Re: [I2nsf] Is the "Security Service Function (SSF)" in draft-mglt-i2nsf-ssf-collaboration same as the NSF defined by the I2NSF-problem-and-use-cases?

Hi Susan,

I deeply apology for not having read carefully the
draft-hares-i2nsf-ddos-yang-dm-00, but my understanding is that our
protocol would – for example – end up in agreeing using inter-cloud-ddos
NSF with the inter-cloud-ddos NETCONF/YANG model. The remaining
configuration NETCONF/YANG will be done outside of our protocol.

We wondered whether using YANG or JSON and we decided to use JSON as
YANG seemed to us non appropriated for our protocol. That said we
might be completely wrong and would be happy to change if necessary.
The reasoning behind was:
I saw NETCONF/YANG as one way to get operational data or to push a
configuration. In our case, the collaboration agreement seemed
different from a configuration file as a given attribute may have a
preset of values. “A”, “B”, “C” and “D”, but the cloud and the
cloudlet may have different policies regarding the attribute. For
example the cloud only accepts “A” “B” and “C” and the cloudlet only
accepts “C” and “D”. In that sense, the purpose of the our protocol is
to let the cloud announce to the cloudlet that it only accepts answers
that are in “A” “B” “C” , and let the cloudlet responds with “C”.

One way to do that in YANG would be to have attributes like:

Attribute-proposal-list and Attribute-chosen, but I am not sure that
is really appropriated.

We are happy to receive feed back on your opinion using YANG/JSON!

BR,
Daniel

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> Linda and Daniel:
>
>
>
> To follow-up on Linda’s second question,  this draft appears to be similar
> to the draft-inter-cloud-DDOS Yang model (draft-hares-i2nsf-ddos-yang-dm-00).
> Is it reasonable to have to different yang models or to make one an
> augmentation of the other data model?
>
>
>
> It might make sense to have a general collaboration model for inter-domain
> SSF functions with the DDOS Yang model as a sub-function.  I’ll send some
> Yang model interactions offline.
>
>
>
> Sue
>
>
>
> *From:* I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Linda Dunbar
> *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2016 5:59 PM
> *To:* 'Daniel Migault'; Alireza Ranjbar; i2nsf@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [I2nsf] Is the “Security Service Function (SSF)” in
> draft-mglt-i2nsf-ssf-collaboration same as the NSF defined by the
> I2NSF-problem-and-use-cases?
>
>
>
> Daniel and Alirezza,
>
>
>
> Is the “Security Service Function (SSF)” in your draft equivalent to the
> Network Security Function (NSF) defined in https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-
> ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-01.pdf  ?
>
>
>
>
>
> NSF: Network Security Function. An NSF is a function that detects abnormal
> activity and blocks/mitigates the effect of such abnormal activity in order
> to preserve the availability of a network or a service. In addition, the
> NSF can help in supporting communication stream integrity and
> confidentiality.
>
>
>
> Flow-based NSF: An NSF which inspects network flows according to a
>
> security policy. Flow-based security also means that packets are
>
> inspected in the order they are received, and without altering
>
> packets due to the inspection process (e.g., MAC rewrites, TTL
>
> decrement action, or NAT inspection or changes).
>
>
>
>
>
> If they are the same, can you change the terminology? If they are
> different, can you elaborate the differences in your draft?
>
>
>
>
>
> Second question:
>
> When the “Cloud based services” need network provider to enforce certain
> flow rules for the traffic destined to (originated from) the “Cloud based
> services”, do you anticipate those flow rules to be applied to specific
> SSFs belonging to different administrators?  Or can those rules be to the
> “controller” of the SSFs belonging to network providers?  As described by
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kumar-i2nsf-controller-northbound-
> framework/ ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Linda
>
> _______________________________________________
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>