Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.



Carrier Ethernet - What and Why

From Ethernet to Carrier Ethernet: A detail explanation

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Carrier Ethernet - What and Why

  1. 1. Carrier Ethernet – What & Why By Anuradha Udunuwara June 2014 1Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  2. 2. Content • What is Ethernet? • What is Carrier (Metro) Ethernet? • Why Carrier Ethernet? • Standards – Technology neutral – MEF – Technology specific – IEEE, IETF 2Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  3. 3. What is Ethernet? 3Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  4. 4. What Do We Mean By “Ethernet?” • Ethernet as an interface • Ethernet as a point-to-point link  IEEE 802.3 view • Ethernet as a Packet Switched Network (PSN) infrastructure (transport)  IEEE 802.1 (bridging) view  ITU-T SG15 / SG13 managed Ethernet network view • Ethernet as a protocol • Ethernet as a service  MEF view – user-to-user transfer of 802.3 frames over any transport layer  E-Line, E-LAN, E-Tree, E-Access 4Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  5. 5. Ethernet evolution through generations 5Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  6. 6. Categories of traditional Ethernet <data rate><Signaling method><Max segment length or cable type> 6Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  7. 7. 5-4-3 Rule 10-Mbps Ethernet could be used on no more than 5 network segments, 4 repeaters, and no more than 3 of the five network segments can be for end-users. 7 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  8. 8. IEEE 802.3 Cable Types Name Cable Max. Max Cable Segment Length /m Nodes /segment Topology 10Base5 thick coax 500 100 Bus 10Base2 thin coax 185 30 Bus 10BaseT twisted pair 100 1 Star 10BaseF Fiber Optic 2000 1 Star 8Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  9. 9. IEEE 802.3 Cable Types, cont., 9 Source: (RG-58) (RG-8) (Cat 3 and above) Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  10. 10. 10Base2 10Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  11. 11. 10Base5 11 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU Source:
  12. 12. 10BaseT • Uses twisted pair Cat3 cable • Star-wire topology • A hub functions as a repeater with additional functions • Fewer cable problems, easier to troubleshoot than coax • Cable length at most 100 meters 12Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  13. 13. 10Base-F 13 Source: Angular Physical Contact for high power laser Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  14. 14. Fast Ethernet • 100 Mbps transmission rate • same frame format, media access, and collision detection rules as 10 Mbps Ethernet • can combine 10 Mbps Ethernet and Fast Ethernet on same network using a switch • media: twisted pair (CAT 5) or fiber optic cable (no coax) • Star-wire topology – Similar to 10BASE-T 14Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  15. 15. Fast Ethernet implementations 15Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  16. 16. 16 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  17. 17. Full-duplex switched Ethernet 17Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  18. 18. Gigabit Ethernet • Speed 1Gpbs • Operates in full/half duplex modes. Mostly full duplex • Maximum length of the cable is determined by the signal attenuation in the cable 18Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  19. 19. 10 Gbps Ethernet  Maximum link distances cover 300 m to 120 km  Full-duplex mode only  Uses optical fiber only 19 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  20. 20. Beyond 10 Gigabit Ethernet • 40 GE • 100 GE • 400 GE • 1 T 20 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  21. 21. History • 1973 - 1st document • 1975 -Xerox gets patent • 1976 - deployed at Xerox • 1980 - DIX (Digital/Intel/Xerox) standard published (The Ethernet, A Local Area Network. Data Link Layer and Physical Layer Specifications_v1) • 1982 - v2 • 1982 - IEEE 802.3 CSMA/CD standard approved (Other options: Token Ring and Token Bus) • 1983 – IEEE 802.3 CSMA/CD Draft Published • 1985 – IEEE 802.3 CSMA/CD Standard published 21 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  22. 22. The Basic Ethernet Bus 22 Thinet coaxial cable Disconnecting a single connection will bring the whole network down! Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  23. 23. Collisions 23 Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  24. 24. Using a Hub 24 • Bus - >Star • Collisions still possible • Centralized wiring • Can automatically bypass any ports that are disconnected or have a cabling fault • -> network much more fault tolerant than a coax based system Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  25. 25. Using a Switch 25 • To overcome the problem of collisions and other effects on network speed • Machines can transmit simultaneously Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  26. 26. IEEE Ethernet (IEEE 802) • In IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Data link layer is split into two sublayers: – Top part: LLC (Logical Link Control) • The subframe is called IEEE 802.2 • Provides error and flow control if needed • It makes the MAC sublayer transparent – Allows interconnectivity between different LANs data link layers • Used to multiplex multiple network layer protocols in the data link layer frame • Implemented in software – Bottom part: MAC • The frame is called IEEE 802.3 in CSMA/CD • Handles framing, MAC addressing, Medium Access Control • Specific implementation for each LAN protocol – Defines CSMA/CD as the access method for Ethernet LANs and Token passing method for Token Ring • Implemented in hardware 26Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  27. 27. 27Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  28. 28. IEEE 802, Some examples 802.1 Bridging (networking) and Network Management 802.2 Logical link control (upper part of data link layer) 802.3 Ethernet (CSMA/CD) (defines the physical layer and data link layer's MAC of wired Ethernet) 802.17 Resilient Packet Ring (RPR) 802.11 Wireless LAN & Mesh (Wi-Fi certification) 802.15 Wireless PAN 802.15.1 Bluetooth certification 802.15.4 ZigBee certification 802.16 Broadband Wireless Access (WiMAX certification) 802.16e (Mobile) Broadband Wireless Access 802.20 Mobile Broadband Wireless Access 28Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  29. 29. IEEE 802.3 802.3a 10BASE2 10 Mbit/s over thin Coax 802.3i 10BASE-T 10 Mbit/s over twisted pair 802.3j 10BASE-F 10 Mbit/s over Fiber-Optic 802.3u 100BASE-TX, 100BASE-T4, 100BASE-FX Fast Ethernet at 100 Mbit/s w/auto- negotiation 802.3x Full Duplex and flow control 802.3y 100BASE-T2 100 Mbit/s over low quality twisted pair 802.3z 1000BASE-X 1 Gbit/s Ethernet over Fiber-Optic 802.3ab 1000BASE-T 1 Gbit/s Ethernet over twisted pair 802.3ac Max frame size extended to 1522 bytes (to allow "Q-tag") 802.3ad Link aggregation for parallel links 802.3ae 10 Gbit/s Ethernet over fiber; 10GBASE-SR, 10GBASE-LR, 10GBASE-ER, 10GBASE-SW, 10GBASE-LW, 10GBASE-EW 802.3af Power over Ethernet (12.95 W) 802.3ah Ethernet in the First Mile 802.3an 10GBASE-T 10 Gbit/s Ethernet over UTP 802.3at Power over Ethernet enhancements (25.5 W) 802.3av 10 Gbit/s EPON 29Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  30. 30. IEEE 802.1 30 802.1w-2001 Rapid Reconfiguration of Spanning Tree (RSTP) 802.1D-2004 MAC Bridges (rollup of 802.1w) 802.1s-2002 Multiple Spanning Trees (MSTP) 802.1v-2001 VLAN Classification by Protocol and Port 802.1Q-2005 VLAN Bridges (Rollup of 802.1s and 802.1v) 802.1ad-2005 Provider Bridging (PB) 802.1ag-2007 Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) 802.1ah-2008 Provider Backbone Bridge (PBB) 802.1aq-2012 Shortest Path Bridging (SPB) 802.1Qay-2009 Provider Backbone Bridge Traffic Engineering (PBB-TE) 802.1Q-2011 VLAN Bridges (Rollup of 802.1Q-2005+Cor-1 and 802.1ad/ag/ah/Qay) 802.1X-2010 Port Based Network Access Control Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  31. 31. Standard to maturity 31 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  32. 32. Ethernet provides Unreliable, Connectionless service – Ethernet data link layer protocol provides connectionless service to the network layer • No handshaking between sending and receiving adapter. – Ethernet protocol provides unreliable service to the network layer : • Receiving adapter doesn’t send ACK to sending adapter • This means stream of datagrams passed to network layer can have gaps (missing data) – Gaps will be filled if application is using reliable transport layer protocol » Otherwise, application will see the gaps 32Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  33. 33. IP vs Ethernet • Wrong questions to ask – Which is better – IP or Ethernet? – Which is cheaper? – Is Ethernet going to take over from IP? – Will IP win out in the end? • Answers – Ethernet and IP will co-exist – Complimenting each other – Meeting different needs – Both occurring in hybrid networks – Delivered over a single, global platform – Sharing similar cost and service characteristics 33Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  34. 34. Why Ethernet ? • Most common Interface today • Cost effective • Supports very high Bandwidths (100 Gbps, 400 Gbps, 1 Tbps, ...) • Flexible upgrades within a wide range (ex: 1Mbps to 1Gbps) • Easy and simple to manage and maintain • Varaible payload support 34Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  35. 35. Cost effectiveness 35 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  36. 36. Use case : Mobile Backhaul Migration 36 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  37. 37. What is Carrier (Metro) Ethernet? 37Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  38. 38. Global Expansion from Metro to Carrier Ethernet • The Beginning: Metro Ethernet (ME) – MEF was formed in 2001 to develop ubiquitous business services for Enterprise users principally accessed over optical metropolitan networks to connect their Enterprise LANs • Expansion to Carrier Ethernet (CE) – Success of ME Services caught the imagination of the world as the concept expanded to include • Worldwide services traversing national and global networks • Access networks to provide availability to a much wider class of user over fiber, copper, cable, PON, and wireless • Economy of scale from the resulting converged business, residential and wireless networks sharing the same infrastructure and services • Scalability & rapid deployment of business applications • Adoption of the certification program – While retaining the cost model and simplicity of Ethernet 38Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  39. 39. Relationship between the MEF Specifications and CE – Technical work of MEF as described in the specifications, together with the work of associated standards bodies, collectively enable the functionality and attributes of CE – Completed specifications continue to refer to MENs (Metro Ethernet Networks) but this is now a generic term covering the enabled service network in the increasing variety of access, metro and long haul networks 39Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  40. 40. What is CE ? • Is it a service, a network, or a technology? • Answer for an end-user – It’s a Service defined by 5 attributes • Answer for a service provider – A set of certified network elements that connect to transport CE services for all users, locally & worldwide – It’s a platform for value added services – A standardized service for all users 40Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  41. 41. MEF CE Definition A ubiquitous, standardized, carrier-class Service and Network defined by 5 attributes that distinguish it from familiar LAN based Ethernet
  42. 42. Attribute 1: Standardized Services CEEnterprise Ethernet  Provide service across multiple geographies and multiple networks  Provides service to multiple customers  Needs to provide converged transport with optimal use of present investment  Service provided over one network (Company LAN)  One customer – can customize network to requirements Network 1 Network 2 Network 3 42Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  43. 43. 1000 Nodes Attribute 2: Scalability  Need to scale to millions of nodes  Need to scale from few Mbps data rate to 10 Gbps and beyond  Network needs to support several services  Few hundreds or thousands of nodes  Need to scale from 10 Mbps to 1 Gbps  Limited number of services to be supported CE Enterprise Ethernet 100 Nodes 100 Mbps 1 Gbps 100 Nodes 100 Mbps 1000 Nodes 1 Gbps 10 Gbps 10K Nodes 100 Gbps 10M Nodes 43Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  44. 44. Attribute 3: Reliability  Need to provide protection in case of link failure in less than 50 ms  Need to provide five 9s reliability of equipment  Need to recover from faults as quickly as possible to provide uptime as specified in SLA  Equipment is all within a premise, more reliable with easy recovery  No strict time limits needed on link protection, no SLAs associated with network availability CE Enterprise Ethernet $$$$ $$ SLA losses 50ms protection 44Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  45. 45. Attribute 4: Service Management  Need to quickly monitor and diagnose faults across multiple vendor equipment  Ability to rapidly provision the bandwidth end-to-end  Fault isolation is easy since equipment is all within a premise  Bandwidth is more static in nature, no need for provisioning CEEnterprise Ethernet Service Down Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Service Down 45Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  46. 46. Attribute 5: Quality of Service  Bandwidth is cheap, hence no contention in the network  No variety in traffic profiles, identical treatment is acceptable Enterprise Ethernet High-speed Mobile Internet Mobile Voice Enterprise Services Leakage of SLA-based traffic due to congestion Metro Network High-speed Mobile Internet Mobile Voice Enterprise Services Metro Network  QoS absolutely required to service variety of SLAs  Ability to treat customer traffic in agreement with the SLAs CE 46Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  47. 47. Equipment Transport Technologies Availability End Customer Geographic Reach In summary Ethernet in LAN CE Department heads Employee Some tolerance for disruption Cat5 Fiber Wireless Campus Building Wiring closet Metro National International Service-oriented Highly resilient Carrier environmental Fiber T1/E1, T3/E3 Cat5 SONET/SDH Cu Wireless No tolerance for disruption Driven by SLA Corporate IT Consumer 47Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  48. 48. Other CE Network (CEN) requirements • Availability • Stability • Performance • Multicast support • TDM support • Security 48 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  49. 49. Availability (Resilience) 49 Hardware Component of CE Node High Availability mechanism Route processor 1:1 Switching fabric 1:1 Power supply 1+1 Note Power feed 1+1 Note Cooling system 1+1 Note Any other control plane module 1:1 Any other switching plane component 1:1 Note : single component shall be able to take the full load of the CE node 1:1 active – standby 1+1 load sharing Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  50. 50. Availability (Resilience), Cont., • ITU-T G.8032 version 1 & 2 (ERPS) • Software level high availability features; – NSR for • LDP • RSVP TE • BGP • OSPF • PIM-SM and PIM-SSM – ISSU – BFD requirement shall be analyzed for following in the future stage • LDP • RSVP • BGP • OSPF • PIM-SM and PIM-SSM – NSF requirement shall be analyzed in future stage 50 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  51. 51. Stability • Stability of the CEN and its NE are very important. This should ensure consistent performance of the NE • MTBF and MTTR values shall meet 99.999% node availability requirements 51 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  52. 52. Performance • Scalability of the CEN determine by providing sufficient bandwidth to be able to guarantee a committed level of performance for the full service portfolio of end users • CEN shall be designed to achieve the certain QoS requirements/KPIs defined with the set of services/products • CEN must be able to handle unpredictable surges in traffic, and appropriate load 52 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  53. 53. Multicasting • To support IPTV and other multicast applications, the CEN shall support IP multicast protocols • Layer 3 based (PIM) multicast technology is preferred over Layer 2 technology for scalability and flexibility reasons • Layer 2 multicasting features shall be available for customer multicasting services 53 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  54. 54. TDM Circuits (e.g. T1/E1 Lines) Supporting TDM services • Enables TDM Services to be transported across CEN, re-creating the TDM circuit at the far end (Circuit Emulation Services (CES) over CE) – Runs on a standard Ethernet Line Service (E-Line) • Use Synchronous Ethernet or IEEE 1588v2 for frequency and time of day synchronization Carrier Ethernet Network TDM Circuits (e.g. T1/E1 Lines) Circuit Emulated TDM Traffic 54Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  55. 55. Ethernet Access: Initial Positioning • Ethernet access networks were considered for new backbones only – Huge saving in the access is expected: “it’s all about money, not technology” Traditional (Legacy) Networks Traditional Access Legacy Infrastructure Ethernet Access New Packet-Switched Networks (PSN) New Infrastructure New Backbone - GbE (Metro) - MPLS - IP Legacy Backbone - SDH - ATM 55Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  56. 56. Ethernet Access to Legacy and Packet-Switched Networks • Co-existence of legacy and new packet-switched backbone networks • Same Ethernet access to SDH and ATM as well as to PSN – “Bottom-Up” approach to Ethernet access deployment New Backbone - GbE - MPLS - IP Legacy Backbone - SDH - ATM Ethernet Access Traditional Access 56Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  57. 57. Evolution of Ethernet Service Delivery NTU Legacy Access TDM, FR, ATM Legacy Core ATM, SDH PSN Core Ethernet, IP, MPLS PSN Core Ethernet, IP, MPLS NTU Legacy/Ethernet Access TDM, FR, ATM Ethernet NTU PSN Access Ethernet, MPLS • Ethernet service (user) interface at NTU • PSN core, and mix of Ethernet and Legacy in the access • “All PSN” network PSN, Access and Core 57Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  58. 58. Emulated Services challenges • Maintain legacy services – Optimization of BW usage over DSL access link • Synchronization and clock distribution over a Packet Network • Support legacy services while keeping IP AGW (DSLAM/MSAN) cost low – Reduce AGW complexity to the lowest possible level – Same DSL card for different emulated services • Multiservice offering at customer premises (multiservice over single access link as an example : FR + LAN or FR + Leased Line) 58Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  59. 59. Pseudo Wire (PW) – concept – synchronous bit stream is chopped into packets – MPLS/IP headers are added – Packets are forwarded to destination over the IP network – At destination, the original bit stream is reconstructed by removing MPLS/ IP headers, concatenating the packets, and regenerating the clock Legacy Service frame Legacy service frame Ethernet/ MPLS/ IP Packets Ethernet/IP Ethernet/ MPLS/ IP Packets 59Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  60. 60. PW Technology - Standards • TDMoIP Standards: – IETF - ietf-pwe3-tdmoip – ITU - Y.1413 – TDMoIP section – MFA – IA 4.0 – MEF – CESoE (Q2/06) • Other PW standards – IETF - ietf-pwe3-CESoPSN – IETF - ietf-pwe3-SAToP – ITU - Y.1413 – CESoPSN and SAToP sections 60Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  61. 61. Migration to IP/MPLS Networks: Maintaining Legacy Services • Maintaining existing services over new IP infrastructure • IP AGW as multiservice access node especially for legacy services • Several options for Service Emulation : – Edge-Edge – CPE-CPE CPE Access Legacy Network Access CPEPOTS/ISDN Leased Lines X.25/FR/ATM POTS/ISDN Leased Lines X.25/FR/ATM IP/MPLS Network Edge-to-Edge Service Emulation (PWE3) CLE Access Access CLE CLE-to-CLE Service Emulation POTS/ISDN Leased Lines X.25/FR/ATM POTS/ISDN Leased Lines X.25/FR/ATM CPE CPE 61Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  62. 62. Circuit Emulation Over Ethernet (MEF) • Industry’s first formal definition of CES standards over Ethernet • CESoETH “tunnels” TDM traffic through a CEN – Packet network “emulates” a circuit-switched network, re-creating the TDM circuit – Invisible to TDM source and destination equipment – Runs on a standard Ethernet Line Service (E-Line) • Treats the CEN as a “virtual wire” between two TDM networks PSTN Customer Premises CESoETH Ethernet UNI Ethernet UNI Ethernet E-Line Service Ethernet T1/DS3T1/DS3 CES IWF TDM subscriber demarcation TDM Network Interface Service Provider Network CESoETH can be delivered over any Ethernet access technology! Carrier Ethernet Network CES IWF 62Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  63. 63. MBH 63Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  64. 64. Backhaul vs. Fronthaul 64 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  65. 65. Mobile Backhaul Migration 65 Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  66. 66. NG RAN Transport Network • CE – can be supported over different physical transports – supports backhaul of all mobile generations over a single pipe – enables high, scalable, and flexible bandwidth at lower cost • Five-Nines availability, redundancy , and OA&M supported using CE • CE positions the RAN for WCDMA, LTE, and WiMAX backhaul BTS BSC EthEth TDM E1/T1 IP ETH eNodeB (3GPP R5/ LTE) BS (WiMax) Access Device Gateway G.823/824 Compliant Clock ATM RNC R99/4 IP RNC LTE AGW ATM/IMANodeB Carrier Ethernet 66Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  67. 67. Multi Physical Transport Mobile Backhaul Direct Fiber User to Network Interface (UNI) Network to Network Interface (NNI) MBH Generic Interworking Function (GIWF) - Ex: MEF3/8 BTS/NodeB BTS/NodeB BTS/NodeB BTS/NodeB N x GigE Wireless CO (RNC/BSC) Carrier ONT BTS/NodeB Splitter PON Fiber Carrier 67Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  68. 68. Service Convergence for Multiple Generations Wireless Generation Cell Site Interface RNC/BSC Interface Supported Service GSM, CDMA TDM: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 TDM: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 MEF 3/8 (Emulation of PDH Circuits over Metro Ethernet Networks) based CESoPSN/SAToP WCDMA based UMTS R.99/4, HSDPA, ATM & ATM IMA: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 ATM: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 MEF 3/8 based CESoPSN/SAToP IETF based ATM PWE3 (RFC4717) CDMA2000: 1xRTT, 1xEVDO HDLC: T1/E1, DS3/E3 HDLC: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 MEF 3/8 based CESoPSN/SAToP IETF based HDLC PWE3 (RFC 4618) iDEN FR: T1/E1, DS3/E3 FR: T1/E1, DS3/E3, OC3/STM-1 MEF 3/8 based CESoPSN/SAToP IETF based FR PWE3 (RFC 4619) WCDMA/UMTS R.5, EVDO, WiMAX, LTE Ethernet: Fast Ethernet Ethernet: GigE Ethernet Services May based on IETF based Ethernet PWE3 (RFC 4448) 68Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  69. 69. Security • CEN addresses the security which provides confidentiality, integrity and availability of specific services. • Following areas shall be equipped with necessary security mechanisms, – Node security – Access security – Interconnection security – UNI and I-NNI – Protocol security – UNI and I-NNI 69 Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  70. 70. CE 2.0 70Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  71. 71. Why CE Generations? • Clearly communicate the CE evolution and the value it brings to the market • Provides a directional roadmap for the industry 71Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  72. 72. CE Generations Framework 72Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  73. 73. • 8 Ethernet virtual and port-based services • 3 powerful features: – Standardized Multi-CoS – Interconnect – Manageability • Enables enriched Mobile & Business Services Enterprise and Cloud Applications, New simple Ethernet access connections • Supported by new services-oriented Certification A new generation of CE 73Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  74. 74. CE Service Types 74Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  75. 75. CE Service Matrix 75 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  76. 76. Attributes CE 2.0 Service Management Automated management Brings Scalability 3 Recent/New Specs for SOAM, FM/PM New Metrics UNI EVC1 CoS 4 10 Mbps CIR for VoIP CoS 2 20Mbps CIR for VPN data traffic 68Mbps for Internet Access EVC2 CoS 6 2 Mbps CIR for control New CE 2.0 Class of Service Extensions Industry’s First Standardized Multi-CoS Application & Distance-Oriented Performance Objectives for Next Gen SLAs Enables New Level of Network Efficiency, Responsiveness for Enterprises & MBH CE 2.0 Multi-CoS UNI Retail Provider’s CE Network UNI Cloud ENNI Wholesale Access Network CE Exchange ENNI Integrates autonomous, CE networks, as a single regional/global network New Wholesale Service simplifies lowers costs, adds revenue CE 2.0 Interconnect 76Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  77. 77. Why CE? 77Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  78. 78. Today’s world demands – Any application, any connectivity, on any device – Information, voice, video or data – Entertainment – video voice, data any source – At home, in the office, on the go, seamlessly and always connected – Any time, 24/7/365, on demand – All delivered on one ubiquitous high performance, global service 78Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  79. 79. 79 Issues with Legacy Networks • Low bandwidth • No flexibility to scale • High cost of installation • Slow provisioning • Bandwidth growth inflexible/non-linear – Limited by multiplexing hierarchy • TDM-based access: inefficient for converged data Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  80. 80. Why Ethernet in the Metro? 10/100 Base -T Enables true extension of Enterprise LAN across multiple locations, as well as effectively providing other multipoint services Utilize simplicity and ubiquity of Ethernet as a technology Enables bandwidth efficiency in the network due to statistical multiplexing Low price/bandwidth ratio makes Ethernet the technology of choice Ethernet Ethernet 80Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  81. 81. 81 CE Value Propositions • Lower per-user provisioning costs – Technically simple relative to TDM ckts. – Due to large installed base • Efficient and flexible transport – Wide range of speeds: 1 Mbps--10 Gbps – QoS capabilities • Ease of inter-working – Plug-and-play feature • Ubiquitous adoption – The technology of choice in enterprise networks Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  82. 82. 82 Ethernet Business Drivers • Business connectivity – Storage networks – Data centers – Video conferencing • Residential services – Triple-play services (IPTV) – On-line gaming – High-speed Internet access • Wireless backhaul – Reduced cost, complexity for mobile operators Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  83. 83. CE Market • Services Revenue : $5B (2012) to over $11B (2017) [Insight Research] • Equipment Revenue: $31.7B (2011) to $42B (2016) [Infonetics] • CE Equipment spend: $186 billion over next 5 years! 83Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  84. 84. Standards Technology neutral Technology specific 84Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  85. 85. MEF 85Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  86. 86. 86 Since 2001, Developing, Marketing and Certifying Standards for CE Services Standards ComplianceEducationOperations 213 Members - 119 Service Providers - 40 Standards 689 Certified Products (54 CE 2.0) - 854 MEF CECPs Accelerating the Global Adoption of CE Networks and Services
  87. 87. Part of International Standards Community MEF’s role is largely additive to these organizations, developing necessary additional specifications that are required to enable CE. MEF also provides inputs in support of CE to these bodies via its participating members and liaisons. It is not within the scope of the MEF to endorse or otherwise the work of other standards bodies and associations 87Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  88. 88. CE: Scope of MEF Work SoHo & Residential Triple-PlaySmall/Medium BusinessEnterprise Clients Mobile data/video HD TV, TVoD, VoD, Content Providers Video Source Gaming, DR, ERP Voice/Video Telephony Internet information & Software apps Host applications, Consolidated Servers Carrier Ethernet CE wire-line and mobile backhaul with copper, fiber , cable, wireless access network delivery 88Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  89. 89. CE Architecture EVC: Ethernet Virtual Connection UNI: User Network Interface. The physical demarcation point between the responsibility of the Service Provider and the responsibility of the Subscriber. UNI-C: UNI customer-side processes UNI-N UNI network-side processes ENNI: External Network to Network Interface. The physical demarcation point between the responsibility of the two Service Providers ENNI-N: ENNI processes Ethernet Services (“Eth”) Layer Terminology Service Provider 1 Carrier Ethernet NetworkCE UNI End User Subscriber Site ETH UNI-C ETH UNI-N ETH UNI-N ETH ENNI-N ETH UNI-C UNI CE ENNI Service Provider 2 ETH ENNI-N End User Subscriber Site EVC Carrier Ethernet Network “In a CEN, data is transported across Point-to-Point and Multipoint-to- Multipoint Ethernet Virtual Connections (EVCs) according to the attributes and definitions of the E-Line, E-LAN, E-Tree and E-Access services” 89Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  90. 90. MEF EVC – Service container – Connects two or more subscriber sites (UNI’s) – An association of two or more UNIs – Prevents data transfer between sites that are not part of the same EVC – Three types of EVCs • Point-to-Point • Multipoint-to-Multipoint • Rooted Multipoint – Can be bundled or multiplexed on the same UNI – Defined in MEF 10.2 technical specification 90Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  91. 91. 91 Service Attributes • Physical Interface – Medium, speed, mode, MAC layer • Traffic Parameters – CIR, CBS, PIR, MBS • QoS Parameters – Availability, delay, IFDV, loss • Service Multiplexing – Multiple instances of EVCs on a given physical I/F • Bundling – Multiple VLAN IDs (VID) mapped to single EVC at UNI Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  92. 92. Services Using E-Line Service Type Ethernet Private Line (EPL) • Replaces a TDM Private line • Port-based service with single service (EVC) across dedicated UNIs providing site-to-site connectivity • Typically delivered over SDH (Ethernet over SDH) • Most popular Ethernet service due to its simplicity Point-to-Point EVCs Carrier Ethernet Network CE UNI CE UNI CE UNI ISP POP UNI Storage Service Provider Internet 92Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  93. 93. Services Using E-Line Service Type Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) • Replaces Frame Relay or ATM L2 VPN services – To deliver higher bandwidth, end-to-end services • Enables multiple services (EVCs) to be delivered over single physical connection (UNI) to customer premises • Supports “hub & spoke” connectivity via Service Multiplexed UNI at hub site – Similar to Frame Relay or Private Line hub and spoke deployments Service Multiplexed Ethernet UNI Point-to-Point EVCs Carrier Ethernet Network CE UNI CE UNI CE UNI 93Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  94. 94. Services Using E-LAN Service Type • EP-LAN: Each UNI dedicated to the EP-LAN service. Example use is Transparent LAN • EVP-LAN: Service Multiplexing allowed at each UNI. Example use is Internet access and corporate VPN via one UNI Ethernet Private LAN example Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC Carrier Ethernet Network CE UNI CE CE UNI UNI Ethernet Virtual Private LAN example Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC Carrier Ethernet Network CE UNI CE CE UNI UNI Point-to-Point EVC (EVPL) UNI CE ISP POP Internet 94Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  95. 95. 95 Services Using E-Tree Service Type Carrier Ethernet Network CE UNI UNI CE CE Leaf Leaf UNI CE Leaf Rooted-Multipoint EVC Ethernet Private Tree example UNI Root EP-Tree and EVP-Tree: Both allow root - root and root - leaf communication but not leaf - leaf communication. • EP-Tree requires dedication of the UNIs to the single EP-Tree service • EVP-Tree allows each UNI to be support multiple simultaneous services at the cost of more complex configuration that EP-Tree Root Ethernet Virtual Private Tree example CE CE CE UNI UNI UNI Rooted-Multipoint EVC Multipoint to Multipoint EVC Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  96. 96. Services Using E-Access Service Type • E-Access Service Type is defined to normalize and accelerate provisioning Service Type Port-Based Service (at the UNI) VLAN-Aware Service (at the UNI) E-Access Access EPL Ethernet Private Line Access EVPL Ethernet Virtual Private Line End-User UNI CE Access Service Provider ENNI E-Access UNI CE Service Providers, CE Exchanges, etc. Ethernet Virtual Connection (EVC) End-User 96Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  97. 97. Ethernet Service Classification and Definitions for Ethernet Access Services (UNI to ENNI) Service Type Port-Based Service (at the UNI) VLAN-Aware Service (at the UNI) E-Access Access Ethernet Private Line (Access EPL) Access Ethernet Virtual Private Line (Access EVPL)  Ethernet Access Services classified into two categories (just like EVC-based services): • Port-based at the UNI endpoint • Single OVC Instance per UNI (dedicated UNI endpoint) • VLAN-aware at the UNI endpoint • Multiple OVC Instances per UNI endpoint (multiplexed UNI endpoint) • ENNI supports multiplexed Access EPLs or Access EVPLs Access EPL = Port-based P2P Ethernet access service Access EVPL = VLAN-aware P2P Ethernet access service 97Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  98. 98. Bandwidth Profiles & Traffic Management (1) Bandwidth Profiles per EVC & per Class of Service Parameters – CIR (Committed Information Rate) • CIR defines assured bandwidth • Assured via bandwidth reservation, traffic engineering – EIR (Excess Information Rate) • EIR bandwidth is considered ‘excess’ • Traffic dropped at congestion points in the network – CBS/EBS (Committed/Excess Burst Size in bytes) • Higher burst size results in improved performance Color Mode (“Color Aware” or “Color Blind”) – When set as “Color Aware” governs discard eligibility • Marking typically done at ingress • Green – Forwarded frames – CIR conforming traffic • Yellow – Discard Eligible frames – Over CIR , within EIR • Red – Discarded frames – Exceeds EIR Coupling Flag (set to 1 or 0) governs which frames are classed as yellow EVC-1 EVC-2 EVC-3 EIR 98Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  99. 99. Bandwidth Profiles & Traffic Management (2) • Bandwidth Profiles can divide bandwidth per EVC over a single UNI – Multiple services over same port (UNI) – CoS markings enable the network to determine the network QoS to provide UNI EVC1 EVC2 EVC3 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per Ingress UNI Port-based UNI EVC1 EVC2 EVC3 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per EVC1 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per EVC2 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per EVC3 Port/VLAN-based UNI EVC1 CE-VLAN CoS 6 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 6 CE-VLAN CoS 4 CE-VLAN CoS 2 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 4 Ingress Bandwidth Profile Per CoS ID 2 EVC2 Port/VLAN/CoS-based 99Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  100. 100. CE Interconnect 100Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  101. 101. Interconnecting autonomous, CENs, locally, regionally, nationally, globally Enabling… – Standardized, streamlined delivery of MEF-certified CE services over multiple, connected, CENs – End-to-end Class of Service, Management and Protection – Ubiquitous service delivery MEF Global Interconnect
  102. 102. Implementation Options and Definition Definition: CE Exchange “An interconnect point among service providers where CE services are exchanged” UNI End-User UNI End-User CE Exchange ENNI CE Service Providers CE Service Providers Definition: Direct Connect: “A bilateral ENNI between two CE service providers” Both must facilitate all 5 attributes of CE UNI End-User UNI End-User ENNI CE Service Provider CE Service Provider 102Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  103. 103. CE Exchange UNI Branch OfficeUNI Access Services ENNI Buying Providers’ On-Net Network Enterprise HQ Enterprise mid size branch end-user UNI ENNI Ethernet Access Services Long Haul UNI SOHO, telecommuter, end-user Cloud ENNI CE Exchange 103Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  104. 104. Interconnect Technical Components Interconnect elements required to enable globally connected CE services The MEF Global Interconnect specifications ensures support for all CE attributes between service providers ENNIUNI UNI Service Provider Service ProviderEnd User End User 104Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  105. 105. Technical work of MEF 105Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  106. 106. 4 Technical Areas MEN A MEN B Services (Subscriber) User Network Interface (UNI) Architecture Management (Fault and Performance) Test (Abstract Tests for Certification) Services (Operator) External Network Network Interface (ENNI) 106Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  107. 107. Complementary Standards Activities Scalability Goals • Reach consensus, bring MEF work to other bodies, re-use work of other bodies, work with other bodies, avoid duplication, keep in communications Reliability Service Management IEEE IETF ITU-T Provider Bridge IEEE 802.1ad Provider Backbone Bridge IEEE 802.1ah (MAC-in-MAC, and extended label space) ITU-T SG 15 has referenced the MEF service work in their documents that describe EPL and EVPL. Layer 2 VPNs IEEE OIF ITU-T IEEE 802.1ag Connectivity Fault Management IEEE 802.3ah link OAM ITU-T SG13 for Service OAM Working with ITU SG 4 on harmonizing their work with MEF 7 and adding additional features of interest to the MEF such as support of E-LMI Customer signaling of Ethernet Services IETF MPLS Fast Reroute, graceful restart 107Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  108. 108. - • G.8010 – Layer Architecture • G.8021 – Equipment model • G.8010v2 – Layer Architecture • G.8021v2 – Equipment model • Y.17ethmpls - ETH-MPLS Interwork - • G.8011 – Services Framewrk • G.8011.1 – EPL Service • G.8011.2 – EVPL Service • G.asm – Service Mgmt Arch • G.smc – Service Mgmt Chnl TMF ITU Ethernet Standards Summary •TMF814 – EMS to NMS Model • Y.1730 – Ethernet OAM Req • Y.1731 – OAM Mechanisms • G.8031 – Protection • Y.17ethqos – QoS • Y.ethperf - Performance Ethernet OAMArchitecture/ControlEthernet Services - • G.8012 – UNI/NNI • G.8012v2 – UNI/NNI • MEF 4 – Generic Architecture • MEF 2 – Protection Req & Framework • MEF 11 – UNI Req & Framework • MEF 12 – Layer Architecture • MEF 20 – UNI Type 2 • MEF 23 – Class of Service • MEF 10.2 – Service Attributes • MEF 3 – Circuit Emulation • MEF 6.1 – Service Definition • MEF 8 – PDH Emulation • MEF 9 – Tests: Eth Services • MEF 14 – Tests: Traffic Mgmt. • MEF 22 - Mobile Backhaul • MEF 28 – UTAS and Virtual UNI MEF • MEF 7– EMS-NMS Info Model • MEF 15– NE Mgmt Reqrmts. • MEF 17 – Service OAM Requirements & Framework • Service OAM Protocol – Ph. 1 • Performance Monitoring • MEF 21 – Tests: Link OAM • MEF 24 – Tests: UNI T2/E-LMI • MEF 30 – SOAM IA • MEF 31– SOAM MIB • MEF 13 - UNI Type 1 • MEF 16 – ELMI • MEF 26 – ENNI • MEF 29 - ESC Ethernet Interfaces Standards Body • 802.3ah – EFM OAM • 802.1ag – CFM • 802.1AB - Discovery • 802.1ap – VLAN MIB • 802.3 – MAC • 802.3ar – Congestion Management • 802.1D/Q – Bridges/VLAN • 802.17 - RPR • 802.1ad – Provider Bridges • .1ah – Provider Backbone Bridges • .1ak – Multiple Registration Protocol • .1aj – Two Port MAC Relay • .1AE/af – MAC / Key Security • .1aq – Shortest Path Bridging - • 802.3 – PHYs • 802.3as - Frame Expansion IEEE
  109. 109. MEF Certification Services Equipment People 109Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  110. 110. MEF Certification: Enabling Standardization MEF Carrier Ethernet Certification Programs certify: • Services That earn buyers’ trust by conforming to MEF standards of quality and performance • Equipment That service providers rely on to build CE services • Professionals With the proven knowledge and skills to support the explosive growth of CE 110Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  111. 111. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Q3 11 Q4 11 Q1 12 Q2 12 Q3 12 Q4 12 Q1 13 MEF- CECPs Cumulative • 634 test cases replace years of test development • 689 manufacturer & service provider products • 2013: 28 new CE 2.0 companies • Accelerating deployment • Driver for growth • 854 MEF-CECPs • 44 countries • 169 employer companies • Rigorous technical exam • Driver for implementation • Driver for new providers MEF Certification Program Seven Accredited Training Providers 111Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  112. 112. MEF Services Certification Program 112Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  113. 113. Some of MEF Certified Providers Worldwide Adoption of Service Certification MERICA 113Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  114. 114. MEF Certifications for Services Program certifies three most widely deployed CE services: • EPL dedicated service that interconnects two sites • EVPL multiplexed service that interconnects a hub to multiple remote sites • E-LAN meshed service that interconnects multiple sites Two major certifications validate service compliance and performance: • MEF 9 validates end-to-end service delivery and functionality • MEF 14 validates service performance and traffic management EPL Service Ethernet Private Line EVPL Service Ethernet Virtual Private Line ELAN Service Ethernet LAN MEF 9 MEF 14 Certifications 114Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  115. 115. MEF Equipment Certification Program 115Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  116. 116. Some of Certified Equipment Vendors MEF Certification Lab July 2011 800+ products certified worldwide 116Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  117. 117. MEF Certifications for Equipment Program certifies wide range of products supporting CE services: • Focus on key CE capabilities deployed by service providers: − CE service delivery and performance at the UNI − TDM services delivered over Ethernet for mobile backhaul MEF 9 Certification 244 Test Cases Ethernet Service at the UNI MEF 14 Certification 170 Test Cases Traffic Management at the UNI MEF 18 Certification 334 Test Cases CES over Ethernet 117Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  118. 118. Technology Specific standards 118Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  119. 119. CE Transport Options IEEE-based Transport • Bridged networks (IEEE 802.1Q) • PB Networks (IEEE 802.1ad) • PBB networks (IEEE 802.1ah) • PBB-TE networks (IEEE 802.1Qay) MPLS-based Transport • MPLS VPWS • MPLS VPLS • MPLS-TP Transparent Transport • SONET/SDH • OTN • xWDM 119Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  120. 120. IEEE based transport 120Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  121. 121. Frame formats. (a) DIX Ethernet , (b) IEEE 802.3 FCS FCS Ethernet Frame format 121Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  122. 122. 802.3 MAC frame 122Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  123. 123. Minimum and maximum lengths 123Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  124. 124. 124 Native Ethernet in Metro Access • How does one create the notion of a virtual circuit? – VLAN tagging with point-to-point VLAN • VLAN stacking – Outer tag  service instance; Inner tag  individual customer – 802.1Q in 802.1Q (Q-in-Q) - IEEE 802.1ad C-DA: Customer Destination MAC C-SA: Customer Source MAC S-TAG: IEEE 802.1ad S-VLAN Tag C-TAG: IEEE 802.1q VLAN Tag FCS: Customer Frame Check Sequence C-DA C-TAGC-SA Client data FCSS-TAG 6bytes 6bytes 4bytes 4bytes 4bytes T y p e 2bytes Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  125. 125. 125 Customer Network Customer Network Customer Network Provider Bridge (PB) Architecture CE: Customer Equipment UNI: User-to-Network Interface CES: Core Ethernet Switch/Bridge UNI-B CES CES CE-A UNI-A UNI-C CE-C Spanning tree CE-B CES Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  126. 126. 126 Limitations of PB Scalability • Limited to 4096 (2 ^12) service instances • Core switches must learn all MAC addresses • Broadcast storms ensue due to learning • MAC address tables explode! Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  127. 127. 127 Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) • Encapsulate customer MAC with provider MAC at edge – Edge switch adds 24-bit service tag (I-SID), not VLAN tag • Core switches need only learn edge switch MAC adds. B-DA: IEEE 802.1ah Backbone Destination MAC B-SA: IEEE 802.1ah Backbone Source MAC B-TAG: IEEE 802.1ad B-VLAN Tag I-TAG: IEEE 802.1ah Service Tag B-DA B-TAGB-SA I-TAG C-DA C-TAGC-SA Client data B-FCS 6bytes 6bytes 6bytes6bytes4bytes 5bytes 4bytes 4bytes T y p e 2bytes Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  128. 128. 128 PBB Architecture CPE BCPE A CPE C Provider backbone network (802.1ah) CPE BCPE A 802.1ad CPE B CPE B 802.1q CPE C Provider bridge network (802.1ad) CPE D CPE D CPE C CPE A Provider bridge network (802.1ad) Provider bridge network (802.1ad) Provider bridge network (802.1ad) Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  129. 129. 129 Benefits of PBB • Scalability – Addresses limitations of 4096 service instances • Robustness – Isolates provider network from broadcast storms • Security – Provider need switch frames only on provider addresses • Simplicity – Provider & customers can plan networks independently Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  130. 130. 130 Traffic Engineering in PBB • Via Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol (MSTP) • Maps a VLAN to ST or multiple VLANs to ST • Enables use of links that would otherwise be idle in ST – Eliminates wasted bandwidth … but … – Too slow for protection switching • Not suitable for complex mesh topologies • Difficult to predict QoS Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  131. 131. 131 Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  132. 132. Ethernet Frame formats 132 Source: 22 bytes 18 + 4 = 22 bytes 22 + 4 = 26 bytes 26 + 22 = 48 bytes 18 bytes Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  133. 133. 133 Challenges with an All-Ethernet Metro Service • Restriction on # of customers – 4096 VLANs! • Service monitoring • Scaling of Layer 2 backbone - xSTP • Service provisioning - signaling • Inter-working with legacy deployments  Need hybrid architectures … Multiple L2 domains connected via IP/MPLS backbone Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  134. 134. MPLS based transport 134Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  135. 135. MPLS • IP/MPLS is one of the ways to path engineer an Ethernet frame MPLS Service Transport 135Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  136. 136. L2 & L3 • Traffic is switched • Control signal is routed Ex:-IP/MPLS • Ethernet does not have a label. Therefore, we have to create labels. One way is using MPLS. 136 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  137. 137. World of headers 1 137Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  138. 138. Why MPLS for Ethernet Services (EoMPLS)? • More Scalable (Free label Space)=>2^20 • Sub 50msec resiliency (MPLS Fast Reroute (FRR)) • Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) • Hierarchical QoS (HQoS) • Easy and simple to operate and maintain 138Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  139. 139. MPLS Components 139 Source: Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  140. 140. Traffic Service Ethernet Service Switch Physical Network Ethernet over MPLS over Ethernet MPLS Ethernet Physical IP Ethernet MPLS or GRE .1q GE,10GE etc. Outer label Service label=VC label=inner label 140Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  141. 141. Source: 141Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  142. 142. Outer label 1 Ethernet Inner label Ethernet Inner label Outer label 2 Ethernet Inner label Outer label 3 Ethernet Inner label Outer label 4 EthernetEthernet A E D C B Ethernet Ethernet MPLS LDP signaling session (TCP port 646) RSVP-TE signaling Ethernet frame: Get me to the other side 142Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  143. 143. Relation between PW, tunnel and LSP 143Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  144. 144. MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) • Started as T-MPLS (Transport MPLS) • MPLS-TP = IP/MPLS – IP 144 Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  145. 145. Why MPLS-TP? • Similar “look and feel” to established SDH/SONET networks; transport-like OAM – Easier adoption by traditional transport network personnel • Absence of control plane (less complexity) • Simple provisioning of resilience (1:1, 1+1, and so on) • Flexible: usable in both rings & limited connectivity environments 145Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  146. 146. IP/MPLs vs. MPLS-TP 146 Source : Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  147. 147. Transparent transport 147Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  148. 148. NID Demarcation Ethernet Over Direct Fiber Longest Distance - Distance up to 140 km with no bandwidth loss Highest Bandwidth Capacity - Bandwidth Capacity of 100 Mbps, 1 Gbps, 10 Gbps, 40 Gbps, and more. - WDM enables multiple data streams per fiber link Security - Physically secure medium with no EMF emission; nearly impossible to tap lines Scalability - EVC / E-Line / E-LAN using Q-in-Q VLAN* *Requires extension for s_tag UNI - High capacity enables rate limiting tiered services Reliability - Protection with redundant links & resilient rings - OAM performance monitoring & fault notification Secure Service Management - 802.3ah OAM IP-less management & provisioning - NIDs provide securely managed demarcation Central Office Multi-Customer NID Demarcation 148Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  149. 149. Ethernet Over WDM Fiber Future Proof - Wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) enables multiple data streams (wavelengths) per fiber link - Add/Drop multiplexers provide new access points by splicing into the WDM fiber link Cost Effective - Increase fiber access capacity and minimize installation of new fiber links - Small form pluggable transceivers, multiplexers and media converters enable WDM wavelengths with existing infrastructure equipment Scalability - Quickly implement new fiber access with off-the-shelf hardware - Wavelengths can deliver different network protocols to mix Ethernet and TDM services over one fiber link Central Office Direct Fiber Add/Drop Multiplexer Multiplexer P2P WDM Fiber Access WDM Ring Add/Drop Multiplexer Direct Fiber NID 149Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  150. 150. Upper layer topology changes with WDM Link over dark fibre Link over Optical Backbone Network 150Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  151. 151. Ethernet Over SONET/SDH Rapid service turn-up – Leverages existing equipment and fiber plant – Ubiquitous availability world wide – Well understood provisioning and billing for off- net applications – Ethernet enable on-net buildings Highly resilient and secure service – Sub-50ms resiliency – Secure multi-tenant services – Legacy TDM circuits supported natively Flexible bandwidth options – OC-3/STM1 up to OC-192/STM64 physical – Sub-rate and Nx OC/STM are available with VCAT bonding – Each channel carries one or more EVCs CE Network Available Service Bandwidth Standard Encapsulation Technologies Standard Circuit Bonding Technologies Ethernet over SONET/SDH 155 Mbps up to 1 Gbps) X.86, GFP VCAT, LAG OC/STM OC/STM Add/Drop Multiplexer Add/Drop Multiplexer EoS Box Multi-tenant EoS Box 151Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  152. 152. Factors Affecting CE Technology Selection • Nature of operator’s business -- scope, size, customer base • Business models -- pricing of services and VAS components • Internal processes -- software, systems for a given technology • Technical expertise available within the organization • Legacy infrastructure of operator – Geography, local conditions, technologies … • Vendor support for given technology and equipment 152Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  153. 153. Ethernet Access 153Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  154. 154. Extending CE into the Last (First) Mile Ubiquity requires multiple access technology solutions from the End-User Subscriber to the CE Network 154Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  155. 155. Bonded T1/E1 Ethernet Ethernet Access for a Multi-Site Enterprise MSO/ Cable Ethernet User to Network Interface (UNI) Ethernet Network Network Interface (NNI) COAX Direct Fiber WDM Fiber Service Provider 2 TDM Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Direct Fiber 100Mbps/1Gbps/10 Gbps SONET/ SDH PON Fiber Ethernet Service Provider 1 Ethernet Ethernet WiMax Ethernet Packet Wireless DS3/E3 155Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  156. 156. Cable uses a Hybrid Fiber Coax (HFC) network – Network extends fiber to a node – Coax is used for lower bandwidth sites while fiber is still used for large bandwidth sites – Coax-fed and fiber-fed sites are integrated into a single network Cost effective alternative to Fiber – Up to 100 Mbps with DOCSIS 3.0 implementation - scalable in 1 Mbps increments Typical Applications – Branch office interconnectivity – Dedicated Internet access – Disaster recovery / business continuity – Distance learning – Automatic teller machine (ATM) – Security cameras – Point of sale (POS) – Teleworker / remote employees Ethernet Over HFC (Coax & Fiber) Carrier Ethernet Network Ethernet Edge Aggregator Node 156Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  157. 157. Ethernet Over Bonded Copper Copper Pairs are Bonded to Create a Single Ethernet Pipe – Long reach 2BASE-TL delivers a minimum of 2 Mbps using G.SHDSL – Short reach 10PASS-TS delivers a minimum of 10 Mbps over VDSL Leverages Existing Copper to Fill Fiber Gap – Nearly 100% of businesses have enough copper pairs to get up to 100 Mbps (reach permitting) Fast Service Turn Up, Fast Pay Back – Deploys in days or weeks – Requires minimal CapEx High Bandwidth and Reliability – Up to 10x more bandwidth than legacy copper solutions – Pair failover capability ensures fiber service level agreements are met or exceeded Enables Ubiquitous Service Offerings – Provides services out to reaches that cover majority of providers’ serving area CE Network Ethernet Over Bonded Copper Pt-to- Multipoint Ethernet over Copper Shelf Ethernet Over Bonded Copper 157Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  158. 158. Ethernet Over TDM Ubiquitous Access – T1 and E1 circuits are universally available, even when fiber is not – No distance limitations Rapid service turn-up – Leverages existing infrastructure – Well understood provisioning and billing for off-net applications Flexible and resilient bonding – Service stays up even if one link breaks – Add and delete links hitlessly CE Network Ethernet Edge Aggregator EoNxT1 EDD Available Service Bandwidth Standard Encapsulation Technologies Standard Circuit Bonding Technologies Ethernet over T1/E1 1.5 Mbps (T1) up to 16 Mbps (with bonding) and 2 Mbps(E1) PPP, GFP, HDLC, G.998.2 MLPPP, PDH VCAT G.998.2 Ethernet over DS3/E3 34 Mbps up to 130 Mbps (with bonding) and 45 Mbps (E3) X.86, GFP, G.998.2 PDH VCAT, G992.2, LAG Nx T1/E1 DS3/E3 158Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  159. 159. OPEX Savings - Passive outside plant lowers costs - No power or maintenance of active equipment - Affordable “Managed UNI” demark - Up to 10Gbps per PON Lowest First Cost for Fiber - Most fiber efficient access technology - Conserves existing fiber - Minimizes need for new fiber PON Simplifies Coverage - 1 Fiber strand is split among up to 64 subscribers - Splitters: pole mounted or on cables - Passive splitter serve multiple ONTs - ONT can be mounted outside - PON addresses fiber exhaust - Quick new customer adds Embedded Service Layering - Supports E-LINE, E-LAN, E-Tree, E-Access - T1 & E1 backhaul ports - IP-POTS ports Ethernet Over PON Central Office Ethernet Metro Core ONT ONT ONT OLT Ethernet Passive Fiber Splitter ONT Optical Network Terminal (CPE) UNI Optical Line Terminal 159Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  160. 160. Packet Microwave Technology – Cost effective solution – Rapid service deployment to virtually any site – Independent of existing wired infrastructure Deployment Scenarios – Complementary and alternative to access and aggregation fiber networks – Mobile Backhaul networks – Used in green field deployments, for network expansion and/or upgrades – Typically used frequency bands from 6 to 40 GHz – Distances of several 100 m up to 150 km and more Carrier Grade Technology – Mature, widely deployed solutions – Scalable throughput up to several Gbps – Established radio planning and dimensioning methods for highest availability requirements CE Network CE Network Ethernet Over Packet Microwave User to Network Interface (UNI) Network to Network Interface (NNI) 160Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  161. 161. Access Methods & Speeds Access Method Speed Ethernet over Active Fiber 10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, 1 Gbps, 10 Gbps, 40 Gbps, 100 Gbps Ethernet over PON 1 Gbps with EPON 1.25 Gbps upstream & 2.5 Gbps downstream with GPON Ethernet over SONET/SDH 155 Mbps to 1 Gbps Ethernet over HFC/DOCSIS Up to 100 Mbps with DOCSIS 3.0 Ethernet over DSL Minimum of 2 Mbps using G.SHDSL Minimum of 10 Mbps over VDSL Up to 100 Mbps (asymmetric) Ethernet over T1/E1 1.5/2Mbps to 16 Mbps with bonding Ethernet over DS3/E3 34/45 Mbps to 130 Mbps with bonding Ethernet over Packet Microwave 1 Mbps to >1Gbps Ethernet over WiMax Varies with distance: Up to 1Gbps. <70Mbps at 50km 161Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  162. 162. Resiliency/Protection • MEF Service Specifications augment industry standards • In totality, they address port and service protection, fault detection and restoration – At the UNI ports – At the ENNI (for direct and Exchange connections) – For UNI to UNI (EVCs) – UNI-ENNI OVCs • Following is one option for Mobile Backhaul showing Active/Standby RAN BS RAN NC UNI UNI EVC 1 (Primary Path) EVC 2 (Backup Path) Leased component of the overall backhaul solution Protection  1+1 APS  LAG (802.1ax LACP)  Dual Homing  Ring (G.8032)  Linear Protection (G.8031) 162Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  163. 163. Reference [1] MEF ( ) [2] Ethernet Academy ( ) 163Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  164. 164. 164 @AnuradhaU Anuradha Udunuwara | @AnuradhaU
  • jay32333

    Sep. 2, 2021
  • saguate

    Oct. 15, 2020
  • newtechhut

    Oct. 15, 2020
  • NaveenReddy36

    Aug. 9, 2020
  • Gudimetla

    May. 15, 2020
  • ssuser1696a6

    Feb. 27, 2020
  • DorepallyNaveen

    Aug. 9, 2019
  • sunilkumar1397

    Jan. 28, 2019
  • VijayPatle2

    Jul. 19, 2018
  • BoonHuiLoh

    Dec. 8, 2017
  • 1535184590

    Dec. 5, 2017
  • JosephMMurphy

    Sep. 27, 2017
  • anandkumarsingh40

    Sep. 19, 2017
  • MoatasemHeza

    Mar. 9, 2017
  • VishwaChathuranga

    Mar. 2, 2017
  • MarkusGoy

    Mar. 1, 2017
  • AnuragKhare7

    Feb. 27, 2017
  • RamSeing

    Feb. 15, 2017
  • AngelInglada

    Jan. 9, 2017
  • kareemali25

    Dec. 7, 2016

From Ethernet to Carrier Ethernet: A detail explanation


Total views


On Slideshare


From embeds


Number of embeds