IP flow information exchange L. Coene
Working group Siemens
Internet-Draft P. Conrad
Expires: August 14, 2003 Temple University
February 13, 2003
Reliable Server pool use in IP flow information exchange
<draft-coene-rserpool-applic-ipfix-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2003.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document describes the applicability of the relialeble server
pool architecture to the IP flow information exchange using Endpoint
Name Resolution Protocol(ENRP) function of Rserpool only. Data
exchange in IPFIX between the router and the datacollector can be
using a limited retransmission protocol.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
1. INTRODUCTION
Reliable server pooling provides protocols for providing higly
available services. The services are located in pool of redundant
servers and if a server fails, another server will take over. The
only requirement put on these servers belonging to the pool is that
if state is maintained by the server, this state must be transfered
to the other server taking over. The mechanism for transfering this
state information is NOT part of the Reliable server pooling
architecture and/or protocols and must be provided by other
protocols.
The goal is to provide server based redundancy. Transport and network
level redundancy are handle by the transport and network layer
protcols.
The application may choose to distribute its traffic over the servers
of the pool conforming to a certain policy.
The application wishing to make use of Rserpool protocols may use
different transport layers(such as UDP, TCP and SCTP). However some
transport layers may have restrictions build in in the way they might
be operating in the Rserpool architecture and its protocols.
1.1 Scope
The scope of this document is to explain the way that a minimal
version of Reliable server pool protocols have to be used in order to
provide a higly available service towards IP flow Information
Exchange(IPFIX) protocols.
1.2 Terminology
The terms are commonly identified in related work and can be found in
the Aggregate Server Access Protocol and Endpoint Name Resolution
Protocol Common Parameters document[RFCCOMM].
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
2. IPFIX using Rserpool
2.1 Architecture
IP flow information is exchanged between observation points and
collector points. The observation points may try to find out via the
endpoint resolution protocol(ENRP) which collector point(s) are
active. Both the observation and the collector point may have
limitations for exchanging the information( observation point may
have limited buffer space and collectors points may be overburdened
with receiving lots of flow info from different observation points).
The observation point will query the ENRP server for resolution of a
particular collector pool name and ENRP will return to the
observation point of list of 1 or more collector points.
The observation point will use its own transport protocols(TCP, UDP,
SCTP, PR-SCTP) for exchanging the IPFIX data between the observation
point and the collection point. If a collection point would fail,
then the observation point will send its data towards a different
collector point, belonging to the same collector pool.
Collector points will announce themselves to the ENRP server and will
be monitored for their avialebility. The observation point will only
query the ENRP server for server pool namer resolution.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
3. Transport protocols suitable for IPFIX
The exchange of IP flow information data between a observation point
and a collection point consists of massive ammounts of data.
One collection point can service many observation points, therefore
transport protocols must do congestion control(example: modifying the
receive buffer space, thus reducing the incoming flow of data), so
that the collection point is not overburdened by its collections
points. Some data must arrive at the collectore while othr data migth
arrive(if it get lost, no problem). The choice of relialeble or
partial relialeble delivery has to be made by the observation point.
This calls for a protocol that should have variable relialebility for
the transport of its data, prefereably to be chosen by IPFIX
protocols on a per-message base.
PR-SCTP is the only know protocol which allows the choice of full,
partial or no relialeble delivery of the message to its peer node.
TCP will only allow full relialeble delivery, while UDP has only
unrelialeble delivery and NO congestion control to speak of.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
4. Security considerations
The protocols used in the Reliable server pool architecture only
tries to increase the availability of the servers in the network.
Rserpool protocols does not contain any protocol mechanisms which are
directly related to user message authentication, integrity and
confidentiality functions. For such features, it depends on the IPSEC
protocols or on Transport Layer Security(TLS) protocols for its own
security and on the architecture and/or security features of its user
protocols.
Rserpool architecture allows the use of different Transport protocols
for its application and control data exchange. Those transport
protocols may have mechanisms for reducing the risk of blind
denial-of-service attacks and/or masquerade attacks. If such measures
are required by the applications, then it is advised to check the
SCTP applicability statement[RFC3057] for guidance on this issue.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
5. Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank X, Y and M. Stillman and many others for
their invaluable comments.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
References
[1] Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Shore, M., Xie, Q., Ong, L., Loughney,
J. and M. Stillman, "Requirements for Reliable Server Pooling",
RFC 3237, January 2002.
[2] Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Shore, M., Xie, Q., Ong, L., Loughney,
J. and M. Stillman, "Architecture for Reliable Server Pooling",
Draft in progress , October 2002.
[3] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M. and M. Tuexen, "Aggregate
Server Access Protocol (ASAP)", Draft in progress , October
2002.
[4] Xie, Q., Stewart, R. and M. Stillman, "Endpoint Name Resolution
Protocol (ENRP)", Draft in progress , October 2002.
[5] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M. and M. Tuexen, "Aggregate
Server Access Protocol and Endpoint Name Resolution Protocol
Common Parameters", Draft in progress , October 2002.
[6] Conrad, P. and P. Lei, ""Services Provided By Reliable Server
Pooling", Draft in progress , January 2003.
[7] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Morneault, K., Sharp, C., Schwarzbauer,
H., Taylor, T., Rytina, I., Kalla, M., Zhang, L. and V. Paxson,
""Stream Control Transmission Protocol"", RFC 2960, October
2000.
[8] Coene, L., ""Stream Control Transmission Protocol Applicability
statement"", RFC 3257, April 2002.
Authors' Addresses
Lode Coene
Siemens
Atealaan 32
Herentals 2200
Belgium
Phone: +32-14-252081
EMail: lode.coene@siemens.com
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
Phil Conrad
Temple University
zzz
zzzz zzzz
USA
Phone: zzzz
EMail: zzzz
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Rspool applicability for IPFIX February 2003
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Coene & Conrad Expires August 14, 2003 [Page 10]