QoS in SIEPON Standard

Jeff Stribling Hitachi 4/20/12

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QoS in SIEPON Standard

by IEEESA on May 07, 2012

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

QoS in SIEPON Standard Presentation Transcript