I2NSF S. Hares
Internet-Draft J. Strassner
Intended status: Informational Huawei
Expires: April 25, 2017 D. Lopez
Telefonica I+D
L. Xia
Huawei
H. Birkholz
Fraunhofer SIT
October 23, 2016
Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) Terminology
draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-02.txt
Abstract
This document defines a set of terms that are used for the Interface
to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) effort.
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 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 25, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 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.
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
This document defines the terminology for the Interface to Network
Security Functions (I2NSF) effort. This section provides some
background on I2NSF; a detailed problem statement can be found in
[I-D.ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases]. Motivation and comparison to
previous work can be found in [I-D.ietf-i2nsf-gap-analysis].
Enterprises are now considering using network security functions
(NSFs) hosted by service providers due to the growing challenges and
complexity in maintaining an up-to-date secure infrastructure that
complies with regulatory requirements, while controlling costs. The
hosted security service is especially attractive to small- and
medium-size enterprises who suffer from a lack of security experts
to continuously monitor, acquire new skills and propose immediate
mitigations to ever increasing sets of security attacks. Small- and
medium-sized businesses (SMBs) are increasingly adopting cloud-based
security services to replace on-premises security tools, while larger
enterprises are deploying a mix of traditional (hosted) and cloud-
based security services.
To meet the demand, more and more service providers are providing
hosted security solutions to deliver cost-effective managed security
services to enterprise customers. The hosted security services are
primarily targeted at enterprises, but could also be provided to
mass-market customers as well. NSFs are provided and consumed in
increasingly diverse environments. Users of NSFs may consume
network security services hosted by one or more providers, which
may be their own enterprise, service providers, or a combination
of both.
It is out of scope in this document to define an exhaustive list of
terms that are used in the security field; the reader is referred to
other applicable documents, such as [RFC4949].
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
2. Conventions Used in This Document
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 [RFC2119]. In
this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to
be interpreted as carrying [RFC2119] significance.
3. Terminology
AAA: Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting. See individual
definitions.
Abstraction: The definition of the salient characteristics and
behavior of an object that distinguish it from all other types of
objects. It manages complexity by exposing common properties
between objects and processes while hiding detail that is not
relevant.
Access Control: Protection of system resources against unauthorized
access; a process by which use of system resources is regulated
according to a security policy, and is permitted by only
authorized entities (users, programs, processes, or other systems)
according to that policy [RFC4949].
Accounting: The act of collecting information on resource usage for
the purpose of trend analysis, auditing, billing, or cost
allocation ([RFC2975] [RFC3539]).
ACL (Access Control List): This is a mechanism that implements
access control for a system resource by enumerating the system
entities that are permitted to access the resource and stating,
either implicitly or explicitly, the access modes granted to each
entity [RFC4949]. A YANG description is defined in
[I-D.ietf-netmod-acl-model].
Action: Defines what is to be done when a set of Conditions are
met (See I2NSF Action). (from
[I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]).
Assertion: Defined by the ITU in [X.1252] as "a statement made by
an entity without accompanying evidence of its validity". In the
context of I2NSF, an assertion MAY include metadata about all or
part of the assertion (e.g., context of the assertion, or about
timestamp indicating the point in time the assertion was
created). The validity of an assertion cannot be verified.
(from [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]).
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Authentication: Defined in [RFC4949] as "the process of verifying
a claim that a system entity or system resource has a certain
attribute value." (from [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]).
Authorization: Defined in [RFC4949] as "an approval that is granted
to a system entity to access a system resource."
(from [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]).
B2B: Business-to-Business.
Bespoke: Something made to fit a particular person, customer, or
company.
Bespoke security management: Security management systems that are
make to fit a particular customer.
Boolean Clause: A logical statement that evaluates to either TRUE
or FALSE. Also called Boolean Expression.
Capability: Defines a set of features that are available from a
managed entity (see also I2NSF Capability). Examples of "managed
entities" are NSFs and Controllers, where NSF Capabilities and
Controller Capabilities define functionality of an NSF and about
Controller, respectively. These functions may, but do not have
to, be used. All Capabilities are announced through the
Registration Interface.
Client: See Consumer. [Editor's note: placeholder for gradually
replacing Client with Consumer, since Client is too vague and
has other connotations (e.g., client-server)].
Client-Facing Interface: See Consumer-Facing Interface.
See also: Interface, NSF-Facing Interface.
Component: An encapsulation of software that communicates using
Interfaces. A Component may be implemented by hardware and/or
software, and be represented using a set of classes. In general,
a Component encapsulates a set of data structures and a set of
algorithms that implement the function(s) that it provides.
Consumer: A Consumer is a Role that is assigned to an I2NSF
Component that represents the needs of a user of I2NSF services.
A consumer can send/receive information to/from another I2NSF
Component (e.g., for defining and monitoring security policies
for the Consumer's specific flows through an I2NSF
administrative domain). See also: Producer, Role.
Consumer-Facing Interface: An Interface dedicated to communication
with Consumers of NSF Data and Services. This is typically
defined per I2NSF administrative domain. See also: Interface,
NSF-Facing Interface.
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Condition: A set of attributes, features, and/or values that are to
be compared with a set of known attributes, features, and/or
values in order to make a decision. A Condition, when used in the
context of a Policy Rule, is used to determine whether or not the
set of Actions in that Policy Rule can be executed or not.
Examples of an I2NSF Condition include matching attributes of a
packet or flow, and comparing the internal state of a NSF to a
desired state. (from [I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]).
Constraint: A Constraint is a limitation or restriction.
Constraints may be associated with any type of object (e.g.,
Events, Conditions, and Actions in Policy Rules).
Constraint Programming: A type of programming that uses constraints
to define relations between variables in order to find a
feasible (and not necessarily optimal) solution.
Context: The Context of an Entity is a collection of measured and/
or inferred knowledge that describe the state and the environment
in which an Entity exists or has existed. (from
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/i2nsf/current/msg00762.html).
Controller: A Controller is a management Component that contains
control plane functions to manage and facilitate information
sharing, as well as execute security functions. This definition
is based on that in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology].
Control Plane: In the context of I2NSF, the Control Plane is an
architectural Component that provides common control functions
to all I2NSF Components, including some or all of the following:
authentication, authorization, accounting, auditing, and
Capability discovery and negotiation. The Control Plane
orchestrates the operation of the Data Plane according to
guidance and/or input from the Management Plane. I2NSF Components
with Interfaces to the Control Plane have knowledge of the
Capabilities of other I2NSF Components within a particular I2NSF
administrative domain. This definition is based on that in
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]. See also: Data Plane, Management
Plane.
Customer: A business role of an entity that is involved in the
definition and/or consumption of services, and the possible
negotiation of a contract to use services from a Provider.
DC: Data Center
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Data Model: A representation of concepts of interest to an
environment in a form that is dependent on data repository, data
definition language, query language, implementation language, and
protocol (typically one or more of these ). Note the difference
between a data **model** and a data **structure**.
[I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model].
Data Plane: In the context of I2NSF, the Data Plane is an
architectural Component that provides operational functions to
enable an I2NSF Component to provide and consume packets and
flows. See also: Control Plane, Management Plane.
Data Structure: A low-level building block that is used in
programming to implement an algorithm. A data model typically
contains multiple types of data structures; however, a data
structure does not contain a data model. Note the difference
between a data **model** and a data **structure**.
Event: An important occurrence in time of a change in the system
being managed, and/or in the environment of the system being
managed. Examples of an I2NSF Event include time and user actions
(e.g. logon, logoff, and actions that violate an ACL). An Event,
when used in the context of a Policy Rule, is used to determine
whether the Condition clause of an imperative Policy Rule can be
evaluated or not (from [I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]).
ECA: Event - Condition - Action (a type of Policy Rule).
Firewall (FW): A function that restricts data communication traffic
to and from one of the connected networks (the one said to be
'inside' the firewall), and thus protects that network's system
resources against threats from the other network (the one that
is said to be 'outside' the firewall) [RFC4949].
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-firewalls]
Flow: A set of information (e.g., packets) that are related in a
fundamental manner (e.g., sent from the same source and sent to
the same destination). A common example is a sequence of packets.
It is the opposite of packet-based, which treats each packet
discretely (e.g., each packet is assessed individually to
determine the action(s) to be taken).
Flow-based NSF: A NSF that inspects network flows according to a
set of policies intended for enforcing security properties. Flow-
based security also means that packets are inspected in the order
they are received, and without modification to the packet due to
the inspection process.
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
I2NSF Agent: A software Component in a device that implements an
NSF. It receives provisioning information and requests for
operational data (e.g., monitoring data) from an I2NSF Consumer.
It is also responsible for enforcing the policies that it
receives from an I2NSF Consumer.
I2NSF Action: An I2NSF Action is a special type of Action that is
used to control and monitor aspects of flow-based Network Security
Functions. Examples of I2NSF Actions include providing intrusion
detection and/or protection, web and flow filtering, and deep
packet inspection for packets and flows. An I2NSF Action, when
used in the context of a I2NSF Policy Rule, may be executed when
both the Event and the Condition clauses of its owning I2NSF
Policy Rule evaluate to true. The execution of this Action may be
influenced by applicable metadata. (from
[I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]).
I2NSF Capability: A set of features that are available from an NSF
Server or an NSF Controller. While both are Capabilities, the
former defines functions that are available from an NSF, whereas
the latter defines functions that are available from a security
Controller or other Management Entity. This definition is based
on that in [I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology].
I2NSF Client: See I2NSF Consumer.
I2NSF Component: A Component that provides one or more I2NSF
Services. I2NSF Components are managed and communicate with other
I2NSF Components using I2NSF Interfaces.
I2NSF Consumer: A software Component that uses the I2NSF framework
to read, write, and/or change provisioning and operational aspects
of the NSFs that it attaches to.
I2NSF Consumer Interface: An Interface dedicated to requesting and
using I2NSF Services. For example, this Interface could be used
to request a set of Flow Security policies from an I2NSF
Controller or from one or more individual NSFs. The difference is
that the former uses more abstract Condition matching (e.g.,
based on tenant or customer ID), whereas the latter uses more
low-level Condition matching (e.g., based on flow state or fields
in a flow or packet). See also: Interface, I2NSF Provider
Interface, Client-Facing Interface, NSF-Facing Interface.
I2NSF Management System: I2NSF Consumers operate within the scope of
a network management system, which serves as a collection and
distribution point for I2NSF security provisioning.
I2NSF Policy: A set of Policy Rules that are used to manage and
control the changing or maintaining of the state of an instance
of an NSF.
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
I2NSF Policy Rule: A Policy Rule that is adapted for I2NSF usage.
The I2NSF Policy Rule is assumed to be in ECA form (i.e., an
imperative structure). Other types of programming paradigms
(e.g., declarative and functional) are currently out of scope.
An example of an I2NSF Policy Rule is, in pseudo-code:
IF <event-clause> is TRUE
IF <condition-clause> is TRUE
THEN execute <action-clause>
END-IF
END-IF
In the above example, the Event, Condition, and Action portions
of a Policy Rule are all **Boolean Clauses**.
I2NSF Provider Interface: An Interface dedicated to providing I2NSF
Services. For example, this could provide Anti-Virus, (D)DoS, or
IPS Services. See also: Interface, I2NSF Provider Interface,
Client-Facing Interface, NSF-Facing Interface.
I2NSF Registry: A registry that contains I2NSF capability
information, which can be controlled by the I2NSF Management
System. See also: Registry.
I2NSF Service: A set of functions, provided by an I2NSF Consumer,
which are used by zero or more I2NSF Producers. Exemplary I2NSF
Services include Anti-Virus, Authentication, Authorization,
(D)DoS, Firewall, and IPS Services. See also: Interface, I2NSF
Provider Interface, Client-Facing Interface, NSF-Facing Interface.
IDS: Intrusion Detection System (see below).
IPS: Intrusion Protection System (see below).
Information Model: A representation of concepts of interest to an
environment in a form that is independent of data repository,
data definition language, query language, implementation language,
and protocol [I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model].
Interface: A set of operations one object knows it can invoke on,
and expose to, another object. It is a subset of all operations
that a given object implements. The same object may have multiple
types of interfaces to serve different purposes. An example of
multiple interfaces can be seen by considering the interfaces
include a firewall uses; these include:
* multiple interfaces for data packets to traverse through,
* an interface for a controller to impose policy, or retrieve
the results of execution of a policy rule.
See also: Consumer Interface, I2NSF Interface, Provider Interface
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Interface Group: A set of Interfaces that are related in purpose and
which share the same communication mechanisms.
Intrusion Detection System (IDS): A system that detects network
intrusions via a variety of filters, monitors, and/or probes. An
IDS may be stateful or stateless.
Intrusion Protection System (IPS): A system that protects against
network intrusions. An IPS may be stateful or stateless.
Management Plane: In the context of I2NSF, the Management Plane is
an architectural Component that provides common functions to
define the behavior of I2NSF Components. The primary use of the
Management Plane is to transport behavioral commands, and supply
OAM data, for making decisions that affect behavior. Examples
include modifying the configuration of an I2NSF Component and
transporting OAM data. See also: Control Plane, Data Plane.
Metadata: Data that provides information about other data.
Examples include IETF network management protocols (e.g. NETCONF,
RESTCONF, IPFIX) or IETF routing interfaces (I2RS). The I2NSF
security interface may utilize Metadata to describe and/or
prescribe characteristics and behavior of the YANG data models.
Middlebox: Any intermediary device performing functions other
than the normal, standard functions of an IP router on the
datagram path between a source host and destination host
[RFC3234].
Network Security Function (NSF): Software that provides a set of
security-related services. Examples include detecting unwanted
activity and blocking or mitigating the effect of such unwanted
activity in order to fulfil service requirements. The NSF can
also help in supporting communication stream integrity and
confidentiality.
NSF-Facing Interface: An Interface dedicated to communication with
a set of NSFs. This is typically defined per I2NSF administrative
domain. See also: Interface, Consumer-Facing Interface.
OAM: Operation, Administrative, and Management.
OCL (Object Constraint Language): A constraint programming language
that is used to specify constraints (e.g., in UML) (from
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/i2nsf/current/msg00762.html)
Policy Rule: A set of rules that are used to manage and control
the changing or maintaining of the state of one or more managed
objects. Often this is shortened to Rule or Policy (see I2NSF
policy rule). (from [I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]).
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Profile: A structured representation of information that uses a
pre-defined set of capabilities of an object, typically in a
specific context. Zero or more Capabilities may be changed at
runtime. This may be used to simplify how this object interacts
with other objects in its environment.
Producer: A Producer is a Role that is assigned to an I2NSF
Component that can send information and/or commands to another
I2NSF Component. See also: Consumer, Role.
Registry: A logically centralized location containing data of a
particular type; it may optionally contain metadata,
relationships, and other aspects of the registered data in order
to use those data effectively. An I2NSF registry is used to
contain capability information that can be controlled by the
controller.
Registration Interface: An interface dedicated to requesting,
receiving, editing, and deleting information in a Registry.
Role: An abstraction of a Component that models context-specific
views and responsibilities of an object as separate Role objects.
Role objects can optionally be attached to, and removed from, the
object that the Role object describes at runtime. This provides
three important benefits. First, it enables different behavior
to be supported by the same Component for different contexts.
Second, it enables the behavior of a Component to be adjusted
dynamically (i.e., at runtime, in response to changes in context)
by using one or more Roles to define the behavior desired for
each context. Third, it decouples the Roles of a Component from
the Applications use that Component.
Service Interface: An Interface dedicated to enabling Policy Rules
to be managed. This is also called the I2NSF Consumer Interface.
Service Provider Security Controller: TBD (Editorial: Place holder
for a split between controller and security controller
definitions.)
Tenant: A group of users that share common access privileges to
the same software. An I2NSF tenant may be physical or virtual,
and may run on a variety of systems or servers.
Vendor-Facing Interface: An Interface dedicated to registering and
vendor-specific NSFs and Capabilities. It is also used to invoke
vendor-specific functionality. This is also called the NSF-Facing
Interface.
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
3. IANA Considerations
No IANA considerations exist for this document.
4. Security Considerations
This is a terminology document with no security considerations.
5. Contributors
The following people contributed to creating this document, and are
listed in alphabetical order:
Henk Birkholz
6. References
6.1. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-i2nsf-gap-analysis]
Hares, S., Moskowitz, R., and Zhang, D., "Analysis of
Existing work for I2NSF", draft-ietf-i2nsf-gap-analysis-02
(work in progress), July 2016.
[I-D.ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases]
Hares, S., Dunbar, L., Lopez, D., Zarny, M., and C.
Jacquenet, "I2NSF Problem Statement and Use cases", draft-
ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-02 (work in progress),
October 2016.
[I-D.ietf-netmod-acl-model]
Bogdanovic, D., Sreenivasa, K., Huang, L., Blair, D.,
"Network Access Control List (ACL) YANG Data Model",
draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-09 (work in progress),
October 2016.
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-firewalls]
Baker, F. and P. Hoffman, "On Firewalls in Internet
Security", draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-01 (work in
progress), October 2012.
[I-D.ietf-sacm-terminology]
Birkholz, H., Lu, J., Strassner, J., Cam-Wignet, N.,
"Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM)
Terminology", draft-ietf-sacm-terminology-11,
September 2016
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
[I-D.ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]
Strassner, J., Halpern, J., and J. Coleman, "Generic
Policy Information Model for Simplified Use of Policy
Abstractions (SUPA)", draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-
info-model-01 (work in progress), July 2016.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2975] Aboba, B., Arkko, J., and D. Harrington, "Introduction to
Accounting Management", RFC 2975, DOI 10.17487/RFC2975,
October 2000, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2975>.
[RFC3234] Carpenter, B. and S. Brim, "Middleboxes: Taxonomy and
Issues", RFC 3234, DOI 10.17487/RFC3234, February 2002,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3234>.
[RFC3539] Aboba, B. and J. Wood, "Authentication, Authorization and
Accounting (AAA) Transport Profile", RFC 3539,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3539, June 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3539>.
[RFC4949] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2",
FYI 36, RFC 4949, DOI 10.17487/RFC4949, August 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4949>.
[X.1252] ITU-T, "Baseline identity management terms and
definitions", Recommendation ITU-T X.1252, April 2510
Authors' Addresses
Susan Hares
Huawei
7453 Hickory Hill
Saline, MI USA 48176
Phone: +1-734-604-0332
Email: shares@ndzh.com
John Strassner
Huawei Technologies
Santa Clara, CA USA 95050
Email: john.sc.strassner@huawei.com
Diego R. Lopez
Telefonica I+D
Don Ramon de la Cruz, 82
Madrid 28006
Spain
Email: diego.r.lopez@telefonica.com
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Terminology October 2016
Liang Xia (Frank)
Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District
Nanjing , Jiangsu 210012
China
Email: Frank.Xialiang@huawei.com
Henk Birkholz
Fraunhofer SIT
Rheinstrasse 75
Darmstadt 64295
Germany
Email: henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de
Hares, et al. Expires April 25, 2017 [Page 13]