draft-ietf-lmap-framework-07.txt   draft-ietf-lmap-framework-08.txt 
Network Working Group P. Eardley Network Working Group P. Eardley
Internet-Draft BT Internet-Draft BT
Intended status: Informational A. Morton Intended status: Informational A. Morton
Expires: December 26, 2014 AT&T Labs Expires: February 8, 2015 AT&T Labs
M. Bagnulo M. Bagnulo
UC3M UC3M
T. Burbridge T. Burbridge
BT BT
P. Aitken P. Aitken
A. Akhter A. Akhter
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
June 24, 2014 August 7, 2014
A framework for large-scale measurement platforms (LMAP) A framework for large-scale measurement platforms (LMAP)
draft-ietf-lmap-framework-07 draft-ietf-lmap-framework-08
Abstract Abstract
Measuring broadband service on a large scale requires a description Measuring broadband service on a large scale requires a description
of the logical architecture and standardisation of the key protocols of the logical architecture and standardisation of the key protocols
that coordinate interactions between the components. The document that coordinate interactions between the components. The document
presents an overall framework for large-scale measurements. It also presents an overall framework for large-scale measurements. It also
defines terminology for LMAP (large-scale measurement platforms). defines terminology for LMAP (large-scale measurement platforms).
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 26, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 8, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Outline of an LMAP-based measurement system . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Outline of an LMAP-based measurement system . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1. Measurement system is under the direction of a single 4.1. The measurement system is under the direction of a single
organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2. Each MA may only have a single Controller at any point in 4.2. Each MA may only have a single Controller at any point in
time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. LMAP Protocol Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Protocol Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. Bootstrapping process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.1. Bootstrapping process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2. Control Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2. Control Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.1. Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2.1. Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.2. Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.2.2. Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2.3. Capabilities and Failure information . . . . . . . . 18 5.2.3. Capabilities, Failure and Logging Information . . . . 18
5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . 20 5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . 20
5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.4. Report Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5.4. Report Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters . . . . 23 5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters . . . . 23
5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer 5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer
mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work . . . . . 24 5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work . . . . . 25
5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system . . . . . . . 25 5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system . . . . . . . 26
6. Deployment considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6. Deployment considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.1. Controller and the measurement system . . . . . . . . . . 26 6.1. Controller and the measurement system . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.2. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 6.2. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.2.1. Measurement Agent on a networked device . . . . . . . 27 6.2.1. Measurement Agent on a networked device . . . . . . . 28
6.2.2. Measurement Agent embedded in site gateway . . . . . 27 6.2.2. Measurement Agent embedded in site gateway . . . . . 28
6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /Firewall 28 6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /firewall 28
6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP Network . . . . . . 29 6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP network . . . . . . 29
6.3. Measurement Peer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 6.3. Measurement Peer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 7. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
8. Privacy Considerations for LMAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 8. Privacy considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8.1. Categories of Entities with Information of Interest . . . 31 8.1. Categories of entities with information of interest . . . 32
8.2. Examples of Sensitive Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8.2. Examples of sensitive information . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8.3. Different privacy issues raised by different sorts of 8.3. Different privacy issues raised by different sorts of
Measurement Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Measurement Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
8.4. Privacy analysis of the Communications Models . . . . . . 34 8.4. Privacy analysis of the communication models . . . . . . 34
8.4.1. MA Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 8.4.1. MA Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
8.4.2. Controller <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . 35 8.4.2. Controller <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . 36
8.4.3. Collector <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . 36 8.4.3. Collector <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . 36 8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . 36
8.4.5. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8.4.5. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8.4.6. Storage and Reporting of Measurement Results . . . . 38 8.4.6. Storage and reporting of Measurement Results . . . . 39
8.5. Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 8.5. Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.5.1. Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8.5.1. Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.5.2. Stored Data Compromise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8.5.2. Stored data compromise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.5.3. Correlation and Identification . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.5.3. Correlation and identification . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8.5.4. Secondary Use and Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.5.4. Secondary use and disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8.6. Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.6. Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.6.1. Data Minimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.6.1. Data minimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.6.2. Anonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.6.2. Anonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.6.3. Pseudonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 8.6.3. Pseudonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.6.4. Other Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8.6.4. Other mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 9. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
10. Appendix: Deployment examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 11. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
12. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.1. From -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
12.1. From -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.2. From -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
12.2. From -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.3. From -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
12.3. From -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 11.4. From -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
12.4. From -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 11.5. From -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
12.5. From -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 11.6. From -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
12.6. From -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 11.7. From -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
12.7. From -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 11.8. From -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
13. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Appendix A. Appendix: Deployment examples . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
There is a desire to be able to coordinate the execution of broadband There is a desire to be able to coordinate the execution of broadband
measurements and the collection of measurement results across a large measurements and the collection of measurement results across a large
scale set of diverse devices. These devices could be software based scale set of diverse devices. These devices could be software based
agents on PCs, embedded agents in consumer devices (e.g. Blu-ray agents on PCs, embedded agents in consumer devices (e.g. Blu-ray
players), service provider controlled devices such as set-top boxes players), service provider controlled devices such as set-top boxes
and home gateways, or simply dedicated probes. It is expected that and home gateways, or simply dedicated probes. It is expected that
such a system could easily comprise 100,000 devices. Measurement such a system could easily comprise 100,000 devices. Measurement
devices may also be embedded on a device that is part of an ISP's devices may also be embedded on a device that is part of an ISP's
network, such as a DSLAM, router, Carrier Grade NAT or ISP Gateway. network, such as a DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access
Such a scale presents unique problems in coordination, execution and Multiplexer), router, Carrier Grade NAT (Network Address Translator)
measurement result collection. Several use cases have been proposed or ISP Gateway. Such a scale presents unique problems in
for large-scale measurements including: coordination, execution and measurement result collection. Several
use cases have been proposed for large-scale measurements including:
o Operators: to help plan their network and identify faults o Operators: to help plan their network and identify faults
o Regulators: to benchmark several network operators and support o Regulators: to benchmark several network operators and support
public policy development public policy development
Further details of the use cases can be found in Further details of the use cases can be found in
[I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases]. The LMAP framework should be useful for [I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases]. The LMAP framework should be useful for
these, as well as other use cases, such as to help end users run these, as well as other use cases, such as to help end users run
diagnostic checks like a network speed test. diagnostic checks like a network speed test.
skipping to change at page 5, line 24 skipping to change at page 5, line 26
Measurement Agents - for example Measurement Agents may come from Measurement Agents - for example Measurement Agents may come from
different vendors, be in wired and wireless networks, be able to different vendors, be in wired and wireless networks, be able to
execute different sorts of Measurement Task and be on devices with execute different sorts of Measurement Task and be on devices with
IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. IPv4 or IPv6 addresses.
2. Outline of an LMAP-based measurement system 2. Outline of an LMAP-based measurement system
Figure 1 shows the main components of a measurement system, and the Figure 1 shows the main components of a measurement system, and the
interactions of those components. Some of the components are outside interactions of those components. Some of the components are outside
the scope of initial LMAP work. In this section we provide an the scope of initial LMAP work. In this section we provide an
overview of the whole measurement system and we introduce the main overview of the whole measurement system. New LMAP-specific terms
terms needed for the LMAP framework. The new terms are capitalised. are capitalised; Section 3 provides a terminology section with a
In the next section we provide a terminology section with a
compilation of all the LMAP terms and their definition. Section 4 compilation of all the LMAP terms and their definition. Section 4
onwards considers the LMAP components in more detail. onwards considers the LMAP components in more detail.
Other LMAP specifications will define an information model, the Other LMAP specifications will define an information model, the
associated data models, and select/extend one or more protocols for associated data models, and select/extend one or more protocols for
the secure communication: firstly, a Control Protocol, from a the secure communication: firstly, a Control Protocol, from a
Controller to instruct Measurement Agents what performance metrics to Controller to instruct Measurement Agents what performance metrics to
measure, when to measure them, how/when to report the measurement measure, when to measure them, how/when to report the measurement
results to a Collector; secondly, a Report Protocol, for a results to a Collector; secondly, a Report Protocol, for a
Measurement Agent to report the results to the Collector. Measurement Agent to report the results to the Collector.
The MA performs Measurement Tasks. The MAs are pieces of code that The MA performs Measurement Tasks. The MAs are pieces of code that
can be executed in specialised hardware (hardware probe) or on a can be executed in specialised hardware (hardware probe) or on a
general-purpose device (like a PC or mobile phone). The MA may general-purpose device (like a PC or mobile phone). The MA may
generate Measurement Traffic and measure some metric associated with generate Measurement Traffic and measure some metric associated with
its transfer, or the MA may observe existing traffic, or there may be its transfer, or the MA may observe existing traffic, or there may be
some kind of hybrid of these two possibilities. A device with a some kind of hybrid of these two possibilities. A device with a
Measurement Agent may have multiple physical interfaces (Wi-Fi, Measurement Agent may have multiple physical interfaces (Wi-Fi,
Ethernet, DSL, fibre; and non-physical interfaces such as PPPoE or Ethernet, DSL (Digital Subscriber Line); and non-physical interfaces
IPsec) and the Measurement Tasks may specify any one of these. such as PPPoE (Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet) or IPsec) and
the Measurement Tasks may specify any one of these.
The Controller manages a MA through use of the Control Protocol, The Controller manages a MA through use of the Control Protocol,
which transfers the Instruction to the MA. This describes the which transfers the Instruction to the MA. This describes the
Measurement Tasks the MA should perform and when. For example the Measurement Tasks the MA should perform and when. For example the
Controller may instruct a MA at a home gateway: "Count the number of Controller may instruct a MA at a home gateway: "Count the number of
TCP SYN packets observed in a 1 minute interval; repeat every hour at TCP SYN packets observed in a 1 minute interval; repeat every hour at
xx.05 + Unif[0,180] seconds". The Measurement Schedule determines xx.05 + Unif[0,180] seconds". The Measurement Schedule determines
when the Measurement Tasks are executed. The Controller also manages when the Measurement Tasks are executed. The Controller also manages
a MA by instructing it how to report the Measurement Results, for a MA by instructing it how to report the Measurement Results, for
example: "Report results once a day in a batch at 4am + Unif[0,180] example: "Report results once a day in a batch at 4am + Unif[0,180]
skipping to change at page 6, line 34 skipping to change at page 6, line 37
to simply by its identifier in the registry. The Measurement Methods to simply by its identifier in the registry. The Measurement Methods
and registry will hopefully be referenced by other standards and registry will hopefully be referenced by other standards
organisations. organisations.
Broadly speaking there are two types of Measurement Method. It may Broadly speaking there are two types of Measurement Method. It may
involve a single MA simply observing existing traffic - for example, involve a single MA simply observing existing traffic - for example,
the Measurement Agent could count bytes or calculate the average loss the Measurement Agent could count bytes or calculate the average loss
for a particular flow. On the other hand, a Measurement Method may for a particular flow. On the other hand, a Measurement Method may
involve multiple network entities, which perform different roles. involve multiple network entities, which perform different roles.
For example, a "ping" Measurement Method, to measure the round trip For example, a "ping" Measurement Method, to measure the round trip
delay , would consist of an MA sending an ICMP ECHO request to a delay , would consist of an MA sending an ICMP (Internet Control
responder in the Internet. In LMAP terms, the responder is termed a Message Protocol) ECHO request to a responder in the Internet. In
Measurement Peer (MP), meaning that it helps the MA but is not LMAP terms, the responder is termed a Measurement Peer (MP), meaning
managed by the Controller. Other Measurement Methods involve a that it helps the MA but is not managed by the Controller. Other
second MA, with the Controller instructing the MAs in a coordinated Measurement Methods involve a second MA, with the Controller
manner. Traffic generated specifically as part of the Measurement instructing the MAs in a coordinated manner. Traffic generated
Method is termed Measurement Traffic; in the ping example, it is the specifically as part of the Measurement Method is termed Measurement
ICMP ECHO Requests and Replies. The protocols used for the Traffic; in the ping example, it is the ICMP ECHO Requests and
Measurement Traffic are out of the scope of initial LMAP work, and Replies. The protocols used for the Measurement Traffic are out of
fall within the scope of other IETF WGs such as IPPM. The the scope of initial LMAP work, and fall within the scope of other
Appendix has some other examples of possible arrangements of IETF WGs such as IPPM (IP Performance Metrics). The Appendix has
Measurement Agents and Peers. some other examples of possible arrangements of Measurement Agents
and Peers.
A Measurement Task is the action performed by a particular MA at a A Measurement Task is the action performed by a particular MA at a
particular time, as the specific instance of its role in a particular time, as the specific instance of its role in a
Measurement Method. LMAP is mainly concerned with Measurement Tasks, Measurement Method. LMAP is mainly concerned with Measurement Tasks,
for instance in terms of its Information Model and Protocols. for instance in terms of its Information Model and Protocols.
For Measurement Results to be truly comparable, as might be required For Measurement Results to be truly comparable, as might be required
by a regulator, not only do the same Measurement Methods need to be by a regulator, not only do the same Measurement Methods need to be
used to assess Metrics, but also the set of Measurement Tasks should used to assess Metrics, but also the set of Measurement Tasks should
follow a similar Measurement Schedule and be of similar number. The follow a similar Measurement Schedule and be of similar number. The
skipping to change at page 7, line 31 skipping to change at page 7, line 36
applications. They affect how the measurement system uses the applications. They affect how the measurement system uses the
Measurement Results and how it decides what set of Measurement Tasks Measurement Results and how it decides what set of Measurement Tasks
to perform. to perform.
The MA needs to be bootstrapped with initial details about its The MA needs to be bootstrapped with initial details about its
Controller, including authentication credentials. The LMAP work Controller, including authentication credentials. The LMAP work
considers the bootstrap process, since it affects the Information considers the bootstrap process, since it affects the Information
Model. However, LMAP does not define a bootstrap protocol, since it Model. However, LMAP does not define a bootstrap protocol, since it
is likely to be technology specific and could be defined by the is likely to be technology specific and could be defined by the
Broadband Forum, CableLabs or IEEE depending on the device. Possible Broadband Forum, CableLabs or IEEE depending on the device. Possible
protocols are SNMP, NETCONF or (for Home Gateways) CPE WAN Management protocols are SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol), NETCONF
Protocol (CWMP) from the Auto Configuration Server (ACS) (as (Network Configuration Protocol) or (for Home Gateways) CPE WAN
specified in TR-069 [TR-069]). Management Protocol (CWMP) from the Auto Configuration Server (ACS)
(as specified in TR-069 [TR-069]).
A Subscriber parameter database contains information about the line, A Subscriber parameter database contains information about the line,
such as the customer's broadband contract (perhaps 2, 40 or 80Mb/s), such as the customer's broadband contract (perhaps 2, 40 or 80Mb/s),
the line technology (DSL or fibre), the time zone where the MA is the line technology (DSL or fibre), the time zone where the MA is
located, and the type of home gateway and MA. These parameters are located, and the type of home gateway and MA. These parameters are
already gathered and stored by existing operations systems. They may already gathered and stored by existing operations systems. They may
affect the choice of what Measurement Tasks to run and how to affect the choice of what Measurement Tasks to run and how to
interpret the Measurement Results. For example, a download test interpret the Measurement Results. For example, a download test
suitable for a line with an 80Mb/s contract may overwhelm a 2Mb/s suitable for a line with an 80Mb/s contract may overwhelm a 2Mb/s
line. line.
A results repository records all Measurement Results in an equivalent A results repository records all Measurement Results in an equivalent
form, for example an SQL database, so that they can easily be form, for example an SQL (Structured Query Language) database, so
accessed by the data analysis tools. that they can easily be accessed by the data analysis tools.
The data analysis tools receive the results from the Collector or via The data analysis tools receive the results from the Collector or via
the Results repository. They might visualise the data or identify the Results repository. They might visualise the data or identify
which component or link is likely to be the cause of a fault or which component or link is likely to be the cause of a fault or
degradation. This information could help the Controller decide what degradation. This information could help the Controller decide what
follow-up Measurement Task to perform in order to diagnose a fault. follow-up Measurement Task to perform in order to diagnose a fault.
The data analysis tools also need to understand the Subscriber's The data analysis tools also need to understand the Subscriber's
service information, for example the broadband contract. service information, for example the broadband contract.
^ ^
skipping to change at page 9, line 14 skipping to change at page 9, line 26
hosting the MA, for example its interface type and speed, but not hosting the MA, for example its interface type and speed, but not
dynamic information. dynamic information.
Channel: A bi-directional logical connection that is defined by a Channel: A bi-directional logical connection that is defined by a
specific Controller and MA, or Collector and MA, plus associated specific Controller and MA, or Collector and MA, plus associated
security. security.
Collector: A function that receives a Report from a Measurement Collector: A function that receives a Report from a Measurement
Agent. Agent.
Configuration: A process for informing the MA about its MA-ID,
(optional) Group-ID and Control Channel.
Controller: A function that provides a Measurement Agent with its Controller: A function that provides a Measurement Agent with its
Instruction. Instruction.
Control Channel: a Channel between a Controller and a MA over which Control Channel: A Channel between a Controller and a MA over which
Instruction Messages and Capabilities, Failure and Logging Instruction Messages and Capabilities, Failure and Logging
Information are sent. Information are sent.
Control Protocol: The protocol delivering Instruction(s) from a Control Protocol: The protocol delivering Instruction(s) from a
Controller to a Measurement Agent. It also delivers Capabilities, Controller to a Measurement Agent. It also delivers Capabilities,
Failure and Logging Information from the Measurement Agent to the Failure and Logging Information from the Measurement Agent to the
Controller. It can also be used to update the MA's configuration. Controller. It can also be used to update the MA's Configuration.
Cycle-ID: A tag that is sent by the Controller in an Instruction and Cycle-ID: A tag that is sent by the Controller in an Instruction and
echoed by the MA in its Report. The same Cycle-ID is used by several echoed by the MA in its Report. The same Cycle-ID is used by several
MAs that use the same Measurement Method for a Metric with the same MAs that use the same Measurement Method for a Metric with the same
Input Parameters. Hence the Cycle-ID allows the Collector to easily Input Parameters. Hence the Cycle-ID allows the Collector to easily
identify Measurement Results that should be comparable. identify Measurement Results that should be comparable.
Data Model: The implementation of an Information Model in a Data Model: The implementation of an Information Model in a
particular data modelling language [RFC3444]. particular data modelling language [RFC3444].
skipping to change at page 11, line 10 skipping to change at page 11, line 20
Measurement Task: The action performed by a particular Measurement Measurement Task: The action performed by a particular Measurement
Agent that consists of the single assessment of a Metric through Agent that consists of the single assessment of a Metric through
operation of a Measurement Method role at a particular time, with all operation of a Measurement Method role at a particular time, with all
of the role's Input Parameters set to specific values. of the role's Input Parameters set to specific values.
Measurement Traffic: the packet(s) generated by some types of Measurement Traffic: the packet(s) generated by some types of
Measurement Method that involve measuring some parameter associated Measurement Method that involve measuring some parameter associated
with the transfer of the packet(s). with the transfer of the packet(s).
Metric: The quantity related to the performance and reliability of Metric: The quantity related to the performance and reliability of
the network that we'd like to know the value of, and that is the network that we'd like to know the value of.
carefully specified.
Report: The set of Measurement Results and other associated Report: The set of Measurement Results and other associated
information (as defined by the Instruction). The Report is sent by a information (as defined by the Instruction). The Report is sent by a
Measurement Agent to a Collector. Measurement Agent to a Collector.
Report Channel: a communications channel between a MA and a Report Channel: A Channel between a Collector and a MA over which
Collector, which is defined by a specific MA, Collector, Report Report messages are sent.
Schedule and associated security, and over which Reports are sent.
Report Protocol: The protocol delivering Report(s) from a Measurement Report Protocol: The protocol delivering Report(s) from a Measurement
Agent to a Collector. Agent to a Collector.
Report Schedule: the schedule for sending Reports to a Collector. Report Schedule: the schedule for sending Reports to a Collector.
Subscriber: An entity (associated with one or more users) that is Subscriber: An entity (associated with one or more users) that is
engaged in a subscription with a service provider. engaged in a subscription with a service provider.
Suppression: the temporary cessation of Measurement Tasks. Suppression: the temporary cessation of Measurement Tasks.
4. Constraints 4. Constraints
The LMAP framework makes some important assumptions, which constrain The LMAP framework makes some important assumptions, which constrain
the scope of the initial LMAP work. the scope of the initial LMAP work.
4.1. Measurement system is under the direction of a single organisation 4.1. The measurement system is under the direction of a single
organisation
In the LMAP framework, the measurement system is under the direction In the LMAP framework, the measurement system is under the direction
of a single organisation that is responsible for any impact that its of a single organisation that is responsible for any impact that its
measurements have on a user's quality of experience and privacy. measurements have on a user's quality of experience and privacy.
Clear responsibility is critical given that a misbehaving large-scale Clear responsibility is critical given that a misbehaving large-scale
measurement system could potentially harm user experience, user measurement system could potentially harm user experience, user
privacy and network security. privacy and network security.
However, the components of an LMAP measurement system can be deployed However, the components of an LMAP measurement system can be deployed
in administrative domains that are not owned by the measuring in administrative domains that are not owned by the measuring
skipping to change at page 12, line 21 skipping to change at page 12, line 27
This simplifies the design of MAs (critical for a large-scale This simplifies the design of MAs (critical for a large-scale
infrastructure) and allows a Measurement Schedule to be tested on infrastructure) and allows a Measurement Schedule to be tested on
specific types of MA before deployment to ensure that the end user specific types of MA before deployment to ensure that the end user
experience is not impacted (due to CPU, memory or broadband-product experience is not impacted (due to CPU, memory or broadband-product
constraints). constraints).
An operator may have several Controllers, perhaps with a Controller An operator may have several Controllers, perhaps with a Controller
for different types of MA (home gateways, tablets) or location for different types of MA (home gateways, tablets) or location
(Ipswich, Edinburgh). (Ipswich, Edinburgh).
5. LMAP Protocol Model 5. Protocol Model
A protocol model [RFC4101] presents an architectural model for how A protocol model [RFC4101] presents an architectural model for how
the protocol operates and needs to answer three basic questions: the protocol operates and needs to answer three basic questions:
1. What problem is the protocol trying to achieve? 1. What problem is the protocol trying to achieve?
2. What messages are being transmitted and what do they mean? 2. What messages are being transmitted and what do they mean?
3. What are the important, but unobvious, features of the protocol? 3. What are the important, but unobvious, features of the protocol?
An LMAP system goes through the following phases: An LMAP system goes through the following phases:
o a bootstrapping process before the MA can take part in the other o a Bootstrapping process before the MA can take part in the other
three phases three phases
o a Control Protocol, which delivers Instruction Messages from a o a Control Protocol, which delivers Instruction Messages from a
Controller to a MA, detailing what Measurement Tasks the MA should Controller to a MA, detailing what Measurement Tasks the MA should
perform and when, and how it should report the Measurement perform and when, and how it should report the Measurement
Results. It also delivers Capabilities, Failure and logging Results. It also delivers Capabilities, Failure and logging
Information from a MA to its Controller. Finally, it allows the Information from a MA to its Controller. Finally, it allows the
Controller to update the MA's configuration. Controller to update the MA's Configuration.
o the actual Measurement Tasks, which measure some performance or o the actual Measurement Tasks, which measure some performance or
reliability parameter(s) associated with the transfer of packets. reliability parameter(s) associated with the transfer of packets.
The LMAP work does not define Metrics and Measurement Methods, The LMAP work does not define Metrics and Measurement Methods,
these are define elsewhere (e.g. IPPM). these are defined elsewhere (e.g. IPPM).
o a Report Protocol, which delivers Reports from a MA to a o a Report Protocol, which delivers Reports from a MA to a
Collector. The Report contains the Measurement Results. Collector. The Report contains the Measurement Results.
The diagrams show the various LMAP messages and uses the following The diagrams show the various LMAP messages and uses the following
convention: convention:
o (optional): indicated by round brackets o (optional): indicated by round brackets
o [potentially repeated]: indicated by square brackets o [potentially repeated]: indicated by square brackets
The protocol model is closely related to the Information Model The protocol model is closely related to the Information Model
[I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model], which is the abstract definition [I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model], which is the abstract definition
of the information carried by the protocol model. The purpose of of the information carried by the protocol. (If there is any
both is to provide a protocol and device independent view, which can difference between this document and the Information Model, the
be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a specific latter is definitive, since it is on the standards track.) The
Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be defined by purpose of both is to provide a protocol and device independent view,
other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is important which can be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a
that they all implement the same Information Model and protocol specific Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be
model, in order to ease the definition, operation and defined by other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is
important that they all implement the same Information Model and
protocol model, in order to ease the definition, operation and
interoperability of large-scale measurement systems. interoperability of large-scale measurement systems.
5.1. Bootstrapping process 5.1. Bootstrapping process
The primary purpose of bootstrapping is to enable a MA to be The primary purpose of bootstrapping is to enable a MA to be
integrated into a measurement system. The MA retrieves information integrated into a measurement system. The MA retrieves information
about itself (like its identity in the measurement system) and about about itself (like its identity in the measurement system) and about
the Controller, the Controller learns information about the MA, and the Controller, the Controller learns information about the MA, and
they learn about security information to communicate (such as they learn about security information to communicate (such as
certificates and credentials). certificates and credentials).
Whilst this memo considers the bootstrapping process, it is beyond Whilst this memo considers the bootstrapping process, it is beyond
the scope of initial LMAP work to define a bootstrap mechanism, as it the scope of initial LMAP work to define a bootstrap mechanism, as it
depends on the type of device and access. depends on the type of device and access.
As a result of the bootstrapping process the MA learns information As a result of the bootstrapping process the MA learns information
with the following aims ([I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] defines with the following aims ([I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] defines
the consequent list of information elements): the consequent list of information elements):
o its identifier, either its MA-ID or a device identifier such as o its identifier, either its MA-ID or a device identifier such as
its MAC or both. one of its MAC or both.
o (optionally) a Group-ID. A Group-ID would be shared by several o (optionally) a Group-ID. A Group-ID would be shared by several
MAs and could be useful for privacy reasons. For instance, MAs and could be useful for privacy reasons. For instance,
reporting the Group-ID and not the MA-ID could hinder tracking of reporting the Group-ID and not the MA-ID could hinder tracking of
a mobile device a mobile device
o the Control Channel, which is defined by: o the Control Channel, which is defined by:
* the address which identifies the Control Channel, such as the * the address which identifies the Control Channel, such as the
Controller's FQDN (Fully Qualified Domain Name) [RFC1035]) Controller's FQDN (Fully Qualified Domain Name) [RFC1035])
* security information (for example to enable the MA to decrypt * security information (for example to enable the MA to decrypt
the Instruction Message and encrypt messages sent to the the Instruction Message and encrypt messages sent to the
Controller) Controller)
The details of the bootstrapping process are device /access specific. The details of the bootstrapping process are device /access specific.
For example, the information could be in the firmware, manually For example, the information could be in the firmware, manually
configured or transferred via a protocol like TR-069 [TR-069]. There configured or transferred via a protocol like TR-069 [TR-069]. There
may be a multi-stage process where the MA contacts the device at a may be a multi-stage process where the MA contacts a 'hard-coded'
'hard-coded' address, which replies with the bootstrapping address, which replies with the bootstrapping information.
information.
The MA must learn its MA-ID before getting an Instruction, either The MA must learn its MA-ID before getting an Instruction, either
during Bootstrapping or via configuration (Section 5.2.1). during Bootstrapping or via Configuration (Section 5.2.1).
5.2. Control Protocol 5.2. Control Protocol
The primary purpose of the Control Protocol is to allow the The primary purpose of the Control Protocol is to allow the
Controller to configure a Measurement Agent with an Instruction about Controller to configure a Measurement Agent with an Instruction about
what Measurement Tasks to do, when to do them, and how to report the what Measurement Tasks to do, when to do them, and how to report the
Measurement Results (Section 5.2.2). The Measurement Agent then acts Measurement Results (Section 5.2.2). The Measurement Agent then acts
on the Instruction autonomously. The Control Protocol also enables on the Instruction autonomously. The Control Protocol also enables
the MA to inform the Controller about its Capabilities and any the MA to inform the Controller about its Capabilities and any
Failure and logging Information (Section 5.2.2). Finally, the Failure and Logging Information (Section 5.2.2). Finally, the
Control Protocol allows the Controller to update the MA's Control Protocol allows the Controller to update the MA's
configuration. Configuration.
5.2.1. Configuration 5.2.1. Configuration
Configuration allows the Controller to update the MA about some or Configuration allows the Controller to update the MA about some or
all of the information that it obtained during the bootstrapping all of the information that it obtained during the bootstrapping
process: the MA-ID, the (optional) Group-ID and the Control Channel. process: the MA-ID, the (optional) Group-ID and the Control Channel.
The measurement system might use Configuration for several reasons. The measurement system might use Configuration for several reasons.
For example, the bootstrapping process could 'hard code' the MA with For example, the bootstrapping process could 'hard code' the MA with
details of an initial Controller, and then the initial Controller details of an initial Controller, and then the initial Controller
could configure the MA with details about the Controller that sends could configure the MA with details about the Controller that sends
skipping to change at page 15, line 35 skipping to change at page 15, line 35
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Controller |======================================| Agent | | Controller |======================================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
Instruction: -> Instruction: ->
[(Measurement Task configuration( [(Measurement Task configuration(
[Input Parameter], [Input Parameter],
(interface), (interface),
(Cycle-ID))), (Cycle-ID))),
(Report Channel), (Report Channel),
(Measurement Schedule), (Schedule),
(Report Schedule),
(Suppression information)] (Suppression information)]
<- Response(details) <- Response(details)
The Instruction defines information with the following aims The Instruction defines information with the following aims
([I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] defines the consequent list of ([I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] defines the consequent list of
information elements): information elements):
o the Measurement Task configurations, each of which needs: o the Measurement Task configurations, each of which needs:
* the Metric, specified as a URI to a registry entry; it includes * the Metric, specified as a URI to a registry entry; it includes
the specification of a Measurement Method. The registry could the specification of a Measurement Method. The registry could
be defined by the IETF [I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry], be defined by the IETF [I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry],
locally by the operator of the measurement system or perhaps by locally by the operator of the measurement system or perhaps by
another standards organisation. another standards organisation.
* the Measurement Method role. For some Measurement Methods, * the Measurement Method role. For some Measurement Methods,
different parties play different roles; for example (figure A3 different parties play different roles; for example (figure A3
in the Appendix) an iperf sender and receiver. Each Metric and in the Appendix) an iperf sender and receiver. Each Metric and
its associated Measurement Method will describe all measurement its associated Measurement Method will describe all measurement
roles involved in the process. Thus, the Measurement Method roles involved in the process.
role is an Input Parameter.
* a boolean flag (suppress or do-not-suppress) indicating how * a boolean flag (suppress or do-not-suppress) indicating how
such a Measurement Task is impacted by a Suppression message such a Measurement Task is impacted by a Suppression message
(see Section 5.2.2.1). Thus, the flag is an Input Parameter. (see Section 5.2.2.1). Thus, the flag is an Input Parameter.
* any Input Parameters that need to be set for the Metric and the * any Input Parameters that need to be set for the Metric and the
Measurement Method, such as the address of a Measurement Peer Measurement Method. For example, the address of a Measurement
(or other Measurement Agent) that may be involved in a Peer (or other Measurement Agent) that may be involved in a
Measurement Task, and for the measurement protocol used, such Measurement Task.
as protocol role(s).
* if the device with the MA has multiple interfaces, then the * if the device with the MA has multiple interfaces, then the
interface to use (if not defined, then the default interface is interface to use (if not defined, then the default interface is
used) used).
o configuration of the Measurement Schedules, each of which needs: * optionally, a Cycle-ID.
* the timing of when the Measurement Tasks are to be performed. * optionally, the measurement point designation
Possible types of timing are periodic, calendar-based periodic, [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path] of the MA and, if applicable, of the
one-off immediate and one-off at a future time MP or other MA. This can be useful for reporting.
o configuration of the Schedules, each of which needs:
* the timing of when the Measurement Tasks are to be performed,
or the Measurement Reports are to be sent. Possible types of
timing are periodic, calendar-based periodic, one-off immediate
and one-off at a future time
o configuration of the Report Channels, each of which needs: o configuration of the Report Channels, each of which needs:
* the address of the Collector, for instance its URL * the address of the Collector, for instance its URL
* security for this Report Channel, for example the X.509 * security for this Report Channel, for example the X.509
certificate certificate
o configuration of the Report Schedules, each of which needs:
* the timing of when reporting is to be performed. For instance,
every hour or immediately.
o Suppression information, if any (see Section 5.2.1.1) o Suppression information, if any (see Section 5.2.1.1)
A single Instruction Message may contain some or all of the above A single Instruction Message may contain some or all of the above
parts. The finest level of granularity possible in an Instruction parts. The finest level of granularity possible in an Instruction
Message is determined by the implementation and operation of the Message is determined by the implementation and operation of the
Control Protocol. For example, a single Instruction Message may add Control Protocol. For example, a single Instruction Message may add
or update an individual Measurement Schedule - or it may only update or update an individual Measurement Schedule - or it may only update
the complete set of Measurement Schedules; a single Instruction the complete set of Measurement Schedules; a single Instruction
Message may update both Measurement Schedules and Measurement Task Message may update both Measurement Schedules and Measurement Task
configurations - or only one at a time; and so on. configurations - or only one at a time; and so on. However,
Suppression information always replaces (rather than adds to) any
previous Suppression information.
The MA informs the Controller that it has successfully understood the The MA informs the Controller that it has successfully understood the
Instruction Message, or that it cannot action the Instruction - for Instruction Message, or that it cannot action the Instruction - for
example, if it doesn't include a parameter that is mandatory for the example, if it doesn't include a parameter that is mandatory for the
requested Metric and Measurement Method, or it is missing details of requested Metric and Measurement Method, or it is missing details of
the target Collector. the target Collector.
The Instruction Message instructs the MA; the Control Protocol does The Instruction Message instructs the MA; the Control Protocol does
not allow the MA to negotiate, as this would add complexity to the not allow the MA to negotiate, as this would add complexity to the
MA, Controller and Control Protocol for little benefit. MA, Controller and Control Protocol for little benefit.
skipping to change at page 17, line 40 skipping to change at page 17, line 39
o a set of Measurement Tasks to suppress; the others are not o a set of Measurement Tasks to suppress; the others are not
suppressed. For example, this could be useful if a particular suppressed. For example, this could be useful if a particular
Measurement Task is overloading a Measurement Peer. Measurement Task is overloading a Measurement Peer.
o a set of Measurement Schedules to suppress; the others are not o a set of Measurement Schedules to suppress; the others are not
suppressed. For example, suppose the measurement system has suppressed. For example, suppose the measurement system has
defined two Schedules, one with the most critical Measurement defined two Schedules, one with the most critical Measurement
Tasks and the other with less critical ones that create a lot of Tasks and the other with less critical ones that create a lot of
Measurement Traffic, then it may only want to suppress the second. Measurement Traffic, then it may only want to suppress the second.
o if both the previous fields are included then the MA suppresses
the union - in other words, it suppresses both the set of
Measurement Tasks and the set of Measurement Schedules.
o if the Suppression information includes neither a set of o if the Suppression information includes neither a set of
Measurement Tasks nor a set of Measurement Schedules, then the MA Measurement Tasks nor a set of Measurement Schedules, then the MA
does not begin new Measurement Tasks that have the boolean flag does not begin new Measurement Tasks that have the boolean flag
set to "suppress"; however, the MA does begin new Measurement set to "suppress"; however, the MA does begin new Measurement
Tasks that have the flag set to "do-not-suppress". Tasks that have the flag set to "do-not-suppress".
o a start time, at which suppression begins. If absent, then o a start time, at which suppression begins. If absent, then
Suppression begins immediately. Suppression begins immediately.
o an end time, at which suppression ends. If absent, then o an end time, at which suppression ends. If absent, then
Suppression continues until the MA receives an un-Suppress Suppression continues until the MA receives an un-Suppress
message. message.
o a demand that the MA immediately ends on-going Measurement Task(s) o a demand that the MA immediately ends on-going Measurement Task(s)
that are tagged for suppression (and deletes the associated that are tagged for suppression. (Most likely it is appropriate
partial Measurement Result(s)). This could be useful in the case to delete the associated partial Measurement Result(s).) This
of a network emergency so that the operator can eliminate all could be useful in the case of a network emergency so that the
inessential traffic as rapidly as possible. If absent, the MA operator can eliminate all inessential traffic as rapidly as
completes on-going Measurement Tasks. possible. If absent, the MA completes on-going Measurement Tasks.
So the default action (if none of the optional fields is set) is that
the MA does not begin any new Measurement Task with the "suppress"
flag.
An un-Suppress message instructs the MA no longer to suppress, An un-Suppress message instructs the MA no longer to suppress,
meaning that the MA once again begins new Measurement Tasks, meaning that the MA once again begins new Measurement Tasks,
according to its Measurement Schedule. according to its Measurement Schedule.
Note that Suppression is not intended to permanently stop a Note that Suppression is not intended to permanently stop a
Measurement Task (instead, the Controller should send a new Measurement Task (instead, the Controller should send a new
Measurement Schedule), nor to permanently disable a MA (instead, some Measurement Schedule), nor to permanently disable a MA (instead, some
kind of management action is suggested). kind of management action is suggested).
skipping to change at page 18, line 39 skipping to change at page 18, line 39
Suppress: Suppress:
[(Measurement Task), -> [(Measurement Task), ->
(Measurement Schedule), (Measurement Schedule),
[start time], [start time],
[end time], [end time],
[on-going suppressed?]] [on-going suppressed?]]
Un-suppress -> Un-suppress ->
5.2.3. Capabilities and Failure information 5.2.3. Capabilities, Failure and Logging Information
The Control Protocol also enables the MA to inform the Controller The Control Protocol also enables the MA to inform the Controller
about various information, such as its Capabilities and any Failures. about various information, such as its Capabilities and any Failures.
It is also possible to use a device-specific mechanism which is It is also possible to use a device-specific mechanism which is
beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work. beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work.
Capabilities are information about the MA that the Controller needs Capabilities are information about the MA that the Controller needs
to know in order to correctly instruct the MA, such as: to know in order to correctly instruct the MA, such as:
o the Measurement Method (roles) that the MA supports o the Measurement Method (roles) that the MA supports
skipping to change at page 19, line 14 skipping to change at page 19, line 14
o the interfaces that the MA has o the interfaces that the MA has
o the version of the MA o the version of the MA
o the version of the hardware, firmware or software of the device o the version of the hardware, firmware or software of the device
with the MA with the MA
o but not dynamic information like the currently unused CPU, memory o but not dynamic information like the currently unused CPU, memory
or battery life of the device with the MA. or battery life of the device with the MA.
Failure information concerns why the MA has been unable to execute a Failure Information concerns why the MA has been unable to execute a
Measurement Task or deliver a Report, for example: Measurement Task or deliver a Report, for example:
o the Measurement Task failed to run properly because the MA o the Measurement Task failed to run properly because the MA
(unexpectedly) has no spare CPU cycles (unexpectedly) has no spare CPU cycles
o the MA failed record the Measurement Results because it o the MA failed record the Measurement Results because it
(unexpectedly) is out of spare memory (unexpectedly) is out of spare memory
o a Report failed to deliver Measurement Results because the o a Report failed to deliver Measurement Results because the
Collector (unexpectedly) is not responding Collector (unexpectedly) is not responding
o but not if a Measurement Task correctly doesn't start. For o but not if a Measurement Task correctly doesn't start. For
example, the first step of some Measurement Methods is for the MA example, the first step of some Measurement Methods is for the MA
to check there is no cross-traffic. to check there is no cross-traffic.
Logging information concerns how the MA is operating and may help Logging Information concerns how the MA is operating and may help
debugging, for example: debugging, for example:
o the last time the MA ran a Measurement Task o the last time the MA ran a Measurement Task
o the last time the MA sent a Measurement Report o the last time the MA sent a Measurement Report
o the last time the MA received an Instruction Message o the last time the MA received an Instruction Message
o whether the MA is currently Suppressing Measurement Tasks o whether the MA is currently Suppressing Measurement Tasks
Capabilities, failure and logging information are sent by the MA, Capabilities, Failure and Logging Information are sent by the MA,
either in response to a request from the Controller (for example, if either in response to a request from the Controller (for example, if
the Controller forgets what the MA can do or otherwise wants to the Controller forgets what the MA can do or otherwise wants to
resynchronize what it knows about the MA), or on its own initiative resynchronize what it knows about the MA), or on its own initiative
(for example when the MA first communicates with a Controller or if (for example when the MA first communicates with a Controller or if
it becomes capable of a new Measurement Method). Another example of it becomes capable of a new Measurement Method). Another example of
the latter case is if the device with the MA re-boots, then the MA the latter case is if the device with the MA re-boots, then the MA
should notify its Controller in case its Instruction needs to be should notify its Controller in case its Instruction needs to be
updated; to avoid a "mass calling event" after a widespread power updated; to avoid a "mass calling event" after a widespread power
restoration affecting many MAs, it is sensible for an MA to pause for restoration affecting many MAs, it is sensible for an MA to pause for
a random delay, perhaps in the range of one minute or so. a random delay, perhaps in the range of one minute or so.
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Controller |===================================| Agent | | Controller |===================================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
(Instruction: (Instruction:
[(Request Capabilities), [(Request Capabilities),
(Request Failure Information), (Request Failure Information),
(Request Logging Information)]) -> (Request Logging Information)]) ->
<- (Capabilities), <- (Capabilities),
(Failure Information), (Failure Information),
(Logging Information) (Logging Information)
5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks 5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks
This LMAP framework is neutral to what the actual Measurement Task This LMAP framework is neutral to what the actual Measurement Task
is. It does not define Metrics and Measurement Methods, these are is. It does not define Metrics and Measurement Methods, these are
defined elsewhere (e.g. IPPM). defined elsewhere (e.g. IPPM).
The MA carries out the Measurement Tasks as instructed, unless it The MA carries out the Measurement Tasks as instructed, unless it
gets an updated Instruction. The MA acts autonomously, in terms of gets an updated Instruction. The MA acts autonomously, in terms of
operation of the Measurement Tasks and reporting of the Results; it operation of the Measurement Tasks and reporting of the Results; it
doesn't do a 'safety check' with the Controller to ask whether it doesn't do a 'safety check' with the Controller to ask whether it
should still continue with the requested Measurement Tasks. should still continue with the requested Measurement Tasks.
The MA may operate Measurement Tasks sequentially or in parallel (see
Section 5.3.2).
5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks 5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks
This LMAP framework does not define a generic start and stop process, This LMAP framework does not define a generic start and stop process,
since the correct approach depends on the particular Measurement since the correct approach depends on the particular Measurement
Task; the details are defined as part of each Measurement Method. Task; the details are defined as part of each Measurement Method.
This section provides some general hints. The MA does not inform the This section provides some general hints. The MA does not inform the
Controller about Measurement Tasks starting and stopping. Controller about Measurement Tasks starting and stopping.
Before sending Measurement Traffic the MA may run a pre-check. (The Before sending Measurement Traffic the MA may run a pre-check. (The
pre-check could be defined as a separate, preceding Task or as the pre-check could be defined as a separate, preceding Task or as the
skipping to change at page 21, line 19 skipping to change at page 21, line 22
It is possible that similar checks continue during the Measurement It is possible that similar checks continue during the Measurement
Task, especially one that is long-running and/or creates a lot of Task, especially one that is long-running and/or creates a lot of
Measurement Traffic, and might lead to it being abandoned whilst in- Measurement Traffic, and might lead to it being abandoned whilst in-
progress. A Measurement Task could also be abandoned in response to progress. A Measurement Task could also be abandoned in response to
a "suppress" message (see Section 5.2.1). Action could include: a "suppress" message (see Section 5.2.1). Action could include:
o For 'upload' tests, the MA not sending traffic o For 'upload' tests, the MA not sending traffic
o For 'download' tests, the MA closing the TCP connection or sending o For 'download' tests, the MA closing the TCP connection or sending
a TWAMP Stop control message [RFC5357]. a TWAMP (Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol) Stop control message
[RFC5357].
The Controller may want a MA to run the same Measurement Task The Controller may want a MA to run the same Measurement Task
indefinitely (for example, "run the 'upload speed' Measurement Task indefinitely (for example, "run the 'upload speed' Measurement Task
once an hour until further notice"). To avoid the MA generating once an hour until further notice"). To avoid the MA generating
traffic forever after a Controller has permanently failed (or traffic forever after a Controller has permanently failed (or
communications with the Controller have failed), the MA can be communications with the Controller have failed), the MA can be
configured with a time limit; if the MA doesn't hear from the configured with a time limit; if the MA doesn't hear from the
Controller for this length of time, then it stops operating Controller for this length of time, then it stops operating
Measurement Tasks. Measurement Tasks.
5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks 5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks
It is possible that a MA starts a new Measurement Task before another It is possible that a MA starts a new Measurement Task before another
Measurement Task has completed. This may be intentional (the way Measurement Task has completed. This may be intentional (the way
that the measurement system has designed the Measurement Schedules), that the measurement system has designed the Measurement Schedules),
but it could also be unintentional - for instance, if a Measurement but it could also be unintentional - for instance, if a Measurement
Task has a 'wait for X' step which pauses for an unexpectedly long Task has a 'wait for X' step which pauses for an unexpectedly long
time. The operator of the measurement system can handle (or not) time. This document makes no assumptions about the impact of one
Measurement Task on another.
The operator of the measurement system can handle (or not)
overlapping Measurement Tasks in any way they choose - it is a policy overlapping Measurement Tasks in any way they choose - it is a policy
or implementation issue and not the concern of LMAP. Some possible or implementation issue and not the concern of LMAP. Some possible
approaches are: to configure the MA not to begin the second approaches are: to configure the MA not to begin the second
Measurement Task; to start the second Measurement Task as usual; for Measurement Task; to start the second Measurement Task as usual; for
the action to be an Input Parameter of the Measurement Task; and so the action to be an Input Parameter of the Measurement Task; and so
on. on.
It may be important to include in the Measurement Report the fact It may be important to include in the Measurement Report the fact
that the Measurement Task overlapped with another. that the Measurement Task overlapped with another.
skipping to change at page 22, line 19 skipping to change at page 22, line 22
the context in which they were obtained. the context in which they were obtained.
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Collector |===================================| Agent | | Collector |===================================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
<- Report: <- Report:
[MA-ID &/or Group-ID], [MA-ID &/or Group-ID],
[Measurement Result], [Measurement Result],
[details of Measurement Task] [details of Measurement Task],
[Cycle-ID]
ACK -> ACK ->
The Report contains: The Report contains:
o the MA-ID or a Group-ID (to anonymise results) o the MA-ID or a Group-ID (to anonymise results)
o the actual Measurement Results, including the time they were o the actual Measurement Results, including the time they were
measured measured. In general the time is simply the MA's best estimate
and there is no guarantee on the accuracy or granularity of the
information. It is possible that some specific analysis of a
particular Measurement Method's Results will impose timing
requirements.
o the details of the Measurement Task (to avoid the Collector having o the details of the Measurement Task (to avoid the Collector having
to ask the Controller for this information later) to ask the Controller for this information later). For example,
the interface used for the measurements.
o the Cycle-ID, if one was included in the Instruction.
o perhaps the Subscriber's service parameters (see Section 5.4.1). o perhaps the Subscriber's service parameters (see Section 5.4.1).
o the measurement point designation of the MA and, if applicable,
the MP or other MA, if the information was included in the
Instruction. This numbering system is defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path] and allows a Measurement Report to
describe abstractly the path measured (for example, "from a MA at
a home gateway to a MA at a DSLAM"). Also, the MA can anonymise
results by including measurement point designations instead of IP
addresses (Section 8.6.2).
The MA sends Reports as defined by the Instruction. It is possible The MA sends Reports as defined by the Instruction. It is possible
that the Instruction tells the MA to report the same Results to more that the Instruction tells the MA to report the same Results to more
than one Collector, or to report a different subset of Results to than one Collector, or to report a different subset of Results to
different Collectors. It is also possible that a Measurement Task different Collectors. It is also possible that a Measurement Task
may create two (or more) Measurement Results, which could be reported may create two (or more) Measurement Results, which could be reported
differently (for example, one Result could be reported periodically, differently (for example, one Result could be reported periodically,
whilst the second Result could be an alarm that is created as soon as whilst the second Result could be an alarm that is created as soon as
the measured value of the Metric crosses a threshold and that is the measured value of the Metric crosses a threshold and that is
reported immediately). reported immediately).
skipping to change at page 23, line 17 skipping to change at page 23, line 37
Measurement Agent) being busy Measurement Agent) being busy
o label Measurement Results obtained by a Measurement Task that o label Measurement Results obtained by a Measurement Task that
overlapped with another overlapped with another
o not report the Measurement Results if the MA believes that they o not report the Measurement Results if the MA believes that they
are invalid are invalid
o detail when Suppression started and ended o detail when Suppression started and ended
As discussed in Section 6.1, data analysis of the results should
carefully consider potential bias from any Measurement Results that
are not reported, or from Measurement Results that are reported but
may be invalid.
5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters 5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters
The Subscriber's service parameters are information about his/her The Subscriber's service parameters are information about his/her
broadband contract, line rate and so on. Such information is likely broadband contract, line rate and so on. Such information is likely
to be needed to help analyse the Measurement Results, for example to to be needed to help analyse the Measurement Results, for example to
help decide whether the measured download speed is reasonable. help decide whether the measured download speed is reasonable.
The information could be transferred directly from the Subscriber The information could be transferred directly from the Subscriber
parameter database to the data analysis tools. It may also be parameter database to the data analysis tools. It may also be
possible to transfer the information via the MA. How (and if) the MA possible to transfer the information via the MA. How (and if) the MA
skipping to change at page 23, line 38 skipping to change at page 24, line 15
MA could either include the information in a Measurement Report or MA could either include the information in a Measurement Report or
separately. separately.
5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer mechanism 5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer mechanism
The above sections have described LMAP's protocol model. Other The above sections have described LMAP's protocol model. Other
specifications will define the actual Control and Report Protocols, specifications will define the actual Control and Report Protocols,
possibly operating over an existing protocol, such as REST-style possibly operating over an existing protocol, such as REST-style
HTTP(S). It is also possible that a different choice is made for the HTTP(S). It is also possible that a different choice is made for the
Control and Report Protocols, for example NETCONF-YANG and IPFIX Control and Report Protocols, for example NETCONF-YANG and IPFIX
respectively. (Internet Protocol Flow Information Export) respectively.
From an LMAP perspective, the Controller needs to know that the MA From an LMAP perspective, the Controller needs to know that the MA
has received the Instruction Message, or at least that it needs to be has received the Instruction Message, or at least that it needs to be
re-sent as it may have failed to be delivered. Similarly the MA re-sent as it may have failed to be delivered. Similarly the MA
needs to know about the delivery of Capabilities and Failure needs to know about the delivery of Capabilities and Failure
information to the Controller and Reports to the Collector. How this information to the Controller and Reports to the Collector. How this
is done depends on the design of the Control and Report Protocols and is done depends on the design of the Control and Report Protocols and
the underlying packet transfer mechanism. the underlying packet transfer mechanism.
For the Control Protocol, the underlying packet transfer mechanism For the Control Protocol, the underlying packet transfer mechanism
skipping to change at page 26, line 34 skipping to change at page 27, line 11
instance what Metrics and Measurement Methods it can perform) and instance what Metrics and Measurement Methods it can perform) and
about the MA's other capabilities like processing power and memory. about the MA's other capabilities like processing power and memory.
This allows the Controller to make sure that the Measurement Schedule This allows the Controller to make sure that the Measurement Schedule
of Measurement Tasks and the Reporting Schedule are sensible for each of Measurement Tasks and the Reporting Schedule are sensible for each
MA that it instructs. MA that it instructs.
An Instruction is likely to include several Measurement Tasks. An Instruction is likely to include several Measurement Tasks.
Typically these run at different times, but it is also possible for Typically these run at different times, but it is also possible for
them to run at the same time. Some Tasks may be compatible, in that them to run at the same time. Some Tasks may be compatible, in that
they do not affect each other's Results, whilst with others great they do not affect each other's Results, whilst with others great
care would need to be taken. care would need to be taken. Some Tasks may be complementary. For
example, one Task may be followed by a traceroute Task to the same
destination address, in order to learn the network path that was
measured.
The Controller should ensure that the Measurement Tasks do not have The Controller should ensure that the Measurement Tasks do not have
an adverse effect on the end user. Tasks, especially those that an adverse effect on the end user. Tasks, especially those that
generate a substantial amount of traffic, will often include a pre- generate a substantial amount of traffic, will often include a pre-
check that the user isn't already sending traffic (Section 5.3). check that the user isn't already sending traffic (Section 5.3).
Another consideration is whether Measurement Traffic will impact a Another consideration is whether Measurement Traffic will impact a
Subscriber's bill or traffic cap. Subscriber's bill or traffic cap.
The different elements of the Instruction can be updated
independently. For example, the Measurement Tasks could be
configured with different Input Parameters whilst keeping the same
Measurement Schedule. In general this should not create any issues,
since Metrics and their associated Measurement Methods should be
defined so their fundamental nature does not change for a new value
of Input Parameter. There could be a problem if, for example, a
Measurement Task involving a 1kB file upload could be changed into a
1GB file upload.
A measurement system may have multiple Controllers (but note the A measurement system may have multiple Controllers (but note the
overriding principle that a single MA is instructed by a single overriding principle that a single MA is instructed by a single
Controller at any point in time (Section 4.2)). For example, there Controller at any point in time (Section 4.2)). For example, there
could be different Controllers for different types of MA (home could be different Controllers for different types of MA (home
gateways, tablets) or locations (Ipswich, Edinburgh), for load gateways, tablets) or locations (Ipswich, Edinburgh), for load
balancing or to cope with failure of one Controller. balancing or to cope with failure of one Controller.
The measurement system also needs to consider carefully how to The measurement system also needs to consider carefully how to
interpret missing Results; for example, if the missing Results are interpret missing Results; for example, if the missing Results are
ignored and the lack of a Report is caused by its broadband being ignored and the lack of a Report is caused by its broadband being
broken, then the estimate of overall performance, averaged across all broken, then the estimate of overall performance, averaged across all
MAs, would be too optimistic. MAs, would be too optimistic. The correct interpretation may depend
on the specifics of the Measurement Task and Measurement Schedule.
6.2. Measurement Agent 6.2. Measurement Agent
The Measurement Agent could take a number of forms: a dedicated The Measurement Agent could take a number of forms: a dedicated
probe, software on a PC, embedded into an appliance, or even embedded probe, software on a PC, embedded into an appliance, or even embedded
into a gateway. A single site (home, branch office etc.) that is into a gateway. A single site (home, branch office etc.) that is
participating in a measurement could make use of one or multiple participating in a measurement could make use of one or multiple
Measurement Agents or Measurement Peers in a single measurement. Measurement Agents or Measurement Peers in a single measurement.
The Measurement Agent could be deployed in a variety of locations. The Measurement Agent could be deployed in a variety of locations.
skipping to change at page 28, line 11 skipping to change at page 28, line 32
it does not compete with user traffic. Generally NAT and firewall it does not compete with user traffic. Generally NAT and firewall
services are built into the gateway, allowing the Measurement Agent services are built into the gateway, allowing the Measurement Agent
the option to offer its Controller-facing management interface the option to offer its Controller-facing management interface
outside of the NAT/firewall. This placement of the management outside of the NAT/firewall. This placement of the management
interface allows the Controller to unilaterally contact the interface allows the Controller to unilaterally contact the
Measurement Agent for instructions. However, a Measurement Agent on Measurement Agent for instructions. However, a Measurement Agent on
a site gateway (whether end-user service-provider owned) will a site gateway (whether end-user service-provider owned) will
generally not be directly available for over the top providers, the generally not be directly available for over the top providers, the
regulator, end users or enterprises. regulator, end users or enterprises.
6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /Firewall 6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /firewall
The Measurement Agent could also be embedded behind a NAT, a The Measurement Agent could also be embedded behind a NAT, a
firewall, or both. In this case the Controller may not be able to firewall, or both. In this case the Controller may not be able to
unilaterally contact the Measurement Agent unless either static port unilaterally contact the Measurement Agent unless either static port
forwarding or firewall pin holing is configured. Configuring port forwarding or firewall pin holing is configured. Configuring port
forwarding could use protocols such as PCP [RFC6887], TR-069 [TR-069] forwarding could use protocols such as PCP [RFC6887], TR-069 [TR-069]
or UPnP [UPnP]. To prop open the firewall, the Measurement Agent or UPnP [UPnP]. To open a pin hole in the firewall, the Measurement
could send keepalives towards the Controller (and perhaps use these Agent could send keepalives towards the Controller (and perhaps use
also as a network reachability test). these also as a network reachability test).
6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent 6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent
If the device with the Measurement Agent is single homed then there If the device with the Measurement Agent is single homed then there
is no confusion about what interface to measure. Similarly, if the is no confusion about what interface to measure. Similarly, if the
MA is at the gateway and the gateway only has a single WAN-side and a MA is at the gateway and the gateway only has a single WAN-side and a
single LAN-side interface, there is little confusion - for single LAN-side interface, there is little confusion - for
Measurement Methods that generate Measurement Traffic, the location Measurement Methods that generate Measurement Traffic, the location
of the other MA or Measurement Peer determines whether the WAN or LAN of the other MA or Measurement Peer determines whether the WAN or LAN
is measured. is measured.
skipping to change at page 29, line 10 skipping to change at page 29, line 31
However, if a MA can measure any of the interfaces, then the However, if a MA can measure any of the interfaces, then the
Controller defines in the Instruction which interface the MA should Controller defines in the Instruction which interface the MA should
use for a Measurement Task; if the choice of interface is not defined use for a Measurement Task; if the choice of interface is not defined
then the MA uses the default one. Explicit definition is preferred then the MA uses the default one. Explicit definition is preferred
if the measurement system wants to measure the performance of a if the measurement system wants to measure the performance of a
particular network, whereas using the default is better if the particular network, whereas using the default is better if the
measurement system wants to include the impact of the MA's interface measurement system wants to include the impact of the MA's interface
selection algorithm. In any case, the Measurement Result should selection algorithm. In any case, the Measurement Result should
include the network that was measured. include the network that was measured.
6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP Network 6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP network
A MA may be embedded on a device that is part of an ISP's network, A MA may be embedded on a device that is part of an ISP's network,
such as a router or switch. Usually the network devices with an such as a router or switch. Usually the network devices with an
embedded MA will be strategically located, such as a Carrier Grade embedded MA will be strategically located, such as a Carrier Grade
NAT or ISP Gateway. [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path] gives many examples NAT or ISP Gateway. [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path] gives many examples
where a MA might be located within a network to provide an where a MA might be located within a network to provide an
intermediate measurement point on the end-to-end path. Other intermediate measurement point on the end-to-end path. Other
examples include a network device whose primary role is to host MA examples include a network device whose primary role is to host MA
functions and the necessary measurement protocol. functions and the necessary measurement protocol.
skipping to change at page 30, line 26 skipping to change at page 30, line 44
use it to launch DoS attacks at targets, reduce the end user's use it to launch DoS attacks at targets, reduce the end user's
quality of experience and corrupt the Measurement Results that are quality of experience and corrupt the Measurement Results that are
reported to the Collector. By altering the Measurement Tasks and/or reported to the Collector. By altering the Measurement Tasks and/or
the address that Results are reported to, they can also compromise the address that Results are reported to, they can also compromise
the confidentiality of the network user and the MA environment (such the confidentiality of the network user and the MA environment (such
as information about the location of devices or their traffic). The as information about the location of devices or their traffic). The
Instruction messages also need to be encrypted to maintain Instruction messages also need to be encrypted to maintain
confidentiality, as the information might be useful to an attacker. confidentiality, as the information might be useful to an attacker.
In some circumstances (if the MA is behind a NAT for instance), the In some circumstances (if the MA is behind a NAT for instance), the
Controller cannot contact the MA directly an so the MA must contact Controller cannot contact the MA directly and so the MA must contact
the Controller (the "pull" model). The Controller should ensure that the Controller (the "pull" model). The Controller should ensure that
its resources cannot be exhausted by a malicious party pretending to its resources cannot be exhausted by a malicious party pretending to
be a MA. For example, the Controller could limit the rate of "pull" be a MA. For example, the Controller could limit the rate of "pull"
requests from a single MA. requests from a single MA.
Reporting by the MA must be encrypted to maintain confidentiality, so Reporting by the MA must be encrypted to maintain confidentiality, so
that only the authorised Collector can decrypt the results, to that only the authorised Collector can decrypt the results, to
prevent the leakage of confidential or private information. prevent the leakage of confidential or private information.
Reporting must also be authenticated (to ensure that it comes from a Reporting must also be authenticated (to ensure that it comes from a
trusted MA) and not vulnerable to tampering (which can be ensured trusted MA and that the MA reports to a genuine Collector) and not
through integrity and replay checks). It must not be possible to vulnerable to tampering (which can be ensured through integrity and
fool a MA into injecting falsified data and the results must also be replay checks). It must not be possible to fool a MA into injecting
held and processed securely after collection and analysis. See falsified data and the results must also be held and processed
section 8.5.2 below for additional considerations on stored data securely after collection and analysis. See section 8.5.2 below for
compromise, and section 8.6 on potential mitigations for compromise. additional considerations on stored data compromise, and section 8.6
on potential mitigations for compromise.
Since Collectors will be contacted repeatedly by MAs using the Since Collectors will be contacted repeatedly by MAs using the
Collection Protocol to convey their recent results, a successful Collection Protocol to convey their recent results, a successful
attack to exhaust the communication resources would prevent a attack to exhaust the communication resources would prevent a
critical operation: reporting. Therefore, all LMAP Collectors should critical operation: reporting. Therefore, all LMAP Collectors should
implement technical mechanisms to: implement technical mechanisms to:
o limit the number of reporting connections from a single MA o limit the number of reporting connections from a single MA
(simultaneous, and connections per unit time). (simultaneous, and connections per unit time).
skipping to change at page 31, line 33 skipping to change at page 32, line 5
the unavailability of a Controller could mean that the MAs do not the unavailability of a Controller could mean that the MAs do not
operate a correct Measurement Schedule. operate a correct Measurement Schedule.
A malicious party could "game the system". For example, where a A malicious party could "game the system". For example, where a
regulator is running a measurement system in order to benchmark regulator is running a measurement system in order to benchmark
operators, an operator could try to identify the broadband lines that operators, an operator could try to identify the broadband lines that
the regulator was measuring and prioritise that traffic. Normally, the regulator was measuring and prioritise that traffic. Normally,
this potential issue is handled by a code of conduct. It is outside this potential issue is handled by a code of conduct. It is outside
the scope of the initial LMAP work to consider the issue. the scope of the initial LMAP work to consider the issue.
8. Privacy Considerations for LMAP 8. Privacy considerations
The LMAP work considers privacy as a core requirement and will ensure The LMAP work considers privacy as a core requirement and will ensure
that by default the Control and Report Protocols operate in a that by default the Control and Report Protocols operate in a
privacy-sensitive manner and that privacy features are well-defined. privacy-sensitive manner and that privacy features are well-defined.
This section provides a set of privacy considerations for LMAP. This This section provides a set of privacy considerations for LMAP. This
section benefits greatly from the timely publication of [RFC6973]. section benefits greatly from the timely publication of [RFC6973].
Privacy and security (Section 7) are related. In some jurisdictions Privacy and security (Section 7) are related. In some jurisdictions
privacy is called data protection. privacy is called data protection.
We begin with a set of assumptions related to protecting the We begin with a set of assumptions related to protecting the
sensitive information of individuals and organisations participating sensitive information of individuals and organisations participating
in LMAP-orchestrated measurement and data collection. in LMAP-orchestrated measurement and data collection.
8.1. Categories of Entities with Information of Interest 8.1. Categories of entities with information of interest
LMAP protocols need to protect the sensitive information of the LMAP protocols need to protect the sensitive information of the
following entities, including individuals and organisations who following entities, including individuals and organisations who
participate in measurement and collection of results. participate in measurement and collection of results.
o Individual Internet users: Persons who utilise Internet access o Individual Internet users: Persons who utilise Internet access
services for communications tasks, according to the terms of services for communications tasks, according to the terms of
service of a service agreement. Such persons may be a service service of a service agreement. Such persons may be a service
Subscriber, or have been given permission by the Subscriber to use Subscriber, or have been given permission by the Subscriber to use
the service. the service.
o Internet service providers: Organisations who offer Internet o Internet service providers: Organisations who offer Internet
access service subscriptions, and thus have access to sensitive access service subscriptions, and thus have access to sensitive
information of individuals who choose to use the service. These information of individuals who choose to use the service. These
organisations desire to protect their Subscribers and their own organisations desire to protect their Subscribers and their own
sensitive information which may be stored in the process of sensitive information which may be stored in the process of
performing Measurement Tasks and collecting and Results. performing Measurement Tasks and collecting Results.
o Regulators: Public authorities responsible for exercising o Regulators: Public authorities responsible for exercising
supervision of the electronic communications sector, and which may supervision of the electronic communications sector, and which may
have access to sensitive information of individuals who have access to sensitive information of individuals who
participate in a measurement campaign. Similarly, regulators participate in a measurement campaign. Similarly, regulators
desire to protect the participants and their own sensitive desire to protect the participants and their own sensitive
information. information.
o Other LMAP system operators: Organisations who operate measurement o Other LMAP system operators: Organisations who operate measurement
systems or participate in measurements in some way. systems or participate in measurements in some way.
skipping to change at page 32, line 32 skipping to change at page 33, line 4
desire to protect the participants and their own sensitive desire to protect the participants and their own sensitive
information. information.
o Other LMAP system operators: Organisations who operate measurement o Other LMAP system operators: Organisations who operate measurement
systems or participate in measurements in some way. systems or participate in measurements in some way.
Although privacy is a protection extended to individuals, we include Although privacy is a protection extended to individuals, we include
discussion of ISPs and other LMAP system operators in this section. discussion of ISPs and other LMAP system operators in this section.
These organisations have sensitive information involved in the LMAP These organisations have sensitive information involved in the LMAP
system, and many of the same dangers and mitigations are applicable. system, and many of the same dangers and mitigations are applicable.
Further, the ISPs store information on their Subscribers beyond that Further, the ISPs store information on their Subscribers beyond that
used in the LMAP system (for instance billing information), and there used in the LMAP system (for instance billing information), and there
should be a benefit in considering all the needs and potential should be a benefit in considering all the needs and potential
solutions coherently. solutions coherently.
8.2. Examples of Sensitive Information 8.2. Examples of sensitive information
This section gives examples of sensitive information which may be This section gives examples of sensitive information which may be
measured or stored in a measurement system, and which is to be kept measured or stored in a measurement system, and which is to be kept
private by default in the LMAP core protocols. private by default in the LMAP core protocols.
Examples of Subscriber or authorised Internet user sensitive Examples of Subscriber or authorised Internet user sensitive
information: information:
o Sub-IP layer addresses and names (MAC address, base station ID, o Sub-IP layer addresses and names (MAC address, base station ID,
SSID) SSID)
skipping to change at page 34, line 22 skipping to change at page 34, line 43
o Status as a study volunteer and Schedule of Measurement Tasks o Status as a study volunteer and Schedule of Measurement Tasks
On the other hand, for a service provider the sensitive information On the other hand, for a service provider the sensitive information
like Measurement Results is the same for all Measurement Tasks. like Measurement Results is the same for all Measurement Tasks.
From the Subscriber perspective, both types of Measurement Task From the Subscriber perspective, both types of Measurement Task
potentially expose the description of Internet access service and potentially expose the description of Internet access service and
specific service parameters, such as subscribed rate and type of specific service parameters, such as subscribed rate and type of
access. access.
8.4. Privacy analysis of the Communications Models 8.4. Privacy analysis of the communication models
This section examines each of the protocol exchanges described at a This section examines each of the protocol exchanges described at a
high level in Section 5 and some example Measurement Tasks, and high level in Section 5 and some example Measurement Tasks, and
identifies specific sensitive information which must be secured identifies specific sensitive information which must be secured
during communication for each case. With the protocol-related during communication for each case. With the protocol-related
sensitive information identified, we can better consider the threats sensitive information identified, we can better consider the threats
described in the following section. described in the following section.
From the privacy perspective, all entities participating in LMAP From the privacy perspective, all entities participating in LMAP
protocols can be considered "observers" according to the definition protocols can be considered "observers" according to the definition
skipping to change at page 35, line 8 skipping to change at page 35, line 30
to join a new or different LMAP system with a different Controller to join a new or different LMAP system with a different Controller
and Collector, or simply install new Metrics with associated and Collector, or simply install new Metrics with associated
Measurement Methods (for example to record DNS queries). A Bootstrap Measurement Methods (for example to record DNS queries). A Bootstrap
attack could result in a breach of the LMAP system with significant attack could result in a breach of the LMAP system with significant
sensitive information exposure depending on the capabilities of the sensitive information exposure depending on the capabilities of the
MA, so sufficient security protections are warranted. MA, so sufficient security protections are warranted.
The Bootstrapping process provides sensitive information about the The Bootstrapping process provides sensitive information about the
LMAP system and the organisation that operates it, such as LMAP system and the organisation that operates it, such as
o Initial Controller IP address or FQDN o the MA's identifier (MA-ID)
o Assigned Controller IP address or FQDN o the address that identifies the Control Channel, such as the
Controller's FQDN
o Security certificates and credentials o Security information for the Control Channel
During the Bootstrap process for an MA located at a single During the Bootstrap process for an MA located at a single
subscriber's service demarcation point, the MA receives a MA-ID which subscriber's service demarcation point, the MA receives a MA-ID which
is a persistent pseudonym for the Subscriber. Thus, the MA-ID is is a persistent pseudonym for the Subscriber. Thus, the MA-ID is
considered sensitive information because it could provide the link considered sensitive information because it could provide the link
between Subscriber identification and Measurements Results. between Subscriber identification and Measurements Results.
Also, the Bootstrap process could assign a Group-ID to the MA. The Also, the Bootstrap process could assign a Group-ID to the MA. The
specific definition of information represented in a Group-ID is to be specific definition of information represented in a Group-ID is to be
determined, but several examples are envisaged including use as a determined, but several examples are envisaged including use as a
skipping to change at page 37, line 40 skipping to change at page 37, line 49
<- ACK, Close <- ACK, Close
This exchange primarily exposes the IP addresses of measurement This exchange primarily exposes the IP addresses of measurement
devices and the inference of measurement participation from such devices and the inference of measurement participation from such
traffic. There may be sensitive information on key points in a traffic. There may be sensitive information on key points in a
service provider's network included. There may also be access to service provider's network included. There may also be access to
measurement-related information of interest such as the Metrics, measurement-related information of interest such as the Metrics,
Schedule, and intermediate results carried in the Measurement Traffic Schedule, and intermediate results carried in the Measurement Traffic
(usually a set of timestamps). (usually a set of timestamps).
The Measurement Peer may be able to use traffic analysis (perhaps
combined with traffic injection) to obtain interesting insights about
the Subscriber. As a simple example, if the Measurement Task
includes a pre-check that the end-user isn't already sending traffic,
the Measurement Peer may be able to deduce when the Subscriber is
away on holiday, for example.
If the Measurement Traffic is unencrypted, as found in many systems If the Measurement Traffic is unencrypted, as found in many systems
today, then both timing and limited results are open to on-path today, then both timing and limited results are open to on-path
observers. observers.
8.4.5. Measurement Agent 8.4.5. Measurement Agent
Some Measurement Methods only involve a single Measurement Agent. Some Measurement Methods only involve a single Measurement Agent.
They raise potential privacy issues, although the specification of They raise potential privacy issues, although the specification of
the mechanisms is beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work. the mechanisms is beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work.
skipping to change at page 38, line 22 skipping to change at page 38, line 38
| | | |
| Measurement | | Measurement |
| Agent | | Agent |
|______________| |______________|
<- Name Resolution Req <- Name Resolution Req
(MA+MP IPAddrs, (MA+MP IPAddrs,
Desired Domain Name) Desired Domain Name)
Return Record -> Return Record ->
This exchange primarily exposes the IP addresses of measurement In this particular example, the MA monitors DNS messages in order to
devices and the intent to communicate with or access the services of measure that DNS response time. The Measurement Agent may be
"Domain Name". There may be information on key points in a service embedded in the user host, or it may be located in another device
provider's network, such as the address of one of its DNS servers. capable of observing user traffic. The MA learns the IP addresses of
The Measurement Agent may be embedded in the user host, or it may be measurement devices and the intent to communicate with or access the
located in another device capable of observing user traffic. services of a particular domain name, and perhaps also information on
key points in a service provider's network, such as the address of
one of its DNS servers.
In principle, any of the user sensitive information of interest In principle, any of the user sensitive information of interest
(listed above) can be collected and stored in the monitoring scenario (listed above) can be collected and stored in the monitoring scenario
and so must be secured. and so must be secured.
It would also be possible for a Measurement Agent to source the DNS It would also be possible for a Measurement Agent to source the DNS
query itself. But then there are few privacy concerns. query itself. But then there are few privacy concerns.
8.4.6. Storage and Reporting of Measurement Results 8.4.6. Storage and reporting of Measurement Results
Although the mechanisms for communicating results (beyond the initial Although the mechanisms for communicating results (beyond the initial
Collector) are beyond the initial LMAP work scope, there are Collector) are beyond the initial LMAP work scope, there are
potential privacy issues related to a single organisation's storage potential privacy issues related to a single organisation's storage
and reporting of Measurement Results. Both storage and reporting and reporting of Measurement Results. Both storage and reporting
functions can help to preserve privacy by implementing the functions can help to preserve privacy by implementing the
mitigations described below. mitigations described below.
8.5. Threats 8.5. Threats
skipping to change at page 39, line 27 skipping to change at page 39, line 46
Measurement Methods may also utilise and store a Subscriber's Measurement Methods may also utilise and store a Subscriber's
currently assigned IP address when conducting measurements that are currently assigned IP address when conducting measurements that are
relevant to a specific Subscriber. Since the Measurement Results are relevant to a specific Subscriber. Since the Measurement Results are
time-stamped, they could provide a record of IP address assignments time-stamped, they could provide a record of IP address assignments
over time. over time.
Either of the above pieces of information could be useful in Either of the above pieces of information could be useful in
correlation and identification, described below. correlation and identification, described below.
8.5.2. Stored Data Compromise 8.5.2. Stored data compromise
Section 5.1.2 of [RFC6973] describes Stored Data Compromise as Section 5.1.2 of [RFC6973] describes Stored Data Compromise as
resulting from inadequate measures to secure stored data from resulting from inadequate measures to secure stored data from
unauthorised or inappropriate access. For LMAP systems this includes unauthorised or inappropriate access. For LMAP systems this includes
deleting or modifying collected measurement records, as well as data deleting or modifying collected measurement records, as well as data
theft. theft.
The primary LMAP entity subject to compromise is the repository, The primary LMAP entity subject to compromise is the repository,
which stores the Measurement Results; extensive security and privacy which stores the Measurement Results; extensive security and privacy
threat mitigations are warranted. The Collector and MA also store threat mitigations are warranted. The Collector and MA also store
skipping to change at page 40, line 8 skipping to change at page 40, line 26
information which the controlling organisation considers private, and information which the controlling organisation considers private, and
again needs protection. again needs protection.
Note that there is tension between the desire to store all raw Note that there is tension between the desire to store all raw
results in the LMAP Collector (for reproducibility and custom results in the LMAP Collector (for reproducibility and custom
analysis), and the need to protect the privacy of measurement analysis), and the need to protect the privacy of measurement
participants. Many of the compromise mitigations described in participants. Many of the compromise mitigations described in
section 8.6 below are most efficient when deployed at the MA, section 8.6 below are most efficient when deployed at the MA,
therefore minimising the risks with stored results. therefore minimising the risks with stored results.
8.5.3. Correlation and Identification 8.5.3. Correlation and identification
Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of [RFC6973] describe Correlation as Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of [RFC6973] describe Correlation as
combining various pieces of information to obtain desired combining various pieces of information to obtain desired
characteristics of an individual, and Identification as using this characteristics of an individual, and Identification as using this
combination to infer identity. combination to infer identity.
The main risk is that the LMAP system could unwittingly provide a key The main risk is that the LMAP system could unwittingly provide a key
piece of the correlation chain, starting with an unknown Subscriber's piece of the correlation chain, starting with an unknown Subscriber's
IP address and another piece of information. For example, a IP address and another piece of information. For example, a
Subscriber utilised Internet access from 2000 to 2310 UTC, because Subscriber utilised Internet access from 2000 to 2310 UTC, because
the Measurement Tasks were deferred, or sent a name resolution for the Measurement Tasks were deferred, or sent a name resolution for
www.example.com at 2300 UTC. www.example.com at 2300 UTC.
8.5.4. Secondary Use and Disclosure 8.5.4. Secondary use and disclosure
Sections 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 of [RFC6973] describes Secondary Use as Sections 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 of [RFC6973] describes Secondary Use as
unauthorised utilisation of an individual's information for a purpose unauthorised utilisation of an individual's information for a purpose
the individual did not intend, and Disclosure is when such the individual did not intend, and Disclosure is when such
information is revealed causing other's notions of the individual to information is revealed causing other's notions of the individual to
change, or confidentiality to be violated. change, or confidentiality to be violated.
Measurement Methods that measure user traffic are a form of Secondary Measurement Methods that measure user traffic are a form of Secondary
Use, and the Subscribers' permission should be obtained beforehand. Use, and the Subscribers' permission should be obtained beforehand.
It may be necessary to obtain the measured ISP's permission to It may be necessary to obtain the measured ISP's permission to
skipping to change at page 41, line 5 skipping to change at page 41, line 21
qualify as Secondary Use. Secondary use may break national laws and qualify as Secondary Use. Secondary use may break national laws and
regulations, and may violate individual's expectations or desires. regulations, and may violate individual's expectations or desires.
8.6. Mitigations 8.6. Mitigations
This section examines the mitigations listed in section 6 of This section examines the mitigations listed in section 6 of
[RFC6973] and their applicability to LMAP systems. Note that each [RFC6973] and their applicability to LMAP systems. Note that each
section in [RFC6973] identifies the threat categories that each section in [RFC6973] identifies the threat categories that each
technique mitigates. technique mitigates.
8.6.1. Data Minimisation 8.6.1. Data minimisation
Section 6.1 of [RFC6973] encourages collecting and storing the Section 6.1 of [RFC6973] encourages collecting and storing the
minimal information needed to perform a task. minimal information needed to perform a task.
LMAP results can be useful for general reporting about performance LMAP results can be useful for general reporting about performance
and for specific troubleshooting. They need different levels of and for specific troubleshooting. They need different levels of
information detail, as explained in the paragraphs below. information detail, as explained in the paragraphs below.
For general results, the results can be aggregated into large For general results, the results can be aggregated into large
categories (the month of March, all subscribers West of the categories (the month of March, all subscribers West of the
skipping to change at page 42, line 38 skipping to change at page 43, line 7
provider, the value of sensitive information can be further diluted provider, the value of sensitive information can be further diluted
by summarising the results over many individuals or areas served by by summarising the results over many individuals or areas served by
the provider. There is an opportunity enabled by forming anonymity the provider. There is an opportunity enabled by forming anonymity
sets [RFC6973] based on the reference path measurement points in sets [RFC6973] based on the reference path measurement points in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path]. For example, all measurements from the [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path]. For example, all measurements from the
Subscriber device can be identified as "mp000", instead of using the Subscriber device can be identified as "mp000", instead of using the
IP address or other device information. The same anonymisation IP address or other device information. The same anonymisation
applies to the Internet Service Provider, where their Internet applies to the Internet Service Provider, where their Internet
gateway would be referred to as "mp190". gateway would be referred to as "mp190".
Another anonymisation technique is for the MA to include its Group-ID
instead of its MA-ID in its Measurement Reports, with several MAs
sharing the same Group-ID.
8.6.3. Pseudonymity 8.6.3. Pseudonymity
Section 6.1.2 of [RFC6973] indicates that pseudonyms, or nicknames, Section 6.1.2 of [RFC6973] indicates that pseudonyms, or nicknames,
are a possible mitigation to revealing one's true identity, since are a possible mitigation to revealing one's true identity, since
there is no requirement to use real names in almost all protocols. there is no requirement to use real names in almost all protocols.
A pseudonym for a measurement device's IP address could be an LMAP- A pseudonym for a measurement device's IP address could be an LMAP-
unique equipment ID. However, this would likely be a permanent unique equipment ID. However, this would likely be a permanent
handle for the device, and long-term use weakens a pseudonym's power handle for the device, and long-term use weakens a pseudonym's power
to obscure identity. to obscure identity.
8.6.4. Other Mitigations 8.6.4. Other mitigations
Data can be de-personalised by blurring it, for example by adding Data can be de-personalised by blurring it, for example by adding
synthetic data, data-swapping, or perturbing the values in ways that synthetic data, data-swapping, or perturbing the values in ways that
can be reversed or corrected. can be reversed or corrected.
Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of [RFC6973] describe User Participation and Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of [RFC6973] describe User Participation and
Security, respectively. Security, respectively.
Where LMAP measurements involve devices on the Subscriber's premises Where LMAP measurements involve devices on the Subscriber's premises
or Subscriber-owned equipment, it is essential to secure the or Subscriber-owned equipment, it is essential to secure the
skipping to change at page 43, line 45 skipping to change at page 44, line 14
reduction and temporary storage mitigations as appropriate and reduction and temporary storage mitigations as appropriate and
certified through code review. certified through code review.
LMAP protocols, devices, and the information they store clearly need LMAP protocols, devices, and the information they store clearly need
to be secure from unauthorised access. This is the hand-off between to be secure from unauthorised access. This is the hand-off between
privacy and security considerations (Section 7). The Data Controller privacy and security considerations (Section 7). The Data Controller
has the (legal) responsibility to maintain data protections described has the (legal) responsibility to maintain data protections described
in the Subscriber's agreement and agreements with other in the Subscriber's agreement and agreements with other
organisations. organisations.
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA considerations
There are no IANA considerations in this memo. There are no IANA considerations in this memo.
10. Appendix: Deployment examples 10. Acknowledgments
In this section we describe some deployment scenarios that are
feasible within the LMAP framework defined in this document.
The LMAP framework defines two types of components involved in the
actual measurement task, namely the Measurement Agent (MA) and the
Measurement Peer (MP). The fundamental difference conveyed in the
definition of these terms is that the MA has a interface with the
Controller/Collector while the MP does not. The MP is broadly
defined as a function that assists the MA in the Measurement Task but
has no interface with the Controller/Collector. There are many
elements in the network that can fall into this broad definition of
MP. We believe that the MP terminology is useful to allow us to
refer an element of the network that plays a role that is
conceptually important to understand and describe the measurement
task being performed. We next illustrate these concepts by
describing several deployment scenarios.
A very simple example of a Measurement Peer is a web server that the
MA is downloading a web page from (such as www.example.com) in order
to perform a speed test. The web server is a MP and from its
perspective, the MA is just another client; the MP doesn't have a
specific function for assisting measurements. This is described in
the figure A1.
^
+----------------+ Web Traffic +----------------+ IPPM
| Web Client |<------------>| MP: Web Server | Scope
| | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................V...
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ V
Figure A1: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with Web server as Measurement Peer
Another case that is slightly different than this would be the one of
a TWAMP-responder. This is also a MP, with a helper function, the
TWAMP server, which is specially deployed to assist the MAs that
perform TWAMP tests. Another example is with a ping server, as
described in Section 2.
A further example is the case of a traceroute like measurement. In
this case, for each packet sent, the router where the TTL expires is
performing the MP function. So for a given Measurement Task, there
is one MA involved and several MPs, one per hop.
In figure A2 we depict the case of an OWAMP responder acting as an
MP. In this case, the helper function in addition reports results
back to the MA. So it has both a data plane and control interface
with the MA.
+----------------+ OWAMP +----------------+ ^
| OWAMP |<--control--->| MP: | |
| control-client |>test-traffic>| OWAMP server & | IPPM
| fetch-client & |<----fetch----| session-rec'ver| Scope
| session-sender | | | |
| | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................v...
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A2: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with OWAMP server as Measurement Peer
However, it is also possible to use two Measurement Agents when
performing one way Measurement Tasks, as described in figure A3
below. In this case, MA1 generates the traffic and MA2 receives the
traffic and send the reports to the Collector. Note that both MAs
are instructed by the Controller. MA1 receives an Instruction to
send the traffic and MA2 receives an Instruction to measured the
received traffic and send Reports to the Collector.
+----------------+ +----------------+ ^
| MA1 | | MA2 | IPPM
| iperf -u sender|-UDP traffic->| iperf -u recvr | Scope
| | | | v
...|................|..............|................|....v...
| LMAP interface | | LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ +----------------+ |
^ ^ | |
Instruction | Instruction{Report} | | Report |
{task, | +-------------------+ | |
schedule} | | | |
| | v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A3: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with two Measurement Agents cooperating to measure UDP traffic
Next, we consider Measurement Methods that measure user traffic.
Traffic generated in one point in the network flowing towards a given
destination and the traffic is observed in some point along the path.
One way to implement this is that the endpoints generating and
receiving the traffic are not instructed by the Controller; hence
they are MPs. The MA is located along the path with a monitor
function that measures the traffic. The MA is instructed by the
Controller to monitor that particular traffic and to send the Report
to the Collector. It is depicted in figure A4 below.
+-----+ +----------------+ +------+ ^
| MP | | MA: Monitor | | MP | IPPM
| |<--|----------------|---traffic--->| | Scope
+-----+ | | +------+ |
.......|................|.........................v...........
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
Figure A4: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with a Measurement Agent monitoring traffic
Finally, we should consider the case of a router or a switch along
the measurement path. This certainly performs an important role in
the measurement - if packets are not forwarded, the measurement task
will not work. Whilst it doesn't has an interface with the
Controller or Collector, and so fits into the definition of MP,
usually it is not particularly useful to highlight it as a MP.
11. Acknowledgments
This document is a merger of three individual drafts: draft-eardley- This document originated as a merger of three individual drafts:
lmap-terminology-02, draft-akhter-lmap-framework-00, and draft- draft-eardley-lmap-terminology-02, draft-akhter-lmap-framework-00,
eardley-lmap-framework-02. and draft-eardley-lmap-framework-02.
Thanks to Juergen Schoenwaelder for his detailed review of the Thanks to Juergen Schoenwaelder for his detailed review of the
terminology. Thanks to Charles Cook for a very detailed review of terminology. Thanks to Charles Cook for a very detailed review of
-02. Thanks to Barbara Stark and Ken Ko for many helpful comments -02. Thanks to Barbara Stark and Ken Ko for many helpful comments
about later versions. about later versions.
Thanks to numerous people for much discussion, directly and on the Thanks to numerous people for much discussion, directly and on the
LMAP list (apologies to those unintentionally omitted): Alan Clark, LMAP list (apologies to those unintentionally omitted): Alan Clark,
Alissa Cooper, Andrea Soppera, Barbara Stark, Benoit Claise, Brian Alissa Cooper, Andrea Soppera, Barbara Stark, Benoit Claise, Brian
Trammell, Charles Cook, Dave Thorne, Frode Soerensen, Greg Mirsky, Trammell, Charles Cook, Dan Romascanu, Dave Thorne, Frode Soerensen,
Guangqing Deng, Jason Weil, Jean-Francois Tremblay, Jerome Benoit, Greg Mirsky, Guangqing Deng, Jason Weil, Jean-Francois Tremblay,
Joachim Fabini, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Jukka Manner, Ken Ko, Lingli Jerome Benoit, Joachim Fabini, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Jukka Manner,
Deng, Mach Chen, Marc Ibrahim, Michael Bugenhagen, Michael Faath, Ken Ko, Lingli Deng, Mach Chen, Matt Mathis, Marc Ibrahim, Michael
Nalini Elkins, Rolf Winter, Sam Crawford, Sharam Hakimi, Steve Bugenhagen, Michael Faath, Nalini Elkins, Rolf Winter, Sam Crawford,
Miller, Ted Lemon, Timothy Carey, Vaibhav Bajpai, Vero Zheng, William Sharam Hakimi, Steve Miller, Ted Lemon, Timothy Carey, Vaibhav
Lupton. Bajpai, Vero Zheng, William Lupton.
Philip Eardley, Trevor Burbridge and Marcelo Bagnulo work in part on Philip Eardley, Trevor Burbridge and Marcelo Bagnulo work in part on
the Leone research project, which receives funding from the European the Leone research project, which receives funding from the European
Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under grant Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under grant
agreement number 317647. agreement number 317647.
12. History 11. History
First WG version, copy of draft-folks-lmap-framework-00. First WG version, copy of draft-folks-lmap-framework-00.
12.1. From -00 to -01 11.1. From -00 to -01
o new sub-section of possible use of Group-IDs for privacy o new sub-section of possible use of Group-IDs for privacy
o tweak to definition of Control protocol o tweak to definition of Control protocol
o fix typo in figure in S5.4 o fix typo in figure in S5.4
12.2. From -01 to -02 11.2. From -01 to -02
o change to INFORMATIONAL track (previous version had typo'd o change to INFORMATIONAL track (previous version had typo'd
Standards track) Standards track)
o new definitions for Capabilities Information and Failure o new definitions for Capabilities Information and Failure
Information Information
o clarify that diagrams show LMAP-level information flows. o clarify that diagrams show LMAP-level information flows.
Underlying protocol could do other interactions, eg to get through Underlying protocol could do other interactions, eg to get through
NAT or for Collector to pull a Report NAT or for Collector to pull a Report
skipping to change at page 49, line 31 skipping to change at page 46, line 23
o add some extra words about the potential impact of Measurement o add some extra words about the potential impact of Measurement
Tasks Tasks
o clarified various aspects of the privacy section o clarified various aspects of the privacy section
o updated references o updated references
o minor tweaks o minor tweaks
12.3. From -02 to -03 11.3. From -02 to -03
o alignment with the Information Model [burbridge-lmap-information- o alignment with the Information Model [burbridge-lmap-information-
model] as this is agreed as a WG document model] as this is agreed as a WG document
o One-off and periodic Measurement Schedules are kept separate, so o One-off and periodic Measurement Schedules are kept separate, so
that they can be updated independently that they can be updated independently
o Measurement Suppression in a separate sub-section. Can now o Measurement Suppression in a separate sub-section. Can now
optionally include particular Measurement Tasks &/or Schedules to optionally include particular Measurement Tasks &/or Schedules to
suppress, and start/stop time suppress, and start/stop time
o for clarity, concept of Channel split into Control, Report and MA- o for clarity, concept of Channel split into Control, Report and MA-
to-Controller Channels to-Controller Channels
o numerous editorial changes, mainly arising from a very detailed o numerous editorial changes, mainly arising from a very detailed
review by Charles Cook review by Charles Cook
o o
12.4. From -03 to -04 11.4. From -03 to -04
o updates following the WG Last Call, with the proposed consensus on o updates following the WG Last Call, with the proposed consensus on
the various issues as detailed in the various issues as detailed in
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/89/slides/slides-89-lmap-2.pdf. In http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/89/slides/slides-89-lmap-2.pdf. In
particular: particular:
o tweaked definitions, especially of Measurement Agent and o tweaked definitions, especially of Measurement Agent and
Measurement Peer Measurement Peer
o Instruction - left to each implementation & deployment of LMAP to o Instruction - left to each implementation & deployment of LMAP to
skipping to change at page 50, line 40 skipping to change at page 47, line 30
o enhancement of Results with Subscriber's service parameters - o enhancement of Results with Subscriber's service parameters -
could be useful, don't define how but can be included in Report to could be useful, don't define how but can be included in Report to
various other sections various other sections
o various other smaller improvements, arising from the WGLC o various other smaller improvements, arising from the WGLC
o Appendix added with examples of Measurement Agents and Peers in o Appendix added with examples of Measurement Agents and Peers in
various deployment scenarios. To help clarify what these terms various deployment scenarios. To help clarify what these terms
mean. mean.
12.5. From -04 to -05 11.5. From -04 to -05
o clarified various scoping comments by using the phrase "scope of o clarified various scoping comments by using the phrase "scope of
initial LMAP work" (avoiding "scope of LMAP WG" since this may initial LMAP work" (avoiding "scope of LMAP WG" since this may
change in the future) change in the future)
o added a Configuration Protocol - allows the Controller to update o added a Configuration Protocol - allows the Controller to update
the MA about information that it obtained during the bootstrapping the MA about information that it obtained during the bootstrapping
process (for consistency with Information Model) process (for consistency with Information Model)
o Removed over-detailed information about the relationship between o Removed over-detailed information about the relationship between
skipping to change at page 51, line 26 skipping to change at page 48, line 17
requested by Controller or by MA on its own initiative). requested by Controller or by MA on its own initiative).
o removed mention of Data Transfer Tasks. This abstraction is left o removed mention of Data Transfer Tasks. This abstraction is left
to the information model i-d to the information model i-d
o added Deployment sub-section about Measurement Agent embedded in o added Deployment sub-section about Measurement Agent embedded in
ISP Network ISP Network
o various other smaller improvements, arising from the 2nd WGLC o various other smaller improvements, arising from the 2nd WGLC
12.6. From -05 to -06 11.6. From -05 to -06
o clarified terminlogy around Measurement Methods and Tasks. Since o clarified terminlogy around Measurement Methods and Tasks. Since
within a Method there may be several different roles (requester within a Method there may be several different roles (requester
and responder, for instance) and responder, for instance)
o Suppression: there is now the concept of a flag (boolean) which o Suppression: there is now the concept of a flag (boolean) which
indicates whether a Task is by default gets suppressed or not. indicates whether a Task is by default gets suppressed or not.
The optional suppression message (with list of specific tasks The optional suppression message (with list of specific tasks
/schedules to suppress) over-rides this flag. /schedules to suppress) over-rides this flag.
o The previous bullet also means there is no need to make a o The previous bullet also means there is no need to make a
distinction between active and passive Measurement Tasks, so this distinction between active and passive Measurement Tasks, so this
distinction is removed. distinction is removed.
o removed Configuration Protocol - Configuration is part of the o removed Configuration Protocol - Configuration is part of the
Instruction and so uses the Control Protocol. Instruction and so uses the Control Protocol.
12.7. From -06 to -07 11.7. From -06 to -07
o Clarifications and nits o Clarifications and nits
13. Informative References 11.8. From -07 to -08
o Clarifications resulting from WG 3rd LC, as discussed in
https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/slides-90-lmap-0.pdf, plus
comments made in the IETF-90 meeting.
o added mention of "measurement point designations" in Measurement
Task configuration and Report Protocol.
12. Informative References
[Bur10] Burkhart, M., Schatzmann, D., Trammell, B., and E. Boschi, [Bur10] Burkhart, M., Schatzmann, D., Trammell, B., and E. Boschi,
"The Role of Network Trace anonymisation Under Attack", "The Role of Network Trace anonymisation Under Attack",
January 2010. January 2010.
[TR-069] TR-069, , "CPE WAN Management Protocol", [TR-069] TR-069, , "CPE WAN Management Protocol",
http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/trlist.php, http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/trlist.php,
November 2013. November 2013.
[UPnP] ISO/IEC 29341-x, , "UPnP Device Architecture and UPnP [UPnP] ISO/IEC 29341-x, , "UPnP Device Architecture and UPnP
skipping to change at page 52, line 42 skipping to change at page 49, line 36
lmap-use-cases-03 (work in progress), April 2014. lmap-use-cases-03 (work in progress), April 2014.
[I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry] [I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry]
Bagnulo, M., Claise, B., Eardley, P., and A. Morton, Bagnulo, M., Claise, B., Eardley, P., and A. Morton,
"Registry for Performance Metrics", draft-manyfolks-ippm- "Registry for Performance Metrics", draft-manyfolks-ippm-
metric-registry-00 (work in progress), February 2014. metric-registry-00 (work in progress), February 2014.
[I-D.ietf-homenet-arch] [I-D.ietf-homenet-arch]
Chown, T., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. Weil, Chown, T., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. Weil,
"IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", draft- "IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", draft-
ietf-homenet-arch-16 (work in progress), June 2014. ietf-homenet-arch-17 (work in progress), July 2014.
[RFC6419] Wasserman, M. and P. Seite, "Current Practices for [RFC6419] Wasserman, M. and P. Seite, "Current Practices for
Multiple-Interface Hosts", RFC 6419, November 2011. Multiple-Interface Hosts", RFC 6419, November 2011.
[RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P. [RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P.
Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April
2013. 2013.
[I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] [I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model]
Burbridge, T., Eardley, P., Bagnulo, M., and J. Burbridge, T., Eardley, P., Bagnulo, M., and J.
Schoenwaelder, "Information Model for Large-Scale Schoenwaelder, "Information Model for Large-Scale
Measurement Platforms (LMAP)", draft-ietf-lmap- Measurement Platforms (LMAP)", draft-ietf-lmap-
information-model-00 (work in progress), February 2014. information-model-01 (work in progress), June 2014.
[RFC6235] Boschi, E. and B. Trammell, "IP Flow Anonymization [RFC6235] Boschi, E. and B. Trammell, "IP Flow Anonymization
Support", RFC 6235, May 2011. Support", RFC 6235, May 2011.
[RFC6973] Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J., [RFC6973] Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J.,
Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy
Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973, July Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973, July
2013. 2013.
[I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path] [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path]
Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T., Crawford, S., Eardley, P., and Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T., Crawford, S., Eardley, P., and
A. Morton, "A Reference Path and Measurement Points for A. Morton, "A Reference Path and Measurement Points for
LMAP", draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-04 (work in progress), LMAP", draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-05 (work in progress),
June 2014. August 2014.
[RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M. [RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
(OWAMP)", RFC 4656, September 2006. (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, September 2006.
[RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J. [RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
RFC 5357, October 2008. RFC 5357, October 2008.
[RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between [RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between
Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444, January Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444, January
2003. 2003.
Appendix A. Appendix: Deployment examples
In this section we describe some deployment scenarios that are
feasible within the LMAP framework defined in this document.
The LMAP framework defines two types of components involved in the
actual measurement task, namely the Measurement Agent (MA) and the
Measurement Peer (MP). The fundamental difference conveyed in the
definition of these terms is that the MA has a interface with the
Controller/Collector while the MP does not. The MP is broadly
defined as a function that assists the MA in the Measurement Task but
has no interface with the Controller/Collector. There are many
elements in the network that can fall into this broad definition of
MP. We believe that the MP terminology is useful to allow us to
refer an element of the network that plays a role that is
conceptually important to understand and describe the measurement
task being performed. We next illustrate these concepts by
describing several deployment scenarios.
A very simple example of a Measurement Peer is a web server that the
MA is downloading a web page from (such as www.example.com) in order
to perform a speed test. The web server is a MP and from its
perspective, the MA is just another client; the MP doesn't have a
specific function for assisting measurements. This is described in
the figure A1.
^
+----------------+ Web Traffic +----------------+ IPPM
| Web Client |<------------>| MP: Web Server | Scope
| | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................V...
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ V
Figure A1: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with Web server as Measurement Peer
Another case that is slightly different than this would be the one of
a TWAMP-responder. This is also a MP, with a helper function, the
TWAMP server, which is specially deployed to assist the MAs that
perform TWAMP tests. Another example is with a ping server, as
described in Section 2.
A further example is the case of a traceroute like measurement. In
this case, for each packet sent, the router where the TTL expires is
performing the MP function. So for a given Measurement Task, there
is one MA involved and several MPs, one per hop.
In figure A2 we depict the case of an OWAMP (One-Way Active
Measurement Protocol) responder acting as an MP. In this case, the
helper function in addition reports results back to the MA. So it
has both a data plane and control interface with the MA.
+----------------+ OWAMP +----------------+ ^
| OWAMP |<--control--->| MP: | |
| control-client |>test-traffic>| OWAMP server & | IPPM
| fetch-client & |<----fetch----| session-rec'ver| Scope
| session-sender | | | |
| | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................v...
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A2: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with OWAMP server as Measurement Peer
However, it is also possible to use two Measurement Agents when
performing one way Measurement Tasks, as described in figure A3
below. In this case, MA1 generates the traffic and MA2 receives the
traffic and send the reports to the Collector. Note that both MAs
are instructed by the Controller. MA1 receives an Instruction to
send the traffic and MA2 receives an Instruction to measured the
received traffic and send Reports to the Collector.
+----------------+ +----------------+ ^
| MA1 | | MA2 | IPPM
| iperf -u sender|-UDP traffic->| iperf -u recvr | Scope
| | | | v
...|................|..............|................|....v...
| LMAP interface | | LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ +----------------+ |
^ ^ | |
Instruction | Instruction{Report} | | Report |
{task, | +-------------------+ | |
schedule} | | | |
| | v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A3: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with two Measurement Agents cooperating to measure UDP traffic
Next, we consider Measurement Methods that measure user traffic.
Traffic generated in one point in the network flowing towards a given
destination and the traffic is observed in some point along the path.
One way to implement this is that the endpoints generating and
receiving the traffic are not instructed by the Controller; hence
they are MPs. The MA is located along the path with a monitor
function that measures the traffic. The MA is instructed by the
Controller to monitor that particular traffic and to send the Report
to the Collector. It is depicted in figure A4 below.
+-----+ +----------------+ +------+ ^
| MP | | MA: Monitor | | MP | IPPM
| |<--|----------------|---traffic--->| | Scope
+-----+ | | +------+ |
.......|................|.........................v...........
| LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ |
^ | |
Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ |
| | |
| v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
Figure A4: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system,
with a Measurement Agent monitoring traffic
Finally, we should consider the case of a router or a switch along
the measurement path. This certainly performs an important role in
the measurement - if packets are not forwarded, the measurement task
will not work. Whilst it doesn't has an interface with the
Controller or Collector, and so fits into the definition of MP,
usually it is not particularly useful to highlight it as a MP.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Philip Eardley Philip Eardley
BT BT
Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath
Ipswich Ipswich
ENGLAND ENGLAND
Email: philip.eardley@bt.com Email: philip.eardley@bt.com
Al Morton Al Morton
AT&T Labs AT&T Labs
200 Laurel Avenue South 200 Laurel Avenue South
Middletown, NJ Middletown, NJ
USA USA
Email: acmorton@att.com Email: acmorton@att.com
Marcelo Bagnulo Marcelo Bagnulo
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Av. Universidad 30 Av. Universidad 30
Leganes, Madrid 28911 Leganes, Madrid 28911
SPAIN SPAIN
Phone: 34 91 6249500 Phone: 34 91 6249500
Email: marcelo@it.uc3m.es Email: marcelo@it.uc3m.es
URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es
 End of changes. 109 change blocks. 
357 lines changed or deleted 415 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/