Resource Control in Access Networks

Resource Control in Access Networks

Bert Winkelman, Sven Ooghe, Fred Willems

September 2008

Agenda

1. Introduction

2. The impact of QoS on quality of end-user services

Why resource control

3. Resource control

Architecture – ITU and ETSI

Proposed RAC architecture

RAC in the first mile

Resource request flow in proposed design

4. Conclusion

3 | Resource Control in Access networks | September 2008 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2008, September 23

Connection types and Service types - Diversity of Requirements

Connection type Services supported Capacity Mbit/ s

Latency1 ms

J itter ms

Constant bit-rate

Digital leased lines, analogue leased lines

0.1… 2.5 5 8

Variable bit-rate – real time

Voice and Video calls, Standard Digital TV, High Definition Digital TV, audio distribution

0.1…19 100 8…20

High priority data

Data VPN Mission critical applications

0.1…1000 1000 500

Best effort data Internet access, data VPN

0…. 1000 n.a. n.a.


The impact of QoS on quality of end-user services - Test Configuration

Traffic burst/load

Gig-E

Gig-E

100BTVDSL

100BTVDSL

Gig-E

Gig-E

MPLS Switch

MPLS Switch

MPLS Switch

MPLS Switch

IP DSLAM

VDSLmodem

PW CPE

E1G.703/G.704

Gig-E

Gig-E Gig-EVDSL

modem

Traffic burst/load

Acterna ANT-20SE

PRC

E1G.703/G.704

PW Gateway


The impact of QoS on quality of end-user services – Test Results

G.823 sync mask Test Condition

Without QoS

With QoS

Static network load of 80% failed passed

Alternating load 20% - 80% failed passed

100s Network outage failed failed


Why resource control?

Bandwidth limitations in first mile, aggregation and core network

Protect quality of established sessions that require QoS treatment

Condition for a satisfactory customer experience for high-bandwidth services on first mile in lower bandwidth bracket ( 5, 10, 20 Mbit/s).


Resource Admission Control – ITU and ETSI architecture


Proposed RAC architecture


RAC Function in the Access Network

Connection types to be supported:

Unicast between access node and service node

Multicast between access node and service node

•Unicast – Client interacts with Server

•Multicast – Client interacts with Access node using IGMP

•Unicast – Client interacts with Server

•Multicast – Client interacts with Access node using IGMP


RAC architecture in the first mile

Central:

Every client must support interaction with RACF

No standards available for session signalling

Central or Local?

Local in Access Node:

Access node performs RAC for unicast and multicast connections

Central RAC passes unicast connection requests to Access node through interface with central RAC

No impact on client


Resource Request Flow with Local RAC in the first mile (unicast service)


Conclusion

Resource control is necessary to protect established sessions against service quality degradation

Local RAC in the access node is the recommended solution because:

It is a logical extension of the IGMP based multicast admission control function used in access node today,

Channel zapping delay does not increase,

No impact on customer premises equipment (set-top box, IP phone)


www.alcatel-lucent.comwww.alcatel-lucent.com

Documents

Resource Control in Access Networks