Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01.txt

["Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dots <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of
> [e-mail]
> Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 3:07 PM
> To: Jon Shallow ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01.txt
> 
> CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> FYI, a review from Jon is available at: https://github.com/boucadair/draft-
> dots-telemetry/raw/master/DOTS%20Telemetry%2001-rev%20Jon-
> res%20Med.docx
> 
> -02 will integrate almost all comments from  Jon. Please find below some
> points we would like to hear more from the working group:
> 
> (1) key value range for telemetry: Jon raised this point "These keys requires 3
> bytes - and telemetry information is going to be difficult to fit into a packet.  I
> appreciate that comprehension-required Is for numbers less than 0x8000 -
> perhaps the comprehension-required range is reduced and also has a section
> higher up so the total of 0x8000 still stands so less bytes can be used here."
> 
>    +----------------------+-------+-------+------------+---------------+
>    | Parameter Name       | CBOR  | CBOR  | Change     | Specification |
>    |                      | Key   | Major | Controller | Document(s)   |
>    |                      | Value | Type  |            |               |
>    +----------------------+-------+-------+------------+---------------+
>    | ietf-dots-signal-cha | 32776 |   5   |    IESG    |   [RFCXXXX]   |
>    | nnel:telemetry       |       |       |            |               |
> 
> Med: This is a major one. We need to assess the gain, but it is possible in
> theory to update our assignment policies and reassign, e.g., 128-255 range to
> be comprehension-optional (specific for telemetry). This would mean that
> the telemetry spec will be tagged as updating the base signal channel spec.
> We need more discussion.

Why not change the DOTS telemetry attributes to comprehension-required ?
If the server does not understand the DOTS telemetry attributes, it will respond with 4.00 error response, and the client can re-send the request without the DOTS telemetry attributes.

Cheers,
-Tiru

> 
> (2) server-initiated-telemetry: "Having server-initiated-telemetry under
> max-config-values, but not min-config-values makes no sense to me.  I think
> it should be under telemetry-config at the level of current-config and
> possibly removed from current-config as well."
> 
> Med:
> 
> A. It is in the max container because setting that value to "false" under that
> container has a special meaning: the server does not support sending pre-
> mitigation telemetry. We can put it under min as well but do we have a case
> where setting it to "true" has a meaning?
> B. I do agree that 'server-initiated-telemetry' can be removed from the
> current configuration because the same functionality is achieved using a
> GET+Observe but we left it there for the moment as we need to work
> further the details for subscribing to pre-mitigation from the servers.
> 
> (3) "vendor-id is missing from the cbor table":
> 
> Med: This was done on purpose to try to optimize the number of CBOR key
> values + encourage attributes reuse. E.g., We replaced "telemetry-id",
> "baseline-id", and "vendor-id" with a single "id" (as we only use those for the
> moment in the message body) but the YANG module includes the meaning
> of each "id" in the definition clause. We may need to revise this if we
> conclude that, e.g., "telemetry-id" (tmid) has to be defined as Path-URI.
> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Dots [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de
> > [e-mail] Envoyé : vendredi 31 janvier 2020 16:18
> À
> > : [e-mail] Objet : Re: [Dots] I-D Action:
> > draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01.txt
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We prepared with Tiru a major revision of the telemetry draft. A diff
> > is provided below to track the changes. We will now focus on sections
> > 7 and 8.
> >
> > Please review and share comments.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Med
> >
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : Dots [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de internet-
> > > [e-mail] Envoyé : vendredi 31 janvier 2020 15:52 À :
> > > [e-mail] Cc : [e-mail] Objet : [Dots] I-D Action:
> > > draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01.txt
> > >
> > >
> > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> > > directories.
> > > This draft is a work item of the DDoS Open Threat Signaling WG of
> > the
> > > IETF.
> > >
> > >         Title           : Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat
> > > Signaling (DOTS) Telemetry
> > >         Authors         : Mohamed Boucadair
> > >                           Tirumaleswar Reddy
> > >                           Ehud Doron
> > >                           Meiling Chen
> > > 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01.txt
> > > 	Pages           : 70
> > > 	Date            : 2020-01-31
> > >
> > > Abstract:
> > >    This document aims to enrich DOTS signal channel protocol with
> > >    various telemetry attributes allowing optimal DDoS attack
> > > mitigation.
> > >    This document specifies the normal traffic baseline and attack
> > >    traffic telemetry attributes a DOTS client can convey to its DOTS
> > >    server in the mitigation request, the mitigation status telemetry
> > >    attributes a DOTS server can communicate to a DOTS client, and
> > the
> > >    mitigation efficacy telemetry attributes a DOTS client can
> > >    communicate to a DOTS server.  The telemetry attributes can
> > assist
> > >    the mitigator to choose the DDoS mitigation techniques and
> > perform
> > >    optimal DDoS attack mitigation.
> > >
> > >
> > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dots-telemetry/
> > >
> > > There are also htmlized versions available at:
> > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01
> > >
> > > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-01
> > >
> > >
> > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> > > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> > > tools.ietf.org.
> > >
> > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dots mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dots mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dots mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots