Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byRosaline Mills Modified over 9 years ago
1
Internet2 Update R/D and Infrastructure Guy Almes Internet2 Project NANOG Meeting Dearborn — 9 June 1998
2
Outline of the Talk Technical Working Groups The Challenge of Delay-Bandwidth Products Abilene Project Update
3
Applications and Engineering Applications Engineering MotivateEnables
4
Comments on Apps and Plumbing Advanced applications transform high-speed plumbing into value Advanced plumbing enables advanced applications Profligate use of bandwidth, per se, does not make an application ‘advanced’ Megalomaniac plumbing, per se, does not make the plumbing ‘advanced’
5
Technical Working Groups IPv6 Measurement Multicast Network Management Network Storage Quality of Service Routing Security Topology
6
IPv6 Chair: Dale Finkelson, Univ Nebraska Membership: Total 12; 9.edu, 3.com, 1.gov Focus: Explore the rôle that IPv6 might play in the Internet2 project Work with those interested in IPv6 to build IPv6 testbeds across the Internet2 structure, including vBNS and Abilene
7
Measurement Chair: David Wasley, Univ California Focus: Places to measure: at campuses, at gigaPoPs, within interconnect(s) Things to measure traffic utilization performance: delay and packet loss traffic characterization
8
One example measurement technology IETF IPPM WG defining one-way delay Take all delay to be due to: Propagation Transmission Queuing Variation in delay suggests congestion
14
Multicast Chair: vacant [Dave Meyer, Univ Oregon still serving] Nearing completion of naming a successor Membership: Total 3; 3.edu Focus: Make native IP multicast scalable and operationally effective
15
Network Management Chair: Mark Johnson, MCNC Membership: Total 4; 3.edu, 1.com Focus: Common trouble ticket system How can all our interconnects and gigaPoPs and universities appear to be a seamless whole?
16
Network Storage Chair: Micah Beck, Univ Tennessee Membership: Total 13; 9.edu, 4.com Focus: Distributed Storage Infrastructure for Internet2 Replication Physical proximity Transparency
17
Quality of Service Chair: Ben Teitelbaum, Internet2 staff Membership: Total 36; 17.edu, 19.com Focus: Multi-network IP based QoS Relevant to advanced applications Interoperability: carriers and kit Scalable Administratable and Measurable Hosts, campus/gigaPoP/Interconnect routers/switches
18
Quality of Service Sketch Does the approach support advanced applications? Are there implementations that work? Only one? If cloud ‘A’ and cloud ‘B’ both implement QoS, does the combined A+B catenation implement QoS? AB
19
QoS, continued Results to date: Requirements document Series of technical recommendations First Internet2 Joint Applications/ Engineering QoS Workshop Santa Clara, California May 21-22, 1998 Hosted by Bay Networks
20
Routing Chair: Steve Corbato, Univ Washington Membership: Total 48; 32.edu, 16.com Focus: Internal and External routing Critical issues gigaPoP internal routing design Explicit routing requirement (the “fish problem”) Met at UCSD in January (21 attendees) gigaPoP external routing recommendations Subscribers (Internet2 campuses) National interconnects (vBNS, Abilene, and NGI networks)
21
Security Chair: Peter Berger, Carniege Mellon Univ Membership: Total 13; 13.edu Focus: Authentication Application to QoS Application to Digital Libraries
22
Topology Chair: Paul Love, Internet2 staff Membership: Total 16; 13.edu, 2.com, 1.gov Focus: Topology of Internet2 Internal Internet2 Connections Internet2 with other Advanced Research Networks
23
Summary Internet2’s WGs focus on project’s needs Complement IETF WGs Membership by invitation - welcome participation by Internet2 corporate members
24
Large Delay-Bandwidth Products As the product of delay and bandwidth grows: The number of unacknowledged packets grows It becomes more difficult to sustain a steady stream of data from end to end Several consequences: Need for direct physical paths Tradeoff between buffering and variation in delay
25
A pessimistic result from Mathis et al. Mathis, Semke, Mahdavi, and Ott, "The Macroscopic Behavior of the TCP Congestion Avoidance Algorithm", Computer Communication Review, July 1997. www.psc.edu/networking/papers/model_abstract.html BW C * packet-size / (delay * packet- loss)
26
Consider the implications for the international high-performance Internet BW packet-size BW 1 / delay BW 1 / packet-loss
27
Example: Delay BW C / delay delay due to distance original raw bandwidth
28
Example: Delay with fatter pipe BW C / delay delay due to distance more raw bandwidth
29
Example: Packet Loss similar phenomenon, but … to double bandwidth, you must cut packet loss by four
30
Abilene Update UCAID Project Addresses infrastructure needs of Internet2
31
Goals and Objectives Provide high-quality, widely available Interconnect among participating gigaPoPs/universities Connect to Internet2 members via the vBNS and to other key research/ education sites via Internet2/NGI- class federal and non-US nets
32
Goals and Objectives, continued Support QoS architecture as it evolves Support other advanced functionality as it evolves Maximize Robustness Minimize Latency Provide Capacity to Avoid Congestion
33
Evolution of Abilene with Time Phase 1: use of operational Qwest Sonet Phase 2: use of separate wavelengths Phase 3: use of separate fibers Allows capacity to grow with Internet2 needs
34
Key Attributes IP over Sonet Benefit from Qwest OC-48 Sonet capacity and collocation sites Benefit from Nortel OC-192 Sonet kit and Lucent fiber Benefit from Cisco GSR 12000 routers
35
Architecture: Core About 11 (up to 30) core nodes Each located at a Qwest PoP Each with a Cisco 12008 router Rack also contains measurements/ management computers Interior lines connect core nodes OC-12 and (eventually) OC-48 Sonet IP-over-Sonet interfaces
37
sttl eugn scrm anhm phnx albq hstn nwortlhs atln rlgh wash phil nycm bstnsyrc clev pitb dtrt milwchcg mpls kscydnvr slkc ipls lsvl nsvl rcmd Subset of Route Map of Interest to Abilene tpka alby elpa
38
Attitude toward interior lines Robustness: mesh plus Sonet Latency: direct physical paths Capacity: avoid congestion
39
Architecture: Access Access node at many Qwest PoPs Qwest Sonet switches needed equipment Access lines connect from core node to gigaPoP Local part: gigaPoP to access node Long distance part: access node to core node IP-over-Sonet or IP-over-ATM possible OC-3 and OC-12 typical
40
One cost-sharing implication Long-distance part of access line is considered part of the ‘backbone’ Thus, number/location of core nodes does not affect costs borne by gigaPoP
41
One robustness implication Each access line is Sonet Long-distance part (at least) will be configured from protected Sonet ring Thus, single access line can tolerate a break in the long-distance part of the access line
42
OK, so where’s the map? Self-selection is key Each gigaPoP will determine where, when, at what speed it connects Detailed topology will be based on engineering considerations
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.