Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-mboned-geo-distribution-control
draft-ietf-mboned-geo-distribution-control
Internet Engineering Task Force H. Jeng
Internet-Draft AT&T
Intended status: Standards Track J. Haas
Expires: August 10, 2014 Y. Rekhter
J. Zhang
Juniper Networks
February 6, 2014
Multicast Geo-Distribution Control
draft-ietf-mboned-geo-distribution-control-00
Abstract
Consider a content provider that wants to deliver a particular
content to a set of customers/subscribers, where the provider and the
subscribers are connected by an IP service provider. This document
covers two areas needed to accomplish this:
1. Providing the content provider with the information of whether it
can use the multicast connectivity service provided by the IP
service provider to deliver a particular content to a particular
set of subscribers, and
2. Providing the content provider with a mechanism to restrict
delivery of a given content to a particular set of the
subscribers.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 10, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
Copyright (c) 2014 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.
Table of Contents
1. Specification of Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Multicast Content Distribution Zones . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. A Brief Overview of Multicast Distribution
Reachability Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4. A Brief Overview of Multicast Distribution Control
Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4.1. An example of configuration on ERs . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Overview of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
1. Specification of Requirements
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].
1.1. Introduction
Consider a content provider that wants to deliver a particular
content to a set of customers/subscribers, where the provider and the
subscribers are connected by an IP service provider. This document
covers two areas needed to accomplish this:
1. Providing the content provider with the information of whether it
can use the multicast connectivity service provided by the IP
service provider to deliver a particular content to a particular
set of subscribers, and
2. Providing the content provider with a mechanism to restrict
delivery of a given content to a particular set of the
subscribers.
For the purpose of this document we assume that a content provider
consists of one or more Content Servers, and one or more Content
Distribution Controllers. While this document assumes communication
between Content Servers and Content Distribution Controllers, the
procedures for implementing such communication is outside the scope
of this document.
Content Servers are connected to one or more IP service providers
(ISP) that can offer both multicast and unicast connectivity service
to the subscribers of the content provider. The content provider
uses this ISP(s) to deliver content to its subscribers.
Subscribers are connected to the Edge Routers (ERs) of the ISP. Note
that the multicast connectivity service provided by the ISP extends
all the way to the ERs. Such service could be provided by either
deploying IP multicast natively, or with some tunneling mechanism
like AMT, or by a combination of both within the ISP. However,
between the ERs and the subscribers there may, or may not be
multicast connectivity.
In the case where a particular subscriber of a given content provider
does not have multicast connectivity to its ER, the content provider
would use IP unicast service provided by the ISP to transmit the
particular content to that subscriber.
A subscriber may want to access a particular content that is not
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
available to that subscriber due to policy reasons. When that
subscriber would have received that content via unicast connectivity,
the Content Distribution Controller, or the Content Servers, or both
may enforce the policy to not deliver the content. However, when the
content would be delivered via multicast connectivity it may be
possible for the subscriber to receive the content by illicitly
participating in the multicast signaling for that content.
To prevent a subversion of the intent of this content delivery
policy, a mechanism is provided to make this policy available to
devices participating in multicast signaling.
1.2. Multicast Content Distribution Zones
For each item of content provided by a content provider, the content
provider maintains a list of subscribers who are either excluded or
allowed to receive the content. For the purpose of maintaining this
list this document assumes that subscribers are grouped into "zones"
based on IP addresses, so that exclusion/inclusion uniformly applies
to all the subscribers within a given zone. Procedures by which
subscribers are grouped into zones are outside the scope of this
document. However, this document assumes that this grouping is done
consistently by both the content provider and the ISP(s) that the
content provider uses for delivering its content.
One example of an implementation of such a zone is based on the
geographic location of the subscribers. Such zones may be used to
implement broadcast "blackout" of some content such as a sporting
event that may not be allowed to air in certain regions due to
regulatory reasons.
1.3. A Brief Overview of Multicast Distribution Reachability Signaling
Content providers and Content Distribution Controllers need to know
the transport mechanism that a subscriber can use to receive some
content. Since not all subscribers may be capable of receiving
content via IP multicast, Multicast Distribution Reachability
Signaling [MDRS] is used to permit the subscriber's ISP to provide
this information.
MDRS permits advertises a BGP prefix with a new SAFI, MCAST-REACH, to
indicate subscribers in the accompanying AFI of the MCAST-REACH SAFI
can receive multicast traffic.
Please see the MDRS document for more details.
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
1.4. A Brief Overview of Multicast Distribution Control Signaling
A content provider or a service provider may need to enforce policies
to exclude access to an item of content that is delivered by IP
multicast. Multicast Distribution Control Signaling [MDCS] permits
this such enforcement to be distributed as BGP flowspec filters with
a new SAFI, MCAST-FLOWSPEC. This filters are used by the multicast
control plane to determine whether access to multicast content may be
made available to downstream routers, including ERs.
These flowspec filters are distributed in BGP with Route Targets
[RFC4360] that identify the include or exclude policy for a zone.
Multicast routers receiving these filters maintain an ordered list of
these Route Target policies to install the filters. The multicast
control plane then makes use of the filter database to implement the
desired policy.
1.4.1. An example of configuration on ERs
Consider an ER in Manhattan that has a port that is provisioned with
the following import RTs:
<include-manhattan, exclude-manhattan, include-nyc, exclude-
nyc, include-east, exclude-east, include-usa, exclude-usa>
When the ER receives a Flow Spec route with <exclude-nyc, include-
manhattan, include-usa> RTs, the ER first try to match "include-
manhattan" or "exclude-manhattan" (the first ones on the list) - and
the result is "include-manhattan". Therefore, the (S, G) carried in
the Flow Spec route is allowed on that port of the ER.
Consider another ER in Boston that has a port that is provisioned
with the following import RTs:
<include-cambridge, exclude-cambridge, include-bos, exclude-
bos, include-east, exclude-east, include-usa, exclude-usa>
The above mentioned Flow Spec route will be imported (due to the
include-usa RT), and will result in the (S, G) carried in the flow
Spec route to be allowed on that port of the ER.
Now consider a different Flow Spec route with the <exclude-usa,
include-bos, include-nyc, exclude-manhattan> RTs. The (S, G) carried
in the route will be disallowed in Manhattan, allowed in Boston, and
allowed in Queens (as the route will match the "include-nyc" RT).
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
2. Overview of Operations
An ISP, using the procedures described in Multicast Distribution
Reachability Signaling [MDRS], provides a content provider, and
specifically Content Distribution Controller(s) of that content
provider, with the information of whether a particular subscriber of
that content provider has multicast connectivity to an ER of that ISP
with the information of whether a particular group of subscribers can
receive multicast content.
To enforce the exclusion/inclusion policies, the content provider
uses procedures described in Multicast Distribution Control Signaling
[MDCS].
For each content provided by a content provider, the content provider
selects a particular multicast channel (S, G) for distributing this
content using multicast connectivity service. Procedures by which
the content provider selects a particular multicast channel, and
maintains the mapping are outside the scope of this document.
Subscribers are connected to the Edge Routers (ERs) of the ISP. Note
that when multicast connectivity service provided is by the ISP, that
service extends all the way to the ERs. Such service could be
provided by either deploying IP multicast natively, or with some
tunneling mechanism like AMT, or a combination of both within the
ISP. However, between the ERs and the subscribers there may, or may
not be multicast connectivity.
When a subscriber wants to receive the particular content from its
content provider, the subscriber issues a request for this content to
the Content Distribution Controller of the provider. When the
Content Distribution Controller receives the request, the Content
Distribution Controller uses the information carried in the request
(e.g., IP address of the subscriber) to determine the zone of the
subscriber, and based on that zone to determine whether the
subscriber can receive this content.
If the Content Distribution Controller determines that the subscriber
can receive the content, then based on the information provided by
the multicast distribution reachability signaling the Content
Distribution Controller determines whether the subscriber can receive
this content using multicast connectivity service, and if yes, then
returns to the subscriber the multicast channel selected for
distributing the content.
If the Content Distribution Controller determines that the subscriber
can receive the content, but can not receive the content using
multicast connectivity service, the Content Distribution Controller
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
returns to the subscriber the information needed to receive this
content using unicast connectivity service.
If the content would have been delivered to the subscriber via
multicast connectivity, but the Content Distribution Controller had
determined the subscriber was not permited access to this content,
then this policy may need to be enforced by the Edge Routers or
upstream multicast routers to prevent illicit access of this content.
This policy is enforced by utilizing filtering information
distributed using Multicast Distribution Control Signaling [MDCS].
Specification of the procedures for communication between subscribers
and Content Distribution Controllers are outside the scope of this
document.
3. IANA Considerations
This document introduces no IANA Considerations.
4. Security Considerations
TBD
5. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Han Nguyen for his contributions to
this document.
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[MDCS] Jeng, H., Haas, J., Rekhter, Y., and J. Zhang, "Multicast
Distribution Control Signaling",
draft-ietf-idr-mdcs-00.txt (work in progress), 2014.
[MDRS] Jeng, H., Haas, J., Rekhter, Y., and J. Zhang, "Multicast
Distribution Reachability Signaling",
draft-ietf-idr-mdrs-00.txt (work in progress), 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Multicast Geo Distribution Control February 2014
6.2. Informative References
[RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, February 2006.
Authors' Addresses
Huajin Jeng
AT&T
Email: hj2387@att.com
Jeffrey Haas
Juniper Networks
1194 N. Mathida Ave.
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
US
Email: jhaas@juniper.net
Yakov Rekhter
Juniper Networks
1194 N. Mathida Ave.
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
US
Email: yakov@juniper.net
Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Juniper Networks
1194 N. Mathida Ave.
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
US
Email: zzhang@juniper.net
Jeng, et al. Expires August 10, 2014 [Page 8]
