source:atis title:the challenges of e2e qos for ngns agenda item:gtsc-2; #5.2 contact:charles...
TRANSCRIPT
1 GSC-9, Seoul
Charles Dvorak, [email protected], +1.973.236.6700CONTACT:
GTSC-2; #5.2AGENDA ITEM:
The challenges of E2E QoS for NGNsTITLE:
ATISSOURCE: GSC9/GTSC_016
QoS Standards Challenges for NGNsQoS Standards Challenges for NGNs
Charles Dvorak, AT&T LabsATIS GSC Delegation
GSC-9, Seoul2
A well-accepted definition from ITU-T E.800:“the collective effects of service performance which determine the degree of satisfaction of a user of the service.” (This means QoS is always really E2E.)
Will QoS be important for NGNs?Every industry forum that has addressed this issue has concluded the answer is an emphatic “YES!”For example, at the 2002 ATIS VoIP Summit, service providers agreed that inadequate QoS for future, IP-based services was “a potential show-stopper.”
QoS—what is it, and what about the NGN?QoS—what is it, and what about the NGN?
GSC-9, Seoul3
SERVICE QUALITY CRITERIA
SPEED
1
ACCURACY
2
AVAILABILITY
3
RELIABILITY
4
SECURITY
5
SIMPLICITY
6
FLEXIBILITY
7
SERVICE FUNCTION
Sales & Pre-Contract Activities 1
Provision 2
Alteration 3
Service Support 4
Repair 5
SE
RV
ICE
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
Cessation 6
Connection Establsh. 7
Information Transfer 8
CO
NN
EC
TIO
N
QU
AL
ITY
Connection Release 9
BILLING 10
NETWORK / SERVICE MANAGMENT BY CUSTOMER 11
A QoS framework that applies to any serviceA QoS framework that applies to any service
((G.1000)G.1000)
GSC-9, Seoul4
CUSTOMERSERVICEPROVIDER
Customer’sQoS
Requirements
QoS OfferedBy
Provider
QoSAchieved byProvider
QoSPerceived
By Customer
Four Views of QoS (G.1000) that Four Views of QoS (G.1000) that always apply (PSTN, ISDN, NGN)always apply (PSTN, ISDN, NGN)
GSC-9, Seoul5
The IAB’s RFC 2990 “Next Steps for the IP QoS Architecture” compared IntServ and DiffServ style networks and considered broader architectural approaches / requirements, including critical “gaps” in routing; resource management; monitoring and accounting; application and service development; and incremental, heterogeneous deployment.
Conclusion: What is needed is “a set of QoS mechanisms and a number of ways these mechanisms can be configured to interoperate in a stable and consistent fashion”
Needed QoS Steps: The IETF circa 2000Needed QoS Steps: The IETF circa 2000
GSC-9, Seoul6
QoS Issues, circa 2002 (still valid !)QoS Issues, circa 2002 (still valid !)
• Most carriers today zero out any QoS-related bits(ToS, DiffServ) of incoming packets and look atnothing but the IP destination address
• IP routing protocols route around failures, notcongestion (some have congestion indicatorstelling sender to use less B/W…no good for VoIP)
• QoS monitoring is dependent on the types of securearchitectures (MPLS nets, IPsec VPNs, SSL VPNs…)
• Scalability, security and restorability still big issues
• Full IP integration of service types still a pipe dream
GSC-9, Seoul7
State of E2E IP QoS in 2004State of E2E IP QoS in 2004 • Application requirements are known; needed QoS
classes defined; monitoring metrics widely used
• QoS is not just per-domain but end-to-end and thus has to be signaled / provisioned across networks.Requirements for needed protocols largely done;now very active positioning on different solutions.
• Much work needed to ensure these solutions are: Reliable, secure and scalable Capable of supporting all traffic/service mixes/priorities Resilient regarding any between-layer dependencies
(e.g., rapid restoration of QoS as well as lower layers)
GSC-9, Seoul8
A way forward, based onA way forward, based onITU-T Y.1541 and Y.1221ITU-T Y.1541 and Y.1221
• Y.1541: QoS classes quantify user application needs in terms of IP network performance
• Y.1221: “traffic contract” complements QoS class by describing flow characteristics/limits
Together, the two Recommendations specify the key data needed for IP network QoS signaling.
GSC-9, Seoul9
Y.1541 - IP QoS Classes and NI-NI ObjectivesY.1541 - IP QoS Classes and NI-NI Objectives
NetworkPerformance
Parameter
Nature ofNetwork
PerformanceObjective Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4
Class 5(Un-
specified)IPTD Upper bound
on the meanIPTD
100 ms 400 ms 100 ms 400 ms 1 s U
IPDV Upper boundon the 1-10-3
quantile ofIPTD minusthe minimum
IPTD
50 ms 50 ms U U U U
IPLR Upper boundon the packet
lossprobability
1*10-3 1*10-3 1*10-3 1*10-3 1*10-3 U
IPER Upper bound 1*10-4 U
GSC-9, Seoul10
Y.1541 Guidance for IP QoS ClassesY.1541 Guidance for IP QoS ClassesQoS Class
Applications (Examples) Node MechanismsNetwork
Techniques
0Real-Time, Jitter Sensitive, High Interaction
(VoIP, VTC)
Separate Queue with Preferential Servicing, Traffic Grooming
Constrained Routing/Distance
1Real-Time, Jitter Sensitive, Interactive (VoIP, VTC)
Less Constrained Routing/ Distance
2Transaction Data, Highly Interactive (Signalling)
Separate Queue, Drop Priority
Constrained Routing/Distance
3Transaction Data, Interactive
Less Constrained Routing/ Distance
4Low Loss Only (Short Transactions, Bulk Data, Video Streaming)
Long Queue, Drop Priority
Any Route/Path
5Traditional Applications of Default IP Networks
Separate Queue (Lowest Priority)
Any Route/Path
GSC-9, Seoul11
Y.1221: Traffic and CongestionY.1221: Traffic and Congestion Control in IP Based NetworksControl in IP Based Networks
Traffic Contract
• Dedicated BW• Statistical BW• Best Effort
• Max Pkt Size• Token Bucket
–Rate (Rp, Rs)–Size (Bp, Bs)
(Y.1541)
IP Transfer Capability
Traffic Descriptor
QoS Class
(conditions under whichQoS specs can be met)
GSC-9, Seoul12
Service Level Parameters to be Signaled Service Level Parameters to be Signaled (came partly out of ATIS VoIP Summit in 2002)(came partly out of ATIS VoIP Summit in 2002)
• Y.1541 QoS class (objective numerical levels for IP Loss Ratio, IP Transfer Delay, and IP Delay Variation may be indicated by specifying the Y.1541 QoS class itself as a signalling parameter)
• Traffic Parameters from Y.1221 Peak rate (Rp) Peak bucket size (Bp) Sustainable rate (Rs) Sustainable bucket size (Bs) Maximum allowed packet size (M)
• IP DSCP (optional) as specified in RFC 2474• Priority/reliability of the service
GSC-9, Seoul13
Assumed Network FunctionalityAssumed Network Functionality
• Subscription VerificationSubscription Verification• AuthenticationAuthentication• Call Admission ControlCall Admission Control• Performance ManagementPerformance Management
GW GWGW
Network
UNIGW
NNI
GSC-9, Seoul14
IPCablecomIPCablecom QoS (J.163):QoS (J.163):Segmented signalling modelSegmented signalling model
T0912600-01
MTA CM Cable CMCable MTAANBackbone Reservation
AN
Access Reservation Access Reservation
GSC-9, Seoul15
Segmented signalling modelSegmented signalling model
T0912600-01
MTA CM Cable CMCable MTAANBackbone Reservation
AN
Access Reservation Access Reservation
……but what if the path looks like:but what if the path looks like:
ISP-1(Intserv)
ISP-2(over-prov)
BB-1(Diffserv)
BB-2(MPLS-TE)
Cable
xDSL?
Wireless w/3GPP sig.
GSC-9, Seoul16
What does the NGN need for e2e QoS?What does the NGN need for e2e QoS?(The following currently being proposed in ATIS)(The following currently being proposed in ATIS)
• A standard set of IP network QoS classes and associated traffic descriptors, for characterizing end-to-end IP packet flows in managed IP networks (or alternatively, more than one specification and an associated set of interworking standards for mapping among them).
• Standard signaling capabilities enabling independent operators of managed IP networks to cooperate in establishing end-to-end IP flows supporting particular user-requested QoS classes and traffic profiles.
• Standards (or guidelines) for relating signaled QoS and traffic specifications with network resource sharing mechanisms capable of supporting them.
GSC-9, Seoul17
Progress towards E2E QoS Requirements for an e2e QoS protocol are being developed in SG11.
IP QoS Signaling "proofs of concept" are being kicked around in the IETF's NSIS WG. AT&T recently submitted :http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-nsis-nslp-qos-sig-proof-of-concept-01.txt , which is based on 3 ITU-T QoS signaling items:
1) [TRQ-QoS-SIG] "Signaling Requirements for IP-QoS," January 2004.
2) [Y.1541] "Network Performance Objectives for IP-Based Services," 2002.
3) [E.361] "QoS Routing Support for Interworking of QoS Service Classes Across Routing Technologies," 2003.
Also, the ATIS VoIP Focus Group has identifiedneeded action, such as a standards work plan to achieve the needed signaling for E2E QoS.
GSC-9, Seoul18
Parting Comments onParting Comments on End-to-End QoS End-to-End QoS Y.1541/Y.1221 specs exist for NI-to-NI IP QoS, but
there is no widely accepted delivery mechanism yet Still unclear if QoS-related resource control of
others’ networks will ever be allowed; even if some carriers agree, interoperability is still an issue
Over-provisioning still central to many solutions No forum is advancing Reliability and Restoration
mechanisms for e2e IP QoS in any tangible way yet Recent attention on IP emergency communications
have served as a magnet for all of the shortcomings of e2e QoS proposals in IP space (IETF’s IEPREP)
GSC-9, Seoul19
BACKUP SLIDESBACKUP SLIDES
GSC-9, Seoul20
Scope of SG11 QoS Signaling Reqts.Scope of SG11 QoS Signaling Reqts.
TE TEGW . . .
Network
End-End Network (IP Service QoS)
Network Network
Customer Installation Customer Installation
User-to-User Connection (Transport and higher QoS)
TE GWTerminal EquipmentGatewayRouter Protocol Stack
LAN LAN
IP Network Cloud
UNI UNI
*NI Network Interface
GW GW GW GW GW
DSTSRC
NNI NNI
Protocol Requirements
GSC-9, Seoul21
Call / session control
Packet forwarding
Gate control
Session IP flow
Call / session control (with indication of QoS requirements)
QoS mechanism (e.g. RSVP or Diffserv packet marking)
End-s
yst
em
End-s
yst
em
1
2 3
4
5 6
7
One Approach: E2E Session ControlOne Approach: E2E Session Control
GSC-9, Seoul22
Packet forwarding
Gate control
Session IP flow
Call / session control (with indication of QoS requirements)
QoS mechanism (e.g. RSVP or Diffserv packet marking)
En
d-sy
stem
En
d-sy
stem
1
2 3
4
5 6
7
Policy Control
Another approach: No Session ControlAnother approach: No Session Control
GSC-9, Seoul23
Call Signalling
Packet Flow
QoS Signalling
Application Plane
Transport Plane
Approach of SG 16Approach of SG 16 (see new H.360) (see new H.360)
Service Domain 1
Transport Domain 1
Transport Domain 2
Transport Domain 3
Service Domain 2
Application Level QoS Signalling
H.323 Annex N
Vertical QoS Signalling
(H.trans.cont)
Transport Level QoS Signalling
(H.trans.cont or NSIS)
H.323 Annex N
H.323 Annex N
GSC-9, Seoul24
Proposed (AAP) ITU-T Y.1291 Appendix–Proposed (AAP) ITU-T Y.1291 Appendix– An architectural framework for support of An architectural framework for support of quality of service (QoS) in packet networksquality of service (QoS) in packet networks
Bearer Layer
Bearer Control Layer
Service Control Layer
Edge Router
Transit Router
Core Router
Service Control Server
Bearer Resource Manager
LSP