Pseudowire Congestion Considerations
draft-ietf-pwe3-congcons-02

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (pals WG)
Last updated 2015-01-25 (latest revision 2014-07-24)
Replaces draft-stein-pwe3-congcons
Replaced by RFC 7893
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream WG state Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead
Document shepherd Andrew Malis
IESG IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-pals-congcons
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pwe3-congcons-02.txt

Abstract

Pseudowires (PWs) have become a common mechanism for tunneling traffic, and may be found in unmanaged scenarios competing for network resources both with other PWs and with non-PW traffic, such as TCP/IP flows. It is thus worthwhile specifying under what conditions such competition is safe, i.e., the PW traffic does not significantly harm other traffic or contribute more than it should to congestion. We conclude that PWs transporting responsive traffic behave as desired without the need for additional mechanisms. For inelastic PWs (such as TDM PWs) we derive a bound under which such PWs consume no more network capacity than a TCP flow. We also propose employing a transport circuit breaker [I-D.fairhurst-tsvwg-circuit-breaker] that shuts down a TDM PW consistently surpassing this bound, as the emulated TDM service itself would be be of insufficient quality.

Authors

Yaakov Stein (yaakov_s@rad.com)
David Black (david.black@emc.com)
Bob Briscoe (bob.briscoe@bt.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)