1. 1 Network Measurement Challenges LHC E2E Network Research Meeting October 25 th 2006 Joe Metzger metzger@es.net Version 1.1

2. 2 Outline Measurement Challenges o Motivation -Increasing Complexity -Usage Changes o End User Application Requirements -Planning -Deployment -Operations o Network Management Requirements perfSONAR o Approach o Partners o Services o Status

3. 3 Increasing Complexity ESnet in 2005-06 ESnet in 2007-08 ESnet in 2009-10

4. 4 Backbone and Connector Speeds Backbone interfaces are limited to multiple 10G for the next 3-4 years Connections to sites and peers are moving from 622 Mbps to multiples of 10G Power users or applications have single machines, or clusters running single applications that can saturate backbone links (intentional or accidentally) o O(100K) general users o O(100) power users now

5. 5 Traffic Patterns are Changing Dramatically While the total traffic is increasing exponentially o Peak flow – that is system-to-system – bandwidth is decreasing o The number of large flows is increasing 1/05 1/06 6/06 2 TB/month 7/05 total traffic, TBy

6. 6 Changing Usage Dynamics Science flows are different from typical Internet flows which presents new Traffic Engineering Challenges o 100,000’s of typical short lived, low bandwidth Internet flows that can be easily balanced across multiple parallel links. o A couple of long lived, large bandwidth science flows that are not easily split across multiple parallel links The network is becoming a critical part of the science instruments and processes o LHC o Confocal Microscopes o Distributed Computing Application communities are making commitments to provide networked services to cross-domain collaborations.

7. 7 Planning Will the existing network meet applications requirements? o Which networks connect to all of the sites of interest? o How are the networks interconnected? o Is there sufficient base capacity? o How much of the existing capacity is in use? o Who is currently using the networks of interest?

8. 8 Deployment & Testing New users of the network are complex workflow systems. Network problems can cause application problems and, application problems can cause network problems. -How do you tell which is which? -How do you prove one or the other? Network Operators and Application managers need to be able to see how the application is affecting the network.

9. 9 Operations Application managers need to: o Easily track when the network is up vs down. o Be able to compute what portion of ‘down time’ is due to the network vs application issues. o Understand utilization to feed back into the planning cycle. Next Generation Applications need to: o Understand how they are impacting the network o Make decisions based on network performance -Schedule large transfers based on available capacity o Interact with the network -Setup Circuits or guaranteed bandwidth if the best-effort transfers are not meeting deadlines.

10. 10 Network Management New Requirements o Quickly differentiate between application problems and network problems o Be able to document that the network has delivered the required services or capabilities (Or generate alerts if they are not) o Determine if the whole end to end path is working. o Measure effectiveness of load-spreading across parallel infrastructure Traditional Requirements o Determine if the ‘local’ portion of the end to end path is up o Real-time Alarming, Diagnostics & Debugging o Capacity Planning o …

11. 11 Challenges Summary Networks are getting more complex Applications are getting more complex Application are dependent on the network Network Measurement tools must be able to o Support delivering and debugging advanced services o Document services delivered o Differentiate between Application & Network problems

12. 12 perfSONAR Approach: Build & Empower the Community Decouple the Problem Space: Analysis and Visualization Performance Data Sharing Performance Data Generation Grow the Footprint: Clean APIs and protocols between each layer Widespread deployment of measurement infrastructure Widespread deployment of common performance measurement tools

13. 13 Groups Developing and/or committed to Deploying perfSONAR Core Participants: o ESnet o GÉANT2 JRA1 o Internet2 o RNP (Brazil) Others o FERMI o University of Delaware o Georgia Tech o SLAC o … GÉANT2 JRA1 includes: o Arnes o Belnet o Carnet o Cesnet o DANTE o DFN o FCCN o GRNet o GARR o ISTF o PSNC o Nordunet (Uninett) o Renater o RedIRIS o Surfnet o SWITCH

14. 14 perfSONAR Services In Development Lookup Service Authentication Service Topology Service Measurement Points o Circuit Status o Ping o OWAMP o BWCTL o Command Line (looking glass) o Traceroute o SNMP Measurement Archives o Utilization (rrd) o Circuit Status (sql) o OWAMP o BWCTL o IEPM-BW Visualization and Analysis Tools o perfSONAR UI o Looking Glass o ICE o Circuit Status o NOC Alarm

15. 15 perfSONAR Status The collaboration is well established Many perfSONAR compatible tools and services are being developed Some are ready for motivated users o Circuit Status -LHCOPN o Link Utilization -ESnet, I2, GN2, & 5-10 others

16. 16 Discussion Issues Target user Community Critical parameters What types of analysis are important? How do we move forward?