Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Joint Techs / APAN Honolulu Mark Johnson MCNC (NCREN, NCNI, NCLR, …)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Joint Techs / APAN Honolulu Mark Johnson MCNC (NCREN, NCNI, NCLR, …)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Joint Techs / APAN Honolulu Mark Johnson MCNC (NCREN, NCNI, NCLR, …)

2 How can an R&E network afford to build an advanced network?  Use the obvious strategy of obtaining donations from providers and equipment vendors and the use of grants  Make more efficient use of the available (scarce) resources - MORPHnet

3 Production and experimental infrastructure(MORPHnet concept) and their use

4 What does a user want from an optical network?  An end-to-end path (lightpath) where the endpoints are not defined by the limits of a single carrier’s network

5 Lightpaths  a lightpath is defined to be a fixed bandwidth connection between two network elements, such as IP routers or ATM switches, established via the optical network  Ietf draft on lightpath attributes

6 Lightpath attributes  It is assumed that a lightpath will have a number of attributes that describe it such as framing, bandwidth, etc  Canarie asserts that across a given AS a lightpath may be abstracted to look like a single (possibly blocking) cross-connect switch interface.

7 working examples of Lightpaths  All Optical wavelength on WDM system  SONET channel  Point to point ethernet  ATM CBR circuit  MPLS LSR with defined QoS  Fiberchannel  SMPTE 259  G.709 (Digital Wrapper)

8 Problems  Intra-domain  Provisioning of network capacity across network elements within an AS  O&M  Inter-domain  Provisioning of network capacity across multiple AS’s  O&M  In this environment the user has to handle performance and fault management

9 Lightpath Carrier A Carrier B Carrier C User desires red path but must negotiate and manage provisioning of green, orange, and blue paths

10 Approaches  Methods of defining, provisioning, and modifying existing services within a management domain  G.ASTN  GMPLS  Methods of linking paths from multiple domains  UCLP  Non-traditional techniques for provisioning capacity between endpoints  OBS/JIT

11 GMPLS  Generalized MPLS signaling to identify the following path types:  Traditionally statistically multiplexed labeled paths such as ATM or Ethernet  Time division multiplexed paths such as SONET where timeslots are the label  Frequency division multiplexed services such as wavelengths where frequency is the label  Space division multiplexed services such as fibers in a bundle where position in the real world is the label

12 Division of labor  Control plane  Signaling, routing, Protection /restoration  Transport  Adaptation, Aggregation, Discovery,data integrity, transmission  Management  Management of Faults, configuration/provisioning, accounting, performance measurement, security

13 Division of labor Network Topology Map Topology Policy Constraints Label Forwarding Information base Control plane based on IP Routing IP Today Future Forwarding plane Optical ATM Drawing poorly copied from Cisco Systems

14 GMPLS Protocol Diagram FIBER SONET Wavelength Switching MAC/GE ATM Frame Relay Adaptation Layer IP LMP RSVP-TECR-LDP-TE TCP OSPF-TEBGP UDP

15 UCLP  Canarie is developing a system including protocols and directories and registration mechanisms Addresses interdomain issues:  Registration of available path components  Directory service for those components  Provisioning of end to end path which could use intra-domain tools such as GMPLS

16 JIT/OBS view of Optical Network Dilemma  Goal: Lower cost by:  Minimizing OEO  Creating larger transparency islands  But:  Dedicated is overkill (expensive)  Low speed apps. need fine grain mux capability  And:  Existing fine grain multiplexing today requires electronics hence OEO conversion

17 Technology gap  Requires optical buffers  Immature, expensive, low density  Buffers in net lead to complexity  IP is a COMPLEX protocol  Hardware implementations only recently  Creates cost and technology barrier Gauger et al., “Determining offset times in optical burst switching networks”, COST 266, Zagreb, June 2001.

18 Optical Cell Switching  TDM dWDM  All wavelengths on fiber switched together  Pluses and minuses  Simpler core network  Need chromatic time correction  Requires frame synchronization  Low utilization of wavelenghts  Lucent is major proponent

19 Three Competing Ideas Need for optical buffering Synchro- nization Relative timeline to commercial viability Relative complexity comments OPScriticalNo Not in our career lifetime Complex switching and protocol Requires optical logic OCSnoyes 5 to 10 years Simplest switch core, with most complex line cards Requires chromatic and frame allignment, low utilization OBS No longer seen as necessary or desirable Not required for JIT, limited sync for JET 2 years with 20 ms, 7 years with 10 ns reconfiguration Simple line with cards modestly complex switch core Requires demultiplexin g and conversion

20 JIT Fundamental Values  Low latency is first priority  Tell and go vs. tell and wait  May sacrifice link utilization  JET and Horizon  Aggressive protocol simplification  A pox on buffers (optical delay lines)  Leads to un-necessary protocol and switch complexities  Leads to greater link speed and lower latency  Keep data in optics  No legacy assumptions  Result: high throughput, min. latency and jitter

21 JIT - OBS Approach  Switched light path network  Large all-optical island  No buffers in data channel  Avoids immature device technology  No buffer overflow in network  Data and signaling channel isolation  Single out of band signaling channel per fiber  Signaling msgs. undergo OEO, processed by intermediate nodes  Network intelligence is concentrated at edge  SIMPLE protocol implemented in hardware

22 ECOnet  Create a confederation of fiber linked NRT projects:  BOSnet:  MIT Lincoln Labs  dark fiber Boston to Washington DC  ATDNet:  Naval Research Lab (& others)  dark fiber within the Washington D.C. metro area  ECO-South (proposed):  MAX/MCNC/SOX  Dark fiber from Washington to Research Triangle Park and then to Atlanta

23 East Coast Optical Network ECOnet MAX/ATDNet Washington, DC MCNC/NCREN Raleigh, NC GaTech/SOX Atlanta, GA MITLL Boston, MA BOSnet ECO-South

24 Illustrates need to evaluate Entire system  Fiber, amps, DCUs, maintenance and Rent can become dominant costs

25 Two fiber routes

26 Fiber cost

27 Amps, colo, maintenance

28 5 year total


30 NCNI WDM Network Cisco RTPMCNC UNC Duke NCSURLGH DCU MCNC Engineering Notes: Ring Circumference = km SMF-28 Fiber EDFA amplifier Dispersion Compensation Unit SMJ Node Network Management Access

Download ppt "Joint Techs / APAN Honolulu Mark Johnson MCNC (NCREN, NCNI, NCLR, …)"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google