Forwarding Label support in CCN Protocol
draft-ravi-icnrg-ccn-forwarding-label-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-03-05
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
ICN Research Group                                          R. Ravindran
Internet-Draft                                            A. Chakraborti
Intended status: Informational                                  A. Azgin
Expires: September 6, 2018                           Huawei Technologies
                                                           March 5, 2018

                Forwarding Label support in CCN Protocol
                draft-ravi-icnrg-ccn-forwarding-label-02

Abstract

   The objective of this proposal is to enable application identifier
   (AI) and network identifier (NI) split in the CCN protocol that has
   several applications such as towards Interest routing optimization,
   mobility, conversational session support, handling indirections in
   manifests, and routing scalability.  We enable this through the
   notion of forwarding label object (FLO), which is an optional hop-by-
   hop payload in the Interest message with a topological name which
   identifies a network domain, router or a host.  FLO can be inserted
   by the end user applications or by the network.  FLO is processed by
   the network resulting in either terminating it or swapping it with a
   new FLO based on the network service context.  Furthermore, depending
   on the application and trust context, a FLO can be subjected to
   policy based actions by the forwarders such as invoking security
   verification or enabling other FLO management actions.

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 September 6, 2018.

Ravindran, et al.       Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       Forwarding label support in CCN          March 2018

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  AI/NI Namespace Split in CCN  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Forwarding Label Object Proposal  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  FLO Naming  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.2.  FLO Insertion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.3.  FLO Swapping  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.4.  FLO Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  FLO Message Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  FLO Processing Rules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  PIT Processing Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Caching Implications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Multiple Domain Scenario  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  FLO Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  Use Case Scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.1.  Handling Producer Mobility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.2.  Handling Consumer Mobility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     9.3.  Manifests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     9.4.  Supporting Conversational Sessions  . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.5.  Interest Routing Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.6.  Routing Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   11. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   12. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18

1.  AI/NI Namespace Split in CCN

   In [1], we discuss several reasons to distinguish application
   identifiers (AI) and network identifiers (NI).  In the context of
   ICN/CCN, we define application identifier (AI) and network identifier
   (NI) as follows:
Show full document text