From nobody Sat Jun 24 21:57:59 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D4112941D for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ty1WRqTLqOjv for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg0-x233.google.com (mail-pg0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B95A129401 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x233.google.com with SMTP id u62so35713357pgb.3 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HE8jBfAxa59S3gygAboMHHejTNDxwctcH0/MoKhJISY=; b=gk/DiZ6M6pCI2LUvzCS4IcEVh05dTQ5Kz05LjJ0igo5N2v37rQ6VNYp5Nb7hYkaeSr 1DS1l81qAuxaSElLrvt3TjYzDwfS+0vXx9TwuGXWr8+90uw6wc6Nct6M23wUEhs1FRal 5Nkf9ZQ3PzFD5UZ8YdWCQIf+x1ePsK1kk9efUVlJOunuQDAcZ9aL/CoWw7y/5U0+6Vf+ Ump3x8+gtP9IeQjF7hdvXxTlOAXMNU70s3XkM99taHh9pcqU+2cjyPCcM5rywR8CytNX dDWvZeQI+TjLp6/JgWLwmvGVKruknW+D0/B+JOpomVXDwAYMZHMacC9xrElOYm/4o0tR 4j+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HE8jBfAxa59S3gygAboMHHejTNDxwctcH0/MoKhJISY=; b=Jlby/KUmnzbrDrN15G6/4R25LwQ7qB2+WX6eoHYGte8Z2xQxUZLLrpkB9vjjNGkeL6 6HEIIxVTTKKjqNOglpZmfgDnsbR4rLUZPuVBjcC1m4mxY8UO1rqApqBeIusHlF1K2hCW tsgGCzc1+3zrkokfxkto1eLm8TPyPMLLaXz2sKEaYZWstB6P5KXw0ov+XjFcAHb0J0Yv +SUAvmwPGAQiHdCTe3enCPdwsA4LHe8M8fi+oXVdowE8OrpYwuv+sIBOoRIRbjR4Afqw S0XODVwr03S7yHbVjV5OmXVoMV50nya1xkOXLApZNMf+LnC9WjcvXwh3GqfN8FNP4IXs Vsmw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOynI50AoRkoeNLBGOg14Ta6vtqsIQLvvfG5Y6cae5jHyTOQJamv uF7yDTagxKeurZ4u X-Received: by 10.84.138.131 with SMTP id 3mr17657820plp.24.1498366671319; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.21] (28.216.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.216.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s15sm16651653pgo.48.2017.06.24.21.57.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 24 Jun 2017 21:57:50 -0700 (PDT) To: "xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn" , casm References: <2017051717301370653329@chinatelecom.cn> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 16:57:47 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2017051717301370653329@chinatelecom.cn> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Casm] I-D Action: draft-li-casm-address-pool-management-architecture-00.txt X-BeenThere: casm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Coordinated Address Space Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 04:57:57 -0000 Sorry, I have been rather busy so did not reply promptly. See comments in line: On 17/05/2017 21:30, xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn wrote: > Hi=EF=BC=8CBrian,=20 >=20 > Thank you for your comments, pls see inline for more comments=EF= =BC=8E >=20 > Chongfeng=E3=80=80 > =20 > Hi, > =20 > Thanks for this interesting draft. > =20 > First, here is one of the definitions: > =20 >> CASM Coordinator: A management system which has a centralized >> database manage the overall address pools and allocate address >> pools to the device in the devices. > =20 > Ther is no need for this database to be centralized or for the allocati= on of address pools to be centralized. It can be done with a completely d= istributed system. (I agree that centralized logging might be needed.) In= fact, sections 4.2 and 4.3 describe a centralized model for everything, = not just for logging. >=20 > Chongfeng: =E3=80=80Centralized and distributed is a different way of = implementation, in the traditional network, usually using a distributed a= pproach, the distributed approach is not excluded, and CASM focus on cent= ralized solutions.=E3=80=80In the centralized address resource management= architecture, the allocation of address blocks is determined by the CASM= Coordinator, which requires the maintenance of allocated, unallocated ad= dress block, and therefore requires a database to hold such information. = And also, it maintains log information. Understood.=20 > Could we perhaps agree that this is only one possible architecture? > If so, we would also need a second draft describing a distributed archi= tecture. It's quite hard to cover both designs in one document. >=20 > Chongfeng: =E3=80=80Yes, as mentioned earlier, centralized is a possib= le architecture. A typical distributed example is BNG, which assigns addr= esses to end users. It is a way that has existed for a long time, should = not need the standard, right? That seems to be an area full proprietary solutions, as far as I can see.= =20 The idea of a standardized practice is to allow multivendor solutions. As far as I know, this isn't described in any IETF documents. Maybe you have a reference? Whether the carriers in general want that, I don't know= =2E But if they do want it, it would be a topic for the IETF, I think (in liason with BBF). My assumption is that current distributed BNG solutions depend on a systematic algorithm for assigning prefix pools to BNGs, from a central pool. With autonomic solutions, we are aiming at complete demand-driven flexibility in assigning prefixes to edge routers. That process could be the same for BNGs as for the devices in a Radio Access Network. =20 > =20 >> The overall procedure is as follows: >> >> o Operators will configure remaining address pools centrally in th= e >> Address Pool Management System (APMS). There are multiple addre= ss >> pools which can be configured centrally. The APMS server will >> then divide the address pools into addressing unit (AU) which wi= ll >> be allocated to the agent in devices by default. > =20 > Certainly the NOC will configure initial address pools into a master ag= ent. > But from that moment, a distributed process can take over in which pool= s > (prefixes) will allocated to distributed agents on demand, with no need= for default allocations. >=20 > Chongfeng:=E3=80=80 In the initial state, CASM Coordinator assign addre= ss pools to the Agent in the device. Then, In the process of running, if = the Agent's address pool resources have been used up, the Agent need to a= pply more address blocks; In addition, when the address pool usage is too= low, the Agent can release a part of the address blocks to CASM Coordina= tor. Yes. That is exactly what will happen in an autonomic solution, except that all assigments will be drive by demand, with no central action except to define the initial central pool. > =20 >> o If the lifetime of the address pool is going to expire, the DA >> should issue an AddressPoolRenew request to extend the >> lifetime,including the IPv4, IPv6, Ports, etc. > =20 > A couple of questions on this.: > =20 > 1. Why is the lifetime useful? Firstly, once an address has been alloca= ted to an end-user, it must be left there as long as necessary; you can't= recover an address while it is in active use. That will block the addres= s pool that contains it indefinitely, so what is the value of the lifetim= e? Secondly, if there is no lifetime, the agent can release the address p= ool on demand if it is not in use. Again, there is no value in the lifeti= me that I can see. >=20 > Chongfeng:=E3=80=80=E3=80=80For DHCP Server service, lifetime is an imp= ortant parameter, it need specify Lifetime, for the DHCP server to assign= addresses to the end user, control the available time, in addition, when= the end user abnormal off-line, DHCP Server need to recycle the address = by Lifetime expiration.=20 Yes, I understand that is necessary at the local level, but why is it necessary to consider it as a parameter of an address pool in the data model? It seems like a parameter of the individual DHCP server, not a parameter of the address itself. > =20 > 2. Is it really useful to include the notion of ports in an address poo= l? In the case of IPv6 it is definitely useless. In the case of > IPv4 with A+P (port-based address sharing, RFC6346), surely you never w= ant to share a single address across different agents? That would lead to= complex and fragile CASM operations at rather high frequency. > RFC6346 defines how A+P gateways may talk to each other (horizontally, = not north-south) to share an address using A+P. You seem to be duplicatin= g that function. Also, RFC7768 seems to assume that port sharing occurs e= ntirely within a single CGN. So it seems to me that it's wrong to include= port ranges in the CASM model. > =20 > (Note: I have no problem with 'port-range' being defined in the CASM YA= NG model; that seems necessary for completeness. My problem is with using= it in network-wide resource management, which doesn't seem reasonable.) >=20 > Chongfeng:=E3=80=80As we know, the range of ports is 1 to 65535, but du= ring NAT use, only a portion is available for use, such as 2048 to 65535.= I agree with what you said "RFC7768 seems to assume that port compromise= d by within a single CGN", Here it used in north-south, and used to set t= he range of ports that NAT can use. Usually, IPv4 and port are used toget= her.=20 >=20 OK, but that is not very clear in the draft. Thanks Brian >> 5.1.1.1. Address pools > ... >> o IPv6 addresses > =20 > I suggest dividing this into 'Globally routable' and 'ULA' >=20 > =20 >> o MAC Addresses > =20 > Can you explain this? Where do layer 2 addresses fit in? > =20 > ... >> Multicast address pool: > =20 > This topic needs more discussion. > =20 > Regards > Brian > =20 > _______________________________________________ > CASM mailing list > CASM@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > CASM mailing list > CASM@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm >=20 From nobody Thu Jun 29 21:47:30 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B99F1200CF for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3eCaidBdeA1f for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x229.google.com (mail-vk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3481E1286B2 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk0-x229.google.com with SMTP id y70so60244539vky.3 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IJKymJMUt6iM8YgsYQ7mDZ8EhOvUNhLo/jZqsBW1D5Y=; b=K+vxb2SgyKCZcOyqWyI6uDM2imqt5M3I8VzDZL2HIGv1X+S4lJG3ICLpRm8c6eND/Z JunreKdRWruhGl5cGn4+BqZyu02SwuA/cD9Ezv250yXPLISuOVkbLfHzBKLn3iu4vcEE PD5mau198ZgxR9QOl5HVQCxnjm6WYY0PASoVE5jklykU7XLRpgux6zA+794647MZJC+C 9TDJbvCs6E708uJyXN68MnjPFF/t45QLnV6C37dAng/xBoeJrcYmqbFDAxftYaASbwFr Q4zfogRgFc/T5cvIH403RkAywlDe9Z+K/AuExe5sF2nyaCt5fuQHDbYLPX8/DwAsy5aY 5YAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IJKymJMUt6iM8YgsYQ7mDZ8EhOvUNhLo/jZqsBW1D5Y=; b=SNe8JsNVr8sn3Fl0sC4QbHvdS/g1B3uB9TmypGNYj/m7BtBjjJXfYceqG7VO4mpXbI 0wbEvAuPzGGjgJUbFHQJBlGx9spfSFUzqmLHVX08Cxhzh0UV9HdsAq7Uks8/6FOQ5hjl gFjbE9Lb+O9WHsn7MN+mVidCeNa0b32NP8F56HH18/yMSwjt09iRyzYKsoqdjiNOhOAd 5LmmA4lLbjXkONdODWXbl8t7twS89V076H4XhPs5c9WGTEZ7TTiB3gchmLJax8zl6oi/ E3Vru3dDwmLCLn69UDRmFp90SCLjDnJNWhqeKwmkydxYXprCG9gnKPRTYtM/ZjzCi0qZ mPwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxSljlaoVj9Nd0+GB/WXkuXNVQpm2hHFyfC+saTJUXMNmeY/i0h 1fwYjjiGP1WPIa05kQakdETwGC/jXEeLTa6iUA== X-Received: by 10.31.110.71 with SMTP id j68mr10335111vkc.72.1498798045710; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.90.18 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:47:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2001:dc0:2001:210:65de:bba6:8f52:bbb9] From: George Michaelson Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 14:47:25 +1000 Message-ID: To: casm@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [Casm] An initial draft on the RIR interfaces X-BeenThere: casm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Coordinated Address Space Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 04:47:29 -0000 I thought people might want to look at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-michaelson-rir-interface/?include_text=1 Which is an initial problem statement/outline of the interfaces available in the RIR system to identify and manage internet number resources. -George