1. Carrier Ethernet: End-to-End OAM & Network-to-Network Interfaces (E-NNI)
Moderator Arie Goldberg, CEO, Omnitron Panelists Michael Haugh, Sr. Product Manager, Ixia Ralph Santitoro, Director CE Solutions, Turin Networks Ran Avital, VP Strategic and Product Marketing, Ceragon

2. Panel Members Arie Goldberg Ran Avital Ralph Santitoro Michael Haugh
MEF Board Member & Secretary MEF
CEO and Chief Technologist
Omnitron Systems Technology, Inc.
Ran Avital
MEF Market Research Co-Chair
VP of Strategic and Product Marketing
Ceragon Networks
Ralph Santitoro
MEF Board Member
Co-chair MEF Security Workgroup
Director of Carrier Ethernet Solutions
Turin Networks
Michael Haugh
Sr. Product Manager
Ixia 2

3. Agenda Introduction Link and Service OAM
Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market
MEF defined CE Services and OAM
Link and Service OAM
OAM Components and Protocols
OAM Hierarchies and Testing
Ethernet Services Demarcation Points
Definition of UNI and E-NNI
E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model
Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM

4. Introduction: Carrier Ethernet Market Services and OAM
Arie Goldberg

5. Agenda Introduction Link and Service OAM
Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market
MEF defined CE Services and OAM
Link and Service OAM
OAM Components and Protocols
OAM Hierarchies and Testing
Ethernet Services Demarcation Points
Definition of UNI and E-NNI
E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model
Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM

6. Demand Drivers – Services and Bandwidth
Education Remote learning
On-line Government
Healthcare date & Tele-medicine $$ $$ $$
NEW
tools!
Apps! $$ $$
Backhaul
Apps $$ $$ $$
VoIP
VoD
IPTV
E-Line
E-LAN)
Low CAPEX
Low OPEX
Low Cost to
Subscribers
Commerce, On-line
Financial Services, On-line
Business, Tele-workers, On-line

7. Global CE Market – Facts & Forecasts
Global CE Service Market Size
Vertical Systems:
$6.1B in 2006 to $31+B in 2012
IDC Research:
$6.1B in 2006 to $17.0B in 2011
Infonetics Research:
$13B in 2007 to 23.7B in 2011
Infonetics Research, Inc.
Vertical Systems Group

8. MEF defined Basic CE Services
E-LINE
EPL: Private Line
EVPL: Virtual Private Line
Point to Point
Site2Site L2 VPNs
Point-to-Point EVC
CPE
CPE
UNI
UNI
E-LAN
EP-LAN: Private LAN
EVP-LAN: Virtual Private
LAN
Multipoint EVC
Multi-Point to Multi-Point
Multi-Site L2 VPNs
Transparent LANs
CPE
UNI
CPE
UNI
Point to Multi-Point
Broadcasting Services
Triple Play backhaul
Mobile backhaul
E-TREE
EP-Tree: Private Tree
EVP-Tree: Virtual Private
Tree
CPE
UNI
Rooted Multipoint EVC
CPE
UNI
UNI
CPE

9. Interfaces and Ethernet Virtual Circuits
E2E Service OAM:
Fault-802.1ag
Perform-Y.1731
UNI
UNI
Point-to-Point EVC
Point-to-Point EVC
UNI
Carrier B
Link OAM
802.3ah
E-NNI
UNI
Carrier A
Multi-point to
Multi-point EVC
UNI
UNI

10. Challenges of CE for Service Providers
Turn-up services quickly and efficiently – be competitive, get revenues ASAP
On/Off-Net services – footprint and more revenue
Reliability/Up-time (99.999%) - enable SLAs and keep revenues
Quality – customer satisfaction – retention – keep revenues coming
Efficient operation - keep costs down – be competitive and profitable
Traditional Private Lease Line and Private Virtual Connection (PVC) are provided through T1/T3 or SONET/SHD access loops. They are complicated, costly, somewhat slow and not very scalable. They do offer very consistent and reliable performances, and have built-in OAM for fault detection and management.

11. Response to Challenges
New Protocol Solutions
Point-to-Point Link OAM (802.3ah)
End-to-End Service Connectivity Fault OAM (802.1ag)
End-to-End Service Performance Monitoring (Y.1731)
Enable quick turn-up – Acct acquisition/revenue
Increase reliability/up-time – Acct retention/revenue
Enables SLA commitments – Keep revenue
Enable efficient service operation / maintenance (man/machine/time/energy) – reduce OPEX
Traditional Private Lease Line and Private Virtual Connection (PVC) are provided through T1/T3 or SONET/SHD access loops. They are complicated, costly, somewhat slow and not very scalable. They do offer very consistent and reliable performances, and have built-in OAM for fault detection and management.

12. Link and Service OAM
Michael Haugh

13. Agenda Introduction Link and Service OAM
Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market
MEF defined CE Services and OAM
Link and Service OAM
OAM Components and Protocols
OAM Hierarchies and Testing
Ethernet Services Demarcation Points
Definition of UNI and E-NNI
E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model
Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM

14. Ethernet OAM / CFM
Ethernet OAM / CFM provides a critical feature to Provider Ethernet networks to ensure they are “Carrier Grade”. OAM and E-LMI are included in the UNI Type 2 MEF standard.
“Link OAM”:
IEEE 802.3ah Clause 57– EOAM “Ethernet in the first mile” – used on access links.
Provides four key mechanisms:
Remote loopback
Remote failure indication
Link monitoring
Loopback Control
Good for single links, but does not monitor across EVC

15. Ethernet OAM / CFM “Service OAM”
IEEE 802.1ag – “Connectivity Fault Management (CFM)” – used over EVC.
Mechanisms include
Continuity Check (CC)
Loopback
Linktrace
Also provides the ability to monitor at specific service levels (including customer, service provider, operator, section) and support for maintenance domains.
ITU-T Y.1731 – “OAM Functions and Mechanisms for Ethernet based networks”
Provides all of the 802.1ag functionality with additions including:
Delay Measurement (DM)
Delay Variation Measurement (DVM)
Loss Measurement (LM)
Automatic Protection Switching (APS)

16. OAM Layer Components Each layer support OAM capabilities independently
OAMs interoperate
Component responsibilities are complementary

17. Protocol Positioning
“Link OAM” 802.3ah is run on a point-to-point L2 Ethernet link. It is a common requirement for the access link
“Service OAM” CFM 802.1ag/Y.1731 is run over a L2 Ethernet service end-to-end. It can traverse many L2 Ethernet hops, but is tunneled over MPLS along with the other customer traffic

18. 802.3ah Ethernet OAM Test Challenges
Functional Protocol Validation
Test Discovery
Verify capability exchange
Test Active/Passive roles
Change capabilities and verify change
Test Loopback
Put remote port in loopback, ensure state change
Transmit data to test link
Test Faults
Dying Gasp, Critical Events, Link Errors, Link Fault
Configure DUT to take action on fault and verify action
Verify all counters and logs
Verify state machine stability (enable/disable/state changes)
Test OUI and Optional TLVs – (transmit and verify receive)
Integrate OAM in Higher Scale and Performance Testing
Enable OAM on ports and run traditional tests (like RFC 2544)
Standardized testing will be defined as part of UNI Type 2 MEF specification

19. Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) Example
This example shows Maintenance Associations (MAs) between Maintenance End Points (MEPs) at three levels within a Maintenance Domain (MD). Maintenance Intermediate Points (MIPs) can be associated per MD or per MA which depends on the visibility the administer has configured.

20. Similar attribute structure as current MEF specifications
E-NNI Attributes
Similar attribute structure as current MEF specifications
E-NNI Attributes
Basic
OAM
Protection
QoS
Service
Type
MTU
Endpoint
Service Mux
Tag ID/CoS Preservation
Link
Rate
L2CPs
Link OAM
IEEE 802.3ah
Service OAM
IEEE 802.1ag & ITU-T Y.1731
Link Protection
IEEE 802.3ad (LAG)
Service Protection
IEEE 802.1D (STP/MSTP)
Bandwidth Profiles
By EI
By EVC
By PCP
By DSCP
Performance
Delay
Loss
Availability

21. Hierarchical OAM Domains
Customer
Service Provider
Customer
E-NNI
UNI
UNI
Customer Domain
Service OAM
Provider Domain
Network OAM
Operator Domain
Operator Domain
A flat network is difficult to manage and define accountabilities
Hierarchical Maintenance Domains will bound OAM Flows & OAM responsibilities

22. Ethernet Service OAM Test Challenges
Basic Protocol Functionality
Ethernet CFM are new protocols and basic functionality and operation needs to be verified and exercised in the lab
Scalability and Performance
Generating and responding to CFM PDUs puts additional strain on network elements. Within a single Maintenance Domain there could be over 8,000 Maintenance Associations concurrently running. Each participating Maintenance Point needs to examine and process each PDU. CC intervals can be configured as low as 3.33ms which may have performance impacts. Test hundreds of ports concurrently.
Interoperability
Ethernet CFM standards (especially 802.1ag) have recently been updated causing all Network Equipment Manufactures to update their implementation. Significant testing is required to ensure interoperability between various products and vendors.
Inter-working
Testing and validating inter-working with other Carrier Ethernet technologies is required for successful end to end service delivery

23. Ethernet Service Demarcation E-NNI and UNI
Ralph Santitoro

24. Agenda Introduction Link and Service OAM
Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market
MEF defined CE Services and OAM
Link and Service OAM
OAM Components and Protocols
OAM Hierarchies and Testing
Ethernet Services Demarcation Points
Definition of UNI and E-NNI
E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model
Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM

25. Ethernet Service Demarcation Points
UNI
Access Network Provider
E-NNI
E-NNI
E-NNI
Transport Network Provider
Ethernet Service Provider
EVC
Subscriber
Subscriber
UNI (User-to-Network Interface)
Demarcation point between
Ethernet Service Provider/Access Network Provider and Subscriber
Ethernet Service (EVC) starting/ending point
E-NNI (External Network-to-Network Interface)
Demarcation/peering point between:
Ethernet Service Provider (ESP) and Access Network Provider
ESP and Transport (Long Haul) Network Provider

26. E-NNI Constructs: Component EVC (CEVC)
UNI4
UNI5
UNI6 A1 B1 C1
Operator A
EVC1
Operator B
Operator C
E-NNI
E-NNI
MP-to-MP EVC1 associates UNI4, UNI5 and UNI6
EVC1 decomposed into 3 CEVCs
CEVC A1 within Operator A’s network
CEVC B1 within Operator B’s network
CEVC C1 within Operator C’s network

27. E-NNI Constructs: Tunnels, VUNIs and RUNIs
EVC1
E-NNI
E-NNI
EVC1
Operator 2
Operator 3
UNI
Transit Tunnel
Operator 1
EVC3
E-NNI
VUNI
EVC2
UNI
EVC2
Terminating tunnel
Operator 4
RUNI
EVC3
UNI
Tunnels
Transit Tunnels (associates two E-NNIs)
Terminating Tunnels (associates a VUNI and an RUNI)
VUNI (Virtual UNI)
Logical interface at endpoint of E-NNI side of Terminating Tunnel
Maps CEVC(s) to its Terminating Tunnel
RUNI (Remote UNI)
Logical interface at end point of UNI side of the Terminating Tunnel

28. E-NNI and VUNI Service Attributes modeled after UNI Service Attributes
MEF E-NNI, VUNI and CEVC Service Attributes - A comparison to MEF UNI and EVC Service Attributes
E-NNI and VUNI Service Attributes modeled after UNI Service Attributes
Ingress/Egress Bandwidth Profiles
MTU Size
Identifier
CEVC Service Attributes modeled after EVC Service Attributes
S-VLAN ID Preservation vs. C-VLAN ID Preservation
Max. Number of VUNI Endpoints vs. Max. Number of UNIs
These similarities will facilitate and accelerate implementation and deployment

29. E-NNI Constructs: Putting it all together
RUNI
VUNI1
VUNI2 and VUNI3
Access Network Provider
UNI1
Transport Network Provider
E-NNI1
E-NNI2
UNI2
E-NNI
Ethernet Service Provider
Terminating Tunnel
Transit Tunnel
CEVC1
CEVC2
EVC
Subscriber
Subscriber
Access Network Provider
Provides CEVC1 connection between Subscriber UNI1 (RUNI) and VUNI1 at E-NNI1 with Transport Network Provider
Transport Network Provider
Provides CEVC2 connection between E-NNI1 (VUNI2) and E-NNI2 (VUNI3) with Ethernet Service Provider
Ethernet Service Provider
Provides connection to E-NNI2 with Transport Network Provider
Provides End-to-End Ethernet Service to Subscriber
Provides EVC between UNI1 and UNI2

30. E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Ran Avital

31. Agenda Introduction Link and Service OAM
Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market
MEF defined CE Services and OAM
Link and Service OAM
OAM Components and Protocols
OAM Hierarchies and Testing
Ethernet Services Demarcation Points
Definition of UNI and E-NNI
E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul
Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model
Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM

32. Why relevant for Mobile Backhaul?
Mobile services need Coverage
Leasing backhaul services is a common practice
High capacity, low cost creates new opportunities
Wholesale
RAN sharing
Converged operations
A better way to do business in Mobile Backhaul

33. Mobile Backhaul Market Survey
Evaluate network planning assumptions and integrate the derived needs from the MEF Implementation Agreement (IA)
41 operators/worldwide coverage (APAC 20%, EMEA 49%, NA 27% and LA 5%)
Independent research commissioned by the MEF

34. Mobile Backhaul Market Survey- Highlights
Will you require UNI at the RAN BS will need to support Link OAM (IEEE 802.3ah)
Likely (91%)
Not
Will you require UNI at the RAN NC will need to support Link OAM (IEEE 802.3ah)
Likely (85%)
Not
Will you require Ethernet Service OAM (IEEE 802.1ag, ITU-T Y.1731)?
Require (78%)
Likely

35. SOAM - A Major Industry Education Challenge
Will you require Ethernet Service OAM (IEEE 802.1ag, ITU-T Y.1731) to perform connectivity and fault management?

36. Ethernet OAM Collectively refers to Link OAM and Service OAM
Ethernet OAM requirements are not specified in any current mobile standards from 3GPP, 3GPP2 or IEEE
And normally not implemented on mobile equipment…
Link OAM
For UNI-N and UNI-C for the RAN NC and RAN BS are recommended.
Service OAM
For UNI-N and UNI-C for the RAN NC and RAN BS are a must

37. OAM Spanning number of MENs
UNI
UNI
RAN BS
RAN NC
E-NNI
E-LMI
E-LMI
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
802.3ah
Service OAM; 802.1ag/Y.1731
A scenario for future Mobile backhaul IA work
RAN BS and the RAN NC are not likely to reside on the same CEN in many mobile networks

38. Further Reasons for E-t-E E-NNI and OAM
Business models:
In the mobile world dictate local optimization
ENNI and SOAM enables a lower cost backhaul network
Scale:
An Ethernet service should be delivered to 000s base stations
Self own Vs. lease parts of the network need to interconnect
Different groups handle aggregation and access backhaul
Cost:
Leverage existing networks serving residential DSL and business services
Lease of substantial parts of the network
Use of multiple technologies
Concurrent traffic delivery over different network
E.g. DSL and Lease lines (Legacy split access)

39. Q&A Panel Members Arie Goldberg Ran Avital Ralph Santitoro
MEF Board Member & Secretary MEF
CEO and Chief Technologist
Omnitron Systems Technology, Inc.
Ran Avital
MEF Market Research Co-Chair
VP of Strategic and Product Marketing
Ceragon Networks
Ralph Santitoro
MEF Board Member
Co-chair MEF Security Workgroup
Director of Carrier Ethernet Solutions
Turin Networks
Michael Haugh
Sr. Product Manager
Ixia 39

40. Presentations are available at www.metroethernetforum.org
Thank You
Presentations are available at