1. Scalable, efficient, personalized, end-to-end QoS Provisioning Polyrakis Andreas apolyr@noc.ntua.gr Dimitrios Kalogeras dkalo@noc.ntua.gr 21.03.2002 GRNET - NTUA

2. Contents  Motives & Targets  Approach  LAN Archtiecture  WAN Architecture  Demo

3. Motives  Issues in QoS Provisioning  Personalization vs Automation (LDAP  policies)  Personalization vs Scalability (personalized policies  inter-domain signaling)  Scalability vs Automation (DiffServ  RSVP)  Automation vs Personalization (RSVP  LDAP)  Requirements  Scalable  Personalized  Automated (efficient)  End-to-End

4. Projects’ Targets  «Almost» Automatic QoS Provisioning per User /Application  Almost ~ Atomated Administratevelly (Semi) automated from user  Personalized service  Allocation from Administrator  User’s request  End-to-End (inter-domain)

5. Basic Assumptions  Approach LAN – WAN  WAN: Architecture Diffserv  LAN: Architecture RSVP  A Border router (congestion) in LAN  Internal LAN Overprovisioned – GigE  Congestion on egress of WAN’s POPs

6. Approach  LAN problem  Authentication  Personalization  Signaling  DiffServ marking of egress traffic  Check ingress traffic BEFORE admitting

7. Trust Model  Egress - Shengen Model  Check on Exit  Ingress – Visa Model  Check on entrance  I.e.: Gold traffic between NTUA  UoP  Check fron NTUA on Exit  Free transit in GRnet  Check from UoP on entrance

8. End-2-End?  QoS Request  Accept and Process from LAN PDP  LAN Installation- Automatic Reception from WAN  Reception of reverse traffic on WAΝ’s PoP  Symmetric Procedure on the other end provides Bidirectional end-2-end Qos

9. LAN Approach

10. Modelling  Profiles  Set of allowed QoS configuration Assigned (default QoS Policy) Requested (Rights for QoS Requests)  Application of Profiles on Users  Policies  Logging of requirements  Application of Policies on routers  Policies + Profiles + Authentication info (+user requests)  Implementation of Targets

11. Implementation – Policies  QoS Policy – Modular QoS CLI (MQC)  Classes – group of traffic with ACLs  Action – “priority – Bandwidth”  Olympic Metal “Gold, Silver, Bronze”  Preconfigured ratio G-S-B

12. Implementation - LDAP  Profiles  Flow Description, Possible CLasses)  Assigned – Requested  More conditions  Users ε profiles PDP Monitoring & Accounting

13. Implementation – User Interface  Thin Client – Fat Server  Web application  Secure Authentication ( Username, Password), secure cookies, One-Time Passwords  Soft-state (RSVP Like)  Signaling (manual) Automated signaling via RSVP not yet implemented

14. Implementation – Policy Server  Central Server  Policy Decision Point (PDP)  Data Base

15. Implemetation - DataBase  Authentication Information  Registered resources from (IP, Ports)  User Profiles from LDAP  User’s Request  ACL for (MQC) Furthermore: Statisitics, monitoring data

16. Implementation - PDP  Data Combination in DataBase  ACLs Creation  Uploading ACLs on router  Step 1: Database clean up  expired users (  authenticated resources)  expired requests, requests of expired deleted users  of policies of deleted users  Of policies with class not matching acls  Step 2: monitoring-accounting application. Policy inactivation when daily usage has expired  user  Class  User’s profile  Step 3: Revision of acl table  Deletion if old rows  Rename of old entries to new ones  Creation of new rows  Step 4: Creation of incoming and outgoing acl  Step 5: Upload of acls on TFTP and HTTP server  Step6 6: Comand router to download outgoing acl

17. Basic LAN Architecture

18. WAN Approach

19. Extension of QoS Requests on Backbone  Installation of incoming policy of every member according to his requirement  Configuration of every member on backbone LDAP  Connected Router  Static / Dynamic Policy Dynamic {url, refresh rate}  Communication with member PDP  Easy application on Internet connection (Geant)  Policy communication with ( HTTP)

20. WAN - Architecture

21. Extension of QoS on Remote side  Check Incoming policy from every member  Autonomy  NO Backbone management (installation …)  Symmetric implementation on outgoing policy  Extension: Automatic Installation of reverse direction SLAs  Between members  Between members and GRNET

22. Demo http://linux.noc.ntua.gr/qos

23. Acknowledgements  Kostas Kalevras  Thanasis Douitsis  Rania labrou

24. Ευχαριστούμε!!! ? Ερωτήσεις ????