Transcript Routing - Index of

The latest developments in
FIND/GENI projects and their
influence on European Networking
Jiří Navrátil [email protected]
Terena Networking Conference 2007
21-24.5.2007 Lyngby/Denmark
Agenda
• Internet expansion and consequences
• Fundamental problems of Internet
• Next generation of Internet (directions and
supporting projects, GENI, FIND)
• New network architectures (overlay
networking, virtualized GRID)
• European projects (OneLab, Phosphorus,
UCLP, FEDERICA)
Internet expansion
• Web (90ties), p2p (2000), video, IPTV, wireless (today),
sensors (tomorrow)
• Asia, Europe, North America, …. Africa
• Expecting trillion of devices in near future
• Problems: technical and social
capacity on last mile, guaranteed Bw, path stability,…
viruses, attacks, unwanted mail, pishing, etc.
• Wide discussion in Internet community about the future, problems in many
forms and on many forums
NO STRENGTH to change fundamentals of existing Internet
• NFS came with the GENI which is trying to find way, how
to change Internet from the base (REINVENTING)
Future Internet
• Creating the Internet you want in 10,15 Years
• The Internet which society TRUST
• Support pervasive computing (from PDA to
Supercomputing)
• Connecting devices and users with all types
communication channels from wireless to
optical light paths
• Enable accept further developments and
innovations
Two paths for changes
Larry Peterson Princeton University:
A Strategy for Continually Reinventing Internet
(May 2005)
Incremental
Clean-Slate (replace Internet with new architecture)
many problems on first path
(many limits, hard manage,, vulnerability, hostile)
there are barriers to second path:
Internet ossificated, cannot be replaced
Inadequate validation of potential solutions,
tesbed dilemma:
production testbed = incremental change
experimental testbed = no real users !
Why now ?
many architectional proposals ( statistics new RFC, papers, etc.)
enabling technology
infrastructure exists (NLR, Planetlab, .. GN2,..)
research community is ready to making it real
Where are the fundamental problems and what is the
most actual (first order) problem ??????
The real problems of IP world are in
the principles (core functionality)
•
IP addresses ? Before 1994 nearly collapsed. Problem postponed because
of reusable private IP, NAT. It is reason why IPv6 is not so hot
•
•
Naming ? DNS still dominate and it has more and more problems
Routing ? Since 1989 BGP (protocol based purely on agreement of ISPs routing policy). All other known protocols are unacceptable, technically
problematic and they are used just locally,
many existing routes is not used, quality of routes is not under control
BGP4 ? Introducing AS was step to aggregation for routing purposes,
it helps to postpone problem with effectiveness of routing.
Reality:
# of ISP and # of AS grow exponentially !
How Internet Grows
In history
The grow of Internet Routing Tables
80000
Expectations
70000 routes
70000
60000
50000
40000
#routes
30000
20000
10000
350
0
1988
92
94
95
96
97
98
99
2000
CIDR, PRIVATE IP addresses, NAT bring slowdown of growing RT
AS growing brings problem to BGP
Grow in 94– 06
Source http://www.routeviews.org/dynamics
Remark.
Individual lines are prefixes (paths) from different peers
http://www.internetworldstats.com/images/users.gif
Partial
visibility
of the Internet from one router
BGP table
analysis
(from the routing tables)
Source: http://www.caida.org/tools/measurement/skitter/
More about the weaknesses
of the Internet
- performance bottlenecks at peering points
–
–
–
–
Ignores many existing alternate paths
Prevents sophisticated algorithms
Route selection uses fixed, simple metrics
Routing isn’t sensitive to path quality (See next examples)
The Internet is ill suited to mission-critical applications
Paxson (95-97)
3.3% of all routes has serious problems
Labovitz (97-00)
10% of routes available <95% of time
65% of routes available <99.9
3 minutes minimum detection time for failure
average recovery ~ 15 minutes
5% of faults last more than 2 hours 45 minutes
Chandra (01)
Wang (06)
80 % of problems on the path is caused by routing
DNS system was designed for identifying
IP objects (computers, routers)
Since WEB appeared DNS become a tool for identify
Internet objects (INFORMATION) !
DNS system was designed for traffic loads that reflect
the rate and complexity of human activities !
How DNS will react on machine-machine applications
(crowlers, traffic reviewer,..)
How is robust, scalable, sensitive to the attacks and misconfigurations
1-2 M updates/hour on root DNS (from misconfigurations)
20 top ASes make 50 % updates (China, US, Spain)
97% such updates is from WINDOWS machines
Wrong coordination between DHCP and DNS for private IP can create
unwanted traffic and requests to global DNS.
This leakage is inappropriate from the traffic and also from the security
aspects.
REFERENCE CAIDA papers:
A.Broido, E.Nemeth, kc claffy, SPECTROSCOPY of Private DNS update Sources
A.Broido, H.Shang, M.Fomenkov, Y.Hyun, kc claffy, The Windows of Private DNS Updates
PROBLEM IS NOT ONLY TO HAVE NAME (registration)
But how TO HANDLE resolution (conversion from/to IP)
and UPDATE databases which are bigger and bigger
TLD com
TLD
ns
.cz
.cvut.
ns .de
ns
.nl
Recursing requests
.ibm. ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
.fel.
ns
.fjfi.
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
.fs.cvut.cz
.hp.
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
URL: server/datapath
browsers
Most request is resolved on the lowest level
but not all data are available => Recursing requests
Remember: Each nice Web page from “somewhere” can contain several resolutions !
(reference to icon/picture/doc located somewhere in Internet) and for seeing it must be resolved !!
And it also means grow of your local cache databases
DNS is undoubted
but
more and more actual problem is:
Separation data from location !
Van Jacobson on Google
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6972678839686672840
( Michael Walfish MIT )
Hostname/pathname
structure and DNS resolution
http://www.myhost.edu/doc/pub1.ps
SFR Semantic Free Referencing
SFRtag/pathname structure and DHT resolution
sfr://fbcd1234/doc/pub1.ps
O-record of Metadata
SFRtag: 160 bit string, IP address, port, …
Contact to traditional web servers:
SFR infrastructure strips first part and makes DHT resolution,
It replaces the first part (host id) with IP and the rest is same as previous case
More flexibility:
pathname part of the SFRtag,
multiple destinations
PASTRY (DHT)
Hash Table
Set of RNodes, each RNode keeps range of addresses for nodes
Each new node is logically located into this range
Lookup is based on the nearest neighbour
RNode
$key=“dabcf2”
$ip = $address {$key}
key
index
1faab1
65a1fc
dabcf0
dabcf1
dabcf2
1
2
0
RNode
ip
d471f1
key
c2d0
148.33.244.1
121
This example cover
224 -1
= 16 mil. objects
d46a1c
128.128.22.11
990
192.161.1.12
991
192.161.1.12
992 192.12.12.121
If in local range
..67c5 to ..71f1
Not forwarding !
d467c4
d462ba
Range of local keys
(c2d1 – 32aaff)
d4213f
RNode
32ab00
Forwarding to d4xxxx
Lookup (d46a1c)
Forwarding to dxxxxx
d13da3
RNode
RNode
from RN with KEY:
65a1fc
In Pastry max key=ffff ffff ffff ffff
Works with concept which separate data from location !
Groupware service
How many files in the Ocean Store?
-Assume 1010 people in the world
-10,000 files/person – very conservative?
-So 1014 files should be stored and maintained
The objects are defined by GUID - fix length string
The objects are replicated
and stored on multiple servers
The lookup process is dynamic based
on queries between client and server
Tapestry routes the message to a physical host containing a resource with that GUID. Further,
Tapestry is locality aware: if there are several resources with the same GUID, it locates (with high
probability) one that is among the closest to the message source.
Basic functions
Publish/Unpublish Object,
Route to Object,
Route to node)
http://oceanstore.cs.berkeley.edu/publications/papers/pdf/SPAA02.pdf
Internet allows create meshed structures, every host can communicate with anybody
USERS JOINING AND LEAVING SYSTEMs RANDOMLY, VOLUNTARILY
Distributer A
Query match
Q.Req. B DB Index
Broadcast query
systems
Q.Req. A
Q.Req. A
Q.Req. A
Explosion of P2P
Searcher
Q.Req. A (send query to all neighbors)
Napster
Gnutella
Ultrapeer
(Index for peers)
Distribute
r
UP-4
New architectures
New tools
New applications
Supernode
SN-A
SN-B
Node A
Login
server
Q.Req. A
Q.Req. A
UP-1
Q.Req. A
GNet,…
SN-C
Searcher
Node B
Skype
from Darleen Fisher and Guru Parulkar
NSF-CISE presentation
from Darleen Fisher and Guru Parulkar
NSF-CISE presentation
from Darleen Fisher and Guru Parulkar
NSF-CISE presentation
IPTV
VOD
HDTV
INTERNET
Lastmile
Open Service Gateway
Service providers
MULTISERVICE MULTIUSER
Gateway operator
Lastmile
VOD
Not only lastmile operator
but business for many SP
Open Service Gateway
The gateway operator, through the core service gateway,
acts much like a Unix root user. He allows users (service providers)
to launch their shell or execution environment (their virtual service gateway).
The core gateway runs services accessible to all users.
However, contrary to Unix root users, the core gateway
does not have access to service gateways' data, files, etc, since these
would belong to different, potentially competing companies.
More details:http://perso.citi.insa-lyon.fr/sfrenot//publications/royonCBSE06vosgi.pdf
Situation is getting worse
From: David Alderson CALTECH , NSF Find meeting, Dec. 2005
GIobal Environment for network
Innovations – GENI
Reaction of NSF to existing Internet problems
• August 25, 2005: NSF announces the GENI Initiative at
SIGCOMM.
• Since 2006 NFS (CISE) divided GENI to program FIND – Future
Internet Design and the program of construction GENI facility
• During 2 years was many working meetings and it was prepared nearly
50 GDD (Geni Design Documents)
http://www.geni.net/documents_nav.php
The most complex is GENI Research plan GDD-06-28 vers. 4.5 from
April 2007 in which defines detail frame for GENI research
GENI
Research program
The GENI Initiative will support research, design, and development of new
networking and distributed systems capabilities by:
• Creating new core functionality: Going beyond existing paradigms of
datagram, packet and circuit switching; designing new naming, addressing,
and overall identity architectures, and new paradigms of network management;
• Developing enhanced capabilities: Building security into the architecture;
designing for high availability; balancing privacy and accountability; designing
for regional difference and local values;
• Deploying and validating new architectures: Designing new architectures that
incorporate emerging technologies (e.g., new wireless and optical
technologies) and new computing paradigms enabled by pervasive devices;
• Building higher-level service abstractions: Using, for example, information
objects, location-based services, and identity frameworks;
• Building new services and applications: Making large-scale distributed
applications secure, robust and manageable; developing principles and
patterns for distributed applications;
• Developing new network architecture theories: Investigating network
complexity, scalability, and economic incentives.
Focus of FIND
On reinvented Internet architecture and not
on individual network technologies
Internet evolution influenced by clean-slate
approach
Alternate architecture(s) coexist with the
current Internet
Virtualization becomes the norm with
plurality of architectures
New services and applications enabled
Status of FIND in 2007
The whole FIND program is currently in initial phase.
NSF has created a FIND Planning Committee, which is working
with NSF to organize a series of meetings among FIND grant
recipients to identify and refine overarching concepts for a
network of the future. It is a continuation of GENI talks that
started in 2005
FIND will in 2007 operate with 40 millions US $ and it is
expected that from this budget would award at about 60-80
teams. The kickoff meeting was held in November 2006.
http://www.nets-find.net/
NeTS - Division of Computer & Network Systems funds research and education projects in
four basic areas:
Programmable Wireless Networks (NeTS-ProWin)
Networking of Sensor Systems (NeTS-NOSS)
Networking Broadly Defined (NeTS-NBD)
Future Internet Design (NeTS-FIND)
16
30
27
15 – (5,2 M US)
FIND - Scope of Research
– Core functionalities (Reconsideration of basics including packets and other modes of
–
–
–
–
–
–
multiplexing and data delivery, addressing, naming and identity; routing and delivery;
support for mobility; overlay networks, and services required to support overlays;
architectural implications of performance objectives; and other elements of network services.)
Security and robustness (prevent attack, flooding, blocking unwanted traffic,
dealing with „zombies“ and „botnets“, design new safe protocols and frameworks for
applications, end nodes security)
Social aspects - privacy and accountability (balancing privacy/identity,
problematic of identity tracking, increase mutual trust between users and authorities,
responsibility for malicious behavior, access to emergency services)
Manageability and usability (facilitate network management, automated networks
configurations, fault reporting and diagnostics, architectures cross region coordinations)
Implications of new Wireless and sensor networks (mobility of subnets,
dynamic resource location, data driven routing, )
Optical network architectures and their implications (integrated
internet/optical management, dynamic alloctaion of capacities, aggregation in backbones )
High level conceptualization (closer to the user, what they want, location based
services, search based on localities, information context etc.)
Theoretical foundations (investigating network complexities, scalability, robustnes)
–
– Support for applications design (How applications and services should be
design to exploit new architectures, deveoloping distributed applications including
economical incentives)
The GENI Facility
As envisioned, the GENI Facility will enable:
– Shared use through slicing and virtualization in time and space domains
(i.e., where "slice" denotes the subset of resources bound to a particular
experiment);
– Access to physical facilities through programmable platforms (e.g., via
customized protocol stacks);
– Large-scale user participation by "user opt-in" and IP tunnels;
– Protection and collaboration among researchers by controlled isolation
and connection among slices;
– A broad range of investigations using new classes of platforms and
networks, a variety of access circuits and technologies, and global control
and management software;
– Interconnection of independent facilities via federated design.
The GENI Facility will leverage the best ideas and capabilities from existing
network testbeds such as PlanetLab, ORBIT, WHYNET, Emulab, X-Bone,
DETER and others.
The GENI Facilty will need to extend beyond these testbeds to create
an experimental infrastructure capable of supporting the ambitious research
goals of the GENI Initiative.
Relation FIND/GENI
Stages of Research 2007 and Later
Architectures as they emerge will be made
operational and tested via:
• Simulation (ns-2, …)
• Emulation (Planetlab, Emulab,…)
• Run on a large-scale GENI facility
When ?
Current situation “HORIZON PROJECT”
with 20 millions US for preconstruction planning
Next step “Readiness Stage”
(allow extension preconstruction planning)
Peter A.Freeman NSFVICE
Jan 2006
?
-Testbed federation (Planetlab/Emulab/?)
-Building control plane (Planetlab prototype)
-Proof-of-concepts wired-wireless integration
-Distributed authorization and access control
2009
2007
Filling gap
(validate new architectures under realistic conditions, keep
potential deployment in sight)
Work on existing experimental infrastructures
Emulab front-end to PlanetLab
Experiments spanning some combination of…Emulab + ORBIT +
WAIL + PlanetLab
ViNI: Virtualized Network Infrastructure
PlanetLabslices on layer 2 networks (NLR + Abilene)
Internet-in-a-Slice (Click + XORP)
http://www.planet-lab.org
What is emulation?
the ability to mimic another machine on your computer.
You can run the same programs that you would on whatever
the other machine is.
Univ. UTAH (160+128+40+18+8) hosts
NEXT 17 EMULABS in operation or in contruction
Switch
( Virt.capability)
wired
http://www.cs.utah.edu/flux/testbed-docs/emulab-dev-jan06.pdf
DETERLAB
shared infrastructure designed for medium scale repeatable experiments in computer security .
2 clusters (100 nodes each)
http://www.deterlab.net
Larry Peterson Princeton University: A Strategy for Continually Reinventing Internet
(May 2005)
It opens way to new virtulal worlds
and possibilities to replicate fundamental parts of internet
Integrate mobility
Develop and test applications in new environment
The first commercial entities will enter into
new environment with their users
Larry Peterson Princeton University:
A Strategy for Continually Reinventing Internet
(May 2005)
Each architecture (service)
runs in own slice
Planetlab node as INGRESS
NLR as high-speed backbone
Source: From GENI backbone working group
Why virtual architectures ?
The programs that should control many different entities in real time with
complex timing often multiplicatively same for different segments of the huge
systems are rather complex.
You can separate the tasks into independent HW
(computers) each responsible for part of the whole
system).
The reason is not only the distribution of the load
but also distribution of complexity.
The computers are more and more powerful and the
tools for writing software are still rather primitive not
very different from these which we had 20 years ago.
The next logical step is to create more independent systems
(virtual machine) on one computer and each can run simple program.
The complexity for writing and running of application is much lower than
in original design
VS – Virtual server
Independent OS LINUX (BSD) running on VM,
with own administartion including root
with own file system and computation capability
VMM
VMM
VMM
VMM
Slice set of VS on different VM
Node/Slices in PlanetLab
N1
N7
N3
N2
N4
N6
SLICE A1 (N3,N1,N2,N3,N4,N5,N6.N7)
SLICE A2 (N3,N6,N5,N4)
SLICE A3 (N1,N2,N6,N7
N5
On each node can run more users (slices)
Each of them is running in own virtual system
One user can run more applications
Node
SLICE
App1
App2
App3
Overlay/Slices in PlanetLab
N1
N7
N3
N2
N4
N6
N5
The Overlays
Xen 3.0 Architecture
AGP
ACPI
PCI
x86_32
x86_64
IA64
VM0
Device
Manager &
Control s/w
VM1
Unmodified
User
Software
VM2
Unmodified
User
Software
GuestOS
GuestOS
GuestOS
(XenLinux)
(XenLinux)
(XenLinux)
Back-End
Back-End
SMP
Native
Device
Driver
Control IF
Native
Device
Driver
Safe HW IF
Front-End
Device Drivers
Event Channel
Virtual CPU
VM3
Unmodified
User
Software
Unmodified
GuestOS
(WinXP))
Front-End
Device Drivers
Virtual MMU
Xen Virtual Machine Monitor
Hardware (SMP, MMU, physical memory, Ethernet, SCSI/IDE)
VT-x
Host-Guest-Middleware-Application Architecture
VM1
Unmodified
User
application
Middleware
Standard interface needed for
Middleware software which
interact with OS
GuestOS
UML
x86_32
x86_64
IA64
Virtual Machine Monitor
Hardware (SMP, MMU, physical memory, Ethernet, SCSI/IDE)
The main objective of the Euro NGI network is to create the European center of excellence
in Next Generation Internet design and engineering,
acting as a "Collective Intelligence Think Tank", representing a major support
for the European Information Society industry and leading towards a European leadership in this domain.
at
6
be
4
ch
10
cy
2
cz
2
de
39
dk
3
es
11
fr
10
gr
6
hu
2
ie
4
il
12
is
2
it
14
nl
4
no
6
pl
16
pt
8
se
6
uk
21
EU
188
OneLab Goals
Extend PlanetLab into new environments, beyond the traditional wired internet.
Deepen PlanetLab’s monitoring capabilities.
Federate - Provide a European administration for PlanetLab nodes in Europe.
at
6
be
4
ch
10
cy
2
cz
2
de
39
dk
3
es
11
fr
10
gr
6
hu
2
ie
4
il
12
is
2
it
14
nl
4
no
6
pl
16
pt
8
se
6
uk
21
EU
188
FP6 projects
•
MUPBED creates an experimental environment to assess the proposed network solutions, and that will be offered
as an open test platform to other European research projects and users. The test bed will represent a multi-layer
network based on IP/MPLS and ASON/GMPLS technologies, equipped with a unified control plane and designed
to support the highly demanding applications of the European research community.
•
•
MUSE creates an experimental environment for low cost multi-service access network. (internet to homes)
NETQoS - project proposes an autonomous policy-based management for wired/wireless heterogeneous
communications networks aimed to provide enhanced end-to-end QoS and efficient resource utilization.
•
OneLab will extend the highly successful and widely used PlanetLab infrastructure by enabling deployment of
PlanetLab nodes in new wireless environments.
•
PANLAB – This will serve as a Technology Roadmap and as a Strategic Development Guideline for
European and global telecommunications.
•
Phosphorus - High capacity optical networking can satisfy bandwidth and latency requirements, but software
tools and frameworks for end-to-end, on-demand provisioning of network services need to be developed in
coordination with other resources (CPU and storage) and need to span multiple administrative and network
technology domains.
•
WEIRD is integrated project aiming at implementing research test-beds using the WiMAX technology in order to
allow isolated or impervious areas to get connection to the GEANT2 research network.
•
WWI Ambient Networks project will create the network solutions for mobile and wireless systems beyond 3G. It
will enable scalable and affordable wireless networking while providing rich and easy to use communication
services for all. Ambient Networks offers a fundamentally new vision based on the dynamic composition of
networks to avoid adding to the growing patchwork of extensions to existing architectures.
Thank You for your
attention
EDGE
EDGE
Current situation in most of NRENs
GN2
200 Mbps
C-uni
Internet
1250 Mbps
?
POP
NREN
IP - Internet
POP
X-uni
2 Gbps
!
E2E
POP
?
Y-uni
?
The problems of future developments of GN2 and NRENs are not on the backbones
but
in the shared IP services
and on the EDGE
in the connection to the appl. users
who need new type of services
IP POPs
(existing)
E2E POPs
(NEW)
Current situation in IP shared traffic
1G
1G
40G 100G
Future situations in IP shared traffic
1G
10G
N x 1.G
10 G
Q1 How to manage traffic in multipath segments ?
Q2 Who control it (users, ISP?)
http://www.vini-veritas.net/about
Andy Bavier, Nick Feamster, Mark Huang, Larry Peterson, Jennifer Rexford.
In VINI Veritas: Realistic and Controlled Network Experimentation.
SIGCOMM 2006.
http://www.vini-veritas.net/about
Internet 2
NLR
Andy Bavier, Nick Feamster, Mark Huang, Larry Peterson, Jennifer Rexford.
In VINI Veritas: Realistic and Controlled Network Experimentation.
SIGCOMM 2006.
http://www.vini-veritas.net/about
Internet 2
VLAN
VLAN
NLR
VLAN
Andy Bavier, Nick Feamster, Mark Huang, Larry Peterson, Jennifer Rexford.
In VINI Veritas: Realistic and Controlled Network Experimentation.
SIGCOMM 2006.
Models of Future networks
Meshed backbones
with service shared
virtual or optical l paths
PNE- EDGE
Simple routing
Load balancing
Fast level of resilience
Easy Plug-in
PNE-EDGE
future NGI backbone ?
Similar to the idea in the project
“Millions Node access Network”
H. Zhang et all in http://100x100network.org
NRENs/ISPs
RN2
RN3
RN1
RN4
Group/class of applications
“G”
RN5
l1
(voice)
sublayer 2
l
RN1
“P”
(video)
“B”
(data)
“Y”
(interactive gaming)
sublayer 1
l2
RN5
sunlayer 3
RN1
RN = routernode
RN4
RN5
l3
RN4
RN5
l4
Domain X
Different L2 allocation
between RN,
different routing for
each L3 sub-layer
sublayer 4
RN1
Different application packets
Core network
RN4
Edge node
Edge node
Questions: Who can create applicaton layer?
Different application packets
Domain Z
*jn*
Applications as Internet overlay
with
own addresses and names for the objects
and
own routing/lookup
P2P for millions of users
• Data sharing
(Napster, Gnutella, Fastrack, BitTorrent,…)
• IP telephony (Skype, SIP)
• PlanetLab applications (CDN,Coral,Iris,…)
IP over P2P network
SODA:
a Service-On-Demand Architecture
MSODA: AN OVERVIEW
From the user’s point of view, MSODA is a shared integrated “market place”
for media service access and composition.
Basic media services are provided by individual service providers and hosted in MSODA nodes.
A media service can be as simple as a video transcoder or as complex as a multi-video stream correlator.
MSODA creates a wide-area collaborative service hosting overlay, with the goal of high resource utilization,
service quality, and service composability.
Service Hosting
Each MSODA node hosts a number of media services. Moreover,
the same media service can be dynamically replicated or migrated
within the MSODA overlay network, driven by service demand
and resource availability.
In an MSODA node, each media service instance runs inside a virtual machine.
The virtual machine has its own IP address, customized operating system, and
Networking capability
User request for different services
Service switch for S1
Service switch for S 2
node 1
Service switch for Sx
node n
node 2
S1
G-OS
S1
SODA
(Daemon)
S2
G-OS
G-OS
S3
SODA
(Daemon)
G-OS
HUP
Hosting utility Platform
SODA Daemon
Bootstrap VM + downloading appl.
Guest OS „UML“
Host OS
Host OS
Each User will get individual service
(web, comp, log, …)
SODA Master
Configuration for SERVICE types
SODA Agent
Request ASP for SERVICE type
•
•
On-demand creation of
services
Virtualization of services
•
Isolation between services
Physical Link
Physical node
Virtual Link
Virtual node
Shared Utility Infrastructure
Utility demand
Trends in networks
• Consolidation of (i.e. reduction in) number of
network providers
– Does it converge on competition or monopoly?
• Emerging structure around population centres
– One regional centre per 5-10 million people
– UK: 5-10 centres
– USA: 30-50 centres
• Increased “meshing” and load-balancing
Valiant Load-Balancing
Structure of switching centers
Current situation in IP shared traffic
1G
1G
10G
1G
40G
100G
Future situations in IP shared traffic
N x 1.G
10 G
Q1 How to manage traffic in multipath segments ?
Q2 Who control it (users, ISP?)
Current situation in IP shared traffic
1G
1G
10G
1G
40G
100G