Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions

2. Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions PNLRST-2020 Fabio Maino, Distinguished Engineer, LISP Team Colin Kincaid, Vice President, NOSTG Marketing & Architecture

3. Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions • Introduction Fabio Maino • LISP Perspectives Colin Kincaid • Customer Use Case :: Cisco IT Khalid Jawaid • Customer Use Case :: IBM Chris Williams • Customer Use Case :: Etat du Valais Christian Quenzer • Customer Use Case :: AVM GmbH Eric van Uden • Questions/Answers ALL • Closing Words Fabio Maino

4. LISP IntroductionFabio Maino, Distinguished EngineerLISP Team

5. Introduction LISP Update • LISP has come a long way since 2006 IETF… • when a small group of Cisco engineers started the design of a protocol for identity/location separation • 8 IETFs RFCs published during 2013 (RFC 6830-6836, RFC 7052) • IETF LISP WG now focusing on LISP use cases • Most importantly we have very significant customer deployments • Enterprise and Service Provider space • Use cases: Internet VPNs, Multi-homing, IPv6 Transition, Data Center Host Mobility

6. Introduction What have we learned so far? • LISP is a transformative technology • LISP adds significant new capabilitiesand reduces complexities! • LISP deployments are now moving beyond ‘early adopters’ • Large number of customers deploying LISP in production • Large scale of LISP deployments and wide diversity of LISP deployments • Commitment to and reliance on LISP • LISP engages a broad range of new participation in networking • Open standard, control plane/data plane separation enables… • Universities and researchers to experiment on new and novel designs • Easy and effective Integration with software defined networking initiatives • Open source code implementations and wide hardware/device support

7. Use Cases: Internet Based VPN • IP based, transport independent VPN solution • Support for multi-tenancy and security • Global mobility • Minimal infrastructure disruption • Today’s Testimonial • Etat du Valais: Christian Quenzer Legacy Site Legacy Site Legacy Site LISP Site IP Network West DC East DC PxTR Mapping DB

8. Use Cases: BGP-free Multi-homing • Multi-provider connectivity and policy without BGP complexity • OpEx-friendly multi-homing across different providers • Simple Policy Management • Ingress/Egress Traffic Engineering • Today’s Testimonial • AVM GmbH: Eric van Uden Internet LISPSite LISP routers

9. Use Cases: IPv6 Transition • Rapid deployment of IPv6 over IPv4 • Or IPv4 over IPv6 • Accelerates IPv6 adoption • Minimal added configurations • No core network changes • Today’s Testimonial • Cisco IT: Khalid Jawaid • AVM GmbH: Eric van Uden IPv4 Enterprise Core v6 V6 IPv4 Core xTR IPv4 Enterprise Core xTR V6 v4 v6 v6

10. Use Cases: Host Mobility • Host mobility for Data Center applications • DC Migration • Disaster Recovery • Hybrid Cloud Extension • Integrated mobility, inbound routing optimization, OTV integration • Today’s Testimonial • IBM: Chris Williams Data Center 1 Data Center 2 Internet LISP routers LISP routers VM move VM VM a.b.c.1 a.b.c.1

11. Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions • Introduction Fabio Maino • LISP Perspectives Colin Kincaid • Customer Use Case :: Cisco IT Khalid Jawaid • Customer Use Case :: IBM Chris Williams • Customer Use Case :: Etat du Valais Christian Quenzer • Customer Use Case :: AVM GmbH Eric van Uden • Questions/Answers ALL • Closing Words Fabio Maino

12. LISP PerspectivesColin Kincaid, Vice President NOSTG Marketing & Architecture

13. LISP Perspective LISP and Cisco • NOSTG is a central innovation engine for CISCO • Supports the core of the LISP HIP team (engineering + marketing) • With LISP, Cisco is innovating at the cutting edge of technology providing • An open, scalable architecture for network virtualization • Easy to deploy • Focused on simplifying network operations

14. LISP Perspective Platforms supporting LISP (Cisco and Open Source)

15. LISP Perspective Future Work • Cisco is strongly committed to LISP technology • Future work is focused on: • Integration with SDN (OpenDayLight LISP project) • Data Center and Hybrid Cloud Extension • Campus Architecture • Support to Customers with existing and new use cases

16. Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions • Introduction Fabio Maino • LISP Perspectives Colin Kincaid • Customer Use Case :: Cisco IT Khalid Jawaid • Customer Use Case :: IBM Chris Williams • Customer Use Case :: Etat du Valais Christian Quenzer • Customer Use Case :: AVM GmbH Eric van Uden • Questions/Answers ALL • Closing Words Fabio Maino

17. LISP @Cisco IT

18. As a Member of Technical Staff at Cisco Systems, Khalid Jawaid is the Lead Design Engineer for IPv6 integration/deployment across Cisco and the EON project (Cisco IT's SDN Initiative). Double CCIE certified and experienced in routing and switching technologies and WAN design, Khalid has been at Cisco for the last 13 years and worked with multiple technologies across TAC, Cisco Services and Cisco IT. • Khalid Jawaid • Member of the Technical Staff, Cisco IT

19. Introducing Cisco The Global Cisco Family • 369 locations in 90 countries • 450+ buildings • 51 data centers and server rooms • 1500+ labs world wide (500+ in San Jose) • 66,000+ Employees • 20,000 Channel Partners • 110+ Application Service Providers • 210+ Business and Support Development Partners Over 180,000 people around the world in the extended Cisco family Estimated Numbers

20. Cisco IT LISP Use-caseIPv6 Transition Support IPv6 deployment challenges IPv6 Deployment strategy Business Impact Delayed deployment of IPv6 affects product development/testing and IPv6 adoption. • IPv4 only WAN Backbone • L3 MPLS VPN Dual stack Long term plan that absorbs cost in established lifecycle process Financial investment required Migration to L2 VPN Overlay • Day-1 tunneling techniques • do not scale very well Next-Generation overlay architecture Locator/ID Separation Protocol Have a quick and scalable solution in hand to relieve delivery pressure Anycast ISATAP Manual 6in4 Tunnel

21. Why LISP ? Day-1 tunneling techniques Next-Generation overlay Anycast ISATAP End-Client centric solution Support challenge Locator/ID Separation Protocol Configuration & Troubleshooting simplicity Any-to-any traffic flows IPv4 exit-strategy (IPv4 over IPv6) New capabilities (Mobility, Virtualization) • Manual 6in4 tunnels • Configuration overhead • Performance impact (Hub & Spoke) • DMVPN • Potential routing challenges when multi-homing • Scalability concerns • Any-to-any traffic flows

22. EMEAR LISP IPv6 Deployment overview DC DC Internet • Mapping System • Proxy Tunnel Router • ASR1006 Cisco Enterprise Backbone Network • Geographically diverse • Standalone / Self-managed • Primary / Backup PxTR London Amsterdam Dual Stack Tunnel Router ASR 1006 & ISR 3945 • Default Route / HSRPv6 to attract traffic • Load sharing defined by WAN topology Carrier Managed L3VPN MPLS LISP IPv6 in IPv4 Internet IPv4 Only Dual Stack • RLOC route-loss detection • RLOC probing • Locator Status Bits (LSB) • Solicited Map-Request (SMR) E1 BB DS3 DS3 DS3 E1 Liveliness features Load Sharing Primary/Backup Primary/Backup DC Cisco Remote Offices From an interim to permanent solution ? “LISP allows us to postpone some of our WAN migrations in locations where services are not available or cost inefficient “ Cisco Managed CEMap-Resolver, Map-Server, Proxy Ingress/Egress Tunnel Router Cisco Managed CE Ingress/Egress Tunnel Router IPSEC VPN Tunnel head-end

23. Deployment Status Pilot Deployment (Completed September 2013) General Deployment (Target completion May 2014) Accelerated Deployment (Completed November 2013) 80+ Remote Offices 7000+ end-users Istanbul (Turkey) Greenpark (UK) Munich (Germany) Moscow (Russia) Dubai (UAE) Galway (Ireland) Vimercatie (Italy) 3 Engineering Data Centers In numbers … Internal LISP Design(Guidelines, Cut-sheet, test plan) Resource training(Configuration & Troubleshooting) Implementation(Test plan execution and monitoring) Operational support Target = IPv6 configuration automation via scripts ! LISP is the easy part ! 1700 end-users 1300 IPv6 endpoints + 30 Mbps IPv6 peak BW 0 LISP related cases opened !!!

24. Lesson learned • Network convergence • Minor routing architecture changes required to match IPv4 convergence SLA • RLOC route-down detection provides fastest convergence (/32 Prefix leakage) • RLOC Probing detects all other failures • MTU handling • Only stateful fragmentation (pMTU) supported as per IPv6 best practices • Previous overlay solutions provided stateful fragmentation • Our LISP implementation uncovered some pMTU support problems • Feature Support • Most exciting capabilities/enhancements included in more recent versions of code

25. Cisco IT LISP Strategy Evaluate Learn Explore Potential use-cases Data-Center VM Mobility Client IP Portability & Disaster Recovery Traffic engineering (SDN/OnePK)

26. Conclusion Big wins for Cisco IT • Accelerated EMEAR IPv6 deployment within 6-9 months • More time to explore most cost-efficient WAN backbone replacement • Supported on existing WAN Edge platforms – no capital investment • Easy to deploy … It just works ! • Relatively low risk learning experience for future use-cases THANKS to the LISP-Support for the guidance and great customer focus !

27. Executive Panel : LISP Customers Discuss Modern Network Solutions • Introduction Fabio Maino • LISP Perspectives Colin Kincaid • Customer Use Case :: Cisco IT Khalid Jawaid • Customer Use Case :: IBM Chris Williams • Customer Use Case :: Etat du Valais Christian Quenzer • Customer Use Case :: AVM GmbH Eric van Uden • Questions/Answers ALL • Closing Words Fabio Maino

28. LISP @IBM

29. Chris enjoyed a successful career with IBM spanning 21 years. His notable achievements include the role of chief architect for IBM on the multi-million dollar Lloyds TSB converged IP network, and conceiving and developing IBM’s global secure network infrastructure connecting its outsourcing clients to IBM Global Services. Chris now works as an independent consultant, and more recently at IBM, working on a data centre and network migration. • Chris Williams • Infrastructure Architect/Network Architect CEng (MIET), IBM PIC

30. IBM and RSA Company Overviews • International Business Machines Corporation. Founded 1911. Headquarters in Armonk, New York. Multinational technology, consulting and hosting corporation. • Royal and Sun Alliance, Founded 1710. Headquartered in London. Operating in 32 countries. 17 million customers in 140 countries . Listed on the London Stock Exchange and FTSE 100 Index. • In 2001, IBM and RSA signed the first IT services agreement for IBM to manage and support the IT infrastructure and provide end-to-end service integration across all of the third party technology suppliers.

31. Data Centre Migration Challenges for IBM Why this is an issue • To reduce the time it takes to migrate servers or applications from: • a customers data centre to an IBM data centre • an ‘inherited’ data centre to an IBM strategic data centre • within a data centre, from a legacy to a new environment (our challenge here) • Competitors who can perform a faster migration can offer a lower price to the customer and have higher margins. • Traditional migration approaches all have limitations: • Application migration • Physical move • Whole DC ‘Big Bang’ migration

32. DC Migration without IP mobility / IP Retention Application Migration – Complexity of Ensuring Interfaces are Maintained Move application to new DC requires change of IP address and hostname Takes longer to start moving servers due to data gathering / documentation of legacy application interfaces Risk – has an interface been overlooked?

33. DC Migration without IP mobility / IP Retention Application Migration – Complexity of Ensuring Interfaces are Maintained Complexity of ensuring interfaces are maintained - affects even non-moved / non-migrated systems DNS may not always help with legacy hard coded applications Applications local and remote may need to be amended Firewalls need to be amended Risk - Can you be sure you have the complete picture?

34. DC Migration without IP mobility / IP Retention What is the traditional approach? • Move a server (physical move or virtual migration) and keep the IP Address and Hostname • Should be simpler process – Is this true?

35. DC Migration without IP mobility / IP Retention Affinity Groups • Move requires understanding of server VLAN cross-patching / affinity groups if smaller units of servers to be migrated in one event Subnet B Subnet C Subnet A

36. DC Migration without IP mobility / IP Retention Affinity Groups • Move requires understanding of server VLAN cross-patching / affinity groups if smaller units of servers to be migrated in one event Subnet B Subnet C Subnet A

37. DC Migration – Server Physical Move Physical Move of Affinity Groups – The Reality • Physically move the server and patch into new infrastructure: • Takes longer to start moving servers due to data gathering and understanding of virtual server network interfaces. • Requires understanding of server VLAN cross-patching & affinity groups if smaller units of servers to be migrated in one event • Conflicting VLAN numbering in switch blocks – virtual server VLAN re-configuration required during migration event • Risk – has a server or VLAN cross connection been overlooked? • Server virtualisation / platform refresh is a follow on project

38. DC Migration – Big Bang Every Server Migrated in Single Migration Event (Physical Move or Re-build) • Without a solution that enables IP mobility with IP Retention for each server then ‘Big Bang’ approach implies: • Years in Planning - takes longer to start moving servers due to data gathering and move planning • Longer storage migration cycle that requires keeping a large data set in synch over WAN (or other methods) • High risk / large service outage during migration event • Cast of thousands / large workforce required

39. DC Migration with IP mobility / IP Retention Using LISP • We need a way to move servers with IP mobility and removing affinity group constraints of traditional approach: • Move a server (physical or virtual) and keep the IP Address and Hostname • Should be simpler process – Is this true using LISP?

40. LISP Implementation Models We Used Model 3 • Model 1 – To use this method, would require every location to have its site WAN routers involved in the LISP ‘cloud’ • Model 2 – Located at a pinch point in the network • Model 3 – The model we intend to use - Link is across the machine room floor in our case

41. The Migration Scope Legacy DC to New Infrastructure – Same Location

42. LISP Infrastructure Cross Machine Room Links – ASR1002 Routers

43. LISP Server Migration Initial State

44. LISP Server Migration Intermediate State – Some Servers Migrated

45. LISP Server Migration Servers Migrated

46. LISP Server Migration Servers Migrated – HSRP Cut-Over • Migration Steps: • New DC aggregation router interface enabled & added to HRSP group • HSRP priority raised - ‘active’ router becomes New DC aggregation router • Routes injected into New DC OSPF & removed from legacy • Remove HSRP configuration on the MR-MS LISP router i/f for fully migrated subnet

47. LISP Server Migration End State – Servers Migrated & Cut-Over to New DC Complete

48. Why Choose LISP Why not use other Layer 2 LAN extension methods? • We looked at but rejected: • IRB(Integrated Route Bridging) • VPLS(Virtual Private LAN Service) over MPLS • There are two viable candidate technologies. They are: • OTV (Overlay Transport Virtualization) • LISP (Locator Identifier Separation Protocol) • Our Preferred Method is LISP • Because it’s a safer interconnection method. It protects against broadcast storms and spanning tree issues • Non-disruptive Layer 3 connection to existing live data centre's • Works with all server types – physical/virtual/x86/P-Series/Mainframe

49. Cisco Services – How They Helped Us

50. Cisco Professional Services Data Centre Replica – Cisco Lab Reading UK Replica data centre - same hardware & code levels LISP infrastructure - 4x Cisco AS1002’s Comprehensive suite of LISP function & performance tests 129Mb test report ! LISP configurations created Post implementation support