Upload
aldous-lucas
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Internet2 QBone:Building a Testbed for IP Differentiated Services
INET99June 23rd, 1999
San Jose, California
Ben Teitelbaum<[email protected]>
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Internet2 Dogma:There is a circularity between advanced networks and advanced apps
NetworkedApplications
NetworkEngineering
Enables
Motivate
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Dogma Article1:Inverse Apps Networking circularity has applied to QoS
QoS-needyApplications
NetworkQoS
Inhibited
Prevented
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Dogma Article2:Work with the neediest apps, build a testbed, and turn the arrows around!
QoS-needyApplications
NetworkQoS
Enables
Motivates
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Internet2 QBone Initiative Build interdomain testbed infrastructure
– Balance networking research with providing a service– Experiment and improve understanding of DiffServ– Iterate and improve testbed design
Support intradomain & interdomain deployment Lead and follow IETF standards work
– Some parts of DiffServ architecture cooked; others far from it– Our experience will inform standards process
Openness of R&E community gives us an edge– We can live with somewhat flaky infrastructure– We are open to sharing implementation experiences and measurement
data
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Internet2 QoS Working Group
– Osama Aboul-Magd (Nortel)– Andy Adamson (Michigan)– Grenville Armitage (Lucent) – Steve Blake (Torrent)– Scott Bradner (Harvard) – Scott Brim (Newbridge)– Larry Conrad (Florida State)– John Coulter (CA*net2) – Chuck Song (MCI/vBNS) – Fred Baker / Larry Dunn
(Cisco) – Rüdiger Geib (Deutsche
Telekom)
– Terry Gray (U Washington) – Jim Grisham (NYSERNet)– Roch Guerin (Penn)– Susan Hares (Merit) – Joseph Lappa (CMU)– Jay Kistler (FORE)– Klara Nahrstedt (UIC)– Kathleen Nichols (IETF coordination) – Ken Pierce (3com) – John Sikora (ATT Labs)– Ben Teitelbaum (chair)– John Wroclawski (MIT)– a liaison from each MOU partner
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Internet2 Applications Qualitative and quantitative
improvements in how we conduct research, teaching, and learning
Require advanced networks Examples:
– Interactive research collaboration and instruction
– Real-time access to remote scientific instruments– Large-scale, multi-site computation
and database processing– Shared virtual reality
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Big Problem #1: Understanding Application Requirements What services do tomorrow’s applications
need? Range of poorly-understood needs
– Both intolerant apps (e.g. tele-immersion) and tolerant apps (e.g. large FTPs, desktop video conferencing) important
– Many apps need absolute, per-flow QoS assurances
– Adaptive apps may require a minimum level of QoS, but can exploit additional network resources if available
– Some institutions/users want multiple classes of best-efforts service (CoS) with relative precedence levels
Good
Bad
Intolerant
Better
Tolerant
Adaptive
Need better understanding through experience
Different App Needs
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Big Problem #2: Scalability
Convergence of flows on the core means:– Large numbers of flows through each router– High forwarding rate requirements
Need to support QoS end-to-end, but keep per-flow state & packet forwarding overhead out of the core
Lots of
flows
here!
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Big Problem #3: Interoperability
CampusNetworks
GigaPoPs
GigaPoPs
CampusNetworks
… and between multipleimplementations of network elements ...
Backbone Networks(vBNS, Abilene, …)
... between separately administered and designed clouds ...
… is crucial if we are to provide end-to-end QoS.
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
DiffServ for Internet2 July 1997 - February 1998
– WG struggled to understand needs of advanced applications / realities of QoS engineering
– Frustrations with RSVP give birth to IETF DiffServ
May 1998– WG recommends EF/Premium DiffServ focus for I2 QoS– First Internet2 Joint Applications/Engineering Workshop,
Santa Clara, CA (report on web site)
October 1998– QBone initiative launched
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
DiffServ Overview Exploits edge/core distinction for scalability Applications contract for specific QoS profiles
– Policing at network periphery– A few simple, differentiated per-hop forwarding behaviors
(PHBs) Indicated in packet header Applied to PHB traffic aggregates
– PHBs + policing rules = range of services
Clouds contract for aggregate QoS traffic profiles– Policing at cloud-cloud boundary– Supports simple, bilateral business agreements
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
DiffServ Architecture
Leaf Router (police, mark flows)
Ingress Edge Router (classify, police, mark aggregates)
EgressEdge Router
(shape aggregates)
Corerouters
Corerouters
Bandwidth Brokers(perform admissions control, manage network resources,
configure leaf and edge devices)
BB BB
Source
Destination
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Example Service #1: Premium Contract: leased line emulation at a
specified peak rate PHB = “forward me first” (EF) Policing rule = drop out-of-profile packets On egress, clouds must shape EF aggregates to
mask induced burstiness
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Why Premium First? Simplest absolute service to understand Strongest flavor of DiffServ
– Could support our most demanding applications– Less demanding applications should work fine on
emerging high-performance BE infrastructure
Explore other PHBs (AF) later To understand this, consider “typical” Internet2 performance:
– I2 networks are largely uncongested– Jitter and loss still occur– Route flaps to the commodity Internet still occur
Prem
ium
Assured
Olym
pic (CoS
)
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Typical 1999 Internet2 Performance
East Coast University to West Coast DOE Lab
• Minimum Delay• 50th Percentile Delay• 90th Percentile Delay
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
......
Initial QIG** 11 February 1999 (actual connectivity and participating networks may vary as deployment progresses)
OtherNGIXs
ESNet NREN
Abilene
UMass
UMN
vBNS
MAGPI NYSERNetTexas GP PSCNCNI
CA*Net2
APAN
SingAREN SURFNet
Merit
UMichUPennCMUTAMU Duke NCSU UNC
CTIT
IU
EVLiCAIRNWUUBC
ARDNOC
NTU
NUS
LBNL
AmesANL
KDD Labs
Korea
RISQ
CRC UNB
MREN /STAR TAP
Other DOE Labs
Other NASA Labs
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone BB Group Open group chartered to recommend BB solutions for the
QBone Lead by Sue Hares - Merit Networks Six R&E proto-BBs:
– Merit– BCIT – UCLA
Extensive participation from corporate partners QBone BB requirements draft on web site Prototype inter-BB signaling protocol due soon
– Telia / Luleå University of Technology– ANL/Globus– LBNL Clipper
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Milestones 1998 - 1999 Sep 25th - Call for participation Oct 30th - WG recommends initial QIG participants Dec 1st - 1st QIG / QBone BB meeting (Evanston) Jan 1st - WG makes major push on architecture draft Jan 26th - 2nd QIG / QBone BB Meeting (RTP) Mar 7th - Measurement sub-group drafts QMA Mar 9th - 3rd QIG / QBone BB Meeting (Las Cruces) May 21st - WG opens QIG June 8th - Open QBone interop BOF (Pittsburgh)
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Architecture (10km view) IETF “Diff” (EF PHB) + QBone “Serv” (QPS) QBone Premium Service
– Idea: converge on Jacobson’s VLL “Premium” service– Well-defined SLS:
Peak rate R & “Service MTU” M implying a token bucket meter Near-zero loss Low jitter
– Delay variation due to queuing effects should be no greater than the packet transmission time of a service MTU sized packet
– All bets are off if the reserved interdomain route flaps
Plus important value-adds:– Integrated measurement/dissemination infrastructure– Experimentation with pre-standards inter-domain bandwidth
brokering and signaling
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Measurement Architecture1
Collection metrics, EF and BE...– Active metrics
One-way delay-variation One-way loss Traceroutes e.g. IPPM Surveyors
– Passive metrics Load Discards (suggested) Link bandwidths (suggested) EF reservation load e.g. OCxMon, RTFM, MIBs
Boundary Router
Intra-Domain Premium Path
Inter-Domain Premium Path
ActiveMeasurements
MIB-basedstatistics
PassiveMeasurements
PassiveMeasurements
PM node PM node
AM node
QBone Domain2
QBone Domain1
QBone Domain3
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Measurement Architecture2
Dissemination– HTTP, even for raw data– real-time + archived measurements– Canonical names for:
Metrics Domains
– Standard metric aggregations: Mostly 5-minute aggregations
– Standard URL name space for: MRTG-style plots Raw ASCII data http://<root_URL>/<source_domain>/<dest_domain>/<first_hop>/<date>/<type>.<aggregation>.{html | gif | txt}
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Starting Simply Intradomain
– Van’s campus example – At least 10Mbps everywhere– “Count to ten” admissions control
with no topological knowledge
Interdomain– Could we do something
similar in the early QBone?– Problem: Worst case
down-stream provisioning starts to look pretty bad even with small initial participant set.
H
HH
H
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
... ...
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Generic Internet2 Topology
NGIXs
CC
GigaPoP
C C
GigaPoP
C C
GigaPoP
C C
Abilene
CC
GigaPoP
C C
GigaPoP
C C
GigaPoP
C C
vBNS
L
C
ESNet, NREN, Int’l, ...
L
C
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
ESNet, NREN, STARTAP, ...
Abilene
GigaPoP GigaPoP GigaPoP
GigaPoP GigaPoP GigaPoP
vBNS
Phase 0 Demand Assessment
NGIXs
CC
C C C C C C
CC
C C C C C C
Int’l
L
C
L
C
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Phase 0 Deployment Planning Converge on a consensus reservation matrix Reservations will be static for period of phase Reservation = {S, D, R, M, TR}
– S = source– D = dest– R = peak rate
S, D are on campus network demarks All bets are off if routing between S and D changes All SLSs still bi-lateral, but Internet2 engineering will
facilitate convergence
– M = service MTU– TR = inter-domain traceroute
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Phase 0 Demand Matrix
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 L1 L2
4 6 4 2 12 2
C1 - 2 2
C2 2 - 2
C3 - 10
C4 2 - 2
C5 -
L1 2 2 -
L2 2 2 -
Campus EF Ingress Load
R
D
Campus Policer Config
Implies
Max
imum
EF
load
to b
e of
fere
d fr
om h
ere
… to here
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Coming Attractions... Jun 99: QBone Architecture in last call Jun 99: QBone BB Advisory Council will recommend
a prototype inter-BB protocol Jun/Jul 99: “Phase 0” rollout planning Aug/Sep 99: Interdisciplinary QBone workshop Fall 99: QBone Connect-a-thon (“QCon”) event Fall 99: “Phase 0”
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
For more information... QBone home page:
http://www.internet2.edu/qbone Internet2 QoS Working Group home page:
http://www.internet2.edu/qos/wg