Taxonomy of real time applications Applications Elastic tcp

  • Slides: 24
Download presentation
Taxonomy of real time applications Applications Elastic (tcp, udp) Download mp 3 Real time

Taxonomy of real time applications Applications Elastic (tcp, udp) Download mp 3 Real time Intolerant (remote surgery) Tolerant Nonadaptive Adaptive Rate adaptive (change video b/w) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks Delay adaptive (add delay) page 1

Qo. S Approaches 4 Fine grained - individual application or flows < Intserv <

Qo. S Approaches 4 Fine grained - individual application or flows < Intserv < E. g. for my video chat application 4 Coarse grained - aggregated traffic < Diffserv < E. g. All traffic from CSE (costs $$) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 2

Integrated Services 4 IETF - 1995 -97 time frame 4 Service Classes < guaranteed

Integrated Services 4 IETF - 1995 -97 time frame 4 Service Classes < guaranteed < controlled-load (tolerant, adaptive applications) = Simulates lightly loaded link 4 Mechanisms < signaling protocol: signals required service < admission control: rejects traffic that cannot be serviced < Policing: make sure that senders stick to agreement < packet scheduling: manage how packets are queued 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 3

Flowspec 4 Rspec: describes service requested from network < controlled-load: none < guaranteed: delay

Flowspec 4 Rspec: describes service requested from network < controlled-load: none < guaranteed: delay target 4 Tspec: describes flow’s traffic characteristics < average bandwidth + burstiness: token bucket filter = token rate r and bucket depth B < must have a token to send a byte < must have n tokens to send n bytes < start with no tokens < accumulate tokens at rate of r per second < can accumulate no more than B tokens 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 4

Per-Router Mechanisms 4 Admission Control < decide if a new flow can be supported

Per-Router Mechanisms 4 Admission Control < decide if a new flow can be supported < answer depends on service class < not the same as policing 4 Packet Processing < classification: associate each packet with the appropriate reservation < scheduling: manage queues so each packet receives the requested service 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 5

Reservation Protocol 4 4 4 Called signaling in ATM Proposed Internet standard: RSVP Consistent

Reservation Protocol 4 4 4 Called signaling in ATM Proposed Internet standard: RSVP Consistent with robustness of today’s connectionless model Uses soft state (refresh periodically) Designed to support multicast Receiver-oriented Two messages: PATH and RESV Source transmits PATH messages every 30 seconds Destination responds with RESV message Merge requirements in case of multicast Can specify number of speakers 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 6

RSVP Example (multicast) Sender 1 PATH R Sender 2 R PATH RESV (merged) R

RSVP Example (multicast) Sender 1 PATH R Sender 2 R PATH RESV (merged) R RESV R R Receiver A RESV Receiver B 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 7

RSVP versus ATM (Q. 2931) 4 RSVP < receiver generates reservation < soft state

RSVP versus ATM (Q. 2931) 4 RSVP < receiver generates reservation < soft state (refresh/timeout) < separate from route establishment < Qo. S can change dynamically < receiver heterogeneity 4 ATM < sender generates connection request < hard state (explicit delete) < concurrent with route establishment < Qo. S is static for life of connection < uniform Qo. S to all receivers 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 8

Differentiated Services 4 Problem with Int. Serv: scalability, Int. Serv operates in a per-flow

Differentiated Services 4 Problem with Int. Serv: scalability, Int. Serv operates in a per-flow basis 4 Idea: segregate packets into a small number of classes < e. g. , premium vs best-effort 4 Packets marked according to class at edge of network (ND will mark certain packets) 4 Core routers implement some per-hop-behavior (PHB) < Example: Expedited Forwarding (EF) =rate-limit EF packets at the edges < PHB implemented with class-based priority queues or Weighted Fair Queue (WFQ) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 9

Diff. Serv (cont) 4 Assured Forwarding (AF) < customers sign service agreements with ISPs

Diff. Serv (cont) 4 Assured Forwarding (AF) < customers sign service agreements with ISPs < edge routers mark packets as being “in” or “out” of profile < core routers run RIO: RED with in/out 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 10

Chapter 8: Security 4 Outline < Encryption Algorithms < Authentication Protocols < Message Integrity

Chapter 8: Security 4 Outline < Encryption Algorithms < Authentication Protocols < Message Integrity Protocols < Key Distribution < Firewalls 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 11

Overview 4 Cryptography functions < Secret key (e. g. , DES) < Public key

Overview 4 Cryptography functions < Secret key (e. g. , DES) < Public key (e. g. , RSA) < Message digest (e. g. , MD 5) 4 Security services < Privacy: preventing unauthorized release of information < Authentication: verifying identity of the remote participant < Integrity: making sure message has not been altered 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 12

Secret Key (DES) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 13

Secret Key (DES) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 13

Public Key (RSA) 4 Encryption & Decryption c = memod n m = cdmod

Public Key (RSA) 4 Encryption & Decryption c = memod n m = cdmod n 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 16

Message Digest 4 Cryptographic checksum < just as a regular checksum protects the receiver

Message Digest 4 Cryptographic checksum < just as a regular checksum protects the receiver from accidental changes to the message, a cryptographic checksum protects the receiver from malicious changes to the message. 4 One-way function < given a cryptographic checksum for a message, it is virtually impossible to figure out what message produced that checksum; it is not computationally feasible to find two messages that hash to the same cryptographic checksum. 4 Relevance < if you are given a checksum for a message and you are able to compute exactly the same checksum for that message, then it is highly likely this message produced the checksum you were given. 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 18

Authentication Protocols 4 Three-way handshake Client Server Clien t. Id, E ( , C

Authentication Protocols 4 Three-way handshake Client Server Clien t. Id, E ( , C HK) Y E(y + , CHK ) ) SHK , K S ( E 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 19

4 Trusted third party (Kerberos) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 20

4 Trusted third party (Kerberos) 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 20

4 Public key authentication A B E(x , Pu blic B ) x 1/8/2022

4 Public key authentication A B E(x , Pu blic B ) x 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 21

Message Integrity Protocols 4 Digital signature using RSA < special case of a message

Message Integrity Protocols 4 Digital signature using RSA < special case of a message integrity where the code can only have been generated by one participant < compute signature with private key and verify with public key 4 Keyed MD 5 < sender: m + MD 5(m + k) + E(k, private) < receiver = recovers random key using the sender’s public key = applies MD 5 to the concatenation of this random key message 4 MD 5 with RSA signature < sender: m + E(MD 5(m), private) < receiver = decrypts signature with sender’s public key = compares result with MD 5 checksum sent with message 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 22

Key Distribution 4 Certificate < special type of digitally signed document: =“I certify that

Key Distribution 4 Certificate < special type of digitally signed document: =“I certify that the public key in this document belongs to the entity named in this document, signed X. ” < the name of the entity being certified < the public key of the entity < the name of the certified authority < a digital signature 4 Certified Authority (CA) < administrative entity that issues certificates < useful only to someone that already holds the CA’s public key. 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 24

Key Distribution (cont) 4 Chain of Trust < if X certifies that a certain

Key Distribution (cont) 4 Chain of Trust < if X certifies that a certain public key belongs to Y, and Y certifies that another public key belongs to Z, then there exists a chain of certificates from X to Z < someone that wants to verify Z’s public key has to know X’s public key and follow the chain 4 Certificate Revocation List 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 25

Firewalls 4 Filter-Based Solution < example ( 192. 13. 14, 1234, 128. 7. 6.

Firewalls 4 Filter-Based Solution < example ( 192. 13. 14, 1234, 128. 7. 6. 5, 80 ) (*, *, 128. 7. 6. 5, 80 ) < default: forward or not forward? < how dynamic? < stateful 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 26

Proxy-Based Firewalls 4 Problem: complex policy 4 Example: web server 4 Solution: proxy 4

Proxy-Based Firewalls 4 Problem: complex policy 4 Example: web server 4 Solution: proxy 4 Design: transparent vs. classical 4 Limitations: attacks from within 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 27

Denial of Service 4 Attacks on end hosts < SYN attack 4 Attacks on

Denial of Service 4 Attacks on end hosts < SYN attack 4 Attacks on routers < Christmas tree packets < pollute route cache 4 Authentication attacks 4 Distributed Do. S attacks 1/8/2022 CSE 364: Computer Networks page 28