1 / 20

LCB Computing Workshop (Marseille) Network Technology Tracking

LCB Computing Workshop (Marseille) Network Technology Tracking. ATM Technologies and Services Status ATM in Internet Backbones Technology Update emerging “Terabit” routers WDM IP related Technologies and Services Status Quality of Service (QoS) High Speed file transfer

santo
Télécharger la présentation

LCB Computing Workshop (Marseille) Network Technology Tracking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LCB Computing Workshop (Marseille)Network Technology Tracking • ATM Technologies and Services • Status • ATM in Internet Backbones • Technology Update • emerging “Terabit” routers • WDM • IP related Technologies and Services • Status • Quality of Service (QoS) • High Speed file transfer • State of the Internet • IAB workshop • Research and Academic networking • LHC Bandwidth Requirements • Evolution of circuit costs Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 1

  2. ATM Technologies and Services • ATM still ubiquitous in many large Internet backbones: • Back in 1996, the fastest router and switch interfaces available were ATM based • ATM switch based core versus IP router based core. • Packet over SONET (POS) now mature. • Higher speed interfaces available (e.g. 2.5Gbps) • Packet over WDM coming. • There is nothing wrong with “cell based” switching, the problem is the availability of very high speed router interfaces (Segmentation and Re-assembly (SAR)). • However, the Internet is packet oriented, does “packet mode” ATM make sense? Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 2

  3. Technology Update • Emerging “Terabit” routers! • A number of startups are trying to beat Cisco, e.g. • Juniper, Avici, Nexabit, Pluris • vBNS, C&W, Uunet are using Juniper M40 • DANTE is testing Juniper as well • Fastest routers are still disappointingly slow (i.e. less than 100Gbps) . • Breakthrough needed ((partly) optical router)? • Wave Division Multiplex (WDM) • evolving very fast (number of channels) Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 3

  4. IP related Technologies and Services • Status • 622Mbps (OC-12c) common, 2.5Gbps (OC-48c) (almost) standard in large backbones, • 10Gbps (OC-192c) coming. • Quality of Service (QoS) • intserv versus diffserv • ATM • community versus public Internets • High Speed file transfer • will remain problematic on high bandwidth*delay paths • could possibly conflict with strong security requirements • State of the Internet • IAB workshop • Research and Academic networking Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 4

  5. Quality of Service (QoS) • Two approaches proposed by the IETF: • integrated services (intserv), • intserv is an end-to-end architecture based on RSVP that has poor scaling properties. • differentiated services (diffserv). • diffserv is a newer and simpler proposal that has much better chances to get deployed in some real Internet Service Providers environments, at least. • ATM is far from dead, of course, but it has serious scaling difficulties. • MPLS is promising. • In the meantime, community Internets will remain the best solution. Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 5

  6. Internet Access Models Canada ESnet Japan Abilene STARTAP vBNS MREN SURFNET Commodity Internet JANET TEN-155 DFN CERN PoP USA CERN CIXP Mission oriented Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 6

  7. Evolution of circuit costs • LHC Bandwidth Requirements • 622 Mbps between CERN and some (or all) LHC regional centers by 2003-2005 • Evolution of circuit costs • 3 scenarios • conservative (-15% per year) • plausible (-33% per year) • optimistic (-50% per year) • Optimistic scenario excepted, there seems to be no other way to reach the LHC target than to significantly increase the budget (factor 3 to 5), depending on the year of delivery. • Evolution of circuit costs Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 7

  8. Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 8

  9. Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 9

  10. Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 10

  11. Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 11

  12. Conclusions • Multiple 622Mbps circuits will be possible. • almost there today but make sure the “c” is not missing (i.e. OC-12c (622Mbps) vs OC-12 (4*155Mbps)). • Cost may be problematic (5-10MCHF per circuit). • Very high speed LAN implied. • Gigabit/second file transfer on high bandwidth*delay paths problematic. • The public Internet as well as national research networks are evolving in a way nobody can predict. • This will have a profound impact on LHC • Full 1999 Network Technology Tracking Team Report available at: • http://network.cern.ch/public/studies/nt3/nt3-1999.doc • http://network.cern.ch/public/studies/nt3/nt3-1999.html Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 12

  13. Background Material • Main Internet connections • Telecom Operators & ISPs • CERN Internet eXchange Point (CIXP) • CERN GigaPoP (August 1999) • C&W (Chicago) Colocation Status (August 99) • STAR TAP access model • STAR TAP Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 13

  14. Main Internet connections@CERN • RENATER (French Academic & Research Network). • SWITCH Next Generation (Swiss Academic & Research Network (supplied by diAx)). • TEN-155 (Trans-European Network - 155 Mb/s). • Combined CERN-SWITCH access (25% CERN, I.e. 40Mbps) • US Line consortium (USLIC) • CERN, US/HEP (via Caltech & DoE), Canada/HEP (via Carleton) • IN2P3 (CCPN Lyon). • World Health Organization (WHO). Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 14

  15. Telecom Operators & ISPs@CERN • France Telecom fiber installed 2*OC48 (2.4 Gbps). • Swisscom 2*OC12 (622 Mb/s) redundant SDH local loop installed. • New Telecom Operators DiaX, SIG/Thermelec, SUNRISE, MCI/Worldcom, Carrier1, Multilink(*), SmartPhone(*). • More Telcos expected to come (e.g. COLT) • 20+ Commercial Internet Service Providers (ISP) Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 15

  16. SWITCH EUnet FDDI FDDI CERN Internet eXchange Point (CIXP) Carrier1 Switched Ethernet FDDI AFstats RENATER GlobalOne IN2P3 Bloomberg Catalyst 5505 HP ISDnet USLIC IBM EBONE TEN-155 Sunrise/ BT Swisscom IP-Plus Petrel US Internet Fast Ethernet AT&T IProLink/ PSInet Transparent WEB Cache SKYcache ATM Test Beds Wisper INS Deckpoint Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 16

  17. CERN GigaPoP (August 1999) SWITCH NationalResearchNetworks RENATER 100 Mb/s 2Mb/s Mission Oriented Link IN2P3 6 Mb/s 2Mb/s WHO 39/155 Mb/s CERN TEN-155 Public 20Mb/s 100 Mb/s C&W 155 Mb/s Commercial C-IXP Test SwissWAN Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 17

  18. C&W (Chicago) Co-location Status (August 99) C&W Internet T3 CERNH8 C&W CERN-USA LS1010 E3 T3 STAR TAP STM-1 LS1010 CERN (Geneva) C&W (Chicago) Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 18

  19. STAR TAP access model Canada ESnet Japan Abilene STARTAP vBNS MREN C&W (ATM VBR-nrt) C&W Internet CERN C&W Chicago Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 19

  20. STAR TAP • STAR TAP (Science Technology & Research Transit Access Point) is one of three Internet eXchange Points provided by AADS (Ameritech Advanced Data Services) out of a huge ATM switch, namely: • Chicago NAP • MREN (Metropolitan Research and Education Network), the local Internet2 GigaPoP. • STAR TAP • A by-product is a full mesh of ATM VC with ALL the connected ISPs, thus making it easy to establish peerings and/ot to buy commercial Internet services (e.g. NAP.NET). Olivier Martin - 1/10/99 - Slide 20

More Related