idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-i2rs-traceability-01.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too? Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (March 4, 2015) is 3334 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-07 == Outdated reference: A later version (-11) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement-04 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 I2RS J. Clarke 3 Internet-Draft G. Salgueiro 4 Intended status: Informational C. Pignataro 5 Expires: September 5, 2015 Cisco 6 March 4, 2015 8 Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) Traceability: Framework and 9 Information Model 10 draft-ietf-i2rs-traceability-01 12 Abstract 14 This document describes a framework for traceability in the Interface 15 to the Routing System (I2RS) and information model for that 16 framework. It specifies the motivation, requirements, use cases, and 17 defines an information model for recording interactions between 18 elements implementing the I2RS protocol. This framework provides a 19 consistent tracing interface for components implementing the I2RS 20 architecture to record what was done, by which component, and when. 21 It aims to improve the management of I2RS implementations, and can be 22 used for troubleshooting, auditing, forensics, and accounting 23 purposes. 25 Status of This Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 5, 2015. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 60 2. Terminology and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 4. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 5. Information Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 5.1. I2RS Traceability Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 5.2. I2RS Trace Log Mandatory Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 66 5.3. End of Message Marker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 67 5.4. I2RS Trace Log Extensibility and Optional Fields . . . . 7 68 6. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 69 7. Operational Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 7.1. Trace Log Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 71 7.2. Trace Log Temporary Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 72 7.3. Trace Log Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 73 7.4. Trace Log Retrieval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 74 7.4.1. Retrieval Via Syslog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 75 7.4.2. Retrieval Via I2RS Information Collection . . . . . . 10 76 7.4.3. Retrieval Via I2RS Pub-Sub . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 77 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 78 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 79 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 80 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 81 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 82 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 83 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 85 1. Introduction 87 The architecture for the Interface to the Routing System 88 ([I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture]) specifies that I2RS Clients wishing to 89 retrieve or change routing state on a routing element MUST 90 authenticate to an I2RS Agent. The I2RS Client will have a unique 91 identity it provides for authentication, and should provide another, 92 opaque identity for applications communicating through it. The 93 programming of routing state will produce a return code containing 94 the results of the specified operation and associated reason(s) for 95 the result. All of this is critical information to be used for 96 understanding the history of I2RS interactions. 98 This document describes use cases for I2RS traceability. Based on 99 these use cases, the document proposes an information model and 100 reporting requirements to provide for effective recording of I2RS 101 interactions. In this context, effective troubleshooting means being 102 able to identify what operation was performed by a specific I2RS 103 Client, what was the result of the operation, and when that operation 104 was performed. 106 Discussions about the retention of the data logged as part of I2RS 107 traceability, while important, are outside of the scope of this 108 document. 110 2. Terminology and Conventions 112 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 113 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 114 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 116 The architecture specification for I2RS [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 117 defines additional terms used in this document that are specific to 118 the I2RS domain, such as "I2RS Agent", "I2RS Client", etc. The 119 reader is expected to be familiar with the terminology and concepts 120 defined in [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture]. 122 The IP addresses used in the example in this document correspond to 123 the documentation address blocks 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1), 124 198.51.100.0/24 (TEST-NET-2) and 203.0.113.0/24 (TEST-NET-3) as 125 described in [RFC5737]. 127 3. Motivation 129 As networks scale and policy becomes an increasingly important part 130 of the control plane that creates and maintains the forwarding state, 131 operational complexity increases as well. I2RS offers more granular 132 and coherent control over policy and control plane state, but it also 133 removes or reduces the locality of the policy that has been applied 134 to the control plane at any individual forwarding device. The 135 ability to automate and abstract even complex policy-based controls 136 highlights the need for an equally scalable traceability function to 137 provide event-level granularity of the routing system compliant with 138 the requirements of I2RS (Section 5 of 139 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-problem-statement]). 141 4. Use Cases 143 An obvious motivation for I2RS traceability is the need to 144 troubleshoot and identify root-causes of problems in these 145 increasingly complex routing systems. For example, since I2RS is a 146 high-throughput multi-channel, full duplex and highly responsive 147 interface, I2RS Clients may be performing a large number of 148 operations on I2RS Agents concurrently or at nearly the same time and 149 quite possibly in very rapid succession. As these many changes are 150 made, the network reacts accordingly. These changes might lead to a 151 race condition, performance issues, data loss, or disruption of 152 services. In order to isolate the root cause of these issues it is 153 critical that a network operator or administrator has visibility into 154 what changes were made via I2RS at a specific time. 156 Some network environments have strong auditing requirements for 157 configuration and runtime changes. Other environments have policies 158 that require saving logging information for operational or regulatory 159 compliance considerations. These requirements therefore demand that 160 I2RS provides an account of changes made to network element routing 161 systems. 163 As I2RS becomes increasingly pervasive in routing environments, a 164 traceability model offers significant advantages and facilitates the 165 following use cases: 167 o Automated event correlation, trend analysis, and anomaly 168 detection. 170 o Trace log storage for offline (manual or tools) analysis. 172 o Improved accounting of routing system operations. 174 o Standardized structured data format for writing common tools. 176 o Common reference for automated testing and incident reporting. 178 o Real-time monitoring and troubleshooting. 180 o Enhanced network audit, management and forensic analysis 181 capabilities. 183 5. Information Model 185 5.1. I2RS Traceability Framework 187 This section describes a framework for I2RS traceability based on the 188 I2RS Architecture. Some notable elements on the architecture are 189 highlighted herein. 191 The interaction between the optional northbound application, I2RS 192 Client, I2RS Agent, the Routing System and the data captured in the 193 I2RS trace log is shown in Figure 1. 195 +----------------+ 196 |Application | 197 |.............. | 198 | Application ID | 199 +----------------+ 200 ^ 201 | 0 .. N 202 | 203 V 204 +-------------+ 205 |I2RS Client | 206 |.............| 207 | Client ID | 208 +-------------+ 209 ^ 210 | 1 .. N 211 | 212 V 213 +-------------+ +-----------------------------+ 214 |I2RS Agent |---------------->|Trace Log | 215 | | |.............................| 216 +-------------+ |Log Entry [1 .. N] | 217 ^ |.............................| 218 | |Request Timestamp | 219 | |Client ID | 220 | ^ |Secondary ID | 221 Operation + | Result Code |Client Address | 222 Op Data | |Operation | 223 V | |Operation Data Present | 224 | |Operation Data | 225 | |Transaction ID | 226 | |Result Code | 227 | |Result Timestamp | 228 V |End Of Message | 229 +-------------+ +-----------------------------+ 230 |Routing | 231 |System | 232 +-------------+ 234 Figure 1: I2RS Interaction Trace Log Capture 236 5.2. I2RS Trace Log Mandatory Fields 238 In order to ensure that each I2RS interaction can be properly traced 239 back to the Client that made the request at a specific point in time, 240 the following information MUST be collected and stored by the Agent. 242 The list below describes the fields captured in the I2RS trace log. 244 Entry ID: This is a unique identifier for each entry in the I2RS 245 trace log. Since multiple operations can occur from the same 246 Client at the same time, it is important to have an identifier 247 that can be unambiguously associated to a specific entry. 249 Request Timestamp: The specific time, adhering to [RFC3339] format, 250 at which the I2RS operation was received by the Agent. Given that 251 many I2RS operations can occur in rapid succession, the use of 252 fractional seconds MUST be used to provide adequate granularity. 253 Fractional seconds SHOULD be expressed using human-readable 32-bit 254 second and 32-bit microsecond granularity in second.microsecond 255 format. 257 Client Identity: The I2RS Client identity used to authenticate the 258 Client to the I2RS Agent. 260 Secondary Identity: This is an opaque identity that may be known to 261 the Client from a northbound controlling application. This is 262 used to trace the northbound application driving the actions of 263 the Client. The Client may not provide this identity to the Agent 264 if there is no external application driving the Client. However, 265 this field MUST be logged. If the Client does not provide an 266 application ID, then the Agent MUST log an UNAVAILABLE value in 267 the field. 269 Client Address: This is the network address of the Client that 270 connected to the Agent. For example, this may be an IPv4 or IPv6 271 address. [Note: will I2RS support interactions that have no 272 network address? If so this field will need to be updated.] 274 Operation: This is the I2RS operation performed. For example, this 275 may be an add route operation if a route is being inserted into a 276 routing table. 278 Operation Data Present: This is a Boolean field that indicates 279 whether or not addition per-Operation Data is present. 281 Operation Data: This field comprises the data passed to the Agent 282 to complete the desired operation. For example, if the operation 283 is a route add operation, the Operation Data would include the 284 route prefix, prefix length, and next hop information to be 285 inserted as well as the specific routing table to which the route 286 will be added. The operation data can also include interface 287 information. If Operation Data is provided, then the Operation 288 Data Present field MUST be set to TRUE. Some operations may not 289 provide operation data. In those cases, the Operation Data 290 Present field MUST be set to FALSE, and this field MUST be empty. 292 Transaction ID: The Transaction Identity is an opaque string that 293 represents this particular operation is part of a long-running 294 I2RS transaction that can consist of multiple, related I2RS 295 operations. Using this value, one can relate multiple log entries 296 together as they are part of a single, overall I2RS operation. 297 [NOTE: The requirements for transactions and long-running requests 298 are being discussed in the NETCONF working group, and this text 299 will follow the requirements set forth there.] 301 Result Code: This field holds the result of the operation. In the 302 case of RIB operations, this MUST be the return code as specified 303 in Section 4 of [I-D.nitinb-i2rs-rib-info-model]. The operation 304 may not complete with a result code in the case of a timeout. If 305 the operation fails to complete, it MUST still log the attempted 306 operation with an appropriate result code (e.g., a result code 307 indicating a timeout). 309 Result Timestamp: The specific time, adhering to [RFC3339] format, 310 at which the I2RS operation was completed by the Agent. If the 311 operation timed out, then this field will contain an all-zeroes 312 value of "0000-00-00T00:00:00.00". Given that many I2RS 313 operations can occur in rapid succession, the use of fractional 314 seconds MUST be used to provide adequate granularity. Fractional 315 seconds SHOULD be expressed using human-readable 32-bit second and 316 32-bit microsecond granularity in second.microsecond format. 318 End Of Message: Each log entry SHOULD have an appropriate End Of 319 Message (EOM) indicator. See section Section 5.3 below for more 320 details. 322 5.3. End of Message Marker 324 Because of variability within I2RS trace log fields, implementors 325 MUST use a format-appropriate end of message (EOM) indicator in order 326 to signify the end of a particular record. That is, regardless of 327 format, the I2RS trace log MUST provide a distinct way of 328 distinguishing between the end of one record and the beginning of 329 another. For example, in a linear formated log (similar to syslog) 330 the EOM marker may be a newline character. In an XML formated log, 331 the schema would provide for element tags that denote beginning and 332 end of records. In a JSON formated log, the syntax would provide 333 record separation (likely by comma-separated array elements). 335 5.4. I2RS Trace Log Extensibility and Optional Fields 337 [NOTE: This section is TBD based on further development of I2RS WG 338 milestones.] 340 6. Examples 342 Here is a proposed sample of what the fields might look like in an 343 I2RS trace log. This is only an early proposal. These values are 344 subject to change. 346 Entry ID: 1 347 Request Timestamp: 2013-09-03T12:00:01.21+00:00 348 Client ID: 5CEF1870-0326-11E2-A21F-0800200C9A66 349 Secondary ID com.example.RoutingApp 350 Client Address: 192.0.2.2 351 Operation: ROUTE_ADD 352 Operation Data Present: TRUE 353 Operation Data: PREFIX 203.0.113.0 PREFIX-LEN 24 NEXT-HOP 354 198.51.100.1 355 Transaction ID: 2763461 356 Result Code: SUCCESS(0) 357 Result Timestamp: 2013-09-03T12:00:01.23+00:00 359 7. Operational Guidance 361 Specific operational procedures regarding temporary log storage, 362 rollover, retrieval, and access of I2RS trace logs is out of scope 363 for this document. Organizations employing I2RS trace logging are 364 responsible for establishing proper operational procedures that are 365 appropriately suited to their specific requirements and operating 366 environment. In this section we only provide fundamental and 367 generalized operational guidelines that are implementation- 368 independent. 370 7.1. Trace Log Creation 372 The I2RS Agent interacts with the Routing and Signaling functions of 373 the Routing Element. Since the I2RS Agent is responsible for 374 actually making the routing changes on the associated network device, 375 it creates and maintains a log of operations that can be retrieved to 376 troubleshoot I2RS-related impact to the network. 378 7.2. Trace Log Temporary Storage 380 The trace information may be temporarily stored either in an in- 381 memory buffer or as a file local to the Agent. Care should be given 382 to the number of I2RS operations expected on a given Agent so that 383 the appropriate storage medium is used and to maximize the 384 effectiveness of the log while not impacting the performance and 385 health of the Agent. Another noteworthy consideration is that Client 386 requests may not always be processed synchronously or within a 387 bounded time period. Consequently, to ensure that trace log fields, 388 such as "Operation" and "Result Code", are part of the same trace log 389 record it may require buffering of the trace log entries. This 390 buffering may result in additional resource load on the Agent and the 391 network element. 393 Section 7.3 talks about rotating the trace log in order to preserve 394 the operation history without exhausting Agent or network device 395 resources. It is perfectly acceptable, therefore, to use both an in- 396 memory buffer for recent operations while rotating or archiving older 397 operations to a local file. 399 It is outside the scope of this document to specify the 400 implementation details (i.e., size, throughput, data protection, 401 privacy, etc.) for the physical storage of the I2RS log file. Data 402 retention policies of the I2RS traceability log is also outside the 403 scope of this document. 405 7.3. Trace Log Rotation 407 In order to prevent the exhaustion of resources on the I2RS Agent or 408 its associated network device, it is RECOMMENDED that the I2RS Agent 409 implements trace log rotation. The details on how this is achieved 410 are left to the implementation and outside the scope of this 411 document. However, it should be possible to do file rotation based 412 on either time or size of the current trace log. If file rollover is 413 supported, multiple archived log files should be supported in order 414 to maximize the troubleshooting and accounting benefits of the trace 415 log. 417 7.4. Trace Log Retrieval 419 Implementors are free to provide their own, proprietary interfaces 420 and develop custom tools to retrieve and display the I2RS trace log. 421 These may include the display of the I2RS trace log as Command Line 422 Interface (CLI) output. However, a key intention of defining this 423 information model is to establish an vendor-agnostic and consistent 424 interface to collect I2RS trace data. Correspondingly, retrieval of 425 the data should also be made vendor-agnostic. 427 Despite the fact that export of I2RS trace log information could be 428 an invaluable diagnostic tool for off-box analysis, exporting this 429 information MUST NOT interfere with the ability of the Agent to 430 process new incoming operations. 432 The following three sections describe potential ways the trace log 433 can be accessed. At least one of these three MUST be used, with the 434 I2RS mechanisms being preferred as they are vendor-independent 435 approaches to retrieving the data. 437 7.4.1. Retrieval Via Syslog 439 The syslog protocol [RFC5424] is a standard way of sending event 440 notification messages from a host to a collector. However, the 441 protocol does not define any standard format for storing the 442 messages, and thus implementors of I2RS tracing would be left to 443 define their own format. So, while the data contained within the 444 syslog message would adhere to this information model, and may be 445 consumable by a human operator, it would not be easily parseable by a 446 machine. Therefore, syslog MAY be employed as a means of retrieving 447 or disseminating the I2RS trace log contents. 449 If syslog is used for trace log retrieval, then existing logging 450 infrastructure and capabilities of syslog [RFC5424] should be 451 leveraged without the need to define or extend existing formats. For 452 example, the various fields described in Section 5.2 SHOULD be 453 modeled and encoded as Structured Data Elements (referred to as "SD- 454 ELEMENT"), as described in Section 6.3.1 of [RFC5424]. 456 7.4.2. Retrieval Via I2RS Information Collection 458 Section 6.7 of the I2RS architecture [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 459 defines a mechanism for information collection. The information 460 collected includes obtaining a snapshot of a large amount of data 461 from the network element. It is the intent of I2RS to make this data 462 available in an implementor-agnostic fashion. Therefore, the I2RS 463 trace log SHOULD be made available via the I2RS information 464 collection mechanism either as a single snapshot or via a 465 subscription stream. 467 7.4.3. Retrieval Via I2RS Pub-Sub 469 Section 6.7 of the I2RS architecture [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 470 goes on to define a publish-subscribe mechanism for a feed of changes 471 happening within the I2RS layer. I2RS Agents SHOULD support 472 publishing I2RS trace log information to that feed as described in 473 that document. Subscribers would then receive a live stream of I2RS 474 interactions in trace log format and could flexibly choose to do a 475 number of things with the log messages. For example, the subscribers 476 could log the messages to a datastore, aggregate and summarize 477 interactions from a single Client, etc. Using pub-sub for the 478 purpose of logging I2RS interactions augments the areas described by 479 [I-D.camwinget-i2rs-pubsub-sec]. The full range of potential 480 activites is virtually limitless and the details of how they are 481 performed are outside the scope of this document, however. 483 8. IANA Considerations 485 This document makes no request of IANA. 487 9. Security Considerations 489 The I2RS trace log, like any log file, reveals the state of the 490 entity producing it as well as the identifying information elements 491 and detailed interactions of the system containing it. The 492 information model described in this document does not itself 493 introduce any security issues, but it does define the set of 494 attributes that make up an I2RS log file. These attributes may 495 contain sensitive information and thus should adhere to the security, 496 privacy and permission policies of the organization making use of the 497 I2RS log file. 499 It is outside the scope of this document to specify how to protect 500 the stored log file, but it is expected that adequate precautions and 501 security best practices such as disk encryption, appropriately 502 restrictive file/directory permissions, suitable hardening and 503 physical security of logging entities, mutual authentication, 504 transport encryption, channel confidentiality, and channel integrity 505 if transferring log files. Additionally, the potentially sensitive 506 information contained in a log file SHOULD be adequately anonymized 507 or obfuscated by operators to ensure its privacy. 509 10. Acknowledgments 511 The authors would like to thank Alia Atlas for her initial feedback 512 and overall support for this work. Additionally, the authors 513 acknowledge Alvaro Retana, Russ White, Matt Birkner, Jeff Haas, Joel 514 Halpern and Dean Bogdanovich for their reviews, contributed text, and 515 suggested improvements to this document. 517 11. References 519 11.1. Normative References 521 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 522 Atlas, A., Halpern, J., Hares, S., Ward, D., and T. 523 Nadeau, "An Architecture for the Interface to the Routing 524 System", draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-07 (work in 525 progress), December 2014. 527 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-problem-statement] 528 Atlas, A., Nadeau, T., and D. Ward, "Interface to the 529 Routing System Problem Statement", draft-ietf-i2rs- 530 problem-statement-04 (work in progress), June 2014. 532 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 533 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 535 11.2. Informative References 537 [I-D.camwinget-i2rs-pubsub-sec] 538 Beck, K., Cam-Winget, N., and D. McGrew, "Using the 539 Publish-Subscribe Model in the Interface to the Routing 540 System", draft-camwinget-i2rs-pubsub-sec-00 (work in 541 progress), July 2013. 543 [I-D.nitinb-i2rs-rib-info-model] 544 Bahadur, N., Folkes, R., Kini, S., and J. Medved, "Routing 545 Information Base Info Model", draft-nitinb-i2rs-rib-info- 546 model-02 (work in progress), August 2013. 548 [RFC3339] Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the 549 Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002. 551 [RFC5424] Gerhards, R., "The Syslog Protocol", RFC 5424, March 2009. 553 [RFC5737] Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks 554 Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737, January 2010. 556 Authors' Addresses 558 Joe Clarke 559 Cisco Systems, Inc. 560 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 561 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 562 US 564 Phone: +1-919-392-2867 565 Email: jclarke@cisco.com 567 Gonzalo Salgueiro 568 Cisco Systems, Inc. 569 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 570 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 571 US 573 Email: gsalguei@cisco.com 574 Carlos Pignataro 575 Cisco Systems, Inc. 576 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 577 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 578 US 580 Email: cpignata@cisco.com