Transcript 990623-INET99-BT

Internet2 QBone:
Building a Testbed for IP
Differentiated Services
INET99
June 23rd, 1999
San Jose, California
Ben Teitelbaum
<[email protected]>
Internet2 Dogma:
There is a circularity between advanced networks and advanced apps
Enables
Networked
Applications
Network
Engineering
Motivate
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Dogma Article1:
Inverse Apps  Networking circularity has applied to QoS
Inhibited
QoS-needy
Applications
Network
QoS
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!
Enables
QoS-needy
Applications
Network
QoS
Motivates
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Internet2 QBone Initiative

Build interdomain testbed infrastructure
–
–
–


Support intradomain & interdomain deployment
Lead and follow IETF standards work
–
–

Balance networking research with providing a service
Experiment and improve understanding of DiffServ
Iterate and improve testbed design
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
Better
Good
Bad
Different App Needs
Need better understanding through experience
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Big Problem #2: Scalability
Lots of
flows here!

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
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Big Problem #3: Interoperability
Campus
Networks
... between separately
administered and
designed clouds ...
GigaPoPs
… and between multiple
implementations of
network elements ...
GigaPoPs
Backbone Networks
(vBNS, Abilene, …)
Campus
Networks
… 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
–
–

May 1998
–
–

WG struggled to understand needs of advanced applications /
realities of QoS engineering
Frustrations with RSVP give birth to IETF DiffServ
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
Bandwidth Brokers
(perform admissions control,
manage network resources,
configure leaf and edge devices)
Destination
Source
BB
BB
Core
routers
Leaf Router
(police, mark flows)
Core
routers
Ingress Edge Router
Egress
Edge Router (classify, police, mark aggregates)
(shape aggregates)
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
–
–

–
–
I2 networks are largely uncongested
Jitter and loss still occur
Route flaps to the commodity Internet still occur
Olympic (CoS)
–
Assured
Explore other PHBs (AF) later
To understand this, consider “typical” Internet2
performance:
Premium

Could support our most demanding applications
Less demanding applications should work fine on
emerging high-performance BE infrastructure
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)
CRC
UNB
UBC
ARDNOC
iCAIR
CA*Net2
EVL
CTIT
UMN
IU
RISQ
MREN /
STAR TAP
SingAREN
NTU
NWU
SURFNet
NUS
APAN
KDD Labs
ANL
NREN
ESNet
Korea
Other
NGIXs
Other DOE Labs
LBNL
Ames
Abilene
TAMU
Duke
NCSU
UMass
vBNS
...
Texas GP NCNI
Other NASA Labs
...
PSC
UNC
MAGPI NYSERNet
CMU
UPenn
Merit
UMich
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
–
–
–
Telia / Luleå University of Technology
ANL/Globus
LBNL Clipper
Extensive participation from corporate partners
QBone BB requirements draft on web site
Prototype inter-BB signaling protocol due soon
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 Architecture

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
Active
Measurements
AM node
1
MIB-based
statistics
Boundary
Router
Intra-Domain
Premium Path
Inter-Domain
Premium Path
PM node
PM node
Passive
Measurements
Passive
Measurements
QBone
Domain2
QBone
Domain1
QBone
Domain3
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
QBone Measurement Architecture

2
Dissemination
–
–
–
HTTP, even for raw data
real-time + archived measurements
Canonical names for:


–
Standard metric aggregations:

–
Metrics
Domains
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
–
–
–
H
H
H
H
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.
...

Van’s campus example
At least 10Mbps everywhere
“Count to ten” admissions control
with no topological knowledge
–
GigaPoP
...

GigaPoP
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Generic Internet2 Topology
C
C
C
C
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
C
vBNS
C
C
GigaPoP
L
C
ESNet, NREN,
Int’l, ...
NGIXs
C
Abilene
C
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
C
C
C
C
C
C
GigaPoP
C
L
C
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Phase 0 Demand Assessment
C
C
C
C
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
C
vBNS
C
C
GigaPoP
L
C
ESNet, NREN,
STARTAP, ...
NGIXs
C
Abilene
C
Int’l
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
GigaPoP
C
C
C
C
C
L
C
C
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
–
–
M = service MTU
TR = inter-domain traceroute
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
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999
Phase 0 Demand Matrix
Maximum EF load to be offered from here
… to here
C1
C2
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 L1 L2
4
6 4 2 12 2
2
2
2 2
C3
C4
C5
L1 2
L2
2
10
-
2
Implies
R
2
2
2
Campus EF
Ingress Load
D
-
Campus Policer
Config
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
ISOC INET99 Conference - San Jose, CA, June 23, 1999