DYnamic NEtwork System (DYNES) NSF #0958998 October 3 rd 2011 – Fall Member Meeting Eric Boyd, Internet2 Jason Zurawski, Internet2

DYnamic NEtwork System (DYNES)DYnamic NEtwork System (DYNES)NSF #0958998NSF #0958998

October 3rd 2011 – Fall Member MeetingEric Boyd, Internet2Jason Zurawski, Internet2

• DYNES Overview and Motivation• DYNES Hardware and Software• Current Status• Next Steps• Recent Discussion

– Equipment Choice– LHCONE/NDDI/OS3E

• Demonstrations– GLIF 2011– USATLAS Facilities Meeting– SC11

• Conclusion

2 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• Data movement to support science:– Increasing in size (100s of TBs in the LHC World,

approaching PB sizes)– Becoming more frequent (multiple times per day)– Reaching more consumers (VO sizes stand to

increase, more VOs)– Time sensitivity (data may grow “stale” if not

processed immediately)• Traditional networking:

– R&E or Commodity “IP” connectivity is subject to congestion by other users

– Supporting large sporadic flows is challenging for the engineers, and frustrating for the scientists

3 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Motivation

• Solution– Dedicated bandwidth (over the entire end to end path)

to move scientific data– Invoke this “on demand” instead of relying on

permanent capacity (cost, complexity)– Exists in harmony with traditional IP networking– Connect to facilities that scientists need to access– Integration with data movement applications

• Invoke the connectivity when the need it, based on network conditions

• Proposed Deployment:– Software and hardware support spanning domain

boundaries• Campus• Regional• Backbone

– Integration with existing technologies and deployments

4 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Motivation

5 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Generic Topology – Access to Resources

• What is it?:– A nationwide cyber-instrument spanning ~40 US

universities and ~14 Internet2 connectors• Extends Internet2’s ION service into regional networks and

campuses, based on OSCARS implementation of IDC protocol (developed in partnership with ESnet)

• High-performance file store at sites

• Who is it?– A collaborative team including Internet2, Caltech,

University of Michigan, and Vanderbilt University – Community of regional networks and campuses– LHC, astrophysics community, OSG, WLCG, other

virtual organizations

DYNES Summary

6 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

• What are the goals?– Support large, long-distance scientific data flows

• LHC• LIGO, • Virtual Observatory

– Build a distributed virtual instrument

• Internet2 received a total of 60 Letters of Collaboration representing potential DYNES sites and their collaborators– 44 Universities (some duplicates)– 14 Regional Networks– 1 Virtual Organization– 1 Federal Lab

• Total Funding of $1.74 Million– Original Request of $2 Million

DYNES Community Support

7 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

• Application process required to establish participants– Submit applications to gauge institutional/network

interest– Encourage discussion with PIs to advance

understanding of the scientific use cases

• Deployment Announcements announced in Feb 2011:– 25 End Sites– 8 Regional Networks– Collaboration with like minded efforts (DoE ESCPS)

• Plans to consider provisional applications (send email to [email protected] if interested)

8 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Participants

9 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Projected Topology (October 2011)

• DYNES Overview and Motivation• DYNES Software and Hardware• Current Status• Next Steps• Recent Discussion



• Conclusion

10 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• Inter-domain Controller (IDC) Server and Software– IDC creates virtual LANs (VLANs) dynamically between

the FDT server, local campus, and wide area network– IDC software is based on the OSCARS and DRAGON

software which is packaged together as the DCN Software Suite (DCNSS)

– DCNSS version correlates to stable tested versions of OSCARS. The current version of DCNSS is v0.5.4.

– Initial DYNES deployments will include both DCNSSv0.6 and DCNSSv0.5.4 virtual machines

• Currently XEN based• Looking into KVM for future releases

• A Dell R410 1U Server has been chosen, running CentOS 5.x

11 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Hardware

• Fast Data Transfer (FDT) server– Fast Data Transfer (FDT) server connects to the disk

array via the SAS controller and runs the FDT software– FDT server also hosts the DYNES Agent (DA) Software– The standard FDT server will be a DELL 510 server with

dual-port Intel X520 DA NIC. This server will a PCIe Gen2.0 card x8 card along with 12 disks for storage.

• DYNES Ethernet switch options:– Dell PC6248 (48 1GE ports, 4 10GE capable ports (SFP+,

CX4 or optical)– Dell PC8024F (24 10GE SFP+ ports, 4 “combo” ports

supporting CX4 or optical)

12 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Standard Equipment

• Dynamic Circuit Control– OSCARS– ION Service

• Monitoring– perfSONAR Circuit Monitoring

• Data Movement– FDT– ESCPS

13 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Software

• OSCARS v0.5.4– Released March 14– Features

• VLAN translation to allow integration into existing network deployments

• Robust handling of circuit creation and failures• Numerous Bugfixes• Additional Documentation/Installation Guidance• Security enhancements

• OSCARS v0.6– Anticipated Fall 2011– Features:

• Major re-write of the underlying codebase by ESnet• Modular, web-services based design• Integration with perfSONAR monitoring framework

• DYNES will deploy OSCARS v0.5 and transition to OSCARS v0.6

14 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Software – ION/OSCARS

• perfSONAR Monitoring– Framework designed to monitor end to end

performance– Early focus – Layer 3 measurements– New projects

• Describing/mapping network topology at all layers• Monitoring Layer 2 circuits (dynamic and static)• Several collaborations working on this problem

– OGF Working Groups (NML, NMC, NSI)– GLIF Working Groups– Joint effort in DICE (DANTE Internet2

CANARIE/Caltech ESnet) collaboration

15 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Software – Monitoring Dynamic Circuits

DYNES Software – Monitoring Dynamic Circuits

• If a failure occurs, what can a user do?

16 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Monitoring Dynamic Circuits• Goal: to enable users to get measurements in their circuits while

allowing domains to provide as much or as little information to the user as the domain wants

• Develop a solution in collaboration with other groups and organizations including DANTE, ESnet, the Network Markup Language Working Group and the Network Measurement Control Working Group– Broad agreement ensures that users can monitor their circuits, no

matter what domains they traverse• Multi-faceted approach

– Enable domains to export monitoring data about circuits– Enable users to discover the domains that make up their circuit, and the

monitoring data those domains contain about the circuit• Leverage the standard perfSONAR infrastructure when available

17 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

• This agent is the “glue” that connects together a Domain’s provisioning software (OSCARS) and monitoring infrastructure with the perfSONAR services so that users can find information about circuit statistics

• When new circuits are brought up, the agent looks at the intra-domain path for the circuit, and builds a description of that path.– This description is then registered into a perfSONAR Topology

Service

• Needs to know how the domain monitors its devices to ensure an appropriate description of the circuit– If configured, the agent can use a user-defined script to start

circuit monitoring

18 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Circuit Monitoring Agent

• Everyone has their own method of monitoring their hardware

• Define the needed functionality instead of requiring a specific solution– Offer a specific solution to users who want to use it

• Requirements:– Software that can measure the operational status and utilization

of the elements making up the circuit– These measurements are made available using standard

perfSONAR protocols• As long as the monitoring meets the above requirements, it can

be made to work in the Circuit Monitoring infrastructure

19 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Router/Switch Monitoring Component

• Specific Solution: ESxSNMP– Developed by Jon Dugan at ESnet– Uses SNMP to monitor operational status and utilization statistics

for all equipment elements, including physical interfaces, VLAN interfaces and LSPs

– These interface statistics are then made available using the perfSONAR-PS SNMP MA

– This software will be packaged for easy installation

20 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Router/Switch Monitoring Component

• The DYNES Agent (DA) will provide the functionality to request the circuit instantiation, initiate and manage the data transfer, and terminate the dynamically provisioned resources. Specifically the DA will do the following:– Accept user request in the form of a DYNES Transfer URLs indicating the

data location and ID– Locates the remote side DYNES EndPoint Name embedded in the Transfer

URL– Submits a dynamic circuit request to its home InterDomain Controller

(IDC) utilizing its local DYNES EndPoint Name as source and DYNES EndPoint Name from Transfer URL as the destination

– Wait for confirmation that dynamic circuit has been established– Starts and manages Data Transfer using the appropriate DYNES Project IP

addresses– Initiate release of dynamic circuit upon completion

21 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Software – FDT

22 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Data Flow Overview




• Conclusion

23 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• Phase 1: Site Selection and Planning (Sep-Dec 2010)– Applications Due: December 15, 2010– Application Reviews: December 15 2010-January 31

2011– Participant Selection Announcement: February 1, 2011

• 33 Were Accepted in 2 categories– 8 Regional Networks– 25 Site Networks

24 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Phase 1 Project Schedule

• Phase 2: Initial Development and Deployment (Jan 1-Jun 30, 2011)– Initial Site Deployment Complete - February 28, 2011

• Caltech, Vanderbilt, University of Michigan, MAX, USLHCnet

– Initial Site Systems Testing and Evaluation complete: April 29, 2011

– Longer term testing (Through July)• Evaluating move to CentOS 6• New functionality in core software:

– OSCARS 6– perfSONAR 3.2.1– FDT Updates

25 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2


• Phase 3: Scale Up to Full-scale System Development (14 months) (July 1, 2011-August 31, 2012)– Phase 3-Group A Deployment (9 Sites): March 1-Fall, 2011– Phase 3-Group B Deployment (13 Sites): July 31-Late Fall, 2011– Phase 3-Group C Deployment (11 Sites): July 18 2011- Winter, 2012– Full-scale System Development, Testing, and Evaluation (Winter 2012-

August 31, 2012)

• Phase 4: Full-Scale Integration At-Scale; Transition to Routine O&M (12 months) (September 1, 2012-August 31, 2013)– DYNES will be operated, tested, integrated and optimized at scale,

transitioning to routine operations and maintenance as soon as this phase is completed

26 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2


• Phase 3-Group A Deployment (10 Sites) (March 1-Late Fall 2011)– Teleconferences and Planning with individual participants: March

28-May 2, 2011• Completed initial telecons with all Group A members• Subsequent interaction during installation

– Finalize Phase 3-Group A Equipment Order List: June, 2011– Place Equipment Order: July, 2011– Receive DYNES Equipment: Week of July 11th, 2011– Configure and Test Individual Participant Configurations: Late July

2011– Ship Phase 3-Group A Equipment to sites: Late July 2011– Deploy and Test at Phase 3-Group A Sites: Through July 31, 2011– Site Level configurations: Through Fall 2011 (delays due to local

factors for the most part)

27 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Phase 3 – Group A Schedule Details

• AMPATH• Mid-Atlantic Crossroads (MAX)

– The Johns Hopkins University (JHU)• Mid Atlantic Gigapop in Philadelphia for Internet2 (MAGPI)‐ *

– Rutgers (via NJEdge)– University of Delaware

• Southern Crossroads (SOX) – Vanderbilt University

• CENIC*– California Institute of Technology (Caltech)

• MREN*– University of Michigan (via MERIT and CIC OmniPoP)

• Note: USLHCNet will also be connected to DYNES Instrument via a peering relationship with DYNES

28 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Phase 3 Group A Members

* temp configuration of static VLANs until future group

• Phase 3-Group A Deployment (15 Sites) (July 18 2011-Late Fall 2011)– Teleconferences and Planning with individual participants: 3rd and

4th Week of July 2011• Completed initial telecons with all Group B members• Subsequent interaction during installation

– Finalize Phase 3-Group B Equipment Order List: Sept 2011– Place Equipment Order: Late Sept 2011– Receive DYNES Equipment: Late Sept – Early Oct 2011– Configure and Test Individual Participant Configurations: Oct 2011– Ship Phase 3-Group B Equipment to sites: Expected Late Oct 2011– Deploy and Test at Phase 3-Group A Sites: Expected Nov 2011– Site Level configurations: Expected through Dec 2011

29 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Phase 3 – Group B Schedule Details

• Mid Atlantic Gigapop in Philadelphia for Internet2 (MAGPI)‐– University of Pennsylvania

• Metropolitan Research and Education Network (MREN)– Indiana University (via I-Light and CIC OmniPoP)– University of Wisconsin Madison (via BOREAS and CIC OmniPoP)– University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign (via CIC OmniPoP)‐– The University of Chicago (via CIC OmniPoP)

• Lonestar Education And Research Network (LEARN)– Southern Methodist University (SMU)– Texas Tech University– University of Houston– Rice University– The University of Texas at Dallas– The University of Texas at Arlington

• Florida International University (Connected through FLR)30 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Phase 3 Group B Members

• Front Range GigaPop (FRGP)– University of Colorado Boulder

• Northern Crossroads (NoX)– Boston University– Harvard University– Tufts University

• CENIC**– University of California, San Diego– University of California, Santa Cruz

• CIC OmniPoP***– The University of Iowa (via BOREAS)

• Great Plains Network (GPN)***– The University of Oklahoma (via OneNet)– The University of Nebraska Lincoln‐

31 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Phase 3 Group C Members

** deploying own dynamic infrastructure*** static configuration based




• Conclusion

32 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• Fall 2011– Group C Deployment– Group A, B, and PI site Testing

• Winter 2011– Group A, B, C, and PI site Testing– Software upgrades as needed– Additional sites come online as funding allows

• 2012 - 2013– Robustness and scalability testing– Hardware evaluation – determine if refresh is

possible/necessary– Outreach to other scientific communities– Encouraging integration of basic ideas into other software

packages (e.g. coordination with other in-progress efforts)

33 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Next Steps




• Conclusion

34 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• Standard Equipment Overview• Our Choices• Recent Comments/Discussions

35 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Equipment Choice

• IDC Server– Inter-domain/Domain controller. Speaks with

OSCARS instances in other domains to arrange circuit management

– Contains passive measurement tools (e.g. Circuit Monitoring

• FDT Server– Primary data movement server– Available active measurement tools (OWAMP,

BWCTL)• Switch

– Connects FDT and other resources, controlled by IDC server.

36 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Standard Equipment Overview

• http://www.internet2.edu/ion/hardware.html • IDC

– Dell R410 1U Server– Dual 2.4 GHz Xeon (64 Bit), 16G RAM, 500G HD– http://i.dell.com/sites/content/shared-content/data-sheets/en/Documents/R410-Spec-Sheet.pdf

• FDT– Dell R510 2U Server– Dual 2.4 GHz Xeon (64 Bit), 24G RAM, 300G Main,

12TB through RAID– http://i.dell.com/sites/content/shared-content/data-sheets/en/Documents/R510-Spec-Sheet.pdf

• Switch– Dell 8024F or Dell 6048– 10G vs 1G Sites; copper ports and SFP+; Optics on a

site by site basis– http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pwcnt/en/PC_6200Series_proof1.pdf – http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pwcnt/en/switch-powerconnect-8024f-spec.pdf

37 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Our Choices

• Why?– LHC Community (e.g. 3 out of 4 PIs) have a good

relationship with Dell– Competitive pricing for all components and add-ons– Long term support– Streamlined ordering/customer support process

(personal representatives)• PI sites ordered/installed April/May 2011

– Tested May/June• Group A ordered July 2011

– Installation in July, Testing July - Sept

38 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Our Choices

• Why Dell and not X?– Prior Relationship in the LHC community– Use of servers/switches in production

environments (1G and 10G)– Pricing vs other vendors

• Switches are expensive• Server choice was heavily influenced by experience

in LHC – need a server that can consistently perform at 10G (NIC, CPU, and Disks)

39 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Recent Discussion

• Performance Testing?– See results on the web: http://www.internet2.edu/ion/docs/20110525-

Dell_R510_Benchmarks.pdf

– Tests were ‘LAN’ for the purposes of evaluating disk performance

– ‘WAN’ tests between PI sites started April, will continue for remainder of year. Things we are testing:

• TCP vs UDP performance over ION• Ability of Switches to cope with multiple concurrent

1G/10G flows• Software robustness (OSCARS/perfSONAR for

infrastructure, FDT for data movement)• Server robustness (e.g. Disk’s ability to sustain 10G

network performance)40 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Recent Discussion

• Performance Testing? (cont)– Discussion on Performance WG list + Dynes Lists: “Big

Buffers for data movement”.• Use Case: DYNES switch != Border router. Meant to live

in existing environment. – Will handle multiple 1G flows (from storage/cluster

machines)– Will handle multiple 10G flows from FDT server and other

devices• ION network being upgraded to support more

bandwidth requests (late 2011), currently pinched in some areas

• Yes, big buffers are important, no one will dispute this (see evidence in past JTs and Member Meeting talks)

– Tradeoffs often must be made due to budget considerations

41 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Recent Discussion

• Performance Testing? (cont)– Reality Check

• Big Iron switches have higher cost. Object of DYNES was to connect as many sites (regionals and campuses) as possible.

• Budget is designed to do this, with guidelines for cost and capabilities of switches.

• Experience has shown current hardware can function well in production environment based on our use case

42 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Recent Discussion

• Performance Testing? (cont)– Options available:

• Sites can choose to not take equipment if they have doubts about functionality in their environment

• Sites can also choose to research other equipment, DYNES is willing to work on ways to support individual requests and work on funding options

– Can’t write a check, – Cost must be similar to what we are paying for other sites– Special equipment will require additional commitment

from end sites to support – DYNES PIs have expertise with Dell, can’t speak for other vendors

43 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Recent Discussion




• Conclusion

44 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• LHCONE– International effort to enhance networking at LHC

facilities– LHCOPN connects CERN (T0) and T1 facilities

worldwide– LHCONE will focus on T2 and T3 connectivity– Utilizes R&E networking to accomplish this goal

• NDDI/OS3E– In addition to Internet2’s “traditional” R&E

services, develop a next generation service delivery platform for research and science to:

• Deliver production layer 2 services that enable new research paradigms at larger scale and with more capacity

• Enable a global scale sliceable network to support network research

• Start at 2x10 Gbps, Possibly 1x40 Gbps

45 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

LHCONE and NDDI/OS3E

46 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

LHCONE High-level Architecture

LHCONE – Early Diagram (June 2011)

48 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

“Joe’s Solution” – Result of June 2011 Meeting

• Two “issues” identified at the DC meeting as needing particular attention:

• Multiple paths across Atlantic• Resiliency

• Agreed to have the architecture group work out a solution

• Layer 2 ‘islands’ joined by Layer 3 connections

49 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

LHCONE – Layer 1 View

49

LHCONE keeps open access

methods

On top of that,2 VLANs

overlaid in tree topology

50 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

LHCONE Pilot (Late Sept 2011)

50Mian Usman, DANTE, LHCONE technical proposal v2.0

• Multipoint:– Domains interconnected through Layer 2 switches– Two VLANs (nominal IDs: 3000, 2000)

• VLAN 2000 configured on GEANT/ACE transatlantic segment• VLAN 3000 configured on US LHCNet transatlantic segment

– Allows to use both TA segments, provides TA resiliency– 2 route servers per VLAN

• Each connecting site peers will all 4 route servers– Enables up to 25G on the Trans-Atlantic routes for LHC traffic.

• Point to Point:– Suggestion: Build on efforts of DYNES and DICE-Dynamic service– DICE-Dynamic service being rolled out by ESnet, GÉANT, Internet2, and

USLHCnet• Remaining issues being worked out• Planned commencement of service: October, 2011• Built on OSCARS (ESnet, Internet2, USLHCnet, RNP) and AutoBAHN

(GÉANT), using IDC protocol

51 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

LHCONE Pilot

Partnership that includes Internet2, Indiana University, & the Clean Slate Program at Stanford as contributing partners. Many global collaborators interested in interconnection and extension

Builds on NSF's support for GENI and Internet2's BTOP-funded backbone upgrade

Seeks to create a software defined advanced-services-capable network substrate to support network and domain research [note, this is a work in progress]

52 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Network Development and Deployment Initiative (NDDI)

30+ high-speed Ethernet switches deployed across the upgraded Internet2 network and interconnected via 10G waves

A common control plane being developed by IU, Stanford, and Internet2

Production-level operational support Ability to support service layers & research slices

53 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Components of the NDDI Substrate

64 x 10G SFP+ 1.28 Tbps non-blocking4 x 40G QSFP+ 1 RU

NDDI substrate control plane key to supporting network research At-scale, high performance, researcher-defined

network forwarding behavior virtual control plane provides the researcher with the

network “LEGOs” to build a custom topology employing a researcher-defined forwarding plane

NDDI substrate will have the capacity and reach to enable large testbeds

54 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Support for Network Research

55 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

NDDI & OS3E

56 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

NDDI & OS3E

57 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

NDDI & OS3E

• This service is being developed in response to the request from the community as expressed in the report from the NTAC and subsequent approval by the AOAC.

• Fundamentally it is a best effort service with long term reservations.– It is at Layer 2– Different price points for hairpin service and inter-

node service – It has a completely open access policy– Underlying wave infrastructure will be augmented

as needed using the same general approach as used in the IP network.

58 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

NDDI / OS3E Service Description

59 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Deployment

• Deployment– NEC G8264 switch selected for initial deployment– Chicago node installed– 4 nodes by Internet2 FMM– 5th node (Seattle) by SC

• Software– NOX OpenFlow controller selected for initial implementation– Software functional to demo Layer 2 VLAN service (OS3E) over

OpenFlow substrate (NDDI) by FMM– Software functional to peer with ION (and other IDCs) by SC11– Software to peer with SRS OpenFlow demos at SC11– Open source software package to be made available in 2012

60 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

NDDI / OS3E Implementation Status




• Conclusion

61 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

• DYNES Infrastructure is maturing as we complete deployment groups

• Opportunities to show usefulness of deployment:– How it can ‘stand alone’ for Science and Campus use

cases– How it can integrate with other funded efforts (e.g.

IRNC)– How it can peer with other international networks and

exchange points• Examples:

– GLIF 2011– USATLAS Facilities Meeting– SC11

62 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Demonstrations

• September 2011• Demonstration of end-to-end Dynamic Circuit

capabilities– International collaborations spanning 3 continents

(South America, North America, and Europe)– Use of several software packages

• OSCARS for inter-domain control of Dynamic Circuits• perfSONAR-PS for end-to-end Monitoring• FDT to facilitate data transfer over IP or circuit networks

– Science components – collaboration in the LHC VO (ATLAS and CMS)

– DYNES, IRIS, and DyGIR NSF grants touted

63 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

GLIF 2011

64 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

GLIF 2011 - Topology

65 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

GLIF 2011 - Participants

• October 2011• Similar topology to GLIF demonstration, emphasis

placed on use case for ATLAS (LHC Experiment)• Important Questions:

– What benefit does this offer to a large Tier2 (e.g. UMich)

– What benefit does this offer to smaller Tier3 (e.g. SMU)– What benefit does the DYNES solution in the US give to

national and International (e.g. SPRACE/HEPGrid in Brazil) collaborators

– Will dynamic networking solutions become a more popular method for transfer activities if the capacity is available?

66 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

USATLAS Facilities Meeting

• November 2011• Components:

– DYNES Deployments at Group A and Group B sites– SC11 Showfloor (Internet2, Caltech, and Vanderbilt Booths –

all are 10G connected and feature identical hardware)– International locations (CERN, SPRACE, HEPGrid, AutoBAHN

enabled Tier1s and Tier2s in Europe)• Purpose:

– Show dynamic capabilities on enhanced Internet2 Network– Demonstrate International peerings to Europe, South

America– Show integration of underlying network technology into the

existing ‘process’ of LHC science– Integrate with emerging solutions such as NDDI, OS3E,

LHCONE

67 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

SC11




• Conclusion

68 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

Agenda

•We anticipate that will be able to add a some more sites. Additional applications are being collected from those that are interested.

•Send email to [email protected] if interested

69 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Additional Activities

• http://www.internet2.edu/dynes

• DYNES: A Nationwide Dynamic Network System – Overview of the DYNES objectives and architecture

• DYNES: Regional Network and End-Site Participation Requirements

• DYNES: Criteria for Site Selection• DYNES: Application Package• DYNES: End-to-End Data Flow Architecture • DYNES: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)• DYNES Regional Network Application• DYNES End-site Application• DYNES Deployment Plan

70 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES Documents

• DYNES– http://www.internet2.edu/dynes

• OSCARS– http://www.es.net/oscars

• DRAGON– http://dragon.east.isi.edu

• DCN Software Suite (DCNSS)– http://wiki.internet2.edu/confluence/display/DCNSS/

• FDT– http://monalisa.cern.ch/FDT/

• perfSONAR-PS– http://psps.perfsonar.net

71 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2

DYNES References

DYnamic NEtwork System (DYNES)DYnamic NEtwork System (DYNES)NSF #0958998NSF #0958998October 3rd 2011 – Fall Member MeetingEric Boyd - Internet2Jason Zurawski - Internet2

For more information, visit http://www.internet2.edu/dynes

72 – 04/21/23, © 2011 Internet2