1. www.internet2.edu

2. 5 September 2015 Internet2: Infraestructura y Aplicaciones Ana Preston Program Manager, Internet2 International apreston@internet2.edu JT RedIRIS 2002 Salamanca, España Ana Preston Program Manager, Internet2 International apreston@internet2.edu JT RedIRIS 2002 Salamanca, España

3. 3 Outline for today’s talk Quick Overview of Internet2 Focus Areas - highlights Backbone Infrastructure Applications Conclusions / Q&A

4. 4 Research & Education Universities strive for qualitative and quantitative improvements: In support of research In support of teaching and learning how to accelerate the change in technologies and applications on the internet to support new demands for the research and education community? how can new technologies be incorporated into the existing Internet? (think back in when the Internet started…) Stanford -- the Internet protocols NSFNet -- the scaled-up Internet CERN -- the WWW protocols University of Illinois -- the Web browser

5. 5 Research and Development Commercialization Partnerships Privatization Internet Development Spiral Today’s Internet Internet2 Source: Ivan Moura Campos

6. 6 Internet2: Mission and Goals Develop and deploy advanced network applications and technologies for research and higher education, accelerating the creation of tomorrow’s internet. Enable new generation of applications Create leading edge R&E network capability Transfer technology and experience to the global production Internet

7. 7 Internet2 Universities 202 University Members, November 2002

8. 8 University Leadership – Collaborative Partnership 200+ university members with commitments from their Presidents/Chancellors/Rectors 60+ corporate members Over 40 Affiliate Members –Government Research Agencies Organization - Not for profit (not commercial) – UCAID: University Corporation for Advanced Internet Development. Internet2 is a UCAID project. Internet2 universities are recreating the partnerships that fostered the Internet in its infancy (industry, government, international) –Support applications developers and users –Provide national-scope advanced networking capabilities for universities, research institutes –Spread availability of new networking technology

9. 9 Internet2 Focus Areas Applications Engineering Middleware Network Infrastructure Partnerships

10. 10 Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure Middleware Engineering Advanced Applications Partnerships

11. 11 University-led Federal agency-led Developing education and research driven applications Agency mission-driven and general purpose applications Building out campus networks, gigaPoPs and inter-gigapop infrastructure Funding research testbeds and agency research networks Interconnecting and interoperating to provide advanced networking capabilities needed to support advanced research and education applications Internet2 and the Next Generation Internet Initiative Internet2NGI

12. 12 National Networks Federal Backbone Networks DREN ESnet NREN SuperNet vBNS Abilene The name of Internet2’s network infrastructure Apr 1998: Project announced at White House Jan 1999: Production status for network

13. 13 Typical Internet2 University Network Connection University Campus Regional Network 622 Mbps-2.4 Gbps Internet2 Backbones (2.4 - 10 Gbps) 155 Mbps – 2.4 Gbps Department 100 Mbps Lab or Classroom

14. 14 Abilene Network Logical Map

15. 15 Internet2 GigaPoPs 31 as of November 2002

16. 16 Abilene: Partnership approach The Abilene Network is a UCAID project done in partnership with Cisco Systems (routers, switches, and access) Juniper Networks (routers) Nortel Networks (SONET kit) Qwest Communications (SONET & DWDM circuits, co-location) Indiana University (network operations center) Internet2 Test & Evaluation Centers (ITECs) – North Carolina and Ohio

17. 17 Abilene – October, 2002 IP-over-DWDM (OC-192c) and IP-over-SONET backbone (OC-48c) 50 direct connections (OC-3c  10-Gbps) 4 (soon 6) OC-48c & 1 Gig Eth connections 2 10-Gbps (10 Gig Eth) connections pending –OC-192 SONET also supported 23 connections at OC-12c or higher Number of ATM connections soon down to 7 219 participants – research univs. & labs All 50 states, District of Columbia, & Puerto Rico Expanded access 54 sponsored participants and 25 state education networks

19. 19 Next Generation Abilene Partnership with Qwest extended thru 2006 Juniper T640 routers selected for backbone 10/11 next generation router nodes in place; 12 th location pending – 2 racks in each location (Juniper T640 router & 4 measurement servers) –OC-48c SONET interconnects to Cisco 12008 routers –Very pleased to date with new router performance and interoperability with 1 st generation backbone 10-Gbps backbone deployment has started this Fall Transcontinental 10-Gbps ’s: 6 ’s connected to network –DC-NYC-Chicago-Indy-KC-Sunnyvale CA-Los Angeles –First outage (3.5 hours): fiber cut in NYC –ITEC network performance validation test: 8 Gbps of 2-way traffic (v4 and v6 mix) transmitted without loss or reordering – Sunnyvale to San Diego

20. 20 Next Generation Abilene – more Incremental, non-disruptive transition Upgrade Schedule Overview Aug/Sep – New backbone routers installed Sep/Oct – ‘First wave’ turn-up Fall 2002 – Connector & peer circuits migrated to new routers 2003 – Remaining 10-Gbps ’s commissioned Advanced service foci –Native, high-performance IPv6 –Enhanced, differentiated measurement –Rapid restoration for resiliency

21. 21 Native IPv6 deployment Abilene is now running native IPv6 over the entire Cisco 12008 and Juniper T640 backbone Dual stack mode IS-ISv6 used for internal routing Significant number of peers and connectors already have converted Tunnel support consolidated IU-NOC provides support for existing tunnels; Not accepting any new tunnels Abilene provided addressing 2001:468::/35 from ARIN for participants – 63% allocated 3ffe:3700::/24 from 6bone for SEGP / sponsored users Native IPv6 (UCSD iGrid demo: 400 Mbps v6 SD-AMS) Kudos to Abilene NOC, IPv6 WG, Cisco, and Juniper

22. 22 Abilene native IPv6 peerings – October, 2002 Connectors (12) Great Plains Network Indiana Gigapop MAX NYSERNet Oregon Gigapop Pittsburgh Gigapop SDSC WiscREN NoX South Florida Gigapop Front Range Gigapop ONEnet Peers/Exchange Points (9) 6TAP APAN/TransPAC CUDI JGNv6/WIDE SingAREN SURFNET vBNS+ AMPATH CA*NET(3)

23. 23 More key aspects of next generation Abilene backbone - I Resiliency Moving from SONET rings to unprotected ’s is significant Collaboration apps demand convergence times of ~100 ms Faster converging IP-based IGP as ultimate solution –v4 unicast IGP switch from OSPF to IS-IS Differentiated measurement capabilities Starting w/four dedicated servers at each node –Local data collection to capture data at times of network instability Enhance active probing –Now: latency & jitter, loss, reachability (Surveyor) –Regular TCP/UDP throughput tests – ~1 Gbps Separate server for E2E performance beacon Enhance passive measurement –Now: SNMP (NOC) & traffic matrix/type (Netflow) –Routing (BGP & IGP) –Optical splitter taps on backbone links at select location(s)

24. 24 Sacramento Los Angeles Washington STAR TAP/Star Light APAN/TransPAC†, CA*net4, CERN, NAUKAnet, GEMnet, HARNET, HEANET, KOREN/KREONET2, NORDUnet, SURFnet, SingAREN, TAnet2 NYCM CA*net3, GEANT*, HEANET, NORDUnet Pacific Wave AARNET, APAN/TransPAC† CA*net4, TANET2 SNVA GEMNET, SINET, SingAREN, WIDE LOSA UNINET AMPATH ANSP, REUNA, RNP2, RETINA OC3->OC12 El Paso (UACJ-UT El Paso) CUDI San Diego (CALREN2) CUDI ARNES, CARNET, CESnet, DFN, GRNET, JANET, NORDUNET, RENATER, RESTENA, SWITCH, HUNGARNET, GARR-B, POL-34, RCCN, RedIRIS † WIDE/JGN, IMnet, CERNet, CSTnet, 09 January 2002 Abilene International Peering (October 2002)

25. 25 Networks reachable via Abilene – by country Europe-Middle East Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Czech Republic Cyprus Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Asia-Pacific Australia China Hong Kong Japan Korea Singapore Taiwan Thailand Americas Argentina Brazil Canada Chile Mexico United States Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom *CERN More information about reachable networks at www.internet2.edu/abilene/peernetworks.html Also, see www.startap.net

26. 26 Abilene international connectivity model Abilene is a GTRN - Global Terabit Research Network - partner Already peering with GTRN router in New York City Peering at major int’l EPs in U.S. encouraged Chicago: Star Light (migration from STAR TAP) Seattle: Pacific Wave Miami: AMPATH New York City: MAN LAN (GigE/10GigE switch) 10 Gig Ethernet to Star Light now and P/WAVE when ready Direct BGP peering preferred via Layer-2 EP media or direct connection to Abilene router ATM support generally ends by Sept 2003 No new ATM peers

27. 27 GTRN: Current Infrastructure DANTE-provided router in NYC in GTRN AS DANTE-provided 2.5gbps links across Atlantic to GEANT Abilene providing tunnel between New York, (Chicago), Seattle NSF-funded StarLight will provide GNAP Pacific Wave hosting GNAP in Seattle Global NOC at Indiana University

28. 28 NGA international update IEEAF (Internet Educational Equal Access Foundation) transatlantic donations – www.ieeaf.org 10-Gbps (unprotected) and OC-12c SONET links – ’s from Los Angeles to Amsterdam! Now links Abilene in NYC and SURFnet in Amsterdam Joint effort in time for iGrid2002, Amsterdam (9/2002) Working collaboratively to extend reach in Europe –GEANT and GTRN

29. 29 Abilene Network objectives - 2003 Advanced Services Multicast - high performance IPv6 - native, high performance Resiliency Security Measurement Active & passive capabilities e2e performance initiative support Abilene Observatory: correlated data archive for network research Experimentation and collaboration Abilene Observatory: experiment/overlay co-location TeraGrid interconnection (LA and Chicago) 'Lambda Grid' experimentation International connectivity –IEEAF collaboration (Europe, other regions?) –MAN LAN exchange point in NYC

30. 30 Optical networking technology drivers Computational science: emerging interdiscipline Now: Bandwidth + distributed data sensing and storage Increasingly distributed data collection and storage NSF Distributed Terascale Facility: TeraGrid Project At end of aggressive period of fiber construction on the national & metro scales in U.S. Now rapid industry contraction, capital crisises, bankruptcies Glut of conduit and fiber, but not of bandwidth Many university campuses and regional GigaPoPs already use dark fiber Much metro DWDM/GigE and some regional (state based) DWDM Optical transport is the focus with switching on horizon

31. 31 U.S. R&E optical networking scaling factors 11 Next Generation Abilene routers ~50 Abilene connectors ~220 Abilene participants Research universities & labs But… 30-60 DWDM access nodes in leading viable carriers’ U.S. networks

32. 32 Regional optical fanout In the next generation architecture, regional & state based optical networking projects are critical Three-level hierarchy remains vital National backbone, GigaPoPs (ARNs), Campuses Close collaboration with the GigaPoPs Regional Optical Networking project U.S. carrier DWDM access is now not nearly as widespread as with SONET circa 1998 30-60 cities for DWDM ~120 cities for SONET

33. 33 Optical network project differentiation Distance scale (km) ExamplesEquipment Metro< 60 UWash(SEA) USC/ISI(LA) Dark fiber & end terminals State/ Regional< 500 I-WIRE (IL), CENIC ONI, I-LIGHT (IN) Add OO amplifiers Extended Regional/ National > 500 (LH) TeraGrid NG Abilene Add OEO regenerators & O&M $’s

34. 34 UCAID objectives for national fiber optical networking facility 1.With partners, help build and operate a world-class, national-scale optical networking facility p2p ’s IP/optical experimentation & protocol development Operational requirements (over time) 2.Serve all of higher education Coordinate closely with regional optical networking initiatives (Quilt RONCO project) 3.Focus on optical transport initially Continue to examine prospects for a national fiber optical networking facility with key partners

35. 35 More information on Abilene www.internet2.edu/abilene Contact: Steve Corbató corbato@internet2.educorbato@internet2.edu Director, Backbone Network Infrastructure

36. 36 Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure Middleware Engineering Advanced Applications Partnerships

37. 37 Internet2 Middleware Initiative – middleware.internet2.edu Middleware: A layer of software between the network and the applications Middleware Architecture Committee for Education Early Harvest and Early Adopters Internet2 PKI Labs Shibboleth (authentication) Computational middleware (Beta Grid) Medical middleware Directories

38. 38 Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure Middleware Engineering Advanced Applications Partnerships

39. 39 Engineering Working Groups End to End Performance Technologies IPv6 Measurement Multicast Quality of Service Routing Security Topology http://www.internet2.edu/html/working-groups.html

40. 40 End-to-End Performance Initiative http://e2epi.internet2.edu/index.shtml To enable the researchers, faculty, students and staff who use high performance networks to obtain optimal performance from the current infrastructure on a consistent basis. Raw Connectivity Applications Performance True End-to-End Performance requires a system approach user perception, OS, Host IP stack, Host network card, …LAN, Campus, regional network/GigaPoP, link to I2 national backbones….all the way to International connections! E2E piPEline: Performance Environment System: To allow end-users and network operators to determine performance capabilities, locate problems, and contact the right person to get a problem resolved using a collaborative approach.

41. 41 Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure Middleware Engineering Advanced Applications Partnerships

42. 42 The new science: e-science Science used to about test tubes, wet labs and big instruments But increasingly science is moving to networks and computers; Applications that harness the power of the network at the edges Science is more global and distributed A virtual supercomputer http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/Cosm/ http://members.ud.com/vypc/cancer/ Arecibo Radio Telescope folding@home running on 500,000+PCs, ~1000 CPU years p/day over half a million CPU years so far 22 teraflops sustained 24x7 SETI@home

43. 43 Virtual Observatory www.voforum.org Discovery process will rely on advanced visualization and data mining tools Not tied to a single brick and mortar location Will cross correlate existing multi-spectral databases petabytes in size No new telescopes or radio dishes. Just big networks interconnecting large database

44. 44 Attributes of Advanced Apps Provide qualitative and quantitative improvements in how we conduct research and engage in teaching and learning Common attributes: Remote instrumentation and interactive collaboration Distributed data storage and data mining Large-scale, multi-site computation Real-time access to remote resources Dynamic data visualization Shared virtual reality Tele-immersion Digital Libraries, virtual labs, etc… …..

45. 45 Internet2 approach: Applications Working Groups Health Sciences Veterinary Medicine Arts & Humanities Non-trad’l Theses Arts Performance High Energy and Nuclear Physics GIS … Remote Instrumentation Voice over IP Digital Video Videoconferencing ResearchChannel Network Storage …

46. 46 Sciences and Engineering highlights – apps.internet2.edu NEES: Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation Earthquake research using real buildings and computer simulations Remote control of physical experiments requires extremely reliable and consistent network characteristics Video will be crucial: both for conferencing and data collection HENP-WG: High Energy and Nuclear Physics Working Group Terabytes of data (1,000,000,000,000 or 1x10 12 ) per experiment from CERN (Switzerland). bulk data transfers that are extremely resistant to data loss. Work on several protocols that take advantage of parallel streams and good neighbor practices (passive QOS). Astronomy: eVLBI - Electronic Very Long Baseline Interferometry Remote-WG: Cross Disciplinary Remote Instrumentation Working Group

47. 47 Remote Instrumentation and Data Analysis Mauna Kea, Hawai’i, USACerro Pachon, Chile Large scientific projects increasingly draw on resources from many countries. Scientists can use high-performance networks for remote instrument control and to pool computing resources for data analysis, improving ease of use and lowering costs. An international collaboration (US, Australia, U.K., Canada, Chile, Argentina, Brazil) NSF funds US participation The Gemini Observatory – Twin Telescopes

48. 48 VLBI - Very Long Baseline Interferometry Astronomers collect data about a star from many different earth based antennae and send the data to a specialized computer for analysis on a 24x7 basis. VLBI is not as concerned with data loss as they are with long term stability. The end goal is to send data at 1Gb/s from over 20 antennae that are located around the globe. Interesting: Successfully ran 788 Mbps sustained test between sites in U.S. Working on prototype experiment to test their ability to run data to Europe and Japan.

49. 49 Virtual Laboratories Distributed nanoManipulator University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Space Physics & Aeronomy Research Collaboratory (SPARC) University of Michigan NSF

50. 50 Health Sciences http://www.internet2.edu/health/ 3D Brain Map Visualization of data: real-time MRI, previously stored data, etc. Computational information transferred to supercomputers and used to understand brain functions in real time Very large multi-dimensional, multi-modal, time- varying data sets University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center Biomedical Informatics Research Network (BIRN) Extremely large data sets and repositories Dynamically generate 3D visualizations from medical records Generating 36Gbytes/day, so new models for search, retrieval and analysis will be necessary http://birn.ncrr.nih.gov/and http://www.nbirn.net/

51. 51 Digital Video – Distance Ed Tele-presence environments Real-time interactions with very high quality audio and MPEG-2 video as needed “meetings” connecting faculty and staff across the ocean Plain and Simple: Language/cultural Exchanges CCIU World Tour/Univ. of Pennsylvania Learning foreign languages through cultural exchanges and problem based experiential learning

52. 52 Arts and Humanities University of Oklahoma Master Classes High fidelity video and audio via MPEG2 Optimized latency, audio/video synchronization Connecting Oklahoma with the New World Symphony in Miami, Florida Zuckerman Interactive A collaboration with: Manhattan School of Music Columbia University National Arts Centre of Canada National Research Council of Canada Photo by R. Andrew Lepley

53. 53 The Internet2 Commons An effort to encourage and support large-scale, distributed collaboration for R&E Enabling one-to-one, one- to-group, and group-to-group collaboration Supporting personal communications, meetings, conferences, and teaching and learning Share best practices Guide to implementations facilitate development & deployment of projects For Internet2 members and their international partners commons.internet2.edu The Internet2 Commons H.323 Other Collaborative Technologies VRVS Videoconferencing Technologies AGMPEG2Others Data SharingInstant MessagingVoice/IP Electronic Notebooks Peer to PeerCollaboratories

54. 54 Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure Middleware Engineering Advanced Applications Partnerships

55. 55 Partnerships: Internet2 International Strategic importance to Internet2 Ensure global interoperability of the next generation of Internet technologies and applications Enable global collaboration in research and education providing/promoting the development of an advanced networking environment internationally Build effective partnerships in other countries With organizations of similar goals/objectives and similar constituencies Mechanism: Memoranda of Understanding

56. 56 MoU in brief Provide/promote interconnectivity between communities Collaborate on technology development and deployment Facilitate collaboration between members on applications Encourage technology transfer

57. 57 Asia-Pacific AAIREP (Australia) APAN (Asia-Pacific) APAN-KR (Korea) APRU (Asia-Pacific) CERNET, CSTNET, NSFCNET (China) JAIRC (Japan) JUCC (Hong Kong) NECTEC / UNINET (Thailand) SingAREN (Singapore) TAnet2 (Taiwan) International MoU Partners Americas CANARIE (Canada) CEDIA (Ecuador) CRNET (Costa Rica) CNTI (Venezuela) CUDI (Mexico) REUNA (Chile) RETINA (Argentina) RNP2/ANSP (Brazil) SENACYT (Panama) Europe-Middle East ARNES (Slovenia) BELNET (Belgium) CARNET (Croatia) CESnet (Czech Republic) DANTE (Europe) DFN-Verein (Germany) GIP RENATER (France) GRNET (Greece) HEAnet (Ireland) HUNGARNET (Hungary) INFN-GARR (Italy) Israel-IUCC (Israel) NORDUnet (Nordic Countries) POL-34 (Poland) RCST (Portugal) RedIRIS (Spain) RESTENA (Luxembourg) SANET (Slovakia) Stichting SURF (Netherlands) SWITCH (Switzerland) TERENA (Europe) JISC, UKERNA (United Kingdom)

58. 58 MoU Partners Newest Internet2 MoU Partners: Ecuador (CEDIA), Slovakia (SANET), Venezuela (CNTI) In discussion America: Uruguay, Colombia Peru, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Cuba Europe: Russia Africa: South Africa Asia: Malaysia, India

59. 59 Resources – more information On the Web www.internet2.edu apps.internet2.edu www.internet2.edu/abilene Email info@internet2.edu Contact us! Ana Preston apreston@internet2.eduapreston@internet2.edu

60. 60 Conclusion Leading-edge, high-performance network infrastructure is being put in place to support science, research, teaching and learning in countries around the world As a global community, we need to work even more closely together to ensure support for global applications on an end to end basis

61. 61 ¡ GRACIAS !

62. www.internet2.edu