theory v. hardware: are current asics up to the challenge? v... · theory v. hardware: are current...

© 2011 Extreme Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Richard Porter

Principal Systems Engineer, CISSP GCIA

Extreme Networks, Inc.

Theory v. Hardware: Are Current

ASICs up to the Challenge?


Agenda

• Quick (and I mean VERY quick) Intro of Extreme Networks, Inc.

• Networking Trends

–“My IPv6 Plan consists of my head, a hole and some sand” – Anonymous Customer Quote

• Hardware ASIC Details

• Real World Problems

–Today and what’s coming

• Aggregated Routing

• NAT64


The Major ASIC Players

• Broadcom

• Marvell

• Fulcrum/Intel

• Mellanox


Data Center Space for Wire-Speed 2304x10GE Ports

4

HP 12508 18 Racks

Juniper EX8208 12 Racks

Brocade MLXE-8 6 Racks

Cisco NX7010 4.5 Racks

Arista 7508 1.5 Racks

Dell/F10 E600i 16.5 Racks

0

70

140

Total Power (KW)

Extreme

Arista

Cisco

Brocade

Juniper

Dell/F10

HP

Extreme BlackDiamond® X8

1 Rack (44RU)


Serving an Established & Growing Customer Base

5

Education 700+

Enterprise

7,000+

Cloud

100+

Mobile Operator

160+

CAMPUS DATA CENTER SERVICE PROVIDER

30+ Million Ports Shipped to Thousands of Customers Worldwide

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Telefonica-Logo.svg


Switch Feature Needs By 10GbE Data Center

Networking Market (2012-2013)

6

Private and Public Cloud Segment (Virtualized Web, App and DB tiers) ~ 57% of the market Needs high buffer utilization, large L2/L3 table scale

Web 2.0 Segment (Search, Social Networking, Web Analytics) ~ 24% of the market Needs high buffer utilization, large L2/L3 table scale

HPC (High Performance Computing), ~5%, Lowest Latency and Small Buffers, Small to Medium L2 Scale

HFT (Ticker Plant, Matching Engine, Order Routing Cluster), ~5%, Lowest Latency and Small Buffers, Small L2/L3 Scale

Business Analytics (Data warehousing, OLTP), ~10%, Mid to low latency, mid L2/L3 scale

Largest markets need high buffer utilization and

large L2/L3 table scale

Market segments and sizing for 2012-2013 based on Dell Oro, Gartner and Broadcom analysis


Growth Drivers

7

User, Device, App

Mobility

Cloud-Sourcing

Consumerization

of IT

Silo’d Workflows

Dynamism

Scale

Complexity

Vendor

Dependence

Cost


In the Numbers, It’s a Human Driver

8

• Total Internet Users as of 30 June 2010

• 1,966,514,816

• Average 2 IP enabled devices per user conservatively

• 3,933,029,632 average devices and growing.

• 32-bit address space 4.3 Billion Possible Addresses

• Roughly 28% of Earth Population Online

• Many /8 Allocations to Companies (e.g. Ford Motor Company 019/8)

Stats from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm taken 21 FEB 2010. Used with permission according to Internet World Stats reference policy. Copyright © 2000 - 2010,

Miniwatts Marketing Group. All rights reserved worldwide.

http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm


Internet Population Today

9

2,267,233,742


Nearly 100% Jump

10


BGP Map (from bgpmon.net)

11

2,267,233,742

8871


Page 2. RFC 3177

12

The way it was recommended until 6177

3. Address Delegation Recommendations

The IESG and the IAB recommend the allocations for the boundary

between the public and the private topology to follow those general

rules:

- /48 in the general case, except for very large subscribers.

- /64 when it is known that one and only one subnet is needed by

design.

- /128 when it is absolutely known that one and only one device

is connecting.

In particular, we recommend:

- Home network subscribers, connecting through on-demand or

always-on connections should receive a /48.

- Small and large enterprises should receive a /48.

- Very large subscribers could receive a /47 or slightly shorter

prefix, or multiple /48's.


Why 6177

13

• /48 seen as Simple

• RFC 6177 Calls out how it could be wasteful

• Making Same Mistakes

• Faster exhaustion

• RFC 3177 had a one-size-fits-all

• Could lead to hard coding or classful routing


RFC 6177 Summary

14

• Easy for End Site to get multiple subnets (larger than /64

• No one size fit’s all assignment

• Take in consideration the site itself

• Even though /64 can hold “One IP per Bullet” - JU, take into

account address assignments for proper subnets. Do not

force the use of address conservation techniques (bridging,

NAT, etc)

• Assign longer prefix to an end site compared to what they

have now.


Hardware Numbers


Scale Comparisons

16

Slide removed – not for publication


NAT64 and the EUI-64 Problem


NAT64 Capable Appliances or Hardware on the Market

18

• Infoblox

– http://www.a10networks.com/resources/files/A10-SB-Infoblox-NAT64-DNS64.pdf

• Microsoft Unified Access Gateway

– http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/forefront/unified-access-gateway.aspx

• MX Series 3D Universal Edge Router

– http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=TN123

• ASR 1000

– http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/ios_xe/ipaddr/configuration/guide/iad_stateless_nat64_xe.html

• Ecdysis (Open Source Project)

– http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/index.html

http://www.a10networks.com/resources/files/A10-SB-Infoblox-NAT64-DNS64.pdf










http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/forefront/unified-access-gateway.aspx









http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=TN123

http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=TN123

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/ios_xe/ipaddr/configuration/guide/iad_stateless_nat64_xe.html



http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/index.html

http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/index.html


Most Memorable Customer Quote’s 2011-12 (Names

not disclosed to protect the Guilty/Innocent)

19

• “My IPv6 Plan Consists of my head, a hole and some sand”

• “I’ll Never need it?” ---Me--- “You already have it!” ---Him “Ship Worm? Seriously?”

• “I’ll just get some kind of NAT device!”

• “Already disabled it, I will retire first!”

• “I’ll just turn it on and see what happens!”

• “I blame XBOX 360 for bringing me IPv6 early”


c8:bc:c8

EUI-64 Mapping, a permanent Unique ID?

20

dc:c0:08

Organization Unique Identifier Network Interface Controller

c8:bc:c8 FF:FE dc:c0:08

Insert

ca:bc:c8 c8 = 11001000

Flip -> 11001000 to 11001010

->

11001010 = ca


c8:bc:c8

EUI-64 Mapping, a permanent Unique ID?

21

dc:c0:08

OUI NIC

c8:bc:c8 FF:FE dc:c0:08

ca:bc:c8

c8 = 11001000

Flip -> 11001000 to

11001010

->

11001010 = ca

fe80::cabc:c8ff:fedc:c008


Contributing Issues, can ASICs do

it?


Trends

• Emerging Protocols

– TRILL (L2)

– SPB (L2)

– AVB (L2 with emerging L3, based on IPv4 currently)

– DCB (L2)

– Open<InsertTradeShowFeatureHere>

• OpenFlow

• OpenStack

– SDN (Software Defined Networking) What ever could go wrong?

• Old Practices

– Less than /64

– Horse and Buggy thinking

• Explosive Services Growth

• Unregulated Market “Cloud” or as we have called that “Hosted?”

• Unique Local Address Networks

• Reliance of Edge Switch/Router for policy and topology control


Let’s talk SDN and what that means to IPv6

Page

24

Centralized Management/Orchestration Platform

Management and Provisioning

Platform

Applications Mobility

Management

VM Lifecycle

Management Multi-tenancy ….

Programmable Network OS External Application

Interfaces

Network and Switch

Automation OpenFlow Agent OpenStack Agent

Modular Resilient Hardware Abstraction

High Performance Network Fabric

High Capacity Low Latency Active-Active

Redundancy Low Power

OpenFlow Controller OpenStack Orchestration


IPv6 Impact on hardware


Issues, its Protocol not RFC?

26

• Extension Headers

• Fragmentation

• Protocol changes

• New Drafts

• Interpretation

• Politics


What are Vendors Doing?

27

• Heavy participation in IETF WG (raising customer experience issues)

• Customers Driving solutions (Cisco RA Guard, Extreme Strict ACLs, etc)

• Real world problem causing issues

–Protocol not hardware

• Examining current hardware limitations


Questions


Email: [email protected]

Handler Contact Info:

[email protected]

twitter @packetalien

Thank You

theory v. hardware: are current asics up to the challenge? v... · theory v. hardware: are current...

Documents