* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download QoS Support in 802.11 Wireless LANs
Net neutrality law wikipedia , lookup
Deep packet inspection wikipedia , lookup
Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet wikipedia , lookup
Internet protocol suite wikipedia , lookup
Asynchronous Transfer Mode wikipedia , lookup
IEEE 802.1aq wikipedia , lookup
Multiprotocol Label Switching wikipedia , lookup
Wake-on-LAN wikipedia , lookup
Distributed firewall wikipedia , lookup
Zero-configuration networking wikipedia , lookup
Piggybacking (Internet access) wikipedia , lookup
Cracking of wireless networks wikipedia , lookup
Network tap wikipedia , lookup
Computer network wikipedia , lookup
Recursive InterNetwork Architecture (RINA) wikipedia , lookup
Peer-to-peer wikipedia , lookup
CHEETAH: Circuit-switched High-speed End-to-End Transport ArcHitecture • Concept/analysis • Opticomm 2003 paper • CHEETAH: a scalable solution for wide usage • Focus: File transfers • Practical implementation • NSF EIN project • Focussed on eScience project - Supernova • NSF ANIR hardware signaling project • NSF ITR project • Commerical applications: financial and retail institutions transfer large files 1 CHEETAH concept • What is it? – Dynamic end-to-end circuits – Circuit: Ethernet –EoS – Ethernet – Leverages • Ethernet – King of LANs • SONET – King of MANs • Why this solution? – Ethernet and SONET already deployed – Add necessary upgrades to switches and software to end hosts to enable the use of these circuits 5/25/2017 2 Add-on solution to Internet NIC: Network Interface Card Internet - Packet Switched (IP routers interconnecting various networks) Router I Ethernet Second NICs hosts Primary NICs ......... Leased circuit I Ethernet switch/ IP router T1/T3/Ethernet Leased circuit II Set 1 MSPP Enterprise/MDU building 1 Optical circuit-switched networks consisting of SONET/SDH WDM Add/Drop Multiplexers (ADMs), crossconnects Ethernet hosts Ethernet switch/ IP router T1/T3/Ethernet Packet-switched networks (MPLS, Frame Relay, ATM, etc.) Set 3 Different types of access networks (PDH, CATV, FTTH, etc.) Ethernet over SONET (EoS) circuit MSPP Enterprise/MDU building 2 5/25/2017 Set 2 Enterprise/MDU building Enterprises, homes, etc. 3 Leverage presence of Internet path 1. Run circuit-switched network in call blocking mode – – If call is blocked, fall back to Internet path Engineer network for high utilization at the cost of blocking 2. File transfers: Use Internet path for reverse direction error control and flow control messages and some retransmissions 3. Same approach for other applications 5/25/2017 4 What extra “stuff” is needed to realize this CHEETAH concept? • At circuit switches: – Ability for dynamic fast provisioning of circuits • At end hosts: – – – – 5/25/2017 Applications upgrade to use circuits A transport protocol Signaling protocol client end Routing decision module – choose between two network choices available to privileged CHEETAH end hosts 5 Provisioning research community • Example: Canarie’s UCLP – Created network to map Ethernet – EoS – Ethernet “lightpahts” with equipment like 15454s – 15454s do not implement routing/signaling/LMP protocols • For provisioning lightpaths – Created external databases to manage routing information: to reach a destination host, what is the set of switches to traverse? – Create external databases to manage inventory information which 454 has what cards? – Inter-domain issues (multiple carriers) – policy manager – Then set up circuit with TL1 commands • Another example: Elematics – software company that created NMSs for routing, signaling functionality – key: not integrated with network elements 5/25/2017 6 Fine solution • if we just want to build small-scale networks • Our goal: – large-scale connection-oriented network – why? reduce costs • the very concept of eScience is possible only because of the cheap wide-scale Internet • the very scientists we strive to serve today will only be served well if we create large-scale connection-oriented networks capable of providing rate-guaranteed connectivity! • Value of the network grows exponentially with number of scientists connected • Example: the huge-scale 64kbps telephone network would not have been possible without signaling integrated into switches 5/25/2017 7 Problems with provisioning with NMS’s • Scalability • My pet peeve: – Call setup delays of in the order of seconds too high • Using network management systems outside the network elements to manage – routing data – inventory data takes significant effort – Operations costs • Other problems – Interoperability of different vendors’ equipment – Inter-carrier issues 5/25/2017 8 Scalability “charges” • Levied against Optical/TDM networks: – “Widely recognized that the current GLIF optical/TDM networking model does not scale beyond a limited number of sites” Internet 2 talk dated 10/15/2003 – “While such circuit-switched networks may not necessarily be suitable for deployment of the scale of the Internet, they are still viable candidates for specialized deployments for connecting a small number of DOE large-scale science nodes” Report of DOE Workshop on Ultra High-Speed Transport Protocols and Dynamic Provisioning for Large-Scale Science Applications, April 10-11, 2003, Argonne, IL, dated Oct. 27, 2003. GLIF: Global Lambda Integration Facility 5/25/2017 9 Inventory problem • TL1 command to set up a crossconnect through a 15454 • Command: – ENT-CRS <STS_PATH>:[<TID>]:<FROM>,<TO>:<CTAG>::[<CCT>][::]; • Example: – ENT-CRS-STS1:BODEGA:STS-5-1,STS-12-5:116::2WAY; • TID: unique name for the system • From and To: Access Identifiers – to identify timeslots on interfaces – STS-1 on the card in Slot 5 – STS-5 on the card in Slot 12 • CTAG: unique identifier used to match response with request • CCT: Crossconnection type: e.g., 1WAY or 2WAY 5/25/2017 10 My take on networks • Network switches should be equipped with all the functionality needed for plug-and-play operation – just as seamless as booting up a PC these days with a network card because of DHCP • DHCP not only gets IP address • It discovers a gateway address too • This implies everything - both back-stage and front-stage • Amazingly: most of the above achieved with connectionless packet switches – back-stage: • address acquisitions • automatic neighbor discovery (manages its own inventory) • automatic topology discovery through routing protocol • routing table computation – front-stage: • packets show up – forward them as per routing table – Ethernet switches – Even IP routers? 5/25/2017 11 To create a connection-oriented (CO) network in the same plug-and-play vein • Additional back-stage functions: – handle call setup requests/releases: signaling protocol – perform authorization and authentication before call setup • encryption of data on user-plane irrelevant? – gather call-level data for billing • CO networks offer us the opportunity to build capitalistic networks in addition to today’s CL socialistic Internet • Front-stage – circuit-switched networks • data shows on interfaces – switch based on “position” – space, time, wavelength – CO PS networks • switch packets based on header data but switch according to resource allocation for CO 5/25/2017 12 Network management • NM functions – – – – – Fault management Performance monitoring Accounting management Security management Configuration management • overall planning of topology • All these are essential to the running of a network but these are back-office operations! – Hence fine to offload these to NMSs. – But leave front-office operations at the NEs. 5/25/2017 13 Signaling approach to connection setup: distributed • Call setup request carries destination IP address D + bandwidth B + incoming timeslot/l – Lookup routing data table (same function as in an IP router) • find outgoing interface O to reach destination D – Resource allocation • Allocate bandwidth B on interface O • Select outgoing timeslot/l – Program switch fabric • Map incoming timeslot/l to outgoing timeslot/l • Send call setup request to neighbor connected by interface O 5/25/2017 14 Industry answer to support distributed signaling approach • IETF GMPLS – Routing – OSPF-TE • Routing built into network switches – Signaling – RSVP-TE – Link Management Protocol (LMP) • Inventory data stored in network switches • Auto-discovery of neighbors • OIF’s UNI-C, UNI-N, NNI – Addresses carriers’ inter-domain issues 5/25/2017 15 Actually implemented! • Not just idle specifications • Implemented by many switch vendors • And interoperability-tested by an OIFsponsored effort led by Univ. of New Hampshire – Demo’ed at OFC2003 – Demo’ed at Isocore in March 2004 – Another demo planned for Supercomm – June 2004 5/25/2017 16 From keynote at Opticomm, Dallas, Oct. 03 • Rajiv Ramaswami, CTO , Optical Systems Group, Cisco, Keynote • UCP (Unified Control Plane) Benefits – Superfast Provisioning • Enables E2E circuit setup without SP intervention while reducing provisioning times • Enables future bandwidth on demand applications as policy & billing standards mature – Enhanced Scalability • Network level: Support for thousands of nodes, links and circuits per inter-connected network • Lightweight EMS: Move from EMS based (centralized) provisioning to node level (distributed) provisioning using signaling 5/25/2017 17 UCP Benefits contd. • Interoperable vendor implementations – Reduces EMS/NMS integration / interoperability issues – UCP/GMPLS – A Driver for Evolution • Build Network as a Database – Simplify provisioning by driving intelligence (topology, circuit inventory and link characteristics) into the NEs with updates to EMS (CTC/CTM) – Enable migration from an NMS based network database to NEs based network database, retrievable on demand by NMS • Deliver Advanced Benefits – New services & features (Ethernet,OVPN & Storage) not possible today… – Reduce costs, increase revenues, address scale of growing networks 5/25/2017 – Enable multi – network/vendor/SP interoperability 18 Our research community • It was hard to wait for network equipment manufacturers to integrate these routing/signaling/LMP into their NEs • It was much easier for us to go off on our own and build NMS software external to switches • But now, we are there. The equipment vendors do have such NEs. Let’s use them. 5/25/2017 19 Back to CHEETAH: Signaling protocol • Since in CHEETAH we propose holding circuits only for duration of file transfer – A 10MB file takes 800ms over a 100Mbps circuit – Reduce end-to-end call setup delay to r.t. propagation delay – We need fast signaling engines + high call handling capacity at MSPPs/switches • Solution: Hardware implementation – NSF funded project: We have completed implementing an RSVP-TE subset on an FPGA • Can handle 400,000 calls/sec • Each call setup takes 4s – Research work – hard for a university to actually build an operational switch. We are building a prototype SONET switch with a 40Gbps fabric and our signaling FPGA 5/25/2017 20 Other aspects of CHEETAH • Transport protocol for file transfers on combination circuit + TCP/IP path – Fixed-Rate Transport Protocol (FRTP) on circuit + TCP on IP path • Routing decision module – Expected delays – Utilization consideration 5/25/2017 21 Crossover file sizes from delay perspective When rc = 100Mbps and Tprop = 0.1ms Me asure of loading on ckt. sw. network Pb = 0.01 Pb = 0.1 Pb = 0.3 T CP/IP path rc = 1Gbps, Tprop = 0.1ms 5/25/2017 Ploss = 0.0001 Ploss = 0.001 Ploss = 0.01 22MB 9MB 1.2MB 24MB 10MB 1.4MB 30MB 12MB 1.8MB 22 Plot of utilization u with rc= 100Mbps, k=20 5/25/2017 Pb=0.3 Pb=0.01 23 CHEETAH implementation: NSF EIN project • Buy circuit switches that come close to “plug-and-play” – distributed signaling solution – distributed routing solution – auto-discovery of neighbors • Currently, only SONET switches integrated with GMPLS capability – RSVP-TE – OSPF-TE – LMP 5/25/2017 24 A lab demo with one circuit switch emulating a SONET network Routing decision SFTP Signaling client PC NIC I TCP FRTP Eth. Sw. NIC II PC Routing decision NIC I Sig SFTP Signaling client TCP NIC II FRTP Ethernet Ctrl XC OC3 • Implement FRTP, signaling client, routing decision module at end hosts (Linux) 5/25/2017 25 Wide-area deployment • Deploy SONET switches in Raleigh and Atlanta – Our scientist co-PIs are in NCSU and ORNL – Networking co-PIs in ORNL already have OC192 link from ORNL to Atlanta • Purchase lambda from NLR (?) for research tests – terminate on SONET OC48 cards • Test end host CHEETAH software for file transfers from ORNL Cray to NCSU (TB files created by TSI scientists) • Find other scientists who connect to ORNL in NC/DC area to test sharing of OC48 RaleighAtlanta link – to test signaling 5/25/2017 26 Revision to CHEETAH thinking • Inspite of wide-spread deployed SONET network, upgrade of these switches with GMPLS software is eons away! • Now, we have the possibility of MPLS LSPs through Abilene • And dedicated circuits using VLANs through Ethernet switches • Hence, we should design a .... 5/25/2017 27 Connection-oriented internet • To complement today’s Connectionless Internet • What’s a CO internet? – an internetwork of various CO networks – what’s CO: a network that can be asked for bandwidth before data flows – VLANs, MPLS, SONET, lambdas – User-plane interworking – with Ethernet – Control-plane interworking – each CO network could have its own signaling/routing/LMP solution 5/25/2017 28 Conclusions • Let’s build such a connection-oriented internet! 5/25/2017 29