1. 1 GMPLS networks and optical network testbeds Malathi Veeraraghavan Professor Charles L. Brown Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Virginia mvee@virginia.edu Tutorial at ICACT09 Feb. 2009 GMPLS: Generalized MultiProtocol Label Switched networks (MPLS, SONET, WDM, SDM, VLAN)

2. 2 Outline Principles –Different types of connection-oriented networks Technologies –Single network –Internetworking Usage –Commercial networks –Research & Education Networks (REN)

3. 3 Principles Types of switches and networks Bandwidth sharing modes –TCP in connectionless (IP) networks –Immediate-request and book-ahead modes in connection-oriented networks

4. 4 Types of switches Multiplexing technique on data-plane links Admission control in control plane? Circuit switch (CS) - position based (port, time, lambda) Packet switch (PS) - header based Connectionless (CL) - no admission control Not an option e.g., Ethernet Connection-oriented (CO) - admission control e.g., telephone SONET WDM Virtual-circuit e.g., MPLS, ATM

5. 5 Types of networks Support function Network type Addressing (in data or control plane?) RoutingSignaling Connectionless (CL)Data plane  Circuit Switched (CS) Control plane Virtual circuit (VC) Control plane Connection-oriented

6. 6 How is bandwidth shared on a connectionless packet-switched network? Pre-1988 IP network: –Just send data without reservations or any mechanism to adjust rates  congestion collapses! Van Jacobson's 1988 contribution: –Added congestion control to TCP –Sending TCP adjusts rate –Advantages: Proportional fairness High utilization –Disadvantages: No rate guarantees No temporal fairness (job seniority)

7. 7 TCP throughput B: Throughput in congestion-avoidance phase RTT: Round-trip time b: an ACK is sent every b segments (b is typically 2) p: packet loss rate on path T 0 : initial retransmission time out in a sequence of retries Effective rate = min (r,B) r: bottleneck link rate Padhye, Firoui, Towsley, Kurose, ACM Sigcomm 98 paper

8. 8 TCP throughput 438750msCase 18 441.75msCase 17 12.430.1ms1GbpsCase 16 441750msCase 15 471.75msCase 14 92.410.1ms100 Mbps 0.01Case 13 128750msCase 12 129.45msCase 11 8.640.1ms1GbpsCase 10 129350msCase 9 135.45msCase 8 82.930.1ms100 Mbps 0.001Case 7 395.750msCase 6 39.65msCase 5 8.250.1ms1GbpsCase 4 396.550msCase 3 89.455msCase 2 82.250.1ms100 Mb/s0.0001Case 1 Round-trip delayBottleneck link ratePacket loss rate Mean transfer delay for a 1GB file (s) Input parametersCase ~21Mbps ~2Mbps

9. 9 Bandwidth sharing in circuit networks (immediate-request mode) Key difference: –Admission control –Intrinsic to circuit networks: position based mux Send a call setup request: –if requested bandwidth is available, it is allocated to the call –if not, the call is blocked (rejected) M/G/m/m model: –m: number of circuits

10. 10 ErlangB formula  : offered traffic load in Erlangs : call arrival rate 1/  : mean call holding time m: number of circuits P b : call blocking probability u b : utilization For a 1% call blocking probability, i.e., P b = 0.01  m uaua 24.8% 58.2% 84.6% 1 10 100 4 17 117 If m is small, high utilization can only be achieved along with high call blocking probability

11. 11 Bandwidth sharing mechanisms in CO networks Bandwidth sharing mechanisms Immediate-request Book-ahead BA-n/BA-First VBDS (Varying-Bandwidth Delayed Start) unspecified call duration call duration specified session-type requests data-type requests BA-nBA-First Users specify a set of call-initiation time options Users are given first available timeslot X. Zhu, Ph.D. Thesis, UVA, http://www.ece.virginia.edu/mv/html-files/students.html Needed if per-call circuit rate is a large fraction of link capacity (e.g., 1Gbps circuits on a 10Gbps link, m = 10)

12. 12 Example –To achieve a 90% utilization with a call blocking probability less than 10% BA-First schemes are needed when m < 59 –To achieve a 90% utilization with a call blocking probability less than 20% BA-First schemes are needed when m < 32 Comparison of Immediate-Request (IR) and Book-Ahead (BA) schemes U: utilization K: number of time periods in advance-reservation window m=10, U = 80%: P B = 23.6% m=100, U = 80%: P B = 0.4% IR m=10, K=10, U = 80%: P B = 0.4% BA

13. 13 Virtual circuit (VC) networks Call Admission Control Scheduling (example: weighted fair queueing) Traffic shaping/policing (example: leaky-bucket algorithm) Two additional dimensions in VC networks Needed in circuit networks Bandwidth sharing more complex, but better utilization PLUS service guarantees

14. 14 Outline Principles –Different types of connection-oriented networks  Technologies –Single network –Internetworking Usage –Commercial networks –Research & Education Networks (REN)

15. 15 Technologies GMPLS networks  Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM (space div. mux) –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE: signaling protocol OSPF-TE: routing protocol LMP: link management protocol Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

16. Multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) MPLS Header: –Label Value: Label used to identify the virtual circuit –Class of Service (CoS): Experimental field, Used for QoS support –S: Identifies the bottom of the label stack –TTL: Time-To-Live value Virtual circuits: Label Switched Path (LSP) MPLS Header Label Value CoSSTTL 20 Bits318

17. IEEE 802.1Q Ethernet VLAN Dest. MAC Address TPIDTCI Type /Len DataFCS VLAN Tag 2 Bytes 802.1Q Tag TypeCFI User Priority VLAN ID 3 Bits1 Bit12 Bits Source MAC Address FCS: Frame Check Sequence new fields

18. VLAN Tag Fields Tag Protocol Identifier (TPID) –802.1Q Tag Protocol Type – set to 0x8100 to identify the frame as a tagged frame Tag Control Information (TCI) –User Priority As defined in 802.1p, 3 bits represent eight priority levels –CFI Canonical Format Indicator, set to indicate the presence of an Embedded-RIF –VLAN ID Uniquely identifies the frame's VLAN

19. 19 SONET/SDH rates (number is the multiplier) Tanenbaum Example: STS-48 frame has 48 x 90 columns in 125  s STS-1: 90 columns by 9 rows in 125  s

20. 20 Optical transport networks (OTN) G. 872 layers –OTS: Optical Transmission Section –OMS: Optical Multiplex Section –OCh: Optical Channel G.709: –Technique for mapping client signals onto the Optical Channel via layers: OTU: Optical Channel Transport Unit, and ODU: Optical Channel Data Unit

21. 21 Layers within an OTN Courtesy: T. Walker's tutorial

22. 22 OTN Hierarchy Electrical domain: –OTU: Optical Channel Transport Unit –ODU: Optical Channel Data Unit –OPU: Optical Channel Payload Unit Courtesy: T. Walker's tutorial Low layer Higher layers

23. 23 G. 709 Optical Channel frame structure (digital wrapper) Optical channel (OCh) overhead: support operations, administration, and maintenance functions OCh payload: can be STM-N, ATM, IP, Ethernet, GFP frames, OTN ODUk, etc. FEC: Reed-Solomon RS(255, 239) code recommended; roughly introduces a 6.7% overhead Frame size: 4 rows of 4080 bytes Frame period: –OTU1 – 48.971 μs (payload data rate: roughly 2.488 Gbps ) –OTU2 – 12.191 μs (payload data rate: roughly 9.995 Gbps ) –OTU3 – 3.035 μs (payload data rate: roughly 40.15 Gbps ) OCh overheadOCh payloadFEC

24. 24 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols:  RSVP-TE: signaling protocol OSPF-TE: routing protocol LMP: link management protocol Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

25. 25 The evolution of Resource reSerVation Protocol (RSVP) RSVP (RFC2205, 1997) RSVP-TE (RFC 3209, 2001) RSVP-TE GMPLS Extension (RFC 3471, 3473, 2003) RSVP-TE GMPLS Extension for SONET/SDH (RFC 3946, 2004, RFC 4606, 2006)

26. 26 Purpose of signaling (needed only in CO networks) Functions: –Call setup: Route selection Admission control: sufficient bandwidth? Switch fabric configuration of each switch –recall position based multiplexing –Call release release bandwidth for use by others

27. 27 Circuit-switched networks Phase 1: Routing protocol exchanges + routing table precomputation IV I V III II Dest.Next hop III-* IV Dest.Next hop III-* III Dest.Next hop III-B III-C Host I-A Host III-B Host III-C Routing protocols exchange: –topology –address reachability –loading conditions

28. 28 Circuit-switched networks Phase 2: Signaling for call setup Host I-A Host III-B I IV V III II a b c a b c d dc a b Connection setup (Dest: III-B; BW: OC1; Timeslot: a, 1) Dest.Next hop III-* IV Routing table Connection setup actions at each switch on the path: 1.Parse message to extract parameter values 2.Lookup routing table for next hop to reach destination 3.Read and update CAC (Connection Admission Control) table 4.Select timeslots on output port 5.Configure switch fabric: write entry into timeslot mapping table 6.Construct setup message to send to next hop

29. 29 Circuit-switched networks Phase 2: Signaling for call setup Connection setup actions at each switch on the path: 1.Parse message to extract parameter values 2.Lookup routing table for next hop to reach destination 3.Read and update CAC (Connection Admission Control) table 4.Select timeslots on output port 5.Configure switch fabric: write entry into timeslot mapping table 6.Construct setup message to send to next hop Host I-A Host III-B I IV V III II a b c a b c d dc a b Dest.Next hop III-* IV Routing table Next hop Interface (Port); Capacity; Avail timeslots IV c; OC12; 1, 4, 5 CAC table Connection setup (Dest: III-B; BW: OC1; Timeslot: a, 1) INPUT Port /Timeslot OUTPUT Port/Timeslot a/1 c/1 Timeslot mapping table Connection setup Update to remove timeslot 1 from available list

30. 30 Circuit-switched networks Phase 2: Signaling for call setup Host I-A Host III-B I IV V III II Connection setup a b c a b c d dc a b INPUT Port /Timeslot OUTPUT Port/Timeslot a/1 c/2 Perform same set of 6 connection setup steps at switch IV write timeslot mapping table entry, update CAC table and send connection setup message to the next hop Connection setup (Dest: III-B; BW: OC1; Timeslot: a, 1) Time slot could be different on each hop

31. 31 Circuit-switched networks Phase 2: Signaling for call setup Host I-A Host III-B I IV V III II a b c a b c d dc a b INPUT Port /Timeslot OUTPUT Port/Timeslot d/2 b/1 Connection setup Circuit setup complete Perform same set of 6 connection setup steps at switch III Reverse setup-confirmation messages typically sent from destination through switches to source host Connection setup

32. 32 Circuit-switched networks Phase 3: User-data flow Bits arriving at switch I on time slot 1 at port a are switched to time slot 1 of port c Host I-A Host III-B I IV V III II a b c a b c d d c a b OUT Port/Timeslot IN Port /Timeslot a/1 c/1 IN Port /Timeslot OUT Port/Timeslot a/1 c/2 IN Port /Timeslot OUT Port/Timeslot d/2 b/1 12 1212 12

33. 33 Release procedure When a communication session ends, there is a hop-by-hop release procedure (similar to the setup procedure) to release timeslots/wavelengths for use by new calls

34. 34 RSVP messages and parameters Messages: –Setup: Path (forward) and Resv (reverse) –Release: PathTear, ResvTear Parameters –Destination: SESSION object –Bandwidth: Sender Tspec object or SONET/SDH Tspec –Timeslot/Wavelength: Generalized LABEL for ports, wavelengths SUKLM label for SONET/SDH Only supports immediate-request circuits/virtual circuits –No time-dimension parameters for book-ahead

35. 35 Explicit Route Object (ERO) A list of groups of nodes along the explicit route (generically called "source route") Thinking: source routing is better for calls than hop-by-hop routing as it can take into account loading conditions Constrained shortest path first (CSPF) algorithm executed at the first node to compute end-to-end route, which is included in the ERO

36. 36 Control-plane message transport: inband or out-of-band Separation of control plane from data plane in GMPLS networks - out-of-band GMPLS Network Internet IP router SONET or WDM switch SONET or WDM switch Data-plane link Ethernet control ports Circuit established Control-plane messages

37. 37 Interface ID field Control plane separation: –Requires upstream switch to identify on which data-plane interface the virtual circuit should be routed –Interface ID field defined in the tag-length-value format –Embedded within the RSVP-HOP object –Carried in PATH messages

38. 38 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE: signaling protocol  OSPF-TE: routing protocol LMP: link management protocol Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

39. 39 OSPF-TE: Open Shortest Path First -Traffic Engineering To advertise loading conditions New parameters: –Maximum bandwidth of a link –Maximum reservable bandwidth: can be greater than the maximum bandwidth to support oversubscription –Unreserved bandwidth RFC 3630 - for MPLS networks Only supports immediate-request circuits/virtual circuits –No time-dimension parameters for book-ahead

40. 40 OSPF-TE extensions for GMPLS RFC 4202 and 4203 Main new parameters –Shared Risk Link Group –Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD) Allows multiple types of switching techniques Example for SONET: Minimum LSP Bandwidth: OC1 on a SONET interface if the switch demultiplexes down to OC1 level

41. 41 Difference between labels in MPLS and circuit-switched GMPLS In circuit-switched GMPLS networks, labels are not carried in the data plane –Labels in circuit-switched networks identify "position" of data for the circuit - time or wavelength In circuit-switched GMPLS networks, cannot assign labels without associated bandwidth reservation –In usage section, we will see the value of this feature in MPLS networks –See two applications: traffic engineering, VPLS (addressing benefits)

42. 42 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE: signaling protocol OSPF-TE: routing protocol  LMP: link management protocol Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

43. 43 LMP procedures Control channel management –Set up and maintain control channels between adjacent nodes Link property correlation –Aggregate multiple data links into a TE link –Synchronize TE link properties at both ends Link connectivity verification (optional) –Data plane discovery; If_Id exchange; physical connectivity verification Fault management (optional) –Fault notification and localization Reference: IETF RFC 4204

44. 44 Control-plane security Need authentication and integrity for all control-plane exchanges Since RSVP, OSPF, LMP run over IP, IPsec is a possible solution

45. 45 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE OSPF-TE LMP  Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

46. 46 Why internetworking? GMPLS networks do not exist as standalone entities Instead they are part of the Internet: –Obvious usage: to interconnect IP routers –Newer uses: Commercial: interconnect Ethernet switches in geographically distributed LANs via point-to-point links or VPNs Research & Education networks: connect GbE and 10GbE cards on cluster computers and storage devices to GMPLS networks

47. 47 Obvious usage Router-to-router circuits and virtual circuits GMPLS Network Internet IP router SONET or WDM switch SONET or WDM switch

48. 48 Router-to-router usage OSPF-enabled usage –simply treat MPLS virtual circuit or GMPLS circuit as a link between routers –allow routing protocol to include these in routing table computations Data-plane –IP over MPLS –IP over PPP over SONET Packet-over-SONET (PoS)

49. 49 Newer uses New type of gateway functionality –No IP layer involvement –Instead Ethernet frames are mapped onto MPLS virtual circuits or GMPLS circuits port mapped VLAN mapped Cisco and Juniper routers support Ethernet over MPLS Sycamore and Ciena SONET switches support Ethernet over GMPLS

50. 50 Ethernet port mapped over MPLS Send all Ethernet frames received on ports I and II on to the MPLS LSP MPLS LSP: Pseudo-wire Enterprise can allocate IP addresses from one subnet: Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Explains one use for MPLS virtual circuits with no bandwith allocation IP router/MPLS switch Ethernet switch Enterprise 1 Enterprise 2 Ethernet switch MPLS LSP (virtual circuit) I II SDM-to-MPLS gateway Pseudowire SDM: Space Division Multiplexing Gateway: interfaces have different MUX schemes unlike switch, which has same MUX scheme on all links SDM-to-MPLS gateway Mux scheme on pseudowire: Ethernet Internet

51. 51 Ethernet VLAN mapped over MPLS Extract frames carrying a specific VLAN ID tag on Ethernet ports I and II and map only these frames on to the MPLS LSP Internet IP router/MPLS switch Ethernet switch Enterprise 1 Enterprise 2 Ethernet switch MPLS LSP I II VLAN-to-MPLS gateway

52. 52 Ethernet port or VLAN mapped over GMPLS circuits Send all frames or frames matching a given VLAN ID tag from Ethernet ports I and II on to the SONET/SDH/WDM circuit SONET/SDH/WDM switches now have Fast Ethernet/GbE/10GbE interfaces in addition to SONET/SDM or WDM interfaces Ethernet switch Enterprise 1 Enterprise 2 Ethernet switch SONET/SDH/WDM circuit I II SONET or WDM switch SDM-to-SONET/WDM gateway

53. 53 Commercial services EPL: Ethernet private line: map an Ethernet port to a SONET/SDH circuit Fractional-EPL: Map a GbE port to a lower- rate SONET circuit –Pause frames sent from switch to client node if buffer fills up V-EPL: Lower-rate VLAN mapped to an equivalent-rate SONET circuit MetroEthernet Forum: E-Line and E-LAN page 110 of GFP section reference: SONET focused

54. 54 Technology So what technologies are required for this type of internetworking: –mapping Ethernet frames on to MPLS/GMPLS virtual circuit/circuit mapping?

55. 55 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE OSPF-TE LMP Internetworking  GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH –PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

56. 56 Why do we need Generic Framing Procedure (GFP)? The framing techniques used in other data-link layer protocols have problems For example, IP packets are carried over SONET using PPP/HDLC frames (called PoS) –HDLC inserts idle frames because SONET is synchronous it needs a constant flow of frames to avoid losing synchronization But, there is a problem: –HDLC uses flags for frame delineation. The issue with this framing technique is that if the flag pattern occurs in the payload, an escape byte has to be inserted –This causes an increase in the required bandwidth –The amount of increase is payload-dependent page 98 of reference

57. 57 Other framing techniques HEC - Header Error Control –this is the CRC framing technique used in ATM –"A header CRC hunting mechanism is employed by the receiver to extract the ATM cells from the bit/byte synchronous stream. The HEC location is fixed and ATM cell length is fixed. Starting from the assumed cell boundary, the ATM receiver compares its computed HEC value for the assumed ATM cell header against the HEC value indicated by the assumed HEC field. Cell stream delineation is declared after positive validations of the incoming HEC fields of a few consecutive ATM cells." ATM cells are fixed in length, but Ethernet frames are variable-length Therefore, we need a length field in order to implement this HEC-based frame delineation mechanism pages 96-97 of reference

58. 58 Main features of the GFP protocol Common aspects (applicable to all client signals): –HEC + Length based delineation Core header has payload length and HEC –Error control: error detection Payload type HEC, payload Frame Check Sequence (CRC-32) –Multiplexing: linear and ring extension headers –Idle frames are sent to maintain synchronization as in HDLC –Scrambling as in ATM: core header + payload scrambling –Client management - client fail signal Client-dependent aspects: –Client-specific encapsulation techniques page 68 of reference

59. 59 Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) for increased efficiency Data signal SONET/SDH payload mapping and bandwidth efficiency SONET/SDH with VCAT payload mapping and bandwidth efficiency Ethernet (10 Mb/s) STS-1/VC-3 – 21%VT1.5-7v/VC-11-7v – 89% Fast Ethernet (100 Mb/s) STS-3c/VC-4 – 67%VT1.5-64v/VC-11-64v – 98% Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mb/s) STS-48c/VC-4-16c – 42% STS-3c-7v/VC-4-7v –95% STS-1-21v/VC-3-21v –98% Page 75 of reference

60. 60 Inverse multiplexing in VCAT Page 82 of reference Implementation of VCAT is only required at select nodes (i.e., the edge nodes); not all multiplexers need to support VCAT

61. 61 Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) LCAS is a mechanism to allow for automatic bandwidth tuning of a virtually concatenated signal –The VCAT group of circuits should already be established using a centralized NMS/EMS based procedure, or by a distributed RSVP-TE based procedure Note that bandwidth cannot be increased beyond the aggregate value of the VCAT signal without a GMPLS RSVP or NMS/EMS procedure of circuit setup

62. 62 Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) LCAS is a synchronization procedure between the two ends of a VCAT signal –Unlike GMPLS RSVP, it is NOT a bandwidth reservation and circuit setup or release procedure LCAS procedures (triggered by GMPLS or NMS/EMS): –add or remove a member of a VCAT group –renumber the members in a VCAT group Messages are exchanged between the originating and terminating SONET/SDH nodes to execute these LCAS procedures –Add member (ChID, GID) –Remove member (ChID, GID) –Member status Messages are sent in the H4 byte for high-order VCAT

63. 63 Technologies GMPLS networks –Data-(user-) plane protocols packet-switched: MPLS, VLAN Ethernet, Intserv IP circuit-switched: SONET/SDH, WDM, SDM –Control-plane protocols: RSVP-TE OSPF-TE LMP Internetworking –GFP, VCAT, LCAS for SONET/SDH  PWE3 for MPLS networks –Digital wrapper for OTN

64. Pseudo Wire Emulation Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) is a mechanism for emulating certain services across a packet-switched network: –Services: Frame-relay, ATM, Ethernet, TDM services, such as SONET/SDH –Packet-switched network: IP MPLS –Common usage: Ethernet service over MPLS Port-mapped to MPLS LSP VLAN mapped to MPLS LSP –IETF RFC 3985

65. 65 Digital wrapper ITU-T G. 709 provides a method to carry Ethernet frames, ATM cells, IP datagrams directly on a WDM lightpath

66. 66 Outline Principles –Different types of connection-oriented networks Technologies –Single network –Internetworking  Usage –Commercial networks –Research & Education Networks (REN)

67. 67 Commercial uses Semi-permanent MPLS virtual circuits –Traffic engineering –Voice over IP QoS concerns: telephony has a 150ms one- way delay requirement (with echo cancellers) –Business or service provider interconnect interconnecting geographically distributed campuses of an enterprise interconnecting wide-area routers of an ISP service provider

68. 68 Traffic engineering (TE) Since BGP and OSPF routing protocols mainly spread reachability information, routing tables are such that some links become heavily congested while others are lightly loaded MPLS virtual circuits are used to alleviate this problem –e.g., NY to SF traffic could be directed to take an MPLS virtual circuit on a lightly loaded route avoiding all paths on which more local traffic may compete This is an application of MPLS VCs without bandwidth allocation

69. 69 Goals of Traffic Engineering (TE) Monitor network resources and control traffic to maximize performance objectives –Goal of TE is to achieve efficient network operation with optimized resource utilization in an Autonomous System Goals of TE can be: –Traffic oriented Enhance the QoS of traffic streams Minimization of loss and delay Maximization of throughput –Resource oriented Load balancing Minimize maximum congestion or minimize maximum resource utilization Output – decreased packet loss and delay, increased throughput

70. 70 Business or service provider interconnect Multiple options: –TDM circuits (traditional private line, T1, T3, OC3, OC12, etc.) –Ethernet private line point-to-point (Ethernet over MPLS/SONET/WDM) VPNs (called Virtual private LAN service) –MPLS VPNs –WDM lightpaths –Dark fiber

71. 71 Dynamic circuits/virtual circuit (GMPLS control-plane) Commercial: –fast restoration circuit/VC setup delay significant –rapid provisioning Verizon: Bandwidth on Demand (Just-in-Time Provisioning) AT&T: Shared mesh networks –Customer Applications for dynamic network configuration »Key industries: Financial, Media & Entertainment »Corporate Utility Backbone Networks (e.g. reconfigure for disaster recovery) »Distribution of real-time content (e.g., Video) Level3: Vyvx service

72. 72 Research & Education (G)MPLS networks Internet2’s Dynamic Circuit network NSF-funded DRAGON DOE's ESnet - Science Data Network DOE's Ultra Science Network (USN) NSF-funded CHEETAH

73. Internet2 DWDM network http://events.internet2.edu/speakers/speakers.php?go=people&id=178 Rick Summerhill talk (10/11/2007) Infinera DWDM system

74. http://events.internet2.edu/speakers/speakers.php?go=people&id=178 Rick Summerhill talk (10/11/2007) Internet2 Dynamic Circuit (DC) network Ciena CD-CI Eth-SONET switch

75. Internet2 IP-routed network Juniper T640 IP router IP-router-to-router links on one wavelength SONET switch-to-switch links on another wavelength Ciena CD-CI Eth-SONET switch http://events.internet2.edu/speakers/speakers.php?go=people&id=178 Rick Summerhill talk (10/11/2007)

76. Equipment at each PoP http://events.internet2.edu/speakers/speakers.php?go=people&id=178 Rick Summerhill talk (10/11/2007)

77. Control-plane software (for DC network) OSCARS implemented in InterDomain Controller (IDC) - one per domain –Abstracted topology exchange –Interdomain scheduling –Interdomain signaling (for provisioning) DRAGON (intradomain control-plane) –Used in Internet2’s DC network –Intradomain routing, path computation, signaling (for provisioning) 77

78. OSCARS On-demand Secure Circuits and Advance Reservation System (OSCARS) DOE Office of Science and ESnet project Co-development with Internet2 Web Service based provisioning infrastructure, which includes scheduling, AAA architecture using X.509 certificates –Extended to include the DICE IDCP –Reservations held in SQL database Recall no support for book-ahead in GMPLS control protocols http://www.es.net/oscars/index.html 78 http://www.csm.ornl.gov/workshops/NetworkingResearchChallenges/agenda.html Talk by Tom Lehman, Sep. 28, 2008

79. DRAGON Washington DC metro-area network: –Adva (old Movaz) WDM switches and Ethernet switches (G.709) Control-plane software: –Network Aware Resource Broker – NARB Intradomain listener, Path Computation –Virtual Label Swapping Router – VLSR Implements OSPF-TE, RSVP-TE Run on control PCs external to switches (since not all switches implement these GMPLS control-plane protocols) Communicates with switches via SNMP, TL1, CLI to configure circuits. –Client System Agent – CSA End system software for signaling into network (UNI or peer mode) –Application Specific Topology Builder – ASTB User Interface and processing which build topologies on behalf of users Topologies are a user specific configuration of multiple LSPs 79 http://dragon.east.isi.edu

80. Open Source DCN Software Suite OSCARS (IDC) –Open source project maintained by ESNet and Internet2 –Uses WDSL, XML, SQL database to store reservations –Reservations accepted with 1 minute granularity DRAGON (DC) –NSF-funded Open source project maintained by USC ISI EASTand MAX Version 0.4 of DCNSS current deployed release –https://wiki.internet2.edu/confluence/display/DCNSShttps://wiki.internet2.edu/confluence/display/DCNSS DCN workshops offered for training: –http://www.internet2.edu/workshops/dcn/index.html 80 http://www.csm.ornl.gov/workshops/NetworkingResearchChallenges/agenda.html Talk by Tom Lehman, Sep. 28, 2008

81. DICE IDCP Dante, Internet2, CANARIE, ESNet http://www.controlplane.net IDCP: InterDomain Controller Protocol wsdl - web service definition of message types and formats xsd – definition of schemas used for network topology descriptions and path definitions 81 http://www.csm.ornl.gov/workshops/NetworkingResearchChallenges/agenda.html Talk by Tom Lehman, Sep. 28, 2008

82. InterDomain Controller (IDC) Protocol (IDCP) The following organizations have implemented/deployed systems which are compatible with this IDCP –Internet2 Dynamic Circuit Network (DCN) –ESNet Science Data Network (SDN) –GÉANT2 AutoBahn System –Nortel (via a wrapper on top of their commercial DRAC System) –Surfnet (via use of above Nortel solution) –LHCNet (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –Nysernet (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –LEARN (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –LONI (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –Northrop Grumman (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –University of Amsterdam (use of I2 DCN Software Suite) –DRAGON Network The following "higher level service applications" have adapted their existing systems to communicate via the user request side of the IDCP: – LambdaStation (FermiLab) – CMS project on Large Hadron Collider –TeraPaths (Brookhaven) - ATLAS project on Large Hadron Collider –Phoebus 82 http://www.csm.ornl.gov/workshops/NetworkingResearchChallenges/agenda.html Talk by Tom Lehman, Sep. 28, 2008

83. Heterogeneous Network Technologies Complex End to End Paths End System AS 1 AS 2 AS 3 VLSR Ethernet Segment VLSR Established VLAN Ethernet over WDM Ethernet over SONET End System Ethernet Segment VLSR Established VLAN VLSR Router MPLS LSP IP Control Plane Ethernet Router Lambda Switch SONET Switch http://events.internet2.edu/speakers/speakers.php?go=people&id=178 Rick Summerhill talk (10/11/2007) Example: ESNet SDN Example: Internet2 DC Example: DRAGON

84. IDCP operation 84 Advance reservation request and circuit provisioning at scheduled time: End user signals IDC with a reservation request Authenticate requester and check authorization Request reservation (create time, bandwidth, VLAN tag) Signaling: creation of circuit (automatic or in response to message to IDC) Topology exchange: interdomain (abstracted topology information) Monitoring http://hpn.east.isi.edu/dice-idcp/dice-idcp-v1.0/idc-protocol-specification-may302008.doc Route selection, admission control centralized per domain at IDC

85. Intra-domain operations Using DRAGON in Internet2 DCN –NARB does intra-domain path computation after collecting routing information by listening to OSPF-TE exchanges between VLSRs –These intradomain paths are provided to IDC for use during resource scheduling (upto 3 path options are considered) –5 VLSRs serve 22 CD-CIs: “subnets of CD-CIs” –In Signaling phase, VLSR sends TL1 command to edge CD- CI, which initiates proprietary hop-by-hop signaling to configure circuit through subnet 85

86. 86 GOLE: GLIF open lightpath exchange

87. 87 DOE networks ESnet and Science Data Network (SDN) –OSCARS: an advance-reservation system –Science Data Network: MPLS network UltraScience Network –Research network for DoE labs –GbE and SONET (Ciena CD-CI) –Centralized scheduler for advance-reservation calls –5-PoP network: ORNL, Atlanta, Chicago, Seattle, Sunnyvale –Connections to Fermi Lab, PNNL, SLAC, CalTech Lambdastation: CMS project –Between Fermi Lab and Univ. of Nebraska

88. 88 NSF-funded CHEETAH network GbEthernet and SONET TN PoP Control card GbE/ 10GbE card GA PoP Control card GbE/ 10GbE card SN16000 Control card OC192 card OC-192 GbE/ 10GbE card End hosts NC PoP SN16000 GaTech End hosts ORNL OC192 cards NCSU OC192 card OC-192 UVa CUNY GbE GbEs GbE Sycamore SN16000 SONET switch with GbE/10GbE interfaces

89. 89 Networking software Sycamore switch comes with built-in GMPLS control-plane protocols: –RSVP-TE and OSPF-TE We developed CHEETAH software for Linux end hosts: –circuit-requestor allows users and applications to issue RSVP-TE call setup and release messages asking for dedicated circuits to remote end hosts –CircuitTCP (CTCP) code http://www.ece.virginia.edu/cheetah/

90. 90 CHEETAH network usage Application DNS client RSVP-TE module TCP/IP CTCP/IP NIC 1 NIC 2 End Host CHEETAH software IP-routed network SONET circuit- switched network Circuit Gateway Circuit Gateway Application DNS client RSVP-TE module TCP/IP CTCP/IP NIC 1 NIC 2 End Host CHEETAH software Bandwidth-sharing mode: Immediate-request mode Heterogeneous rate allocation under high loads: higher BW for large files than for small files Applications: Common file transfers (web, P2P, CDN, storage) attempts circuits for large files (if blocked, use IP-routed path) use IP-routed path for small files

91. 91 End-to-end call setup delay measurements Delays incurred in setting up a circuit between host zelda1 (in Atlanta, GA) and host wuneng (in Raleigh, NC) across the CHEETAH network Observations: –Setup delays for SONET circuits (OC1, OC3) are small (166ms) –Setup delays for Ethernet-over-SONET (EoS) hybrid circuits are much higher (1.6s) (no standard; proprietary implementation) –Signaling message processing delays dominate end-to-end circuit setup delays Circuit typeEnd-to-end circuit setup delay (s) Processing delay for Path message at the NC SN16000 (s) Processing delay for Resv message at the NC SN16000 (s) OC-10.1661030.0911190.008689 OC-30.1654500.0908520.008650 1Gb/s EoS1.6456731.5669320.008697 Round-trip signaling message propagation plus emission delay between GA SN16000 and NC SN16000: 0.025s

92. Spectrum of services 92 Leased line Verizon BoD eScience 10G POTS IP Plain Old Telephone Service (64kbps) Immediate-Request (IR) mode Unspecified call duration Low call setup overhead (  holding times can be shorter) Distributed path computation/admission control High call handling volume Book-ahead mode Call duration specified Current solution: centralized per-domain path computation/admission control Low call handling volume New services OSCARS/DRAGON CHEETAH

93. 93 Summary Principles –Different types of connection-oriented networks Technologies –Single network: MPLS, SONET, OTN –Internetworking: PWE3, GFP, G.709 Usage –Commercial networks –Research & Education Networks (REN)

94. 94 References on bandwidth sharing modes X. Fang and M. Veeraraghavan, “On using a hybrid architecture for file transfers,” acceptedto IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 2009. X. Zhu and M. Veeraraghavan, "Analysis and Design of Book-ahead Bandwidth-Sharing Mechanisms," IEEE Transactions on Communications, Dec. 08. X. Fang and M. Veeraraghavan, On using circuit-switched networks for file transfers,” in IEEE Globecom, New Orleans, LA, Nov. 2008. X. Zhu, M. E. McGinley, T. Li, and M. Veeraraghavan, "An Analytical Model for a Book-ahead Bandwidth Scheduler," in IEEE Globecom Washington, DC, Nov. 2007. X. Zhu, X. Zheng, and M. Veeraraghavan, "Experiences in implementing an experimental wide-area GMPLS network," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (JSAC), Apr. 2007. M. Veeraraghavan, X. Fang, and X. Zheng, “On the suitability of applications for GMPLS networks,” in IEEE Globecom, San Francisco, CA, Nov. 2006.

95. 95 References for OTN ITU-T G. 872 and G.709/Y.1331 Specifications T. Walker, “Optical Transport Network (OTN) Tutorial”, Available online: http://www.itu.int/ITU- T/studygroups/com15/otn/OTNtutorial.pdf Agilent, “An overview of ITU-T G.709,” Application Note 1379 P. Bonenfant and A. Rodriguez-Moral, "Optical Data Networking," IEEE Communications Magazine, Mar. 2000, pp. 63-70. E. L. Varma, S. Sankaranarayanan, G. Newsome, Z.-W. Lin, and H. Esptein, “Architecting the Services Optical Network,” IEEE Communications Magazine, Sept. 2001, pp. 80-87.

96. 96 References for OSPF-TE RFC 2702 - Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2702.html http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2702.html RFC 3630 - Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3630.html http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3630.html RFC 4203 - OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) : http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4203.txthttp://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4203.txt RFC 2328 - OSPF Version 2 : http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2328.txthttp://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2328.txt OSPFv2 Routing Protocols Extensions for ASON Routing: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing- ospf-02.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing- ospf-02.txt RFC 4202 - Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS): http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4202.txthttp://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4202.txt RFC 3471- Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3471.htmlhttp://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3471.html Dimitri Papadimitriou, IETFInternet Draft, "OSPFv2 Routing Protocols Extensions for ASON Routing," draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf- 02.txt, October 2006.

97. 97 Reference for GFP/VCAT/LCAS IEEE Communications Magazine, May 2002, Special issue on "Generic Framing Procedure (GFP) and Data over SONET/SDH and OTN," Guest Editors, Tim Armstrong and Steven S. Gorshe 6 excellent papers

98. 98 References for REN projects IEEE Communication Magazine special issue, March 2006 –DRAGON, UltraScience Net, CHEETAH, several other projects