1

QoS-NSLP QSPEC Template draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-05.txt

Jerry Ash, Attila Bader, Cornelia Kappler NSIS WG Meeting, Paris, 5th Aug 2005

updates to current -05 draft open issues

2

Updates to Current -05 QSPEC I-D

Comprehensive description of QSPEC Procedures new:

–“RSVP style reservation”–“simple resource queries”

Note: bidirectional reservations are not reflected in the QSPEC

Supported by “QSPEC procedure ID” in QSPEC Control Information

3

Updates to Current -05 QSPEC I-D Sec. 7.2 QSPEC Examples

Removed example for IntServ QSPECs– Reference Controlled Load QOSM Draft instead

(draft-kappler-nsis-qosmodel-controlledload) Give examples of possible QSPECs for DiffServ admission control

– Not to be taken as DiffServ QOSMs

Priority Parameter Broke out Reservation Priority parameter

– <Reservation Priority> = <Admission Priority> <RPH Namespace> <RPH Priority>

– Avoids defining new namespace for SIP resource priority header (RPH) specification

– No change in functionality

4

Updates to Current -05 QSPEC I-DMinor issues

Removed individual MTU parameter as agreed at Interim Meeting (May 2005) Assume MTU is discovered by another process

(e.g. see Path MTU Discovery (PMTUD) WG) MTU still part of <token bucket> because this is how it is defined by RSVP

– Leave as is? Added “Tunneled QSPEC Parameter Flag”

When a RESERVE is tunneled, internal QNEs cannot update QSPEC information (e.g. expected Path Latency)

If the QNE at the tunnel egress cannot update the information on behalf of the tunneled domain it raises the “Tunneled QSPEC Parameter Flag”

– One for each optional and mandatory parameter This is in addition to the “non-support flag” for optional parameters

Define 2nd token bucket parameters for more precise traffic description E.g. for DiffServ This is an optional parameter

– The “first” token bucket is a mandatory parameter Differentiate the two token buckets by parameter IDs

5

Updates to Current -05 QSPEC I-DMinor issues cont’

QSPEC container Current coding: each QOSM parameter consumes at least 8 Bytes

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+| Object ID | Parameter ID | Length (bytes)|ParameterValues|+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

// Parameter Values //

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ QSPEC container allows more efficient coding, e.g. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Object ID = 0 | Parameter ID | Length = 5 | Para 1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Para 2 |S|M| Para 5 |U|B| Para 8 | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Intended for parameters always used together – Because only container can be identified, not individual parameters– Used for token bucket and RMD QOSM

6

Open Issues in Current -05 QSPEC I-D Review QSPEC object/parameter formats

Helpful input by Chris Lang (GIMPS implementor)– Will slightly reformat to simplify processing

Specify how to signal QSPEC-specific errors Suggestion

– Signal protocol errors in QoS NSLP and copy erroneous part into ErrorSpec• E.g. unknown parameter ID, incorrect parameter length,…

– Signal unsuccessful reservations in QoS NSLP• Provide more detailed information (which parameter could not be reserved) in

QSPEC as flags=> Only add “not reserved” flags to QSPEC parameters and leave all other error

information in QoS NSLP

Proposal to add H.460.4 priority encodings Related to H.323 legacy signaling protocol Some support for this on the list Need to avoid feature creep Is there support?

…and that’s it!

7

backup

8

Sender-Initiated Reservations | RESERVE | RESPONSE --------------------------------------------------------------- a.| QoS Desired | QoS Reserved b.| QoS Desired, QoS Avail. | QoS Reserved, QoS Avail. c.| QoS Desired, QoS Avail., Min. QoS | QoS Reserved, QoS Avail. Receiver-Initiated Reservations QUERY | RESERVE | RESPONSE --------------------------------------------------------------------- a. QoS Des. | QoS Des. | QoS Res. b. QoS Des.,Min. QoS | QoS Des.,QoS Avl.,(Min QoS)| QoS Res.,QoS Avl.

Updates to Current -05 QSPEC I-D Section 7: Section on QSPEC procedures & examples:

For sender/receiver initiated reservations the following combinations of QSPEC objects are possible

– The QSPEC objects inserted in the first message uniquely determine the QSPEC objects to be inserted in subsequent messages

The presence of QoS Avail. implies that QoS Desired is negotiable. Also collect path properties.

Inform other end of QoS Avail.

„RSVP Style“: c. QoS Avail. | QoS Des. | QoS Res.

Resource Queries QUERY | RESPONSE -------------------------------------------- QoS Avail. | QoS Avail.

Read-only object