idnits 2.17.1 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-score-06.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** You're using the IETF Trust Provisions' Section 6.b License Notice from 12 Sep 2009 rather than the newer Notice from 28 Dec 2009. (See https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/) Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (January 5, 2010) is 5225 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-34) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt-04 == Outdated reference: A later version (-31) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover-01 == Outdated reference: A later version (-33) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-delay-03 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group T. Dreibholz 3 Internet-Draft University of Duisburg-Essen 4 Intended status: Informational M. Tuexen 5 Expires: July 9, 2010 Univ. of Applied Sciences Muenster 6 January 5, 2010 8 Reliable Server Pooling (RSerPool) Bakeoff Scoring 9 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-score-06.txt 11 Abstract 13 This memo describes some of the scoring to be used in the testing of 14 Reliable Server Pooling protocols ASAP and ENRP at upcoming bakeoffs. 16 Status of this Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 23 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 24 Drafts. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 34 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 35 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 37 This Internet-Draft will expire on July 9, 2010. 39 Copyright Notice 41 Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 42 document authors. All rights reserved. 44 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 45 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 46 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 47 publication of this document. Please review these documents 48 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 49 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 50 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 51 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 52 described in the BSD License. 54 Table of Contents 56 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 2. Aggregate Server Access Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 2.1. Pool Element Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 2.2. Pool User Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 2.3. ENRP Server Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 3. Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 3.1. Peer Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 3.2. Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 3.3. Synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 65 3.4. Takeover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 66 4. Bonus Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 67 5. Reference Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 68 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 69 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 71 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 72 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 73 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 75 1. Introduction 77 This document will be used as a basis for point scoring at upcoming 78 RSerPool bakeoffs. Its purpose is similar to that described in 79 RFC1025. It is hoped that a clear definition of where and how to 80 score points will further the development of RSerPool. 82 Note that while attending a bakeoff no one else will score your 83 points for you. We trust that all implementations will faithfully 84 record their points that are received honestly. Note also that these 85 scores are NOT to be used for marketing purposes. They are for the 86 use of the implementations to know how well they are doing. The only 87 reporting that will be done is a basic summary to the Reliable Server 88 Pooling Working Group but please note that NO company or 89 implementation names will be attached. 91 2. Aggregate Server Access Protocol 93 The ASAP protocol is described in the follwing documents: 95 o [RFC5352] 97 o [RFC5354] 99 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt] 101 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay] 103 2.1. Pool Element Communication 105 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 106 successfully communicate with. 108 o 2 Successful ASAP Registration Request of a PE in a pool using 109 Round Robin policy and handling of ASAP Registration Response. 111 o 2 Failing ASAP Registration Request of a PE requesting Least Used 112 policy in a pool using Round Robin policy and appropriate handling 113 of ASAP Registration Response (e.g. printing error message, but 114 not retrying registration). 116 o 2 Successful re-registration of a PE in a pool using Round Robin 117 policy. 119 o 2 Successful ASAP Deregistration Request of the PE from its pool 120 and handling of ASAP Deregistration Response. 122 o 2 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive without Home bit 123 set, i.e. answering with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack. 125 o 5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive with Home bit 126 set: respond with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack and use new ENRP 127 server for re-registration. 129 o 5 Successful connection to and registration at an ENRP server 130 announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces. 132 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Least Used policy. 134 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Round Robin 135 policy. 137 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Random policy. 139 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Random policy. 141 2.2. Pool User Communication 143 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 144 successfully communicate with. 146 o 5 Successful ASAP Handle Resolution in a pool using Round Robin 147 policy, correct handling of ASAP Handle Resolution Response. 149 o 2 Successful failure reporting using ASAP Endpoint Unreachable. 151 o 5 Successful connection to and handle resolution at ENRP server 152 announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces. 154 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Least Used policy. 156 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Round 157 Robin policy. 159 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Random policy. 161 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Random 162 policy. 164 2.3. ENRP Server Communication 166 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 167 successfully communicate with. 169 o 2 Successful handling of an ASAP Registration Request into a pool 170 using Round Robin policy (ENRP server answers with successful ASAP 171 Registration Response). 173 o 2 Rejecting registration of a PE requesting Round Robin policy 174 into a pool using Least Used policy. 176 o 5 Rejecting registration of a PE with all addresses *not* being 177 part of the ASAP association. 179 o 5 Successful registration of a PE with some addresses *not* being 180 part of the ASAP association. The invalid addresses may *not* go 181 into the handlespace. 183 o 5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Unreachable messages. The 184 ENRP server must remove the given PE after MAX-BAD-PE-REPORTS=3 185 unreachability reports. 187 o 2 Sending regular ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alives to its PEs. 189 o 2 Removing PE not answering to ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive. 191 3. Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol 193 The ENRP protocol is described in the follwing documents: 195 o [RFC5353] 197 o [RFC5354] 199 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] 201 3.1. Peer Management 203 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 204 successfully communicate with. 206 o 2 Sending ENRP Presence to a new ENRP server. 208 o 2 Sending ENRP Presences in the interval given by PEER-HEARTBEAT- 209 CYCLE. 211 o 5 Requesting peer list from new ENRP server using ENRP Peer List 212 Request, handling ENRP Peer List Response and adding entries to 213 its own peer list. 215 o 2 Handling ENRP Peer List Request and replying with own peer list 216 in ENRP Peer List Response. 218 o 5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle 219 Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit 220 set) and inserting entries into its own handlespace copy. 222 o 5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle 223 Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set, 224 requesting more entries and inserting entries into its own 225 handlespace copy. 227 o 2 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace 228 in ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit). 230 o 10 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace 231 in ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set, remembering point to 232 continue from, responding next block of handlespace entries upon 233 following ENRP Handle Table Request, etc. until transfer of 234 handlespace data is complete. 236 o 5 Successful addition of new ENRP server announcing itself via 237 multicast ENRP Presence (including association establishment as 238 well as download of peer list and handlespace). 240 3.2. Update 242 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 243 successfully communicate with. 245 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update adding a PE. 247 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update updating a PE. The changes must 248 be entered into the local handlespace copy. 250 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update removing a PE. 252 3.3. Synchronization 254 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 255 successfully communicate with. 257 o 5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 258 reception of ENRP Presence (due to additional PE), request of 259 Handle Table with W-bit set, integration of missing PE into local 260 handlespace copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP 261 Presence. 263 o 5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 264 reception of ENRP Presence (due to out-of-date PE), request of 265 Handle Table with W-bit set, removal of PE from local handlespace 266 copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP Presence. 268 o 10 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 269 reception of ENRP Presence (due to multiple new and out-of-date PE 270 identities; size of PE identities is larger than maximum ENRP 271 message size), request of Handle Table with W-bit set, handling of 272 ENRP Handle Table Responses with M-bit set, removal of out-of-date 273 PEs, integration of new PEs into the local handlespace copy and 274 reporting correct checksum in own ENRP Presence. 276 3.4. Takeover 278 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 279 successfully communicate with. The setup contains your ENRP server 280 plus a set of peers running another implementation. 282 o 5 Successfully detecting the failure of a remote peer and 283 initiating a takeover procedure. 285 o 5 Acknowledging another peer's takeover and aborting own takeover 286 procedure. 288 o 10 Correctly handling a remote peer's Takeover Server message, 289 including ownership change for the remote peer's PEs. 291 o 10 Successfully taking over a dead peer, including ownership 292 change and informing the PEs taken over. 294 4. Bonus Points 296 You can also earn Bonus Points: 298 o 20 points for the ENRP server handling the largest number of PEs. 300 o 20 points for the ENRP server achieving the highest handle 301 resolution throughput for a pool containing 100 (should this be 302 larger?) PEs. 304 Please note that the whole period of the bakeoff is relevant. 306 5. Reference Implementation 308 The RSerPool reference implementation RSPLIB can be found at 310 [RSerPoolPage]. It supports the functionalities defined by 311 [RFC5351], [RFC5352], [RFC5353], [RFC5354] and [RFC5356] as well as 312 the options [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt], 313 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] and 314 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay]. An introduction to this 315 implementation is provided in [Dre2006]. 317 6. Security Considerations 319 This document does only describe test scenarios and therefore does 320 not introduce any new security issues. 322 For security considerations of the RSerPool protocols see [RFC3237], 323 [RFC5351], [RFC5352], [RFC5353], [RFC5354]. [RFC5356] and in 324 particular [RFC5355]. 326 7. IANA Considerations 328 This document introduces no additional considerations for IANA. 330 8. References 332 8.1. Normative References 334 [RFC3237] Tuexen, M., Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Shore, M., Ong, L., 335 Loughney, J., and M. Stillman, "Requirements for Reliable 336 Server Pooling", RFC 3237, January 2002. 338 [RFC5351] Lei, P., Ong, L., Tuexen, M., and T. Dreibholz, "An 339 Overview of Reliable Server Pooling Protocols", RFC 5351, 340 September 2008. 342 [RFC5352] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, 343 "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP)", RFC 5352, 344 September 2008. 346 [RFC5353] Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Stillman, M., Tuexen, M., and A. 347 Silverton, "Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol 348 (ENRP)", RFC 5353, September 2008. 350 [RFC5354] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, 351 "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) and Endpoint 352 Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) Parameters", 353 RFC 5354, September 2008. 355 [RFC5355] Stillman, M., Gopal, R., Guttman, E., Sengodan, S., and M. 356 Holdrege, "Threats Introduced by Reliable Server Pooling 357 (RSerPool) and Requirements for Security in Response to 358 Threats", RFC 5355, September 2008. 360 [RFC5356] Dreibholz, T. and M. Tuexen, "Reliable Server Pooling 361 Policies", RFC 5356, September 2008. 363 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt] 364 Dreibholz, T., "Handle Resolution Option for ASAP", 365 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt-04 (work in progress), 366 January 2009. 368 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] 369 Dreibholz, T. and X. Zhou, "Takeover Suggestion Flag for 370 the ENRP Handle Update Message", 371 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover-01 (work in 372 progress), January 2009. 374 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay] 375 Dreibholz, T. and X. Zhou, "Definition of a Delay 376 Measurement Infrastructure and Delay-Sensitive Least-Used 377 Policy for Reliable Server Pooling", 378 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-delay-03 (work in progress), 379 January 2009. 381 8.2. Informative References 383 [RSerPoolPage] 384 Dreibholz, T., "Thomas Dreibholz's RSerPool Page", 385 URL: http://tdrwww.iem.uni-due.de.de/dreibholz/rserpool/. 387 [Dre2006] Dreibholz, T., "Reliable Server Pooling -- Evaluation, 388 Optimization and Extension of a Novel IETF Architecture", 389 Ph.D. Thesis University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty of 390 Economics, Institute for Computer Science and Business 391 Information Systems, URL: http:// 392 duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/ 393 Derivate-16326/Dre2006-final.pdf, March 2007. 395 Authors' Addresses 397 Thomas Dreibholz 398 University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Experimental Mathematics 399 Ellernstrasse 29 400 45326 Essen, Nordrhein-Westfalen 401 Germany 403 Phone: +49-201-1837637 404 Fax: +49-201-1837673 405 Email: dreibh@iem.uni-due.de 406 URI: http://www.iem.uni-due.de/~dreibh/ 408 Michael Tuexen 409 University of Applied Sciences Muenster 410 Stegerwaldstrasse 39 411 48565 Steinfurt, Nordrhein-Westfalen 412 Germany 414 Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de