architectural options for metro carrier-ethernet network buildout: analysis & evaluation

100
Architectural Options for Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis Network Buildout: Analysis and Evaluation and Evaluation © Copyright 2009 All Rights Reserved Metanoia, Inc. Critical Systems Thinking™ Metanoia, Inc. Email: experts@metanoia- inc.com Web: http://www.metanoia-inc.com Phone: +1-888-641-0082 Fax: +1-888-641-0086

Upload: vishal-sharma

Post on 22-Apr-2015

1.323 views

Category:

Technology


0 download

DESCRIPTION

This workshop is one of the first that we're aware of to give a detailed taxonomy & analysis of deployment options for Carrier Ethernet-based metro/access networks, in one place. 

We elaborate each option addressing questions like: network architectures possible? Is other supporting technology needed? Or, is it standalone for the applications/services a provider might run, and so on.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Architectural Options for Metro Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout:

Analysis and EvaluationAnalysis and Evaluation

© Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Metanoia, Inc. Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.metanoia-inc.comPhone: +1-888-641-0082Fax: +1-888-641-0086

Page 2: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-2

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel

Overlay

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 3: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-3

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel

Overlay

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 4: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-4

Building Carrier Ethernet Networks Architectural Choices

Three basic options to architect a carrier Ethernet network

Parallel, Overlay, Uniform

Mobile Backhaul – specially designed for wireless data and mobile voice traffic

Hybrids – numerous options, based on operator network status and technology availability, discussed extensively later in this module

Ethernet only in access/metro/core

IP/MPLS only in access/metro/core

Uniform Networks

Carrier Ethernet Network Architectural Choices

Ethernet-based

IP/MPLS-based

Mobile Backhaul

IP/MPLS + Ethernet in parallel, spanning same geographic areaEthernet à L2 servicesIP/MPLS à L3 services

Parallel Networks

Ethernet over IP/MPLS

IP/MPLS over Ethernet

Overlay Networks

Page 5: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-5

Our Analysis Approach For Each Basic Architectural Option

Network Architecture Overall architecture/layout of the network

Logical Structure How the devices are logically connected at the service layer

Physical Realization (of the logical structure) What constructs are used at the transport layer (not PHY transport,

rather the Carrier Ethernet transport) to realize the logical structure

Protocol Stack How tunnelling/interworking occurs in different segments of the

network

Page 6: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-6

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel

Overlay

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 7: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-7

Applicability of Key Technologies:Assessment of Suitability

Reference is to different network segments within the metro network itself Metro Access (referred to in this workshop as “access”)

Metro Aggregation (referred to in this workshop as “metro”)

Metro Core (referred to in this workshop as “core”)

“Eyeball” assessment of which technology is suitable for which particular segment

Ratings Scale based on inherent properties of technology Optimally suited – excellent fit/match for segment

Moderately suited – reasonable fit/match for segment

Minimally suited – could be used, but would not be effective

Not suited – Not recommended for this segment (either incapable or overkill for the segment)

Page 8: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-8

Applicability of Key Technologies:A Comparative Rating

Metro Access

Q-in-Q802.1ad (PB)

üüüGood with small # flows

(few hundreds)

üSuitable for access, but

likely overkill

MAC-in-MAC802.1ah (PBB)

802.1 Qay (PBB-TE) and

PVT

ûWaste, as config./mgt. overhead not worth it

üScalability strained w/

large # flows (thousands)

Metro Aggregation Metro Core

ûUnscalable (due to SPT, flooding, convergence)

üüüIdeally scaled for agg.

ûUnstable and unscalable

(SPT/flooding, mgt.)

üüUseable, gives TE and

manageability

üüüTE/ manageability help long-lived paths, QoS

üüMature tech., suitable, but

needs configuration

üüSignaling, automatic CP

simplify confi.

üüüLong indstry experience, significant best practices

üSuitable, but config. overhead significant

üüüControllability, similarity

to SDH/SONET, resilience

üüüBetter manageability of

aggregated traffic

IP/MPLS

T-MPLS/MPLS-TP

Co

nn

ecti

on

-O

rien

ted

Co

nn

ecti

on

les

s

The above assessment/rating is based on the inherent properties/capabilities of each technology(and not its maturity, availability, and standardization status, which are examined in Module 3)

Page 9: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-9

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel

Overlay

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 10: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-10

Parallel Networks: Network Architecture

Two isolated networks (ships-in-the-night) Different fibers, lambdas, or SDH/SONET channels

Separate systems (for Ethernet and IP/MPLS) or independent cards in the same system

IP/MPLS network can be: p2p, mp2mp

Ethernet network can be PB, PBB, PBB-TE based, and be: p2p, mp2mp, p2mp

Page 11: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-11

Why Parallel Networks?

If majority of metro services are ...

Ethernet

IP/MPLS connections handled by backhauling them from spoke(s) to metro hub, where IP routing is done

IP routing capability not needed in spoke COs

IP or IP/MPLS

Mesh IP/MPLS routers by co-locating with Ethernet switches in all or some CO/POPs

Page 12: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-12

Why Parallel Networks?

Useful when the provider L2 (Ethernet) and L3 (IP/MPLS) networks have

Shared POPs/Cos

MSPPs with both IP/MPLS and Ethernet capabilities

Applicable for operators that wish for both technologies to co-exist with service aggregation

Page 13: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-13

Parallel Networks: Network Layout

PB, PBB, PBB-TE Network

IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network

IP/MPLS Router

Ethernet Switch

Co-located IP/MPLS Router & Ethernet

SwitchIP/MPLS

Ethernet

Hybrid system with two types of line cards

Ethernet Linecard

IP/MPLSLinecard

Page 14: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-14

Parallel Networks: Logical Structure

IP/MPLS Router

Ethernet Switch

Co-located IP/MPLS Router & Ethernet

Switch

Logical IP/MPLSLink

Hybrid system with two types of line cards

Ethernet Switch

Ethernet Linecard

IP/MPLSLinecard

Logical Ethernet Link

Logical IP/MPLSLink

Logical Ethernet Link

Page 15: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-15

Parallel Networks: IP/MPLS Network Realization

Logical Mesh IP/MPLS Layer

Bi-directional logical links

p2p LSPs

mp2p LSPs

Physical links can have Ethernet or SONET/SDH framing

L1 L2

L3

L4 L5

L1

L2

L3

L4

L5

(a) Logical MPLS Network

(b) LSP Realization of Logical Network

Page 16: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-16

Parallel Networks: Ethernet Network Realization

Logical links

E-Line

Physical links with Ethernet framing

Logical Mesh at Ethernet Layer

(Realization via Ethernet entities)

(a) Logical Ethernet Network

(b) E-Line Realization of Logical Network

Page 17: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-17

Parallel Networks: Protocol Stack

In parallel networks, the protocol stack is trivial, since each network is fully independent of the other

For Ethernet it is:

For IP/MPLS it is:

Payload

Ethernet Header

IP Header

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

Varies depending on whether the Ethernet network is PB, PBB, or PBB-TE-based

May vary if further nesting of LSPs is used

Page 18: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-18

Parallel Networks: Assessment

Pros Flexible

IP/Ethernet networks/services can grow independently

Fault isolation Faults in one n/w, do not affect

service in the other

Service independence L2 svcs. not affected by L3 svcs.

and visa-versa

Cons Higher CapEX relative to uniform

network Need 2x fibers, lambdas, or

SDH/SONET channels More systems, cabling; thus,

CO/POP space & power Different mgt. s/w – one for each

network: IP, Ethernet

Greater OpEX More vendors, maintenance Greater number of s/w and mgt.

tools

Good choice if a provider has either an Ethernet- or IP/MPLS-dominant network, and wishes to expand into the other incrementally

Page 19: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-19

Overlay Networks: IP/MPLS over Ethernet

Metro is built using Ethernet switches PB, or PBB, or PBB-TE capable

Requires transport network SDH/SONET, lambda’s or fiber to interconnect switches

Ethernet layer is transmission network Interconnects IP/MPLS routers – using p2p, mp2mp, p2mp constructs

Ethernet network is oblivious to IP/MPLS layer

IP/MPLS routers (U-PE, N-PE, PE) connected in logical mesh or hub-and-spoke, or some mix of two

Page 20: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-20

Why Overlay Networks with IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet?

If majority of metro services are ...

Ethernet

IP/MPLS connections handled by backhauling them from spoke(s) to metro hub, where IP routing is done

IP routing capability not needed in spoke COs

IP or IP/MPLS

Mesh IP/MPLS routers by co-locating with Ethernet switches in all or some CO/POPs

Page 21: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-21

IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Network Layout

PB, PBB, or PBB-TE Ethernet Network

CE

CE

Co-LocatedSystems

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

Co-LocatedSystems

Ethernet

IP/MPLS

Customer Edge Device

Page 22: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-22

IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Logical Structure

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

PB, PBB, or PBB-TE Network

Logical Links

Logical Mesh

Page 23: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-23

IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Realization via E-Line

p2p E-Line service (offered by underlying

Ethernet network)

Logical Links

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

The “transmission network” here is the Ethernet network

Logical network is thus realized using this network’s entities: E-lines

Page 24: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-24

IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Realization via E-LAN

mp2mp Ethernet (E-LAN)

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

The “transmission network” here is the Ethernet network

Logical network is thus realized using this network’s entities: E-LAN

Page 25: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-25

IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Protocol Stack

Ethernet Svc

Co-located Systems

Ethernet

Ethernet

Payload

Ethernet

IP

Payload

MPLS

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

CECE

CE

Ethernet

Payload

Ethernet Network

IP/MPLS

IP/MPLS

Combined IP/Ethernet Switch

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

IP

Payload

Ethernet

IP

Payload

Ethernet

MPLS

PB/PBBPBB-TE

Ethernet

IP

Payload

MPLS

IP

Payload

Ethernet

MPLS

PB/PBBPBB-TE

IP

Payload

Ethernet

MPLS

PB/PBBPBB-TE

IP Service

IP Service orIP/MPLS Service

Ethernet Service

IP

Payload

Ethernet

IP Service

Ethernet Svc

Page 26: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-26

Overlay Networks IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet: Assessment

Pros

Lower CapEX relative to Parallel n/wks Potentially fewer systems (need only

one set for underlying txn. network – here Ethernet)

Less fiber – due to common transport

Simpler mgt – due to fewer systems, and hybrid systems (IP+Ethernet)

Lower OpEx Potentially, one vendor

Single s/w and mgt. tools

Single dept. to manage network

Cons

Lower flexibility relative to Parallel network IP/MPLS & Ethernet networks coupled

Cannot grow independently

Resilience issues Faults in Ethernet network may affect

IP/MPLS service

Good choice if a provider has primarily an Ethernet infrastructure, and wishes to expand into IP/MPLS services

Page 27: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-27

Overlay Networks: Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Metro is built using IP/MPLS devices

p2p, mp2mp IP/MPLS, MPLS-TP/T-MPLS network or any mix

Requires one transport network SDH/SONET, lambda’s or fiber to interconnect IP/MPLS routers

MPLS layer is transmission network Interconnects Ethernet switches – using p2p (VPWS) or mp2mp (VPLS) constructs

VPWS interconnection MPLS network provides a transparent tunnel (network interworking)

VPLS interconnection MPLS network participates in Ethernet switching via VSI (service interworking)

Ethernet switches connected as logical mesh or hub-and-spoke or mesh-star topology

Page 28: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-28

Why Overlay Networks with Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS?

If majority of metro services are ...

IP/MPLS

Ethernet connections are backhauled to metro hub, where Ethernet switching is done

Ethernet switching capability not needed in spoke COs/PoPs

Ethernet

Mesh Ethernet switches by co-locating with IP/MPLS routers in all or some CO/POPs

Page 29: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-29

Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Network Layout

CE

CE Co-Located Systems

Ethernet SVC

IP SVC

IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network

Co-Located Systems

IP/MPLS

Ethernet

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

Customer EdgeDevice

Page 30: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-30

Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Logical Structure

IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

Logical Links

Logical Mesh

Page 31: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-31

Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Realization via VPWS

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

Logical Links

Logical Mesh

p2p PW in IP/MPLS network

Page 32: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-32

Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Realization via VPLS

PW full-mesh (VPLS) withVSI-based routing

Single IP/Ethernet Platform

Page 33: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-33

Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Protocol Stack

Ethernet SVC

Co-located Systems

IP

Payload

MPLS Label

Ethernet

IP

Payload

Ethernet

Payload

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

Ethernet

Payload

IP/MPLS Network

IP

Payload

MPLS Label

IP

Payload

MPLS Label

CE

CECE

CE

Ethernet

IP

Payload

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

PWE3 Label

MPLS Label

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

Ethernet SVC

IP Service

Ethernet Service

IP Service

IP/MPLS

Ethernet

Ethernet SVC

IP Service

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

PWE3 Label

MPLS Label

Ethernet

Payload

PB/PBBPBB-TE

PWE3 Label

MPLS Label

Page 34: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-34

Ethernet-over-PB-over-IP/MPLS (VPWS) Interworking: Protocol Stack

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

LSP Label

VC Label

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

LSP Label

VC Label

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

CustomerPacket

Ethernet SwitchPacket

IP/MPLSRouter Packet

(MPLS)

(PWE3)

Ethernet SVC

Co-located Systems Ethernet

IP/MPLS, T-MPLS, MPLS-TP Network

IP/MPLSEthernet SVC

CE

CE

CE

CE

One-to-one Mapping (No MAC Lookup)

Page 35: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-35

Ethernet-over-PBB-over-IP/MPLS (VPWS) Interworking: Protocol Stack

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

(MPLS)

(PWE3)

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

LSP Label

VC Label

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

LSP Label

VC Label

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

Ethernet SVC

Co-located Systems Ethernet

IP/MPLS, T-MPLS,MPLS-TP Network

IP/MPLSEthernet SVC

CE

CE

CE

CE

One-to-one Mapping (no MAC

lookup)

CustomerPacket

Ethernet SwitchPacket

IP/MPLSRouter Packet

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

Page 36: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-36

Ethernet-over-PB-over-IP/MPLS (VPLS) Interworking: Protocol Stack

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

LSP Label

VC Label

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

LSP Label

VC Label

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

C-DA

5-tag

C-SA

Payload

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

CustomerPacket

Ethernet SwitchPacket

IP/MPLSRouter Packet

(MPLS)

(PWE3)

Ethernet SVC

Co-located Systems Ethernet

IP/MPLS, T-MPLS, MPLS-TP Network

IP/MPLSEthernet SVC

CE

CE

CE

CE

Ethernet bridging VPLS

(VSI MAC Lookup)

VPLSVSI

Page 37: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-37

Ethernet-over-PBB-over-IP/MPLS (VPLS) Interworking: Protocol Stack

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

C-tag

Payload

C-SA

C-DA

(MPLS)

(PWE3)

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

LSP Label

VC Label

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

LSP Label

VC Label

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

Ethernet SVC

Co-located Systems Ethernet

IP/MPLS, T-MPLS,MPLS-TP Network

IP/MPLSEthernet SVC

CE

CE

CE

CE

CustomerPacket

Ethernet SwitchPacket

IP/MPLSRouter Packet

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

C-SA

C-tag

Payload

C-DA

S-tag

B-tag

I-tag

B-SA

B-DA

Ethernet bridging VPLS

(VSI MAC Lookup)

VPLSVSI

Page 38: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-38

Uniform Networks: Network Architecture

One technology used throughout (for all three metro segments) Access, Aggregation, and Core

Technology could be either Ethernet or IP/MPLS

Ethernet-only option Access can be 802.1ad (Q-in-Q)

Metro can be 802.1ah (MAC-in-MAC)

Core can be 802.1Qay (Provider Backbone Bridging – TE)

IP/MPLS-only option Access uses p2p PWs in hub-and-spoke design

Metro uses a meshed VPLS design

Core uses a hierarchically meshed H-VPLS design

Page 39: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-39

Uniform Networks: Ethernet-Only

Network Architecture Comprised typically of access, metro, core segments

Access PB (802.1ad), metro PBB (802.1ah), core PBB/PBB-TE (802.1Qay)

Logical Structure Service-Layer is Ethernet, with remote CE’s knowing each other’s MAC address

Devices at service-layer connected by p2p or p2mp Ethernet tunnels

Physical Realization (of logical structure) Transport layer could be Ethernet or SDH/SONET

Protocol Stack Illustrated ahead ...

Page 40: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-40

Uniform Networks: Ethernet OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack

CE

Access Network(802.1ad)

Aggregation Network(802.1ah)

Core Network(802.1Qay)

Aggregation Network(802.1ah)

Access Network(802.1ad)

PB

IB-BEB

BCB

BCB

PE

PE

B-BEB

B-BEB

BCB

B-BEB B-BEB

BCB

IB-BEB

PB

PE

PE

B-BEB

802.1ad/Q-in-Qencapsulation

802.1ahencapsulation

802.1ahdecapsulation

802.1ad/Q-in-Qdecapsulation

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

CEIB-BEB

IB-BEB

CE

CE

B-BEB

BCB

B-BEB

Provider Bridging (PBB) Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)

Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)

Provider Bridging (PBB)

PBB – Traffic Engineered (PBB-TE)

Switching based on pre-configured fwding tables

- Pinned paths- Based only on B-DA, B-SA, B-Tag - No STP- No MAC learning

Last MileLast Mile

Page 41: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-41

Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS-Only Network Architecture

Comprised typically of access, aggregation (metro), core segments Two options exist: Option 1: Access/Metro (Aggregation) p2p spoke PWs to backbone (core)

PEs, Core H-VPLS mesh between backbone PEs Option 2: Access p2p spoke PWs to aggregation PEs, Metro

(Aggregation)/Core H-VPLS mesh between all aggregation PEs

Logical Structure Service-Layer is still Ethernet; remote CE’s/nPE’s learn MAC addresses Devices at service-layer connected by p2p MPLS LSPs

Physical Realization (of logical structure) Construct used at transport layer are IP/MPLS p2p PWs in p2p LSPs

Protocol Stacks Illustrated ahead ...

Page 42: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-42

Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack (1)

CE

Access Network(p2p PW)

Aggregation Network(p2p PW)

Core Network(PW full mesh, H-VPLS)

Aggregation Network(p2p PW)

Access Network(p2p PW)

VPWS (p2p PW)decapsulation

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

LSP Label

PW Label

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

Payload

CE

CE

CE uPE

P

uPE

PE

PE

P

P

PE

PE

P

P

P

uPE

P

uPE

P

nPE

nPE

P

nPE

nPE

PE

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

Tunnel

Spoke(PW)

Tunnel

Mesh(VPLS

Instance)

Tunnel

Spoke(PW)

Spoke PW

Spoke PWVPWS (p2p) PW encapsulation VPLS

encapsulationVPLS

decapsulation

Full PW Mesh per service

Access + Aggregation spanned by spoke PWs

Page 43: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-43

Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack (2)

CE

Access Network(p2p PW)

Aggregation Network(PW full mesh)

Core Network(PW full mesh, H-VPLS)

Aggregation Network(PW full mesh)

Access Network(p2p PW)

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

Payload

LSP Label

PW Label

S/C-Tag

Payload

S/C-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

Payload

CE

CE

CE uPE

P

uPE

nPE

nPE

P

P

nPE

nPE

P

P

P

uPE

P

uPE

P

PE

PE

P

PE

PE

PE

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

LSP Label

PW Label

C-DA

C-SA

Tunnel

Spoke(PW)

Tunnel

Mesh(VPLS

Instance)

Tunnel

Spoke(PW)

Spoke PW

Spoke PW

VPWS (p2p) PW encapsulation

VPLS encapsulation

VPLSdecapsulation

Aggregation and Core spanned by Full PW Mesh

VPWS (p2p PW)decapsulation

PW Full Mesh

Page 44: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-44

Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS-OnlyObservations

Trade-offs exist between Option 1 and Option 2 in terms of MAC learning and PW scalability

Option 1: PW full mesh in core, spoke PWs upto core nPEs nPEs must learn all customer MAC addresses PW mesh confined to core, thus only core PEs must be meshed Requires one PW mesh per customer’s service instance

Option 2: PW full mesh in agg. + core, spoke PWs upto agg. nPEs nPEs learn all customer MACs, but fewer than in Option 1 PW mesh, however, is between nPEs in all aggregation networks (thus

much larger with more PWs than in Option 1) Requires one PW mesh per customer’s service instance

Page 45: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-45

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Overlay

Parallel

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 46: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-46

Our Analysis Approach For Hybrid Architectures

Network Overview

Overall architecture/layout of the network

Protocol Stack

Explain tunneling/interworking in different network segments

Assessment

Key observations about the architecture

Benefits and drawbacks of approach

Page 47: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-47

Hybrid Architectures: Overview

Involve a combination of IP/MPLS and Ethernet (PB, PBB, PBB-TE)

Access network, customer-edge to provider-edge, is common and typically one of three Ethernet types (so not shown in figures)

Vanilla Ethernet (802.1d)

V-LAN capable Ethernet (802.1q)

S-VLAN capable Ethernet or Q-in-Q (802.1ad)

Two principal hybrid architectures

H-VPLS with PB or PBB Aggregation

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation

Page 48: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-48

Hybrid Architectures Taxonomy

H-VPLS w/ Homogeneous PBB Aggregation

Type I Svc. Interface(S-Tag (B-VID) as delimiter)

Type II Svc. Interface(I-SID as delimiter)

H-VPLS with Heterogeneous PB/PBB Aggregation

Modified PB PE Modified PBB PE

H-VPLS with PB/PBB Aggregation

PBB-capable uPE(PBB uPE, for short)

PBB Migration

PB service frames over H-VPLS core

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation

PBB-capable nPE(PBB nPE, for short)

PBB service frames over H-VPLS core

PB and PBB service frames over H-VPLS core

Page 49: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-49

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type I Interface -- Overview

Type I i/f is a B-tagged i/f with B-VID as service delimiter

Handoff between BCB and N-PE is B-tagged PBB frame

N-PE itself can be transparent to the frames

Treats them as 802.1ad frames

Only need support 802.1ad-style frames

Page 50: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-50

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type I i/f – Operation & Protocol Stack

X X

N-PE N-PE

IP/MPLSPBB PBB

BCBU-PE BCB U-PECECE

C1 D1A1 B1

PBB

Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

IB-BEBIB-BEB

S-Tag I/f (B-VID is Svc. delimiter)

S-Tag I/f (B-VID is Svc. delimiter)

Supports VPLS for B-Tag (need not be PBB-aware)

Raw or Tagged-mode Ethernet PW

All 3 operational modes supported:- Port Mode- VLAN Mode- VLAN Bundling Mode

Page 51: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-51

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation Type I Interface: Assessment

Benefits

No new functionality in VPLS PE

Reduces C-MAC learning and PW mesh in core PEs

Due to I-SID bundling, multiple svc. instances map to one bridge domain (B-VID)

Separates service layer (I-SID) from network layer (B-VID)

Drawbacks

Needs extra replication in core (relative to w/o I-SID bundling)

Unknown unicast, brdcast, or mcast in a single svc. instance (I-SID) leads to full brdcast in core

May be addressed by per-I-SID flood containment

Application of the overlay model Use case: SP has converged to an MPLS core, but prefers Ethernet

aggregation to connect 802.1ad-based access networks A “steady-state” model, once all aggregation networks are 802.1ah-capable

Page 52: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-52

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type II Interface -- Overview

Type II i/f: I-tagged i/f with I-SID as service delimiter

B-Tag is locally significant in PBB cloud, not sent over core

PE must support B-BEB and VPLS functionality

Must interpret I-Tag

Page 53: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-53

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type II i/f – Operation & Protocol Stack

B-Tag

X X

N-PE N-PE

IP/MPLSPBB PBB

B-BEBU-PE B-BEB U-PECECE

C1 D1A1 B1

PBB

Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload Payload

B-DA

B-SA

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

B-DA

B-SA

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

PBB PBB

I-tag I/f(Type II)

I-tag I/f (Type II)(I-SID is svc. delimiter)

Must support B-BEBand VPLS capability

B-VID locally significant in PBB, not xported over core

B-BEB B-BEB

Internal B-VID, enables I-SID

bundling

2 Mapping options-- I-SID à VPLS -- I-SID à B-VID à VPLS

VD-Label

LSP-LabelB-BEB removes

PBB-specificB-Tag

PBB

Page 54: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-54

H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation Type II Interface: Assessment

Benefits

Less replication in core, w/o needing per-I-SID flood containment

Supports tightly & loosely-coupled service domains

Drawbacks

N-PE complex with new capability – needs B-comp for I-SID processing

Potentially larger # of PWs in core, for same # of services (relative to Type I)

Increased segregation of svc. instances (by I-SID) over disjoint PW meshes

Application of the overlay model Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but prefers Ethernet

aggregation to connect 802.1ad-based access networks Good for customers with mcast traffic (w/o mcast pruning fn. at VPLE-PE)

Page 55: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-55

H-VPLS with Heterogeneous Access Modified PB PE -- Overview

Used to interoperate existing 802.1ad (PB) networks with new 802.1ah (PBB) aggregation networks

Both networks connect to an H-VPLS core/backbone

PE interfacing with PB network must support VPLS and IB-BEB functionality

Mapping of S-VID to I-SID

I-SID bundling into B-VID and mapping to a VPLS instance

Page 56: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-56

H-VPLS with Modified PB PEOperation & Protocol Stack

IP/MPLS PBB

CECE

A1 B1

PBB

Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

B-DA

B-SA

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

U-PE2B-BEBN-PE1

C1

X

D1

X

N-PE2

Q-in-Q

S-tag I/f(Type 1)

I-tag I/f(Type II)

Must supportB-BEB and

VPLS

C-DA

S-Tag

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

S-Tag

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

S-Tag

C/S-Tag

S-Tag

-- Participates in local I-SID domain of MPLS core-- Supports I-SID bundling-- 1:1 mapping of S-VID à I-SID

Must supportIB-BEB and

VPLS

U-PE1 BCB

Q-in-Q

Page 57: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-57

H-VPLS with Modified PB PE: Assessment

Benefits

Reduces PW mesh in core

Via I-SID bundling, where group of I-SIDs is mapped to B-VID and to a VPLS instance

Supports tightly, loosely-coupled, and different service domains

Drawbacks

N-PE is complex with new capability – needs IB-BEB functionality

PB PE (N-PE1) needs to learn many C-MAC addresses

Overlay with cascade of IP/MPLS and Ethernet networks Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but has different Ethernet

aggregation/access networks, which have not converged to a single Ethernet technology

Page 58: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-58

H-VPLS with Heterogeneous Access Modified PBB PE -- Overview

Used to interoperate existing 802.1ad (PB) networks with new 802.1ah (PBB) aggregation networks

Both networks connect to an H-VPLS core/backbone

PE interfacing with PBB network must support VPLS and IB-BEB functionality

B-component faces PBB cloud

I-component faces MPLS core, connects to VPLS forwarder

Page 59: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-59

H-VPLS with Modified PBB PEOperation & Protocol Stack

X X

N-PE1 N-PE2

IP/MPLSQ-in-Q PBB

PCBU-PE1 B-BEB U-PE2CECE

1P 1P1P 1P

Q-in-Q

Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW

C-DA

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S-Tag

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VD-Label

C-SA

C-Tag

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

S-Tag

B-DA

B-SA

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

PBB

S-tag I/f(Type I)

I-tag I/f(Type II)

Must support IB-BEB

and VPLS

Must support VPLS for B-tag

(not PBB aware)

C-Tag

S-Tag

I-Comp

B-Comp

-- 1:1 mapping of S-VID to VPLS instance-- S-VID bundle has no counterpart in PBB n/w

Page 60: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-60

H-VPLS with Modified PBB PE: Assessment

Benefits VPLS core can operate without any

modifications Maps tags (I-tag) to VPLS instance

Supports tightly, loosely-coupled, and different service domains

Viable option to incrementally at PBB aggregation networks to existing PB networks over IP/MPLS core

Drawbacks N-PE2 needs IB-BEB functionality

PB PE (N-PE1) must learn C-MAC addresses

Absence of S-VID bundling, implies each I-SID maps to independent PW mesh in core no scaling in PWs

Need same I-SID domain across all PBB aggregation networks for consistent C-VID grouping

Overlay with cascade of Ethernet and IP/MPLS networks Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but has different Ethernet

aggregation/access networks, which have not converged to a single Ethernet technology

Page 61: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-61

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE -- Overview

Used to integrate 802.1ah (PBB) functionality into an IP/MPLS provider network

PBB functionality is embedded in uPE to restrict MAC learning as close to customer as possible

PE at the IP/MPLS core is unchanged, and only needs IP/MPLS and PW capability

Bridging over VPLS network need be only 802.1ad capable as

MAC forwarding is based on B-MAC address space

Service delimiter is based on B-VLAN ID or B-VID

Page 62: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-62

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE: Operation & Protocol Stack

X X

N-PE N-PE

IP/MPLS

CECE

C1 D1A1 B1

PBB

MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

Must support IB-BEB and MPLS/PW encap of C-MAC frames into B- MAC frames

MPLSI/f

MPLSI/f

-- Port Mode-- VLAN Mode-- VLAN-bundling ModeMaps svcs. to I-SIDI-SID à B-Tag (bridge domain)B-Tag à VPLS instance

Spoke PWs per VPLS instance

IB-BEB IB-BEB

Must support MPLS/PWOperates on B-DA, B-SA, B-VID only (not I-SID), so need be 802.1ad capable

Full PW mesh per VPLS instance

MPLSMPLS

LSRU-PE LSR U-PE

Page 63: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-63

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE: Assessment

Benefits PBB functionality at uPE improves

scalability

Multiple I-SIDs per B-VLAN fewer core PWs

N-PE only learns uPE MACs MAC addresses scale

Drawbacks Customer broadcast/mcast frames

must be sent over entire B-VLAN

Greater replication over VPLS PW mesh

As B-VLAN mesh is larger than scope of any particular I-SID

Overlay with IP/MPLS transmission n/w and Ethernet service Use case: SP converged to MPLS in core and aggregation networks I-SID allocation

Global across MPLS networksno I-SID translation needed

I-SID bundling must be consistent across all participating PEs

Page 64: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-64

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE -- Overview

Used to integrate 802.1ah (PBB) functionality into an IP/MPLS provider network

PBB function embedded in nPE, when uPE is not capable

Bridging over VPLS n/w must be 802.1ah capable, as nPE

Assigns an I-SID for each service of a customer

Muxes I-SIDs into a common bridge domain, or B-VLAN

Maps either I-SIDs or B-VLANs to VPLS instances

Page 65: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-65

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE: Operation & Protocol Stack

X X

N-PE N-PE

IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS

CECE

C1 D1A1 B1

PBB

MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VD-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VD-Label

LSP-Label

VD-Label

S-Tag S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VD-Label

LSP-Label

VD-Label

Q-in-Q Q-in-Q

MPLSI/f

MPLSI/f

Must support VPLS and PBB

PWs per customer (one service per PW, no service muxing)

Full PW mesh per customer or cust. grp

Supports-- Port Mode-- VLAN Mode-- VLAN-bundling Mode

IB-BEB

IB-BEB

LSRU-PE LSR U-PE

Page 66: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-66

H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE: Assessment

Benefits

PBB functionality at nPE improves VPLS PW scalability

nPE maps multipe I-SIDs into a B-VLAN fewer core PW meshes

Drawbacks

Spoke PWs terminate at nPE

nPE must learn all customer MAC addresses

Per-service spoke PWs needs significantly more spoke PWs

Since uPE is not PBB aware

Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, but

aggregation n/w is not PBB capable Needs integration of PBB functionality into H-VPLS PE

Page 67: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-67

H-VPLS with PBB Migration

Provides migration path for operators with investments in IP/MPLS (and VPLS) deployments

Enables incremental induction of PBB into the network

Expands scalability benefits of PBB over time with deployment

Three migration scenarios: Non-PBB (802.1ad) encapsulated frames over VPLS core

PBB-encapsulated (802.1ah) frames over VPLS core

Mixed frames (802.1ad and 802.1ah) over VPLS core Depends on capabilities of different edge devices in network

Page 68: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-68

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ad Frames in Core -- Overview

Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks Unchanged – need no modifications

nPE’s require no changes, and need no knowledge of PBB

New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks with PBB functionality on uPE Need IB-BEB functionality on nPE

Required to terminate PBB encap. on incoming frames

Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ad format VPLS core operation is unchanged

Page 69: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-69

H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration 802.1ad Frames in Core: Operation & Protocols

X X

N-PE1 N-PE2

IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS

CECE

C1 D1A1 B1

MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

S/C-Tag

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

Must supportVPLS

S-Tag S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

Q-in-Q PBB

Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2

IB-BEBMPLSI/f

MPLSI/f

I-Comp

B-Comp

I-Comp

B-Comp

IB-BEB

PWs could be per VPLS instance or per service

Spoke PWs per customer (one service per PW)

Page 70: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-70

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ad Frames in Core: Assessment

Benefits

Requires no change to existing access/aggregation n/wk (Q-in-Q)

No change to existing VPLS nPEs (those not facing 802.1ah n/wks)

Drawbacks

nPE1 must learn all customer MAC addresses (as spoke PWs terminate at nPE1)

PBB benefit cannot be leveraged

nPEs need full mesh of PWs

Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, but all

access/aggregation networks are not PBB capable Ideal when SP has single PBB-capable aggregation/access network

Page 71: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-71

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core -- Overview

Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks Unchanged – need no modifications

nPE’s must be upgraded for PBB-based processing (IB-BEB) All Ethernet svc frames over VPLS core are PBB-encapsulated

New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks have PBB functionality on uPE Need IB-BEB functionality on remote nPE PBB encap. of incoming frames terminated at far-end nPE

Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ah format Thus, VPLS core operation is modified

Page 72: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-72

H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration 802.1ah Frames in Core: Operation & Protocols

X X

N-PE1 N-PE2

IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS

CECE

C1 D1A1 B1

MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

LSP-Label

VC-Label

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-DA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2

IB-BEBMPLSI/f

MPLSI/f

I-Comp

B-Comp

I-Comp

B-Comp

IB-BEB

PWs per VPLS instance Spoke PWs per customer

(one service per PW)

Must supportonly VPLS

Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

B-DA

B-SA

B-Tag

I-Tag

S-Tag

C-DA

C-SA

C-Tag

Payload

LSP-Label

VC-Label

PBBQ-in-Q

Page 73: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-73

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core: Assessment

Benefits Reduces MAC learning at nPEs

Due to PBB at nPEs, thus giving MAC address scalability

Lowers PW mesh counts in core Multiple customer instances can

be bound to a single B-VLAN and VPLS instance

Drawbacks Must upgrate nPEs of all existing

MPLS access/aggregation n/wks nPE needs IB-BEB functions

Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, and

wishes to have the benefit of PBB scaling in the VPLS core Useful for the operator whose MPLS access/aggregation networks are

being upgraded to support PBB IB-BEB at uPEs

Page 74: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-74

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: Mixed Frames in Core -- Overview

Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks unchanged Exchange Ethernet frames with 802.1ad format over PWs in core

nPE’s must be upgraded for PBB-based processing (IB-BEB) All Ethernet svc frames over VPLS core are PBB-encapsulated

New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks have PBB functionality on uPE Exchange PBB-encap frames over VPLS core

Interworking b/ween PBB-capable and PB-capable requires that nPE of PBB network has IB-BEB functionality

Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ah/802.1ad format

Page 75: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-75

H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration Mixed Frames in Core: Operation

X X

N-PE1 N-PE2

IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS

CECE

C1 D1A1 B1

MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW

Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2

IB-BEBMPLSI/f

MPLSI/f

I-Comp

B-Comp

I-Comp

B-Comp

IB-BEB

PWs per VPLS instance

Spoke PWs per customer (one service per PW)

Must supportonly VPLS

-- Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW

-- Needs IB-BEB and B-BEB capability

-- Should be aware of remote PEs’ capabilities – via static config. or extended VPLS control plane

Non-PBB CapableExisting Access Networks

PBB- CapableNew Access Networks

B-BEB

Q-in-QPBB

PBBQ-in-Q

Protocol stack is a combination of those shown earlier for 802.1ad and 802.1ah in core

Page 76: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-76

H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core: Assessment

Benefits

Core can serve both PB-encapsulated and PBB-encapsulated frames

Lowers PW mesh counts in core

For PBB-capable aggregation networks

Drawbacks

Must upgrate nPEs of PBB-capable access/aggregation n/wks. nPE needs

IB-BEB to interface with PBB network

B-BEB to interface with PB network

PE must be aware of remote peer’s capability

Requires either static config. or VPLS control plane extensions

Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, has a

mix of PB- and PBB-capable access/aggregation networks

Page 77: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-77

Workshop Outline

Overview of Architectural Options

Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,

MPLS-TP

Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Overlay

Parallel

Uniform

Mobile-Backhaul

Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis

Page 78: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-78

Mobile Backhaul Architectures

Mobile backhaul architectures derive from the basic and hybrid architectures presented earlier

We examine them separately due to their unique needs:

Interface with the core network

Timing and synchronization requirements

Evolution requirements – from TDM or ATM to IP/MPLS and/or Ethernet

Page 79: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-79

Evolution of Cellular Technology: 2G to 4G 2G

GSM (TDM, 56-114 kbps)

2.5G GPRS, EDGE (TDM, 236-473 kbps) CDMA 1XRTT (HDLC, TDM, 144 kbps)

3G WCDMA/UMTS (3GPP) (R99, R4) (ATM, 384 kbps uplink, 2Mbps downlink) UMTS (3GPP) (R5 (HSDPA), R6 (HSUPA))( IP, 2-3 Mbps) EV-DO (3GPP2) (Rev0, RevA, RevB, RevC) (IP, 1.8 Mbps uplink, 3.1Mbps

downlink)

4G (LTE) 3GPP (R7/R8) (IP, >50 Mbps uplink, >100 Mbps downlink) WiMAX (802.16e, 802.16m) (IP, 50-100 Mbps)

Page 80: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-80

Evolution of Cellular Technology and Backhaul Types

Network Speed Interface

GSM/GPRS

EDGE

3G (UMTS/WCDMA) R3, R4

3G, R5 (HSDPA), R6 (HSUPA)

LTE R8 (20 Mhz)

CDMA1X-RTT

CDMA EV-DORev A/B

WiMAX (10 Mhz)

56-114 Kbps TDM

236 – 473 Kbps

384 Kbps Uplink14.4 Kbps Downlink

500 Mbps Uplink>100 Mbps Downlink

100 Kbps

1.8 Mbps Uplink1.8 to 5 Mbps Downlink

384 Kbps Uplink384 Kbps Downlink

TDM

ATM

IP/Ethernet

IP/Ethernet

IP/Ethernet

TDM

IP/Ethernet50 Mbps

Backhaul Types

2G

2.5G

3G

4G

Legend

Page 81: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-81

Mobile Backhaul Components Backhaul network – defined as the network that connects

Base Transceiver Station (BTS, or Base Station) to Base Station Controller (BSC) in 3GPP2 – GSM-based cellular networks

Node-B to Radio Network Controller (RNC) in 3GPP – CDMA-based cellular networks

Traditional backhaul networks have used ... E1/T1 leased lines SONET/SDH TDM channels (for higher rate aggregation)

Mobile transport infrastructure has hitherto been ... Microwave links Optical fiber with SDH/SONET

Evolution to packet-based wireless services creates a push for the transport itself to be packet-based: Ethernet or IP/MPLS or a combination

Page 82: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-82

Traditional Backhaul Evolution

SDH/SONET Network

BSC

RNC

TDMTI/EI Cellsite

Gateway

ATM

nxE1

T1/E1/STM

E1

ATM

3G BTS

2G BTS

ATM Switch

SONET/SDH XConnect

SONET/SDH XConnect

Separate transmission facilities for different technologies (TDM and packets)

Page 83: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-83

Mobile Backhaul Challenges

Exponential growth in mobile subscribers 3 Billion subscribers (2007) Expected to touch 5 Billion by 2013! Leads to massive increase in traffic volume

Shift in mobile traffic patterns High-speed data, including multimedia traffic (video, VoIP, IMS) Bandwidth insensitive but QoS sensitive applications! With increasing speed, revenue-per-bit is decreasing

Result is that traffic and revenue are decoupled !

These trends lead to massive increase in traffic volume

Backhaul accounts for 30% of OpEX (Per Yankee Group 2005)

Traditional backhaul unsustainable with such traffic growth

Page 84: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-84

Key Performance Requirements for Mobile Backhaul

Delay – budget for entire RAN is 100ms

Backhaul segment delay must be < 3-4 ms

Loss – Target BER is

2G networks = 10-7

3G networks = 10-5 to 10-4

Synchronization – Frequency and Time accuracy

2G: 50 ppb freq. accuracy at radio interface

3G: 50 ppb freq. accuracy and 2.5 s time accuracy for TDD

WiMAX: 8 ppm freq. for FDD/TDD, and 5-25 s time accuracy for TDD

Page 85: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-85

Backhaul Strategy Fundamentals

Future-Proof Should support existing legacy (TDM) infrastructure Evolving new packet-based and IP services using diverse and

coexistent technologies

Scalable Grow b/w to support next-gen. wireless access technology LTE/4G Ethernet interfaces versus nxT1/E1

Cost Effective – reduce OpEx

Must meet timing and synchronization targets

Simplify provisioning & planning – advanced OAM, troubleshooting

Page 86: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-86

Timing and Synchronization

ITU-T G.8261 specifies timing & synchronization in packet networks

Synchronization needed for Radio framing accuracy, hand-off control, backhaul transport

reliability

Three Methods Synch. Ethernet: Similar to SONET/SDH -- embed clock in PHY layer

Requires changes in PHY chip

IEEE 1588 (Precision Time Protocol) Distributed protocol: specifies how real-time PTP clocks synchronize

IEEE 802.1as Aimed at adapting IEEE 1588 to Carrier Ethernet

Page 87: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-87

Clock Distribution Methods Used

Physical Layer Clock Via synchronous TDM i/fs e.g. PDH/SDH/SONET Via Sync. Ethernet as per G.8261/G.8262

GPS-receiver based synchronization

Clock distribution over packet network IEEE 1588v2 – being looked at in ITU-T Q13/SG15, who are developing

a telecom profile for 1588 v2 NTP – IETF currently working on NTP v4

Adaptive and Differential clock synchronization

Page 88: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-88

Packet Transport for Mobile Backhaul

Packet-based transport can provide high bandwidth at lower cost (than TDM transport)

Ideal choice for LTE and 4G technologies

Challenges ...

Support legacy traffic (TDM and ATM ) via circuit emulation

Meet timing and synchronization requirements

Provide QoS and protection switching

Furnish advanced OAM capabilities

Page 89: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-89

Pseudowires (PW) for Legacy Transport

Encapsulation

Structure-Agnostic TDM-over-IP (SAToIP) (RFC 4553)

Structure-Aware TDM Circuit Emulation (CESoPSN) (RFC 5086)

ATMoPSN (RFC 4717)

Carrier EthernetNetwork

PE PECE

(BTS)

BSC

WirelessCore

AC AC

PSN Tunnel

PW

AC: Attachment CktPE: Provider Edge

CE : Customer Edge (BTS)BSC: Base Station Controller

PSN Tunnels May be IP/MPLS, T-MPLS/MPLS-TP, or

PB/PBB/PBB-TE based

PW Signaling

Page 90: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-90

PBB/PBB-TE for Mobile Backhaul

Connection-oriented p2p tunnels b/ween BTS (BS) -- BSC (NC)

Provides MEF-style EVPL/EVP-Tree between RAN BS and RAN NC

IEEE 802.1ag OAM enables carrier-grade OAM tools

Delay/loss ensured via admission control & 802.1Q PCP

Supporting Legacy TDM over PBB/PBB-TE

IETF has draft on PW over PBB-TE

802.1ah supports encap. of non-Ethernet frames (via short I-TAG TCI)

Page 91: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-91

PBB/PBB-TE for TDM Encapsulation

We show I-SID with C-DA and C-SA but without Ethernet encapsulation

IEEE 802.1ah PBB Short & Long I-Tag

DEIEtc.

I-SID(Service Identifier)

C-DA C-SA

Long I-TAG Tag Control Information

DEIEtc.

I-SID(Service Identifier)

Short I-Tag(Only I-SID used for encapsulation of multiple protocols)

EtherType used to indicate encapsulation of Ethernet or multiple protocols

Page 92: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-92

MEF Services for Mobile Backhaul

Metro EthernetEVC EVC

RNC

BSC

Service Multiplexing

BTS BTS

RNC

BSC

BTSBTS

BTS

mp2mp EVC

Metro Ethernet

Services muxed at RNC UNI Needed when inter-BS communication is permitted like in LTE/802.16m (WiMAX)

EVPL Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks

EP-LAN Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks

Page 93: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-93

MEF Services for Mobile Backhaul

Metro Ethernet

EVC EVC

RNC

BSC

Service Multiplexing

BS/BTS

BS/BTS

BS/BTS

EP-Tree Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks

Page 94: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-94

IP/MPLS for Mobile Backhaul

MPLS PW/VPLS can provide effective backhaul

Traditional circuit-based services are offered using PWs

PW signaling – uses either BGP or LDP

Protection switching

Achieved via MPLS Fast Reroute (FRR) on LSP tunnel

OAM provided by

LSP Ping, VCCV

BFD

Page 95: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-95

IP/MPLS and PBB/PBB-TE Caveats

Poor support for P2MP LSPs in MPLS

Such support is desirable:

For Clock Distribution from BSC to BTSs

When BSs allowed to communicate with each other and cooperate as in WiMAX/LTE

PW over PBB-TE is not fully developed

Page 96: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-96

Migration Strategies for Service Providers

HSDPA/3G Data Off-load

Separation of transport

GSM/UMTS voice sent over SONET/SDH

Data traffic transported over PSN tunnel

Packet-based Backhaul

TDM/ATM/Ethernet/IP all transported over PSN tunnel via PWs

Converged Transport

Single packet-switched infrastructure for wireline, broadband and mobile services

Page 97: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-97

HSDPA/3G Data Off-Load

SDH/SONET Network

TDMTI/EI

Cellsite Gateway

ATM

TI/EI/STM

3G BTS

2G BTS

Carrier EthernetNetwork

2G BSC

3G RNC

Ethernet

Multi-ServiceAggregation

Router

nxE1

Wireless Core

SONET/SDH XConnect

SONET/SDH XConnect

Ethernet Switch

Ethernet Switch

Page 98: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-98

Packet-Based Backhaul

BSC

RNC/GW

TDMCellsite

Gateway

ATMTI/EI/STM

3G/4G BTS

2G BTS

Ethernet

Carrier EthernetNetwork (PSN)

PE PE

IP/ATM/Ethernet/TDM are all transported over the PSNTunnel using PWs

Page 99: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-99

Converged Packet-Based Transport

Converged Service Delivery Platform

3G/4G Base Station Aggregation

NetworkConverged Metro Core

AccessNetwork

Internet

Common packet-switched infrastructure for both wireline and wireless services

Page 100: Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Analysis & Evaluation

Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved

Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™

Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-100

Backhaul References MEF White Paper, “Carrier Ethernet Access for Mobile Backhaul Networks”, Feb

2008.

MEF Technical Specification Draft 2, “Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement- Phase 1”, Feb 2008

Nortel Networks White Paper, “Mobile Network Evolves with Carrier Ethernet”, 2008.

ITU-T G.8261, “Timing and Synchronization Aspects in Packet Networks”, Sept 2007.

IP/MPLS Forum White Paper, “Use of MPLS Technology in Mobile Backhaul Networks”, Feb 2008

Kireeti Kompella and Mallik Tatipamula, “IP/MPLS in Next Gen Mobile Backhaul Networks”, MPLS 2007.