Transcript apnoms `99
Multi-Protocol Label Switching Technology for Next Generation Internet 1999. 9. 2. ETRI Switching & Transmission Technology Research Laboratory Chu-Hwan Yim Topics Internet - Current Status Current Internet - What is the Problem? MPLS(Multi-Protocol Label Switching) Technology APNOMS ‘99 2 Internet Topology - USA A Picture designating the real connection state of USA’s internet. http://www.caida.org/Presentations/IEPG.9808/outline-1.html APNOMS ‘99 3 Internet Connection in Korea APNOMS ‘99 4 Telecom Service Forecasting in Korea Subscribers (Unit: 10,000) 3000 Telephony 2500 2000 Internet 1500 CATV 1000 PC Comm. 500 ISDN 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Source: ETRI TM - KII Strategy APNOMS ‘99 5 Internet Traffic (USA) Terabyte/day Rapid Growth of Internet Traffic New Internet Services 1600 1400 Total Voice IP VoIP 1200 1000 IP Voice, Fax IP-VPN 800 New Technology 600 DWDM, ADSL Terabit Router 400 200 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 0 2003 Source: ATM Year’98 AT&T APNOMS ‘99 6 Average Duration of Internet Calls Average Holding Time (min.) 30 28.9 25 20 15 13.4 10 5 0 Source: ISS’97 APNOMS ‘99 4 Internet Voice Call Metered Internet Flat Rate Rate 7 Internet Hop Distance - Average 15 Hops - the main cause of Internet Delay APNOMS ‘99 http://www.caida.org/Presentations/IEPG.9808/outline-1.html 8 Internet Loss & Response Time (North America) Packet Loss Average 6% Response Time APNOMS ‘99 Average 280 ms 9 Internet Loss & Response Time (Europe) Packet Loss Average 8% Response Time Average 400 ms APNOMS ‘99 10 Internet Loss & Response Time (Asia) Packet Loss Average 18% Response Time Average 590 ms APNOMS ‘99 11 VoIP(Voice over IP) Delay Gateway Architecture PSTN PSTN Internet GW PC-to-PC Architecture PSTN (Modem) Internet PSTN (Modem) GW 30~100* msec 30~100* msec 70~110 msec 140~460 msec 100~210 msec Hard to reduce below 100msec of End-to-End delay. 170~500 msec Total delay is dominated by sound card and modem delay(100~430msec). *Case of measured link delay at Chicago-California(2000 miles). APNOMS ‘99 12 VoIP Quality Characteristic N: The present quality limitation of VoIP A: Case of insufficient buffer on the path (high loss, low delay) B,C: Case of suitable buffer on the path D: Case of sufficient buffer on the path (low loss, high delay) Loss 20% A Potentially useful 10% Good B C 5% Toll Quality N 100ms APNOMS ‘99 Required below 7% of loss and below 120msec of delay for reasonable voice quality. D 150ms 400ms Delay IEEE Network Jan/Feb 1998 13 Internet Networking Issues QoS - Admission control - Traffic shaping - Scheduling VPN - CUG - Reliability - Network management - Billing High-Speed Low Cost - Performance - Low Cost . Equipment - Scalability . Operation IP over ATM IP over SDH/WDM IP over ? (MPLS ?) APNOMS ‘99 14 Requirements of Internet VPN(Virtual Private Network) Reduction of Teleco cost (Leased Line, Remote Access) Reduction of INTRANET construction cost(RAS, PABX) CoS(Class of Service) To meet the users’ requirements in delay and loss To support various types of traffic in the same network Flows Traffic engineering APNOMS ‘99 15 MPLS and INTERNET Appropriate for Internet Backbone Easy to implement VPN less processing overhead than router-based VPN Support of CoS strict QoS support easy to support ‘Differentiated Service’ Traffic Engineering Aspects Path-level traffic control Dynamic Bandwidth allocation APNOMS ‘99 16 MPLS Motivations Simplify integration of ATM and IP Offer both ATM and native IP services in a single network Offer benefits of traditionally found only in Level 2 networks directly to IP - Traffic Engineering, VPNs Address major network scalability challenges Permit graceful evolution of routing and services APNOMS ‘99 17 MPLS extends traditional IP in the following areas: Simplified Forwarding Based on labels instead of longest prefix-match Efficient Explicit Routing Route is specified once by source at path setup time Traffic Engineering Split traffic load over multiple parallel or alternate routes QoS Routing Select routes based upon QoS requirements APNOMS ‘99 18 MPLS Network Architecture Label Switch Router (LSR) MPLS Domain • Switching on Label • Label swapping LER Label Edge Router (LER) • Full-function Layer 3 routers • Label Binding based on FIB APNOMS ‘99 MPLS Control Component LER ATM Switch Fabric 19 MPLS Network Routing at Layer 3, Forwarding at Layer 2 End System End System LER LSR LSR LER IP routing IP routing IP routing IP routing IP routing ATM/FR/ Ethernet ATM/FR/ Ethernet (Switch or Router) ATM/FR/ Ethernet (Switch or Router) ATM/FR/ Ethernet (Switch or Router) ATM/FR/ Ethernet (Switch or Router) IP routing ATM/FR/ Ethernet MPLS Domain APNOMS ‘99 20 MPLS Components and Protocols Separation allows flexibility Simple label-swapping paradigm Multiple Control Planes can manipulate labels Various applications can directly manipulate label binding LDP CR-LDP Unicast Routing Multicast Traffic Differental QoS Routing Engineering Services (RSVP) (PIM) Virtual Private Networks Label Information Base (LIB) TCP/IP Per-label Forwarding, Queuing, Multicasting ATM, FR, Ethernet, SONET APNOMS ‘99 21 MPLS Benefits Integration of IP and ATM New services and capabilities for IP VPNs Traffic Engineering Flexibility in the delivery of new routing services Scalability APNOMS ‘99 22 MPLS Internet Premium Service : Super - ISP Service Premium Internet Access Service 1.5~155Mbps, CoS Selection and QoS Guarantee Service Service for business user, Value-added items High-speed Internet Access (1 or 2 Hops in a network) High-speed Net. Server Access Portal Server, IP/CP Server, E-business, Cyber Mall High-speed access to International Gateway Node VPN Service High-speed IP-TV Broadcast Service Role of LER as PoP and GigaPoP APNOMS ‘99 23 MPLS Internet Backbone Service : Super - NSP Service ISP Backbone Service NSP Service for national ISPs Backbone Access Service for regional ISPs Common Int’l Gateway with Caching Internet Traffic Exchange Service between ISPs Role of Network Access Point Peering Service Service agreement between ISP and NSP Bi-, Multilateral peering Additional Routing Server Support Policy-based routing, BB(Bandwidth Broker), RA(Routing Arbiter) APNOMS ‘99 24 New Services are Driving the Need to Scale IP Networks • Packet Forwarding • Packet Filtering • Policing • IP Flow Classification • BGP Peering • IGP Scaling • Multicast Scaling • Policy Scaling • Virtual Routing MPLS: Multiservice IP + ATM Source: NGN’98 APNOMS ‘99 25 Driving Force in IP Networking Network Management Scalable Multicast New IP Services Traffic Management MPLS Multiservice Network Traffic Engineering CoS, QoS and Differential Services Intelligent Data Network Extranets Intranets Security Directory Service Carrier-Class WAN Backbone with Quality IP Source: NGN’98 APNOMS ‘99 26