1 / 7

Network Testbeds: Infrastructure / Connectivity Issues

This session aims to evaluate the proposed testbeds for their alignment with technology and application project requirements. Attendees include experts from various organizations discussing network research developments, advanced forwarding services, multicast usage, and the need for advanced reservations and quality of service (QoS). Action items include defining interoperable advanced services, disseminating information through web pages, and conducting TCP testing and analysis.

lakiar
Download Presentation

Network Testbeds: Infrastructure / Connectivity Issues

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. Network Testbeds:Infrastructure / Connectivity Issues Goal: Critique the proposed testbeds from the point of view of technology and application project requirements

  2. Attendees • Ben Teitelbaum - UCAID (moderator) • Daniel Lee - USC • Guy Almes - UCAID • Mike Underwood - DOE • Linda Winkler - ANL • Jim Brandt - SNL • Richard Mount - SLAC • James Leighton - ESnet • Bill Johnston - LBL • George Seweryniak - DOE (scribe) • Rene Cruz - UCSD • Richard Carlson - DOE

  3. PITAC Goals • Network research developments and demonstration • Development of testbed networks with measured e2e speed and functionality advances • Development of advanced internet applications • Geographic reach to rural minority/small colleges • Technology transfer to industry • NGI agency coordination • IT leadership (staying #1) • Evaluated at beginning and end of breakout w.r.t. to where DOE-NGI testbeds are going

  4. Four Advanced Forwarding Services • High-speed BE • Network improvements (latency, RED, measurement) in support of high-perf TCPs very important • Need to work with other groups on this • Statistical assurances for long-term bulk transfer • PPDG’s regular, daily transfers (“FedEx” replacement) • Hard loss/latency assurances for interactive visualization, voice • QBone Premium Service fits this bill (all three testbeds working towards QBone conformant implementations) • Advanced reservations fixed bandwidth (remote crystallography) minutes, hours • Implications for BB designs • AF-style QoS needed or managed BE bandwidth OK?

  5. Also, the “M” Word • CorridorOne: • Historic native multicast difficulties has lead to use of reflectors • Reflectors may continue to be OK • Do any other apps groups need multicast? • Multicast ~= secure group communication • Need to work with apps folks to understand multicast priorities: (QoS, speed, reach)

  6. Action Items1 • Testbed Taskforce Testbed Definition Working Group needs to converge on a defining what interoperable advanced services will be made available • Need contact for each testbed, especially with regard to Diffserv implementation. (Rene Cruz) • Encourage working groups to put up WWW pages to help disseminate info and show progress • Info on analysis as to why measurements show we have not reached theoretical maximum on the testbeds

  7. Action Items2 • Need to get TCP experts to publish testing results to find out what best TCP advances are • Need high speed encryption? • Need better understanding of M/C needs • Is QBone architecture sufficient standard for QoS interoperability?

More Related