Internet2/Abilene Perspective Guy Almes and Ted Hanss Internet2 Project NASA Ames -- August 10, 1999

Applications and engineering Applications Engineering MotivateEnables

What makes this hard?  Combination of: high bandwidth wide area intrinsically bursty applications  Need for multicast  Need for quality of service  Need for measurements

Applications Challenges  Raising awareness among all faculty  Providing “services-rich” network environment  Supporting application developers  Supporting deployment communities From packaging to ensuring end-to-end network environment is there

Approaches  Internet2 is a membership participation organization  Nothing is done in isolation

Examples  I2-Distributed Storage Infrastructure  I2-Digital Video

Outline of Engineering Issues  QoS Low-latency very-low packet loss  Multicast PIM-SparseMode, MBGP, MSDP  Measurements Surveyor: One-way delay and loss Traffic utilization End to end flows with gigaPoP help OC3MON -- passive measurements

Measurements Perspectives  Traffic Utilization: Easy, boring, but important to do well Periods, formats, etc.  Active Measurements: very accurate one-way delay and loss throughput  Passive Measurements: OCXmon etc Each monitor useful to all

Focusing In  Remember those meritorious applications?  Rôle of campus, gigaPoP, and backbone engineers in supporting aggressive applications

The bottom line  Supporting inter-university networking  Supporting advanced applications users know apps, but not infrastructure expectations  Supporting univ / gigapop / backbone / ngix infrastructure multiple support organizations multiple kinds of engineering commitment to cooperative end-end solutions

More Info...     apps.internet2.edu/talks/

Abilene and Internet2  Internet2 as infrastructure: 150+ campus LANs about 35 gigaPoPs a few interconnect backbones  Abilene is the 2nd Backbone OC-48 trunks from Qwest Cisco routers with IP/Sonet OC-3 and OC-12 access to gigaPoPs

Seattle Kansas City Denver Cleveland New York Atlanta Houston Indianapolis Abilene -- Sep-98 Sacramento Los Angeles

Seattle Kansas City Denver Cleveland New York Atlanta Houston Indianapolis Abilene Jan-99 Sacramento Los Angeles

Seattle Kansas City Denver Cleveland New York Atlanta Houston Indianapolis Abilene Aug-99 Sacramento Los Angeles

Seattle Kansas City Denver Cleveland New York Atlanta Houston Indianapolis Abilene -- plus on order Sacramento Los Angeles

Seattle Kansas City Denver Cleveland New York Atlanta Houston Indianapolis Abilene -- plus on order plus expected Sacramento Los Angeles

Summary of New Connections  OC12: 7 now plus 4 ordered plus 3  OC3: 11 now plus 13 ordered plus 1  Most are IP/Sonet  Project ratio of 1::7 in traffic  Plus impact of routing

Multicast  Now running PIM-SM, MBGP, MSDP  Beginning multicast beta service  NASA demonstration: CalREN2, NREN, Abilene, NGIX-Ames 50 Mb/s to 80 Mb/s multicast flows Medical application  Emphasis of NOC and NCNE

Interconnect Issues  NGIX effort with the NGI/Internet2 JET Chicago: OC3 going to OC12 Ames: OC12 Washington: OC12 as soon as possible  International: StarTap plus Emphasize StarTap as the universal solution Optimize where appropriate Canada as an important special case

ISP SURFnet NORDUnet Chicago New York City Europe Teleglobe Qwest Abilene

ISP SURFnet NORDUnet Chicago New York City Europe Teleglobe Qwest Abilene