Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Global IP Network Mobility using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Brian L. Skeen

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How to Multi-Home Avi Freedman VP Engineering AboveNet Communications.
Advertisements

Broadband Connectivity to Aircraft
MPLS VPN.
Routing Basics.
NAT, firewalls and IPv6 Christian Huitema Architect, Windows Networking Microsoft Corporation.
Comparing IPv4 and IPv6 from the perspective of BGP dynamic activity Geoff Huston APNIC February 2012.
Routing: Exterior Gateway Protocols and Autonomous Systems Chapter 15.
© J. Liebeherr, All rights reserved 1 Border Gateway Protocol This lecture is largely based on a BGP tutorial by T. Griffin from AT&T Research.
Border Gateway Protocol Autonomous Systems and Interdomain Routing (Exterior Gateway Protocol EGP)
Fundamentals of Computer Networks ECE 478/578 Lecture #18: Policy-Based Routing Instructor: Loukas Lazos Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering University.
1 Interdomain Routing Protocols. 2 Autonomous Systems An autonomous system (AS) is a region of the Internet that is administered by a single entity and.
The need for BGP AfNOG Workshops Philip Smith. “Keeping Local Traffic Local”
IPv4 and IPv6 Mobility Support Using MPLS and MP-BGP draft-berzin-malis-mpls-mobility-00 Oleg Berzin, Andy Malis {oleg.berzin,
Best Practices for ISPs
CS Summer 2003 Lecture 14. CS Summer 2003 MPLS VPN Architecture MPLS VPN is a collection of sites interconnected over MPLS core network. MPLS.
1 Network Architecture and Design Routing: Exterior Gateway Protocols and Autonomous Systems Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Reference D. E. Comer, Internetworking.
Mini Introduction to BGP Michalis Faloutsos. What Is BGP?  Border Gateway Protocol BGP-4  The de-facto interdomain routing protocol  BGP enables policy.
Analysis of BGP Routing Tables
The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Sharad Jaiswal.
A Routing Control Platform for Managing IP Networks Jennifer Rexford Princeton University
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 Exterior Gateway Protocols: EGP, BGP-4, CIDR Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
COS 420 Day 16. Agenda Finish Individualized Project Please Have Grading sheets to me by Tomorrow Group Project Discussion Assignment 3 moved back to.
Feb 12, 2008CS573: Network Protocols and Standards1 Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Network Protocols and Standards Winter
Allocations vs Announcements A comparison of RIR IPv4 Allocation Records with Global Routing Announcements Geoff Huston May 2004 (Activity supported by.
– Chapter 4 – Secure Routing
1 Chapter 27 Internetwork Routing (Static and automatic routing; route propagation; BGP, RIP, OSPF; multicast routing)
Dr. John P. Abraham Professor University of Texas Pan American Internet Routing and Routing Protocols.
TCOM 515 Lecture 6.
Inter-domain Routing: Today and Tomorrow Dr. Jia Wang AT&T Labs Research Florham Park, NJ 07932, USA
Lecture 8 Page 1 Advanced Network Security Review of Networking Basics: Internet Architecture, Routing, and Naming Advanced Network Security Peter Reiher.
Introduction to BGP.
© Janice Regan, CMPT 128, CMPT 371 Data Communications and Networking BGP, Flooding, Multicast routing.
1 Interdomain Routing (BGP) By Behzad Akbari Fall 2008 These slides are based on the slides of Ion Stoica (UCB) and Shivkumar (RPI)
IP-v6 Drivers for Aviation & Usage Concepts Terry L Davis Boeing Commercial Airplanes (Advisor to the North America IPv6 Task Force)
1 Chapter 27 Internetwork Routing (Static and automatic routing; route propagation; BGP, RIP, OSPF; multicast routing)
CS 3700 Networks and Distributed Systems Inter Domain Routing (It’s all about the Money) Revised 8/20/15.
CELLULAR DATA NETWORKS Mr. Husnain Sherazi Lecture 5.
Jennifer Rexford Fall 2014 (TTh 3:00-4:20 in CS 105) COS 561: Advanced Computer Networks BGP.
1 TCP/IP Internetting ä Subnet layer ä Links stations on same subnet ä Often IEEE LAN standards ä PPP for telephone connections ä TCP/IP specifies.
David Wetherall Professor of Computer Science & Engineering Introduction to Computer Networks Hierarchical Routing (§5.2.6)
Addressing Issues David Conrad Internet Software Consortium.
1 Internet Routing. 2 Terminology Forwarding –Refers to datagram transfer –Performed by host or router –Uses routing table Routing –Refers to propagation.
BGP4 - Border Gateway Protocol. Autonomous Systems Routers under a single administrative control are grouped into autonomous systems Identified by a 16.
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) W.lilakiatsakun. BGP Basics (1) BGP is the protocol which is used to make core routing decisions on the Internet It involves.
More on Internet Routing A large portion of this lecture material comes from BGP tutorial given by Philip Smith from Cisco (ftp://ftp- eng.cisco.com/pfs/seminars/APRICOT2004.
T. S. Eugene Ngeugeneng at cs.rice.edu Rice University1 COMP/ELEC 429/556 Introduction to Computer Networks Inter-domain routing Some slides used with.
On Understanding of Transient Interdomain Routing Failures Feng Wang, Lixin Gao, Jia Wang, and Jian Qiu Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
COP 5611 Operating Systems Spring 2010 Dan C. Marinescu Office: HEC 439 B Office hours: M-Wd 2:00-3:00 PM.
Eliminating Packet Loss Caused by BGP Convergence Nate Kushman Srikanth Kandula, Dina Katabi, and Bruce Maggs.
Computer networks Internet, Intranet, Extranet, Lan, Wan, characteristics and differences.
Campus Network Best Practices: Introduction and NREN Models Dale Smith University of Oregon/NSRC This document is a result of work by the.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—6-1 Scaling Service Provider Networks Scaling IGP and BGP in Service Provider Networks.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—5-1 Customer-to-Provider Connectivity with BGP Connecting a Multihomed Customer to a Single Service.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—1-1 Course Introduction.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—3-1 Route Selection Using Policy Controls Using Multihomed BGP Networks.
Inter-domain Routing Outline Border Gateway Protocol.
Border Gateway Protocol. Intra-AS v.s. Inter-AS Intra-AS Inter-AS.
NT1210 Introduction to Networking
Mobile IP THE 12 TH MEETING. Mobile IP  Incorporation of mobile users in the network.  Cellular system (e.g., GSM) started with mobility in mind. 
Boarder Gateway Protocol (BGP)
Border Gateway Protocol
BGP supplement Abhigyan Sharma.
Distributed Content in the Network: A Backbone View
BGP Overview BGP concepts and operation.
Connecting an Enterprise Network to an ISP Network
Connexion by Boeing Internet services to airline passengers and crew
Scaling Service Provider Networks
A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network Fred L. Templin IETF101 Routing Working Group.
COMP/ELEC 429/556 Introduction to Computer Networks
Computer Networks Protocols
Presentation transcript:

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Global IP Network Mobility using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Brian L. Skeen

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 BGP Network Mobility  Connexion Service Summary  Current IP Mobility standards  Network and Service Challenges  BGP as a mobility solution  Questions

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Enabling 2-Way Onboard Communications Services… To Passengers: Real-time, Internet Access VPN Support Connectivity throughout their travel experience Extending commonly known hotspot connection method Television to Singapore Airlines in 2005 To Airlines: Simple cabin design Reliable and robust system Use wireless to reduce weight & power Real-time crew information services E-Enabled Aircraft Initiatives

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC HotSpot In The Sky a/b/g Wireless Access Points Antenna Data Transceiver/Router Box Notional representation

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Boeing Airlines CBB Airlines Data Transceiver & Router Antenna Ground Stations Enterprise & Network Operations Centers Internet Core Network Unit Antenna Controller Connexion by Boeing – System Architecture

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC Service Region Satellite Network Operations Center (NOC) Ground Station & Data Center 75 o 60 o 45 o 30 o 15 o 0o0o -15 o -30 o -45 o Latitude Ground Station

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Current Mobility Standards  Target host mobility rather than network mobility –Mobile IP protocols for IPv4 & IPv6 –Require mobility support in protocol stacks  Do not provide “intuitive routing” over a wide geographic area  Network Mobility only being seriously addressed in IPv6, through the NEMO working group. NEMO Basic Support Protocol (under development) relies heavily on IP tunneling  Routing optimization is limited to within a BGP autonomous system

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Network & Service Goals & Challenges  Our network challenges are unique in a number of areas –Our platforms move,  But not just a little…they also move fast  Hosts remain stationary with regard to the platform  Hosts may number in the hundreds –A typical flight between Europe & Asia will use 3 different ground stations and 4 satellite transponders within half a day –Leads to a desire for seamless handoff between satellite transponders and between ground stations

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 The Latency Tax  Using BGP allows us to directly influence traffic within the Internet as a whole and not just within our own network  Mobile IP protocols are not optimized for the vast distances that a jet aircraft normally travels in a single day. Most rely on tunneling & static homing which adds large latencies when the mobile router is not near the home router  For Example: Latency with an aircraft homed in Europe currently over east-Asia to an Asia website - one-way –320ms – Aircraft -> geo-synchronous satellite -> ground East Asia –130ms – Asia -> North America –70ms – East Across North America –80ms – North America to Europe –80ms – Europe to North America –70ms – West Across North America –130ms – North America -> Asia –30ms – Within Asia –890ms Total  Almost 2.7 seconds to complete a TCP 3-way handshake!!!

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Finding a better path through the ether…  Find a better way to route traffic, reduce latency, improve network reliability, and allow for global connectivity  Static homing & tunneling solutions would require us to provision a substantial global IP backbone to carry the backhauled traffic. These WAN costs would be substantial  The solution needed to allow seamless user connections throughout a flight  The solution needed to leverage existing routing technology, couldn’t require outside networks to make changes to accommodate our mobile platforms & needed to be acceptable to network operators worldwide  In general, traffic flows should follow geography!  Our solution: Leverage BGP –Natively supported worldwide –Uses the global routing table for mobility –Selective announcement and withdrawal mobile platform prefixes as the platforms move

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Fighting Latency Back  Instead of having mobile platforms homed to a specific geographic network, send & receive the mobile network traffic to & from the Internet at each satellite ground station  For Example: Aircraft dynamically homed in Asia to Asian website –320ms – Aircraft -> geo-synchronous satellite -> ground East Asia –40ms – within Asia –380ms Total  1.1 seconds to complete a TCP handshake  1.6 seconds or 56% reduction TCP handshake time

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Asian Gateway ASN US Gateway ASN European Gateway ASN Commercial passenger traffic is released at each ground station Each ground station only advertises the IP’s for the planes it is serving. When a plane leaves a region, that gateway stops advertising its IP’s. Announce Mobile Netblocks Internet X.Y.Z.0/24 Using BGP for mobile routing Announce Mobile Netblocks X.Y.Z.0/24

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Connexion Network Architecture Internet Route Servers ISP #2 ISP #1 BGP Route Reflectors iBGP Peering eBGP Peering

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Challenges using BGP for Mobility  /24 network propagation –Concerns about the growing number of BGP routes in the global default free zone have caused some network providers to filter smaller route announcements –We currently advertise a /24 address block for each mobile platform. Testing of route propagation found that most providers will accept and propagate our /24 announcements –In the event that some providers don’t accept our /24 announcements we are advertising a larger aggregate containing all of the mobile platforms –We only really require all of our Internet providers to exchange our routes among themselves, mobile platform routes could be filtered at the edge of the network without a loss of connectivity

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Challenges using BGP for Mobility  BGP convergence vs. handoff time between ground stations –Our testing has shown that the period of time required to achieve 2- way communications on a new satellite transponder is complementary to the time BGP will converge on global providers  Provider concerns –Prefix churn  route changes happen only a few times a day  As a percentage of total global route-updates our updates are very small –Prefixes may have an “inconsistent” origin ASN  Currently originates at the active ground station  Changes when platform moves…  … but does not originate from two places at once

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Prefix Transition in Action  An actual Lufthansa flight from East-Asia to Europe –November 17, :00 -> 19:00 UTC  BGP update collectors located throughout the globe collected mobile platform BGP updates as seen from their point of view  This shows the transition process from one ground station to another –Each number on the plot represents a BGP autonomous system –Red spots represent the originating autonomous system numbers  BGP data modeling and extraction provided by the route-views project from the University of Oregon –

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Routes Announced from Ibaraki, Japan Ibaraki Ground Station AS Moscow Ground Station AS Leuk Ground Station AS SCC PoweredCom ISP AS Internap Japan ISP AS

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Routes Announced from Moscow, Russia KPN ISP AS TeliaSonera ISP AS

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Routes Announced from Leuk, Switzerland KPN ISP AS Sprint ISP AS

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Route Flapping and Dampening  Route Flapping and Dampening –Will our routes be dampened by some providers? –Testing & research has shown that a single route update is unlikely to cause a route to be dampened by core networks. We see some dampening after about 5 changes within a short period of time. Dampening for global network operators is also not as popular as it used to be –We always announce a stable aggregate “safety net” for our mobile platforms to ensure a stable path from the dark corners of the Internet –Satellite handoff within a ground station: A ground station may serve more than one satellite transponder. When a handoff occurs within a ground station, we do not propagate a route withdrawal beyond our autonomous system

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Future Prefix Management  Dynamic Prefix Management –A system that could allow for mobile platforms to “lease” address blocks for the duration of a “flight”. Similar to DHCP for hosts. This will allow for more efficient use of address space  Regionalization of address space –Address blocks can also be regionalized. Certain “flights” generally stay within the service of a single ground station –By noting which “flights” will be served by a single ground station, we can then assign address space from a larger aggregate which is tied to the ground station. This will allow us to not announce specific blocks for flights when they are not needed

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Conclusions  BGP as a Mobility Solution –Does not require special IP stacks on customer hosts –Does not require special routing onboard the mobile platform –Does not require any special treatment of BGP attributes –Does not require special operational support from peers –Only suitable for /24 and bigger networks Special thanks to all members of the Connexion Network Team Gordon Letney, Andrew Dul, Terry Davis, Carlos Montes, Ben Abarbanel

Global IP Network Mobility – APNIC 19 Thank you