1. NSIS Operation Over IP Tunnels draft-shen-nsis-tunnel-00.txt Charles Shen, Henning Schulzrinne Sung-Hyuck Lee, Jong Ho Bang IETF#63 – Paris, France August 2005

2. Outline Problem Statement Related Work Design Goals Design Approach Basic Operation Examples

3. Problem Statement Currently looking at QoS signalling Three types of tunnels (RFC 2746) Type 1 - Best effort Type 2 - Supporting aggregate resource management Type 3 - Supporting dynamic individual flow signalling Problems on signalling operation over the tunnel Tunnel Signalling - Normal signalling messages not identified inside a tunnel. Packet Classification – E2e data packet classification fields not examined inside a tunnel.

4. RFC 2746 – RSVP over Tunnel Tunnel Signaling Signaling over the tunnel is carried out by a tunnel session. The e2e session is associated with its tunnel session using a SESSION_ASSOC RSVP object. The same association mechanism supports both type 2 & 3 tunnels. Tunnel Packet Classification QoS data packets are UDP encapsulated, the added UDP source and destination port numbers provide tunnel sessions with the same packet classification granularity as flows outside the tunnel. IPSEC Data Flows are not UDP encapsulated, they use the SPI for classification purpose [RFC 2207]

5. NSIS Differences Two-layer architecture for general purpose signaling. QoS NSLP allows both sender initiated and receiver initiated reservations. QoS NSLP deals only with unicast. New features, such as Session ID, to facilitate operation in specific environments (e.g. mobility).

6. Major Design Goals Support both aggregate managed and individual signaling tunnels. Work with most, if not all, existing IP tunneling schemes. Place the tunnel related functionalities only in one or both of the tunnel end points. If possible, make NSIS tunnel signaling handle specific events (e.g. mobility) in a consistent way as that of NSIS signaling without tunneling.

7. Design Approaches - Signaling over the Tunnel Managed by one or both tunnel end points Open issue – how should the e2e and tunnel session be associated? Option I: Different Session IDs - Current QoS NSLP provides a BOUND_SESSION_ID object. Pro: same association mechanism can be used for aggregate and individual tunnels Option II: Shared Session IDs – Probably an intra- session binding object is needed. Pro: Try to keep Session ID unchanged is why we created it; also facilitates mobility handling.

8. Design Approaches - Tunnel Packet Classification Base Tunnel Encapsulation Header with IPv6 flow label IPv4 or IPv6 DSCP field Tunnel specific fields (e.g. SPI for IPSEC) Extra UDP header Additional interfaces at tunnel end points

9. Basic Operation Example - Sender Initiated Scenario A SenderTentryTnodeTexit RESERVE RESPONSE RESERVE’ RESPONSE’ RESERVE Receiver RESERVE’ RESPONSE’ RESPONSE RESERVE RESPONSE

10. Basic Operation Example - Sender Initiated Scenario B SenderTentryTnodeTexit RESERVE RESPONSE RESERVE ’ RESPONSE’ RESERVE Receiver RESERVE’ RESPONSE’ RESPONSE RESERVE RESPONSE

11. Basic Operation Example - Receiver Initiated Scenario A SenderTentryTnodeTexit QUERY RESPONSE QUERY’ QUERY Receiver QUERY’ RESERVE RESPONSE’ RESERVE RESPONSE QUERY RESERVE’

12. Basic Operation Example - Receiver Initiated Scenario B SenderTentryTnodeTexit QUERY RESPONSE QUERY’ RESERVE’ QUERY Receiver QUERY’ RESERVE’ RESERVE RESPONSE’ RESERVE RESPONSE QUERY