| rfc9550v2.txt | rfc9550.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| skipping to change at line 182 ¶ | skipping to change at line 182 ¶ | |||
| * To add minimal or no delay to the forwarding process of packets. | * To add minimal or no delay to the forwarding process of packets. | |||
| * To not require synchronization between PREOF nodes. | * To not require synchronization between PREOF nodes. | |||
| Some aspects are explicitly out of scope for a POF: | Some aspects are explicitly out of scope for a POF: | |||
| * To eliminate the delay variation caused by the packet ordering. | * To eliminate the delay variation caused by the packet ordering. | |||
| Dealing with delay variation is a DetNet forwarding sub-layer | Dealing with delay variation is a DetNet forwarding sub-layer | |||
| target, and it can be achieved, for example, by placing a de- | target, and it can be achieved, for example, by placing a de- | |||
| jitter buffer or flow regulator (e.g., shaping) function after the | jitter buffer or flow regulator (e.g., shaping) function after the | |||
| POF functionality. | POF. | |||
| 4. POF Algorithms | 4. POF Algorithms | |||
| 4.1. Prerequisites and Assumptions | 4.1. Prerequisites and Assumptions | |||
| The POF algorithms discussed in this document make some assumptions | The POF algorithms discussed in this document make some assumptions | |||
| and trade-offs regarding the characteristics of the sequence of | and trade-offs regarding the characteristics of the sequence of | |||
| received packets. In particular, the algorithms assume that a PEF is | received packets. In particular, the algorithms assume that a PEF is | |||
| performed on the incoming packets before they are handed to the POF. | performed on the incoming packets before they are handed to the POF. | |||
| Hence, the sequence of incoming packets can be out-of-order or | Hence, the sequence of incoming packets can be out-of-order or | |||
| skipping to change at line 422 ¶ | skipping to change at line 422 ¶ | |||
| * When the first timer expires, the packet with lowest seq_num in | * When the first timer expires, the packet with lowest seq_num in | |||
| the buffer is selected and forwarded, and "POFLastSent" is set | the buffer is selected and forwarded, and "POFLastSent" is set | |||
| with its seq_num. | with its seq_num. | |||
| * The basic or advanced POF rules are applied for the packet(s) in | * The basic or advanced POF rules are applied for the packet(s) in | |||
| the buffer and the subsequently received packets. | the buffer and the subsequently received packets. | |||
| 4.6. Selecting and Using the POF Algorithms | 4.6. Selecting and Using the POF Algorithms | |||
| The selection of the POF algorithm depends on the network scenario | The selection of the POF algorithm depends on the network scenario | |||
| and the remaining delay budget of a flow. Using the POF and | and the remaining delay budget of a flow. Using the POF algorithms | |||
| calculating its parameters require proper design. Knowing the path | and calculating their parameters require proper design. Knowing the | |||
| delay difference is essential for the POF algorithms described here. | path delay difference is essential for the POF algorithms described | |||
| Failure scenarios breaking the design assumptions can impact the | here. Failure scenarios breaking the design assumptions can impact | |||
| result of the POF (e.g., packet received out of the expected worst- | the result of the POF (e.g., packet received out of the expected | |||
| case delay window -- calculated based on the path delay difference -- | worst-case delay window -- calculated based on the path delay | |||
| can result in unwanted out-of-order delivery). | difference -- can result in unwanted out-of-order delivery). | |||
| In DetNet scenarios, there is always an elimination function before | In DetNet scenarios, there is always an elimination function before | |||
| the POF (therefore, duplicates are not considered by the POF). | the POF (therefore, duplicates are not considered by the POF). | |||
| Implementing them together in the same node allows the POF to | Implementing them together in the same node allows the POF to | |||
| consider PEF events/states during the reordering. For example, under | consider PEF events/states during the reordering. For example, under | |||
| normal circumstances, the difference between sequence numbers in | normal circumstances, the difference between sequence numbers in | |||
| consecutive packets is bounded due to the history window of the PEF. | consecutive packets is bounded due to the history window of the PEF. | |||
| However, in some scenarios (e.g., reset of sequence number), the | However, in some scenarios (e.g., reset of sequence number), the | |||
| difference can be much larger than the size of the history window. | difference can be much larger than the size of the history window. | |||
| End of changes. 2 change blocks. | ||||
| 8 lines changed or deleted | 8 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. | ||||