draft-ietf-lmap-framework-08.txt   draft-ietf-lmap-framework-09.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: February 8, 2015 AT&T Labs Expires: June 15, 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
August 7, 2014 December 12, 2014
A framework for large-scale measurement platforms (LMAP) A framework for large-scale measurement platforms (LMAP)
draft-ietf-lmap-framework-08 draft-ietf-lmap-framework-09
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 February 8, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 15, 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1. The measurement system is under the direction of a single 4.1. The measurement system is under the direction of a single
organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. Protocol Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Protocol Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1. Bootstrapping process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.1. Bootstrapping process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2. Control Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2. Control Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2.1. Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2.1. Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2.2. Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.2.2. Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2.3. Capabilities, Failure and Logging Information . . . . 18 5.2.3. Capabilities, Failure and Logging Information . . . . 19
5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5.3. Operation of Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . 20 5.3.1. Starting and Stopping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . 21
5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.3.2. Overlapping Measurement Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.4. Report Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5.4. Report Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters . . . . 23 5.4.1. Reporting of Subscriber's service parameters . . . . 25
5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer 5.5. Operation of LMAP over the underlying packet transfer
mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work . . . . . 25 5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work . . . . . 26
5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system . . . . . . . 26 5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system . . . . . . . 27
6. Deployment considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6. Deployment considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.1. Controller and the measurement system . . . . . . . . . . 26 6.1. Controller and the measurement system . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.2. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 6.2. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2.1. Measurement Agent on a networked device . . . . . . . 28 6.2.1. Measurement Agent on a networked device . . . . . . . 29
6.2.2. Measurement Agent embedded in site gateway . . . . . 28 6.2.2. Measurement Agent embedded in site gateway . . . . . 29
6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /firewall 28 6.2.3. Measurement Agent embedded behind site NAT /firewall 30
6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 6.2.4. Multi-homed Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP network . . . . . . 29 6.2.5. Measurement Agent embedded in ISP network . . . . . . 31
6.3. Measurement Peer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 6.3. Measurement Peer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 7. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8. Privacy considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8. Privacy considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8.1. Categories of entities with information of interest . . . 32 8.1. Categories of entities with information of interest . . . 34
8.2. Examples of sensitive information . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 8.2. Examples of sensitive information . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
8.3. Different privacy issues raised by different sorts of 8.3. Different privacy issues raised by different sorts of
Measurement Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Measurement Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8.4. Privacy analysis of the communication models . . . . . . 34 8.4. Privacy analysis of the communication models . . . . . . 36
8.4.1. MA Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 8.4.1. MA Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8.4.2. Controller <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . 36 8.4.2. Controller <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . 37
8.4.3. Collector <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . 36 8.4.3. Collector <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . 36 8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent . . . . . . . 38
8.4.5. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 8.4.5. Measurement Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8.4.6. Storage and reporting of Measurement Results . . . . 39 8.4.6. Storage and reporting of Measurement Results . . . . 41
8.5. Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8.5. Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.5.1. Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8.5.1. Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.5.2. Stored data compromise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8.5.2. Stored data compromise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.5.3. Correlation and identification . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.5.3. Correlation and identification . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.5.4. Secondary use and disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.5.4. Secondary use and disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.6. Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.6. Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.6.1. Data minimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.6.1. Data minimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.6.2. Anonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 8.6.2. Anonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.6.3. Pseudonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8.6.3. Pseudonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.6.4. Other mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8.6.4. Other mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 9. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
11. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 11. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
11.1. From -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 11.1. From -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
11.2. From -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 11.2. From -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
11.3. From -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 11.3. From -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
11.4. From -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 11.4. From -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
11.5. From -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 11.5. From -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
11.6. From -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.6. From -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
11.7. From -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.7. From -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
11.8. From -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.8. From -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 11.9. From -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix A. Appendix: Deployment examples . . . . . . . . . . . 50 12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Appendix A. Appendix: Deployment examples . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
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 (such as TVs or
players), service provider controlled devices such as set-top boxes gaming consoles), service provider controlled devices such as set-top
and home gateways, or simply dedicated probes. It is expected that boxes and home gateways, or simply dedicated probes. It is expected
such a system could easily comprise 100,000 devices. Measurement that such a system could easily comprise 100,000 devices.
devices may also be embedded on a device that is part of an ISP's Measurement devices may also be embedded on a device that is part of
network, such as a DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access an ISP's network, such as a DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access
Multiplexer), router, Carrier Grade NAT (Network Address Translator) Multiplexer), router, Carrier Grade NAT (Network Address Translator)
or ISP Gateway. Such a scale presents unique problems in or ISP Gateway. Such a scale presents unique problems in
coordination, execution and measurement result collection. Several coordination, execution and measurement result collection. Several
use cases have been proposed for large-scale measurements including: 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
skipping to change at page 4, line 40 skipping to change at page 4, line 40
for example: "Report results once a day in a batch at 4am". We refer for example: "Report results once a day in a batch at 4am". We refer
to these as the Measurement Schedule and Report Schedule. to these as the Measurement Schedule and Report Schedule.
The Collector accepts Reports from the MAs with the Results from The Collector accepts Reports from the MAs with the Results from
their Measurement Tasks. Therefore the MA is a device that gets their Measurement Tasks. Therefore the MA is a device that gets
Instructions from the Controller, initiates the Measurement Tasks, Instructions from the Controller, initiates the Measurement Tasks,
and reports to the Collector. The communications between these three and reports to the Collector. The communications between these three
LMAP functions are structured according to a Control Protocol and a LMAP functions are structured according to a Control Protocol and a
Report Protocol. Report Protocol.
The desirable features for a large-scale measurement systems we are The desirable features for a large-scale Measurement Systems we are
designing for are: designing for are:
o Standardised - in terms of the Measurement Tasks that they o Standardised - in terms of the Measurement Tasks that they
perform, the components, the data models and protocols for perform, the components, the data models and protocols for
transferring information between the components. Amongst other transferring information between the components. Amongst other
things, standardisation enables meaningful comparisons of things, standardisation enables meaningful comparisons of
measurements made of the same metric at different times and measurements made of the same metric at different times and
places, and provides the operator of a measurement system with places, and provides the operator of a Measurement System with
criteria for evaluation of the different solutions that can be criteria for evaluation of the different solutions that can be
used for various purposes including buying decisions (such as used for various purposes including buying decisions (such as
buying the various components from different vendors). Today's buying the various components from different vendors). Today's
systems are proprietary in some or all of these aspects. systems are proprietary in some or all of these aspects.
o Large-scale - [I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases] envisages Measurement o Large-scale - [I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases] envisages Measurement
Agents in every home gateway and edge device such as set-top boxes Agents in every home gateway and edge device such as set-top boxes
and tablet computers, and located throughout the Internet as well and tablet computers, and located throughout the Internet as well
[I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path]. It is expected that a measurement [I-D.ietf-ippm-lmap-path]. It is expected that a Measurement
system could easily encompass a few hundred thousand or even System could easily encompass a few hundred thousand or even
millions of Measurement Agents. Existing systems have up to a few millions of Measurement Agents. Existing systems have up to a few
thousand MAs (without judging how much further they could scale). thousand MAs (without judging how much further they could scale).
o Diversity - a measurement system should handle different types of o Diversity - a Measurement System should handle Measurement Agents
Measurement Agents - for example Measurement Agents may come from from different vendors, that are in wired and wireless networks,
different vendors, be in wired and wireless networks, be able to can execute different sorts of Measurement Task, are on devices
execute different sorts of Measurement Task and be on devices with with IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, and so on.
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 In this section we provide an overview of the whole Measurement
interactions of those components. Some of the components are outside System. New LMAP-specific terms are capitalised; Section 3 provides
the scope of initial LMAP work. In this section we provide an a terminology section with a compilation of all the LMAP terms and
overview of the whole measurement system. New LMAP-specific terms their definition. Section 4 onwards considers the LMAP components in
are capitalised; Section 3 provides a terminology section with a more detail.
compilation of all the LMAP terms and their definition. Section 4
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 Figure 1 shows the main components of a Measurement System, and the
can be executed in specialised hardware (hardware probe) or on a interactions of those components. Some of the components are outside
general-purpose device (like a PC or mobile phone). The MA may the scope of initial LMAP work.
generate Measurement Traffic and measure some metric associated with
its transfer, or the MA may observe existing traffic, or there may be The MA performs Measurement Tasks. In the example shown in Figure 1,
some kind of hybrid of these two possibilities. A device with a the MA is observing existing traffic. Another possibility is for the
Measurement Agent may have multiple physical interfaces (Wi-Fi, MA may generate (or receive) traffic specially created for the
Ethernet, DSL (Digital Subscriber Line); and non-physical interfaces purpose and measure some metric associated with its transfer. The
such as PPPoE (Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet) or IPsec) and Appendix shows some examples of possible arrangements of the
the Measurement Tasks may specify any one of these. components.
The MAs are pieces of code that can be executed in specialised
hardware (hardware probe) or on a general-purpose device (like a PC
or mobile phone). A device with a Measurement Agent may have
multiple physical interfaces (Wi-Fi, Ethernet, DSL (Digital
Subscriber Line); and non-physical interfaces 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 25 skipping to change at page 6, line 30
soon as possible"), as well as recurring ones. soon as possible"), as well as recurring ones.
The Collector accepts a Report from a MA with the Measurement Results The Collector accepts a Report from a MA with the Measurement Results
from its Measurement Tasks. It then provides the Results to a from its Measurement Tasks. It then provides the Results to a
repository (see below). repository (see below).
A Measurement Method defines how to measure a Metric of interest. It A Measurement Method defines how to measure a Metric of interest. It
is very useful to standardise Measurement Methods, so that it is is very useful to standardise Measurement Methods, so that it is
meaningful to compare measurements of the same Metric made at meaningful to compare measurements of the same Metric made at
different times and places. It is also useful to define a registry different times and places. It is also useful to define a registry
for commonly-used Metrics [I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry] so for commonly-used Metrics [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] so that a
that a Metric with its associated Measurement Method can be referred Metric with its associated Measurement Method can be referred to
to simply by its identifier in the registry. The Measurement Methods simply by its identifier in the registry. The registry will
and registry will hopefully be referenced by other standards hopefully be referenced by other standards organisations. The
organisations. Measurement Methods may be defined by the IETF, locally, or by some
other standards body.
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 (Internet Control delay , would consist of an MA sending an ICMP (Internet Control
Message Protocol) ECHO request to a responder in the Internet. In Message Protocol) ECHO request to a responder in the Internet. In
LMAP terms, the responder is termed a Measurement Peer (MP), meaning LMAP terms, the responder is termed a Measurement Peer (MP), meaning
that it helps the MA but is not managed by the Controller. Other that it helps the MA but is not managed by the Controller. Other
Measurement Methods involve a second MA, with the Controller Measurement Methods involve a second MA, with the Controller
instructing the MAs in a coordinated manner. Traffic generated instructing the MAs in a coordinated manner. Traffic generated
specifically as part of the Measurement Method is termed Measurement specifically as part of the Measurement Method is termed Measurement
Traffic; in the ping example, it is the ICMP ECHO Requests and Traffic; in the ping example, it is the ICMP ECHO Requests and
Replies. The protocols used for the Measurement Traffic are out of Replies. The protocols used for the Measurement Traffic are out of
the scope of initial LMAP work, and fall within the scope of other the scope of initial LMAP work, and fall within the scope of other
IETF WGs such as IPPM (IP Performance Metrics). The Appendix has IETF WGs such as IPPM (IP Performance Metrics).
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 26 skipping to change at page 7, line 28
Messages are transferred over a secure Channel. A Control Channel is Messages are transferred over a secure Channel. A Control Channel is
between the Controller and a MA; the Control Protocol delivers between the Controller and a MA; the Control Protocol delivers
Instruction Messages to the MA and Capabilities, Failure and Logging Instruction Messages to the MA and Capabilities, Failure and Logging
Information in the reverse direction. A Report Channel is between a Information in the reverse direction. A Report Channel is between a
MA and Collector, and the Report Protocol delivers Reports to the MA and Collector, and the Report Protocol delivers Reports to the
Collector. Collector.
Finally we introduce several components that are outside the scope of Finally we introduce several components that are outside the scope of
initial LMAP work and will be provided through existing protocols or initial LMAP work and will be provided through existing protocols or
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. As shown in Figure 1, these components are: the
bootstrapper, Subscriber parameter database, data analysis tools, and
Results repository.
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 (Simple Network Management Protocol), NETCONF protocols are SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol), NETCONF
(Network Configuration Protocol) or (for Home Gateways) CPE WAN (Network Configuration Protocol) or (for Home Gateways) CPE WAN
Management Protocol (CWMP) from the Auto Configuration Server (ACS) Management Protocol (CWMP) from the Auto Configuration Server (ACS)
skipping to change at page 8, line 17 skipping to change at page 9, line 5
that they can easily be 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.
^ +-----------+ +-----------+ ^
| |End user or| |End user or| |
+-------------+ IPPM |Measurement| |Measurement| Non-LMAP
+---------------+ Measurement | Measurement | Scope | Peer | | Peer | Scope
| Measurement |<------------>| Peer | | +-----------+ +-----------+ v
| Agent | Traffic +-------------+ v ^ ^
+------->| | ^ \ traffic +-------------+ / ^
| +---------------+ | \...............|.............|........./ |
| ^ | | | Measurement | |
| Instruction | | Report | +----------------->| Agent | |
| | +-----------------+ | | +-------------+ |
| | | | | ^ | |
| | v LMAP | Instruction | | Report |
| +------------+ +------------+ Scope | (over Control | | (over Control Channel) |
| | Controller | | Collector | | | Channel) | +---------------+ |
| +------------+ +------------+ v | | | |
| ^ ^ | ^ | | |
| | | | | | | v LMAP
| | +----------+ | | | +------------+ +------------+ Scope
| | | v | | | Controller | | Collector | |
| +------------+ +------------+ v
| ^ ^ | ^
| | | | |
| | +-------+ | |
| | | v |
+------------+ +----------+ +--------+ +----------+ | +------------+ +----------+ +--------+ +----------+ |
|Bootstrapper| |Subscriber|--->| data |<---|repository| Out |Bootstrapper| |Subscriber|--->| data |<---| Results | Out
+------------+ |parameter | |analysis| +----------+ of +------------+ |parameter | |analysis| |repository| of
|database | | tools | Scope |database | | tools | +----------+ Scope
+----------+ +--------+ | +----------+ +--------+ |
| |
v v
Figure 1: Schematic of main elements of an LMAP-based Figure 1: Schematic of main elements of an LMAP-based
measurement system Measurement System
(showing the elements in and out of the scope of initial LMAP work) (showing the elements in and out of the scope of initial LMAP work)
3. Terminology 3. Terminology
This section defines terminology for LMAP. Please note that defined This section defines terminology for LMAP. Please note that defined
terms are capitalized. terms are capitalized.
Bootstrap: A process that integrates a Measurement Agent into a Bootstrap: A process that integrates a Measurement Agent into a
measurement system. Measurement System.
Capabilities: Information about the performance measurement Capabilities: Information about the performance measurement
capabilities of the MA, in particular the Measurement Method roles capabilities of the MA, in particular the Measurement Method roles
and measurement protocol roles that it can perform, and the device and measurement protocol roles that it can perform, and the device
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.
skipping to change at page 9, line 40 skipping to change at page 10, line 28
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.
It runs over the Control Channel.
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 10, line 13 skipping to change at page 11, line 4
Measurement Task proceeds. Measurement Task proceeds.
Failure Information: Information about the MA's failure to action or Failure Information: Information about the MA's failure to action or
execute an Instruction, whether concerning Measurement Tasks or execute an Instruction, whether concerning Measurement Tasks or
Reporting. Reporting.
Group-ID: An identifier of a group of MAs. Group-ID: An identifier of a group of MAs.
Information Model: The protocol-neutral definition of the semantics Information Model: The protocol-neutral definition of the semantics
of the Instructions, the Report, the status of the different elements of the Instructions, the Report, the status of the different elements
of the measurement system as well of the events in the system of the Measurement System as well of the events in the system
[RFC3444]. [RFC3444].
Input Parameter: A parameter whose value is left open by the Metric Input Parameter: A parameter whose value is left open by the Metric
and its Measurement Method and is set to a specific value in a and its Measurement Method and is set to a specific value in a
Measurement Task. Altering the value of an Input Parameter does not Measurement Task. Altering the value of an Input Parameter does not
change the fundamental nature of the Measurement Task. change the fundamental nature of the Measurement Task.
Instruction: The description of Measurement Tasks for a MA to perform Instruction: The description of Measurement Tasks for a MA to perform
and the details of the Report for it to send. It is the collective and the details of the Report for it to send. It is the collective
description of the Measurement Task configurations, the configuration description of the Measurement Task configurations, the configuration
skipping to change at page 10, line 47 skipping to change at page 11, line 38
scope and perhaps in concert with one or more other Measurement scope and perhaps in concert with one or more other Measurement
Agents or Measurement Peers) and (if part of the Instruction) by Agents or Measurement Peers) and (if part of the Instruction) by
reporting Measurement Results to a Collector or Collectors. reporting Measurement Results to a Collector or Collectors.
Measurement Agent Identifier (MA-ID): a UUID [RFC4122] that Measurement Agent Identifier (MA-ID): a UUID [RFC4122] that
identifies a particular MA and is configured as part of the identifies a particular MA and is configured as part of the
Bootstrapping process. Bootstrapping process.
Measurement Method: The process for assessing the value of a Metric; Measurement Method: The process for assessing the value of a Metric;
the process of measuring some performance or reliability parameter the process of measuring some performance or reliability parameter
associated with the transfer of traffic; where this process involves associated with the transfer of traffic.
multiple MAs or MPs, each may perform different roles.
Measurement Peer (MP): The function that assists a Measurement Agent Measurement Peer (MP): The function that assists a Measurement Agent
with Measurement Tasks and does not have an interface to the with Measurement Tasks and does not have an interface to the
Controller or Collector. Controller or Collector.
Measurement Result: The output of a single Measurement Task (the Measurement Result: The output of a single Measurement Task (the
value obtained for the parameter of interest or Metric). value obtained for the parameter of interest or Metric).
Measurement Schedule: The schedule for performing Measurement Tasks. Measurement Schedule: The schedule for performing Measurement Tasks.
Measurement System: The set of LMAP-defined and related components
that are operated by a single organisation, for the purpose of
measuring performance aspects of the network.
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. the network that we'd like to know the value of.
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 Channel between a Collector and a MA over which Report Channel: A Channel between a Collector and a MA over which
Report messages are sent. Report messages 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. It runs over the Report Channel.
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. The measurement system is under the direction of a single 4.1. The measurement system is under the direction of a single
organisation 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
organisation. Thus, the system of functions deployed by a single organisation. Thus, the system of functions deployed by a single
organisation constitutes a single LMAP domain which may span organisation constitutes a single LMAP domain which may span
ownership or other administrative boundaries. ownership or other administrative boundaries.
4.2. Each MA may only have a single Controller at any point in time 4.2. Each MA may only have a single Controller at any point in time
A MA is instructed by one Controller and is in one measurement A MA is instructed by one Controller and is in one Measurement
system. The constraint avoids different Controllers giving a MA System. The constraint avoids different Controllers giving a MA
conflicting instructions and so means that the MA does not have to conflicting instructions and so means that the MA does not have to
manage contention between multiple Measurement (or Report) Schedules. manage contention between multiple Measurement (or Report) Schedules.
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). However, a Measurement System may have several
Controllers.
An operator may have several Controllers, perhaps with a Controller
for different types of MA (home gateways, tablets) or location
(Ipswich, Edinburgh).
5. 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 (amongst other things).
perform and when, and how it should report the Measurement
Results. It also delivers Capabilities, Failure and logging
Information from a MA to its Controller. Finally, it allows the
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, o a Report Protocol, which delivers Reports containing the
these are defined elsewhere (e.g. IPPM). Measurement Results from a MA to a Collector.
o a Report Protocol, which delivers Reports from a MA to a
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. (If there is any of the information carried by the protocol. (If there is any
difference between this document and the Information Model, the difference between this document and the Information Model, the
latter is definitive, since it is on the standards track.) The latter is definitive, since it is on the standards track.) The
purpose of both is to provide a protocol and device independent view, purpose of both is to provide a protocol and device independent view,
which can be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a which can be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a
specific Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be specific Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be
defined by other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is defined by other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is
important that they all implement the same Information Model and important that they all implement the same Information Model and
skipping to change at page 13, line 29 skipping to change at page 14, line 15
[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. (If there is any of the information carried by the protocol. (If there is any
difference between this document and the Information Model, the difference between this document and the Information Model, the
latter is definitive, since it is on the standards track.) The latter is definitive, since it is on the standards track.) The
purpose of both is to provide a protocol and device independent view, purpose of both is to provide a protocol and device independent view,
which can be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a which can be implemented via specific protocols. LMAP defines a
specific Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be specific Control Protocol and Report Protocol, but others could be
defined by other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is defined by other standards bodies or be proprietary. However it is
important that they all implement the same Information Model and important that they all implement the same Information Model and
protocol model, in order to ease the definition, operation 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
skipping to change at page 14, line 42 skipping to change at page 15, line 31
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
Instruction Messages. (Note that a MA only has one Control Channel, Instruction Messages. (Note that a MA only has one Control Channel,
and so is associated with only one Controller, at any moment.) and so is associated with only one Controller, at any moment.)
Note that an implementation may choose to combine Configuration Note that an implementation may choose to combine Configuration
information and an Instruction Message into a single message. information and an Instruction Message into a single message.
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Controller |======================================| Agent | | Controller |===================================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
Configuration information: -> Configuration information: ->
(MA-ID), (MA-ID),
(Group-ID), (Group-ID),
(Control Channel) (Control Channel)
<- Response(details) <- Response(details)
5.2.2. Instruction 5.2.2. Instruction
The Instruction is the description of the Measurement Tasks for a The Instruction is the description of the Measurement Tasks for a
Measurement Agent to do and the details of the Measurement Reports Measurement Agent to do and the details of the Measurement Reports
for it to send. In order to update the Instruction the Controller for it to send. In order to update the Instruction the Controller
uses the Control Protocol to send an Instruction Message over the uses the Control Protocol to send an Instruction Message over the
Control Channel. Control Channel.
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Controller |======================================| Agent | | Controller |===================================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
Instruction: -> Instruction: ->
[(Measurement Task configuration( [(Measurement Task configuration
[Input Parameter], URI of Metric(
(interface), [Input Parameter],
(Cycle-ID))), (interface),
(Report Channel), (Cycle-ID))),
(Schedule), (Report Channel),
(Suppression information)] (Schedule),
<- Response(details) (Suppression information)]
<- 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.ietf-ippm-metric-registry], locally
locally by the operator of the measurement system or perhaps by by the operator of the Measurement System or perhaps by another
another standards organisation. 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. roles involved in the process.
* 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.
skipping to change at page 17, line 20 skipping to change at page 18, line 11
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.
5.2.2.1. Suppression 5.2.2.1. Suppression
The Instruction may include Suppression information. The purpose of The Instruction may include Suppression information. The main
Suppression is to enable the Controller to instruct the MA not to motivation for Suppression is to enable the Measurement System to
perform Measurement Tasks. It is used if the measurement system eliminate Measurement Traffic, because there is some unexpected
wants to eliminate inessential traffic, because there is some network issue for example. There may be other circumstances when
unexpected network issue for example. Suppression is useful, for example to eliminate inessential Reporting
traffic.
The Suppression information may include any of the following optional The Suppression information may include any of the following optional
fields: fields:
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 with
Measurement Traffic.
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 o if both the previous fields are included then the MA suppresses
the union - in other words, it suppresses both the set of the union - in other words, it suppresses both the set of
Measurement Tasks and the set of Measurement Schedules. 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
skipping to change at page 18, line 25 skipping to change at page 19, line 16
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).
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
| | | Measurement | | | | Measurement |
| Controller |===================================| Agent | | Controller |==============================| Agent |
+-----------------+ +-------------+ +-----------------+ +-------------+
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, Failure and Logging 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:
skipping to change at page 19, line 4 skipping to change at page 19, line 43
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
o the measurement protocol types and roles that the MA supports o the measurement protocol types and roles that the MA supports
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 its Instruction (this could be useful if the Controller thinks
something has gone wrong, and wants to check what Instruction the
MA is using)
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
skipping to change at page 20, line 5 skipping to change at page 21, line 5
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), (Request Instruction)]) ->
<- (Capabilities),
(Failure Information), (Failure Information),
(Logging Information) (Logging Information),
(Instruction)
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.
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 The MA may operate Measurement Tasks sequentially or in parallel (see
Section 5.3.2). 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 beginning a Measurement Task the MA may want to run a pre-
pre-check could be defined as a separate, preceding Task or as the check. (The pre-check could be defined as a separate, preceding Task
first part of a larger Task.) Action could include: or as the first part of a larger Task.)
For Measurement Tasks that observe existing traffic, action could
include:
o checking that there is traffic of interest;
o checking that the device with the MA has enough resources to
execute the Measurement Task reliably. Note that the designer of
the Measurement System should ensure that the device's
capabilities are normally sufficient to comfortably operate the
Measurement Tasks.
For Measurement Tasks that generate Measurement Traffic, a pre-check
could include:
o the MA checking that there is no cross-traffic. In other words, a o the MA checking that there is no cross-traffic. In other words, a
check that the end-user isn't already sending traffic; check that the end-user isn't already sending traffic;
o the MA checking with the Measurement Peer (or other Measurement o the MA checking with the Measurement Peer (or other Measurement
Agent involved in the Measurement Task) that it can handle a new Agent) involved in the Measurement Task that it can handle a new
Measurement Task (in case, for example, the Measurement Peer is Measurement Task. For example, the Measurement Peer may already
already handling many Measurement Tasks with other MAs); be handling many Measurement Tasks with other MAs;
o sending traffic that probes the path to check it isn't overloaded; o sending traffic that probes the path to check it isn't overloaded;
o checking that the device with the MA has enough resources to o checking that the device with the MA has enough resources to
execute the Measurement Task reliably. Note that the designer of execute the Measurement Task reliably.
the measurement system should ensure that the device's
capabilities are normally sufficient to comfortably operate the
Measurement Tasks.
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
skipping to change at page 21, line 38 skipping to change at page 22, line 51
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. This document makes no assumptions about the impact of one time. This document makes no assumptions about the impact of one
Measurement Task on another. Measurement Task on another.
The operator of the measurement system can handle (or not) 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.
5.4. Report Protocol 5.4. Report Protocol
The primary purpose of the Report Protocol is to allow a Measurement The primary purpose of the Report Protocol is to allow a Measurement
Agent to report its Measurement Results to a Collector, along with Agent to report its Measurement Results to a Collector, along with
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] [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. In general the time is simply the MA's best estimate measured. In general the time is simply the MA's best estimate
and there is no guarantee on the accuracy or granularity of the and there is no guarantee on the accuracy or granularity of the
information. It is possible that some specific analysis of a information. It is possible that some specific analysis of a
particular Measurement Method's Results will impose timing particular Measurement Method's Results will impose timing
skipping to change at page 23, line 22 skipping to change at page 24, line 37
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).
Optionally, a Report is not sent when there are no Measurement Optionally, a Report is not sent when there are no Measurement
Results. Results.
In the initial LMAP Information Model and Report Protocol, for In the initial LMAP Information Model and Report Protocol, for
simplicity we assume that all Measurement Results are reported as-is, simplicity we assume that all Measurement Results are reported as-is,
but allow extensibility so that a measurement system (or perhaps a but allow extensibility so that a Measurement System (or perhaps a
second phase of LMAP) could allow a MA to: second phase of LMAP) could allow a MA to:
o label, or perhaps not include, Measurement Results impacted by, o label, or perhaps not include, Measurement Results impacted by,
for instance, cross-traffic or the Measurement Peer (or other for instance, cross-traffic or a Measurement Peer (or other
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 As discussed in Section 6.1, data analysis of the results should
carefully consider potential bias from any Measurement Results that carefully consider potential bias from any Measurement Results that
are not reported, or from Measurement Results that are reported but are not reported, or from Measurement Results that are reported but
may be invalid. 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
skipping to change at page 24, line 14 skipping to change at page 25, line 29
knows such information is likely to depend on the device type. The knows such information is likely to depend on the device type. The
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 [RFC6241] and
(Internet Protocol Flow Information Export) respectively. IPFIX (Internet Protocol Flow Information Export) [RFC7011]
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
could be: could be:
o a 'push' protocol (that is, from the Controller to the MA) o a 'push' protocol (that is, from the Controller to the MA)
o a multicast protocol (from the Controller to a group of MAs) o a multicast protocol (from the Controller to a group of MAs)
o a 'pull' protocol. The MA periodically checks with Controller if o a 'pull' protocol. The MA periodically checks with Controller if
the Instruction has changed and pulls a new Instruction if the Instruction has changed and pulls a new Instruction if
necessary. A pull protocol seems attractive for a MA behind a NAT necessary. A pull protocol seems attractive for a MA behind a NAT
(as is typical for a MA on an end-user's device), so that it can or firewall (as is typical for a MA on an end-user's device), so
initiate the communications. A pull mechanism is likely to that it can initiate the communications. It also seems attractive
require the MA to be configured with how frequently it should for a MA on a mobile device, where the Controller might not know
check in with the Controller, and perhaps what it should do if the how to reach the MA. A pull mechanism is likely to require the MA
Controller is unreachable after a certain number of attempts. to be configured with how frequently it should check in with the
Controller, and perhaps what it should do if the Controller is
unreachable after a certain number of attempts.
o a hybrid protocol. In addition to a pull protocol, the Controller o a hybrid protocol. In addition to a pull protocol, the Controller
can also push an alert to the MA that it should immediately pull a can also push an alert to the MA that it should immediately pull a
new Instruction. new Instruction.
For the Report Protocol, the underlying packet transfer mechanism For the Report Protocol, the underlying packet transfer mechanism
could be: could be:
o a 'push' protocol (that is, from the MA to the Collector) o a 'push' protocol (that is, from the MA to the Collector)
o perhaps supplemented by the ability for the Collector to 'pull' o perhaps supplemented by the ability for the Collector to 'pull'
Measurement Results from a MA. Measurement Results from a MA.
5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work 5.6. Items beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work
There are several potential interactions between LMAP elements that There are several potential interactions between LMAP elements that
are beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work: are beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work:
1. It does not define a coordination process between MAs. Whilst a 1. It does not define a coordination process between MAs. Whilst a
measurement system may define coordinated Measurement Schedules Measurement System may define coordinated Measurement Schedules
across its various MAs, there is no direct coordination between across its various MAs, there is no direct coordination between
MAs. MAs.
2. It does not define interactions between the Collector and 2. It does not define interactions between the Collector and
Controller. It is quite likely that there will be such Controller. It is quite likely that there will be such
interactions, optionally intermediated by the data analysis interactions, optionally intermediated by the data analysis
tools. For example, if there is an "interesting" Measurement tools. For example, if there is an "interesting" Measurement
Result then the measurement system may want to trigger extra Result then the Measurement System may want to trigger extra
Measurement Tasks that explore the potential cause in more Measurement Tasks that explore the potential cause in more
detail; or if the Collector unexpectedly does not hear from a MA, detail; or if the Collector unexpectedly does not hear from a MA,
then the measurement system may want to trigger the Controller to then the Measurement System may want to trigger the Controller to
send a fresh Instruction Message to the MA. send a fresh Instruction Message to the MA.
3. It does not define coordination between different measurement 3. It does not define coordination between different Measurement
systems. For example, it does not define the interaction of a MA Systems. For example, it does not define the interaction of a MA
in one measurement system with a Controller or Collector in a in one Measurement System with a Controller or Collector in a
different measurement system. Whilst it is likely that the different Measurement System. Whilst it is likely that the
Control and Report Protocols could be re-used or adapted for this Control and Report Protocols could be re-used or adapted for this
scenario, any form of coordination between different scenario, any form of coordination between different
organisations involves difficult commercial and technical issues organisations involves difficult commercial and technical issues
and so, given the novelty of large-scale measurement efforts, any and so, given the novelty of large-scale measurement efforts, any
form of inter-organisation coordination is outside the scope of form of inter-organisation coordination is outside the scope of
the initial LMAP work. Note that a single MA is instructed by a the initial LMAP work. Note that a single MA is instructed by a
single Controller and is only in one measurement system. single Controller and is only in one Measurement System.
* An interesting scenario is where a home contains two * An interesting scenario is where a home contains two
independent MAs, for example one controlled by a regulator and independent MAs, for example one controlled by a regulator and
one controlled by an ISP. Then the Measurement Traffic of one one controlled by an ISP. Then the Measurement Traffic of one
MA is treated by the other MA just like any other end-user MA is treated by the other MA just like any other end-user
traffic. traffic.
4. It does not consider how to prevent a malicious party "gaming the 4. It does not consider how to prevent a malicious party "gaming the
system". For example, where a regulator is running a measurement system". For example, where a regulator is running a Measurement
system in order to benchmark operators, a malicious operator System in order to benchmark operators, a malicious operator
could try to identify the broadband lines that the regulator was could try to identify the broadband lines that the regulator was
measuring and prioritise that traffic. It is assumed this is a measuring and prioritise that traffic. It is assumed this is a
policy issue and would be dealt with through a code of conduct policy issue and would be dealt with through a code of conduct
for instance. for instance.
5. It does not define how to analyse Measurement Results, including 5. It does not define how to analyse Measurement Results, including
how to interpret missing Results. how to interpret missing Results.
6. It does not specifically define a end-user-controlled measurement 6. It does not specifically define a end-user-controlled Measurement
system, see sub-section 5.6.1. System, see sub-section 5.6.1.
5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system 5.6.1. End-user-controlled measurement system
This framework concentrates on the cases where an ISP or a regulator This framework concentrates on the cases where an ISP or a regulator
runs the measurement system. However, we expect that LMAP runs the Measurement System. However, we expect that LMAP
functionality will also be used in the context of an end-user- functionality will also be used in the context of an end-user-
controlled measurement system. There are at least two ways this controlled Measurement System. There are at least two ways this
could happen (they have various pros and cons): could happen (they have various pros and cons):
1. an end-user could somehow request the ISP- (or regulator-) run 1. an end-user could somehow request the ISP- (or regulator-) run
measurement system to test his/her line. The ISP (or regulator) Measurement System to test his/her line. The ISP (or regulator)
Controller would then send an Instruction to the MA in the usual Controller would then send an Instruction to the MA in the usual
LMAP way. LMAP way.
2. an end-user could deploy their own measurement system, with their 2. an end-user could deploy their own Measurement System, with their
own MA, Controller and Collector. For example, the user could own MA, Controller and Collector. For example, the user could
implement all three functions onto the same end-user-owned end implement all three functions onto the same end-user-owned end
device, perhaps by downloading the functions from the ISP or device, perhaps by downloading the functions from the ISP or
regulator. Then the LMAP Control and Report Protocols do not regulator. Then the LMAP Control and Report Protocols do not
need to be used, but using LMAP's Information Model would still need to be used, but using LMAP's Information Model would still
be beneficial. The Measurement Peer (or other MA involved in the be beneficial. A Measurement Peer (or other MA involved in a
Measurement Task) could be in the home gateway or outside the Measurement Task) could be in the home gateway or outside the
home network; in the latter case the Measurement Peer is highly home network; in the latter case the Measurement Peer is highly
likely to be run by a different organisation, which raises extra likely to be run by a different organisation, which raises extra
privacy considerations. privacy considerations.
In both cases there will be some way for the end-user to initiate the In both cases there will be some way for the end-user to initiate the
Measurement Task(s). The mechanism is outside the scope of the Measurement Task(s). The mechanism is outside the scope of the
initial LMAP work, but could include the user clicking a button on a initial LMAP work, but could include the user clicking a button on a
GUI or sending a text message. Presumably the user will also be able GUI or sending a text message. Presumably the user will also be able
to see the Measurement Results, perhaps summarised on a webpage. It to see the Measurement Results, perhaps summarised on a webpage. It
skipping to change at page 27, line 18 skipping to change at page 28, line 38
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. Some Tasks may be complementary. For 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 example, one Task may be followed by a traceroute Task to the same
destination address, in order to learn the network path that was destination address, in order to learn the network path that was
measured. 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 Measurement Traffic, will often
check that the user isn't already sending traffic (Section 5.3). include a pre-check that the user isn't already sending traffic
Another consideration is whether Measurement Traffic will impact a (Section 5.3). Another consideration is whether Measurement Traffic
Subscriber's bill or traffic cap. will impact a Subscriber's bill or traffic cap.
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, Paris), 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. The correct interpretation depends on why
ignored and the lack of a Report is caused by its broadband being the Results are missing, and potentially on the specifics of the
broken, then the estimate of overall performance, averaged across all Measurement Task and Measurement Schedule.
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 MA should be cautious about resuming Measurement Tasks if it re-
boots or has been off-line for some time, as its Instruction may be
stale. In the former case it also needs to ensure that its clock has
re-set correctly, so that it interprets the Schedule correctly.
If the MA runs out of storage space for Measurement Results or can't
contact the Controller, then the appropriate action is specific to
the device and Measurement System.
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.
Not all deployment locations are available to every kind of Not all deployment locations are available to every kind of
Measurement Agent. There are also a variety of limitations and Measurement Agent. There are also a variety of limitations and
trade-offs depending on the final placement. The next sections trade-offs depending on the final placement. The next sections
skipping to change at page 29, line 10 skipping to change at page 30, line 36
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.
However, the device with the Measurement Agent may be multi-homed. However, the device with the Measurement Agent may be multi-homed.
For example, a home or campus may be connected to multiple broadband For example, a home or campus may be connected to multiple broadband
ISPs, such as a wired and wireless broadband provider, perhaps for ISPs, such as a wired and wireless broadband provider, perhaps for
redundancy or load- sharing. It may also be helpful to think of dual redundancy or load- sharing. It may also be helpful to think of dual
stack IPv4 and IPv6 broadband devices as multi-homed. More stack IPv4 and IPv6 broadband devices as multi-homed. More
generally, Section 3.2 of [I-D.ietf-homenet-arch] describes dual- generally, Section 3.2 of [RFC7368] describes dual-stack and multi-
stack and multi-homing topologies that might be encountered in a home homing topologies that might be encountered in a home network,
network, [RFC6419] provides the current practices of multi-interfaces [RFC6419] provides the current practices of multi-interfaces hosts,
hosts, and the Multiple Interfaces (mif) working group covers cases and the Multiple Interfaces (mif) working group covers cases where
where hosts are either directly attached to multiple networks hosts are either directly attached to multiple networks (physical or
(physical or virtual) or indirectly (multiple default routers, etc.). virtual) or indirectly (multiple default routers, etc.). In these
In these cases, there needs to be clarity on which network cases, there needs to be clarity on which network connectivity option
connectivity option is being measured. is being measured.
One possibility is to have a Measurement Agent per interface. Then One possibility is to have a Measurement Agent per interface. Then
the Controller's choice of MA determines which interface is measured. the Controller's choice of MA determines which interface is measured.
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.
6.3. Measurement Peer 6.3. Measurement Peer
A Measurement Peer participates in some Measurement Methods. It may A Measurement Peer participates in some Measurement Methods. It may
have specific functionality to enable it to participate in a have specific functionality to enable it to participate in a
particular Measurement Method. On the other hand, other Measurement particular Measurement Method. On the other hand, other Measurement
Methods may require no special functionality, for example if the Methods may require no special functionality. For example if the
Measurement Agent sends a ping to example.com then the server at Measurement Agent sends a ping to example.com then the server at
example.com plays the role of a Measurement Peer. example.com plays the role of a Measurement Peer; or if the MA
monitors existing traffic, then the existing end points are
Measurement Peers.
A device may participate in some Measurement Methods as a Measurement A device may participate in some Measurement Methods as a Measurement
Agent and in others as a Measurement Peer. Agent and in others as a Measurement Peer.
Measurement Schedules should account for limited resources in a Measurement Schedules should account for limited resources in a
Measurement Peer when instructing a MA to execute measurements with a Measurement Peer when instructing a MA to execute measurements with a
Measurement Peer. In some measurement protocols, such as [RFC4656] Measurement Peer. In some measurement protocols, such as [RFC4656]
and [RFC5357], the Measurement Peer can reject a measurement session and [RFC5357], the Measurement Peer can reject a measurement session
or refuse a control connection prior to setting-up a measurement or refuse a control connection prior to setting-up a measurement
session and so protect itself from resource exhaustion. This is a session and so protect itself from resource exhaustion. This is a
valuable capability because the MP may be used by more than one valuable capability because the MP may be used by more than one
organisation. organisation.
7. Security considerations 7. Security considerations
The security of the LMAP framework should protect the interests of The security of the LMAP framework should protect the interests of
the measurement operator(s), the network user(s) and other actors who the measurement operator(s), the network user(s) and other actors who
could be impacted by a compromised measurement deployment. The could be impacted by a compromised measurement deployment. The
measurement system must secure the various components of the system Measurement System must secure the various components of the system
from unauthorised access or corruption. Much of the general advice from unauthorised access or corruption. Much of the general advice
contained in section 6 of [RFC4656] is applicable here. contained in section 6 of [RFC4656] is applicable here.
The process to upgrade the firmware in an MA is outside the scope of The process to upgrade the firmware in an MA is outside the scope of
the initial LMAP work, similar to the protocol to bootstrap the MAs the initial LMAP work, similar to the protocol to bootstrap the MAs
(as specified in the charter). However, systems which provide remote (as specified in the charter). However, systems which provide remote
upgrade must secure authorised access and integrity of the process. upgrade must secure authorised access and integrity of the process.
We assume that each Measurement Agent (MA) will receive its We assume that each Measurement Agent (MA) will receive its
Instructions from a single organisation, which operates the Instructions from a single organisation, which operates the
Controller. These Instructions must be authenticated (to ensure that Controller. These Instructions must be authenticated (to ensure that
they come from the trusted Controller), checked for integrity (to they come from the trusted Controller), checked for integrity (to
ensure no-one has tampered with them) and not vulnerable to replay ensure no-one has tampered with them) and not vulnerable to replay
attacks. If a malicious party can gain control of the MA they can attacks. If a malicious party can gain control of the MA they can
use it to launch DoS attacks at targets, reduce the end user's use it to launch DoS attacks at targets, create a platform for
quality of experience and corrupt the Measurement Results that are pervasive monitoring [RFC7258], reduce the end user's quality of
reported to the Collector. By altering the Measurement Tasks and/or experience and corrupt the Measurement Results that are reported to
the address that Results are reported to, they can also compromise the Collector. By altering the Measurement Tasks and/or the address
the confidentiality of the network user and the MA environment (such that Results are reported to, they can also compromise the
as information about the location of devices or their traffic). The confidentiality of the network user and the MA environment (such as
Instruction messages also need to be encrypted to maintain information about the location of devices or their traffic). The
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
Controller cannot contact the MA directly and so the MA must contact
the Controller (the "pull" model). The Controller should ensure that
its resources cannot be exhausted by a malicious party pretending to
be a MA. For example, the Controller could limit the rate of "pull"
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 that the MA reports to a genuine Collector) and not trusted MA and that the MA reports to a genuine Collector) and not
vulnerable to tampering (which can be ensured through integrity and vulnerable to tampering (which can be ensured through integrity and
replay checks). It must not be possible to fool a MA into injecting replay checks). It must not be possible to fool a MA into injecting
falsified data and the results must also be held and processed falsified data and the results must also be held and processed
securely after collection and analysis. See section 8.5.2 below for securely after collection and analysis. See section 8.5.2 below for
additional considerations on stored data compromise, and section 8.6 additional considerations on stored data compromise, and section 8.6
on potential mitigations for compromise. 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
skipping to change at page 31, line 33 skipping to change at page 33, line 9
o limit the transmission rate from a single MA. o limit the transmission rate from a single MA.
o limit the memory/storage consumed by a single MA's reports. o limit the memory/storage consumed by a single MA's reports.
o efficiently reject reporting connections from unknown sources. o efficiently reject reporting connections from unknown sources.
o separate resources if multiple authentication strengths are used, o separate resources if multiple authentication strengths are used,
where the resources should be separated according to each class of where the resources should be separated according to each class of
strength. strength.
A corrupted MA could report falsified information to the Collector.
Whether this can be effectively mitigated depends on the platform on
which the MA is deployed, but where the MA is deployed on a customer-
controlled device then the reported data is to some degree inherently
untrustworthy. Further, a sophisticated party could distort some
Measurement Methods, perhaps by dropping or delaying packets for
example. This suggests that the network operator should be cautious
about relying on Measurement Results for action such as refunding
fees if a service level agreement is not met.
As part of the protocol design, it will be decided how LMAP operates
over the underlying protocol (Section 5.5). The choice raises
various security issues, such as how to operate through a NAT and how
to protect the Controller and Collector from denial of service
attacks.
The security mechanisms described above may not be strictly necessary The security mechanisms described above may not be strictly necessary
if the network's design ensures the LMAP components and their if the network's design ensures the LMAP components and their
communications are already secured, for example potentially if they communications are already secured, for example potentially if they
are all part of an ISP's dedicated management network. are all part of an ISP's dedicated management network.
Finally, there are three other issues related to security: privacy Finally, there are three other issues related to security: privacy
(considered in Section 8 below), availability and 'gaming the (considered in Section 8 below), availability and 'gaming the
system'. While the loss of some MAs may not be considered critical, system'. While the loss of some MAs may not be considered critical,
the unavailability of the Collector could mean that valuable business the unavailability of the Collector could mean that valuable business
data or data critical to a regulatory process is lost. Similarly, data or data critical to a regulatory process is lost. Similarly,
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 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.
skipping to change at page 32, line 46 skipping to change at page 34, line 38
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 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.
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)
o IP address in use o IP address in use
skipping to change at page 34, line 29 skipping to change at page 36, line 24
authorities make a distinction on time of storage, and information authorities make a distinction on time of storage, and information
that is kept only temporarily to perform a communications function is that is kept only temporarily to perform a communications function is
not subject to regulation (for example, active queue management, deep not subject to regulation (for example, active queue management, deep
packet inspection). Such Measurement Tasks could reveal all the packet inspection). Such Measurement Tasks could reveal all the
websites a Subscriber visits and the applications and/or services websites a Subscriber visits and the applications and/or services
they use. they use.
Other types of Measurement Task are conducted on traffic which is Other types of Measurement Task are conducted on traffic which is
created specifically for the purpose. Even if a user host generates created specifically for the purpose. Even if a user host generates
Measurement Traffic, there is limited sensitive information about the Measurement Traffic, there is limited sensitive information about the
Subscriber present and stored in the measurement system: Subscriber present and stored in the Measurement System:
o IP address in use (and possibly sub-IP addresses and names) o IP address in use (and possibly sub-IP addresses and names)
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
skipping to change at page 36, line 46 skipping to change at page 38, line 38
and stored. and stored.
The Measurement Results are the additional sensitive information The Measurement Results are the additional sensitive information
included in the Collector-MA exchange. Organisations collecting LMAP included in the Collector-MA exchange. Organisations collecting LMAP
measurements have the responsibility for data control. Thus, the measurements have the responsibility for data control. Thus, the
Results and other information communicated in the Collector protocol Results and other information communicated in the Collector protocol
must be secured. must be secured.
8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent 8.4.4. Measurement Peer <-> Measurement Agent
A Measurement Method involving a Measurement Peer (or second A Measurement Method involving Measurement Traffic raises potential
Measurement Agent) raises potential privacy issues, although the privacy issues, although the specification of the mechanisms is
specification of the mechanisms is beyond the scope of the initial beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work. The high-level
LMAP work. The high-level communications model below illustrates the communications model below illustrates the various exchanges to
various exchanges to execute such a Measurement Method and store the execute such a Measurement Method and store the Results.
Results.
We note the potential for additional observers in the figures below We note the potential for additional observers in the figures below
by indicating the possible presence of a NAT, which has additional by indicating the possible presence of a NAT, which has additional
significance to the protocols and direction of initiation. significance to the protocols and direction of initiation.
The various messages are optional, depending on the nature of the The various messages are optional, depending on the nature of the
Measurement Method. It may involve sending Measurement Traffic from Measurement Method. It may involve sending Measurement Traffic from
the Measurement Peer to MA, MA to Measurement Peer, or both. the Measurement Peer to MA, MA to Measurement Peer, or both.
Similarly, a second (or more) MAs may be involved. Similarly, a second (or more) MAs may be involved.
skipping to change at page 38, line 13 skipping to change at page 40, line 7
includes a pre-check that the end-user isn't already sending traffic, 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 the Measurement Peer may be able to deduce when the Subscriber is
away on holiday, for example. 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 observing existing traffic. They raise potential privacy issues,
the mechanisms is beyond the scope of the initial LMAP work. although the specification of the mechanisms is beyond the scope of
the initial LMAP work.
The high-level communications model below illustrates the collection The high-level communications model below illustrates the collection
of user information of interest with the Measurement Agent performing of user information of interest with the Measurement Agent performing
the monitoring and storage of the Results. This particular exchange the monitoring and storage of the Results. This particular exchange
is for measurement of DNS Response Time, which most frequently uses is for measurement of DNS Response Time, which most frequently uses
UDP transport. UDP transport.
_________________ ____________ _________________ ____________
| | | | | | | |
| DNS Server |=========== NAT ? ==========*=======| User client| | DNS Server |=========== NAT ? ==========*=======| User client|
skipping to change at page 44, line 36 skipping to change at page 46, line 34
-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, Dan Romascanu, Dave Thorne, Frode Soerensen, Trammell, Charles Cook, Dan Romascanu, Dave Thorne, Frode Soerensen,
Greg Mirsky, Guangqing Deng, Jason Weil, Jean-Francois Tremblay, Greg Mirsky, Guangqing Deng, Jason Weil, Jean-Francois Tremblay,
Jerome Benoit, Joachim Fabini, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Jukka Manner, Jerome Benoit, Joachim Fabini, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Jukka Manner,
Ken Ko, Lingli Deng, Mach Chen, Matt Mathis, Marc Ibrahim, Michael Ken Ko, Lingli Deng, Mach Chen, Matt Mathis, Marc Ibrahim, Michael
Bugenhagen, Michael Faath, Nalini Elkins, Rolf Winter, Sam Crawford, Bugenhagen, Michael Faath, Nalini Elkins, Radia Perlman, Rolf Winter,
Sharam Hakimi, Steve Miller, Ted Lemon, Timothy Carey, Vaibhav Sam Crawford, Sharam Hakimi, Steve Miller, Ted Lemon, Timothy Carey,
Bajpai, Vero Zheng, William Lupton. Vaibhav 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.
11. History 11. History
First WG version, copy of draft-folks-lmap-framework-00. First WG version, copy of draft-folks-lmap-framework-00.
skipping to change at page 47, line 8 skipping to change at page 48, line 50
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
decide on the granularity at which an Instruction Message works decide on the granularity at which an Instruction Message works
o words added about overlapping Measurement Tasks (measurement o words added about overlapping Measurement Tasks (Measurement
system can handle any way they choose; Report should mention if System can handle any way they choose; Report should mention if
the Task overlapped with another) the Task overlapped with another)
o Suppression: no defined impact on Passive Measurement Task; extra o Suppression: no defined impact on Passive Measurement Task; extra
option to suppress on-going Active Measurement Tasks; suppression option to suppress on-going Active Measurement Tasks; suppression
doesn't go to Measurement Peer, since they don't understand doesn't go to Measurement Peer, since they don't understand
Instructions Instructions
o new concept of Data Transfer Task (and therefore adjustment of the o new concept of Data Transfer Task (and therefore adjustment of the
Channel concept) Channel concept)
skipping to change at page 48, line 48 skipping to change at page 50, line 41
11.8. From -07 to -08 11.8. From -07 to -08
o Clarifications resulting from WG 3rd LC, as discussed in o Clarifications resulting from WG 3rd LC, as discussed in
https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/slides-90-lmap-0.pdf, plus https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/slides-90-lmap-0.pdf, plus
comments made in the IETF-90 meeting. comments made in the IETF-90 meeting.
o added mention of "measurement point designations" in Measurement o added mention of "measurement point designations" in Measurement
Task configuration and Report Protocol. Task configuration and Report Protocol.
11.9. From -08 to -09
o Clarifications and changes from the AD review (Benoit Claise) and
security directorate review (Radia Perlman).
12. Informative References 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.
skipping to change at page 49, line 23 skipping to change at page 51, line 23
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC4101] Rescorla, E. and IAB, "Writing Protocol Models", RFC 4101, [RFC4101] Rescorla, E. and IAB, "Writing Protocol Models", RFC 4101,
June 2005. June 2005.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally [RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, July Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, July
2005. 2005.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., and A.
Bierman, "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC
6241, June 2011.
[RFC7011] Claise, B., Trammell, B., and P. Aitken, "Specification of
the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the
Exchange of Flow Information", STD 77, RFC 7011, September
2013.
[RFC7368] Chown, T., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. Weil,
"IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", RFC 7368,
October 2014.
[RFC7258] Farrell, S. and H. Tschofenig, "Pervasive Monitoring Is an
Attack", BCP 188, RFC 7258, May 2014.
[I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases] [I-D.ietf-lmap-use-cases]
Linsner, M., Eardley, P., Burbridge, T., and F. Sorensen, Linsner, M., Eardley, P., Burbridge, T., and F. Sorensen,
"Large-Scale Broadband Measurement Use Cases", draft-ietf- "Large-Scale Broadband Measurement Use Cases", draft-ietf-
lmap-use-cases-03 (work in progress), April 2014. lmap-use-cases-05 (work in progress), November 2014.
[I-D.manyfolks-ippm-metric-registry]
Bagnulo, M., Claise, B., Eardley, P., and A. Morton,
"Registry for Performance Metrics", draft-manyfolks-ippm-
metric-registry-00 (work in progress), February 2014.
[I-D.ietf-homenet-arch] [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry]
Chown, T., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. Weil, Bagnulo, M., Claise, B., Eardley, P., Morton, A., and A.
"IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", draft- Akhter, "Registry for Performance Metrics", draft-ietf-
ietf-homenet-arch-17 (work in progress), July 2014. ippm-metric-registry-01 (work in progress), September
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-01 (work in progress), June 2014. information-model-02 (work in progress), August 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-05 (work in progress), Large-Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance", draft-
August 2014. ietf-ippm-lmap-path-07 (work in progress), October 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 Appendix A. Appendix: Deployment examples
In this section we describe some deployment scenarios that are In this section we describe some deployment scenarios that are
feasible within the LMAP framework defined in this document. feasible within the LMAP framework defined in this document.
The LMAP framework defines two types of components involved in the A very simple example of a Measurement Peer (MP) is a web server that
actual measurement task, namely the Measurement Agent (MA) and the the MA is downloading a web page from (such as www.example.com) in
Measurement Peer (MP). The fundamental difference conveyed in the order to perform a speed test. The web server is a MP and from its
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 perspective, the MA is just another client; the MP doesn't have a
specific function for assisting measurements. This is described in specific function for assisting measurements. This is described in
the figure A1. the figure A1.
^ ^
+----------------+ Web Traffic +----------------+ IPPM +----------------+ Web Traffic +----------------+ non-LMAP
| Web Client |<------------>| MP: Web Server | Scope |MA: Web Client |<------------>| MP: Web Server | Scope
| | +----------------+ | | | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................V... ...|................|....................................V...
| LMAP interface | ^ | LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ | +----------------+ |
^ | | ^ | |
Instruction | | Report | Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ | | +-----------------+ |
| | | | | |
| v LMAP | v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope +------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | | | Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ V +------------+ +------------+ V
Figure A1: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system, Figure A1: Schematic of LMAP-based Measurement System,
with Web server as Measurement Peer with Web server as Measurement Peer
Another case that is slightly different than this would be the one of 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 a TWAMP-responder. This is also a MP, with a helper function, the
TWAMP server, which is specially deployed to assist the MAs that TWAMP server, which is specially deployed to assist the MAs that
perform TWAMP tests. Another example is with a ping server, as perform TWAMP tests. Another example is with a ping server, as
described in Section 2. described in Section 2.
A further example is the case of a traceroute like measurement. In 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 this case, for each packet sent, the router where the TTL expires is
performing the MP function. So for a given Measurement Task, there performing the MP function. So for a given Measurement Task, there
is one MA involved and several MPs, one per hop. is one MA involved and several MPs, one per hop.
In figure A2 we depict the case of an OWAMP (One-Way Active In figure A2 we depict the case of an OWAMP (One-Way Active
Measurement Protocol) responder acting as an MP. In this case, the Measurement Protocol) responder acting as an MP. In this case, the
helper function in addition reports results back to the MA. So it helper function in addition reports results back to the MA. So it
has both a data plane and control interface with the MA. has both a data plane and control interface with the MA.
+----------------+ OWAMP +----------------+ ^ +----------------+ OWAMP +----------------+ ^
| OWAMP |<--control--->| MP: | | | MA: OWAMP |<--control--->| MP: | |
| control-client |>test-traffic>| OWAMP server & | IPPM | control-client |-test-traffic>| OWAMP server & | non-LMAP
| fetch-client & |<----fetch----| session-rec'ver| Scope | fetch-client & |<----fetch----| session-rec'ver| Scope
| session-sender | | | | | session-sender | | | |
| | +----------------+ | | | +----------------+ |
...|................|....................................v... ...|................|....................................v...
| LMAP interface | ^ | LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ | +----------------+ |
^ | | ^ | |
Instruction | | Report | Instruction | | Report |
| +-----------------+ | | +-----------------+ |
| | | | | |
| v LMAP | v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope +------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | | | Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v +------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A2: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system, Figure A2: Schematic of LMAP-based Measurement System,
with OWAMP server as Measurement Peer with OWAMP server as Measurement Peer
However, it is also possible to use two Measurement Agents when However, it is also possible to use two Measurement Agents when
performing one way Measurement Tasks, as described in figure A3 performing one way Measurement Tasks, as described in figure A3
below. In this case, MA1 generates the traffic and MA2 receives the below. Both MAs are instructed by the Controller: MA-1 to send the
traffic and send the reports to the Collector. Note that both MAs traffic and MA-2 to measure the received traffic and send Reports to
are instructed by the Controller. MA1 receives an Instruction to the Collector. Note that the Measurement Task at MA-2 can listen for
send the traffic and MA2 receives an Instruction to measured the traffic from MA-1 and respond multiple times without having to be
received traffic and send Reports to the Collector. rescheduled.
+----------------+ +----------------+ ^ +----------------+ +----------------+ ^
| MA1 | | MA2 | IPPM | MA-1: | | MA-2: | non-LMAP
| iperf -u sender|-UDP traffic->| iperf -u recvr | Scope | iperf -u sender|-UDP traffic->| iperf -u recvr | Scope
| | | | v | | | | v
...|................|..............|................|....v... ...|................|..............|................|....v...
| LMAP interface | | LMAP interface | ^ | LMAP interface | | LMAP interface | ^
+----------------+ +----------------+ | +----------------+ +----------------+ |
^ ^ | | ^ ^ | |
Instruction | Instruction{Report} | | Report | Instruction | Instruction{Report} | | Report |
{task, | +-------------------+ | | {task, | +-------------------+ | |
schedule} | | | | schedule} | | | |
| | v LMAP | | v LMAP
+------------+ +------------+ Scope +------------+ +------------+ Scope
| Controller | | Collector | | | Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v +------------+ +------------+ v
IPPM
Figure A3: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system, Figure A3: Schematic of LMAP-based Measurement System,
with two Measurement Agents cooperating to measure UDP traffic with two Measurement Agents cooperating to measure UDP traffic
Next, we consider Measurement Methods that measure user traffic. Next, we consider Measurement Methods that measure user traffic.
Traffic generated in one point in the network flowing towards a given Traffic generated in one point in the network flowing towards a given
destination and the traffic is observed in some point along the path. destination and the traffic is observed in some point along the path.
One way to implement this is that the endpoints generating and One way to implement this is that the endpoints generating and
receiving the traffic are not instructed by the Controller; hence receiving the traffic are not instructed by the Controller; hence
they are MPs. The MA is located along the path with a monitor they are MPs. The MA is located along the path with a monitor
function that measures the traffic. The MA is instructed by the function that measures the traffic. The MA is instructed by the
Controller to monitor that particular traffic and to send the Report Controller to monitor that particular traffic and to send the Report
to the Collector. It is depicted in figure A4 below. to the Collector. It is depicted in figure A4 below.
+-----+ +----------------+ +------+ ^ +--------+ +----------------+ +--------+ ^
| MP | | MA: Monitor | | MP | IPPM |End user| | MA: Monitor | |End user| |
| |<--|----------------|---traffic--->| | Scope | or MP |<--|----------------|--traffic-->| or MP | non-LMAP
+-----+ | | +------+ | | | | | | | Scope
.......|................|.........................v........... +--------+ | | +--------+ |
| LMAP interface | ^ ...|................|............................v..
+----------------+ | | LMAP interface | ^
^ | | +----------------+ |
Instruction | | Report | ^ | |
| +-----------------+ | Instruction | | Report |
| | | | +-----------------+ |
| v LMAP | | |
+------------+ +------------+ Scope | v LMAP
| Controller | | Collector | | +------------+ +------------+ Scope
+------------+ +------------+ v | Controller | | Collector | |
+------------+ +------------+ v
Figure A4: Schematic of LMAP-based measurement system, Figure A4: Schematic of LMAP-based Measurement System,
with a Measurement Agent monitoring traffic 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
 End of changes. 126 change blocks. 
384 lines changed or deleted 423 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/