Upload
ieee-standards-association
View
1.698
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation from SIEPON Seminar on 20 April in Czech Republic, sponsored by IEEE-SA & CAG. Opinions presented by the speakers in this presentation are their own, and not necessarily those of their employers or of IEEE.
Citation preview
IEEE 1904.1 (SIEPON) Architecture and Model
Marek Hajduczenia ZTE Corporation
EPON deployment scenarios
FTTH
STB
OLT
FTTBiz
Business ONU
Business
Cellular Backhaul
ONU
•Coax
Splitter
Splitter
Home Networking
FTTN
Coax / xDSL
Business
HGW
Fiber
ONU (SFU)
EPON GE
MII or Coax
Outside Cabinet
ONU
MDU EPoC CLT Wiring Closet /
Basement
Clock Transport / 1588 v2
SFU: 1x GE / 4FE SFU: 4FE + 2x POTS
SFU: Home Gateway
Rise
r
MEF over EPON
MDU
ONU
ONU
2
• IEEE 802.3 provides solid PHY standard guaranteeing interoperability at physical, MAC and MPCP/OAM levels
• Service layer interoperability was enforced by individual operators, defining their own service layer requirements on top of 802.3 specs (e.g. CTC, NTT, KT etc.)
• This approach leads to an explosive growth in number of parallel and similar specifications, leading to problems for – operators: equipment has to be customized to their needs, thus becomes more
expensive; and – vendors: need to support multiple sets of options, leading to longer development
cycles, increased manufacturing cost and incremental software complexity for management platforms
• Clearly, this approach is not scalable to a larger number of carriers and prevents smaller operators from adopting EPON as transport solution for their access networks
• A solution is needed to facilitate adoption of EPON by creating service layer interoperability standard
Service-layer interoperability …
3
• EPON is being used in various environments
– Some would like to manage EPON as part of DOCSIS network
– Some would like to manage EPON like DSL network
• Many external specifications supply requirements relevant to EPON technology
– BBF (WT-200) – CableLabs (DPoE) – Also, deployed solutions reflect
different regulatory or national environments
• The goal of SIEPON project is to address these diverse requirements in a consistent and unified way
– Improve system-level interoperability by specifying a common management and provisioning framework.
Various operators – one standard
IEEE 802.3ah (1G-EPON)
IEEE 802.3av(10G-EPON)
Ope
rato
rA
OperatorB
CableL
abs
Require
ments
for usin
g EPON in
DOCSIS envir
onment
OperatorC
Operator
D
BBF Requirements
for using EPON in
DSL environment
OperatorE
OperatorF
Operator
G
4
• SIEPON provides interoperable service-layer specifications for the following features:
– frame operations performed on ONU and OLT, including VLAN modes, tunneling modes and multicast distribution
– bandwidth reporting and QoS enforcement – power saving – line and device protection and monitoring functions – alarms and warnings, including set and reset conditions and delivery mechanisms – authentication, privacy and encryption mechanisms – maintenance mechanisms, including software update, ONU discovery and registration
processes – extended management (eOAM), including definition of protocol requirements, message
format and their exchange sequences for specific functions (e.g., during authentication)
• These functions are defined in a sets (packages), which eliminate the need for options, facilitating development of compliant equipment and testing
Main focus of SIEPON
5
• SIEPON builds on top of 802.3 EPON specifications – There are no changes to physical layer, MAC and MAC Control specifications developed in
802.3 for 1G-EPON and 10G-EPON – SIEPON defines operation of MAC Client, OAM Client, MAC Control Client and Operation,
Administration, and Management functions – SIEPON scope extends between NNI and UNI (when OLT and ONU do not include service-
specific functions) or OLT_CI and ONU_CI (when there are service-specific functions included – see next slide)
SIEPON coverage (I)
Reference: Figure 5-1, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
6
• SIEPON does not specify operation and requirements of any service-specific functions
– VoIP (SIP), HGW router, POTS, CES, etc., are outside the scope of this standard – Such functions are typically managed using existing L3 protocols – SIEPON definitions do not prevent or break in any way operation of such protocols,
maintaining transparency of their operation
SIEPON coverage (II)
Reference: Figure 5-1, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
7
OLT Architecture (1+ Line OLTs)
1904.1 802.3
Reference: Figure 5-7 IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
ODN
8
ONU Architecture (1+ Line ONU)
1904.1 802.3
Reference: Figure 5-4 IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
ODN
9
• SIEPON clearly delineates bounds of specification – Line device = functions defined in 802.3, providing a set of
standardized primitives for interaction with MAC Client, MAC Control Client and OAM Client, Line device cannot establish connectivity with link peer without support of functions defined by SIEPON,
– Client device = Line device + additional functions and processes specified in SIEPON; Client device is capable of establishing bidirectional connectivity with link peer, sending and receiving user frames (with necessary processing), participating in MPCP and OAM processes (Discovery & Registration, OAM Discovery, etc.),
– Service device = Client device + additional, service-specific functions outside of the scope of this standard,
Line, Client, Service ONU / OLT …
10
SIEPON provides unified provisioning model for the MAC Client data path: – [C] = Classifier – [M] = Modifier – [PS] = Policer/Shaper – [X] = CrossConnect – [Q] = Queues – [S] = Scheduler
Each functional block has a dedicated set of functions (examples follow): – Classifier: identifies frames and
controls their path through MAC Client
– Modifier: operations on frames, changing VLAN tags, colour marking etc., as provisioned
– Scheduler: polls queues for frames and delivers them to Output port.
MAC Client
Policer/Shaper [P
S]
CrossC
onnect [X]
Queues [Q
]
Scheduler [S]
Output [O
]
Modifer [M
]
Classifier [C
]
Input [I]Provisioning / Alarms & Status
[I] [C] [M] [PS] [X] [Q] [S] [O]
Path for data frames
Path for control
Block controls connectivity
Block controls performance
Path for management
Legend
a) Functional blocks
b) Compact representation
Reference: Figure 6-1, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
11
SIEPON and BBF TR-200 model
• SIEPON coverage compared with BBF TR-200 with a multi-customer ONU (MDU)
SIEPON coverage compared with BBF TR-200 with a single-customer ONU (SFU)
Reference: Figure 5A-1, Figure 5A-2, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
12
SIEPON and MEF model
• SIEPON coverage versus MEF 10.2 architecture, spanning between E-NNI / I-NNI and UNI interfaces
Reference: Figure 5A-3, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.3
13
• SIEPON addresses multiple requirements from different operators and varied markets, requiring flexibility in the architecture model
• The adopted model may address any new requirements brought in the future – Individual functions are separated into MAC Client, OAM Client, MAC Control
Client and OAM – Individual clients communicate with each other, sharing variables (when
needed) and device status • SIEPON definitions are clearly delineated, building on top of 802.3 and
802.1 specifications, while not affecting any existing L3 management protocols for service-specific functions (VoIP, POTS, CES etc.)
• SIEPON coexists, rather than competes, with MEF 10.2 and BBF TR-200 networking models, complementing them when EPON is used as access network transport technology
Conclusions
14
Thanks!