projektovanje man mreža -...

Projektovanje MAN mreža

Mr Nenad KrajnovićKatedra za telekomunikacijeE-mail: [email protected]

©Krajko 2

MAN mreže

•

Metropolitan Area Network•

Pokrivaju zonu od desetak kilometara u prečniku

•

Veliki broj korisnika•

Veliki protoci

•

Sopstveni optički kablovi•

Zahteva se visoka raspoloživost (“pet devetki”

–

99,999% ?)

©Krajko 3

MAN mreže

•

Relativno velika rastojanja (par desetina kilometara) tako da se moraju koristiti SM optički kablovi

•

Veliki broj korisnika –

pored standardnih sistema kabliranja koriste se i sistemi mikro kabliranja

•

Cilj je doći do svakog korisnika optičkim kablom po što manjoj ceni; u zavisnosti od tipa mreže, mogu se koristiti i bakarni kablovi (KDS, ADSL)

•

Prilikom bilo kakvih građevinskih radova (npr: gasifikacija) zgodno je postaviti optičke kablove

©Krajko 4

MAN mreže

•

Kako organizovati mrežu kada imamo veliki broj optičkih kablova?

•

Dvo-

i tro-nivoska arhitektura (u zavisnosti od veličine mreže)

•

Jezgro mreže najčešće prsten dok se ostali povezuju zvezdasto

•

Nekad se koristili

SDH,

RPR,

a danas sve više DWDM + ethernet

©Krajko 5

Topologija prstena

•

Topologija –

prsten / zvezda / mešovito?•

Topologija prstena nudi pouzdan prenos podataka (uvek imamo dve putanje između dve tačke)

•

Dobro funkcioniše kada je broj tačaka na prstenu relativno mali (pristup zajedničkom medijumu –

isti problem kao kod ethernet-a)

•

Za veći broj čvorova na prstenu pojavljuje se problem performansi i pitanje pouzdanosti prstena.

©Krajko 6

Topologija zvezde

•

Jednostavna za realizaciju i prati stvarnu topologiju kablovske infrastrukture

•

Nema redundantnih linkova usled čega ne može da ima visoku raspoloživost

•

Najčešće se koristi u pristupnom delu mreže –

veza do krajnjeg korisnika

©Krajko 7

Mešovita topologija

•

Najčešće se koristi u praksi•

Predstavlja kombinaciju prethodno opisanih topologija

•

Okosnica mreže se, po pravilu, realizuje kao prsten (sa redundansom po fizički odvojenoj putanji)

•

Pristupni deo najčešće kao zvezdasta topologija

©Krajko 8

Dvo-nivoska arhitektura

©Krajko 9

Dvo-nivoska arhitektura

•

U situaciji kada su veličina mreže i broj korisnika relativno mali

•

Okosnica se realizuje kao prsten a povezivanje sa drugim nivoom može da bude sa redundantnim linkom ili bez njega

•

Broj linkova u tačkama koncentracije zavisi od izabrane komunikacione opreme

©Krajko 10

Tro-nivoska arhitektura

©Krajko 11

Tro-nivoska arhitektura

•

Po pravilu,

koristi

se

kada imamo velike mreže, kako po pitanju rastojanja tako i po pitanju broja korisnika/lokacija koje je potrebno povezati

•

Veze između prvog i drugog nivoa bi trebale da budu redundantne (prsten, dupli link, trougao)

•

Veze drugi-treći nivo možda mogu da ne budu redundantne?

©Krajko 12

SDH u MAN mreži

•

Prve MAN mreže uglavnom su bile bazirane na SDH tehnologiji

•

Visoka raspoloživost i prstenasta struktura bile velike prednosti

•

Vremenom je nefleksibilnost SDH sistema prenosa dovela do novih alternativnih tehnologija

©Krajko 13

SDH u MAN mreži

•

Protoci po virtuelnim kanalima strogo definisani (2Mb/s, 155Mb/s, 622Mb/s,...)

•

Za druge protoke potrebni posebni uređaji (inverzni MUX) ili NGN SDH uređaj

•

Različiti formati prenosa podataka (TDM kanali, paketi)

ADD/ DROP MUX

ADD/ DROP MUX

ADD/ DROP MUX

ADD/ DROP MUX

STM-4, STM-16, STM-64

STM-4, STM-16, STM-64

DXC

DXC – Digital Cross Connect

©Krajko 14

Ethernet kao osnova novih MAN mreža

•

Razvoj Ethernet-a omogućio je prenos velike količine podataka (10Gb/s) na velika rastojanja (40 –

80 km)

•

Za dalje povećanje protoka potrebna nova vlakna ili nova tehnološka rešenja (100Gb/s Eth)

•

Problem razdvajanja tipova saobraćaja (VLAN, QinQ), broadcast saobraćaja, broja korisnika na nivou cele mreže (max broj MAC adresa koje podržava jedan uređaj)

©Krajko 15

Ethernet kao osnova novih MAN mreža

•

Razvoj novih servisa baziranih na ethernet transportu

•

Unapređenja ethernet tehnologije u cilju omogućavanja novih servisa

©Krajko 16

LAN ethernet vs. MAN ethernet

•

LAN ethernet, po pravilu, obezbeđuje sirovi protok podataka, bez QoS-a–

Razdvajanje saobraćaja na nivou VLAN-ova

•

MAN ethernet mora da obezbedi:–

Razdvajanje saobraćaja različitih korisnika

–

Garantovanje QoS-a–

Visoku raspoloživost servisa (availability)

–

Velike protoke–

Laku proširivost mreže

©Krajko 17

Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF)

•

O daljem razvoju Ethernet-a kao tehnologije za MAN i WAN mreže brine i MEF (Metro Ethernet Forum)

www.metroethernetforum.orgwww.metroethernetforum.org•

Asocijacija proizvođača i istraživača koji se bave ethernet tehnologijom

•

Koji su im ciljevi?

18

Metro Ethernet Forum

Mission StatementThe MEF’s mission is to accelerate the worldwide adoption of Carrier-class Ethernet networks and services.What we doThe MEF develops technical specifications and implementation agreements to promote interoperability and deployment of Carrier Ethernet worldwide.International Membership, April 2009:156

companies, 2/3 Vendors, 1/3 Service Providers

19

Ethernet Standards Summary

Management and OAM

Architecture/ControlEthernet Services

•TMF814 –

EMS to NMS Model–– –

Ethernet Interfaces

Standards Body

• 802.3ah –

EFM OAM• 802.1ag –

CFM• 802.1AB -

Discovery• 802.1ap –

VLAN MIB

•

802.3 –

MAC•

802.1D/Q –

Bridges/VLAN•

802.1ah –

Provider Backbone Bridges•

802.1Qay –

PBB –TE•

802.1ax –

Next-gen Link Aggregation•

802.17 -

RPR•

802.1ad –

Provider Bridges•

.1ah –

Provider Backbone Bridges•

.1ak –

Multiple Registration Protocol•

.1aj –

Two Port MAC Relay•

.1AE/af –

MAC / Key Security•

.1aq –

Shortest Path Bridging

–

•

802.3 –

PHYs•

802.3as -

Frame Expansion

•

802.3ba 100GigE

• Y.1730 –

Ethernet OAM Req• Y.1731 –

OAM Mechanisms• G.8031 –

Protection•Y.ethperf

-

Performance

• G.8010 –

Layer Architecture• G.8021 –

Equipment model• G.8010v2 –

Layer Architecture• G.8021v2 –

Equipment model• Y.17ethmpls -

ETH-MPLS Interwork

•

G.8011 –

Carrier Ethernet Services Framework• G.81xx –

T-MPLS• G.asm

–

Service Mgmt Arch• G.smc

–

Service Mgmt Chnl

• G.8012 –

UNI/NNI• G.8012v2 –

UNI/NNI

• MEF 7–

EMS-NMS Info Model• MEF 15–

NE Management Req• OAM Req

& Framework• OAM Protocol –

Phase 1• Performance Monitoring

• MEF 4 –

Generic Architecture• MEF 2 –

Protection Req

& Framework• MEF 11 – UNI Req & Framework• MEF 12 -

Layer Architecture

• MEF 10 –

Service Attributes• MEF 3 –

Circuit Emulation• MEF 6 –

Service Definition• MEF 8 –

PDH Emulation• MEF 9 –

Test Suites• MEF 14 –

Test Suites• Services Phase 2

• MEF 13 -

UNI Type 1• MEF 16 –

E-LMI• E-NNI

––•

MFAF.12 –

Multi-Service Interworking –

http://www.tmforum.com/browse.asp?catID=0

http://www.itu.int/

20

Service Architecture

21

Carrier Ethernet Architecture (1)

Dat

a Pl

ane

Con

trol

Pla

ne

Man

agem

ent P

lane

Transport Services Layer (e.g., IEEE 802.1, SONET/SDH, MPLS)

Ethernet Services Layer (Ethernet Service PDU)

Application Services Layer (e.g., IP, MPLS, PDH, etc.)APP Layer

ETH Layer

TRAN Layer

Data moves from UNI to UNI across "the network" with a layered architecture.

When traffic moves between ETH domains it

does so at the TRAN layer. This allows Carrier Ethernet traffic to be agnostic to the networks that it traverses.

MEF Focus

22

Ethernet Services Layer Terminology

Carrier Ethernet Architecture (2)

Service Provider 1

Carrier Ethernet Network

CECE

UNIUNI

Ethernet Services “Eth” Layer

Subscriber Site

ETHUNI-CETH

UNI-CETH

UNI-NETH

UNI-NETH

UNI-NETH

UNI-NETH

E-NNIETH

E-NNIETH

UNI-CETH

UNI-C

UNI: User Network Interface, UNI-C: UNI-customer side, UNI-N network sideNNI: Network to Network Interface, E-NNI: External NNI; I-NNI Internal NNI

CE: Customer Equipment

UNIUNI

CECE

I-NNII-NNI E-NNIE-NNI

Service Provider 2

I-NNII-NNI

ETHE-NNIETH

E-NNI

Subscriber Site

23

Service Attributes

24

Service Attributes•

EVC Service Attributes–

Details regarding the EVC including:

•

Bandwidth profiles•

CoS Identification

•

Service Performance–

Frame Delay (Latency)–

Frame Delay Variation–

Frame Loss Ratio–

Availability

•

UNI Service Attributes–

Details regarding the UNI including:

•

Physical interface capabilities•

Service multiplexing capability

•

C-VLAN bundling capability

25

EVC Service AttributesBandwidth Profiles per EVC (service) and per CoS

–

CIR (Committed Information Rate)•

CIR assured via Bandwidth Reservation and Traffic Engineering

–

EIR (Excess Information Rate)•

EIR bandwidth is considered ‘excess’•

Traffic dropped at congestion points in the network–

CBS/EBS (Committed/Excess Burst Size)•

Higher burst size results in improved performance

EVC-1CIR

EIREVC-2

CIR

EIR

EVC-3

CIREIR

UNI EVC1

CoS 6 1Mbps CIR for VoIP

CoS 26Mbps CIR for VPN data traffic

3Mbps for Internet AccessEVC2

10Mbps UNI

(port)

BWPs can divide bandwidth per EVC (service) over a single UNI

–

Multiple services over same port (UNI)–

CoS markings enable the network to determine the network QoS to provide

CIR defines the assured bandwidth CIR defines the assured bandwidth EIR improves the networkEIR improves the network’’s Goodput s Goodput

26

UNIEVC1

EVC2

EVC3

Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per Ingress UNI

UNIEVC1

EVC2

EVC3

Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per EVC1



UNI EVC1

CE-VLAN CoS 6 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 6

CE-VLAN CoS 4

CE-VLAN CoS 2

Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 4

Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 2

EVC2

Port-based Port/VLAN-based

Port/VLAN/CoS-based

MEF 10.1 Traffic Management Model

27

Purpose

•

Carrier Ethernet Services Overview –

This presentation defines the MEF Ethernet Services that represent the principal attribute of a Carrier Ethernet Network

–

This presentation is intended to give a simple overview as a grounding for all other MEF documents

28

Carrier Ethernet Terminology

•

User to Network Interface (UNI)–

Physical interface/demarcation between service provider/Cable Operator/Carrier/ and subscriber

•

Ethernet Virtual Connection (EVC)–

Logical representation of an Ethernet service as defined by the associate between 2 or more UNIs

•

Network to Network Interface (NNI)–

Demarcation between carrier Ethernet networks operated by one or more carriers

UNI, EVC and NNI are the Fundamental Constructs of an Ethernet SUNI, EVC and NNI are the Fundamental Constructs of an Ethernet Serviceervice

29


UNIUNI

MEF Carrier Ethernet Terminology

•

The User Network Interface (UNI)–

The UNI is the physical interface or port that is the demarcation between the customer and the service provider/Cable Operator/Carrier/MSO

–

The UNI is always provided by the Service Provider–

The UNI in a Carrier Ethernet Network is a physical Ethernet Interface at operating speeds 10Mbs, 100Mbps, 1Gbps or 10Gbps

CE: Customer Equipment, UNI: User Network Interface. MEF certified Carrier Ethernet products

CECE

30

Service provider responsibilityUNIUNI


MEF Carrier Ethernet Terminology -

User to Network Interface (UNI)

•

Ethernet service demarcation point–

between customer (subscriber) and service provider

•

Physical Ethernet Interface operating at: –

10Mbps–

100Mbps–

1Gbps–

10GbpsCECE

customer responsibility

31

MEF Carrier Ethernet Terminology -

Ethernet Virtual Connection (EVC)

•

An Ethernet Service Instantiation–

Most commonly identified via 802.1ad S-VLAN ID

•

Connects two or more subscriber sites (UNIs)–

Can multiplex multiple EVCs on the same UNI

•

Three types of EVCs defined by MEF–

Point-to-Point, Multipoint-to-Multipoint, Rooted Multipoint (Point-to-Multipoint)

–

Typically distinguished by C-VLAN or S-VLAN tags

UNIEVC1

EVC2

UNI(port)

e.g. 1GE

32

MEF Carrier Ethernet Terminology

•

Ethernet Virtual Connection (EVC)–

Connects two or more subscriber sites (UNI’s)

–

An association of two or more UNIs–

Prevents data transfer between sites that are not part of the same EVC

–

Three types of EVC•

Point-to-Point

•

Multipoint-to-Multipoint

33

Carrier Ethernet: Three Ethernet Service Types

•

E-Line Service Type–

Ethernet Private Lines

–

Virtual Private Lines (site-to-site Layer 2 VPNs)•

Ethernet Internet Access

•

E-LAN Service Type–

Multi-site Layer 2 VPNs

–

Transparent LAN Service•

E-Tree Service Type–

Point-to-Multipoint Infrastructure

•

Triple play backhaul•

Cell sites backhauled to mobile switching center

34

Carrier Ethernet: Service Types Using EVCs

•

E-Line Service used to create–

Ethernet Private Lines–

Virtual Private Lines–

Ethernet Internet Access

•

E-LAN Service used to create–

Multipoint L2 VPNs–

Transparent LAN Service–

Foundation for IPTV and Multicast networks etc.

E-Line Service type

E-LAN Service type

Point-to-Point EVC


UNI: User Network Interface, CE: Customer Equipment

CECE

UNIUNI UNIUNI

CECE

Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC


CECE

UNIUNI

MEF certified Carrier Ethernet products

CECE

UNIUNI

35

MEF Ethernet Service Definition Classification

Service TypeService Type PortPort--BasedBased(All(All--toto--One Bundling)One Bundling)

VLANVLAN--BasedBased(Service Multiplexed)(Service Multiplexed)

EE--LineLine (Point(Point--toto--Point EVC)Point EVC)

Ethernet Private LineEthernet Private Line (EPL)(EPL)

Ethernet Virtual Private Ethernet Virtual Private LineLine

(EVPL)(EVPL)

EE--LANLAN (multipoint(multipoint--toto--

multipoint EVC)multipoint EVC)

Ethernet Private LANEthernet Private LAN (EP(EP--LAN)LAN)

Ethernet Virtual Private Ethernet Virtual Private LANLAN

(EVP(EVP--LAN)LAN)

EE--TreeTree (rooted multipoint (rooted multipoint

EVC)EVC)

Ethernet Private TreeEthernet Private Tree (EP(EP--Tree)Tree)

Ethernet Virtual Private Ethernet Virtual Private TreeTree

(EVP(EVP--Tree)Tree)

•

MEF Services are classified into two categories:–

Port-based•

Single Service Instance per UNI (dedicated network resource)–

VLAN-based•

Multiple Service Instances per UNI (shared network resource)

36

EVCs and Services

In a Carrier Ethernet network, data is transported across Point-to-Point and Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVCs

according to the attributes and definitions of

the E-Line and E-LAN services

Point-to-Point EVC


UNIUNI UNIUNI

37

Services Using E-Line Service Type

•

Ethernet Private Line (EPL)–

Replaces a TDM Private line–

Port-based service with single service (EVC) across dedicated UNIs providing site-to-site connectivity

–

Typically delivered over SDH (Ethernet over SDH)–

Most popular Ethernet service due to its simplicity

Point-to-Point EVCs


CECE UNIUNI

CECEUNIUNI

CECE

UNIUNI

ISPPOP

UNIUNI

Storage Service Provider

Internet

38

Services Using E-Line Service Type

•

Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL)–

Replaces Frame Relay or ATM L2 VPN services•

To deliver higher bandwidth, end-to-end services–

Enables multiple services (EVCs) to be delivered over single physical connection (UNI) to customer premises

–

Supports “hub and spoke”

connectivity via Service Multiplexed UNI at hub site

•

Similar to Frame Relay or Private Line hub and spoke deployments

Service Multiplexed

Ethernet UNI

Point-to-Point EVCs


CECE

UNIUNI

CECE

UNIUNI

CECE

UNIUNI

39

Services Using E-LAN Service Type

•

Ethernet Private LAN (EP-LAN) and Ethernet Virtual Private LAN (EVP-LAN) Services–

Supports dedicated or service-multiplexed UNIs –

Supports transparent LAN services and multipoint Layer 2 VPNs

Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC


CECEUNIUNI

UNIUNI

CECE

CECE

UNIUNI

Ethernet Private LAN example

40

Services Using E-Tree Service Type

•

Ethernet Private Tree (EP-Tree) and Ethernet Virtual Private Tree (EVP-Tree) Services–

Enables Point-to-Multipoint Services with less provisioning than using EVPLs for large hub & spoke deployments

•

Provides traffic separation between users (Leaf UNIs)•

Each “Leaf”

UNI interchanged with “Root”

UNI(s)

•

No exchange of traffic between “Leaf”

UNIs

Root


CECEUNIUNI

UNIUNI

UNIUNI

CECE

CECE

Leaf

Leaf

UNIUNI

CECE

Leaf

Rooted-Multipoint EVCEthernet Private Tree example

41

Wireless Backhaul

Carrier Ethernet in Access Networks

Voice gateway

Voice/VideoTelephony

HD TVTVoD, VoD

Gaming, BusinessBackup, ERP

E-Line andE-LAN service

ResidentialTriple-Play

FTTx and DSLAM , Cable Modem

Broadbandmobile data/video

VideoSource

VideoSource

Bringing vastly extended scalability for business and residential users

CarrierEthernet AccessCarrierEthernet Access

Global/NationalCarrier EthernetGlobal/NationalCarrier Ethernet

Metro Carrier Ethernet Metro Carrier Ethernet

BusinessBroadband

Small/Medium Business

42

TDM Circuits(e.g. T1/E1 Lines)

Circuit Emulation Services over Carrier Ethernet

•

Enables TDM Services to be transported across Carrier Ethernet network, re- creating the TDM circuit at the far end–

Runs on a standard Ethernet Line Service (E-Line)

Carrier Ethernet NetworkTDM Circuits

(e.g. T1/E1 Lines)Circuit Emulated

TDM Traffic

43

Carrier Ethernet Architecture for Cable OperatorsHeadend Hub

EQAM

CMTS

Optical Metro Ring Network

VideoServer

D2A

AdInsertion

E-LAN

E-LineBusiness Services over Fiber (GigE)

Voice gateway

Voice/VideoTelephony

Digital TV, VOD, Interactive TV, Gaming, HDTV

Managed BusinessApplications

InternetAccess

AnalogTV Feeds

HubUNIUNI

CECE

E-NNIE-NNI

Another MSO or carrierNetwork

EoDOCSIS(future)

EoT1/DS3

PON

Greenfield Residential

& Business Services

EoSONET/SDH

CECEUNIUNI

WDM

UNIUNIHome RunFiber

EoCoaxEoHFC

SwitchedFiber

Business Park

Business Services

Node

E-LineE-LAN

CECE

UNIUNI

CECE

WirelessPlant

Extension LeasedT1/DS3

CECEUNIUNI

Off Air

LocalBroadcaster

A2D

Local Venues

44

Related MEF Services Specifications

Purpose Defines the Ethernet Services (EPL, EVPL, E-Line, ELAN, etc)

MEF 6MEF 6

Purpose Defines the service attributes and parameters required to offer the services defined in MEF 6. Updated from Original MEF 10 in October 2006

Audience

Appropriate for equipment vendors, service providers, and business customers, since it provides the fundamentals required to build devices and services that deliver Carrier Ethernet. For Enterprise users

it gives the background to Service Level Specifications for Carrier Ethernet Services being offered by their Service Providers and helps to plan Ethernet Services as part of their overall network.

Ethernet Services Attributes Phase 2 MEF 10.1MEF 10.1

Metro Ethernet Services Definitions Phase I

45

Example Uses of Services

46

Examples for EPL

HQ

Branch

Branch

EPL

EPL

•

Simple configuration

•

“The port to the Internet it is un-trusted”

•

“The port to the branches it is trusted”

•

No coordination with MEN SP for HQ to branch subnets

•

Fractional bandwidth (Bandwidth Profile) to minimize monthly service charges

Internet

Firewall

47

Example Use EVPL

ISPISP Customer 1Customer 1

Turbo 2000Turbo 2000 Internet Access, Inc.Internet Access, Inc.



Service MultiplexingService Multiplexing

VLANVLAN 2000 2000 ↔↔ BlueBlueVLANVLAN 2000 2000 ↔↔ YellowYellow

VLANVLAN 2000 2000 ↔↔ GreenGreen

VLAN 178 VLAN 178 ↔↔ BlueBlue VLAN 179 VLAN 179 ↔↔ YellowYellow VLAN 180 VLAN 180 ↔↔ GreenGreen

•

Efficient use of ISP router ports

•

Easy configuration at ISP customer sites

•

This port and VLAN 2000 (or even untagged) to Turbo Internet

48

Example Use of EVP-LAN

Credit Check, Inc.

Instant Loans, Inc.

Walk In Drive Out Used Cars, Inc.

•

Redundant points of access for critical availability higher layer service

•

Efficient use of DDC’s

router ports

•

IL and Used Cars cannot see each other’s traffic

Service Multiplexing

A

BD

EVC1C

EVC2

49

Example Use of EP-Tree

A

B

C

D

EVC1

Internet for the Small Guy, Inc.

Small Guy Travel

RootLeaves

Diminutive Guy Gaming Center

Tiny Guy Coffee

•

Efficient use of ISG router port

•

One subnet to configure on ISG router

•

Simple configuration for the little guys

•

Small, Tiny, and Diminutive Guys can’t see each other’s traffic

•

Second Root would provide redundant internet access

•

Some limits on what routing protocols can be used

50

Example Use of EVP-Tree

A

B

C

D

EVC1

Internet for the Small Guy, Inc.

Small Guy Travel

RootsLeaves

Diminutive Guy Gaming Center

Tiny Guy Coffee

•

Efficient use of ISG router port

•

Efficient distribution of elevator video

•

Small, Tiny, and Diminutive Guys can’t see each other’s traffic, EV Franchises can’t see each other’s traffic

•

Second Root would provide redundant internet access

•

Some limits on what routing protocols can be used

Elevator Video Franchises

LeavesService Multiplexing

©Krajko 51

Način korišćenja ethernet-a

•

MAN mreža se može podeliti na dve celine:–

Pristupni deo mreže –

veza krajnjeg korisnika

i mreže–

Ostatak –

jezgro (okosnica) mreže i

distributivni nivo mreže bazirani na ethernet tehnologiji

©Krajko 52

Okosnica mreže

•

U početku

je

bio standardni ethernet•

Uvođenjem novih servisa migrirao ka kompleksnijoj tehnologiji

•

VLAN, QinQ – uvođenje dvostrukog VLAN ID polja, jedno za operatora drugo za korisnika

©Krajko 53

Problemi kod ethernet-a

•

Razdvajanje virtuelnih kanala/korisnika (VLAN, QinQ)

•

Broadcast saobraćaj•

Broj korisnika na nivou cele mreže (max broj MAC adresa koje podržava jedan uređaj)

•

Rad na L2 nivou –

rutiranje saobraćaja, tabele rutiranja (MAC tabele), performanse

©Krajko 54

Rešenja za probleme

•

Uvođenje IP tehnologije u kombinaciji sa MPLS-om rešava problem skalabilnosti ethernet mreže

•

Povećanje protoka uvođenjem WDM tehnologije

•

Kombinacijom WDM-a i MPLS-a dobijamo MPλS

©Krajko 55

IP+MPLS+WDM realizacija

IP/MPLS/MPλS

xDSL/PON/Cable

VVVV

PSTN

3G/4GWiMAXWiMeshOptical

cross- connect

Optical transport

Voice gateway

©Krajko 56

Pristupni deo mreže

•

Kako doći do svih korisnika?•

Najbolje rešenje je FTTH ali je ujedno i najskuplje

•

Drugo rešenje je korišćenje PON (Passive Optical Network)

•

Treće je FTTC u kombinaciji sa xDSL-om

57

EP2P and GPON

Carrier Ethernet and the Five Attributes

58

BroadbandWireless

Wireless data/videoMobile Computing

Small/Medium Business

Fiber, Copper

Copper, Fiber, Coax

Enterprise/ BusinessBroadband

Residential and Telecommuting

Fiber

Carrier EthernetCarrier Ethernet

E-Line andE-LAN service

The Access / First Mile – Technology Neutrality

59

First Mile / Access Link OAM (802.3ah)

Link OAM Monitors and Reports UNI Link Faults and Performance•

Discovery•

Remote Loopback•

Fault Detection (hard faults e.g. link breaks / unidirectional, dying gasp)•

Link Performance Monitoring (soft errors, threshold based alarms)•

Collecting Performance Statistics (via OAM Extensions)

NID

CECE

UNIUNI UNI-CUNI-N

NID

Link OAM 802.3ah

60

Service OAM (Y.1731/802.1ag)

UNICECE

Subscriber MEG (Maintenance Entity Group)

OP A OP B

EVC MEG

Operator A MEG Operator B MEG

Service OAM Monitors and Reports Per Service end-to-end Performance• 802.1ag: end-to-end fault detection and management.• Y.1731: end-to-end performance monitoring.• Support multi-level details for different stakeholders:

–

Customer, Service Provider, Operator• Performance Monitoring:

–

Delay, Jitter, Loss, Availability• Enable SLA monitoring, documenting, policing

UNI

61

EP2P as Ethernet Access Network

•

Access Bridge–

Traffic Aggregation•

Network Interface Device - NID)–

Service (EVC, CoS, Rate-Limiting) Mapping–

Ethernet Link OAM (with Access Bridge and CPE)–

End-to-End Service OAM–

Provides the User-to-Network Interface

Access Bridge

Ethernet Layer Topology

NNI UNI

NIDMetro Carrier

Ethernet

62

GPON as Ethernet Transport Access Network

•

GPON provides transport–

Transparent to the Ethernet service traffic•

Link OAM–

Ethernet Link OAM -

not available between Bridge and NID–

Can use GPON Link OAM

Access Bridge Ethernet Layer Topology

Transport Layer Topology

NNI UNI

NID

GPON OLT GPON ONT

Metro Carrier

Ethernet

63

Metro Carrier

Ethernet

GPON as Ethernet Service Access Network

•

GPON network participates in MEF Implementation Agreement•

OLT participates in NNI requirements–

Traffic Aggregation–

Link Aggregation•

ONT participate in UNI requirements–

Business ONT (w/ NID features)–

Service (EVC, CoS, Rate-Limiting) Mapping

Ethernet Layer Topology

GPON OLT GPON ONT

NNI

UNI

64

Standardized Services

Topic EP2P GPON

MEF Services Support Native support for E-Line, E-LAN, E-Tree

Ethernet service is supported via GEM encapsulation

Multiple Data Streams/Services Support Supported with NIDs Supported with “Business”

ONT

TDM Service Supports Supported via CESoE

(emulation over Ethernet) Supported Natively

GPON ONT

UNI

NID NID

UNI UNI

UNIGPON OLT

EP2P GPON

Y

65

Scalability

Topic EP2P GPON

Coverage/User addition Add as needed Requires detailed planning

Distance scalability Up to 150km up to 20km

Bandwidth scalability0-10 Gig/user dedicated BW, (more w. 100Gig and WDM)

0-2.5 Gig shared BW (future: 10 Gig, 4-λ

WDM)

EP2P GPON20 Km max150 Km

maxDistanceY

66

Y

Quality of Service

Topic EP2P GPON

Class of Service Up to 8 levels Up to 8 levels

Bandwidth Provisioning Up to 10Gbps dedicated BW Up to 2.5Gbps shared BW

TDM Emulated via CESoE Native, accurate timing

EP2P GPON

Bandwidth Dedicated Bandwidth 10Mbps to 10Gbps 2.5 Gigabit Shared Bandwidth

67

Reliability

Topic EP2P GPON

Equipment/Feeder Failure

Affect one customer per portmultiple per module

Affect multiple per port,many per module

Feeder/Customer Link Protection Optional at many levels, Geo-Diverse Mostly cost prohibitive

Link Fault Detection802.3ah OAM

(Bi-Directional Link Fault Detection,

link quality monitoring)

PLOAM

(Bi-Directional Link Fault Detection,

link quality monitoring)

EP2P GPON

Link Redundancy with Geographic Path Diversity

XX

XX

XX

68

Service Management

Topic EP2P GPON

Physical Level Management

802.3ah Link OAM(Loop-back, variable request)

PLOAM

(delay calibration, time slot allocation)

Remote ManagementSNMP / TELNET/

802.3ah extensions,Proprietary IP-Less

OMCI / OLT / ONT Management Control Interface

End-to-End Service OAM

802.1ag, Y.1731 (fault and performance monitoring) Normally none

EP2P GPON

Y

SNMPvXTELNET OMCI

69

ScalabilityScalability

Quality of ServiceQuality of Service

ReliabilityReliability

ServiceManagementServiceManagement

StandardizedServiceStandardizedService

In Summary: Comparison of 5 Attributes

EP2P Ethernet GPON

Link and Service OAM

Per user faults, Strong Redundancy options

More BW options, TDM emulation

E-Line, E-LAN

Wide BW upgrade options, wide distance reach

E-Line, E-LAN

Limits BW upgrade options

Native TDM

Per user / multi-user faults, weak redundancy

Link OAM only

70

Agenda

•

Introduction

•

Comparing Capex

and Opex

of active versus passive architectures

•

Identifying strengths and weaknesses of active versus passive architectures

•

Outlook

71

Introduction

•

the MEF's view is a layer 2 view•

it's about–

service types (E-Line, E-LAN, ..)

–

traffic management (bandwidth profiles, service frame colour, CIR, CBS, EIR, EBS, ..)

–

CFM, OAM, demarcation monitoring, ..–

ubiquitous service

•

it's not about–

layer 1 physical infrastructure

–

active vs. passive–

copper vs. fiber

–

what technology is used in the backbone (PBT, ..)

72

Comparing Capex and Opex

there are several different approaches

•

purely fiber

based–

P2P

–

GPON / EPON•

mixed approaches–

fiber

to the curb/building

–

usage of copper in the last (1/2) mile•

copper all the way from CO to CP

73

P2P

CO

CP

CP

CP

dedicated fiber

for each user

74

P2P

ProCapex•

most future proof infrastructure

Opex•

no active equipment in street cabinets needed

•

easier BW upgrades•

easier unbundling

ConCapex•

higher investment in fiber, but digging similar

•

higher number of IFOpex•

more CO rack space needed

•

higher power consumption

•

bigger distribution frames

75

PON

CO

CP

CP

CP

passive splitter

combine

drop –

distribution and

distribution –

feeder fiber

splitter

splitter

76

PON

ProCapex•

less fiber

/ duct utilisation

•

smaller number of active interfaces

Opex•

no active equipment in street cabinets needed

•

less CO rack space needed

•

smaller power consumption

ConCapex•

whole domain limited to common downlink speed

•

asymmetric BW split does not meet business service requirements

Opex•

more difficult for unbundling

•

more complex trouble shooting

77

mixed approaches / FTTC

CO

mini DSLAM in

street cabinets

connected via P2P

fiber

(or GPON)

CP

CP

CP

CP

mini

DSLAM

in SC

e.g.

VDSL2

78

mixed approaches / FTTC

ProCapex•

smaller cost for civil works, less digging

•

reuse of existing copper infrastructure

Opex•

less CO rack space needed

ConCapex•

upgrade cost of street cabinets (power, ..)

•

higher cost for hardened equipment

Opex•

active equipment in street cabinets

79

from yesterdays presentations

Source:IDATEfromFTTxSummit2007Munich

80

Identifying strengths and weaknesses

•

Identifying strengths and weaknesses of active versus passive architectures, considering:

–

scalability–

power requirements

–

maintenance–

length of fibre deployed

–

coverage–

OLT and ONT costs

–

utilisation–

customer management

–

evolution to new services

81

in more detail - P2P vs. PON

scalabilitycable / duct size vs. OLT size / splitter rationPtP vs. smallest OLT

power requirementsP2P has more active interfacesboth solution do not need active equipment in

street cabinetsmaintenance

P2P seams to be easier to troubleshoot, has more independence from other customers services

82


length of fibre deployedcable length / duct length is similarP2P uses more fiber between

CO – distribution – drop locationscoverage

both solutions do need last mile fiberdiscussion between Ethernet over Fiber vs.

Ethernet over Copper similarOLT and ONT costs

needs a more detailed comparisonP2P CPE may be more expensive than ONT but

may be compensated by higher OLT cost

83


utilisationP2P provides independent, symmetrical bandwidthGPON/EPON is limited by the common downstream

customer managementP2P allows more easy, independent customer

management and flexible upgradesPON provides a more centralised approach in line

with consumer market requirementsevolution to new services

P2P seams to be more flexible towards new requirements, main assets are duct, fiber, distribution frames, floor/rack space

84

Outlook

•

between PON and P2P, WDM PON will find its place•

combining the strength of both sides

•

common fiber, independent wavelength•

bandwidth demand will grow and push EPON / GPON towards their limits

•

usual question is by when

but•

the interface will be an Ethernet interface

•

the L2 will be Ethernet (Carrier Ethernet)

©Krajko 85

Active vs Passive Ethernet

•

Prethodne analize su pokazale da u različitim situacijama različito

vrednujemo

pojedina rešenja•

Globalno gledano, treba koristiti rešenja bazirana na optičkim kablovima (veći protok nego bakarni kablovi, veća raspoloživost sirovina za proizvodnju)

©Krajko 86

MAN za korisnike?

•

Odgovarajući servis koji nudi operator•

Servis može da bude opšteg tipa –

transportni kanal odgovarajućeg protoka – na korisniku je da obezbedi

multipleksiranje servisa (npr. SDH kanal ili L2 VPN sa protokom 14Mb/s)

•

Specifičan servis –

prenos video signala P2P, nivo kvaliteta za kontribuciju

©Krajko 87

MAN za operatere? (1)

•

FTTx –

analiza troškova treba da pokaže dokle stiže optika

•

Preporuka je da se ide na FTTH zbog budućih servisa koji se brzo pojavljuju (broadcast TV, VoD, HSI, ...)

•

Gde god može postaviti dovoljno optičkih vlakana da ne mora odmah da se koristi WDM

©Krajko 88

MAN za operatere? (2)

•

Gde nije moguće postaviti dovoljno vlakana koristiti WDM tehnologiju

•

Ethernet kao osnovni transport podataka•

Korišćenje IP/MPLS-a kao nadgradnje zbog veće skalabilnosti i multipleksiranja servisa

•

U velikim MAN mrežama sa velikim saobraćajem razmotriti MPλS

©Krajko 89

Adresiranje

•

Operater ima svoj adresni blok koji je nevidljiv za korisnika zbog tunelovanja paketa

•

Ako je mreža izolovana od Interneta koriste se privatni adresni opseg

•

Još

uvek se koriste IPv4 adrese ali treba razmotriti i prelazak na IPv6 (raspoloživost uređaja i implementirane funkcije)

©Krajko 90

Rutiranje

•

Zavisi on načina realizacije MAN-a•

Kod SDH se koristi statičko prosleđivanje kanala sa zaštitom (statička zaštita, ASON)

•

Kod Ethernet MAN-a koristi se prosleđivanje na osnovu VLAN-ova i MAC adresa (kombinacija self learning-a i statičkog konfigurisanja)

©Krajko 91

Rutiranje

•

Kod IP/ethernet mreža koriste se standardni protokoli za dinamičko rutiranje saobraćaja uz dodatak QoS-a (RSVP)

•

Kod IP/MPLS mreža rutiranje saobraćaja na osnovu labela; FRR (Fast ReRouting) obezbeđuje zaštitu saobraćaja od prekida linka

•

Kod MPλS-a koristi se rutiranje talasnih dužina

©Krajko 92

Sigurnost i zaštita u mreži

•

Saobraćaj različitih korisnika je izolovan korišćenjem odgovarajuće tehnike (VLAN, LSP, talasna dužina)

•

Operater uvek ima mogućnost uvida u podatke koji se prenose

•

Za zaštitu od neovlašćenog pristupa informacijama treba koristiti end-to-end kripto zaštitu

©Krajko 93

Nadzor i upravljanje

•

Za nadzor složenih mreža kao što su MAN mreže neophodno je korišćenje odgovarajućih NMS alata

•

Poželjno je implementirati OSS (Operation Support System) koji integriše sve funkcije nadzora i upravljanja mrežom i servisima

Projektovanje MAN mreža

Mr Nenad KrajnovićKatedra za telekomunikacijeE-mail: [email protected]

projektovanje man mreža -...

Documents