Hi,
Following up on my previous message, here are some thoughts about how GRASP
could manage itself. It will be a lame autonomic protocol if it can't manage
itself ;-).
One mechanism is that a "GRASP manager" ASA in an autonomic node associated
with the NOC could send out configuration messages as GRASP floods. In all
other autonomic nodes, a local "GRASP manager" ASA could receive these floods
and act accordingly.
For example, we could build this capability on top of what is already proposed
in draft-eckert-anima-grasp-dnssd. Something like:
objective-value /= { 1*elements }
elements //= ( @rfcXXXX: { 1*relement } )
relement = ( relement-codepoint => relement-value )
relement-codepoint = uint
relement-value = any
...
relement-codepoint //= ( &(grasp-control:3) => grasp-config )
grasp-config = {
?( &(grasp-version:1) => 0..255),
?( &(max-flood:2) => 0..65536),
?( &(max-unicast:3) => 0..65536),
}
This allows us to specify a GRASP version for the domain (RFC8990 is version 1,
of course) and maximum message sizes for flooding and unicast. This would be
easily extensible for any other aspects of GRASP that we want to configure
within a domain.
(It's clear that we might also want to add an authentication/authorization
mechanism to such messages, because they could be very dangerous if misused.)
Is this idea worth following up?
Regards
Brian
P.S. Thanks to Michael Richardson, Toerless Eckert and Carsten Bormann for some
early discussion.
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
