Subject: [iccrg] Packet Relevance Drop Marking[TM]

From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 22:04:43 +0100

Probably a controversial question, anyway: knows someone a mechanism where
packets are marked by their data relevance so middleboxes can "optimize" their
drop selection?

It's a trustworthy separated network, lion share of traffic is UDP (~50%
mcast), marking via IPv6 extension header thinkable, middlebox can parse
extension header, ...

Idea is to classify packets based on data relevance into n classes (encode
this in an IPv6 ext header):

- important
- less important
- ...

For example: MPEG keyframe loss is more critical compared to delta frame loss.
Similar, routing management information can also be marked alternating cause
not every routing packet is required. In the case of congestion it is better
to drop every other packet as in an uncontrolled fashion.

Any references or mechanisms known?

Hagen

---

From: Michael Welzl <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 00:05:09 +0100

> On 29. des. 2015, at 22.04, Hagen Paul Pfeifer <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

Depends on whether you’re looking for hardware out there, research papers, I-Ds… I don’t know about the first, but the latter two exist - e.g. Toerless Eckert has been blowing that horn for a while, you’ll find the idea represented in his I-Ds related to "flow metadata” or its follow-ups (AE(C)ON etc).

Cheers,
Michael

---

From: "Eggert, Lars" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 08:29:25 +0000

> packets are marked by their data relevance so middleboxes can "optimize" their

Ericsson did some drafts on using ECN with UDP, with the goal of improving media transmission in wireless (cellular) networks. There is some related IPR that I haven't looked at, but my guess would be that they have schemes where a switch has insight into how important a given packet is for the user's quality of experience, and they mark or drop those that aren't.

Lars

---

From: Matt Mathis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 00:37:58 -0800

Why the [TM]?

Thanks,
--MM--
The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay

Privacy matters!  We know from recent events that people are using our
services to speak in defiance of unjust governments.   We treat privacy and
security as matters of life and death, because for some users, they are.

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Eggert, Lars <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Ericsson did some drafts on using ECN with UDP, with the goal of improving
> media transmission in wireless (cellular) networks. There is some related
> IPR that I haven't looked at, but my guess would be that they have schemes
> where a switch has insight into how important a given packet is for the
> user's quality of experience, and they mark or drop those that aren't.
>
> Lars
>
> _______________________________________________
> iccrg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg
>
>

---

From: "Eggert, Lars" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:09:47 +0000

TM?

On 2015-12-30, at 9:37, Matt Mathis <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Privacy matters!  We know from recent events that people are using our services to speak in defiance of unjust governments.   We treat privacy and security as matters of life and death, because for some users, they are.
> 
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Eggert, Lars <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
> On 2015-12-29, at 22:04, Hagen Paul Pfeifer <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
> >
> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg>
> 
>

---

From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:42:40 +0100

Hey Lars, Kilkki, Michael, Matt,

yes this was the kind of information I was looking for: IDs, research papers
and the like. Thank you!

* Eggert, Lars | 2015-12-30 08:29:25 [+0000]:

>media transmission in wireless (cellular) networks. There is some related IPR
>that I haven't looked at, but my guess would be that they have schemes where
>a switch has insight into how important a given packet is for the user's
>quality of experience, and they mark or drop those that aren't.

Sound similar to my particular use case. Except that the network is 100%
separated and a proprietary multi-hop capable link layer (think about MPLS
header) is available where some more bits can be used to encode such
information.

Hagen

@matt, I added the [TM] because I had no clue how to name such an mechanism.
Packet Relevance Drop Marking at the end fulfills all marketing requirements
to fill a TM form. ;) Ignore it.