Service Provider LoB G2M Plan 2013

Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation CommunicationsPresented by:Motty AnaviVP Business DevelopmentEntelec ConferenceSpring 2013Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#1AgendaUtility Network Migration ProcessFactors and Influencers on MigrationMigration OptionsProcessTechnologyLooking at the New TechnologyReliabilityServicesStill OutstandingSummaryEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#The Legacy Utility NetworkOnly TDM based Strict and well known and tested protocolsCyber Security in not a major concernDelay is not an issueUbiquitously supported by carriers and service providersADM

ADM

Tele-ProtectionC37.94

RTURS-232

Sub-StationT1/E1PBX

Multiplexer

T1/E1ADM

RTURS-232

Sub-Station4WPhone

Control Console

Power Line

Control CenterMultiplexer

Server

NMS

PBX

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Migrating to Packet NetworksObsolescence of equipmentLack of support for 4W serviceImproving and streamlining of Telecom networkNew standards for Sub Station ServicesIEC61850M2M communicationsNew challenges with Packet NetworksCyber SecurityNew Characteristics of transport (More Delay, Compatibility)

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#The Evolving Telecom NetworkADM

ADM

Tele-ProtectionC37.94

RTURS-232

Sub-StationT1/E1PBX

Multiplexer

T1/E1ADM

Tele-ProtectionC37.94

RTURS-232

Sub-StationT1/E1PBX

Multiplexer

Switch

Control Console

Power Line

Control CenterPBX

Server

NMS

RTURS-232

PMU/ Small SS

RF-3080

Multiplexer

Packet Network

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Challenges: Next Generation Migration UncertaintyChallenges in switching to All PacketNot all critical application capable of migrationMaintain smooth operation of current networks, despite discontinued vendor productsAvoid over-burdening network operations and management due to TDM/PSN transport co-existenceReconcile required investment in SDH/SONET equipment with decommissioning plansAvoid CapEx hikes related to increase in number of network devices:Continue using legacy installed-base while introducing IP/Ethernet devicesEnsure service quality for mission critical apps (e.g., Teleprotection)

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#6Challenges: Next Generation Migration Technology AspectSmart Communications over PacketService assurance for mission critical apps in PSN environment:Low end-to-end delay High AvailabilitySDH/SONET-level ResiliencyDifferentiated quality of service for SCADA, video surveillance, voice, Teleprotection, radio and data traffic Remote operations, administration and maintenance (OAM) for fault management and lower OpExEfficient connectivity for IEC 61850 intelligent electronic devices (IEDs)Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#7The Migrated Telecom NetworkTele-ProtectionC37.94

RTURS-232

Sub-StationT1/E1PBX

ADM

Tele-ProtectionC37.94

RTURS-232

Sub-StationT1/E1PBX

Next Gen MS

Control Console

Power Line

Control CenterPBX

Server

NMS

PS Network

Next Gen MS

Firewall

Firewall

RTURS-232

PMU/ Small SS

Firewall

MS Gateway

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#The ChallengesSelecting the winning packet networkNot all applications can be transported over packetApplication issuesSecurity concernsUpgrading ancillary equipment to be Packet CompatibleOr making adjustment to the networkTraining or retraining of workforceMassive capital expense with a complete upgradeComplexity of maintaining two or more networksBuying more equipment with a short usability timeframe

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Addressing the Challenges: The OptionsHigh operating costsLow scalabilityNot flexibleKeep my legacy forever!Utilize existing assetsDeterministic performance No learning curveHigh equipment costsNon-deterministicSteep learning curveMove everything to packet!Flexible & scalableLow OpExFuture supportAsset lifespanGradual migrationGuaranteed performanceModerate learning curveFuture ready designEvolution instead of RevolutionEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#Option 1: Stay with Legacy systemsPros:if it works do not break itMaximize asset lifespanDeterministicNo learning curveCons:Cost (CaPex, OpEx)Scalability, flexibility, CapacityStay behind

Option 2: Move everything to PSNPros:Flexible, Scalable, high capacityFuture proofCons:Loose existing assetsNon deterministic pose performance issuesRequires a high learning curve (new staff etc)Not needed in all cases

Option 3: Evolution not RevolutionPros:Best of both worldsFuture proof designGuaranteed performance of mission critical servicesOptimized use of existing assetsCons:Requires a medium learning curve (new staff etc)Multiple technologies at the same time

10The Core Replacement ChoicesIP/MPLSAdded deterministic paths to IPUsed as a core TechnologyNo Built-in Security MechanismStill untried as access technologyCoE (aka Carrier Ethernet)Mature TechnologyEnhanced and updatedEstablished Security Protocol supportConnection Oriented Ethernet

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#IP/MPLS HighlightsMature TechnologyWidely usedDeterministic routingNo Built-in SecurityAll paths for packets setup on connection establishmentWell established resiliency mechanismsNo built-in security (very susceptible for cyber attacks)Different in architecture than existing SONET/TDMFairly unaffordableEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#CoEthernet HighlightsMature TechnologyNewly enhanced Connection Oriented Ethernet technologyBuilt in Security including Source authenticationSimilar to SONET/SDH in terms of architecture and TerminologyCoE developed mechanisms for:Deterministic network performanceDetection of Network failureMeasurement of network performanceVery fast restoration of service (Sub 10ms)Very affordableEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#An IP/MPLS Based NetworkArchitecture is very different than SONET/SDH (Similar to IP)New set of addressable valuesEach device now requires new management connectionTraining is a challengeSusceptible to cyber attacks with no source authenticationNetwork performance is predictableIn network delay is manageable and could be designed to be lowExtremely high equipment costsBuilt in fast resiliency

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#A CoE Based NetworkArchitecture similar SONET/SDHConnection based virtual circuitsSimilar OAM terms (AIS/RDI etc.)Training simpleMore resilient to cyber attacks with source authenticationNetwork performance guaranteed by CoE OAM measurementsIn network delay can be designed to be lowRelatively low equipment cost regardless of network size or number of nodesBuilt in fast resiliency

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Comparing The TechnologiesConnection SetupSONET : Hard coded paths mapped through ADMsCoE: Hard coded EVCs mapped through Switches with pre-determined prioritiesMPLS: Dynamic path setup based on IP addressing and exchanging routing tablesVulnerability of connectionsSONET: All connections are initiated by NMSCOE: All connections are initiated by NMSMPLS: Connections made dynamically and are vulnerable to errored/malicious routing information

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Comparing The TechnologiesTroubleshootingSONET : Comprehensive troubleshooting built in with OAM bits propagating faultsCoE: Comprehensive troubleshooting built in with OAM packets propagating faultsMPLS: No built-in OAM mechanism for localizing faults relies on other overlays to initiate backup pathsResiliencySONET: Ring resiliency to a predetermined pathCOE: Ring and path resiliency to a pre-determined path within 10msMPLS: Ring or Mesh resiliency depending on topology

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Comparing SecuritySource Authentication:MPLS No source authentication, once entering an CE/PE local id is erased.Ethernet Universal address is maintained (MAC address), Standard for source authentication 802.1XSnooping / Scouting:MPLS LSPs used as transparent pipes from one location to another.Ethernet - Individual frames screened at global level (MAC) for validityControl Plane:MPLS - BGP and other routing protocols very susceptible for attacks that can crash entire networkEthernet - Control plane isolated and access controlled by corporate access control

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#The Future: IEC 61850Standard design for Sub Station CommunicationsEstablishes standard:Architecture (Process/Station Bus)Protocols and formats (e.g. Goose)Open interconnection pointsEquipment requirementsCommon communications: Ethernet

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Comparing the ContendersCoE has the advantage over the other packet technologies when it comes to similarity to SONET/SDH which make this technology the technological and business winnerIP/MPLSCoESONETSimplicityTraining ResiliencyCostSecurityLongevityEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#Ethernet OAMEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#21Drivers for Ethernet OAMOAM benchmarksSet by TDM and existing WAN technologiesOperational EfficiencyReduce OPEX, avoid truck-rollsDowntime costManagement ComplexityLarge Span NetworksMultiple constituent networks belong to disparate organizations/companiesEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#Fault ManagementFault DetectionFault Verification Fault IsolationFault RecoveryFault Notification

Configuration Management

Performance ManagementFrame Loss Measurement Delay Measurement Delay Variation Measurement Availability Measurement

EthernetOAMEthernet OAM CapabilitiesEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#Ethernet OAM

IEEE 802.1agConnectivity Fault Management (CFM)Also referred as Service OAMIEEE 802.3ah (clause 57)Ethernet Link OAMAlso referred as 802.3 OAM, Link OAM or Ethernet in the First Mile (EFM) OAMITU-T Y.1731OAM functions and mechanisms for Ethernet-based networks Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Standards: Ethernet OAMA summary of available Ethernet OAM mechanismsEnd-End/Last SegmentPerformance MonitoringTypeFault PropagationETX ImplementationIEEE 802.3-2005 (formerly 802.3ah)Single SegmentNoLinkNoStandardIEEE 802.1agEnd-to-EndNoConnectivityNoStandardITU-T Y.1731End-to-EndYesServiceYesStandard

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Ethernet SLA Tools ExampleEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#26PseudowiresEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#27What is Pseudowire (PW)?Pseudo = Simulated, SeeminglyEmulation of a native service over a Packet Switched Network (PSN). The native services can be ATM, TDM, Frame Relay or ETH, while the PSN can be ETH, IP or MPLS.Supports voice, data and videoProvides a transparent tunnel through the PSNProvides clock distribution and synchronization over PSNEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#28The encapsulation of PSN is performed using the PW mechanismWhat is PW ?PW is exactly like the name, Pseudo is simulated or seemingly or like a wire, it is a logical wire across a PSN.So, actually, the PW is a transparent tunnel that allows extend services such as voice, data and video over PSN networks (IP or MPLS networks).

What is Pseudowire (PW)? SCADAAnalog TDMPW-GW

PW-GW

PSN NetworkSCADAAnalogTDMEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#29As we said, PW is a tunnel across the PSNYou can see here that the access device is used to carry either ATM, traffic which coming with certain VCC, or TDM traffic over certain Bundle. Both services are running over PW all the way to the remote site.

PW enable multiplexing/aggregation of multiple services over PSN.

The PW technology is a multi service solution for the access, as it support all carrier servicesTiming Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#30IEEE 1588Defines a Precision Time Protocol (PTP) designed to synchronize real-time clocks in a hierarchical distributed system Intended for LAN using multicast communications Targeted accuracy of microseconds or sub-microsecond (v1) v1 approved in September 2002 and published November 2002 v2 approved in June 2007IEEE-1588 is a standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#What is IEEE1588v2?IEEE1588v2 is designed to distribute frequency and time to a higher accuracy and precision, to the scale of nanoseconds and fractional nanoseconds.The protocol operates over packet switched networks. The standard is currently defined to run over IEEE 802.3, UDP/IPv4, UDP/IPv6, DeviceNet, ControlNet and PROFINET.Designed to operate automatically to establish master slave hierarchy for time distribution. (not for Telecomm industry)Introduces Transparent Clocks to overcome the networks delay variation.C37.238 Power Profile based on IEEE-1588v2 required for Syncrophasor accuracy

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Protection Over Ethernet - G.8031Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#33G.8031 Protection Protection as per ITU-T G.80311:1 ModeUnidirectional Only Using APS messages Triggers Port Signal loss CCM LOC , ETH-AIS Protection time 10ms protection for one pair of EVCAs low as 40ms protection 4 pairs of EVCs Topologies EVC protection with one fiber (both EVCs running on the same Fiber) EVC protection with 2 fiber each path on different fiber (dual link) EVC protection with dual fiber working with MC-LACP to dual PEEVC protection with Dual NTU (Future development)

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#34G.8031 Applications End to End path protectionRedundancy on S-Tags in the networkAPS is running over one standby EVC onlyRevertive and Non revertive modesEnd to end service shell be maintained TLS , Accesses to L3 VPN CCM or ETH-AIS is used to trigger protection event Slide 35Metro /VPLS

L2PE

L2PEL2PEEnd to End path protectionOnline EVCRedundant EVCNID

CPECustomer Premises

XNIDEthernetCustomer Premises

CPE

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#35G.8031 Applications Segment Protection Redundancy on S-Tags in the networkRevertive and Non revertive modes One EVC failure can trigger on all other EVCsEnd to end service is maintained TLS , Accesses to L3 VPN Metro /VPLS NIDEthernetCustomer Premises

CPEAccess NetworkL2PEOnline EVCRedundant EVC

NIDGE

CPE

L2PEL3PESecured access segment

XConfidentialAPS MSG.Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#36Teleprotection

Deliver Teleprotection signals with mission-critical accuracy over dedicated fiber, TDM or IP C37.94-compliant Teleprotection communication channels allow reliable transmission by minimizing data errors due to EM and RF interference, or ground potential rise (GPR)Ultra-low end-to-end propagation delay supports immediate delivery of Transfer Trip commands from protective relay/contact transfer to remote-end substationsMaintain performance levels when migrating to packet networks with hard QoS, as well as robust latency and jitter protectionEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#37Teleprotection RequirementsVery strict delay 80ms total40ms for networkDifferential TeleprotectionConstant delayDuring failover Delay could changePacket solutions do not factor differential delays on redundancy

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#The Ideal Migration StrategySelect a new technologyReliabilityLongevityAffordabilitySelectively migrate applicationCheck availability of solutionsMigrate only when application validateMinimize cyber security threatComplete migration within timeframe

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Migration StepsAccessAccess AggregationRequired ServicesInfrastructure

Legacy to SDH/SONET

SDH/SONETAggregation Network

NMSVoIPDataETH to PSNPSNETH to SDH/SONTLegacy to PSN

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#40SummaryThe energy industry is being forced to migrate to packet technologiesCaution should be used when selecting a new technologyEstablished Standards such as IEC61850, C37.238 (IEEE-1588v2) use Ethernet as their transport of choiceAn evolutionary approach to migration can ease the painSome applications may not be suitable today for migration to NGNMigrating to NGN is unavoidable and should be designed today to optimize available funds and reduce future issues

Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#Questions ?Entelec Spring 2013 Slide#42For More Information:Motty AnaviVP of Business DevelopmentMotty_a@rad.com(201) 378-0213www.rad.comThank You For Your AttentionEntelec Spring 2013 Slide#43