1. Internet2 Update June 29 th 2010, LHCOPN Jason Zurawski – Internet2

2. Internet2 is an advanced networking consortium led by members of the Research and Education (R&E) community. We promote the missions of our members, in part through the development and support of networking activities and related initiatives. We are committed to supporting scientific use of the network, including the LHC. – Enabling large scale data transfers over a high capacity nationwide network – Dynamic circuit capability through the ION service – Performance Monitoring through perfSONAR – Support for the debugging of Network Performance, end to end. 2 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Introduction

3. Internet2 Network and Advanced Services Update ARRA and Stimulus Update A Blast from the Past LHC Traffic Observations 3 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Outline

4. Backbone router upgrades – Houston, Kansas City, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, Seattle routers upgraded to Juniper MX960s in early 2010 – Chicago router will remain Juniper T1600 in 2010 (getting crowded!) Backbone augments – All backbone circuits re-framed from OC-192 to 10GigE LANPHY – Additional backbone links lit between all adjacent routers; adjacent nodes now connected with 20G of bandwidth Optical capacity added between Denver and Salt Lake City (10 additional waves) 10G capacity between Internet2 and TransitRail added in Los Angeles, Seattle, Chicago, Washington DC Network Architecture

5. IP NETWORK VISUALIZED Note: New York to Chicago is now 20G, more later…

6. Less Than Best Effort service available on Internet2 IP network – Researchers can signal LBE service using TOS overhead bytes – Internet2 will evolve the service and documentation over the coming months Backbone routers configured to handle MPLS transport of ION services Route Statistics – R&E IPv4: 13,094 routes – R&E IPv6: 812 routes – CPS* IPv4: 154,272 routes – CPS* IPv6: 2,850 routes *CPS = Commercial Peering Service (http://noc.net.internet2.edu/i2network/commercial-peering-service.html)http://noc.net.internet2.edu/i2network/commercial-peering-service.html IP Service

7. ION = Interface to Dynamic Circuits (similar to Autobahn/SDN) Transition from Ciena CoreDirectors to Juniper MX960s in 1H2010 – Move from SONET-based network on the Cienas to an MPLS- based service operating on the current IP network MPLS transport more efficient use of resources – Bandwidth reserved for circuit instantiation is available for use by other users when circuit owner not utilizing circuit for transfer – Opportunity to provide circuits that can burst above their requested commit rate, if sufficient headroom available ION will be a production service managed by the Internet2 NOC ION circuits provisioned using a simple and secure web-based interface or IDC signalling ION Service

8. INTERNET2 HISTORICAL OFFERED LOAD

9. Internet2 Network and Advanced Services Update ARRA and Stimulus Update A Blast from the Past LHC Traffic Observations 9 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Outline

10. Many Internet2 connectors are looking to expand through NTIA BTOP program. Internet2 is exploring ways to upgrade/expand capabilities to match up with the expected growth of regionals and ensure fees remain the same or potentially reduced. Internet2 has submitted a Round 2 Proposal to the ARRA- funded Broadband Technologies Opportunities Program (BTOP) as funded by the NTIA – Seeks to acquire nationwide dark fiber, optical equipment to light the fiber at 100G speeds, and an upgraded IP network delivering 100GigE to the Internet2 Community 10 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Internet2 and ARRA Stimulus

11. 11 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 New Network Builds in Proposal

12. 12 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Combined US UCAN System Capability

13. 13 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Upgraded IP Backbone

14. Internet2 Network and Advanced Services Update ARRA and Stimulus Update A Blast from the Past LHC Traffic Observations 14 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Outline

15. The following slides were given at Summer Joint Techs 2007 (Fermilab) – Rick Summerhill and Eric Boyd – http://www.internet2.edu/presentations/jt2007jul/20070716- boyd-summerhill.ppt http://www.internet2.edu/presentations/jt2007jul/20070716- boyd-summerhill.ppt Background – Internet2 used to sponsor workshops as a service to our members and connectors to prepare for the LHC – Data and network requirements – Common stumbling blocks to success (e.g. network performance and design) Have since evolved into a more general ‘Network Performance’ workshop 15 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 A Blast from the Past

16. Are you ready for LHC? 16 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

17. CERN Tier 0Raw Data FNAL BNL Shared Data Storage and Reduction Tier 1 (12 orgs) US Tier 2 (15 orgs) CMS (7) Atlas (6-7) US Tier 3 (68 orgs) US Tier 4 (1500 US scientists) Scientists Request Data Provides Data to Tier 3 Scientists Analyze Data LHCOPN GEANT-ESNet-Internet2 Internet2/Connectors Local Infrastructure 17 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

18. CERN Tier 0 to Tier1: Requires 10-40 Gbps Tier 1 to Tier 2: Requires 10-20 Gbps LHCOPN GEANT-ESNet-Internet2 Internet2/Connectors Tier 1 or 2 to Tier 3: Estimate: Requires 1.6 Gbps per transfer (2 TB's in 3 hours) Peak Flow Network Requirements Local Infrastructure 18 18 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

19. What are the Implications for Normal Network Operations from T2 to T3? Example: 13 people (3 Professors and 10 Graduate Students) require ten 3-hour timeslots a month to receive 8 Gigabit data flows. 19 4 Gig 10 Gig 19 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

20. 20 CMS T2 Traffic at UNL 20 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

21. Internet2 Connectors 21 MAGPI 3ROX CalREN-2 South Great Plains Network Indiana GigaPoP MREN Merit LONI Internet2 ESnet NoX NYSERNet OARnet OmniPoP SoX Oregon GigaPoP Pacific Northwest GigaPoP 21 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

22. Cyberinfrastructure Requirements Data storage Robust campus infrastructure Security and Authorization IT support for local and remote resources Network Performance monitoring tools 22 22 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

23. Cyberinfrastructure Components Network MiddlewarePerformance Infrastructure / Tools Control Plane …. Bulk Transport 2-Way Interactive Video Real-Time Communications Applications Applications call on Network Cyberinfrastructure …. Phoebus Network Cyberinfrastructure 23 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2

24. Was the message heard at the Tier2 Level? – Absolutely – most (if not all) US Tier2s are extremely well connected (diverse and capable network paths) and can (do) flood the network at will (see examples later) – Cyberinfrastructure components are well deployed and useful perfSONAR-PS available at all USATLAS Tier1/Tier2s. Gaining at USCMS as well. Striving for Tier3s to have a deployment available Lambda Station/Terapaths/Phoebus are successful data movement tools that utilize the Dynamic Circuit networks What more needs to be done? – Tier3s – what is the worse case scenario? – Bridging the gap – Campus IT vs the Science Disciplines – The workshops where valuable, why can’t they continue? Internet2 wants to be involved, but needs support and help of the scientific communities (beyond the LHC as well) and network partners 24 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Blast from the Past Summary

25. 25 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Internet2 LHC Project Connectivity (2009)

26. Based on conversation by John and others yesterday, some clarifications – perfSONAR-MDM: Managed service e.g. support available for the installation, configuration, and management of open source software based on the perfSONAR protocols – perfSONAR-PS: Non-managed service (e.g. pure open source support model) for the use of open source software based on the perfSONAR protocols Is there a difference between the two? – Only in the management and development, the software is interoperable on a protocol basis Key stakeholders (for both) – Networks (R&E and Commercial) – Campuses – Federal Labs – VOs Open development opportunities – Yes! There are APIs and the data is available – Traditional (Python, Perl, Java), REST gaining strength 26 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 And a note on perfSONAR-PS…

27. 27 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Outside Development Gaining Traction

28. Internet2 Network and Advanced Services Update ARRA and Stimulus Update A Blast from the Past LHC Traffic Observations 28 – 10/30/2015, © 2010 Internet2 Outline

29. Aggregate traffic from Fermilab/BNL on Internet2 Network Dates: 3/30 to 4/2 (First collision through data dissemination) Note the ‘peaks’ of around 3-5G. Didn’t last too long, supports the maximum size of the data set. Graph courtesy of Chris Robb. 29 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 So … Where is All the Data?

30. Aggregate traffic from Fermilab/BNL on Internet2 Network Dates: 3/30 to 4/2 (First collision through data dissemination) Note the ‘peaks’ of around 3-5G. Didn’t last too long, supports the maximum size of the data set. Graph courtesy of Chris Robb. 30 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 So … Where is All the Data? Possible Transfers?

31. Despite these facts on data size and where it came from, did we see the data on Internet2? – “Some”, but not all – A little later than first availability (more with Tier2 and Tier3 transfers) Who saw the data? – Purpose built R&E nets (Ultralight, USLHCNet) – ESnet (into and out of Fermilab/BNL) – Internet2/NLR From Tier1s Between Tier2s* To Tier3s *Expected, and becoming common 31 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 So … Where is All the Data?

32. Minor experiment by me to see how Tier-2s route to each other, and the Tier-1 for USATLAS. pS Performance Toolkit (http://psps.perfsonar.net/toolkit/) available at Tier-1 and almost all Tier-2s.http://psps.perfsonar.net/toolkit/ – Co-allocated near the rest of the processing/storage – Using the available performance tools, analyze the routes – Determine the paths the data is flowing – Check the times/data stores to find evidence of the transfers – ‘Reverse Traceroute’ Tool – Developed by SLAC 32 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Connectivity

33. Tier 1 for USATLAS Connectivity to other sites (Tier-2s, Tier3s) – MSU/UMich – Ultralight – Indiana - ESnet – U of Chicago – Private R&E Network/Peering – Boston Univ. – Private R&E Network/Peering – Oklahoma - ESnet – U of Texas at Arlington – Esnet/NLR – SMU – ESnet/Internet2 – U of Wisconsin - ESnet – LBNL/NERSC – ESnet As expected for a Tier1, there is not much touching Internet2 33 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Connectivity – BNL (Tier 1)

34. Tier 2 (Northeast Tier2 [NET2] w/ Harvard) Connectivity to other sites – BNL (Tier-1) – Private Network/Peering – MSU/UMich (Tier-2) – Internet2 – Indiana (Tier-2) – Internet2 – U of Chicago (Tier-2) – Internet2 – Oklahoma (Tier-2) – Internet2 – U of Texas at Arlington (Tier-2) – Internet2 – SMU (Tier-3) – Internet2 – U of Wisconsin (Tier-3) – Internet2 – LBNL/NERSC (Tier-3) – ESnet Private connectivity to the Tier1 (shared with NET2 partner Harvard), but T2-T2 transfers almost exclusively R&E 34 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Connectivity – Boston Univ. (Tier 2)

35. Tier 2 (Southwest Tier2 [SWT2] w/ U of T at A) Connectivity to other sites – BNL (Tier-1) - ESnet – MSU/UMich (Tier-2) - NLR – Indiana (Tier-2) - NLR – U of Chicago (Tier-2) – Internet2 – Boston Univ. (Tier-2) – Internet2 – U of Texas at Arlington (Tier-2) - NLR – SMU (Tier-3) - NLR – U of Wisconsin (Tier-3) - NLR – LBNL/NERSC (Tier-3) – ESnet Well connected site, mix of different R&E peerings. Diversity of path is a good thing. 35 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Connectivity – Oklahoma (Tier 2)

36. Tier-2 to Tier-2 Transfers – We are always monitoring and looking for pinch points – Some activity is more visible than others… – Fully expect this type of to occur (and increase!) as the project matures Tier-2 Transfers, sometimes International (CMS) – Expecting this based on the CMS model – Directly lead to capacity changes on the network New 10G between New York and Chicago – Early May 2010 – Ready and willing to add capacity as needed to where it is needed RE: David’s slides yesterday regarding ‘protection’ Will be speaking with heavy network users as traffic increases to talk about solutions (e.g. extra capacity at the regional/campus network, use of ION, etc.) Working with regional partners to increase capacity into heavy use campuses (e.g. Vanderbilt University [New Heavy ION Tier2] -> SOX) 36 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 What We are Expecting

37. Inbound to Internet2 from GPN (UNL – A CMS Tier-2) 37 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Example of T2 – T2: 4/26 7 EDT

38. Outbound to CalREN (Caltech – A CMS Tier-2) 38 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Example of T2 – T2: 4/26 7 EDT

39. Backed up by CMS PhEDEx data 39 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Example of T2 – T2: 4/26 7 EDT

40. Backed up by CMS PhEDEx data 40 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Example of T2 – T2: 4/26 7 EDT

41. Backbone traffic heating up (NEWY-CHIC) 41 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Other Example of a T2: 4/15 to date

42. Tracked to University of Wisconsin (USCMS/USATLAS Tier-2) 42 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Other Example of a T2: 4/15 to date

43. PhEDEx confirms (into UofWisc) 43 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Other Example of a T2: 4/15 to date

44. Some (not all) coming out of a Tier-1 in Germany (KIT/GridKA) 44 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 Other Example of a T2: 4/15 to date

45. Backbones are ready for the challenges – Underestimates can be met with action to increase capacity Regional Networks should be prepared as well. – Working to upgrade heavy users to increase the science capability Campus preparedness will vary – Large campus – more than likely aware of the demands of big science – Small campus – prepared? Time is running out, to find out … Internet2’s Roll – Support the missions of our members, no matter the project – Deliver networking – Support key cyberinfrastructure, either through software development, instruction, or advanced services 45 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2 LHC Science Preparedness

46. Internet2 Update June 29 th 2010, LHCOPN Jason Zurawski – Internet2 For more information, visit www.internet2.edu 46 – 10/30/2015, © 2009 Internet2