Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net 1 Next Generation BRAS Access Technologies for Consumer Broadband Truman Boyes Professional Services APAC

2 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Agenda  Welcome. Where is Broadband Going? What Issues are we solving? What are the methodologies that we are using to solve these issues? Carriers to enter voice and video market Digital Media Gateway Speeds to increase ; needing more capacity…

3 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Triple Play : VIDEO  The most complex of all services. The most bandwidth The most noticeable in terms of quality.  How is it delivered? Set Top Box. MS IPTV probably dominating in this area. BW Mbps for normal TV. 7-9Mbps for HD compressed.  HQOS is still extremely important for this service. It’s enabled on the BNG.

4 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Triple Play: Video (CONT)  Resources are critical when delivering video content. Multicast is the resources solver. But where do we want to save bandwidth? –As close to the customer as possible and everywhere back to the source. IGMP snooping in DSLAM. IGMP multicast replication in DLSAM saves bandwidth between the BNG and DSLAM. Allow sharing of bandwidth between unicast and multicast traffic for access interface. (This is where HQoS can help).

5 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Multicast - Overview IP Backbone Performs Transparent IGMP Snooping. MAC filters and multicast replication Internet Port IPTV Port Single M-VLAN for video channels RG provides a single VC connection between home and DSLAM IPoE and 1483B session (video/IGMP-Proxy) RG provides a single VC connection between home and DSLAM IPoE and 1483B session (video/IGMP-Proxy) Video Head End or ASP ASP (e.g. IP Telephony) ISP (Internet) Enterprise VPNs IGMP joins received on subscriber interface Adjusts (unicast) VLAN shaper in QoS h- scheduler to reflect MC traffic IGMP joins received on subscriber interface Adjusts (unicast) VLAN shaper in QoS h- scheduler to reflect MC traffic C-VLAN per Subscriber Reasoning: DSL Forum base WT-101 & TR-59 compliant. Simple single VC scheme, bandwidth fully optimized and dynamically balanced. IP QoS and stats restored. Works with PPPoE!!! Single M- VLAN for all requested channels, i.e.: M-VLAN carries the channels actually requested, over broadcast approach and static broadcast of top 20 groups. DSLAM

6 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net The second function of IGMP Dynamic QoS adjustment Subscriber VC Multicast VLAN Subscriber VLAN 3. IGMP/C-VLAN Processed IPTV Headend Internet VoIP / VoD 1. IGMP (PPPoE or IPoE) 2. IGMP Snooping 5. Unicast Scheduler (C-VLAN) adjusted 7. Final MC Replication 6. MC Video Session forwarded over MC VLAN 4. IGMP OIF map to MC-VLAN

7 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Customer to Service Relationship  If the carrier sells circuits, it may be wise to apply the 1:1 customer to C-VLAN model. May “map” port to C-VLAN, so customer has single VC to the RG and single C-VLAN interface on BNG. Easy to apply QoS to single identifier.  N:1 Model for true distinction between services. The services run on different logical links. HQOS become an issue. Provisioning and Troubleshooting multiple l2 interfaces for a single customer will prove to be a challenge.

8 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net WT-101: 1:1 VLAN Solution IP Backbone Internet Port IPTV Multi-Service BSR RG Video Head End or ASP DSLAM C-VLANs ASP (e.g. IP Telephony) ISP (Internet) Enterprise VPNs Multi-Service Edge Routing (BSR) IP VPNs Stacked VLANs per customer site VLAN auto-sensing, no OPEX PPP and DHCP (and routed IP) DHCP sessions may be aggregated Hierarchical IP QoS ; per user, per flow Multi-Service Edge Routing (BSR) IP VPNs Stacked VLANs per customer site VLAN auto-sensing, no OPEX PPP and DHCP (and routed IP) DHCP sessions may be aggregated Hierarchical IP QoS ; per user, per flow VoIP Switch One ATM VC per household Usually one for consumers Could convey 1..N PPP / DHCP sessions IP Subnet(s) for business sites Can optionally support multi-VCs, with Ethernet QoS mapping (single C-VLAN). One ATM VC per household Usually one for consumers Could convey 1..N PPP / DHCP sessions IP Subnet(s) for business sites Can optionally support multi-VCs, with Ethernet QoS mapping (single C-VLAN). One C-VLAN per port S-VLAN added by DSLAM or Aggregation NW Node Optional: frames marked with Eth priority within a VLAN Optional: Sub/Line ID Multicast: IGMP Snooping M-VLAN – N:1 Multicast Replication & x-connect One C-VLAN per port S-VLAN added by DSLAM or Aggregation NW Node Optional: frames marked with Eth priority within a VLAN Optional: Sub/Line ID Multicast: IGMP Snooping M-VLAN – N:1 Multicast Replication & x-connect Optional: Separate Edge for BIZ Same as 1:1 as each port is directed to a single edge Optional: Separate Edge for BIZ Same as 1:1 as each port is directed to a single edge Optional

9 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net WT-101: N:1 VLAN Solution Internet Port IPTV RG Video Head End or ASP DSLAM Service VLANs ASP (e.g. IP Telephony) ISP (Internet) Enterprise VPNs One or more ATM VC (and per service Internet or VPN Access IP/Video Telephony Broadcast TV Video streaming (unicast) Gaming? Storage? Per VC: Protocol Based X-Connect – IP or PPP (via ETHERTYPE); other RG – Marking VLAN ATM may be removed from the local loop (EFM) One or more ATM VC (and per service Internet or VPN Access IP/Video Telephony Broadcast TV Video streaming (unicast) Gaming? Storage? Per VC: Protocol Based X-Connect – IP or PPP (via ETHERTYPE); other RG – Marking VLAN ATM may be removed from the local loop (EFM) VoIP Switch Business Site Service Node with MC Service Node + SBC BRAS Service Node One VLAN per consumer “service” Some QoS Semantics in VID Some QoS Semantics in.1p One VLAN per business site Mixing of VLAN schemes M-VLAN – N:1 Line ID via PPPoE IA & DHCP Op82 One VLAN per consumer “service” Some QoS Semantics in VID Some QoS Semantics in.1p One VLAN per business site Mixing of VLAN schemes M-VLAN – N:1 Line ID via PPPoE IA & DHCP Op82 Multiple Service Nodes or “Broadband Gateways” QoS architecture: non standard H-QoS, DiffServ++ SLAs Lawful intercept per BNG Security & OAM challenges (see other slides) Provisioning Overhead on AN, Aggregation NW, BNG Multiple Service Nodes or “Broadband Gateways” QoS architecture: non standard H-QoS, DiffServ++ SLAs Lawful intercept per BNG Security & OAM challenges (see other slides) Provisioning Overhead on AN, Aggregation NW, BNG

10 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net One BNG to rule them all  Policy enforcement is clear with a single BNG as access point into the SP net.  Multicast / HQOS is easy (at least the “carving” of the bandwidth between services at a single point is easy.  Lawful Intercept in a single location reduces the admin work.  What about L2C between BNG and DSLAM to obtain correct sync rates between customer and DSLAM.

11 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Migrations from existing BRAS/ACCESS  Many SP’s have ATM DSLAMs, ATM networks, that connect to MPLS/IP cores  As we move to Ethernet it makes sense to use protocols that are better suited for Ethernet: PPPoE. Why does it suite? Client/Server instead of just point to point. Protection on ethernet segments Allows a move away from ATM infrastructure. BNGs can start to support both PPPoA and PPPoE, and of course, PPPoEoA. Some DSLAMS are implementing PPPoA to PPPoE translation. Be warned about MTU issues. PPPoE max MTU is 1492, many modems do not support MSS clamping, and PMTU discovery is not always going to work. Draft: draft-arberg-pppoe-mtu-gt1492 PPPoA ---> PPPoE -----> DHCP when possible.

12 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net If you build it they will need to be trunked  VPLS/ Kompella / PWE3/ trunking of Ethernet from some regions to a centralized BNG.  Grows a network quicker in some cases.  Make the choice to trunk or deploy BNG based on population densities and what equipment/infrastructure do you have in that region.  BNG’s could also provide trunking of some traffic back to other PE.

13 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net BRAS PE  Past 4-5 yrs we have been building MPLS networks because they give us: Fast re-route, link protection, node protection Signaling of BW Isolation of routing tables BW reservations (ie. Reserve and possibly police LSP traffic from BRAS)  Why not enjoy the same benefits in BRAS networks ? BRAS as dual homed PE direct to P nodes. Remove dependence on existing PE’s (potentially makes these nodes *more* available)

14 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net High Availability on BRAS  PPP State Replication  DHCP state replication  All routing protocol state preserved between routing engines / SRPs / controllers.  Software faults do happen, but can your network handle 30k subscribers being dropped and reconnecting?  Software patches on the fly. Upgrade specific applications on BNGs, ie. DHCP local server to support new option. Moves away from monolithic operating system maintenance.

15 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Service Activations / Alterations Now  BW policy changes that are activated by a customer through a portal. Could be captive portal or user initiated  Service Change 7Mbps xDSL line. Shaped to 1M. User wants to download an ISO image; can increase service speed to line rate for period of time. User subscribes to policy that blocks incoming traffic at the SP. Could allow differentiated billing on volume for specific services. IE. Billable internet data, and all you can eat local content. Free to the provider traffic.

16 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net NGN Broadband in Summary  Broadband is changing More services, speeds More importance on the services –Means more Reliability is necessary  Carriers will be digital media gateways. Not the media companies : but the ppl that bring it to you.  Adoption of mechanisms like HQOS and DSLAM multicast replication are key to scaling and guaranteeing the right delivery of service.  Resiliency is extremely important. We are spending time to build these networks. Lets built it once the right way so that it can last at least 5-6 years.

Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net 17 Thank You APRICOT 06!

18 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Broadband Today  ADSL, Cable, WiFi, Metro Ethernet North America dominating cable markets but growing in DSL deployment. DSL in Asia / Europe / Americas WiFi in rural areas for last mile. Also available in highly populated areas for short range use. 3G dedicated access to augment this WiFi market. Ethernet delivery is cheap, and scalable to deploy in populated areas. Connecting multi-unit buildings for residential and business customers.

19 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net WT-101 Background WT-101 was born out of the desire of SP to take advantage of the benefits of Ethernet, which are primarily cost & simplicity and which align with general move to packet based NGN Participants actively involved  SP: BT, Bellsouth, DT, FT, Telecom Italia, Singtel  Vendors: Juniper, Alcatel, Cisco, Ericsson, Redback, Huawei, Fujitsu Network Architecture Philosophy  Simplest Architecture Possible (basic network design)  Simple L2(-only) Access Node  Edge Architectures: Single Edge, Dual Edge (Video & Other) Multiple Edge – outside of scope, however if req, principles should be extended Business Models  Based on Multi-Service Business Requirements defined in TR-058  Additional specification in WT-102 New term in WT-101: Broadband Network Gateway (BNG) Defined as a device that implements a subset of BRAS requirements (defined in TR-092) with additional requirements in WT-101

20 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net WT-101 Overview & Status Access Node  Port (1:1) / Protocol (N:1) based x-connect  Restricted 802.1d bridging  Multicast: IGMP: Snooping, Report Suppression/Proxy Reporting Multicast VLAN: replication and x-connect to Subscriber ports  IWF for PPPoA  Line ID: PPPoE IA; DHCP Op82  Encapsulation & Line Params Signalling  Bulk Provisioning Ethernet Aggregation Network  Only Ethernet requirements – network architecture is not prescribed  802.1ad (S-Tag) Bridging & with restricted forwarding  Support for 1:1 & N:1 VLAN Models  Multicast-VLAN  Simple Priority based QoS BNG  802.1ad: N:1 & 1:1 support Dual-tag push & pop Auto-sense VLAN (dynamic) & Static VLAN interfaces  Hierarchical QoS  Modular Multicast Requirements for several deployment scenarios Multicast-VLAN Dynamic H-QoS adjustment PPP or IP for Unicast Single and Dual BNG deployments  Security: IP Spoofing  Secure ARP & DHCP Snooping Proxy-ARP CPE (RG)  Support of Legacy CPE for Legacy Services  RG requirements for new applications/services

21 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net WT-101 VLAN Architecture Priority is optional. Usually wiser to not change DSL interface

22 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Multicast - Key Attributes  1) Low Zap time (end user experience <1s, network experience <250ms)  2) Minimize replication of multicast streams on the core network  3) No duplication of multicast streams on the access network, DSL line = low BW, end RG/STB can’t deal with duplicate packets  4) Redundancy  5) Ability to migrate to DSLAM IGMP-proxy or RG-Forking at a later stage  6) Dynamic QoS adjustment on IGMP report  7) Scale to multiple E320’s connected to M-VLAN (~67K subs for each E320)  8) DSL Forum - WT-101 compliant

23 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Multicast Solutions – “Like Skinning a Cat!”  1a: IGMP to M-Series & IGMP-Proxy on E320  1b: PIM on M-Series & E320  2a: Multicast VR with IGMP-Proxy  2b: Multicast VR with PIM-SSM  2c: Only Internet VR with PIM-SSM

24 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Single BNG – PPP – AN/RG Forking Single BNG – IPoE – H-QoS for MC Dual BNG – IPoE – no H-QoS for MC Single BNG – IPoE – no H-QoS for MC WT-101 Multicast Architecture Options BNG RG-A 2’ Copy IGMP/PPP Msg to IGMP/IPoE on M-VLAN & Snoop 1’ Copy IGMP/PPP Msg to IGMP/IPoE on VC Unicast 1:1 or N:1 M-VLAN IGMP Snooping Deliver IPmc to M- VLAN, update Unicast shaper BNG RG-A Unicast 1:1 or N:1 M-VLAN IGMP Snooping Deliver IPmc to M- VLAN, update Unicast shaper Copy IGMP Msg to M- VLAN & Snoop BNG RG-A Unicast 1:1 or N:1 M-VLAN IGMP Snooping Deliver IPmc to M-VLAN, don’t update Unicast shaper Copy IGMP Msg to M- VLAN, Snoop & Proxy/Suppress Reports BNG RG-A Unicast 1:1 or N:1 M-VLAN IGMP Snooping Copy IGMP Msg to M- VLAN, Snoop & Proxy/Suppress Reports Deliver IPmc to M-VLAN, don’t update Unicast shaper 12 34

25 Copyright © 2005 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net Reasons to go for C-VLAN  Faulting / Tracking -> Ethernet OAM immature (Eth-to-ATM OAM even worse) -> C-VLAN allows for ARP broadcast to check end-to-end connectivity  MAC spoofing -> checks/’hacks’ in DSLAMs and switches not considered as secure enough  Multi-session PPPoE -> easier to control  Protocol translation -> translation complicates DHCP setups is in DHCP payload as well). L2 DSLAMs require too much complexity  Multicast -> need per-subscriber IGMP knowledge for QoS adjustments  End user id for legal interception -> easier to adapt existing system for ATM to ethernet