1 / 12

UNI Task Force Summary Overview V.0.1

UNI Task Force Summary Overview V.0.1. UNI Interface definitions: The differences explained and the road to a GMPLS UNI ”. WP 4 Network Management and Control/Protocols L ieven Levrau, Marconi. Objective and approach. Objective UNI analysis and Conclusion Table

buffy-berg
Download Presentation

UNI Task Force Summary Overview V.0.1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UNI Task ForceSummary OverviewV.0.1 UNI Interface definitions: The differences explained and the road to a GMPLS UNI” WP 4Network Management and Control/ProtocolsLieven Levrau, Marconi Task Force-UNI

  2. Objective and approach • Objective • UNI analysis and Conclusion Table • Comparison between ITU, OIF & IETF UNI: Main differences • Towards a common UNI:from fact to fiction? • The GMPLS UNI: Public UNI and overlay model • The GMPLS UNI: GMPLS UNI and overlay model • Comparative: GMPLS UNI and OIF UNI • Summary Task Force-UNI

  3. Objective and approach Overview Feasibility study: • Get to common understanding of the different standardized UNI’s (study) • Comparison for each studied UNI: • Analysis of UNI implementation • Protocol • Required messages types Considered standard bodies UNI: • IETF • ITU-T • OIF • MPLS and FrameRelayForum • ATM Forum • TMF • MEF MEF ATM Forum ITU-T OIF NBT UNI UNI UNI UNI UNI Transport Technology ATM SDH Other Ethernet Task Force-UNI

  4. How have we achieved?UNI analysis approach Each standardized UNI broken down into: • Definition of UNI What is it ? Where is it defined? • UNI functionality What service can be supported • UNI Messages set And what protocols are used to achieve the UNI functionality? Task Force-UNI

  5. Architectural aspects Conclusiontable Note: incomplete Table. Task Force-UNI

  6. TNA address usage LSP Session/Call and Connection segments Last hop specification for SCs and SPCs Neighbour node Link Identification Call Connection separation Explicit route object Protocol conformance ResvTear and ResvErr messages Comparison between ITU, OIF & IETF UNI Main differences Task Force-UNI

  7. FROM …. …. To common UNI Common UNI Specific MEF ATM Forum ITU-T OIF NBT Common UNI UNI UNI UNI UNI Transport Specific UNI part UNI Transport Technology ATM SDH Other Ethernet Transport Technology ATM SDH Other Ethernet Towards a common UNIfrom fact to fiction? Task Force-UNI

  8. OIF UNI version 1.0 = Public UNI StrictCP separation imposed Public OIF UNI Transport Network Assigned (TNA) addresses identify UNI connection end points (UNI-C to UNI-N) UNI signaling messages, TNA areincluded in GENERALIZED_UNI object, to uniquely identify end points of a connection. Internal data plane address spaceis completely hidden to clients, complementing TNA address spaces. The GMPLS UNIPublic UNI and overlay model Task Force-UNI

  9. Three independent signaling sessions  complexity! Increase of RSVP sessions to be managed The GMPLS UNIPublic UNI and overlay model Task Force-UNI

  10. Differences between Public OIF UNI and GMPLS UNI Restrict end-point identification to numbered (IPv4/IPv6) or unnumbered interfaces. A UNI-C has only access to the end points of the data network adjacent to the transport network. Allow client-driven explicit routing (typically loose routing in this context). Public (OIF) UNI, the GMPLS UNI allows to explicitly express a route along the transport network. Maintain a single end-to-end signalling session. GMPLS UNI enables to trigger and refresh one signalling session instead of three signalling sessions. This capability simplifies the RSVP-TE based procedures. The GMPLS UNIGMPLS UNI and overlay model Task Force-UNI

  11. The GMPLS UNIComparative:GMPLS UNI and OIF UNI Task Force-UNI

  12. Comparison between UNI’s is finished and consolidated in document A potential solution for a common UNI is discussed Applied methodology can be used for NNI study Summary Task Force-UNI

More Related