[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-jeong-i2nsf-applicability) 00 01 02 03 04 05

Network Working Group                                           J. Jeong
Internet-Draft                                                   S. Hyun
Intended status: Informational                   Sungkyunkwan University
Expires: September 6, 2018                                        T. Ahn
                                                           Korea Telecom
                                                                S. Hares
                                                                  Huawei
                                                                D. Lopez
                                                          Telefonica I+D
                                                           March 5, 2018


 Applicability of Interfaces to Network Security Functions to Network-
                        Based Security Services
                   draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-02

Abstract

   This document describes the applicability of Interface to Network
   Security Functions (I2NSF) to network-based security services in
   Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) environments, such as
   firewall, deep packet inspection, or attack mitigation engines.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  I2NSF Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Time-dependent Web Access Control Service . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  I2NSF Framework with SDN  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Firewall: Centralized Firewall System . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.2.  Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security
           System  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.3.  Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation
           System  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   6.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   8.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Appendix A.  Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-01 . . .  19
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19

1.  Introduction

   Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) defined a framework
   and interfaces for interacting with Network Security Functions
   (NSFs).  The I2NSF framework allows heterogeneous NSFs developed by
   different security solution vendors to be used in the NFV environment
   by utilizing the capabilities of such products and the virtualization
   of security functions in the NFV platform.  In the I2NSF framework,
   each NSF initially registers the profile of its own capabilities into
   the system in order for themselves to be available in the system.  In
   addition, the Security Controller registers itself to the I2NSF user
   so that the user can request security services to the Security
   Controller.

   This document describes the applicability of I2NSF framework to
   network-based security services with a use case of time-dependent web
   access control.  This document also describes integrating I2NSF
   framework with Software-Defined Networking (SDN) technology for
   efficient security services and use cases, such as firewall
   [opsawg-firewalls], Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), and Distributed
   Denial of Service (DDoS) attack mitigation.  We implemented the I2NSF




Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   framework based on SDN for these use cases, and the implementation
   successfully verified the effectiveness of the I2NSF framework.

2.  Terminology

   This document uses the terminology described in [RFC7149],
   [ITU-T.Y.3300], [ONF-OpenFlow], [ONF-SDN-Architecture],
   [ITU-T.X.1252], [ITU-T.X.800], [RFC8329], [i2nsf-terminology],
   [consumer-facing-inf-im], [consumer-facing-inf-dm],
   [i2nsf-nsf-cap-im], [nsf-facing-inf-dm], [registration-inf-im],
   [registration-inf-dm], and [nsf-triggered-steering].  In addition,
   the following terms are defined below:

   o  Software-Defined Networking (SDN): A set of techniques that
      enables to directly program, orchestrate, control, and manage
      network resources, which facilitates the design, delivery and
      operation of network services in a dynamic and scalable manner
      [ITU-T.Y.3300].

   o  Firewall: A service function at the junction of two network
      segments that inspects every packet that attempts to cross the
      boundary.  It also rejects any packet that does not satisfy
      certain criteria for, for example, disallowed port numbers or IP
      addresses.

   o  Centralized Firewall System: A centralized firewall that can
      establish and distribute policy rules into network resources for
      efficient firewall management.  These rules can be managed
      dynamically by a centralized server for firewall.  SDN can work as
      a network-based firewall system through a standard interface
      between an SDN switch and a firewall function as a vitual network
      function (VNF).

   o  Centralized VoIP Security System: A centralized security system
      that handles the security functions required for VoIP and VoLTE
      services.  SDN can work as a network-based security system through
      a standard interface between an SDN switch and a VoIP/VoLTE
      security function as a VNF.

   o  Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation System: A centralized mitigator
      that can establish and distribute access control policy rules into
      network resources for efficient DDoS-attack mitigation.  These
      rules can be managed dynamically by a centralized server for DDoS-
      attack mitigation.  The SDN controller and switches can
      cooperatively work as a network-based firewall system through a
      standard interface between an SDN switch and a firewall function
      as a VNF running in the SDN controller.




Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


3.  I2NSF Framework

   This section describes an I2NSF framework and its use case.  Figure 1
   shows an I2NSF framework [RFC8329] to support network-based security
   services.  As shown in Figure 1, I2NSF User can use security
   functions by delivering high-level security policies, which specify
   security requirements the I2NSF user wants to enforce, to the
   Security Controller via the Consumer-Facing Interface
   [consumer-facing-inf-im][consumer-facing-inf-dm].

   The Security Controller receives and analyzes the high-level security
   policies from an I2NSF User, and identifies what types of security
   capabilities are required to meet these high-level security policies.
   The Security Controller then identifies NSFs that have the required
   security capabilities, and generates low-level security policies for
   each of the NSFs so that the high-level security policies are
   eventually enforced by those NSFs.  Finally, the Security Controller
   sends the generated low-level security policies to the NSFs
   [i2nsf-nsf-cap-im][nsf-facing-inf-dm].

   The Security Controller requests NSFs to perform low-level security
   services via the NSF-Facing Interface.  The NSFs are enabled as
   Virtual Network Functions (VNFs) on top of virtual machines through
   Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) [ETSI-NFV].  In addition, the
   Security Controller uses the I2NSF Registration Interface
   [registration-inf-im][registration-inf-dm] to communicate with
   Developer's Management System (called Developer's Mgmt System) for
   registering (or deregistering) the developer's NSFs into (or from)
   the NFV system using the I2NSF framework.

   The Consumer-Facing Interface between an I2NSF User and the Security
   Controller can be implemented using, for example, RESTCONF [RFC8040].
   Data models specified by YANG [RFC6020] describe high-level security
   policies to be specified by an I2NSF User.  The data model defined in
   [consumer-facing-inf-dm] can be used for the I2NSF Consumer-Facing
   Interface.















Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


      +------------+
      | I2NSF User |
      +------------+
             ^
             | Consumer-Facing Interface
             v
   +-------------------+     Registration     +-----------------------+
   |Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System|
   +-------------------+       Interface      +-----------------------+
             ^
             | NSF-Facing Interface
             v
      +----------------+ +---------------+   +-----------------------+
      |      NSF-1     |-|     NSF-2     |...|         NSF-n         |
      |   (Firewall)   | | (Web Filter)  |   |(DDoS-Attack Mitigator)|
      +----------------+ +---------------+   +-----------------------+

                         Figure 1: I2NSF Framework

   The NSF-Facing Interface between Security Controller and NSFs can be
   implemented using NETCONF [RFC6241].  YANG data models describe low-
   level security policies for the sake of NSFs, which are translated
   from the high-level security policies by the Security Controller.
   The data model defined in [nsf-facing-inf-dm] can be used for the
   I2NSF NSF-Facing Interface.

   The Registration Interface between the Security Controller and the
   Developer's Mgmt System can be implemented by RESTCONF [RFC8040].
   The data model defined in [registration-inf-dm] can be used for the
   I2NSF Registration Interface.

   Also, the I2NSF framework can enforce multiple chained NSFs for the
   low-level security policies by means of service function chaining
   (SFC) techniques for the I2NSF architecture described in
   [nsf-triggered-steering].

   The following describes a security service scenario using the I2NSF
   framework.

3.1.  Time-dependent Web Access Control Service

   This service scenario assumes that an enterprise network
   administrator wants to control the staff members' access to Facebook
   during business hours.  The following is an example high-level
   security policy rule that the administrator requests: Block the staff
   members' access to Facebook from 9 am to 6 pm.  The administrator
   sends this high-level security policy to the security controller,
   then the security controller identifies required secuity



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   capabilities, e.g., IP address and port number inspection
   capabilities and URL inspection capability.  In this scenario, it is
   assumed that the IP address and port number inspection capabilities
   are required to check whether a received packet is an HTTP packet
   from a staff member.  The URL inspection capability is required to
   check whether the target URL of a received packet is facebook.com or
   not.

   The Security Controller maintains the security capabilities of each
   NSF running in the I2NSF system, which have been reported by the
   Developer's Management System via the Registation interface.  Based
   on this information, the Security Controller identifies NSFs that can
   perform the IP address and port number inspection and URL inspection.
   In this scenario, it is assumed that an NSF of firewall has the IP
   address and port number inspection capabilities and an NSF of web
   filter has URL inspection capability.

   The Security Controller generates low-level security rules for the
   NSFs to perform IP address and port number inspection, URL
   inspection, and time checking.  Specifically, the Security Controller
   may interoperate with an access control server in the enterprise
   network in order to retrieve the information (e.g., IP address in
   use, company ID, and role) of each employee that is currently using
   the network.  Based on the retrieved information, the Security
   Controller generates low-level security rules to check whether the
   source IP address of a received packet matches any one being used by
   a staff member.  In addition, the low-level security rules should be
   able to determine that a received packet is of HTTP protocol.  The
   low-level security rules for web filter checks that the target URL
   field of a received packet is equal to facebook.com.  Finally, the
   Security Controller sends the low-level security rules of the IP
   address and port number inspection to the NSF of firewall and the
   low-level rules for URL inspection to the NSF of web filter.

   The following describes how the time-dependent web access control
   service is enforced by the NSFs of firewall and web filter.

   1.  A staff member tries to access Fackbook.com during business
       hours, e.g., 10 am.

   2.  The packet is forwarded from the staff member's device to the
       firewall, and the firewall checks the source IP address and port
       number.  Now the firewall identifies the received packet is an
       HTTP packet from the staff member.

   3.  The firewall triggers the web filter to further inspect the
       packet, and the packet is forwarded from the firewall to the web
       filter.  Service Function Chaining (SFC) technology can be



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


       utilized to support such packet forwarding in the I2NSF framework
       [nsf-triggered-steering].

   4.  The web filter checks the target URL field of the received
       packet, and realizes the packet is toward Facebook.com.  The web
       filter then checks that the current time is in business hours.
       If so, the web filter drops the packet, and consequently the
       staff member's access to Facebook during business hours is
       blocked.

4.  I2NSF Framework with SDN

   This section describes an I2NSF framework with SDN for I2NSF
   applicability and use cases, such as firewall, deep packet
   inspection, and DDoS-attack mitigation functions.  SDN enables some
   packet filtering rules to be enforced in the network switches by
   controlling their packet forwarding rules.  By taking advantage of
   this capability of SDN, it is possible to optimize the process of
   security service enforcement in the I2NSF system.

   Figure 2 shows an I2NSF framework [RFC8329] with SDN networks to
   support network-based security services.  In this system, the
   enforcement of security policy rules is divided into the SDN switches
   and NSFs.  Especially, SDN switches enforce simple packet filtering
   rules that can be translated into their packet forwarding rules,
   whereas NSFs enforce NSF-related security rules requiring the
   security capabilities of the NSFs.  For this purpose, the Security
   Controller instructs the Switch Controller via NSF-Facing Interface
   so that SDN switches can perform the required security services with
   flow tables under the supervision of the Switch Controller (i.e., SDN
   Controller).

   As an example, let us consider two different types of security rules:
   Rule A is a simple packet fltering rule that checks only the IP
   address and port number of a given packet, whereas rule B is a time-
   consuming packet inspection rule for analyzing whether an attached
   file being transmitted over a flow of packets contains malware.  Rule
   A can be translated into packet forwarding rules of SDN switches and
   thus be enforced by the switches.  In contrast, rule B cannot be
   enforced by switches, but it can be enforced by NSFs with anti-
   malware capability.  Specifically, a flow of packets is forwarded to
   and reassembled by an NSF to reconstruct the attached file stored in
   the flow of packets.  The NSF then analyzes the file to check the
   existence of malware.  If the file contains malware, the NSF drops
   the packets.

   In an I2NSF framework with SDN, the Security Controller can analyze
   given security policy rules and automatically determine which of the



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   given security policy rules should be enforced by SDN switches and
   which should be enforced by NSFs.  If some of the given rules
   requires security capabilities that can be provided by SDN switches,
   then the Security Controller instructs the Switch Controller via NSF-
   Facing Interface so that SDN switches can enforce those security
   policy rules with flow tables under the supervision of the Switch
   Controller (i.e., SDN Controller).  Or if some rules require security
   capabilities that can be provided by not SDN switches but NSFs, then
   the Security Controller instructs relevant NSFs to enforce those
   rules.









































Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


      +------------+
      | I2NSF User |
      +------------+
             ^
             | Consumer-Facing Interface
             v
   +-------------------+     Registration     +-----------------------+
   |Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System|
   +-------------------+       Interface      +-----------------------+
      ^     ^
      |     | NSF-Facing Interface
      |     v
      | +----------------+ +---------------+   +-----------------------+
      | |      NSF-1     |-|     NSF-2     |...|         NSF-n         |
      | |   (Firewall)   | |     (DPI)     |   |(DDoS-Attack Mitigator)|
      | +----------------+ +---------------+   +-----------------------+
      |         ^
      |         |
      |         v
      |    +--------+
      |    |   SFF  |
      |    +--------+
      |         ^
      |         |
      |         V                                     SDN Network
   +--|----------------------------------------------------------------+
   |  V NSF-Facing Interface                                           |
   |  +-----------------+                                              |
   |  |Switch Controller|                                              |
   |  +-----------------+                                              |
   |           ^                                                       |
   |           | SDN Southbound Interface                              |
   |           v                                                       |
   |      +--------+ +--------+ +--------+      +--------+             |
   |      |Switch 1|-|Switch 2|-|Switch 3|......|Switch m|             |
   |      +--------+ +--------+ +--------+      +--------+             |
   +-------------------------------------------------------------------+

               Figure 2: An I2NSF Framework with SDN Network

   The following subsections introduce three use cases for cloud-based
   security services: (i) firewall system, (ii) deep packet inspection
   system, and (iii) attack mitigation system.  [RFC8192]








Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


4.1.  Firewall: Centralized Firewall System

   A centralized network firewall can manage each network resource and
   firewall rules can be managed flexibly by a centralized server for
   firewall (called Firewall).  The centralized network firewall
   controls each switch for the network resource management and the
   firewall rules can be added or deleted dynamically.

   The procedure of firewall operations in this system is as follows:

   1.  A switch forwards an unknown flow's packet to one of the Switch
       Controllers.

   2.  The Switch Controller forwards the unknown flow's packet to an
       appropriate security service application, such as the Firewall.

   3.  The Firewall analyzes, typically, the headers and contents of the
       packet.

   4.  If the Firewall regards the packet as a malicious one with a
       suspicious pattern, it reports the malicious packet to the Switch
       Controller.

   5.  The Switch Controller installs new rules (e.g., drop packets with
       the suspicious pattern) into underlying switches.

   6.  The suspected packets are dropped by these switches.

   Existing SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces
   between the firewall application and switches
   [RFC7149][ITU-T.Y.3300][ONF-OpenFlow] [ONF-SDN-Architecture].

   Legacy firewalls have some challenges such as the expensive cost,
   performance, management of access control, establishment of policy,
   and packet-based access mechanism.  The proposed framework can
   resolve the challenges through the above centralized firewall system
   based on SDN as follows:

   o  Cost: The cost of adding firewalls to network resources such as
      routers, gateways, and switches is substantial due to the reason
      that we need to add firewall on each network resource.  To solve
      this, each network resource can be managed centrally such that a
      single firewall is manipulated by a centralized server.

   o  Performance: The performance of firewalls is often slower than the
      link speed of network interfaces.  Every network resource for
      firewall needs to check firewall rules according to network




Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


      conditions.  Firewalls can be adaptively deployed among network
      switches, depending on network conditions in the framework.

   o  The management of access control: Since there may be hundreds of
      network resources in a network, the dynamic management of access
      control for security services like firewall is a challenge.  In
      the framework, firewall rules can be dynamically added for new
      malware.

   o  The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each
      network resource.  However, it is difficult to describe what flows
      are permitted or denied for firewall within a specific
      organization network under management.  Thus, a centralized view
      is helpful to determine security policies for such a network.

   o  Packet-based access mechanism: Packet-based access mechanism is
      not enough for firewall in practice since the basic unit of access
      control is usually users or applications.  Therefore, application
      level rules can be defined and added to the firewall system
      through the centralized server.

4.2.  Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security System

   A centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can monitor each VoIP/VoLTE
   flow and manage VoIP/VoLTE security rules controlled by a centralized
   server for VoIP/VoLTE security service called VoIP Intrusion
   Prevention System (IPS).  The VoIP/VoLTE security system controls
   each switch for the VoIP/VoLTE call flow management by manipulating
   the rules that can be added, deleted or modified dynamically.

   A centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can cooperate with a network
   firewall to realize VoIP/VoLTE security service.  Specifically, a
   network firewall performs basic security checks of an unknown flow's
   packet observed by a switch.  If the network firewall detects that
   the packet is an unknown VoIP call flow's packet that exhibits some
   suspicious patterns, then it triggers the VoIP/VoLTE security system
   for more specialized security analysis of the suspicious VoIP call
   packet.

   The procedure of VoIP/VoLTE security operations in this system is as
   follows:

   1.  A switch forwards an unknown flow's packet to the Switch
       Controller, and the Switch Controller further forwards the
       unknown flow's packet to the Firewall for basic security
       inspection.





Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   2.  The Firewall analyzes the header fields of the packet, and
       figures out that this is an unknown VoIP call flow's signal
       packet (e.g., SIP packet) of a suspicious pattern.

   3.  The Firewall triggers an appropriate security service function,
       such as VoIP IPS, for detailed security analysis of the
       suspicious signal packet.  That is, the firewall sends the packet
       to the Service Function Forwarder (SFF) in the I2NSF framework
       [nsf-triggered-steering], as shown in Figure 2.  The SFF forwards
       the suspicious signal packet to the VoIP IPS.

   4.  The VoIP IPS analyzes the headers and contents of the signal
       packet, such as calling number and session description headers
       [RFC4566].

   5.  If, for example, the VoIP IPS regards the packet as a spoofed
       packet by hackers or a scanning packet searching for VoIP/VoLTE
       devices, it drops the packet.  In addition, the VoIP IPS requests
       the Switch Controller to block that packet and the subsequent
       packets that have the same call-id.

   6.  The Switch Controller installs new rules (e.g., drop packets)
       into underlying switches.

   7.  The illegal packets are dropped by these switches.

   Existing SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces
   between the VoIP IPS application and switches [RFC7149][ITU-T.Y.3300]
   [ONF-OpenFlow][ONF-SDN-Architecture].

   Legacy hardware based VoIP IPS has some challenges, such as
   provisioning time, the granularity of security, expensive cost, and
   the establishment of policy.  The I2NSF framework can resolve the
   challenges through the above centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system
   based on SDN as follows:

   o  Provisioning: The provisioning time of setting up a legacy VoIP
      IPS to network is substantial because it takes from some hours to
      some days.  By managing the network resources centrally, VoIP IPS
      can provide more agility in provisioning both virtual and physical
      network resources from a central location.

   o  The granularity of security: The security rules of a legacy VoIP
      IPS are compounded considering the granularity of security.  The
      proposed framework can provide more granular security by
      centralizing security control into a switch controller.  The VoIP
      IPS can effectively manage security rules throughout the network.




Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   o  Cost: The cost of adding VoIP IPS to network resources, such as
      routers, gateways, and switches is substantial due to the reason
      that we need to add VoIP IPS on each network resource.  To solve
      this, each network resource can be managed centrally such that a
      single VoIP IPS is manipulated by a centralized server.

   o  The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each
      network resource.  However, it is difficult to describe what flows
      are permitted or denied for VoIP IPS within a specific
      organization network under management.  Thus, a centralized view
      is helpful to determine security policies for such a network.

4.3.  Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation System

   A centralized DDoS-attack mitigation can manage each network resource
   and manipulate rules to each switch through a centralized server for
   DDoS-attack mitigation (called DDoS-attack Mitigator).  The
   centralized DDoS-attack mitigation system defends servers against
   DDoS attacks outside private network, that is, from public network.

   Servers are categorized into stateless servers (e.g., DNS servers)
   and stateful servers (e.g., web servers).  For DDoS-attack
   mitigation, traffic flows in switches are dynamically configured by
   traffic flow forwarding path management according to the category of
   servers [AVANT-GUARD].  Such a managenent should consider the load
   balance among the switches for the defense against DDoS attacks.

   The procedure of DDoS-attack mitigation operations in this system is
   as follows:

   1.  A Switch periodically reports an inter-arrival pattern of a
       flow's packets to one of the Switch Controllers.

   2.  The Switch Controller forwards the flow's inter-arrival pattern
       to an appropriate security service application, such as DDoS-
       attack Mitigator.

   3.  The DDoS-attack Mitigator analyzes the reported pattern for the
       flow.

   4.  If the DDoS-attack Mitigator regards the pattern as a DDoS
       attack, it computes a packet dropping probability corresponding
       to suspiciousness level and reports this DDoS-attack flow to
       Switch Controller.

   5.  The Switch Controller installs new rules into switches (e.g.,
       forward packets with the suspicious inter-arrival pattern with a
       dropping probability).



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   6.  The suspicious flow's packets are randomly dropped by switches
       with the dropping probability.

   For the above centralized DDoS-attack mitigation system, the existing
   SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces between the
   DDoS-attack mitigator application and switches [RFC7149]
   [ITU-T.Y.3300][ONF-OpenFlow][ONF-SDN-Architecture].

   The centralized DDoS-attack mitigation system has challenges similar
   to the centralized firewall system.  The proposed framework can
   resolve the challenges through the above centralized DDoS-attack
   mitigation system based on SDN as follows:

   o  Cost: The cost of adding DDoS-attack mitigators to network
      resources such as routers, gateways, and switches is substantial
      due to the reason that we need to add DDoS-attack mitigator on
      each network resource.  To solve this, each network resource can
      be managed centrally such that a single DDoS-attack mitigator is
      manipulated by a centralized server.

   o  Performance: The performance of DDoS-attack mitigators is often
      slower than the link speed of network interfaces.  The checking of
      DDoS attacks may reduce the performance of the network interfaces.
      DDoS-attack mitigators can be adaptively deployed among network
      switches, depending on network conditions in the framework.

   o  The management of network resources: Since there may be hundreds
      of network resources in an administered network, the dynamic
      management of network resources for performance (e.g., load
      balancing) is a challenge for DDoS-attack mitigation.  In the
      framework, as dynamic network resource management, traffic flow
      forwarding path management can handle the load balancing of
      network switches [AVANT-GUARD].  With this management, the current
      and near-future workload can be spread among the network switches
      for DDoS-attack mitigation.  In addition, DDoS-attack mitigation
      rules can be dynamically added for new DDoS attacks.

   o  The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each
      network resource.  However, it is difficult to describe what flows
      are permitted or denied for new DDoS-attacks (e.g., DNS reflection
      attack) within a specific organization network under management.
      Thus, a centralized view is helpful to determine security policies
      for such a network.

   So far this document has described the procedure and impact of the
   three use cases for network-based security services using the I2NSF
   framework with SDN networks.  To support these use cases in the
   proposed data-driven security service framework, YANG data models



Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   described in [consumer-facing-inf-dm], [nsf-facing-inf-dm], and
   [registration-inf-dm] can be used as Consumer-Facing Interface, NSF-
   Facing Interface, and Registration Interface, respectively, along
   with RESTCONF [RFC8040] and NETCONF [RFC6241].

5.  Security Considerations

   The I2NSF framework with SDN networks in this document is derived
   from the I2NSF framework [RFC8329], so the security considerations of
   the I2NSF framework should be included in this document.  Therefore,
   proper secure communication channels should be used the delivery of
   control or management messages among the components in the proposed
   framework.

   This document shares all the security issues of SDN that are
   specified in the "Security Considerations" section of [ITU-T.Y.3300].

6.  Acknowledgments

   This work was supported by Institute for Information & communications
   Technology Promotion (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government
   (MSIP) (No.R-20160222-002755, Cloud based Security Intelligence
   Technology Development for the Customized Security Service
   Provisioning).

7.  Contributors

   I2NSF is a group effort.  I2NSF has had a number of contributing
   authors.  The following are considered co-authors:

   o  Hyoungshick Kim (Sungkyunkwan University)

   o  Jung-Soo Park (ETRI)

   o  Se-Hui Lee (Korea Telecom)

   o  Mohamed Boucadair (Orange)

8.  Informative References

   [AVANT-GUARD]
              Shin, S., Yegneswaran, V., Porras, P., and G. Gu, "AVANT-
              GUARD: Scalable and Vigilant Switch Flow Management in
              Software-Defined Networks", ACM CCS, November 2013.







Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   [consumer-facing-inf-dm]
              Jeong, J., Kim, E., Ahn, T., Kumar, R., and S. Hares,
              "I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface YANG Data Model", draft-
              ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-00 (work in
              progress), March 2018.

   [consumer-facing-inf-im]
              Kumar, R., Lohiya, A., Qi, D., Bitar, N., Palislamovic,
              S., Xia, L., and J. Jeong, "Information Model for
              Consumer-Facing Interface to Security Controller", draft-
              kumar-i2nsf-client-facing-interface-im-04 (work in
              progress), October 2017.

   [ETSI-NFV]
              ETSI GS NFV 002 V1.1.1, "Network Functions Virtualisation
              (NFV); Architectural Framework", October 2013.

   [i2nsf-nsf-cap-im]
              Xia, L., Strassner, J., Basile, C., and D. Lopez,
              "Information Model of NSFs Capabilities", draft-ietf-
              i2nsf-capability-00 (work in progress), September 2017.

   [i2nsf-terminology]
              Hares, S., Strassner, J., Lopez, D., Xia, L., and H.
              Birkholz, "Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF)
              Terminology", draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-05 (work in
              progress), January 2018.

   [ITU-T.X.1252]
              Recommendation ITU-T X.1252, "Baseline Identity Management
              Terms and Definitions", April 2010.

   [ITU-T.X.800]
              Recommendation ITU-T X.800, "Security Architecture for
              Open Systems Interconnection for CCITT Applications",
              March 1991.

   [ITU-T.Y.3300]
              Recommendation ITU-T Y.3300, "Framework of Software-
              Defined Networking", June 2014.

   [nsf-facing-inf-dm]
              Kim, J., Jeong, J., Park, J., Hares, S., and Q. Lin,
              "I2NSF Network Security Function-Facing Interface YANG
              Data Model", draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-
              model-00 (work in progress), March 2018.





Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   [nsf-triggered-steering]
              Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Park, J., and S. Hares, "Service
              Function Chaining-Enabled I2NSF Architecture", draft-hyun-
              i2nsf-nsf-triggered-steering-05 (work in progress), March
              2018.

   [ONF-OpenFlow]
              ONF, "OpenFlow Switch Specification (Version 1.4.0)",
              October 2013.

   [ONF-SDN-Architecture]
              ONF, "SDN Architecture", June 2014.

   [opsawg-firewalls]
              Baker, F. and P. Hoffman, "On Firewalls in Internet
              Security", draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-01 (work in
              progress), October 2012.

   [registration-inf-dm]
              Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Roh, T., Wi, S., and J. Park, "I2NSF
              Registration Interface YANG Data Model", draft-hyun-i2nsf-
              registration-dm-03 (work in progress), March 2018.

   [registration-inf-im]
              Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Roh, T., Wi, S., and J. Park, "I2NSF
              Registration Interface Information Model", draft-hyun-
              i2nsf-registration-interface-im-04 (work in progress),
              March 2018.

   [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
              Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.

   [RFC6020]  Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the
              Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
              October 2010.

   [RFC6241]  Enns, R., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., and A.
              Bierman, "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)",
              RFC 6241, June 2011.

   [RFC7149]  Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software-Defined
              Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider
              Environment", RFC 7149, March 2014.

   [RFC8040]  Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
              Protocol", RFC 8040, January 2017.





Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   [RFC8192]  Hares, S., Lopez, D., Zarny, M., Jacquenet, C., Kumar, R.,
              and J. Jeong, "Interface to Network Security Functions
              (I2NSF): Problem Statement and Use Cases", RFC 8192, July
              2017.

   [RFC8329]  Lopez, D., Lopez, E., Dunbar, L., Strassner, J., and R.
              Kumar, "Framework for Interface to Network Security
              Functions", RFC 8329, February 2018.











































Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 18]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


Appendix A.  Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-01

   The following changes have been made from draft-ietf-i2nsf-
   applicability-01:

   o  In Section 4, it is clarified what types of security policy rules
      can be enforced by SDN switches or NSFs in the environment of
      I2NSF framework with SDN.

   o  In Section 4, it is explained what should be done by the Security
      Controller in order to divide the enforcement of security policy
      rules into the SDN switches and NSFs in the I2NSF framework with
      SDN.

Authors' Addresses

   Jaehoon Paul Jeong
   Department of Software
   Sungkyunkwan University
   2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu
   Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do  16419
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 31 299 4957
   Fax:   +82 31 290 7996
   EMail: pauljeong@skku.edu
   URI:   http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php


   Sangwon Hyun
   Department of Software
   Sungkyunkwan University
   2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu
   Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do  16419
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 31 290 7222
   Fax:   +82 31 299 6673
   EMail: swhyun77@skku.edu
   URI:   http://imtl.skku.ac.kr/











Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 19]


Internet-Draft             I2NSF Applicability                March 2018


   Tae-Jin Ahn
   Korea Telecom
   70 Yuseong-Ro, Yuseong-Gu
   Daejeon  305-811
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 42 870 8409
   EMail: taejin.ahn@kt.com


   Susan Hares
   Huawei
   7453 Hickory Hill
   Saline, MI  48176
   USA

   Phone: +1-734-604-0332
   EMail: shares@ndzh.com


   Diego R. Lopez
   Telefonica I+D
   Jose Manuel Lara, 9
   Seville  41013
   Spain

   Phone: +34 682 051 091
   EMail: diego.r.lopez@telefonica.com























Jeong, et al.           Expires September 6, 2018              [Page 20]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.127, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/