The DRAGON Project Context, Objectives, Progress, and Directions Presented to the Optical Network Testbeds II Workshop NASA Ames Research Center September 12-14, 2005 National Science Foundation Jerry Sobieski Mid-Atlantic Crossroads (MAX) Tom Lehman University of Southern California Information Sciences Institute (USC ISI) Bijan Jabbari George Mason University (GMU) Don Riley University of Maryland (UMD) The DRAGON Project

September 8, 2005 Dynamic Resource Allocation over GMPLS Optical Networks -> “DRAGON” NSF funded four year program –“Experimental Infostructure Networks” (EIN 2003) –Washington DC regional optical network Collaboration of many organizations: –Mid-Atlantic Crossroads (Sobieski PI) –USC Information Sciences Institute (Tom Lehman co-PI) –George Mason University (Bijan Jabbari co-PI) –University of Maryland College Park (Don Riley co-PI) –Movaz Networks –NASA Goddard Space Flight Center –MIT Haystack Observatory –NCSA ACCESS –University of Maryland Baltimore County

September 8, 2005 The DRAGON Regional Optical Infrastructure Washington DC CLPK ARLG DCGW MCLN (Level3) MIT Haystack Observatory (HAYS) U. S. Naval Observatory* (USNO) University of Maryland College Park (UMCP) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Univ of Southern California/ Information Sciences Institute (ISIE) DCNE (Qwest) GIG-EF HOPI NREN ABIL NLR NCSA Access*

September 8, 2005 DRAGON International Experiments Staging for IGrid2005 HOPI LAX HOPI LAX HOPI SEA HOPI SEA HOPI WDC HOPI WDC HOPI CHI HOPI CHI EU-CHI Chicago EU-CHI Chicago EU-STK Stockholm EU-STK Stockholm EU-AMS Amsterdam EU-AMS Amsterdam EU-MAN Manchester EU-MAN Manchester DRAGON MCLN DRAGON MCLN DRAGON GSFC DRAGON GSFC DRAGON ARLG DRAGON ARLG DRAGON HAYS DRAGON HAYS UKLight HOPI DRAGON NorthernLight Onsala Space Obs Jodrel Banks Obs Westerbork Westford, MA GGAO Greenbelt MIT Haystack Correlator

September 8, 2005 Assumptions/Context: Some emerging applications have requirements for global data flows that are of the same order capacity as existing IP backbone capacity; e.g. e-VLBI, HEP, etc –The NIC-to-Backbone ratio has again flipped (see 1994). The end systems again have the cost and performance advantage over the core backbone. 10Gbs nics ~$1000, 10Gbs router blades ~$100K, 10Gbs LH transmission $$$ 10Gbs packet backbones will not easily or cost effectively handle multi-Gbs applications – particularly if they proliferate due to availability of cheap nics. Some emerging applications have service requirements other than simply capacity; e.g. security/privacy, control, predictability, repeatability, usage policies, cost, performance, etc. IP is (and will continue to be) a mainstay of the the network environment: –Proven success for generalized and broadly deployed applications –IP networks have themselves been built on top of lower layer point-to-point technologies/services- This IP layer makes general and global scalability feasible… –but it has never encouraged application access to lower layer dedicated network resources

September 8, 2005 DRAGON Premises: Enable the applications to access these “light path” services directly and dynamically; –These lower layer Light Paths provide dedicated network resources to the application –They provide deterministic performance –They provide predictability and repeatability –They are reservable and schedulable Adopt and extend standardized protocols to enable dynamic control of the underlying service layer(s) –Open source GMPLS protocol stacks (GMPLS-OSPF-TE & GMPLS-RSVP-TE) –Extend these with novel interdomain and multi-region service routing techniques Develop tools to formalize the application’s service requirements and to integrate network resources with non-network resources and parameters –Enable the creation of “Application Specific Topologies” (ASTs)

September 8, 2005 DRAGON [optical] Premise: Deploy and refine photonic technologies that enable advanced “optical network” capabilities: –As the cost of DWDM plugables decreases, push these devices out closer to the end user. Design the core to allow external waves to transit the network freely. The core network requires fewer OEO components –Accumultae and dessiminate a set of baseline design and engineering principles for photonic networking Understand where all-photonic networks add value, and where they are not [yet] ready for prime time –Expand the “accessibility” and flexibility of photonic infrastructures Allow the end user (research group, institution, etc) to leverage these emerging RONs directly – push the uninterupted optics out as close to the end user as possible.

September 8, 2005 DRAGON’s Vision of the Future Optical Network Both packet and circuit based services will be available to the end user –Packet switched services (IP) will provide overall global access for the large majority of network usage –Circuits (“light paths”) will enable dynamic private network environments for Special purpose applications and “affinity grids” where deterministic network services are required for global collaborations Deterministic, predictable, repeatable network resources… The network resources will be viewed as part of the overall resource set required by an “application”- Network resource management agents will need to interact with non-network resource managers – a holistic end-user experience. Viable all-photonic networks will emerge into the campus and metro/regional space as DWDM optical technologies mature –Inexpensive ITU compliant plugables (SFPs, XFPs, etc), functional and automated wavelength routing and provisioning technologies, tuneable lasers/filters, reliable (and inexpensive) wavelength switching systems, etc. –Ultra high capacity photonic switching will enable very large scale grid applications beyond the “machine room”. The network will need to dynamically select, reserve, and instantiate these light path resources… –These networks will be far more intelligent, more robust, more secure, and more complex …than present networks. Automation of these provisioning and operational functions will be necessary… –(Lots of other issues associated with non-optical network aspects..)

September 8, 2005 Progress The DRAGON Project has been focused on two key areas: –GMPLS routing and signaling to dynamically establish point-to-point deterministic data paths; –All-Photonic metro scale switched optical networking DRAGON Software Suite: –A Virtual Label Switching Router (VLSR) GMPLS-OSPF-TE (modified from the Zebra implementation) GMPLS-RSVP-TE (modified from the KOM RSPV implementation) –NARB – Network Aware Resource Broker for inter-domain service advertising, AAA, scheduling –Application Specific Topology Builder We are deploying VLSR code/switches to support dynamic ethernet services over DRAGON, HOPI, and international locations supporting the e-VLBI program –Regional Domain: The DRAGON network has ~10 VLSRs deployed –National Domain: VLSRs are being deployed for testing over HOPI WDC, CHI, SEA, LAX, NYC –International Domain: E-VLBI community is exploring Application Specific Topologies using the DRAGON GMPLS based VLSR: VLSRs deployed in Manchester UK, Stockholm SE, Chicago US, and Amsterdam NL using statically provisioned network resources on UKLight, NetherLight, and NorthernLight. These will allow telescope resources at the Onsala SE, Westerbork NL, Jodrel Banks UK, Westford US, and NASA GSFC US and Kashima JP to dynamically estabish realtime and near RT links to coorelators at Haystack, JIVE, and [hopefully soon] US Naval Observatory.

September 8, 2005 Critical Issues for the Future Common Service Definitions (!) –A common service definition defines the end-user experience: It clearly and unequivocally describes the capabilities that the network offers to its connectors. –GLIF style services are being planned and deployed on a global basis by many different organizations and affinity groups… –These will inevitably and necessarily need to cooperate in order to provide a global reach for the leading edge networked applications –Interconnecting such network domains and concatenating the offered services will *require* a very clear and specific definition of the service capabilities being offered to the applications “ethernet” is not at all specific enough- nor broad enough –Do you mean 1500 Byte MTU or 9000 MTU? 10Gbs? Or 9.4 Gbs? VLANs allowed? What about FiberChannel? Infinband? Sonet? Other novel [i.e. optical] framing layers? On demand? Or scheduled? When? Predictability and repeatability are critical resource characteristics for emerging applications.

September 8, 2005 Why Common Service Definitions are so important: A D C B 10GE Lan 10GE Eth GFP/OC48c (1500 byte MTU only) User A Requests 1 Gbs ethernet Big Ethernet switch Requires VLAN tags (i.e. No user VLANs) Big Ethernet switch Without rate shaping Ethernet over 2R WDM Ethernet (WAN)/ OC192c (only 9.4 Gbs) 1Gbs Eth User Z 1 Gbs ethernet NIC

September 8, 2005 Other Issues on the Roadmap Optical R&D coupled with network adaptation and experimentation –Viability of photonic networks is dependent upon the continued advance of optical device technologies – in both reduced cost and extended functionality –Few RONs today have the engineering experience base to design or deploy an switched optical/photonic network Little if any interaction with optical technologie experts (e.g. research faculty, commercial development labs, etc.) Few of the national R&E networks are actively involved in optical networking research programs, and probably fewer RONs. These organizations need to be involved in the research component lest they relegate themselves to simply a commodity network service [provider. Viable and self sustaining business models for these emerging advanced service capabilites must be explored –Developing and deploying architectures that reduce the cost of Light Path services, and push the cost of such services out towards the end users will reduce the “core-loading” financials –Encouraging these services into [semi-]production so that service models and business economics can be matured is necessary Existing [traditional] business/service models for circuits will not suit the R&E community, and probably won’t be workable in a dynamic global environment Traditional ISP business model won’t support investment in advanced architectures – new cost recovery concepts need to be experimented with –E.g. Best-Effort Light Path port pricing

September 8, 2005 Thank You The DRAGON Project –