Jose Saldana (jsaldana@unizar.es) TCMTF 2014

TCM-TF Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing Traffic Flows

I. Problem statement

II. Scenarios

III. TCM-TF details

IV. TCM-TF savings

V. Related links

Problem statement

New emerging real-time services have increased their

popularity (e.g., online games, VoIP, etc.)

Many of them do not use RTP, but bare UDP

They generate tiny packets (20-40 bytes payload)

Users are very sensitive to delay

Problem statement

Inefficiency of these real-time flows High frequency implies:

Small payloads

IPv4/UDP/RTP headers: 40 bytes

IPv6/UDP/RTP headers: 60 bytes

One IPv4/TCP packet 1500 bytes

η=1460/1500=97%

One IPv4/UDP/RTP VoIP packet with two samples of 10 bytes

η=20/60=33%

One IPv6/UDP/RTP packet of VoIP with two samples of 10 bytes

η=20/80=25%

One IPv6/TCP packet 1500 bytes

η=1440/1500=96%

Problem statement

So…why not compressing and multiplexing packets in

order to

save bandwdith

reduce the amount of packets per second

Five IPv4/UDP/RTP VoIP packets with two samples of 10 bytes

η=100/300=33%

savingOne IPv4 TCMTF Packet multiplexing five two sample packets

η=100/161=62%

Four IPv6/UDP/RTP VoIP packets with two samples of 10 bytes

η=80/240=33%

savingOne IPv6 TCMTF Packet multiplexing four two sample packets

η=80/161=49%

The basic idea

Native

TCM

TCM

ingress

TCM

egress

Common network segment

Jose Saldana (jsaldana@unizar.es) TCMTF 2014

TCM-TF Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing Traffic Flows

I. Problem statement

II. Scenarios

III. TCM-TF details

IV. TCM-TF savings

V. Related links

TCM-TF scenarios

Multi-domain scenario

- Network devices optimize flows with the same destination.

- A server in the network of the service provider demultiplexes them.

- Other option: The Internet Router does the multiplexion

ISP network Internet

ENodeB

Internet Router

(ISP)

BRAS

Network of the service

provider

Internet Router

(Service provider)

ApplicationServer 1

DSLAM

aggregation network

Serving

Gateway

aggregation network

TCM-demux

ApplicationServer 2

Native

TCM optimized

TCM-TF scenarios

Single-domain scenario

Network devices multiplex all the real-

time flows going to the Internet Router

Operator network

Aggregation network

Aggregation network

Internet

EnodeB

Internet Router

BRASDSLAM

Serving

Gateway

TCM-TF scenarios

Private solutions

IP network

Central server

Remote desktop

VoIP

VoIP

TCM

TCM

TCM-TF scenarios

IoT scenario

Internet

Satellite link

Data Center 3

IP sensors

Data Center 2

Data Center 1

Satellite

TerminalGateway

Satellite

Terminal

Satellite

Terminal

Jose Saldana (jsaldana@unizar.es) TCMTF 2014

TCM-TF Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing Traffic Flows

I. Problem statement

II. Scenarios

III. TCM-TF details

IV. TCM-TF savings

V. Related links

TCM-TF details

Three layers

1. Header compression

2. Multiplexing

3. Tunneling

IP IP

No compr. / ROHC / IPHC / ECRTP

PPPMux / Other

GRE / L2TP

IP

Compression layer

Multiplexing layer

Tunneling layer

Network Protocol

UDP

RTP

payload

UDP

payload

MPLS

IP IP

No compr. / ROHC / IPHC / ECRTP

PPPMux / Other

GRE / L2TP

IP

Compression layer

Multiplexing layer

Tunneling layer

Network Protocol

UDP

RTP

payload

UDP

payload

MPLS

TCM-TF details

Different traffics: UDP, RTP Different header compression algorithms.

The most adequate one can be selected

according to kind of traffic, scenario (loss,

delay), processing capacity, etc.

Different mux algorithms.

Currently: PPPMux, but new

developed ones can be considered

Different tunneling algorithms.

Currently: L2TPv3

Others: GRE, MPLS, others

One IPv4/UDP/RTP VoIP packet with two samples of 10 bytes

η=20/60=33%

Five IPv4/UDP/RTP VoIP packets with two samples of 10 bytes

η=20/60=33%

saving

VoIP

One IPv4 TCMTF Packet multiplexing five two sample packets

η=100/161=62%

40 to 6-8 bytes compression

TCM-TF details

Currently: TCRTP (RFC4170) only considers one option for VoIP (ECRTP,

PPPMux, L2TP), so we would update it with more options on each layer

PPP

PPP Mux

ECRTP

payload

IP

UDP

RTP...

ECRTP

payload

L2TP

IP

Jose Saldana (jsaldana@unizar.es) TCMTF 2014

TCM-TF Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing Traffic Flows

I. Problem statement

II. Scenarios

III. TCM-TF details

IV. TCM-TF savings

V. Related links

TCM-TF savings

VoIP

70%

85%

100%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1234567891011121314151617181920

prob. of reduced headerNumber of calls

TCMTF Bandwidth Saving, RTP/UDP/IPv4 voice G.729a, 2 samples per packet

"Evaluating the Influence of Multiplexing Schemes and Buffer Implementation on Perceived VoIP Conversation Quality,"

Computer Networks (Elsevier). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2012.02.004

TCM-TF savings

UDP First Person Shooter (Counter Strike)

50 ms

40 ms

30 ms

20 ms

10 ms

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

23

45

67

8910

11121314151617181920

multiplexingperiod

B

W

R

number of players

TCMTF Bandwidth Saving, UDP/IPv4 Counter Strike

First Person Shooters: Can a Smarter Network Save Bandwidth without Annoying the Players?," IEEE Communications

Magazine, vol. 49, no.11, pp. 190-198, November 2011

TCM-TF savings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Quake 2 UnrealTournament

Counter Strike1

Quake 3 EnemyTerritory

Counter Strike2

Halo 2 Quake 4

Bandwidth saving IPv4 IPv4 10 ms 5 players

IPv4 10 ms 20 players

IPv4 reached

IPv4 theoretical

TCM-TF savings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Quake 2 UnrealTournament

Counter Strike1

Quake 3 EnemyTerritory

Counter Strike2

Halo 2 Quake 4

Bandwidth saving IPv6 IPv6 10 ms 5 players

IPv6 10 ms 20 players

IPv6 reached

IPv6 theoretical

Jose Saldana (jsaldana@unizar.es) TCMTF 2014

TCM-TF Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing Traffic Flows

I. Problem statement

II. Scenarios

III. TCM-TF details

IV. TCM-TF savings

V. Related links

TCM-TF related links

mailing list: tcmtf@ietf.org. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf

Description draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-tsvwg-

tcmtf/

Recommendations draft (maximum added delays and classification

methods): http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-suznjevic-tsvwg-mtd-tcmtf/

Related publications: Emerging Real-time Services: Optimizing Traffic by Smart Cooperation in the Network," IEEE

Communications Magazine, Vol. 51, n. 11, pp 127-136, Nov. 2013.

First Person Shooters: Can a Smarter Network Save Bandwidth without Annoying the Players?," IEEE

Communications Magazine, vol. 49, no.11, pp. 190-198, November 2011

Widening the Scope of a Standard: Real Time Flows Tunneling, Compressing and Multiplexing," IEEE

ICC 2012, Workshop on Telecommunications: from Research to Standards, June 10-11, 2012, Ottawa,

Canada.

Evaluating the Influence of Multiplexing Schemes and Buffer Implementation on Perceived VoIP

Conversation Quality," Computer Networks (Elsevier), Volume 56, Issue 7, Pages 1893-1919, May 2012.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2012.02.004