idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 9, 2017) is 2605 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-29) exists of draft-ietf-manet-dlep-24 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group B. Cheng 3 Internet-Draft Lincoln Laboratory 4 Intended status: Standards Track L. Berger, Ed. 5 Expires: August 13, 2017 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 6 February 9, 2017 8 DLEP Lantency Range Extension 9 draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension-00 11 Abstract 13 This document defines an extension to the DLEP protocol to provide 14 the range of latency that may be experienced on a link. 16 Status of This Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 23 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 24 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 13, 2017. 33 Copyright Notice 35 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 36 document authors. All rights reserved. 38 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 39 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 40 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 41 publication of this document. Please review these documents 42 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 43 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 44 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 45 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 46 described in the Simplified BSD License. 48 Table of Contents 50 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 51 1.1. Key Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 52 2. Extension Usage and Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 53 3. Latency Range Data Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 54 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 56 5.1. Extension Type Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 57 5.2. Data Item Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 58 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 61 1. Introduction 63 The Dynamic Link Event Protocol (DLEP) is defined in 64 [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep]. It provides the exchange of link related 65 control information between DLEP peers. DLEP peers are comprised of 66 a modem and a router. DLEP defines a base set of mechanisms as well 67 as support for possible extensions. This document defines one such 68 extension. 70 The base DLEP specification includes the Latency metric which 71 provides an average latency on a link. This document adds the 72 ability to relay the minimum and maximum latency range seen on a 73 link. The extension defined in this document is referred to as 74 "Latency Range". 76 This document defines a new DLEP Extension Type Value in Section 2 77 which is used to indicate the use of the extension, and one new DLEP 78 Data Items in Section 3. 80 1.1. Key Words 82 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 83 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 84 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 85 14, RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 87 2. Extension Usage and Identification 89 The use of the Latency Range Extension SHOULD be configurable. To 90 indicate that the Latency Range Extension is to be used, an 91 implementation MUST include the Latency Range Extension Type Value in 92 the Extensions Supported Data Item. The Extensions Supported Data 93 Item is sent and processed according to [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep]. 95 The Latency Range Extension Type Value is TBA1, see Section 5. 97 3. Latency Range Data Items 99 The Latency Range Data Item serves much the same purpose as the 100 Latency Data Item defined in [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep] with the addition 101 of being able to communicate the latency range that may be 102 experienced by traffic on a link. The Latency Range Item MAY be 103 carried in the same messages and MUST be processed according to the 104 same rules as the Latency Range Data Item defined in 105 [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep]. 107 The format of the Latency Range Data Item is: 109 0 1 2 3 110 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 111 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 112 | Data Item Type | Length | 113 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 114 | Maximum Latency : 115 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 116 : Maximum Latency | 117 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 118 | Minimum Latency : 119 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 120 : Minimum Latency | 121 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 123 Data Item Type: TBA2 125 Length: 16 127 Maximum Latency: 129 A 64-bit unsigned integer, representing the transmission longest 130 delay, in microseconds, that a packet encounters as it is 131 transmitted over the link. 133 Minimum Latency: 135 A 64-bit unsigned integer, representing the transmission shortest 136 delay, in microseconds, that a packet encounters as it is 137 transmitted over the link. 139 4. Security Considerations 141 The extension introduces a new mechanism for flow control between a 142 router and modem using the DLEP protocol. The extension does not 143 inherently introduce any additional threats above those documented in 144 [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep]. The approach taken to Security in that 145 document applies equally when running the extension defined in this 146 document. 148 5. IANA Considerations 150 This document requests the assignment of 2 values by IANA. All 151 assignments are to registries defined by [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep]. 153 5.1. Extension Type Value 155 This document requests one new assignment to the DLEP Extensions 156 Registry named "Extension Tyoe Values" in the range with the 157 "Specification Required" policy. The requested value is as follows: 159 +------+---------------+ 160 | Code | Description | 161 +------+---------------+ 162 | TBA1 | Latency Range | 163 +------+---------------+ 165 Table 1: Requested Extension Type Value 167 5.2. Data Item Value 169 This document requests one new assignment to the DLEP Data Item 170 Registry named "Data Item Values" in the range with the 171 "Specification Required" policy. The requested values are as 172 follows: 174 +-----------+---------------+ 175 | Type Code | Description | 176 +-----------+---------------+ 177 | TBA2 | Latency Range | 178 +-----------+---------------+ 180 Table 2: Requested Data Item Values 182 6. Normative References 184 [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep] 185 Ratliff, S., Jury, S., Satterwhite, D., Taylor, R., and (. 186 (Unknown), "Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP)", draft- 187 ietf-manet-dlep-24 (work in progress), July 2016. 189 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 190 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 191 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 192 . 194 Authors' Addresses 196 Bow-Nan Cheng 197 Lincoln Laboratory 198 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 199 244 Wood Street 200 Lexington, MA 02420-9108 202 Email: bcheng@ll.mit.edu 204 Lou Berger (editor) 205 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 207 Email: lberger@labn.net