| < draft-polk-tsvwg-rfc4594-update-02.txt | draft-polk-tsvwg-rfc4594-update-03.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network WG James Polk, ed. | Network WG James Polk, ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft Cisco | Internet-Draft Cisco | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track (PS) Oct 22, 2012 | Intended status: Standards Track (PS) Feb, 2013 | |||
| Obsoletes: RFC 4594 | Obsoletes: RFC 4594 | |||
| Updates: RFC 5865 | Updates: RFC 5865 | |||
| Expires: April 22, 2013 | Expires: August 25, 2013 | |||
| Standard Configuration of DiffServ Service Classes | Standard Configuration of DiffServ Service Classes | |||
| draft-polk-tsvwg-rfc4594-update-02.txt | draft-polk-tsvwg-rfc4594-update-03.txt | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes service classes configured with DiffServ and | This document describes service classes configured with DiffServ and | |||
| identifies how they are used and how to construct them using | identifies how they are used and how to construct them using | |||
| Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCPs), traffic conditioners, | Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCPs), traffic conditioners, | |||
| Per-Hop Behaviors (PHBs), and Active Queue Management (AQM) | Per-Hop Behaviors (PHBs), and Active Queue Management (AQM) | |||
| mechanisms. There is no intrinsic requirement that particular | mechanisms. There is no intrinsic requirement that particular | |||
| DSCPs, traffic conditioners, PHBs, and AQM be used for a certain | DSCPs, traffic conditioners, PHBs, and AQM be used for a certain | |||
| service class, but for consistent behavior under the same network | service class, but for consistent behavior under the same network | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 39 ¶ | |||
| 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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | |||
| months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents | months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents | |||
| at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as | at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as | |||
| reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on April 22, 2013. | This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2013. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2012 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 | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://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 | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with | |||
| respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this | respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this | |||
| document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in | document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in | |||
| Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without | Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without | |||
| warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction ...................................................3 | 1. Introduction ...................................................3 | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Notation .....................................8 | 1.1. Requirements Notation ..................................... | |||
| 1.2. Expected Use in the Network ...............................8 | 1.2. Expected Use in the Network ............................... | |||
| 1.3. Service Class Definition ..................................8 | 1.3. Service Class Definition .................................. | |||
| 1.4. Key Differentiated Services Concepts .....................10 | 1.4. Key Differentiated Services Concepts ...................... | |||
| 1.4.1. Queuing .............................................10 | 1.4.1. Queuing .............................................. | |||
| 1.4.1.1. Priority Queuing ...........................10 | 1.4.1.1. Priority Queuing ............................ | |||
| 1.4.1.2. Rate Queuing ...............................11 | 1.4.1.2. Rate Queuing ................................ | |||
| 1.4.2. Active Queue Management .............................11 | 1.4.2. Active Queue Management .............................. | |||
| 1.4.3. Traffic Conditioning ................................12 | 1.4.3. Traffic Conditioning ................................. | |||
| 1.4.4. Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) ...........12 | 1.4.4. Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) ............ | |||
| 1.4.5. Per-Hop Behavior (PHB) ..............................13 | 1.4.5. Per-Hop Behavior (PHB) ............................... | |||
| 1.5. Key Service Concepts .....................................13 | 1.5. Key Service Concepts ...................................... | |||
| 1.5.1. Default Forwarding (DF) .............................13 | 1.5.1. Default Forwarding (DF) .............................. | |||
| 1.5.2. Assured Forwarding (AF) .............................14 | 1.5.2. Assured Forwarding (AF) .............................. | |||
| 1.5.3. Expedited Forwarding (EF) ...........................14 | 1.5.3. Expedited Forwarding (EF) ...........................1 | |||
| 1.5.4. Class Selector (CS) .................................15 | 1.5.4. Class Selector (CS) .................................1 | |||
| 1.5.5. Admission Control ...................................15 | 1.5.5. Admission Control ...................................1 | |||
| 2. Service Differentiation .......................................16 | 1.6 What Changes are Proposed Here from RFC 4594?..............1 | |||
| 2.1. Service Classes ..........................................16 | 2. Service Differentiation .......................................1 | |||
| 2.2. Categorization of User Oriented Service Classes ..........18 | 2.1. Service Classes ..........................................1 | |||
| 2.3. Service Class Characteristics ............................22 | 2.2. Categorization of User Oriented Service Classes ..........1 | |||
| 2.4. Service Classes vs. Treatment Aggregate (from RFC 5127)...27 | 2.3. Service Class Characteristics ............................1 | |||
| 2.4.1 Examples of Service Classes in Treatment Aggregates...29 | 2.4. Service Classes vs. Treatment Aggregate (from RFC 5127)...2 | |||
| 3. Network Control Traffic .......................................31 | 2.4.1 Examples of Service Classes in Treatment Aggregates...2 | |||
| 3.1. Current Practice in the Internet .........................32 | 3. Network Control Traffic .......................................2 | |||
| 3.2. Network Control Service Class ............................32 | 3.1. Current Practice in the Internet .........................2 | |||
| 3.3. OAM Service Class ........................................34 | 3.2. Network Control Service Class ............................2 | |||
| 4. User Oriented Traffic .........................................36 | 3.3. OAM Service Class ........................................2 | |||
| 4.1. Conversational Service Class Group .......................36 | 4. User Oriented Traffic .........................................3 | |||
| 4.1.1 Audio Service Class ..................................37 | 4.1. Conversational Service Class Group .......................3 | |||
| 4.1.2 Video Service Class ..................................40 | 4.1.1 Audio Service Class ..................................3 | |||
| 4.1.3 Hi-Res Service Class .................................44 | 4.1.2 Video Service Class ..................................3 | |||
| 4.2. Realtime-Interactive Service Class ...................... 47 | 4.1.3 Hi-Res Service Class .................................3 | |||
| 4.3. Multimedia Conferencing Service Class ....................50 | 4.2. Realtime-Interactive Service Class ...................... 3 | |||
| 4.4. Multimedia Streaming Service Class .......................52 | 4.3. Multimedia Conferencing Service Class ....................3 | |||
| 4.5. Broadcast Video Service Class ............................55 | 4.4. Multimedia Streaming Service Class .......................3 | |||
| 4.6. Low-Latency Data Service Class ...........................58 | 4.5. Broadcast Video Service Class ............................4 | |||
| 4.7. Conversational Signaling Service Class ...................60 | 4.6. Low-Latency Data Service Class ...........................4 | |||
| 4.8. High-Throughput Data Service Class .......................62 | 4.7. Conversational Signaling Service Class ...................4 | |||
| 4.9. Standard Service Class ...................................65 | 4.8. High-Throughput Data Service Class .......................4 | |||
| 4.10. Low-Priority Data .......................................66 | 4.9. Standard Service Class ...................................4 | |||
| 5. Additional Information on Service Class Usage .................67 | 4.10. Low-Priority Data .......................................4 | |||
| 5.1. Mapping for NTP ..........................................67 | 5. Additional Information on Service Class Usage .................4 | |||
| 5.2. VPN Service Mapping ......................................67 | 5.1. Mapping for NTP ..........................................5 | |||
| 5.2. VPN Service Mapping ......................................5 | ||||
| 6. Security Considerations .......................................68 | 6. Security Considerations .......................................5 | |||
| 7. Contributing Authors ..........................................68 | 7. Contributing Authors ..........................................5 | |||
| 8. Acknowledgements ..............................................69 | 8. Acknowledgements ..............................................5 | |||
| 9. References ....................................................70 | 9. References ....................................................5 | |||
| 9.1. Normative References .....................................70 | 9.1. Normative References .....................................5 | |||
| 9.2. Informative References ...................................71 | 9.2. Informative References ...................................5 | |||
| Author's Address .................................................72 | Author's Address .................................................5 | |||
| Appendix A - Changes .............................................72 | Appendix A - Changes .............................................5 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Differentiated Services [RFC2474][RFC2475] provides the ability to | Differentiated Services [RFC2474][RFC2475] provides the ability to | |||
| mark/label/classify IP packets differently to distinguish how | mark/label/classify IP packets differently to distinguish how | |||
| individual packets need to be treated differently through (or | individual packets need to be treated differently through (or | |||
| throughout) a network on a per hop basis. Local administrators are | throughout) a network on a per hop basis. Local administrators are | |||
| who configure each router for which Differentiated Services Code | who configure each router for which Differentiated Services Code | |||
| Points (DSCP) are to be treated differently, which are to be | Points (DSCP) are to be treated differently, which are to be | |||
| ignored (i.e., no differentiated treatment), and which DSCPs are to | ignored (i.e., no differentiated treatment), and which DSCPs are to | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 22 ¶ | |||
| Forwarding by having the packets marked be for admitted traffic. | Forwarding by having the packets marked be for admitted traffic. | |||
| This concept of "admitted" traffic is spread throughout the real | This concept of "admitted" traffic is spread throughout the real | |||
| time traffic classes. | time traffic classes. | |||
| Thus, the document flow is as follows: | Thus, the document flow is as follows: | |||
| o maintain the general format of RFC 4594; | o maintain the general format of RFC 4594; | |||
| o augment the content with the concept of capacity-admission; | o augment the content with the concept of capacity-admission; | |||
| o incorporate much more video into this document, as it has become | o incorporate more video into this document, as it has become a | |||
| a dominant application in enterprises and other managed networks, | dominant application in enterprises and other managed networks, | |||
| as well as on the open public Internet; | as well as on the open public Internet; | |||
| o reduce the discussion on voice and its examples; | o reduce the discussion on voice and its examples; | |||
| o articulate the subtle differences learned since RFC 4594 was | o articulate the subtle differences learned since RFC 4594 was | |||
| published. | published. | |||
| The goal here is to provide a standard configuration for DiffServ | The goal here is to provide a standard configuration for DiffServ | |||
| DSCP assignments and expected PHBs for enterprises and other managed | DSCP assignments and expected PHBs for enterprises and other managed | |||
| networks, as well as towards the public Internet with specific | networks, as well as towards the public Internet with specific | |||
| traffic characteristics per Service class/DSCP, and example | traffic characteristics per Service class/DSCP, and example | |||
| applications shown for each. | applications shown for each. | |||
| This document describes service classes configured with DiffServ and | This document describes service classes configured with DiffServ and | |||
| defines how they can be used and how to construct them using | defines how they can be used and how to construct them using | |||
| Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCPs), and recommends how to | Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCPs), and recommends how to | |||
| construct them using traffic conditioners, Per-Hop Behaviors (PHBs), | construct them using traffic conditioners, Per-Hop Behaviors (PHBs), | |||
| and Active Queue Management (AQM) mechanisms. There is no intrinsic | and Active Queue Management (AQM) mechanisms. There is no intrinsic | |||
| requirement that particular traffic conditioners, PHBs, and AQM be | requirement that particular traffic conditioners, PHBs, and AQM be | |||
| used for a certain service class, but as a policy and for | used for a certain service class, but as a policy and for | |||
| interoperability it is useful to apply them consistently. This | interoperability it is useful to apply them consistently. | |||
| document explicitly states there is a fundamental requirement that a | ||||
| particular DSCP or DSCPs be used for each service class. | ||||
| We differentiate services and their characteristics in Section 2. | We differentiate services and their characteristics in Section 2. | |||
| Network control traffic, as well as user oriented traffic are | Network control traffic, as well as user oriented traffic are | |||
| discussed in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. We analyze the security | discussed in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. We analyze the security | |||
| considerations in Section 6. Section 7 offers a tribute to the | considerations in Section 6. Section 7 offers a tribute to the | |||
| authors of RFC 4594, from which this document is based. It is in its | authors of RFC 4594, from which this document is based. It is in its | |||
| own section, and not part of the normal acknowledgements portion of | own section, and not part of the normal acknowledgements portion of | |||
| each IETF document. | each IETF document. | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Notation | 1.1. Requirements Notation | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 23 ¶ | |||
| - First, there are per-hop behaviors that are already in widespread | - First, there are per-hop behaviors that are already in widespread | |||
| use (e.g., those satisfying the IPv4 Precedence queuing | use (e.g., those satisfying the IPv4 Precedence queuing | |||
| requirements specified in [RFC1812]), and | requirements specified in [RFC1812]), and | |||
| - this document will continue to permit their use in DS-compliant | - this document will continue to permit their use in DS-compliant | |||
| networks. | networks. | |||
| In addition, there are some DSCPs that correspond to historical use | In addition, there are some DSCPs that correspond to historical use | |||
| of the IP Precedence field, | of the IP Precedence field, | |||
| - CS0 (000000) will remain 'Default Forwarding' (also know as 'Best | - CS0 (000000) will remain 'Default Forwarding' (also known as 'Best | |||
| Effort') | Effort') | |||
| - 11xxxx will remain for routing traffic | - 11xxxx will remain for routing traffic | |||
| and will map to PHBs that meet the general requirements specified in | and will map to PHBs that meet the general requirements specified in | |||
| [RFC2474], Section 4.2.2.2. | [RFC2474], Section 4.2.2.2. | |||
| No attempt is made to maintain backward compatibility with the "DTR" | No attempt is made to maintain backward compatibility with the "DTR" | |||
| or Type of Service (TOS) bits of the IPv4 TOS octet, as defined in | or Type of Service (TOS) bits of the IPv4 TOS octet, as defined in | |||
| [RFC0791] and [RFC1349]. | [RFC0791] and [RFC1349]. | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 29 ¶ | |||
| transits and the load on each transited network. There are a series | transits and the load on each transited network. There are a series | |||
| of new DSCPs proposed in [ID-DSCP], each specifying unique | of new DSCPs proposed in [ID-DSCP], each specifying unique | |||
| characteristics necessitating a separate marking from what existing | characteristics necessitating a separate marking from what existing | |||
| before that document. | before that document. | |||
| This document will import in four new '*-Admit' DSCPs from | This document will import in four new '*-Admit' DSCPs from | |||
| [ID-DSCP], 2 others that are new but not capacity-admitted, one from | [ID-DSCP], 2 others that are new but not capacity-admitted, one from | |||
| RFC 5865, and change the existing usage of 2 DSCPs from RFC 4594. | RFC 5865, and change the existing usage of 2 DSCPs from RFC 4594. | |||
| This is discussed throughout the rest of this document. | This is discussed throughout the rest of this document. | |||
| 1.6 What Changes are Proposed Here from RFC 4594? | ||||
| Changing an entire network DiffServ configuration has proven to be a | ||||
| painful experience for both individuals and companies. It is not | ||||
| done very often, and for good reason. This effort is based on | ||||
| experience learned since the publication of RFC 4594 (circa 2006). | ||||
| Audio, once thought to be ok grouped with video, needs to be in | ||||
| separate service classes. Collaboration has taken off, mostly | ||||
| because of mobility, but also because of a worldwide recession that | ||||
| has limited physical travel, and relying on people to do more with | ||||
| their computers. With that in mind, there has been an explosion in | ||||
| application development for the individual (seems everyone has an | ||||
| "app-store"). The following set of bullets has this world - that | ||||
| needs a robust layer 3 - in mind. | ||||
| o Scope of document is changed to tighten it up for standards track | ||||
| consideration. | ||||
| o This document explicitly states there is a fundamental requirement | ||||
| that a particular DSCP(s) be used for each service class, each | ||||
| with a recommended set of applications to be used by that service | ||||
| class - at least on that individual's externally facing (public) | ||||
| interface. | ||||
| o Created the Conversational group of service classes to focus on | ||||
| realtime, mostly bidirectional communications (unless multicast is | ||||
| used). | ||||
| o "Realtime-Interactive" | ||||
| Moved to (near) realtime TCP-based apps | ||||
| Why the change? TCP based transports have proven, in certain | ||||
| environments, to be a bidirectional realtime transport, e.g., for | ||||
| multiplayer gaming and virtual desktops applications. | ||||
| o "Audio" | ||||
| Same as Telephony (which is now gone), adds Voice-Admit for | ||||
| capacity-admitted traffic | ||||
| Why the change? RFC 5865 (Voice-Admit) needed to be added to the | ||||
| Audio service class. Video needed to be separate from audio, hence | ||||
| the name change from Telephony (which includes video) to just audio. | ||||
| o "Video" | ||||
| NEW for video and audio/video conferencing, was in | ||||
| Multimedia-Conferencing service classification | ||||
| Why the change? Many networks are using the AF4X for video, but | ||||
| others are throwing anything "multimedia" into the same service | ||||
| class (like elastic TCP flows). Video has become so dominant that it | ||||
| should be what mostly goes into one service class. | ||||
| o "Hi-Res" | ||||
| NEW for video and audio/video conferencing | ||||
| Why the change? This entirely new service class is for local policy | ||||
| based higher end video (think Telepresence). Without congestion, | ||||
| this service class has the same treatment as Video, but if there is | ||||
| any pushback from the network, Hi-Res (note: not married to the | ||||
| name) has a better PHB. | ||||
| o "Multimedia-Conferencing" | ||||
| Now without audio or human video | ||||
| Why the change? The change is taking bidirectional human audio and | ||||
| video out of this service class. This is all about non-realtime | ||||
| collaboration - even in conjunction with an audio and/or video flow. | ||||
| o "Broadcast" | ||||
| Remains the same, added CS3-Admit for capacity-admitted | ||||
| Why the change? Removing the "-Video" from the name because there | ||||
| are so many more flows that are Broadcast in realtime than video. | ||||
| o "Low-Latency Data" | ||||
| Remains the same, adds IM & Presence traffic explicitly | ||||
| Why the change? Merely explicitly stating a place for some | ||||
| additional traffic types that otherwise could go elsewhere. | ||||
| o "Conversational Signaling" (A/V-Sig) | ||||
| Was 'Signaling' | ||||
| Why the change? This change is merely a renaming of a service class, | ||||
| and acknowledgement that some of the previous authors inaccurate | ||||
| beliefs that DSCPs were linearly ordered with those values having a | ||||
| higher value definitely getting better treatment than lower values. | ||||
| 2. Service Differentiation | 2. Service Differentiation | |||
| There are practical limits on the level of service differentiation | There are practical limits on the level of service differentiation | |||
| that should be offered in the IP networks. We believe we have | that should be offered in the IP networks. We believe we have | |||
| defined a practical approach in delivering service differentiation | defined a practical approach in delivering service differentiation | |||
| by defining different service classes that networks may choose to | by defining different service classes that networks may choose to | |||
| support in order to provide the appropriate level of behaviors and | support in order to provide the appropriate level of behaviors and | |||
| performance needed by current and future applications and services. | performance needed by current and future applications and services. | |||
| The defined structure for providing services allows several | The defined structure for providing services allows several | |||
| applications having similar traffic characteristics and performance | applications having similar traffic characteristics and performance | |||
| skipping to change at page 46, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 47, line 39 ¶ | |||
| However, it is typically the case that the Hi-Res conferencing flows | However, it is typically the case that the Hi-Res conferencing flows | |||
| have more rigid requirements for quality and business-wise, need to | have more rigid requirements for quality and business-wise, need to | |||
| be experience far less errors than the regular video service on the | be experience far less errors than the regular video service on the | |||
| same network. | same network. | |||
| Note that it is likely the case in these networks that the | Note that it is likely the case in these networks that the | |||
| accompanying audio to the Hi-Res video call will be marked as the | accompanying audio to the Hi-Res video call will be marked as the | |||
| Hi-Res video is marked (i.e., using the same DSCP. | Hi-Res video is marked (i.e., using the same DSCP. | |||
| The Hi-Res service class MUST use the Class Selector 5 (CS4) PHB, | The Hi-Res service class MUST use the Class Selector 5 (CS4) PHB, | |||
| defined in [RFC2474], for non-capacity-admitted conferences. While | defined in [RFC2474], for non-capacity-admitted conferences. While | |||
| the capacity-admitted Hi-Res conferences MUST use the CS4-Admit PHB, | the capacity-admitted Hi-Res conferences MUST use the CS4-Admit PHB, | |||
| defined in [ID-DSCP]. This service class MUST be configured to | defined in [ID-DSCP]. This service class MUST be configured to | |||
| provide a bandwidth assurance for CS4 and CS4-Admit marked packets | provide a bandwidth assurance for CS4 and CS4-Admit marked packets | |||
| to ensure that they get forwarded. The Hi-Res service class SHOULD | to ensure that they get forwarded. The Hi-Res service class SHOULD | |||
| be configured to use a Priority Queuing system such as that defined | be configured to use a Priority Queuing system such as that defined | |||
| in Section 1.4.1.1 of this document. Further, CS4-Admit will be | in Section 1.4.1.1 of this document. Further, CS4-Admit will be | |||
| designated as the DSCP for use when capacity-admission signaling has | designated as the DSCP for use when capacity-admission signaling has | |||
| been used, such as RSVP or NSIS, to guarantee delivery through the | been used, such as RSVP or NSIS, to guarantee delivery through the | |||
| network. CS4 will be used for non-admitted Hi-Res conferences, as | network. CS4 will be used for non-admitted Hi-Res conferences, as | |||
| well as overflows from CS4-Admit sources that send more packets than | well as overflows from CS4-Admit sources that send more packets than | |||
| skipping to change at page 73, line 6 ¶ | skipping to change at page 74, line 38 ¶ | |||
| Phone: +1.817.271.3552 | Phone: +1.817.271.3552 | |||
| Email: jmpolk@cisco.com | Email: jmpolk@cisco.com | |||
| Appendix A - Changes | Appendix A - Changes | |||
| Here is a list of all the changes that were captured during the | Here is a list of all the changes that were captured during the | |||
| editing process. This will not be a complete list, and others are | editing process. This will not be a complete list, and others are | |||
| free to point out what the authors missed, and we'll include that in | free to point out what the authors missed, and we'll include that in | |||
| the next release. | the next release. | |||
| A.1 Since Individual -01 to -02 | A.1 Since Individual -02 to -03 | |||
| o Inserted section 1.6 to explain fundamentally what has changed | ||||
| since RFC 4594, and why changes are necessary. | ||||
| A.2 Since Individual -01 to -02 | ||||
| o Added text to the Intro section on the justification from | o Added text to the Intro section on the justification from | |||
| DiffServ Problem Statement draft, as to more of why this update | DiffServ Problem Statement draft, as to more of why this update | |||
| is necessary. | is necessary. | |||
| o Added text to the Intro section expanding on the concept of | o Added text to the Intro section expanding on the concept of | |||
| service classes vs. treatment aggregates (from RFC 5127). | service classes vs. treatment aggregates (from RFC 5127). | |||
| A.2 Since Individual -00 to -01 | A.3 Since Individual -00 to -01 | |||
| o Added Section 2.4 which covers the conflation issues regarding | o Added Section 2.4 which covers the conflation issues regarding | |||
| the differences between service classes and treatment aggregates. | the differences between service classes and treatment aggregates. | |||
| o Added example operational configurations of treatment aggregates | o Added example operational configurations of treatment aggregates | |||
| applied to this draft's new set of service classes and additional | applied to this draft's new set of service classes and additional | |||
| DSCPs. | DSCPs. | |||
| o Added references RFC 5865, RFC 5462, IEEE 802.1E and IEEE 802.1Q. | o Added references RFC 5865, RFC 5462, IEEE 802.1E and IEEE 802.1Q. | |||
| A.3 Since RFC 4594 to Individual Update -00 | A.4 Since RFC 4594 to Individual Update -00 | |||
| o rewrote Intro to emphasize current topics | o rewrote Intro to emphasize current topics | |||
| o Created a Conversational Service group, comprising the audio, | o Created a Conversational Service group, comprising the audio, | |||
| video and Hi-Res service classes - because they have similar | video and Hi-Res service classes - because they have similar | |||
| characteristics. | characteristics. | |||
| o Incorporated the 6 new DSCPs from [ID-DSCP]. | o Incorporated the 6 new DSCPs from [ID-DSCP]. | |||
| o moved the example section, en mass, to an appendix that might not | o moved the example section, en mass, to an appendix that might not | |||
| End of changes. 13 change blocks. | ||||
| 67 lines changed or deleted | 158 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/ | ||||