GEC3 – October 28-30, 2008www.geni.net1 Control Framework Working Group System Engineering Report October 29, 2008 Harry Mussman CF WG System Engineer groups.geni.net GENI working group wiki

What is the GENI control framework? October 29, 2008www.geni.net2 Control framework includes: Clearinghouse Registries, each Aggregate Manager and users such as Researchers with their Experiment Control Tools, communicating via the Control Plane.

Agenda Goals Introduction to WG SE and roles Relevant Spiral 1 projects Control Framework Architecture (CFA) document Current CF issues Planned CF documents CF WG action items October 29, 2008www.geni.net3

Goals (for this meeting) Understand WG SE roles Get overview of CF WG activities Discuss work plan for coming year, and make suggestions Recommend collaborators and authors October 29, 2008www.geni.net4

Who am I? Harry Mussman –Current: Senior Systems Engineer in the GPO at BBN –Last: Voice-over-IP architect at BridgePort Networks (a startup) and GTE Internetworking/Genuity –BSEE Univ Michigan, MSEE Northwestern Univ, PhD Stanford Univ GENI roles: –Control Framework WG SE –Opt-in WG SE –GPO coordinator for six Spiral 1 projects October 29, 2008www.geni.net5

Role of the Control Framework WG SE Frame technical issues from top-down –Collect issues from WG, compile and revise –Use to identify and structure WG documents Synthesize input from bottom-up –Collect input from WG, and distribute –Look for and summarize consensus (or lack of it) Draft WG documents… –Manage process to completion Assist WG communications –Take and distribute notes –Maintain wiki October 29, 2008www.geni.net6

How WG Creates a Document SE drafts document GPO does internal review SE posts first draft –On wiki (to start); repository up RSN WG discusses document on WG list –Possible one-on-one follow-ups SE assembles changes, and revises SE posts revision (Repeat, until document completed) October 29, 2008www.geni.net7

Agenda Goals Introduction to WG SE and roles Relevant Spiral 1 projects Control Framework Architecture (CFA) document Current CF issues Planned CF documents CF WG action items October 29, 2008www.geni.net8

9 GENI Spiral 1 Integration: Five Control Framework Clusters 1578 Overlay Hosting Nodes 1579 ProtoGENI 1595 Great Plains Environment for Ntwk Innovation 1646 CMU Testbeds 1609 DETER Trial Integ 1609 DETER Trial Integ 1642 Instrumentation Tools 1613 Enterprise GENI 1600 PlanetLab 1658 Mid-Atlantic Crossroads 1658 Mid-Atlantic Crossroads 1602 Sensor/Actuat or Network 1582 ORCA/BEN 1599 Vehicular Mobile Network 1660 ORBIT Framework 1601 Virtual Tunnels 1657 WIMAX 1657 WIMAX 1663 Digital Object Registry 1663 Digital Object Registry 1633 Kansei Sensor Network 1628 Measurement System 1604 GENI Meta Operations 1643 Programmable Edge Node 1621 GUSH Tools 1622 Provisioning Service 1650 Regional Opt-In 1650 Regional Opt-In 1632 Security Architecture 1645 Million- Node GENI 1610 GENI at 4-Year Colleges 1610 GENI at 4-Year Colleges Cluster A Cluster ECluster D Cluster CCluster B Key: Projects with active Spiral 1 clearinghouse interfaces STUDY ALL PICK ONE 1619 Optical Access Networks 1619 Optical Access Networks Column labels show common control framework Highlighted Spiral 1 projects are central or highly relevant to Control Framework 1653 Data Plane Measurements 1631 Embedded Real-time Measurements 1631 Embedded Real-time Measurements

Spiral 1 Projects Five Spiral 1 projects are focused on control frameworks for different clusters of projects: –1609 DETER (Cluster A) –1600 Planetlab (Cluster B) –1579 ProtoGENI (Cluster C) –1582 ORCA (Cluster D) –1660 ORBIT (Cluster E) Each is implementing Clearinghouse Registries, and reference software for an Aggregate Manager. Three Spiral 1 projects are highly relevant to the CFs: –1621 GUSH tools –1632 Security Architecture –1663 Digital Object Registry October 29, 2008www.geni.net10

continued (2) CF is highest risk item for Spiral 1. Having five CFs: –Will mitigate risks. –Will bring unique contributions to the table. –Allows strengths to be identified, for inclusion in final CF. –Prevents the loss of good ideas. Expect consolidation over time, but no “sudden death”. How do we: –Clearly describe each CF, with a common vocabulary? –Understand similarities and differences? –Identify common issues, and get them resolved? –Work towards defining a “final” CF? October 29, 2008www.geni.net11

Agenda Goals Introduction to WG SE and roles Relevant Spiral 1 projects Control Framework Architecture (CFA) document Current CF issues Planned CF documents CF WG action items October 29, 2008www.geni.net12

Control Framework Architecture Document Drafted, and now ready for review by CF WG: GENI-ARCH-CP-01.4.pdf GENI-ARCH-CP-01.4.pdf Intent: –Clearly describe each CF, with a common vocabulary. –Understand similarities and differences. –Identify common issues. –A way towards defining a “final” CFA Approach: –Separate the CFA into parts, indicating architectural options and current choices. –Provide multiple “worked examples”. –Provide a “linear” structure, to decompose the CFA, and be able to understand structure/features of each current CF implementation. October 29, 2008www.geni.net13

continued (2) Structure of document: –Start with system design overview to understand structure and concepts. (Section 3) –List features and functions that must be included. (Section 4) –Present control framework structure, including entities, interfaces, principals, services and objects. (Section 5) –Consider each interface, plus major concepts, and present examples of usage that walks through key scenarios. (Sections 6 – 11) –Include sections to summarize five current control frameworks being implemented for Spiral 1. (Sections 12 – 16) October 29, 2008www.geni.net14

continued (3) Shows current architecture choices: –Generally common to current implementations. –Control interfaces include APIs that follow a web services model, using SOAP and https (for a secure channel). –Principals (and services) have global identities, and are identified and authenticated with certificates from a PKI –Authorization is handled with signed tokens (certificates) that are passed from registry, to researcher, to aggregate, etc., based on an underlying trust management system. Has allowed several architectural issues to be identified. October 29, 2008www.geni.net15

Agenda Goals Introduction to WG SE and roles Relevant Spiral 1 projects Control Framework Architecture (CFA) document Current CF issues Planned CF documents CF WG action items October 29, 2008www.geni.net16

Identified Control Framework Issues Issue 1: CFA includes authentication and authorization techniques that are strongly dependent on security architecture. –Are current choices reasonable? –What changes will have to be made as security architecture is formulated? –1632 Security Architecture project will address this issue. –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net17

continued (2) Issue 2: Identity and authentication should include use of existing identity management systems, to permit easier federation –Which system(s)? InCommon? Others? –How can this best be done? –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net18

continued (3) Issue 3: CFA includes authorization techniques that are based on signed tokens. –This is fundamental to current CFA. –What needs to be done to properly verify signed tokens? –What needs to be done to properly verify the identity of offering principal (service)? –Can we be sure that this will work securely in a large scale system? –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net19

continued (4) Issue 4: CFA authorization mechanism is part of a larger trust management system. –Principals have “credential” (signed “trust assertion”). –Aggregate Manager accepts credential, and uses a local “policy checker” to decide whether (or not) to authorize resource assignment. –How does Policy Checker work? –Can it be extended to flexibly utilize new parameters and approaches? –How can trust management be established over diverse entities, to permit wide-ranging federation? –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net20

continued (5) Issue 5: Current CF implementations have clearinghouse registries (and related authority services) that vary. –From centralized to distributed. –With different arrangements of registries and related authority services. –Can one CFA accommodate them all? –How? –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net21

continued (6) Issue 6: Current CF implementations have different token flows for requesting resources, etc. –Can we identify and evaluate the differences? –Can we have a flexible arrangement for future extensions? –How does this interact with the resource description approach? –Is the current approach to an Rspec sufficient, or does it need to be extended? –Who in WG is interested in this issue? October 29, 2008www.geni.net22

Next Steps for CFA Document Continue to identify and address issues. –Fold solutions back into CFA document. Provide a “linear” structure for the CFA. –To be able to decompose the CFA. –And apply to understanding the structure/features of each current CF implementation. Continue reviews of CFA document, revise, and repeat until complete. Who in WG is interested in helping? Work toward v2 of CFA document, as we learn from Spiral 1 implementations. October 29, 2008www.geni.net23

Agenda Goals Introduction to WG SE and roles Relevant Spiral 1 projects Control Framework Architecture (CFA) document Current CF issues Planned CF documents CF WG action items October 29, 2008www.geni.net24

Planned Control Framework Documents Architecture: –CF Architecture, v1DRAFT compete 10/17/08 –CF Architecture, v2DRAFT due 6/16/09 Subsystems: –Clearinghouse Subsystem Technical Description, v1 DRAFT due 2/15/09 –Clearinghouse Subsystem Technical Description, v2 DRAFT due 7/16/09 –Clearinghouse Subsystem Intfc Cntrl Doc, v1 DRAFT due 3/1/09 –Clearinghouse Subsystem Intfc Cntrl Doc, v2 DRAFT due 8/1/09 October 29, 2008www.geni.net25

Control Framework Action Items 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) October 29, 2008www.geni.net26

Follow-up Notes, slides, actions, etc will be sent to the working group mail list and posted on the wiki page: October 29, 2008www.geni.net27