The IRATI project: objectives, outcomes and lessons learned · • Linux/OS RINA implementation over Ethernet, which can be a platform for research and future RINA-based products

IRATI objectives, outcomes and lessons learned

The IRATI project: objectives, outcomes and lessons learned

3rd international RINA Workshop. Ghent. January 2015

Eduard Grasa (Fundació i2CAT) on behalf of the IRATI team

Quick facts about the project

IRATI objectives and outcomes 2

•  What? Main goals –  To advance the state of the art of RINA towards an architecture

reference model and specifications that are closer to enable implementations deployable in production scenarios.

–  The design and implementation of a RINA prototype on top of Ethernet will enable the experimentation and evaluation of RINA in comparison to TCP/IP.

Budget

Total Cost 1.126.660 €

EC Contribu5on 870.000 €

Dura+on 2 years

Start Date 1st January 2013

External Advisory Board

Juniper Networks, ATOS, Cisco Systems, TRIA Network Systems

5 ac+vi+es:

  WP1: Project management

  WP2: Arch., Use cases and Req.

  WP3: SW Design and Implementation

  WP4: Deployment into OFELIA

  WP5: Dissemination, Standardisation and Exploitation

Who? 5 partners

From 2014

Main goals

•  Linux/OS RINA implementation over Ethernet, which can be a platform for research and future RINA-based products

IRATI objectives, outcomes and lessons learned 3

1

•  Experimental evaluation of the RINA implementation and comparison with the TCP/IP networking stack

2

•  Advance the SotA of RINA specifications: work out new ones, debug and enhance existing ones

3

•  Increase RINA awareness in sci/tech community and contribute to the development of its standardization strategy

4

LINUX/OS RINA IMPLEMENTATION

IRATI objec5ves, outcomes and lessons learned 4

1

•  … but can also be the basis of RINA-based products –  Tightly integrated with the Operating System –  Capable of being optimized for high performance –  Enables future hardware offload of some functions –  Capable of seamlessly supporting existing applications –  IP over RINA

RINA implementation goals

•  Build a platform that enables RINA experimentation … –  Flexible, adaptable (host, interior router, border router) –  Modular design –  Programmable –  RINA over X (Ethernet, TCP, UDP, USB, shared memory, etc.) –  Support for native RINA applications


1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

Some decisions and tradeoffs


Decision Pros Cons

Linux/OS vs other Opera5ng systems

Adop%on, Community, Stability, Documenta%on, Support

Monolithic kernel (RINA/ IPC Model may be be@er suited to micro-‐kernels)

User/kernel split vs user-‐space only

IPC as a fundamental OS service, access device drivers, hardware

offload, IP over RINA, performance

More complex implementa%on and

debugging

C/C++ vs Java, Python, …

Na%ve implementa%on Portability, Skills to master

language (users)

Mul+ple user-‐space daemons vs single one

Reliability, Isola%on between IPCPs and IPC Manager

Communica%on overhead, more complex impl.

SoQ-‐irqs/tasklets vs. workqueues (kernel)

Minimize latency and context switches of data going through the

“stack”

More complex kernel locking and debugging

High-level software arch.


Open source IRATI


•  IRATI github side •  http://irati.github.io/stack

•  Hosts code, docs, issues •  Installation guide •  Experimenters (tutorials)

•  Developers (software arch)

•  Mailing list for users and developers •  [email protected]

•  Procedures to contribute under discussion, doc ongoing

Planned contributions to (open) IRATI


Open IRATI

FP7 IRATI project •  Merge last contribu5ons (new kernel workflow, DTCP, DU Protec5on, fixes) Feb/March 2015

FP7 PRISTINE project •  SoZware Development Kit (RPI) •  Simple configura5on tools •  Management Agent •  Enhanced CDAP and RIB libraries •  Several IPCP Policies •  Bug fixes •  Faux sockets? Network Manager? Contribs during 2015 and 1H 2016

G3+ OC winner IRINA project •  Traffic genera5on modules for test apps, bug fixes April/May 2015

You •  Lots to do! Let’s talk!

EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF THE RINA IMPLEMENTATION


2

Comparison to TCP/IP Not an excuse, but …

•  What is a meaningful comparison today?

–  Raw performance

–  Stability/bugs


Contributors Time Specs Deployed

RINA Prototype 8-‐10 (par5al) 1.5 years Experimental IRATI

Linux networking stack 100s 20+ years Stable for years Millions of systems

–  Structure/complexity of implementation

–  Flexibility/adaptability of design

–  Programmability of implementation

–  Application interface

RSVP Daemon

VPN soQware

Structure and flexibility (RINA vs TCP/IP)

•  RINA: As many IPCPs as you wish; single point of management of the stack; configurable to be a router or a host; no protocols -> policies

•  TCP/IP stack: TCP/UDP over IP over Ethernet (fixed configuration). If routing or resource reservation external software has to be added; if more layers VPN software has to be added; disperse config utils


IPCP (data transfer)

IPCP (layer mgmt)

Shim IPCP

IPC Manager

App

KIPCM

App

Sockets

TCP/UDP

IP / Ethernet

Traffic control

Config. tools Rou+ng Daemon

RSVP Daemon

VPN soQware

Programmability (RINA vs TCP/IP)

•  RINA: Policies programmable in each IPCP: delimiting, EFCP syntax, flow control, rtx. control, addressing, routing, resource allocation, multipexing, authentication, authorization, TTL, encryption, CRC, etc.

•  TCP/IP stack: Fixed syntax, protocols not programmable, have to develop full new protocols to try new things (* with OF now you can “program” the forwarding table)


IPCP (data transfer)

IPCP (layer mgmt)

Shim IPCP

IPC Manager

App

KIPCM

App

Sockets

TCP/UDP

IP / Ethernet

Traffic control

Config. tools Rou+ng Daemon

How to setup an experiment Master the config file!


InstanCaCon of IPCPs Shim DIF config

Normal DIF config, rouCng

Normal DIF config, EFCP

1 Login to the node

2 Edit config file

3 Start IPC Manager

Improving node configuration..


•  Today •  Manual editing of the config

files at each node -> time consuming and error-prone

•  Tomorrow (short-term) •  Standalone tool to generate

configuration files (PRISTINE) •  RINA Plugin Infrastructure (RPI)

Tooling (PRISTINE)

•  Tomorrow (mid-term) •  RINA Configuration via

Network Management System (PRISTINE)

Experiments “easy to setup” today Without having to develop code •  Link-state routing (no metrics)

–  Convergence time after connectivity graph changes vs network diameter

–  Multi-homing –  Routing in multiple layers

•  EFCP –  Layers with different syntaxes (different lengths of fields) –  Different rates of flow control –  Rtx control with ACK immediately policy vs. A-Timer policy

•  See the influence of the A-timer, Rtx. Timer and number of Rtx. –  Different configurations on different layers

•  SDU Protection –  Different CRC/TTL configurations across the layers


Some early results

•  Performance evaluation of the RINA implementation –  IEEE Globecom 2014. Achieves line-rate over GigE link.

•  Deliverable D4.3 (to be published next few weeks) –  Influence of credit (constant policy) in throughput

–  Effect of adding parallel flows on throughput

–  Prototype CPU and memory resource utilization

–  Study of retransmission control behavior at various loss rates (immediate ACK policy vs. A-timer policy) with parallel flows

–  Validation and performance evaluation of shim DIF over TCP/UDP and shim DIF over Hypervisors

–  Evaluation of SDU Protection policies (CRC and TTL)

–  Study on interop requirements with TRIA Network Systems prototype


1

2

3

4

5

1

6

7

ADVANCE STATE OF THE ART OF RINA SPECIFICATIONS


3

•  Source MAC @ (6 bytes) –  Source shim IPC Process address

•  Destination MAC @ (6 bytes) –  Destination shim IPC Process address

•  IEEE 802.1Q tag (2 bytes) –  DIF name

•  Ethertype (2 bytes) –  0x0D1F

19

Shim DIF over Ethernet

Ethernet II PCI Applica+on data

•  Minimum length: 42 bytes (46 if 802.1Q not present)

•  Maximum length: 1500 bytes

Shim DIF over 802.1Q Use of the Ethernet frame

T-5 Alternatives to TCP/IP

Shim DIF over 802.1Q Environment

Investigating RINA as an Alternative to TCP/IP 20

Shim DIF over TCP/UDP

•  Wraps an IP network with the DIF IPC API

•  Two QoS cubes possible: reliable and in-order-delivery of flows (TCP), unreliable (UDP)

–  More could be possible depending on the capabilities of the underlying IP network

•  IPCP name is mapped to an IP address and a port number –  Using proprietary procedures or leveraging DNS (via SRV records)

T-5 Alternatives to TCP/IP 21

IPCP a.1

IPCP b.1

Shim DIF over IP networks

IP layer UDP Port:2524 UDP Port:2524

Shim IPCP X.1

Shim IPCP Y.1

IP: 4.3.2.1 IP: 5.3.5.8

2 5

Flow

Shim DIF for HyperVisors


•  Allow a VM to communicate with its Main Environment (Host OS for type 2 HV or privileged VM for type 1 HVs), using shared memory mechanisms

Type 2 HyperVisor

Type 1 HyperVisor

Link-state routing policy


RIB Daemon

Resource Allocator

PDU Forwarding Table Generator

Events

N-‐1 flow allocated N-‐1 flow deallocated

N-‐1 flow down N-‐1 flow up

Neighbor B invoked write opera5on on object X

CDAP

Incoming CDAP messages from neighbor IPC Processes

CDAP

Outgoing CDAP messages to neighbor IPC Processes

Invoke write opera5on on object X to neighbor A

Update knowledge on N-‐1 flow state

Propagate knowledge on N-‐1 flow state

Recompute forwarding table

PDU Forwarding Table

Relaying and Mul+plexing Task

Lookup PDU Forwarding table to select output N-‐1

flow for each PDU

4 3 2 1

N-‐1 Flows to nearest neighbors

IPC Process

Enrollment Task

Events

Enrollment completed successfully

INCREASE RINA AWARENESS AND STANDARDS STRATEGY


4

Some reactions to the RINA message

•  Disseminating RINA can be challenging sometimes …


SkepCcism If it’s so nice, why it is not implemented yet?

Not mainstream? Don’t care

Some tips for disseminating RINA

•  RINA is a new architecture, not a single point solution. Position RINA as a better toolbox to allow architects/designers to design better networks. –  Benefits of RINA are easier to understand when you take a

systems view.

•  Explain relationship of RINA with hot topics such as SDN, NFV, 5G, ICN –  In order to create initial interest and provide some context

•  We need to work out specific use cases of how RINA could be used in certain environments –  See IRINA NRENs and GEANT use case – to be published soon


Standards: PSOC and ISO

•  Need for a forum that is the authoritative source for the RINA specifications and keeps them up to date –  Must be formed by people that is interested in moving RINA

forward and are experts in the topic -> cannot be established SDOs (have their own agendas)

–  PSOC talk later this afternoon by John Day

•  ISO SC6 WG 7 (Future Networks) –  RINA presented last October, received with interest –  Opportunity to bring RINA as one of this group’s projects; very

long process but may be worth –  It may work to do the RINA standards within PSOC, take them

to ISO for approval and international recognition


IRATI objectives, outcomes and lessons learned

Questions? Thanks to all the IRATI crew!

http://irati.eu

Documents

The IRATI project: objectives, outcomes and lessons learned · • Linux/OS RINA implementation over Ethernet, which can be a platform for research and future RINA-based products