End Point Properties for Peer Selection
draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext-03
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 | Deng Lingli , Haibin Song , Sebastian Kiesel | ||
| Last updated | 2014-07-03 | ||
| 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-deng-alto-p2p-ext-03
ALTO Working Group L. Deng
INTERNET-DRAFT China Mobile
Intended Status: Standard Track H. Song
Expires: Febuary 5, 2015 Huawei
S. Kiesel
University of Stuttgart
July 4, 2014
End Point Properties for Peer Selection
draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext-03
Abstract
The initial purpose for ALTO protocol is to provide better than
random peer selection for p2p networks. The peer selection method
does not only depend on the peer location, but also on other
properties of the peering node. In this document, we define
additional endpoint properties.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 1
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 End Point Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1 location-related properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2 network-related properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.1 Endpoint Property Type: network_access . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.2 Endpoint Property Type: access_preference . . . . . . . 6
4.3 node-related properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3.1 Endpoint Property Type: participating_role . . . . . . . 6
4.3.2 Endpoint Property Type: battery_limited . . . . . . . . 7
4.4 subscription-related properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4.1 Endpoint Property Type: volume_limited . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4.2 Endpoint Property Type: provisioned_bandwidth . . . . . 7
5 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 2
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
1 Introduction
The initial purpose for ALTO protocol is to provide better than
random peer selection for p2p networks. In this document, we define
extended endpoint property extensions that will provide guidance for
both p2p and other applications.
2 Overview
It is expected that EP properties from the following aspects can be
useful for an ALTO client to provide better user experience or avoid
performance degradation due to the ignorance of these EP specific
information:
o location related properties, the information about the geographic
location of the end point;
o network related properties, the information about the accessing
network of the end point, such as the type or configuration of the
access network (e.g. 2G/3G/4G, WLAN, DSL, etc.);
o node related information, the information about the end point's
local features, such as software/hardware configuration and the
participating role of the end point (e.g. as a end user, or a CDN
server, or a P2P cache, etc.);
o subscription related properties, the information about the service
provision agreement between the end point's owner (i.e. the
subscriber) and the network provider.
2.1 Guidelines and Methodology
The most basic principle would be to maintain the EP property set to
a minimum, which in turn implies two guidelines: non-redundancy and
generality.
o Non-redundancy, refers to the guideline that there is no complete
coverage between any two properties.
o Generality, refers to the guideline that any property defined
should be generally applicable to a group of settings. It is not
economic to define a property which is bounded to be used only by a
single type of applications or for EPs within a single deployment
scenarios.
In order to make sure that the properties as defined in this document
fulfill the above principle and guidelines, we intend to justify each
property's definition using the following methodology:
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 3
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
Firstly, (usefulness) there should be clear motivation and
application scenarios that justify the necessity and value for
providing such EP property for peer selection.
Secondly, (non-redundancy) to ensure non-redundancy, whenever a new
property is defined, it should be analyzed that whether there is any
overlap with any pre-defined EP property or can it be deduced from
one or multiple pre-defined EP properties. We should avoid defining
such redundant properties, but keep the discussion and suggestions
for substitution or construction from other defined properties in the
document.
Thirdly, (case-independency) when designing the concrete information
model for the properties, it is suggested to group
application/deployment specific information into more general
property definition (with different value for different
applications/scenarios).
2.2 Privacy considerations
Privacy considerations is especially critical to EP property
information exposure in ALTO, as they are by definition more
stationary information regarding the subscriber of a specific end
point.
However, each user may have different concerns or sensitive
preference over a specific EP property. For example, endpoint
property regarding to the service role of the endpoint, such like P2P
caching server, or CDN node. Therefore, it may be necessary to
provide a mechanism to accommodate this type of individual
customization by providing a channel for an end point to explicitly
indicate this information based on its own preference.
Fortunately, there are generally applicable schemes to be used to
address the privacy protection concerns, which may be applicable to a
group of EP properties and can be configured by the ISP or the EP
subscriber.
On the one hand, the privacy concern is unnecessary if the specific
endpoint property can also be measured/disclosed in another way. The
privacy concern regarding to the accurate information of the endpoint
would be alleviated if using relative numbers to rank them. For
deployment considerations, it is also possible for each endpoint to
make the choice whether to disclose the relative information or not,
but an incentive could be used to encourage the disclosure when it is
beneficial to the application.
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 4
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
On the other hand, access control to sensitive property information
may also be used to mitigate the privacy concern of a defined
property. Even greater flexibility can be delivered by access control
at the discretion of both the network operator and the individual
subscriber, which is out of scope for this document.
2.3 Relation with other properties
Endpoint information can be extremely dynamic or relatively static.
Currently, this specification does not intend to provide any real-
time properties such like the available bandwidth from the endpoint
[I-D.draft-wu-alto-te-metrics], which is extremely hard to measure
and change frequently. But some relatively static properties could be
provided, for example, by defining the available bandwidth from the
endpoint to be green, yellow and red, such information can be
disclosed and be useful when other endpoints consider to connect to
it.
The basic end point properties as defined in this document, may in
turn be used to derive PID properties [I-D.draft-roome-alto-pid-
properties] for the corresponding peer group, which can also be used
as one of the alternatives for the ALTO serve to directly expose
sensitive end point information to distrusted applications.
2.4 Information flow
Endpoint properties can be retrieved and aggregated into the ALTO
server in two ways, one is from the endpoint itself, and the other is
from the service provider which provides network service to the
endpoint. An endpoint can discover the ALTO server with ALTO
discovery mechanisms, and then setup a communication channel with its
ALTO server, and after that the endpoint property from the endpoint
itself can be reported. The ALTO server can also be configured to
access the Network Management System server or other similar servers
provided by the network service provider for the subscription
information and etc.
3 Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
This document makes use of the ALTO terminology defined in RFC 5693
[RFC5693].
4 End Point Extensions
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 5
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
This document defines new endpoint property types for the ALTO
protocol [RFC 7285].
4.1 location-related properties TBA.
4.2 network-related properties
4.2.1 Endpoint Property Type: network_access
One important endpoint property that will impact peer selection is
the node access type. If it is a node owned by a home subscriber,
the access type can be DSL, FTTB, or FTTH. If it is deployed in a
data center, one may prefer to specify a special access type for it,
because it is likely to be more robust, and have more network
resources than home users. A p2p application may have its own
algorithm for peer selection if the node access type information can
be provided.
The value for this property can be enumerated as "adsl", "ftth",
"fttb", "dc", and etc.
4.2.2 Endpoint Property Type: access_preference
In case that the end point has its own privacy concerns in revealing
its access network type directly to potentially distrusted
applications through ALTO, another indirect way of exposing the
similar information can be used by "access_preference".
The value for this property (defined as integer) can be set by the
ISP of the ALTO server, based on its own relative preference to
different network access types. A peer with the higher value is more
preferable than another peer with the lower value.
For example, an ISP could use the following setting for now:
1 = DSL; 10 = FTTB; 12 = FTTH; 50 = DC;
and add "100=new_technology", when some new technology better than
FTTH appears later.
4.3 node-related properties
4.3.1 Endpoint Property Type: participating_role
Different types of end points have different roles or participating
policies for a given application, which can be explored in making a
better decision when choosing a serving node. For example, as
described in [I-D.draft-deng-alto-p2pcache], P2P caching node can
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 6
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
also act as p2p peers in a p2p network. If a p2p caching peer is
located near the edge of the network, it will reduce the backbone
traffic, as well as the uploading traffic. [RFC7069] provides one
example of such caching nodes. P2P caching peers are usually
expected to be given higher priority than the ordinary peers for
serving a content request so as to optimize the network traffic. So
it's necessary for the endpoint property to support this indication.
In general, the end points which belong to different participating
parties (subscriber, ISP, or ICP) within an application's service
transaction demonstrate different role/policies.
The value for this property can be enumerated as "user", "p2pcache",
"super-node", etc.
4.3.2 Endpoint Property Type: battery_limited
Another important endpoint property that will impact peer selection
is what kind of power supply the peer has. It can be either the
electric power or the battery supply. And for most of the time, it
is safe to bet that electric power supplied nodes would stay online
longer than those battery supplied nodes. And most of the nowadays
intelligent equipments are aware of their power supply type. But it
is necessary that the power supply of a peer can be queried through
some method no matter whether or not it is limited by its battery.
The value for this property (defined as a boolean) is either "true"
or "false". If the peer in question is actually battery-limited, the
value of this property wrt the peer is set to "true".
4.4 subscription-related properties
4.4.1 Endpoint Property Type: volume_limited
Many wireless operators offer low-cost plans, which limit the amount
of data to be transmitted within a month to some gigabytes. After
that they will throttle the subscriber's bandwidth or charge extra
money. Hosts with such a tariff, could be tagged by another endpoint
property "volume_limited" and should be avoided for peer selection.
The value for this property (defined as a boolean) is either "true"
or "false". If a peer is constrained by such a subscription plan, the
value of this property wrt the peer is set to "true".
4.4.2 Endpoint Property Type: provisioned_bandwidth TBA.
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 7
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
5 Security Considerations
TBA.
6 IANA Considerations
This document adds the following new endpoint property types to the
existing registry created by ALTO protocol [RFC7285].
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|Identifier |Intended Semantics |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|geo-location |TBA. |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|participating_role |The type of end point's role, value |
|(string) |is enumerated as "user", "p2pcache" |
| |"super-node", etc. in ASCII. |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|battery_limited |Whether the peer is battery-limited, |
|(boolean) |value is "true" or "false". |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|network_access |The type of access network of the peer,|
|(string) |value is enumerated as "adsl", "ftth", |
| |"fttb", "dc", in ASCII. |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|link_preference |The relative preference from the ISP's |
|(number) |point of view based on the type of |
| |network access of the peer, value is |
| |a integer. |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|volume_limited |Whether the peer's plan is constrained,|
|(boolean) |value is "true" or "false". |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
|provisioned_bandwidth |TBA. |
+----------------------+---------------------------------------+
7 Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Richard Yang, Michael Scarf, Vijay
Gurbani, Reinaldo Penno and Sabine Randriamsy for their review and
valuable comments.
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 8
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
8 References
8.1 Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC7285] Alimi, R., Penno, R., and Y. Yang, "ALTO Protocol",
RFC7285, March 2014.
8.2 Informative References
[I-D.draft-deng-alto-p2pcache] Deng, L., Chen, W., and Q. Yi,
"Considerations for ALTO with network-deployed P2P
caches", draft-deng-alto-p2pcache-03 (work in progress),
February 2014.
[RFC7069] Alimi, R., Rahman, A., Kutscher, D., Yang, Y., Song, H.,
and K. Pentikousis, "DECoupled Application Data Enroute
(DECADE)", RFC 7069, November 2013.
[I-D.draft-roome-alto-pid-properties] Roome, W. and Yang, R., "PID
Property Extension for ALTO Protocol", draft-roome-alto-
pid-properties-01 (work in progress), February 2014.
[I-D.draft-wu-alto-te-metrics] Wu, Q., Yang, R., Lee, Y., and
Randriamasy, S., "ALTO Traffic Engineering Cost Metrics",
draft-wu-alto-te-metrics-03 (work-in-progress), June 2014.
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 9
INTERNET DRAFT <EP Extensions for Peer Selection> Jul 4, 2014
Authors' Addresses
Lingli Deng
China Mobile
China
Email: denglingli@chinamobile.com
Haibin Song
Huawei
China
Email: haibin.song@huawei.com
Sebastian Kiesel
University of Stuttgart, Computing Center
Germany
Email: ietf-alto@skiesel.de
Deng, et al. Expires Feb 5, 2015 Page 10