Internet2

1. Internet2 Intel Partnership Planning Meeting November 19,2001

2. What Is Internet2? A project of the university community working with our corporate colleagues and government to close the gap between the potential and reality of the Internet

3. Internet2 Universities188 Universities as of November 2001

4. Internet2 Mission • Develop and deploy advanced network applications and technologies, accelerating the creation of tomorrow’s Internet.

5. Internet2 Goals • Enable a new generation of applications • Re-create leading edge R&E network capability • Transfer technology and experience to the global production Internet

6. Today’s Internet Doesn’t • Provide reliable end-to-end performance • Encourage cooperation on new capabilities • Allow testing of new technologies • Support development of revolutionary applications

7. Why University Leadership? • The Internet came from the academic community • Stanford -- the Internet protocols • NSFNet -- the scaled-up Internet • CERN -- the WWW protocols • University of Illinois -- the Web browser • Universities’ research and education mission require an advanced Internet and have demonstrated they can develop it

8. Technology Transfer Conduits • Collaborating on advanced applications • Deploying pre-commercial infrastructure and protocols • Establishing expertise and human capital • Large-scale proof of concept

9. Internet Development Spiral Commercialization Privatization ANS/Core PSI MichNet Today’s Internet AOL UUNet SURANet InternetMCI NYSERNet Intelligent Networks GigaBit Testbeds ARPANet NSFNet NGI MBone Internet2 Research and Partnerships Development Source: Ivan Moura Campos

10. Internet2 Activities and Focus Areas • Advanced Network Infrastructure • Middleware • Engineering • Advanced Applications • End-to-End Performance • Advanced Network Management • Partnerships

11. Internet2 Activities and Focus Areas • Advanced Network Infrastructure

12. Internet2 Network of the Future • Current state of Abilene • Evolution of optical networking • Next phase of Abilene

13. Abilene background & milestones • Abilene is a UCAID project in partnership with • Qwest Communications • Nortel Networks • Cisco Systems • Indiana University • ITECs in North Carolina and Ohio • Timeline • Apr 1998: Project announced at White House • Jan 1999: Production status for network • Oct 1999: IP version of HDTV (215 Mbps) over Abilene • Apr 2001: First state education network added • Jun 2001: Participation reaches all 50 states & D.C. • Nov 2001: Raw HDTV/IP (1.5 Gbps) over Abilene

14. Abilene focus • Enabling innovative applications and services not possible over the commercial Internet • Advanced service efforts • Multicast • IPv6 • QoS • Measurement • Security • DDoS detection efforts (Arbor Networks & Asta Networks)

15. Abilene status – November, 2001 • IP-over-SONET (OC-48c) backbone • 54 direct connections • 3 OC-48c (2.5 Gbps) connections • 22 will connect via at least OC-12c (622 Mbps) by year end • 200+ primary participants • All 50 states, District of Columbia, & now Puerto Rico • 15 regional GigaPoPs support ~70% of participants • 37 sponsored participants • 15 state education networks (SEGPs) • Collaboration of sponsoring member universities and Abilene connectors

18. International peering • Transoceanic R&E bandwidths growing! • Key international exchange points facilitated by Internet2 membership and the U.S. scientific community • STARTAP  STAR LIGHT – Chicago • Pacific Wave – Seattle • AMPATH – Miami • New York City – EP under development • CUDI - CENIC and Univ. of Texas at El Paso • International transit service

19. Measurement and DDoS • Traffic characterization (Ohio ITEC) • Network utilization by SEGPs and Abilene ITN • Abilene Scavenger Service policing • GigaPoP pair hotspot identification • Passive measurement • Planned for Indianapolis router backbone links • Collaboration with SDSC • Distributed Denial of Service detection • Strong IU Global NOC interest • Asta Networks (UCSD/U of Washington roots) • Arbor Networks (U of Michigan/Merit roots) • Data privacy and anonymity policy

20. Network of the Future:Context for the next backbone • Computational science as an emerging interdisciplinary field • Bandwidth and distributed sensing capability as the next critical parameters • Complement CPU, memory & storage • Increasingly distributed data collection and storage • NSF Distributed Terascale Facility solicitation • Emergence of optical technologies • Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM) • Important distinction: optical transport vs. switching • Much new transcontinental conduit and fiber in place; a lot of business plans abandoned… • Glut of fiber & conduit – but not bandwidth

21. Current state of optical networking • Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM) • Current systems can support >160 10-Gbps ’s (1.6 Tbps!) • Optical growth can overwhelm Moore’s Law (routers) • Costs scale dramatically with distance • Three possible scenarios for the future • Enhanced IP transport (higher BW and circuit multiplicity) • Fine-grained traffic engineering • p2p links between campuses, HPC centers, & Gigapops • Physical manifestation of switched circuits (a la ATM SVCs) • Evolution of optical switching will be critical • Leading international efforts in R&E exploration • The Netherlands, Canada, STAR LIGHT (Chicago)

22. National optical networking options • 1 - Incremental wavelengths • Provision 10-Gbps ’s from provider(s) in the same way that SONET circuits are done for Abilene now • Exploit smaller incremental cost of additional ’s • 2 - Dim Fiber • Acquisition of fiber IRU and subsequent O&M agreement for inter-PoP services (amps, regenerators, DWDMs?) • National footprint of 1-2 fiber pairs • IRU would cost $10-20M • Most likely awaits the availability of lower-cost optical transmission equipment

23. Future of Abilene • Original UCAID/Qwest MoU amended on October 1, 2001 • Extension of Qwest’s original commitment to Abilene for another 5 years – 10/01/2006 • Originally expired March, 2003 • Upgrade of Abilene backbone to optical transport capability - ’s • x4 increase in the core backbone bandwidth • OC-48c SONET (2.5 Gbps) to 10-Gbps DWDM • Capability for flexible provisioning of ’s to support future point-to-point experimentation & other projects

24. Key aspects of the next backbone • IPv6 • Running natively concurrently with IPv4 • Replicate multicast deployment strategy • Motivations • Resolving IPv4 address exhaustion issues • Preservation of the original End-to-End Architecture • International collaboration • Router and host capabilities • Close collaboration with Internet2 IPv6 Working Group • Network resiliency • MPLS/TE fast reroute or IP-based IGP fast convergence • Opportunity for new measurement capabilities • Support of End-to-End Performance Initiative

25. Next generation network deployment • October, 2001: Detailed technical design starts • February, 2002: PoP upgrades start • deployment in three phases • April, 2002 – Phase 1 • October, 2002 – Phase 2 • April, 2003 – Phase 3 • October 2003 - Completion of 10-Gbps upgrade

26. Network design overview • Overall next generation topology is expected to be very similar to current design • Previous iterations to router locations • Washington DC, Chicago, Sunnyvale, Houston • Some differences expected due to Qwest DWDM deployment • Expect same number of backbone routers

27. Optical fanout • Next generation architecture: Regional & state based optical networking projects are critical • Three-level hierarchy: backbone, GigaPoPs, campuses • CENIC ONI, I-WIRE, SURA Crossroads, Indiana, Ohio • Pacific/Northwest Gigapop and PREN are relevant players in the Northwest • Collaboration with the Quilt • Regional Optical Networking project • Carrier DWDM access is now not nearly as widespread as with SONET circa 1998

28. The Quilt • A UCAID project support regional advanced networking initiatives • 15 charter GigaPoPs • EDUCAUSE and SURA • Quilt GigaPoPs support over 70% of Abilene participants • Initial projects • Commodity Internet Services • Regional Optical Networking • Measurement • Led by Wendy Huntoon (Pittsburgh SC)

29. Conclusions • Abilene future • UCAID’s partnership with Qwest extended through 2006 • Backbone to be upgraded to 10-Gbps in three phases starting spring 2002 • Capability for flexible  provisioning in support of future experimentation in optical networking • Overall approach to the new technical design and business plan is for an incremental, non-disruptive transition • Follow-on network most likely will be developed around national dark fiber facility and will utilize next generation optical transport technology

30. For more information • Web: www.internet2.edu/abilene • E-mail: abilene@internet2.edu

31. Internet2 Activities and Focus Areas • Engineering Emphases

32. Engineering:Advanced Functionality Multicast IPv6 QoS

33. Internet2 Multicast Kevin Almeroth, Univ California Santa Barbara, chair Increasingly pervasive high-quality deployment of native IP multicast throughout the Internet2 infrastructure Keeping an eye on SSM • Implications of SSM on scalability, manageability • Adapting applications to make use of SSM Clarifying the application story • Internet2's multicast infrastructure is a valuable sand box in which to test the value of new multicast applications

35. Internet2 IPv6 Dale Finkelson, Univ Nebraska, Michael Lambert, PSC, co-chairs Build the Internet2 IPv6 infrastructure • Currently, based on v4-over-v6 tunnels • Planned as first-class service with the coming 10 Gb/s upgrade of Abilene Educate campus network engineers to support IPv6 Explore the Motivation for IPv6 within the Internet2 community Make IPv6 'real' within the university community (and to our students)

37. Internet2 QoS Ben Teitelbaum, Internet2 staff, chair QBone Premium Service • Hard priority service for selected streams • Very hard due to need for policing/administration Scavenger Service • Voluntary less-than-best-effort service • Enables unconscionable bulk data transfers without threatening performance of best-efforts traffic Other 'non-elevated' services • E.g., delay- vs loss-sensitive best effort service • Interoperability without policing / administration

38. Internet2 Measurements Matt Zekauskas, Internet2 Staff, chair Define architecture: • Usage • Active Measurements of Performance • Passive Measurements Uniform Access to Results Contributing to Measurement Infrastructure for the End-to-end Performance Initiative

39. Surveyors with: Active delay/loss measurements Ad hoc throughput tests Active Measurements within Abilene

40. Application to Performance Debugging

41. Application to Performance Debugging

42. Divide and Conquer • Systematically identify/isolate the network segment at fault • Can we make this systematic and (eventually) automated?

43. Internet2 Activities and Focus Areas • End-to-End Performance

44. Why the End-to-End Performance Initiative? • Even with high bandwidth network links, the Internet2 community often does not see expected performance.

45. The Wizard Gap

46. The E2Epi Mission • To enable the researchers, faculty, students and staff who use high performance networks to obtain optimal performance from the current infrastructure on a consistent basis. Raw Connectivity Applications Performance

47. True End-to-End Experience • User perception • Application • Operating system • Host IP stack • Host network card • Local Area Network • Campus backbone network • Campus link to regional network/GigaPoP • GigaPoP link to Internet2 national backbones • Internationalconnections EYEBALL APPLICATION STACK JACK NETWORK . . . . . . . . . . . .

48. No other complaints Everything is AOK Talk to the other guys System Administrator LAN Administrator LAN Administrator System Administrator Campus Networking Campus Networking Backbone Gigapop Gigapop The Problem Hey, this is not working right! Others are getting in ok Not our problem Applications Developer Applications Developer The computer Is working OK Looks fine All the lights are green How do you solve a problem along a path? We don’t see anything wrong The network is lightly loaded

49. First Steps • Workshop in Ann Arbor on 9 January, 2001 • 40+ participants • Each participant provided a short paper on “What does E2EPerformance Mean?” • Planned agenda was not used in order to respond to more pressing issues from participants. • Design team formed to create an overall vision paper.

50. Areas of the Initiative • Applications • Host/OS Tuning • Measurement Infrastructure • Performance Improvement Environment (PIE) • Operations and Human Communications • Performance Evaluation and Review Framework (PERF)