Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-quic-multipath
draft-ietf-quic-multipath
QUIC Working Group Y. Liu, Ed.
Internet-Draft Y. Ma
Intended status: Standards Track Alibaba Inc.
Expires: 14 September 2023 Q. De Coninck, Ed.
UCLouvain
O. Bonaventure
UCLouvain and Tessares
C. Huitema
Private Octopus Inc.
M. Kuehlewind, Ed.
Ericsson
13 March 2023
Multipath Extension for QUIC
draft-ietf-quic-multipath-04
Abstract
This document specifies a multipath extension for the QUIC protocol
to enable the simultaneous usage of multiple paths for a single
connection.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this document takes place on the QUIC Working Group
mailing list (quic@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/mirjak/draft-lmbdhk-quic-multipath.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
This Internet-Draft will expire on 14 September 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. High-level overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Handshake Negotiation and Transport Parameter . . . . . . . . 6
4. Path Setup and Removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Path Initiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Path State Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3. Path Close . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3.1. Use PATH_ABANDON Frame to Close a Path . . . . . . . 9
4.3.2. Refusing a New Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3.3. Effect of RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID Frame . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.4. Idle Timeout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.4. Path States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Multipath Operation with Multiple Packet Number Spaces . . . 14
5.1. Sending Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2. Packet Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.3. Key Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.1. Path Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2. Path Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7.1. Number Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7.2. Congestion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.3. Computing Path RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.4. Packet Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.5. Retransmissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.6. Handling different PMTU sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7.7. Keep Alive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7.8. Connection ID Changes and NAT Rebindings . . . . . . . . 23
8. New Frames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
8.1. ACK_MP Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
8.2. PATH_ABANDON Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8.3. PATH_STATUS frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
9. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
12. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
13. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1. Introduction
This document specifies an extension to QUIC version 1
[QUIC-TRANSPORT] to enable the simultaneous usage of multiple paths
for a single connection.
This proposal is based on several basic design points:
* Re-use as much as possible mechanisms of QUIC version 1. In
particular, this proposal uses path validation as specified for
QUIC version 1 and aims to re-use as much as possible of QUIC's
connection migration.
* Use the same packet header formats as QUIC version 1 to avoid the
risk of packets being dropped by middleboxes (which may only
support QUIC version 1)
* Congestion Control must be per-path (following [QUIC-TRANSPORT])
which usually also requires per-path RTT measurements
* PMTU discovery should be performed per-path
* The use of this multipath extension requires the use of non-zero
Connection IDs in both directions.
* A path is determined by the 4-tuple of source and destination IP
address as well as source and destination port. Therefore, there
can be at most one active paths/connection ID per 4-tuple.
* If the 4-tuple changes without the use of a new connection ID
(e.g. due to a NAT rebinding), this is considered as a migration
event.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
The path management specified in Section 9 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]
fulfills multiple goals: it directs a peer to switch sending through
a new preferred path, and it allows the peer to release resources
associated with the old path. Multipath requires several changes to
that mechanism:
* Allow simultaneous transmission of non-probing frames on multiple
paths.
* Continue using an existing path even if non-probing frames have
been received on another path.
* Manage the removal of paths that have been abandoned.
As such, this extension specifies a departure from the specification
of path management in Section 9 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] and therefore
requires negotiation between the two endpoints using a new transport
parameter, as specified in Section 3.
This extension uses multiple packet number spaces. When multipath is
negotiated, each destination connection ID is linked to a separate
packet number space. Using multiple packet number spaces enables
direct use of the loss recovery and congestion control mechanisms
defined in [QUIC-RECOVERY].
This specification requires the sender to use a non-zero connection
ID when opening an additional path. Some deployments of QUIC use
zero-length connection IDs. However, when a node selects to use
zero-length connection IDs, it is not possible to use different
connection IDs for distinguishing packets sent to that node over
different paths.
Each endhost may use several IP addresses to serve the connection.
In particular, the multipath extension supports the following
scenarios.
* The client uses multiple IP addresses and the server listens on
only one.
* The client uses only one IP address and the server listens on
several ones.
* The client uses multiple IP addresses and the server listens on
several ones.
This proposal does not cover address discovery and management.
Addresses and the actual decision process to setup or tear down paths
are assumed to be handled by the application that is using the QUIC
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
multipath extension. This is sufficient to address the first
aforementioned scenario. However, this document does not prevent
future extensions from defining mechanisms to address the remaining
scenarios. Further, this proposal only specifies a simple basic
packet scheduling algorithm, in order to provide some basic
implementation guidance. However, more advanced algorithms as well
as potential extensions to enhance signaling of the current path
state are expected as future work.
1.1. Conventions and Definitions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
We assume that the reader is familiar with the terminology used in
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]. When this document uses the term "path", it refers
to the notion of "network path" used in [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
2. High-level overview
The multipath extensions to QUIC proposed in this document enable the
simultaneous utilization of different paths to exchange non-probing
QUIC frames for a single connection. This contrasts with the base
QUIC protocol [QUIC-TRANSPORT] that includes a connection migration
mechanism that selects only one path to exchange such frames.
A multipath QUIC connection starts with a QUIC handshake as a regular
QUIC connection. See further Section 3. The peers use the
enable_multipath transport parameter during the handshake to
negotiate the utilization of the multipath capabilities. The
active_connection_id_limit transport parameter limits the maximum
number of active paths that can be used during a connection. A
multipath QUIC connection is thus an established QUIC connection
where the enable_multipath transport parameter has been successfully
negotiated.
To add a new path to an existing multipath QUIC connection, a client
starts a path validation on the chosen path, as further described in
Section 4. In this version of the document, a QUIC server does not
initiate the creation of a path, but it can validate a new path
created by a client. A new path can only be used once the associated
4-tuple has been validated by ensuring that the peer is able to
receive packets at that address (see Section 8 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]).
The Destination Connection ID is used to associate a packet to a
packet number space that is used on a valid path. Further, the
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
sequence number of Destination Connection ID is used as numerical
identifier in control frames. E.g. an endpoint sends a PATH_ABANDON
frame to request its peer to abandon the path on which the sender
uses the Destination Connection ID with the sequence number contained
in the PATH_ABANDON frame.
In addition to these core features, an application using Multipath
QUIC will typically need additional algorithms to handle the number
of active paths and how they are used to send packets. As these
differ depending on the application's requirements, their
specification is out of scope of this document.
Using multiple packet number spaces requires changes in the way AEAD
is applied for packet protection, as explained in Section 5.2, and
tighter constraints for key updates, as explained in Section 5.3.
3. Handshake Negotiation and Transport Parameter
This extension defines a new transport parameter, used to negotiate
the use of the multipath extension during the connection handshake,
as specified in [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. The new transport parameter is
defined as follows:
* name: enable_multipath (current version uses 0x0f739bbc1b666d04)
* value: 0 (default) for disabled.
The valid options for the value field are listed in Table 1:
+========+================================================+
| Option | Definition |
+========+================================================+
| 0x0 | don't support multipath |
+--------+------------------------------------------------+
| 0x1 | supports multipath as defined in this document |
+--------+------------------------------------------------+
Table 1: Available value for enable_multipath
If for any one of the endpoints, the parameter is absent or set to 0,
the endpoints MUST fallback to [QUIC-TRANSPORT] with single active
path and MUST NOT use any frame or mechanism defined in this
document.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
If the parameter is set to 1, both endpoints MUST use non-zero
connection IDs. If an enable_multipath parameter set to 1 is
received and the carrying packet does not contain a non-zero length
connection ID, the receiver MUST treat this as a connection error of
type TRANSPORT_PARAMETER_ERROR (specified in Section 20.1 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]) and close the connection.
If endpoint receives an unexpected value for the transport parameter
"enable_multipath", it MUST treat this as a connection error of type
TRANSPORT_PARAMETER_ERROR (specified in Section 20.1 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]) and close the connection.
This extension does not change the definition of any transport
parameter defined in Section 18.2. of [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
Inline with the definition in [QUIC-TRANSPORT]
disable_active_migration also disables multipath support, except
"after a client has acted on a preferred_address transport parameter"
(Section 18.2. of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]).
The transport parameter "active_connection_id_limit" [QUIC-TRANSPORT]
limits the number of usable Connection IDs, and also limits the
number of concurrent paths. For the QUIC multipath extension this
limit even applies when no connection ID is exposed in the QUIC
header.
4. Path Setup and Removal
After completing the handshake, endpoints have agreed to enable
multipath feature and can start using multiple paths. This document
does not specify how an endpoint that is reachable via several
addresses announces these addresses to the other endpoint. In
particular, if the server uses the preferred_address transport
parameter, clients SHOULD NOT assume that the initial server address
and the addresses contained in this parameter can be simultaneously
used for multipath. Furthermore, this document does not discuss when
a client decides to initiate a new path. We delegate such discussion
in separate documents.
To open a new path, an endpoint SHALL use different Connection IDs on
different paths. Still, the receiver may observe the same Connection
ID used on different 4-tuples due to, e.g., NAT rebinding. In such
case, the receiver reacts as specified in Section 9.3 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT].
This proposal adds two multipath control frames for path management:
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
* PATH_ABANDON frame for the receiver side to abandon the path (see
Section 8.2)
* PATH_STATUS frame to express a preference in path usage (see
Section 8.3
All the new frames are sent in 1-RTT packets [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
4.1. Path Initiation
Following [QUIC-TRANSPORT], each endpoint uses NEW_CONNECTION_ID
frames to issue usable connections IDs to reach it. Before an
endpoint adds a new path by initiating path validation, it MUST check
whether at least one unused Connection ID is available for each side.
If the transport parameter "active_connection_id_limit" is negotiated
as N, the server provided N Connection IDs, and the client is already
actively using N paths, the limit is reached. If the client wants to
start a new path, it has to retire one of the established paths.
When the multipath option is negotiated, clients that want to use an
additional path MUST first initiate the Address Validation procedure
with PATH_CHALLENGE and PATH_RESPONSE frames described in Section 8.2
of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. After receiving packets from the client on a
new path, if the server decides to use the new path, the server MUST
perform path validation (Section 8.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]) unless it
has previously validated that address.
If validation succeed, the client can send non-probing, 1-RTT packets
on the new paths. In contrast with the specification in Section 9 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT], the server MUST NOT assume that receiving non-
probing packets on a new path indicates an attempt to migrate to that
path. Instead, servers SHOULD consider new paths over which non-
probing packets have been received as available for transmission.
4.2. Path State Management
An endpoint uses PATH_STATUS frames to inform that the peer should
send packets in the preference expressed by these frames. Notice
that the endpoint might not follow the peer’s advertisements, but the
PATH_STATUS frame is still a clear signal of suggestion for the
preference of path usage by the peer.
PATH_STATUS frame describes 2 kinds of path states:
* Mark a path as "available", i.e., allow the peer to use its own
logic to split traffic among available paths.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
* Mark a path as "standby", i.e., suggest that no traffic should be
sent on that path if another path is available.
Endpoints use Destination Connection ID Sequence Number field in
PATH_STATUS frame to identify which path state is going to be
changed. Notice that PATH_STATUS frame can be sent via a different
path. An Endpoint MAY ignore the PATH_STATUS frame if it would make
all the paths unavailable in a single connection.
4.3. Path Close
Each endpoint manages the set of paths that are available for
transmission. At any time in the connection, each endpoint can
decide to abandon one of these paths, following for example changes
in local connectivity or changes in local preferences. After an
endpoint abandons a path, the peer will not receive any more non-
probing packets on that path. Non-probing packets are defined in
Section 9.1 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
An endpoint that wants to close a path SHOULD use explicit request to
terminate the path by sending the PATH_ABANDON frame (see
Section 4.3.1). Note that while abandoning a path will cause
Connection ID retirement, only retiring the associated Connection ID
does not necessarily advertise path abandon (see Section 4.3.3).
However, implicit signals such as idle time or packet losses might be
the only way for an endhost to detect path closure (see
Section 4.3.4).
Note that other explicit closing mechanisms of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] still
apply on the whole connection. In particular, the reception of
either a CONNECTION_CLOSE (Section 10.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]) or a
Stateless Reset (Section 10.3 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]) closes the
connection.
4.3.1. Use PATH_ABANDON Frame to Close a Path
Both endpoints, namely the client and the server, can initiate path
closure, by sending a PATH_ABANDON frame (see Section 8.2) which
requests the peer to stop sending packets with the corresponding
Destination Connection ID.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
The sender and receiver of a PATH_ABANDON frame should not release
its resources immediately, but SHOULD wait for at least three times
the current Probe Timeout (PTO) interval as defined in Section 6.2.
of [QUIC-RECOVERY] after the last sent packet before sending the
RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame for the corresponding CID. This is inline
with the requirement of Section 10.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] to ensure
that paths close cleanly and that delayed or reordered packets are
properly discarded. The effect of receiving a RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID
frame is specified in the next section.
Usually, it is expected that the PATH_ABANDON frame is used by the
client to indicate to the server that path conditions have changed
such that the path is or will be not usable anymore, e.g. in case of
a mobility event. The PATH_ABANDON frame therefore recommends to the
receiver that no packets should be sent on that path anymore. In
addition, the RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame is used indicate to the
receiving peer that the sender will not send any packets associated
to the Connection ID used on that path anymore. The receiver of a
PATH_ABANDON frame MAY also send a PATH_ABANDON frame to indicate its
own unwillingness to receive any packet on this path anymore.
PATH_ABANDON frames can be sent on any path, not only the path that
is intended to be closed. Thus, a path can be abandoned even if
connectivity on that path is already broken.
Retransmittable frames, that have previously been sent on the
abandoned path and are considered lost, will be retransmitted on a
different path.
If a PATH_ABANDON frame is received for the only active path of a
QUIC connection, the receiving peer SHOULD send a CONNECTION_CLOSE
frame and enter the closing state. If the client received a
PATH_ABANDON frame for the last open path, it MAY instead try to open
a new path, if available, and only initiate connection closure if
path validation fails or a CONNECTION_CLOSE frame is received from
the server. Similarly the server MAY wait for a short, limited time
such as one PTO if a path probing packet is received on a new path
before sending the CONNECTION_CLOSE frame.
4.3.2. Refusing a New Path
An endpoint may deny the establishment of a new path initiated by its
peer during the address validation procedure. According to
[QUIC-TRANSPORT], the standard way to deny the establishment of a
path is to not send a PATH_RESPONSE in response to the peer's
PATH_CHALLENGE.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
4.3.3. Effect of RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID Frame
Receiving a RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame causes an endpoint to discard
the resources associated with that Connection ID. Specifically, the
endpoint should not use the sequence number of the retired Connection
ID anymore in any control frames, as the peer will not be able to
associate those frames to a path and will therefore ignore them.
This means an endpoint is also not required to acknowledge any late
packets carrying that Connection ID and, hence, it can remove the
list of received packets used to send acknowledgements after
receiving the RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame.
The peer, that sent RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame, can keep sending data
using the same IP addresses and UDP ports previously associated with
that Connection ID, but MUST use a different connection ID when doing
so. If no new connection ID is available anymore, the endpoint
cannot send on this path. This can happen if, e.g., the Connection
ID issuer requests retirement of a Connection ID using the Retire
Prior To field in the NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame but does provide
sufficient new CIDs.
Note that even if a peer cannot send on a path anymore because it
does not have a valid Connection ID to use, it can still acknowledge
packets received on the path, by sending ACK_MP frames on another
path, if available. But also note that, as there is no valid CID
associated with the path, the other end cannot send multipath control
frames that contain the sequence number of a Connection ID, such as
PATH_ABANDON or PATH_STATUS.
If the peer cannot send on a path and no data is received on the
path, the idle time-out will close the path. If, before the idle
timer expires, a new Connection ID gets issued by its peer, the
endpoint can re-activate the path by sending a packet with a new
Connection ID on that path.
If the sender retires a Connection ID that is still used by in-flight
packets, it may receive ACK_MP frames referencing the retired
Connection ID. If the sender stops tracking sent packets with
retired Connection ID, these would be spuriously marked as lost. To
avoid such performance issue without keeping retired Connection ID
state, an endpoint should first stop sending packets with the to-be-
retired Connection ID, then wait for all in-flight packets to be
either acknowledged or marked as lost, and finally retire the
Connection ID.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
4.3.4. Idle Timeout
[QUIC-TRANSPORT] allows for closing of connections if they stay idle
for too long. The connection idle timeout in multipath QUIC is
defined as "no packet received on any path for the duration of the
idle timeout". When only one path is available, servers MUST follow
the specifications in [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
When more than one path is available, hosts shall monitor the arrival
of non-probing packets and the acknowledgements for the packets sent
over each path. Hosts SHOULD stop sending traffic on a path if for
at least the period of the idle timeout as specified in Section 10.1.
of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] (a) no non-probing packet was received or (b) no
non-probing packet sent over this path was acknowledged, but MAY
ignore that rule if it would disqualify all available paths. To
avoid idle timeout of a path, endpoints can send ack-eliciting
packets such as packets containing PING frames (Section 19.2 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]) on that path to keep it alive. Sending periodic
PING frames also helps prevent middlebox timeout, as discussed in
Section 10.1.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
Server MAY release the resource associated with paths for which no
non-probing packet was received for a sufficiently long path-idle
delay, but SHOULD only release resource for the last available path
if no traffic is received for the duration of the idle timeout, as
specified in Section 10.1 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. This means if all
paths remain idle for the idle timeout, the connection is implicitly
closed.
Server implementations need to select the sub-path idle timeout as a
trade- off between keeping resources, such as connection IDs, in use
for an excessive time or having to promptly reestablish a path after
a spurious estimate of path abandonment by the client.
4.4. Path States
Figure 1 shows the states that an endpoint's path can have.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
o
| PATH_CHALLENGE sent/received on new path
v
+------------+ Path validation abandoned
| Validating |----------------------------------+
+------------+ |
| |
| PATH_RESPONSE received |
| |
v |
+------------+ Path blackhole detected |
| Active |----------------------------------+
+------------+ |
| |
| PATH_ABANDON sent/received |
v |
+------------+ |
| Closing | |
+------------+ |
| |
| Path's draining timeout |
| (at least 3 PTO) |
v |
+------------+ |
| Closed |<---------------------------------+
+------------+
Figure 1: States of a path
In non-final states, hosts have to track the following information.
* Associated 4-tuple: The tuple (source IP, source port, destination
IP, destination port) used by the endhost to send packets over the
path.
* Associated Destination Connection ID: The Connection ID used to
send packets over the path.
In Active state, hosts MUST also track the following information:
* Associated Source Connection ID: The Connection ID used to receive
packets over the path. The endpoint relies on its sequence number
to send path control information and specifically acknowledge
packets belonging to that Connection ID-specific packet number
space.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
A path in the "Validating" state performs path validation as
described in Section 8.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. An endhost should not
send non-probing frames on a path in "Validating" state, as it has no
guarantee that packets will actually reach the peer.
The endhost can use all the paths in the "Active" state, provided
that the congestion control and flow control currently allow sending
of new data on a path. Note that if a path became idle due to a
timeout, endpoints SHOULD send PATH_ABANDON frame before closing the
path.
In the "Closing" state, the endhost SHOULD NOT send packets on this
path anymore, as there is no guarantee that the peer can still map
the packets to the connection. The endhost SHOULD wait for the
acknowledgment of the PATH_ABANDON frame before moving the path to
the "Closed" state to ensure a graceful termination of the path.
When a path reaches the "Closed" state, the endhost releases all the
path's associated resources, including the associated Connection IDs.
Endpoints SHOULD send RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames for releasing the
associated Connection IDs following [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. Considering
endpoints are not expected to send packets on the current path in the
"Closed" state, endpoints can send RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames on
other available paths. Consequently, the endhost is not able to send
nor receive packets on this path anymore.
5. Multipath Operation with Multiple Packet Number Spaces
The QUIC multipath extension uses different packet number spaces for
each path. This also means that the same packet number can occur on
each path and the packet number is not a unique identifier anymore.
This requires changes to the ACK frame as well as packet protection
as described in the following subsections.
When multipath is negotiated, each Destination Connection ID is
linked to a separate packet number space. Each CID-specific packet
number space starts at packet number 0. When following the packet
number encoding algorithm described in Appendix A.2 of
[QUIC-TRANSPORT], the largest packet number (largest_acked) that has
been acknowledged by the peer in this new CID's packet number space
is initially set to "None".
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
5.1. Sending Acknowledgements
The ACK_MP frame, as specified in Section 8.1, is used to acknowledge
1-RTT packets. Compared to the QUIC version 1 ACK frame, the ACK_MP
frame additionally contains the receiver's Destination Connection ID
Sequence Number field to distinguish the Connection ID-specific
packet number space.
Acknowledgements of Initial and Handshake packets MUST be carried
using ACK frames, as specified in [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. The ACK frames,
as defined in [QUIC-TRANSPORT], do not carry the Destination
Connection ID Sequence Number field to identify the packet number
space. If the multipath extension has been successfully negotiated,
ACK frames in 1-RTT packets acknowledge packets sent with the
Connection ID having sequence number 0.
As soon as the negotiation of multipath support is completed,
endpoints SHOULD use ACK_MP frames instead of ACK frames to
acknowledge application data packets, including 0-RTT packets, using
the initial Connection ID with sequence number 0 after the handshake
concluded.
ACK_MP frame (defined in Section 8.1) SHOULD be sent on the path it
received packet with the Connection ID of the packet number space it
acknowledges. However, an ACK_MP frame can be returned via a
different path, based on different strategies of sending ACK_MP
frames.
5.2. Packet Protection
Packet protection for QUIC version 1 is specified in Section 5 of
[QUIC-TLS]. The general principles of packet protection are not
changed for QUIC Multipath. No changes are needed for setting packet
protection keys, initial secrets, header protection, use of 0-RTT
keys, receiving out-of-order protected packets, receiving protected
packets, or retry packet integrity. However, the use of multiple
number spaces for 1-RTT packets requires changes in AEAD usage.
Section 5.3 of [QUIC-TLS] specifies AEAD usage, and in particular the
use of a nonce, N, formed by combining the packet protection IV with
the packet number. When multiple packet number spaces are used, the
packet number alone would not guarantee the uniqueness of the nonce.
In order to guarantee the uniqueness of the nonce, the nonce N is
calculated by combining the packet protection IV with the packet
number and with the Destination Connection ID sequence number.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
Section 19 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] encodes the Connection ID Sequence
Number as a variable-length integer, allowing values up to 2^62-1; in
this specification, a range of less than 2^32-1 values MUST be used
before updating the packet protection key.
To calculate the nonce, a 96 bit path-and-packet-number is composed
of the 32 bit Connection ID Sequence Number in byte order, two zero
bits, and the 62 bits of the reconstructed QUIC packet number in
network byte order. If the IV is larger than 96 bits, the path-and-
packet-number is left-padded with zeros to the size of the IV. The
exclusive OR of the padded packet number and the IV forms the AEAD
nonce.
For example, assuming the IV value is 6b26114b9cba2b63a9e8dd4f, the
Connection ID Sequence Number is 3, and the packet number is aead,
the nonce will be set to 6b2611489cba2b63a9e873e2.
5.3. Key Update
The Key Phase bit update process for QUIC version 1 is specified in
Section 6 of [QUIC-TLS]. The general principles of key update are
not changed in this specification. Following QUIC version 1, the Key
Phase bit is used to indicate which packet protection keys are used
to protect the packet. The Key Phase bit is toggled to signal each
subsequent key update. Because of network delays, packets protected
with the older key might arrive later than the packets protected with
the new key. Therefore, the endpoint needs to retain old packet keys
to allow these delayed packets to be processed and it must
distinguish between the new key and the old key. In QUIC version 1,
this is done using packet numbers so that the rule is made simple:
Use the older key if packet number is lower than any packet number
frame the current key phase.
When using multiple packet number spaces on different paths, some
care is needed when initiating the Key Update process, as different
paths use different packet number spaces but share a single key.
When a key update is initiated on one path, packets sent to another
path needs to know when the transition is complete. Otherwise, it is
possible that the other paths send packets with the old keys, but
skip sending any packets in the current key phase and directly jump
to sending packet in the next key phase. When that happens, as the
endpoint can only retain two sets of packet protection keys with the
1-bit Key Phase bit, the other paths cannot distinguish which key
should be used to decode received packets, which results in a key
rotation synchronization problem.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
To address such a synchronization issue, if key update is initialized
on one path, the sender SHOULD send at least one packet with the new
key on all active paths. Further, an endpoint MUST NOT initiate a
subsequent key update until a packet with the current key has been
acknowledged on each path.
Following Section 5.4 of [QUIC-TLS], the Key Phase bit is protected,
so sending multiple packets with Key Phase bit flipping at the same
time should not cause linkability issue.
6. Examples
6.1. Path Establishment
Figure 2 illustrates an example of new path establishment using
multiple packet number spaces.
Client Server
(Exchanges start on default path)
1-RTT[]: NEW_CONNECTION_ID[C1, Seq=1] -->
<-- 1-RTT[]: NEW_CONNECTION_ID[S1, Seq=1]
<-- 1-RTT[]: NEW_CONNECTION_ID[S2, Seq=2]
...
(starts new path)
1-RTT[0]: DCID=S2, PATH_CHALLENGE[X] -->
Checks AEAD using nonce(CID sequence 2, PN 0)
<-- 1-RTT[0]: DCID=C1, PATH_RESPONSE[X], PATH_CHALLENGE[Y],
ACK_MP[PID=2,PN=0]
Checks AEAD using nonce(CID sequence 1, PN 0)
1-RTT[1]: DCID=S2, PATH_RESPONSE[Y],
ACK_MP[PID=1, PN=0], ... -->
Figure 2: Example of new path establishment
In Figure 2, the endpoints first exchange new available Connection
IDs with the NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame. In this example, the client
provides one Connection ID (C1 with sequence number 1), and server
provides two Connection IDs (S1 with sequence number 1, and S2 with
sequence number 2).
Before the client opens a new path by sending a packet on that path
with a PATH_CHALLENGE frame, it has to check whether there is an
unused Connection IDs available for each side. In this example, the
client chooses the Connection ID S2 as the Destination Connection ID
in the new path.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
If the client has used all the allocated CID, it is supposed to
retire those that are not used anymore, and the server is supposed to
provide replacements, as specified in [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. Usually, it
is desired to provide one more Connection ID as currently in use, to
allow for new paths or migration.
6.2. Path Closure
In this example, the client detects the network environment change
(client's 4G/Wi-Fi is turned off, Wi-Fi signal is fading to a
threshold, or the quality of RTT or loss rate is becoming worse) and
wants to close the initial path.
Figure 3 illustrates an example of path closing. For the first path,
the server's 1-RTT packets use DCID C1, which has a sequence number
of 1; the client's 1-RTT packets use DCID S2, which has a sequence
number of 2. For the second path, the server's 1-RTT packets use
DCID C2, which has a sequence number of 2; the client's 1-RTT packets
use DCID S3, which has a sequence number of 3. Note that the paths
use different packet number spaces. In this case, the client is
going to close the first path. It identifies the path by the
sequence number of the DCID its peer uses for sending packets over
that path, hence using the DCID sequence number 1 (which relates to
C1). Optionally, the server confirms the path closure by sending an
PATH_ABANDON frame by indicating the sequence number of the DCID the
client uses to send over that path, which corresponds to the sequence
number 2 (of S2). Both the client and the server can close the path
after receiving the RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame for that path.
Client Server
(client tells server to abandon a path)
1-RTT[X]: DCID=S2 PATH_ABANDON[dcid_seq_num=1]->
(server tells client to abandon a path)
<-1-RTT[Y]: DCID=C1 PATH_ABANDON[dcid_seq_num=2],
ACK_MP[PID=2, PN=X]
(client retires the corresponding CID)
1-RTT[U]: DCID=S3 RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID[2], ACK_MP[PID=1, PN=Y] ->
(server retires the corresponding CID)
<- 1-RTT[V]: DCID=C2 RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID[1], ACK_MP[PID=3, PN=U]
Figure 3: Example of closing a path.
7. Implementation Considerations
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
7.1. Number Spaces
As stated in Section 1, when multipath is negotiated, each
Destination Connection ID is linked to a separate packet number
space. This a big difference between implementations of QUIC as
specified in [QUIC-TRANSPORT], which only have to manage three number
spaces for Initial, Handshake and Application packets.
Implementation of multipath capable QUIC will need to carefully model
the relations between paths and number spaces, as shown in Figure 4.
+-------------------------+
| CID received from peer: |
| Previous Sender Number |
| Space |-- - - - - - +
+-------------------------+
+-------------------------+ |
| CID received from peer: |
| Sender Number Space | |
+-------------------------+ v
^ +----------------+
| | Path (4 tuple) |
+-------------| - RTT |
+------------------>| - Congestion |
| | state |
v +----------------+
+-------------------------+ ^
| CID provided to peer: | |
| Receiver Number Space |
+-------------------------+ |
+-------------------------+
| CID previously used by |-- - - - - - +
| Peer: old Receiver |
| Number Space |
+-------------------------+
Figure 4: Send and Receive number spaces
The path is defined by the 4-tuple through which packets are received
and sent. Packets sent on the path will include the Destination
Connection ID currently used for that path, selected from the list of
CID provided by the peer. Packets received on the path carry a
Destination CID selected by the peer from the list provided to that
peer.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
The relation between CIDs and paths is not fixed. A node may decide
to rotate the Destination CID it uses, a NAT may decide to change the
4-tuple over which packets from that path will be received.
Implementation will have to manage these evolving relations.
Data associated with the transmission and reception on a given path
can be associated to either the "path state", or to the state of
either the sender or receiver number spaces. For example:
* RTT measurements and congestion state are logically associated
with the 4-tuple. They will remain unchanged if data starts being
received or sent through the same 4-tuple using new CIDs.
* Implementations of loss recovery typically maintain lists of
packets sent and not yet acknowledged. Such information, along
with the value of the next PN to use for sending, is logically
associated with the "Sender Number Space", and with the peer-
provided CID used for sending on the path.
* Sending of acknowledgement requires keeping track of the PN of
received packets and of acknowledgements previously sent. Such
information is logically associated with the "Receiver Number
Space", and with the CID used by the peer for sending on the path.
When the link between paths and CID changes, the information tied to
the now unused CID remains useful for some time. For example, the
list of packet numbers to acknowledge maintained in the old receiver
number space could still be used to send ACK_MP frames for that
number space. Similarly, the list of packets sent but not yet
acknowledged with an old sender number space can be used when
processing incoming ACK_MP frames for that number space. Such data
should not be discarded immediately after a CID change, but only
later, for example when the CID is retired.
7.2. Congestion Control
When the QUIC multipath extension is used, senders manage per-path
congestion status as required in Section 9.4 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
However, in [QUIC-TRANSPORT] only one active path is assumed and as
such the requirement is to reset the congestion control status on
path migration. With the multipath extension, multiple paths can be
used simultaneously, therefore separate congestion control state is
maintained for each path. This means a sender is not allowed to send
more data on a given path than congestion control for that path
indicates.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
When a Multipath QUIC connection uses two or more paths, there is no
guarantee that these paths are fully disjoint. When two (or more
paths) share the same bottleneck, using a standard congestion control
scheme could result in an unfair distribution of the bandwidth with
the multipath connection getting more bandwidth than competing single
paths connections. Multipath TCP uses the LIA congestion control
scheme specified in [RFC6356] to solve this problem. This scheme can
immediately be adapted to Multipath QUIC. Other coupled congestion
control schemes have been proposed for Multipath TCP such as [OLIA].
7.3. Computing Path RTT
Acknowledgement delays are the sum of two one-way delays, the delay
on the packet sending path and the delay on the return path chosen
for the acknowledgements. When different paths have different
characteristics, this can cause acknowledgement delays to vary
widely. Consider for example a multipath transmission using both a
terrestrial path, with a latency of 50ms in each direction, and a
geostationary satellite path, with a latency of 300ms in both
directions. The acknowledgement delay will depend on the combination
of paths used for the packet transmission and the ACK transmission,
as shown in Table 2.
+======================+=============+===========+
| ACK Path \ Data path | Terrestrial | Satellite |
+======================+=============+===========+
| Terrestrial | 100ms | 350ms |
+----------------------+-------------+-----------+
| Satellite | 350ms | 600ms |
+----------------------+-------------+-----------+
Table 2: Example of ACK delays using multiple
paths
Using the default algorithm specified in [QUIC-RECOVERY] would result
in suboptimal performance, computing average RTT and standard
deviation from series of different delay measurements of different
combined paths. At the same time, early tests showed that it is
desirable to send ACKs through the shortest path because a shorter
ACK delay results in a tighter control loop and better performances.
The tests also showed that it is desirable to send copies of the ACKs
on multiple paths, for robustness if a path experiences sudden
losses.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
An early implementation mitigated the delay variation issue by using
time stamps, as specified in [QUIC-Timestamp]. When the timestamps
are present, the implementation can estimate the transmission delay
on each one-way path, and can then use these one way delays for more
efficient implementations of recovery and congestion control
algorithms.
If timestamps are not available, implementations could estimate one
way delays using statistical techniques. For example, in the example
shown in Table 1, implementations can use "same path" measurements to
estimate the one way delay of the terrestrial path to about 50ms in
each direction, and that of the satellite path to about 300ms.
Further measurements can then be used to maintain estimates of one
way delay variations, using logical similar to Kalman filters. But
statistical processing is error-prone, and using time stamps provides
more robust measurements.
7.4. Packet Scheduling
The transmission of QUIC packets on a regular QUIC connection is
regulated by the arrival of data from the application and the
congestion control scheme. QUIC packets that increase the number of
bytes in flight can only be sent when the congestion window allows
it. Multipath QUIC implementations also need to include a packet
scheduler that decides, among the paths whose congestion window is
open, the path over which the next QUIC packet will be sent. Most
frames, including control frames (PATH_CHALLENGE and PATH_RESPONSE
being the notable exceptions), can be sent and received on any active
path. The scheduling is a local decision, based on the preferences
of the application and the implementation.
Note that this implies that an endpoint may send and receive ACK_MP
frames on a path different from the one that carried the acknowledged
packets. A reasonable default consists in sending ACK_MP frames on
the path they acknowledge packets, but the receiver must not assume
its peer will do so.
7.5. Retransmissions
Simultaneous use of multiple paths enables different retransmission
strategies to cope with losses such as: a) retransmitting lost frames
over the same path, b) retransmitting lost frames on a different or
dedicated path, and c) duplicate lost frames on several paths (not
recommended for general purpose use due to the network overhead).
While this document does not preclude a specific strategy, more
detailed specification is out of scope.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
7.6. Handling different PMTU sizes
An implementation should take care to handle different PMTU sizes
across multiple paths. One simple option if the PMTUs are relatively
similar is to apply the minimum PMTU of all paths to each path. The
benefit of such an approach is to simplify retransmission processing
as the content of lost packets initially sent on one path can be sent
on another path without further frame scheduling adaptations.
7.7. Keep Alive
The QUIC specification defines an optional keep alive process, see
Section 5.3 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]. Implementations of the multipath
extension should map this keep alive process to a number of paths.
Some applications may wish to ensure that one path remains active,
while others could prefer to have two or more active paths during the
connection lifetime. Different applications will likely require
different strategies. Once the implementation has decided which
paths to keep alive, it can do so by sending Ping frames on each of
these paths before the idle timeout expires.
7.8. Connection ID Changes and NAT Rebindings
Section 5.1.2 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] indicates that an endpoint can
change the Connection ID it uses for to another available one at any
time during the connection. As such a sole change of the Connection
ID without any change in the address does not indicate a path change
and the endpoint can keep the same congestion control and RTT
measurement state.
While endpoints assign a Connection ID to a specific sending 4-tuple,
networks events such as NAT rebinding may make the packet's receiver
observe a different 4-tuple. Servers observing a 4-tuple change will
performs path validation (see Section 9 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT]). If
path validation process succeeds, the endpoints set the path's
congestion controller and round-trip time estimator according to
Section 9.4 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
Section 9.3 of [QUIC-TRANSPORT] allows an endpoint to skip validation
of a peer address if that address has been seen recently. However,
when the multipath extension is used and an endpoint has multiple
addresses that could lead to switching between different paths, it
should rather maintain multiple open paths instead.
If an endpoint uses a new Connection ID after an idle period and a
NAT rebinding leads to a 4-tuple changes on the same packet, the
receiving endpoint may not be able to associate the packet to an
existing path and will therefore consider this as a new path. This
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
leads to an inconsistent view of open paths at both peers, however,
as the "old" path will not work anymore, it will be silently closed
after the idle timeout expires.
8. New Frames
All the new frames MUST only be sent in 1-RTT packet, and MUST NOT
use other encryption levels.
If an endpoint receives multipath-specific frames from packets of
other encryption levels, it MUST return MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION as a
connection error and close the connection.
All multipath-specific frames relate to a Destination Connection ID
sequence number. If an endpoint receives a Destination Connection ID
sequence number greater than any previously sent to the peer, it MUST
treat this as a connection error of type MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION. If
an endpoint receives a multipath-specific frame with a Destination
Connection ID sequence number that it cannot process anymore (e.g.,
because the Connection ID might have been retired), it MUST silently
ignore the frame.
8.1. ACK_MP Frame
The ACK_MP frame (types TBD-00 and TBD-01; experiments use
0xbaba00..0xbaba01) is an extension of the ACK frame defined by
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]. It is used to acknowledge packets that were sent
on different paths using multiple packet number spaces. If the frame
type is TBD-01, ACK_MP frames also contain the sum of QUIC packets
with associated ECN marks received on the connection up to this
point.
ACK_MP frame is formatted as shown in Figure 5.
ACK_MP Frame {
Type (i) = TBD-00..TBD-01 (experiments use 0xbaba00..0xbaba01),
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number (i),
Largest Acknowledged (i),
ACK Delay (i),
ACK Range Count (i),
First ACK Range (i),
ACK Range (..) ...,
[ECN Counts (..)],
}
Figure 5: ACK_MP Frame Format
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
Compared to the ACK frame specified in [QUIC-TRANSPORT], the
following field is added.
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number: The sequence number of
the Connection ID identifying the packet number space of the 1-RTT
packets which are acknowledged by the ACK_MP frame.
8.2. PATH_ABANDON Frame
The PATH_ABANDON frame informs the peer to abandon a path.
PATH_ABANDON frames are formatted as shown in Figure 6.
PATH_ABANDON Frame {
Type (i) = TBD-02 (experiments use 0xbaba05),
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number (i),
Error Code (i),
Reason Phrase Length (i),
Reason Phrase (..),
}
Figure 6: PATH_ABANDON Frame Format
PATH_ABANDON frames contain the following fields:
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number: The sequence number of
the Destination Connection ID used by the receiver of the frame to
send packets over the path to abandon.
Error Code: A variable-length integer that indicates the reason for
abandoning this path.
Reason Phrase Length: A variable-length integer specifying the
length of the reason phrase in bytes. Because an PATH_ABANDON
frame cannot be split between packets, any limits on packet size
will also limit the space available for a reason phrase.
Reason Phrase: Additional diagnostic information for the closure.
This can be zero length if the sender chooses not to give details
beyond the Error Code value. This SHOULD be a UTF-8 encoded
string [RFC3629], though the frame does not carry information,
such as language tags, that would aid comprehension by any entity
other than the one that created the text.
PATH_ABANDON frames SHOULD be acknowledged. If a packet containing a
PATH_ABANDON frame is considered lost, the peer SHOULD repeat it.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
8.3. PATH_STATUS frame
PATH_STATUS Frame are used by endpoints to inform the peer of the
current status of one path, and the peer should send packets
according to the preference expressed in these frames. PATH_STATUS
frames are formatted as shown in Figure 7.
PATH_STATUS Frame {
Type (i) = TBD-03 (experiments use 0xbaba06),
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number (i),
Path Status sequence number (i),
Path Status (i),
}
Figure 7: PATH_STATUS Frame Format
PATH_STATUS Frames contain the following fields:
Destination Connection ID Sequence Number: The sequence number of
the Destination Connection ID used by the receiver of this frame
to send packets over the path the status update corresponds to.
Path Status sequence number: A variable-length integer specifying
the sequence number assigned for this PATH_STATUS frame. The
sequence number MUST be monotonically increasing generated by the
sender of the PATH_STATUS frame in the same connection. The
receiver of the PATH_STATUS frame needs to use and compare the
sequence numbers separately for each Destination Connection ID
Sequence Number.
Available values of Path Status field are:
* 1: Standby
* 2: Available
Endpoints use PATH_STATUS frame to inform the peer whether it prefer
to use this path or not. If an endpoint receives a PATH_STATUS frame
containing 1-Standby status, it SHOULD stop sending non-probing
packets on the corresponding path, until it receives a new
PATH_STATUS frame containing 2-Available status with a higher
sequence number referring to the same path.
Frames may be received out of order. A peer MUST ignore an incoming
PATH_STATUS frame if it previously received another PATH_STATUS frame
for the same Destination Connection ID Sequence Number with a Path
Status sequence number equal to or higher than the Path Status
sequence number of the incoming frame.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
PATH_STATUS frames SHOULD be acknowledged. If a packet containing a
PATH_STATUS frame is considered lost, the peer should only repeat it
if it was the last status sent for that path -- as indicated by the
sequence number.
9. Error Codes
Multipath QUIC transport error codes are 62-bit unsigned integers
following [QUIC-TRANSPORT].
This section lists the defined multipath QUIC transport error codes
that can be used in a CONNECTION_CLOSE frame with a type of 0x1c.
These errors apply to the entire connection.
MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION (experiments use 0xba01): An endpoint detected
an error with protocol compliance that was not covered by more
specific error codes.
10. IANA Considerations
This document defines a new transport parameter for the negotiation
of enable multiple paths for QUIC, and three new frame types. The
draft defines provisional values for experiments, but we expect IANA
to allocate short values if the draft is approved.
The following entry in Table 3 should be added to the "QUIC Transport
Parameters" registry under the "QUIC Protocol" heading.
+==========================+==================+===============+
| Value | Parameter Name. | Specification |
+==========================+==================+===============+
| TBD (current version | enable_multipath | Section 3 |
| uses 0x0f739bbc1b666d04) | | |
+--------------------------+------------------+---------------+
Table 3: Addition to QUIC Transport Parameters Entries
The following frame types defined in Table 4 should be added to the
"QUIC Frame Types" registry under the "QUIC Protocol" heading.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
+==============================+==============+===============+
| Value | Frame Name | Specification |
+==============================+==============+===============+
| TBD-00 - TBD-01 (experiments | ACK_MP | Section 8.1 |
| use 0xbaba00-0xbaba01) | | |
+------------------------------+--------------+---------------+
| TBD-02 (experiments use | PATH_ABANDON | Section 8.2 |
| 0xbaba05) | | |
+------------------------------+--------------+---------------+
| TBD-03 (experiments use | PATH_STATUS | Section 8.3 |
| 0xbaba06) | | |
+------------------------------+--------------+---------------+
Table 4: Addition to QUIC Frame Types Entries
The following transport error code defined in Table 5 should be added
to the "QUIC Transport Error Codes" registry under the "QUIC
Protocol" heading.
+==============+=======================+===========+===============+
| Value | Code |Description| Specification |
+==============+=======================+===========+===============+
| TBD | MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION |Multipath | Section 9 |
| (experiments | |protocol | |
| use 0xba01) | |violation | |
+--------------+-----------------------+-----------+---------------+
Table 5: Error Code for Multipath QUIC
11. Security Considerations
TBD
12. Contributors
This document is a collaboration of authors that combines work from
three proposals. Further contributors that were also involved one of
the original proposals are:
* Qing An
* Zhenyu Li
13. Acknowledgments
TBD
14. References
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
14.1. Normative References
[QUIC-RECOVERY]
Iyengar, J., Ed. and I. Swett, Ed., "QUIC Loss Detection
and Congestion Control", RFC 9002, DOI 10.17487/RFC9002,
May 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9002>.
[QUIC-TLS] Thomson, M., Ed. and S. Turner, Ed., "Using TLS to Secure
QUIC", RFC 9001, DOI 10.17487/RFC9001, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9001>.
[QUIC-TRANSPORT]
Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based
Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3629>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
14.2. Informative References
[I-D.bonaventure-iccrg-schedulers]
Bonaventure, O., Piraux, M., De Coninck, Q., Baerts, M.,
Paasch, C., and M. Amend, "Multipath schedulers", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-bonaventure-iccrg-
schedulers-02, 25 October 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bonaventure-
iccrg-schedulers-02>.
[OLIA] Khalili, R., Gast, N., Popovic, M., Upadhyay, U., and J.
Le Boudec, "MPTCP is not pareto-optimal: performance
issues and a possible solution", Proceedings of the 8th
international conference on Emerging networking
experiments and technologies, ACM , 2012.
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Multipath QUIC March 2023
[QUIC-Invariants]
Thomson, M., "Version-Independent Properties of QUIC",
RFC 8999, DOI 10.17487/RFC8999, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8999>.
[QUIC-Timestamp]
Huitema, C., "Quic Timestamps For Measuring One-Way
Delays", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-huitema-
quic-ts-08, 28 August 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-huitema-quic-
ts-08>.
[RFC6356] Raiciu, C., Handley, M., and D. Wischik, "Coupled
Congestion Control for Multipath Transport Protocols",
RFC 6356, DOI 10.17487/RFC6356, October 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6356>.
Authors' Addresses
Yanmei Liu (editor)
Alibaba Inc.
Email: miaoji.lym@alibaba-inc.com
Yunfei Ma
Alibaba Inc.
Email: yunfei.ma@alibaba-inc.com
Quentin De Coninck (editor)
UCLouvain
Email: quentin.deconinck@uclouvain.be
Olivier Bonaventure
UCLouvain and Tessares
Email: olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be
Christian Huitema
Private Octopus Inc.
Email: huitema@huitema.net
Mirja Kuehlewind (editor)
Ericsson
Email: mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com
Liu, et al. Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 30]
