Virtualizing the Transport Network Why it matters & how OpenFlow can help Saurav Das OFELIA Workshop, ECOC 18 th Sept, 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MPLS and GMPLS Li Yin CS294 presentation.
Advertisements

All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2009 Enhancing Dynamic Cloud-based Services using Network Virtualization F. Hao, T.V. Lakshman, Sarit Mukherjee, H.
OpenFlow in Service Provider Networks AT&T Tech Talks October 2010
OPEN TRANSPORT SWITCH A SOFTWARE DEFINED NETWORKING ARCHITECTURE FOR TRANSPORT NETWORKS Abhinava Sadasivarao, Sharfuddin Syed, Ping Pan, Chris Liou – Infinera.
Pac.c Packet & Circuit Convergence with OpenFlow Saurav Das, Guru Parulkar, & Nick McKeown Stanford University
Unifying Packet & Circuit Networks with OpenFlow Saurav Das, Guru Parulkar, & Nick McKeown Stanford University Huawei, Feb 3 rd 2010
Frenetic: A High-Level Language for OpenFlow Networks Nate Foster, Rob Harrison, Matthew L. Meola, Michael J. Freedman, Jennifer Rexford, David Walker.
Why SDN and MPLS? Saurav Das, Ali Reza Sharafat, Guru Parulkar, Nick McKeown Clean Slate CTO Summit 9 th November, 2011.
CPSC Network Layer4-1 IP addresses: how to get one? Q: How does a host get IP address? r hard-coded by system admin in a file m Windows: control-panel->network->configuration-
OpenFlow overview Joint Techs Baton Rouge. Classic Ethernet Originally a true broadcast medium Each end-system network interface card (NIC) received every.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—4-1 MPLS VPN Technology Introducing VPNs.
COS 461 Fall 1997 Networks and Protocols u networks and protocols –definitions –motivation –history u protocol hierarchy –reasons for layering –quick tour.
An Overview of Software-Defined Network Presenter: Xitao Wen.
Flow Space Virtualization on Shared Physical OpenFlow Networks Hiroaki Yamanaka, Shuji Ishii, Eiji Kawai (NICT), Masayoshi Shimamura, Katsuyoshi Iida (TITECH),
OpenFlow Costin Raiciu Using slides from Brandon Heller and Nick McKeown.
Mobile Communication and Internet Technologies
Software-Defined Networking, OpenFlow, and how SPARC applies it to the telecommunications domain Pontus Sköldström - Wolfgang John – Elisa Bellagamba November.
OpenFlow : Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks SIGCOMM 2008 Nick McKeown, Tom Anderson, et el. Stanford University California, USA Presented.
Towards Virtual Routers as a Service 6th GI/ITG KuVS Workshop on “Future Internet” November 22, 2010 Hannover Zdravko Bozakov.
Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net 1 Provider Opportunities for Enterprise MPLS APRICOT 2006, Perth Matt.
Software Defined Networks Saurav Das Guru Parulkar Nick McKeown With contributions from many others… A Presentation to the OIF 12 th July, 2011.
An Overview of Software-Defined Network
A Policy-Based Optical VPN Management Architecture.
Saurav Das, Guru Parulkar & Nick McKeown Stanford University European Conference on Optical Communications (ECOC) 18 th Sept, 2012 Why OpenFlow/SDN Can.
Transport SDN: Key Drivers & Elements
An Overview of Software-Defined Network Presenter: Xitao Wen.
Application-Aware Aggregation & Traffic Engineering in a Converged Packet-Circuit Network Saurav Das, Yiannis Yiakoumis, Guru Parulkar Nick McKeown Stanford.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ROUTE v1.0—2-1 Implementing an EIGRP-Based Solution Configuring and Verifying EIGRP for the Enterprise.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco PublicITE I Chapter 6 1 Cisco Certified Network Associate CCNA Access the WAN Asst.Prof. It-arun.
OpenFlow: Enabling Technology Transfer to Networking Industry Nikhil Handigol Nikhil Handigol Cisco Nerd.
C O R P O R A T E T E C H N O L O G Y Information & Communications Networks & Multimedia Communications NOBEL WP4 – Siemens implementation activities contact:
End-to-end resource management in DiffServ Networks –DiffServ focuses on singal domain –Users want end-to-end services –No consensus at this time –Two.
Software Defined-Networking. Network Policies Access control: reachability – Alice can not send packets to Bob Application classification – Place video.
OpenFlow: Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks
Aditya Akella (Based on slides from Aaron Gember and Nick McKeown)
LO1 Know types of Network Systems and Protocols. Wan Technologies.
Click to edit Master subtitle style Chapter 9: Introduction to IP Routing Instructor:
A Simple Unified Control Plane for Packet and Circuit Networks Saurav Das, Guru Parulkar, Nick McKeown Stanford University.
Rick Summerhill Chief Technology Officer, Internet2 Internet2 Fall Member Meeting 9 October 2007 San Diego, CA The Dynamic Circuit.
© 1999, Cisco Systems, Inc. Module 9: Understanding Virtual LANs.
A Framework for Internetworking Heterogeneous High-Performance Networks via GMPLS and Web Services Xi Yang, Tom Lehman Information Sciences Institute (ISI)
5: Link Layer Part Link Layer r 5.1 Introduction and services r 5.2 Error detection and correction r 5.3Multiple access protocols r 5.4 Link-Layer.
17575_03_2003 © 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Optical Networking: From Photons to Packets Rajiv Ramaswami VP/GM Optical Technology Group.
Unifying Packet & Circuit Networks with OpenFlow Saurav Das, Guru Parulkar, & Nick McKeown Stanford University BIPN, Nov 30 th 2009
TeraPaths TeraPaths: Establishing End-to-End QoS Paths through L2 and L3 WAN Connections Presented by Presented by Dimitrios Katramatos, BNL Dimitrios.
Dynamic Lightpath Services on the Internet2 Network Rick Summerhill Director, Network Research, Architecture, Technologies, Internet2 TERENA May.
Aaron Gember, Theophilus Benson, Aditya Akella University of Wisconsin-Madison.
1 | © 2015 Infinera Open SDN in Metro P-OTS Networks Sten Nordell CTO Metro Business Group
Circuit Services Christian Todorov Internet2 Fall Member Meeting October 9, 2007.
Optical + Ethernet: Converging the Transport Network An Overview.
Why OpenFlow/SDN Can Succeed Where GMPLS Failed
OpenFlow MPLS and the Open Source Label Switched Router Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan,
A Snapshot on MPLS Reliability Features Ping Pan March, 2002.
3.6 Software-Defined Networks and OpenFlow
MULTI-PROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING By: By: YASHWANT.V YASHWANT.V ROLL NO:20 ROLL NO:20.
© 2013, CYAN, INC. 11 Software Defined Metro Networks TNC2013 Virtualization and Innovation Robin Massey SE Manager EMEA
Fabric: A Retrospective on Evolving SDN Presented by: Tarek Elgamal.
Wrapping up subnetting, mapping IPs to physical ports BSAD 146 Dave Novak Sources: Network+ Guide to Networks, Dean 2013.
Software Defined Networking and OpenFlow Geddings Barrineau Ryan Izard.
SDN and Beyond Ghufran Baig Mubashir Adnan Qureshi.
How is all that data traffic controlled on the Internet?
Network Layer Goals: Overview:
OpenFlow in Service Provider Networks AT&T Tech Talks October 2010
The Stanford Clean Slate Program
Software Defined Networking (SDN)
PPPoE Internet Point to Point Protocol over Ethernet
The Business Value of MPLS VPNs
Software Defined Networking
Lecture 8: The Network Layer.
Chapter 4: outline 4.1 Overview of Network layer data plane
Presentation transcript:

Virtualizing the Transport Network Why it matters & how OpenFlow can help Saurav Das OFELIA Workshop, ECOC 18 th Sept, 2011

Outline Motivation Unified Control Architecture Three Challenges

Transport Network IP Network 3

TRANSPORT Network INTERNET The Future? INTERNET Enterprise Private -Lines Private-Nets Cellular PSTN All Services Is there a need for circuit switching in the Transport Network?

Packet and Circuit Switches Glimmerglass IOS600Fujitsu Flashwave 7500Ciena CoreDirector Cisco CRS-1 Fiber SwitchWDM Switch TDM Switch Packet Switch B/w1111 Power1 W/Gbps Volume 1 in 3 /Gbps44165 Price1 $/Gbps3553

Capex Results 1 59%

Outline Motivation  IP and Transport must work together for mutual benefit  But does NOT happen today! Unified Control Architecture 1. Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction

The Flow Abstraction End – to – End Flow L4: TCP src/dst port L3: IP src/dst addr, IP proto L2.5: L2: Flow Identifiers Common Dest Flow L4: L3: IP dst prefix for China L2.5: L2: 8

The Flow Abstraction Classification of packets that have a logical association Action & Maintaining Flow State Flow based Accounting & Resource Management What is a Flow? L4: L3: IP src prefix for branch L2.5: L2: Flow Identifiers Common Src Flow L4: TCP dst port 80 L3: IP proto L2.5: L2: MAC src Web traffic from a Handset L4: L3: L2.5: MPLS Label ID L2: All packets between 2 routers 9

1. Common Flow Abstraction Flow Identifiers L1: L0: (p2, p5, p7, p9) λ5 L1: L0: (p2, p5, p7, p9) (λ5, λ8, λ3) L1: L0: (p2, λ5), (p5, λ8), (p7, λ3) 10

1. Common Flow Abstraction Flow Identifiers L1: p3, ts6, num3 L0: L1: p3, ts6, num3 p4, ts3, num3 p7, ts9, num3 L0: 11

Packet Switch Wavelength Switch Time-slot Switch Multi-layer Switch 1. Common Flow Abstraction L4 L3 L2.5 L2 L1 L0

routing, access-control, mobility, traffic-engineering, guarantees, recovery, bandwidth-on-demand … 2. Common Map Abstraction Unified Control Plane

routing, access-control, mobility, traffic-engineering, guarantees, recovery, bandwidth-on-demand … Unified Control Plane Unified Control Architecture 1.Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction

Outline Motivation  IP and Transport must work together for mutual benefit  But does NOT happen today! Unified Control Architecture 1. Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Three Challenges 1.Has to be simple!

Implementation of the Architecture 16 NOX Interface: OpenFlow Protocol Packet & Circuit Switches Converged Network Unified Control Plane 1.Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction

Prototype 17 Hybrid Packet-Circuit Switches Packet switches NOX

Prototype – Emulated WAN SAN FRANCISCO HOUSTON NEW YORK NOX OpenFlow Protocol 18 GE links OC-48 links (2.5 Gbps)

VOIP HTTP VOIP HTTP VIDEO Example Network Application Control Function: Treat different kinds of traffic differently Function Impl.: Use both packets and circuits, at the same time. Traffic-typeDelay/JitterBandwidthRecovery VoIPLowest DelayLowMedium VideoZero JitterHighHighest WebBest-effortMediumLowest

Why is it Simpler? 20 NOX Packet and Circuit Switches Converged Network 4500 lines of code Unified Control Plane 1.Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Application across packet and circuits Interface: OpenFlow Protocol

Why is it Simpler? 21 NOX Interface: OpenFlow Protocol Converged Network EMS Proprietary Interface Vendor Islands IP Network Transport Network OSPF-TE RSVP-TE OSPF-TE RSVP-TE IP/MPLS Control Plane GMPLS Control Plane UNI

Why is it Simpler? 22 EMS Proprietary Interface Vendor Islands IP Network Transport Network OSPF-TE RSVP-TE OSPF-TE RSVP-TE IP/MPLS Control Plane GMPLS Control Plane UNI 35000* # ! ^ ^ Sources: * Quagga # Tequila ! MUPBED ^ DRAGON ∑ = 175,000 + x LOC

Outline Motivation  IP and Transport must work together for mutual benefit  But does NOT happen today! Unified Control Architecture 1. Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Three Challenges 1.Has to be simple! >>> Two orders of magnitude simpler 2.Need to share information

Share Nothing 24 EMS IP Network Transport Network IP/MPLS Control Plane GMPLS Control Plane UNI IP and Transport networks will not share information.

How to build the Common Map? 25 NOX Packet and Circuit Switches Converged Network Unified Control Plane 1.Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Application across packet and circuits Interface: OpenFlow Protocol SLICING PLANE

26

Common Map PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ISP# 1’s NetOS App PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ISP# 2’s NetOS App PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM Transport Service Provider’s (TSP) virtualized network Internet Service Provider’s (ISP# 1) OF enabled network with slice of TSP’s network Internet Service Provider’s (ISP# 2) OF enabled network with another slice of TSP’s network

ISP# 1’s network PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH Packet (virtual) topology Actual topology Notice the spare interfaces..and spare bandwidth in the slice 28

ISP# 1’s network PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH Packet (virtual) topology Actual topology ISP# 1 redirects bw between the spare interfaces to dynamically create new links!! 29

ISP# 2’s network Packet (virtual) topology Actual topology PKT ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM PKTPKT ETHETH ETHETH SONETSONET SONETSONET TDMTDM ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ETHETH ISP# 2 uses variable bandwidth packet links!! Only static link bw paid for up-front 30

Outline Motivation  IP and Transport must work together for mutual benefit  But does NOT happen today! Unified Control Architecture 1. Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Three Challenges 1.Has to be simple! >> Two orders of magnitude simpler 2.Need to share information >> Slicing & Switching-as-a-Service 3.Conservative nature of operators

Transport network operators dislike giving up precise (manual) control to an automated software control plane irrespective of how intelligent it may be & decades worth of established procedures Is there a gradual adoption path?

OpenFlow Protocol C CK P P P P Gradual Adoption Path CC Slicing Plane Under Transport Service Provider (TSP) control ISP ‘A’ Client Controller OpenFlow Protocol ISP ‘B’ Client Controller ISP ‘C’ Client Controller 33

Summary Motivation  IP and Transport must work together for mutual benefit  But does NOT happen today! Unified Control Architecture 1. Common Flow Abstraction 2. Common Map Abstraction Three Challenges 1.Has to be simple! >> Two orders of magnitude simpler 2.Need to share information >> Slicing & Switching-as-a-Service 3.Conservative nature of operators >> Gradual Adoption Path

Software Defined Networks Thanks!