Policy Interoperability and Network Autonomics

  • Shane Magrath
  • Robin Braun
  • Fernando Cuervo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3457)


Autonomic behaviours in network operations will alleviate much of the labour intensive and error prone interventions of today’s complex networks. The Service Provider must be able to manage the infrastructure and services at an abstract level, focusing on what the desired behaviour should be rather than how it might be specifically achieved. Policy-Based Network Management (Pbnm) appears as one of the leading mechanisms to describe desired behaviours and abstract the programmability of an autonomic network infrastructure to the Service Provider. For massive-scale and complex networks, the current understanding of the Higher Level to Lower Level (HL→LL) refinement process commonly used in Pbnm today is not completely effective. One problem encountered is the need to provide a bind mechanism between Higher Level and Lower Level policy specifications such that cross-layer policy requests in the policy continuum can be made by lower policy layers in a dynamic policy refinement cycle (LL→HL→LL). In this paper, we illustrate the problem with a policy-based simple admission control (SAC) application. We then show that policy specifications with a join operator (⋈) simplify the SAC specification. We also investigate the performance considerations of this enhancement in Internet size applications. Our future goal is to provide a policy inference engine that can support complex specifications appropriate for Pbnm systems that support autonomic behaviours in large networks, made of Network elements with realistic memory and processing constraints.


  1. 1.
    Sloman, M., Lupu, E.: Security and Management Policy Specification. IEEE Network 2, 10–19 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lupu, E., Milosevic, Z., Sloman, M.: Use of Roles and Policies for Specifying and Managing a Virtual Enterprise. In: Proceedings., Ninth International Workshop on Research Issues on Data Engineering: Information Technology for Virtual Enterprises, 1999. RIDE-VE 1999, pp. 72–79 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strassner, J.: Policy-Based Network Management - Solutions for the Next Generation. Morgan-Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    TMF: The NGOSS Technology Neutral Architecture Specification V3.0. Technical Report TMF053, TMF (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Westerinen, A., Schnizlein, J., Strassner, J., Scherling, M., Quinn, B., Herzog, S., Huynh, A., Carlson, M., Perry, J., Waldbusser, S.: Terminology for Policy-Based Management. In: Informational RFC 3198, IETF, Network Working Group (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Verma, D.: Simplifying Network Administration Using Policy-Based Management. IEEE Network 16, 20–26 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rajan, R., Verma, D., Kamat, S., Felstaine, E., Herzog, S.: A Policy Framework for Integrated and Differentiated Services in the Internet. IEEE Network 13, 36–41 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Verma, D.C.: Policy-Based Networking: Architecture and Algorithms. New Riders (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Verma, D., Beigi, M., Jennings, R.: Policy Based SLA Management in Enterprise Networks. In: Sloman, M., Lobo, J., Lupu, E.C. (eds.) POLICY 2001. LNCS, vol. 1995, p. 137. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: A Policy Based Role Object Model. In: Proceedings of First International, Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop 1997, EDOC 1997, pp. 36–47 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damianou, N., Dulay, N., Lupu, E., Sloman, M., Tonouchi, T.: Tools for Domain-Based Policy Management of Distributed Systems. In: Network Operations and Management Symposium 2002, NOMS 2002, pp. 203–217. IEEE/IFIP (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Robinson, D., Sloman, M.: Domains: A New Approach to Distributed System Management. In: Proceedings of Workshop on the Future Trends of. Distributed Computing Systems in the 1990s 1998, pp. 154–163 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sloman, M., Magee, J., Twidle, K., Kramer, J.: An Architecture for Managing Distributed Systems. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Future Trends of. Distributed Computing Systems, 1993, pp. 40–46 (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bandara, A.K., Lupu, E., Russo, A.: Using Event Calculus to Formalise Policy Specification and Analysis. In: IEEE Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, Policy 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Damianou, N.: A Policy Framework for Management of Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Computing. Imperial College, London (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bhatia, R., Lobo, J., Kohli, M.: Policy Evaluation for Network Management. In: Proceedings of Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, INFOCOM 2000, vol. 3, pp. 1107–1116. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kohli, M., Lobo, J.: Realizing Network Control Policies Using Distributed Action Plans. Journal of Network and Systems Management 11 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kanada, Y.: Policy Division and Fusion: Examples and a Method-or, Multiple Classifiers Considered Harmful. In: Proceedings of IEEE/IFIP International Symposium on Integrated Network Management, pp. 545–560 (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kanada, Y., O’Keefe, B.J.: Rule-Based Building-Block Architectures for Policy-Based Networking. Journal of Network and Systems Management 11 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Strassner, J.: Autonomic networking - theory and practice (tutorial seven). In: 2004 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cuervo, F., Sim, M.: Policy Control Model: a Key Factor for the Success of Policy in Telecom Applications. In: IEEE 5th International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, POLICY 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seagall, B., Arnold, D.: Elvin has left the building: A publish/subscribe notification service with quenching. In: Australian Unix and Open Systems Group (1997)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Forgy, C.L.: Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Match Problem. Artificial Intelligence 19, 17–37 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miranker, D.P.: TREAT: A Better Match Algorithm for AI Production Systems. In: National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 42–47 (1987)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perlin, M.: Incremental binding-space match: The linearized matchbox algorithm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Tools for AI. (1991)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    various: Design Principles for the Immune Systems and Other Distributed Autonomous Systems. In: Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., Theraulaz, G.: Swarm Intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems. In: Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shane Magrath
    • 1
  • Robin Braun
    • 1
  • Fernando Cuervo
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TechnologySydney, BroadwayAustralia
  2. 2.Research and InnovationOntarioCanada

Personalised recommendations