strategy for switch's next generation optical network · strategy for switch's next...
TRANSCRIPT
© SWITCH 2012
Strategy for SWITCH's next generation optical network Terena Network Architecture Workshop 2012
Felix Kugler, Willi Huber [email protected] [email protected]
21.11.2012
© SWITCH 2012
Introduction !The project for the SWITCHlan renewal was formally accepted on November 15, 2012.
• no detailed concept is available yet • we present our vision, goals, and the
rough concepts
2
© SWITCH 2012
Agenda!
• where we are today • where we want to go • how to get there
– fibers and optical transmission – switching layer
• summary
3
© SWITCH 2012
• 11 years since first light • 2500 km of fiber pairs • ~60 PoPs
SWITCHlan mid 2012!
6
• high quality, high performance, low latency IP backbone • multiple upstreams to commercial Internet @ 2 large
exchange points • exclusive GEANT access
“hotspots”: areas with largest bandwidth needs
regional links • 1Gbps • few with 10Gbps
core backbone • DWDM • 10..16 lambdas • max 10Gbps/lambda
© SWITCH 2012
SWITCHlan is doing fine!!• IP service
– 0.1..20 Gbps access speeds
• OPN (optical private network) – EoMPLS based P2P and multipoint links (0.1..10Gbps) – resilient – no bandwidth guarantee (but overprovisioning and careful monitoring)
• lambda services – unprotected only – so far exclusively used for LHCOPN CBF links – sub-standard availability !
7
CNAF - KIT
CNAF - CERN CNAF - FERMILAB
our No.1 service!
© SWITCH 2012
Why fix what ain’t broken ?!
SWITCHlan’s DWDM gear is getting old • some components face their end of life • number of free lambdas decreasing rapidely • investments no longer pay out • no development to 40G/100G • inflexible operations
8
…though less than 50% of lambdas are in use today!
© SWITCH 2012
Technology has gone a long way !
9
optical switching (ROADMs)
2005
2012
size
sophisticated modulation schemes
tunable optics
Let us make best use of it!
© SWITCH 2012
Agenda!
• where we are today • where we want to go • how to get there
– fibers and optical transmission – switching layer
• summary
10
© SWITCH 2012
What we anticipate…!• new users to be connected, mostly small ones • continued average traffic growth of 40%, and • sudden high bandwidth demands triggered by outplacement
of storage & computing • only few users will need full 100G any time soon • 10G will prevail for the next years • new trend: sensor sites at far away locations
– bandwidths needs exceeding GPRS, ADSL range – but very limited budget – often not permanent
11
© SWITCH 2012
Long Term Development Strategy
• optical layer – forced upgrade all our DWDM infrastructure
within 3 years (amplifiers, ROADMs, filters etc) – a long term investment (for a 10 years life) – additional channels and new functionalities
deployed when needed – select a vendor with
• a clearly defined, realistic road-map • willingness for a continuing, close collaboration
13
© SWITCH 2012
Long Term Development Strategy
• network layer – evolutionary approach – continue to use existing (10G capable) routers – new 100G capable router will be deployed as
needed – shorter renewal cycle compared to the optical
equipment
14
© SWITCH 2012
Four things we want to improve!• bandwidth reserves
– more lambdas – 100Gbps capability
• flexibility – transparent lambdas between all core nodes – rapid channel setup – auto-calibration of power levels
• stability – topology improvements to enhance resilience – optical switching capability at major junctions
• coverage – enlarge fiber footprint – extend core backbone over whole country
15
© SWITCH 2012
Agenda!
• where we are today • where we want to go • how to get there
– fibers and optical transmission – switching layer
• summary
16
© SWITCH 2012
Overall network stability!• based on 10 years experience we postulate
– three independent paths into “hotspots” Zürich, Geneva, Lugano
– two-way resilience on the core backbone – single fiber paths sufficient within city limits
• stability of electric power worse than availability of fibers – crucial: keep connectivity up even if a whole region goes black
for a long time – run two powerful exit points to the Internet – build bypasses around major network hubs
17
© SWITCH 2012
Proposed fiber footprint 2015 !
19
moderate expansion of fiber footprint
© SWITCH 2012
Optical transport 2001..2012 !
20
Sorrento DWDM 2001..2003 16 lambdas
BTI DWDM 2005..2010 10 lambdas
CWDM router plugins + passive optics 1..4 lambdas
© SWITCH 2012
The new optical core!• equal capabilities for all regions • uniform transmission gear • to be built on existing fibers, while services remain up • connects all cross border links to neighbor NRENs
21
GARR
Renater
DFN BelWü
extend core backbone
© SWITCH 2012
Photonic core backbone design!
• most nodes add/drop few lambdas only • express lambdas between network hotspots prevail
– minimizing OEO conversions seems reasonable – thus we favor photonic ROADMs
• no bundling or sub-lambda switching on optical layer 23
typical span 60..100km
large university or computing center
large university or computing center
smaller university
max ring length 1000km
transponders
core nodes
numerous express lambdas between network hotspots network “hotspot”
© SWITCH 2012
Key requirements!• 40 lambdas, easily upgradable to 80 • native 10G and 100G wavelengths • 1000km reach without regeneration • auto-calibration of optical power levels • support for alien waves • tolerance for optical signals outside C-band • smooth path toward super-channels for
400G compatibility appreciated
24
© SWITCH 2012
Optical switching !• optical switching capability mandatory • initial deployment of multi-degree ROADMs
– at selected major fiber junctions – at entry points of native lambda services
• long-term plans remain to be defined – use of direction-, color-, contention-less ROADMs – where and when ? – functionality versus reliability ? – economics, size, complexity ?
25
© SWITCH 2012
About economics!• equipment, connectivity
– dramatic increase in performance & functionality per $$
• maintenance – cost approx. stable
• fiber leases (CH) – 45% of overall network cost – last 10 years: ~30% decrease in lease cost/m – won’t go significantly down any more
26
find ways to mitigate!
© SWITCH 2012
Fiber sharing with Hybrid WDM!
27
core backbone • 40..80 DWDM channels • OSC • spans up to 100km • unrepeatered links up to
1000km
1503..1577 [nm] 1470 1490 1590 1610
regional links • 4 CWDM channels • links up to 60km
L-Band range, suitable for amplified long range links
for use • by SWITCH to connect small sites • by regional networks
Use existing backbone fibers to connect small sites!
© SWITCH 2012
Fiber sharing with Hybrid WDM!
• possible for a few dB more span loss… • micro-housing at regional junctions: cheap, small, passive
28
DWDM node
DWDM node
core site core site
(routerless)
small site
HW
DM
split
ter
HW
DM
split
ter
HW
DM
split
ter
HW
DM
split
ter
micro-housing
© SWITCH 2012
Agenda!
• where we are today • where we want to go • how to get there
– fibers and optical transmission – switching layer
• summary
29
© SWITCH 2012
IP Layer Design Goals • network services
– 99.99% availability – overprovisioning -> virtually no packet loss – lowest possible transfer delays – IP service & private layer 2 networks
• network infrastructure – meshed network – two exit points at the extreme (Geneva & Zurich) – PoPs at customer premises
• border of responsibility: Ethernet interface • footprint & power is an issue
– must scale to small and big sites (1 : 100)
30
© SWITCH 2012
Routing vs. Switching • shortest (physical) path first:
– IP routers – shortest path bridging (TRILL, IEEE 802.1aq)
• test with TRILL (Brocade switches): – missing network management tools – lacking interoperability among vendors – difficult to provide layer 2 services – doesn’t scale for a national network
⇒ routed IP backbone – robust, proven and well scalable solution – small organizations connected with stub links (without router)
31
© SWITCH 2012
Layer 1 & 2 Services • emulated layer 2 services
– benefit from meshed backbone topology – EoMPLS point-to-point links, VPLS multipoint
networks
• lambdas – only for higher bandwidths, 10G and 100G – protection will be available
32
© SWITCH 2012
MPLS in the Backbone • layer 2 services forced us to deploy MPLS in
the backbone – the only available tunneling technology, that was
implemented in hardware – used for a restricted address range for layer 2
services only
• desirable solution: – tunneling technique using encapsulation in IP – no need for additional protocols in the backbone – a use case for SDN?
33
© SWITCH 2012
Agenda!
• where we are today • where we want to go • how to get there
– fibers and optical transmission – switching layer
• summary
34
© SWITCH 2012
Summary • fiber footprint
– modest expansion
• transmission layer – core backbone to cover all regions – advanced, uniform DWDM system on core
• built to last 10 years • coexists with other optical services on same fibers
• switching layer – simple, robust, high performance routed IP network – overprovisioning, no BoD – private networks nevertheless needed
• traffic isolation • no traffic engineering
35
© SWITCH 2012
Strategy for SWITCH's next generation optical network Terena Network Architecture Workshop 2012
21.11.2012