Export of Structured Data in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
draft-ietf-ipfix-structured-data-06
The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 6313.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Benoît Claise , Stan Yates , Gowri Dhandapani , Paul Aitken | ||
| Last updated | 2020-01-21 (Latest revision 2011-05-03) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 6313 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Dan Romascanu | ||
| IESG note | ** No value found for 'doc.notedoc.note' ** | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-ipfix-structured-data-06
IPFIX Working Group B. Claise
Internet-Draft G. Dhandapani
Update: RFC5102 P. Aitken
Intended Status: Standards Track S. Yates
Expires: November 3, 2011 Cisco Systems, Inc.
May 3, 2011
Export of Structured Data in IPFIX
draft-ietf-ipfix-structured-data-06.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance
with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet
Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working
groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working
documents as Internet-Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on September, 2011.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires November 3 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
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.
Abstract
This document specifies an extension to the IP Flow Information
eXport (IPFIX) protocol specification in [RFC5101] and the IPFIX
information model specified in [RFC5102] to support hierarchical
structured data and lists (sequences) of Information Elements in
data records. This extension allows definition of complex data
structures such as variable-length lists and specification of
hierarchical containment relationships between Templates.
Finally, the semantics are provided in order to express the
relationship among multiple list elements in a structured data
record.
Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described
in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Table of Contents
1. Overview...................................................7
1.1. IPFIX Documents Overview..............................7
1.2. Relationship between IPFIX and PSAMP..................8
2. Introduction...............................................8
2.1. The IPFIX Track.......................................9
2.2. The IPFIX Limitations................................10
2.3. Structured Data Use Cases............................10
2.4. Specifications Summary...............................12
3. Terminology...............................................13
3.1. New Terminology......................................13
4. Linkage with the IPFIX Information Model..................13
4.1. New Abstract Data Types..............................14
4.1.1. basicList.......................................14
4.1.2. subTemplateList.................................14
4.1.3. subTemplateMultiList............................14
4.2. New Data Type Semantic...............................14
4.2.1. List............................................15
4.3. New Information Elements.............................15
4.3.1. basicList.......................................15
4.3.2. subTemplateList.................................15
4.3.3. subTemplateMultiList............................15
4.4. New Structured Data Type Semantics...................16
4.4.1. undefined.......................................16
4.4.2. noneOf..........................................16
4.4.3. exactlyOneOf....................................17
4.4.4. oneOrMoreOf.....................................18
4.4.5. allOf...........................................18
4.4.6. ordered.........................................19
4.5. Encoding of IPFIX Data Types.........................19
4.5.1. basicList.......................................19
4.5.2. subTemplateList.................................22
4.5.3. subTemplateMultiList............................24
5. Structured Data Format....................................28
5.1. Length Encoding Considerations.......................29
5.2. Recursive Structured Data............................29
5.3. Structured Data Information Elements Applicability in
Options Template Sets.....................................30
5.4. Usage Guidelines for Equivalent Data Representations.31
5.5. Padding..............................................32
5.6. Semantic.............................................32
6. Template Management.......................................36
7. The Collecting Process's Side.............................37
8. Defining New Information Elements Based on the New
Abstract Data Types..........................................38
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
9. Structured Data Encoding Examples.........................38
9.1. Encoding a Multicast Data Record with basicList......38
9.2. Encoding a Load-balanced Data Record with a basicList40
9.3. Encoding subTemplateList.............................41
9.4. Encoding subTemplateMultiList........................44
9.5. Encoding an Options Template Set using Structured
Data......................................................49
10. Relationship with the Other IFPIX Documents..............54
10.1. Relationship with Reducing Redundancy...............54
10.1.1. Encoding Structured Data Element using Common
Properties.............................................54
10.1.2. Encoding Common Properties elements With
Structured Data Information Element....................54
10.2. Relationship with Guidelines for IPFIX Testing......56
10.3. Relationship with IPFIX Mediation Function..........57
11. IANA Considerations......................................57
11.1. New Abstract Data Types.............................58
11.1.1. basicList......................................58
11.1.2. subTemplateList................................58
11.1.3. subTemplateMultiList...........................58
11.2. New Data Type Semantics.............................58
11.2.1. list...........................................59
11.3. New Information Elements............................59
11.3.1. basicList......................................59
11.3.2. subTemplateList................................59
11.3.3. subTemplateMultiList...........................60
11.4. New Structured Data Semantics.......................60
11.4.1. undefined......................................60
11.4.2. noneOf.........................................60
11.4.3. exactlyOneOf...................................61
11.4.4. oneOrMoreOf....................................61
11.4.5. allOf..........................................61
11.4.6. ordered........................................61
12. Security Considerations..................................62
13. References...............................................62
13.1. Normative References................................62
13.2. Informative References..............................62
14. Acknowledgement..........................................63
15. Authors' Addresses.......................................64
Appendix A. Additions to XML Specification of IPFIX
Information Elements and Abstract Data Types.................65
Appendix B. Encoding IPS Alert using Structured Data
Information Elements.........................................70
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Table of Figures
Figure A: basicList Encoding...................................19
Figure B: basicList Encoding with Enterprise Number............21
Figure C: Variable-Length basicList Encoding (Length < 255 octets)
...........................................................21
Figure D: Variable-Length basicList Encoding (Length 0 to 65535
octets) ....................................................22
Figure E: subTemplateList Encoding.............................22
Figure F: Variable-Length subTemplateList Encoding (Length < 255
octets) ....................................................23
Figure G: Variable-Length subTemplateList Encoding (Length 0 to
65535 octets) ..............................................24
Figure H: subTemplateMultiList Encoding........................25
Figure I: Variable-Length subTemplateMultiList Encoding (Length <
255 octets) ................................................27
Figure J: Variable-Length subTemplateMultiList Encoding (Length 0
to 65535 octets) ...........................................28
Figure K: Encoding basicList, Template Record..................39
Figure L: Encoding basicList, Data Record, Semantic allOf......40
Figure M: Encoding basicList, Data Record with Variable-Length
Elements, Semantic allOf ...................................40
Figure N: Encoding basicList, Data Record, Semantic ExactlyOneOf
...........................................................41
Figure O: Encoding subTemplateList, Template for One-Way Delay
Metrics ....................................................42
Figure P: Encoding subTemplateList, Template Record............43
Figure Q: Encoding subTemplateList, Data Set...................44
Figure R: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Filtering
Attributes .................................................47
Figure S: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Sampling
Attributes .................................................47
Figure T: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Flow Record
...........................................................48
Figure U: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Data Set..............49
Note that the example could further be improved with a basicList
of selectorId if many Selector IDs have to be reported. ....51
Figure V: PSAMP SSRI to be encoded.............................51
Figure W: Options Template Record for PSAMP SSRI using
subTemplateMultiList .......................................51
Figure X: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for interface............52
Figure Y: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for linecard.............52
Figure Z: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for linecard and interface
...........................................................52
Figure ZA: Example of a PSAMP SSRI Data Record, Encoded using a
subTemplateMultiList .......................................53
Figure ZB: Common and Specific Properties Exported Together
[RFC5473] ..................................................55
Figure ZC: Common and Specific Properties Exported Separately
according to [RFC5473] .....................................55
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Figure ZD: Common and Specific Properties Exported with Structured
Data Information Element ...................................55
Figure B0: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Target.............72
Figure B1: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Attacker...........72
Figure B2: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Participant........73
Figure B3: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for IPS Alert..........73
Figure B4: Encoding IPS Alert, Data Set........................75
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
1. Overview
1.1. IPFIX Documents Overview
The IPFIX Protocol [RFC5101] provides network administrators with
access to IP Flow information.
The architecture for the export of measured IP Flow information
out of an IPFIX Exporting Process to a Collecting Process is
defined in the IPFIX Architecture [RFC5470], per the requirements
defined in RFC 3917 [RFC3917].
The IPFIX Architecture [RFC5470] specifies how IPFIX Data Records
and Templates are carried via a congestion-aware transport
protocol from IPFIX Exporting Processes to IPFIX Collecting
Processes.
IPFIX has a formal description of IPFIX Information Elements,
their name, type and additional semantic information, as specified
in the IPFIX information model [RFC5102].
In order to gain a level of confidence in the IPFIX
implementation, probe the conformity and robustness, and allow
interoperability, the Guidelines for IPFIX Testing [RFC5471]
presents a list of tests for implementers of compliant Exporting
Processes and Collecting Processes.
The Bidirectional Flow Export [RFC5103] specifies a method for
exporting bidirectional flow (biflow) information using the IP
Flow Information Export (IPFIX) protocol, representing each Biflow
using a single Flow Record.
The "Reducing Redundancy in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) and
Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Reports" [RFC5473] specifies a bandwidth
saving method for exporting Flow or packet information, by
separating information common to several Flow Records from
information specific to an individual Flow Record: common Flow
information is exported only once.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
1.2. Relationship between IPFIX and PSAMP
The specification in this document applies to the IPFIX protocol
specifications [RFC5101]. All specifications from [RFC5101] apply
unless specified otherwise in this document.
The Packet Sampling (PSAMP) protocol [RFC5476] specifies the
export of packet information from a PSAMP Exporting Process to a
PSAMP Collecting Process. Like IPFIX, PSAMP has a formal
description of its information elements, their name, type and
additional semantic information. The PSAMP information model is
defined in [RFC5477].
As the PSAMP protocol specifications [RFC5476] are based on the
IPFIX protocol specifications, the specifications in this document
are also valid for the PSAMP protocol.
Indeed, the major difference between IPFIX and PSAMP is that the
IPFIX protocol exports Flow Records while the PSAMP protocol
exports Packet Reports. From a pure export point of view, IPFIX
will not distinguish a Flow Record composed of several packets
aggregated together, from a Flow Record composed of a single
packet. So the PSAMP export can be seen as a special IPFIX Flow
Record containing information about a single packet.
2. Introduction
While collecting the interface counters every five minutes has
proven to be useful in the past, more and more granular
information is required from network elements for a series of
applications: performance assurance, capacity planning, security,
billing, or simply monitoring. However, the amount of information
has become so large that, when dealing with highly granular
information such as Flow information, a push mechanism (as opposed
to a pull mechanism, such as SNMP) is the only solution for
routers whose primary function is to route packets. Indeed,
polling short-lived Flows via SNMP is not an option: high end
routers can support hundreds of thousands of Flows simultaneously.
Furthermore, in order to reduce the export bandwidth requirements,
the network elements have to integrate mediation functions to
aggregate the collected information, both in space (typically from
different line cards or different Exporters) and in time.
Typically, it would be beneficial if access routers could export
Flow Records, composed of the counters before and after an
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
optimization mechanism on the egress interface, instead of
exporting two Flow Records with identical tuple information.
In terms of aggregation in time, let us imagine that, for
performance assurance, the network management application must
receive the performance metrics associated with a specific flow,
every millisecond. Since the performance metrics will be
constantly changing, there is a new dimension to the Flow
definition: we are not dealing anymore with a single Flow lasting
a few seconds or a few minutes, but with a multitude of one
millisecond sub flows for which the performance metrics are
reported.
Which current protocol is suitable for these requirements: push
mechanism, highly granular information, and huge number of similar
records? IPFIX, as specified in RFC5101 would give part of the
solution.
2.1. The IPFIX Track
The IPFIX working group has specified a protocol to export Flow
information [RFC5101]. This protocol is designed to export
information about IP traffic Flows and related measurement data,
where a Flow is defined by a set of key attributes (e.g. source
and destination IP address, source and destination port, etc.).
The IPFIX protocol specification [RFC5101] specifies that traffic
measurements for Flows are exported using a TLV (type, length,
value) format. The information is exported using a Template
Record that is sent once to export the {type, length} pairs that
define the data format for the Information Elements in a Flow.
The Data Records specify values for each Flow.
Based on the Requirements for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
[RFC3917], the IPFIX protocol has been optimized to export Flow
related information. However, thanks to its Template mechanism,
the IPFIX protocol can export any type of information, as long as
the relevant Information Element is specified in the IPFIX
information model [RFC5102], registered with IANA [IANA-IPFIX], or
specified as an enterprise-specific Information Element. For each
Information Element, the IPFIX information model [RFC5102] defines
a numeric identifier, an abstract data type, an encoding mechanism
for the data type, and any semantic constraints. Only basic,
single-valued data types, e.g., numbers, strings, and network
addresses are currently supported.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
2.2. The IPFIX Limitations
The IPFIX protocol specification [RFC5101] does not support the
encoding of hierarchical structured data and arbitrary-length
lists (sequences) of Information Elements as fields within a
Template Record. As it is currently specified, a Data Record is a
"flat" list of single-valued attributes. However, it is a common
data modeling requirement to compose complex hierarchies of data
types, with multiple occurrences, e.g., 0..* cardinality allowed
for instances of each Information Element in the hierarchy.
A typical example is the MPLS label stack entries model. An early
NetFlow implementation used two Information Elements to represent
the MPLS label stack entry: a "label stack entry position"
followed by a "label stack value". However, several drawbacks
were discovered. Firstly, the Information Elements in the
Template Record had to be imposed so that the position would
always precede the value. However, some encoding optimizations
are based on the permutation of Information Element order.
Secondly, a new semantic intelligence, not described in the
information model, had to be hardcoded in the Collecting Process:
the label value at the position "X" in the stack is contained in
the "label stack value" Information Element following by a "label
stack entry position" Information Element containing the value
"X". Therefore, this model was abandoned.
The selected solution in the IPFIX information model [RFC5102] is
a long series of Information Elements: mplsTopLabelStackSection,
mplsLabelStackSection2, mplsLabelStackSection3,
mplsLabelStackSection4, mplsLabelStackSection5,
mplsLabelStackSection6, mplsLabelStackSection7,
mplsLabelStackSection8, mplsLabelStackSection9,
mplsLabelStackSection10. While this model removes any ambiguity,
it overloads the IPFIX information model with repetitive
information. Furthermore, if mplsLabelStackSection11 is required,
IANA [IANA-IPFIX] will not be able to assign the new Information
Element next to the other ones in the registry, which might cause
some confusion.
2.3. Structured Data Use Cases
Clearly the MPLS label stack entries issue can best be solved by
using a real structured data type composed of ("label stack entry
position", "label stack value") pairs, potentially repeated
multiple times in Flow Records, since this would be the most
efficient from an information model point of view.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Some more examples enter the same category: how to encode the list
of output interfaces in a multicast Flow, how to encode the list
of BGP Autonomous Systems (AS) in a BGP Flow, how to encode the
BGP communities in a BGP Flow, etc?
The one-way delay passive measurement, which is described in the
IPFIX Applicability [RFC5472], is yet another example that would
benefit from a structured data encoding. Assuming synchronized
clocks, the Collector can deduce the one-way delay between two
Observation Points from the following two Information Elements,
collected from two different Observation Points:
- Packet arrival time: observationTimeMicroseconds [RFC5477]
- Packet ID: digestHashValue [RFC5477]
In practice, this implies that many pairs of
(observationTimeMicroseconds, digestHashValue) must be exported
for each Observation Point, even if Hash-Based Filtering [RFC5475]
is used. On top of that information, if the requirement is to
understand the one-way delay per application type, the 5-tuple
(source IP address, destination IP address, protocol, source port,
destination port) would need to be added to every Flow Record.
Instead of exporting this repetitive 5-tuple, as part of every
single Flow Record a Flow Record composed of a structured data
type such as the following would save a lot of bandwidth:
5-tuple
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 1, digestHashValue 1 }
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 2, digestHashValue 2 }
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 3, digestHashValue 3 }
{ ... , ... }
As a last example, here is a more complex case of hierarchical
structured data encoding. Consider the example scenario of an IPS
(Intrusion Prevention System) alert data structure containing
multiple participants, where each participant contains multiple
attackers and multiple targets, with each target potentially
composed of multiple applications, as depicted below:
alert
signatureId
protocolIdentifier
riskRating
participant 1
attacker 1
sourceIPv4Address
applicationId
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
...
attacker N
sourceIPv4Address
applicationId
target 1
destinationIPv4Address
applicationId 1
...
applicationId n
...
target N
destinationIPv4Address
applicationId 1
...
applicationId n
participant 2
...
To export this information in IPFIX, the data would need to be
flattened (thus losing the hierarchical relationships) and a new
IPFIX Template created for each alert, according to the number of
applicationId elements in each target, the number of targets and
attackers in each participant, and the number of participants in
each alert. Clearly each Template will be unique to each alert,
and a large amount of CPU, memory and export bandwidth will be
wasted creating, exporting, maintaining, and withdrawing the
Templates. See Appendix B for a specific example related to this
case study.
2.4. Specifications Summary
This document specifies an IPFIX extension to support hierarchical
structured data and variable-length lists by defining three new
Information Elements and three corresponding new abstract data
types called basicList, subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList.
These are defined in Section 4.1.
The three Structured Data Information Elements carry some semantic
information so that the Collecting Process can understand the
relationship between the different list elements. The semantic in
the Structured Data Information Elements is provided in order to
express the relationship among the multiple top-level list
elements. As an example, if a list is composed of the elements
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
(A,B,C), the semantic expresses the relationship among A, B, and
C, regardless of whether A, B, and C, are individual elements or
list of elements.
It is important to note that whereas the Information Elements and
abstract data types defined in the IPFIX information model
[RFC5102] represent single values, these new abstract data types
are structural in nature and primarily contain references to other
Information Elements and to Templates. By referencing other
Information Elements and Templates from an Information Element's
data content, it is possible to define complex data structures
such as variable-length lists and to specify hierarchical
containment relationships between Templates. Therefore, this
document prefers the more generic "Data Record" term to the "Flow
Record" term.
This document specifies three new abstract data types, which are
basic blocks to represent structured data. However, this document
does not comment on all possible combinations of basicList,
subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList. Neither, does it limit
the possible combinations.
3. Terminology
IPFIX-specific terminology used in this document is defined in
Section 2 of the IPFIX protocol specification [RFC5101] and
Section 3 of PSAMP protocol specification [RFC5476]. As in
[RFC5101], these IPFIX-specific terms have the first letter of a
word capitalized when used in this document.
3.1. New Terminology
Structured Data Information Element
One of the Information Elements supporting structured data,
i.e., the basicList, subTemplateList, or subTemplateMultiList
Information Elements specified in section 4.3.
4. Linkage with the IPFIX Information Model
As in the IPFIX Protocol specification [RFC5101], the new
Information Elements specified in Section 4.3. below MUST be sent
in canonical format in network-byte order (also known as the big-
endian byte ordering).
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
4.1. New Abstract Data Types
This document specifies three new abstract data types, as
described below.
4.1.1. basicList
The type "basicList" represents a list of zero or more instances
of any Information Element, primarily used for single-valued data
types. For example, a list of port numbers, a list of interface
indexes, a list of AS in a BGP AS-PATH, etc.
4.1.2. subTemplateList
The type "subTemplateList" represents a list of zero or more
instances of a structured data type, where the data type of each
list element is the same and corresponds with a single Template
Record. For example, a structured data type composed of multiple
pairs of ("MPLS label stack entry position", "MPLS label stack
value"), a structured data type composed of performance metrics, a
structured data type composed of multiple pairs of IP address,
etc.
4.1.3. subTemplateMultiList
The type "subTemplateMultiList" represents a list of zero or more
instances of a structured data type, where the data type of each
list element can be different and corresponds with different
template definitions. For example, a structured data type
composed of multiple access-list entries, where entries can be
composed of different criteria types.
4.2. New Data Type Semantic
This document specifies a new data type semantic, in addition to
the ones specified in the section 3.2 of the IPFIX information
model [RFC5102], as described below.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
4.2.1. List
A list represents an arbitrary-length sequence of zero or more
structured data Information Elements, either composed of regular
Information Elements or composed of data conforming to a Template
Record.
4.3. New Information Elements
This document specifies three new Information Elements, as
described below.
4.3.1. basicList
A basicList specifies a generic Information Element with a
basicList abstract data type as defined in Section 4.1.1. and list
semantics as defined in Section 4.2.1. For example, a list of
port numbers, a list of interface indexes, etc.
EDITOR'S NOTE: while waiting for IANA [IANA-IPFIX] to assign this
new Information Element identifier, the value XXX is used in all
the examples and in the XML in Appendix A.
4.3.2. subTemplateList
A subTemplateList specifies a generic Information Element with a
subTemplateList abstract data type as defined in Section 4.1.2.
and list semantics as defined in Section 4.2.1.
EDITOR'S NOTE: while waiting for IANA [IANA-IPFIX] to assign this
new Information Element identifier, the value YYY is used in all
the examples and in the XML in Appendix A.
4.3.3. subTemplateMultiList
A subTemplateMultiList specifies a generic Information Element
with a subTemplateMultiList abstract data type as defined in
Section 4.1.3. and list semantics as defined in Section 4.2.1.
EDITOR'S NOTE: while waiting for IANA [IANA-IPFIX] to assign this
new Information Element identifier, the value ZZZ is used in all
the examples and in the XML in Appendix A.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
4.4. New Structured Data Type Semantics
Structured data type semantics are provided in order to express
the relationship among multiple list elements in a Structured Data
Information Element. These structured data type semantics require
a new IPFIX subregistry, as specified in the "IANA Considerations"
section. The semantics are specified in the next following
subsections.
4.4.1. undefined
The "undefined" structured data type semantic specifies that the
semantic of list elements is not specified, and that, if a
semantic exists, then it is up to the Collecting Process to draw
its own conclusions. The "undefined" structured data type
semantic, which is the default value, is used when none other
structured data type semantic applies.
For example, a mediator that wants to translate IPFIX [RFC5101]
into the export of structured data according to the specifications
in this document, doesn't know what the semantic is; it can only
guess, as the IPFIX specifications [RFC5101] does not contain any
semantic. Therefore, the mediator should use the "undefined"
semantic.
4.4.2. noneOf
The "noneOf" structured data type semantic specifies that none of
the elements are actual properties of the Data Record.
For example, a mediator might want to report to a Collector that a
specific Flow is suspicious, but that it checked already that this
Flow does not belong to the attack type 1, attack type 2, and
attack type 3. So this Flow might need some further inspection.
In such a case, the mediator would report the Flow Record with a
basicList composed of (attack type 1, attack type 2, attack type
3) and the respective structured data type semantic of "noneOf".
Another example is a router that monitors some specific BGP AS-
PATHs and reports if a Flow belongs to any of them. If the router
wants to export that a Flow does not belong to any of the
monitored BGP AS-PATHs, the router reports a Data Record with a
basicList composed of (BGP AS-PATH 1, BGP AS-PATH 2, BGP AS-PATH
3) and the respective structured data type semantic of "noneOf".
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
4.4.3. exactlyOneOf
The "exactlyOneOf" structured data type semantic specifies that
only a single element from the structured data is an actual
property of the Data Record. This is equivalent to a logical XOR
operation.
For example, if a Flow record contains a basicList of outgoing
interfaces with the "exactlyOneOf" semantic, then it implies that
the reported Flow only egressed from a single interface, although
the Flow Record lists all of the possible outgoing interfaces.
This is a typical example of a per destination load-balancing.
Another example is a mediator that must aggregate Data Records
from different Observation Points and report an aggregated
Observation Point. However, the different Observation Points can
be specified by different Information Element types depending on
the Exporter. For example:
Exporter1 Observation Point is characterized by the
exporterIPv4Address, so a specific Exporter can be represented.
Exporter2 Observation Point is characterized by the
exporterIPv4Address and a basicList of ingressInterface, so the
Exporting Process can express that the observations were made on a
series of input interfaces.
Exporter3 Observation Point is characterized by the
exporterIPv4Address and a specific lineCardId, so the Exporting
Process can express that the observation was made on a specific
line card.
If the mediator models the three different types of Observation
Points with the three Template Records below:
Template Record 1: exporterIPv4Address
Template Record 2: exporterIPv4Address, basicList of
ingressInterface
Template Record 3: exporterIPv4Address, lineCardId
then it can represent the aggregated Observation Point with a
subTemplateMultiList and the semantic "exactlyOneOf". The
aggregated Observation Point is modeled with the Data Records
corresponding to either Template Record 1, Template Record 2, or
Template Record 3 but not more than one of these. This implies
that the Flow was observed at exactly one of the Observation
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Points reported.
4.4.4. oneOrMoreOf
The "oneOrMoreOf" structured data type semantic specifies that one
or more elements from the list in the structured data are actual
properties of the Data Record. This is equivalent to a logical OR
operation.
Consider an example where a mediator must report an aggregated
Flow (e.g. by aggregating IP addresses from IP prefixes), with an
aggregated Observation Point. However, the different Observation
Points can be specified by different Information Element types as
described in Section 4.4.2.
If the mediator models the three different types of Observation
Points with the three Template Records below:
Template Record 1: exporterIPv4Address
Template Record 2: exporterIPv4Address, basicList of
ingressInterface
Template Record 3: exporterIPv4Address, lineCardId
then it can represent the aggregated Observation Point with a
subTemplateMultiList and the semantic "oneOrMoreOf". The
aggregated Observation Point is modeled with the Data Records
corresponding to either Template Record 1, Template Record 2, or
Template Record 3. This implies that the Flow was observed on at
least one of the Observation Points reported, and potentially on
multiple Observation Points.
4.4.5. allOf
The "allOf" structured data type semantic specifies that all of
the list elements from the structured data are actual properties
of the Data Record.
For example, if a Record contains a basicList of outgoing
interfaces with the "allOf" semantic, then the observed Flow is
typically a multicast Flow where each packet in the Flow has been
replicated to each outgoing interface in the basicList.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
4.4.6. ordered
The "ordered" structured data type semantic specifies that
elements from the list in the structured data are ordered.
For example, an Exporter might want to export the AS10 AS20 AS30
AS40 BGP AS-PATH. In such a case, the Exporter would report a
basicList composed of (AS10, AS20, AS30, AS40) and the respective
structured data type semantic of "ordered".
4.5. Encoding of IPFIX Data Types
The following subsections define the encoding of the abstract data
types defined in Section 4.1. above. These data types may be
encoded using either fixed or variable-length Information
Elements, as discussed in Section 5.1. . Like in the IPFIX
specifications [RFC5101], all length are specified in octets.
4.5.1. basicList
The basicList Information Element defined in Section 4.3.1.
represents a list of zero or more instances of an Information
Element and is encoded as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Semantic |0| Field ID | Element... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ...Length | basicList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure A: basicList Encoding
Semantic
The Semantic field indicates the relationship among the
different Information Element values within this Structured
Data Information Element. Refer to IANA's IPFIX "structured
data types semantics registry.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Field ID
Field ID is the Information Element identifier of the
Information Element(s) contained in the list.
Element Length
Per Section 7 of [RFC5101], the Element Length field indicates
the length, in octets, of each list element specified by Field
ID, or contains the value 0xFFFF if the length is encoded as a
variable-length Information Element at the start of the
basicList Content.
The Element Length field is effectively part of the header, so
even in the case of a zero-element list, it MUST NOT be
omitted.
basicList Content
A Collecting Process decodes list elements from the basicList
Content until no further data remains. A field count is not
included but can be derived when the Information Element is
decoded.
Note that in the diagram above, Field ID is shown with the
Enterprise bit (most significant bit) set to 0. If instead the
Enterprise bit is set to 1, a four-byte Enterprise Number MUST be
encoded immediately after the Element Length as shown below. See
the "Field Specifier Format" section in the IPFIX Protocol
[RFC5101] for additional information.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Semantic |1| Field ID | Element... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ...Length | Enterprise Number ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | basicList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Figure B: basicList Encoding with Enterprise Number
Also note that, if a basicList has zero elements, the encoded data
contains the Semantic field, Field ID, the Element Length field
and the four-byte Enterprise Number (if present), while basicList
Content is empty.
If the basicList is encoded as a variable-length Information
Element in less than 255 octets, it MAY be encoded with the Length
field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as shown in Figure C. However,
the three-byte length encoding, as shown Figure D, is RECOMMENDED
(see section 5.1. ).
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length (< 255)| Semantic |0| Field ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Element Length | basicList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure C: Variable-Length basicList Encoding (Length < 255
octets)
If the basicList is encoded as a variable-length Information
Element in 255 or more octets, it MUST be encoded with the Length
field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | Length (0 to 65535) | Semantic |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| Field ID | Element Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| basicList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure D: Variable-Length basicList Encoding (Length 0 to 65535
octets)
4.5.2. subTemplateList
The subTemplateList Information Element represents a list of zero
or more Data Records corresponding to a specific Template.
Because the Template Record referenced by a subTemplateList
Information Element can itself contain other subTemplateList
Information Elements, and because these Template Record references
are part of the Information Elements content in the Data Record,
it is possible to represent complex hierarchical data structures.
The following diagram shows how a subTemplateList Information
Element is encoded within a Data Record:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Semantic | Template ID | ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| subTemplateList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure E: subTemplateList Encoding
Semantic
The Semantic field indicates the relationship among the
different Data Records within this Structured Data Information
Element.
Template ID
The Template ID field contains the ID of the template used to
encode and decode the subTemplateList Content.
subTemplateList Content
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
subTemplateList Content consists of zero or more instances of
Data Records corresponding to the Template ID specified in the
Template ID Field. A Collecting Process decodes the
subTemplateList Content until no further data remains. A
record count is not included but can be derived when the
subTemplateList is decoded. Encoding and decoding are
performed recursively if the specified Template itself
contains Structured Data Information Elements as described
here.
Note that, if a subTemplateList has zero elements, the encoded
data contains only the Semantic field and the Template ID field,
while subTemplateList Content is empty.
If the subTemplateList is encoded as a variable-length Information
Element in less than 255 octets, it MAY be encoded with the Length
field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as shown in Figure F. However,
the three-byte length encoding, as shown Figure G, is RECOMMENDED
(see section 5.1. ).
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length (< 255)| Semantic | Template ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| subTemplateList Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure F: Variable-Length subTemplateList Encoding (Length < 255
octets)
If the subTemplateList is encoded as a variable-length Information
Element in 255 or more octets, it MUST be encoded with the Length
field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | Length (0 to 65535) | Semantic |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID | subTemplateList Content ... |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure G: Variable-Length subTemplateList Encoding (Length 0 to
65535 octets)
4.5.3. subTemplateMultiList
Whereas each element in a subTemplateList Information Element
corresponds to a single Template, it is sometimes useful for a
list to contain elements corresponding to different Templates. To
support this case, each top-level element in a
subTemplateMultiList Information Element carries a Template ID,
Length and zero or more Data Records corresponding to the Template
ID. The following diagram shows how a subTemplateMultiList
Information Element is encoded within a Data Record. Note that
the encoding following the Semantic field is consistent with the
Set Header specified in [RFC5101].
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Semantic | Template ID X |Data Records...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Length X | Data Record X.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record X.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record X.L Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Template ID Y |Data Records...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Length Y | Data Record Y.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Y.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Y.M Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Template ID Z |Data Records...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Length Z | Data Record Z.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Z.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Z.N Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure H: subTemplateMultiList Encoding
Semantic
The Semantic field indicates the top-level relationship among
the series of Data Records corresponding to the different
Template Records within this Structured Data Information
Element.
Template ID
Unlike the subTemplateList Information Element, each element
of the subTemplateMultiList contains a Template ID which
specifies the encoding of the following Data Records.
Data Records Length
The total length of the Data Records encoding for the Template
ID previously specified, including the 2 bytes for the
Template ID and the 2 bytes for the Data Records Length field
itself.
Data Record X.M
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
The Data Record X.M consists of the Mth Data Record of the
Template Record X. A Collecting Process decodes the Data
Records according to Template Record X until no further data
remains, according to the Data Records Length X. Further
Template IDs and Data Records may then be decoded according to
the overall subTemplateMultiList length. A record count is
not included but can be derived when the Element Content is
decoded. Encoding and decoding are performed recursively if
the specified Template itself contains Structured Data
Information Elements as described here.
In the exceptional case of zero instances in the
subTemplateMultiList, no data is encoded, only the Semantic field
and Template ID field(s), and the Data Record Length field is set
to zero.
If the subTemplateMultiList is encoded as a variable-length
Information Element in less than 255 octets, it MAY be encoded
with the Length field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as shown in
Figure I. However, the three-byte length encoding, as shown
Figure J, is RECOMMENDED (see section 5.1. ).
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length (< 255)| Semantic | Template ID X |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Records Length X | Data Record X.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record X.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record X.L Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Template ID Y |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data RecordsLength Y | Data Record Y.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Y.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Y.M Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Template ID Z |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Records Length Z | Data Record Z.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Z.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | Data Record Z.N Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure I: Variable-Length subTemplateMultiList Encoding (Length <
255 octets)
If the subTemplateMultiList is encoded as a variable-length
Information Element in 255 or more octets, it MUST be encoded with
the Length field per Section 7 of [RFC5101] as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | Length (0 to 65535) | Semantic |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID X | Data Records Length X |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record X.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record X.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record X.L Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID Y | Data Records Length Y |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Y.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Y.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Y.M Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID Z | Data Records Length Z |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Z.1 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Z.2 Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data Record Z.N Content ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure J: Variable-Length subTemplateMultiList Encoding (Length
0 to 65535 octets)
5. Structured Data Format
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
5.1. Length Encoding Considerations
The new Structured Data Information Elements represent a list that
potentially carries complex hierarchical and repeated data.
When the encoding of a Structured Data Information Element has a
fixed length (because, for example, it contains the same number of
fixed-length elements, or if the permutations of elements in the
list always produces the same total length), the element length
can be encoded in the corresponding Template Record.
However, when representing variable-length data, hierarchical
data, and repeated data with variable element counts, where the
number and length of elements can vary from record to record, we
RECOMMEND that the Information Elements are encoded using the
variable-length encoding described in Section 7 of [RFC5101], with
the length carried before the Structured Data Information Element
encoding.
Because of the complex and repeated nature of the data, it is
potentially difficult for the Exporting Process to efficiently
know in advance the exact encoding size. In this case, the
Exporting Process may encode the available data starting at a
fixed offset and fill in the final length afterwards. Therefore,
the three-byte length encoding is RECOMMENDED for variable-length
information elements in all Template Records containing a
Structured Data Information Element, even if the encoded length
can be less than 255 bytes, because the starting offset of the
data is known in advance.
When encoding such data, an Exporting Process MUST take care to
not exceed the maximum allowed IPFIX message length of 65535 bytes
as specified in [RFC5101].
5.2. Recursive Structured Data
It is possible to define recursive relationships between IPFIX
structured data instances, for example when representing a tree
structure. The simplest case of this might be a basicList where
each element is itself a basicList, or a subTemplateList where one
of the fields of the referenced template is itself a
subTemplateList referencing the same Template. Also, the
Exporting Process MUST take care when encoding recursively-defined
structured data, not to exceed the maximum allowed length of an
IPFIX Message (as noted in Length Encoding Considerations).
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
5.3. Structured Data Information Elements Applicability in Options
Template Sets
Structured Data Information Elements MAY be used in Options
Template Sets.
As an example, consider a mediation function that must aggregate
Data Records from multiple Observation Point types:
Router 1, (interface 1)
Router 2, (line card A)
Router 3, (line card B)
Router 4, (line card C, interface 2)
In order to encode the PSAMP Selection Sequence Report
Interpretation [RFC5476], the mediation function must express this
combination of Observation Points as a single new Observation
Point. Recall from [RFC5476] that the PSAMP Selection Sequence
Report Interpretation consists of the following fields:
Scope: selectionSequenceId
Non-Scope: one Information Element mapping the Observation Point
selectorId (one or more)
Without structured data, there is clearly no way to express the
complex aggregated Observation Point as "one Information Element
mapping the Observation Point". However, the desired result may
be easily achieved using the structured data types. Refer to
Section 9.5. for an encoding example related to this case study.
Regarding the scope in the Options Template Record, the IPFIX
specification [RFC5101] mentions that "The IPFIX protocol doesn't
prevent the use of any Information Elements for scope".
Therefore, a Structured Data Information Element MAY be used as
scope in an Options Template Set.
Extending the previous example, the mediation function could
export a given name for this complex aggregated Observation Point:
Scope: Aggregated Observation Point (structured data)
Non-Scope: a new Information Element containing the name
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
5.4. Usage Guidelines for Equivalent Data Representations
Because basicList, subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList are
all lists, in several cases there is more than one way to
represent what is effectively the same data structure. However,
in some cases, one approach has an advantage over the other e.g.
more compact, uses fewer resources, etc., and is therefore
preferred over an alternate representation.
A subTemplateList can represent the same simple list of single-
value Information Elements as a basicList, if the Template
referenced by the subTemplateList contains only one single-valued
Information Element. Although the encoding is more compact than a
basicList by two bytes, using a subTemplateList in this case
requires a new Template per Information Element. The basicList
requires no additional Template and is therefore RECOMMENDED in
this case.
Although a subTemplateMultiList with one Element can represent the
contents of a subTemplateList, the subTemplateMultiList carries
two additional bytes (Element Length). It is also potentially
useful to a Collecting Process to know in advance that a
subTemplateList directly indicates that list element types are
consistent. The subTemplateList Information Element is therefore
RECOMMENDED in this case.
The Semantic field in a subTemplateMultiList indicates the top-
level relationship among the series of Data Records corresponding
to the different Template Records, within this Structured Data
Information Element. If a semantic is required to describe the
relationship among the different Data Records corresponding to a
single Template ID within the subTemplateMultiList, then an
encoding based on a basicList of subTemplateLists should be used,
refer to Section 5.6 for more information. Alternatively, if a
semantic is required to describe the relationship among all Data
Records within a subTemplateMultiList (regardless of the Template
Record), an encoding based on a subTemplateMultiList with one Data
Record corresponding to a single Template ID can be used.
Note that the referenced Information Element(s) in the Structured
Data Information Elements can be taken from the IPFIX information
model [RFC5102], the PSAMP information model [RFC5477], any of the
Information Elements defined in the IANA IPFIX registry [IANA-
IPFIX] or enterprise-specific Information Elements.
If a Template Record contains a subTemplateList as the only field,
a Set encoding as specified in the IPFIX protocol specifications
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
[RFC5101] should be considered, unless:
- A relationship among multiple list elements must be exported,
in which case, the semantic from the IPFIX Structured Data
Information Element can convey this relationship.
- The Exporting Process wants to convey the number of elements in
the list, even in the special cases of zero or one element in the
list. Indeed, the case of an empty list cannot be represented with
the IPFIX protocol specifications [RFC5101]. In the case of a
single element list, the Template Record specified in the IPFIX
protocol specification [RFC5101] could be used. However, on the
top of the Template Record with the subTemplateList to export
multiple list elements, this supplementary Template would impose
some extra management, both on the Exporting Process and on the
Collecting Process, which might have to correlate the information
from two Template Records.
Similarly, if a Template Record contains a subTemplateMultiList as
the only field, an IPFIX Message as described in the IPFIX
protocol specification [RFC5101] should be considered, unless:
- A relationship among top-level list elements must be exported,
in which case, the semantic from the IPFIX Structured Data
Information Element can convey this relationship.
- The Exporting Process wants to convey the number of Data Records
corresponding to every Template in the subTemplateMultiList.
5.5. Padding
The Exporting Process MAY insert some padding octets in structured
data field values in a Data Record by including the
'paddingOctets' Information Element as described in [RFC5101]
Section 3.3.1. The paddingOctets Information Element can be
included in a Template Record referenced by structured data
Information Element for this purpose.
5.6. Semantic
Semantic interpretations of received Data Records at or beyond the
Collecting Process remain explicitly undefined, unless that data
is transmitted using this extension with explicit Structured Data
type semantic information.
It is not the Exporter's role to check the validity of the
semantic representation of Data Records.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
More complex semantics can be expressed as a combination of the
Semantic Data Information Elements specified in this document.
For example, the export of the AS10 AS20 AS30 AS40 {AS50,AS60} BGP
AS-PATH would be reported as a basicList of two elements, each
element being a basicList of BGP AS, with the top level structured
data type semantic of "ordered". The first element would contain
a basicList composed of (AS10,AS20,AS30,AS40) and the respective
structured data type semantic of "ordered", while the second
element would contain a basicList composed of (AS50, AS60) and the
respective structured data type semantic of "exactlyOneOf". A
high level Data Record diagram would be represented as:
BGP AS-PATH = (basicList, ordered,
(basicList, ordered, AS10,AS20,AS30,AS40),
(basicList, exactlyOneOf, AS50, AS60)
)
If a semantic is required to describe the relationship among the
different Data Records corresponding to a single Template ID
within the subTemplateMultiList, then an encoding based on a
basicList of subTemplateLists should be used, as shown in the next
case study.
Case study 1:
In this example, an Exporter monitoring security attacks must
export a list of security events consisting of attackers and
targets. For the sake of the example, assume that the Collector
can differentiate the attacker (which is expressed using source
fields) from the target (which is expressed using destination
fields). Imagine that attackers A1 or A2 may attack targets T1
and T2.
The first case uses a subTemplateMultiList composed of two
Template Records, one representing the attacker and one
representing the target, each of them containing an IP address and
a port.
Attacker Template Record = (src IP address, src port)
Target Template Record = (dst IP address, dst port)
A high level Data Record diagram would be represented as:
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Alert = (subTemplateMultiList, allOf,
(Attacker Template Record, A1, A2),
(Target Template Record, T1, T2)
)
The Collecting Process can only conclude that the list of
attackers (A1, A2) and the list of targets (T1, T2) are present,
without knowing the relationship amongst attackers and targets.
The Exporting Process would have to explicitly call out the
relationship amongst attackers and targets as the top level
semantic offered by the subTemplateMultiList isn't sufficient.
The only proper encoding for the previous semantic (i.e. attacker
A1 or A2 may attack target T1 and T2) uses a basicList of
subTemplateLists and is represented as follows:
Attacker Template Record = (src IP address, src port)
Target Template Record = (dst IP address, dst port)
Alert = (basicList, allof,
(subTemplateList, exactlyOneOf, attacker A1, A2)
(subTemplateList, allOf, target T1, T2)
)
Case study 2:
In this example, an Exporter monitoring security attacks must
export a list of attackers and targets. For the sake of the
example, assume that the Collector can differentiate the attacker
(which is expressed using source fields) from the target (which is
expressed using destination fields). Imagine that attackers A1 or
A2 are attacking target T1, while attacker A3 is attacking targets
T2 and T3. The first case uses a subTemplateMultiList that
contains Data Records corresponding to two Template Records, one
representing the attacker and one representing the target, each of
them containing an IP address and a port.
Attacker Template Record = (src IP address, src port)
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Target Template Record = (dst IP address, dst port)
A high level Data Record diagram would be represented as:
Alert = (subTemplateMultiList, allOf,
(Attacker Template Record, A1, A2, A3),
(Target Template Record, T1, T2, T3)
)
The Collecting Process can only conclude that the list of
attackers (A1, A2, A3) and the list of targets (T1, T2, T3) are
present, without knowing the relationship amongst attackers and
targets.
The second case could use a Data Record definition composed of the
following:
Alert = (subTemplateMultiList, allOf,
(Attacker Template Record, A1, A2),
(Target Template Record, T1),
(Attacker Template Record, A3),
(Target Template Record, T2, T3)
)
With the above representation, the Collecting Process can infer
that the alert consists of the list of attackers (A1, A2), target
(T1), attacker (A3) and list of targets (T2, T3). From the
sequence in which attackers and targets are encoded, the Collector
can possibly deduce that some relationship exists among (A1, A2,
T1) and (A2, T1, T2) but cannot understand what it is exactly.
So, there is a need for the Exporting Process to explicitly define
the relationship between the attackers and targets and the top-
level semantic of the subTemplateMultiList is not sufficient.
The only proper encoding for the previous semantic (i.e. attacker
A1 or A2 attack target T1, attacker A3 attacks targets T2 and T3)
uses a basicList of subTemplateLists and is represented as
follows:
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Participant P1 =
(basicList, allOf,
(subTemplateList, exactlyOneOf, attacker A1, A2)
(subTemplateList, undefined, target T1)
)
Participant P2 =
(basicList, allOf,
(subTemplateList, undefined, attacker A3,
(subTemplateList, allOf, targets T2, T3)
)
The security alert is represented as a subTemplateList of
participants.
Alert =
(subTemplateList, allOf, Participant P1, Participant P2)
Note that, in the particular case of a single element in a
Structured Data Information Element, the semantic field is
actually not very useful since it specifies the relationship among
multiple elements. Any choice of allOf, exactlyOneOr, or
OneOrMoreOf would provide the same result semantically.
Therefore, in case of a single element in a Structured Data
Information Element, the default "undefined" semantic SHOULD be
used.
6. Template Management
This section introduces some more specific Template management and
Template Withdrawal Message-related specifications compared to the
IPFIX protocol specification [RFC5101].
First of all, the Template ID uniqueness is unchanged compared to
[RFC5101]; the uniqueness is local to the Transport Session and
Observation Domain that generated the Template ID. In other
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
words, the Set ID used to export the Template Record does not
influence the Template ID uniqueness.
While [RFC5101] mentions that: "If an Information Element is
required more than once in a Template, the different occurrences
of this Information Element SHOULD follow the logical order of
their treatments by the Metering Process.", this rule MAY be
ignored within Structured Data Information Elements.
As specified in [RFC5101], Templates that are not used anymore
SHOULD be deleted. Deleting a Template implies that it MUST NOT
be used within subTemplateList and subTemplateMultiList any more.
Before reusing a Template ID, the Template MUST be deleted. In
order to delete an allocated Template, the Template is withdrawn
through the use of a Template Withdrawal Message.
7. The Collecting Process's Side
This section introduces some more specific specifications to the
Collection Process compared to Section 9 in the IPFIX Protocol
[RFC5101].
As opposed to the IPFIX specification in [RFC5101], IPFIX Messages
with IPFIX Structured Data Information Elements change the IPFIX
concept from the Collector's point of view as the data types are
present in the Data Records rather than in the Template Records.
For example, a basicList Information Element in a Template Record
doesn't specify the list element data type, this information is
contained in the Data Record. For example, in case of a
subTemplateMultiList, the Collecting Process must refer to the
included Template Records in the middle of the Data Record decode.
As described in [RFC5101], a Collecting Process MUST note the
Information Element identifier of any Information Element that it
does not understand and MAY discard that Information Element from
the Flow Record. Therefore a Collection Process that does not
support the extension specified in this document can ignore the
Structured Data Information Elements in a Data Record, or it can
ignore Data Records containing these new Structured Data
Information Elements while continuing to process other Data
Records.
If the structured data contains the "undefined" structured data
type semantic, the Collecting Process MAY attempt to draw its own
conclusion in terms of the semantic contained in the Data Record.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
8. Defining New Information Elements Based on the New Abstract Data
Types
This document specifies three new abstract data types: basicList,
subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList. As specified in
[RFC5102], the specification of new IPFIX Information Elements
uses the template specified in Section 2.1 of [RFC5102]. This
template mentioned existing and future the data types: "One of the
types listed in Section 3.1 of this document or in a future
extension of the information model." So new Information Elements
can be specified based on the three new abstract data types.
The authors anticipate the creation of both enterprise-specific
and IANA Information Elements based on the IPFIX structured data
types. For example, bgpPathList, bgpSequenceList and bgpSetList,
of abstract types and semantics basicList/ordered,
basicList/ordered, and basicList/exactlyOneOf respectively would
define the complete semantic of the list. This specification
doesn't specify any new Information Elements beyond the ones in
Section 4.3.
9. Structured Data Encoding Examples
The following examples are created solely for the purpose of
illustrating how the extensions proposed in this document are
encoded.
9.1. Encoding a Multicast Data Record with basicList
Consider encoding a multicast Data Record containing the following
data:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ingress If | Source IP | Destination IP | Egress Interfaces
---------------------------------------------------------------
9 192.0.2.201 233.252.0.1 1, 4, 8
---------------------------------------------------------------
Template Record for the multicast Flows, with the Template ID 256:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 24 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 256 | Field Count = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| ingressInterface = 10 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| DestinationIPv4Address = 12 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| basicList = XXX | Field Length = 0xFFFF |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure K: Encoding basicList, Template Record
The list of outgoing interfaces is represented as a basicList with
semantic allOf, and the Length of the list is chosen to be encoded
in three bytes even though it may be less than 255 octets.
The Data Set is represented as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 256 | Length = 36 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ingressInterface = 9 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.201 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DestinationIPv4Address = 233.252.0.1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | List Length = 17 | semantic=allOf|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface FieldId = 14 |egressInterface Field Length=4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 1 = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 2 = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 3 = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Figure L: Encoding basicList, Data Record, Semantic allOf
In the example above, the basicList contains fixed-length
elements. To illustrate how variable-length elements would be
encoded, the same example is shown below with variable-length
interface names in the basicList instead:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 256 | Length = 44 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ingressInterface = 9 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.201 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DestinationIPv4Address = 233.252.0.1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | List Length = 25 | semantic=allOf|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| InterfaceName FieldId = 82 | InterfaceName Field Len=0xFFFF|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length = 5 | 'F' | 'E' | '0' |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| '/' | '0' | Length = 7 | 'F' |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 'E' | '1' | '0' | '/' |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| '1' | '0' | Length = 5 | 'F' |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 'E' | '2' | '/' | '2' |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure M: Encoding basicList, Data Record with Variable-Length
Elements, Semantic allOf
9.2. Encoding a Load-balanced Data Record with a basicList
Consider encoding a load-balanced Data Record containing the
following data:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ingress If | Source IP | Destination IP | Egress Interfaces
---------------------------------------------------------------
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
9 192.0.2.201 233.252.0.1 1, 4, 8
---------------------------------------------------------------
So the Data Record egressed from either interface 1, 4, or 8. The
Data Set is represented as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 256 | Length = 36 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ingressInterface = 9 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.201 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DestinationIPv4Address = 233.252.0.1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | List Length = 17 |sem=exactlyOne |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface FieldId = 14 |egressInterface Field Length=4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 1 = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 2 = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| egressInterface value 3 = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure N: Encoding basicList, Data Record, Semantic ExactlyOneOf
9.3. Encoding subTemplateList
As explained in Section 2.2. , multiple pairs of
(observationTimeMicroseconds, digestHashValue) must be collected
from two different Observation Points to passively compute the
one-way delay across the network. This data can be exported with
an optimized Data Record that consists of the following
attributes:
5-tuple
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 1, digestHashValue 1 }
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 2, digestHashValue 2 }
{ observationTimeMicroseconds 3, digestHashValue 3 }
{ ... , ... }
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
A subTemplateList is best suited for exporting the list of
(observationTimeMicroseconds, digestHashValue). For illustration
purposes, the number of elements in the list is 5; in practice, it
could be more.
------------------------------------------------------------------
srcIP | dstIP | src | dst |proto| one-way delay
| | Port | Port | | metrics
------------------------------------------------------------------
192.0.2.1 192.0.2.105 1025 80 6 Time1, 0x0x91230613
Time2, 0x0x91230650
Time3, 0x0x91230725
Time4, 0x0x91230844
Time5, 0x0x91230978
------------------------------------------------------------------
The following Template is defined for exporting the one-way delay
metrics:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 257 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| observationTimeMicroSec=324 | Field Length = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| digestHashValue = 326 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure O: Encoding subTemplateList, Template for One-Way Delay
Metrics
The Template Record for the Optimized Data Record is as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 32 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 258 | Field Count = 6 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
|0| destinationIPv4Address = 12 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceTransportPort = 7 | Field Length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| destinationTransportPort= 11| Field Length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| protocolIdentifier = 4 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| subTemplateList = YYY | Field Length = 0xFFFF |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure P: Encoding subTemplateList, Template Record
The list of (observationTimeMicroseconds, digestHashValue) is
exported as a subTemplateList with semantic allOf. The Length of
the subTemplatelist is chosen to be encoded in three bytes even
though it may be less than 255 octets.
The Data Record is represented as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 258 | Length = 83 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| destinationIPV4Address = 192.0.2.105 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceTransportPort = 1025 | destinationTransportPort = 80 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Protocol = 6 | 255 | one-way metrics list len = 63 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| semantic=allOf| TemplateID = 257 | TimeValue1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 2-5 of TimeValue1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 6-8 of TimeValue1 |digestHashVal1=|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 0x0x91230613 | TimeValue2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 2-5 of TimeValue2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 6-8 of TimeValue2 |digestHashVal2=|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 0x0x91230650 | TimeValue3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| ... octets 2-5 of TimeValue3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 6-8 of TimeValue3 |digestHashVal3=|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 0x0x91230725 | TimeValue4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 2-5 of TimeValue4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 6-8 of TimeValue4 |digestHashVal4=|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 0x0x91230844 | TimeValue5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 2-5 of TimeValue5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... octets 6-8 of TimeValue5 |digestHashVal5=|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 0x0x91230978 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure Q: Encoding subTemplateList, Data Set
9.4. Encoding subTemplateMultiList
As explained in Section 4.5.3., a subTemplateMultiList is used to
export a list of mixed-type content where each top level element
corresponds to a different Template Record.
To illustrate this, consider the Data Record with the following
attributes:
5-tuple (Flow Keys), octetCount, packetCount
attributes for filtering
selectorId,
selectorAlgorithm
attributes for sampling
selectorId,
selectorAlgorithm,
samplingPacketInterval,
samplingPacketSpace
This example demonstrates that the Selector Report Interpretation
[RFC5476] can be encoded with the subTemplateMultiList. More
specifically, the example describes Property Match Filtering
Selector Report Interpretation [RFC5476] used for filtering
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
purposes, and the Systemic Count-Based Sampling as described in
Section 6.5.2.1 of [RFC5476]. Some traffic will be filtered
according to match properties configured, some will be sampled,
some will be filtered and sampled, and some will not be filtered or
be sampled.
A subTemplateMultiList is best suited for exporting this variable
data. A Template is defined for filtering attributes and another
Template is defined for sampling attributes. A Data Record can
contain data corresponding to either of the Templates, both of
them, or neither of them.
Consider the example below where the following Data Record contains
both filtering and sampling attributes.
Key attributes of the Data Record:
------------------------------------------------------------------
srcIP | dstIP | src | dst | proto | octetCount | packet
| | Port | Port | | | Count
------------------------------------------------------------------
2001:DB8::1 2001:DB8::2 1025 80 6 108000 120
------------------------------------------------------------------
Filtering attributes:
-------------------------------------------
selectorId | selectorAlgorithm
-------------------------------------------
100 5 (Property Match Filtering)
-------------------------------------------
Sampling attributes:
For Systemic Count-Based Sampling as defined in Section 6.5.2.1 of
[RFC5476] the required algorithm-specific Information Elements are:
samplingPacketInterval: number of packets selected in a row
samplingPacketSpace: number of packets between selections
Example of a simple 1 out-of 100 systematic count-based Selector
definition, where the samplingPacketInterval is 1 and the
samplingPacketSpace is 99.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------
selectorId | selectorAlgorithm | sampling | sampling
| | Packet | Packet
| | Interval | Space
--------------------------------------------------------------
15 1 (Count-Based Sampling) 1 99
--------------------------------------------------------------
To represent the Data Record, the following Template Records are
defined:
Template for filtering attributes: 259
Template for sampling attributes: 260
Template for Flow Record: 261
Flow record (261)
| (sourceIPv6Address)
| (destinationIPv6Address)
| (sourceTransportPort)
| (destinationTransportPort)
| (protocolIdentifier)
| (octetTotalCount)
| (packetTotalCount)
|
+------ filtering attributes (259)
| (selectorId)
| (selectorAlgorithm)
|
+------ sampling attributes (260)
| (selectorId)
| (selectorAlgorithm)
| (samplingPacketInterval)
| (samplingPacketSpace)
The following Template Record is defined for filtering attributes:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 259 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| selectorId = 302 | Field Length = 4 |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| selectorAlgorithm = 304 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure R: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Filtering
Attributes
The Template for sampling attributes is defined as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 24 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 260 | Field Count = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| selectorId = 302 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| selectorAlgorithm = 304 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| samplingPacketInteval = 305 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| samplingPacketSpace = 306 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure S: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Sampling
Attributes
Note that while selectorAlgorithm is defined as unsigned16, and
samplingPacketInterval and samplingPacketSpace are defined as
unsigned32, they are compressed down to 1 octet here as allowed
by Reduced Size Encoding in Section 6.2 of the IPFIX protocol
specifications [RFC5101].
Template for the Flow Record is defined as shown below:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 40 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 261 | Field Count = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceIPv6Address = 27 | Field Length = 16 |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| destinationIPv6Address = 28 | Field Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceTransportPort = 7 | Field Length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| destinationTransportPort=11 | Field Length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| protocolIdentifier = 4 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| octetTotalCount = 85 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| packetTotalCount = 86 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| subTemplateMultiList = ZZZ | Field Length = 0XFFFF |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure T: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Template for Flow Record
A subTemplateMultiList with semantic allOf is used to export the
filtering and sampling attributes. The Length field of the
subTemplateMultilist is chosen to be encoded in three bytes even
though it may be less than 255 octets.
The Data Record is encoded as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 261 | Length = 73 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceIPv6Address = ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 2001:DB8::1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| destinationIPv6Address = ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 2001:DB8::2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sourceTransportPort = 1025 | destinationTransportPort = 80 |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| protocol = 6 | octetTotalCount = 108000 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | packetTotalCount = 120 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | 255 | Attributes List Length = 21 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|semantic=allOf | Filtering Template ID = 259 |Filtering Attr |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ...Length = 9 | selectorId = ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 100 |selectorAlg = 5| Sampling Template ID = 260 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sampling Attributes Length=11 | selectorId = ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 15 |selectorAlg = 1| Interval = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Space = 99 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure U: Encoding subTemplateMultiList, Data Set
9.5. Encoding an Options Template Set using Structured Data
As described in Section 5.3. , consider a mediation function that
must aggregate Data Records from different Observation Points.
Say Observation Point 1 consists of one or more interfaces,
Observation Points 2 and 3 consist of one or more line cards, and
Observation Point 4 consists of one or more interfaces and one or
more line cards. Without structured data, a template would have
to be defined for every possible combination to interpret the data
corresponding to each of the Observation Points. However, with
structured data, a basicList can be used to encode the list of
interfaces and another basicList can be used to encode the list of
line cards.
For the sake of simplicity, each Observation Point shown below has
the IP address corresponding to the Router and an <interface> or
<linecard> or <line card and interface>. This can very well be
extended to include a list of interfaces and a list of linecards
using basicLists as explained above.
Observation Point 1: Router 1, (interface 1)
Observation Point 2: Router 2, (line card A)
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Observation Point 3: Router 3, (line card B)
Observation Point 4: Router 4, (line card C, interface 2)
The mediation function wishes to express this as a single
Observation Point, in order to encode the PSAMP Selection
Sequence Report Interpretation (SSRI). Recall from [RFC5476]
that the PSAMP Selection Sequence Report Interpretation
consists of the following fields:
Scope: selectionSequenceId
Non-Scope: one Information Element mapping the
Observation Point
selectorId (one or more)
For example, the Observation Point detailed above may be
encoded in a PSAMP Selection Sequence Report Interpretation as
shown below:
Selection Sequence 7 (Filter->Sampling):
Observation Point: subTemplateMultiList.
Router 1 (IP address = 192.0.2.11), (interface 1)
Router 2 (IP address = 192.0.2.12), (line card A)
Router 3 (IP address = 192.0.2.13), (line card B)
Router 4 (IP address = 192.0.2.14), (line card C, interface 2)
selectorId: 5 (Filter, match IPV4SourceAddress 192.0.2.1)
selectorId: 10 (Sampler, Random 1 out-of ten)
The following Templates are defined to represent the PSAMP SSRI:
Template for representing PSAMP SSRI: 262
Template for representing interface: 263
Template for representing linecard: 264
Template for representing linecard and interface: 265
PSAMP SSRI (262)
| (SelectionSequenceId)
|
+--- Observation Point 1 (263)
| (exporterIPv4Address)
| (Interface Id)
|
+--- Observation Point 2 and 3 (264)
| (exporterIPv4Address)
| (line card)
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
|
+--- Observation Point 4 (265)
| (exporterIPv4Address)
| (line card)
| (Interface Id)
|
| (selectorId 1)
| (selectorId 2)
Note that the example could further be improved with a basicList
of selectorId if many Selector IDs have to be reported.
Figure V: PSAMP SSRI to be encoded
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 3 | Length = 26 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 262 | Field Count = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Scope Field Count = 1 |0| selectionSequenceId = 301 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Scope 1 Length = 4 |0| subTemplateMultiList = ZZZ |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Field Length = 0xFFFF |0| selectorId = 302 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Field Length = 4 |0| selectorId = 302 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure W: Options Template Record for PSAMP SSRI using
subTemplateMultiList
A subTemplateMultiList with semantic allOf is used to encode the
list of Observation Points.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 |
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 263 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| exporterIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| ingressInterface = 10 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure X: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for interface
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 264 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| exporterIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| lineCardId = 141 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure Y: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for linecard
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 20 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 265 | Field Count = 3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| exporterIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| lineCardId = 141 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| ingressInterface = 10 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure Z: PSAMP SSRI, Template Record for linecard and interface
The PSAMP SSRI Data Set is represented as follows:
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 262 | Length = 68 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| selectionSequenceId = 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | Observation Point List Len=49 |semantic=allOf |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP1 Template ID = 263 | OP1 Length = 12 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Router 1 exporterIPv4Address = 192.0.2.11 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP1 ingressInterface = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP2&OP3 Template ID = 264 | OP2 & OP3 Length = 20 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Router 2 exporterIPv4Address = 192.0.2.12 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP2 lineCardId = A |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Router 3 exporterIPv4Address = 192.0.2.13 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP3 lineCardId = B |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP4 Template ID = 265 | OP4 Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Router 4 exporterIPv4Address = 192.0.2.14 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP4 lineCardId = C |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OP4 ingressInterface = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| selectorId = 5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| selectorId = 10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure ZA: Example of a PSAMP SSRI Data Record, Encoded using a
subTemplateMultiList
Note that the Data Record above contains multiple instances of
Template 264 to represent Observation Point 2 (Router2, line card
A) and Observation Point 3 (Router3, line card B). Instead, if a
single Observation Point had both line card A and line card B, a
basicList would be used to represent the list of line cards.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
10. Relationship with the Other IFPIX Documents
10.1. Relationship with Reducing Redundancy
"Reducing Redundancy in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) and
Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Reports" [RFC5473] describes a bandwidth
saving method for exporting Flow or packet information using the
IP Flow Information eXport (IPFIX) protocol.
It defines the commonPropertiesID Information Element for
exporting Common Properties.
10.1.1. Encoding Structured Data Element using Common Properties.
When Structured Data Information Elements contain repeated
elements, these elements may be replaced with a
commonPropertiesID Information Element as specified in
[RFC5473]. The replaced elements may include the basicList,
subTemplateList and subTemplateMultiList Information Elements.
This technique might help reducing the bandwidth requirements
for the export. However, a detailed analysis of the gain has
not been done; refer to Section 8.3 of [RFC5473] for further
considerations.
10.1.2. Encoding Common Properties elements With Structured Data
Information Element.
Structured Data Information Element MAY be used to define a list
of commonPropertiesID, as a replacement for the specifications
in [RFC5473].
Indeed, the example in figures 1 and 2 of [RFC5473] can be
encoded with the specifications in this document.
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| sourceAddressA | sourcePortA | <Flow1 information> |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| sourceAddressA | sourcePortA | <Flow2 information> |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| sourceAddressA | sourcePortA | <Flow3 information> |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| sourceAddressA | sourcePortA | <Flow4 information> |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| ... | ... | ... |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
Figure ZB: Common and Specific Properties Exported Together
[RFC5473]
+------------------------+-----------------+-------------+
| index for properties A | sourceAddressA | sourcePortA |
+------------------------+-----------------+-------------+
| ... | ... | ... |
+------------------------+-----------------+-------------+
+------------------------+---------------------------+
| index for properties A | <Flow1 information> |
+------------------------+---------------------------+
| index for properties A | <Flow2 information> |
+------------------------+---------------------------+
| index for properties A | <Flow3 information> |
+------------------------+---------------------------+
| index for properties A | <Flow4 information> |
+------------------------+---------------------------+
Figure ZC: Common and Specific Properties Exported Separately
according to [RFC5473]
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| sourceAddressA | sourcePortA | <Flow1 information> |
+----------------+-------------+---------------------------+
| <Flow2 information> |
+---------------------------+
| <Flow3 information> |
+---------------------------+
| <Flow4 information> |
+---------------------------+
| ... |
+---------------------------+
Figure ZD: Common and Specific Properties Exported with
Structured Data Information Element
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
The example in figure ZD could be encoded with a basicList if
the <Flow information> represents a single Information Element,
with a subTemplateList if the <Flow information> represents a
Template Record, or with a subTemplateMultiList if the <Flow
information> is composed of different Template Records.
Using Structured Data Information Elements as a replacement for
the techniques specified in "Reducing Redundancy in IP Flow
Information Export (IPFIX) and Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Reports"
[RFC5473] offers the advantage that a single Template Record is
defined. Hence the Collectors job is simplified in terms of
Template management and combining Template/Options Template
Records.
However, it must be noted that using Structured Data Information
Elements as a replacement for the techniques specified in
"Reducing Redundancy in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) and
Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Reports" only applies to simplified
cases. For example, the "Multiple Data Reduction" (Section 7.1
[RFC5473]) might be too complex to encode with Structured Data
Information Elements.
10.2. Relationship with Guidelines for IPFIX Testing
[RFC5471] presents a list of tests for implementers of IP Flow
Information eXport (IPFIX) compliant Exporting Processes and
Collecting Processes.
Although [RFC5471] doesn't define any structured data element
specific tests, the Structured Data Information Elements can be
used in many of the [RFC5471] tests.
The [RFC5471] series of test could be useful because the
document specifies that every Information Element type should be
tested. However, not all cases from this document are tested in
[RFC5471].
The following sections are especially noteworthy:
. 3.2.1. Transmission of Template with fixed size
Information Elements
- each data type should be used in at least one test.
The new data types specified in Section 4.1. should
be included in this test.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
. 3.2.2. Transmission of Template with variable length
Information Elements
- this test should be expanded to include Data Records
containing variable length basicList,
subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList Information
Elements.
. 3.3.1. Enterprise-specific Information Elements
- this test should include the export of basicList,
subTemplateList, and subTemplateMultiList Information
Elements containing Enterprise-specific Information
Elements. e.g., see the example in figure B.
. 3.3.3. Multiple instances of the same Information Element
in one Template
- this test should verify that multiple instances of the
basicList, subTemplateList and subTemplateMultiList
Information Elements are accepted.
. 3.5 Stress/Load tests
- since the structured data types defined here allow
modeling of complex data structures, they may be
useful for stress testing both Exporting Processes
and Collecting Processes.
10.3. Relationship with IPFIX Mediation Function
The Structured Data Information Elements would be beneficial for
the export of aggregated Data Records in mediation function, as
was demonstrated with the example of the aggregated Observation
Point in Section 5.3.
11. IANA Considerations
This document specifies several new IPFIX abstract data types, a
new IPFIX Data Type Semantic, and several new Information
Elements.
These require the creation of two new IPFIX registries and
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
updating the existing IPFIX Information Element registry as
detailed below.
11.1. New Abstract Data Types
Section 4.1. of this document specifies several new IPFIX abstract
data types. Per Section 6 of the IPFIX information model
[RFC5102], new abstract data types can be added to the IPFIX
information model, in the IPFIX Information Element Data Types
registry.
Abstract data types to be added to the IPFIX "Information Element
Data Types" registry are listed below.
EDITOR'S NOTE: IANA, please pick the number three values in the
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xml#informationElement
DataTypes for the basicList, subTemplateList, and
subTemplateMultiList.
11.1.1. basicList
The type "basicList" represents a list of any Information Element
used for single-valued data types.
11.1.2. subTemplateList
The type "subTemplateList" represents a list of a structured data
type, where the data type of each list element is the same and
corresponds with a single Template Record.
11.1.3. subTemplateMultiList
The type "subTemplateMultiList" represents a list of structured
data types, where the data types of the list elements can be
different and correspond with different template definitions.
11.2. New Data Type Semantics
Section 4.2. of this document specifies a new IPFIX Data Type
Semantic. Per Section 3.2 of the IPFIX information model
[RFC5102], new data type semantics can be added to the IPFIX
information model. Therefore, the IANA IPFIX
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
informationElementSemantics registry [IANA-IPFIX], which contains
all the data type semantics from Section 3.2 of [RFC5102], must be
augmented with the "list" value below.
11.2.1. list
A list is a structured data type, being composed of a sequence of
elements e.g. Information Element, Template Record, etc.
11.3. New Information Elements
Section 4.3. of this document specifies several new Information
Elements which are to be created in the IPFIX Information Element
registry [IANA-IPFIX].
New Information Elements to be added to the IPFIX Information
Element registry are listed below.
EDITOR'S NOTE: the XML specification in Appendix A must be updated
with the elementID values allocated below.
11.3.1. basicList
Name: basicList
Description:
Specifies a generic Information Element with a basicList abstract
data type. For example, a list of port numbers, a list of
interface indexes, etc.
Abstract Data Type: basicList
Data Type Semantics: list
ElementId: XXX (to be specified by IANA)
Status: current
11.3.2. subTemplateList
Name: subTemplateList
Description:
Specifies a generic Information Element with a subTemplateList
abstract data type.
Abstract Data Type: subTemplateList
Data Type Semantics: list
ElementId: YYY (to be specified by IANA)
Status: current
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
11.3.3. subTemplateMultiList
Name: subTemplateMultiList
Description:
Specifies a generic Information Element with a
subTemplateMultiList abstract data type.
Abstract Data Type: subTemplateMultiList
Data Type Semantics: list
ElementId: ZZZ (to be specified by IANA)
Status: current
11.4. New Structured Data Semantics
Section 4.4. of this document specifies a series of new IPFIX
structured data type semantics, which is expressed as an 8-bit
value. This requires the creation of a new IPFIX "structured data
types semantics" IPFIX subregistry [IANA-IPFIX].
Entries may be added to this subregistry subject to a Standards
Action [RFC5226]. Initially, this registry should include all the
structured data type semantics listed below.
11.4.1. undefined
Name: undefined
Description: The "undefined" structured data type semantic
specifies that the semantic of list elements is not specified, and
that, if a semantic exists, then it is up to the Collecting
Process to draw its own conclusions. The "undefined" structured
data type semantic is the default structured data type semantic.
Value: 0xFF
Reference: <this future RFC>
11.4.2. noneOf
Name: noneOf
Description: The "noneOf" structured data type semantic specifies
that none of the elements are actual properties of the Data
Record.
Value: 0x00
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Reference: <this future RFC>
11.4.3. exactlyOneOf
Name: exactlyOneOf
Description: The "exactlyOneOf" structured data type semantic
specifies that only a single element from the structured data is
an actual property of the Data Record. This is equivalent to a
logical XOR operation.
Value: 0x01
Reference: <this future RFC>
11.4.4. oneOrMoreOf
Name: oneOrMoreOf
Description: The "oneOrMoreOf" structured data type semantic
specifies that one or more elements from the list in the
structured data are actual properties of the Data Record. This is
equivalent to a logical OR operation.
Value: 0x02
Reference: <this future RFC>
11.4.5. allOf
Name: allOf
Description: The "allOf" structured data type semantic specifies
that all of the list elements from the structured data are actual
properties of the Data Record.
Value: 0x03
Reference: <this future RFC>
11.4.6. ordered
Name: ordered
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Description: The "ordered" structured data type semantic specifies
that elements from the list in the structured data are ordered.
Value: 0x04
Reference: <this future RFC>
12. Security Considerations
The addition of complex data types necessarily complicates the
implementation of the Collector. This could easily result in new
security vulnerabilities (e.g., buffer overflows); this creates
additional risk in cases where either DTLS is not used, or if the
Observation Point and Collector belong to different trust domains.
Otherwise, the same security considerations as for the IPFIX
Protocol [RFC5101] and the IPFIX information model [RFC5102]
apply.
13. References
13.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] S. Bradner, Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels, BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5101] Claise, B., Ed., "Specification of the IP Flow
Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the Exchange of
IP Traffic Flow Information", RFC 5101, January 2008.
[RFC5102] Quittek, J., Bryant, S., Claise, B., Aitken, P., and
J. Meyer, "Information Model for IP Flow Information
Export", RFC 5102, January 2008.
[RFC5226] T. Narten, T., Alverstrand, H. , "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs",
RFC5226, May 2008.
13.2. Informative References
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
[RFC3917] Quittek, J., Zseby, T., Claise, B., and S. Zander,
Requirements for IP Flow Information Export, RFC 3917,
October 2004.
[RFC5103] Trammell, B., and E. Boschi, "Bidirectional Flow
Export Using IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)", RFC
5103, January 2008.
[RFC5470] Sadasivan, G., Brownlee, N., Claise, B., and J.
Quittek, "Architecture for IP Flow Information Export",
RFC 5470, March 2009.
[RFC5471] Schmoll, C., Aitken, P., and B. Claise, "Guidelines
for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Testing", RFC
5471, March 2009.
[RFC5472] Zseby, T., Boschi, E., Brownlee, N., and B. Claise,
"IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Applicability", RFC
5472, March 2009.
[RFC5473] Boschi, E., Mark, L., and B. Claise, "Reducing
Redundancy in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) and
Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Reports", RFC 5473, March 2009.
[RFC5475] Zseby, T., Molina, M., Duffield, N., Niccolini, S.,
and F. Raspall, "Sampling and Filtering Techniques for
IP Packet Selection", RFC 5475, March 2009.
[RFC5476] Claise, B., Ed., "Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Protocol
Specifications", RFC 5476, March 2009.
[RFC5477] Dietz, T., Claise, B., Aitken, P., Dressler, F., and
G. Carle, "Information Model for Packet Sampling
Exports", RFC 5477, March 2009.
[IANA-IPFIX] http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml
14. Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Zhipu Jin, Nagaraj Varadharajan,
Brian Trammel, Atsushi Kobayashi, Rahul Patel for their feedback,
and Gerhard Muenz, for proof reading the document.
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
15. Authors' Addresses
Benoit Claise
Cisco Systems, Inc.
De Kleetlaan 6a b1
Diegem 1813
Belgium
Phone: +32 2 704 5622
EMail: bclaise@cisco.com
Gowri Dhandapani
Cisco Systems, Inc.
13615 Dulles Technology Drive
Herndon, Virigina 20171
United States
Phone: +1 408 853 0480
EMail: gowri@cisco.com
Stan Yates
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7100-8 Kit Creek Road
PO Box 14987
Research Triangle Park
North Carolina, 27709-4987
United States
Phone: +1 919 392 8044
EMail: syates@cisco.com
Paul Aitken
Cisco Systems, Inc.
96 Commercial Quay
Commercial Street
Edinburgh, EH6 6LX, United Kingdom
Phone: +44 131 561 3616
EMail: paitken@cisco.com
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Appendix A. Additions to XML Specification of IPFIX Information
Elements and Abstract Data Types
This appendix contains additions to the machine-readable
description of the IPFIX information model coded in XML in
Appendix A and Appendix B in [RFC5102]. Note that this appendix
is of informational nature, while the text in section 4.
(generated from this appendix) is normative.
The following field definitions are appended to the IPFIX
information model in Appendix A of [RFC5102].
<field name="basicList"
dataType="basicList"
group="structured-data"
dataTypeSemantics="List"
elementId="XXX" applicability="all" status="current">
<description>
<paragraph>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of
any Information Element, primarily used for
single-valued data types. For example, a list of port
numbers, list of interface indexes, list of AS in a
BGP AS-PATH, etc.
</paragraph>
</description>
</field>
<field name="subTemplateList"
dataType="subTemplateList"
group="structured-data"
dataTypeSemantics="List"
elementId="YYY" applicability="all" status="current">
<description>
<paragraph>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of a
structured data type, where the data type of each list
element is the same and corresponds with a single
Template Record. For example, a structured data type
composed of multiple pairs of ("MPLS label stack entry
position", "MPLS label stack value"), a structured data
type composed of performance metrics, a structured data
type composed of multiple pairs of IP address, etc.
</paragraph>
</description>
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
</field>
<field name="subTemplateMultiList"
dataType="subTemplateMultiList"
group="structured-data"
dataTypeSemantics="List"
elementId="ZZZ" applicability="all" status="current">
<description>
<paragraph>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of
structured data types, where the data type of each list
element can be different and corresponds with
different template definitions. For example, a
structured data type composed of multiple access-list
entries, where entries can be composed of different
criteria types.
</paragraph>
</description>
</field>
The following structured data type semantic definitions are
appended to the the IPFIX information model in Appendix A of
[RFC5102].
<structuredDataTypeSemantics>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="undefined" value="255">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "undefined" structured data type semantic specifies
that the semantic of list elements is not specified, and
that, if a semantic exists, then it is up to the
Collecting Process to draw its own conclusions. The
"undefined" structured data type semantic is the default
structured data type semantic.
</paragraph>
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="noneOf" value="0">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "noneOf" structured data type semantic specifies
that none of the elements are actual properties of the
Data Record.
</paragraph>
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="exactlyOneOf" value="1">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "exactlyOneOf" structured data type semantic
specifies that only a single element from the structured
data is an actual property of the Data Record. This is
equivalent to a logical XOR operation.
</paragraph>
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="oneOrMoreOf" value="2">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "oneOrMoreOf" structured data type semantic
specifies that one or more elements from the list in the
structured data are actual properties of the Data
Record. This is equivalent to a logical OR operation.
</paragraph>
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="allOf" value="3">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "allOf" structured data type semantic specifies that
all of the list elements from the structured data are
actual properties of the Data Record.
</paragraph>
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
<structuredDataTypeSemantic name="ordered" value="4">
<description>
<paragraph>
The "ordered" structured data type semantic specifies
that elements from the list in the structured data are
ordered.
</paragraph>
</description>
</structuredDataTypeSemantic>
</structuredDataTypeSemantics>
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
The following schema definitions are appended to the abstract data
types defined in Appendix B of [RFC5102]. This schema and its
namespace are registered by IANA at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/schema/ipfix.xsd
<simpleType name="dataType">
<restriction base="string">
<enumeration value="basicList">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of
any Information Element, primarily used for
single-valued data types. For example, a list of port
numbers, list of interface indexes, list of AS in a
BGP AS-PATH, etc.
</documentation>
</annotation>
</enumeration>
<enumeration value="subTemplateList">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of a
structured data type, where the data type of each list
element is the same and corresponds with a single
Template Record. For example, a structured data type
composed of multiple pairs of ("MPLS label stack entry
position", "MPLS label stack value"), a structured
data type composed of performance metrics, a
structured data type composed of multiple pairs of IP
address, etc.
</documentation>
</annotation>
</enumeration>
<enumeration value="subTemplateMultiList">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Represents a list of zero or more instances of
structured data types, where the data type of each
list element can be different and corresponds with
different template definitions. For example, a
structured data type composed of multiple
access-list entries, where entries can be
composed of different criteria types.
</documentation>
</annotation>
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
</enumeration>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<simpleType name="dataTypeSemantics">
<restriction base="string">
<enumeration value="List">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Represents an arbitrary-length sequence of structured
data elements, either composed of regular Information
Elements or composed of data conforming to a Template
Record.
</documentation>
</annotation>
</enumeration>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<complexType name="structuredDataTypeSemantics">
<sequence>
<element name="structuredDataTypeSemantic"
minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded">
<complexType>
<sequence>
<element name="description" type="text"/>
</sequence>
<attribute name="name" type="string" use="required"/>
<attribute name="value" type="unsignedByte"
use="required"/>
</complexType>
</element>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<element name="structuredDataTypeSemantics"
type="structuredDataTypeSemantics">
<annotation>
<documentation>
structured data type semantics express the relationship
among multiple list elements in a structured data
Information Element.
</documentation>
</annotation>
</element>
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
Appendix B. Encoding IPS Alert using Structured Data Information
Elements
In this section, an IPS alert example is used to demonstrate how
complex data and multiple levels of hierarchy can be encoded using
Structured Data Information Elements. Also, this example
demonstrates how a basicList of subTemplateLists can be used to
represent semantics at multiple levels in the hierarchy.
An IPS alert consists of the following mandatory attributes:
signatureId, protocolIdentifier and riskRating. It can also
contain zero or more participants, each participant can contain
zero or more attackers and zero or more targets. An attacker
contains the attributes sourceIPv4Address and applicationId, and
a target contains the attributes destinationIPv4Address and
applicationId.
Note that the signatureId and riskRating Information Element
fields are created for these examples only; the Field IDs are
shown as N/A. The signatureId helps to uniquely identify the IPS
signature that triggered the alert. The riskRating identifies the
potential risk, on a scale of 0-100 (100 being most serious), of
the traffic that triggered the alert.
Consider the example described in case study 2 of Section 5.6. The
IPS alert contains participants encoded as a subTemplateList with
semantic allOf. Each participant uses a basicList of
subTemplateLists to represent attackers and targets. For the sake
of simplicity, the alert has two participants P1 and P2. In
participant P1, attacker A1 or A2 attack target T1. In
participant P2, attacker A3 attacks targets T2 and T3.
Participant P1:
(basicList, allof,
(subTemplateList, exactlyOneOf, attacker A1, A2)
(subTemplateList, undefined, target T1)
)
Participant P2:
(basicList, allOf,
(subTemplateList, undefined, attacker A3,
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
(subTemplateList, allOf, targets T2, T3)
)
Alert :
(subTemplateList, allOf, Participant P1, Participant P2)
------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | participant
sigId |protocol| risk | attacker | target
| Id | Rating | IP | appId | IP | appId
------------------------------------------------------------------
1003 17 10 192.0.2.3 103 192.0.2.103 3001
192.0.2.4 104
192.0.2.5 105 192.0.2.104 4001
192.0.2.105 5001
------------------------------------------------------------------
Participant P1 contains:
Attacker A1: (IP, appID)=(192.0.2.3, 103)
Attacker A2: (IP, appID)=(192.0.2.4, 104)
Target T1: (IP, appID)= (192.0.2.103, 3001)
Participant P2 contains:
Attacker A3: (IP, appID) = (192.0.2.5, 105)
Target T2: (IP, appID)= (192.0.2.104, 4001)
Target T3: (IP, appID)= (192.0.2.105, 5001)
To represent an alert, the following Templates are defined:
Template for target (268)
Template for attacker (269)
Template for participant (270)
Template for alert (271)
alert (271)
| (signatureId)
| (protocolIdentifier)
| (riskRating)
|
+------- participant (270)
|
+------- attacker (269)
| (sourceIPv4Address)
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| (applicationId)
|
+------- target (268)
| (destinationIPv4Address)
| (applicationId)
Note that the attackers are always composed of a single
applicationId, while the targets typically have multiple
applicationId, for the sake of simplicity this example shows only
one applicationId in the target.
Template Record for target, with the Template ID 268:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 268 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| destinationIPv4Address = 12 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| applicationId = 95 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure B0: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Target
Template Record for attacker, with the Template ID 269:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 16 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 269 | Field Count = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| sourceIPv4Address = 8 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| applicationId = 95 | Field Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure B1: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Attacker
Template Record for participant, with the Template ID 270:
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 12 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 270 | Field Count = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| basicList = XXX | Field Length = 0xFFFF |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure B2: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for Participant
The Template Record for the participant has one basicList
Information Element, which is a list of subTemplateLists of
attackers and targets.
Template Record for IPS alert, with the Template ID 271:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 2 | Length = 24 octets |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Template ID = 271 | Field Count = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| signatureId = N/A | Field Length = 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| protocolIdentifier = 4 | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| riskRating = N/A | Field Length = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| subTemplateList = YYY | Field Length = 0xFFFF |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure B3: Encoding IPS Alert, Template for IPS Alert
The subTemplateList in the alert Template Record contains a list
of participants.
The Length of basicList and subTemplateList are encoded in three
bytes even though they may be less than 255 octets.
The Data Set is represented as follows:
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Set ID = 271 | Length = 102 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| signatureId = 1003 | protocolId=17 | riskRating=10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 |participant List Length = 91 |semantic=allOf |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| participant Template ID = 270 | 255 | P1 List Len = |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 41 | semantic=allOf| P1 List Field ID = YYY |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 List Field ID Len = 0xFFFF | 255 |P1 attacker ...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| List Len = 19 |sem=exactlyOne | P1 attacker Template ID = 269 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 attacker A1 sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 attacker A1 applicationId = 103 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 attacker A2 sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 attacker A2 applicationId = 104 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | P1 target List Len = 11 | sem=undefined |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P1 target Template ID = 268 | P1 target T1 destinationIPv4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Address = 192.0.2.103 |P1 target T1 applicationId =...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 3001 | 255 | P2 List Len = |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 41 | semantic=allOf| P2 List Field ID = YYY |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P2 List Field ID Len = 0xFFFF | 255 |P2 attacker ...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| List Len = 11 | sem=undefined | P2 attacker Template ID = 269 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P2 attacker A3 sourceIPv4Address = 192.0.2.5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P2 attacker A3 applicationId = 105 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 255 | P2 target List Len = 19 |semantic=allOf |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| P2 target Template ID = 268 | P2 target T2 destinationIPv4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft <Export of Structured Data in IPFIX> May 2011
| ... Address = 192.0.2.104 |P2 target T2 applicationId =...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 4001 | P2 target T3 destinationIPv4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Address = 192.0.2.105 |P2 target T3 applicationId =...|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... 5001 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure B4: Encoding IPS Alert, Data Set
<Claise, et. Al> Expires September 5 2011 [Page 75]