Framework for evaluating TCP/IP extensions in communication protocols
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.2.4906Keywords:
Networking, Measurements, Middleboxes, Protocol extensions, Testing infrastructureAbstract
Most of the network and transport layer protocols had been designed with consideration for future extensions. As a result, variable-length sections had been devised in order to expand the fixed-size headers and allow the annotation of packets with metadata, known as protocol options. Although numerous enhancements such as MultiPath-TCP are based on these mechanisms, their support in the Internet is still generally considered to be opaque.
In this paper we introduce an extendable packet annotation tool for IP, TCP and UDP options, based on NetfilterQueue. Using this tool in conjunction with our testing framework that can incorporate multiple regions, we conducted a series of experiments to determine the acceptance rate of each type of option and whether new extensions will be readily supported in the Internet. Additionally, we discuss particularities of cloud provider infrastructures in dealing with certain options.
References
Andrea Bittau, Michael Hamburg, Mark Handley, David Mazieres, and Dan Boneh. The case for ubiquitous transport-level encryption. USENIX Association, 2010.
Brent Chun, David Culler, Timothy Roscoe, Andy Bavier, Larry Peterson, Mike Wawrzoniak, and Mic Bowman. Planetlab: an overlay testbed for broad-coverage services. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 33(3):3-12, 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1145/956993.956995
Rongrong DAI, Honghui LI, and Xueliang FU. Elephant flow scheduling in sdn data center network based on differential evolution algorithm. In UPB Scientific Bulletin Series C, 2022.
Walter De Donato, Pietro Marchetta, and Antonio Pescapé. A hands-on look at active probing using the ip prespecified timestamp option. In International Conference on Passive and Active Network Measurement, pages 189-199. Springer, 2012.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28537-0_19
Gregory Detal, Benjamin Hesmans, Olivier Bonaventure, Yves Vanaubel, and Benoit Donnet. Revealing middlebox interference with tracebox. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Internet measurement conference, pages 1-8, 2013.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2504730.2504757
Godred Fairhurst, Tom Jones, and Raffaele Zullo. Checksum compensation options for udp options. Internet-Draft draft-fairhurst-udp-options-cco-00, IETF Secretariat, 2018. https:// www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-fairhurst-udp-options-cco-00.txt.
Bill Fenner. Experimental values in ipv4, ipv6, icmpv4, icmpv6, udp, and tcp headers. Technical report, RFC 4727, November, 2006.
https://doi.org/10.17487/rfc4727
Rodrigo Fonseca, George Porter, R Katz, Scott Shenker, and Ion Stoica. Ip options are not an option. Technical report, Technical report, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley, 2005.
Phillipa Gill, Martin Arlitt, Zongpeng Li, and Anirban Mahanti. The flattening internet topology: Natural evolution, unsightly barnacles or contrived collapse? In International Conference on Passive and Active Network Measurement, pages 1-10. Springer, 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79232-1_1
F. Gont, R. Atkinson, and C. Pignataro. Recommendations on filtering of ipv4 packets containing ipv4 options. BCP 186, RFC Editor, 2014.
https://doi.org/10.17487/rfc7126
Brian J Goodchild, Yi-Ching Chiu, Rob Hansen, Haonan Lua, Matt Calder, Matthew Luckie, Wyatt Lloyd, David Choffnes, and Ethan Katz-Bassett. The record route option is an option! In Proceedings of the 2017 Internet Measurement Conference, pages 311-317, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3131365.3131392
Michio Honda, Yoshifumi Nishida, Costin Raiciu, Adam Greenhalgh, Mark Handley, and Hideyuki Tokuda. Is it still possible to extend tcp? In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference, pages 181-194, 2011.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2068816.2068834
Mirja Kühlewind, Sebastian Neuner, and Brian Trammell. On the state of ecn and tcp options on the internet. In International Conference on Passive and Active Network Measurement, pages 135-144. Springer, 2013.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36516-4_14
Iain R Learmonth, Brian Trammell, Mirja Kuhlewind, and Gorry Fairhurst. Pathspider: A tool for active measurement of path transparency. In Proceedings of the 2016 Applied Networking Research Workshop, pages 62-64, 2016.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2959424.2959441
Pietro Marchetta, Valerio Persico, Giuseppe Aceto, Alessio Botta, and Antonio Pescape. Measuring networks using ip options. IEEE Network, 31(3):30-36, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2017.1600070NM
Jon Postel. Internet protocol. STD 5, RFC Editor, 1981. http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/ rfc791.txt.
Yakov Rekhter, B Moskowitz, Daniel Karrenberg, GJ de Groot, and Eliot Lear. Rfc1918: Address allocation for private internets, 1996.
https://doi.org/10.17487/rfc1918
Joseph Touch. Shared use of experimental tcp options. Technical report, RFC 6994, August, 2013.
https://doi.org/10.17487/rfc6994
Joseph Touch. Transport options for udp. Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-udpoptions- 07, IETF Secretariat, 2019. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-07.txt.
Jason Weil, Victor Kuarsingh, Chris Donley, Christopher Liljenstolpe, and Marla Azinger. IANAReserved IPv4 Prefix for Shared Address Space. RFC 6598, April 2012.
https://doi.org/10.17487/rfc6598
Damon Wischik, Costin Raiciu, Adam Greenhalgh, and Mark Handley. Design, implementation and evaluation of congestion control for multipath tcp. In NSDI, volume 11, pages 8-8, 2011.
Raffaele Zullo, Tom Jones, and Gorry Fairhurst. Overcoming the sorrows of the young udp options. In 2020 Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA), IEEE, 2020.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Mihai Chiroiu, Radu Mantu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
ONLINE OPEN ACCES: Acces to full text of each article and each issue are allowed for free in respect of Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0.
You are free to:
-Share: copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format;
-Adapt: remix, transform, and build upon the material.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
DISCLAIMER: The author(s) of each article appearing in International Journal of Computers Communications & Control is/are solely responsible for the content thereof; the publication of an article shall not constitute or be deemed to constitute any representation by the Editors or Agora University Press that the data presented therein are original, correct or sufficient to support the conclusions reached or that the experiment design or methodology is adequate.
