[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Network Working Group                                       T. Dreibholz
Internet-Draft                              University of Duisburg-Essen
Intended status: Informational                                 M. Tuexen
Expires: December 7, 2007             Univ. of Applied Sciences Muenster
                                                            June 5, 2007


           Reliable Server Pooling (RSerPool) Bakeoff Scoring
                 draft-dreibholz-rserpool-score-01.txt

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 7, 2007.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   This memo describes some of the scoring to be used in the testing of
   Reliable Server Pooling protocols ASAP and ENRP at upcoming bakeoffs.


1.  Introduction

   This document will be used as a basis for point scoring at upcoming



Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


   RSerPool bakeoffs.  Its purpose is similar to that described in
   RFC1025.  It is hoped that a clear definition of where and how to
   score points will further the development of RSerPool.

   Note that while attending a bakeoff no one else will score your
   points for you.  We trust that all implementations will faithfully
   record their points that are received honestly.  Note also that these
   scores are NOT to be used for marketing purposes.  They are for the
   use of the implementations to know how well they are doing.  The only
   reporting that will be done is a basic summary to the Reliable Server
   Pooling Working Group but please note that NO company or
   implementation names will be attached.


2.  Aggregate Server Access Protocol

   The ASAP protocol is described in the follwing documents:

   o  draft-ietf-rserpool-asap [2]

   o  draft-ietf-rserpool-common-param [4]

2.1.  Pool Element Communication

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  2 Successful ASAP Registration Request of a PE in a pool using
      Round Robin policy and handling of ASAP Registration Response.

   o  2 Failing ASAP Registration Request of a PE requesting Least Used
      policy in a pool using Round Robin policy and appropriate handling
      of ASAP Registration Response (e.g. printing error message, but
      not retrying registration).

   o  2 Successful re-registration of a PE in a pool using Round Robin
      policy.

   o  2 Successful ASAP Deregistration Request of the PE from its pool
      and handling of ASAP Deregistration Response.

   o  2 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive without Home bit
      set, i.e. answering with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack.

   o  5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive with Home bit
      set: respond with ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive Ack and use new ENRP
      server for re-registration.




Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


   o  5 Successful connection to and registration at an ENRP server
      announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces.

   o  1 Successful registration into pool using Least Used policy.

   o  1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Round Robin
      policy.

   o  1 Successful registration into pool using Random policy.

   o  1 Successful registration into pool using Weighted Random policy.

2.2.  Pool User Communication

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  5 Successful ASAP Handle Resolution in a pool using Round Robin
      policy, correct handling of ASAP Handle Resolution Response.

   o  2 Successful failure reporting using ASAP Endpoint Unreachable.

   o  5 Successful connection to and handle resolution at ENRP server
      announcing itself via multicast ASAP Announces.

   o  1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Least Used policy.

   o  1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Round
      Robin policy.

   o  1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Random policy.

   o  1 Successful handle resolution in a pool using Weighted Random
      policy.

2.3.  ENRP Server Communication

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  2 Successful handling of an ASAP Registration Request into a pool
      using Round Robin policy (ENRP server answers with successful ASAP
      Registration Response).

   o  2 Rejecting registration of a PE requesting Round Robin policy
      into a pool using Least Used policy.





Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


   o  5 Rejecting registration of a PE with all addresses *not* being
      part of the ASAP association.

   o  5 Successful registration of a PE with some addresses *not* being
      part of the ASAP association.  The invalid addresses may *not* go
      into the handlespace.

   o  5 Successful handling of ASAP Endpoint Unreachable messages.  The
      ENRP server must remove the given PE after MAX-BAD-PE-REPORTS=3
      unreachability reports.

   o  2 Sending regular ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alives to its PEs.

   o  2 Removing PE not answering to ASAP Endpoint Keep-Alive.


3.  Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol

   The ENRP protocol is described in the follwing documents:

   o  draft-ietf-rserpool-enrp [2]

   o  draft-ietf-rserpool-common-param [4]

3.1.  Peer Management

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  2 Sending ENRP Presence to a new ENRP server.

   o  2 Sending ENRP Presences in the interval given by PEER-HEARTBEAT-
      CYCLE.

   o  5 Requesting peer list from new ENRP server using ENRP Peer List
      Request, handling ENRP Peer List Response and adding entries to
      its own peer list.

   o  2 Handling ENRP Peer List Request and replying with own peer list
      in ENRP Peer List Response.

   o  5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle
      Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit
      set) and inserting entries into its own handlespace copy.

   o  5 Requesting handlespace from new ENRP server using ENRP Handle
      Table Request, handling ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set,
      requesting more entries and inserting entries into its own



Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


      handlespace copy.

   o  2 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace
      in ENRP Handle Table Response (without M-bit).

   o  10 Handling ENRP Handle Table Request and replying own handlespace
      in ENRP Handle Table Response with M-bit set, remembering point to
      continue from, responding next block of handlespace entries upon
      following ENRP Handle Table Request, etc. until transfer of
      handlespace data is complete.

   o  5 Successful addition of new ENRP server announcing itself via
      multicast ENRP Presence (including association establishment as
      well as download of peer list and handlespace).

3.2.  Update

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update adding a PE.

   o  2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update updating a PE.  The changes must
      be entered into the local handlespace copy.

   o  2 Handling an ENRP Handle Update removing a PE.

3.3.  Synchronization

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.

   o  5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon
      reception of ENRP Presence (due to additional PE), request of
      Handle Table with W-bit set, integration of missing PE into local
      handlespace copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP
      Presence.

   o  5 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon
      reception of ENRP Presence (due to out-of-date PE), request of
      Handle Table with W-bit set, removal of PE from local handlespace
      copy and reporting the correct checksum in own ENRP Presence.

   o  10 Successful detection of different handlespace checksums upon
      reception of ENRP Presence (due to multiple new and out-of-date PE
      identities; size of PE identities is larger than maximum ENRP
      message size), request of Handle Table with W-bit set, handling of
      ENRP Handle Table Responses with M-bit set, removal of out-of-date



Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


      PEs, integration of new PEs into the local handlespace copy and
      reporting correct checksum in own ENRP Presence.

3.4.  Takeover

   These points will be scored for EACH peer implementation that you
   successfully communicate with.  The setup contains your ENRP server
   plus a set of peers running another implementation.

   o  5 Successfully detecting the failure of a remote peer and
      initiating a takeover procedure.

   o  5 Acknowledging another peer's takeover and aborting own takeover
      procedure.

   o  10 Correctly handling a remote peer's Takeover Server message,
      including ownership change for the remote peer's PEs.

   o  10 Successfully taking over a dead peer, including ownership
      change and informing the PEs taken over.


4.  Bonus Points

   You can also earn Bonus Points:

   o  20 points for the ENRP server handling the largest number of PEs.

   o  20 points for the ENRP server achieving the highest handle
      resolution throughput for a pool containing 100 (should this be
      larger?)  PEs.

   Please note that the whole period of the bakeoff is relevant.


5.  Security Considerations

   This document does only describe test scenarios and therefore does
   not introduce any new security issues.

   For security considerations of the protocols see
   draft-ietf-rserpool-asap [2], draft-ietf-rserpool-enrp [2], and
   draft-ietf-rserpool-common-param [4].


6.  References





Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


6.1.  Normative References

   [1]   Tuexen, M., "Architecture for Reliable Server Pooling",
         draft-ietf-rserpool-arch-12 (work in progress), November 2006.

   [2]   Stewart, R., "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP)",
         draft-ietf-rserpool-asap-15 (work in progress), January 2007.

   [3]   Stewart, R., "Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP)",
         draft-ietf-rserpool-enrp-15 (work in progress), January 2007.

   [4]   Stewart, R., "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) and
         Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy  Protocol (ENRP) Parameters",
         draft-ietf-rserpool-common-param-11 (work in progress),
         October 2006.

   [5]   Tuexen, M. and T. Dreibholz, "Reliable Server Pooling
         Policies", draft-ietf-rserpool-policies-04 (work in progress),
         March 2007.

   [6]   Conrad, P. and P. Lei, "Services Provided By Reliable Server
         Pooling", draft-ietf-rserpool-service-02 (work in progress),
         October 2005.

   [7]   Silverton, A., "Reliable Server Pooling Sockets API
         Extensions", draft-ietf-rserpool-api-00 (work in progress),
         October 2005.

   [8]   Stillman, M., "Threats Introduced by Rserpool and Requirements
         for Security in response to  Threats",
         draft-ietf-rserpool-threats-06 (work in progress),
         November 2006.

   [9]   Dreibholz, T., "Applicability of Reliable Server Pooling for
         Real-Time Distributed  Computing",
         draft-dreibholz-rserpool-applic-distcomp-02 (work in progress),
         August 2006.

   [10]  Coene, L., "Reliable Server Pooling Applicability for IP Flow
         Information Exchange", draft-coene-rserpool-applic-ipfix-03
         (work in progress), August 2006.

   [11]  Dreibholz, T. and J. Pulinthanath, "Applicability of Reliable
         Server Pooling for SCTP-Based Endpoint Mobility",
         draft-dreibholz-rserpool-applic-mobility-01 (work in progress),
         August 2006.





Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


6.2.  Informative References

   [12]  Dreibholz, T., "Thomas Dreibholz's RSerPool Page",
         URL: http://tdrwww.exp-math.uni-essen.de/dreibholz/rserpool/.

   [13]  Dreibholz, T., "Reliable Server Pooling -- Evaluation,
         Optimization and Extension of a Novel IETF Architecture", Ph.D.
         Thesis University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty of Economics,
         Institute for Computer Science and Business Information
         Systems, URL: http://duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/servlets/
         DerivateServlet/Derivate-16326/Dre2006-final.pdf, March 2007.


Authors' Addresses

   Thomas Dreibholz
   University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Experimental Mathematics
   Ellernstrasse 29
   45326 Essen, Nordrhein-Westfalen
   Germany

   Phone: +49-201-1837637
   Fax:   +49-201-1837673
   Email: dreibh@exp-math.uni-essen.de
   URI:   http://www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~dreibh/


   Michael Tuexen
   University of Applied Sciences Muenster
   Stegerwaldstrasse 39
   48565 Steinfurt, Nordrhein-Westfalen
   Germany

   Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de

















Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          RSerPool Bakeoff Scoring               June 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).





Dreibholz & Tuexen      Expires December 7, 2007                [Page 9]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/