Autonomic Networking Use Case for Distributed Detection of SLA Violations
draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-sla-violation-detection-11

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (nmrg RG)
Last updated 2017-09-04 (latest revision 2017-09-01)
Stream IRTF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream IRTF state In IRSG Poll
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Management Research Group                               J. Nobre
Internet-Draft                       University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos
Intended status: Informational                              L. Granville
Expires: March 5, 2018           Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
                                                                A. Clemm
                                                                  Huawei
                                                      A. Gonzalez Prieto
                                                                  VMware
                                                       September 1, 2017

     Autonomic Networking Use Case for Distributed Detection of SLA
                               Violations
          draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-sla-violation-detection-11

Abstract

   This document describes an experimental use case for autonomic
   networking concerning monitoring of Service Level Agreements (SLAs).
   The use case aims to detect violations of SLAs in a distributed
   fashion, striving to optimize and dynamically adapt the autonomic
   deployment of active measurement probes in a way that maximizes the
   likelihood of detecting service level violations with a given
   resource budget to perform active measurements, and is able to do so
   without any outside guidance or intervention.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on March 5, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Nobre, et al.             Expires March 5, 2018                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   AN Use Case Detection of SLA Violations  September 2017

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Definitions and Acronyms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Current Approaches  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Use Case Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  A Distributed Autonomic Solution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Intended User Experience  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.1.  Device Based Self-Knowledge and Decisions . . . . . . . .  11
     7.2.  Interaction with other devices  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Comparison with current solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  Related IETF Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   13. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   The Internet has been growing dramatically in terms of size,
   capacity, and accessibility in the last years.  Communication
   requirements of distributed services and applications running on top
   of the Internet have become increasingly demanding.  Some examples
   are real-time interactive video or financial trading.  Providing such
   services involves stringent requirements in terms of acceptable
   latency, loss, or jitter.

   Performance requirements lead to the articulation of Service Level
   Objectives (SLOs) which must be met.  Those SLOs are part of Service
   Level Agreements (SLAs) that define a contract between the provider
   and the consumer of a service.  SLOs, in effect, constitute a service
Show full document text