future internet a sustainable network andrea soppera – network research centre bt innovate

Future Internet A Sustainable Network

Andrea Soppera – Network Research Centre

BT Innovate

© British Telecommunications plc

Various “patches”NAT, DPI, QoS, Security …

Optics,Terabit routers

Scale: BGPv4

Small academic

TCP congestion control

Sustainable Platform for Innovation?

Rate of innovation

Internet of Things

Uncertain Future

Sustainable

Catastrophe

Plateau


Catastrophe ahead ?

ISP’s traffic policing inhibits new services

ISP’s traffic policing inhibits new services

Big 5 Tier I players go under

Big 5 Tier I players go under

Globality of Internet breaks down

Globality of Internet breaks down

Internet nationalised in ……… ……. ….. … .. .

Internet nationalised in ……… ……. ….. … .. .

World leaders call for action

World leaders call for action

Soaring operational costsSoaring operational costs

Increasing customer concern with service levels

Increasing customer concern with service levels

Limited investment in Super Fast Broadband

Limited investment in Super Fast Broadband

Malicious attack crashes Internet

Malicious attack crashes Internet


Plateau ahead ?

value flow from services to infrastructure broken:• lack of network RoI reduces investment in capacity and capabilities which in tern

limits application innovation• also lack of network RoI causes network operators to limit costs via the

introduction of restrictive practices (DPI etc) which in tern also limits application innovation

rising operational costs:• as complexity rises, operation costs also rise, this coupled with the lack of RoI

causes ever greater restrictive practices for the operator just to maintain his margins plus a spiralling downwards of innovation

limited cross-layer interaction:• limited sharing of information across the network/application boundary stifles

innovation in all areas

security, privacy & trust:• often tackled separately by different parts of the value chain which complicates

solutions, limits opportunities for innovation, drives up costs, reduces viability …


What must be done (differently)

Neither incremental evolution NOR Clean Slate But larger step size in our evolution

Vision 1

Vision 2

Vision 3

Vision driven change Diversity in visions wanted! Plan for transition & change

Integration of research, test-beds, regulation and industry Experimental validation of technologies

but also business and regulatory approaches!


Future Internet Vision: A Sustainable Network

Sustaining Innovation New applications New business models and industry structures Open for innovation Dynamic - MUST sustain change

Economic Sustainability Value flow across the value chain RoI Lower cost of operation

Environmental Sustainability Zero Carbon Internet (2%) Sustaining Internet (ICT impact on 98%)

Socially Sustaining Security, Privacy & Trust Digital divide / access Culture & spiritual background

We need a new sustainable architecture - urgently!

Trilogy Project

Global Network

Infrastructure

Services

Users


Trilogy – An Architecture for Change

Main Objectives Develop a unified control

architecture for the Future Internet that can adapt in a scalable, dynamic and robust manner to local operational and business requirements

Develop and evaluate new technical solutions for key Internet control elements: re-achability & resource control

Assess commercial and social control aspects, including internal & external strategic evaluation

congestioncontrol

load-dependent,multi-path

topology discovery,reachability

routing policyeconomic

drivers

trafficengineering

TRILOGY

re-feedback

reachabilitymechanisms

resourcecontrol

business

Trilogy Concept


Trilogy Design Principles

++

Original Internet design principles

Socio-economic goals

== Trilogy’s ‘tussle-

aware’ Design Principles


Trilogy Design Principles

++

Connectionless datagrams

Packet switching

IP at the waist of the hourglass

End-to-end principle

Accountability (for usage of scarce resources)

Efficiency (maximise utility)

Sustainability (resilience, scalability)

Diversity (of businesses, networks, apps, users…)

==

Information exposure Data (or transaction) integrates

info about its resource usage

Separate policy and mechanism Increase utilization and agility

while controlling the cost of the infrastructure

Fuzzy ends Need application more sensitive

to network usage and network more friendly to applications

Resource pooling Cost effective way for the Internet

to achieve high network utilization and secure future innovation


Scenario: Managing P2P Traffic

Those who take most, get most. Can we afford to have an Internet without resource control?

bit-rate

time

lightusage

heavyusage

“Unfair” TCP sharing

lightusage

heavyusage

Throttling Heavy User – “DPI Solution”

lightusage

heavyusageAllow faster

light usage.

Better Customer Experience


Packet Forwarding

Transport Apps/Network

Control

Apps/Network Policy

Socio Economic

Sender

ReceiverRe-Feedback + Multi-Homing

Applications control “Sharing of Resources”“Routing + Transport”

Multi-Path, Multi-Layer, Multi-session

w

xi , pi

Si xi · pi

b

upstreampolicer

Prioritize user/service/flows according to “control information”

Network ControlAccountability of Resources

MTCP

Future Internet – A multilayer Incentive Framework

Allowing application to have the freedom to innovate while networks police resource usage

Incentive to have application more sensitive to resource usage

“Application” ensures that service run to user expectations

“Network” ensures that services are accounted on resource usage

Tussles Policy Accountability


Exposure of “Control Information”

Sender

ReceiverCongestion Feedback Router marks packet (red)

Sender re-insert congestion feedback (black)

Network can monitor resource

usage

Sender reveals congestion created

throughout the network

Can the network know the cost of carrying traffic? how user impacts other users/services?

Link between cost and congestion information (Kelly) (e.g. Ryanair). Problem cannot be solved at the IP layer. Within the Internet Architecture this function was given solely to the “End System”

Re-Feedback

Economic Sustainability


Sender

Receiver

w

xi , pi

Si xi · pi

b

upstreampolicer

Can the Network Provider: support an accountable allocation of resources? associate infrastructure costs to customers? provide more QoS to an application?

“Lightweight” Network Control MechanismNo resource allocation and control mechanism in the resources – control at the ingress

Accountability Framework

bit-rate

time

lightusage

heavyusage

“Unfair” TCP sharing

lightusage

heavyusage

Economic Sustainability


Improve Application Performance

The accountability framework provides more freedom to application provider incentivise application to be more sensitive to resource usage

Example: Bit Torrent DNA –(currently penalized by volume despite being friendly).

Application best place to: Exploit co-operative transmission Choose the best path for transmission (e.g. low cost path). Ensure performance but also fairness with other applications. Manage mobility and multi-homing.

Increasing Customer Value


Overall Benefits

High availability, robustness to

overload and low latency.

Increased capacity utilization for voice

and videos.

SaaS – Cloud Based Computing

Resilience at acceptable cost with flexibility and high

utilization

Opportunity to use any spare bandwidth

resource

More bandwidth for more content centric

application

More privacy, security and

greener equipment

Robustness and load balance across

peering links

Everyone gets more freedom but the network is now sustainable


Conclusions

Global Network

Infrastructure

Services

Users

Sustaining Innovation

Economic Sustainability Environmental Sustainability

Socially Sustaining

future internet a sustainable network andrea soppera – network research centre bt innovate

Documents

carbon internet

globality of internet

innovation dynamic

key internet control

new sustainable architecture

lack of network roi

viability slide

operational costs