Dynamic-Anycast Architecture
draft-li-dyncast-architecture-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 | Yizhou Li , Luigi Iannone , Dirk Trossen , Peng Liu , Cheng Li | ||
| Last updated | 2022-03-07 (Latest revision 2022-03-04) | ||
| 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-li-dyncast-architecture-03
rtgwg Y. Li
Internet-Draft L. Iannone
Intended status: Informational D. Trossen
Expires: 8 September 2022 Huawei Technologies
P. Liu
China Mobile
C. Li
Huawei Technologies
7 March 2022
Dynamic-Anycast Architecture
draft-li-dyncast-architecture-03
Abstract
This document describes a proposal for an architecture for the
Dynamic-Anycast (Dyncast). It includes an architecture overview,
main components that shall exist, and the workflow. An example of
workflow is provided, focusing on the load-balance multi-edge based
service use-case, where load is distributed in terms of both
computing and networking resources through the dynamic anycast
architecture.
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 https://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
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 8 September 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Architecture Main Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Dyncast Architecture Workflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Service Notification/Metrics Update . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Service Demand Dispatch and Instance Affinity . . . . . . 10
5. Dyncast Control-plane vs Data-plane operations . . . . . . . 11
6. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
Edge computing is expanding from a single edge nodes to multiple
networked collaborating edge nodes to solve the issues like response
time, resource optimization, and network efficiency.
The current network architecture in edge computing provides
relatively static service dispatching, for example, to the closest
edge from an IGP perspective, or to the server with the most
computing resources without considering the network status, and even
sometimes just based on static configuration.
Networking taking into account computing resource metrics seems to be
an interesting paradigm that fits numbers of use-cases that would
benefit from such capability [I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases]. Yet,
more investigation is still needed in key areas for this paradigm
and, to this end, this document aims at providing an architectural
framework, which will enable service notification, status update, and
service dispatch in edge computing..
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
The Dyncast architecture presents an anycast based service and access
model addressing the problematic aspects of existing network layer
edge computing service deployment, including the unawareness of
computing resource information of service, static edge selection,
isolated network and computing metrics and/or slow refresh of status.
Dyncast assumes that there are multiple equivalent service instances
running on different edge nodes, globally providing (from a logical
point of view) one single service. A single edge may have limited
computing resources available, and different edges likely have
different resources available, such as CPU or GPU. The main
principle of Dyncast is that multiple edge nodes are interconnected
and collaborate with each other to achieve a holistic objective,
namely to dispatch service demands taking into account both service
instances status as well as network state (e.g., paths length and
their congestion). For this, computing resources available to serve
a request is one of the top metrics to be considered. At the same
time, the quality of the network path to an edge node may vary over
time and may hence be another key attribute to be considered for said
dispatching of service demands.
2. Definition of Terms
Dyncast: As defined in [I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases], Dynamic
Anycast, taking the dynamic nature of computing resource metrics
into account to steer an anycast routing decision.
Service: As defined in [I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases], a monolithic
functionality that is provided by an endpoint according to the
specification for said service. A composite service can be built
by orchestrating monolithic services.
Service instance: As defined in [I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases],
running environment (e.g., a node) that makes the functionality of
a service available. One service can have several instances
running at different network locations.
D-Router: A node supporting Dyncast functionalities as described in
this document. Namely it is able to understand both network-
related and service-instances-related metrics, take forwarding
decision based upon and manitain instance affinity, i.e., forwards
packets belonging to the same service demand to the same instance.
D-MA: Dyncast Metric Agent (D-MA): A dyncast specific agent able to
gather and send metric updates (from both network and instance
prespective) but not performing forwarding decisions. May run on a
D-Router, but it can be also implementated as a separate module
(e.g., a software library) collocated with a service instance.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
D-SID: Dyncast Service ID, an identifier representing a service,
which the clients use to access said service. Such identifier
identifies all of the instances of the same service, no matter on
where they are actually running. D-SID is independent of which
service instance serves the service demand. Usually multiple
instances provide a (logically) single service, and service demands
are dispatched to the different instance through an anycast model,
i.e., choosing one instance among all available instances.
D-BID: Dyncast Binding ID, an address to reach a service instance
for a given D-SID. It is usually a unicast IP where service
instances are attached. Different service instances provide the
same service identified through D-SID but with different Dyncast
Binding IDs.
Service demand: The demand for a specific service and addressed to a
specific D-SID.
Service request: The request for a specific service and addressed to
a specific service instance identified with D-BID.
3. Architecture Main Concepts
Dyncast assumes that there are multiple equivalent service instances
running on different edge sites, globally providing one single
service which is represented by D-SID. The network will take
forwarding decision for the service demand from the client according
to both service instances status as well as network state.
The architecture of Dyncast has two typical modes, distributed or
centralized.
* Distributed mode: The resources and status of the different
service instances are propagated from the D-Routers connecting the
edge sites where the service is deployed to the D-Routers with
clients. In addition D-Routers have the network topology and
status. The ingress D-Router which receives the service demand
from the client decides independently which service instance to
access according to the service instances status and network state
and maintains instance affinity.
* Centralized mode: The resources and status of the different
service instances are reported to the network controller from the
D-Routers connecting the edge sites where the service is deployed.
At the same time the controller collects the network topology and
status. The controller makes routing decisions for each ingress
D-Router according to the service instances status and network
state and downloads the decisions to all the ingress D-Routers.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
When the ingress D-Router receives the service demand from the
client, it selects which service instance to access according to
the decision made by the controller, and maintains the instance
affinity subsequently.
This document mainly introduces the detailed process of the
distributed mode, and the centralized mode will be introduced in
detail in the future.
Edge sites (edges for short) are normally the sites where edge
computing is performed. Service instances are initiated at different
edge sites. Thus, a single service can actually have a significant
number of instances running on different edges. A Dyncast Service ID
(D-SID) is used to uniquely identify a service (e.g., a matrix
computation for face recognition, or a game server). Service
instances can be hosted on servers, virtual machines, access routers
or gateway in edge data center.
Close to (one or more) Service instances is the Dyncast Metric Agent
(D-MA). This element has the task to gather information about
resources and status of the different instances as well as network-
related information. Such element may also run in a dyncast-enable
router (named D-Router), while other deployment scenarios may lead to
this element running separately on edge nodes.
A D-Router is actually the main element in a Dyncast network,
providing the capability to exchange the information about the
computing resources information of service instances which have been
gathered through D-MAs. A D-Router can also be a service access
point for clients. When a service demand arrives, it will be
delivered to the most appropriate service instance. A service demand
may be the first packet of a data flow rather than an explicit out of
band service request. This architectural document does not make any
specific assumption on this matter. This documents only assumes
that:
* D-Routers are able to identify new service demands. The Dyncast
architecture presented in this document allows then to deliver
such a packet to the most appropriate service instance according
to information received from D-MAs and other D-Routers.
* D-Router are able to identify packets belonging to an existing
service demand. The Dyncast architecture presented in this
document allows to deliver these packets always to the same
service instance selected at the initial service demand. We term
this capability as 'instance affinity'.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
Note: As described above, D-Router can make routing decision based on
per-service-instance computing-aware information. Actually, the
D-Router can make the decison based on per-site computing-aware
information. In this case, the egress D-Router can send the packet
to the specific instance based on local policy, Load balancing, etc.
This will be described in the future.
The element introduced above are depicted in Figure 1, which shows
the proposed Dyncast architecture. In Figure 1, the "infrastructure"
indicates the general IP infrastructure that does not necessarily
need to support Dyncats, i.e., not all routers of the infrastructure
need to be D-Routers.
edge site 1 edge site 2 edge site 3
+------------+ +------------+
+------------+ | +------------+ |
| service | | | service | |
| instance |-+ | instance |-+
+------------+ +------------+
| |
+----------+ |
| D-MA | |
+----------+ +----------+
| +-----------------+ | D-MA |
+----------+ | | +----------+
|D-Router 1| ----| Infrastructure |---- |D-Router 3|
+----------+ | | +----------+
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| | |
| +----------+ |
| |D-Router 2| |
| +----------+ |
| | |
| | |
+-----+ +------+ +------+
+------+| +------+ | +------+ |
|client|+ |client|-+ |client|-+
+------+ +------+ +------+
Figure 1: Dyncast Architecture.
Figure 2 shows an example of Dyncast deployment, with 2 service
instantiated twice (2 instances) on two different edges, namely edge
site 2 and 3. Those service instances utilize different D-BIDs to
serve service demands. D-Router 1 doesn't connect the edge site
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
directly and needn't collect the metric updates by D-MA. But it has
client to access and need to take forwarding decision for the client.
D-Router 2 gets metric updates by D-MA which runs on it. Edge site 2
has client present, so D-Router 2 need to take forwarding decision.
D-Router 3 gets metric updates from D-MA which is a separate software
module on edge computing platform in edge site 3. No client is
present at edge site 3, so D-Router 3 doesn't need take forwarding
decision.
D-SID: Dyncast Service ID
D-BID: Dyncast Binding ID
Service/Metrics Information
(D-SID 1, D-BID 21, <metrics>)
(D-SID 2, D-BID 22, <metrics>)
<----------------->
+-------+
+-------+ | D-SID 1
|Clients|-+ +--------+
+-------+ +--|D-BID 21| instance 1
| | +--------+
+----------+----+ | Edge 2
|D-Router 2|D-MA|--| D-SID 2
+----------+----+ | +--------+
| +--|D-BID 22| instance 2
+----------------+ +--------+
| |
| |
+------+ +----------+ | |
|Client|--|D-Router 1|--| Infrastructure |
+------+ +----------+ | |
| | D-SID 2
| | +--------+
+----------------+ +---|D-BID 32| instance 3
| | +--------+
+----------+ +------+ Edge 3
|D-Router 3| -| D-MA |
+----------+ +------+ D-SID 1
| +--------+
+---|D-BID 31| instance 4
+--------+
<---------------------------------->
(D-SID 2, D-BID 32, <metrics>)
(D-SID 1, D-BID 31, <metrics>)
Service/Metrics Information
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
Figure 2: Dyncast deployment example.
In Figure 2, the Dyncast Service ID (D-SID) follows an anycast
semantic, such as provided through an IP anycast address. It is used
to access a specific service no matter which service instance
eventually handles the service demand of the client. Clients or
other entities which want to access a service need to know about its
D-SID in advance. It can be achieved in different ways, for example,
using a special range of addresses associated to a certain service or
coding of anycast IP address as D-SID, or using DNS.
The Dyncast Binding ID (D-BID) is a unicast IP address. It is
usually the interface IP address through to reach a specific service
instance. Mapping and binding a D-SID to a D-BID is dynamic and
depends on the computing and network status at the time the service
demand first arrives (see Section 4.1 for the reporting of such
status). To ensure instance affinity, D-Routers are requested to
remember the instance that has been selected (e.g., by storing the
mapping) for delivering all packets to the same instance (see
Section 4.2 for discussing this aspect).
4. Dyncast Architecture Workflow
The following subsections provide an overview of how the
architectural elements introduced in the previous section do work
together.
4.1. Service Notification/Metrics Update
When a service instance is instantiated/terminated the service
information consisting in the mapping between the D-SID and the D-BID
has to be updated/deleteted as well. An update can also be triggered
by a change in relevant metrics (e.g., an instance becomes
overloaded). Computing resource information of service instance is
key information in Dyncast. Some of them may be relatively static
like CPU/GPU capacity, and some may be very dynamic, for example,
CPU/GPU utilization, number of sessions associated, number of queuing
requests. Changes in service-related relevant information has to be
collected by D-MA associated to each service instance. Various ways
can be used, for example, via routing protocols like EBGP or via an
API of a management system. Conceptually a D-Router collects
information coming from D-MA and keeps track of the IDs and computing
metrics of all service instances.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
Figure 2 shows an example of information shared by the Dyncast
elements. The D-MA which is deployed with D-Router2 shares binding
information concerning the two instances of the two services running
on edge 2 (upper right hand side of the figure). These information
is:
* (D-SID 1, D-BID 21, metrics)
* (D-SID 2, D-BID 22, metrics)
The D-MA which is deployed as a separate module on edge 3 (lower
right hand side of the figure) shares binding information concerning
the two instances of the two services running on edge 3. These
information is:
* (D-SID 1, D-BID 31, metrics)
* (D-SID 2, D-BID 32, metrics)
Dyncast nodes share among themselves the service information
including the associated computing metrics for the service instances
attached to them. As a network node, a D-Router can also monitor the
network cost or metrics (e.g., congestion) to reach other D-Routers.
This is the focus of Dyncast control plane. Different mechanisms can
be used to share such information, for instance BGP ([RFC4760]), an
IGP, or a controller based mechanism. The specific mechanism is
beyond the scope of this document. The architecture assumes that the
Dyncast elements are able to share relevant information.
If, for instance, the client on the left hand side of Figure 2 sends
a service demand for D-SID1, D-Router1 has the knowledge of the
status of the service instance on both edge 2 and edge 3 and can make
a decision toward which D-BID to forward the demand.
There are different ways to represent the computing metrics. A
single digitalized value calculated from weighted attributes like
CPU/GPU consumption and/or number of sessions associated may be used
for simplicity reasons. However, it may not accurately reflect the
computing resources of interest. Multi-dimensional values give finer
information. This architectural document does not make any specific
assumption about metrics and how to encode or even use them. As
stated in Section 3, the only assumption is that a D-Router is able
to use such metrics so to take a decision when a service demand
arrives in order to map the demand onto a suitable service request.
As explained in the problem statement document
[I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases], computing metrics may change very
frequently, when and how frequent such information should be
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
exchanged among Dyncats elements should be determined also in
accordance with the distribution protocol used for such purpose. A
spectrum of approaches can be employed,such as interval based
updates, threshold triggered updates, policy based updates, etc.
4.2. Service Demand Dispatch and Instance Affinity
This is the focus of the Dyncast data plane. When a new flow
(representing a service demand) arrives at a Dyncast ingress, such
ingress node selects the most appropriate egress according to the
network status and the computing resource of the attached service
instances.
Instance affinity is one of the key features that Dyncast should
support. It means that packets from the same 'flow' for a service
should always be sent to the same egress to be processed by the same
service instance. The affinity is determined at the time of newly
formulated service demand.
It is worth noting that different services may have different notions
of what constitutes a 'flow' and may thus identify a flow
differently. Typically a flow is identified by the 5-tuple value.
However, for instance, an RTP video streaming may use different port
numbers for video and audio, and it may be identified as two flows if
5-tuple flow identifier is used. However they certainly should be
treated by the same service instance. Therefore a 3-tuple based flow
identifier is more suitable for this case. Hence, it is desired to
provide certain level of flexibility in identifying flows, or from a
more general perspective, in identifying the set of packets for which
to apply instance affinity. More importantly, the means for
identifying a flow for the purpose of ensuring instance affinity must
be application-independent to avoid the need for service-specific
instance affinity methods.
Specifically, Instance affinity information should be configurable on
a per-service basis. For each service, the information can include
the flow/packets identification type and means, affinity timeout
value, and etc. For instance, the affinity configuration can
indicate what are the values, e.g., 5-tuple or 3-tuple, to be used as
the flow identifier.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
When the most appropriate egress and service instance is determined
when a new flow for a service demand arrives, a binding table should
save this association between new service demand and service instance
selection. The information in such binding table may include flow/
packets identification, affinity timeout value, etc. The subsequent
packets matching the entry are forwarded based on the table.
Figure 3 shows a possible example of flow binding table at the
ingress D-Router.
+-----------------------------------------+----------------+--------+
| Flow/Packets Identifier | | |
+------+--------+---------+--------+------+ D-BID egress | timeout|
|src_IP| dst_IP |src_port |dst_port|proto | | |
+------+--------+---------+--------+------+----------------+--------+
| X | D-SID 2| - | 8888 | tcp | D-BID 32 | xxx |
+------+--------+---------+--------+------+----------------+--------+
| Y | D-SID 2| - | 8888 | tcp | D-BID 12 | xxx |
+------+--------+---------+--------+------+----------------+--------+
Figure 3: Example of what a binding table can look like.
5. Dyncast Control-plane vs Data-plane operations
In summary, Dyncast consists of the following Control-plane and Data-
plane operations:
* Dyncast Control Plane:
- Dyncast Service ID Notification: the D-SID, an anycast IP
address, should be available and known. This can be achieved
in different ways. For example, use a special range or coding
of anycast IP address as service IDs or using the DNS.
- Dyncast Binding ID Notification: the mapping of (D-SID, D-BID),
i.e., service ID and the binding address, should be notified to
the D-Routers when the service instance starts (or stops).
Various ways can be used, for example, EBGP or management
system notification.
- Metrics Notification: D-MA have to be able to share the metrics
for a service and its binding ID so that D-Routers can select
the "best" instance for each new service demand.
* Dyncast Data Plane:
- New service demand: an ingress D-Router selects the most
appropriate egress in terms of the network status and the
computing resources of the instances of the requested service.
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
- Instance Affinity: Make sure the subsequent packets of an
existing service demand are always delivered to the same
service instance so that they can be served by the same service
instance.
6. Summary
This draft introduces a Dyncast architecture that enables the service
demand to be sent to an optimal service instance. It can dynamically
adapt to the computing resources consumption and network status
change. Dyncast is a network based architecture that supports a
large number of edges and is independent of the applications or
services hosted on the edge.
More discussion and input on control plane and data plane approach
are welcome.
7. Security Considerations
The computing resource information changes over time very frequent
with the creation and termination of service instance. When such
information is carried in routing protocol, too many updates can make
the network fluctuate. Control plane approach should take it into
considerations.
More thorough security analysis to be provided in future revisions.
8. IANA Considerations
This document does not make any request to IANA.
9. Contributors
Huijuan Yao
yaohuijuan@chinamobile.com
China Mobile
Xia Chen
jescia.chenxia@huawei.com
Huawei
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Dyncast Architecture March 2022
10. Informative References
[RFC4760] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter,
"Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4760>.
[I-D.liu-dyncast-ps-usecases]
Liu, P., Willis, P., Trossen, D., and C. Li, "Dynamic-
Anycast (Dyncast) Use Cases & Problem Statement", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-liu-dyncast-ps-usecases-
02, 17 January 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/
draft-liu-dyncast-ps-usecases-02.txt>.
Acknowledgements
TBD
Authors' Addresses
Yizhou Li
Huawei Technologies
Email: liyizhou@huawei.com
Luigi Iannone
Huawei Technologies
Email: Luigi.iannone@huawei.com
Dirk Trossen
Huawei Technologies
Email: dirk.trossen@huawei.com
Peng Liu
China Mobile
Email: liupengyjy@chinamobile.com
Cheng Li
Huawei Technologies
Email: c.l@huawei.com
Li, et al. Expires 8 September 2022 [Page 13]