idnits 2.17.1 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-score-11.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. 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 contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (July 2, 2012) is 4315 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for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-34) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt-10 == Outdated reference: A later version (-33) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-delay-09 == Outdated reference: A later version (-31) exists of draft-dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover-07 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 2 comments (--).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 Simula Research Laboratory 4 Intended status: Informational M. Tuexen 5 Expires: January 3, 2013 Univ. of Applied Sciences 6 Muenster 7 July 2, 2012 9 Reliable Server Pooling (RSerPool) Bakeoff Scoring 10 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-score-11.txt 12 Abstract 14 This memo describes some of the scoring to be used in the testing of 15 Reliable Server Pooling protocols ASAP and ENRP at upcoming bakeoffs. 17 Status of this Memo 19 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 20 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 24 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 25 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 28 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 29 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 30 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 3, 2013. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 44 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 45 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 46 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 47 described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 50 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 51 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 52 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 53 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 54 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 55 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 56 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 57 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 58 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 59 than English. 61 Table of Contents 63 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 2. Aggregate Server Access Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 2.1. Pool Element Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 2.2. Pool User Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 2.3. ENRP Server Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 68 3. Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 3.1. Peer Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 3.2. Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 71 3.3. Synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 72 3.4. Takeover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 4. Bonus Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 74 5. Reference Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 75 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 76 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 77 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 78 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 79 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 80 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 82 1. Introduction 84 This document will be used as a basis for point scoring at upcoming 85 RSerPool bakeoffs. Its purpose is similar to that described in 86 RFC1025. It is hoped that a clear definition of where and how to 87 score points will further the development of RSerPool. 89 Note that while attending a bakeoff no one else will score your 90 points for you. We trust that all implementations will faithfully 91 record their points that are received honestly. Note also that these 92 scores are NOT to be used for marketing purposes. They are for the 93 use of the implementations to know how well they are doing. The only 94 reporting that will be done is a basic summary to the Reliable Server 95 Pooling Working Group but please note that NO company or 96 implementation names will be attached. 98 2. Aggregate Server Access Protocol 100 The ASAP protocol and useful extensions are described in the follwing 101 documents: 103 o [RFC5352] 105 o [RFC5354] 107 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt] 109 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay] 111 2.1. Pool Element Communication 113 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 114 successfully communicate with. 116 o 2 Successful ASAP Registration Request of a PE in a pool using 117 Round Robin policy and handling of ASAP Registration Response. 119 o 2 Failing ASAP Registration Request of a PE requesting Least Used 120 policy in a pool using Round Robin policy and appropriate handling 121 of ASAP Registration Response (e.g. printing error message, but 122 not retrying registration). 124 o 2 Successful re-registration of a PE in a pool using Round Robin 125 policy. 127 o 2 Successful ASAP Deregistration Request of the PE from its pool 128 and handling of ASAP Deregistration Response. 130 o 2 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive without Home bit 131 set, i.e. answering with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack. 133 o 5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive with Home bit 134 set: respond with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack and use new ENRP 135 server for re-registration. 137 o 5 Successful connection to and registration at an ENRP server 138 announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces. 140 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Least Used policy. 142 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Round Robin 143 policy. 145 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Random policy. 147 o 1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Random policy. 149 2.2. Pool User Communication 151 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 152 successfully communicate with. 154 o 5 Successful ASAP Handle Resolution in a pool using Round Robin 155 policy, correct handling of ASAP Handle Resolution Response. 157 o 2 Successful failure reporting using ASAP Endpoint Unreachable. 159 o 5 Successful connection to and handle resolution at ENRP server 160 announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces. 162 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Least Used policy. 164 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Round 165 Robin policy. 167 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Random policy. 169 o 1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Random 170 policy. 172 2.3. ENRP Server Communication 174 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 175 successfully communicate with. 177 o 2 Successful handling of an ASAP Registration Request into a pool 178 using Round Robin policy (ENRP server answers with successful ASAP 179 Registration Response). 181 o 2 Rejecting registration of a PE requesting Round Robin policy 182 into a pool using Least Used policy. 184 o 5 Rejecting registration of a PE with all addresses *not* being 185 part of the ASAP association. 187 o 5 Successful registration of a PE with some addresses *not* being 188 part of the ASAP association. The invalid addresses may *not* go 189 into the handlespace. 191 o 5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Unreachable messages. The 192 ENRP server must remove the given PE after MAX-BAD-PE-REPORTS=3 193 unreachability reports. 195 o 2 Sending regular ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alives to its PEs. 197 o 2 Removing PE not answering to ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive. 199 3. Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol 201 The ENRP protocol and useful extensions are described in the follwing 202 documents: 204 o [RFC5353] 206 o [RFC5354] 208 o [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] 210 3.1. Peer Management 212 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 213 successfully communicate with. 215 o 2 Sending ENRP Presence to a new ENRP server. 217 o 2 Sending ENRP Presences in the interval given by PEER-HEARTBEAT- 218 CYCLE. 220 o 5 Requesting peer list from new ENRP server using ENRP Peer List 221 Request, handling ENRP Peer List Response and adding entries to 222 its own peer list. 224 o 2 Handling ENRP Peer List Request and replying with own peer list 225 in ENRP Peer List Response. 227 o 5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle 228 Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit 229 set) and inserting entries into its own handlespace copy. 231 o 5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle 232 Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set, 233 requesting more entries and inserting entries into its own 234 handlespace copy. 236 o 2 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace 237 in ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit). 239 o 10 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace 240 in ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set, remembering point to 241 continue from, responding next block of handlespace entries upon 242 following ENRP Handle Table Request, etc. until transfer of 243 handlespace data is complete. 245 o 5 Successful addition of new ENRP server announcing itself via 246 multicast ENRP Presence (including association establishment as 247 well as download of peer list and handlespace). 249 3.2. Update 251 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 252 successfully communicate with. 254 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update adding a PE. 256 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update updating a PE. The changes must 257 be entered into the local handlespace copy. 259 o 2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update removing a PE. 261 3.3. Synchronization 263 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 264 successfully communicate with. 266 o 5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 267 reception of ENRP Presence (due to additional PE), request of 268 Handle Table with W-bit set, integration of missing PE into local 269 handlespace copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP 270 Presence. 272 o 5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 273 reception of ENRP Presence (due to out-of-date PE), request of 274 Handle Table with W-bit set, removal of PE from local handlespace 275 copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP Presence. 277 o 10 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon 278 reception of ENRP Presence (due to multiple new and out-of-date PE 279 identities; size of PE identities is larger than maximum ENRP 280 message size), request of Handle Table with W-bit set, handling of 281 ENRP Handle Table Responses with M-bit set, removal of out-of-date 282 PEs, integration of new PEs into the local handlespace copy and 283 reporting correct checksum in own ENRP Presence. 285 3.4. Takeover 287 These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you 288 successfully communicate with. The setup contains your ENRP server 289 plus a set of peers running another implementation. 291 o 5 Successfully detecting the failure of a remote peer and 292 initiating a takeover procedure. 294 o 5 Acknowledging another peer's takeover and aborting own takeover 295 procedure. 297 o 10 Correctly handling a remote peer's Takeover Server message, 298 including ownership change for the remote peer's PEs. 300 o 10 Successfully taking over a dead peer, including ownership 301 change and informing the PEs taken over. 303 4. Bonus Points 305 You can also earn Bonus Points: 307 o 20 points for the ENRP server handling the largest number of PEs. 309 o 20 points for the ENRP server achieving the highest handle 310 resolution throughput for a pool containing 100 (should this be 311 larger?) PEs. 313 Please note that the whole period of the bakeoff is relevant. 315 5. Reference Implementation 317 The RSerPool reference implementation RSPLIB can be found at 319 [RSerPoolPage]. It supports the functionalities defined by 320 [RFC5351], [RFC5352], [RFC5353], [RFC5354] and [RFC5356] as well as 321 the options [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt], 322 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] and 323 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay]. The MIB module is defined in 324 [RFC5525]. An introduction to this implementation is provided in 325 [Dre2006]. 327 6. Security Considerations 329 This document does only describe test scenarios and therefore does 330 not introduce any new security issues. 332 For security considerations of the RSerPool protocols see [RFC3237], 333 [RFC5351], [RFC5352], [RFC5353], [RFC5354]. [RFC5356] and in 334 particular [RFC5355]. 336 7. IANA Considerations 338 This document introduces no additional considerations for IANA. 340 8. References 342 8.1. Normative References 344 [RFC3237] Tuexen, M., Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Shore, M., Ong, L., 345 Loughney, J., and M. Stillman, "Requirements for Reliable 346 Server Pooling", RFC 3237, January 2002. 348 [RFC5351] Lei, P., Ong, L., Tuexen, M., and T. Dreibholz, "An 349 Overview of Reliable Server Pooling Protocols", RFC 5351, 350 September 2008. 352 [RFC5352] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, 353 "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP)", RFC 5352, 354 September 2008. 356 [RFC5353] Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Stillman, M., Tuexen, M., and A. 357 Silverton, "Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol 358 (ENRP)", RFC 5353, September 2008. 360 [RFC5354] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, 361 "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) and Endpoint 362 Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) Parameters", 363 RFC 5354, September 2008. 365 [RFC5355] Stillman, M., Gopal, R., Guttman, E., Sengodan, S., and M. 366 Holdrege, "Threats Introduced by Reliable Server Pooling 367 (RSerPool) and Requirements for Security in Response to 368 Threats", RFC 5355, September 2008. 370 [RFC5356] Dreibholz, T. and M. Tuexen, "Reliable Server Pooling 371 Policies", RFC 5356, September 2008. 373 [RFC5525] Dreibholz, T. and J. Mulik, "Reliable Server Pooling MIB 374 Module Definition", RFC 5525, April 2009. 376 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt] 377 Dreibholz, T., "Handle Resolution Option for ASAP", 378 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-asap-hropt-10 (work in progress), 379 December 2011. 381 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-delay] 382 Dreibholz, T. and X. Zhou, "Definition of a Delay 383 Measurement Infrastructure and Delay-Sensitive Least-Used 384 Policy for Reliable Server Pooling", 385 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-delay-09 (work in progress), 386 December 2011. 388 [I-D.dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover] 389 Dreibholz, T. and X. Zhou, "Takeover Suggestion Flag for 390 the ENRP Handle Update Message", 391 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-enrp-takeover-07 (work in 392 progress), December 2011. 394 8.2. Informative References 396 [Dre2006] Dreibholz, T., "Reliable Server Pooling - Evaluation, 397 Optimization and Extension of a Novel IETF Architecture", 398 March 2007. 400 [RSerPoolPage] 401 Dreibholz, T., "Thomas Dreibholz's RSerPool Page", 2012. 403 Authors' Addresses 405 Thomas Dreibholz 406 Simula Research Laboratory, Network Systems Group 407 Martin Linges vei 17 408 1364 Fornebu, Oestlandet 409 Norway 411 Phone: +47-6782-8200 412 Fax: +47-6782-8201 413 Email: dreibh@simula.no 414 URI: http://www.iem.uni-due.de/~dreibh/ 416 Michael Tuexen 417 University of Applied Sciences Muenster 418 Stegerwaldstrasse 39 419 48565 Steinfurt, Nordrhein-Westfalen 420 Germany 422 Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de