* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download NCA Speech - Larry Roberts
Survey
Document related concepts
Asynchronous Transfer Mode wikipedia , lookup
Net neutrality law wikipedia , lookup
Wake-on-LAN wikipedia , lookup
Computer network wikipedia , lookup
Airborne Networking wikipedia , lookup
Network tap wikipedia , lookup
Internet protocol suite wikipedia , lookup
Distributed firewall wikipedia , lookup
TCP congestion control wikipedia , lookup
Piggybacking (Internet access) wikipedia , lookup
Recursive InterNetwork Architecture (RINA) wikipedia , lookup
Cracking of wireless networks wikipedia , lookup
List of wireless community networks by region wikipedia , lookup
Quality of service wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Internet Creation and Future Dr. Lawrence Roberts CEO, Founder, Anagran 1 Packet Switching History Redundancy Routing 0.85716 Economics 0.7143 Rand Report IEEE paper Paul Baran Rand ARPANET Program IFIP paper ACM paper Donald Davies NPL 0.57144 Topology Queuing 0.42858 Len Kleinrock MIT RLE Report 0.28572 Protocol Book “Communication Nets” Roberts & Marill MIT Davies & Larry Roberts Scantlebury ARPA NPL J.C.R. Licklider - Intergalactic Network One Node TX-2-SDC Experiment 0.14286 2 Node Exp FJCC Paper INTERNET IEEE papers ACM paper 3 nodes 13 SJCC Paper 20 38 0 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 2 Packet Switching – 1969 Cost Crossover 60 65 70 75 80 From: “Data by the Packet,” IEEE Spectrum, Lawrence Roberts, Vol. 11, No. 2, February 1974, pp.3 46-51. Original Internet Design It was designed for Data File Transfer and Email main activities Constrained by high cost of memory – – – – – – – Only Packet Destination Examined No Source Checks No QoS No Security Best Effort Only Voice Considered Video not feasible ARPANET 1971 Not much change since then 4 The Beginning of the Internet ARPANET became the Internet • 1965 – MIT- 2 Computer Experiment • Roberts designs packet structure • Len Kleinrock – queuing theory • 1967 - Roberts moved to ARPA • Designs ARPANET • 1968 – RFP for Packet Switch - BBN • 1969 – Student team designs protocol • Crocker, Cerf, others NCP • 1969 – First 4 nodes installed: • UCLA, SRI, UCSB, U. Utah • 1971 – ICCC Show – Proved to world • Network 21 nodes & productive Roberts at MIT • Email created Main traffic soon • 1972 – Network spawned sub-networks, Satellite network to UK added Computer • Aloha packet radio added – pre WiFi, Ethernet developed & connected • Bob Kahn joins me at ARPA – takes on network program • 1973 – Roberts leaves – Starts Telenet, first commercial packet carrier in world • 1974 – TCP design paper published by Kahn & Cerf • 1975 – Vint Cerf joins ARPA – continues work on new protocol TCP/IP • 1983 – TCP/IP installed on ARPANET & required for DoD • 1993 – Internet opened to commercial use 5 Internet Early History “Internet” 100,000 Name first used- RFC 675 Roberts term at ARPA Kahn term at ARPA Cerf term at ARPA Hosts or Traffic in bps/10 10,000 SATNET - Satellite to UK Aloha-Packet Radio PacketRadioNET Spans US DNS 1,000 TCP/IP Design 100 Ethernet EMAIL FTP NCP TCP/IP Hosts Traffic 10 ICCC Demo X.25 – Virtual Circuit standard 1 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 6 ARPANET Logical Structure 7 Internet Growth ARPANET July 1977 8 NAE Draper Award Laureates Feb. 20th, 2001 for creating the Internet Roberts Kahn Kleinrock Cerf 9 Major Internet Contributions 1959-1964 - Kleinrock develops packet network theory proving that message segments (packets) could be safely queued with modest buffers at network nodes – later proves theory by measurement 1965 – Roberts tests a two node packet network and proves telephone network inadequate for data, packet network needed 1967-1973 Roberts at ARPA designs ARPANET, contracts parts out (routers, transmission lines, protocol, application software), growing network to 38 nodes and 50 computers 1973-1985 Kahn at ARPA, manages ARPANET, converting to TCP/IP, and standardizing DoD (also world) on TCP/IP 1975-1983 Cerf at ARPA designs TCP/IP and helps grow network 1990-1993 Berners-Lee designs hypertext browser (WWW) 10 Internet Traffic: Growth = 1 Trillion in 39 years Internet Traffic Grow th 1.E+05 1.E+04 World Total Gbps Doubling/year Commercial 1.E+03 1.E+02 1.E+01 Gbps/second NSFNET 1.E+00 WWW 1.E-01 1.E-02 1.E-03 1.E-04 ARPANET 1.E-05 TCP/IP 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 11 TCP - Network Stability Has Allowed the Network to Scale TCP Network TCP and Network Equipment keep a balance This balance keeps the network stable – TCP speeds up until a packet lost, then slows down – Network drops packets if overloaded Result: – – – – TCP grows to fill network Network then loses random packets All traffic impacted by packet losses, random rate changes However, system is basically stable 12 A New Alternative - Flow Management in the Network TCP or the Network need to Change Network Equipment has always dropped random packets – IPTV cannot be controlled – it is just banged around Flow Management provides a new control alternative – Control the rate of each TCP flow individually – Measure the rate of each group of flows including IPTV – Smoothly adjust the TCP rates to fill the available capacity Replacing random drops with rate control: – Network Stability is maintained – All traffic moves smoothly without random loss – Video flows cleanly with no loss or delay jitter 13 Changing Use of Internet Major changes in Network Use Voice Video Totally moving to packets – Low loss, low delay required Totally moving to packets – Low loss, low delay jitter required Emergency Services Security No Preference Priority Cyberwar is now a real threat TCP unfairness – multiple flows (P2P, Clouds, …) – Congests network – 5% of users take 80% of capacity 14 Changing Structure of Internet Was: Low Speed Edge, High speed Core – No way to Overload the Core – Unlimited use was OK EDGE CORE EDGE Now: Broadband Edge, Core Limited Economically – Edge Speed is for Burst Speed, not Continuous use – Unlimited use not a reasonable option – Edge Traffic must be controlled EDGE CORE EDGE 15 Internet Traffic Grown 1012 since 1970 World Internet Traffic 100000 P2P Traffic 10000 PetaBytes per month 1000 100 10 1 0.1 WWW 0.01 0.001 0.0001 0.00001 Normal Traffic 0.000001 0.0000001 TCP 0.00000001 0.000000001 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 In 1999 P2P applications discovered using multiple flows could give them more capacity and their traffic moved up to 70% of the network capacity 2010 16 Where will the Internet be in the next decade % World Population On-Line Total Traffic PB/month Traffic per User GB/month GB/mo/user Developed areas GB/mo/user Less Dev. areas 2009 30% 14,600 6 9 0.3 2019 99% 300,000 40 250 3 People in less developed areas will have more capacity than is available in developed areas today! Users in developed areas could see 5 -10 hours of video per day (HD or SD) Requires a 60 times increase in capacity (Moore’s Law increase) 17 Network Change Required Fairness – Multi-flow applications (P2P) overload access networks Network Security – Need User Authentication and Source Checking Emergency Services – Need Secure Preference Priorities Cost & Power – Growth constrained to Moore’s law & developed areas Quality & Speed – Video & Voice require lower jitter and loss, consistent speed 18 – TCP stalls slow interactive applications like the web Technology Improvement – Flow Management Historically, congestion managed by queues and discards – Creates delay, jitter, and random losses – TCP flow rates vary widely, often stall – UDP can overload, if so all flows hurt Alternatively, flows can be rate controlled to fill link – – – – Keep table of all flows, measure output, assign rates to each flow Rate control TCP flows to avoid congestion but maintain utilization Limit total fixed rate flow utilization by rejecting excessive requests Assign rate priorities to flows to insure fairness and quality Flow Management requires less power, size, & cost – There are 14 times as many packets as flows – Flows have predictable rate and user significance 19 Flow Management Architecture Flow State Memory Assign Rate, QoS, Output Port, & Class Input Switch Processors Output Discard Rate of Each Flow Controlled at Input Traffic measured on both the output port and in up to 4000 Classes Flows measured and policed at input Unique TCP rate control – Fair and precise rate/flow Rates controlled based on utilization of both output port and class All traffic controlled to fill output at 90%+ No output queue – Minimal delay Voice and video protected to insure quality 20 Flow Rates Control with Intelligent Flow Delivery (IFD) Discard 1 packet Fair Rate Instead of random discards in an output queue: Anagran controls each flows rate at the input IFD does not ever discard if the flow stays below the Fair Rate If the flow rate exceeds a threshold, one packet is discarded Then the rate is watched until the next cycle and repeats This assures the flow averages the Fair Rate The flow then has low rate variance (s=.33) and does not stall 21 IFD Eliminates TCP Stalls, Equalizes Rates Normal Network With Flow Management Rates often stall Peak utilization high Response time is slow Jumble hurts Video & Voice No stalled flows Less peak utilization 3 times faster response times Video and Voice protected 22 Above graphs are actual data captures Impact of Flow Management at Network Edge Web access three times faster TCP stalls eliminated – all requests complete Voice quality protected – no packet loss, low delay Video quality protected – no freeze frame, no artifact Critical apps can be assigned rate priority When traffic exceeds peak trunk capacity: – Eliminates the many impacts of congestion – Smooth slowdown of less critical traffic – Voice and video quality maintained 23 Fairness - In the beginning A flow was a file transfer, or a voice call The voice network had 1 flow per user – All flows were equal (except for 911) – Early networking was mainly terminal to computer – Again we had 1 flow (each way) per user – No long term analysis was done on fairness It was obvious that under congestion: Users are equal thus Equal Capacity per Flow was the default design 24 Fairness - Where is the Internet now? The Internet is still equal capacity per flow under congestion Computers, not users, now generate flows today – Any process can use any number of flows – P2P takes advantage of this using 10-1000 flows P2P FTP Congestion typically occurs at the Internet edge – – – – Here, many users share a common capacity pool TCP generally expands until congestion occurs This forces equal capacity per flow Then the number of flows determines each users capacity The result is therefore unfair to users who paid the same 25 1,000 Users 10 Mbps peak rate Typical Home Network Access 100 Kbps Average / User 100 Mbps INTERNET Internet Service Providers provision for average use Average use today is about 100 Kbps per subscriber Without P2P all users would usually get the peak TCP rate With >0.5% P2P users, average users see much lower rates 26 Internet Traffic Recently Since 2004, total traffic has increased 60% per year – P2P has increased 70% per year – Consuming most of the capacity growth – Normal traffic has only increased 45% per year –Significantly slowdown from past Multi-Flow traffic (mainly P2P) slows other traffic so users can’t do as much This may account for the normal traffic growth being slow World Internet Traffic Impact of Multi-Flow Traffic 12,000 10,000 PB/month 8,000 6,000 Multi-Flow Traffic 4,000 2,000 Normal Traffic 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 27 Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) Fails to Stop P2P DPI currently main defense – but recently has problems with encrypted P2P – Studies show it detects < 75% of P2P – reducing the P2P users from 5% to 1.3% – As P2P adds encryption, DPI detection misses 25% already and encryption growing – Remainder of P2P simply adds more flows, again filling capacity to congestion Upstream Capacity Usage Asym etric DSL ISP 25 Mbps 20 15 Wasted 10 P2P Users Ave. Users 5 0 No Regulation DPI Filtering Equalization Result – Even ½ % P2P still overload the upstream channel – This slows the Average Users acknowledgements which limits their downstream usage User Equalization based on flow rate management solves problem 28 A New Fairness Rule Inequity in TCP/IP – Currently equal capacity per flow – P2P has taken advantage of this, using 10-1000 flows – This gives the 5% P2P users 80-95% of the capacity – P2P does not know when to stop until it sees congestion Instead we should give equal capacity for equal pay – This is simply a revised equality rule – similar users get equal capacity – This tracks with what we pay – If network assures all similar users get equal service, file sharing will find the best equitable method – perhaps slack time and local hosts This is a major worldwide problem – P2P is not bad, it can be quite effective – But, without revised fairness, multi-flow applications can take capacity away from other users, dramatically slowing their network use 29 – It then becomes an arms race – who can use the most flows P2P Control with Flow Management Normal & P2P Traffic - Before & After Anagran Control Traffic % Measured from a University Wireless Area 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 5:48 P2P Normal Control Off 5:52 5:57 Control On 6:01 6:05 Time (AM) 6:09 6:13 6:17 These are actual measurements showing the effect of controlling P2P traffic as a class In this case, all P2P was limited to a fixed capacity, then equalized for fairness P2P was reduced from 67% to 1.6% Normal traffic then increased by 4:1 30 Why is it Important to Change Fairness Rule? P2P is attractive and growing rapidly It cannot determine its fair share itself The network must provide the fair boundary Without fairness, normal users will slow down and stall Multi-flow applications will be misled on economics – – – – Today most P2P users believe their peak capacity is theirs They do not realize they may be slowing down other users The economics of file transfer are thus badly misjudged This leads to globally un-economic product decisions User equality will lead to economic use of communications 31 Network Security Today the network is open and unchecked All security is based on “flawless” computer systems This needs to change - the network must help Finding Bots is best done watching network traffic Knowing who is trying to connect can help stop penetration Allocating high priority capacity requires authentication – Emergency services, critical services, paid services High value services need authentication, not passwords – On-line banking, credit transactions, etc. 32 Authentication Security Program New DARPA project will allow users to be authenticated The network can insure source IP address is not faked The network can assign user based priorities – Emergency services needs priority – Corporations have priority applications The recipient can know who is trying to connect – Filter out request from un-authenticated sources – Control application access to specific users Today security is based on fixing all computer holes Network assistance greatly reduces the threat 33 DARPA Secure Authentication Program Each Flow Start: Each Flow Start: SH SH = Secure Hash (Identifies checked by NC using Key user when hashed with Key) SH sent to NC NC Sender NC NC Each Flow Start: User can be checked with AAA using SH Receiver NC First Packet: NC checks user via SH with AAA, get Key & priority User Log-in: NC identifies self to AAA, gets SH & Key AAA Server NC=Network Controller • Network finds users priority & QoS info from AAA server • Receiver can check user ID if allowed & reject flow if desired • Intermediate NC’s can also check users priority & QoS • Result: Users ID securely controls network access & priority 34 The New Network Edge – Flow Management Flow Management at the ISP edge can: – – – – – Insure fairness – equal capacity for equal pay Eliminate overload problems (TCP stalls and video artifact) Insure voice works over wireless & WiFi Add authentication security to network Support rate controlled service levels per subscriber All these benefits at much lower cost & power vs. DP 40 Gbps capacity in 1 RU with Anagran 35 Summary Today’s IP Networks need improvement Fairness is poor – 5% of users take 80% of capacity – The cause is the old rule of equal capacity per flow – This needs to change to equal capacity for equal pay Response time and QoS suffer from random discards – Web access suffers from unequal flow rates, TCP stalls – Video suffers from packet loss and TCP stalls – Voice suffers from packet loss and excessive delay Security could be improved if network did authentication – Avoid unknown users penetrating computers – Permit priority for emergency workers, critical apps Flow Management allows these improvements at lower36cost