ICN Management Considerations
draft-corujo-icn-mgmt-02
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel Corujo , Kostas Pentikousis , Ivan Vidal, Stefan Lederer , Spiros Spirou | ||
| Last updated | 2013-10-21 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-corujo-icn-mgmt-02
ICNRG D. Corujo
Internet-Draft Instituto de Telecomunicacoes
Intended status: Informational K. Pentikousis
Expires: April 24, 2014 EICT
I. Vidal
UC3M
S. Lederer
Alpen-Adria Universitat Klagenfurt
S. Spirou
Intracom Telecom
October 21, 2013
ICN Management Considerations
draft-corujo-icn-mgmt-02
Abstract
Motivated by the need to find and evaluate better ways for reaching
on-line content in upcoming Future Internet environments, ICN has
been increasingly deployed in an broad range of research and
experimental actions. Some deployments even go as far as subjecting
ICN to new scenarios beyond content-reaching, exposing the
flexibility of ICN core primitives in supporting such mechanisms. In
this sense, besides analyzing and discussing the role of network
management procedures in ICN environments, this document also
analyzes possibilities on how intrinsic core ICN mechanisms can be
reutilized for network management. We consider that the availability
of management mechanisms for ICN will foster their deployment and, as
such, should be tackled still in the design and experimentation
phases. Perhaps ICN can adapt successful mechanisms from the host-
centric paradigm, or new network management schemes can be designed.
Perhaps even both. This document centralizes that discussion,
drawing the attention of the ICNRG community to this underdeveloped
area of research in ICN.
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 http://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
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 24, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 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
(http://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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. ICN Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Face Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1. Towards a Management Framework for NDN . . . . . . . 5
2.1.2. NDN Management Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.2.1. Discovery Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.2.2. Management Data Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.3. Implementation Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2. Video Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.1. Adaptive Delivery of Multimedia Content in ICN . . . 11
2.3. Content Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4. Network Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4.1. NetInf Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 13
3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction
Information-centric networking (ICN) enables new ideas for naming and
addressing, privacy, security, and trust, and should also lead us to
think new ways for deploying, operating and managing networks in the
future. By default, users, programs, information objects and hosts
are in general untrustworthy and mobile in an information-centric
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
network. This means that many of the assumptions in traditional
network management, including all aspects of FCAPS (Fault,
Configuration, Accounting, Performance, and Security) need to be
rethought. However, despite the different instantiations of ICN
architectures, and the plethora of novel research work built on top
of them, little attention has been paid to management aspects so far.
This includes both enabling "traditional" network management
operations (which work well from small networks to large
infrastructure networks), and supporting and optimizing intrinsic
procedures of the ICN fabric.
This document aims to draw the attention of ICNRG to the importance
of network management for real-world deployments. Today, network
management is practically an add-on to host-centric deployments. We
can do better as we move forward in ICN research considering the full
range of deployments from home-office environments to challenged
networks to tier-1 networks. To this end, we draft some first
management considerations that, on the one hand, capitalize on ICN
concepts for defining management procedures and, on the other,
explore the possibilities for defining a common management framework
irrespective of the ICN approach taken. We reckon that the later is
a much more formidable task and we are looking forward to tackling it
together with other members of ICNRG. In this document, different
ICN research aspects tackled by ICNRG members are analyzed in respect
to management possibilities and impact.
We argue that addressing management at an early stage is not only
important for real-world adoption and the successful future
deployment of ICN, but also to deal with scenarios where management
can simplify, enhance or optimize ICN network utilization and
performance. The subject becomes particularly challenging, as
disparate characteristics from different ICN approaches (e.g., in
terms of namespace, granularity, routing, and so on) impact the
definition and design of these management mechanisms. Section 2
below provides an initial assessment, showcasing considerations on
Face Management Section 2.1, Video Adaptation Section 2.2, Content
Management Section 2.3and Network Policies Section 2.4.
We plan to incrementally develop the draft, incorporating
considerations on other ICN aspects as well as different approaches
(e.g., [PURSUIT] and [NetInf]) as well as address other pertinent
aspects as we receive feedback from the research group members.
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
2. ICN Management Considerations
This section addresses management considerations regarding specific
ICN deployments and scenarios, by analyzing the opportunities,
requirements and possibilities for management deployment therein.
This analysis starts with the proposal of a NDN-based face management
framework, followed by considerations from video adaptation, content
management and network policies scenarios.
2.1. Face Management
The Named Data Networking [NDN] ICN architecture provides a new
communication framework built on named data. Like other ICN
counterparts, such as [NetInf], [PURSUIT] and [DONA], NDN
intrinsically supports security, routing/forwarding, reliability,
caching and even mobility, aiming at scalable and more efficient
content-distribution than today's IP-based approaches. Fostered by
an open-source implementation [CCNx], NDN has been at the heart of an
active topic with several research contributions evaluating its
deployment feasibility and performance in a number of scenarios
[ICN-Scenarios].
NDN relies on a hierarchical, human-readable namespace to address
named data objects, where the naming scheme is simultaneously used to
both name information and to route it. It relies on content
requesters sending an Interest packet with a Content Name, where the
prefix can provide information for global and organizational routing,
while the suffix indicates versioning and segmentation details. When
a node receives an Interest packet asking for content which matches
what is already available at the node, it responds with a matching
Data packet carrying back the content.
Each NDN node comes with a set of supporting data structures which
enable the coordination between the transmission of Interest packets
with the reception of the corresponding Data packets. These
structures include:
1. Content Store: maintains an indication of locally available
content, according to name, and is used for Interest packet
matching. If the content is available at the node, the Interest
packet is consumed, and a Data packet with the respective content
is sent towards the request origin.
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
2. Pending Interest Table (PIT): keeps track of Interest packets
seen previously by the node, on their way to locate matching
content. Interest packets in the PIT were not matched to content
available in the node. Basically, PIT maintains a degree of
state regarding Interest packets, mapping them to a corresponding
egress network interface.
3. Forward Information Base (FIB): associates named data to
potential holders of the content. A routing protocol can
populate the FIB (although this is outside the scope of NDN) or
it can be populated through registration in a local NDN store.
NDN introduces the concept of a Strategy Layer, which can control
Interest packet forwarding behavior. It basically determines which
is the best interface (or set of interfaces) to send an Interest
packet. The "strategy" component establishes a pre-configured
algorithm for tackling Interest packet decisions, ranging from
sending it sequentially on each interface until a Data packet is
received, to evaluating which interfaces provide better performance
(i.e., lower average RTT) in retrieving certain content (as discussed
in [NDN]).
It is important to keep in mind that NDN replaces the commonly used
term "interface" with the term "face", since packets can be forwarded
over hardware network interfaces as well as between application
interfaces, further acknowledging the information dissemination
capabilities of ICN. This aspect is considered in [NDN] and [NDN-R],
where programs can be associated to the NDN governing structures
(like the FIB), defining configurations such as "sendToAll" and
"sendToBest" with respect to managing the content reaching process.
Corujo et al. [NDN-MGMT] exploit these concepts enabling management
mechanisms to be deployed, and steer network operations and NDN
operation, as described in the following section.
2.1.1. Towards a Management Framework for NDN
An important aspect supporting network management procedures is the
interaction of network information residing at the network side with
information about the network from the perspective of clients
connected to it. The former includes, for instance, information
stored in the network operator core about user profiles, associated
policies, or data collected by the access network equipment, such as
current and past traffic load levels, active flows, and maintenance
information. Today, such information can be retrieved for management
and operation support through dedicated signaling protocols (e.g.,
[RFC1157], [RFC6733]), or Operation Support Services (OSS) web
services. The client point of view of the network includes
information that, for example, a wireless terminal can provide,
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
indicating wireless link quality, average return-trip times (RTT) or
perceived Quality of Experience (QoE).
Both types of information can be capitalized upon allowing, for
example, the network to coordinate network management procedures,
considering as input information obtained from other network elements
as well as from user nodes. One way to generate management
information in network entities and at client nodes, as well as to
consume and act upon it (i.e., using the management information
exchange as a control channel) is to couple NDN nodes with Management
Agent (MA) entities.
Fig. 1 (redrawn here from [NDN-MGMT] for convenience) illustrates how
a MA can be deployed in both network and client entities, interfacing
with different operational aspects and protocol layers of an NDN
node. By using NDN content reaching and disseminating mechanisms,
management information can be consumed by the MA to steer not only
the behavior of application processes and network interfaces, but
also to interface with NDN supporting structures (i.e. Content Store,
FIB, PIT). Effectively, different kinds of information can be
conveyed to a network node responsible for managing the network
(under different perspectives and processes), and resubmitted back
towards client nodes, affecting the way applications interface with
network interfaces and the NDN fabric.
NDN Fabric
+------------------------------------------+
| Face 0 |
| +--------------+ +---+ | +------+
| |Content Store | ptr/type | <---->|WLAN |
| +------------^-+ +-+----+ +---+ | +------+
| +---------+| | Face 1 |
| +--------------+ +------+ +---+ | +------+
| |Pending <--------+| | | <---->|LTE |
| |Interest Table| +------+ +---+ | +------+
| +--------------+ | | | Face i |
| +------+ +---+ | +------+
| +--------------+ | | | | <---->| MA |
| |Forward | +------+ +---+ | +------+
| |Information <---------+| | Face j |
| |Base | +-+----+ +---+ | +------+
| +--------------+ | <---->|VoIP |
| +---+ | |Video |
+------------------------------------------+ +------+
Figure 1. NDN Management Framework
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
MA can interface with the PIT and FIB structures, acting as a
dynamic, application- and/or network-controlled interface to the
strategy layer. This could also be used to direct how to forward NDN
Interest and Data packets, in a configurable manner. Regarding
network interfaces, the MA can interface with them not only to
control (i.e., initiate wireless access scanning procedures), but
also to collect information (i.e., an informational event regarding
detected access points). Finally, the MA can also interface with
application processes, drawing out information about the perceived
QoS/QoE (e.g., lost packets or delay from a real-time video feed) and
also to execute commands, such as selecting a better video codec when
the network commands the video flow to be accessed from a different
wireless access interface.
Conversely, MA entities residing in network equipment can provide
informational events as well, but related to network-side link layer
characteristics (such as number of attached nodes or load), as well
as accepting commands from the network (i.e., activate maintenance
procedures). Management processes residing in the network core can
leverage information collected from applications, client terminals
and network equipment, to drive optimization procedures. Such
optimization procedures can also tap into other entities, containing
complementary information such as policies and subscription
information, and use it to produce an overall network decision, which
can then be forwarded to multiple client nodes, in a policy enforcing
way.
An important consideration from the NDN architecture, is the
hierarchical namespace, allowing nodes to request and convey
management data, by simply using an appropriate prefix (e.g., ccn://
domain/management/ME).
By leveraging the NDN information-centric dissemination mechanisms to
convey management information and commands as content, these
management extensions inherit the intrinsic capabilities of the NDN
architecture, including security and reliability, which are
fundamental for management procedures.
2.1.2. NDN Management Operations
In order to implement management operations, besides the interfacing
capabilities of the MA entity mentioned in the previous section, a
management framework needs other supporting mechanisms in order to
provide the envisioned management capabilities, while maintaining the
inherent NDN capabilities. Concretely, when nodes connect to the
network, the management entities need to become aware of the
management capabilities of the newly-connected node. In addition, an
asynchronous information exchange capability needs to be provided,
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
allowing not only the request of management information, but also the
ability to push information towards a remote node (i.e., sending a
command or an informational event).
2.1.2.1. Discovery Procedure
The discovery procedure is illustrated in Fig. 2 (redrawn from
[NDN-MGMT]), and borrows for the procedures described in [NDN-VOIP].
The procedure starts with the newly connected User Equipment (UE)
broadcasting an Interest packet (Fig. 2:1) perhaps with a well-known
content name (e.g., ccn://domain/management/mgmt-case/ME) to its
local network.
+-------+ +------------+
|+--+ | | +---+|
||MA| UE| |Network|ME ||
|+--+ | | +---+|
+-|-----+ +------------+
|(1) INTEREST |
|-/domain/management/mgmt-case/ME ------------------>|
| |
|(2) DATA |
|<-/domain/management/mgmtm-case/ME------------------|
|(Signature, ME-publisher-id, key locator |
| DATA:supported security mechanisms) |
| |
|(3) INTEREST |
|-/domain/management/mgmt-case/ME/MA-published-id/ ->|
|(encrypted with ME's PK:security-mechanism, SKey) |
| |
|(4) DATA |
|<-/domain/management/mgmt-case/ME/MA-publisher-id/--|
|(encrypted with ME's PK:security-mechanism, SKey) |
| DATA: Session Key received |
| |
|(5) INTEREST |
|<-/domain/management/mgmt-case/MA-publisher-id/-----|
| /nonce (encrypted) |
| |
|(6) DATA |
|-/domain/management/mgmt-case/MA-publisher-id/----->|
| /nonce (encrypted) |
| DATA: Encrypted nonce received |
Figure 2. Secure Management Session Establishment
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
The "mgmt-case" part of the name can be used to select different
aspects of management capabilities allowed by a Management Entity
(ME) (i.e., a management decision point in the network). The ME then
replies to this Interest with a Data packet (Fig. 2:2), providing its
shorthand identifier (i.e., ME-publisher-key) and a key locator,
indicating how to retrieve its public key (assuming it is authorized
by another key trusted by the UE). In this way, the MA at the UE
recognizes the ME as a valid signer (and provider) of management
content.
A session key, Ks, is generated by the MA, considering an encryption
algorithm from the ones indicated by the ME in the Data packet. The
MA then expresses its desire to receive (and reply to) Interests
matching a specific NDN name associated with the management service
(e.g., ccn://domain/management/mgmt-case/ME/MA-publisher-id), where
MA-publisher-id uniquely and globally identifies the MA, through a
cryptographic digest of its public key. After this, the MA sends an
Interest packet (Fig. 2:3) to retrieve management Data from the ME
containing the short-hand identifier of the MA (MA-publisher-id), the
chosen encryption algorithm and session key (Ks), both encrypted with
the public key of the ME. In this way, the confidentiality of the
content exchanged between the ME and the MA is guaranteed. The ME
responds with a Data packet (Fig. 2:4) signaling the reception of the
session Key.
Before the actual exchange of management data begins, the ME
generates a challenge (i.e., a nonce) which is sent via an Interest
packet (Fig. 2:5) to the MA, indicating through a named data name
that it requests the reception of the response to this challenge,
sent by the MA using a Data packet (Fig. 2:6). This allows the ME,
after verifying the signature of the Data packet, to verify that the
encryption algorithm and the session key are valid for the MA, making
it ready to exchange information for coordinating management
procedures in the network.
2.1.2.2. Management Data Exchange
After the discovery and security establishment procedures have been
finalized, the framework provides the capability for both the MA and
the ME to securely obtain management content from one another.
In order to push unsolicited content, a dual Interest/Data procedure
can maintain compatibility with the Interest and Data exchange/
consumption of the NDN architecture. Fig. 3 (redrawn from Fig.2 of
[NDN-MGMT]) illustrates the procedure which is initiated by the MA.
In this case, the MA intends to push management information to the
ME. It does so via an Interest packet manifesting its interest in
receiving management content with a local sequence number. This
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
sequencing allows the recovery of new content over cached content.
If the ME is interested in retrieving content from the MA, it answers
back with a Data packet, where it indicates that it is willing to
receive management content. Then, the ME sends an Interest packet to
retrieve the management data with the sequence number provided by the
MA, which responds with a Data packet containing the information it
wanted to push into the ME.
+-------+ +------------+
|+--+ | | +---+|
||MA| UE| |Network|ME ||
|+--+ | | +---+|
+-|-----+ +------------+
|(1) INTEREST |
|-/domain/management/faces/MA-publisher-id/seq_num-->|
| |
|(2) DATA |
|<-/domain/management/faces/MA-publisher-id/seq_num--|
|(Signature) |
| DATA:content seq_num accepted |
| |
|(3) INTEREST |
|<-/domain/management/faces/MA-publisher-id/seq_num--|
| |
|(4) DATA |
|-/domain/management/mgmt-case/ME/MA-publisher-id/-->|
|(Signature) |
| DATA: management data (encrypted with Ks) |
| |
Figure 3. Content Management Push
2.1.3. Implementation Experience
As a proof-of-concept, a software prototype of the management
framework, [NDNFlexManager] was developed for [NDN-MGMT], using the
CCNx Java API [CCNx]. At this early stage, it includes the
implementation of an ME and an MA as NDN applications, supporting the
NDN management operations outlined in Fig. 3. Thus, the ME and the
MA can push unsolicited content to each other, related with
management operations.
To validate this basic prototype, [NDN-MGMT] considered a specific
use case supported by the framework, i.e., face management. This
entails configuring and selecting an appropriate face in a UE to
retrieve a given content. Based on the CCNx, an evaluation test-bed
was deployed including an NDN UE (featuring an MA and a set of
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
network interfaces), a content server and a network node (featuring
an ME). These entities are interconnected by a set of NDN routers.
The purpose of the evaluation scenario is to demonstrate feasibility
for the protocol exchanges mentioned earlier. Note that the code has
been tested in a small-scale environment where the ME is topology-
aware and keeps track of conditions of the access networks that are
available to the UE. Thus, the ME can provide the MA with management
information reporting the appropriate face for content retrieval, or
an alternative point of access that could be used to improve the
performance. The MA uses the management information to reconfigure
the FIB (and possibly the network interfaces) in the UE, setting the
appropriate face to forward subsequent Interests.
For validation purposes, a local application was also implemented at
the NDN UE that works similarly to a ping utility, generating
periodic Interests that match a given prefix (served by the content
server), and computing the Round Trip Time of each Interest/Data
exchange. The RTT values obtained by this application in [NDN-MGMT],
indicate that the performance of the NDN management framework in the
considered evaluation scenario is satisfactory, given the early stage
of this work. Further development and testing is ongoing.
2.2. Video Adaptation
This section investigates ICN management considerations for the
delivery of video data, and especially the adaptive delivery of
video. From a content perspective, multimedia is omnipresent in the
Internet, e.g., producing 62% of the total Internet traffic in North
America's fixed access networks [GIPR2013].
Video, and multimedia content in general, is has specific
characteristics, which have to be considered and where network
management consideration are necessary. The consumption of
multimedia content comes along with timing requirements for the
delivery of the content, for both, live and on-demand consumption.
Long startup delays, buffering periods or poor quality, etc. should
be avoided to achieve a good Quality of Experience of the consumer of
the content. Of course, these requirements are heavily influenced by
routing decision and caching, which are central parts of ICN, and
which may be leveraged more efficiently by an intelligent network
management.
2.2.1. Adaptive Delivery of Multimedia Content in ICN
Today's dominant streaming systems are based on the common approach
of leveraging HTTP-based Internet infrastructures, which are
consequently based on the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and the
Internet Protocol (IP). Especially the adaptive multimedia streaming
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
(AMS) via HTTP is gaining more and more momentum and resulted in the
standardization of MPEG-DASH [MPEG-DASH], which stands for Dynamic
Adaptive Streaming over HTTP. The basic idea of AHS is to split up
the media file into segments of equal length, which can be encoded at
different resolutions, bitrates, etc. The segments are stored on
conventional HTTP Web server and can be accessed through HTTP GET
requests from the client. Due to this, the streaming system is pull
based and the entire streaming logic is on the client side. This
means that the client fully controls the bitrate of the streaming
media on a per-segment basis, which has several advantages, e.g., the
client knows its bandwidth requirements and capabilities best. As
one can see, ICN and adaptive multimedia streaming have several
elements in common, such as the client-initiated pull approach, the
content being dealt with in pieces as well as the support of
efficient replication and distribution of content pieces within the
network. As ICN is a promising candidate for the Future Internet
(FI) architecture, it is useful to investigate its suitability in
combination with AMS systems and standards like MPEG-DASH as shown in
[AdaptCCN][InterAdaptCCN], as well as the possibilities and benefits
of intelligent network management to improve the performance of AMS
in ICN as well as the resulting QoE at the client.
One of the most promising aspects in this context is the possibility
of ICN to consume content from different origin nodes as well as over
different network links in parallel, which can be seen as an
intrinsic error resilience feature w.r.t. the network. This is a
useful feature of ICN for adaptive multimedia streaming within mobile
environments since most mobile devices are equipped with multiple
network links. Here, a focus of ICN management could be in the load
balancing of such traffic between the available links. This would
increase the effective media throughput of the multimedia content,
however, it could potentially lead to high variations of the
resulting bandwidth which is available to the client. As DASH is
designed for environments with dynamic bandwidth conditions, they can
be compensated in general. However, more conservative adaptation
algorithms may prevent too frequent switching between the content's
bitrate representations as well as compensate short-term bandwidth
drops caused by network link switches more smoothly.
2.3. Content Management
An ICN network aims by definition to facilitate access to and
delivery of information objects (content and services). An ICN
network can certainly do more, as it has been discussed in earlier
sections. However, as content (in particular, video) access and
delivery seems to be the dominant use case in current host-based
networks, ICN networking carries content delivery as a minimum
requirement. Indeed, virtually all ICN approaches so far include
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
content delivery as a premise. In that respect, from the perspective
of a content owner or provider, an ICN network functions essentially
as a content delivery network. This creates a set of extra
requirements for ICN. Not surprisingly, content providers and end
users alike should be able to Read (consume) a content object
available on the ICN network. But, in addition, a content provider
needs the ability to Create (publish), Update, and Delete content.
In this way, these three operations (Create, Update, and Delete)
stand as the core aspects whose implications on ICN have to be
considered. For example, it's not obvious how content can be deleted
from an ICN network that makes extensive use of in-network caching.
In addition, Accounting, which is typical required by any service
provider, also needs to be tackled.
2.4. Network Policies
2.4.1. NetInf Management Considerations
Early-phase work in NetInf management [NetInfSelfX] discussed a two-
fold problem. The first question that arises is whether it is
possible by adopting a new set of network primitives and in-network
storage to usher a new type of network management. In other words,
can network management become information-centric while handling
often host-centric data? The second question is whether an
information-centric network is more suitable for self-management
mechanisms than IP-based networks are. In particular with respect to
the later, [NetInfSelfX] introduced some design considerations for
adding self-management mechanisms in NetInf.
Of interest from this early work are two examples where network
management can play a new role. First, network management can get
involved in decisions about caching and (re)distribution of content,
and not only whether an (inter)face is on or off, or what traffic
limits should be enforced. Moreover, network policies can be
distributed securely in the same way as other content in the network,
removing the need for centralized management, and enabling improved
recovery procedures. Second, network management can get involved in
more intricate processes such as controlling multiaccess support,
intermediating for content adaptation when deemed appropriate, and
enabling richer tools for traffic engineering.
3. Acknowledgements
This document has benefited from comments and/or text provided by the
following members of ICNRG:
Jaime Garcia-Reinoso (UC3M); Section 2.1.3
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
4. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
5. Security Considerations
TBD
6. Informative References
[AdaptCCN]
Lederer, S., Mueler, C., Rainer, B., Timmerer, C., and H.
Hellwagner, "Adaptive Streaming over Content Centric
Networks in Mobile Networks using Multiple Links",
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Communication (ICC), Budapest, Hungary , June 2013.
[CCNx] PARC, "CCNx Project", 2013, <http://www.ccnx.org>.
[DONA] Koponen, T. et al., "A Data-Oriented (and Beyond) Network
Architecture", SIGCOMM, ACM , 2007.
[GIPR2013]
Sandivine, ., "Global Internet Phenomena Report 1H 2013",
Sandvine Intelligent Broadband Networks , 2013.
[ICN-Scenarios]
Pentikousis, K., Ohlman, B., Corujo, D., and G. Boggia,
"ICN Baseline Scenarios", draft-pentikousis-icn-scenarios
(work in progress), February 2013.
[InterAdaptCCN]
Grandl, R., Su, K., and C. Westphal, "On the Interaction
of Adaptive Video Streaming with Content-Centric
Networking", Proceedings of the 20th Packet Video Workshop
2013, San Jose, USA , December 2013.
[MPEG-DASH]
Sodagar, I., "The MPEG-DASH Standard for Multimedia
Streaming Over the Internet", IEEE MultiMedia, IEEE,
vol.18, no.4, pp.62-67 , 2011.
[NDN-MGMT]
Corujo, D., Vidal, I., Garcia-Reinoso, J., and R. Aguiar,
"A named data networking flexible framework for management
communications", Communications Magazine, IEEE , vol.50,
no.12, pp.36-43 , Dec 2012.
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
[NDN-R] Zhang, L. et al., "Named Data Networking (NDN) Project",
NDN Report ndn-0001, Tech Report, PARC , 2010,
<http://www.named-data.net/techreport/TR001ndn-proj.pdf>.
[NDN-VOIP]
Jacobson, V., Smetters, D., Briggss, N., Plass, M.,
Steward, P., and J. Thornton, "VoCCN: Voice Over Content-
Centric Networks", ReARCH 2009, Rome , Dec 2009.
[NDNFlexManager]
UC3M and ITAV, "Framework for Flexible NDN Management",
2013, <https://github.com/ndnflexmanager/framework>.
[NDN] Jacobson, V., Smetters, D., Thornton, J., Plass, M.,
Briggss, N., and R. Braynard, "Networking Named Content",
CoNEXT 2009, Rome , Dec 2009.
[NetInfSelfX]
Pentikousis, K. et al., "Self-Management for a Network of
Information", IEEE ICC Workshops 2009 , June 2009.
[NetInf] Ahlgren, B. et al., "Design considerations for a network
of information", CoNEXT, Re-Arch Workshop, ACM , 2008.
[PURSUIT] Fotiou, N. et al., "Developing Information Networking
Further: From PSIRP to PURSUIT", BROADNETS, ICST , 2010.
[RFC1157] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M., and J. Davin,
"Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 15, RFC
1157, May 1990.
[RFC3552] Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552, July
2003.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
"Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, October 2012.
Authors' Addresses
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft ICN Management Considerations October 2013
Daniel Corujo
Instituto de Telecomunicacoes
Campus Universitario de Santiago
Aveiro P-3810-193 Aveiro
Portugal
Phone: +351 234 377 900
Email: dcorujo@av.it.pt
Kostas Pentikousis
EICT GmbH
Torgauer Strabe 12-15
10829 Berlin
Germany
Email: k.pentikousis@eict.de
Ivan Vidal
UC3M
Av de la Universidad, 30
28911 Leganes, Madrid
Spain
Email: ividal@it.uc3m.es
Stefan Lederer
Alpen-Adria Universitat Klagenfurt
Universitatsstrasse 65-67
Klagenfurt
Austria
Email: stefan.lederer@itec.aau.at
Spiros Spirou
Intracom Telecom
19.7 km Markopoulou Avenue
Peania 19002
Greece
Email: spis@intracom.com
Corujo, et al. Expires April 24, 2014 [Page 16]