Liyanage, Ahmad, Okwuibe, Montes de Oca, MAI, Perez, and Itzazelaia
234
some agreed‐upon locations and choke points. However, observing the network at different locations or gathering network statistics or packet samples from randomly chosen
locations might be required. Since the control plane in legacy networks is co‐located
with the forwarding plane, changes in the monitoring system would require making
changes in the devices, which are physically spread in large networks.
Traditional networks comprise of many autonomous chunks of networked systems
(ASs), where a change in some parameters can induce undesirable effects on the overall
network state. Moreover, there is no global visibility of the network state in current
networks. This leads to localized decision‐making at multiple points in large networks.
Hence, synchronizing a huge number of monitoring decisions is a daunting task for
both network management and monitoring systems.
Existing monitoring systems need to be adapted and correctly controlled, since they
were meant mostly for physical and not virtual systems and boundaries, and do not
allow fine‐grained analysis adapted to the needs of SDN/NFV based 5G network management. The lack of visibility and controls on internal virtual networks that are created,
coupled with the heterogeneity of devices used, make many performance assessment
applications ineffective. For instance, existing security monitoring applications cannot
monitor virtual connections in 5G network elements.
10.4 Use of Monitoring in 5G
Network performance and security monitoring can be viewed as complementary entities. Monitoring can provide the knowledge necessary to assess, and in consequence
assure both the network’s QoS/QoE (Quality of Service/Quality of Experience) and
security. Network monitoring is required for the verification and validation of SLAs,
managing performance (QoS) and user experience (QoE), troubleshooting, assessment
of optimizations and use of resources. Detection and prevention of security breaches
will enhance the performance, for example it can prevent Denial of Service (DoS)
attacks. In the context of 5G, monitoring mechanisms need to be rethought to be able
to deal with the requirements introduced by virtualization and profit from the flexibility
obtained from SDN and NFV to obtain the best balance between costs, reliability and
quality.
Future 5G networks will support extremely large amounts of devices with various
capabilities and intelligence (e.g. mobile phones, tablet computers, IoT devices, tactile
internet and automated vehicles). This requires automated management and security
services to assure confidentiality and integrity. This will also lead to high signalling and
processing costs and hence would require new strategies for cost‐effective adaptive
security. For this reason, it is necessary to have a clear view of what is happening in the
network, the devices used and how they are used. Monitoring is instrumental for understanding the network traffic and how the services and applications are being used; enabling improved and automated security assurance.
Existing security solutions (e.g. SIEM, IDS, IPS, firewalls.) need to be adapted and
correctly controlled since they were meant mostly for physical and not virtual systems
and boundaries and do not allow fine‐grained analysis adapted to the needs of SDN‐
and NFV‐based 5G network management. The lack of visibility and controls on internal
virtual networks created coupled with the heterogeneity of used devices make many
security applications ineffective.
234
some agreed‐upon locations and choke points. However, observing the network at different locations or gathering network statistics or packet samples from randomly chosen
locations might be required. Since the control plane in legacy networks is co‐located
with the forwarding plane, changes in the monitoring system would require making
changes in the devices, which are physically spread in large networks.
Traditional networks comprise of many autonomous chunks of networked systems
(ASs), where a change in some parameters can induce undesirable effects on the overall
network state. Moreover, there is no global visibility of the network state in current
networks. This leads to localized decision‐making at multiple points in large networks.
Hence, synchronizing a huge number of monitoring decisions is a daunting task for
both network management and monitoring systems.
Existing monitoring systems need to be adapted and correctly controlled, since they
were meant mostly for physical and not virtual systems and boundaries, and do not
allow fine‐grained analysis adapted to the needs of SDN/NFV based 5G network management. The lack of visibility and controls on internal virtual networks that are created,
coupled with the heterogeneity of devices used, make many performance assessment
applications ineffective. For instance, existing security monitoring applications cannot
monitor virtual connections in 5G network elements.
10.4 Use of Monitoring in 5G
Network performance and security monitoring can be viewed as complementary entities. Monitoring can provide the knowledge necessary to assess, and in consequence
assure both the network’s QoS/QoE (Quality of Service/Quality of Experience) and
security. Network monitoring is required for the verification and validation of SLAs,
managing performance (QoS) and user experience (QoE), troubleshooting, assessment
of optimizations and use of resources. Detection and prevention of security breaches
will enhance the performance, for example it can prevent Denial of Service (DoS)
attacks. In the context of 5G, monitoring mechanisms need to be rethought to be able
to deal with the requirements introduced by virtualization and profit from the flexibility
obtained from SDN and NFV to obtain the best balance between costs, reliability and
quality.
Future 5G networks will support extremely large amounts of devices with various
capabilities and intelligence (e.g. mobile phones, tablet computers, IoT devices, tactile
internet and automated vehicles). This requires automated management and security
services to assure confidentiality and integrity. This will also lead to high signalling and
processing costs and hence would require new strategies for cost‐effective adaptive
security. For this reason, it is necessary to have a clear view of what is happening in the
network, the devices used and how they are used. Monitoring is instrumental for understanding the network traffic and how the services and applications are being used; enabling improved and automated security assurance.
Existing security solutions (e.g. SIEM, IDS, IPS, firewalls.) need to be adapted and
correctly controlled since they were meant mostly for physical and not virtual systems
and boundaries and do not allow fine‐grained analysis adapted to the needs of SDN‐
and NFV‐based 5G network management. The lack of visibility and controls on internal
virtual networks created coupled with the heterogeneity of used devices make many
security applications ineffective.