Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Distributed firewall wikipedia , lookup
Internet protocol suite wikipedia , lookup
Zero-configuration networking wikipedia , lookup
Distributed operating system wikipedia , lookup
National Broadband Plan (United States) wikipedia , lookup
Recursive InterNetwork Architecture (RINA) wikipedia , lookup
SIP extensions for the IP Multimedia Subsystem wikipedia , lookup
Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 Document: Emulation and Simulation Tool for Design and Optimization of IMS based FMC Networks Date: 2007-12-05 Originator: Stefanie Braun, Stefan Wahl Muse confidential Agenda > Motivation of the Tool > Emulation and Simulation Tool > Usage and Output Results > Tool Appliances > Conclusions Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 2 Motivation > Questions on Optimization and Deployment Alternatives for an IMS System • What is the most efficient architecture of an IMS system? – • central any flavor between central/distributed distributed How does the efficiency vary with the deployment and service scenarios? size of the network – type of the services – the service usage and use case scenarios – • Which function grouping improves the efficiency? – • grouping of functions may simplify the interface less processing effort What is the best deployment strategy of (new) services on the architecture? Development of Simulation and Emulation Tool Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 3 Emulation and Simulation Tool > Emulation part used to • emulate functions and interfaces at application, call control and media transport layer – with different (selectable) abstraction levels whereby – each invocation of functions/interfaces adds a computational effort share – • > validate the interworking of functions and interfaces Simulator part • • applies the emulated functions and interfaces adds user agents and a traffic generator which – • • • produce a mixtures of determinable services at offered loads accumulates the computational efforts provides statistics on average/peak/hot spot computational efforts effort analysis on function, node and architecture level Objective: Performance comparison, validation and verification of IMS like— 4architectures and service scenarios. Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture composition and output > Graphical or XML based network architecture composition: • Provides means to configure easily the network size and the amount of network domains … • Network element (NE) are composed by … application, call control and media layer functions NE1 • Assignment of a number of User Agents (UA) to UA 1 the NE for generation and termination of service calls Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 5 NEm NE5 NE4 AS mobility logic S-CSCF … NE2 I-CSCF P-CSCF UA 2 NE3 MRFP … UA UA Traffic generator UA UA n Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture composition and output Graphical output of the simulator part NE2 peak or average computational effort S-CSCF … NE3 e.g. UA 2 setup video call to UAx NE1 NE2 NE3 NE4 … NE5 NEm per function or component Processing Effort per Component MRFP … UA release audio call UA UAx Traffic generator requests and releases independently network services and end2end calls Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 6 UA n setup teleVoting call Traffic Generator 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Effort .. P-CSCF NEm Effort AS … per network element 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 I-CSCF UA 1 Processing Effort of Network Elements (NE) mobility logic Effort NE1 AS PCS CF I-C SC F SCS CF M RF M ob P ilit yL og ic … Components per function or component over time Time Dependent Effort for S-CSCF 40 30 20 Effort 10 0 0.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 12.00 16.00 Time 16.00 20.00 20.00 24.00 Research of Processing Effort Values Input parameters for the emulation/simulation tool Extraction of SIP processing effort values from performed tests and literature* • • Parsing Consumes about 25% of total message processing time Parsing time grows linearly with message size String and Memory Manipulation Proprietary string operations and less processing stages reduce the impact on the total processing message time from 45% to 7% Proprietary memory operations reduce processing message time from 18 to 3 % Parsing + string handling + memory allocation: take 33 - 83 % of total message processing time in SIP proxies Inter NE function (e.g. CSCF) interfaces could replace SIP protocol Replacing SIP protocol with more efficient inter NE protocols (e.g. binary, ordered) improves the message processing time * Articles : „On SIP Performance“, Cortes, Ensor, Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 7Esteban, Bell Labs Technical Journal 2004 „Measurement of the SIP Parsing Performance in the SIP Express Router“, S. Wanke et al., Proc. EUNICE 2007 Emulation and Simulation Tool Examples for architecture optimization > Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions > Architecture and protocol investigations based on computational processing effort • • • > Scenario A: Call sessions with media processing Scenario B: TeleVoting with high signaling, AS and media load Scenario C: Trend analysis – increasing amount of AS services Comparison between centralized and distributed AS server concept Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 8 Emulation and Simulation Tool Current IMS Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions Standard IMS case visited for multi-domain with roaming A home A S I I-CSCF P Average = 6.2 CSCF hops P-CSCF UE UE P home B I I S visited B I S-CSCF P P UE Home-Home: 6 CSCF Instances UE Foreign-Foreign: 8 CSCF Instances MS-ER Solution Terminal / Peering Grouping IMS CSC-Functions in MS-ER PSI UE I Typical Example 3.5 43 % SP UE Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 9 Probability Histogram of combined CSC-Functions - 10 IMS domains - Calls equally distributed across all domains - 20% users in roaming Most advantageous CSCF combinations: SP-CSCF, PSI-CSCF, SI-CSCF, … Average CSCF hops: Reduction: Simulation Result: I-CSCF (S-P)-CSCF (P-S-I)-CSCF P-CSCF (S-I)-CSCF (P-S)-CSCF About 57 % of the simulated cases require 3 CSCF hops Emulation and Simulation Tool Examples for architecture optimization > Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions > Architecture and protocol investigations based on computational processing effort • • • > Scenario A: Call sessions with media processing Scenario B: TeleVoting with high signaling, AS and media load Scenario C: Trend analysis – increasing amount of AS services Comparison between centralized and distributed AS server concept Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 10 Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture investigations: Call sessions with media processing Architecture Comparison ... S ... S P ... MRF UE UE Test case: Typical IMS MS-ER intra MS-ER protocol P intra ... S AS MRF 3GPP SIP MS-ER AS S inter intra ... MS-ER protocol > 2 independent administrative domains > Clients are equally distributed across domains > No roaming clients > Clients establishes calls randomly > 80% standard calls > 20% calls use transcoding service > IMS SIP stack processing effort: 100% > Processing effort values for the inter and intra MS-ER protocol are varied 3GPP SIP ... P 3GPP SIP Home network AS ... IMS Scenario Description MRF UE Test case: MS-ER Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 11 intra ... P 3GPP SIP UE • Intra/Inter: 20% / 40% • Intra/Inter: 50% / 70% Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture investigations: Call sessions with media processing Test Results Total Average Effort Effort Estimation 120 Effort [%] _ 100 100% -28% 80 Total Peak Effort -17% -17% -4% 60 40 20 0 IMS 3GPP SIP Typical IMS implementation with SIP based interfaces Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 12 MS-ER intra= 20% inter= 40% of 3GPP SIP MS-ER intra= 50% inter= 70% of 3GPP SIP MS-ER implementation with optimized “inter” and “intra” interfaces Emulation and Simulation Tool Examples for architecture optimization > Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions > Architecture and protocol investigations based on computational processing effort • • • > Scenario A: Call sessions with media processing Scenario B: TeleVoting with high signaling, AS and media load Scenario C: Trend analysis – increasing amount of AS services Comparison between centralized and distributed AS server concept Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 13 Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture investigations: TeleVoting scenario Test Results Televoting Basic Calls Effort Estimation 120 ... 3GPP SIP AS ... S CT Vote App. ... P 100 100% -28% -28% 80 Total Peak Effort -17% -16% 60 40 20 S 0 IMS 3GPP SIP ... Home network Central App. Server UE Effort [%] _ Architecture Comparison Total Average Effort MRF MS-ER intra= 20% inter= 40% of 3GPP SIP MS-ER intra= 50% inter= 70% of 3GPP SIP Home network MS-ER 1 intra MS-ER protocol P intra .. S AS Vote result CT Vote App. intra .. MRF 3GPP SIP UE Co-located App. Server Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 14 Higher efficiency for co-locating call control, application layer and media transport functions to one MS-ER node • Improved efficiency also for heavy load generating TeleVoting services • Emulation and Simulation Tool Examples for architecture optimization > Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions > Architecture and protocol investigations based on computational processing effort • • • > Scenario A: Call sessions with media processing Scenario B: TeleVoting with high signaling, AS and media load Scenario C: Trend analysis – increasing amount of AS services Comparison between centralized and distributed AS server concept Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 15 Emulation and Simulation Tool Architecture investigations: Increasing amount of AS services Test Cases MS-ER 1 intra MS-ER protocol S AS 3GPP SIP S inter MS-ER protocol MS-ER + central AS Peak Effort Estimation MS-ER 2 120 100 intra .. P Effort [%] _ central AS Test Results P 3GPP SIP 3GPP SIP UE intra .. P S inter MS-ER protocol AS -17% 80 60 40 intra .. callFw= 100% the MS-ER + AS histogram bars are used as effort references MS-ER 2 S • P 3GPP SIP 3GPP SIP -11% -14% callFw= 0% callFw= 20% callFw= 40% callFw= 60% callFw= 80% co-located AS intra .. -8% 0 UE AS -5% 20 Home network MS-ER 1 0% MS-ER Home network UE UE Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 16 The efficiency of the MS-ER concept increases with the increasing number of services applying AS functions Emulation and Simulation Tool Examples for architecture optimization > Performance gains due to grouping of IMS functions > Architecture and protocol investigations based on computational processing effort • • • > Scenario A: Call sessions with media processing Scenario B: TeleVoting with high signaling, AS and media load Scenario C: Trend analysis – increasing amount of AS services Comparison between centralized and distributed AS server concept Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 17 Emulation and Simulation Tool Comparison co-located central AS MS-ER architecture with co-located AS MS-ER 1 intra .. S P intra .. AS AS inter MS-ER protocol MS-ER 2 intra .. S intra .. P 3GPP SIP Break Event Points for co-located AS MS-ER + central AS MS-ER + co-located AS Peak Computational Effort Estimation 3GPP SIP Home network MS-ER central AS is more efficient Effort [%] MS-ER architecture with central AS MS-ER 3 AS MS-ER co-located AS is more efficient 20 MS-ER inter MS-ER protocol MS-ER 1 S P intra .. AS AS inter MS-ER protocol MS-ER 2 S 3GPP SIP ≈ 16 P 3GPP SIP ≈ 4 MS-ER 20 24 28 32 36 40 Intra MS-ER protocol effort [%] Parameter: Inter MS-ER protocol effort = 40 % Home network To maintain the peak effort gain for an increasing number of MS-ER nodes, the co-located AS MS-ER architecture requires a more performing intra MS-ER communication. Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 18 Emulation and Simulation Tool Further use cases > Resource Manager • • > Network planning • • > hardware, service-, signaling-, and media software components algorithm development optimization of existing network (identification of hot spots) extension of the network Distributed service execution • evaluation of more advanced strategies Cross domain session mobility L3 Mobility Domain 1 IMS Core Domain 2 AS AS Session Signaling Media Processing Stream Switching IP Transport Service logic for sea mless session mobility control Service logic for joint mobility detection Distributed Distributed AS AS and and MRF MRF enable enable cross cross domain domain seamless seamless session session mobility mobility Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 19 Foreign N etwork AS AS Emulation and Simulation Tool Conclusion > Emulation features allow to • • • > integrate functions with required abstraction levels reduce the communication protocols to the relevant functions compare service introduction strategies into an IMS architecture Computational effort evaluation to • • • • • compare various variants of IMS network architectures identify processing effort values and hot spots at different levels: domains, network node and functions estimate performance dependencies and critical optimization parameters of a network architecture derive the influence of protocol and functional improvements check the influence of a resource management algorithm Broadband Europe 2007 We3A.4 — 20 Questions ? Muse confidential