





Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        R. Stewart
Request for Comments: 8260                                 Netflix, Inc.
Category: Standards Track                                      M. Tuexen
ISSN: 2070-1721                         Muenster Univ. of Appl. Sciences
                                                               S. Loreto
                                                                Ericsson
                                                           R. Seggelmann
                                     Metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH
                                                           November 2017


            Stream Schedulers and User Message Interleaving
              for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol

Abstract

   The Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) is a message-oriented
   transport protocol supporting arbitrarily large user messages.  This
   document adds a new chunk to SCTP for carrying payload data.  This
   allows a sender to interleave different user messages that would
   otherwise result in head-of-line blocking at the sender.  The
   interleaving of user messages is required for WebRTC data channels.

   Whenever an SCTP sender is allowed to send user data, it may choose
   from multiple outgoing SCTP streams.  Multiple ways for performing
   this selection, called stream schedulers, are defined in this
   document.  A stream scheduler can choose to either implement, or not
   implement, user message interleaving.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8260.









Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.





































Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.1.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2.  Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   2.  User Message Interleaving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  The I-DATA Chunk Supporting User Message Interleaving . .   7
     2.2.  Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       2.2.1.  Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.2.  Sender-Side Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.3.  Receiver-Side Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.3.  Interaction with Other SCTP Extensions  . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.3.1.  SCTP Partial Reliability Extension  . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.3.2.  SCTP Stream Reconfiguration Extension . . . . . . . .  13
   3.  Stream Schedulers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     3.1.  First-Come, First-Served Scheduler (SCTP_SS_FCFS) . . . .  14
     3.2.  Round-Robin Scheduler (SCTP_SS_RR)  . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     3.3.  Round-Robin Scheduler per Packet (SCTP_SS_RR_PKT) . . . .  14
     3.4.  Priority-Based Scheduler (SCTP_SS_PRIO) . . . . . . . . .  14
     3.5.  Fair Capacity Scheduler (SCTP_SS_FC)  . . . . . . . . . .  15
     3.6.  Weighted Fair Queueing Scheduler (SCTP_SS_WFQ)  . . . . .  15
   4.  Socket API Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     4.1.  Exposure of the Stream Sequence Number (SSN)  . . . . . .  15
     4.2.  SCTP_ASSOC_CHANGE Notification  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     4.3.  Socket Options  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       4.3.1.  Enable or Disable the Support of User Message
               Interleaving (SCTP_INTERLEAVING_SUPPORTED)  . . . . .  16
       4.3.2.  Get or Set the Stream Scheduler
               (SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       4.3.3.  Get or Set the Stream Scheduler Parameter
               (SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER_VALUE) . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     4.4.  Explicit EOR Marking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.1.  I-DATA Chunk  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.2.  I-FORWARD-TSN Chunk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23










Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


1.  Introduction

1.1.  Overview

   When SCTP [RFC4960] was initially designed, it was mainly envisioned
   for the transport of small signaling messages.  Late in the design
   stage, it was decided to add support for fragmentation and reassembly
   of larger messages with the thought that someday signaling messages
   in the style of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] may also
   need to use SCTP, and a message that is a single Maximum Transmission
   Unit (MTU) would be too small.  Unfortunately this design decision,
   though valid at the time, did not account for other applications that
   might send large messages over SCTP.  The sending of such large
   messages over SCTP, as specified in [RFC4960], can result in a form
   of sender-side head-of-line blocking (e.g., when the transmission of
   a message is blocked from transmission because the sender has started
   the transmission of another, possibly large, message).  This head-of-
   line blocking is caused by the use of the Transmission Sequence
   Number (TSN) for three different purposes:

   1.  As an identifier for DATA chunks to provide a reliable transfer.

   2.  As an identifier for the sequence of fragments to allow
       reassembly.

   3.  As a sequence number allowing up to 2**16 - 1 Stream Sequence
       Numbers (SSNs) outstanding.

   The protocol requires all fragments of a user message to have
   consecutive TSNs.  This document allows an SCTP sender to interleave
   different user messages.

   This document also defines several stream schedulers for general SCTP
   associations allowing different relative stream treatments.  The
   stream schedulers may behave differently depending on whether or not
   user message interleaving has been negotiated for the association.

   Figure 1 illustrates the behavior of a round-robin stream scheduler
   using DATA chunks when three streams with the Stream Identifiers
   (SIDs) 0, 1, and 2 are used.  Each queue for SID 0 and SID 2 contains
   a single user message requiring three chunks.  The queue for SID 1
   contains three user messages each requiring a single chunk.  It is
   shown how these user messages are encapsulated in chunks using TSN 0
   to TSN 8.  Please note that the use of such a scheduler implies late







Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   TSN assignment, but it can be used with an implementation that is
   compliant with [RFC4960] and that does not support user message
   interleaving.  Late TSN assignment means that the sender generates
   chunks from user messages and assigns the TSN as late as possible in
   the process of sending the user messages.

   +---+---+---+
   |    0/0    |-+
   +---+---+---+ |
                 |  +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   +---+---+---+ +->|1/2|1/1|2/0|2/0|2/0|1/0|0/0|0/0|0/0|
   |1/2|1/1|1/0|--->|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
   +---+---+---+ +->| 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
                 |  +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   +---+---+---+ |
   |    2/0    |-+
   +---+---+---+
                                  +-------+
     +-------+                    |SID/SSN|
     |SID/SSN|                    |-------|
     +-------+                    |  TSN  |
                                  +-------+

     Figure 1: Round-Robin Scheduler without User Message Interleaving

   This document describes a new chunk carrying payload data called
   I-DATA.  This chunk incorporates the properties of the current SCTP
   DATA chunk, all the flags and fields except the Stream Sequence
   Number (SSN), and also adds two new fields in its chunk header -- the
   Fragment Sequence Number (FSN) and the Message Identifier (MID).  The
   FSN is only used for reassembling all fragments that have the same
   MID and the same ordering property.  The TSN is only used for the
   reliable transfer in combination with Selective Acknowledgment (SACK)
   chunks.

   In addition, the MID is also used for ensuring ordered delivery
   instead of using the stream sequence number (the I-DATA chunk omits
   an SSN).

   Figure 2 illustrates the behavior of an interleaving round-robin
   stream scheduler using I-DATA chunks.










Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


+---+---+---+
|    0/0    |-+
+---+---+---+ |
              |  +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
+---+---+---+ +->|2/0/2|1/2/0|0/0/2|2/0/1|1/1/0|0/0/1|2/0/0|1/0/0|0/0/0|
|1/2|1/1|1/0|--->|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|
+---+---+---+ +->|  8  |  7  |  6  |  5  |  4  |  3  |  2  |  1  |  0  |
              |  +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
+---+---+---+ |
|    2/0    |-+
+---+---+---+
                                     +-----------+
  +-------+                          |SID/MID/FSN|
  |SID/MID|                          |-----------|
  +-------+                          |    TSN    |
                                     +-----------+

      Figure 2: Round-Robin Scheduler with User Message Interleaving

   The support of the I-DATA chunk is negotiated during the association
   setup using the Supported Extensions Parameter, as defined in
   [RFC5061].  If I-DATA support has been negotiated for an association,
   I-DATA chunks are used for all user messages.  DATA chunks are not
   permitted when I-DATA support has been negotiated.  It should be
   noted that an SCTP implementation supporting I-DATA chunks needs to
   allow the coexistence of associations using DATA chunks and
   associations using I-DATA chunks.

   In Section 2, this document specifies the user message interleaving
   by defining the I-DATA chunk, the procedures to use it, and its
   interactions with other SCTP extensions.  Section 3 defines multiple
   stream schedulers, and Section 4 describes an extension to the socket
   API for using the mechanism specified in this document.

1.2.  Conventions

   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.

2.  User Message Interleaving

   The protocol mechanisms described in this document allow the
   interleaving of user messages sent on different streams.  They do not
   support the interleaving of multiple messages (ordered or unordered)
   sent on the same stream.



Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   The interleaving of user messages is required for WebRTC data
   channels, as specified in [DATA-CHAN].

   An SCTP implementation supporting user message interleaving is
   REQUIRED to support the coexistence of associations using DATA chunks
   and associations using I-DATA chunks.  If an SCTP implementation
   supports user message interleaving and the Partial Reliability
   extension described in [RFC3758] or the Stream Reconfiguration
   Extension described in [RFC6525], it is REQUIRED to implement the
   corresponding changes specified in Section 2.3.

2.1.  The I-DATA Chunk Supporting User Message Interleaving

   The following Figure 3 shows the new I-DATA chunk allowing user
   message interleaving.

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 64   |  Res  |I|U|B|E|       Length = Variable       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                              TSN                              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Stream Identifier      |           Reserved            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Message Identifier                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    Payload Protocol Identifier / Fragment Sequence Number     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   \                                                               \
   /                           User Data                           /
   \                                                               \
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Figure 3: I-DATA Chunk Format

   The only differences between the I-DATA chunk in Figure 3 and the
   DATA chunk defined in [RFC4960] and [RFC7053] are the addition of the
   new Message Identifier (MID) and the new Fragment Sequence Number
   (FSN) and the removal of the Stream Sequence Number (SSN).  The
   Payload Protocol Identifier (PPID), which is already defined for DATA
   chunks in [RFC4960], and the new FSN are stored at the same location
   of the packet using the B bit to determine which value is stored at
   the location.  The length of the I-DATA chunk header is 20 bytes,
   which is 4 bytes more than the length of the DATA chunk header
   defined in [RFC4960] and [RFC7053].





Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   The old fields are:

   Res: 4 bits
      These bits are reserved.  They MUST be set to 0 by the sender and
      MUST be ignored by the receiver.

   I bit: 1 bit
      The (I)mmediate Bit, if set, indicates that the receiver SHOULD
      NOT delay the sending of the corresponding SACK chunk.  Same as
      the I bit for DATA chunks, as specified in [RFC7053].

   U bit: 1 bit
      The (U)nordered bit, if set, indicates the user message is
      unordered.  Same as the U bit for DATA chunks, as specified in
      [RFC4960].

   B bit: 1 bit
      The (B)eginning fragment bit, if set, indicates the first fragment
      of a user message.  Same as the B bit for DATA chunks, as
      specified in [RFC4960].

   E bit: 1 bit
      The (E)nding fragment bit, if set, indicates the last fragment of
      a user message.  Same as the E bit for DATA chunks, as specified
      in [RFC4960].

   Length: 16 bits (unsigned integer)
      This field indicates the length in bytes of the DATA chunk from
      the beginning of the Type field to the end of the User Data field,
      excluding any padding.  Similar to the Length for DATA chunks, as
      specified in [RFC4960].

   TSN: 32 bits (unsigned integer)
      This value represents the TSN for this I-DATA chunk.  Same as the
      TSN for DATA chunks, as specified in [RFC4960].

   Stream Identifier: 16 bits (unsigned integer)
      Identifies the stream to which the user data belongs.  Same as the
      Stream Identifier for DATA chunks, as specified in [RFC4960].

   The new fields are:

   Reserved: 16 bits (unsigned integer)
      This field is reserved.  It MUST be set to 0 by the sender and
      MUST be ignored by the receiver.






Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   Message Identifier (MID): 32 bits (unsigned integer)
      The MID is the same for all fragments of a user message; it is
      used to determine which fragments (enumerated by the FSN) belong
      to the same user message.  For ordered user messages, the MID is
      also used by the SCTP receiver to deliver the user messages in the
      correct order to the upper layer (similar to the SSN of the DATA
      chunk defined in [RFC4960]).  The sender uses two counters for
      each outgoing stream: one for ordered messages and one for
      unordered messages.  All of these counters are independent and
      initially 0.  They are incremented by 1 for each user message.
      Please note that the serial number arithmetic defined in [RFC1982]
      using SERIAL_BITS = 32 applies.  Therefore, the sender MUST NOT
      have more than 2**31 - 1 ordered messages for each outgoing stream
      in flight and MUST NOT have more than 2**31 - 1 unordered messages
      for each outgoing stream in flight.  A message is considered in
      flight if at least one of its I-DATA chunks is not acknowledged in
      a way that cannot be reneged (i.e., not acknowledged by the
      cumulative TSN Ack).  Please note that the MID is in "network byte
      order", a.k.a.  Big Endian.

   Payload Protocol Identifier (PPID) / Fragment Sequence Number (FSN):
      32 bits (unsigned integer)
      If the B bit is set, this field contains the PPID of the user
      message.  Note that in this case, this field is not touched by an
      SCTP implementation; therefore, its byte order is not necessarily
      in network byte order.  The upper layer is responsible for any
      byte order conversions to this field, similar to the PPID of DATA
      chunks.  In this case, the FSN is implicitly considered to be 0.
      If the B bit is not set, this field contains the FSN.  The FSN is
      used to enumerate all fragments of a single user message, starting
      from 0 and incremented by 1.  The last fragment of a message MUST
      have the E bit set.  Note that the FSN MAY wrap completely
      multiple times, thus allowing arbitrarily large user messages.
      For the FSN, the serial number arithmetic defined in [RFC1982]
      applies with SERIAL_BITS = 32.  Therefore, a sender MUST NOT have
      more than 2**31 - 1 fragments of a single user message in flight.
      A fragment is considered in flight if it is not acknowledged in a
      way that cannot be reneged.  Please note that the FSN is in
      "network byte order", a.k.a.  Big Endian.

2.2.  Procedures

   This subsection describes how the support of the I-DATA chunk is
   negotiated and how the I-DATA chunk is used by the sender and
   receiver.

   The handling of the I bit for the I-DATA chunk corresponds to the
   handling of the I bit for the DATA chunk described in [RFC7053].



Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


2.2.1.  Negotiation

   An SCTP endpoint indicates user message interleaving support by
   listing the I-DATA chunk within the Supported Extensions Parameter,
   as defined in [RFC5061].  User message interleaving has been
   negotiated for an association if both endpoints have indicated I-DATA
   support.

   If user message interleaving support has been negotiated for an
   association, I-DATA chunks MUST be used for all user messages and
   DATA chunks MUST NOT be used.  If user message interleaving support
   has not been negotiated for an association, DATA chunks MUST be used
   for all user messages and I-DATA chunks MUST NOT be used.

   An endpoint implementing the socket API specified in [RFC6458] MUST
   NOT indicate user message interleaving support unless the user has
   requested its use (e.g., via the socket API; see Section 4.3).  This
   constraint is made since the usage of this chunk requires that the
   application is capable of handling interleaved messages upon
   reception within an association.  This is not the default choice
   within the socket API (see the SCTP_FRAGMENT_INTERLEAVE socket option
   in Section 8.1.20 of [RFC6458]); thus, the user MUST indicate to the
   SCTP implementation its support for receiving completely interleaved
   messages.

   Note that stacks that do not implement [RFC6458] may use other
   methods to indicate interleaved message support and thus indicate the
   support of user message interleaving.  The crucial point is that the
   SCTP stack MUST know that the application can handle interleaved
   messages before indicating the I-DATA support.

2.2.2.  Sender-Side Considerations

   The sender-side usage of the I-DATA chunk is quite simple.  Instead
   of using the TSN for fragmentation purposes, the sender uses the new
   FSN field to indicate which fragment number is being sent.  The first
   fragment MUST have the B bit set.  The last fragment MUST have the E
   bit set.  All other fragments MUST NOT have the B or E bit set.  All
   other properties of the existing SCTP DATA chunk also apply to the
   I-DATA chunk, i.e., congestion control as well as receiver window
   conditions MUST be observed, as defined in [RFC4960].

   Note that the usage of this chunk implies the late assignment of the
   actual TSN to any chunk being sent.  Each I-DATA chunk uses a single
   TSN.  This way messages from other streams may be interleaved with
   the fragmented message.  Please note that this is the only form of
   interleaving support.  For example, it is not possible to interleave
   multiple ordered or unordered user messages from the same stream.



Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   The sender MUST NOT process (move user data into I-DATA chunks and
   assign a TSN to it) more than one user message in any given stream at
   any time.  At any time, a sender MAY process multiple user messages,
   each of them on different streams.

   The sender MUST assign TSNs to I-DATA chunks in a way that the
   receiver can make progress.  One way to achieve this is to assign a
   higher TSN to the later fragments of a user message and send out the
   I-DATA chunks such that the TSNs are in sequence.

2.2.3.  Receiver-Side Considerations

   Upon reception of an SCTP packet containing an I-DATA chunk whose
   user message needs to be reassembled, the receiver MUST first use the
   SID to identify the stream, consider the U bit to determine if it is
   part of an ordered or unordered message, find the user message
   identified by the MID, and use the FSN for reassembly of the message
   and not the TSN.  The receiver MUST NOT make any assumption about the
   TSN assignments of the sender.  Note that a non-fragmented message is
   indicated by the fact that both the E and B bits are set.  A message
   (either ordered or unordered) whose E and B bits are not both set may
   be identified as being fragmented.

   If I-DATA support has been negotiated for an association, the
   reception of a DATA chunk is a violation of the above rules and
   therefore the receiver of the DATA chunk MUST abort the association
   by sending an ABORT chunk.  The ABORT chunk MAY include the 'Protocol
   Violation' error cause.  The same applies if I-DATA support has not
   been negotiated for an association and an I-DATA chunk is received.

2.3.  Interaction with Other SCTP Extensions

   The usage of the I-DATA chunk might interfere with other SCTP
   extensions.  Future SCTP extensions MUST describe if and how they
   interfere with the usage of I-DATA chunks.  For the SCTP extensions
   already defined when this document was published, the details are
   given in the following subsections.

2.3.1.  SCTP Partial Reliability Extension

   When the SCTP extension defined in [RFC3758] is used in combination
   with the user message interleaving extension, the new I-FORWARD-TSN
   chunk MUST be used instead of the FORWARD-TSN chunk.  The difference
   between the FORWARD-TSN and the I-FORWARD-TSN chunk is that the
   16-bit Stream Sequence Number (SSN) has been replaced by the 32-bit
   Message Identifier (MID), and the largest skipped MID can also be





Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   provided for unordered messages.  Therefore, the principle applied to
   ordered messages when using FORWARD-TSN chunks is applied to ordered
   and unordered messages when using I-FORWARD-TSN chunks.

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 194  | Flags = 0x00  |      Length = Variable        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       New Cumulative TSN                      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |       Stream Identifier       |          Reserved           |U|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Message Identifier                      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   \                                                               \
   /                                                               /
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |       Stream Identifier       |          Reserved           |U|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Message Identifier                      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                   Figure 4: I-FORWARD-TSN Chunk Format

   The old fields are:

   Flags: 8 bits (unsigned integer)
      These bits are reserved.  They MUST be set to 0 by the sender and
      MUST be ignored by the receiver.  Same as the Flags for FORWARD
      TSN chunks, as specified in [RFC3758].

   Length: 16 bits (unsigned integer)
      This field holds the length of the chunk.  Similar to the Length
      for FORWARD TSN chunks, as specified in [RFC3758].

   New Cumulative TSN: 32 bits (unsigned integer)
      This indicates the New Cumulative TSN to the data receiver.  Same
      as the New Cumulative TSN for FORWARD TSN chunks, as specified in
      [RFC3758].

   The new fields are:

   Stream Identifier (SID): 16 bits (unsigned integer)
      This field holds the stream number this entry refers to.






Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   Reserved: 15 bits
      This field is reserved.  It MUST be set to 0 by the sender and
      MUST be ignored by the receiver.

   U bit: 1 bit
      The U bit specifies if the Message Identifier of this entry refers
      to unordered messages (U bit is set) or ordered messages (U bit is
      not set).

   Message Identifier (MID): 32 bits (unsigned integer)
      This field holds the largest Message Identifier for ordered or
      unordered messages indicated by the U bit that was skipped for the
      stream specified by the Stream Identifier.  For ordered messages,
      this is similar to the FORWARD-TSN chunk, just replacing the
      16-bit SSN by the 32-bit MID.

   Support for the I-FORWARD-TSN chunk is negotiated during the SCTP
   association setup via the Supported Extensions Parameter, as defined
   in [RFC5061].  The partial reliability extension is negotiated and
   can be used in combination with user message interleaving only if
   both endpoints indicated their support of user message interleaving
   and the I-FORWARD-TSN chunk.

   The FORWARD-TSN chunk MUST be used in combination with the DATA chunk
   and MUST NOT be used in combination with the I-DATA chunk.  The
   I-FORWARD-TSN chunk MUST be used in combination with the I-DATA chunk
   and MUST NOT be used in combination with the DATA chunk.

   If I-FORWARD-TSN support has been negotiated for an association, the
   reception of a FORWARD-TSN chunk is a violation of the above rules
   and therefore the receiver of the FORWARD-TSN chunk MUST abort the
   association by sending an ABORT chunk.  The ABORT chunk MAY include
   the 'Protocol Violation' error cause.  The same applies if
   I-FORWARD-TSN support has not been negotiated for an association and
   a FORWARD-TSN chunk is received.

2.3.2.  SCTP Stream Reconfiguration Extension

   When an association resets the SSN using the SCTP extension defined
   in [RFC6525], the two counters (one for the ordered messages, one for
   the unordered messages) used for the MIDs MUST be reset to 0.

   Since most schedulers, especially all schedulers supporting user
   message interleaving, require late TSN assignment, it should be noted
   that the implementation of [RFC6525] needs to handle this.






Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


3.  Stream Schedulers

   This section defines several stream schedulers.  The stream
   schedulers may behave differently depending on whether or not user
   message interleaving has been negotiated for the association.  An
   implementation MAY implement any subset of them.  If the
   implementation is used for WebRTC data channels, as specified in
   [DATA-CHAN], it MUST implement the Weighted Fair Queueing Scheduler
   defined in Section 3.6.

   The selection of the stream scheduler is done at the sender side.
   There is no mechanism provided for signaling the stream scheduler
   being used to the receiver side or even for letting the receiver side
   influence the selection of the stream scheduler used at the sender
   side.

3.1.  First-Come, First-Served Scheduler (SCTP_SS_FCFS)

   The simple first-come, first-served scheduler of user messages is
   used.  It just passes through the messages in the order in which they
   have been delivered by the application.  No modification of the order
   is done at all.  The usage of user message interleaving does not
   affect the sending of the chunks, except that I-DATA chunks are used
   instead of DATA chunks.

3.2.  Round-Robin Scheduler (SCTP_SS_RR)

   When not interleaving user messages, this scheduler provides a fair
   scheduling based on the number of user messages by cycling around
   non-empty stream queues.  When interleaving user messages, this
   scheduler provides a fair scheduling based on the number of I-DATA
   chunks by cycling around non-empty stream queues.

3.3.  Round-Robin Scheduler per Packet (SCTP_SS_RR_PKT)

   This is a round-robin scheduler, which only switches streams when
   starting to fill a new packet.  It bundles only DATA or I-DATA chunks
   referring to the same stream in a packet.  This scheduler minimizes
   head-of-line blocking when a packet is lost because only a single
   stream is affected.

3.4.  Priority-Based Scheduler (SCTP_SS_PRIO)

   Scheduling of user messages with strict priorities is used.  The
   priority is configurable per outgoing SCTP stream.  Streams having a
   higher priority will be scheduled first and when multiple streams
   have the same priority, the scheduling between them is implementation




Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   dependent.  When the scheduler interleaves user messages, the sending
   of large, lower-priority user messages will not delay the sending of
   higher-priority user messages.

3.5.  Fair Capacity Scheduler (SCTP_SS_FC)

   A fair capacity distribution between the streams is used.  This
   scheduler considers the lengths of the messages of each stream and
   schedules them in a specific way to maintain an equal capacity for
   all streams.  The details are implementation dependent.  interleaving
   user messages allows for a better realization of the fair capacity
   usage.

3.6.  Weighted Fair Queueing Scheduler (SCTP_SS_WFQ)

   A Weighted Fair Queueing scheduler between the streams is used.  The
   weight is configurable per outgoing SCTP stream.  This scheduler
   considers the lengths of the messages of each stream and schedules
   them in a specific way to use the capacity according to the given
   weights.  If the weight of stream S1 is n times the weight of stream
   S2, the scheduler should assign to stream S1 n times the capacity it
   assigns to stream S2.  The details are implementation dependent.
   Interleaving user messages allows for a better realization of the
   capacity usage according to the given weights.

   This scheduler, in combination with user message interleaving, is
   used for WebRTC data channels, as specified in [DATA-CHAN].

4.  Socket API Considerations

   This section describes how the socket API defined in [RFC6458] is
   extended to allow applications to use the extension described in this
   document.

   Please note that this section is informational only.

4.1.  Exposure of the Stream Sequence Number (SSN)

   The socket API defined in [RFC6458] defines several structures in
   which the SSN of a received user message is exposed to the
   application.  The list of these structures includes:

   struct sctp_sndrcvinfo
      Specified in Section 5.3.2 of [RFC6458] and marked as deprecated.

   struct sctp_extrcvinfo
      Specified in Section 5.3.3 of [RFC6458] and marked as deprecated.




Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 15]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   struct sctp_rcvinfo
      Specified in Section 5.3.5 of [RFC6458].

   If user message interleaving is used, the lower-order 16 bits of the
   MID are used as the SSN when filling out these structures.

4.2.  SCTP_ASSOC_CHANGE Notification

   When an SCTP_ASSOC_CHANGE notification (specified in Section 6.1.1 of
   [RFC6458]) is delivered indicating a sac_state of SCTP_COMM_UP or
   SCTP_RESTART for an SCTP association where both peers support the
   I-DATA chunk, SCTP_ASSOC_SUPPORTS_INTERLEAVING should be listed in
   the sac_info field.

4.3.  Socket Options

   +-----------------------------+-------------------------+-----+-----+
   | Option Name                 | Data Type               | Get | Set |
   +-----------------------------+-------------------------+-----+-----+
   | SCTP_INTERLEAVING_SUPPORTED | struct sctp_assoc_value |  X  |  X  |
   | SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER       | struct sctp_assoc_value |  X  |  X  |
   | SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER_VALUE | struct                  |  X  |  X  |
   |                             | sctp_stream_value       |     |     |
   +-----------------------------+-------------------------+-----+-----+

4.3.1.  Enable or Disable the Support of User Message Interleaving
        (SCTP_INTERLEAVING_SUPPORTED)

   This socket option allows the enabling or disabling of the
   negotiation of user message interleaving support for future
   associations.  For existing associations, it allows for querying
   whether or not user message interleaving support was negotiated on a
   particular association.

   This socket option uses IPPROTO_SCTP as its level and
   SCTP_INTERLEAVING_SUPPORTED as its name.  It can be used with
   getsockopt() and setsockopt().  The socket option value uses the
   following structure defined in [RFC6458]:

   struct sctp_assoc_value {
     sctp_assoc_t assoc_id;
     uint32_t assoc_value;
   };








Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 16]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   assoc_id:  This parameter is ignored for one-to-one style sockets.
      For one-to-many style sockets, this parameter indicates upon which
      association the user is performing an action.  The special
      sctp_assoc_t SCTP_FUTURE_ASSOC can also be used; it is an error to
      use SCTP_{CURRENT|ALL}_ASSOC in assoc_id.

   assoc_value:  A non-zero value encodes the enabling of user message
      interleaving, whereas a value of zero encodes the disabling of
      user message interleaving.

   sctp_opt_info() needs to be extended to support
   SCTP_INTERLEAVING_SUPPORTED.

   An application using user message interleaving should also set the
   fragment interleave level to 2 by using the SCTP_FRAGMENT_INTERLEAVE
   socket option specified in Section 8.1.20 of [RFC6458].  This allows
   the interleaving of user messages from different streams.  Please
   note that it does not allow the interleaving of user messages
   (ordered or unordered) on the same stream.  Failure to set this
   option can possibly lead to application deadlock.  Some
   implementations might therefore put some restrictions on setting
   combinations of these values.  Setting the interleaving level to at
   least 2 before enabling the negotiation of user message interleaving
   should work on all platforms.  Since the default fragment interleave
   level is not 2, user message interleaving is disabled per default.

4.3.2.  Get or Set the Stream Scheduler (SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER)

   A stream scheduler can be selected with the SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER
   option for setsockopt().  The struct sctp_assoc_value is used to
   specify the association for which the scheduler should be changed and
   the value of the desired algorithm.

   The definition of struct sctp_assoc_value is the same as in
   [RFC6458]:

   struct sctp_assoc_value {
     sctp_assoc_t assoc_id;
     uint32_t assoc_value;
   };

   assoc_id:  Holds the identifier of the association for which the
      scheduler should be changed.  The special
      SCTP_{FUTURE|CURRENT|ALL}_ASSOC can also be used.  This parameter
      is ignored for one-to-one style sockets.






Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 17]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   assoc_value:  This specifies which scheduler is used.  The following
      constants can be used:

      SCTP_SS_DEFAULT:  The default scheduler used by the SCTP
         implementation.  Typical values are SCTP_SS_FCFS or SCTP_SS_RR.

      SCTP_SS_FCFS:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.1.

      SCTP_SS_RR:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.2.

      SCTP_SS_RR_PKT:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.3.

      SCTP_SS_PRIO:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.4.  The
         priority can be assigned with the sctp_stream_value struct.
         The higher the assigned value, the lower the priority.  That
         is, the default value 0 is the highest priority, and therefore
         the default scheduling will be used if no priorities have been
         assigned.

      SCTP_SS_FB:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.5.

      SCTP_SS_WFQ:  Use the scheduler specified in Section 3.6.  The
         weight can be assigned with the sctp_stream_value struct.

   sctp_opt_info() needs to be extended to support
   SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER.

4.3.3.  Get or Set the Stream Scheduler Parameter
        (SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER_VALUE)

   Some schedulers require additional information to be set for
   individual streams as shown in the following table:

                   +-----------------+-----------------+
                   | Name            | Per-Stream Info |
                   +-----------------+-----------------+
                   | SCTP_SS_DEFAULT |       n/a       |
                   | SCTP_SS_FCFS    |        no       |
                   | SCTP_SS_RR      |        no       |
                   | SCTP_SS_RR_PKT  |        no       |
                   | SCTP_SS_PRIO    |       yes       |
                   | SCTP_SS_FB      |        no       |
                   | SCTP_SS_WFQ     |       yes       |
                   +-----------------+-----------------+







Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 18]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   This is achieved with the SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER_VALUE option and the
   corresponding struct sctp_stream_value.  The definition of struct
   sctp_stream_value is as follows:

   struct sctp_stream_value {
     sctp_assoc_t assoc_id;
     uint16_t stream_id;
     uint16_t stream_value;
   };

   assoc_id:  Holds the identifier of the association for which the
      scheduler should be changed.  The special
      SCTP_{FUTURE|CURRENT|ALL}_ASSOC can also be used.  This parameter
      is ignored for one-to-one style sockets.

   stream_id:  Holds the identifier of the stream for which additional
      information has to be provided.

   stream_value:  The meaning of this field depends on the scheduler
      specified.  It is ignored when the scheduler does not need
      additional information.

   sctp_opt_info() needs to be extended to support
   SCTP_STREAM_SCHEDULER_VALUE.

4.4.  Explicit EOR Marking

   Using explicit End of Record (EOR) marking for an SCTP association
   supporting user message interleaving allows the user to interleave
   the sending of user messages on different streams.

5.  IANA Considerations

   Two new chunk types have been assigned by IANA.

5.1.  I-DATA Chunk

   IANA has assigned the chunk type for this chunk from the pool of
   chunks with the upper two bits set to '01'.  This appears in the
   "Chunk Types" registry for SCTP as follows:

   +----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | ID Value | Chunk Type                                 | Reference |
   +----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
   | 64       | Payload Data supporting Interleaving       | RFC 8260  |
   |          | (I-DATA)                                   |           |
   +----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+




Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 19]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


   The registration table (as defined in [RFC6096]) for the chunk flags
   of this chunk type is initially as follows:

            +------------------+-----------------+-----------+
            | Chunk Flag Value | Chunk Flag Name | Reference |
            +------------------+-----------------+-----------+
            | 0x01             | E bit           | RFC 8260  |
            | 0x02             | B bit           | RFC 8260  |
            | 0x04             | U bit           | RFC 8260  |
            | 0x08             | I bit           | RFC 8260  |
            | 0x10             | Unassigned      |           |
            | 0x20             | Unassigned      |           |
            | 0x40             | Unassigned      |           |
            | 0x80             | Unassigned      |           |
            +------------------+-----------------+-----------+

5.2.  I-FORWARD-TSN Chunk

   IANA has assigned the chunk type for this chunk from the pool of
   chunks with the upper two bits set to '11'.  This appears in the
   "Chunk Types" registry for SCTP as follows:

                 +----------+---------------+-----------+
                 | ID Value | Chunk Type    | Reference |
                 +----------+---------------+-----------+
                 | 194      | I-FORWARD-TSN | RFC 8260  |
                 +----------+---------------+-----------+

   The registration table (as defined in [RFC6096]) for the chunk flags
   of this chunk type is initially empty.

6.  Security Considerations

   This document does not add any additional security considerations in
   addition to the ones given in [RFC4960] and [RFC6458].

   It should be noted that the application has to consent that it is
   willing to do the more complex reassembly support required for user
   message interleaving.  When doing so, an application has to provide a
   reassembly buffer for each incoming stream.  It has to protect itself
   against these buffers taking too many resources.  If user message
   interleaving is not used, only a single reassembly buffer needs to be
   provided for each association.  But the application has to protect
   itself for excessive resource usages there too.







Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 20]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC1982]  Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Serial Number Arithmetic", RFC 1982,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC1982, August 1996,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1982>.

   [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/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3758]  Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P.
              Conrad, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)
              Partial Reliability Extension", RFC 3758,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3758, May 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3758>.

   [RFC4960]  Stewart, R., Ed., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol",
              RFC 4960, DOI 10.17487/RFC4960, September 2007,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4960>.

   [RFC5061]  Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., Maruyama, S., and M.
              Kozuka, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)
              Dynamic Address Reconfiguration", RFC 5061,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5061, September 2007,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5061>.

   [RFC6096]  Tuexen, M. and R. Stewart, "Stream Control Transmission
              Protocol (SCTP) Chunk Flags Registration", RFC 6096,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6096, January 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6096>.

   [RFC6525]  Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and P. Lei, "Stream Control
              Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Stream Reconfiguration",
              RFC 6525, DOI 10.17487/RFC6525, February 2012,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6525>.

   [RFC7053]  Tuexen, M., Ruengeler, I., and R. Stewart, "SACK-
              IMMEDIATELY Extension for the Stream Control Transmission
              Protocol", RFC 7053, DOI 10.17487/RFC7053, November 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7053>.

   [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/info/rfc8174>.




Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 21]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


7.2.  Informative References

   [DATA-CHAN]
              Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data
              Channels", Work in Progress,
              draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-13, January 2015.

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.

   [RFC6458]  Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., Poon, K., Lei, P., and V.
              Yasevich, "Sockets API Extensions for the Stream Control
              Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 6458,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6458, December 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6458>.

Acknowledgments

   The authors wish to thank Benoit Claise, Julian Cordes, Spencer
   Dawkins, Gorry Fairhurst, Lennart Grahl, Christer Holmberg, Mirja
   Kuehlewind, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner, Karen E. Egede Nielsen, Maksim
   Proshin, Eric Rescorla, Irene Ruengeler, Felix Weinrank, Michael
   Welzl, Magnus Westerlund, and Lixia Zhang for their invaluable
   comments.

   This work has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020
   research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 644334
   (NEAT).  The views expressed are solely those of the authors.




















Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 22]

RFC 8260         Stream Schedulers and the I-DATA Chunk    November 2017


Authors' Addresses

   Randall R. Stewart
   Netflix, Inc.
   Chapin, SC  29036
   United States of America

   Email: randall@lakerest.net


   Michael Tuexen
   Muenster University of Applied Sciences
   Stegerwaldstrasse 39
   48565 Steinfurt
   Germany

   Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de


   Salvatore Loreto
   Ericsson
   Torshamnsgatan 21
   164 80 Stockholm
   Sweden

   Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com


   Robin Seggelmann
   Metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH
   Leopoldstrasse 146
   80804 Muenchen
   Germany

   Email: rfc@robin-seggelmann.com
















Stewart, et al.              Standards Track                   [Page 23]

