Developing a Next-Generation Internet

Architecture

Robert Braden, David Clark,Scott Shenker, and John Wrokclawski

Presented By Ding Lizhao

This is the Introductory Paper of the NewArch Project, and was written in 2000.

Consequence: Requirements drive the Architecture drives the technical design.

Main concerns: Why do we need an Architecture? The problems within the original Architecture. What are the requirements of the original Arch? What are the new requirements for the NG

Architecture? How to design/develop the NewArch briefly and

conceptually

Paper approach

Why do we need Architecture? It is the set of High-level design principles Provides a guide or a baseline to ensure the resulting

technical design’s consistency and coherence The problems with the original Internet Arch?

Increasing App. And new requirements eating out the viability

Extensions to meet the bounded regions( point solutions) decrease the coherence and consistency.

Eg. IPSEC, Firewall, NAT, Label Switching The extensions have interaction problems Lead to a loss of functionality, adaptability,

robustness

Architecture drives technical design

Requirements drive the Architecture

Development of an architecture must be guided in part by an understanding of the requirements to be met

Requirements Underlying the original Internet Arch. Internetworking Robustness Heterogeneity Distributed management Cost Ease of attachment Accountability

Requirements drive the Architecture Features of the new requirements:

Some from no-technical issues in real world, most are due to the commercialization of the Internet

The others are themselves from the product of the earlier technical designs

Fewer and fewer requirements are truly global So single ordered list is problematic, Multi-ordered set is

needed. The new requirements(technical drivers):

Mobility Policy-based Auto-configuration Highly time-variable resources Allocation of Capacity Exemely long propagation delays

Development of NewArch(1)

Work from established principles as much as possible

Backwards the compatibility issue to a lower priority

Development components list: Examination of the failed areas Examination of the changed and changing requirements Exploration of the new proposed architectural

changes(2) Exploration of the new meta-principles(3) Implementation of proof-of-concept environment(4) Iteration based on feedback Etc.

Development of NewArch (2):new architectural principles A new architecture: ALF

lower cost, more flexible implementation, more efficient operation over diverse infrastructure, effectively support wider range of applications

The idea is used to implement new applications based on existing network by researchers

But proposal was not cast as a incremental of the original architecture

A new layer in the reference model Internet composed by regions Isolator defined to connect the regions Additional layer added in the protocol stack: Trust

enforcement layer It is a sort of reconsideration of e2e argument

Development of NewArch(3): meta-principles

Meta-architectural principle To specifically acknowledge the variability of

requirements of different regions of the network

To minimize the degree of the required global architectural consistency

To maximize the regional flexibility

Development of NewArch(4): Proof-of-

concept Proof-of-concept environment

To ensure the conceptual research and work are not idle by using the combination of the experimental code and simulation

Areas need to be validated: Scaling issues heterogeneity High performance Interaction with economic and business models

Conclusions

Architecture plays core role in the technical development of the Internet

Long-term viability needs a more evolutionary approach

Evolution is need for both concrete and abstract result.