idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-rap-cops-frwk-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 1 longer page, the longest (page 3) being 202 lines == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 3 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack an Authors' Addresses Section. ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There are 31 instances of lines with control characters in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- 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 (February 2002) is 8104 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'RFC-2119' is mentioned on line 38, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'FWPIB' is defined on line 157, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'DSPIB' is defined on line 162, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-rap-frameworkpib-04 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic draft: draft-ietf-rap-frameworkpib (ref. 'FWPIB') == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-03 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic draft: draft-ietf-diffserv-pib (ref. 'DSPIB') Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 9 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Internet Engineering Task Force Kwok Ho Chan 2 RAP Working Group Nortel Networks 3 Internet-Draft 4 Expiration: February 2002 5 draft-ietf-rap-cops-frwk-00.txt 7 An Architecture for COPS Based Policy Control 8 Management Framework 10 Last Updated: 7/13/01 12 Status of this Memo 14 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 15 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 17 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 18 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 19 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 20 Drafts. 22 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 23 months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents 24 at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as 25 reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 27 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 28 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 30 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 33 Conventions used in this document 35 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 36 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in 37 this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-2119]. 39 Status of this Memo 1 40 Conventions used in this document 1 41 Abstract 3 42 1. Introduction 3 43 2. Architecture Overview 3 44 2.1 Policy Controlled Management System Units 3 45 2.2 Policy Controlled Management System Data Models 4 46 3. Policy Decision Point 4 47 3.1 Message Processing 4 48 3.2 Security 4 49 3.3 Framework Data Model 4 50 3.4 Application Specific Data Model 4 51 4. Access Edge Policy Enforcement Point 4 52 4.1 Message Processing 4 53 4.2 Security 4 54 4.3 Framework Data Model 4 55 4.4 Application Specific Data Model 4 56 5. Core Policy Enforcement Point 4 57 5.1 Message Processing 4 58 5.2 Security 4 59 5.3 Framework Data Model 4 60 5.4 Application Specific Data Model 4 61 6. References 4 63 Abstract 65 This document describes an architecture for a COPS based Policy 66 Control Management System Framework. The architecture is designed 67 to be modular, allowing future modification and addition to existing 68 framework. The major units of the architecture are the Policy 69 Decision Points (PDP), the Access Edge Policy Enforcement Points 70 (PEP), the Core Policy Enforcement Points. With Message Processing 71 Subsystem, Security Subsystem, Framework Data Model Subsystem, and 72 Application Specific Data Model Subsystem in each PDP and PEP. 74 This document further provides a high level description of each unit 75 and describes the relationship among each unit. This document also 76 describes how the subsystems within each unit interact with each 77 other to provide the functionality of a Policy Control Management 78 System. 80 1. Introduction 82 COPS based Policy Control Management System provides a modular and 83 scalable way to management resource access and provisioning. We 84 started with network QoS resources but this is only the initial 85 application of COPS based Policy Control. Other applications 86 includes but not limited to: 87 1. Network Plumbing Resource 88 2. Content Resource 90 This document provides examples on how Policy Controlled access and 91 provisioning can be done for each of the above resources. Providing 92 some solutions for Policy Controlled End-To-End Services. 94 2. Architecture Overview 96 The COPS based Policy Control Management System Architecture 97 contains two kinds of modular decompositions: 98 1. Functional Units 99 2. Data Models 101 As described in more details in the following sub sections. 103 2.1 Policy Controlled Management System Units 105 In this architecture, we have broken up the Policy Controlled 106 Management System into two functionalities, each handled by the 107 functional units: 108 1. Policy Decision Point (PDP) 109 PDPs are the gateways to the centralized policy repository, 110 allowing administrative domain wide policy implementation. 111 2. Policy Enforcement Point (PEP) 112 PEPs are the gateways to the resource being managed and have 113 direct interfaces to the resource's control planes. 115 2.2 Policy Controlled Management System Data Models 117 In this architecture, the Data Models are tied to the kinds of 118 resource being managed, for example: 119 1. For Network QoS Resource, the DiffServ PIB Data Model is used. 120 2. For Network Plumbing Resource, the TE PIB Data Model is used. 122 Other Data Models are being defined and more examples will be 123 provided as this document is being developed. 125 3. Policy Decision Point 127 3.1 Message Processing 129 3.2 Security 131 3.3 Framework Data Model 133 3.4 Application Specific Data Model 135 4. Access Edge Policy Enforcement Point 137 4.1 Message Processing 139 4.2 Security 141 4.3 Framework Data Model 143 4.4 Application Specific Data Model 145 5. Core Policy Enforcement Point 147 5.1 Message Processing 149 5.2 Security 151 5.3 Framework Data Model 153 5.4 Application Specific Data Model 155 6. References 157 [FWPIB] M. Fine, K. McCloghrie, J. Seligson, K. Chan, S. Hahn, R. 158 Sahita, A. Smith, F. Reichmeyer, Framework Policy 159 Information Base," 160 draft-ietf-rap-frameworkpib-04.txt, March 1, 2001. 162 [DSPIB] M. Fine, K. McCloghrie, J. Seligson, K. Chan, S. Hahn, C. 163 Bell, A. Smith, F. Reichmeyer, "Differentiated 164 Services Quality of Service Policy Information Base," 165 draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-03.txt, March 2, 2001. 167 9. Author Information and Acknowledgments 169 Kwok Ho Chan 170 Nortel Networks 171 600 Technology Park Drive 172 Billerica, MA 01821 173 Phone: 978-288-8175 174 E-mail: khchan@nortelnetworks.com