Advertisement

Representing and Reasoning About Logical Network Topologies

  • Shaun Voigt
  • Catherine Howard
  • Dean Philp
  • Christopher Penny
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10775)

Abstract

For network analysts, constructing a representation, and developing an understanding, of logical network topologies is crucial for a wide range of cyber security applications. However, constructing a representation of logical network topologies is difficult. This paper presents three novel ontologies; the Internet Protocol (IP) Ontology, the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Ontology and the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Ontology. These ontologies provide a common, technology independent syntax and semantics for complex communication network concepts. The semantic and syntactic interoperability provided by these ontologies enables data from disparate, heterogeneous sources, such as network diagrams, router configuration files and routing protocol messages, to be consistently represented, which facilitates information fusion. The approach presented in this paper allows domain knowledge to be encoded in an intuitive manner, facilitates knowledge discovery by automated reasoning, and facilitates the process of making specialist knowledge and tradecraft accessible to non-expert network analysts.

Keywords

Ontologies Network data Network topologies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Part of this work was conducted using the Protégé resource [22], which is supported by grant GM10331601 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the United States National Institutes of Health.

References

  1. 1.
    van der Ham, J., Ghijsen, M., Grosso, P., de Laat, C.: Trends in Computer Network Modeling Towards the Future Internet. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1402.3951v2.pdf. Accessed Oct 2016
  2. 2.
    Motamedi, R., Rejaie, R., Willinger, W.: A survey of techniques for internet topology discovery. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 17(2), 1044–1065 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ioannou, P.A., Pitsillides, A.: Modeling and Control of Complex Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rahman, M., Pakstas, A., Wang, F.Z.: Towards communications network modelling ontology for designers and researchers. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems, London, England (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    MOMENT - Monitoring and Measurement in the Next Generation Technologies. http://www.salzburgresearch.at/en/projekt/moment_en/. Accessed Oct 2016
  6. 6.
    Yeung, D., Qu, Y., Zhang, J., Chen, I., Lindem, A.: Yang Data Model for OSPF Protocol. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-yang-01. Accessed Oct 2016
  7. 7.
    Zhdankin, A., Patel, K., Clemm, A., Hares, S., Jethanandani, M., Liu, X.: Yang Data Model for BGP Protocol. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhdankin-idr-bgp-cfg-00. Accessed Oct 2016
  8. 8.
    Common Information Model. http://www.dmtf.org/standards/cim. Accessed Aug 2015
  9. 9.
    Strassner, J.: DEN-ng: achieving business-driven network management. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    van der Ham, J., Dijkstra, F., Lapacz, R., Brown, A.: The network markup language; a standardized network topology abstraction for inter-domain and cross-layer network applications. In: Proceedings of the TERENA Networking Conference, Maastricht, Netherlands (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van der Ham, J., Dijkstra, F., Travostino, F., Andree, H., de Laat, C.: Using RDF to describe networks. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 22(8), 862–867 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ghijsen, M., van der Ham, J., Grosso, P., Dumitru, C., Zhu, H., Zhao, Z., de Laat, C.: A semantic-web approach for modelling computing infrastructures. J. Comput. Electr. Eng. 39, 2553–2565 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Network Innovation over Virtualized Infrastructures. http://www.fp7-novi.eu/index.php. Accessed Oct 2016
  14. 14.
    Moy, J.: RFC 2328 - OSPF Version 2. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2328.txt. Accessed Oct 2016
  15. 15.
    Nakibly, G., Gonikman, D., Kirshon, A., Boneh, D.: Persistent OSPF attacks. In: Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Network and Distributed System Security Conference (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rekhter, Y., Li, T., Hares, S.: RFC 4271 - A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4). https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4271.txt. Accessed Oct 2016
  17. 17.
    Center for Applied Internet Data Analysis. www.caida.org. Accessed Oct 2016
  18. 18.
    Antoniou, G., van Harmelen, F.: A Semantic Web Primer. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reynolds, D., Thompson, C., Mukerji, J., Coleman, D.: An Assessment of RDF/OWL Modelling. Digital Media Systems Laboratory, HP Laboratories Bristol, HPL-2005-189 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sowa, J.: Semantic networks. In: The Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2nd edn. (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    OSI Model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model. Accessed Oct 2016
  22. 22.
    Protege. http://protege.standford.edu/. Accessed Oct 2016

Copyright information

© Crown 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shaun Voigt
    • 1
  • Catherine Howard
    • 1
  • Dean Philp
    • 1
  • Christopher Penny
    • 1
  1. 1.Defence Science and Technology GroupEdinburgh, AdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations