SuperComm2004 interoperability test demo report
Part I : OIF OUNI/E-NNI Interoperability Demo

2004/11/02
NTTネットワークサービスシステム研究所
ネットワークサービスシステム研究所
岡本 聡
E-mail: okamoto.satoru@lab.ntt.co.jp

OIFとは

Optical Internetworking Forum1998年に設立
年に設立• IPネットワークとフォトニックネットワークの間の物理的および論ネットワークとフォトニックネットワークの間の物理的および論理的インタフェイスの仕様策定を行い，マルチベンダ環境での相互運用可能な製品とサービスの開発および広報活動による市場開拓を行うことを目的としている。
• 約180組織が参加組織が参加• 2000年
年1月より
月より overlay model に基づいた、IPに基づいた、 router とOXC 間の制御プロトコル(UNI)ををGMPLSを流用して制定するを流用して制定する間の制御プロトコルプロジェクトをスタート。
• 現在、UNI(1.0R2, 2.0), E-NNI (1.0) を制定し、SuperComm
現在、を制定し、2004 において、World
Wide UNI/E-NNI Interop. Demo をにおいて、実施。
•MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

OIFの参照ネットワーク


UNI は、TDM,LSC に対して定義しているが、TDMの実装がの実装がは、に対して定義しているが、大多数である。
•IP Router

UNI の IF 速度 < キャリア網内 IF 速度 (ex. OC3 vs. OC192)
UNI

E-NNI
ベンダA
NMSベース

UNI
ベンダB
独自プロトコルSONET/SDH ADM

単一のキャリア網
MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

SuperComm Demo 参加組織
15 Vendors• ADVA• Alcatel• Avici Systems• CIENA Corp.
• Cisco Systems• Fujitsu• Lucent Technologies• Mahi Networks• Marconi• NEC• Nortel Networks• Siemens• Sycamore Networks• Tellabs• Turin Networks



7 Carriers in 3 continents
Asia

China Telecom• KDDI Labs
• NTTEurope• Deutsche Telekom• Telecom Italia•

North America• AT&T• Verizon

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Inter-lab interconnections
NEC

仮想キャリアの網NTT

Tellabs
Marconi

Ciena

Ciena

Ciena

AT&TNEC

KDDI
SycamoreDT

NortelTellabs
Sycamore

Verizon

Mahi
Sycamore

Ciena

Sycamore

CTTI
Ciena

Marconi
実リンク (OC3/48/192)
仮想リンク (OC48)
MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

SuperComm終了時の接続図

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

C-Plane 網の構築


IPsec over internet•

NTT lab (武蔵野武蔵野)からの武蔵野 からの RTT (traceroute で測定)
で測定
• KDDI研究所
研究所• AT&T• Verizon
• DT
• CT

•

14ms (上福岡上福岡)
上福岡
186ms (East Coast)
197ms (East Coast)
312ms (Berlin)
503ms (北京北京)
北京

朝9時～時～10時にパケット落ちが発生との報告有時～ 時にパケット落ちが発生との報告有• RSVP パケット (Raw IP) は再送されない。。。。
は再送されない。。。。
• Ack パケット(?)が落ちると、最悪はパケット が落ちると、最悪は reboot !!!



Chicago 9:00, Tokyo 23:00, Berlin 16:00•

事前ネゴシエーションが大変

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Problems基本的な、Interoperabilityは確保
基本的な、LSP (call) 設定の可視化に難有• Ethereal でプロトコル追跡は辛い• 可視化ツールは、実際に反映されて見えるようになるまで時間がかかる
Router Alert Option の立ったRSVPパケットは事故の元の立ったパケットは事故の元• GMPLS では、RouterAlert Option は基本的に使用しない
では、システムの安定性は、まだまだ• ほとんどのシステムのコードはβ
ほとんどのシステムのコードはβ版• 使えないから、使わないから、熟成されないといった悪循環• 遠隔操作で対応できるベンダもあるが、技術者がつきっきりで対応することが必要なベンダも多数• 時差のある環境での、大規模デモはつらい• NOC から、統合制御できないと。。。。
から、統合制御できないと。。。。

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Supercomm 2004 interoperability test demoreport
Part II: ISOCORE IP-Optical PavilionNovember 2, 2004
Kohei Shiomoto
NTT Network Service Systems Laboratories

Isocore’s Position in the Industry



Offers interactive platform for service providers and vendors
community
Performs technology validation and technology feasibility for future
network deployments
State-of-the art facility in the Washington DC area (Northern Virginia)
with live peering with multiple carriers who are associated with Isocore
Live operationally-oriented test services verifying the stability andmaturity of services on any high-end router
Isocore consulting helps large enterprise/Government and carrier
networks migrate to the next generation networkPerforms Interoperability and Interworking services for crosstechnology and between multiple devices
PIL is group member of ISOCORE as well as sister site. Professor.
Naoaki Yamanaka (Keio Univ.), is Executive director for Asia Pacific ofISOOCRE.

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

ISOCORE IP-Optical Pavilion Overview
Demonstrate the state of next generation networking technologies for IP andOptical networks••



Optical transport to showcase GMPLS-enabled core
IP multi-service network to showcase MPLS enabled applications on top ofredundant core

IP-Optical Integration defined•••Integrating multiple-layered networks through a common control plane
Simplification of Topology and Service Discovery
Enabling automated resource provisioning of transport and data planes

 Automated setup of circuits in the transport layer using GMPLS using routing
thus forming the intelligent optical core
 Allowing the usage of circuits at the IP layer
 Enabling MPLS/IP based multi-services on top of the dynamically provisioned
GMPLS links
 Participants•

Vendors••

ADC, APC, Alcatel, Avici Systems, Chiaro, Ciena, Cisco Systems, Data Connection,Fujitsu, Juniper Networks, Marconi, NEC, NTT, Quarry Technologies, Redback Networks,and Sycamore Networks

Test equipment manufactures•Ixia and Spirent

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Isocore
SP 2Tripse le-Prv
ice lays

Metro NetworkIPVoHigh
De
Video finition
over IPSIP Gateways
andServerss

Multi-Service Edge

InternetPhone

L2tu TP/Gnn Reli Eng

M
OANVP ing/LS P PM P LS

SIPX
Po A)
PP E/Eo/TP(AHigh Availability
Core

LDP Fast Conv.
QoS Enabled

Self- Managed
Dynamic
Optical Transport
GMPLSfor sall esew cc
Fir net aer

Int

Fast Reroute
Standby LSP

IP/BRAS

Local DSL
Company

IPv6 Sites
SMigration urve Secuillar
nce itySystemsL2esVciPNrv ere
SVP ervi
N S idLS ces
V P r ov
L3 ter-P
Converged
In
IP/MPLS Corellwatir e
c/F ntexeIPS N Co
PV

Network and Broadband
Aggregation

IPsec
/L2
TPIP/MPLS Network topology & showcase
conceptIsocore
SP 1Local Cable
CompanyIsocore HQ
McLean, VA

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Optical – GMPLS Network

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Brief Overview of the IP-Optical Network
Status – GMPLS Optical Network
Optical Dynamic GMPLS LSPs established using OC48 Links
 Isocore Internetworking Lab devised a multi-layerednetwork topology encompassing all kind of devices
in the OTN (Optical Transport Network)
•

FSC, L2SC, TDM, LSC

LSP paths spanning across multi-layered network
were defined LSPs established in the optical domain are used as
forwarding adjacencies in the IP domain
 G-LSPs are setup across multiple type of Physicalinterfaces including OC-48, GigE, and OC-12


MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Findings (Summary)






Control plane• Native ethernet or IP tunnel (GRE, IP in IP, etc)
• Associated/Non-associated topology
Addressing• Numbered/unnumbered TE link
• Numbered C-plane• Router ID (SHOULD be loopback addres)
RSVP-TE• ERO/RRO• HOP• Label• Router Alert Option
OSPF-TE• Router Address TLV (=Router ID) SHOULD be routable, i.e., loopback address• Link TLV
See also <draft-shiomoto-control-plane-architecture>

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Findings (RSVP)ERO•

Numbered/unnumbered••••Upstream/downstream-side•
•

RRO•



HOP•

MUST accept numbered TE-link
MUST accept unnumbered TE-link (RFC3477)
MUST accept numbered and unnumbered TE-link in the same message
SHOULD send the upstream-side Id of the TE-link
MUST accept either upstream-side or downstream-side Id of the TE-link

See ERO
Loop-back address/interface address•

Next/Previous Hop Address•••

Interface_ID (type 1: IPv4)
••
•
•

Label

See Next/Previous Hop Address

Interface_ID (type 3:IF_index)
Interface_ID (type 4:Component IF downstream)Interface_ID (type 5:Component IF upstream)•

SHOULD be the Loop-back address of the sender.
MAY be the interface address of the sender, from which the RSVP message is sent out.

For IP address, see Next/Previous Hop Address

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

Reference model for signaling
terminology
Control channel
Path msg.
Resv msg.
Upstream-side

Downstream-side

TE-linkDownstream-direction
Upstream-direction
MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

After Supercomm 2004
MPLS 2004 public demo (www.mpls2004.com)• Date: October 20, 2004
• Items:• MPLS to GMPLS migration strategies• Constraint shortest path (CSPF) algorithms• Dynamic GMPLS label switch paths• GMPLS-OIF UNI interworking• Vendors:• Alcatel, Avici Systems, Chiaro Networks, Cisco Systems,Ciena, Extreme Networks, Fujitsu, Foundry Networks, Ixia,
Juniper Networks, Marconi, Movaz Networks, MRVCommunications, Navtel Communications, NTT, Quarry
Technologies, Redback Networks, Spirent
Communications, Sycamore Networks and Tellabs
iPOP2005 showcase• Date: February 21-22, 2005

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004

iPOP2005

International Conference on IP + Optical Network
http://www.pilab.org/ipop2005/
Date: February 21-22, 2005
 Venue: Tokyo Fashion Town (TFT) Hall, Tokyo, Japan
 Sponsors: PIL(Photonic Internet Lab), ISOCORE,and PIF (Photonic Internet Forum) CALL FOR PRESENTATINOS• Technical area: Field trial report, operators requirements,

international standards, inter-operability experiment, newservices, multi-region/multi-layer, P&R, Protocol design,experiment, theory, implementation, and operational
experiences are solicited.
• Submission Deadline is November 15 (EXTENDED)CALL FOR SHOWCASE EXIBITOR PROPOSALS• Showcase inter operability demonstration for the leading-edge technologies• Technical area (TBD): multi-region/multi-layer network,
P&R, Layer-one VPN, etc.

Audience: over 200 attendees, network operators,
service providers, and equipment vendors areanticipated

MPLS Japan 2004, November 2, 2004