Internet-Draft CCNinfo December 2022
Asaeda, et al. Expires 1 July 2023 [Page]
Workgroup:
ICN Research Group
Internet-Draft:
draft-irtf-icnrg-ccninfo-15
Published:
Intended Status:
Experimental
Expires:
Authors:
H. Asaeda
NICT
A. Ooka
NICT
X. Shao
Toyohashi University of Technology

CCNinfo: Discovering Content and Network Information in Content-Centric Networks

Abstract

This document describes a mechanism named "CCNinfo" that discovers information about the network topology and in-network cache in Content-Centric Networks (CCN). CCNinfo investigates: 1) the CCN routing path information per name prefix, 2) the Round-Trip Time (RTT) between the content forwarder and consumer, and 3) the states of in-network cache per name prefix. CCNinfo is useful to understand and debug the behavior of testbed networks and other experimental deployments of CCN systems.

This document is a product of the IRTF Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG). This document represents the consensus view of ICNRG and has been reviewed extensively by several members of the ICN community and the RG. The authors and RG chairs approve of the contents. The document is sponsored under the IRTF and is not issued by the IETF and is not an IETF standard. This is an experimental protocol and the specification may change in the future.

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 1 July 2023.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

In Content-Centric Networks (CCN), publishers provide the content through the network, and receivers retrieve it by name. In this network architecture, routers forward content requests through their Forwarding Information Bases (FIBs), which are populated by name-based routing protocols. CCN also enables receivers to retrieve content from an in-network cache.

In CCN, while consumers do not generally need to know the content forwarder that is transmitting the content to them, the operators and developers may want to identify the content forwarder and observe the routing path information per name prefix for troubleshooting or investigating the network conditions.

IP traceroute is a useful tool for discovering the routing conditions in IP networks because it provides intermediate router addresses along the path between the source and destination and the Round-Trip Time (RTT) for the path. However, this IP-based network tool cannot trace the name prefix paths used in CCN. Moreover, such IP-based network tools do not obtain the states of the in-network cache to be discovered.

Contrace [7] enables end users (i.e., consumers) to investigate path and in-network cache conditions in CCN. Contrace is implemented as an external daemon process running over TCP/IP that can interact with a previous CCNx forwarding daemon (CCNx-0.8.2) to retrieve the caching information on the forwarding daemon. This solution is flexible, but it requires defining the common APIs used for global deployment in TCP/IP networks. ICN ping [8] and traceroute [9] are lightweight operational tools that enable a user to explore the path(s) that reach a publisher or a cache storing the named content. ICN ping and traceroute, however, do not expose detailed information about the forwarders deployed by a network operator.

This document describes the specifications of "CCNinfo", an active networking tool for discovering the path and content caching information in CCN. CCNinfo defines the protocol messages to investigate path and in-network cache conditions in CCN. It is embedded in the CCNx forwarding process and can facilitate with non-IP networks as with the basic CCN concept.

The two message types, Request and Reply messages, are encoded in the CCNx TLV format [1]. The request-reply message flow, walking up the tree from a consumer toward a publisher, is similar to the behavior of the IP multicast traceroute facility [10].

CCNinfo facilitates the tracing of a routing path and provides: 1) the RTT between the content forwarder (i.e., caching router or first-hop router) and consumer, 2) the states of the in-network cache per name prefix, and 3) the routing path information per name prefix.

In addition, CCNinfo identifies the states of the cache, such as the following metrics for Content Store (CS) in the content forwarder: 1) size of cached content objects, 2) number of cached content objects, 3) number of accesses (i.e., received Interests) per content, and 4) elapsed cache time and remaining cache lifetime of content.

CCNinfo supports multipath forwarding. The Request messages can be forwarded to multiple neighbor routers. When the Request messages are forwarded to multiple routers, the different Reply messages are forwarded from different routers or publishers.

Furthermore, CCNinfo implements policy-based information provisioning that enables administrators to "hide" secure or private information but does not disrupt message forwarding. This policy-based information provisioning reduces the deployment barrier faced by operators in installing and running CCNinfo on their routers.

The document represents the consensus of the Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG). This document was read and reviewed by the active research group members. It is not an IETF product and is not a standard.

1.1. CCNinfo as an Experimental Tool

In order to carry out meaningful experimentation with CCNx protocols, comprehensive instrumentation and management information is needed to take measurements and explore both the performance and robustness characteristics of the protocols and of the applications using them. CCNinfo's primary goal is to gather and report this information. As experience is gained with both the CCNx protocols and CCNinfo itself, we can refine the instrumentation capabilities and discover what additional capabilities might be needed in CCNinfo and conversely which features wind up not being of sufficient value to justify the implementation complexity and execution overhead.

CCNinfo is intended as a comprehensive experimental tool for CCNx-based networks. It provides a wealth of information from forwarders, including on-path in-network cache conditions as well as forwarding path instrumentation of multiple paths toward content forwarders. As an experimental capability that exposes detailed information about the forwarders deployed by a network operator, CCNinfo employs more granular authorization policies than those required of ICN ping or ICN traceroute.

CCNinfo uses two message types: Request and Reply. A CCNinfo user, e.g., consumer, initiates a CCNinfo Request message when s/he wants to obtain routing path and cache information. When an adjacent neighbor router receives the Request message, it examines its own cache information. If the router does not cache the specified content, it inserts its Report block into the hop-by-hop header of the Request message and forwards the message to its upstream neighbor router(s) decided by its FIB. In Figure 1, CCNinfo user and routers (Router A, B, C) insert their own Report blocks into the Request message and forward the message toward the content forwarder.

       1. Request    2. Request    3. Request
          (U)           (U+A)         (U+A+B)
         +----+        +----+        +----+
         |    |        |    |        |    |
         |    v        |    v        |    v
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
| CCNinfo|----| Router |----| Router |----| Router |----|Publisher|
|  user  |    |   A    |    |   B    |    |   C    |    |         |
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
                                     \
                                      \          +-------+
                            3. Request \         | Cache |
                               (U+A+B)  \ +---------+    |
                                         v| Caching |----+
                                          |  router |
                                          +---------+
Figure 1: Request message invoked by CCNinfo user and forwarded by routers.

When the Request message reaches the content forwarder, the content forwarder forms the Reply message; it inserts its own Reply block TLV and Reply sub-block TLV(s) to the Request message. The Reply message is then forwarded back toward the user in a hop-by-hop manner along the Pending Interest Table (PIT) entries. In Figure 2, each router (Router C, B, and A) forwards the Reply message along its PIT entry and finally, the CCNinfo user receives a Reply message from Router C, which is the first-hop router for the Publisher. Another Reply message from the Caching router (i.e., Reply(C)) is discarded at Router B if the other Reply message (i.e., Reply(P)) was already forwarded by Router B.

       3. Reply(P)   2. Reply(P)   1. Reply(P)
         +----+        +----+        +----+
         |    |        |    |        |    |
         v    |        v    |        v    |
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
| CCNinfo|----| Router |----| Router |----| Router |----|Publisher|
|  user  |    |   A    |    |   B    |    |   C    |    |         |
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
                                     ^
                                      \          +-------+
                           1. Reply(C) \         | Cache |
                                        \ +---------+    |
                                         \| Caching |----+
                                          |  router |
                                          +---------+
Figure 2: Reply messages forwarded by routers, and one Reply message is received by CCNinfo user.

2. Terminology

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 (RFC2119 [3] and RFC8174 [4]) when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2.1. Definitions

This document follows the basic terminologies and definitions described in [1]. Although CCNinfo requests flow in the opposite direction to the data flow, we refer to "upstream" and "downstream" with respect to data, unless explicitly specified.

Scheme name
It indicates a URI and protocol. This document only considers "ccnx:/" as the scheme name.
Prefix name
A prefix name, which is defined in [2], is a name that does not uniquely identify a single content object, but rather a namespace or prefix of an existing content object name.
Exact name
An exact name, which is defined in [2], is one that uniquely identifies the name of a content object.
Node
A node within a CCN network can fulfill the role of a data publisher, a data consumer, and/or a forwarder for interest and content object as given in [6].
Consumer
A node that requests content objects by generating and sending out interests. It is a same definition of ICN Consumer as given in [6].
Publisher
A node that creates content objects and makes them available for retrieval. It is a same definition of ICN Producer as given in [6].
Router
A node that implements stateful forwarding in the path between consumer and publisher.
Caching router
A node that temporarily stores and potentially carries interests or content objects before forwarding it to next node.
Content forwarder
It is either a caching router or a first-hop router that forwards content objects to consumers.
CCNinfo user
A node that initiates the CCNinfo Request, which is consumer or router that invokes the CCNinfo user program with the name prefix of the content. The CCNinfo user program, such as "ccninfo" command described in Appendix A or other similar commands, initiates the Request message to obtain routing path and cache information.
Incoming face
The face on which data are expected to arrive from the specified name prefix.
Outgoing face
The face to which data from the publisher or router are expected to transmit for the specified name prefix. It is also the face on which the Request messages are received.
Upstream router
The router that connects to an Incoming face of a router.
Downstream router
The router that connects to an Outgoing face of a router.
First-hop router (FHR)
The router that matches a FIB entry with an Outgoing face referring to a local application or a publisher.
Last-hop router (LHR)
The router that is directly connected to a consumer.

3. CCNinfo Message Formats

CCNinfo Request and Reply messages are encoded in the CCNx TLV format ([1], Figure 3). The Request message consists of a fixed header, Request block TLV (Figure 7), and Report block TLV(s) (Figure 12). The Reply message consists of a fixed header, Request block TLV, Report block TLV(s), Reply block TLV (Figure 14), and Reply sub-block TLV(s) (Figure 15).

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|    Version    |  PacketType   |         PacketLength          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|           PacketType specific fields          | HeaderLength  |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional Hop-by-hop header TLVs                               /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ PacketPayload TLVs                                            /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationAlgorithm TLV                         /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationPayload TLV (ValidationAlg required)  /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 3: Packet format [1]

The PacketType values in the fixed header shown in Figure 3 are PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST and PT_CCNINFO_REPLY, respectively (Figure 4). CCNinfo Request and Reply messages are forwarded in a hop-by-hop manner. When the Request message reaches the content forwarder, the content forwarder turns it into a Reply message by changing the Type field value in the fixed header from PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST to PT_CCNINFO_REPLY and forwards it back toward the node that initiated the Request message.

  Code         Type name
========      =====================
  %x00        PT_INTEREST [1]
  %x01        PT_CONTENT [1]
  %x02        PT_RETURN [1]
  %x03        PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST
  %x04        PT_CCNINFO_REPLY
Figure 4: Packet Type Namespace

Following a fixed header, there can be a sequence of optional hop-by-hop header TLV(s) for a Request message. In the case of a Request message, it is followed by a sequence of Report blocks, each from a router on the path toward the publisher or caching router.

At the beginning of PacketPayload TLVs, a top-level TLV type, T_DISCOVERY (Figure 5), exists at the outermost level of a CCNx protocol message. This TLV indicates that the Name segment TLV(s) and Reply block TLV(s) would follow in the Request or Reply message.

    Code           Type name
=============      =========================
   %x0000          Reserved [1]
   %x0001          T_INTEREST [1]
   %x0002          T_OBJECT [1]
   %x0003          T_VALIDATION_ALG [1]
   %x0004          T_VALIDATION_PAYLOAD [1]
   %x0005          T_DISCOVERY
Figure 5: Top-Level Type Namespace

3.1. Request Message

When a CCNinfo user initiates a discovery request (e.g., via the ccninfo command described in Appendix A), a CCNinfo Request message is created and forwarded to its upstream router through the Incoming face(s) determined by its FIB.

The Request message format is shown in Figure 6. It consists of a fixed header, Request header block TLV (Figure 7), Report block TLV(s) (Figure 12), Name TLV, and Request block TLV. Request header block TLV and Report block TLV(s) are contained in the hop-by-hop header, as those might change from hop to hop. Request block TLV is encoded in the PacketPayload TLV by content forwarder as the protocol message itself. The PacketType value of the Request message is PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST (Figure 4). The Type value of the Top-Level type namespace is T_DISCOVERY (Figure 5).

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|    Version    |  PacketType   |         PacketLength          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|    HopLimit   |   ReturnCode  | Reserved(MBZ) | HeaderLength  |
+===============+===============+===============+===============+
/                    Request header block TLV                   /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                      Report block TLV 1                       /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                      Report block TLV 2                       /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                               .                               /
/                               .                               /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                      Report block TLV n                       /
+===============+===============+===============+===============+
|      Type (=T_DISCOVERY)      |         MessageLength         |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|            T_NAME             |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/   Name segment TLVs (name prefix specified by CCNinfo user)   /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                       Request block TLV                       /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationAlgorithm TLV                         /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationPayload TLV (ValidationAlg required)  /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 6: Request message consists of a fixed header, Request block TLV, Report block TLV(s), and Name TLV

HopLimit: 8 bits

  • HopLimit is a counter that is decremented with each hop whenever a Request packet is forwarded. It is specified by the CCNinfo user program. The HopLimit value MUST be decremented by 1 prior to forwarding the Request packet. The packet is discarded if HopLimit is decremented to zero. HopLimit limits the distance that a Request may travel on the network. Only the specified number of hops from the CCNinfo user traces the Request. The last router stops the trace and sends the Reply message back to the CCNinfo user.

ReturnCode: 8 bits

  • ReturnCode is used for the Reply message. This value is replaced by the content forwarder when the Request message is returned as the Reply message (see Section 3.2). Until then, this field MUST be transmitted as zeros and ignored on receipt.
Value  Name             Description
-----  ---------------  ----------------------------------------------
%x00   NO_ERROR         No error
%x01   WRONG_IF         CCNinfo Request arrived on an interface
                        to which this router would not forward for
                        the specified name/function toward the
                        publisher.
%x02   INVALID_REQUEST  Invalid CCNinfo Request is received.
%x03   NO_ROUTE         This router has no route for the name prefix
                        and no way to determine a route.
%x04   NO_INFO          This router has no cache information for the
                        specified name prefix.
%x05   NO_SPACE         There was not enough room to insert another
                        Report block in the packet.
%x06   INFO_HIDDEN      Information is hidden from this discovery
                        owing to some policy.
%x0E   ADMIN_PROHIB     CCNinfo Request is administratively
                        prohibited.
%x0F   UNKNOWN_REQUEST  This router does not support/recognize the
                        Request message.
%x80   FATAL_ERROR      In a fatal error, the router may know the
                        upstream router but cannot forward the
                        message to it.

Reserved (MBZ): 8 bits

  • The reserved fields in the Value field MUST be transmitted as zeros and ignored on receipt.

3.1.1. Request Header Block and Request Block

When a CCNinfo user transmits the Request message, s/he MUST insert her/his Request header block TLV (Figure 7) into the hop-by-hop header and Request block TLV (Figure 10) into the message before sending it through the Incoming face(s).

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|     Type (=T_DISC_REQHDR)     |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+-------+-------+-------+-+-+-+-+
|           Request ID          |SkipHop|      Flags    |V|F|O|C|
+---------------+---------------+-------+-------+-------+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7: Request header block TLV (hop-by-hop header)
    Code           Type name
=============      =========================
   %x0000          Reserved [1]
   %x0001          T_INTLIFE [1]
   %x0002          T_CACHETIME [1]
   %x0003          T_MSGHASH [1]
%x0004-%x0007      Reserved [1]
   %x0008          T_DISC_REQHDR
   %x0009          T_DISC_REPORT
   %x0FFE          T_PAD [1]
   %x0FFF          T_ORG [1]
%x1000-%x1FFF      Reserved [1]
Figure 8: Hop-by-Hop Type Namespace

Type: 16 bits

  • Format of the Value field. For the type value of the Request block TLV MUST be T_DISC_REQHDR.

Length: 16 bits

  • Length of Value field in octets.

Request ID: 16 bits

  • This field is used as a unique identifier for the CCNinfo Request so that the duplicate or delayed Reply messages can be detected.

SkipHop (Skip Hop Count): 4 bits

  • Number of skipped routers for a Request. It is specified by the CCNinfo user program. The number of routers corresponding to the value specified in this field are skipped and the CCNinfo Request messages are forwarded to the next router without the addition of Report blocks; the next upstream router then starts the trace. The maximum value of this parameter is 15. This value MUST be lower than that of HopLimit at the fixed header.

Flags: 12 bits

  • The Flags field is used to indicate the types of the content or path discoveries. Currently, as shown in Figure 9, four bits, "C", "O", "F", and "V" are assigned, and the other 8 bits are reserved (MBZ) for the future use. Each flag can be mutually specified with other flags. These flags are set by the CCNinfo user program when they initiate Requests (see Appendix A), and the routers that receive the Requests deal with the flags and change the behaviors (see Section 5 for details). The Flag values defined in this Flags field correspond to the Reply sub-blocks.
Flag    Value   Description
-----   -----   -----------------------------------------------------
  C       0     Path discovery (i.e., no cache information retrieved)
                (default)
  C       1     Path and cache information retrieval
  O       0     Request to any content forwarder (default)
  O       1     Publisher discovery (i.e., only FHR can reply)
  F       0     Request based on FIB's forwarding strategy (default)
  F       1     Full discovery request. Request to possible multiple
                upstream routers specified in FIB simultaneously
  V       0     No reply validation (default)
  V       1     Reply sender validates Reply message
Figure 9: Codes and types specified in Flags field
                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|       Type (=T_DISC_REQ)      |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                     Request Arrival Time                      |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                        Node Identifier                        /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 10: Request block TLV (packet payload)
     Code          Type name
==============     ===================
    %x0000         T_NAME [1]
    %x0001         T_PAYLOAD [1]
    %x0002         T_KEYIDRESTR [1]
    %x0003         T_OBJHASHRESTR [1]
    %x0005         T_PAYLDTYPE [1]
    %x0006         T_EXPIRY [1]
%x0007-%x000C      Reserved [1]
    %x000D         T_DISC_REQ
    %x000E         T_DISC_REPLY
    %x0FFE         T_PAD [1]
    %x0FFF         T_ORG [1]
%x1000-%x1FFF      Reserved [1]
Figure 11: CCNx Message Type Namespace

Type: 16 bits

  • Format of the Value field. For the Request block TLV, the type value(s) MUST be T_DISC_REQ (see Figure 11) in the current specification.

Length: 16 bits

  • Length of Value field in octets.
Request Arrival Time: 32 bits

The Request Arrival Time is a 32-bit NTP timestamp specifying the arrival time of the CCNinfo Request message at the router. The 32-bit form of an NTP timestamp consists of the middle 32 bits of the full 64-bit form; that is, the low 16 bits of the integer part and the high 16 bits of the fractional part.

The following formula converts from a timespec (fractional part in nanoseconds) to a 32-bit NTP timestamp:

      request_arrival_time
      = ((tv.tv_sec + 32384) << 16) + ((tv.tv_nsec << 7) / 1953125)
The constant 32384 is the number of seconds from Jan 1, 1900 to Jan 1, 1970 truncated to 16 bits. ((tv.tv_nsec << 7) / 1953125) is a reduction of ((tv.tv_nsec / 1000000000) << 16), where "<<" denotes a logical left shift.
Note that it is RECOMMENDED for all the routers on the path to have synchronized clocks to measure one-way latency per hop; however, even if they do not have synchronized clocks, CCNinfo measures the RTT between the content forwarder and consumer.

Node Identifier: variable length

  • This field specifies the node identifier (e.g., node name or hash-based self-certifying name [11]) or all-zeros if unknown. This document assumes that the Name TLV defined in the CCNx TLV format [1] can be used for this field and the node identifier is specified in it.

3.1.2. Report Block TLV

A CCNinfo user and each upstream router along the path would insert their own Report block TLV without changing the Type field of the fixed header of the Request message until one of these routers is ready to send a Reply. In the Report block TLV (Figure 12), the Request Arrival Time and Node Identifier MUST be inserted.

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|     Type (=T_DISC_REPORT)     |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                     Request Arrival Time                      |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                        Node Identifier                        /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 12: Report block TLV (hop-by-hop header)

Type: 16 bits

  • Format of the Value field. For the Report block TLV, the type value(s) MUST be T_DISC_REPORT in the current specification. For all the available types for hop-by-hop type namespace, please see Figure 8.

Length: 16 bits

  • Length of Value field in octets.

Request Arrival Time: 32 bits

Node Identifier: variable length

3.1.3. Content Name Specification

Specifications of the Name TLV (whose type value is T_NAME) and the Name Segment TLVs are described in [1], which are followed by CCNinfo. CCNinfo enables to specification of the content name either with a prefix name without chunk number (such as "ccnx:/news/today") or an exact name (such as "ccnx:/news/today/Chunk=10"). When a CCNinfo user specifies a prefix name, s/he will obtain the summary information of the matched content objects in the content forwarder. In contrast, when a CCNinfo user specifies an exact name, s/he will obtain only about the specified content object in the content forwarder. A CCNinfo Request message MUST NOT be sent only with a scheme name, ccnx:/. It will be rejected and discarded by routers.

3.2. Reply Message

When a content forwarder receives a CCNinfo Request message from an appropriate adjacent neighbor router, it inserts its own Reply block TLV and Reply sub-block TLV(s) to the Request message and turns the Request into the Reply by changing the Type field of the fixed header of the Request message from PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST to PT_CCNINFO_REPLY. The Reply message (see Figure 13) is then forwarded back toward the CCNinfo user in a hop-by-hop manner.

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|    Version    |  PacketType   |         PacketLength          |
+---------------+---------------+-------------+-+---------------+
|    HopLimit   |   ReturnCode  | Reserved(MBZ) | HeaderLength  |
+===============+===============+=============+=+===============+
/                    Request header block TLV                   /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                               .                               /
/                               .                               /
/                      n Report block TLVs                      /
/                               .                               /
/                               .                               /
+===============+===============+===============+===============+
|      Type (=T_DISCOVERY)      |         MessageLength         |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|            T_NAME             |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/   Name segment TLVs (name prefix specified by CCNinfo user)   /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                       Request block TLV                       /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                        Reply block TLV                        /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                     Reply sub-block TLV 1                     /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                               .                               /
/                               .                               /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                     Reply sub-block TLV k                     /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationAlgorithm TLV                         /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/ Optional CCNx ValidationPayload TLV (ValidationAlg required)  /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 13: Reply message consists of a fixed header, Request block TLV, Report block TLV(s), Name TLV, and Reply block/sub-block TLV(s)

3.2.1. Reply Block TLV

The Reply block TLV is an envelope for the Reply sub-block TLV(s) (explained from the next section).

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|      Type (=T_DISC_REPLY)     |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                     Request Arrival Time                      |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                        Node Identifier                        /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 14: Reply block TLV (packet payload)

Type: 16 bits

  • Format of the Value field. For the Reply block TLV, the type value MUST be T_DISC_REPLY shown in Figure 11 in the current specification.

Length: 16 bits

  • Length of the Value field in octets. This length is the total length of Reply sub-block(s).

Request Arrival Time: 32 bits

Node Identifier: variable length

3.2.1.1. Reply Sub-Block TLV

The router on the traced path will add one or multiple Reply sub-blocks followed by the Reply block TLV before sending the Reply to its neighbor router. This section describes the Reply sub-block TLV for informing various cache states and conditions as shown in Figure 15. (Other Reply sub-block TLVs will be discussed in separate document(s).)

Note that some routers may not be capable of reporting the following values, such as Object Size, Object Count, # Received Interest, First Seqnum, Last Seqnum, Elapsed Cache Time, and Remain Cache Lifetime, shown in Figure 15, or do not report these values due to their policy. In that case, the routers set these fields to a value of all ones (i.e., %xFFFFFFFF). The value of each field will be also all-one when the value is equal to or bigger than the maximum size expressed by the 32-bit field. The CCNinfo user program MUST inform that these values are not valid if the fields received are set to the value of all ones.

If the cache is refreshed after reboot, the value in each field MUST be refreshed (i.e., MUST be set to 0). If the cache remains after reboot, the value MUST NOT be refreshed (i.e., MUST be reflected as it is).

                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|             Type              |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                          Object Size                          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                         Object Count                          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                      # Received Interest                      |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                         First Seqnum                          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                          Last Seqnum                          |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                       Elapsed Cache Time                      |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|                      Remain Cache Lifetime                    |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
|            T_NAME             |             Length            |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
/                       Name Segment TLVs                       /
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
Figure 15: Reply sub-block TLV for T_DISC_CONTENT and T_DISC_CONTENT_PUBLISHER (packet payload)
    Code          Type name
=============     ===========================
   %x0000         T_DISC_CONTENT
   %x0001         T_DISC_CONTENT_PUBLISHER
   %x0FFF         T_ORG
%x1000-%x1FFF     Reserved (Experimental Use)
Figure 16: CCNinfo Reply Type Namespace

Type: 16 bits

  • Format of the Value field. For the Reply sub-block TLV, the type value MUST be either T_DISC_CONTENT or T_DISC_CONTENT_PUBLISHER defined in the CCNinfo Reply Type Namespace (Figure 16). T_DISC_CONTENT is specified when the cache information is replied from a caching router. T_DISC_CONTENT_PUBLISHER is specified when the content information is replied from a FHR attached to a publisher.

Length: 16 bits

  • Length of the Value field in octets.

Object Size: 32 bits

  • The total size (KB) of the unexpired content objects. Values less than 1 KB are truncated. Note that the maximum size expressed by the 32-bit field is approximately 4.29 TB.

Object Count: 32 bits

  • The number of the unexpired content objects. Note that the maximum count expressed by the 32-bit field is approximately 4.29 billion.

# Received Interest: 32 bits

  • The total number of the received Interest messages to retrieve the cached content objects.

First Seqnum: 32 bits

  • The first sequential number of the unexpired content objects.

Last Seqnum: 32 bits

  • The last sequential number of the unexpired content objects. The First Seqnum and Last Seqnum do not guarantee the consecutiveness of the cached content objects; however, knowing these values may help in the analysis of consecutive or discontinuous chunks such as [12].

Elapsed Cache Time: 32 bits

  • The elapsed time (seconds) after the oldest content object of the content is cached.

Remain Cache Lifetime: 32 bits

  • The lifetime (seconds) of a content object, which is lastly cached.

4. CCNinfo User Behavior

4.1. Sending CCNinfo Request

A CCNinfo user invokes a CCNinfo user program (e.g., ccninfo command) that initiates a CCNinfo Request message and sends it to the user's adjacent neighbor router(s) of interest. The user later obtains both the routing path information and in-network cache information in the single Reply.

When the CCNinfo user program initiates a Request message, it MUST insert the necessary values, i.e., the "Request ID" and the "Node Identifier", in the Request block. The Request ID MUST be unique for the CCNinfo user until s/he receives the corresponding Reply message(s) or the Request is timed out.

Owing to some policies, a router may want to validate the CCNinfo Requests using the CCNx ValidationPayload TLV (whether it accepts the Request or not) especially when the router receives the "full discovery request" (see Section 5.3.2). Accordingly, the CCNinfo user program MAY require validating the Request message and appending the user's signature into the CCNx ValidationPayload TLV. The router then forwards the Request message. If the router does not approve the Request, it rejects the Request message as described in Section 6.11.

After the CCNinfo user program sends the Request message, until the Reply is timed out or the expected numbers of Replies or a Reply message with a non-zero ReturnCode in the fixed header is received, the CCNinfo user program MUST keep the following information: HopLimit, specified in the fixed header, Request ID, Flags, Node Identifier, and Request Arrival Time, specified in the Request block.

4.1.1. Routing Path Information

A CCNinfo user can send a CCNinfo Request for investigating the routing path information for the specified named content. Using the Request, a legitimate user can obtain 1) the node identifiers of the intermediate routers, 2) node identifier of the content forwarder, 3) number of hops between the content forwarder and consumer, and 4) RTT between the content forwarder and consumer, per name prefix. This CCNinfo Request is terminated when it reaches the content forwarder.

4.1.2. In-Network Cache Information

A CCNinfo user can send a CCNinfo Request for investigating in-network cache information. Using the Request, a legitimate user can obtain 1) the size of cached content objects, 2) number of cached content objects, 3) number of accesses (i.e., received Interests) per content, and 4) lifetime and expiration time of the cached content objects, for Content Store (CS) in the content forwarder, unless the content forwarder is capable of reporting them (see Section 3.2.1.1). This CCNinfo Request is terminated when it reaches the content forwarder.

4.2. Receiving CCNinfo Reply

A CCNinfo user program will receive one or multiple CCNinfo Reply messages from the adjacent neighbor router(s). When the program receives the Reply, it MUST compare the kept Request ID and Node Identifier to identify the Request and Reply pair. If they do not match, the Reply message MUST be silently discarded.

If the number of Report blocks in the received Reply is more than the initial HopLimit value (which was inserted in the original Request), the Reply MUST be silently ignored.

After the CCNinfo user has determined that s/he has traced the whole path or the maximum path that s/he can be expected to, s/he might collect statistics by waiting for a timeout. Useful statistics provided by CCNinfo are stated in Section 8.

5. Router Behavior

5.1. User and Neighbor Verification

Upon receiving a CCNinfo Request message, a router MAY examine whether a valid CCNinfo user has sent the message. If the router recognizes that the Request sender's signature specified in the Request is invalid, it SHOULD terminate the Request, as defined in Section 6.4.

Upon receiving a CCNinfo Request/Reply message, a router MAY examine whether the message comes from a valid adjacent neighbor node. If the router recognizes that the Request/Reply sender is invalid, it SHOULD silently ignore the Request/Reply message, as specified in Section 10.9.

5.2. Receiving CCNinfo Request

After a router accepts the CCNinfo Request message, it performs the following steps.

  1. The value of "HopLimit" in the fixed header and that of "SkipHop (Skip Hop Count)" in the Request block are counters that are decremented with each hop. If the HopLimit value is zero, the router terminates the Request, as defined in Section 6.5. If the SkipHop value is equal to or more than the HopLimit value, the router terminates the Request, as defined in Section 6.4. Otherwise, until the SkipHop value becomes zero, the router forwards the Request message to the upstream router(s) without adding its own Report block and without replying to the Request. If the router does not know the upstream router(s) regarding the specified name prefix, it terminates the Request, as defined in Section 6.5. It should be noted that the Request messages are terminated at the FHR; therefore, although the maximum value for the HopLimit is 255 and that for SkipHop is 15, if the Request messages reach the FHR before the HopLimit or SkipHop value becomes 0, the FHR silently discards the Request message and the Request is timed out.
  2. The router examines the Flags field (specified in Figure 9) in the Request block of the received CCNinfo Request. If the "C" flag is not set, it is categorized as the "routing path information discovery". If the "C" flag is set, it is the "cache information discovery". If the "O" flag is set, it is the "publisher discovery".
  3. If the Request is either "cache information discovery" or "routing path information discovery", the router examines its FIB and CS. If the router caches the specified content, it sends the Reply message with its own Reply block and sub-block(s). If the router cannot insert its own Reply block or sub-block(s) because of no space, it terminates the Request, as specified in Section 6.7. If the router does not cache the specified content but knows the upstream neighbor router(s) for the specified name prefix, it creates the PIT entry, and inserts its own Report block in the hop-by-hop header and forwards the Request to the upstream neighbor(s). If the router cannot insert its own Report block because of no space, or if the router does not cache the specified content and does not know the upstream neighbor router(s) for the specified name prefix, it terminates the Request, as defined in Section 6.5.
  4. If the Request is the "publisher discovery", the router examines whether it is the FHR for the requested content. If the router is the FHR, it sends the Reply message with its own Report block and sub-blocks (in the case of cache information discovery) or the Reply message with its own Report block without adding any Reply sub-blocks (in the case of routing path information discovery). If the router is not the FHR but knows the upstream neighbor router(s) for the specified name prefix, it creates the PIT entry, and inserts its own Report block and forwards the Request to the upstream neighbor(s). If the router cannot insert its own Report block in the hop-by-hop header because of no space, it terminates the Request, as specified in Section 6.7. If the router is not the FHR and does not know the upstream neighbor router(s) for the specified name prefix, it terminates the Request, as defined in Section 6.5. Note that in Cefore [14], there is an API by which a publisher informs the application prefix to the FHR and the FHR registers it into the FIB. The prefix entry then can be statically configured on other routers or announced by a routing protocol.

5.3. Forwarding CCNinfo Request

5.3.1. Regular Request

When a router decides to forward a Request message with its Report block to its upstream router(s), it specifies the Request Arrival Time and Node Identifier in the Report block of the Request message. The router then forwards the Request message upstream toward the publisher or caching router based on the FIB entry like the ordinary Interest-Data exchanges in CCN.

When the router forwards the Request message, it MUST record the F flag and Request ID in the Request block of the Request message and exploiting path labels (specified in Section 1) at the corresponding PIT entry. The router can later check the PIT entry to correctly forward the Reply message(s) back.

CCNinfo supports multipath forwarding. The Request messages can be forwarded to multiple neighbor routers. Some routers may have a strategy for multipath forwarding; when a router sends Interest messages to multiple neighbor routers, it may delay or prioritize to send the message to the upstream routers. The CCNinfo Request, as the default, complies with such strategies; a CCNinfo user could trace the actual forwarding path based on the forwarding strategy and will receive a single Reply message such as a content object.

5.3.2. Full Discovery Request

There may be a case wherein a CCNinfo user wants to discover all possible forwarding paths and content forwarders based on the routers' FIBs. The "full discovery request" enables this functionality. If a CCNinfo user sets the F flag in the Request block of the Request message (as seen in Figure 9) to request the full discovery, the upstream routers simultaneously forward the Requests to all multiple upstream routers based on the FIBs. Then, the CCNinfo user can trace all possible forwarding paths. As seen in Figure 17, each router forwards the Reply message along its PIT entry and finally, the CCNinfo user receives two Reply messages: one from the FHR (Router C) and the other from the Caching router.

       3. Reply(C)   2. Reply(C)
       3. Reply(P)   2. Reply(P)   1. Reply(P)
         +----+        +----+        +----+
         |    |        |    |        |    |
         v    |        v    |        v    |
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
| CCNinfo|----| Router |----| Router |----| Router |----|Publisher|
|  user  |    |   A    |    |   B    |    |   C    |    |         |
+--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +--------+    +---------+
                                     ^
                                      \          +-------+
                           1. Reply(C) \         | Cache |
                                        \ +---------+    |
                                         \| Caching |----+
                                          |  router |
                                          +---------+
Figure 17: Full discovery request. Reply messages forwarded by publisher and routers.

To receive different Reply messages forwarded from different routers, the PIT entries initiated by CCNinfo remain until the configured CCNinfo Reply Timeout (Section 7.1) is expired. In other words, unlike the ordinary Interest-Data exchanges in CCN, if routers that accept the full discovery request receive the full discovery request, the routers SHOULD NOT remove the PIT entry created by the full discovery request until the CCNinfo Reply Timeout value expires.

Note that the full discovery request is an OPTIONAL implementation of CCNinfo; it may not be implemented on routers. Even if it is implemented on a router, it may not accept the full discovery request from non-validated CCNinfo users or routers or because of its policy. If a router does not accept the full discovery request, it rejects the full discovery request as described in Section 6.11. Routers that enable the full discovery request MAY rate-limit Replies, as described in Section 10.8 as well.

5.4. Sending CCNinfo Reply

If there is a caching router or FHR for the specified content within the specified hop count along the path, the caching router or FHR sends back the Reply message toward the CCNinfo user and terminates the Request.

When a router decides to send a Reply message to its downstream neighbor router or the CCNinfo user with NO_ERROR return code, it inserts a Report block with the Request Arrival Time and Node Identifier to the Request message. Then, the router inserts the corresponding Reply sub-block(s) (Figure 15) to the payload. The router finally changes the Type field in the fixed header from PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST to PT_CCNINFO_REPLY and forwards the message back as the Reply toward the CCNinfo user in a hop-by-hop manner.

If a router cannot continue the Request, the router MUST put an appropriate ReturnCode in the Request message, change the Type field value in the fixed header from PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST to PT_CCNINFO_REPLY, and forward the Reply message back toward the CCNinfo user to terminate the Request (see Section 6).

5.5. Forwarding CCNinfo Reply

When a router receives a CCNinfo Reply whose Request ID and Node Identifier match those in the PIT entry, sent from a valid adjacent neighbor router, it forwards the CCNinfo Reply back toward the CCNinfo user. If the router does not receive the corresponding Reply within the [CCNinfo Reply Timeout] period, then it removes the corresponding PIT entry and terminates the trace.

The Flags field in the Request block TLV is used to indicate whether the router keeps the PIT entry during the CCNinfo Reply Timeout even after one or more corresponding Reply messages are forwarded. When the CCNinfo user does not set the F flag (i.e., "0"), the intermediate routers immediately remove the PIT entry whenever they forward the corresponding Reply message. When the CCNinfo user sets the F flag (i.e., "1"), which means the CCNinfo user chooses the "full discovery request" (see Section 5.3.2), the intermediate routers keep the PIT entry within the [CCNinfo Reply Timeout] period. After this timeout, the PIT entry is removed.

CCNinfo Replies MUST NOT be cached in routers upon the transmission of Reply messages.

5.6. PIT Entry Management for Multipath Support

Within a network with multipath condition, there is a case (Figure 18) wherein a single CCNinfo Request is split into multiple Requests (e.g., at Router A), which are injected into a single router (Router D). In this case, multiple Replies with the same Request ID and Node Identifier including different Report blocks are received by the router (Router D).

                          +--------+
                          | Router |
                          |   B    |
                          +--------+
                         /          \
                        /            \
+--------+    +--------+              +--------+     +---------+
| CCNinfo|----| Router |              | Router | ... |Publisher|
|  user  |    |   A    |              |   D    |     |         |
+--------+    +--------+              +--------+     +---------+
                        \            /
                         \          /
                          +--------+
                          | Router |
                          |   C    |
                          +--------+
Figure 18

To recognize different CCNinfo Reply messages, the routers MUST distinguish the PIT entries by the Request ID and exploiting path labels, which could be a hash value of the concatenation information of the cumulate Node Identifiers in the hop-by-hop header and the specified content name. For example, when Router D in Figure 18 receives a CCNinfo Request from Router B, its PIT includes the Request ID and value such as H((Router_A|Router_B)|content_name), where "H" indicates some hash function and "|" indicates concatenation. When Router D receives a CCNinfo Request from Router C, its PIT includes the same Request ID and value of H((Router_A|Router_C)|content_name). Two different Replies are later received on Router D and each Reply is appropriately forwarded to Router B and Router C, respectively. Note that two Reply messages coming from Router B and Router C are reached at Router A, but the CCNinfo user can only receive the first Reply message either from Router B or Router C as Router A removes the corresponding PIT entry after it forwards the first Reply.

To avoid routing loops, when a router seeks the cumulate Node Identifiers of the Report blocks in the hop-by-hop header, it MUST examine whether its own Node Identifier is not previously inserted. If a router detects its own Node Identifier in the hop-by-hop header, the router inserts its Report block and terminates the Request as will be described in Section 6.8.

6. CCNinfo Termination

When performing a hop-by-hop trace, it is necessary to determine when to stop the trace. There are several cases when an intermediate router might return a Reply before a Request reaches the caching router or the FHR.

6.1. Arriving at First-hop Router

A CCNinfo Request can be determined to have arrived at the FHR. To ensure that a router recognizes that it is the FHR for the specified content, it needs to have a FIB entry (or attach) to the corresponding publisher or the content.

6.2. Arriving at Router Having Cache

A CCNinfo Request can be determined to have arrived at the router having the specified content cache within the specified HopLimit.

6.3. Arriving at Last Router

A CCNinfo Request can be determined to have arrived at the last router of the specified HopLimit. If the last router does not have the corresponding cache, it MUST insert its Report block and send the Reply message with NO_INFO return code without appending any Reply (sub-)block TLVs.

6.4. Invalid Request

If the router does not validate the Request or the Reply even it is required, the router MUST note a ReturnCode of INVALID_REQUEST in the fixed header of the message, insert its Report block, and forward the message as the Reply back to the CCNinfo user. The router MAY, however, randomly ignore the received invalid messages. (See Section 10.7.)

6.5. No Route

If the router cannot determine the routing paths or neighbor routers for the specified name prefix within the specified HopLimit, it MUST note a ReturnCode of NO_ROUTE in the fixed header of the message, insert its Report block, and forward the message as the Reply back to the CCNinfo user.

6.6. No Information

If the router does not have any information about the specified name prefix within the specified HopLimit, it MUST note a ReturnCode of NO_INFO in the fixed header of the message, insert its Report block, and forward the message as the Reply back to the CCNinfo user.

6.7. No Space

If appending the Report block or the Reply (sub-)block would make the hop-by-hop header longer than 247 bytes or the Request packet longer than the MTU of the Incoming face, the router MUST note a ReturnCode of NO_SPACE in the fixed header of the message and forward the message as the Reply back to the CCNinfo user.

6.8. Fatal Error

If a CCNinfo Request has encountered a fatal error, the router MUST note a ReturnCode of FATAL_ERROR in the fixed header of the message and forward the message as the Reply back to the CCNinfo user. This may happen, for example, when the router detects some routing loop in the Request blocks (see Section 1). The fatal error can be encoded with another error: if a router detects routing loop but cannot insert its Report block, it MUST note NO_SPACE and FATAL_ERROR ReturnCodes (i.e., %x85) in the fixed header and forward the message back to the CCNinfo user.

6.9. CCNinfo Reply Timeout

If a router receives the Request or Reply message that expires its own [CCNinfo Reply Timeout] value (Section 7.1), the router will silently discard the Request or Reply message.

6.10. Non-Supported Node

Cases will arise in which a router or a FHR along the path does not support CCNinfo. In such cases, a CCNinfo user and routers that forward the CCNinfo Request will time out the CCNinfo request.

6.11. Administratively Prohibited

If CCNinfo is administratively prohibited, the router rejects the Request message and MUST send the CCNinfo Reply with the ReturnCode of ADMIN_PROHIB. The router MAY, however, randomly ignore the Request messages to be rejected (see Section 10.7).

7. Configurations

7.1. CCNinfo Reply Timeout

The [CCNinfo Reply Timeout] value is used to time out a CCNinfo Reply. The value for a router can be statically configured by the router's administrators/operators. The default value is 3 (seconds). The [CCNinfo Reply Timeout] value SHOULD NOT be larger than 4 (seconds) and SHOULD NOT be lower than 2 (seconds).

7.2. HopLimit in Fixed Header

If a CCNinfo user does not specify the HopLimit value in the fixed header for a Request message as the HopLimit, the HopLimit is set to 32. Note that 0 HopLimit is an invalid Request; hence, the router in this case follows the way defined in Section 6.4.

7.3. Access Control

A router MAY configure the valid or invalid networks to enable an access control. The access control MAY be defined per name prefix, such as "who can retrieve which name prefix" (see Section 10.2).

8. Diagnosis and Analysis

8.1. Number of Hops and RTT

A CCNinfo Request message is forwarded in a hop-by-hop manner and each forwarding router appends its own Report block. We can then verify the number of hops to reach the content forwarder or publisher and the RTT between the content forwarder or publisher.

8.2. Caching Router Identification

While some routers may hide their node identifiers with all-zeros in the Report blocks (as seen in Section 10.1), the routers in the path from the CCNinfo user to the content forwarder can be identified.

8.3. TTL or Hop Limit

By taking the HopLimit from the content forwarder and forwarding the TTL threshold over all hops, it is possible to discover the TTL or hop limit required for the content forwarder to reach the CCNinfo user.

8.4. Time Delay

If the routers have synchronized clocks, it is possible to estimate the propagation and queuing delays from the differences between the timestamps at the successive hops. However, this delay includes the control processing overhead; therefore, it is not necessarily indicative of the delay that would be experienced by the data traffic.

8.5. Path Stretch

By obtaining the path stretch "d / P", where "d" is the hop count of the data and "P" is the hop count from the consumer to the publisher, we can measure the improvements in path stretch in various cases, such as in different caching and routing algorithms. We can then facilitate the investigation of the performance of the protocol.

8.6. Cache Hit Probability

CCNinfo can show the number of received interests per cache or chunk on a router. Accordingly, CCNinfo measures the content popularity (i.e., the number of accesses for each content/cache), thereby enabling the investigation of the routing/caching strategy in networks.

9. IANA Considerations

This section details each kind of CCNx protocol value that can be registered. As per [5], this section makes assignments in four existing registries and creates a new Reply Type registry in the "Content-Centric Networking (CCNx)" registry group. The registration procedure is "RFC Required", which requires only that this document be published as an RFC.

9.1. Packet Type Registry

As shown in Figure 4, CCNinfo defines two packet types, PT_CCNINFO_REQUEST and PT_CCNINFO_REPLY, whose suggested values are %x03 and %x04, respectively.

9.2. Top-Level Type Registry

As shown in Figure 5, CCNinfo defines one top-level type, T_DISCOVERY, whose suggested value is %x0005.

9.3. Hop-by-Hop Type Registry

As shown in Figure 8, CCNinfo defines two hop-by-hop types, T_DISC_REQHDR and T_DISC_REPORT, whose suggested values are %x0008 and %x0009, respectively.

9.4. Message Type Registry

As shown in Figure 11, CCNinfo defines two message types, T_DISC_REQ and T_DISC_REPLY, whose suggested values are %x000D and %x000E, respectively.

9.5. Reply Type Registry

IANA has created the "CCNx Reply Types" registry and allocated the reply types. The Type value is 2 octets. The range is %x0000-%xFFFF. As shown in Figure 16, CCNinfo defines three reply types, T_DISC_CONTENT, T_DISC_CONTENT_PUBLISHER, and T_ORG, whose suggested values are %x0000, %x0001, and %x0FFF, respectively.

10. Security Considerations

This section addresses some of the security considerations.

10.1. Policy-Based Information Provisioning for Request

Although CCNinfo gives excellent troubleshooting cues, some network administrators or operators may not want to disclose everything about their network to the public or may wish to securely transmit private information to specific members of their networks. CCNinfo provides policy-based information provisioning, thereby allowing network administrators to specify their response policy for each router.

The access policy regarding "who is allowed to retrieve" and/or "what kind of cache information" can be defined for each router. For the former type of access policy, routers with the specified content MAY examine the signature enclosed in the Request message and decide whether they should notify the content information in the Reply. If the routers decide to not notify the content information, they MUST send the CCNinfo Reply with the ReturnCode of ADMIN_PROHIB without appending any Reply (sub-)block TLVs. For the latter type of policy, the permission, whether (1) All (all cache information is disclosed), (2) Partial (cache information with a particular name prefix can (or cannot) be disclosed), or (3) Deny (no cache information is disclosed), is defined at the routers.

In contrast, we entail that each router does not disrupt the forwarding of CCNinfo Request and Reply messages. When a Request message is received, the router SHOULD insert the Report block if the ReturnCode is NO_ERROR. Here, according to the policy configuration, the Node Identifier field in the Report block MAY be null (i.e., all-zeros), but the Request Arrival Time field SHOULD NOT be null. Finally, the router SHOULD forward the Request message to the upstream router toward the content forwarder if the ReturnCode is kept with NO_ERROR.

10.2. Filtering CCNinfo Users Located in Invalid Networks

A router MAY support an access control mechanism to filter out Requests from invalid CCNinfo users. To accomplish this, invalid networks (or domains) could, for example, be configured via a list of allowed/disallowed networks (as observed in Section 7.3). If a Request is received from a disallowed network (according to the Node Identifier in the Request block), the Request MUST NOT be processed and the Reply with the ReturnCode of INFO_HIDDEN SHOULD be used to note that. The router MAY, however, perform rate limited logging of such events.

10.3. Topology Discovery

CCNinfo can be used to discover actively used topologies. If a network topology is not disclosed, CCNinfo Requests SHOULD be restricted at the border of the domain using the ADMIN_PROHIB return code.

10.4. Characteristics of Content

CCNinfo can be used to discover the type of content being sent by publishers. If this information is a secret, CCNinfo Requests SHOULD be restricted at the border of the domain, using the ADMIN_PROHIB return code.

10.5. Computational Attacks

CCNinfo may impose heavy tasks at content forwarders because it makes content forwarders seek their internal cache states reported in the Reply messages whenever they form the Reply messages. The current CCNinfo specification allows to return null values for several fields, such as First/Last Seqnum or Elapsed Cache Time fields in the Reply sub-block. As mentioned in Section 3.2.1.1, these values MAY be null. This means that the content forwarder can not only hide these values owing to privacy/security policies, but also skip the implementations of the complex functions to report these values.

10.6. Longer or Shorter CCNinfo Reply Timeout

Routers can configure CCNinfo Reply Timeout (Section 7.1), which is the allowable timeout value to keep the PIT entry. If routers configure a longer timeout value, there may be an attractive attack vector against the PIT memory. Moreover, especially when the full discovery request option (Section 5.3) is specified for the CCNinfo Request, several Reply messages may be returned and cause a response storm. (See Section 10.8 for rate-limiting to avoid the storm). To avoid DoS attacks, routers MAY configure the timeout value, which is shorter than the user-configured CCNinfo timeout value. However, if it is too short, the Request may be timed out and the CCNinfo user does not receive all Replies; s/he only retrieves the partial path information (i.e., information about a part of the tree).

There may be a way to enable incremental exploration (i.e., to explore the part of the tree that was not explored by the previous operation); however, discussing such mechanisms is out of scope of this document.

10.7. Limiting Request Rates

A router MAY rate-limit CCNinfo Requests by ignoring some of the consecutive messages. The router MAY randomly ignore the received messages to minimize the processing overhead, i.e., to keep fairness in processing requests, or prevent traffic amplification. In such a case, no error message is returned. The rate limit function is left to the router's implementation.

10.8. Limiting Reply Rates

CCNinfo supporting multipath forwarding may result in one Request returning multiple Reply messages. To prevent abuse, the routers in the traced path MAY need to rate-limit the Replies. In such a case, no error message is returned. The rate limit function is left to the router's implementation.

10.9. Adjacency Verification

It is assumed that the CCNinfo Request and Reply messages are forwarded by adjacent neighbor nodes or routers. The CCNx message format or semantics do not define a secure way to verify the node/router adjacency, while HopAuth [11] provides a possible method for an adjacency verification and defines the corresponding message format for adjacency verification as well as the router behaviors. CCNinfo MAY use a similar method for node adjacency verification.

11. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Jerome Francois, Erik Kline, Spyridon Mastorakis, Paulo Mendes, Ilya Moiseenko, David Oran, and Thierry Turletti for their valuable comments and suggestions on this document.

12. References

12.1. Normative References

[1]
Mosko, M., Solis, I., and C. Wood, "CCNx Messages in TLV Format", RFC 8609, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8609>.
[2]
Mosko, M., Solis, I., and C. Wood, "CCNx Semantics", RFC 8569, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8569>.
[3]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[4]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[5]
Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

12.2. Informative References

[6]
Wood, C., Afanasyev, A., Zhang, L., Oran, D., and C. Tschudin, "Information-Centric Networking (ICN): Content-Centric Networking (CCNx) and Named Data Networking (NDN) Terminology", RFC 8793, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8793>.
[7]
Asaeda, H., Matsuzono, K., and T. Turletti, "Contrace: A Tool for Measuring and Tracing Content-Centric Networks", IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol.53, No.3, pp.182-188, .
[8]
Mastorakis, S., Gibson, J., Moiseenko, I., Droms, R., and D. Oran, "ICN Ping Protocol Specification", draft-irtf-icnrg-icnping-06 (work in progress), .
[9]
Mastorakis, S., Gibson, J., Moiseenko, I., Droms, R., and D. Oran, "ICN Traceroute Protocol Specification", draft-irtf-icnrg-icntraceroute-06 (work in progress), .
[10]
Asaeda, H., Mayer, K., and W. Lee, "Mtrace Version 2: Traceroute Facility for IP Multicast", RFC 8487, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8487>.
[11]
Li, R. and H. Asaeda, "Hop-by-Hop Authentication in Content-Centric Networking/Named Data Networking", draft-li-icnrg-hopauth-02 (work in progress), .
[12]
Li, R., Matsuzono, K., Asaeda, H., and X. Fu, "Consecutive Caching and Adaptive Retrieval for In-Network Big Data Sharing", Proc. IEEE ICC, Kansas City, USA, .
[13]
Asaeda, H., Ooka, A., Matsuzono, K., and R. Li, "Cefore: Software Platform Enabling Content-Centric Networking and Beyond", IEICE Transaction on Communications, Vol.E102-B, No.9, pp.1792-1803, .
[14]
"Cefore Home Page", <https://cefore.net/>.

Appendix A. ccninfo Command and Options

CCNinfo is implemented in Cefore [13][14]. The command invoked by the CCNinfo user (e.g., consumer) is named "ccninfo". The ccninfo command sends the Request message and receives the Reply message(s). There are several options that can be specified with ccninfo, while the content name prefix (e.g., ccnx:/news/today) is the mandatory parameter.

The usage of ccninfo command is as follows:

Usage: ccninfo [-c] [-f] [-o] [-V] [-r hop_count] [-s hop_count] [-v
       algo] name_prefix
name_prefix
Prefix name of content (e.g., ccnx:/news/today) or exact name of content (e.g., ccnx:/news/today/Chunk=10) the CCNinfo user wants to trace.
c option
This option can be specified if a CCNinfo user needs the cache information as well as the routing path information for the specified content/cache and RTT between the CCNinfo user and content forwarder.
f option
This option enables the "full discovery request"; routers send CCNinfo Requests to multiple upstream faces based on their FIBs simultaneously. The CCNinfo user can then trace all possible forwarding paths.
o option
This option enables to trace the path to the content publisher. Each router along the path to the publisher inserts each Report block and forwards the Request message. It does not send Reply even if it caches the specified content. FHR that attaches the publisher (who has the complete set of content and is not a caching router) sends the Reply message.
V option
This option requests the Reply sender to validate the Reply message with the Reply sender's signature. The Reply message will then include the CCNx ValidationPayload TLV. The validation algorithm is selected by the Reply sender.
r option
Number of traced routers. This value is set in the "HopLimit" field located in the fixed header of the Request. For example, when the CCNinfo user invokes the CCNinfo command with this option, such as "-r 3", only three routers along the path examine their path and cache information.
s option
Number of skipped routers. This value is set in the "SkipHop" field located in the Request block TLV. For example, when the CCNinfo user invokes the CCNinfo command with this option, such as "-s 3", three upstream routers along the path only forward the Request message but do not append their Report blocks in the hop- by-hop header and do not send Reply messages despite having the corresponding cache.
v option
This option enables the CCNinfo user to validate the Request message with his/her signature. The Request message will include the CCNx ValidationPayload TLV. The validation algorithm is specified by the CCNinfo user.

Authors' Addresses

Hitoshi Asaeda
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi, Koganei,
Tokyo 184-8795
Japan
Atsushi Ooka
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi, Koganei,
Tokyo 184-8795
Japan
Xun Shao
Toyohashi University of Technology
1-1 Hibarigaoka Tempaku-cho, Toyohashi,
Aichi 441-8580
Japan