Carrier Ethernet Transport in Metro and Core Network T7 - Gruber - Autenrieth

1 Nokia Siemens Networks
Carrier Ethernet Transport

in Metro and Core Networks
Tutorial by
Claus G. Gruber and Achim Autenrieth
Nokia Siemens Networks
13th International Telecommunications Network Strategy and Planning
Symposium - Convergence in Progress Networks 2008
September 28 October 2, 2008
Budapest, Hungary
Claus G. Gruber, Achim Autenrieth, {claus.gruber,achim.autenrieth}@nsn.com 2 Nokia Siemens Networks 2008/09/29
Networks 2008 - Carrier Ethernet Transport in Metro and Core Networks
About Us
Dr.-Ing. Claus G. Gruber
Claus Gruber is senior consultant and project manager at Nokia Siemens Networks, Munich,
Germany. Division: Research Technology and Platforms, Network Technology, Network Control and
Transport (RTP NT NCT). His main area of research focuses on next generation packet network
architectures including Carrier Grade Ethernet and IP/MPLS over WDM. He is mainly interested in
networking concepts, total cost of ownership, multilayer traffic engineering and resilience, control
plane, and network management and configuration of ubiquitous communication technologies.
Prior to his work at Nokia Siemens Networks he was a member of the research and teaching staff at
Technische Universitt Mnchen (TUM), Germany, where he received his Dr.-Ing. and Dipl.-Ing.
degree in electrical engineering and information technology.
Claus published about 30 articles in journals and conference proceedings and submitted about 20
invention reports in the area of routing, resilience, network planning, optimization and management
that are currently under review at EU and US patent offices.
Dr.-Ing. Achim Autenrieth
Achim Autenrieth is Head of IP Transport R&D Management Innovation (IPT RD Innovation) at Nokia
Siemens Networks, Munich, Germany. Focus areas of his work are multilayer transport networks
(OTN/DWDM, SDH/SONET, Ethernet/MPLS-TP, IP/MPLS), control plane protocols (ASON/GMPLS),
network architecture evaluation, multilayer resilience and multilayer network design, routing and
grooming.
Prior to his current responsibility he was working as project manager and senior research scientist in
internal innovation projects and funded research projects at Siemens AG, Corporate Technology and
Siemens AG, Fixed Networks.
Achim studied Electrical Engineering and Information Technology at the Technische Universitt
Mnchen (TUM) and received his Dipl.-Ing. and Dr.-Ing. degree in 1996 and 2003, respectively. From
1996 to 2003 he was member of the research and teaching staff at the Institute of Communication
Networks at TUM.
General Information
Schedule
9:00 10:30 Tutorial Part I
10:30 11:00 Coffee Break
11:00 12:30 Tutorial Part II
To ensure proper knowledge transfer to the audience, some basic behavior
rules should be strictly obeyed during the tutorial
Q&A
After each main section
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Operator Requirements for Transport Networks
3. Ethernet Basics
4. Carrier Ethernet Evolution
5. Carrier Ethernet Transport Technologies
6. Carrier Ethernet Transport Network Architecture & Solutions
7. Outlook Towards Future Internet Architectures
8. Conclusion
Networks get run over by a huge traffic growth -
Technology innovation is a must on the way forward
The fastest and most cost
efficient access technologies
are not sufficient on their own
Huge traffic volumes have to
be transported throughout
the network
Data super highways and an
optimized end-to-end
transport are needed to
connect 5bn people
5 billion people
connected
Challenges and Opportunities
100x traffic
growth
User service
experience
Add value
beyond bit-pipe
Reinventing the
connected world
Environmental
Performance
Internet for
the next billion
5 Bn people
connected
Tomorrow's communication world
5 Bn People
connected
Main growth in mobile
subscriptions from new
growth markets
Majority can be always
online via mobile
high-speed Internet
access technologies
Wireline Broadband will
facilitate usage of
applications like TV
and/or video streaming.
4 Bn mobile
users
2 Bn fixed
broadband users
Source: Nokia Siemens Networks estimations based external forecasts (Ovum, Strategy Analytics)
xDSL
FTTx
cable
2015 2005 2010
0.2 Bn
0.4 Bn
0.6 Bn
0.8 Bn
fixed
WiMAX
* Broadband subscriptions are typically shared by 2-3 people
5 Bn
4 Bn
3 Bn
2 Bn
2 Bn
2015 2005 2010
Voice and
high-speed
Internet enabled
(EDGE, HSPA, ... ,
LTE, WiMAX)
Voice and
low-speed Internet enabled
Mobile Users Worldwide
Fixed Broadband Subscriptions* Worldwide
Broadband services drive transport network
evolution
Cost of data transport
must go down
Optical Metro
Rural connectivity
Photonic core
Operators invest
into the whole network
Enable next generation of
connectivity
Transport investment
worldwide
Consumers
Quality of life
for citizens
Business
Growth and
efficiency
Government
Productivity
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

S
c
o
r
e
c
a
r
d
Higher network efficiency
One technology
Leased Line OPEX
Profitable self built
Revenues
Traffic
Voice
Dominant
Data
Dominant
2007 2011
CAGR
7,7%
Broadband enabled network
In the year 2012, there will be more than
500 million Broadband subscribers worldwide
Most subscribers will use a DSL connection
Fiber access subscription is expected to grow in
line with IPTV subscription
2006
2008
2010
2012
100
200
300
400
500
600
Million
subscriptions
(world)
Fiber to the building/home
subscription
DSL Subscriptions
IPTV/VoD Subscriptions
Cablemodem Subscriptions
Total Broadband Subscriptions
Demand for fixed broadband will increase
over the next years
Source: internal research based on several analyst forecasts
Total Broadband Access Market World
[bn ]
1,1
0,9 0,9
0,8
2,9
2,8
2,9
3
3,1
1,0 1,5
1,8
2,1
2,3
1
5,0
5,3
6,2
5,9
5,6
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
5.0%
6.4%
DSL is the dominant broadband market and will
remain
Driven by high bandwidth demand, fiber based
access revenue will double in the next 10 years
Narrowband revenue will decrease
Source: internal research based on several analyst forecasts
total
Fiber access
DSLAM
Narrowband
5 billion people
connected
100x traffic growth within 5 years means
a growing need for scalable networks
Growing #
of customers
Business
New services at
lower cost
Growing #
of services
Consumer
Consumer
Multimedia services drive bandwidth requirements
Triple Play
services require
bandwidth from
25 to 100 Mbit/s
per user!
Source: Internet research, 2006
IPTV: 20-30 Mbps
(multiroom HDTV, VoD)
Internet: 5-10 Mbps
VoIP: 0.1 Mbps
Video and TV services as main driver
Video Services will drive
exponential growth in residential
wireline traffic, ... with most growth
from IPTV
2010
0
10 ExaByte
20 ExaByte
30 ExaByte
40 ExaByte
50 ExaByte
60 ExaByte
70 ExaByte
2008
230% 230%
2009
530% 530%
2007
100%
100%
100%
100%
2011
1600%
220%
1500%
1600%
220%
1500%
1100%
820%
200%
1100%
820%
200%
TV Services
(unicast&broadcast)
P2P Video*
Streaming Video Clips
US residential
Wireline Video related Traffic
Source:
Heavy Reading, June 2007, Internet TV, OTT Video & Future of IPTV
* excluding P2P video and
music exchange which
dominate currently the Internet
traffic
Increasing bandwidth demands require a
simplified and more efficient infrastructure
Technology goes highest
scalability and flexibility
Operators go Ethernet
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

C
o
n
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
;

L
i
g
h
t
r
e
a
d
i
n
g
2
0
0
7
Up to 100Gbit/s channels
in the core
Flexible Gigabit services &
multi-Gigabit wavelength
switching
Ethernet switching @ all
transport technologies
Microwave Radio, NG SDH,
DWDM, Carrier Ethernet
Level 3:
Ethernet is becoming a
preferred enabler for leading
applications, e.g. Internet,
Content delivery, utility
services, IP video,
FT, Telefonica:
IP does not scale enough,
Ethernet is an alternative
The broadband telecommunication environment
is enabled by next generation connectivity
Megabit applications -
Gigabit services
Broadband access
everywhere
Reliable and secure
traffic control
Flexible bandwidths
from access to core
Optimized connectivity
in fixed and mobile environment
Solutions to balance networks
and ensure Quality of Service
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
What is Carrier Ethernet Transport ?
In a sentence
Ethernet with Carrier Grade qualities
for Transport Networks
But seriously
Taking the simple, well known and widely deployed
Ethernet service and extending it to the metro and
core of public networks thus maintaining the
simplicity, flexibility and cost effectiveness of the
protocol and components on an end-to-end basis
Carrier Ethernet Transport technology
is defined by six key attributes
End to End Ethernet
Seamless Ethernet across portfolio of
IP Transport/Nokia Siemens Network
Differentiated service creation
Resiliency
Connection Oriented Ethernet
50ms protection
Resilient IP (ResIP)
certification
Simple Management
Automation of network
Point and click provisioning
Standard Operation and
Maintenance
Optimized Deployment
Scalable architecture with
end to end portfolio
Technology agnostic multi-
layer optimization
Flexible Solutions
Integrated Solution for
Mobile Backhaul, Business
and residential services
Shared best practices
Scalability
Standardized platforms
Prove worldwide
deployment
Over 20,000 service and
support personnel
Connection
Oriented
Packet Based Service
Transparent
Deterministic Controlled
Carrier Ethernet Transport Defined
Architecture Goals and Building Blocks
Enable IP Services over a Converged Carrier Class Transport Architecture
Add Scalability, Resiliency, and Manageability to Ethernet
Multi-Service
Convergence
Static
Managed
Isolated
Secure
Predictable
Protected
Guaranteed
SLA
Point-and-Click Provisioning
Carrier Grade OAM High Reliability
Hard QoS Stratum Quality Sync
Integrated TDM High Scalability
Unified Architecture for Cost-Effective
Transport of High-Speed Packet Services
Carrier Ethernet Transport Defined
Fundamental Requirements
Connection
Oriented
Provisioned
Deterministic
Predictable
L3 Service
Transparency
Guaranteed
SLAs
Carrier Class
Resiliency
Multi-Layer
Service
Management
L2 Client
Encapsulation
Secure
Transport
L3 Proxy
Provisioned
Strict QoS
Connection
Admission
Control
NE Quality
SW Stability
Network
Protection
End-to-End
Pt-and-Click
Control Plane
Robust OAM
Reporting
Ethernet
Economics
Scalable
Multi-Service
Single UNI
Synchronous
Cost-Effective
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
Network Basics
8. Conclusion
Going Back to Where It Began
We have to go back to 1984
Network Hierarchy Concept
The OSI Reference Model
Layer
Layer
Layer n-1
n
n+1
Provides services to higher layers
with standardized interfaces
Uses services of lower layers
with standardized interfaces
The concept of layers
It is a simple and efficient way of communication
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
The OSI reference model provides:
Standardized interfaces
(compatibility, interoperability and competition)
Simplifies network technology development
considerably
(just trust and use the functionality of the lower layer)
Why seven layers?
Is an often discussed question
(e.g. Three layer approach of Future Internet projects)
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Binary transmission on a physical link
Electrical, mechanical, procedural, and functional specification
Access to media
Defines the data format and how the access to the media is controlled
(includes bit-error correction)
Data delivery
Provides routes between two host systems (might be at different locations)
(includes network discovery and routing decision)
End-to-end connection
Ensures data transport reliability, information flow
(includes maintaining of virtual circuits between hosts)
Interapplication communication
Maintains sessions between applications
Data presentation
Presents data in the right format to the application layer
(includes encryption, reformating, restructuring of data)
Network service part of applications
Provides network services to applications
(e.g. protocols to applications such as snmp)
What we call application
e.g. email client such as Thunderbird
Real
Application
8
The User
9
Data Encapsulation
Application
Presentation
Session
Transport
Network
Data Link
Physical 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Header Header Header Header Header Header
Header Header Header Header Header
Header Header Header Header
Header Header Header
Header Header
Header
Data Header
Data Header
Data Header
Data Header
Data Header
Data Header
Data Header
Communication
G
F
E
D
C
B1
A1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7 G
F
E
D
C
B2
A2 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
C
B1
A1 1
2
3
B2
A2
Only instances
of the same layer
can talk to each other!
Intermediate
System (IS)
End System 2 End System 1
Sample OSI Layer Protocols and Services
SDH, OTH,
optical frames
Bits Bits
1
Physical
SDH, OTH
optical frames
SDH, OTH
optical frames
Frames
Packets
Frames
2
Data Link
IP
3
Network
TCP / UDP
4
Transport
5
Session
Services e.g.:
MIDI, HTML, GIF
JPG, ASCII
Services e.g.:
MIDI, HTML, GIF
JPG, ASCII
6
Presentation
End System
Services e.g.:
FTP, HTTP,
Telnet
Services e.g.:
FTP, HTTP,
Telnet
OSI Layer
7
Application
Ethernet
(IEEE 802.1),
LLC, MAC, ATM
Ethernet
(IEEE 802.1),
LLC, MAC, ATM
Ethernet
& IEEE 802.3,
LLC, MAC, ATM
Packets
Packets
IP IP
Datagram
Datagram
Transit System
Messages / Data
TCP / UDP
Services e.g.:
MIDI, HTML, GIF
JPG, ASCII
Services e.g.:
MIDI, HTML, GIF
JPG, ASCII
End System
Services e.g.:
FTP, HTTP,
Telnet
Services e.g.:
FTP, HTTP,
Telnet
Transceiver
Repeater
Hub, Cable
Bridge
Switch
Router
Gateway
Gateway
Gateway
Equipment
Gateway
e.g. Security
(Firewall, Proxy)
e.g. Security
(Firewall, Proxy)
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
P
r
o
t
o
c
o
l
s
Information unit Information unit
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
Network Hierarchy
According to OSI Reference Model
NSN Location
Munich
NSN Location
Espoo
Routers are used to connect networks
Switches are used to connect hosts
Backbone Network A
Backbone Network B
Fixed Transport Network Structure
Optical
Transport
Fixed
Services
Access
IP
Edge
Core Aggregation
Routing
Applications
CES
CLS
IP/MPLS
Core
Residential
Layer 2 VPN,
Ethernet /TDM
Leased
Line
Business
Layer 1
Optical/
Wavelength
Leased Line
OTN/DWDM
Metro
OTN/DW
DM Core
HSI: High Speed Internet CIS: Customer IP service CES: Customer Ethernet Service COS: Customer Optical Service
MSAN: Multiservice access node (PON, DSLAM) CLS: Customer Legacy Services
Business
Voice,
Video,
HSI
MSAN
L3 VPN
Server
VoIP, VoD, IPTV,
IMS IMS
L2 switch
BRAS
COS
CIS
CIS
L2
Transport
Carrier Ethernet /
SDH/SONET
Carrier Ethernet /
SDH/SONET
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
Ethernet Standards
8. Conclusion
The original Ethernet
by Bob Metcalf
Bob Metcalf, 1973
The original format for Ethernet was developed in Xerox Palo Alto Research Centre (PARC), California in 1972
and called Alto Aloha. Using Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) it had a
transmission rate of 2.94Mb/s and could support 256 devices over cable stretching for 1km. The two inventors
were Robert Metcalf and David Boggs
Advantages of Packet and Ethernet Networks
Packet
Almost 100% of traffic generated by applications is packet based
Multiplex gain
Control plane often deployed in combination with packet services (restoration)
Advantages of Ethernet
Widely deployed
The standard for LAN equipment (10M, 100M, 1G, 10G, 100G)) available in
almost every computing device
Chipsets are very cheap and high numbers
Plug and play
Very simple technology to operate
Combines data link layer and switching layer
Drawbacks of Ethernet:
MAC addressing scheme
Different protocols (STP, RSTP, MSTP)
Limited traffic-engineering and slow failure recovery
Operation Administration and Maintenance
IEEE 802 Standards
IEEE 802.1 Architecture, management, switching
802.1D MAC layer bridges
802.1Q Virtual LANs
802.1p Quality-of-Service & Multicast support
802.1d Spanning Tree Protocol (STP)
802.1s/w Multiple STP / Rapid STP
IEEE 802.3 CSMA/CD (Ethernet) standards
802.3u Fast Ethernet (100Base-TX, 100Base-FX)
802.3x Full-duplex Ethernet over LAN
802.3z Gigabit Ethernet over fiber (1000Base-X)
802.3ab Gigabit Ethernet over copper (1000Base-T)
802.3ad Aggregation of multiple link segments (LAG)
Ethernet Basics
IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Interfaces
Older Ethernet Implementations:
10 Base 5 yellow cable / 10 Base 2 cheapernet
R
Typical Implementation:
Busses / Segments
Disadvantage:
Collisions
multiply when data load
Increases
Current Implementations with electrical Interfaces:
10 Base T
100 Base T Fast Ethernet
1000 Base T Gigabit Ethernet
100 Base FX Fast Ethernet
Current Implementations with optical Interfaces:
1000 Base SX Gigabit Ethernet
1000 Base LX
10 Gigabit-Ethernet
In optical Ethernets,
Collision detection is not possible
Data Link
Network
Transport
Session
Presentation
Application
Physical
Typical Implementation:
Point-to-Point
Advantage:
Collisions can be minimized
with a switch
Ethernet Basics
IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Frames and MAC Addressing
Destination
MAC
Source
MAC
Type
Field
Check
sum
Data of Layers 3 to 7
6 Bytes 6 Bytes 2 By 4 Bytes
The Type Field: specifies, which Layer 3 Protocol is contained
The Checksum (CRC) secures both addresses, type field and data
Minimum length 64 bytes, maximum length 1518 bytes
up to 1500 Bytes
Ethernet Frame
MAC-Address: (Media Access Control)
Address on Layer 2 most commonly used on Ethernet, 6 Bytes long,
linked to Hardware, worldwide unique
MAC-Broadcast addresses all stations on a LAN (Address = ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff)
MAC-Multicast addresses all stations with a particular property
e.g. all switches supporting a particular protocol
Data Link
Network
Transport
Session
Presentation
Application
Physical
1
10
100
1 000
10 000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Ethernets timeline
2002: IEEE 802.3ae
10GBase-SR,-LR, ER,
LX4,-SW, LW, EW
1999: IEEE 802.3ab 1000Base-T
1998: IEEE 802.3z 1000Base-SX, -LX, -CX
1997: IEEE 802.3u 100Base-T2
1995: IEEE 802.3u 100Base-T4,-Tx,-FX
1990: IEEE 802.3i 10Base-T
1987: IEEE 802.3d FOIRL
1993: IEEE 802.3j 10Base-FL,-FB,-FP
1973: Ethernet is invented
3 Mbit/s, thick coax
1979: DIX is formed
10Mbit/s,thick coax
1983: IEEE 802.3 10 Base 5
1985: IEEE 802.3b 10 Broad 36
1987: IEEE 802.33 1Base5
1985: IEEE 802.3 10 Base 2,
Bit rate (Mbit/s)
Year
Ethernet Basics
Ethernet Switching (1)
A B C D E F
1 2 3 4 5 6
F C
Address
Port 6 Port 5 Port 4 Port 3 Port 2 Port 1
MAC-
Table
A = C
C ?
A
MAC-Learning
Ethernet Basics
Ethernet Switching (2)
A B C D E F
1 2 3 4 5 6
F C
Address
MAC-
Table
A = C
D ?
A
F = D
Flooding
In Ethernet networks loops are strictly forbidden because otherwise broadcast storms would
bring down the network performance. With Spanning tree protocol loops are avoided in an
Ethernet network: All links that would built up a loop are blocked by the Switches. So STP can
be used for protection: If the working link fails, the protection link (i.e. a blocked link) is activated.
Path 1 (working)
Ethernet Basics
802.1d Spanning Tree (1)
active links
blocked links
If the working link fails, the protection link (i.e. a blocked link) is activated. RSTP (Rapid
spanning tree protocoll) improves the switching time from several seconds to approximately
one second.
Path 2 (unblocked)
Path 1 (broken)
Ethernet Basics
802.1d Spanning Tree (2)
802.1w Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol (RSTP)
1s ~60s Worst Case
RSTP STP Timing
Spanning Tree was designed for Enterprise. Recovery Time is not
acceptable for Carrier Grade.
Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol is identical to STP, except:
STP Learns the backup route after failure
RSTP Learns the backup route before failure
The convergence time is significantly shortened:
802.1s Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol (MSTP)
MSTP enables the use of
different paths for different
VLANs (or groups of VLANs)
Traffic can be organized to use
all possible links, optimising
traffic distribution
If a link fails, only the MSTIs
(MSTP Instances individual
trees) using that link are
affected
MSTP only works together with
RSTP
Up to 32+1 instances per node
VLAN 10
VLAN 20
Advantages
Efficient VLAN Paths
(e.g. SW 1 => SW 4)
Load-sharing
SW 3
SW 2
SW 4
SW 1
C
F
I
16 bit
TAG Protocol Identifier TPID
0x8100
1 bit 12 bit 3 bit
Priority
VLAN ID
IEEE 802.3 Frame without VLAN Tag Header
Destination
address
Source
address
Type /
Length
Data
CRC
IEEE 802.3 with 802.1Q 4-Byte VLAN Tag Header
TCI
Tag Control Identifier
TPID
TAG Protocol Identifier
2 bytes 2 bytes
Destination
address
Source
address
Tag
Type/
8100
Data
CRC
4 bytes
Ethernet Basics
802.1Q VLAN support
802.1Q Highlights
Customer separation by VLAN
Physical view
Logical view
S S
S
R
R
VLAN Functionality Highlights
Up to 4096 VLAN
Priority 802.1p associated with VLAN
VLAN-based priority take precedence
Allows Spanning Tree per VLAN
Allows overlapping VLANs
VLAN Advantages
Better security
Solve the broadcast problem
Solve the physical location issue
A B C D E F
Ethernet Basics
Ethernet VLANs (1)
A = D
B = D
A
E D B
VLAN 1
F E C
VLAN 2
MAC-
Table
1 2 3 4 5 6
?
Ethernet Basics
Ethernet VLANs (2)
A B C D E F
1 2 3 4 5 6
E D B
VLAN 1
F E C
VLAN 2
MAC-
Table
A
X
A = D
B = D
-
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Evolution of Ethernet Hierarchy
DA
SA
Pay
load
802.1D
DA
SA
Pay
load
VID
802.1Q
SA: Source MAC Address
DA: Destination MAC Address
VID: VLAN ID
C-VID: Customer VID
S-VID: Service VID
VID: VLAN ID
B-SA: Backbone SA
B-DA: Backbone DA
B-VID: Backbone VID
B-TAG: a Provider Bridge S-TAG
I-SID: 24 bit Service ID
I-TAG: allocated for 802.1Q service instance
B-VID VLAN identifies per destination
alternate path
B-DA MAC identifies destination node
B-SA MAC identifies source node
DA
SA
Pay
load
S-VID
C-VID
802.1ad
Q-in-Q
DA
SA
Pay
load
S-VID
C-VID
B-DA
B-SA
B-VID
I-SID
802.1ah
Mac-in-Mac
Service ID
Backbone VID
Backbone MAC
Provider
Backbone
Bridges
PBB
Standard
Ethernet
Frame
acc.
IEE 802.3
Inner VLAN ID
Outer VLAN ID
Customer MAC
Contains IP
packet
VLAN
PBB-TE
Provider
Bridges
VLAN XC:
based on
VLAN ID
Frame with double VLAN tag header 802.1ad
The Concept
Adding another layer of 802.1Q
The purpose - expanding the VLAN space by tagging the tagged packets
The expanded VLAN space allows the service provider to provide certain services, such as
Internet access on specific VLANs for specific customers, and yet still allows the service
provider to provide other types of services for their other customers on other VLANs.
802.1ad Provider Bridge (Q-in-Q)
S-VLAN
Frame without VLAN Tag Header
Destination
address
Source
address
Type /
Length Data
CRC
Frame with single VLAN tag header 802.1Q
Destination
address
Source
address C-VLAN
Type /
Length
Data CRC
Destination
address
Source
address
C-VLAN
Type /
Length
Data CRC
Support of 4K S-VLAN x 4K C-VLAN = theoretical 16 Mill VLAN
Transport Network
Transport Network
Transport of Ethernet Services
Issues with Flat Ethernet Architecture
Full transparency ?
Use of client information as forwarding decision ?
Learning of all client MAC addresses in all transport nodes ?
Known issues with STP issues with STP (resilience and traffic engineering)
TPI
D
S-
VID
S-
VID
TP
ID
C-DA C-SA L/T User Data FCS
802.1ad
Frame
6 octets 6 octets 2 2 2 2 2
4 octets 46 1500 octets
S-TAG C-TAG
C-DA
Transport Network
Transport Network
802.1ah Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)
Adding a Transport Hierarchy
Source: D. Allen, N.Bragg, A. McGuire, A. Reid, Ethernet as Carrier Transport Infrastructure, IEEE
Communications Magazine, Feb. 2006
TPI
D
S-
VID
S-
VID
TP
ID
802.1ad
Frame
S-TAG C-TAG
TP
ID
B-TAG
ES-VID B-DA B-SA
B-
VID
L/T
802.1ad Frame
(/w or /wo FCS)
FCS
Backbone
Provider
Bridge
Frame
6 octets 6 octets 2 2
2
Add a transport hierarchy MAC in MAC encapsulation
No learning of customer MAC addresses in the middle of the network
Transport spanning TREES TREES instead
Use global global meaning of tag (B-DA (48 bit) and B-VID (12 bit))
C-DA
B-DA
802.1ah Provider Backbone Bridging
PBB, MAC in MAC
Interconnect Provider Bridge networks
through a highly scalable Ethernet
backbone
MAC in MAC encapsulation
Encapsulation at the backbone edge
Providers MAC and VLAN space, isolates
provider from customer broadcast domains
Core is agnostic to customer MAC and
customer services
MAC tables are learned automatically,
xSTP prevents loops
Drawbacks
Lack of carrier grade protection
(xSTP based)
Lack of effective traffic engineering
Provider Bridging nw
Customer networks
Provider Backbone Bridging network
Provider Bridging nw
Payload
C-VID
S-VID
SA
DA
802.1ad
Payload
C-VID
S-VID
SA
DA
I-SID
B-VID
B-SA
B-DA
802.1ah
Q-in-Q
Customer MAC
OAM for Carrier Grade Switches
OAM is the carrier tool kit for the network management functions such
as fault indication, performance monitoring, security management,
diagnostic functions and configuration
An advanced management tool kit contains:
Transport link level
Network & Service
Level
OAM management
802.3ah 802.3ah EFM EFM
(Ethernet at the first mile) (Ethernet at the first mile)
802.1ag 802.1ag
Connectivity Fault Management Connectivity Fault Management
VLAN OAM VLAN OAM
MEF recommendation MEF recommendation
Element Manager System Element Manager System
MPLS OAM MPLS OAM
QoS allows to guarantee parameters like
- Bandwidth
- Packet loss rate
- Maximum delay
- Maximum jitter
Examples of typical service class definitions:
- Gold: Guaranteed Bandwidth, very low packet loss rate,
Minimum jitter suitable for VoIP and Video Boadcast
- Bronze: No guarantees suitable for Data transmission
(data packets can be re-transmitted in case of loss)
- Network Most important traffic, highest priority
Control:
Advanced Ethernet Features
Quality of Service - QoS (1)
CIR: Committed information rate
PIR: Peak information rate
CBS: Committed burst size
PBS: Peak burst size
Service End-to-End
CIR
EIR
t
Bandwidth available to other services
at time t
Link Capacity
Quality of Service - QoS (2)
Waste
Packet stream (one direction)
High priority packet
Medium priority packet
Low priority packet
Egress buffers
For one egress port
Many Low priority packets are
dropped,
Few medium priority,
None high priority.
+
The critical point in the packet flow
is the summarization of several ingress ports
to one egress port.
Therefore one egress buffer per service class
is required. In this buffers high priority packets
can overtake low priority packets.
Packet classification Packet scheduling
Ingress ports Egress port
SLA Guarantees for all Services
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Connectionless and Connection Oriented Transport
Connection oriented
A predetermined path is used between
two end nodes for packets of the same
service
Bandwidth reserved End-to-End to
ensure quality
Protection paths are preset and
available for immediate usage
BW for protection can be reserved in
advance
Known path allows more E2E OAM
capabilities
The OSI 7-layer model specifies two methods for packet transport:
Connectionless
Every packet can be taken at any path
as long as it gets to its final destination
Service BW can not be guaranteed
In case of failure nodes are required to
re-calculated path which may take long
time
No constant End-2-End monitoring
Primary path
Backup path
Carrier Ethernet
Forwarding based on Spanning Tree Spanning Tree
Inefficient use of resources
Limited Limited traffic engineering possibilities
Very complex optimization complex optimization tasks when using multiple trees
Slow Slow restoration upon failures (seconds)
Flat Flat switching hierarchy (broadcast broadcast if unknown)
Forwarding based on transport label transport label not on customer MAC address
Establishment of virtual tunnels virtual tunnels (paths)
Packets are tagged and switched accordingly
Broadcast if unknown is disabled (hierarchy hierarchy)
Centralized management or
distributed control plane control plane
(e.g. GMPLS)
Carrier Ethernet (cl) vs.
Carrier Ethernet Transport (co)
Traffic Engineering and Resilience
Traffic Engineering can be done by applying tunnel characteristics
Route of tunnel can be optimized
Multiple Multiple tunnels tunnels and traffic distribution
Intermediate grooming and merging of tunnels
Multi Multi- -layer traffic engineering layer traffic engineering especially
between Ethernet and WDM
Resilience mechanisms can be based on tunnels
A large number of path path- -based based resilience
mechanisms can be applied for Carrier Ethernet
Protection Protection and restoration restoration
Multi Multi- -layer resilience layer resilience optimization
Carrier Ethernet switches with c/o Ethernet
Benefits and features for packet transport
Features and Benefits
Advanced connection oriented Ethernet mechanisms
+Well determined and predictable network operation
+ Advanded resilience mechanisms possible
Traffic engineering (Traffic separation per VLAN, Classification per port and
port+VLAN ++, Policing, QoS (basic- , Diffserv-, Enhanced-mode),
horizontal split)
+efficient use of fibers, balancing of the traffic load on various links in the
network
Challenges
Multicast: Interworking of IGMP and PBB-TE still to be verified
Synchronization and clock provisioning in mobile backhaul
Interworking with DWDM
Increased scalability and cost-efficient long-distance transport
(Grey interfaces up to 80 km)
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
Ethernet Label Switching
8. Conclusion
Ethernet Label Switching (ELS) aka VLAN Cross-Connect
Q in Q Tunnelling (IEEE 802.1Q, IEEE802.1ad)
Idea: Use the existing Ethernet header
(802.1ad) but forward according to
ingress port and VLAN-ID, not MAC
address
Add tags if required (label stacking)
Forwarding decision based on
single VLAN-ID (12 bit) or
double VLAN-ID (24 bit) with local link
scope (16M connections per port)
Replacing Flooding and MAC Learning
with configuration of VLAN-Switching
Cross Connect
1
2
4
3
Bridge
5
VID = 10
7
8
6
VID = 10
VID = 50
VID = 10
VID = 50
VID = 11
VID = 20
VID = 17
VID = 17
VID = 50
VID = 10
VID = 72
VID = 50
TPI
D
VID VID
TP
ID
DA SA L/T User Data FCS
4 octets
TAG1 TAG2
VID
TP
ID
802.1Q
Frame
2
4 octets
TAG
802.1ad
Frame
Single Tag
Double Tag
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
PBB-TE
8. Conclusion
Transport Network
Transport Network
802.1ah Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)
Adding a Transport Hierarchy
TPI
D
S-
VID
S-
VID
TP
ID
802.1ad
Frame
S-TAG C-TAG
TP
ID
B-TAG
ES-VID B-DA B-SA
B-
VID
L/T
802.1ad Frame
(/w or /wo FCS)
FCS
Backbone
Provider
Bridge
Frame
2
Transport spanning TREES TREES instead
C-DA
B-DA
Transport Network
Transport Network
802.1Qay Provider Backbone BridgingTraffic
Engineering (PBB-TE)
Transparent Tunneling of Ethernet Services
C-DA
B-DA
TPI
D
S-
VID
S-
VID
TP
ID
802.1ad
Frame
S-TAG C-TAG
TP
ID
B-TAG
ES-VID B-DA B-SA
B-
VID
L/T
802.1ad Frame
(/w or /wo FCS)
FCS
Backbone
Provider
Bridge
Frame
2
Transport PATHS PATHS instead GMPLS or NMS configured
802.1Qay Provider Backbone BridgingTraffic
Engineering (PBB-TE)
The Global Label Meaning
Scalability: Scalability:
4096 different paths per B-DA
Reuse of B-VLAN-ID possible
Merging of paths possible
Simplicity: Simplicity:
Inherent knowledge of the destination
Possibility to have PATHS and (multicast) TREES with the
same forwarding technology
B-DA
B-DA
Same
VLAN-ID
B A
Incoming
B-DA / B-VLAN-ID
B & C
Outgoing
Ports
A
Incoming
Port
B
C
A
802.1Qay Provider Backbone Bridging Traffic Engineering
A profile of PBB which allows
engineering deterministic, protected,
and secured connection oriented trunks
and services
MAC learning, xSTP, Broadcast
unknown frames disabled
Management plane is used to set up
Ethernet Switched Paths (ESP)
Populates forwarding table
Calculates load for each ESP and
allocates to physical link
Also sets up protecting path
Alternative: control plane signaling
Traffic Engineering
50ms protection switching (G.8031)
PB
nw
PB
nw
Provider Backbone Bridging network
MAC in
MAC
MAC in
MAC
I-SID 1
Port 1, S-VID 1, C-VID1
Port 1, S-VID 1, C-VID2
I-SID 2
Port 2
Trunk (B-DA, B-VID)
Payload
C-VID
S-VID
SA
DA
I-SID
B-VID
B-SA
B-DA
802.1ah
PBB / PBB-TE Summary
Many proposals not yet standard (most expected
mid/end 2009)
Standardization status
in discussion (e.g. synchronization) Others (e.g. mobility)
First products available Product status
Pt2Pt , Pt2MPt , other proposals in

discussion
Pt2Pt, Pt2Mpt, Mpt2Pt,
Mpt2Mpt
Via NMS or Control Plane (in definition) Remote configuration
OAM Mechanisms defined or standard proposed
Currently static NMS solutions, GMPLS in
discussion
Manageable and simple
Not based on shortest paths, not based on global
link weights
Efficient use of resources
Client/Transport separation, ~4000 paths per
destination in PBB-TE with implicit merging
Scalability
Similar to IP packet forwarding QoS
Configured working and backup paths (SDH-like) Predictability
Currently shared end-to-end protection,
Restoration mechanisms proposed
Availability/Resilience
Status Topic
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
MPLS Basics
8. Conclusion
Multi Protocol
MPLS is encapsulating Ethernet, Frame Relay, ATM and IP and
transport them transparently through each network
Label Switching
Each packet is marked with a short, fixed-length label
Forwarding of packets is based on this label
Reservation of resources is associated with this label
MPLS Basics
Two Aspects
LER
LSR
Non-MPLS
access network
Label
LSP: Switched
Path
MPLS Backbone
Label
Edge
Router
Label
Switching
Router
MPLS Basics
Acronyms
MPLS Basics
Shim Header Structure
TTL Label (20 bits) CoS S
IP Packet
IP Packet
32 bits
L2 Header
L2 Header
MPLS Header
MPLS header consist of four fields
Labelused to associate packet with an LSP
Experimental bitscarry packet queuing priority (CoS)
Stacking bit
Time to livelimits packet lifetime within LSP
In most cases, the IP TTL is copied into the MPLS TTL
Some label values are reserved
MPLS Principles
Virtual connections in a connectionless network
Add a label to an IP packet that encodes a predefined tunnel
Traffic towards different destinations can be separated or aggregated and
forwarded along a pre-defined path using only small labels as routing
decision
Label stacking is possible
Efficient Traffic Engineering due to source routing
Fast resilience mechanisms
Label Edge
Router
(LER)
Label
Switch
Router
(LSR)
3: Routing
according to IP
header
1: The edge router
classifies packets
and adds an MLPS
header, see table
below to them
2: Small tables,
fast routing
IP Packet Label IP Packet Label
MPLS Major Tasks
Information distribution (network topology and capacity)
Based on existing IP protocols (OSPF, IS-IS, EIGRP)
- inband
Path calculation
What are the best paths?
Constraint Based Routing (CBR)
Path setup, label distribution and exchange
Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
Reservation Protocol (RSVP-TE)
Forwarding of traffic along the MPLS path
Forwarding Principle
Label Edge
Router (LER)
Label Switch
Router (LSR)
4: Routing according to IP
header
In Label
A
Out Label
C
1: The edge router classifies
packets and adds an MLPS
header to them (see table below)
3: Last but one router drops
the MPLS header
Address
prefix
129.187.0.0/16
185.222.0.0/16
Next Hop
IP Address
102.4.4.2
102.4.4.3
Address
prefix
129.187.0.0/16
185.222.0.0/16
Next Hop
IP Address
10.152.4.2
10.152.4.2
Out
Label
A
A
2: Forwarding using labels
instead of IP addresses
-
Swapping of labels at each
intermediate router
Label Switch
Router (LSR)
Path Setup with RSVP
The Ingress LSR (I-LSR) sends a PATH message along the calculated
route (source routing).
Each intermediate router checks if the required bandwidth is available and
forwards the message to the tail of the path (last router).
The Egress LSR (E-LSR) sends a RESV message back along the same
path. On the way back, the resources are reserved and labels are selected
and signaled to the upstream LSR
Paths are updated / refreshed via a soft-state mechanisms
E-LSR
I-LSR
RESV message
PATH message
Pros and Cons of MPLS Switching
Advantages:
+Aggregation of traffic
+Reduction of routing entries
+Efficient traffic engineering
possibilities
(source routing)
+Fast and efficient resilience
mechanisms
+VPN support
+GMPLS support
Disadvantages:
- Additional technology below
the IP Layer
- Handling of MPLS paths
(number, soft state)
- Complexity of Network
Configuration
- Tight interelation of IP and
MPLS makes it quite complex
to handle
Challenge: Is MPLS ready to replace SDH/SONET?
Transport teams mentality
Long term statically provisioned
paths, pre-determined backup paths
Highly automated operation
environment
Strong reliance on automated OAM
and fault management systems
Simple static control plane scores
well over complex dynamic control
plane
Transport teams view on IP/MPLS
Believe IP/MPLS is not suitable for
transport applications
Consider it to be very complex (LDP, IS-
IS, OSPF, MPLS-TE, CSPF, FRR,..)
Do not need dynamic routing protocols,
and recovery times too slow
IP/MPLS OAM tools not consistent with
transport OAM requirements
Carrier Ethernet will replace SDH/SONET infrastructure over time
SONET/SDH infrastructure traditionally designed and managed by transport
departments
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
T-MPLS
8. Conclusion
T-MPLS (Transport Multi Protocol Label Switching)
Idea: Use the MPLS concept known from IP and adapt it for forwarding issues
defined in ITU-T G8110.1
Operate independently of its clients and its associated control networks
(Management and Signaling Network).
IP/MPLS IP + SDH
MPLS with a few changes:
Use of Penultimate Hop Popping is prohibited
Uni-directional and bi-directional LSPs can be defined
Use of global or per interface label space
Three types of Signalling Communication Channels (in-band via native IP
packets, in-band via dedicated LSP, out-of band)
OAM based on Y.1711 and Y.1731
Protection switching (ITU-T Y.1720)
Merging and ECMP is prohibited
Multicasting in alignment to on-going work in IETF
TPI
D
S-
VID
S-
VID
TP
ID
S-TAG C-TAG
T-MPLS GFP or Ethernet
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
MPLS-TP
8. Conclusion
MPLS-TP standardization process and timeline
MPLS-TP
MPLS-TP
Timeline:
ITU-T - IETF Joint Working Team (JWT)
was setup in March 2008
Agreement reached on
recommendations: End of April 2008
First draft: July 2008
Expected final agreements: E 2009
Joint Working Team
Technologies comparison
- /~ /~ /~ -
Multipoint
support
-
~
IP/MPLS
- - ~
Standardized or
in process of
standardization
- - - ~
Scalable
- - - -
Transport
oriented
MPLS-TP PBB-TE T-MPLS ELS
Terminated
by ITU-T
Market shift from PBB-TE to MPLS-TP
NSN focus
Mature but not transport oriented
IP/MPLS
Transport oriented
Terminated by ITU-T
T-MPLS
ELS
In standardization process
Not mature
No Control plane
No multipoint support
PBB-TE
In standardization process
Based on MPLS maturity
Enhanced for Transport
T-MPLS
MPLS-TP
The options
Standardized partly (single tagging)
Double use of VID for user-traffic
separation and routing
MPLS-TP MPLS Transport Profile
IP/MPLS & L2 MPLS can be categories as IETF MPLS
Nokia Siemens Networks is a major player in MPLS-TP standardization
MPLS Connection Oriented
Lacks some
transport
capabilities
T-MPLS
A subset of MPLS plus additional
capabilities providing packet transport
Uses the same Ether type as MPLS but
some mechanisms are not compatible
with MPLS
Nokia Siemens Networks has participants in the Joint Working Team
Nokia Siemens Networks acts as author and co-author for
requirements, framework and solution documents
JWT
3. Frameworks
3.1 MPLS-TP
3.2 3.3 OAM
3.4 Survivability
3.4.1 for LSPs
3.4.2 for PWs
3.6 Control Plane
3.7 Network
Management
2. Requirements
2.1 MPLS-TP
2.2 OAM
2.3 Network
management
4. Solution Documents
4.1 Generic ACH Alert Label Definition
4.2 ACH definition
4.3 OAM Procedure document
4.3.1 OAM Analysis document
4.3.2 OAM Tool documents
4.4 Survivability
4.4.1 Linear Protection
4.4.2 Ring Protection
4.5 Control Plane protocols
What is MPLS-TP?
A new standard focused on extending MPLS as a viable transport
option to help building the next generation packet transport network
Being developed by IETF as a result of a collaboration between IETF and ITU-T via joint
working team (JWT)
Objective:
To bring transport requirements into IETF MPLS and extend IETF MPLS
forwarding, OAM survivability, network management and control plane
protocols to meet those requirements through IETF standard process
The JWT is divided into multiple sub-groups focused on:
Forwarding plane
OAM
Protection
Control plane
Management
MPLS-TP defines a profile of MPLS targeted at Transport applications.
MPLS-TP foundation
The architecture for a transport profile of MPLS (MPLS-TP)
is based on IETF MPLS (RFC 3031) & IETF PWE3 (RFC 3985)
OAM
extensions
Management
extensions
Control Plane
extensions
Survivability
extensions
Alert Label
Definition
extensions
MPLS-TP profile
This addresses specific MPLS characteristics and extensions
required to meet transport requirements.
Desire: To make MPLS more Transport Oriented
Data plane: Data, OAM, protection congruent within architecture
Control plane: Optional and separated from data plane
Management plane: Configuration of LSP, PWE with point & click
MPLS-TP
NMS Point & Click
LSP and PWE
management via external
Configuration of
LSPs & PWEs via NMS
and later dynamic control
plane
LSPs, PWEs
nesting similar to
SONET/SDH
environments
LSP, PWE, OAM
works independent of control
plane
OAM and Data path
must be congruent (use
the same path)
Protection and OAM
mechanism works
within the MPLS
architecture
MPLS-TPfor
Connection Oriented
services, scalability and
flexibility
End-to-Endmonitoring
and control of customer services
Preserve the
look-and-feel to
which carriers have become
accustomed to deploying
SDH/Sonet networks
Efficient support of
packet based services on
the transport network
Control and
deterministic usage
of network resources
Ethernet
Economics
Utilisation
The Goal for the MPLS-TP technology
Sonet/SDH
comparable Reliability and
Operational Simplicity
MPLS-TP will enable the migration of SONET/SDH networks to a packet-based network that will easily
scale to support packet services in a simple and cost effective way.
Main characteristics of MPLS-TP
No modification of MPLS forwarding/data plane architecture
Current Standards for LSPs and PWEs construct
Configure LSPs and PWEs via Management plane
Bidirectional and congruent point-to-point LSPs
Framework supporting transport OAM capabilities for PWEs, LSPs
Complete Fault,
Configuration,
Accounting,
Performance and
Security (FCAPS)
Ability for LSPs and PWEs to be managed at different nested levels (path,
segment, multiple segments)
Interoperability with existing control and forwarding plane
MPLS Transport Profile - Terminology
Definition of an MPLS Transport Profile (TP) within IETF MPLS standards
Based on PWE3 and LSP forwarding architecture
IETF MPLS architecture concepts
The major construct of the transport profile for MPLS are LSPs
Multi-node LSP network
Pseudo-wire (PWE)
PW1
Emulated Service
Attachment
Circuit
PE1 PE2
CE1 CE2
Attachment
Circuit
End to End LSP operations
Path diversity is not part of the OAM process.
It is the responsibility of the Control Plane
OAM function uses GAL with Generic Channel Association
Pre-provisioned primary and backup paths
LSP OAM running on primary and back-up paths
OAM failure on backup path Alert NMS
OAM failure on primary path A and E updating LFIB
to send and receive PW-L traffic over backup path
LSP OAM
LSP OAM
LFIB:AB-BC
LFIB:BC-CD
LFIB:CD-DE
PW-L, AB
DE, PW-L
LFIB:AW-WX
LFIB:WX-XY
LFIB:XY-YZ A
E
Primary Path
Backup Path
PW-L, AW
YZ, PW-L
L0/L1:
Loss of Light; G.709, SONET/SDH LoS, LoF, ES, SES (NOT DISCUSSED)
Non MPLS L2 connectivity:
Native L2 solution 802.1ag (Not Discussed) , Non IP BFD
Failure propagation across layers is supported by this architecture
General LSPs :
Generic Exception Label and Generic Associated Channel
Includes End to End and segment LSPs
Used to carry a variety of OAM, Mgmt, signalling protocols.
Pseudo-wires :
PWE3 Associated Channel
B A D C F E
L1/L2 L1/L2 L1/L2 L1/L2 L1/L2
Segment LSP
End to End LSP
Pseudo-wire
Midpoint
Overview: OAM hierarchy and mechanisms
LSP example
- end to end and per carrier monitoring
P
P
P
P
MEP MIP MIP MEP
MEP MEP MEP MEP MEP MEP MIP MIP
A segment is between MEPs
OAM is end to end or per segment
In SDH/OTN and Ethernet segment OAM is implemented using Tandem Connection Monitoring (TCM)
The OAM in each segment is independent of any other segment
Recovery actions (Protection or restoration) are always between MEPs i.e. per segment or end to end
Carrier 1
Carrier 2
NNI
MEP: Maintenance End Point
MIP: Maintenance Intermediate Point
end to end LSP OAM
end to end LSP OAM
segment LSP
OAM
(inter carrier)
segment LSP
OAM
(inter carrier)
PE
PE
PE
PE
segment LSP OAM
(carrier 2)
segment LSP OAM
(carrier 2)
segment LSP OAM
(carrier 1)
segment LSP OAM
(carrier 1)
PE
PE
P
P
MIP
NNI
NNI
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
PE
MIP MIP
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Market Trends in Infrastructure
Growth of Internet, Video Services, hence IP traffic
Revenue shifts from voice to data
Effective technology for carrying IP
Ethernet Cost points drops
Video accelerate the problem
IP traffic doubles every year
Drives infrastructure migration from SDH to packet hence Ethernet
All TDM
TDM
All Packet
Packet
Yesterday
Today Tomorrow
Technology dominance
The migration to CET covers all IPT business lines
and is key IPT strategy
Migration from NG-SDH installed base
Evolution to hybrid platform with CET connectivity
From TDM to
Packet
From existing
base to optimized
networks
From current
switches to NG
portfolio
Migration from existing non-Connection oriented L2
aggregation
Multilayer optimization: L1 to L3
Greenfield overlay with Carrier Ethernet Transport
Interworking with customer edge (L2, L3) and provider
edge (L3) as well as with 3rd party L2
Multi-reach DWDM
Microwave
Packet Radio
CET Switches
Hybrid NG
Metro
NMS
Migration towards Carrier Ethernet Transport
Evolution of Ethernet in all network technologies
IP/MPLS
SDH/SONET
Carrier
Switches
WDM/OTN
ROADM/PXC
Ethernet ADM
with GFP-T/F
Ethernet ADM
with L2 Switch Integration of
Ethernet functionality
Integration of
Ethernet/ODU-Switching
Classical Ethernet
Classical Ethernet
Classical IP/MPLS
MPLS MPLS- -TP TP
T T- -MPLS MPLS
PBB PBB
PBB PBB- -TE TE
Integration of
Ethernet functionality
ELS ELS
Microwave
IP
TDM
Hybrid Packet/TDM
CET Migration Scenarios
A. Replacement of TDM by Packet Transport
Platform based on c/o Ethernet
Deployment of a new Packet Transport platform
to replace SDH/SONET TDM platform.
B. Hybrid (TDM/Packet) scenario
Hybrid platform deployment for all new traffic
(packet and TDM) in a jointly network with an
existing NG-SDH platform for TDM traffic
C. Integration of Ethernet in DWDM
GbE add/drop cards or L2 switch cards allows
cost-efficient and scalable DSLAM aggregation /
mobile backhaul in metro aggregation networks
TDM
Packet
+
Rethinking the Role of the Layers
IP/MPLS
IP/MPLS
ETHERNET
Including Aggregation, Metro and Core
ETHERNET
Including Aggregation, Metro and Core
OTN/WDM
OTN/WDM
SONET/SDH
SONET/SDH
Transition
Service-awareness
High-touch
networking
Efficient end-to-end
carrier-grade packet transport
pt-pt, pt-mpt, mpt-pt, mpt-mpt
Services
Layer 3
Layer 2
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n

s
p
l
i
t
IP IP is the convergence platform for applications applications and services services.
Ethernet Ethernet and OTN/WDM OTN/WDM will be the convergence platform for transport transport.
Common OTN/WDM
infrastructure
Layer 1
Subscriber/
Service
Aggregation Core
Layer 3 / IP
Edge
LER LSR
LSR
Access
GPON
FTTH
Layer 2 / Carrier Ethernet Transport
DSLAM
Access Switch
Metro DWDM Core DWDM
L2 VPN
Leased Line,
E-Line
Business
Residential
IP, Voice,
Video
Carrier Ethernet Transport in a Multilayer Network
Optimized Transport based on Packet, TDM and Optics
Service Awareness Service Awareness
Packet routing
Traffic Engineering
Robust network
(Restoration)
Packet switching Packet switching
Traffic Engineering
Robust network
Native layer 2 Native layer 2
Predictable Predictable behavior
Carrier Grade OAM Carrier Grade OAM
Cost efficient Cost efficient
2.5Gbps, 10Gbps,
40Gbps, 100Gbps 100Gbps
Native transport Native transport
of services on of services on
the lowest possible layer the lowest possible layer
dependent on service dependent on service
requirements and cost requirements and cost
Optimal mix Optimal mix of intermediate
grooming and routing and
transparent bypass
(Ethernet + WDM Ethernet + WDM)
Functionality only Functionality only
where needed where needed
Minimize intermediate
routing - offload routers
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
Applications
8. Conclusion
High Speed Access to IP-VPN
Low cost access combined
with centralized router
to offer IP VPN
Customer
HQ
Customer site
Customer
site
Carrier
Ethernet
Customer
HQ
Customer
site
Customer site
IP VPN
Network
Carrier
Ethernet
Customer
HQ
Customer
site
Carrier
Ethernet
Carrier
Ethernet
Customer
HQ
Customer
site
Customer
site
r
High Speed
Internet Access
Multi-Service Access
VPLS
Group
Customer HQ
Customer
site
T1/E1
OC-3/STM1
or NxT1/E1
VPLS or VPLS-TE Service
Video conference, Ethernet PMP,
Intranet access
Inter-LAN or Inter-PABX
Ethernet, Storage,
Video (surveillance)
VPLS: Virtual Private LAN Services VPN: Virtual Private Network
Carrier Ethernet enables service providers to deliver a
wide range of mission-critical applications
www
IP VPN
CET Solution Focus addresses three main
operator broadband challenges
Residential and broadband
High Speed Internet (HSI)
IPTV, VoD
Voice
Mobile Backhauling
TDM PWE3 (CESoP) for 2G backhaul
Ethernet backhaul for 3G, I-HSPA, LTE & WiMAX
Synchronous Ethernet
LTE
2G
3G
WiMax
Business Services
E-Line, E-LAN (TE, non TE), E-Tree (Hub & Spoke)
SAN, legacy technologies (TDM, clock sync)
NG-CET 2200-1G
NG-CET M
NG-CET 1200
NG-CET L
Mobile Backhaul QoS
MPLS-TP is QoS-enabled Transport network, providing Traffic Engineering,Queuing,
Scheduling, Policing \\and Mapping capabilities that meet Mobile system E2E requirements
MPLS-TP is QoS-enabled Transport network, providing Traffic Engineering,Queuing,
Scheduling, Policing \\and Mapping capabilities that meet Mobile system E2E requirements
Low Delay, Low Jitter and zero Packet Loss for real-
time traffic types:
ToP Synchronization, Signaling and Control, Voice
QoS mapping and Traffic
Policing on UNI ports
Traffic Engineered paths for
different traffic types
Fixed Operator
E1
Eth
E1
Eth
CET (MPLS-TP)
STM-1
Eth
Mobile
Operator
CET (Ethernet)
BSC
RNC
Mobile Backhaul OAM
MPLS-TP provides OAM tool-box that enable the Fixed Operator to verify the
Mobile Operators E2E SLA over the transport network
MPLS-TP provides OAM tool-box that enable the Fixed Operator to verify the
Mobile Operators E2E SLA over the transport network
Service level OAM: Delay, Jitter, Frame loss (Y.1731)
LSP OAM (Delay, Jitter, Frame loss )
Performance Monitoring:
Service level
LSP level
Statistics History
Traffic Crossing Alarms
Fault Management:
Link, segment and
E2E Service continuity
Check to identify failures
Network Maintenance:
Loopback
Ping and Traceroute
Protection Triggering:
Service & LSP OAM triggers
Protection Switching events in <50ms
Fixed Operator
E1
Eth
E1
Eth
CET (MPLS-TP)
STM-1
Eth
Mobile
Operator
CET (Ethernet)
BSC
RNC
Mobile Backhaul Protection and Resiliency
MPLS-TP provides <50ms Transport grade Protection and Resiliency at
VLAN level and MPLS LSP level
MPLS-TP provides <50ms Transport grade Protection and Resiliency at
VLAN level and MPLS LSP level
UNI Interface Protection:
LAG (GE)
Multi-Chassis LAG (GE)
APS (STM-1)
N:1(E1)
Protection & Resiliency
in Bridged Access:
<50ms Ring & Linear
protection for Bridged
and Non-Bridged traffic
Protection & Resiliency
in MPLS Aggregation:
Linear (<50ms)
Ring (<50ms)
Complete inter-working of Protection
mechanisms (Ethernet, MPLS),
providing e2e Service Resiliency
Fixed Operator
E1
Eth
E1
Eth
CET (MPLS-TP)
STM-1
Eth
Mobile
Operator
CET (Ethernet)
BSC
RNC
MPLS linear and
ring protections,
FRR
Ethernet (VLAN)
linear and ring
protection
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
Network Management
8. Conclusion
OSPF-TE
IS-IS TE
LDP
FRR
Carrier Ethernet Transport Management
Access network
(VLAN/MPLS-TP)
Aggregation / Core network
(MPLS-TP)
Management
plane
L2-MPLS
MPLS-TP
control plane
L2-MPLS
MPLS-TP
data plane
RSVP-TE
VLAN-ID
NMS: NetAct Connectivity
NMS: NetAct Connectivity
Traffic engineered services
RSVP-TE
Path computation
The CET architecture offers proven ease of use
and simplified interoperability
Interoperable
with other
vendors
Unique
SDH-like
operational
system
MPLS-TP
Data Plane
MPLS-TP
Control
Plane
Management
Plane
Based on NetAct
Connectivity
Fault and
trouble
Service quality
and SLA
Performance Inventory,
configuration
Service ,
subscriber
provisioning
CET Manager: Traffic engineered services
End-to-End
Provisioning
Pre-calculated path
Configuring each node on the
path via CET Manager, or
Using standard RSVP-TE for
node configuration
Assure QoS with e2e service management
Example mobile backhaul
NodeB
I-HSPA NodeB
eNodeB
WiMAX BTS
RNC
GGSN/SGSN
aGW
ASN-GW
Access Aggregation
NetAct
CET
Manager
Microwave radio (FlexiPacket)
Point to point fiber (A-series)
CET Switches
Next Gen SDH (hiT 7065)
Metro WDM (hiT 7300)
Radio network elements visible in CET Manager
Hard QoS all along the connection, consistent with
radio network expectations
Radio network elements visible in CET Manager
Hard QoS all along the connection, consistent with
radio network expectations
Status of Ethernet
connection visible
in NetAct
Status of Ethernet
connection visible
in NetAct
End to end connection provisioned
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Challenges and opportunities
Internet is expanding from an information service to a critical
infrastructure for all aspects of society
Current technologies can be, and need to be improved significantly to
meet the challenges stemming from scale and new usage forms:
New functionality split between protocol layers
Routing scalability
Evolution towards information centric networking
Vision
Billions of people and trillions of
devices connected anywhere
and anytime
Research Projects on Future Internet Technology
Enabling economic progress and development of our society
G-Lab
FI / ICT-SHOK
4WARD
PSIRP
Future Internet
Internet
core based
on BGP
Egress
Tunnel
Router
Fixed
Access
Mobile
access
Customer
network
Egress
Tunnel
Router
Ingress
Tunnel
Router
Ingress
Tunnel
Router
Mapping
service
Example of typical overlay based
routing solution in the IETF/IRTF
Objectives:
Deepen our understanding of the
challenges of the Internet routing
machinery: scalability, multiple
addressing domains, operator
practices
Ensure that Nokia Siemens
Networks has involvement in the
relevant IETF/IRTF actvities, close
co-ordination with the iHop
standardization project
Develop Nokia Siemens Networks
view and approach to t he Internet
routing and other Future internet
challenges of medium term
Duration: 2 years
Major partners: Ericsson, Nokia,
TKK, VTT, TeliaSonera
Part of Tekes ICT shok
Future Internet program
4WARD Architecture and Design of the Future
Internet
Motivation
Major architectural changes stemming from
heterogeneity that will affect the integrity of the core
architecture
Objectives
Enable very different architectures to co-exist and interoperate:
Network virtualization, addressing and naming schemes
Develop network of information
Addressing of informational objects
Protocols and management of information dissemination
Management of rich communication paths (QoS, Security, mobility, multicast)
Resource management for cross-layer techniques
Distributed monitoring protocols
Develop an integrated framework for network architectures
W
A D R
4
Publish-Subscribe Internet Routing Paradigm (PSIRP) FP7
project
The PSIRP project will design a new internetworking
architecture based on the publish-subscribe paradigm
Control unwanted traffic and provide inherent
security
Apply the Pub/sub across the protocol stack
Provide efficient information networking
Forwarding
Forwarding
Routing
Forwarding
Rendezvous
AP
I
H H
H H
H H
H H
R R
R R
R R
R R
Pub Pub
Sub Sub
Sub Sub
Publish(Id
Pub
)
Subscribe(Id
Sub
)
Subscribe(Id
Sub
)
G-Lab
Goals:
Design of a virtual nationwide testbed
Technological trends in networking and network
applications should be identified and their
implications for the design and engineering of Future
Internet should be considered
Suitable concepts and architectures should be
developed and tested in the experimental
environment close to reality
Duration: 39 month (internal start: 01.07.2008,
BMBF funding: 01.10.2008 30.09.2011)
Major Partners: Alcatel-Lucent Deutschland AG
(ALUD), Ericsson GmbH (ERI), Nokia Siemens
Networks GmbH & Co. KG (NSN), Qualcomm
CDMA Technologies GmbH (QCOM), TU Berlin and
Deutsche Telekom Laboratories (TLABS), TU
Darmstadt (TUD), TU Mnchen (TUM), Universitt
Karlsruhe (TH) (UKA), TU Kaiserslautern (UKL),
Universitt Wrzburg (UWUE)
G-Lab
TUM
TLABS
UKL
UKA
TUD
UWUE
DFN
Infrastructure
One Virtual Network
BMBF CELTIC 100GET-E3
Content:
Conduct pre-development research on a carrier-grade Ethernet/DWDM
transport technology
Multi-layer network architecture Requirements and functional
specification of the Carrier Ethernet / DWDM target network architecture
Multi-layer routing / planning framework Coherent framework for
routing, resilience and traffic management across technology layers, as
basis for planning and provisioning
Multi-constraint, multi-layer and multi-domain PCE demonstrator
Proof-of-concept SW demonstrator as cornerstone of an end-to-end QoS
provisioning framework
Multi-layer network management Requirements and functional
specification of a modular NMS supporting centralized and decentralized
path computation (--> PCE) and provisioning (--> GMPLS) across the
involved technology layers
100Gb/s-scalable packet processing Feasibility assessment and
proof-of-concept FPGA demonstrator for a 100Gb/s-scalable NPU
architecture provided by partners
100Gb/s DWDM transmission A set of robust and spectrally efficient
modulation formats, assessed and understood in terms of performance,
complexity, feasibility, and cost. A proof-of-concept FPGA demonstrator
for a 100Gb/s transceiver provided by partners
Duration: 3 years (CELTIC+BMBF, start 01.10.2007)
Major Partners: Nokia Siemens Networks RTP+IPT, CoreOptics, IHP, and
numerous university partners/subcontracts
Metro Metro
Carrier Carrier
Ethernet Ethernet
Metro Metro
Carrier Carrier
Ethernet Ethernet
Metro Metro
Carrier Carrier
Ethernet Ethernet
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
IP
IP
I P
I P
I P
I P
IP
IP
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
I
P
Nationwide/ Nationwide/
Global Global
Carrier Carrier
Ethernet Ethernet
E2E E2E
Ethernet Ethernet
service service
BMBF EIBONE / 100GET-E3
100G Field Trial @ US Tier 1 Operator
40G
10G
111G CP-QPSK Tx
111G CP-QPSK Rx
A/D
Thorsten Wuth, May 2008
see also. ECOC 2008
1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
BMBF EIBONE / 100GET-E3
100G Field Trial @ US Tier 1 Operator
111G CP-QPSK
40G DPSK 40G DPSK
OCR10T V5
OTS 4040
OTS 4040
OCR10T V5
6x
.
.
.
10G PRBS, MZM
2
MZM
MZM
3db
2
MZM
MZM
h
v
IQ-modulator
IQ-modulator
111G CP-QPSK
hiT7500,
13 Spans, 1040km
90
LO
90
ADC
ADC
ADC
ADC
Postprocessing
(offline)
111G CP-QPSK
10G PRBS, MZM
111G Tx 111G Rx
Tx
Rx
Contents
1. Introduction
3. Ethernet Basics
8. Conclusion
Conclusion (1)
Ethernet offers a simple but powerful set of concepts
connectionless transport using MAC addresses
traffic load optimisation using switching
traffic separation using VLANs
link bandwidth increase using Link Aggregation
Network resiliency using Spanning Tree Protocol
Network reliability using "Ethernet First Mile" OAM
Service awareness using Pritority Bits
Availabitlty by offering network and node redundancy
Reliability using rapid recovery mechanisms
Manageability by providing an end to end management
service
QoS by classification of individual user traffic and
treatment according to service levels
Scalability of network and nodes
Conclusion (2)
Carrier Ethernet offers additional concepts
Conclusion (3)
MPLS offers a simple but powerful set of concepts
Addressing using Labels
connection oriented transport using LSPs
traffic separation using LSPs
Network resiliency using Fast Reroute
Service awareness using "Experimental Bits" for
priority marking
Conclusion (4)
NSN offers a unique Carrier Ethernet Transport Solution:
Connection Oriented MPLS-TP
Traffic separation using End-to-End Service
connections
Provisioning System ensures Resiliency,
Reliability and Availability
No Spanning Tree
Network resiliency using Link & Node
protection + Backup VLANs
Full Service awareness offering Classification, QoS,
SLA monitoring
Summary
Is not a single technology but a multilayer network architecture
Enables predictable packet transport networks
Combines flexible electronic packet layer with cost-efficient optical
layer
Efficient multilayer traffic engineering
(IP, Ethernet, NG-SDH/SONET, OTH/WDM)
Efficient end-to-end Quality of Service and resilience
Native transport of layer 2 services
Main forwarding technologies:
MPLS-TP, PBB-TE, ELS
Functionality where needed, simplicity everywhere
Functionality where needed, simplicity everywhere
Thank you for your attention!
Claus G. Gruber and Achim Autenrieth
Nokia Siemens Networks, Germany
{claus.gruber;achim.autenrieth}@nsn.com
Carrier Ethernet Standards
Standardization activities in MEF, ITU-T, IEEE and IETF.

Carrier Ethernet Transport in Metro and Core Network T7 - Gruber - Autenrieth

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Carrier Ethernet Transport in Metro and Core Network T7 - Gruber - Autenrieth

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1 Nokia Siemens Networks

Carrier Ethernet Transport

Pt2Pt , Pt2MPt , other proposals in

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen