< draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-03.txt   draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-04.txt >
Network Working Group G. Fioccola, Ed. Network Working Group G. Fioccola, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Obsoletes: 8889 (if approved) M. Cociglio Obsoletes: 8889 (if approved) M. Cociglio
Intended status: Standards Track Telecom Italia Intended status: Standards Track Telecom Italia
Expires: August 27, 2022 A. Sapio Expires: October 7, 2022 A. Sapio
Intel Corporation Intel Corporation
R. Sisto R. Sisto
Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Torino
T. Zhou T. Zhou
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
February 23, 2022 April 5, 2022
Multipoint Alternate-Marking Method Multipoint Alternate-Marking Method
draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-03 draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-04
Abstract Abstract
This document generalizes and expands Alternate-Marking methodology This document generalizes and expands Alternate-Marking methodology
to measure any kind of unicast flow whose packets can follow several to measure any kind of unicast flow whose packets can follow several
different paths in the network -- in wider terms, a multipoint-to- different paths in the network -- in wider terms, a multipoint-to-
multipoint network. For this reason, the technique here described is multipoint network. For this reason, the technique here described is
called "Multipoint Alternate Marking". This document obsoletes called "Multipoint Alternate Marking". This document obsoletes
[RFC8889]. [RFC8889].
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
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 August 27, 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 7, 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2022 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/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 4 skipping to change at page 3, line 4
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix A. Changes Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Appendix A. Changes Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Alternate-Marking method, as described in The Alternate-Marking method, as described in
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis], is applicable to a point-to-point path. [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis], is applicable to a point-to-point path.
The extension proposed in this document applies to the most general The extension proposed in this document applies to the most general
case of multipoint-to-multipoint path and enables flexible and case of a multipoint-to-multipoint path and enables flexible and
adaptive performance measurements in a managed network. adaptive performance measurements in a managed network.
The Alternate-Marking methodology described in The Alternate-Marking methodology described in
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] allows the synchronization of the [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] allows the synchronization of the
measurements in different points by dividing the packet flow into measurements at different points by dividing the packet flow into
batches. So it is possible to get coherent counters and show what is batches. So it is possible to get coherent counters and show what is
happening in every marking period for each monitored flow. The happening in every marking period for each monitored flow. The
monitoring parameters are the packet counter and timestamps of a flow monitoring parameters are the packet counter and timestamps of a flow
for each marking period. Note that additional details about the for each marking period. Note that additional details about the
applicability of the Alternate-Marking methodology are described in applicability of the Alternate-Marking methodology are described in
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] while implementation details can be found [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] while implementation details can be found
in the paper "AM-PM: Efficient Network Telemetry using Alternate in the paper "AM-PM: Efficient Network Telemetry using Alternate
Marking" [IEEE-Network-PNPM]. Marking" [IEEE-Network-PNPM].
There are some applications of the Alternate-Marking method where There are some applications of the Alternate-Marking method where
skipping to change at page 4, line 11 skipping to change at page 4, line 11
Therefore, the Alternate-Marking method can be extended to any kind Therefore, the Alternate-Marking method can be extended to any kind
of multipoint-to-multipoint paths, and the network-clustering of multipoint-to-multipoint paths, and the network-clustering
approach presented in this document is the formalization of how to approach presented in this document is the formalization of how to
implement this property and allow a flexible and optimized implement this property and allow a flexible and optimized
performance measurement support for network management in every performance measurement support for network management in every
situation. situation.
Without network clustering, it is possible to apply Alternate Marking Without network clustering, it is possible to apply Alternate Marking
only for all the network or per single flow. Instead, with network only for all the network or per single flow. Instead, with network
clustering, it is possible to use the partition of the network into clustering, it is possible to use the partition of the network into
clusters at different levels in order to perform the needed degree of clusters at different levels in order to provide the needed degree of
detail. In some circumstances, it is possible to monitor a detail. In some circumstances, it is possible to monitor a
multipoint network by analyzing the network clustering, without multipoint network by monitoring the network clusters, without
examining in depth. In case of problems (packet loss is measured or examining in depth. In case of problems (packet loss is measured or
the delay is too high), the filtering criteria could be specified the delay is too high), the filtering criteria could be enhanced in
more in order to perform a detailed analysis by using a different order to perform a detailed analysis by using a different combination
combination of clusters up to a per-flow measurement as described in of clusters up to a per-flow measurement as described in
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis]. [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis].
This approach fits very well with the Closed-Loop Network and This approach fits very well with the Closed-Loop Network and
Software-Defined Network (SDN) paradigm, where the SDN orchestrator Software-Defined Network (SDN) paradigm, where the SDN orchestrator
and the SDN controllers are the brains of the network and can manage and the SDN controllers are the brains of the network and can manage
flow control to the switches and routers and, in the same way, can flow control to the switches and routers and, in the same way, can
calibrate the performance measurements depending on the desired calibrate the performance measurements depending on the desired
accuracy. An SDN controller application can orchestrate how accuracy. An SDN controller application can orchestrate how
accurately the network performance monitoring is set up by applying accurately the network performance monitoring is set up by applying
the Multipoint Alternate Marking as described in this document. the Multipoint Alternate Marking as described in this document.
It is important to underline that, as an extension of It is important to underline that, as an extension of
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis], this is a methodology document, so the [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis], this is a methodology document, so the
mechanism that can be used to transmit the counters and the mechanism that can be used to transmit the counters and the
timestamps is out of scope here, and the implementation is open. timestamps is out of scope here, and the implementation is open.
Several options are possible -- e.g., see "Enhanced Alternate Marking Several options are possible -- e.g., see "Enhanced Alternate Marking
Method" [I-D.zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking]. Method" [I-D.zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking].
This document assumes that the blocks are created according to a This document assumes that the blocks are created according to a
fixed timer as per [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis]. The switching after a fixed timer as per [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis]. Switching after a
fixed number of packets is an additional possibility but it is out of fixed number of packets is possible but it is out of scope here.
scope here.
Note that the fragmented packets case can be managed with the Note that the fragmented packets case can be managed with the
Alternate-Marking methodology. The same considerations of Alternate-Marking methodology. The same considerations of
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] apply also in the case of Multipoint [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] apply also in the case of Multipoint
Alternate Marking. As defined in [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] the Alternate Marking. As defined in [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] the
marking node MUST mark all the fragments except in the case of marking node MUST mark all the fragments except in the case of
fragmentation within the network domain, in that event it is fragmentation within the network domain, in that event it is
suggested to mark only the first fragment. suggested to mark only the first fragment.
1.1. Requirements Language 1.1. Requirements Language
skipping to change at page 9, line 20 skipping to change at page 9, line 20
The case of unicast flow is considered in Figure 1. The anycast flow The case of unicast flow is considered in Figure 1. The anycast flow
is also in scope, because there is no replication and only a single is also in scope, because there is no replication and only a single
node from the anycast group receives the traffic, so it can be viewed node from the anycast group receives the traffic, so it can be viewed
as a special case of unicast flow. Furthermore, an ECMP flow is in as a special case of unicast flow. Furthermore, an ECMP flow is in
scope by definition, since it is a point-to-multipoint unicast flow. scope by definition, since it is a point-to-multipoint unicast flow.
4. Extension of the Method to Multipoint Flows 4. Extension of the Method to Multipoint Flows
By using the Alternate-Marking method, only point-to-point paths can By using the Alternate-Marking method, only point-to-point paths can
be monitored. To have an IP (TCP/UDP) flow that follows a point-to- be monitored. To have an IP (TCP/UDP) flow that follows a point-to-
point path, we have to define, with a specific value, 5 point path, in general we have to define, with a specific value, 5
identification fields (IP Source, IP Destination, Transport Protocol, identification fields (IP Source, IP Destination, Transport Protocol,
Source Port, Destination Port). Source Port, Destination Port).
Multipoint Alternate Marking enables the performance measurement for Multipoint Alternate Marking enables the performance measurement for
multipoint flows selected by identification fields without any multipoint flows selected by identification fields without any
constraints (even the entire network production traffic). It is also constraints (even the entire network production traffic). It is also
possible to use multiple marking points for the same monitored flow. possible to use multiple marking points for the same monitored flow.
4.1. Monitoring Network 4.1. Monitoring Network
skipping to change at page 10, line 46 skipping to change at page 10, line 46
The rest of the document assumes that the traffic is going from left The rest of the document assumes that the traffic is going from left
to right in order to simplify the explanation. But the analysis done to right in order to simplify the explanation. But the analysis done
for one direction applies equally to all directions. for one direction applies equally to all directions.
4.2. Network Packet Loss 4.2. Network Packet Loss
Since all the packets of the considered flow leaving the network have Since all the packets of the considered flow leaving the network have
previously entered the network, the number of packets counted by all previously entered the network, the number of packets counted by all
the input nodes is always greater than, or equal to, the number of the input nodes is always greater than, or equal to, the number of
packets counted by all the output nodes. Noninitial fragments are packets counted by all the output nodes. Non-initial fragments are
not considered here. not considered here.
The assumption is the use of the Alternate-Marking method. In the In the case of no packet loss occurring in the marking period, if all
case of no packet loss occurring in the marking period, if all the the input and output points of the network domain to be monitored are
input and output points of the network domain to be monitored are
measurement points, the sum of the number of packets on all the measurement points, the sum of the number of packets on all the
ingress interfaces equals the number on egress interfaces for the ingress interfaces equals the number on egress interfaces for the
monitored flow. In this circumstance, if no packet loss occurs, the monitored flow. In this circumstance, if no packet loss occurs, the
intermediate measurement points only have the task of splitting the intermediate measurement points only have the task of splitting the
measurement. measurement.
It is possible to define the Network Packet Loss of one monitored It is possible to define the Network Packet Loss of one monitored
flow for a single period. In a packet network, the number of lost flow for a single period. In a packet network, the number of lost
packets is the number of packets counted by the input nodes minus the packets is the number of packets counted by the input nodes minus the
number of packets counted by the output nodes. This is true for number of packets counted by the output nodes. This is true for
skipping to change at page 15, line 18 skipping to change at page 15, line 18
<> R8 <>--- <> R8 <>---
+------+ +------+
Figure 3: Clusters Example Figure 3: Clusters Example
There are clusters with more than two nodes as well as two-node There are clusters with more than two nodes as well as two-node
clusters. In the two-node clusters, the loss is on the link (Cluster clusters. In the two-node clusters, the loss is on the link (Cluster
4). In more-than-two-node clusters, the loss is on the cluster, but 4). In more-than-two-node clusters, the loss is on the cluster, but
we cannot know in which link (Cluster 1, 2, or 3). we cannot know in which link (Cluster 1, 2, or 3).
In this way, the calculation of packet loss, delay and delay The algorithm, as applied in this example of a point-to-multipoint
variation can be made on a cluster basis. Note that the packet network, works for the more general case of multipoint-to-multipoint
counters for each marking period permit calculating the packet rate network in the same way. It should be highlighted that for a
on a cluster basis, so Committed Information Rate (CIR) and Excess multipoint-to-multipoint network the multiple sources MUST mark
Information Rate (EIR) could also be deduced on a cluster basis. coherently the traffic and MUST be synchronized with all the other
nodes according to the timing requirements detailed in Section 8.
When the clusters partition is done, the calculation of packet loss,
delay and delay variation can be made on a cluster basis. Note that
the packet counters for each marking period permit calculating the
packet rate on a cluster basis, so Committed Information Rate (CIR)
and Excess Information Rate (EIR) could also be deduced on a cluster
basis.
Obviously, by combining some clusters in a new connected subnetwork Obviously, by combining some clusters in a new connected subnetwork
(called a "super cluster"), the packet-loss rule is still true. the packet-loss rule is still true. So it is also possible to
consider combinations of clusters if and where it suits.
In this way, in a very large network, there is no need to configure In this way, in a very large network, there is no need to configure
detailed filter criteria to inspect the traffic. It is possible to detailed filter criteria to inspect the traffic. It is possible to
check a multipoint network and, in case of problems, go deep with a check a multipoint network and, in case of problems, go deep with a
step-by-step cluster analysis, but only for the cluster or step-by-step cluster analysis, but only for the cluster or
combination of clusters where the problem happens. combination of clusters where the problem happens.
In summary, once a flow is defined, the algorithm to build the In summary, once a flow is defined, the algorithm to build the
clusters partition is based on topological information; therefore, it clusters partition is based on topological information; therefore, it
considers all the possible links and nodes crossed by the given flow, considers all the possible links and nodes crossed by the given flow,
even if there is no traffic. So, if the flow does not enter or even if there is no traffic. So, if the flow does not enter or
traverse all the nodes, the counters have a nonzero value for the traverse all the nodes, the counters have a non-zero value for the
involved nodes and a zero value for the other nodes without traffic; involved nodes and a zero value for the other nodes without traffic;
but in the end, all the formulas are still valid. but in the end, all the formulas are still valid.
The algorithm described above is an iterative clustering algorithm, The algorithm described above network is an iterative clustering
but it is also possible to apply a recursive clustering algorithm by algorithm, but it is also possible to apply a recursive clustering
using the node-node adjacency matrix representation algorithm by using the node-node adjacency matrix representation
[IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM]. [IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM].
The complete and mathematical analysis of the possible algorithms for The complete and mathematical analysis of the possible algorithms for
clusters partition, including the considerations in terms of clusters partition, including the considerations in terms of
efficiency and a comparison between the different methods, is in the efficiency and a comparison between the different methods, is in the
paper [IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM]. paper [IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM].
6. Multipoint Packet Loss Measurement 6. Multipoint Packet Loss Measurement
The Network Packet Loss, defined in Section 4.2, valid for the an The Network Packet Loss, defined in Section 4.2, valid for the an
skipping to change at page 24, line 10 skipping to change at page 24, line 10
14. Acknowledgements 14. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Martin Duke and Tommy Pauly for their The authors would like to thank Martin Duke and Tommy Pauly for their
assistance and their detailed and precious reviews. assistance and their detailed and precious reviews.
15. References 15. References
15.1. Normative References 15.1. Normative References
[I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis] [I-D.fioccola-rfc8321bis]
Fioccola, G., Cociglio, M., Mirsky, G., Mizrahi, T., Zhou, Fioccola, G., Cociglio, M., Mirsky, G., Mizrahi, T., and
T., and X. Min, "Alternate-Marking Method", draft- T. Zhou, "Alternate-Marking Method", draft-fioccola-
fioccola-rfc8321bis-03 (work in progress), February 2022. rfc8321bis-04 (work in progress), April 2022.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5474] Duffield, N., Ed., Chiou, D., Claise, B., Greenberg, A., [RFC5474] Duffield, N., Ed., Chiou, D., Claise, B., Greenberg, A.,
Grossglauser, M., and J. Rexford, "A Framework for Packet Grossglauser, M., and J. Rexford, "A Framework for Packet
Selection and Reporting", RFC 5474, DOI 10.17487/RFC5474, Selection and Reporting", RFC 5474, DOI 10.17487/RFC5474,
March 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5474>. March 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5474>.
skipping to change at page 25, line 6 skipping to change at page 25, line 6
(AURA)", draft-ietf-ippm-route-10 (work in progress), (AURA)", draft-ietf-ippm-route-10 (work in progress),
August 2020. August 2020.
[I-D.mizrahi-ippm-marking] [I-D.mizrahi-ippm-marking]
Mizrahi, T., Fioccola, G., Cociglio, M., Chen, M., and G. Mizrahi, T., Fioccola, G., Cociglio, M., Chen, M., and G.
Mirsky, "Marking Methods for Performance Measurement", Mirsky, "Marking Methods for Performance Measurement",
draft-mizrahi-ippm-marking-00 (work in progress), October draft-mizrahi-ippm-marking-00 (work in progress), October
2021. 2021.
[I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework] [I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework]
Song, H., Qin, F., Chen, H., Jin, J., and J. Shin, "In- Song, H., Qin, F., Chen, H., Jin, J., and J. Shin, "A
situ Flow Information Telemetry", draft-song-opsawg-ifit- Framework for In-situ Flow Information Telemetry", draft-
framework-16 (work in progress), October 2021. song-opsawg-ifit-framework-17 (work in progress), February
2022.
[I-D.zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking] [I-D.zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking]
Zhou, T., Fioccola, G., Liu, Y., Lee, S., Cociglio, M., Zhou, T., Fioccola, G., Liu, Y., Cociglio, M., Lee, S.,
and W. Li, "Enhanced Alternate Marking Method", draft- and W. Li, "Enhanced Alternate Marking Method", draft-
zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking-08 (work in zhou-ippm-enhanced-alternate-marking-09 (work in
progress), January 2022. progress), February 2022.
[IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM] [IEEE-ACM-ToN-MPNPM]
IEEE/ACM TRANSACTION ON NETWORKING, "Multipoint Passive IEEE/ACM TRANSACTION ON NETWORKING, "Multipoint Passive
Monitoring in Packet Networks", Monitoring in Packet Networks",
DOI 10.1109/TNET.2019.2950157, 2019. DOI 10.1109/TNET.2019.2950157, 2019.
[IEEE-Network-PNPM] [IEEE-Network-PNPM]
IEEE Network, "AM-PM: Efficient Network Telemetry using IEEE Network, "AM-PM: Efficient Network Telemetry using
Alternate Marking", DOI 10.1109/MNET.2019.1800152, 2019. Alternate Marking", DOI 10.1109/MNET.2019.1800152, 2019.
skipping to change at page 26, line 34 skipping to change at page 26, line 34
and Timing" and Timing"
o Renamed old section on "Multipoint Packet Loss" as "Network Packet o Renamed old section on "Multipoint Packet Loss" as "Network Packet
Loss" Loss"
o New section on "Multipoint Packet Loss Measurement" o New section on "Multipoint Packet Loss Measurement"
o Renamed section on "Multipoint Performance Measurement" as o Renamed section on "Multipoint Performance Measurement" as
"Extension of the Method to Multipoint Flows" "Extension of the Method to Multipoint Flows"
Changes in v-(04) include:
o Revised section 5.1 on "Algorithm for Clusters Partition"
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Giuseppe Fioccola (editor) Giuseppe Fioccola (editor)
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Riesstrasse, 25 Riesstrasse, 25
Munich 80992 Munich 80992
Germany Germany
Email: giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com Email: giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com
Mauro Cociglio Mauro Cociglio
Telecom Italia Telecom Italia
Via Reiss Romoli, 274 Via Reiss Romoli, 274
Torino 10148 Torino 10148
Italy Italy
Email: mauro.cociglio@telecomitalia.it Email: mauro.cociglio@telecomitalia.it
Amedeo Sapio Amedeo Sapio
Intel Corporation Intel Corporation
4750 Patrick Henry Dr. 4750 Patrick Henry Dr.
Santa Clara, CA 95054 Santa Clara, CA 95054
USA USA
Email: amedeo.sapio@intel.com Email: amedeo.sapio@intel.com
Riccardo Sisto Riccardo Sisto
Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Torino
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
39 lines changed or deleted 51 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/