Download campus ggw

Site Requirements for GENI
Deployment and Operations
Steve Corbató (Internet2/U of Utah)
Wendy Huntoon (NLR/PSC)
Ron Hutchins (SLR/Georgia Tech)
for Facilities Architecture Working Group (FAWG)
NSF CISE GENI brief
02 November 2006
Background: Opportunities
• Leveraging…
– Recent campus investments in robust,
scalable data centers (CI driven in many
cases)
– Significant regional investments in facilitiesbased, optical networking capability (RONs)
• Improving dialog→collaboration among
network research faculty/teams, CIOs/
campus IT organizations, and potentially
VPRs
Regional Fiber Infrastructure – Summer 2006
Deployment/terminology
Site A
Internet
PEC
PAP
Urban Grid
Access Network
Site B
PEN
PCN
GGW
PEN
GGW
Sensor Net
PAP
Suburban Hybrid
Access Network
PEN
PAP
Source: Larry Peterson/GENI FAWG
PCN
PCN
GENI
Backbone
PAP: Programmable Access Point
PEN: Programmable Edge Node
PEC: Programmable Edge Cluster
PCN: Programmable Core Node
GGW: GENI Gateway
Node co-location models
•
Options (primarily for PEC and PENs)
1.
Embedded within campus network
•
2.
Located on campus DMZ
•
•
3.
•
Many campuses and regionals (RONs) operate EPs
Allows GENI node to maintain independent routing policy from host
campus
GENI node can still use the campus or regional net for transit
Most GENI end users on campuses will presumably fall under
#1(embed)
–
•
Outside firewall
Behind campus border routers
Exchange point/peering
•
•
•
Behind campus firewall/NIS (if employed)
Need to consider dual connected hosts (campus vs. GENI)
Potentially significant flexibility and other advantages with #3
(peering)
Tail circuit options
• Recommendation should be to exploit dedicated regional
R&E optical infrastructure wherever possible
– Commercial providers where RONs are unavailable
• Possible circuit types
– 10-Gbps λ’s (OC-192 SONET or 10G Ethernet framing)
– GigE channels
• MPLS tunnels through IP networks (commodity or NRN)
could be supported
– ‘Starter kit’ option?
• Campus termination
– GGW or campus border router
• Circuit management issues to be addressed
Backbone considerations
• Three options
– GENI backbone
– NRNs (Abilene→Internet2 Network; NLR)
• Greater configurability/measurability than commodity
• Potential peering with GENI backbone to enable campus
tunneling
– ‘Commodity’ Internet
• Regional connectivity
– Many campuses aggregate behind RONs and thus do
not control at least some fraction of their downstream
routing policy
– Visibility and coordination through the Quilt
Policy considerations - I
• Need to establish campus points and
communication channels early
–
–
–
–
–
Research lead (CS faculty)
Research operational contact
Administrative lead (e.g., CIO)
Campus engineering support (IT network lead?)
Campus operational support (NOC)
• Site support agreement
– Envisioned as MoU-style document among individual
campus, network researchers, and perhaps the GPO
– Will outline clearly roles and responsibilities for GENI
node hosting and research facilitation
– Template to be developed in this process
Policy considerations - II
• Coordination and procedures for incident handling
– Operational
• Need for/capability of local site support
– Security
•
•
•
•
Access to campus resources
Compliance (e.g., need for IRB approval?)
CALEA?
Objective: while seeking to minimize the impact of policy
considerations on GENI, all parties should maintain a
flexible interface in light of a surely evolving policy
landscape over time
• Close interaction with the GENI Operational Model
Outreach & coordination
• Campus
– CIOs/Network leads
• Internet2 Member Meeting – Community Leaders
Forum
– Network engineering & operations
• Internet2/ESnet Joint Techs Workshop
• Regional
– Quilt