Philip Eardley MPTCP WG CoChair t svarea 1 st August IETF87 Berlin 1 Summary Brief introduction to Multipath TCP Status update on MPTCP implementations draft eardley mptcp ID: 595646
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Multipath TCP Update" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Multipath TCP Update
Philip Eardley, MPTCP WG Co-Chairtsvarea1st August, IETF-87, Berlin
1Slide2
Summary
Brief introduction to Multipath TCPStatus update on MPTCP implementationsdraft-eardley-mptcp-implementations-surveySome examples of deployments
and
experiments
MPTCP experts, please feel free to chip in
2Slide3
Multipath TCP – The basic idea
Enable a single TCP connection to use multiple paths simultaneouslyStop hiding multihomingEstablish more than one path for the same connection (multiple addresses)
Use new TCP option for signalling
Paths may be used simultaneously (spread congestion in space)
Paths may be used sequentially (‘handover’)Looks like TCP…
to
application (Support unmodified
applications)to network (Each TCP subflow is sent over a single path and appears like a regular TCP connection along this path)fall back to TCP if necessaryOlivier Bonaventure’s MPTCP tutorial on Sunday (lots of refs)
3Slide4
Feb 19, 2009
Trilogy – Re-architecting the Internet
4
Possible scenarios & benefits
A mobile node with 3G and
WiFi
A form of mobility
A campus with 2 providers
Resilience
Inside a network
Fast load balancing, TE on RTT
Increase utilisation, resource pooling
Inside a data centre
Load balancingMore info later
4Slide5
Status - Initial charter complete
Signalling (RFC6824)Congestion (RFC6356)API (RFC6897)Architecture (RFC6182)Threats (RFC6181)Experimental or InformationalAim of current charter:
Progress RFC6824 to Standards track
5Slide6
Status - Implementations
We have 5 independent implementations!Linux, UCLouvainFreeBSD, SwinburneCommercial OS, Anon *
NetScaler
, Citrix
User-space **RFC6824 is well implemented and understoodInteroperate with Linux ‘reference’
* Not publicly available
** RFC compliant, but no longer maintained
6Slide7
Implementations survey
(1) signallingSignalling works wellADD_ADDR needs more discussionDetails in draft-eardley
-
mptcp
-implementations-survey
7
X YesSlide8
Implementations survey
(2) fallbackFall-back to TCP works wellA few clarifications are neededDetails in draft-
eardley
-
mptcp-implementations-survey
8Slide9
Implementations survey
(3) congestion controlUse of mptcp for ‘active standby’OLIA is proposed improvement to RFC6356, draft-
khalili
-
mptcp-congestion-controlSeveral other multipath CC algorithms in the literature
Details in draft-
eardley
-mptcp-implementations-survey
9Slide10
Implementations survey
(4) APIAPI not really been explored yetDetails in draft-eardley-
mptcp
-implementations-survey
10Slide11
Next steps
Moving RFC6824 to Standards trackADD_ADDR needs more discussionFall-back needs a bit more clarification
‘Better’ security may be needed
Now: during initial handshake exchange keys in clear, then use keyed HMAC – do we try & do something ‘better’
More operational experience of different use cases, scenarios…
“particularly looking for cases where MPTCP
could be detrimental in some way”
Implementation advice (heuristics)MPTCP-aware middlebox (where at least one end host is MPTCP-enabled)Your help would be very welcome!
11Slide12
Use cases
Some examples of how people are using MPTCP today12Slide13
Commercial deployment of MPTCP
First commercial deployment in 2012
Initial target markets :- emergency services
incident command units
, mobile
offices. Deployed
in
multiple EU countriesMPTCP’s benefits are speed and reliabilityImplementation:
Specialised hardware developed, 4 x UMTS radios combined with specialised amplifier.
MPTCP Louvain implementation
Dynamic use of tunnels and proxies used to aggregate trafficMPTCP core functionality works well. Efficiency ~85%Issues includeMiddleboxes Big queues (slow feedback) on mobile networksjustin.collery@multipathnetworks.comSlide14
Mptcp
interop in Berlin on WedChristoph Paasch & Nigel Williams
14Slide15
52Gbit/s with MPTCP
See Christoph’s talk in mptcp wg meeting
15Slide16
16
Note, mobile client has only single NIC
See
Costin’s
slides in
mptcp
wg
meetingSlide17
17
Ask
Costin
!Slide18
Summary
We have 4 independent, maintained implementations of MPTCPRFC6824 is well implemented and understood
Aim to capture implementation
advice (heuristics
) (but just ask)Our main aim is to move RFC6824 to Standards track - we’d like your help!
To agree what needs to be improved
To advise on how to do any improvements
More operational experience of different use cases and deploymentsAlready MPTCP being used in a commercial deploymentMPTCP & middleboxesGetting middleboxes to be more MPTCP-friendly
Proxy scenario where at least one end host is MPTCP-enabled
18