draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-09.txt | draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-10.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
I2NSF Working Group J. Jeong | I2NSF Working Group J. Jeong | |||
Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University | Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University | |||
Intended status: Informational S. Hyun | Intended status: Informational S. Hyun | |||
Expires: September 12, 2019 Chosun University | Expires: November 3, 2019 Chosun University | |||
T. Ahn | T. Ahn | |||
Korea Telecom | Korea Telecom | |||
S. Hares | S. Hares | |||
Huawei | Huawei | |||
D. Lopez | D. Lopez | |||
Telefonica I+D | Telefonica I+D | |||
March 11, 2019 | May 2, 2019 | |||
Applicability of Interfaces to Network Security Functions to Network- | Applicability of Interfaces to Network Security Functions to Network- | |||
Based Security Services | Based Security Services | |||
draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-09 | draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-10 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This document describes the applicability of Interface to Network | This document describes the applicability of Interface to Network | |||
Security Functions (I2NSF) to network-based security services in | Security Functions (I2NSF) to network-based security services in | |||
Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) environments, such as | Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) environments, such as | |||
firewall, deep packet inspection, or attack mitigation engines. | firewall, deep packet inspection, or attack mitigation engines. | |||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 41 ¶ | |||
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://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 September 12, 2019. | This Internet-Draft will expire on November 3, 2019. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2019 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 | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://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 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶ | |||
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3. I2NSF Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3. I2NSF Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
4. Time-dependent Web Access Control Service . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 4. Time-dependent Web Access Control Service . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
5. I2NSF Framework with SFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 5. I2NSF Framework with SFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
6. I2NSF Framework with SDN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 6. I2NSF Framework with SDN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
6.1. Firewall: Centralized Firewall System . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 6.1. Firewall: Centralized Firewall System . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
6.2. Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security | 6.2. Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security | |||
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
6.3. Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation | 6.3. Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation | |||
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
7. I2NSF Framework with NFV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 7. I2NSF Framework with NFV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-08 . . . 25 | Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-09 . . . 23 | |||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) defines a framework | Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) defines a framework | |||
and interfaces for interacting with Network Security Functions | and interfaces for interacting with Network Security Functions | |||
(NSFs). Note that Network Security Function (NSF) is defined as a | (NSFs). Note that Network Security Function (NSF) is defined as | |||
funcional block for a security service within an I2NSF framework that | software that provides a set of security-related services, such as | |||
has well-defined I2NSF NSF-facing interface and other external | (i) detecting unwanted activity, (ii) blocking or mitigating the | |||
interfaces and well-defined functional behavior [NFV-Terminology]. | effect of such unwanted activity in order to fulfil service | |||
requirements, and (iii) supporting communication stream integrity and | ||||
confidentiality [i2nsf-terminology]. | ||||
The I2NSF framework allows heterogeneous NSFs developed by different | The I2NSF framework allows heterogeneous NSFs developed by different | |||
security solution vendors to be used in the Network Functions | security solution vendors to be used in the Network Functions | |||
Virtualization (NFV) environment [ETSI-NFV] by utilizing the | Virtualization (NFV) environment [ETSI-NFV] by utilizing the | |||
capabilities of such products and the virtualization of security | capabilities of such NSFs through I2NSF interfaces such as Customer- | |||
functions in the NFV platform. In the I2NSF framework, each NSF | Facing Interface [consumer-facing-inf-dm] and NSF-Facing Interface | |||
initially registers the profile of its own capabilities into the | [nsf-facing-inf-dm]. In the I2NSF framework, each NSF initially | |||
system in order for themselves to be available in the system. In | registers the profile of its own capabilities into the Security | |||
addition, the Security Controller is validated by the I2NSF User | Controller (i.e., network operator management system [RFC8329]) in | |||
(also called I2NSF Client) that a system administrator (as a user) is | the I2NSF system via Registration Interface [registration-inf-dm] so | |||
employing, so that the system administrator can request security | that each NSF can be selected and used to enforce a given security | |||
services through the Security Controller. | policy from I2NSF User (i.e., network security administrator). Note | |||
that Developer's Management System (DMS) is management software that | ||||
provides a vendor's security service software as a Virtual Network | ||||
Function (VNF) in an NFV environment (or middlebox in the legacy | ||||
network) as an NSF, and registers the capabilities of an NSF into | ||||
Security Controller via Registration Interface for a security service | ||||
[RFC8329]. | ||||
Security Controller is defined as a management component that | ||||
contains control plane functions to manage NSFs and facilitate | ||||
information sharing among other components (e.g., NSFs and I2NSF | ||||
User) in an I2NSF system [i2nsf-terminology]. Security Controller | ||||
maintains the mapping between a capability and an NSF, so it can | ||||
perform to translate a high-level security policy received from I2NSF | ||||
User to a low-level security policy configured and enforced in an NSF | ||||
[policy-translation]. Security Controller can monitor the states and | ||||
security attacks in NSFs through NSF monitoring [nsf-monitoring-dm]. | ||||
This document illustrates the applicability of the I2NSF framework | This document illustrates the applicability of the I2NSF framework | |||
with four different scenarios: | with four different scenarios: | |||
1. The enforcement of time-dependent web access control. | 1. The enforcement of time-dependent web access control. | |||
2. The application of I2NSF to a Service Function Chaining (SFC) | 2. The application of I2NSF to a Service Function Chaining (SFC) | |||
environment [RFC7665]. | environment [RFC7665]. | |||
3. The integration of the I2NSF framework with Software-Defined | 3. The integration of the I2NSF framework with Software-Defined | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 50 ¶ | |||
4. The use of Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) [ETSI-NFV] as a | 4. The use of Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) [ETSI-NFV] as a | |||
supporting technology. | supporting technology. | |||
The implementation of I2NSF in these scenarios has allowed us to | The implementation of I2NSF in these scenarios has allowed us to | |||
verify the applicability and effectiveness of the I2NSF framework for | verify the applicability and effectiveness of the I2NSF framework for | |||
a variety of use cases. | a variety of use cases. | |||
2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
This document uses the terminology described in [RFC7665], [RFC7149], | This document uses the terminology described in [RFC7665], [RFC7149], | |||
[ITU-T.Y.3300], [ONF-OpenFlow], [ONF-SDN-Architecture], | [ITU-T.Y.3300], [ONF-SDN-Architecture], [ITU-T.X.800], | |||
[ITU-T.X.1252], [ITU-T.X.800], [NFV-Terminology], [RFC8329], | ||||
[i2nsf-terminology], [consumer-facing-inf-dm], [i2nsf-nsf-cap-im], | [NFV-Terminology], [RFC8329], and [i2nsf-terminology]. In addition, | |||
[nsf-facing-inf-dm], [registration-inf-dm], and | the following terms are defined below: | |||
[nsf-triggered-steering]. In addition, the following terms are | ||||
defined below: | ||||
o Software-Defined Networking (SDN): A set of techniques that | o Software-Defined Networking (SDN): A set of techniques that | |||
enables to directly program, orchestrate, control, and manage | enables to directly program, orchestrate, control, and manage | |||
network resources, which facilitates the design, delivery and | network resources, which facilitates the design, delivery and | |||
operation of network services in a dynamic and scalable manner | operation of network services in a dynamic and scalable manner | |||
[ITU-T.Y.3300]. | [ITU-T.Y.3300]. | |||
o Network Function: A funcional block within a network | o Network Function: A funcional block within a network | |||
infrastructure that has well-defined external interfaces and well- | infrastructure that has well-defined external interfaces and well- | |||
defined functional behavior [NFV-Terminology]. | defined functional behavior [NFV-Terminology]. | |||
o Network Security Function (NSF): A funcional block within a | o Network Security Function (NSF): Software that provides a set of | |||
security service within a network infrastructure that has well- | security-related services. Examples include detecting unwanted | |||
defined external interfaces and well-defined functional | activity and blocking or mitigating the effect of such unwanted | |||
behavior[NFV-Terminology]. | activity in order to fulfil service requirements. The NSF can | |||
also help in supporting communication stream integrity and | ||||
confidentiality [i2nsf-terminology]. | ||||
o Network Functions Virtualization (NFV): A principle of separating | o Network Functions Virtualization (NFV): A principle of separating | |||
network functions (or network security functions) from the | network functions (or network security functions) from the | |||
hardware they run on by using virtual hardware abstraction | hardware they run on by using virtual hardware abstraction | |||
[NFV-Terminology]. | [NFV-Terminology]. | |||
o Service Function Chaining (SFC): The execution of an ordered set | o Service Function Chaining (SFC): The execution of an ordered set | |||
of abstract service functions (i.e., network functions) according | of abstract service functions (i.e., network functions) according | |||
to ordering constraints that must be applied to packets, frames, | to ordering constraints that must be applied to packets, frames, | |||
and flows selected as a result of classification. The implied | and flows selected as a result of classification. The implied | |||
skipping to change at page 5, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 45 ¶ | |||
[consumer-facing-inf-dm]. | [consumer-facing-inf-dm]. | |||
The Security Controller receives and analyzes the high-level security | The Security Controller receives and analyzes the high-level security | |||
policies from an I2NSF User, and identifies what types of security | policies from an I2NSF User, and identifies what types of security | |||
capabilities are required to meet these high-level security policies. | capabilities are required to meet these high-level security policies. | |||
The Security Controller then identifies NSFs that have the required | The Security Controller then identifies NSFs that have the required | |||
security capabilities, and generates low-level security policies for | security capabilities, and generates low-level security policies for | |||
each of the NSFs so that the high-level security policies are | each of the NSFs so that the high-level security policies are | |||
eventually enforced by those NSFs [policy-translation]. Finally, the | eventually enforced by those NSFs [policy-translation]. Finally, the | |||
Security Controller sends the generated low-level security policies | Security Controller sends the generated low-level security policies | |||
to the NSFs [i2nsf-nsf-cap-im][nsf-facing-inf-dm]. | to the NSFs via the NSF-Facing Interface [nsf-facing-inf-dm]. | |||
The Security Controller requests NSFs to perform low-level security | As shown in Figure 1, with a Developer's Management System (called | |||
services via the NSF-Facing Interface. As shown in Figure 1, with a | DMS), developers (or vendors) inform the Security Controller of the | |||
Developer's Management System (DMS), developers (or vendors) inform | capabilities of the NSFs through the Registration Interface | |||
the Security Controller of the capabilities of the NSFs through the | [registration-inf-dm] for registering (or deregistering) the | |||
I2NSF Registration Interface [registration-inf-dm] for registering | corresponding NSFs. Note that an inside attacker at the DMS can | |||
(or deregistering) the corresponding NSFs. Note that an inside | seriously weaken the I2NSF system's security. That is, DMS can be | |||
attacker at the DMS can seriously weaken the I2NSF system's security. | compromised to attack the Security Controller by providing the | |||
To deal with this type of threat, the role of the DMS should be | Security Controller with malicious NSFs, and controlling those NSFs | |||
restricted to providing an I2NSF system with the software package/ | in real time. To deal with this type of threat, the role of the DMS | |||
image for NSF execution, and the DMS should never be able to access | should be restricted to providing an I2NSF system with the software | |||
NSFs in online/activated status for the I2NSF system's security. On | package/image for NSF execution, and the DMS should never be able to | |||
the other hand, an access to running (online) NSFs should be allowed | access NSFs in online/activated status for the I2NSF system's | |||
only to the Security Controller, not the DMS. Also, the Security | security. On the other hand, an access to active NSFs should be | |||
Controller can detect and prevent inside attacks by monitoring the | allowed only to the Security Controller, not the DMS during the | |||
activity of all the DMSs as well as the NSFs through the I2NSF NSF | provisioning time of those NSFs to the I2NSF system. However, note | |||
monitoring functionality [nsf-monitoring-dm]. | that an inside attacker can access the active NSFs, which are being | |||
executed as either VNFs or middleboxes in the I2NSF system, through a | ||||
back door (i.e., an IP address and a port number that are known to | ||||
the DMS to control an NSF). However, the Security Controller can | ||||
detect and prevent inside attacks by monitoring the activities of all | ||||
the DMSs as well as the NSFs through the I2NSF NSF monitoring | ||||
functionality [nsf-monitoring-dm]. Through the NSF monitoring, the | ||||
Security Controller can monitor the activities and states of NSFs, | ||||
and then can make a diagnosis to see whether the NSFs are working in | ||||
normal conditions or in abnormal conditions including the insider | ||||
threat. Note that the monitoring of the DMSs is out of scope for | ||||
I2NSF. | ||||
The Consumer-Facing Interface between an I2NSF User and the Security | The Consumer-Facing Interface can be implemented as an XML file based | |||
Controller can be implemented using, for example, RESTCONF [RFC8040]. | on the Consumer-Facing Interface data model [consumer-facing-inf-dm] | |||
Data models specified by YANG [RFC6020] describe high-level security | along with RESTCONF [RFC8040], which befits a web-based user | |||
policies to be specified by an I2NSF User. The data model defined in | interface for an I2NSF User to send a Security Controller a high- | |||
[consumer-facing-inf-dm] can be used for the I2NSF Consumer-Facing | level security policy. Data models specified by YANG [RFC6020] | |||
Interface. | describe high-level security policies to be specified by an I2NSF | |||
User. The data model defined in [consumer-facing-inf-dm] can be used | ||||
for the I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface. Note that an inside | ||||
attacker at the I2NSF User can misuse the I2NSF system so that the | ||||
network system under the I2NSF system is vulnerable to security | ||||
attacks. To handle this type of threat, the Security Controller | ||||
needs to monitor the activities of all the I2NSF Users as well as the | ||||
NSFs through the I2NSF NSF monitoring functionality | ||||
[nsf-monitoring-dm]. Note that the monitoring of the I2NSF Users is | ||||
out of scope for I2NSF. | ||||
The NSF-Facing Interface between the Security Controller and NSFs can | The NSF-Facing Interface can be implemented as an XML file based on | |||
be implemented using NETCONF [RFC6241]. YANG data models describe | the NSF-Facing Interface YANG data model [nsf-facing-inf-dm] along | |||
low-level security policies for the sake of NSFs, which are | with NETCONF [RFC6241], which befits a command-line-based remote- | |||
procedure call for a Security Controller to configure an NSF with a | ||||
low-level security policy. Data models specified by YANG [RFC6020] | ||||
describe low-level security policies for the sake of NSFs, which are | ||||
translated from the high-level security policies by the Security | translated from the high-level security policies by the Security | |||
Controller. The data model defined in [nsf-facing-inf-dm] can be | Controller. The data model defined in [nsf-facing-inf-dm] can be | |||
used for the I2NSF NSF-Facing Interface. | used for the I2NSF NSF-Facing Interface. | |||
The Registration Interface between the Security Controller and the | The Registration Interface can be implemented as an XML file based on | |||
Developer's Management System can be implemented by RESTCONF | the Registration Interface YANG data model [registration-inf-dm] | |||
[RFC8040]. The data model defined in [registration-inf-dm] can be | along with NETCONF [RFC6241], which befits a command-line-based | |||
used for the I2NSF Registration Interface. | remote-procedure call for a DMS to send a Security Controller an | |||
NSF's capability information. Data models specified by YANG | ||||
[RFC6020] describe the registration of an NSF's capabilities to | ||||
enforce security services at the NSF. The data model defined in | ||||
[registration-inf-dm] can be used for the I2NSF Registration | ||||
Interface. | ||||
Also, the I2NSF framework can enforce multiple chained NSFs for the | Also, the I2NSF framework can enforce multiple chained NSFs for the | |||
low-level security policies by means of SFC techniques for the I2NSF | low-level security policies by means of SFC techniques for the I2NSF | |||
architecture described in [nsf-triggered-steering]. | architecture [RFC7665]. | |||
The following sections describe different security service scenarios | The following sections describe different security service scenarios | |||
illustrating the applicability of the I2NSF framework. | illustrating the applicability of the I2NSF framework. | |||
4. Time-dependent Web Access Control Service | 4. Time-dependent Web Access Control Service | |||
This service scenario assumes that an enterprise network | This service scenario assumes that an enterprise network | |||
administrator wants to control the staff members' access to a | administrator wants to control the staff members' access to a | |||
particular Internet service (e.g., Example.com) during business | particular Internet service (e.g., Example.com) during business | |||
hours. The following is an example high-level security policy rule | hours. The following is an example high-level security policy rule | |||
for a web filter that the administrator requests: Block the staff | for a web filter that the administrator requests: Block the staff | |||
members' access to Example.com from 9 AM to 6 PM. Figure 2 is an | members' access to Example.com from 9 AM (i.e., 09:00) to 6 PM (i.e., | |||
example XML code for this web filter: | 18:00) by dropping their packets. Figure 2 is an example XML code | |||
for this web filter that is sent from the I2NSF User to the Security | ||||
Controller via the Consumer-Facing Interface | ||||
[consumer-facing-inf-dm]: | ||||
<I2NSF> | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> | |||
<name>block_website</name> | <ietf-i2nsf-cfi-policy:policy> | |||
<cond> | <policy-name>block_website</policy-name> | |||
<src>Staff_Member's_PC</src> | <rule> | |||
<dest>Example.com</dest> | <rule-name>block_website_during_working_hours</rule-name> | |||
<time-span-start>9:00AM</time-span-start> | <event> | |||
<time-span-end>-6:00PM</time-span-end> | <time-information> | |||
</cond> | <begin-time>09:00</begin-time> | |||
<action>block<action> | <end-time>18:00</end-time> | |||
</I2NSF> | </time-information> | |||
</event> | ||||
<condition> | ||||
<firewall-condition> | ||||
<source-target> | ||||
<src-target>Staff_Member's_PC</src-target> | ||||
</source-target> | ||||
</firewall-condition> | ||||
<custom-condition> | ||||
<destination-target> | ||||
<dest-target>Example.com</dest-target> | ||||
</destination-target> | ||||
</custom-condition> | ||||
</condition> | ||||
<action> | ||||
<primary-action>drop</primary-action> | ||||
</action> | ||||
</rule> | ||||
</ietf-i2nsf-cfi-policy:policy> | ||||
Figure 2: An XML Example for Time-based Web-filter | Figure 2: An XML Example for Time-based Web-filter | |||
The security policy name is "block_website" with the tag "name". The | The security policy name is "block_website" with the tag "policy- | |||
filtering condition has the source group "Staff_Member's_PC" with the | name", and the security policy rule name is | |||
tag "src", the destination website "Example.com" with the tag "dest", | "block_website_during_working_hours" with the tag "rule-name". The | |||
the filtering start time is the time "9:00AM" with the tag " time- | filtering event has the time span where the filtering begin time is | |||
span-start", and the filtering end time is the time "6:00PM" with the | the time "09:00" (i.e., 9:00AM) with the tag "begin-time", and the | |||
tag "time-span-end". The action is to "block" the packets satisfying | filtering end time is the time "18:00" (i.e., 6:00PM) with the tag | |||
the above condition, that is, to drop those packets. | "end-time". The filtering condition has the source target of | |||
"Staff_Member's_PC" with the tag "src-target", the destination target | ||||
of a website "Example.com" with the tag "dest-target". The action is | ||||
to "drop" the packets satisfying the above event and condition with | ||||
the tag "primary-action". | ||||
After receiving the high-level security policy, the Security | After receiving the high-level security policy, the Security | |||
Controller identifies required security capabilities, e.g., IP | Controller identifies required security capabilities, e.g., IP | |||
address and port number inspection capabilities and URL inspection | address and port number inspection capabilities and URL inspection | |||
capability. In this scenario, it is assumed that the IP address and | capability. In this scenario, it is assumed that the IP address and | |||
port number inspection capabilities are required to check whether a | port number inspection capabilities are required to check whether a | |||
received packet is an HTTP packet from a staff member. The URL | received packet is an HTTP packet from a staff member. The URL | |||
inspection capability is required to check whether the target URL of | inspection capability is required to check whether the target URL of | |||
a received packet is in the Example.com domain or not. | a received packet is in the Example.com domain or not. | |||
The Security Controller maintains the security capabilities of each | The Security Controller maintains the security capabilities of each | |||
NSF running in the I2NSF system, which have been reported by the | NSF running in the I2NSF system, which have been reported by the | |||
Developer's Management System via the Registration interface. Based | Developer's Management System via the Registration interface. Based | |||
on this information, the Security Controller identifies NSFs that can | on this information, the Security Controller identifies NSFs that can | |||
perform the IP address and port number inspection and URL inspection | perform the IP address and port number inspection and URL inspection | |||
[policy-translation]. In this scenario, it is assumed that an NSF of | [policy-translation]. In this scenario, it is assumed that a | |||
firewall has the IP address and port number inspection capabilities | firewall NSF has the IP address and port number inspection | |||
and an NSF of web filter has URL inspection capability. | capabilities and a web filter NSF has URL inspection capability. | |||
The Security Controller generates low-level security rules for the | The Security Controller generates low-level security rules for the | |||
NSFs to perform IP address and port number inspection, URL | NSFs to perform IP address and port number inspection, URL | |||
inspection, and time checking. Specifically, the Security Controller | inspection, and time checking. Specifically, the Security Controller | |||
may interoperate with an access control server in the enterprise | may interoperate with an access control server in the enterprise | |||
network in order to retrieve the information (e.g., IP address in | network in order to retrieve the information (e.g., IP address in | |||
use, company identifier (ID), and role) of each employee that is | use, company identifier (ID), and role) of each employee that is | |||
currently using the network. Based on the retrieved information, the | currently using the network. Based on the retrieved information, the | |||
Security Controller generates low-level security rules to check | Security Controller generates low-level security rules to check | |||
whether the source IP address of a received packet matches any one | whether the source IP address of a received packet matches any one | |||
being used by a staff member. In addition, the low-level security | being used by a staff member. In addition, the low-level security | |||
rules should be able to determine that a received packet is of HTTP | rules should be able to determine that a received packet is of HTTP | |||
protocol. The low-level security rules for web filter check that the | protocol. The low-level security rules for web filter check that the | |||
target URL field of a received packet is equal to Example.com. | target URL field of a received packet is equal to Example.com. | |||
Finally, the Security Controller sends the low-level security rules | Finally, the Security Controller sends the low-level security rules | |||
of the IP address and port number inspection to the NSF of firewall | of the IP address and port number inspection to the firewall NSF and | |||
and the low-level rules for URL inspection to the NSF of web filter. | the low-level rules for URL inspection to the web filter NSF. | |||
The following describes how the time-dependent web access control | The following describes how the time-dependent web access control | |||
service is enforced by the NSFs of firewall and web filter. | service is enforced by the NSFs of firewall and web filter. | |||
1. A staff member tries to access Example.com during business hours, | 1. A staff member tries to access Example.com during business hours, | |||
e.g., 10 AM. | e.g., 10 AM. | |||
2. The packet is forwarded from the staff member's device to the | 2. The packet is forwarded from the staff member's device to the | |||
firewall, and the firewall checks the source IP address and port | firewall, and the firewall checks the source IP address and port | |||
number. Now the firewall identifies the received packet is an | number. Now the firewall identifies the received packet is an | |||
HTTP packet from the staff member. | HTTP packet from the staff member. | |||
3. The firewall triggers the web filter to further inspect the | 3. The firewall triggers the web filter to further inspect the | |||
packet, and the packet is forwarded from the firewall to the web | packet, and the packet is forwarded from the firewall to the web | |||
filter. SFC technology can be utilized to support such packet | filter. SFC technology can be utilized to support such packet | |||
forwarding in the I2NSF framework [nsf-triggered-steering]. | forwarding in the I2NSF framework [RFC7665]. | |||
4. The web filter checks the target URL field of the received | 4. The web filter checks the target URL field of the received | |||
packet, and realizes the packet is toward Example.com. The web | packet, and realizes the packet is toward Example.com. The web | |||
filter then checks that the current time is in business hours. | filter then checks that the current time is in business hours. | |||
If so, the web filter drops the packet, and consequently the | If so, the web filter drops the packet, and consequently the | |||
staff member's access to Example.com during business hours is | staff member's access to Example.com during business hours is | |||
blocked. | blocked. | |||
5. I2NSF Framework with SFC | ||||
In the I2NSF architecture, an NSF can trigger an advanced security | ||||
action (e.g., DPI or DDoS attack mitigation) on a packet based on the | ||||
result of its own security inspection of the packet. For example, a | ||||
firewall triggers further inspection of a suspicious packet with DPI. | ||||
For this advanced security action to be fulfilled, the suspicious | ||||
packet should be forwarded from the current NSF to the successor NSF. | ||||
SFC [RFC7665] is a technology that enables this advanced security | ||||
action by steering a packet with multiple service functions (e.g., | ||||
NSFs), and this technology can be utilized by the I2NSF architecture | ||||
to support the advanced security action. | ||||
+------------+ | +------------+ | |||
| I2NSF User | | | I2NSF User | | |||
+------------+ | +------------+ | |||
^ | ^ | |||
| Consumer-Facing Interface | | Consumer-Facing Interface | |||
v | v | |||
+-------------------+ Registration +-----------------------+ | +-------------------+ Registration +-----------------------+ | |||
|Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System| | |Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System| | |||
+-------------------+ Interface +-----------------------+ | +-------------------+ Interface +-----------------------+ | |||
^ ^ | ^ ^ | |||
skipping to change at page 9, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 41 ¶ | |||
| . | | . | |||
| . | | . | |||
| . | | . | |||
| +-----------------------+ | | +-----------------------+ | |||
------>| NSF-n | | ------>| NSF-n | | |||
|(DDoS-Attack Mitigator)| | |(DDoS-Attack Mitigator)| | |||
+-----------------------+ | +-----------------------+ | |||
Figure 3: An I2NSF Framework with SFC | Figure 3: An I2NSF Framework with SFC | |||
5. I2NSF Framework with SFC | ||||
In the I2NSF architecture, an NSF can trigger an advanced security | ||||
action (e.g., DPI or DDoS attack mitigation) on a packet based on the | ||||
result of its own security inspection of the packet. For example, a | ||||
firewall triggers further inspection of a suspicious packet with DPI. | ||||
For this advanced security action to be fulfilled, the suspicious | ||||
packet should be forwarded from the current NSF to the successor NSF. | ||||
SFC [RFC7665] is a technology that enables this advanced security | ||||
action by steering a packet with multiple service functions (e.g., | ||||
NSFs), and this technology can be utilized by the I2NSF architecture | ||||
to support the advanced security action. | ||||
Figure 3 shows an I2NSF framework with the support of SFC. As shown | Figure 3 shows an I2NSF framework with the support of SFC. As shown | |||
in the figure, SFC generally requires classifiers and service | in the figure, SFC generally requires classifiers and service | |||
function forwarders (SFFs); classifiers are responsible for | function forwarders (SFFs); classifiers are responsible for | |||
determining which service function path (SFP) (i.e., an ordered | determining which service function path (SFP) (i.e., an ordered | |||
sequence of service functions) a given packet should pass through, | sequence of service functions) a given packet should pass through, | |||
according to pre-configured classification rules, and SFFs perform | according to pre-configured classification rules, and SFFs perform | |||
forwarding the given packet to the next service function (e.g., NSF) | forwarding the given packet to the next service function (e.g., NSF) | |||
on the SFP of the packet by referring to their forwarding tables. In | on the SFP of the packet by referring to their forwarding tables. In | |||
the I2NSF architecture with SFC, the Security Controller can take | the I2NSF architecture with SFC, the Security Controller can take | |||
responsibilities of generating classification rules for classifiers | responsibilities of generating classification rules for classifiers | |||
skipping to change at page 10, line 11 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 30 ¶ | |||
classification rules of the SFPs, and then configures classifiers | classification rules of the SFPs, and then configures classifiers | |||
with the classification rules over NSF-Facing Interface so that | with the classification rules over NSF-Facing Interface so that | |||
relevant traffic packets can follow the SFPs. Also, based on the | relevant traffic packets can follow the SFPs. Also, based on the | |||
global view of NSF instances available in the system, the Security | global view of NSF instances available in the system, the Security | |||
Controller constructs forwarding tables, which are required for SFFs | Controller constructs forwarding tables, which are required for SFFs | |||
to forward a given packet to the next NSF over the SFP, and | to forward a given packet to the next NSF over the SFP, and | |||
configures SFFs with those forwarding tables over NSF-Facing | configures SFFs with those forwarding tables over NSF-Facing | |||
Interface. | Interface. | |||
To trigger an advanced security action in the I2NSF architecture, the | To trigger an advanced security action in the I2NSF architecture, the | |||
current NSF appends a metadata describing the security capability | current NSF appends metadata describing the security capability | |||
required for the advanced action to the suspicious packet and sends | required for the advanced action to the suspicious packet to the | |||
network service header (NSH) of the packet [RFC8300]. It then sends | ||||
the packet to the classifier. Based on the metadata information, the | the packet to the classifier. Based on the metadata information, the | |||
classifier searches an SFP which includes an NSF with the required | classifier searches an SFP which includes an NSF with the required | |||
security capability, changes the SFP-related information (e.g., | security capability, changes the SFP-related information (e.g., | |||
service path identifier and service index [RFC8300]) of the packet | service path identifier and service index [RFC8300]) of the packet | |||
with the new SFP that has been found, and then forwards the packet to | with the new SFP that has been found, and then forwards the packet to | |||
the SFF. When receiving the packet, the SFF checks the SFP-related | the SFF. When receiving the packet, the SFF checks the SFP-related | |||
information such as the service path identifier and service index | information such as the service path identifier and service index | |||
contained in the packet and forwards the packet to the next NSF on | contained in the packet and forwards the packet to the next NSF on | |||
the SFP of the packet, according to its forwarding table. | the SFP of the packet, according to its forwarding table. | |||
6. I2NSF Framework with SDN | ||||
This section describes an I2NSF framework with SDN for I2NSF | ||||
applicability and use cases, such as firewall, deep packet | ||||
inspection, and DDoS-attack mitigation functions. SDN enables some | ||||
packet filtering rules to be enforced in network forwarding elements | ||||
(e.g., switch) by controlling their packet forwarding rules. By | ||||
taking advantage of this capability of SDN, it is possible to | ||||
optimize the process of security service enforcement in the I2NSF | ||||
system. | ||||
Figure 4 shows an I2NSF framework [RFC8329] with SDN networks to | ||||
support network-based security services. In this system, the | ||||
enforcement of security policy rules is divided into the SDN | ||||
forwarding elements (e.g., switch running as either a hardware middle | ||||
box or a software virtual switch) and NSFs (e.g., firewall running in | ||||
a form of a virtual network function [ETSI-NFV]). Especially, SDN | ||||
forwarding elements enforce simple packet filtering rules that can be | ||||
translated into their packet forwarding rules, whereas NSFs enforce | ||||
NSF-related security rules requiring the security capabilities of the | ||||
NSFs. For this purpose, the Security Controller instructs the SDN | ||||
Controller via NSF-Facing Interface so that SDN forwarding elements | ||||
can perform the required security services with flow tables under the | ||||
supervision of the SDN Controller. | ||||
+------------+ | +------------+ | |||
| I2NSF User | | | I2NSF User | | |||
+------------+ | +------------+ | |||
^ | ^ | |||
| Consumer-Facing Interface | | Consumer-Facing Interface | |||
v | v | |||
+-------------------+ Registration +-----------------------+ | +-------------------+ Registration +-----------------------+ | |||
|Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System| | |Security Controller|<-------------------->|Developer's Mgmt System| | |||
+-------------------+ Interface +-----------------------+ | +-------------------+ Interface +-----------------------+ | |||
^ ^ | ^ ^ | |||
skipping to change at page 11, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 40 ¶ | |||
| | SDN Southbound Interface | | | | SDN Southbound Interface | | |||
| v | | | v | | |||
| +--------+ +------------+ +--------+ +--------+ | | | +--------+ +------------+ +--------+ +--------+ | | |||
| |Switch-1|-| Switch-2 |-|Switch-3|.......|Switch-m| | | | |Switch-1|-| Switch-2 |-|Switch-3|.......|Switch-m| | | |||
| | | |(Classifier)| | (SFF) | | | | | | | | |(Classifier)| | (SFF) | | | | | |||
| +--------+ +------------+ +--------+ +--------+ | | | +--------+ +------------+ +--------+ +--------+ | | |||
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | |||
Figure 4: An I2NSF Framework with SDN Network | Figure 4: An I2NSF Framework with SDN Network | |||
6. I2NSF Framework with SDN | ||||
This section describes an I2NSF framework with SDN for I2NSF | ||||
applicability and use cases, such as firewall, deep packet | ||||
inspection, and DDoS-attack mitigation functions. SDN enables some | ||||
packet filtering rules to be enforced in network forwarding elements | ||||
(e.g., switch) by controlling their packet forwarding rules. By | ||||
taking advantage of this capability of SDN, it is possible to | ||||
optimize the process of security service enforcement in the I2NSF | ||||
system. For example, for efficient firewall services, simple packet | ||||
filtering can be performed by SDN forwarding elements (e.g., | ||||
switches), and complicated packet filtering based on packet payloads | ||||
can be performed by a firewall NSF. This optimized firewall using | ||||
both SDN forwarding elements and a firewall NSF is more efficient | ||||
than a firewall where SDN forwarding elements forward all the packets | ||||
to a firewall NSF for packet filtering. This is because packets to | ||||
be filtered out can be early dropped by SDN forwarding elements | ||||
without consuming further network bandwidth due to the forwarding of | ||||
the packets to the firewall NSF. | ||||
Figure 4 shows an I2NSF framework [RFC8329] with SDN networks to | ||||
support network-based security services. In this system, the | ||||
enforcement of security policy rules is divided into the SDN | ||||
forwarding elements (e.g., switch running as either a hardware middle | ||||
box or a software virtual switch) and NSFs (e.g., firewall running in | ||||
a form of a virtual network function (VNF) [ETSI-NFV]). Note that | ||||
NSFs are created or removed by the NFV Management and Orchestration | ||||
(MANO) [ETSI-NFV-MANO], performing the life-cycle management of NSFs | ||||
as VNFs. Refer to Section 7 for the detailed discussion of the NSF | ||||
life-cycle management in the NFV MANO for I2NSF. SDN forwarding | ||||
elements enforce simple packet filtering rules that can be translated | ||||
into their packet forwarding rules, whereas NSFs enforce complicated | ||||
NSF-related security rules requiring the security capabilities of the | ||||
NSFs. Note that SDN packet forwarding rules are for packet | ||||
forwarding or filtering by flow table entries at SDN forwarding | ||||
elements, and NSF rules are for security enforcement at NSFs (e.g., | ||||
firewall). Thus, simple firewall rules can be enforced by SDN packet | ||||
forwarding rules at SDN forwarding elements (e.g., switches). For | ||||
the tasks for security enforcement (e.g., packet filtering), the | ||||
Security Controller instructs the SDN Controller via NSF-Facing | ||||
Interface so that SDN forwarding elements can perform the required | ||||
security services with flow tables under the supervision of the SDN | ||||
Controller. | ||||
As an example, let us consider two different types of security rules: | As an example, let us consider two different types of security rules: | |||
Rule A is a simple packet filtering rule that checks only the IP | Rule A is a simple packet filtering rule that checks only the IP | |||
address and port number of a given packet, whereas rule B is a time- | address and port number of a given packet, whereas rule B is a time- | |||
consuming packet inspection rule for analyzing whether an attached | consuming packet inspection rule for analyzing whether an attached | |||
file being transmitted over a flow of packets contains malware. Rule | file being transmitted over a flow of packets contains malware. Rule | |||
A can be translated into packet forwarding rules of SDN forwarding | A can be translated into packet forwarding rules of SDN forwarding | |||
elements and thus be enforced by these elements. In contrast, rule B | elements and thus be enforced by these elements. In contrast, rule B | |||
cannot be enforced by forwarding elements, but it has to be enforced | cannot be enforced by forwarding elements, but it has to be enforced | |||
by NSFs with anti-malware capability. Specifically, a flow of | by NSFs with anti-malware capability. Specifically, a flow of | |||
packets is forwarded to and reassembled by an NSF to reconstruct the | packets is forwarded to and reassembled by an NSF to reconstruct the | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 15 ¶ | |||
rules requires security capabilities that can be provided by SDN | rules requires security capabilities that can be provided by SDN | |||
forwarding elements, then the Security Controller instructs the SDN | forwarding elements, then the Security Controller instructs the SDN | |||
Controller via NSF-Facing Interface so that SDN forwarding elements | Controller via NSF-Facing Interface so that SDN forwarding elements | |||
can enforce those security policy rules with flow tables under the | can enforce those security policy rules with flow tables under the | |||
supervision of the SDN Controller. Or if some rules require security | supervision of the SDN Controller. Or if some rules require security | |||
capabilities that cannot be provided by SDN forwarding elements but | capabilities that cannot be provided by SDN forwarding elements but | |||
by NSFs, then the Security Controller instructs relevant NSFs to | by NSFs, then the Security Controller instructs relevant NSFs to | |||
enforce those rules. | enforce those rules. | |||
The distinction between software-based SDN forwarding elements and | The distinction between software-based SDN forwarding elements and | |||
NSFs, which can both run as virtual network functions, may be | NSFs, which can both run as virtual network functions (VNFs), may be | |||
necessary for some management purposes in this system. For this, we | necessary for some management purposes in this system. Note that an | |||
can take advantage of the NFV MANO where there is a subsystem that | SDN forwarding element (i.e., switch) is a specific type of VNF | |||
maintains the descriptions of the capabilities each VNF can offer | rather than an NSF because an NSF is for security services rather | |||
than for packet forwarding. For this distinction, we can take | ||||
advantage of the NFV MANO where there is a subsystem that maintains | ||||
the descriptions of the capabilities each VNF can offer | ||||
[ETSI-NFV-MANO]. This subsystem can determine whether a given | [ETSI-NFV-MANO]. This subsystem can determine whether a given | |||
software element (VNF instance) is an NSF or a virtualized SDN | software element (VNF instance) is an NSF or a virtualized SDN | |||
switch. For example, if a VNF instance has anti-malware capability | switch. For example, if a VNF instance has anti-malware capability | |||
according to the description of the VNF, it could be considered as an | according to the description of the VNF, it could be considered as an | |||
NSF. A VNF onboarding system [VNF-ONBOARDING] can be used as such a | NSF. A VNF onboarding system [VNF-ONBOARDING] can be used as such a | |||
subsystem that maintains the descriptions of each VNF to tell whether | subsystem that maintains the descriptions of each VNF to tell whether | |||
a VNF instance is for an NSF or for a virtualized SDN switch. | a VNF instance is for an NSF or for a virtualized SDN switch. | |||
For the support of SFC in the I2NSF framework with SDN, as shown in | For the support of SFC in the I2NSF framework with SDN, as shown in | |||
Figure 4, network forwarding elements (e.g., switch) can play the | Figure 4, network forwarding elements (e.g., switch) can play the | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 44 ¶ | |||
Security Controller. This interface is used to update security | Security Controller. This interface is used to update security | |||
service function chaining information for traffic flows. For | service function chaining information for traffic flows. For | |||
example, when it needs to update an SFP for a traffic flow in an SDN | example, when it needs to update an SFP for a traffic flow in an SDN | |||
network, as shown in Figure 4, SFF (denoted as Switch-3) asks | network, as shown in Figure 4, SFF (denoted as Switch-3) asks | |||
Security Controller to update the SFP for the traffic flow (needing | Security Controller to update the SFP for the traffic flow (needing | |||
another security service as an NSF) via NSF-Facing Interface. This | another security service as an NSF) via NSF-Facing Interface. This | |||
update lets Security Controller ask Classifier (denoted as Switch-2) | update lets Security Controller ask Classifier (denoted as Switch-2) | |||
to update the mapping between the traffic flow and SFP in Classifier | to update the mapping between the traffic flow and SFP in Classifier | |||
via NSF-Facing Interface. | via NSF-Facing Interface. | |||
The following subsections introduce three use cases for cloud-based | The following subsections introduce three use cases from [RFC8192] | |||
security services: (i) firewall system, (ii) deep packet inspection | for cloud-based security services: (i) firewall system, (ii) deep | |||
system, and (iii) attack mitigation system. [RFC8192] | packet inspection system, and (iii) attack mitigation system. | |||
6.1. Firewall: Centralized Firewall System | 6.1. Firewall: Centralized Firewall System | |||
A centralized network firewall can manage each network resource and | A centralized network firewall can manage each network resource and | |||
apply common rules to individual network elements (e.g., switch). | apply common rules to individual network elements (e.g., switch). | |||
The centralized network firewall controls each forwarding element, | The centralized network firewall controls each forwarding element, | |||
and firewall rules can be added or deleted dynamically. | and firewall rules can be added or deleted dynamically. | |||
The procedure of firewall operations in this system is as follows: | A time-based firewall can be enforced with packet filtering rules and | |||
a time span (e.g., work hours). With this time-based firewall, a | ||||
1. A switch forwards an unknown flow's packet to one of the SDN | time-based security policy can be enforced, as explained in | |||
Controllers. | Section 4. For example, employees at a company are allowed to access | |||
social networking service websites during lunch time or after work | ||||
2. The SDN Controller forwards the unknown flow's packet to an | hours. | |||
appropriate security service application, such as the Firewall. | ||||
3. The Firewall analyzes, typically, the headers and contents of the | ||||
packet. | ||||
4. If the Firewall regards the packet as a malicious one with a | ||||
suspicious pattern, it reports the malicious packet to the SDN | ||||
Controller. | ||||
5. The SDN Controller installs new rules (e.g., drop packets with | ||||
the suspicious pattern) into underlying switches. | ||||
6. The suspected packets are dropped by these switches. | ||||
Existing SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces | ||||
between the firewall application and switches | ||||
[RFC7149][ITU-T.Y.3300][ONF-OpenFlow] [ONF-SDN-Architecture]. | ||||
Legacy firewalls have some challenges such as the expensive cost, | ||||
performance, management of access control, establishment of policy, | ||||
and packet-based access mechanism. The proposed framework can | ||||
resolve the challenges through the above centralized firewall system | ||||
based on SDN as follows: | ||||
o Cost: The cost of adding firewalls to network resources such as | ||||
routers, gateways, and switches is substantial due to the reason | ||||
that we need to add firewall on each network resource. To solve | ||||
this, each network resource can be managed centrally such that a | ||||
single firewall is manipulated by a centralized server. | ||||
o Performance: The performance of firewalls is often slower than the | ||||
link speed of network interfaces. Every network resource for | ||||
firewall needs to check firewall rules according to network | ||||
conditions. Firewalls can be adaptively deployed among network | ||||
switches, depending on network conditions in the framework. | ||||
o The management of access control: Since there may be hundreds of | ||||
network resources in a network, the dynamic management of access | ||||
control for security services like firewall is a challenge. In | ||||
the framework, firewall rules can be dynamically added for new | ||||
malware. | ||||
o The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each | ||||
network resource. However, it is difficult to describe what flows | ||||
are permitted or denied for firewall within a specific | ||||
organization network under management. Thus, a centralized view | ||||
is helpful to determine security policies for such a network. | ||||
o Packet-based access mechanism: Packet-based access mechanism is | ||||
not enough for firewall in practice since the basic unit of access | ||||
control is usually users or applications. Therefore, application | ||||
level rules can be defined and added to the firewall system | ||||
through the centralized server. | ||||
6.2. Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security System | 6.2. Deep Packet Inspection: Centralized VoIP/VoLTE Security System | |||
A centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can monitor each VoIP/VoLTE | A centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can monitor each VoIP/VoLTE | |||
flow and manage VoIP/VoLTE security rules, according to the | flow and manage VoIP/VoLTE security rules, according to the | |||
configuration of a VoIP/VoLTE security service called VoIP Intrusion | configuration of a VoIP/VoLTE security service called VoIP Intrusion | |||
Prevention System (IPS). This centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system | Prevention System (IPS). This centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system | |||
controls each switch for the VoIP/VoLTE call flow management by | controls each switch for the VoIP/VoLTE call flow management by | |||
manipulating the rules that can be added, deleted or modified | manipulating the rules that can be added, deleted or modified | |||
dynamically. | dynamically. | |||
The centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can cooperate with a | The centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system can cooperate with a | |||
network firewall to realize VoIP/VoLTE security service. | network firewall to realize VoIP/VoLTE security service. | |||
Specifically, a network firewall performs the basic security check of | Specifically, a network firewall performs the basic security check of | |||
an unknown flow's packet observed by a switch. If the network | an unknown flow's packet observed by a switch. If the network | |||
firewall detects that the packet is an unknown VoIP call flow's | firewall detects that the packet is an unknown VoIP call flow's | |||
packet that exhibits some suspicious patterns, then it triggers the | packet that exhibits some suspicious patterns, then it triggers the | |||
VoIP/VoLTE security system for more specialized security analysis of | VoIP/VoLTE security system for more specialized security analysis of | |||
the suspicious VoIP call packet. | the suspicious VoIP call packet. | |||
The procedure of VoIP/VoLTE security operations in this system is as | ||||
follows: | ||||
1. A switch forwards an unknown flow's packet to the SDN Controller, | ||||
and the SDN Controller further forwards the unknown flow's packet | ||||
to the Firewall for basic security inspection. | ||||
2. The Firewall analyzes the header fields of the packet, and | ||||
figures out that this is an unknown VoIP call flow's signal | ||||
packet (e.g., SIP packet) of a suspicious pattern. | ||||
3. The Firewall triggers an appropriate security service function, | ||||
such as VoIP IPS, for detailed security analysis of the | ||||
suspicious signal packet. In order for this triggering of VoIP | ||||
IPS to be served, the suspicious packet is sent to the Service | ||||
Function Forwarder (SFF) that is usually a switch in an SDN | ||||
network, as shown in Figure 4. The SFF forwards the suspicious | ||||
signal packet to the VoIP IPS. | ||||
4. The VoIP IPS analyzes the headers and contents of the signal | ||||
packet, such as calling number and session description headers | ||||
[RFC4566]. | ||||
5. If, for example, the VoIP IPS regards the packet as a spoofed | ||||
packet by hackers or a scanning packet searching for VoIP/VoLTE | ||||
devices, it drops the packet. In addition, the VoIP IPS requests | ||||
the SDN Controller to block that packet and the subsequent | ||||
packets that have the same call-id. | ||||
6. The SDN Controller installs new rules (e.g., drop packets) into | ||||
underlying switches. | ||||
7. The malicious packets are dropped by these switches. | ||||
Existing SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces | ||||
between the VoIP IPS application and switches [RFC7149][ITU-T.Y.3300] | ||||
[ONF-OpenFlow][ONF-SDN-Architecture]. | ||||
Legacy hardware based VoIP IPS has some challenges, such as | ||||
provisioning time, the granularity of security, expensive cost, and | ||||
the establishment of policy. The I2NSF framework can resolve the | ||||
challenges through the above centralized VoIP/VoLTE security system | ||||
based on SDN as follows: | ||||
o Provisioning: The provisioning time of setting up a legacy VoIP | ||||
IPS to network is substantial because it takes from some hours to | ||||
some days. By managing the network resources centrally, VoIP IPS | ||||
can provide more agility in provisioning both virtual and physical | ||||
network resources from a central location. | ||||
o The granularity of security: The security rules of a legacy VoIP | ||||
IPS are compounded considering the granularity of security. The | ||||
proposed framework can provide more granular security by | ||||
centralizing security control into a switch controller. The VoIP | ||||
IPS can effectively manage security rules throughout the network. | ||||
o Cost: The cost of adding VoIP IPS to network resources, such as | ||||
routers, gateways, and switches is substantial due to the reason | ||||
that we need to add VoIP IPS on each network resource. To solve | ||||
this, each network resource can be managed centrally such that a | ||||
single VoIP IPS is manipulated by a centralized server. | ||||
o The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each | ||||
network resource. However, it is difficult to describe what flows | ||||
are permitted or denied for VoIP IPS within a specific | ||||
organization network under management. Thus, a centralized view | ||||
is helpful to determine security policies for such a network. | ||||
6.3. Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation System | 6.3. Attack Mitigation: Centralized DDoS-attack Mitigation System | |||
A centralized DDoS-attack mitigation can manage each network resource | A centralized DDoS-attack mitigation can manage each network resource | |||
and configure rules to each switch for DDoS-attack mitigation (called | and configure rules to each switch for DDoS-attack mitigation (called | |||
DDoS-attack Mitigator) on a common server. The centralized DDoS- | DDoS-attack Mitigator) on a common server. The centralized DDoS- | |||
attack mitigation system defends servers against DDoS attacks outside | attack mitigation system defends servers against DDoS attacks outside | |||
the private network, that is, from public networks. | the private network, that is, from public networks. | |||
Servers are categorized into stateless servers (e.g., DNS servers) | Servers are categorized into stateless servers (e.g., DNS servers) | |||
and stateful servers (e.g., web servers). For DDoS-attack | and stateful servers (e.g., web servers). For DDoS-attack | |||
mitigation, the forwarding of traffic flows in switches can be | mitigation, the forwarding of traffic flows in switches can be | |||
dynamically configured such that malicious traffic flows are handled | dynamically configured such that malicious traffic flows are handled | |||
by the paths separated from normal traffic flows in order to minimize | by the paths separated from normal traffic flows in order to minimize | |||
the impact of those malicious traffic on the the servers. This flow | the impact of those malicious traffic on the servers. This flow path | |||
path separation can be done by a flow forwarding path management | separation can be done by a flow forwarding path management scheme | |||
scheme based on [AVANT-GUARD]. This management should consider the | based on [AVANT-GUARD]. This management should consider the load | |||
load balance among the switches for the defense against DDoS attacks. | balance among the switches for the defense against DDoS attacks. | |||
The procedure of DDoS-attack mitigation in this system is as follows: | ||||
1. A Switch periodically reports an inter-arrival pattern of a | ||||
flow's packets to one of the SDN Controllers. | ||||
2. The SDN Controller forwards the flow's inter-arrival pattern to | ||||
an appropriate security service application, such as DDoS-attack | ||||
Mitigator. | ||||
3. The DDoS-attack Mitigator analyzes the reported pattern for the | ||||
flow. | ||||
4. If the DDoS-attack Mitigator regards the pattern as a DDoS | ||||
attack, it computes a packet dropping probability corresponding | ||||
to suspiciousness level and reports this DDoS-attack flow to the | ||||
SDN Controller. | ||||
5. The SDN Controller installs new rules into switches (e.g., | ||||
forward packets with the suspicious inter-arrival pattern with a | ||||
dropping probability). | ||||
6. The suspicious flow's packets are randomly dropped by switches | ||||
with the dropping probability. | ||||
For the above centralized DDoS-attack mitigation system, the existing | ||||
SDN protocols can be used through standard interfaces between the | ||||
DDoS-attack mitigator application and switches [RFC7149] | ||||
[ITU-T.Y.3300][ONF-OpenFlow][ONF-SDN-Architecture]. | ||||
The centralized DDoS-attack mitigation system has challenges similar | ||||
to the centralized firewall system. The proposed framework can | ||||
resolve the challenges through the above centralized DDoS-attack | ||||
mitigation system based on SDN as follows: | ||||
o Cost: The cost of adding DDoS-attack mitigators to network | ||||
resources such as routers, gateways, and switches is substantial | ||||
due to the reason that we need to add DDoS-attack mitigator on | ||||
each network resource. To solve this, each network resource can | ||||
be managed centrally such that a single DDoS-attack mitigator is | ||||
manipulated by a centralized server. | ||||
o Performance: The performance of DDoS-attack mitigators is often | ||||
slower than the link speed of network interfaces. The checking of | ||||
DDoS attacks may reduce the performance of the network interfaces. | ||||
DDoS-attack mitigators can be adaptively deployed among network | ||||
switches, depending on network conditions in the framework. | ||||
o The management of network resources: Since there may be hundreds | ||||
of network resources in an administered network, the dynamic | ||||
management of network resources for performance (e.g., load | ||||
balancing) is a challenge for DDoS-attack mitigation. In the | ||||
framework, for dynamic network resource management, a flow | ||||
forwarding path management scheme can handle the load balancing of | ||||
network switches [AVANT-GUARD]. With this management scheme, the | ||||
current and near-future workload can be spread among the network | ||||
switches for DDoS-attack mitigation. In addition, DDoS-attack | ||||
mitigation rules can be dynamically added for new DDoS attacks. | ||||
o The establishment of policy: Policy should be established for each | ||||
network resource. However, it is difficult to describe what flows | ||||
are permitted or denied for new DDoS-attacks (e.g., DNS reflection | ||||
attack) within a specific organization network under management. | ||||
Thus, a centralized view is helpful to determine security policies | ||||
for such a network. | ||||
So far this section has described the procedure and impact of the | So far this section has described the three use cases for network- | |||
three use cases for network-based security services using the I2NSF | based security services using the I2NSF framework with SDN networks. | |||
framework with SDN networks. To support these use cases in the | To support these use cases in the proposed data-driven security | |||
proposed data-driven security service framework, YANG data models | service framework, YANG data models described in | |||
described in [consumer-facing-inf-dm], [nsf-facing-inf-dm], and | [consumer-facing-inf-dm], [nsf-facing-inf-dm], and | |||
[registration-inf-dm] can be used as Consumer-Facing Interface, NSF- | [registration-inf-dm] can be used as Consumer-Facing Interface, NSF- | |||
Facing Interface, and Registration Interface, respectively, along | Facing Interface, and Registration Interface, respectively, along | |||
with RESTCONF [RFC8040] and NETCONF [RFC6241]. | with RESTCONF [RFC8040] and NETCONF [RFC6241]. | |||
+--------------------+ | +--------------------+ | |||
+-------------------------------------------+ | ---------------- | | +-------------------------------------------+ | ---------------- | | |||
| I2NSF User (OSS/BSS) | | | NFV | | | | I2NSF User (OSS/BSS) | | | NFV | | | |||
+------+------------------------------------+ | | Orchestrator +-+ | | +------+------------------------------------+ | | Orchestrator +-+ | | |||
| Consumer-Facing Interface | -----+---------- | | | | Consumer-Facing Interface | -----+---------- | | | |||
+------|------------------------------------+ | | | | | +------|------------------------------------+ | | | | | |||
skipping to change at page 19, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 20 ¶ | |||
on security requirements. In order to take advantages of the NFV | on security requirements. In order to take advantages of the NFV | |||
technology, the I2NSF framework can be implemented on top of an NFV | technology, the I2NSF framework can be implemented on top of an NFV | |||
infrastructure as show in Figure 5. | infrastructure as show in Figure 5. | |||
Figure 5 shows an I2NSF framework implementation based on the NFV | Figure 5 shows an I2NSF framework implementation based on the NFV | |||
reference architecture that the European Telecommunications Standards | reference architecture that the European Telecommunications Standards | |||
Institute (ETSI) defines [ETSI-NFV]. The NSFs are deployed as | Institute (ETSI) defines [ETSI-NFV]. The NSFs are deployed as | |||
virtual network functions (VNFs) in Figure 5. The Developer's | virtual network functions (VNFs) in Figure 5. The Developer's | |||
Management System (DMS) in the I2NSF framework is responsible for | Management System (DMS) in the I2NSF framework is responsible for | |||
registering capability information of NSFs into the Security | registering capability information of NSFs into the Security | |||
Controller. Those NSFs are created or removed by a virtual network | Controller. However, those NSFs are created or removed by a virtual | |||
functions manager (VNFM) in the NFV architecture that performs the | network functions manager (VNFM) in the NFV MANO that performs the | |||
life-cycle management of VNFs. The Security Controller controls and | life-cycle management of VNFs. Note that the life-cycle management | |||
monitors the configurations (e.g., function parameters and security | of VNFs are out of scope for I2NSF. The Security Controller controls | |||
policy rules) of VNFs. Both the DMS and Security Controller can be | and monitors the configurations (e.g., function parameters and | |||
implemented as the Element Managements (EMs) in the NFV architecture. | security policy rules) of VNFs via NSF-Facing Interface along with | |||
Finally, the I2NSF User can be implemented as OSS/BSS (Operational | NSF monitoring capability [nsf-facing-inf-dm][nsf-monitoring-dm]. | |||
Support Systems/Business Support Systems) in the NFV architecture | Both the DMS and Security Controller can be implemented as the | |||
that provides interfaces for users in the NFV system. | Element Managements (EMs) in the NFV architecture. Finally, the | |||
I2NSF User can be implemented as OSS/BSS (Operational Support | ||||
Systems/Business Support Systems) in the NFV architecture that | ||||
provides interfaces for users in the NFV system. | ||||
The operation procedure in the I2NSF framework based on the NFV | The operation procedure in the I2NSF framework based on the NFV | |||
architecture is as follows: | architecture is as follows: | |||
1. The VNFM has a set of virtual machine (VM) images of NSFs, and | 1. The VNFM has a set of virtual machine (VM) images of NSFs, and | |||
each VM image can be used to create an NSF instance that provides | each VM image can be used to create an NSF instance that provides | |||
a set of security capabilities. The DMS initially registers a | a set of security capabilities. The DMS initially registers a | |||
mapping table of the ID of each VM image and the set of | mapping table of the ID of each VM image and the set of | |||
capabilities that can be provided by an NSF instance created from | capabilities that can be provided by an NSF instance created from | |||
the VM image into the Security Controller. | the VM image into the Security Controller. | |||
skipping to change at page 20, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 24 ¶ | |||
6. After being notified of the created NSF instance, the Security | 6. After being notified of the created NSF instance, the Security | |||
Controller delivers low-level security policy rules to the NSF | Controller delivers low-level security policy rules to the NSF | |||
instance for policy enforcement. | instance for policy enforcement. | |||
We can conclude that the I2NSF framework can be implemented based on | We can conclude that the I2NSF framework can be implemented based on | |||
the NFV architecture framework. Note that the registration of the | the NFV architecture framework. Note that the registration of the | |||
capabilities of NSFs is performed through the Registration Interface | capabilities of NSFs is performed through the Registration Interface | |||
and the lifecycle management for NSFs (VNFs) is performed through the | and the lifecycle management for NSFs (VNFs) is performed through the | |||
Ve-Vnfm interface between the DMS and VNFM, as shown in Figure 5. | Ve-Vnfm interface between the DMS and VNFM, as shown in Figure 5. | |||
More details about the I2NSF framework based on the NFV reference | ||||
architecture are described in [i2nsf-nfv-architecture]. | ||||
8. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
The same security considerations for the I2NSF framework [RFC8329] | The same security considerations for the I2NSF framework [RFC8329] | |||
are applicable to this document. | are applicable to this document. | |||
This document shares all the security issues of SDN that are | This document shares all the security issues of SDN that are | |||
specified in the "Security Considerations" section of [ITU-T.Y.3300]. | specified in the "Security Considerations" section of [ITU-T.Y.3300]. | |||
9. Acknowledgments | 9. Acknowledgments | |||
skipping to change at page 21, line 47 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 39 ¶ | |||
Available: https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.3300-201406-I, | Available: https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.3300-201406-I, | |||
June 2014. | June 2014. | |||
[NFV-Terminology] | [NFV-Terminology] | |||
"Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Terminology for | "Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Terminology for | |||
Main Concepts in NFV", Available: | Main Concepts in NFV", Available: | |||
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/ | https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/ | |||
NFV/001_099/003/01.02.01_60/gs_nfv003v010201p.pdf, | NFV/001_099/003/01.02.01_60/gs_nfv003v010201p.pdf, | |||
December 2014. | December 2014. | |||
[ONF-OpenFlow] | ||||
"OpenFlow Switch Specification (Version 1.4.0)", | ||||
Available: https://www.opennetworking.org/wp- | ||||
content/uploads/2014/10/openflow-spec-v1.4.0.pdf, October | ||||
2013. | ||||
[ONF-SDN-Architecture] | [ONF-SDN-Architecture] | |||
"SDN Architecture (Issue 1.1)", Available: | "SDN Architecture (Issue 1.1)", Available: | |||
https://www.opennetworking.org/wp- | https://www.opennetworking.org/wp- | |||
content/uploads/2014/10/TR- | content/uploads/2014/10/TR- | |||
521_SDN_Architecture_issue_1.1.pdf, June 2016. | 521_SDN_Architecture_issue_1.1.pdf, June 2016. | |||
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the | [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the | |||
Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, | Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, | |||
October 2010. | October 2010. | |||
skipping to change at page 23, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 47 ¶ | |||
ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-03 (work in | ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-03 (work in | |||
progress), March 2019. | progress), March 2019. | |||
[ETSI-NFV-MANO] | [ETSI-NFV-MANO] | |||
"Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Management and | "Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Management and | |||
Orchestration", Available: | Orchestration", Available: | |||
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/nfv- | https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/nfv- | |||
man/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_nfv-man001v010101p.pdf, | man/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_nfv-man001v010101p.pdf, | |||
December 2014. | December 2014. | |||
[i2nsf-nfv-architecture] | ||||
Yang, H., Kim, Y., Jeong, J., and J. Kim, "I2NSF on the | ||||
NFV Reference Architecture", draft-yang-i2nsf-nfv- | ||||
architecture-04 (work in progress), November 2018. | ||||
[i2nsf-nsf-cap-im] | ||||
Xia, L., Strassner, J., Basile, C., and D. Lopez, | ||||
"Information Model of NSFs Capabilities", draft-ietf- | ||||
i2nsf-capability-04 (work in progress), October 2018. | ||||
[i2nsf-terminology] | [i2nsf-terminology] | |||
Hares, S., Strassner, J., Lopez, D., Xia, L., and H. | Hares, S., Strassner, J., Lopez, D., Xia, L., and H. | |||
Birkholz, "Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) | Birkholz, "Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) | |||
Terminology", draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-07 (work in | Terminology", draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology-07 (work in | |||
progress), January 2019. | progress), January 2019. | |||
[ITU-T.X.1252] | ||||
"Baseline Identity Management Terms and Definitions", | ||||
April 2010. | ||||
[ITU-T.X.800] | [ITU-T.X.800] | |||
"Security Architecture for Open Systems Interconnection | "Security Architecture for Open Systems Interconnection | |||
for CCITT Applications", March 1991. | for CCITT Applications", March 1991. | |||
[nsf-facing-inf-dm] | [nsf-facing-inf-dm] | |||
Kim, J., Jeong, J., Park, J., Hares, S., and Q. Lin, | Kim, J., Jeong, J., Park, J., Hares, S., and Q. Lin, | |||
"I2NSF Network Security Function-Facing Interface YANG | "I2NSF Network Security Function-Facing Interface YANG | |||
Data Model", draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-03 | Data Model", draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-03 | |||
(work in progress), March 2019. | (work in progress), March 2019. | |||
[nsf-monitoring-dm] | [nsf-monitoring-dm] | |||
Jeong, J., Chung, C., Hares, S., Xia, L., and H. Birkholz, | Jeong, J., Chung, C., Hares, S., Xia, L., and H. Birkholz, | |||
"A YANG Data Model for Monitoring I2NSF Network Security | "A YANG Data Model for Monitoring I2NSF Network Security | |||
Functions", draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-00 | Functions", draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model-00 | |||
(work in progress), March 2019. | (work in progress), March 2019. | |||
[nsf-triggered-steering] | ||||
Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Park, J., and S. Hares, "Service | ||||
Function Chaining-Enabled I2NSF Architecture", draft-hyun- | ||||
i2nsf-nsf-triggered-steering-06 (work in progress), July | ||||
2018. | ||||
[opsawg-firewalls] | [opsawg-firewalls] | |||
Baker, F. and P. Hoffman, "On Firewalls in Internet | Baker, F. and P. Hoffman, "On Firewalls in Internet | |||
Security", draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-01 (work in | Security", draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-01 (work in | |||
progress), October 2012. | progress), October 2012. | |||
[policy-translation] | [policy-translation] | |||
Yang, J., Jeong, J., and J. Kim, "Security Policy | Yang, J., Jeong, J., and J. Kim, "Security Policy | |||
Translation in Interface to Network Security Functions", | Translation in Interface to Network Security Functions", | |||
draft-yang-i2nsf-security-policy-translation-03 (work in | draft-yang-i2nsf-security-policy-translation-03 (work in | |||
progress), March 2019. | progress), March 2019. | |||
[registration-inf-dm] | [registration-inf-dm] | |||
Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Roh, T., Wi, S., and J. Park, "I2NSF | Hyun, S., Jeong, J., Roh, T., Wi, S., and J. Park, "I2NSF | |||
Registration Interface YANG Data Model", draft-ietf-i2nsf- | Registration Interface YANG Data Model", draft-ietf-i2nsf- | |||
registration-interface-dm-02 (work in progress), March | registration-interface-dm-02 (work in progress), March | |||
2019. | 2019. | |||
[RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session | ||||
Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006. | ||||
[VNF-ONBOARDING] | [VNF-ONBOARDING] | |||
"VNF Onboarding", Available: | "VNF Onboarding", Available: | |||
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/mano/VNF+Onboarding, | https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/mano/VNF+Onboarding, | |||
November 2016. | November 2016. | |||
Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-08 | Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-i2nsf-applicability-09 | |||
The following changes have been made from draft-ietf-i2nsf- | The following changes have been made from draft-ietf-i2nsf- | |||
applicability-08: | applicability-09: | |||
o This version has reflected the additional comments from Eric | o This version has reflected the questions and comments from Roman | |||
Rescorla who is a Security Area Director as follows. | Danyliw who is a Security Area Director as follows. | |||
o In Section 3, for a Developer's Management System, the problem of | o In Section 1, the description of I2NSF components and interfaces | |||
an inside attacker is addressed, and a possible solution for the | is clarified with typo correction. | |||
inside attacks is suggested through I2NSF NSF monitoring | ||||
functionality. Also, some restrictions on the role of the DMS are | ||||
required to deal with the inside attacks. | ||||
o In Section 4, an XML code for the time-dependent web access | o In Section 2, unnecessary references are deleted, and the | |||
control is explained as an example. | definition of a term "NSF" is clarified with the I2NSF terminology | |||
draft [i2nsf-terminology]. | ||||
o In Section 3, inside attacks at DMS or I2NSF User are described | ||||
clearly along with feasible counterattacks against those inside | ||||
attacks. Also, the usage of RESTCONF and NETCONF with YANG data | ||||
model language is clarified for three I2NSF interfaces such as the | ||||
Consumer-Facing Interface, NSF-Facing Interface, and Registration | ||||
Interface. | ||||
o In Section 4, a real XML code for the time-dependent web access | ||||
control is added for the Consumer-Facing Interface as an example. | ||||
o In Section 5, the network service header (NSH) as a reference is | ||||
added for the metadata format for I2NSF traffic steering based on | ||||
SFC. | ||||
o In Section 6, the definitions of an SDN forwarding element and an | o In Section 6, the definitions of an SDN forwarding element and an | |||
NSF are clarified such that an SDN forwarding element is a switch | NSF are clarified. Also, the optimization of an SDN-and-NFV-based | |||
running as either a hardware middle box or a software virtual | firewall is explained clearly in terms of delay and network | |||
switch, and an NSF is a virtual network function for a security | bandwidth saving. | |||
service. It also discusses about how to determine whether a given | ||||
software element in virtualized environments is an NSF or a | ||||
virtualized switch. | ||||
Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
Jaehoon Paul Jeong | Jaehoon Paul Jeong | |||
Department of Software | Department of Software | |||
Sungkyunkwan University | Sungkyunkwan University | |||
2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu | 2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu | |||
Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419 | Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419 | |||
Republic of Korea | Republic of Korea | |||
End of changes. 47 change blocks. | ||||
402 lines changed or deleted | 291 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |