Transcript From SLA to SLS up to QoS control: The CADENUS Framework

QoS Management from an
Operator point of view:
The CADENUS framework
29/01/03
Dr. Olivier Dugeon FTR&D/DAC
Present document contains information proprietary to France Telecom. Accepting this document means for
its recipient he or she recognizes the confidential nature of its content and his or her engagement not to
reproduce it, not to transmit it to a third party, not to reveal its content and not to use it for commercial
purposes without previous FTR&D written consent.
ADANETS Workshop - Slides 1 - 29/01/03
Outline
 CADENUS presentation
 SLA to SLS QoS setup
 The CADENUS demo
 Conclusion
ADANETS Workshop Slides 2 - 29/01/03
CADENUS project
Creation And Deployment of End-User
Services in Premium IP Networks
Operators:
Manu factors:
Universities & Research
Institutes:
Consultancies:
MARTEL
+ 2 institutes from the Newly Associated States:
ITTI (Poland)
SETCCE (Slovenia)
ADANETS Workshop Slides 3 - 29/01/03
Objectives of CADENUS
 Each network & service provider recognises the importance of QoS to the
future of their business, but some points are unclear
They don’t know how provide this QoS
They don’t know what sort of QoS And for what sort of services
 Network providers have another paradigm
QoS is the key point to make money from value–added network services
The Main Goal is
 To propose an integrated solution for the creation, configuration and


provisioning of end user services with QoS guarantees in Premium IP
networks.
Define a framework in which all the relationship can be seen as
client/furnisher one
Let the end-user select the QoS he/she want
Both during the subscription and the invocation process
ADANETS Workshop Slides 4 - 29/01/03
Motivations and Solutions
 Solutions are based on the answers to this questions :
Who is request the content services QoS ?
Who is request the network services ?
Who and How control the QoS ?
 In the context of the NGN architecture
We introduce the Mediation at each levels to give a unique entry point and open
the architecture to different actors.
 The CADENUS Business Model defined roles which are:
Access Mediator, Service Mediator & Service logic, Resource Mediator &
Network Controller,
the different actors may assumed one or many of these roles.
ADANETS Workshop Slides 5 - 29/01/03
Outline
 CADENUS presentation
 SLA to SLS QoS setup
 The CADENUS demo
 Conclusion
ADANETS Workshop Slides 6 - 29/01/03
From SLA to SLS up to QoS
Access
Mediator
Service Level Agreement (SLA)
- Administrative contract
Service Level Specification (SLS)
- QoS requirements
- Traffic characterization
Service
Mediator
Resource
Mediator
Network
Controller
Per Domain Behaviour (PDB)
- Rules (edge) + Behavior (core)
- QoS class definition
Per Hop Behaviour (PHB)
- Router local QoS behaviour
Scheduling and resource allocation
- Vendor & product specific
implementation
Network
Devices
ADANETS Workshop Slides 7 - 29/01/03
Fonctionnal Architecture
Client access
(contract
& transaction)
Access Mediation
Service
Mediation
(contract & transaction)
Service
Resource Access
Logic
Service
Resource
Mediation
communication
Network
Controller
Transfer
PIP (Access Network)
PIP (Backbone Network)
Sessions
User Side
Network Side
ADANETS Workshop Slides 8 - 29/01/03
Architecture
- AAA
- Directory/yellow pages
- Preference lists
- Service Menu
- User profile
- Terminal types
Access
Mediator
SLA
Bus
- AAA
- Presentation
- Subscription
SM
FTP & HTTP
Proxy
SM
SIP Proxy
H323 GK
SM
RTSP Proxy
Generic
Service
Mediator
Unitary
Service
SLS
Bus
Resource
mediator
Resource
Mediator
Network
Controller
Network
Controller
Network
Controller
Access
Network
provider
Backbone Network
provider
Next
Administrative
domain
- Traffic engineering
- Terminal localisation
- Terminal capability
- Network capability
- Local CAC
- Technology adaptation
- Policy rules
ADANETS Workshop Slides 9 - 29/01/03
One step beyond
 The Operators won’t necessary setup resources permanently especially when
the client used rarely a service. In this case, they want a per call QoS setup.
 If SLA is well suitable for the subscription process, it is too huge for the per
call QoS control. SLS is more adapted but un-comprehensible by an end-user
 We introduce an i-SLA and i-SLS for the invocation process only
 The i-SLA is the light version of the SLA allowing a call by call QoS selection
 It could be simply describe with the Gold, Silver Bronze of the DiffServ model
 The i-SLS is the technical description of the QoS suitable to be used by the
network operator’s
 There are similar to the SLS described in the draft-tequila or in the Eurescom
P1008 WG, but with an end-to-end scope to be compliant to the NGN: Clearly
separate the Service Plane to the Control Plane
ADANETS Workshop Slides 10 - 29/01/03
Inter-domain SLS
 Performing a inter-domain SLA and SLS negotiation inside the invocation
process is not scalable !
 Each RM negotiate an agreement with its peer (like for BGP4 peering)
 The negotiate contract is an SLA one
 It content all the information describing the capabilities of each network to let
the RM exchange i-SLS
 And it may be follow by an SLS to provision resources between the two networks
 The inter-domain i-SLS are exchange inside this peering agreement
 Some parameters could be monitor to adapt the network capabilities of the peer
network. Recent studies around BGP4 extensions could be used.
 The first RM involved in the QoS control, split the i-SLS in 2 parts:
 One for its domain the other for the remaining domain
 The remaining i-SLS is forwarded to the next RM
 This concept look like the aggregation of CoS in DiffServ
ADANETS Workshop Slides 11 - 29/01/03
Outline
 CADENUS presentation
 SLA to SLS QoS setup
 The CADENUS demo
 Conclusion
ADANETS Workshop Slides 12 - 29/01/03
The VoD case study
End-to-end QoS is request by the SM and setup by the RMs
The quality is as good as request See it in action …
SM : VoD
Web server
Data Plane
Control Plane
RM (java)
Background
Traffic
NC : Scream

’ 
NC : ICP 
RM+NC :
IQ-Man


ADSL access
Network
Web &
video
client


AS2

Video server
AS1
BAS
DiffServ Aware
Network
DiffServ Aware
Network
ADANETS Workshop Slides 13 - 29/01/03
The VoIP case study
SM : H323
Gatekeeper
Data Plane
Control Plane
RM + NC:
IQ-Man
Background
Traffic


The Netmeeting has registered itself
into the gatekeeper
before sending a call
The quality is as good as requested
See it in action …




AS1
DiffServ Aware
Network
H.323 client A
H.323 client B
ADANETS Workshop Slides 14 - 29/01/03
Outline
 CADENUS presentation
 SLA to SLS QoS setup
 The CADENUS demo
 Conclusion
ADANETS Workshop Slides 15 - 29/01/03
RM component and mobility
Nomadic:
 Due to the nature of IP protocol, we must localize the first equipment
involve in the end-to-end QoS set up ie. The Edge Router, so nomadic is
naturally take into account
Security:
 RM component has the responsibility to choose appropriate network
partition and technology, so he can choose tunnel, IP sec., LSP … to set up
the a secure connection or a VPN
Handover:
 RM component is not design to handle the handover. So, user mobility is not
take into account
3G wireless:
 RM component can be use as is to control the QoS in the IP 3G access
network. The radio access network is a particular network saw as the over
access network
ADANETS Workshop Slides 16 - 29/01/03
Conclusions
 The CADENUS framework is well suited for QoS control driven by services
 It is open, flexible and independent of the network technology
BUT work is in progress
 To exchange SLA and SLS
 There are many proposals AND we need only one standard
 CADENUS uses eb-XML
 COPS-SLS or Web-Services technology could be used
 TEQUILA uses SLRN…
CADENUS wants to publish its interface as a reference model
 To choose an appropriate flow process
 Reference points are well identified : AM/SM, SM/RM, RM/NC
 WHERE to open the architecture to 3rd parties ? Between SM/RM ? AM/SM ?
 Who splits the first SLS ? Hub (SM) or Cascade (RM) flow process model ?
Let the Service and Network Operators decide which is the
most suitable one
ADANETS Workshop Slides 17 - 29/01/03