . . . . 32 | |||
| 4.1.18. System Management and Control Interfaces . . . . . . 34 | 4.1.18. System Management and Control Interfaces . . . . . . 32 | |||
| 4.2. Content Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | 4.2. Content Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | |||
| 5. Taxonomy of Traffic Engineering Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | 5. Taxonomy of Traffic Engineering Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | |||
| 5.1. Time-Dependent Versus State-Dependent Versus Event | 5.1. Time-Dependent Versus State-Dependent Versus Event | |||
| Dependent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | Dependent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | |||
| 5.2. Offline Versus Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | 5.2. Offline Versus Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
| 5.3. Centralized Versus Distributed . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | 5.3. Centralized Versus Distributed . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | |||
| 5.3.1. Hybrid Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | 5.3.1. Hybrid Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | |||
| 5.3.2. Considerations for Software Defined Networking . . . 38 | 5.3.2. Considerations for Software Defined Networking . . . 36 | |||
| 5.4. Local Versus Global . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | 5.4. Local Versus Global . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | |||
| 5.5. Prescriptive Versus Descriptive . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | 5.5. Prescriptive Versus Descriptive . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | |||
| 5.5.1. Intent-Based Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | 5.5.1. Intent-Based Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | |||
| 5.6. Open-Loop Versus Closed-Loop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | 5.6. Open-Loop Versus Closed-Loop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | |||
| 5.7. Tactical vs Strategic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | 5.7. Tactical vs Strategic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | |||
| 6. Recommendations for Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . 39 | 6. Recommendations for Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . 38 | |||
| 6.1. Generic Non-functional Recommendations . . . . . . . . . 40 | 6.1. Generic Non-functional Recommendations . . . . . . . . . 38 | |||
| 6.2. Routing Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 | 6.2. Routing Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 | |||
| 6.3. Traffic Mapping Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 | 6.3. Traffic Mapping Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 | |||
| 6.4. Measurement Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 | 6.4. Measurement Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 | |||
| 6.5. Network Survivability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 | 6.5. Network Survivability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 | |||
| 6.5.1. Survivability in MPLS Based Networks . . . . . . . . 48 | 6.5.1. Survivability in MPLS Based Networks . . . . . . . . 46 | |||
| 6.5.2. Protection Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 | 6.5.2. Protection Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 | |||
| 6.6. Traffic Engineering in Diffserv Environments . . . . . . 50 | 6.6. Traffic Engineering in Diffserv Environments . . . . . . 48 | |||
| 6.7. Network Controllability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 | 6.7. Network Controllability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 | |||
| 7. Inter-Domain Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 | 7. Inter-Domain Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 | |||
| 8. Overview of Contemporary TE Practices in Operational IP | 8. Overview of Contemporary TE Practices in Operational IP | |||
| Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 | Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 | |||
| 9. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 | 9. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 | |||
| 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 | 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 | |||
| 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 | 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 | |||
| 12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 | 12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 | |||
| 13. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 | 13. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 | |||
| 14. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 | 14. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 | |||
| Appendix A. Historic Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 | Appendix A. Historic Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 | |||
| A.1. Traffic Engineering in Classical Telephone Networks . . . 71 | A.1. Traffic Engineering in Classical Telephone Networks . . . 70 | |||
| A.2. Evolution of Traffic Engineering in Packet Networks . . . 72 | A.2. Evolution of Traffic Engineering in Packet Networks . . . 71 | |||
| A.2.1. Adaptive Routing in the ARPANET . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | A.2.1. Adaptive Routing in the ARPANET . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
| A.2.2. Dynamic Routing in the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | A.2.2. Dynamic Routing in the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . 72 | |||
| A.2.3. ToS Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | A.2.3. ToS Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
| A.2.4. Equal Cost Multi-Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | A.2.4. Equal Cost Multi-Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 | |||
| A.2.5. Nimrod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 | A.2.5. Nimrod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
| A.3. Development of Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . 75 | A.3. Development of Internet Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . 74 | |||
| A.3.1. Overlay Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 | A.3.1. Overlay Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 | |||
| Appendix B. Overview of Traffic Engineering Related Work in | Appendix B. Overview of Traffic Engineering Related Work in | |||
| Other SDOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 | Other SDOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 | |||
| B.1. Overview of ITU Activities Related to Traffic Engineering 76 | B.1. Overview of ITU Activities Related to Traffic Engineering 75 | |||
| Appendix C. Summary of Changes Since RFC 3272 . . . . . . . . . 77 | Appendix C. Summary of Changes Since RFC 3272 . . . . . . . . . 76 | |||
| Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 | Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| This memo describes the principles of Internet traffic engineering. | This document describes the principles of Internet traffic | |||
| The objective of the document is to articulate the general issues and | engineering (TE). The objective of the document is to articulate the | |||
| principles for Internet traffic engineering; and where appropriate to | general issues and principles for Internet traffic engineering, and | |||
| provide recommendations, guidelines, and options for the development | where appropriate to provide recommendations, guidelines, and options | |||
| of online and offline Internet traffic engineering capabilities and | for the development of online and offline Internet traffic | |||
| support systems. | engineering capabilities and support systems. | |||
| This document can aid service providers in devising and implementing | ||||
| traffic engineering solutions for their networks. Networking | ||||
| hardware and software vendors will also find this document helpful in | ||||
| the development of mechanisms and support systems for the Internet | ||||
| environment that support the traffic engineering function. | ||||
| This document provides a terminology for describing and understanding | This document provides a terminology and taxonomy for describing and | |||
| common Internet traffic engineering concepts. This document also | understanding common Internet traffic engineering concepts. | |||
| provides a taxonomy of known traffic engineering styles. In this | ||||
| context, a traffic engineering style abstracts important aspects from | ||||
| a traffic engineering methodology. Traffic engineering styles can be | ||||
| viewed in different ways depending upon the specific context in which | ||||
| they are used and the specific purpose which they serve. The | ||||
| combination of styles and views results in a natural taxonomy of | ||||
| traffic engineering systems. | ||||
| Even though Internet traffic engineering is most effective when | Even though Internet traffic engineering is most effective when | |||
| applied end-to-end, the focus of this document is traffic engineering | applied end-to-end, the focus of this document is traffic engineering | |||
| within a given domain (such as an autonomous system). However, | within a given domain (such as an autonomous system). However, | |||
| because a preponderance of Internet traffic tends to originate in one | because a preponderance of Internet traffic tends to originate in one | |||
| autonomous system and terminate in another, this document provides an | autonomous system and terminate in another, this document also | |||
| overview of aspects pertaining to inter-domain traffic engineering. | provides an overview of aspects pertaining to inter-domain traffic | |||
| engineering. | ||||
| This work was first published as [RFC3272] in May 2002. This | This work was first published as [RFC3272] in May 2002. This | |||
| document obsoletes [RFC3272] by making a complete update to bring the | document obsoletes [RFC3272] by making a complete update to bring the | |||
| text in line with best current practices for Internet traffic | text in line with best current practices for Internet traffic | |||
| engineering and to include references to the latest relevant work in | engineering and to include references to the latest relevant work in | |||
| the IETF. It is worth noting around three fifths of the RFCs | the IETF. It is worth noting around three fifths of the RFCs | |||
| referenced in this document post-date the publication of RFC 3272. | referenced in this document post-date the publication of RFC 3272. | |||
| Appendix C provides a summary of changes between RFC 3272 and this | Appendix C provides a summary of changes between RFC 3272 and this | |||
| document. | document. | |||
| 1.1. What is Internet Traffic Engineering? | 1.1. What is Internet Traffic Engineering? | |||
| The Internet exists in order to transfer information from source | One of the most significant functions performed by the Internet is | |||
| nodes to destination nodes. Accordingly, one of the most significant | the routing of traffic from ingress nodes to egress nodes. | |||
| functions performed by the Internet is the routing of traffic from | Therefore, one of the most distinctive functions performed by | |||
| ingress nodes to egress nodes. Therefore, one of the most | Internet traffic engineering is the control and optimization of the | |||
| distinctive functions performed by Internet traffic engineering is | routing function, to steer traffic through the network. | |||
| the control and optimization of the routing function, to steer | ||||
| traffic through the network. | ||||
| Internet traffic engineering is defined as that aspect of Internet | Internet traffic engineering is defined as that aspect of Internet | |||
| network engineering dealing with the issue of performance evaluation | network engineering dealing with the issues of performance evaluation | |||
| and performance optimization of operational IP networks. Traffic | and performance optimization of operational IP networks. Traffic | |||
| Engineering encompasses the application of technology and scientific | engineering encompasses the application of technology and scientific | |||
| principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, and | principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, and | |||
| control of Internet traffic [RFC2702], [AWD2]. | control of Internet traffic [RFC2702], [AWD2]. | |||
| Ultimately, it is the performance of the network as seen by end users | It is the performance of the network as seen by end users of network | |||
| of network services that is truly paramount. The characteristics | services that is paramount. The characteristics visible to end users | |||
| visible to end users are the emergent properties of the network, | are the emergent properties of the network, which are the | |||
| which are the characteristics of the network when viewed as a whole. | characteristics of the network when viewed as a whole. A central | |||
| A central goal of the service provider, therefore, is to enhance the | goal of the service provider, therefore, is to enhance the emergent | |||
| emergent properties of the network while taking economic | properties of the network while taking economic considerations into | |||
| considerations into account. This is accomplished by addressing | account. This is accomplished by addressing traffic oriented | |||
| traffic oriented performance requirements, while utilizing network | performance requirements while utilizing network resources | |||
| resources economically and reliably. Traffic oriented performance | economically and reliably. Traffic oriented performance measures | |||
| measures include delay, delay variation, packet loss, and throughput. | include delay, delay variation, packet loss, and throughput. | |||
| Internet traffic engineering responds to network events. Aspects of | Internet traffic engineering responds to network events. Aspects of | |||
| capacity management respond at intervals ranging from days to years. | capacity management respond at intervals ranging from days to years. | |||
| Routing control functions operate at intervals ranging from | Routing control functions operate at intervals ranging from | |||
| milliseconds to days. Packet level processing functions operate at | milliseconds to days. Packet level processing functions operate at | |||
| very fine levels of temporal resolution, ranging from picoseconds to | very fine levels of temporal resolution, ranging from picoseconds to | |||
| milliseconds while responding to the real-time statistical behavior | milliseconds while reacting to the real-time statistical behavior of | |||
| of traffic. | traffic. | |||
| Thus, the optimization aspects of traffic engineering can be viewed | Thus, the optimization aspects of traffic engineering can be viewed | |||
| from a control perspective and can be pro-active and/or reactive. In | from a control perspective, and can be both pro-active and reactive. | |||
| the pro-active case, the traffic engineering control system takes | In the pro-active case, the traffic engineering control system takes | |||
| preventive action to obviate predicted unfavorable future network | preventive action to protect against predicted unfavorable future | |||
| states such as e.g. engineering a backup path. It may also take | network states, for example, by engineering backup paths. It may | |||
| perfective action to induce a more desirable state in the future. In | also take action that will lead to a more desirable future network | |||
| the reactive case, the control system responds correctively and | state. In the reactive case, the control system responds to correct | |||
| perhaps adaptively to events that have already transpired in the | issues and adapt to network events, such as routing after failure. | |||
| network, such as routing after failure. | ||||
| Another important objective of Internet traffic engineering is to | Another important objective of Internet traffic engineering is to | |||
| facilitate reliable network operations [RFC2702]. Reliable network | facilitate reliable network operations [RFC2702]. Reliable network | |||
| operations can be facilitated by providing mechanisms that enhance | operations can be facilitated by providing mechanisms that enhance | |||
| network integrity and by embracing policies emphasizing network | network integrity and by embracing policies emphasizing network | |||
| survivability. This results in a minimization of the vulnerability | survivability. This reduces the vulnerability of services to outages | |||
| of the network to service outages arising from errors, faults, and | arising from errors, faults, and failures occurring within the | |||
| failures occurring within the infrastructure. | network infrastructure. | |||
| The optimization aspects of traffic engineering can be achieved | The optimization aspects of traffic engineering can be achieved | |||
| through capacity management and traffic management. As used in this | through capacity management and traffic management. In this | |||
| document, capacity management includes capacity planning, routing | document, capacity management includes capacity planning, routing | |||
| control, and resource management. Network resources of particular | control, and resource management. Network resources of particular | |||
| interest include link bandwidth, buffer space, and computational | interest include link bandwidth, buffer space, and computational | |||
| resources. Likewise, as used in this document, traffic management | resources. In this document, traffic management includes: | |||
| includes (1) nodal traffic control functions such as traffic | ||||
| conditioning, queue management, scheduling, and (2) other functions | 1. nodal traffic control functions such as traffic conditioning, | |||
| that regulate traffic flow through the network or that arbitrate | queue management, scheduling | |||
| access to network resources between different packets or between | ||||
| different traffic streams. | 2. other functions that regulate traffic flow through the network or | |||
| that arbitrate access to network resources between different | ||||
| packets or between different traffic streams. | ||||
| One major challenge of Internet traffic engineering is the | One major challenge of Internet traffic engineering is the | |||
| realization of automated control capabilities that adapt quickly and | realization of automated control capabilities that adapt quickly and | |||
| cost effectively to significant changes in a network's state, while | cost effectively to significant changes in network state, while still | |||
| still maintaining stability of the network. Results from performance | maintaining stability of the network. Performance evaluation can | |||
| evaluation assessing the effectiveness of traffic engineering methods | assess the effectiveness of traffic engineering methods, and the | |||
| can be used to identify existing problems, guide network re- | results of this evaluation can be used to identify existing problems, | |||
| optimization, and aid in the prediction of potential future problems. | guide network re-optimization, and aid in the prediction of potential | |||
| However this process can also be time consuming and may not be | future problems. However, this process can also be time consuming | |||
| suitable to act on sudden, ephemeral changes in the network. | and may not be suitable to act on short-lived changes in the network. | |||
| Performance evaluation can be achieved in many different ways. The | Performance evaluation can be achieved in many different ways. The | |||
| most notable techniques include analytical methods, simulation, and | most notable techniques include analytical methods, simulation, and | |||
| empirical methods based on measurements. | empirical methods based on measurements. | |||
| In genaral, traffic engineering comes in two flavors. Either as a | Traffic engineering comes in two flavors: either a background process | |||
| background process that constantly monitors traffic and optimize the | that constantly monitors traffic and optimizes the use of resources | |||
| usage of resources to improve performance, or in form of a pre- | to improve performance; or a form of a pre-planned optimized traffic | |||
| planned optimized traffic distribution that is considered optimal. | distribution that is considered optimal. In the later case, any | |||
| In the later case, any deviation from the optimum distribution (e.g., | deviation from the optimum distribution (e.g., caused by a fiber cut) | |||
| caused by a fiber cut) is reverted upon repair without further | is reverted upon repair without further optimization. However, this | |||
| optimization. However, this form of traffic engineering heavily | form of traffic engineering relies upon the notion that the planned | |||
| relies upon the notion that the planned state of the network is | state of the network is optimal. Hence, in such a mode there are two | |||
| indeed optimal. Hence, in such a mode there are two levels of | levels of traffic engineering: the TE-planning task to enable optimum | |||
| traffic engineering: the TE-planning task to enable an optimum | ||||
| traffic distribution, and the routing task keeping traffic flows | traffic distribution, and the routing task keeping traffic flows | |||
| attached to the pre-planned distribution | attached to the pre-planned distribution. | |||
| As a general rule, traffic engineering concepts and mechanisms must | As a general rule, traffic engineering concepts and mechanisms must | |||
| be sufficiently specific and well-defined to address known | be sufficiently specific and well-defined to address known | |||
| requirements, but simultaneously flexible and extensible to | requirements, but simultaneously flexible and extensible to | |||
| accommodate unforeseen future demands. | accommodate unforeseen future demands. | |||
| 1.2. Components of Traffic Engineering | 1.2. Components of Traffic Engineering | |||
| As mentioned in Section 1.1, Internet Traffic Engineering provides | As mentioned in Section 1.1, Internet traffic engineering provides | |||
| performance optimization of operational IP networks while utilizing | performance optimization of operational IP networks while utilizing | |||
| network resources economically and reliably. Such optimization is | network resources economically and reliably. Such optimization is | |||
| supported at the control/controller level and within the data/ | supported at the control/controller level and within the data/ | |||
| forwarding plane. | forwarding plane. | |||
| The key elements required in any TE solution are as follows. Some TE | The key elements required in any TE solution are as follows: | |||
| solutions rely on these elements to a lesser or greater extent. | ||||
| Debate remains about whether a solution can truly be called Traffic | ||||
| Engineering that does not include all of these elements. For the | ||||
| sake of this document we assert that all TE solutions must include | ||||
| some aspects of all of these elements. Other solutions can be | ||||
| classed as "partial TE" and also fall in scope of this document. | ||||
| 1. Policy | 1. Policy | |||
| 2. Path steering | 2. Path steering | |||
| 3. Resource management | 3. Resource management | |||
| Some TE solutions rely on these elements to a lesser or greater | ||||
| extent. Debate remains about whether a solution can truly be called | ||||
| traffic engineering if it does not include all of these elements. | ||||
| For the sake of this document, we assert that all TE solutions must | ||||
| include some aspects of all of these elements. Other solutions can | ||||
| be classed as "partial TE" and also fall in scope of this document. | ||||
| Policy allows for the selection of next hops and paths based on | Policy allows for the selection of next hops and paths based on | |||
| information beyond basic reachability. Early definitions of routing | information beyond basic reachability. Early definitions of routing | |||
| policy, e.g., [RFC1102] and [RFC1104], discuss routing policy being | policy, e.g., [RFC1102] and [RFC1104], discuss routing policy being | |||
| applied to restrict access to network resources at an aggregate | applied to restrict access to network resources at an aggregate | |||
| level. BGP is an example of a commonly used mechanism for applying | level. BGP is an example of a commonly used mechanism for applying | |||
| such policies, see [RFC4271] and [RFC5575]. In the Traffic | such policies, see [RFC4271] and [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis]. In the | |||
| Engineering context, policy decisions are made within the control | traffic engineering context, policy decisions are made within the | |||
| plane or by controllers, and govern the selection of paths. Examples | control plane or by controllers, and govern the selection of paths. | |||
| of such can be found in [RFC4655] and [RFC5394]. Standard TE | Examples can be found in [RFC4655] and [RFC5394]. Standard TE | |||
| solutions may cover the mechanisms to distribute and/or enforce | solutions may cover the mechanisms to distribute and/or enforce | |||
| polices, but specific policy definition is generally unspecified. | polices, but specific policy definition is generally unspecified. | |||
| Path steering is the ability to forward packets using information | Path steering is the ability to forward packets using more | |||
| beyond the next hop. Examples of path steering include IPv4 source | information than just knowledge of the next hop. Examples of path | |||
| routes [RFC0791], RSVP-TE explicit routes [RFC3209], and Segment | steering include IPv4 source routes [RFC0791], RSVP-TE explicit | |||
| Routing [RFC8402]. Path steering for TE can be supported via control | routes [RFC3209], and Segment Routing [RFC8402]. Path steering for | |||
| plane protocols or by encoding in the data plane headers or any | TE can be supported via control plane protocols, by encoding in the | |||
| combination of the two. This includes when control is provided via a | data plane headers, or by a combination of the two. This includes | |||
| controller and some southbound, i.e., controller to router, control | when control is provided by a controller using a southbound (i.e., | |||
| protocol. | controller to router) control protocol. | |||
| Resource management provides resource aware control and, in some | Resource management provides resource aware control and, in some | |||
| cases, forwarding. Examples of resources are bandwidth, buffers and | cases, forwarding. Examples of resources are bandwidth, buffers, and | |||
| queues, which in turn can be managed to control loss and latency. | queues, which in turn can be managed to control loss and latency. | |||
| Resources reservation is the control aspect of resource management. | ||||
| It provides for network domain-wide consensus on which network | ||||
| (including node and link) resources are to be used by a particular | ||||
| flow. This determination may be done on a very course or very fine | ||||
| level. Note that this consensus exists at the network control or | ||||
| controller level, not the data plane level. It may be purely | ||||
| composed of accounting/bookkeeping. It typically includes an ability | ||||
| to admit, reject or reclassify a flow based on policy. Such | ||||
| accounting can be done based on a static understanding of resource | ||||
| requirements, or using dynamic mechanisms to collect requirements | ||||
| (e.g., via [RFC3209]) and resource availability (e.g., via | ||||
| [RFC4203]), or any combination of the two. | ||||
| Resource allocation is the data plane aspect of resource management. | Resource reservation is the control aspect of resource management. | |||
| It provides for the allocation of specific node and link resources to | It provides for domain-wide consensus about which network | |||
| specific flows. Example resources include buffers, policing and | resources are to be used by a particular flow. This determination | |||
| rate-shaping mechanisms which are typically supported via queuing. | may be done on a very course or very fine level. Note that this | |||
| It also includes the matching of a flow, i.e., flow classification, | consensus exists at the network control or controller level, not | |||
| to a particular set of allocated resources. The method for flow | within the data plane. It may be purely composed of accounting/ | |||
| classification and granularity of resource management is technology | bookkeeping, but it typically includes an ability to admit, reject | |||
| specific. Examples include DiffServ with dropping and remarking | or reclassify a flow based on policy. Such accounting can be done | |||
| [RFC4594], MPLS-TE [RFC3209] and GMPLS [RFC3945] based LSPs, and | based on a static understanding of resource requirements, or using | |||
| controller-based solutions implementing [RFC8453]. This level of | dynamic mechanisms to collect requirements (e.g., via [RFC3209]) | |||
| resource control, while optional, is important in networks that wish | and resource availability (e.g., via [RFC4203]), or any | |||
| to support congestion management policies to control or regulate the | combination of the two. | |||
| offered traffic to deliver different levels of service and alleviate | ||||
| congestion problems, or those networks that wish to control latencies | Resource allocation is the data plane aspect of resource | |||
| experienced by specific traffic flows. | management. It provides for the allocation of specific node and | |||
| link resources to specific flows. Example resources include | ||||
| buffers, policing, and rate-shaping mechanisms that are typically | ||||
| supported via queuing. It also includes the matching of a flow | ||||
| (i.e., flow classification) to a particular set of allocated | ||||
| resources. The method for flow classification and granularity of | ||||
| resource management is technology specific. Examples include | ||||
| DiffServ with dropping and remarking [RFC4594], MPLS-TE [RFC3209], | ||||
| and GMPLS based label switched paths [RFC3945], as well as | ||||
| controller-based solutions implementing [RFC8453]. This level of | ||||
| resource control, while optional, is important in networks that | ||||
| wish to support congestion management policies to control or | ||||
| regulate the offered traffic to deliver different levels of | ||||
| service and alleviate congestion problems, or those networks that | ||||
| wish to control latencies experienced by specific traffic flows. | ||||
| 1.3. Scope | 1.3. Scope | |||
| The scope of this document is intra-domain traffic engineering; that | The scope of this document is intra-domain traffic engineering. That | |||
| is, traffic engineering within a given autonomous system in the | is, traffic engineering within a given autonomous system in the | |||
| Internet. This document will discuss concepts pertaining to intra- | Internet. This document discusses concepts pertaining to intra- | |||
| domain traffic control, including such issues as routing control, | domain traffic control, including such issues as routing control, | |||
| micro and macro resource allocation, and the control coordination | micro and macro resource allocation, and the control coordination | |||
| problems that arise consequently. | problems that arise consequently. | |||
| This document describes and characterize techniques already in use or | This document describes and characterizes techniques already in use | |||
| in advanced development for Internet traffic engineering. The way | or in advanced development for Internet traffic engineering. The way | |||
| these techniques fit together will be discussed and scenarios in | these techniques fit together is discussed and scenarios in which | |||
| which they are useful will be identified. | they are useful will be identified. | |||
| While this document considers various intra-domain traffic | ||||
| engineering approaches, it focuses more on traffic engineering with | ||||
| MPLS and GMPLS. Traffic engineering based upon manipulation of IGP | ||||
| metrics is not addressed in detail. This topic may be addressed by | ||||
| other working group documents. | ||||
| Although the emphasis is on intra-domain traffic engineering, in | Although the emphasis in this document is on intra-domain traffic | |||
| Section 7, an overview of the high level considerations pertaining to | engineering, in Section 7, an overview of the high level | |||
| inter-domain traffic engineering will be provided. Inter-domain | considerations pertaining to inter-domain traffic engineering will be | |||
| Internet traffic engineering is crucial to the performance | provided. Inter-domain Internet traffic engineering is crucial to | |||
| enhancement of the global Internet infrastructure. | the performance enhancement of the global Internet infrastructure. | |||
| Whenever possible, relevant requirements from existing IETF documents | Whenever possible, relevant requirements from existing IETF documents | |||
| and other sources will be incorporated by reference. | and other sources are incorporated by reference. | |||
| 1.4. Terminology | 1.4. Terminology | |||
| This subsection provides terminology which is useful for Internet | This section provides terminology which is useful for Internet | |||
| traffic engineering. The definitions presented apply to this | traffic engineering. The definitions presented apply to this | |||
| document. These terms may have other meanings elsewhere. | document. These terms may have other meanings elsewhere. | |||
| Baseline analysis: A study conducted to serve as a baseline for | ||||
| comparison to the actual behavior of the network. | ||||
| Busy hour: A one hour period within a specified interval of time | Busy hour: A one hour period within a specified interval of time | |||
| (typically 24 hours) in which the traffic load in a network or | (typically 24 hours) in which the traffic load in a network or | |||
| sub-network is greatest. | sub-network is greatest. | |||
| Bottleneck: A network element whose input traffic rate tends to be | ||||
| greater than its output rate. | ||||
| Congestion: A state of a network resource in which the traffic | Congestion: A state of a network resource in which the traffic | |||
| incident on the resource exceeds its output capacity over an | incident on the resource exceeds its output capacity over an | |||
| interval of time. | interval of time. | |||
| Congestion avoidance: An approach to congestion management that | Congestion avoidance: An approach to congestion management that | |||
| attempts to obviate the occurrence of congestion. | attempts to obviate the occurrence of congestion. | |||
| Congestion control: An approach to congestion management that | Congestion control: An approach to congestion management that | |||
| attempts to remedy congestion problems that have already occurred. | attempts to remedy congestion problems that have already occurred. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 25 ¶ | |||
| well as flows. It is a generalization of QoS routing. | well as flows. It is a generalization of QoS routing. | |||
| Demand side congestion management: A congestion management scheme | Demand side congestion management: A congestion management scheme | |||
| that addresses congestion problems by regulating or conditioning | that addresses congestion problems by regulating or conditioning | |||
| offered load. | offered load. | |||
| Effective bandwidth: The minimum amount of bandwidth that can be | Effective bandwidth: The minimum amount of bandwidth that can be | |||
| assigned to a flow or traffic aggregate in order to deliver | assigned to a flow or traffic aggregate in order to deliver | |||
| 'acceptable service quality' to the flow or traffic aggregate. | 'acceptable service quality' to the flow or traffic aggregate. | |||
| Egress traffic: Traffic exiting a network or network element. | ||||
| Hot-spot: A network element or subsystem which is in a state of | Hot-spot: A network element or subsystem which is in a state of | |||
| congestion. | congestion. | |||
| Ingress traffic: Traffic entering a network or network element. | ||||
| Inter-domain traffic: Traffic that originates in one Autonomous | Inter-domain traffic: Traffic that originates in one Autonomous | |||
| system and terminates in another. | system and terminates in another. | |||
| Loss network: A network that does not provide adequate buffering for | ||||
| traffic, so that traffic entering a busy resource within the | ||||
| network will be dropped rather than queued. | ||||
| Metric: A parameter defined in terms of standard units of | Metric: A parameter defined in terms of standard units of | |||
| measurement. | measurement. | |||
| Measurement methodology: A repeatable measurement technique used to | Measurement methodology: A repeatable measurement technique used to | |||
| derive one or more metrics of interest. | derive one or more metrics of interest. | |||
| Network survivability: The capability to provide a prescribed level | Network survivability: The capability to provide a prescribed level | |||
| of QoS for existing services after a given number of failures | of QoS for existing services after a given number of failures | |||
| occur within the network. | occur within the network. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 5 ¶ | |||
| exists outside of the network. | exists outside of the network. | |||
| Online traffic engineering: A traffic engineering system that exists | Online traffic engineering: A traffic engineering system that exists | |||
| within the network, typically implemented on or as adjuncts to | within the network, typically implemented on or as adjuncts to | |||
| operational network elements. | operational network elements. | |||
| Performance measures: Metrics that provide quantitative or | Performance measures: Metrics that provide quantitative or | |||
| qualitative measures of the performance of systems or subsystems | qualitative measures of the performance of systems or subsystems | |||
| of interest. | of interest. | |||
| Performance management: A systematic approach to improving | ||||
| effectiveness in the accomplishment of specific networking goals | ||||
| related to performance improvement. | ||||
| Performance metric: A performance parameter defined in terms of | Performance metric: A performance parameter defined in terms of | |||
| standard units of measurement. | standard units of measurement. | |||
| Provisioning: The process of assigning or configuring network | Provisioning: The process of assigning or configuring network | |||
| resources to meet certain requests. | resources to meet certain requests. | |||
| QoS routing: Class of routing systems that selects paths to be used | QoS routing: Class of routing systems that selects paths to be used | |||
| by a flow based on the QoS requirements of the flow. | by a flow based on the QoS requirements of the flow. | |||
| Service Level Agreement (SLA): A contract between a provider and a | Service Level Agreement (SLA): A contract between a provider and a | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 22 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 31 ¶ | |||
| as a way of avoiding disputes between the two parties based on | as a way of avoiding disputes between the two parties based on | |||
| misunderstanding. | misunderstanding. | |||
| Stability: An operational state in which a network does not | Stability: An operational state in which a network does not | |||
| oscillate in a disruptive manner from one mode to another mode. | oscillate in a disruptive manner from one mode to another mode. | |||
| Supply-side congestion management: A congestion management scheme | Supply-side congestion management: A congestion management scheme | |||
| that provisions additional network resources to address existing | that provisions additional network resources to address existing | |||
| and/or anticipated congestion problems. | and/or anticipated congestion problems. | |||
| Transit traffic: Traffic whose origin and destination are both | ||||
| outside of the network under consideration. | ||||
| Traffic characteristic: A description of the temporal behavior or a | Traffic characteristic: A description of the temporal behavior or a | |||
| description of the attributes of a given traffic flow or traffic | description of the attributes of a given traffic flow or traffic | |||
| aggregate. | aggregate. | |||
| Traffic engineering system: A collection of objects, mechanisms, and | Traffic engineering system: A collection of objects, mechanisms, and | |||
| protocols that are used conjunctively to accomplish traffic | protocols that are used conjunctively to accomplish traffic | |||
| engineering objectives. | engineering objectives. | |||
| Traffic flow: A stream of packets between two end-points that can be | Traffic flow: A stream of packets between two end-points that can be | |||
| characterized in a certain way. A micro-flow has a more specific | characterized in a certain way. A micro-flow has a more specific | |||
| definition A micro-flow is a stream of packets with the same | definition A micro-flow is a stream of packets with the same | |||
| source and destination addresses, source and destination ports, | source and destination addresses, source and destination ports, | |||
| and protocol ID. | and protocol ID. | |||
| Traffic intensity: A measure of traffic loading with respect to a | ||||
| resource capacity over a specified period of time. In classical | ||||
| telephony systems, traffic intensity is measured in units of | ||||
| Erlangs. | ||||
| Traffic matrix: A representation of the traffic demand between a set | Traffic matrix: A representation of the traffic demand between a set | |||
| of origin and destination abstract nodes. An abstract node can | of origin and destination abstract nodes. An abstract node can | |||
| consist of one or more network elements. | consist of one or more network elements. | |||
| Traffic monitoring: The process of observing traffic characteristics | Traffic monitoring: The process of observing traffic characteristics | |||
| at a given point in a network and collecting the traffic | at a given point in a network and collecting the traffic | |||
| information for analysis and further action. | information for analysis and further action. | |||
| Traffic trunk: An aggregation of traffic flows belonging to the same | Traffic trunk: An aggregation of traffic flows belonging to the same | |||
| class which are forwarded through a common path. A traffic trunk | class which are forwarded through a common path. A traffic trunk | |||
| may be characterized by an ingress and egress node, and a set of | may be characterized by an ingress and egress node, and a set of | |||
| attributes which determine its behavioral characteristics and | attributes which determine its behavioral characteristics and | |||
| requirements from the network. | requirements from the network. | |||
| 2. Background | 2. Background | |||
| The Internet must convey IP packets from ingress nodes to egress | The Internet must convey IP packets from ingress nodes to egress | |||
| nodes efficiently, expeditiously, and economically. Furthermore, in | nodes efficiently, expeditiously, and economically. Furthermore, in | |||
| a multiclass service environment (e.g., Diffserv capable networks), | a multiclass service environment (e.g., Diffserv capable networks - | |||
| the resource sharing parameters of the network must be appropriately | see Section 4.1.4), the resource sharing parameters of the network | |||
| determined and configured according to prevailing policies and | must be appropriately determined and configured according to | |||
| service models to resolve resource contention issues arising from | prevailing policies and service models to resolve resource contention | |||
| mutual interference between packets traversing through the network. | issues arising from mutual interference between packets traversing | |||
| Thus, consideration must be given to resolving competition for | through the network. Thus, consideration must be given to resolving | |||
| network resources between traffic streams belonging to the same | competition for network resources between traffic streams belonging | |||
| service class (intra-class contention resolution) and traffic streams | to the same service class (intra-class contention resolution) and | |||
| belonging to different classes (inter-class contention resolution). | traffic streams belonging to different classes (inter-class | |||
| contention resolution). | ||||
| 2.1. Context of Internet Traffic Engineering | 2.1. Context of Internet Traffic Engineering | |||
| The context of Internet traffic engineering pertains to the scenarios | The context of Internet traffic engineering includes: | |||
| where traffic engineering is used. A traffic engineering methodology | ||||
| establishes appropriate rules to resolve traffic performance issues | ||||
| occurring in a specific context. The context of Internet traffic | ||||
| engineering includes: | ||||
| 1. A network context defining the universe of discourse, and in | 1. A network domain context that defines the scope under | |||
| particular the situations in which the traffic engineering | consideration, and in particular the situations in which the | |||
| problems occur. The network context includes network structure, | traffic engineering problems occur. The network domain context | |||
| network policies, network characteristics, network constraints, | includes network structure, network policies, network | |||
| network quality attributes, and network optimization criteria. | characteristics, network constraints, network quality attributes, | |||
| and network optimization criteria. | ||||
| 2. A problem context defining the general and concrete issues that | 2. A problem context defining the general and concrete issues that | |||
| traffic engineering addresses. The problem context includes | traffic engineering addresses. The problem context includes | |||
| identification, abstraction of relevant features, representation, | identification, abstraction of relevant features, representation, | |||
| formulation, specification of the requirements on the solution | formulation, specification of the requirements on the solution | |||
| space, and specification of the desirable features of acceptable | space, and specification of the desirable features of acceptable | |||
| solutions. | solutions. | |||
| 3. A solution context suggesting how to address the issues | 3. A solution context suggesting how to address the issues | |||
| identified by the problem context. The solution context includes | identified by the problem context. The solution context includes | |||
| analysis, evaluation of alternatives, prescription, and | analysis, evaluation of alternatives, prescription, and | |||
| resolution. | resolution. | |||
| 4. An implementation and operational context in which the solutions | 4. An implementation and operational context in which the solutions | |||
| are methodologically instantiated. The implementation and | are instantiated. The implementation and operational context | |||
| operational context includes planning, organization, and | includes planning, organization, and execution. | |||
| execution. | ||||
| The context of Internet traffic engineering and the different problem | The context of Internet traffic engineering and the different problem | |||
| scenarios are discussed in the following subsections. | scenarios are discussed in the following subsections. | |||
| 2.2. Network Context | 2.2. Network Domain Context | |||
| IP networks range in size from small clusters of routers situated | IP networks range in size from small clusters of routers situated | |||
| within a given location, to thousands of interconnected routers, | within a given location, to thousands of interconnected routers, | |||
| switches, and other components distributed all over the world. | switches, and other components distributed all over the world. | |||
| Conceptually, at the most basic level of abstraction, an IP network | At the most basic level of abstraction, an IP network can be | |||
| can be represented as a distributed dynamical system consisting of: | represented as a distributed dynamic system consisting of: | |||
| o a set of interconnected resources which provide transport services | o a set of interconnected resources which provide transport services | |||
| for IP traffic subject to certain constraints | for IP traffic subject to certain constraints | |||
| o a demand system representing the offered load to be transported | o a demand system representing the offered load to be transported | |||
| through the network | through the network | |||
| o a response system consisting of network processes, protocols, and | o a response system consisting of network processes, protocols, and | |||
| related mechanisms which facilitate the movement of traffic | related mechanisms which facilitate the movement of traffic | |||
| through the network (see also [AWD2]). | through the network (see also [AWD2]). | |||
| The network elements and resources may have specific characteristics | The network elements and resources may have specific characteristics | |||
| restricting the manner in which the demand is handled. Additionally, | restricting the manner in which the traffic demand is handled. | |||
| network resources may be equipped with traffic control mechanisms | Additionally, network resources may be equipped with traffic control | |||
| superintending the way in which the demand is serviced. Traffic | mechanisms managing the way in which the demand is serviced. Traffic | |||
| control mechanisms may, for example, be used to: | control mechanisms may be used to: | |||
| o control various packet processing activities within a given | o control packet processing activities within a given resource | |||
| resource | ||||
| o arbitrate contention for access to the resource by different | o arbitrate contention for access to the resource by different | |||
| packets | packets | |||
| o regulate traffic behavior through the resource. | o regulate traffic behavior through the resource. | |||
| A configuration management and provisioning system may allow the | A configuration management and provisioning system may allow the | |||
| settings of the traffic control mechanisms to be manipulated by | settings of the traffic control mechanisms to be manipulated by | |||
| external or internal entities in order to exercise control over the | external or internal entities in order to exercise control over the | |||
| way in which the network elements respond to internal and external | way in which the network elements respond to internal and external | |||
| stimuli. | stimuli. | |||
| The details of how the network provides transport services for | The details of how the network carries packets are specified in the | |||
| packets are specified in the policies of the network administrators | policies of the network administrators and are installed through | |||
| and are installed through network configuration management and policy | network configuration management and policy based provisioning | |||
| based provisioning systems. Generally, the types of services | systems. Generally, the types of service provided by the network | |||
| provided by the network also depends upon the technology and | also depend upon the technology and characteristics of the network | |||
| characteristics of the network elements and protocols, the prevailing | elements and protocols, the prevailing service and utility models, | |||
| service and utility models, and the ability of the network | and the ability of the network administrators to translate policies | |||
| administrators to translate policies into network configurations. | into network configurations. | |||
| Contemporary Internet networks have three significant | Internet networks have three significant characteristics: | |||
| characteristics: | ||||
| o they provide real-time services | o they provide real-time services | |||
| o they have become mission critical | o they are mission critical | |||
| o their operating environments are very dynamic. | o their operating environments are very dynamic. | |||
| The dynamic characteristics of IP and IP/MPLS networks can be | The dynamic characteristics of IP and IP/MPLS networks can be | |||
| attributed in part to fluctuations in demand, to the interaction | attributed in part to fluctuations in demand, to the interaction | |||
| between various network protocols and processes, to the rapid | between various network protocols and processes, to the rapid | |||
| evolution of the infrastructure which demands the constant inclusion | evolution of the infrastructure which demands the constant inclusion | |||
| of new technologies and new network elements, and to transient and | of new technologies and new network elements, and to transient and | |||
| persistent impairments which occur within the system. | persistent faults which occur within the system. | |||
| Packets contend for the use of network resources as they are conveyed | Packets contend for the use of network resources as they are conveyed | |||
| through the network. A network resource is considered to be | through the network. A network resource is considered to be | |||
| congested if, for an interval of time, the arrival rate of packets | congested if, for an interval of time, the arrival rate of packets | |||
| exceed the output capacity of the resource. Congestion may result in | exceed the output capacity of the resource. Congestion may result in | |||
| some of the arrival packets being delayed or even dropped. | some of the arriving packets being delayed or even dropped. | |||
| Congestion increases transit delays, delay variation, packet loss, | ||||
| and reduces the predictability of network services. Clearly, | ||||
| congestion is highly undesirable. | ||||
| Combating congestion at a reasonable cost is a major objective of | Congestion increases transit delay, delay variation, may lead to | |||
| Internet traffic engineering. | packet loss, and reduces the predictability of network services. | |||
| Clearly, congestion is highly undesirable. Combating congestion at a | ||||
| reasonable cost is a major objective of Internet traffic engineering. | ||||
| Efficient sharing of network resources by multiple traffic streams is | Efficient sharing of network resources by multiple traffic streams is | |||
| a basic operatoinal premise for packet switched networks in general | a basic operational premise for the Internet. A fundamental | |||
| and for the Internet in particular. A fundamental challenge in | challenge in network operation is to increase resource utilization | |||
| network operation, especially in a large scale public IP network, is | while minimizing the possibility of congestion. | |||
| to increase the efficiency of resource utilization while minimizing | ||||
| the possibility of congestion. | ||||
| The Internet will have to function in the presence of different | The Internet has to function in the presence of different classes of | |||
| classes of traffic with different service requirements. RFC 2475 | traffic with different service requirements. RFC 2475 provides an | |||
| provides an architecture for Differentiated Services and makes this | architecture for Differentiated Services (DiffServ) and makes this | |||
| requirement clear [RFC2475]. The RFC allows packets to be grouped | requirement clear [RFC2475]. The RFC allows packets to be grouped | |||
| into behavior aggregates such that each aggregate has a common set of | into behavior aggregates such that each aggregate has a common set of | |||
| behavioral characteristics or a common set of delivery requirements. | behavioral characteristics or a common set of delivery requirements. | |||
| Delivery requirements of a specific set of packets may be specified | Delivery requirements of a specific set of packets may be specified | |||
| explicitly or implicitly. Two of the most important traffic delivery | explicitly or implicitly. Two of the most important traffic delivery | |||
| requirements are capacity constraints and QoS constraints. | requirements are capacity constraints and QoS constraints. | |||
| Capacity constraints can be expressed statistically as peak rates, | Capacity constraints can be expressed statistically as peak rates, | |||
| mean rates, burst sizes, or as some deterministic notion of effective | mean rates, burst sizes, or as some deterministic notion of effective | |||
| bandwidth. QoS requirements can be expressed in terms of: | bandwidth. QoS requirements can be expressed in terms of: | |||
| o integrity constraints such as packet loss | o integrity constraints such as packet loss | |||
| o in terms of temporal constraints such as timing restrictions for | o temporal constraints such as timing restrictions for the delivery | |||
| the delivery of each packet (delay) and timing restrictions for | of each packet (delay) and timing restrictions for the delivery of | |||
| the delivery of consecutive packets belonging to the same traffic | consecutive packets belonging to the same traffic stream (delay | |||
| stream (delayvariation). | variation). | |||
| 2.3. Problem Context | 2.3. Problem Context | |||
| There are several large problems in association with operating a | There are several large problems associated with operating a network | |||
| network described by the simple model of the previous subsection. | described in the previous section. This section analyzes the problem | |||
| This subsection analyze the problem context in relation to traffic | context in relation to traffic engineering. The identification, | |||
| engineering. | abstraction, representation, and measurement of network features | |||
| relevant to traffic engineering are significant issues. | ||||
| The identification, abstraction, representation, and measurement of | ||||
| network features relevant to traffic engineering are significant | ||||
| issues. | ||||
| A particular challenge is to explicitly formulate the problems that | A particular challenge is to formulate the problems that traffic | |||
| traffic engineering attempts to solve. For example: | engineering attempts to solve. For example: | |||
| o how to identify the requirements on the solution space | o how to identify the requirements on the solution space | |||
| o how to specify the desirable features of good solutions | o how to specify the desirable features of solutions | |||
| o how to actually solve the problems | o how to actually solve the problems | |||
| o how to measure and characterize the effectiveness of the | o how to measure and characterize the effectiveness of solutions. | |||
| solutions. | ||||
| Another class of problems is how to measure and estimate relevant | Another class of problems is how to measure and estimate relevant | |||
| network state parameters. Effective traffic engineering relies on a | network state parameters. Effective traffic engineering relies on a | |||
| good estimate of the offered traffic load as well as a view of the | good estimate of the offered traffic load as well as a view of the | |||
| underlying topology and associated resource constraints. A network- | underlying topology and associated resource constraints. A network- | |||
| wide view of the topology is also a must for offline planning. | wide view of the topology is also a must for offline planning. | |||
| Still another class of problems is how to characterize the state of | Still another class of problem is how to characterize the state of | |||
| the network and how to evaluate its performance under a variety of | the network and how to evaluate its performance. The performance | |||
| scenarios. The performance evaluation problem is two- fold. One | evaluation problem is two-fold: one aspect relates to the evaluation | |||
| aspect of this problem relates to the evaluation of the system-level | of the system-level performance of the network; the other aspect | |||
| performance of the network. The other aspect relates to the | relates to the evaluation of resource-level performance, which | |||
| evaluation of the resource-level performance, which restricts | restricts attention to the performance analysis of individual network | |||
| attention to the performance analysis of individual network | ||||
| resources. | resources. | |||
| In this document, we refer to the system-level characteristics of the | In this document, we refer to the system-level characteristics of the | |||
| network as the "macro-states" and the resource-level characteristics | network as the "macro-states" and the resource-level characteristics | |||
| as the "micro-states." The system-level characteristics are also | as the "micro-states." The system-level characteristics are also | |||
| known as the emergent properties of the network. Correspondingly, we | known as the emergent properties of the network. Correspondingly, we | |||
| shall refer to the traffic engineering schemes dealing with network | refer to the traffic engineering schemes dealing with network | |||
| performance optimization at the systems level as "macro-TE" and the | performance optimization at the systems level as "macro-TE" and the | |||
| schemes that optimize at the individual resource level as "micro-TE." | schemes that optimize at the individual resource level as "micro-TE." | |||
| Under certain circumstances, the system-level performance can be | Under certain circumstances, the system-level performance can be | |||
| derived from the resource-level performance using appropriate rules | derived from the resource-level performance using appropriate rules | |||
| of composition, depending upon the particular performance measures of | of composition, depending upon the particular performance measures of | |||
| interest. | interest. | |||
| Another fundamental class of problems concerns how to effectively | Another fundamental class of problem concerns how to effectively | |||
| optimize network performance. Performance optimization may entail | optimize network performance. Performance optimization may entail | |||
| translating solutions to specific traffic engineering problems into | translating solutions for specific traffic engineering problems into | |||
| network configurations. Optimization may also entail some degree of | network configurations. Optimization may also entail some degree of | |||
| resource management control, routing control, and/or capacity | resource management control, routing control, and capacity | |||
| augmentation. | augmentation. | |||
| As noted previously, congestion is an undesirable phenomena in | ||||
| operational networks. Therefore, the next subsection addresses the | ||||
| issue of congestion and its ramifications within the problem context | ||||
| of Internet traffic engineering. | ||||
| 2.3.1. Congestion and its Ramifications | 2.3.1. Congestion and its Ramifications | |||
| Congestion is one of the most significant problems in an operational | Congestion is one of the most significant problems in an operational | |||
| IP context. A network element is said to be congested if it | IP context. A network element is said to be congested if it | |||
| experiences sustained overload over an interval of time. Congestion | experiences sustained overload over an interval of time. Congestion | |||
| almost always results in degradation of service quality to end users. | almost always results in degradation of service quality to end users. | |||
| Congestion control schemes can include demand-side policies and | Congestion control schemes can include demand-side policies and | |||
| supply-side policies. Demand-side policies may restrict access to | supply-side policies. Demand-side policies may restrict access to | |||
| congested resources and/or dynamically regulate the demand to | congested resources or dynamically regulate the demand to alleviate | |||
| alleviate the overload situation. Supply-side policies may expand or | the overload situation. Supply-side policies may expand or augment | |||
| augment network capacity to better accommodate offered traffic. | network capacity to better accommodate offered traffic. Supply-side | |||
| Supply-side policies may also re-allocate network resources by | policies may also re-allocate network resources by redistributing | |||
| redistributing traffic over the infrastructure. Traffic | traffic over the infrastructure. Traffic redistribution and resource | |||
| redistribution and resource re-allocation serve to increase the | re-allocation serve to increase the 'effective capacity' of the | |||
| 'effective capacity' seen by the demand. | network. | |||
| The emphasis of this document is primarily on congestion management | The emphasis of this document is primarily on congestion management | |||
| schemes falling within the scope of the network, rather than on | schemes falling within the scope of the network, rather than on | |||
| congestion management systems dependent upon sensitivity and | congestion management systems dependent upon sensitivity and | |||
| adaptivity from end-systems. That is, the aspects that are | adaptivity from end-systems. That is, the aspects that are | |||
| considered in this document with respect to congestion management are | considered in this document with respect to congestion management are | |||
| those solutions that can be provided by control entities operating on | those solutions that can be provided by control entities operating on | |||
| the network and by the actions of network administrators and network | the network and by the actions of network administrators and network | |||
| operations systems. | operations systems. | |||
| 2.4. Solution Context | 2.4. Solution Context | |||
| The solution context for Internet traffic engineering involves | The solution context for Internet traffic engineering involves | |||
| analysis, evaluation of alternatives, and choice between alternative | analysis, evaluation of alternatives, and choice between alternative | |||
| courses of action. Generally the solution context is based on making | courses of action. Generally the solution context is based on making | |||
| reasonable inferences about the current or future state of the | reasonable inferences about the current or future state of the | |||
| network, and subsequently making appropriate decisions that may | network, and making decisions that may involve a preference between | |||
| involve a preference between alternative sets of action. More | alternative sets of action. More specifically, the solution context | |||
| specifically, the solution context demands reasonable estimates of | demands reasonable estimates of traffic workload, characterization of | |||
| traffic workload, characterization of network state, deriving | network state, derivation of solutions which may be implicitly or | |||
| solutions to traffic engineering problems which may be implicitly or | ||||
| explicitly formulated, and possibly instantiating a set of control | explicitly formulated, and possibly instantiating a set of control | |||
| actions. Control actions may involve the manipulation of parameters | actions. Control actions may involve the manipulation of parameters | |||
| associated with routing, control over tactical capacity acquisition, | associated with routing, control over tactical capacity acquisition, | |||
| and control over the traffic management functions. | and control over the traffic management functions. | |||
| The following list of instruments may be applicable to the solution | The following list of instruments may be applicable to the solution | |||
| context of Internet traffic engineering. | context of Internet traffic engineering. | |||
| o A set of policies, objectives, and requirements (which may be | o A set of policies, objectives, and requirements (which may be | |||
| context dependent) for network performance evaluation and | context dependent) for network performance evaluation and | |||
| performance optimization. | performance optimization. | |||
| o A collection of online and possibly offline tools and mechanisms | o A collection of online and possibly offline tools and mechanisms | |||
| for measurement, characterization, modeling, and control of | for measurement, characterization, modeling, and control traffic, | |||
| Internet traffic and control over the placement and allocation of | and control over the placement and allocation of network | |||
| network resources, as well as control over the mapping or | resources, as well as control over the mapping or distribution of | |||
| distribution of traffic onto the infrastructure. | traffic onto the infrastructure. | |||
| o A set of constraints on the operating environment, the network | o A set of constraints on the operating environment, the network | |||
| protocols, and the traffic engineering system itself. | protocols, and the traffic engineering system itself. | |||
| o A set of quantitative and qualitative techniques and methodologies | o A set of quantitative and qualitative techniques and methodologies | |||
| for abstracting, formulating, and solving traffic engineering | for abstracting, formulating, and solving traffic engineering | |||
| problems. | problems. | |||
| o A set of administrative control parameters which may be | o A set of administrative control parameters which may be | |||
| manipulated through a Configuration Management (CM) system. The | manipulated through a Configuration Management (CM) system. The | |||
| CM system itself may include a configuration control subsystem, a | CM system itself may include a configuration control subsystem, a | |||
| configuration repository, a configuration accounting subsystem, | configuration repository, a configuration accounting subsystem, | |||
| and a configuration auditing subsystem. | and a configuration auditing subsystem. | |||
| o A set of guidelines for network performance evaluation, | o A set of guidelines for network performance evaluation, | |||
| performance optimization, and performance improvement. | performance optimization, and performance improvement. | |||
| Determining traffic characteristics through measurement and/or | Determining traffic characteristics through measurement or estimation | |||
| estimation is very useful within the realm the traffic engineering | is very useful within the realm the traffic engineering solution | |||
| solution space. Traffic estimates can be derived from customer | space. Traffic estimates can be derived from customer subscription | |||
| subscription information, traffic projections, traffic models, and | information, traffic projections, traffic models, and from actual | |||
| from actual measurements. The measurements may be performed at | measurements. The measurements may be performed at different levels, | |||
| different levels, e.g. the traffic-aggregate level or at the flow | e.g., at the traffic-aggregate level or at the flow level. | |||
| level. Measuring at different levels is done in order to aquire | Measurements at the flow level or on small traffic aggregates may be | |||
| traffic statistics at more or less detail. Measurements at the flow | performed at edge nodes, when traffic enters and leaves the network. | |||
| level or on small traffic aggregates may be performed at edge nodes, | Measurements for large traffic-aggregates may be performed within the | |||
| when traffic enters and leaves the network. Measurements for large | core of the network. | |||
| traffic-aggregates may be performed within the core of the network. | ||||
| To conduct performance studies and to support planning of existing | To conduct performance studies and to support planning of existing | |||
| and future networks, a routing analysis may be performed to determine | and future networks, a routing analysis may be performed to determine | |||
| the paths the routing protocols will choose for various traffic | the paths the routing protocols will choose for various traffic | |||
| demands, and to ascertain the utilization of network resources as | demands, and to ascertain the utilization of network resources as | |||
| traffic is routed through the network. The routing analysis should | traffic is routed through the network. Routing analysis captures the | |||
| capture the selection of paths through the network, the assignment of | selection of paths through the network, the assignment of traffic | |||
| traffic across multiple feasible routes, and the multiplexing of IP | across multiple feasible routes, and the multiplexing of IP traffic | |||
| traffic over traffic trunks (if such constructs exists) and over the | over traffic trunks (if such constructs exist) and over the | |||
| underlying network infrastructure. A network topology model is a | underlying network infrastructure. A model of network topology is | |||
| necessity for routing analysis. A network topology model may be | necessary to perform routing analysis. A network topology model may | |||
| extracted from: | be extracted from: | |||
| o network architecture documents | o network architecture documents | |||
| o network designs | o network designs | |||
| o information contained in router configuration files | o information contained in router configuration files | |||
| o routing databases | o routing databases | |||
| o routing tables | o routing tables | |||
| o automated tools that discover and depict network topology | o automated tools that discover and collate network topology | |||
| information. | information. | |||
| Topology information may also be derived from servers that monitor | Topology information may also be derived from servers that monitor | |||
| network state, and from servers that perform provisioning functions. | network state, and from servers that perform provisioning functions. | |||
| Routing in operational IP networks can be administratively controlled | Routing in operational IP networks can be administratively controlled | |||
| at various levels of abstraction including the manipulation of BGP | at various levels of abstraction including the manipulation of BGP | |||
| attributes and IGP metrics. For path oriented technologies such as | attributes and IGP metrics. For path oriented technologies such as | |||
| MPLS, routing can be further controlled by the manipulation of | MPLS, routing can be further controlled by the manipulation of | |||
| relevant traffic engineering parameters, resource parameters, and | relevant traffic engineering parameters, resource parameters, and | |||
| administrative policy constraints. Within the context of MPLS, the | administrative policy constraints. Within the context of MPLS, the | |||
| path of an explicitly routed label switched path (LSP) can be | path of an explicitly routed label switched path (LSP) can be | |||
| computed and established in various ways including: | computed and established in various ways including: | |||
| o manually | o manually | |||
| o automatically online using constraint-based routing processes | o automatically, online using constraint-based routing processes | |||
| implemented on label switching routers | implemented on label switching routers | |||
| o automatically offline using constraint-based routing entities | o automatically, offline using constraint-based routing entities | |||
| implemented on external traffic engineering support systems. | implemented on external traffic engineering support systems. | |||
| 2.4.1. Combating the Congestion Problem | 2.4.1. Combating the Congestion Problem | |||
| Minimizing congestion is a significant aspect of Internet traffic | Minimizing congestion is a significant aspect of Internet traffic | |||
| engineering. This subsection gives an overview of the general | engineering. This subsection gives an overview of the general | |||
| approaches that have been used or proposed to combat congestion | approaches that have been used or proposed to combat congestion. | |||
| problems. | ||||
| Congestion management policies can be categorized based upon the | Congestion management policies can be categorized based upon the | |||
| following criteria (see e.g., [YARE95] for a more detailed taxonomy | following criteria (see [YARE95] for a more detailed taxonomy of | |||
| of congestion control schemes): | congestion control schemes): | |||
| o Response time scale which can be characterized as long, medium, or | ||||
| short | ||||
| o reactive versus preventive which relates to congestion control and | ||||
| congestion avoidance | ||||
| o supply side versus demand side congestion management schemes. | ||||
| These aspects are discussed in the following paragraphs. | ||||
| 1. Congestion Management based on Response Time Scales | 1. Congestion Management based on Response Time Scales | |||
| * Long (weeks to months): Expanding network capacity by adding | * Long (weeks to months): Expanding network capacity by adding | |||
| new equipement, routers and links, takes time and is | new equipement, routers, and links, takes time and is | |||
| comparatively costly. Capacity planning needs to take this | comparatively costly. Capacity planning needs to take this | |||
| into consideration. Network capacity is expanded based on | into consideration. Network capacity is expanded based on | |||
| estimates or forcasts of future traffic development and | estimates or forcasts of future traffic development and | |||
| traffic distribution. These upgrades are typically carried | traffic distribution. These upgrades are typically carried | |||
| out over weeks or months, or maybe even years. | out over weeks or months, or maybe even years. | |||
| * Medium (minutes to days): Several control policies fall within | * Medium (minutes to days): Several control policies fall within | |||
| the medium timescale category. Examples include: | the medium timescale category. Examples include: | |||
| a. Adjusting IGP and/or BGP parameters to route traffic away | a. Adjusting routing protocol parameters to route traffic | |||
| or towards certain segments of the network | away or towards certain segments of the network. | |||
| b. Setting up and/or adjusting some explicitly routed LSPs in | b. Setting up or adjusting explicitly routed LSPs in MPLS | |||
| MPLS networks to route some traffic trunks away from | networks to route traffic trunks away from possibly | |||
| possibly congested resources or toward possibly more | congested resources or toward possibly more favorable | |||
| favorable routes | routes. | |||
| c. Re-configuring the logical topology of the network to make | c. Re-configuring the logical topology of the network to make | |||
| it correlate more closely with the spatial traffic | it correlate more closely with the spatial traffic | |||
| distribution using for example some underlying path- | distribution using, for example, an underlying path- | |||
| oriented technology such as MPLS LSPs or optical channel | oriented technology such as MPLS LSPs or optical channel | |||
| trails. | trails. | |||
| Many of these adaptive medium time scale response schemes rely | Many of these adaptive medium time scale response schemes rely | |||
| on a measurement system. The measurement system monitors | on a measurement system. The measurement system monitors | |||
| changes in traffic distribution, traffic shifts, and network | changes in traffic distribution, traffic shifts, and network | |||
| resource utilization. The measurement system then provides | resource utilization. The measurement system then provides | |||
| feedback to the online and/or offline traffic engineering | feedback to the online and/or offline traffic engineering | |||
| mechanisms and tools which employ this feedback information to | mechanisms and tools which employ this feedback information to | |||
| trigger certain control actions to occur within the network. | trigger certain control actions to occur within the network. | |||
| The traffic engineering mechanisms and tools can be | The traffic engineering mechanisms and tools can be | |||
| implemented in a distributed or centralized fashion, and may | implemented in a distributed or centralized fashion, and may | |||
| have a hierarchical or flat structure. The comparative merits | have a hierarchical or flat structure. The comparative merits | |||
| of distributed and centralized control structures for networks | of distributed and centralized control structures for networks | |||
| are well known. A centralized scheme may have global | are well known. A centralized scheme may have global | |||
| visibility into the network state and may produce potentially | visibility into the network state and may produce potentially | |||
| more optimal solutions. However, centralized schemes are | more optimal solutions. However, centralized schemes are | |||
| prone to single points of failure and may not scale as well as | prone to single points of failure and may not scale as well as | |||
| distributed schemes. Moreover, the information utilized by a | distributed schemes. Moreover, the information utilized by a | |||
| centralized scheme may be stale and may not reflect the actual | centralized scheme may be stale and may not reflect the actual | |||
| state of the network. It is not an objective of this memo to | state of the network. It is not an objective of this document | |||
| make a recommendation between distributed and centralized | to make a recommendation between distributed and centralized | |||
| schemes. This is a choice that network administrators must | schemes. This is a choice that network administrators must | |||
| make based on their specific needs. | make based on their specific needs. | |||
| * Short (picoseconds to minutes): This category includes packet | * Short (picoseconds to minutes): This category includes packet | |||
| level processing functions and events on the order of several | level processing functions and events on the order of several | |||
| round trip times. It includes router mechanisms such as | round trip times. It includes router mechanisms such as | |||
| passive and active buffer management. These mechanisms are | passive and active buffer management. These mechanisms are | |||
| used to control congestion and/or signal congestion to end | used to control congestion and/or signal congestion to end | |||
| systems so that they can adaptively regulate the rate at which | systems so that they can adaptively regulate the rate at which | |||
| traffic is injected into the network. One of the most popular | traffic is injected into the network. One of the most popular | |||
| skipping to change at page 63, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 62, line 17 ¶ | |||
| 2000. | 2000. | |||
| [FT01] Fortz, B. and M. Thorup, "Optimizing OSPF/IS-IS Weights in | [FT01] Fortz, B. and M. Thorup, "Optimizing OSPF/IS-IS Weights in | |||
| a Changing World", n.d., | a Changing World", n.d., | |||
| <http://www.research.att.com/~mthorup/PAPERS/papers.html>. | <http://www.research.att.com/~mthorup/PAPERS/papers.html>. | |||
| [HUSS87] Hurley, B., Seidl, C., and W. Sewel, "A Survey of Dynamic | [HUSS87] Hurley, B., Seidl, C., and W. Sewel, "A Survey of Dynamic | |||
| Routing Methods for Circuit-Switched Traffic", | Routing Methods for Circuit-Switched Traffic", | |||
| Article IEEE Communication Magazine, September 1987. | Article IEEE Communication Magazine, September 1987. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis] | ||||
| Loibl, C., Hares, S., Raszuk, R., McPherson, D., and M. | ||||
| Bacher, "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules", | ||||
| draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-27 (work in progress), October | ||||
| 2020. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo] | [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo] | |||
| Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H., and | Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H., and | |||
| O. Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE) | O. Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE) | |||
| Topologies", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-22 (work in | Topologies", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-22 (work in | |||
| progress), June 2019. | progress), June 2019. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-tewg-qos-routing] | [I-D.ietf-tewg-qos-routing] | |||
| Ash, G., "Traffic Engineering & QoS Methods for IP-, ATM-, | Ash, G., "Traffic Engineering & QoS Methods for IP-, ATM-, | |||
| & Based Multiservice Networks", draft-ietf-tewg-qos- | & Based Multiservice Networks", draft-ietf-tewg-qos- | |||
| routing-04 (work in progress), October 2001. | routing-04 (work in progress), October 2001. | |||
| skipping to change at page 68, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 67, line 15 ¶ | |||
| [RFC5394] Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., Berger, L., and J. Ash, | [RFC5394] Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., Berger, L., and J. Ash, | |||
| "Policy-Enabled Path Computation Framework", RFC 5394, | "Policy-Enabled Path Computation Framework", RFC 5394, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC5394, December 2008, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5394, December 2008, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5394>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5394>. | |||
| [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation | [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation | |||
| Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, | Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. | |||
| [RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., | ||||
| and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification | ||||
| Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5575>. | ||||
| [RFC6119] Harrison, J., Berger, J., and M. Bartlett, "IPv6 Traffic | [RFC6119] Harrison, J., Berger, J., and M. Bartlett, "IPv6 Traffic | |||
| Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, DOI 10.17487/RFC6119, | Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, DOI 10.17487/RFC6119, | |||
| February 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6119>. | February 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6119>. | |||
| [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., | [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., | |||
| and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol | and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol | |||
| (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, | (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. | |||
| [RFC6374] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay | [RFC6374] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay | |||
| End of changes. 94 change blocks. | ||||
| 413 lines changed or deleted | 339 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||