QoS in SIEPON Standard

1,101 views

Published on

Presentation from SIEPON Seminar on 20 April in Czech Republic, sponsored by IEEE-SA & CAG. Opinions presented by the speakers in this presentation are their own, and not necessarily those of their employers or of IEEE.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,101
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

QoS in SIEPON Standard

  1. 1. Jeff Stribling Hitachi 4/20/12
  2. 2. Services Landscape Examples User Type Data Voice Video HSDSMB Cell Backhaul Cloud SFU ComputingMDU/MTU E‐Line/E‐LAN VoIPEveryone wants everything! IPTVSimple to say, but a complex problem to solve.4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 2
  3. 3. EPON Architecture Central  Customer  PON Office Premise Optical Splitters EPON ONU EPON OLT EPON ONU EPON ONU EPON can cost effectively provide access for any and all  users within fiber reach.  What about providing varied services?4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 3
  4. 4. The Problem of QoS Different services and different use cases have different  requirements for traffic treatment. Data Latency / Jitter Voice Video Bandwidth To simultaneously support all these services, QoS must  be both comprehensive and flexible.4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 4
  5. 5. SIEPON’s QoS Mandate Address the previously stated  problem: create a comprehensive and  flexible QoS architecture using  EPON transport that simultaneously  enables vendor interoperability. This starts with defining service  parameters we can use as metrics to  ensure the service requirements (and  operator SLAs) are met: CIR/CBS PIR/PBS      Throughput parameters EIR/EBS Frame Delay (FD) Frame Delay Variation (FDV) Frame Loss Ratio (FLR)4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 5
  6. 6. EPON Service Paths (ESPs) ESPs can be: Upstream Downstream @ ONU @ OLT One LLID Many LLIDs ULTIMATE FLEXIBILITY! Reference: Figure 6‐1, IEEE P1904.1, draft D2.34/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 6
  7. 7. Distributed vs. Centralized Intelligence Distributed CentralizedSuited for: Suited for:MDUs with multiple customers on a  SFU or SMB with single customers with single ONU multiple services on a single ONUReducing overhead and resources at  MTUs with business services needing OLT strict QoS control4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 7
  8. 8. Queue Service Discipline (QSD) (a) Threshold‐first Prevents starvation, improves quality of  “Best Effort Traffic” Typically used in high bandwidth systems  with small numbers of users (b) Priority‐first Improves quality of higher priority traffic,  but cannot prevent starvation Typically used in bandwidth‐limited  systems with large numbers of users (c) Strict Priority Improves quality of the highest priority  traffic Used only when this highest priority  traffic must be ensured at all costs4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 8
  9. 9. Final Thoughts Everyone wants everything! QoS architecture must be flexible SIEPON introduces ESPs and defines service parameters to  control QoS portions of ESPs Flexibility of ESP allows for proper treatment of service for  different user types Flexibility of QSD allows for proper treatment of service for  different service types Everyone gets everything!4/20/2012 IEEE 1904.1 SIEPON Seminar, Prague 9

×