1. SIP r Session Initiation Protocol r Comes from IETF SIP long-term vision r All telephone calls and video conference calls take place over the Internet r People are identified by names or e-mail addresses, rather than by phone numbers. r You can reach the callee, no matter where the callee roams, no matter what IP device the callee is currently using.

2. SIP Services r Setting up a call m Provides mechanisms for caller to let callee know she wants to establish a call m Provides mechanisms so that caller and callee can agree on media type and encoding. m Provides mechanisms to end call. r Determine current IP address of callee. m Maps mnemonic identifier to current IP address r Call management m Add new media streams during call m Change encoding during call m Invite others m Transfer and hold calls

3. Setting up a call to a known IP address Alice’s SIP invite message indicates her port number & IP address. Indicates encoding that Alice prefers to receive (PCM ulaw) Bob’s 200 OK message indicates his port number, IP address & preferred encoding (GSM) SIP messages can be sent over TCP or UDP; here sent over RTP/UDP. Default SIP port number is 5060.

4. Setting up a call (more) r Codec negotiation: m Suppose Bob doesn’t have PCM ulaw encoder. m Bob will instead reply with 606 Not Acceptable Reply and list encoders he can use. m Alice can then send a new INVITE message, advertising an appropriate encoder. r Rejecting the call m Bob can reject with replies “busy,” “gone,” “payment required,” “forbidden”. r Media can be sent over RTP or some other protocol.

5. Example of SIP message INVITE sip:bob@domain.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 167.180.112.24 From: sip:alice@hereway.com To: sip:bob@domain.com Call-ID: a2e3a@pigeon.hereway.com Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 885 c=IN IP4 167.180.112.24 m=audio 38060 RTP/AVP 0 Notes: r HTTP message syntax r sdp = session description protocol r Call-ID is unique for every call. Here we don’t know Bob’s IP address. Intermediate SIP servers will be necessary. Alice sends and receives SIP messages using the SIP default port number 506. Alice specifies in Via: header that SIP client sends and receives SIP messages over UDP

6. Name translation and user locataion r Caller wants to call callee, but only has callee’s name or e-mail address. r Need to get IP address of callee’s current host: m user moves around m DHCP protocol m user has different IP devices (PC, PDA, car device) r Result can be based on: m time of day (work, home) m caller (don’t want boss to call you at home) m status of callee (calls sent to voicemail when callee is already talking to someone) Service provided by SIP servers: r SIP registrar server r SIP proxy server

7. SIP Registrar REGISTER sip:domain.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 193.64.210.89 From: sip:bob@domain.com To: sip:bob@domain.com Expires: 3600 r When Bob starts SIP client, client sends SIP REGISTER message to Bob’s registrar server (similar function needed by Instant Messaging) Register Message:

8. SIP Proxy r Alice send’s invite message to her proxy server m contains address sip:bob@domain.com r Proxy responsible for routing SIP messages to callee m possibly through multiple proxies. r Callee sends response back through the same set of proxies. r Proxy returns SIP response message to Alice m contains Bob’s IP address r Note: proxy is analogous to local DNS server

9. Example Caller jim@umass.edu with places a call to keith@upenn.edu (1) Jim sends INVITE message to umass SIP proxy. (2) Proxy forwards request to upenn registrar server. (3) upenn server returns redirect response, indicating that it should try keith@eurecom.fr (4) umass proxy sends INVITE to eurecom registrar. (5) eurecom regristrar forwards INVITE to 197.87.54.21, which is running keith’s SIP client. (6-8) SIP response sent back (9) media sent directly between clients. Note: also a SIP ack message, which is not shown.

10. Comparison with H.323 r H.323 is another signaling protocol for real-time, interactive r H.323 is a complete, vertically integrated suite of protocols for multimedia conferencing: signaling, registration, admission control, transport and codecs. r SIP is a single component. Works with RTP, but does not mandate it. Can be combined with other protocols and services. r H.323 comes from the ITU (telephony). r SIP comes from IETF: Borrows much of its concepts from HTTP. SIP has a Web flavor, whereas H.323 has a telephony flavor. r SIP uses the KISS principle: Keep it simple stupid.

11. Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort” Future: next generation Internet with QoS guarantees m RSVP: signaling for resource reservations m Differentiated Services: differential guarantees m Integrated Services: firm guarantees r simple model for sharing and congestion studies:

12. Principles for QOS Guarantees r Example: 1MbpsI P phone, FTP share 1.5 Mbps link. m bursts of FTP can congest router, cause audio loss m want to give priority to audio over FTP packet marking needed for router to distinguish between different classes; and new router policy to treat packets accordingly Principle 1

13. Principles for QOS Guarantees (more) r what if applications misbehave (audio sends higher than declared rate) m policing: force source adherence to bandwidth allocations r marking and policing at network edge: m similar to ATM UNI (User Network Interface) provide protection (isolation) for one class from others Principle 2

14. Principles for QOS Guarantees (more) r Allocating fixed (non-sharable) bandwidth to flow: inefficient use of bandwidth if flows doesn’t use its allocation While providing isolation, it is desirable to use resources as efficiently as possible Principle 3

15. Principles for QOS Guarantees (more) r Basic fact of life: can not support traffic demands beyond link capacity Call Admission: flow declares its needs, network may block call (e.g., busy signal) if it cannot meet needs Principle 4

16. Summary of QoS Principles Let’s next look at mechanisms for achieving this ….

17. Scheduling And Policing Mechanisms r scheduling: choose next packet to send on link; allocate link capacity and output queue buffers to each connection (or connections aggregated into classes) r FIFO (first in first out) scheduling: send in order of arrival to queue m discard policy: if packet arrives to full queue: who to discard? Tail drop: drop arriving packet priority: drop/remove on priority basis random: drop/remove randomly

18. Need for a Scheduling Discipline r Why do we need a non-trivial scheduling discipline? r Per-connection delay, bandwidth, and loss are determined by the scheduling discipline m The NE can allocate different mean delays to different connections by its choice of service order m it can allocate different bandwidths to connections by serving at least a certain number of packets from a particular connection in a given time interval m Finally, it can allocate different loss rates to connections by giving them more or fewer buffers

19. FIFO Scheduling r Disadvantage with strict FIFO scheduling is that the scheduler cannot differentiate among connections -- it cannot explicitly allocate some connections lower mean delays than others r A more sophisticated scheduling discipline can achieve this objective (but at a cost) r The conservation law m “the sum of the mean queueing delays received by the set of multiplexed connections, weighted by their fair share of the link’s load, is independent of the scheduling discipline”

20. Requirements r A scheduling discipline must satisfy four requirements: m Ease of implementation -- pick a packet every few microsecs; a scheduler that takes O(1) and not O(N) time m Fairness and Protection (for best-effort connections) -- FIFO does not offer any protection because a misbehaving connection can increase the mean delay of all other connections. Round-robin scheduling? m Performance bounds -- deterministic or statistical; common performance parameters: bandwidth, delay (worst-case, average), delay-jitter, loss m Ease and efficiency of admission control -- to decide given the current set of connections and the descriptor for a new connection, whether it is possible to meet the new connection’s performance bounds without jeopardizing the performance of existing connections

21. Max-Min Fair Share r Fair Resource allocation to best-effort connections? r Fair share allocates a user with a “small” demand what it wants, and evenly distributes unused resources to the “big” users. r Maximize the minimum share of a source whose demand is not fully satisfied. m Resources are allocated in order of increasing demand m no source gets a resource share larger than its demand m sources with unsatisfied demand s get an equal share of resource

22. Schedulable Region

23. Designing a scheduling discipline r Four principal degrees of freedom: m the number of priority levels m whether each level is work-conserving or non-work- conserving m the degree of aggregation of connections within a level m service order within a level r Each feature comes at some cost m for a small LAN switch -- a single priority FCFS scheduler or at most 2-priority scheduler may be sufficient m for a heavily loaded wide-area public switch with possibly noncooperative users, a more sophisticated scheduling discipline may be required.

24. Priority Scheduling transmit highest priority queued packet r multiple classes, with different priorities m class may depend on marking or other header info, e.g. IP source/dest, port numbers, etc..

25. Priority Scheduling r The scheduler serves a packet from priority level k only if there are no packets awaiting service in levels k+1, k+2, …, n r at least 3 levels of priority in an integrated services network? r Starvation? Appropriate admission control and policing to restrict service rates from all but the lowest priority level r Simple implementation

26. Round Robin Scheduling r multiple classes r cyclically scan class queues, serving one from each class (if available) r provides protection against misbehaving sources (also guarantees a minimum bandwidth to every connection)

27. Weighted Fair Queueing r generalized Round Robin (offers differential service to each connection/class) r each class gets weighted amount of service in each cycle

28. Policing Mechanisms Goal: limit traffic to not exceed declared parameters Three common-used criteria: r (Long term) Average Rate: how many pkts can be sent per unit time (in the long run) m crucial question: what is the interval length: 100 packets per sec or 6000 packets per min have same average! r Peak Rate: e.g., 6000 pkts per min. (ppm) avg.; 1500 ppm peak rate r (Max.) Burst Size: max. number of pkts sent consecutively (with no intervening idle)

29. Traffic Regulators r Leaky bucket controllers r Token bucket controllers

30. Policing Mechanisms Token Bucket: limit input to specified Burst Size and Average Rate. r bucket can hold b tokens r tokens generated at rate r token/sec unless bucket full r over interval of length t: number of packets admitted less than or equal to (r t + b).

31. Policing Mechanisms (more) r token bucket, WFQ combine to provide guaranteed upper bound on delay, i.e., QoS guarantee! WFQ token rate, r bucket size, b per-flow rate, R D = b/R max arriving traffic

32. IETF Integrated Services r architecture for providing QOS guarantees in IP networks for individual application sessions r resource reservation: routers maintain state info (a la VC) of allocated resources, QoS req’s r admit/deny new call setup requests: Question: can newly arriving flow be admitted with performance guarantees while not violating QoS guarantees made to already admitted flows?

33. Intserv: QoS guarantee scenario r Resource reservation m call setup, signaling (RSVP) m traffic, QoS declaration m per-element admission control m QoS-sensitive scheduling (e.g., WFQ) request/ reply

34. RSVP

35. Call Admission Arriving session must : r declare its QOS requirement m R-spec: defines the QOS being requested r characterize traffic it will send into network m T-spec: defines traffic characteristics r signaling protocol: needed to carry R-spec and T- spec to routers (where reservation is required) m RSVP

36. Intserv QoS: Service models [rfc2211, rfc 2212] Guaranteed service: r worst case traffic arrival: leaky- bucket-policed source r simple (mathematically provable) bound on delay [Parekh 1992, Cruz 1988] Controlled load service: r "a quality of service closely approximating the QoS that same flow would receive from an unloaded network element." WFQ token rate, r bucket size, b per-flow rate, R D = b/R max arriving traffic

37. Chapter 6 outline r 6.1 Multimedia Networking Applications r 6.2 Streaming stored audio and video m RTSP r 6.3 Real-time, Interactivie Multimedia: Internet Phone Case Study r 6.4 Protocols for Real- Time Interactive Applications m RTP,RTCP m SIP r 6.5 Beyond Best Effort r 6.6 Scheduling and Policing Mechanisms r 6.7 Integrated Services r 6.8 RSVP r 6.9 Differentiated Services

38. IETF Differentiated Services Concerns with Intserv: r Scalability: signaling, maintaining per-flow router state difficult with large number of flows r Flexible Service Models: Intserv has only two classes. Also want “qualitative” service classes m “behaves like a wire” m relative service distinction: Platinum, Gold, Silver Diffserv approach: r simple functions in network core, relatively complex functions at edge routers (or hosts) r Do’t define define service classes, provide functional components to build service classes

39. Diffserv Architecture Edge router: - per-flow traffic management - marks packets as in-profile and out-profile Core router: - per class traffic management - buffering and scheduling based on marking at edge - preference given to in-profile packets - Assured Forwarding scheduling... r b marking

40. Edge-router Packet Marking r class-based marking: packets of different classes marked differently r intra-class marking: conforming portion of flow marked differently than non-conforming one r profile: pre-negotiated rate A, bucket size B r packet marking at edge based on per-flow profile Possible usage of marking: User packets Rate A B

41. Classification and Conditioning r Packet is marked in the Type of Service (TOS) in IPv4, and Traffic Class in IPv6 r 6 bits used for Differentiated Service Code Point (DSCP) and determine PHB that the packet will receive r 2 bits are currently unused

42. Classification and Conditioning may be desirable to limit traffic injection rate of some class: r user declares traffic profile (eg, rate, burst size) r traffic metered, shaped if non-conforming

43. Forwarding (PHB) r PHB result in a different observable (measurable) forwarding performance behavior r PHB does not specify what mechanisms to use to ensure required PHB performance behavior r Examples: m Class A gets x% of outgoing link bandwidth over time intervals of a specified length m Class A packets leave first before packets from class B

44. Forwarding (PHB) PHBs being developed: r Expedited Forwarding: pkt departure rate of a class equals or exceeds specified rate m logical link with a minimum guaranteed rate r Assured Forwarding: 4 classes of traffic m each guaranteed minimum amount of bandwidth m each with three drop preference partitions

45. Multimedia Networking: Summary r multimedia applications and requirements r making the best of today’s best effort service r scheduling and policing mechanisms r next generation Internet: Intserv, RSVP, Diffserv