Status Update of CAPWAP Architecture Taxonomy Lily Yang (Editor) Intel Corp. August 4, th IETF meeting

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy2 Overview What happened since last IETF? Learning from the taxonomy work (v04) Conclusions

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy3 Draft History Since 59 th IETF March: –V00: minor revision from the individual draft –59 th IETF at Seoul: Design Team (12 people) –Architecture Survey (14 submissions) –Presented to IEEE , started discussion on AP Functional Description April: major rewrite of the draft –v01: basic outline of the architecture landscapes, adopting Matrix for data representation –V02: refinement of text and draft organization May: –IEEE review (50+ comments) –IETF CAPWAP WG mailing list comments –IEEE WG approved formation of new SG for AP Functional Description June: –2 more survey submissions (mesh vendors) –V03: incorporated IEEE+IETF comments and rewrote section on distributed arch. July: –More comments and discussion at the mailing list –V04: incorporated above comments) Aug: –Received comments from security review –Plan to do v05 next week: incorporate comments from above –Ready for WG last call => Informational RFC

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy4 Design Team Lily Yang (Intel, Editor) Petros Zerfos (UCLA) Sadot, Emek (Avaya) Ajit Sanzgiri (Cisco Systems) Bob O’Hara (AireSpace) Dave Hetherington (Roving Planet) Inderpreet Singh (Chantry Networks) Jim Murphy (Trapeze Networks) Matt Holdrege (Strix Systems) Partha Narasimhan (Aruba Wireless Networks) Peyush AGARWAL (STMicroelectronics) Victor Lin (Extreme Networks)

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy5 Architecture Survey Template Design considerations & requirements WLAN functions supported The functional architecture to implement the functions described The protocol used between network entities Network connectivity assumptions (L2 or L3) Security Analysis Pros and Cons

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy6 16 Architecture Survey Submissions AireSpace Aruba Wireless Networks Avaya Chantry Networks Cisco Sytems Cranite Systems Extreme Networks, Instant802 Intoto Janusys Networks Nortel Networks Panasonic Strix Systems Symbol Trapeze UCLA

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy7 CAPWAP Architecture Taxonomy Autonomous Architecture Centralized Architecture Distributed Architecture WLAN Architectures * Centralized controller * Distributed control across multiple nodes * Self-contained controller Categorized Largely by Control Plane Characteristics

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy8 Autonomous Architecture: Traditional WLAN Architecture STA 1STA2 AP STA 3STA 4 AP Autonomous (standalone) AP: “ fat ” and self- contained AP No explicit infrastructure support for “ wireless ” Each AP provides most of the WLAN functions including “ distribution ”, “ integration ” and other L3 services within itself. External Network AP STA 5

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy9 Centralized Architecture STA 1 STA2 WTP STA 3STA 4 WTP External Network WTP A ccess Controller (AC) STA 5 “ WTP + AC ” together implements AP functions Advantages of AC: –centralized controller(s) => manageability for large networks –network wide visibility => better coordination across the network Challenges: –no standard way of splitting AP functions onto WTP and AC Current State of Art: No interoperability

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy10 From Autonomous to Centralized Local MAC (5) Split MAC (6) Remote MAC (1) AP Functionality WTPAC Real Time MACPHYNon RT MACControl & Config Autonomous (1) WTP MACPHY Control & Config AC WTP MACPHYControl & Config WTP AC Real Time MACPHYNon RT MACControl & Config

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy11 Functional Distribution Matrix for Local MAC Arch7 Arch8 Arch9 Arch10 Arch connectivity L3 L3 L3 L3 L mgmt termination WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP control termination WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP data aggregation AC AC WTP AC WTP

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy12 Functional Distribution Matrix for Split MAC Arch1 Arch2 Arch3 Arch4 Arch5 Arch connectivity L3 L3 L3 L2 L3 L mgmt termination AC AC AC AC AC/WTP AC control termination WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP data aggregation AC AC AC AC AC AC Same as Local MAC Different than Local MAC

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy13 From Centralized to Distributed: Mesh Example Data plane: de-centralized, multi-hop Control plane: can be either –Centralized, or –Distributed (via peer-to-peer mesh interface), or –Hybrid STA 1STA2 WTP #1 STA 3STA 4 WTP #3 External Network WTP #2 STA 5 ACPortal

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy14 Summary 3 distinct architecture families: –Autonomous (traditional) –Centralized (current generation) –Distributed (emerging, TGs) Among the centralized architecture family: 3 sub-categories –Remote MAC: severe constraints on AC-WTP inter-connection & WTP capability –Local MAC: there exists enough commonality that should make cross- vendor interoperability feasible. –Split MAC: cross-vendor interoperability should also be feasible. Harder question: Interoperability across architectures (e.g. between local MAC & Split MAC)? –Is it necessary? –Is it feasible? Next Steps: –Define the exact interoperability scope for the protocol(s) Target architecture(s) If multiple architectures: Same or different protocols?

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy15 Proposed Next Steps V05: WG Last call Aug IESG review for Informational RFC publication Re-charter for Protocol work: define the scope for interoperability (architecture assumptions, Protocol requirements, …) Sept Protocol Proposal(s)

60th IETF: CAPWAP Arch. Taxonomy16 Design Team Mission Accomplished (almost) THANK YOU Lily Yang (Intel, Editor) Petros Zerfos (UCLA) Sadot, Emek (Avaya) Ajit Sanzgiri (Cisco Systems) Bob O’Hara (AireSpace) Dave Hetherington (Roving Planet) Inderpreet Singh (Chantry Networks) Jim Murphy (Trapeze Networks) Matt Holdrege (Strix Systems) Partha Narasimhan (Aruba Wireless Networks) Peyush AGARWAL (STMicroelectronics) Victor Lin (Extreme Networks)