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

2. Outline Motivation Unified Control Architecture Three Challenges

3. Transport Network IP Network 3

4. 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?

5. Packet and Circuit Switches Glimmerglass IOS600Fujitsu Flashwave 7500Ciena CoreDirector Cisco CRS-1 Fiber SwitchWDM Switch TDM Switch Packet Switch B/w1111 Power1 W/Gbps551332 Volume 1 in 3 /Gbps44165 Price1 $/Gbps3553

6. Capex Results 1 59%

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

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

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

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

14. 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

15. 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!

16. 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

17. Prototype 17 Hybrid Packet-Circuit Switches Packet switches NOX

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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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* 45000 # 15000 ! 45000 ^ 35000 ^ Sources: * Quagga # Tequila ! MUPBED ^ DRAGON ∑ = 175,000 + x LOC

23. 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

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

25. 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. 26

27. 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

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 Notice the spare interfaces..and spare bandwidth in the slice 28

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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?

33. 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

34. 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

35. Software Defined Networks Thanks!