| < draft-irtf-panrg-questions-07.txt | draft-irtf-panrg-questions-10.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Path Aware Networking RG B. Trammell | Path Aware Networking RG B. Trammell | |||
| Internet-Draft Google Switzerland GmbH | Internet-Draft Google Switzerland GmbH | |||
| Intended status: Informational August 29, 2020 | Intended status: Informational 11 October 2021 | |||
| Expires: March 2, 2021 | Expires: 14 April 2022 | |||
| Current Open Questions in Path Aware Networking | Current Open Questions in Path Aware Networking | |||
| draft-irtf-panrg-questions-07 | draft-irtf-panrg-questions-10 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| In contrast to the present Internet architecture, a path-aware | In contrast to the present Internet architecture, a path-aware | |||
| internetworking architecture has two important properties: it exposes | internetworking architecture has two important properties: it exposes | |||
| the properties of available Internet paths to endpoints, and provides | the properties of available Internet paths to endpoints, and provides | |||
| for endpoints and applications to use these properties to select | for endpoints and applications to use these properties to select | |||
| paths through the Internet for their traffic. This document poses | paths through the Internet for their traffic. While this property of | |||
| questions in path-aware networking open as of 2020, that must be | "path awareness" already exists in many Internet-connected networks | |||
| answered in the design, development, and deployment of path-aware | within single domains and via administrative interfaces to the | |||
| internetworks. It was originally written to frame discussions in the | network layer, a fully path-aware internetwork expands these concepts | |||
| Path Aware Networking proposed Research Group (PANRG), and has been | across layers and across the Internet. | |||
| published to snapshot current thinking in this space. | ||||
| This document poses questions in path-aware networking open as of | ||||
| 2021, that must be answered in the design, development, and | ||||
| deployment of path-aware internetworks. It was originally written to | ||||
| frame discussions in the Path Aware Networking proposed Research | ||||
| Group (PANRG), and has been published to snapshot current thinking in | ||||
| this space. | ||||
| Discussion Venues | ||||
| This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. | ||||
| Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at | ||||
| https://github.com/panrg/questions. | ||||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on March 2, 2021. | This Internet-Draft will expire on 14 April 2022. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | |||
| (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | ||||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction to Path-Aware Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction to Path-Aware Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
| 1.1. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.1. A Vocabulary of Path Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1. A Vocabulary of Path Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.2. Discovery, Distribution, and Trustworthiness of Path | 2.2. Discovery, Distribution, and Trustworthiness of Path | |||
| Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.3. Supporting Path Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2.3. Supporting Path Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.4. Interfaces for Path Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2.4. Interfaces for Path Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.5. Implications of Path Awareness for the Data Plane . . . . 6 | 2.5. Implications of Path Awareness for the Transport and | |||
| 2.6. What is an Endpoint? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | Application Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.7. Operating a Path Aware Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.6. What is an Endpoint? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.8. Deploying a Path Aware Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.7. Operating a Path Aware Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.8. Deploying a Path Aware Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 4. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | ||||
| 1. Introduction to Path-Aware Networking | 1. Introduction to Path-Aware Networking | |||
| In the current Internet architecture, the network layer provides an | In the current Internet architecture, the network layer provides an | |||
| unverifiable, best-effort service: an application can assume that a | unverifiable, best-effort service to the endpoints using it. While | |||
| packet with a given destination address will eventually be forwarded | there are technologies that attempt better-than-best-effort delivery, | |||
| toward that destination, but little else. A transport layer protocol | the interfaces to these are generally administrative as opposed to | |||
| such as TCP can provide reliability over this best-effort service, | endpoint-exposed (e.g. PCE [RFC4655] and SD-WAN approaches), and | |||
| and a protocol above the network layer such as IPsec AH [RFC4302] or | they are often restricted to single administrative domains. In this | |||
| TLS [RFC8446] can authenticate the remote endpoint. However, little, | environment, an application can assume that a packet with a given | |||
| if any, explicit information about the path is available, and | destination address will eventually be forwarded toward that | |||
| assumptions about that path often do not hold, sometimes with serious | destination, but little else. | |||
| impacts on the application, as in the case with BGP hijacking | ||||
| attacks. | A transport layer protocol such as TCP can provide reliability over | |||
| this best-effort service, and a protocol above the network layer such | ||||
| as IPsec AH [RFC4302] or TLS [RFC8446] can authenticate the remote | ||||
| endpoint. However, little, if any, explicit information about the | ||||
| path is available to the endpoint, and assumptions about that path | ||||
| often do not hold, sometimes with serious impacts on the application, | ||||
| as in the case with BGP hijacking attacks. | ||||
| By contrast, in a path-aware internetworking architecture, endpoints | By contrast, in a path-aware internetworking architecture, endpoints | |||
| have the ability to select or influence the path through the network | have the ability to select or influence the path through the network | |||
| used by any given packet, and the network and transport layers | used by any given packet or flow. The network and transport layers | |||
| explicitly expose information about the path or paths available from | explicitly expose information about the path or paths available from | |||
| one endpoint to another, and vice versa, to those endpoints and the | one endpoint to another, and to those endpoints and the applications | |||
| applications running on them, so that they can make this selection. | running on them, so that they can make this selection. The ALTO | |||
| protocol [RFC7285] can be seen as an example of a path-awareness | ||||
| approach implemented in transport-layer terms on the present Internet | ||||
| protocol stack. | ||||
| Path selection provides transparency and control to applications and | Path selection provides explicit visibility and control of network | |||
| users of the network. Selection may be made at either the | treatment to applications and users of the network. This selection | |||
| application layer or the transport layer. Path control at the packet | is available to the application, transport, and/or network layer | |||
| entities at each endpoint. Path control at the flow and subflow | ||||
| level enables the design of new transport protocols that can leverage | level enables the design of new transport protocols that can leverage | |||
| multipath connectivity across disjoint paths through the Internet, | multipath connectivity across disjoint paths through the Internet, | |||
| even over a single physical interface. When exposed to applications, | even over a single physical interface. When exposed to applications, | |||
| or to end-users through a system configuration interface, path | or to end-users through a system configuration interface, path | |||
| control allows the specification of constraints on the paths that | control allows the specification of constraints on the paths that | |||
| traffic should traverse, for instance to confound passive | traffic should traverse, for instance to confound passive | |||
| surveillance in the network core [RFC7624]. | surveillance in the network core [RFC7624]. | |||
| We note that this property of "path awareness" already exists in many | We note that this property of "path awareness" already exists in many | |||
| Internet-connected networks within single domains. Indeed, much of | Internet-connected networks within single domains. Indeed, much of | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 31 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 9 ¶ | |||
| This document presents a snapshot of open questions in this space | This document presents a snapshot of open questions in this space | |||
| that will need to be answered in order to realize a path-aware | that will need to be answered in order to realize a path-aware | |||
| internetworking architecture; it is published to further frame | internetworking architecture; it is published to further frame | |||
| discussions within and outside the Path Aware Networking Research | discussions within and outside the Path Aware Networking Research | |||
| Group, and is published with the rough consensus of that group. | Group, and is published with the rough consensus of that group. | |||
| 1.1. Definition | 1.1. Definition | |||
| For purposes of this document, "path aware networking" describes | For purposes of this document, "path aware networking" describes | |||
| endpoint discovery of the properties of paths they use for | endpoint discovery of the properties of paths they use for | |||
| communication, and endpoint reaction to these properties that affects | communication across an internetwork, and endpoint reaction to these | |||
| routing and/or transmission; note that this can and already does | properties that affects routing and/or data transfer. Note that this | |||
| happen to some extent in the current Internet architecture. | can and already does happen to some extent in the current Internet | |||
| architecture; this definition expands current techniques of path | ||||
| discovery and manipulation to cross administrative domain boundaries | ||||
| and up to the transport and application layers at the endpoints. | ||||
| Expanding on this definition, a "path aware internetwork" is one in | Expanding on this definition, a "path aware internetwork" is one in | |||
| which endpoint discovery of path properties and endpoint selection of | which endpoint discovery of path properties and endpoint selection of | |||
| paths used by traffic exchanged by the endpoint are explicitly | paths used by traffic exchanged by the endpoint are explicitly | |||
| supported, regardless of the specific design of the protocol features | supported, regardless of the specific design of the protocol features | |||
| which enable this discovery and selection. | which enable this discovery and selection. | |||
| A "path", for the purposes of these definitions, is abstractly | ||||
| defined as a sequence of adjacent path elements over which a packet | ||||
| can be transmitted, where the definition of "path element" is | ||||
| technology-dependent. As this document is intended to pose questions | ||||
| rather than answer them, it assumes that this definition will be | ||||
| refined as part of the answer the first two questions it poses, about | ||||
| the vocabulary of path properties and how they are disseminated. | ||||
| Research into path aware networking covers any and all aspects of | Research into path aware networking covers any and all aspects of | |||
| designing, building, and operating path aware internetworks or the | designing, building, and operating path aware internetworks or the | |||
| networks and endpoints attached to them. This document presents a | networks and endpoints attached to them. This document presents a | |||
| collection of research questions to address in order to make a path | collection of research questions to address in order to make a path | |||
| aware Internet a reality. | aware Internet a reality. | |||
| 2. Questions | 2. Questions | |||
| Realizing path-aware networking requires answers to a set of open | Realizing path-aware networking requires answers to a set of open | |||
| research questions. This document poses these questions, as a | research questions. This document poses these questions, as a | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 30 ¶ | |||
| The first question: how are paths and path properties defined and | The first question: how are paths and path properties defined and | |||
| represented? | represented? | |||
| 2.2. Discovery, Distribution, and Trustworthiness of Path Properties | 2.2. Discovery, Distribution, and Trustworthiness of Path Properties | |||
| Once endpoints and networks have a shared vocabulary for expressing | Once endpoints and networks have a shared vocabulary for expressing | |||
| path properties, the network must have some method for distributing | path properties, the network must have some method for distributing | |||
| those path properties to the endpoint. Regardless of how path | those path properties to the endpoint. Regardless of how path | |||
| property information is distributed to the endpoints, the endpoints | property information is distributed to the endpoints, the endpoints | |||
| require a method to authenticate the properties - to determine that | require a method to authenticate the properties -- to determine that | |||
| they originated from and pertain to the path that they purport to. | they originated from and pertain to the path that they purport to. | |||
| Choices in distribution and authentication methods will have impacts | Choices in distribution and authentication methods will have impacts | |||
| on the scalability of a path-aware architecture. Possible dimensions | on the scalability of a path-aware architecture. Possible dimensions | |||
| in the space of distribution methods include in-band versus out-of- | in the space of distribution methods include in-band versus out-of- | |||
| band, push versus pull versus publish-subscribe, and so on. There | band, push versus pull versus publish-subscribe, and so on. There | |||
| are temporal issues with path property dissemination as well, | are temporal issues with path property dissemination as well, | |||
| especially with dynamic properties, since the measurement or | especially with dynamic properties, since the measurement or | |||
| elicitation of dynamic properties may be outdated by the time that | elicitation of dynamic properties may be outdated by the time that | |||
| information is available at the endpoints, and interactions between | information is available at the endpoints, and interactions between | |||
| the measurement and dissemination delay may exhibit pathological | the measurement and dissemination delay may exhibit pathological | |||
| behavior for unlucky points in the parameter space. | behavior for unlucky points in the parameter space. | |||
| The second question: how do endpoints and applications get access to | The second question: how do endpoints and applications get access to | |||
| trustworthy path properties? | accurate, useful, and trustworthy path properties? | |||
| 2.3. Supporting Path Selection | 2.3. Supporting Path Selection | |||
| Access to trustworthy path properties is only half of the challenge | Access to trustworthy path properties is only half of the challenge | |||
| in establishing a path-aware architecture. Endpoints must be able to | in establishing a path-aware architecture. Endpoints must be able to | |||
| use this information in order to select paths for specific traffic | use this information in order to select paths for specific traffic | |||
| they send. As with the dissemination of path properties, choices | they send. As with the dissemination of path properties, choices | |||
| made in path selection methods will also have an impact on the | made in path selection methods will also have an impact on the | |||
| tradeoff between scalability and expressiveness of a path-aware | tradeoff between scalability and expressiveness of a path-aware | |||
| architecture. One key choice here is between in-band and out-of-band | architecture. One key choice here is between in-band and out-of-band | |||
| control of path selection. Another is granularity of path selection | control of path selection. Another is granularity of path selection | |||
| (whether per packet, per flow, or per larger aggregate), which also | (whether per packet, per flow, or per larger aggregate), which also | |||
| has a large impact on the scalabilty/expressiveness tradeoff. Path | has a large impact on the scalabilty/expressiveness tradeoff. Path | |||
| selection must, like path property information, be trustworthy, such | selection must, like path property information, be trustworthy, such | |||
| that the result of a path selection at an endpoint is predictable. | that the result of a path selection at an endpoint is predictable. | |||
| Moreover, any path selection mechanism should aim to provide an | Moreover, any path selection mechanism should aim to provide an | |||
| outcome that is not worse than using a single path, or selecting | outcome that is not worse than using a single path, or selecting | |||
| paths at random. | paths at random. | |||
| Path selection may be exposed in terms of the properties of the path | ||||
| or the identity of elements of the path. In the latter case, a path | ||||
| may be identified at any of multiple layers (e.g. control plane | ||||
| address, network layer address, higher-layer identifier or name, and | ||||
| so on). In this case, care must be taken to present semantically | ||||
| useful information to those making decisions about which path(s) to | ||||
| trust. | ||||
| The third question: how can endpoints select paths to use for traffic | The third question: how can endpoints select paths to use for traffic | |||
| in a way that can be trusted by the network, the endpoints, and the | in a way that can be trusted by the network, the endpoints, and the | |||
| applications using them? | applications using them? | |||
| 2.4. Interfaces for Path Awareness | 2.4. Interfaces for Path Awareness | |||
| In order for applications to make effective use of a path-aware | In order for applications to make effective use of a path-aware | |||
| networking architecture, the control interfaces presented by the | networking architecture, the control interfaces presented by the | |||
| network and transport layers must also expose path properties to the | network and transport layers must also expose path properties to the | |||
| application in a useful way, and provide a useful set of paths among | application in a useful way, and provide a useful set of paths among | |||
| which the application can select. Path selection must be possible | which the application can select. Path selection must be possible | |||
| based not only on the preferences and policies of the application | based not only on the preferences and policies of the application | |||
| developer, but of end-users as well. Also, the path selection | developer, but of end-users as well. Also, the path selection | |||
| interfaces presented to applications and end users will need to | interfaces presented to applications and end users will need to | |||
| support multiple levels of granularity. Most applications' | support multiple levels of granularity. Most applications' | |||
| requirements can be satisfied with the expression path selection | requirements can be satisfied with the expression of path selection | |||
| policies in terms of properties of the paths, while some applications | policies in terms of properties of the paths, while some applications | |||
| may need finer-grained, per-path control. These interfaces will need | may need finer-grained, per-path control. These interfaces will need | |||
| to support incremental development and deployment of applications, | to support incremental development and deployment of applications, | |||
| and provide sensible defaults, to avoid hindering their adoption. | and provide sensible defaults, to avoid hindering their adoption. | |||
| The fourth question: how can interfaces to the transport and | The fourth question: how can interfaces among the network, transport, | |||
| application layers support the use of path awareness? | and application layers support the use of path awareness? | |||
| 2.5. Implications of Path Awareness for the Data Plane | 2.5. Implications of Path Awareness for the Transport and Application | |||
| Layers | ||||
| In the current Internet, the basic assumption that at a given time | In the current Internet, the basic assumption that at a given time | |||
| all traffic for a given flow will receive the same network treatment | all traffic for a given flow will receive the same network treatment | |||
| and traverse the same path or equivalend paths often holds. In a | and traverse the same path or equivalend paths often holds. In a | |||
| path aware network, this assumption is more easily violated. The | path aware network, this assumption is more easily violated. The | |||
| weakening of this assumption has implications for the design of | weakening of this assumption has implications for the design of | |||
| protocols above any path-aware network layer. | protocols above any path-aware network layer. | |||
| For example, one advantage of multipath communication is that a given | For example, one advantage of multipath communication is that a given | |||
| end-to-end flow can be "sprayed" along multiple paths in order to | end-to-end flow can be "sprayed" along multiple paths in order to | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 32 ¶ | |||
| A concept for path aware network operations will need to have clear | A concept for path aware network operations will need to have clear | |||
| methods for the resolution of apparent (if not actual) conflicts of | methods for the resolution of apparent (if not actual) conflicts of | |||
| intent between the network's operator and the path selection at an | intent between the network's operator and the path selection at an | |||
| endpoint. It will also need set of safety principles to ensure that | endpoint. It will also need set of safety principles to ensure that | |||
| increasing path control does not lead to decreasing connectivity; one | increasing path control does not lead to decreasing connectivity; one | |||
| such safety principle could be "the existence of at least one path | such safety principle could be "the existence of at least one path | |||
| between two endpoints guarantees the selection of at least one path | between two endpoints guarantees the selection of at least one path | |||
| between those endpoints." | between those endpoints." | |||
| The seventh question: how can a path aware network in a path aware | The seventh question: how can a path aware network in a path aware | |||
| internetwork be effectively operated, given control inputs from the | internetwork be effectively operated, given control inputs from | |||
| network administrator as well as from the endpoints? | network administrators, application designers, and end users? | |||
| 2.8. Deploying a Path Aware Network | 2.8. Deploying a Path Aware Network | |||
| The vision presented in the introduction discusses path aware | The vision presented in the introduction discusses path aware | |||
| networking from the point of view of the benefits accruing at the | networking from the point of view of the benefits accruing at the | |||
| endpoints, to designers of transport protocols and applications as | endpoints, to designers of transport protocols and applications as | |||
| well as to the end users of those applications. However, this vision | well as to the end users of those applications. However, this vision | |||
| requires action not only at the endpoints but within the | requires action not only at the endpoints but also within the | |||
| interconnected networks offering path aware connectivity. While the | interconnected networks offering path aware connectivity. While the | |||
| specific actions required are a matter of the design and | specific actions required are a matter of the design and | |||
| implementation of a specific realization of a path aware protocol | implementation of a specific realization of a path aware protocol | |||
| stack, it is clear than any path aware architecture will require | stack, it is clear than any path aware architecture will require | |||
| network operators to give up some control of their networks over to | network operators to give up some control of their networks over to | |||
| endpoint-driven control inputs. | endpoint-driven control inputs. | |||
| Here the question of apparent versus actual conflicts of intent | Here the question of apparent versus actual conflicts of intent | |||
| arises again: certain network operations requirements may appear | arises again: certain network operations requirements may appear | |||
| essential, but are merely accidents of the interfaces provided by | essential, but are merely accidents of the interfaces provided by | |||
| current routing and management protocols. Incentives for deployment | current routing and management protocols. For example, related (but | |||
| must show how existing network operations requirements are met | adjacent) to path aware networking, the widespread use of the TCP | |||
| through new path selection and property dissemination mechanisms. | wire image [RFC8546] in network monitoring for DDoS prevention | |||
| appears in conflict with the deployment of encrypted transports, only | ||||
| because path signaling [RFC8558] has been implicit in the deployment | ||||
| of past transport protocols. | ||||
| Similarly, incentives for deployment must show how existing network | ||||
| operations requirements are met through new path selection and | ||||
| property dissemination mechanisms. | ||||
| The incentives for network operators and equipment vendors need to be | The incentives for network operators and equipment vendors need to be | |||
| made clear, in terms of a plan to transition [RFC8170] an | made clear, in terms of a plan to transition [RFC8170] an | |||
| internetwork to path-aware operation, one network and facility at a | internetwork to path-aware operation, one network and facility at a | |||
| time. This plan to transition must also take into account that the | time. This plan to transition must also take into account that the | |||
| dynamics of path aware networking early in this transition (when few | dynamics of path aware networking early in this transition (when few | |||
| endpoints and flows in the Internet use path selection) may be | endpoints and flows in the Internet use path selection) may be | |||
| different than those later in the transition. | different than those later in the transition. | |||
| Aspects of data security and information management in a network that | ||||
| explicitly radiates more information about the network's deployment | ||||
| and configuration, and implicitly radiates information about endpoint | ||||
| configuration and preference through path selection, must also be | ||||
| addressed. | ||||
| The eighth question: how can the incentives of network operators and | The eighth question: how can the incentives of network operators and | |||
| end-users be aligned to realize the vision of path aware networking, | end-users be aligned to realize the vision of path aware networking, | |||
| and how can the transition from current ("path-oblivious") to path- | and how can the transition from current ("path-oblivious") to path- | |||
| aware networking be managed? | aware networking be managed? | |||
| 3. Acknowledgments | 3. Acknowledgments | |||
| Many thanks to Adrian Perrig, Jean-Pierre Smith, Mirja Kuehlewind, | Many thanks to Adrian Perrig, Jean-Pierre Smith, Mirja Kuehlewind, | |||
| Olivier Bonaventure, Martin Thomson, Shwetha Bhandari, Chris Wood, | Olivier Bonaventure, Martin Thomson, Shwetha Bhandari, Chris Wood, | |||
| Lee Howard, Mohamed Boucadair, Thorben Krueger, Gorry Fairhurst, | Lee Howard, Mohamed Boucadair, Thorben Krueger, Gorry Fairhurst, | |||
| Spencer Dawkins, and Theresa Enghardt for discussions leading to | Spencer Dawkins, Theresa Enghardt, and Laurent Ciavaglia, for | |||
| questions in this document, and for feedback on the document itself. | discussions leading to questions in this document, and for feedback | |||
| on the document itself. | ||||
| This work is partially supported by the European Commission under | This work is partially supported by the European Commission under | |||
| Horizon 2020 grant agreement no. 688421 Measurement and Architecture | Horizon 2020 grant agreement no. 688421 Measurement and Architecture | |||
| for a Middleboxed Internet (MAMI), and by the Swiss State Secretariat | for a Middleboxed Internet (MAMI), and by the Swiss State Secretariat | |||
| for Education, Research, and Innovation under contract no. 15.0268. | for Education, Research, and Innovation under contract no. 15.0268. | |||
| This support does not imply endorsement. | This support does not imply endorsement. | |||
| 4. Informative References | 4. Informative References | |||
| [RFC4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, | [RFC4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC4302, December 2005, | DOI 10.17487/RFC4302, December 2005, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4302>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4302>. | |||
| [RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.-P., and J. Ash, "A Path | ||||
| Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655, | ||||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4655>. | ||||
| [RFC7285] Alimi, R., Ed., Penno, R., Ed., Yang, Y., Ed., Kiesel, S., | ||||
| Previdi, S., Roome, W., Shalunov, S., and R. Woundy, | ||||
| "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol", | ||||
| RFC 7285, DOI 10.17487/RFC7285, September 2014, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7285>. | ||||
| [RFC7624] Barnes, R., Schneier, B., Jennings, C., Hardie, T., | [RFC7624] Barnes, R., Schneier, B., Jennings, C., Hardie, T., | |||
| Trammell, B., Huitema, C., and D. Borkmann, | Trammell, B., Huitema, C., and D. Borkmann, | |||
| "Confidentiality in the Face of Pervasive Surveillance: A | "Confidentiality in the Face of Pervasive Surveillance: A | |||
| Threat Model and Problem Statement", RFC 7624, | Threat Model and Problem Statement", RFC 7624, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC7624, August 2015, | DOI 10.17487/RFC7624, August 2015, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7624>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7624>. | |||
| [RFC8170] Thaler, D., Ed., "Planning for Protocol Adoption and | [RFC8170] Thaler, D., Ed., "Planning for Protocol Adoption and | |||
| Subsequent Transitions", RFC 8170, DOI 10.17487/RFC8170, | Subsequent Transitions", RFC 8170, DOI 10.17487/RFC8170, | |||
| May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8170>. | May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8170>. | |||
| [RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol | [RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol | |||
| Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018, | Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8446>. | |||
| [RFC8546] Trammell, B. and M. Kuehlewind, "The Wire Image of a | ||||
| Network Protocol", RFC 8546, DOI 10.17487/RFC8546, April | ||||
| 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8546>. | ||||
| [RFC8558] Hardie, T., Ed., "Transport Protocol Path Signals", | ||||
| RFC 8558, DOI 10.17487/RFC8558, April 2019, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8558>. | ||||
| Author's Address | Author's Address | |||
| Brian Trammell | Brian Trammell | |||
| Google Switzerland GmbH | Google Switzerland GmbH | |||
| Gustav-Gull-Platz 1 | Gustav-Gull-Platz 1 | |||
| 8004 Zurich | CH- 8004 Zurich | |||
| Switzerland | Switzerland | |||
| Email: ietf@trammell.ch | Email: ietf@trammell.ch | |||
| End of changes. 30 change blocks. | ||||
| 69 lines changed or deleted | 146 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||