Internet2 Update R/D and Infrastructure

1
Internet2 UpdateR/D and Infrastructure

• Guy AlmesInternet2 Project
• ltalmes_at_internet2.edugt
• NANOG MeetingDearborn 9 June 1998

2
Outline of the Talk

• Technical Working Groups
• The Challenge of Delay-Bandwidth Products
• Abilene Project Update

3
Applications and Engineering
Applications
Motivate
Enables
Engineering
4
Comments on Apps and Plumbing

• Advanced applications transform high-speed
  plumbing into value
• Advanced plumbing enables advanced applications
• Profligate use of bandwidth, per se, does not
  make an application advanced
• Megalomaniac plumbing, per se, does not make the
  plumbing advanced

5
Technical Working Groups

• IPv6
• Measurement
• Multicast
• Network Management
• Network Storage

• Quality of Service
• Routing
• Security
• Topology

6
IPv6

• Chair Dale Finkelson, Univ Nebraska
  ltdmf_at_unl.edugt
• Membership Total 12 9 .edu, 3 .com, 1 .gov
• Focus
• Explore the rôle that IPv6 might play in the
  Internet2 project
• Work with those interested in IPv6 to build IPv6
  testbeds across the Internet2 structure,
  including vBNS and Abilene

7
Measurement

• Chair David Wasley, Univ California
  ltdavid.wasley_at_ucop.edugt
• Focus
• Places to measure
• at campuses, at gigaPoPs, within interconnect(s)
• Things to measure
• traffic utilization
• performance delay and packet loss
• traffic characterization

8
One example measurement technology

• IETF IPPM WG defining one-way delay
• Take all delay to be due to
• Propagation
• Transmission
• Queuing
• Variation in delay suggests congestion

9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
Multicast

• Chair vacant Dave Meyer, Univ Oregon still
  serving
• Nearing completion of naming a successor
• Membership Total 3 3 .edu
• Focus Make native IP multicast scalable and
  operationally effective

15
Network Management

• Chair Mark Johnson, MCNC ltmj_at_ncren.netgt
• Membership Total 4 3 .edu, 1 .com
• Focus
• Common trouble ticket system
• How can all our interconnects and gigaPoPs and
  universities appear to be a seamless whole?

16
Network Storage

• Chair Micah Beck, Univ Tennessee ltmbeck_at_utk.edugt
• Membership Total 13 9 .edu, 4 .com
• Focus Distributed Storage Infrastructure for
  Internet2
• Replication
• Physical proximity
• Transparency

17
Quality of Service

• Chair Ben Teitelbaum, Internet2 staff
  ltben_at_internet2.edugt
• Membership Total 36 17 .edu, 19 .com
• Focus Multi-network IP based QoS
• Relevant to advanced applications
• Interoperability carriers and kit
• Scalable
• Administratable and Measurable
• Hosts, campus/gigaPoP/Interconnect
  routers/switches

18
Quality of Service Sketch
A
B
Does the approach support advanced
applications? Are there implementations that
work? Only one? If cloud A and cloud B
both implement QoS, does the combined AB
catenation implement QoS?
19
QoS, continued

• Results to date
• Requirements document
• Series of technical recommendations
• First Internet2 Joint Applications/ Engineering
  QoS WorkshopSanta Clara, CaliforniaMay 21-22,
  1998Hosted by Bay Networks

20
Routing

• Chair Steve Corbato, Univ Washington
  ltcorbato_at_cac.washington.edugt
• Membership Total 48 32 .edu, 16 .com
• Focus Internal and External routing
• Critical issues
• gigaPoP internal routing design
• Explicit routing requirement (the fish problem)
• Met at UCSD in January (21 attendees)
• gigaPoP external routing recommendations
• Subscribers (Internet2 campuses)
• National interconnects (vBNS, Abilene, and NGI
  networks)

21
Security

• Chair Peter Berger, Carniege Mellon Univ
  ltpeterb_at_hoopoe.psc.edugt
• Membership Total 13 13 .edu
• Focus
• Authentication
• Application to QoS
• Application to Digital Libraries

22
Topology

• Chair Paul Love, Internet2 staff
  ltepl_at_internet2.edugt
• Membership Total 16 13 .edu, 2 .com, 1 .gov
• Focus Topology of Internet2
• Internal Internet2 Connections
• Internet2 with other Advanced Research Networks

23
Summary

• Internet2s WGs focus on projects needs
• Complement IETF WGs
• Membership by invitation - welcome participation
  by Internet2 corporate members

24
Large Delay-Bandwidth Products

• As the product of delay and bandwidth grows
• The number of unacknowledged packets grows
• It becomes more difficult to sustain a steady
  stream of data from end to end
• Several consequences
• Need for direct physical paths
• Tradeoff between buffering and variation in delay

25
A pessimistic result from Mathis et al.

• Mathis, Semke, Mahdavi, and Ott, "The Macroscopic
  Behavior of the TCP Congestion Avoidance
  Algorithm", Computer Communication Review, July
  1997.
• www.psc.edu/networking/papers/model_abstract.html
  
• BW ? C packet-size / (delay ? packet-loss)

26
Consider the implications for the
internationalhigh-performance Internet

• BW ? packet-size
• BW ? 1 / delay
• BW ? 1 / ? packet-loss

27
Example Delay
BW ? C / delay
delay due to distance
original raw bandwidth
28
Example Delay with fatter pipe
BW ? C / delay
delay due to distance
more raw bandwidth
29
Example Packet Loss

• similar phenomenon, but
• to double bandwidth, you must
• cut packet loss by four

30
Abilene Update

• UCAID Project
• Addresses infrastructure needs of Internet2

31
Goals and Objectives

• Provide high-quality, widely available
  Interconnect among participating
  gigaPoPs/universities
• Connect to Internet2 members via the vBNS and to
  other key research/ education sites via
  Internet2/NGI-class federal and non-US nets

32
Goals and Objectives, continued

• Support QoS architecture as it evolves
• Support other advanced functionality as it
  evolves
• Maximize Robustness
• Minimize Latency
• Provide Capacity to Avoid Congestion

33
Evolution of Abilene with Time

• Phase 1 use of operational Qwest Sonet
• Phase 2 use of separate wavelengths
• Phase 3 use of separate fibers
• Allows capacity to grow with Internet2 needs

34
Key Attributes

• IP over Sonet
• Benefit from Qwest OC-48 Sonet capacity and
  collocation sites
• Benefit from Nortel OC-192 Sonet kit and Lucent
  fiber
• Benefit from Cisco GSR 12000 routers

35
Architecture Core

• About 11 (up to 30) core nodes
• Each located at a Qwest PoP
• Each with a Cisco 12008 router
• Rack also contains measurements/ management
  computers
• Interior lines connect core nodes
• OC-12 and (eventually) OC-48 Sonet
• IP-over-Sonet interfaces

36
(No Transcript)
37
Subset of Route Map of Interest to Abilene
sttl
bstn
syrc
milw
chcg
dtrt
alby
clev
eugn
mpls
nycm
pitb
ipls
phil
scrm
slkc
kscy
dnvr
tpka
lsvl
wash
rcmd
nsvl
albq
rlgh
atln
anhm
phnx
hstn
elpa
nwor
tlhs
38
Attitude toward interior lines

• Robustness mesh plus Sonet
• Latency direct physical paths
• Capacity avoid congestion

39
Architecture Access

• Access node at many Qwest PoPs
• Qwest Sonet switches needed equipment
• Access lines connect from core node to gigaPoP
• Local part gigaPoP to access node
• Long distance part access node to core node
• IP-over-Sonet or IP-over-ATM possible
• OC-3 and OC-12 typical

40
One cost-sharing implication

• Long-distance part of access line is considered
  part of the backbone
• Thus, number/location of core nodes does not
  affect costs borne by gigaPoP

41
One robustness implication

• Each access line is Sonet
• Long-distance part (at least) will be configured
  from protected Sonet ring
• Thus, single access line can tolerate a break in
  the long-distance part of the access line

42
OK, so wheres the map?

• Self-selection is key
• Each gigaPoP will determine where, when, at what
  speed it connects
• Detailed topology will be based on engineering
  considerations