[PANRG] draft-rass-panrg-mpath-usecase

<Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de> Thu, 28 March 2019 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de>
X-Original-To: panrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: panrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A73120499 for <panrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telekom.de
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FS5RAh305-22 for <panrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:23:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout21.telekom.de (mailout21.telekom.de [194.25.225.215]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D48912048B for <panrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telekom.de; i=@telekom.de; q=dns/txt; s=dtag1; t=1553783010; x=1585319010; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=U04SYmX+KU4tUYrokNJxkZgG6qEJBCZ+GxWP0U9+oso=; b=mToDHONpTsyZh4x9XY9niCuMsBbYxVn56U7IBdHti5LW+lfm51dh9ljL BIaCz3y1PPiOIV52chREmTd4yL34q8dE0KIKqC4qUuaoz217Yxg6pGSTP m4yalkc3HbMvjaKb5QN2p3lvcbuNS69pGGHt1EZ1IiR9JSHZMDil9gfwM PQU0pq8QmYip7+F8HmxMhE5dap5S5CjhZL7cve5WLH4mBuZf9bTwhueo3 pxNcIfkXxDRDvRKIYuFtqtIP7HoKyvC9E8HhB6zZ93g4c8VHBbuDktQmW vmnRtxWye6sAsEz260hMvcml5pE2c1gl6+ZOvIRr5hiqLPOPIz6kmZaDQ w==;
Received: from qdec94.de.t-internal.com ([10.171.255.41]) by MAILOUT21.dmznet.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Mar 2019 15:23:27 +0100
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,280,1549926000"; d="scan'208,217";a="391897082"
Received: from he105871.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.169.118.68]) by QDEC97.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 28 Mar 2019 15:23:26 +0100
Received: from HE101946.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.82) by HE105871.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.68) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:23:25 +0100
Received: from HE106564.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.171.40.16) by HE101946.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.118.82) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:23:25 +0100
Received: from GER01-FRA-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.de (51.4.80.18) by O365mail01.telekom.de (172.30.0.234) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:23:25 +0100
Received: from LEJPR01MB0460.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE (10.158.142.153) by LEJPR01MB0458.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE (10.158.142.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1730.18; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:23:25 +0000
Received: from LEJPR01MB0460.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE ([fe80::6846:71f5:e7d1:f189]) by LEJPR01MB0460.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE ([fe80::6846:71f5:e7d1:f189%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1730.019; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:23:25 +0000
From: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
To: stefan.rass@aau.at
CC: yingzhen.qu@Huawei.com, lin.han@Huawei.com, panrg@irtf.org, ietf@trammell.ch
Thread-Topic: draft-rass-panrg-mpath-usecase
Thread-Index: AdTlbormHOVqAJilSy+eOsBwQ+x38A==
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:23:25 +0000
Message-ID: <LEJPR01MB0460CD485E061E2AF4DF34C29C590@LEJPR01MB0460.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [164.19.3.219]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ae4b2650-a8c9-4a52-c114-08d6b388f075
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:LEJPR01MB0458;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: LEJPR01MB0458:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <LEJPR01MB0458A491442787F2063CAA489C590@LEJPR01MB0458.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
x-forefront-prvs: 0990C54589
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(199004)(189003)(33656002)(8676002)(86362001)(54906003)(19627235002)(478600001)(5640700003)(2906002)(106356001)(2351001)(790700001)(2501003)(68736007)(81166006)(75402003)(186003)(81156014)(6116002)(14454004)(105586002)(71190400001)(14444005)(71200400001)(3846002)(26005)(72206003)(256004)(6916009)(66066001)(53936002)(54896002)(7696005)(6306002)(52396003)(74482002)(476003)(4326008)(102836004)(316002)(55016002)(7736002)(8936002)(97736004)(9686003)(486006)(5660300002)(66574012); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:LEJPR01MB0458; H:LEJPR01MB0460.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: telekom.de does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: hE5wOYjOyt+7ohFq7F4myGQpE4FNhmi6Oe2oEDJ5lP8iLGN2QippZhnVTUkKYpuFxTMUHqGO1MXuhemnGwCLsa5G1f2D2BG/m3jRnQzT6n/tNKD9NDi/JsRIMme6dLyswYJQ9lQZ5EHMA6TLNcGfCSwfoCwZPNK0pgfz7Prq3wW+DNBBuHMCYUk7AbbDw9wqDkRGXc5NeaUJNZL73BGA5TwqACFGT2FNbR7KlAo2zJ77xjmbJ4vjt2SoXbYjLVJ0tHZ18BNWQLVLQBxWsfBJry4nW5hcbc6Vm72y4Xa5xJprWCv6JYYLS3Tlf+JXsB6vIEf3W7jBqSRDCB+hXoz5Qjp8diLnpjcGolYbz3eAycG2gvI/3+oeU9KJ36w1fjNXX0ZYJnTfZz0ZSAGsZyzk38U5kdiQIwm+GuRrjCn0an8=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_LEJPR01MB0460CD485E061E2AF4DF34C29C590LEJPR01MB0460DEUP_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ae4b2650-a8c9-4a52-c114-08d6b388f075
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Mar 2019 14:23:25.0196 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bde4dffc-4b60-4cf6-8b04-a5eeb25f5c4f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: LEJPR01MB0458
X-OriginatorOrg: telekom.de
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/panrg/GjzBV-82m2T6lGCWKQB_G4qdQWc>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 13:31:14 -0700
Subject: [PANRG] draft-rass-panrg-mpath-usecase
X-BeenThere: panrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Path Aware Networking \(Proposed\) Research Group discussion list" <panrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/panrg>, <mailto:panrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/panrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:panrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:panrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/panrg>, <mailto:panrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:23:34 -0000

Hi Stefan,

the idea to route packets containing encrypted information via different paths sound reasonable to me. This may be challenging for higher layers, but well, one may be able to design them to cope with packets received from different paths, I think.

I've recommended to investigate available options rather that path detection this morning. Some of these are:

  *   An end system can be multihomed
  *   There's multi-path transport, like MPTCP
  *   If the IP-addresses can be varied, the packets will likely follow different Equal Cost Multi-Path's (ECMP, search the Internet). Varying source address will do.

Multipath could mean:

  *   Same fiber, different router interfaces/headers (imagine the LTE path and fixed access sharing the same fiber at some part of a layer 0 path) .
  *   Different parallel ports of a router, but same router to router hop
  *   Different router hops (combined with different ports).

What likely is difficult is to vary the AS path. That might work, if you are multihomed with different networks. For a single domain, you may have to use a proxy or a tunnel to reach a different section of that domain (but I assume that there are multiple peerings to reach the destination AS - that might not be the case).

I'm not an onion routing expert. That may help too.

You could try different paths with the methods described above and measure delays to figure out different router paths (different ports between the same routers a hard to detect). No matter what you do, and even with path aware networking, you'll not be able to figure out or avoid using the same fiber by different networks.

Please note, I'm not on the panrg list and readers there may receive this message delayed. While I like your idea, my time doesn't suffice for an ongoing support.

Regards,

Ruediger