Carrier Ethernet for Mobile Backhaul

1. Carrier Ethernet for Mobile Backhaul

2. Agenda Market overview Wireless Backhaul alternatives & technology OAM Standards/SLA monitoring for backhaul Challenges/applications

3. Mobile Backhaul Trends Over 2.5 billion mobile phone users in 2006, growing to 3.6 billion in 2010 Growing dependence on mobile connection Data mobility for all Data, video applications growing Traffic grows exponentially, ARPU/revenue does not The #1 driver for new backhaul technologies Carrier Ethernet for backhaul Ethernet microwave Wireline Ethernet copper, coax, fiber, DOCSIS, DSL, PON

4. What Your Wireless Carriers are Thinking about Migration to IP WiMax, LTE all IP CDMA is moving there rapidly UMTS �3G� is moving to IP via ATM, Ethernet Radios out this year Cell Site equipment & Mobile applications being designed for IP Circuit Emulation to sustain TDM infrastructure Bandwidth Growth � Need to plan for 15 to 20 times the growth of bandwidth and systems over the next 5 - 8 years. Mobile operators are looking to Lower Costs Broadband costs less per bit than T1 T-1 is too small of a bandwidth increment to manage easily Reduce the amount of systems etc, Simplify

5. What Your Wireless Carriers are Thinking about 3GPP and 3GPP2 Mobile Wireless standards bodies have unequivocally stated that IP architectures are the architectural basis for all new systems. WiMax and LTE are all IP based solutions. CDMA is moving there rapidly. UMTS is moving to IP via ATM��(go figure) Radio Vendors are designing new Cell Site equipment to be IP attached. Mobile applications are being built for IP switching. Mobile operators are looking to Lower Monthly Recurring Costs T-1s Circuit Costs etc. Increase ARPU. Lower operational costs Reduce the amount of systems etc, Simplify Need to sustain existing infrastructure of TDM infrastructure until it depreciates and they move users to more efficient systems. Plan for 15 to 20 times the growth of bandwidth and systems.

6. Spectrum and Bandwidth Today's cell sites typically have between 2 to 6 T-1�s of RAN backhaul capacity or 3 to 9 meg of bandwidth. With new 4G radios 4 bits can be effectively transported per 1 Hz of spectrum in optimum circumstances. In normal operation using good radio design we can achieve 2 bits per Hz. So 1 Mhz of spectrum = 2,000,000 bits of throughput or 2Mb Today most providers are initially allocating a minimum of 20Mhz of spectrum with new 4G radios. This means around 40Mb of data per cell in addition to the existing bandwidth will be produced. There have been sizeable spectrum auctions and more to come. Most notably around 84 Mhz of the 700 Ghz spectrum. Mobile operators have a huge issue. They need backhaul to use the new spectrum.

7. RAN Backhaul Bandwidth issues��..

8. Mobile Backhaul Has Dynamic Growth � New mobile applications and bandwidth growth(>100% in 2008 with much more to come)

9. Worldwide Cell Site Connections Growing

10. Mobile Transport Evolution

11. RF Innovations and New Multimedia ApplicationsDrive Mobile Network Bandwidth Requirements and Evolution New wireless technology provides promise that new services will be available anywhere. Interactive sessions like video conferencing will no longer be relegated to a conference room or corner office. We are at an inflection with respect to the next generation of technology and the jury is still out there with respect to 4G � the choices are LTE, CDMA Rev C and WiMax and each has its own strengths and frankly a lot depends on the current technology of our customers. New wireless technology provides promise that new services will be available anywhere. Interactive sessions like video conferencing will no longer be relegated to a conference room or corner office. We are at an inflection with respect to the next generation of technology and the jury is still out there with respect to 4G � the choices are LTE, CDMA Rev C and WiMax and each has its own strengths and frankly a lot depends on the current technology of our customers.

12. Ethernet Options Solve Backhaul Cost Problem

13. Industry trends Demand for bandwidth will grow disproportionately more than revenue for the operator The bandwidth increase will primarily be on Best Effort data user services, and driven by �flat fee business models� Search for technologies to provide cheaper and more effective ways to meet the capacity grow at a lower CAPEX and OPEX Evolution towards Ethernet/IP based mobile solutions

14. Agenda Market overview Wireless Backhaul alternatives & technology OAM Standards/SLA monitoring for backhaul Challenges/applications

15. Today�s Mobile Backhaul and MEF Use Cases

16. Packet offload over carrier Ethernet � 1a Overlay MEN does bandwidth offloading onto Ethernet services Legacy network continues to transport voice and deliver timing

17. Emulation over Carrier Ethernet � 1b

18. RAN dual stack � 2a

19. Full Ethernet � 2b

20. Mobile Backhaul Options Real life example of carrier challenges for delivering a ubiquitous ethernet service to a band headquarters and its branches The headquarters and downtown branches are in fiber fed offices, which are easy to get to, but the suburban branches can only be reach via copper The out of state branches are in another carriers territory and must be fed using leased capacity (DS3) The carrier (and end-user) want a uniform service across all these branches/headquarters regardless of first mile technology � the only difference between sites should be the Ethernet service bit rate Real life example of carrier challenges for delivering a ubiquitous ethernet service to a band headquarters and its branches The headquarters and downtown branches are in fiber fed offices, which are easy to get to, but the suburban branches can only be reach via copper The out of state branches are in another carriers territory and must be fed using leased capacity (DS3) The carrier (and end-user) want a uniform service across all these branches/headquarters regardless of first mile technology � the only difference between sites should be the Ethernet service bit rate

21. Ethernet Growth by Backhaul Technology - NA In North America, T1s continue to be the dominant backhaul technology for the period 2007-2011. For new Ethernet deployments, most will be served by Ethernet over fiber (59%) and microwave (25%) technologies.

22. Agenda Market overview Wireless Backhaul alternatives & technology OAM Standards/SLA monitoring for backhaul Challenges/applications

23. Ethernet OAM Standards Overview

24. Test/Monitoring Standards Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) Recommended key parameters for SLAs � MEF 10 Service availability, frames lost, frame delay, frame delay variation Defined the �what�, not the �how� RFC-2819 - RMON Etherstats Monitoring of local performance (eg node or LAN) Y.1731/802.1ag Focused on end to end service (WAN) Includes both monitoring and test Frame delay, frame delay variation, frame loss ratio RFC-2544 Out of service testing � followed by most test sets, some demarc devices Frame loss, latency, throughput, back to back, system recovery, reset

25. Mobile Backhaul Latency is Critical Mobile radio vendors have indicated aggressive backhaul latency requirements. 5ms latency from BTS to BSC or NodeB to RNC This is now being written into some SLA contracts In practice CDMA 1xRTT has the most stringent latency requirement. 1xRTT latency needs to be under 10ms from BTS to BSC. Average of 7ms This has to do with the tight handoff requirements found in the CDMA system and the �Make before break� handoff method. In later investigations, IP backhaul solutions have been able to increase this latency by tuning the BSC mobility handoff parameters.

26. Radio Backhaul Latency requirements � Con�t UMTS Tolerance UMTS deployments can go up to 15ms in latency from the Node-B to the RNC without having any derogation to service and mobility performance. GSM Tolerance GSM deployments can go up to 15ms as well and even higher in latency from the BTS to the BSC without having any derogation to service and mobility performance. GSM uses a �break then make� mobility solution allowing higher latencies. WiMax and LTE Tolerances WiMax and LTE all IP technologies have very low radio latencies in many cases in comparison to other technologies. VoIP can handle large latencies WiMax and LTE could offer VoIP services with up to 50ms of backhaul transport latency

27. Measuring One-way Frame Delay A given - Measuring One-way Frame Delay is an important requirement to ensure CBH reliability. This is a measurement of how long it takes a frame to go from one Network Element (NE) to another. Different OAM techniques exist to do this In some situations, there is a need to carefully distribute Time of Day (ToD) information to NEs. This discussion is just a �heads-up�. Solutions exist but must generally be tailored to your network. This is not a full analysis.

28. Frame Delay on Symmetrical Networks In a Symmetrical Network segment, the Frame Delay is identical out and back. In this situation, ToD distribution is not needed. Here�s how One-way Frame Delay is measured Network Element A (NE A) sends an OAM frame to NE B containing Timestamp ToDA(t1). NE B immediately reflects the OAM frame back NE A receives the OAM frame at ToDA(t2) NE A computes the One-way Frame Delay One-way Frame Delay = (ToDA(t2) � ToDA(t1)) / 2 The answer is right because of the symmetry ToDA need not be accurate with respect to ToDB.

29. Frame Delay on Asymmetrical Networks In an Asymmetrical Network segment, the frame delay is different out and back. In this situation, ToD distribution is needed. Here�s how One-way Frame Delay is measured Network Element A (NE A) sends an OAM frame to NE B containing Timestamp ToDA(t1). NE B receives the OAM frame at ToDB(t2) NE B computes the One-way Frame Delay One-way Frame Delay = ToDB(t2) � ToDA(t1) The answer is only �right� if ToDA is accurate with respect to ToDB. This engenders the need to carefully distribute ToD information to NE A and NE B.

30. ToD Distribution on Asymmetrical Networks The goal is to have identical ToDs ToDA on NE A and ToDB on NE B Potential Solutions - multiple ToD distribution methods exist (see NTP, 1588 PTP, TICTOC, 802.1as, etc) Problems exist with each solution They all assume a symmetrical network exists for the distribution of ToD information. Some methods assume that specific interface structures exist for last micro-second Timestamp insertion.

31. ToD Distribution - strategies to look at Find a predictable delay network that also reaches the NEs Can be GPS (down from the sky) Can be high priority IP Can be a different physical technology ToDA and ToDB will be delayed the same amount during distribution Find a parallel, symmetrical network that also reaches the NEs, then use NTP, etc. Understand your needs for accuracy Dig. And contact experts.

32. Agenda Market overview Wireless Backhaul alternatives & technology OAM Standards/SLA monitoring for backhaul Challenges/applications

33. NID/Demarcation device � MEF UNI Three key functions for Ethernet NID/demarcation Link/Service layer Ethernet OAM � 802.3ah/802.1ag/Y.1731 Ethernet Service UNI (User Network Interface) Service layer policing and definition � MEF/ITU Integrated first mile transport Extend Ethernet reach over Fiber (GbE/100FX, EoOC-n/STM-n, EoDS3/E3) or copper (EoDSL, EoT1/E1, EoNxT1/E1) For providing intelligent Ethernet services, two functions are required at the service demarcation point: and Ethernet Network Interface Device (NID) to provide remote monitoring and test and a service UNI to provide service policing and definition. I�m going to talk about each one of these functions by themselves, starting with the NIDFor providing intelligent Ethernet services, two functions are required at the service demarcation point: and Ethernet Network Interface Device (NID) to provide remote monitoring and test and a service UNI to provide service policing and definition. I�m going to talk about each one of these functions by themselves, starting with the NID

34. Demarcation device - NNI Key functions for E-NNI (External Network to Network Interface) demarcation device Link/Service layer Ethernet OAM � 802.3ah/802.1ag/Y.1731 Throughput Test � RFC-2544 Service layer policing/shaping and definition � MEF Protection mechanisms - LAG, MSTP For providing intelligent Ethernet services, two functions are required at the service demarcation point: and Ethernet Network Interface Device (NID) to provide remote monitoring and test and a service UNI to provide service policing and definition. I�m going to talk about each one of these functions by themselves, starting with the NIDFor providing intelligent Ethernet services, two functions are required at the service demarcation point: and Ethernet Network Interface Device (NID) to provide remote monitoring and test and a service UNI to provide service policing and definition. I�m going to talk about each one of these functions by themselves, starting with the NID

35. Wireless Backhaul App. � Wholesale Provider (MSO) Intelligent demarcation device critical for Ethernet service delivery Media conversion Loopbacks/testing SLA monitoring

36. NNI Demarcation Network to network Interface or carrier to carrier demarcation Used for test, monitoring and network separation Provides far end MEP/MIP for SLA monitoring

37. Wireless backhaul application � Wireless Service Provider

38. Traffic Shaping 100M radio output drives a 10M service When traffic exceeds 10M, it can be dropped (policed) or buffered (shaped) Traffic shaping in Wireless Carrier demarc device stores traffic in buffer and feeds it upstream at 10M rate to ensure that no traffic gets dropped With multiple wholesale carrier vendors (and equipment vendors) � shaping/policing capabilities and buffer sizes will vary greatly The user network interface is required in the demarcation device, especially if Ethernet is transported over a non-Ethernet transport system such as SONET, DS1/DS3, copper etc. All these transport technologies require rate limiting, and as soon as you are performing rate limiting, you must have the service intelligence to ensure that the low priority traffic is dropped or delayed. If the wrong traffic is dropped at the customer premise, there is no way to fix it at the provider edge switch or any other upstream device. The metro Ethernet forum (MEF) provides a service definition on a port or EVC basis, and uses CIR/EIR/CBS/EBS parameters to define the service Traffic can be classified into EVCs using type of service (TOS), differentiated services code point (DSCP), VLANs and VLAN priorities (802.1P and 802.1Q). This ensures that VoIP or video services will receive the proper quality of service necessary for these latency sensitive applications. VLAN tag stacking is also a common requirement at the UNI interface to ensure that carrier VLANs don�t interfere with Enterprise use of VLANs. The user network interface is required in the demarcation device, especially if Ethernet is transported over a non-Ethernet transport system such as SONET, DS1/DS3, copper etc. All these transport technologies require rate limiting, and as soon as you are performing rate limiting, you must have the service intelligence to ensure that the low priority traffic is dropped or delayed. If the wrong traffic is dropped at the customer premise, there is no way to fix it at the provider edge switch or any other upstream device. The metro Ethernet forum (MEF) provides a service definition on a port or EVC basis, and uses CIR/EIR/CBS/EBS parameters to define the service Traffic can be classified into EVCs using type of service (TOS), differentiated services code point (DSCP), VLANs and VLAN priorities (802.1P and 802.1Q). This ensures that VoIP or video services will receive the proper quality of service necessary for these latency sensitive applications. VLAN tag stacking is also a common requirement at the UNI interface to ensure that carrier VLANs don�t interfere with Enterprise use of VLANs.

39. Shared NIDs Back to back demarcation devices (NIDs)are not the right long term solution Required today due to standards and business practice issues MEF NID group is working on standards to allow demarcation device sharing

40. Thank You