iir london

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Service Intelligence for Optical Networks

Top 50 Companies to Watch

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Internetworking IP Routing and Optical Switching to Build

The Next Generation Intelligent Optical Network

Examining theProgress Being Made by

Standards GroupsK. Arvind

Founding Engineer

arvind@tenornetworks.com

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Plan of the Presentation“Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood”, D. H. Burnham

• IP/O Internetworking Evolution

• IP/O Internetworking Standards – Why, Who, What

• IP/O Control Plane Standards

• IP/O UNI Standards

• Conclusion

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/Optical Internetworking Evolution

• Evolution of carrier network architecture

• Today

• Tomorrow

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Current Generation “Technology is like fish. The longer it stays in the market, the less desirable it becomes”, Andrew Heller, IBM

• SONET 1980s

• IP Tsunami 1990s

• Multi-layer Architecture

• SONET core

• DWDM for capacity

• ATM for intelligence

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

What is wrong? “Every solution breeds new problems”, Murphy’s Law

• SONET provisioning: static, fixed sizes

• SONET+DWDM is expensive

• Fat data pipes: Need SONET multiplexing?

• ATM: OC-3 (predominant), OC-12

• ATM: Complex

• Rack space at POPs and COs

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Next Generation

• Two Layers• Transport Layer

– Bulk Transport

• Service Layer– Service

Intelligence– Bandwidth =>

Revenue

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Transport Layer: Bulk Transport

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Service Layer: Service Intelligence

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Next Generation: Topology View

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Internetworking Standards

• Why?

• Who?

• What?

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Standards: Why?

• Industry: Interoperability vital for success

• Carriers: Best of breed product selection

• Vendors: Faster time to market and revenue

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Standards: Who?“The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from”, A.S. Tannenbaum

• IETF

• ODSI

• OIF

• ANSI T1/X1.5

• ITU

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Standards: What?

• Control Plane– Signaling, Routing,

Protection, Management

• Optical Service Layer– IETF (MPLS/Traffic

Engineering)

• Optical Transport Layer– IETF (MPλS)

• Inter-Layer Control– ODSI, OIF, IETF (O-UNI)

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Standards: What?

• Optical Service LayerOptical Service Layer– IETF (MPLS/Traffic IETF (MPLS/Traffic

Engineering)Engineering)

• Optical Transport Layer– IETF (MPλS)

• Inter-Layer InterfaceInter-Layer Interface– ODSI, OIF, IETF (O-UNI)ODSI, OIF, IETF (O-UNI)

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Transport Layer Control“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past”, George Orwell

• IP/MPLS-based control plane– robust, scalable, well-understood, interoperable, field-tested

• Paradigm: MPλS

• Frame-work: IP over Optical

• Routing Protocols

• Signaling Protocols

• Link Management

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

MPλS

• draft-awduche-mpls-te-optical-02.txt

• Isomorphism between layers– Dynamic provisioning and maintenance of virtual pipes– Virtual pipe = Segments (FEC,λ) stitched together at

cross-connects (LSR, OXC).• Label switching at both layers

• Dynamic provisioning: – Path selection: Automated selection of pipe segments

• Topology discovery (routing protocols), Algorithmic constraint-based routing

– Signaling: Coordinated configuration of cross-connects

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP over Optical Framework

• draft-many-ip-optical-framework-01.txt

• UNI + Optical Transport Layer

• Interconnection Models: Peer and Overlay

• Intra and inter-optical subnet issues:– Addressing, Neighbor discovery, Topology

discovery, Restoration models, Signaling issues

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical Routing Protocols

• draft-komplella-mpls-optical-00.txt

• IS-IS/OSPF extensions

• New TLVs to advertise characteristics specific to optical links.

• Link type TLV, Path sub-TLV, Link Media Type TLV, SRLG TLV

• Link bundling considerations

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical Signaling Protocols

• draft-saha-rsvp-optical-signaling-00.txt• draft-komplella-mpls-optical-00.txt• draft-ashwood-generalized-mpls-signaling-00.txt

• Atomic bi-directional LSP setup• Reduce trail establishment latency• Support for permanent light paths• Fast notification of failures• Generalized label request and label

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical Link Management

• draft-lang-mpls-lmp-01.txt

• Link Management Protocol (LMP)• Bundled link: 1 control + n x data channels• Control channel diverse from data channels• IP encoded• Functions:

– Control channel management– Link connectivity verification– Link property correlation– Fault isolation

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Transport Layer Control: Review

• Paradigm: MPλS • Frame-work: IP over Optical • Routing Protocols • Signaling Protocols • Link Management

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

IP/O Standards: What?

• Optical Service LayerOptical Service Layer– IETF (MPLS/Traffic IETF (MPLS/Traffic

Engineering)Engineering)

• Optical Transport LayerOptical Transport Layer– IETF (MPIETF (MPλS)λS)

• Inter-Layer Interface– ODSI, OIF, IETF (O-UNI)

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Inter-Layer Control

• Inter-Layer Control Coupling Models

• Optical UNI Signaling– Messages– Protocols– Architecture

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Control Coupling Models“People can have the Model T in any color - so long as it's black” - Henry Ford

• draft-ip-optical-framework-01.txt

• Overlay Model (Domain Services Model)– Uncoupled: ~ IP over ATM– Loosely coupled: ~ IP inter-domain routing

• Peer Model (Unified Service Model)– Tightly Coupled: Control planes collapsed

into one

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Collapsed Control Planes

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Overlay Model

• Independent routing domains• Reachability Information

– Loosely coupled: BGP, OSPF/ISIS– Uncoupled: Address registration protocols

• Independent signaling/traffic engineering• UNI signaling: ODSI, OIF• Non-IP service layer: SONET, ATM• Separate administrative domains

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Peer Model

• Integrated routing domain• Complete visibility: One big IP network• Unified traffic engineering/signaling• UNI signaling not required

– draft-ashwood-generalized-mpls-signaling-00.txt

• Data overlay• Both layers are IP-based• Single administrative domain

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Which Model?“Comparisons are odorous”, III,v,15, Much Ado About Nothing

• Peer or overlay?• Deployment and interoperability time frame

– Peer , Overlay

• Legacy infrastructure reuse– Peer , Overlay

• Non-IP service layer– Peer , Overlay

• Power and elegance– Peer , Overlay

• Short Term => Overlay, Long Term => Peer

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI

• Actions

• Messages and TLVs

• Signaling Entities

• Control channels

• Interactions

• Protocols

• Management

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Actions

• Signaling:– Set up, Tear down, Modify light paths– Light path status enquiry– Light path Event Notification

• “Inter-Domain Routing”– Address registration and de-registration

• Service Discovery

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Messages

• draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt

• Lightpath Create Request/Response• Lightpath Delete Request/Response• Lightpath Modify Request/Response• Lightpath Status Enquiry/Response• Lightpath Notification• ODSI/OIF/IETF closely aligned

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: TLVs

• draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt

• Identification-Related Parameters– Light path end points: IP address + logical port– Contract ID: identifies service contract– Light path ID: unique within optical network– User Group ID: RFC 2685 VPN ID– UNI-C ID: IP address of client device

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: TLVs

• draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt

• Service-Related Parameters:– Directionality: Unidirectional or bidirectional– Framing: Signal format (PDH/SONET/SDH etc.)– Bandwidth: Service bandwidth – Transparency: PLR-C, STE-C, LTE-C– Propagation delay: milliseconds– Service level: priority, preemption, QoS

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: TLVs

• draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt

• Routing-Related Parameters– Diversity: List of the following

• Light paths with which resources should not be shared• Type of diversity: node, link, or SRLG diverse

• Security-Related Parameters– To be specified; reuse security parameters of

signaling transport where possible.

• Policy/Accounting/Authorization-Related– To be specified

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Signaling Entities“Traffic signals in New York are just rough guidelines”, David Letterman

• Head End Client (Initiating UNI-C, Trail Head)– IP, ATM, SONET

• Tail End Client (Terminating UNI-C, Trail Tail)

• Third Party Client: ODSI• Head End OXC (Initiating UNI-N)• Tail End OXC (Terminating UNI-N)• Optical Network Controller (ONC)

• Logical or Physical Entity

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Signaling Entities

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Control Channels

• In-Band – Overhead bytes (e.g., SONET Line DCC)– Digital wrapper overhead channel– Signaling, Service Registration

• Out-of-Band– e.g., Ethernet– Signaling only

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI Control Channels

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Interactions

• Who talks to whom and when?– OIF: Traditional UNI ordering

• Head end router, Head end OXC, Tail end OXC, Tail End Router and back

– ODSI: Flexible ordering• Service layer devices Optical Network

Controller– Control Route TLV– Service layer coordination prior to UNI request– Single point of interaction

• Third party signaling

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI: Protocols

• Service Discovery– ODSI: PPP extensions (ODSICP)– OIF: Under development

• Address Registration– ODSI: PPP extensions (ODSICP)– OIF: Neighbor discovery

• Signaling: OIF/IETF, ODSI

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

OIF UNI Signaling Protocol

• OIF/IETF: CR-LDP extensions– draft-aboulmagd-mpls-ldp-optical-uni-00.txt

• Reliable transport for TLVs between router and OXC.

• Create: Label Request, Label Mapping• Modify: draft-ietf-mpls-crlsp-modify-01.txt

• Delete: Label Release, Label Withdraw

• Notification

• New LDP messages: Status enquiry, Status response

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

OIF UNI Signaling Protocol

• OIF/IETF: RSVP-TE extensions– draft-gray-mpls-rsvp-oif-uni-ext-00.txt

• Maps RSVP objects and procedures for UNI• Create: Path, Resv• Modify: LSP setup procedures

• Delete: PathTear, ResvTear (Reliable)• Notification• RSVP Diagnostics (RFC2745): DREQ (Status

enquiry), DREP (Status response)

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

ODSI Signaling Protocol

• ODSI: – UNI is not MPLS– Clients may be SONET, ATM devices

• RSVP/CR-LDP excess baggage?

– Simple protocol sufficient for TLV transport– TCP-based application– Signaling request Build up and

Unwinding of distributed transaction.

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Optical UNI Management

• ODSI MIB, OIF UNI MIB

• Simple

• Monitoring only

• No support for setting up light paths via SNMP.

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Status and Future Direction“If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly”, Macbeth Act I

• ODSI: November time frame• OIF: End of the year• IETF: IP over Optical SIG• Convergence between standards efforts• Long Term Evolution towards Unified Control• Future Work

– Interconnection of optical subnetworks– Dynamic cut through routing

K. ArvindLondon, September 28, 2000

Conclusion"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.” Dan Quayle

• Summary:– Evolution, Why, Who, What

• Tremendous interest and momentum– Interoperability– IP-centric standards