1 / 49

The New Internet

The New Internet Exploring the Synergy Between the Next Generation Internet and Internet2 Jeffrey R. Ellis, Richard C. Gronback, Adam P. Uccello CSE 245 - Computer Networks and Communication April 27, 1999 Introduction

jacob
Download Presentation

The New Internet

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. The New Internet Exploring the Synergy Between the Next Generation Internet and Internet2 Jeffrey R. Ellis, Richard C. Gronback, Adam P. Uccello CSE 245 - Computer Networks and Communication April 27, 1999

  2. Introduction The Gartner Group has predicted that a large minority of the more than 4,500 Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the United States “will be forced out of business in the next five years.” Two major initiatives in this quest for alleviating the bandwidth-constrained research and academic communities who now share with commercial markets what was once their exclusive network: Internet2 (I2) and Next Generation Internet (NGI)

  3. Internet2 • Private Academic Network • High-Speed Backbones • Experimental Technologies and Protocols • Network Application Development • Cooperative Learning • 130 Universities • 25 Corporate Partners

  4. Internet2 Mission • “Facilitate and coordinate the development, deployment, operation and technology transfer of advanced, network-based applications and network services to further U.S. leadership in research and higher education and accelerate the availability of new services and applications on the Internet.”

  5. UCAID’s Internet 2 Goals • Development of a cutting edge network • Development of revolutionary networking applications • Transfer of networking advances to the commercial Internet

  6. Goal #1: Cutting Edge Network • High Performance Backbone • GigaPOPs • Experimental Technologies in Data Transfer • Reliability • Security • Hardware Devices • Adaptability

  7. Goal #2: Network Applications • Current Model: Client/Server • Applets • CGI-Scripts • Fully Distributed Environment • Better Use of Resources

  8. Goal #3: Migration to Internet • Motivation for Corporate Sponsors • Public Domain Research • Network Topology Adopted by ISPs and Topology Implementers • Successes Adopted by Standards Organizations

  9. Internet2 Working Groups • IP version 6 • Quality of Service • QBone • Measurements • Network Storage • Distributed Storage Infrastructure Applications

  10. Internet2 Working Groups (cont’d) • Multicast • Topology • Routing • Network Management • Security

  11. I2 - UConn Participation • “Educational Outcomes of Networked Multimedia” • Authentic activities inside classroom setting • “Network-Based Monitoring and Fault Diagnosis” • Computational complexity overcome by networking • “Network-Based Scheduling and Supply Chain Coordination” • Integrated planning, scheduling, supply chain tool

  12. I2 - UConn Participation (cntd.) • “Distributed Services Telemedicine” • Collaborative image analysis • “Virtual One Stop Computational Biology Resource Center” • Data location and resource management • “Networking Controls for Network Edge Multimedia Appliances • Analog and digital signal scheduling

  13. C C C P C P P C P P P P C C C P C C C C P C Connected GigaPoPs In Process GigaPoPs Abilene Router Node Operational January 1999 Planned 1999 Abilene NetworkFebruary 1999 Seattle Pacific Northwest Eugene NYSERNET NOX MREN MERIT New York CalREN2 North MAGPI Chicago Sacramento Cleveland Indiana Denver Great Plains OarNet Indianapolis MAX Front Range Kansas City CalREN2South Arizona MCNC Los Angeles OneNet Atlanta SOX Texas Houston

  14. Next Generation Internet • “The goal of the NGI initiative is to conduct R&D in advanced networking technologies, to demonstrate those technologies in testbeds that are 100 to 1,000 times faster than today’s Internet, and to develop and demonstra[te] on those testbeds revolutionary applications that meet important national needs and that cannot be achieved with today’s Internet.” (LSN98, 1)

  15. NGI - Partners • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) • National Science Foundation (NSF) • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) • National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) • National Library of Medicine (NLM) • Department of Energy (DoE) (FY99+)

  16. NGI - Budget • Funding • Fiscal Year (FY) 98 - $100 million • FY 99, 00 - $110 million (projected)

  17. NGI - Goals • Goal #1: • To advance research, development, and experimentation in the next generation of networking technologies to add functionality and improve performance.

  18. NGI - Goals • Goal #2: • To develop a Next Generation Internet testbed, emphasizing end-to-end performance, to support networking research and demonstrate new networking technologies. This testbed will connect at least 100 NGI sites – universities, Federal research institutions, and other research partners – at speeds 100 times faster than today’s Internet, and will connect on the order of 10 sites at speeds 1,000 times faster than the current Internet.

  19. NGI - Goals • Goal #3: • To develop and demonstrate revolutionary applications that meet important national goals and missions and that rely on the advances made in goals 1 and 2. These applications are not possible on today’s Internet. (LSN98, 2)

  20. NGI - Application Proposals • Remote Control Telemedicine • Sponsored by The National Institutes of Health • Vision: • Allow control of medical instrument from a distance.

  21. NGI - Application Proposals • Advanced Weather Forecasting • Sponsored by NOAA • Vision: To add the new advanced Doppler weather radars to the suite of observing systems used to initialize and update numerical weather models. This will provide additional warning of weather related hazards and for crisis management related to these events.

  22. NGI - Application Proposals • Chesapeake Bay Virtual Environment (CBVE) • Sponsored by NSF • Vision: To enable scientists at dispersed sites to study the Chesapeake Bay and other marine environments using real time control of the simulation and multimodal presentation.

  23. NGI and I2 Synergy • Although distinctly different, NGI and I2 share some key features: • the vBNS • gigaPOPs • IPv6

  24. vBNS • The very-high-performance Backbone Network Service (vBNS) was launched in April 1995 as the result of a 5 year cooperative agreement between MCI and the NSF. • The vBNS provides the following core services: • High-speed best-effort Ipv4 datagram delivery service • IPv4 multicast service • ATM switched virtual circuit logical IP subnet service • ATM permanent virtual circuits across the vBNS backbone as needed. • Reserved-bandwidth service and a high-speed IPv6 datagram delivery service (under development).

  25. vBNS • Like the NSFnet that preceded it, the vBNS is a closed network that connects: • NSF-sponsored supercomputer centers (SCC) • NSF-specified network access points • Originally, only 5 SCCs and 4 network access points were available. • The vBNS will ultimately host over 100 institutions, including links to other research networks in the U.S. and abroad.

  26. vBNS - Architectural Layout • Implemented as IP-over-ATM running on over 25,000 km of a Synchronous Optical Network (Sonet) OC-12-622.08 Mbps backbone. (Rides on MCI’s Hyperstream network) • A collection of ATM switches and IP routers interconnect 12 vBNS POPs, located at MCI terminal facilities, and four POPs located at the following SCCs: • The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) • The National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) • The Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center (PSC) • The San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC).

  27. vBNS • Architectural layout of the vBNS (cont’d): • Each POP typically provides access via User-Network Interface (UNI) ports on a Fore ASX-1000 ATM switch. • Frame-based connections to a Cisco 7507 router are also available, as are ports which support Packet-over-Sonet • To allow supercomputers access via High-Performance Parallel Interface (HIPPI), their POPs also have Ascend GRF 400 routers. • Each POP has a Sun Microsystems Ultra-2 workstation with an OC-12 ATM NIC to run nightly tests on each backbone link of the vBNS. Plotted output of these tests on the vBNS web site at http://www.vbns.net/stats.

  28. vBNS • The high-speed (mostly 155.52Mb/s) Ipv4 connectivity between the vBNS and other large Federal Networks provides a valuable broadening of the vBNS community, and is an integral part of the vBNS’ participation in Internet2 and the Next Generation Internet. • The vBNS project aims to accelerate the pace of the deployment of advanced services into the commercial Internet in order to advance the capabilities of all Internet users.

  29. vBNS • The vBNS is an environment in which new Internet technologies and services can be introduced and evaluated prior to deployment on the large-scale, heavily-loaded commercial backbones. • Examples include: • Native IP multicasting • A reserved bandwidth service • The latest version of IP, IPv6.

  30. vBNS Logical Network Map CA*Net II APAN NREN TANet SREN NI Abilene Abilene DREN iDREN ESnet NREN NI DREN ESnet FSU Miami 88 Operational Connections 16 Planned Connections Last Updated 03/16/99 UIC Wisconsin @ Milwaukee FNAL ANL Chicago Northwestern Wisconsin @ Madison Dartmouth Notre Dame UNH UMaine Brown Indiana Minnesota Iowa State Boston U MIT Iowa Washington Harvard 35 Mbps MREN/ STARTAP ESnet UMass PNW 13.8 Mbps SUNY Buffalo ESnet 15 Mbps Yale Rensselaer NREN Wayne State DREN Rochester Merit NYSERNET Boston NI Michigan Syracuse UC Boulder NMSU NMSU Seattle Oregon State Michigan State DREN Columbia Cornell NASA AMES NYU Rutgers NCAR UNM Utah Chicago Princeton Cleveland New York City UC Davis Ohio State UC Berkeley Sprint NY NAP NCSA Denver PSC UCSF UWV CalREN-2 North UIUC Penn State Drexel Stanford CMU Pitt Perryman, MD UPenn UCSC Missouri San Francisco Johns Hopkins Washington in St. Louis UMBC UMD UCLA MFS DC NAP UCSB Washington DC CalTech Los Angeles Cal Poly Pomona USC CalREN-2 South Atlanta NIH Houston USC ISI Arizona MAX MCI Reston Wake Forest Kentucky NCSC SDSC UCSD Highway 1 UNC UC Irvine Cal State San Bernardino Vanderbilt Texas Duke UC Riverside SDSU SoX VA Tech UT Austin Tenn - Knoxville NC State ODU Alabama @ Birmingham UVA Georgetown MUSC MCI - vBNS POP vBNS Approved Institution Planned vBNS Approved Institution vBNS Partner Institution Network of vBNS Partner Institutions Planned Network of vBNS Partner Institutions Aggregation Point Planned Aggregation Point DS3 OC3 OC12 OC48 Baylor C. of Medicine George Washington USC GA State IB&T @ Houston Clemson GA Tech Houston Florida TAMU Rice UCF USF NOTE: Lines between institutions and aggregation points or NAPs represent the configured bandwidth of their connection to the vBNS. The bandwidth of the actual circuits may be greater than shown.

  31. vBNS Backbone Network Map Seattle C Boston Cleveland Ameritech NAP C National Center for Atmospheric Research New York City Chicago C C A A C C Sprint NAP C C Perryman, MD C Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center A San Francisco C Denver C C C National Center for Supercomputing Applications C J Washington, DC MFS NAP Los Angeles J C C A Atlanta San Diego Supercomputer Center C Ascend GRF 400 Cisco 7507 Juniper M40 FORE ASX-1000 NAP DS-3 OC-3C OC-12C OC-48 A C Houston C J

  32. vBNS Multicast Network Map CA*Net II APAN ESnet ESnet SREN NREN NREN NI DREN Abilene DREN iDREN NREN DREN ESnet FSU Miami Last Updated 03/16/99 UIC Wisconsin @ Milwaukee FNAL ANL Chicago Northwestern Wisconsin @ Madison Dartmouth Notre Dame UNH UMaine Brown Indiana Minnesota Iowa State Boston U MIT Iowa Washington Harvard 35 Mbps MREN/ STARTAP UMass PNW 13.8 Mbps SUNY Buffalo 15 Mbps Yale Rensselaer TANet Wayne State DREN Rochester Abilene Merit NYSERNET Boston NI Michigan Syracuse UC Boulder NMSU NMSU Seattle Oregon State Michigan State Columbia Cornell NASA AMES NYU Rutgers NCAR UNM Utah Chicago Princeton Cleveland New York City UC Davis Ohio State UC Berkeley Sprint NY NAP NCSA Denver PSC UCSF UWV CalREN-2 North UIUC Penn State Drexel Stanford CMU Pitt Perryman, MD UPenn UCSC Missouri San Francisco Johns Hopkins Washington in St. Louis UMBC UMD UCLA MFS DC NAP UCSB Washington DC CalTech ESnet Los Angeles Cal Poly Pomona USC CalREN-2 South Atlanta NI NIH Houston USC ISI Arizona MAX MCI Reston Wake Forest Kentucky NCSC SDSC UCSD Highway 1 UNC UC Irvine Cal State San Bernardino Vanderbilt Texas Duke UC Riverside SDSU SoX VA Tech UT Austin Tenn - Knoxville NC State ODU Alabama @ Birmingham UVA Georgetown MUSC MCI - vBNS POP vBNS Approved Institution Planned vBNS Approved Institution vBNS Partner Institution Network of vBNS Partner Institutions Planned Network of vBNS Partner Institutions Aggregation Point Planned Aggregation Point DS3 OC3 OC12 OC48 Baylor C. of Medicine George Washington USC GA State IB&T @ Houston Clemson GA Tech Houston Florida TAMU Rice UCF USF NOTE: Lines between institutions and aggregation points or NAPs represent the configured bandwidth of their connection to the vBNS. The bandwidth of the actual circuits may be greater than shown.

  33. gigaPOPs • A gigaPOP is a gigabit-capacity Point of Presence. • To provide the desired interconnectivity, a gigaPOP must: • have at least 622 Mbps capacity • provide high reliability and availability • use the Internet Protocol (IP) as a bearer service • also be able to support emerging protocols and applications • be capable of serving simultaneously as a workaday environment and as a test bed • allow for traffic measurement and data gathering • permit migration to differentiated services and application-aware networking

  34. gigaPOPs - Two Types • Type I gigapops, which are relatively simple, serve only I2 members, route their traffic through a one or two connections to another gigapops, and therefore have little need for complex internal routing and firewalling. • Type II gigapops, which are relatively complex, serve both I2 members and other networks to which I2 members need access, have a rich set of connections to other gigapops, and therefore must provide mechanisms to route traffic correctly and prevent unauthorized or improper use of I2 connectivity.

  35. The NC gigaPOP • The NC GigaPOP; a project of the North Carolina Networking Initiative (NCNI). • NCNI was formed in May 1996 and is made up of the following: • Duke University • North Carolina (NC) State • the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill • MCNC • Cisco Systems • IBM • Nortel Networks • Time-Warner Communications

  36. The NC gigaPOP • The NC GigaPOP forwarded its first packets on in February 1997, becoming one of the first implementations of a GigaPOP. • Four Primary Nodes at NC State, Duke, UNC Chapel Hill and MCNC. • These primary nodes will serve as connection points to the vBNS and upcoming Abilene Network, while secondary nodes connect other NCNI partners.

  37. The NC gigaPOP

  38. The NC gigaPOP • The architecture of the GigaPOP took into consideration two issues: • topology • fiber-optic infrastructure • NC gigaPOP Topology: • A ring topology was implemented due to its scalability and its resemblance to what phone and cable companies call a metropolitan network (MAN). • Allows for the use of hardware and software equipment that has been optimized for this configuration.

  39. The NC gigaPOP • Fiber-Optic Infrastructure: • Came down to cost: to lease the required four OC-12 links to form the ring, the monthly cost would be $276,000 a month ($3.3 million per annum). • NCNI made a deal with Time Warner Communications to provide a private four-fiber ring infrastructure (two in, two out). • Networking Technologies: • NCNI decided on the same setup as the vBNS; IP atop ATM over Sonet. • Sonet add/drop multiplexers (ADMs) for each of the nodes, providing a total of 2.488 Gbps (OC-48) in both directions around the ring.

  40. IPv6 • An improvement to IPv4 is needed to overcome the scaling problems associated with the Internet’s rapid growth. • IPv6 provides a 128-bit address space, which will allow it to address 3.4 x 1038 distinct nodes. • “Based on the most pessimistic estimates of efficiency…, the IPv6 address space is predicted to provide over 1500 addresses per square foot of the earth’s surface,which certainly seems like it should serve us well even when toasters on Venus have IP addresses”(Pet96, 254).

  41. IPv6 - Features • Expanded Routing and Addressing: along with the increase from 32 to 128-bit addresses, IPv6 will provide more levels of addressing hierarchy and allow for simpler auto-configuration of addresses. An additional “scope” field will add to the scalability of multicast routing. • Anycast Addresses: this new type of address will identify sets of nodes where a packet sent to an anycast address is delivered to one of those nodes. This will allow IPv6 source route to allow nodes to control the path which their traffic flows.

  42. IPv6 - Features • Header Format Simplification: some of the IPv4 header fields have been dropped or made optional. By header simplification, even though the size of the IPv6 address is four times that of IPv4, its header is only two times longer. • Improved Option Support: the IPv6 header options are encoded to allow for more efficient forwarding with less stringent limits on the length of options and greater flexibility for the additions of new options in the future.

  43. IPv6 - Features • QoS Capabilities: packets can be labeled as belonging to a particular traffic “flow” for which the sender requests special handling, such as non-default QoS or “real-time” service. • Authentication and Privacy Capabilities: IPv6 includes the definition of extensions which provide for authentication, data integrity, and confidentiality.

  44. IPv6 Packet Header

  45. Conclusion • I2 and NGI: same goal, different directions. • NGI is “top-down” • I2 is “bottom-up” • Incorporate similar technologies: • the vBNS • gigaPOPs • IPv6

  46. References Jamison, John, et al, "vBNS: Not Your Father's Internet," IEEE Spectrum, July 1998: http://www.vbns.net/presentations/papers/NotYourFathers/notyourf.htm Von Schweber, Erick, "Projects Promise IS Plenty," PC WEEK, 09 Feb. 1998: http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/reviews/0209/09ngi.html Finley, Amy, "Untangling the Next Internet," SunWorld, April 1998: http://www.sunworld.com/sunworldonline/swol-04-1998/swol-04-internet2.html GigaPOP - Lynchpin of Future Networks - Will Add Scalability; Wide Range of Price/Performance Choices," Gartner Group, 19 Aug. 1998: http://www.techmall.com/techdocs/TS970819-8.html

  47. References "Preliminary Engineering Report," Internet2, 22 Jan. 1997: http://www.internet2.edu/html/engineering.html Collins, John C., et al, “Data Express: Gigabit Junction with the Next-Generation Internet,” IEEE Spectrum, February 1999: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/spectrum/feb99/ngi.html. Peterson, Larry L., Davie, Bruce S., Computer Networks: A Systems Approach. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 1996. http://www.mkp.com/books_catalog/1-55860-368-9.asp. Hinden, Robert M., “IP Next Generation Overview,” IETF, 14 May 1995: http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/INET-IPng-Paper.html.

  48. References • (LSN98)Large Scale Networking , Next Generation Internet Implementation Team, NGI Implementation Plan, February 1998 http://www.ngi.gov/implementation • (NGI99) The Official NGI Web Site http://www.ngi.gov

More Related