Download Packet Optical Networking for LTE Cell Tower Backhaul

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Optical sound wikipedia, lookup

Last mile wikipedia, lookup

PSTN network topology wikipedia, lookup

Windows Vista networking technologies wikipedia, lookup

History of network traffic models wikipedia, lookup

Telecommunications in Russia wikipedia, lookup

Dell PowerConnect wikipedia, lookup

Cellular network wikipedia, lookup

Telecommunications engineering wikipedia, lookup

Computer network wikipedia, lookup

Telecommunication wikipedia, lookup

Long-tail traffic wikipedia, lookup

RapidIO wikipedia, lookup

AppleTalk wikipedia, lookup

5G wikipedia, lookup

Dell M1000e wikipedia, lookup

Asynchronous Transfer Mode wikipedia, lookup

Airborne Networking wikipedia, lookup

Multiprotocol Label Switching wikipedia, lookup

Wake-on-LAN wikipedia, lookup

Deep packet inspection wikipedia, lookup

Quality of service wikipedia, lookup

Packet switching wikipedia, lookup

LTE (telecommunication) wikipedia, lookup

Passive optical network wikipedia, lookup

4G wikipedia, lookup

Transcript
Packet Optical Networking for
LTE Cell Tower Backhaul
Ralph Santitoro
Carrier Ethernet Market Development
[email protected]
Current landscape
 Many, if not most, backhaul deployments use SONET
 Using Multi-Service Provisioning Platforms (MSPP)
 SONET delivered via MSPPs well served cell tower
backhaul providers for a long time





May 18, 2011
Reliable
Secure
Provides guaranteed bandwidth
Efficiently supports T1s (predominant circuit type requiring backhaul)
Supports Ethernet, albeit inefficiently  this is where the problem lies
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
2
Ethernet over SONET (EoS) for Backhaul
Why use it ?
 Many different implementations of Ethernet Transport




Switched (Connectionless) Ethernet
Ethernet over MPLS
Ethernet over SONET
Connection-Oriented Ethernet
 Each implementation varies significantly in:




QoS Performance (packet latency, loss)
Network Availability (protected / unprotected transport)
Bandwidth Assurances (statistical versus guaranteed)
Network Security (number of vulnerabilities)
EoS used because it is the safe choice… It just works !
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
3
Mobile Backhaul Technology Migration
3G/4G
Data
Bandwidth
 Keep 2G traffic on TDM
 No traffic growth so T1 MRC is flat
Voice +
2G Data
 High growth 3G and emerging LTE traffic
Time
 High bandwidth cell site base stations upgrade to Ethernet
 Ethernet over SONET on MSPPs not efficient for packet-centric traffic
• How do you evolve this to a more efficient technology?
Backhaul Network
2G
3G
LTE
May 18, 2011
T1s
T1s
Ethernet
Ethernet
SONET
Ethernet over SONET

??
Mobile
Switching
Center
Connection-Oriented Ethernet for Efficient Cell Tower Backhaul. (c) Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications.
4
Packet Optical Networking
 Packet Optical Networking provides the integration of
 Packet: Connection-Oriented Ethernet
 Optical Transport: SONET, ROADM, WDM, OTN
 Packet Optical Networking:





Reliable
Secure
Provides guaranteed bandwidth
Efficiently supports T1s (predominant circuit type requiring backhaul)
Efficiently supports Ethernet for high-growth packet centric data
 Packet Optical Networking Platforms (P-ONP)
 Enable 3G/LTE high growth data services to be efficiently backhauled
over existing SONET infrastructure
 While facilitating migration to packet-centric infrastructure
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
5
Ethernet over SONET challenges and how
Packet Optical Networking addresses them
Ethernet over SONET (EoS) Challenges using
Multi-Service Provisioning Platforms (MSPPs)
 EoS doesn’t support aggregation
 EoS is a port-based transport with no service multiplexing
 Ethernet switch added for aggregation
Eth
MSPP
Eth
MSPP
MSC
SONET MSPP
 EoS bandwidth dictated by SONET Container Size
 EoS bandwidth available in only 50Mbps STS increments
 Other bandwidth rates waste SONET bandwidth
SONET VCG
50Mbps
30Mbps
wasted
20Mbps EVC
SONET VCG
50Mbps
40Mbps
wasted
10Mbps EVC
SONET VCG
50Mbps
30Mbps
wasted
20Mbps EVC
150Mbps of SONET BW required for only 50Mbps of EVC BW
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
7
COE over SONET on Fujitsu’s Packet
Optical Networking Platforms (P-ONP)
 COE supports aggregation
 Aggregates EVCs onto higher speed Ethernet port
Eth
P-ONP
Eth
P-ONP
COE
over
SONET
MSC
P-ONP
 COE aggregates EVCs onto same SONET VCG
 Can achieve up to 100% bandwidth utilization
50Mbps
20Mbps EVC
10Mbps EVC
20Mbps EVC
More Service Revenue and Higher Margins using Existing Assets
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
8
Cell Tower Backhaul Evolution
From SONET to Ethernet using COE
FMO Step 1:
Add P-ONP with COE over
SONET to increase BW
efficiency
PMO:
Cell tower  MSC
SONET
P-ONP at MSC
MSPP at MSCEach Ethernet service
SONET
requires a separate
SONET VCG SONET
MSPP at Cell Site
TDM
T1s
EoS
Ethernet
2G/3G 3G/LTE
FMO Step 2:
Begin Migration to Ethernet
over Fiber (EoF) network.
Existing services unaffected
P-ONP at MSC
COE muxes Ethernet
services onto same
SONET
SONET VCG
P-ONP at Cell Site
P-ONP at Cell Site
TDM
T1s
COE
EoF
TDM
Ethernet
2G/3G 3G/LTE
T1s
2G/3G
COE
Ethernet
3G/LTE
Fujitsu’s Packet Optical Networking Platforms facilitate CTBH network
evolution while supporting multi-generation Connection-Oriented
2G/3G/LTE
services
Ethernet: A No-Nonsense Overview
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
9
Connection-Oriented Ethernet for Efficient,
Packet-centric Cell Tower Backhaul
Why COE for Cell Tower Backhaul ?
 Makes Ethernet more like SONET which dominates
CTBH networks today
 Network operations procedures similar to SONET
 Smoother transition for SONET-trained operations personnel
 Highly scalable packet-centric technology
 Meets large scale CTBH connectivity and aggregation requirements
 COE is supported over any Layer 1 networking technology
 Key Attributes
 Guaranteed Bandwidth (CIR)
 Consistent QoS Performance (Bounded Packet Delay, Packet Loss)
 High Security
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
11
Connection-Oriented Ethernet (COE) FAQs
 What is COE ?
 Industry term defining a point-to-point implementation of Carrier Ethernet
• Tracked by industry analysts for past few years
 COE technologies have been around for about 10 years
 What’s the difference between COE and Carrier Ethernet ?
 COE is a high performance implementation of Carrier Ethernet
 Are COE implementations based on industry standards ?
 Implementations utilize MEF, IEEE, IETF and ITU-T standards
• Plus value added enhancements where standards are nascent
 What technologies can be used to implement COE?
 COE can be implemented using Ethernet or MPLS technologies
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
12
COE designed to mimic SONET
 Makes Ethernet point-to-point
 Just like SONET circuits
 Ethernet Virtual Connections (EVCs) are provisioned
across the network
 Just like SONET circuits
 Eliminates Ethernet control plane and many layer 2 control protocols
 Provide 50ms EVC path protection / restoration
 Just like SONET linear path protection
 Provide EVC fault management at demarcation points
 Just like DS1 circuit loopbacks
 Provides guaranteed bandwidth throughout the network
 Just like SONET circuits
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
13
Different approaches to COE
Technology selection depends on the problem you’re trying to solve
Ethernet-centric COE
MPLS-centric COE
Static PW
Eth PW
MPLS-TP
T-MPLS
MPLS LSP
PBB-TE
PBT
PW Eth
Eth
• Ethernet
• MPLS Pseudowire (PW)
• MPLS Label Switched Path (LSP)

Optimized for Multi-Service
Transport





New standards being developed
Augmenting MPLS standards
BMAC/BVID or C/SVID

Optimized for Ethernet Service
Transport



One OAM Layer
Less optimal for multi-service
transport
Standardized Now

Reuses existing Carrier Ethernet
standards, e.g., Service OAM
Ethernet-centric COE optimized for Ethernet Transport
MPLS-centric COE optimized for Multi-service Transport
May 18, 2011
Eth
• Ethernet
Three OAM Layers
Less optimal for Ethernet
service transport
Standards Under Development
Ethernet
VLAN Tag
Tag
Switching
14
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
Connection-Oriented Ethernet: A No-Nonsense Overview
COE Ecosystem
6 Attributes of Connection-Oriented Ethernet
Standardized Services
• MEF E-Line and E-Access
Deterministic QoS
•Lowest Packet Latency and Loss
•Bandwidth Resource Reservation
Ethernet OAM
• Link Fault Management
• EVC/OVC Fault Management
• Performance Measurements
Scalability
• Layer 2 Aggregation
• Statistical Multiplexing
Reliability / Availability
• 50ms EVC/OVC Protection
• UNI and ENNI Protection
Security
• No Bridging: MAC DoS attacks mitigated
• Completely Layer 2: No IP vulnerabilities
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
15
High Availability Ethernet for Cell Tower Backhaul
Multi-level Fault Tolerance with Fujitsu Packet Optical Networking
High Availability CTBH Service
Service
 Ethernet Service OAM via 802.1ag and Y.1731
 50ms Network Protection via G.8031
Network
NE Software
Management
Network Element
May 18, 2011
 In-Service System Software Upgrades
 Working / Protect EMS/NMS Instances
 Protected Power, Switch Fabric, etc.
Card
 Card protection (active/standby or active/active)
Port
 Port protection via Link Aggregation
 Link Aggregation across cards
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
16
COE vs. Ethernet over SONET for LTE Backhaul
Key differences summary
Attribute
COE on P-ONP
EoS on MSPP
High Security


Bounded QoS (latency, loss)


50 ms protection/restoration


Ethernet Service OAM

No
Guaranteed Bandwidth (CIR) through
resource reservation


(CIR in 1Mbps increments)

(CIR in SONET 50Mbps
increments)
(EIR in 1Mbps increments)
No
Service Multiplexing and Aggregation

No
Efficient Bandwidth Utilization

No
MEF-compliant Services
EPL, EVPL,
Access EPL, Access EVPL
EPL
Ethernet Topologies
P2P, P2MP (hub & spoke)
P2P
Oversubscribed Bandwidth (EIR)
May 18, 2011
Packet Optical Transport for LTE. © Copyright 2011 Fujitsu Network Communications
17