Architectural Options for Metro Architectural Options for Metro Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout: Carrier-Ethernet Network Buildout:
Analysis and EvaluationAnalysis and Evaluation
© Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Metanoia, Inc. Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.metanoia-inc.comPhone: +1-888-641-0082Fax: +1-888-641-0086
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-2
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel
Overlay
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-3
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel
Overlay
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-4
Building Carrier Ethernet Networks Architectural Choices
Three basic options to architect a carrier Ethernet network
Parallel, Overlay, Uniform
Mobile Backhaul – specially designed for wireless data and mobile voice traffic
Hybrids – numerous options, based on operator network status and technology availability, discussed extensively later in this module
Ethernet only in access/metro/core
IP/MPLS only in access/metro/core
Uniform Networks
Carrier Ethernet Network Architectural Choices
Ethernet-based
IP/MPLS-based
Mobile Backhaul
IP/MPLS + Ethernet in parallel, spanning same geographic areaEthernet à L2 servicesIP/MPLS à L3 services
Parallel Networks
Ethernet over IP/MPLS
IP/MPLS over Ethernet
Overlay Networks
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-5
Our Analysis Approach For Each Basic Architectural Option
Network Architecture Overall architecture/layout of the network
Logical Structure How the devices are logically connected at the service layer
Physical Realization (of the logical structure) What constructs are used at the transport layer (not PHY transport,
rather the Carrier Ethernet transport) to realize the logical structure
Protocol Stack How tunnelling/interworking occurs in different segments of the
network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-6
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel
Overlay
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-7
Applicability of Key Technologies:Assessment of Suitability
Reference is to different network segments within the metro network itself Metro Access (referred to in this workshop as “access”)
Metro Aggregation (referred to in this workshop as “metro”)
Metro Core (referred to in this workshop as “core”)
“Eyeball” assessment of which technology is suitable for which particular segment
Ratings Scale based on inherent properties of technology Optimally suited – excellent fit/match for segment
Moderately suited – reasonable fit/match for segment
Minimally suited – could be used, but would not be effective
Not suited – Not recommended for this segment (either incapable or overkill for the segment)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-8
Applicability of Key Technologies:A Comparative Rating
Metro Access
Q-in-Q802.1ad (PB)
üüüGood with small # flows
(few hundreds)
üSuitable for access, but
likely overkill
MAC-in-MAC802.1ah (PBB)
802.1 Qay (PBB-TE) and
PVT
ûWaste, as config./mgt. overhead not worth it
üScalability strained w/
large # flows (thousands)
Metro Aggregation Metro Core
ûUnscalable (due to SPT, flooding, convergence)
üüüIdeally scaled for agg.
ûUnstable and unscalable
(SPT/flooding, mgt.)
üüUseable, gives TE and
manageability
üüüTE/ manageability help long-lived paths, QoS
üüMature tech., suitable, but
needs configuration
üüSignaling, automatic CP
simplify confi.
üüüLong indstry experience, significant best practices
üSuitable, but config. overhead significant
üüüControllability, similarity
to SDH/SONET, resilience
üüüBetter manageability of
aggregated traffic
IP/MPLS
T-MPLS/MPLS-TP
Co
nn
ecti
on
-O
rien
ted
Co
nn
ecti
on
les
s
The above assessment/rating is based on the inherent properties/capabilities of each technology(and not its maturity, availability, and standardization status, which are examined in Module 3)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-9
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Parallel
Overlay
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-10
Parallel Networks: Network Architecture
Two isolated networks (ships-in-the-night) Different fibers, lambdas, or SDH/SONET channels
Separate systems (for Ethernet and IP/MPLS) or independent cards in the same system
IP/MPLS network can be: p2p, mp2mp
Ethernet network can be PB, PBB, PBB-TE based, and be: p2p, mp2mp, p2mp
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-11
Why Parallel Networks?
If majority of metro services are ...
Ethernet
IP/MPLS connections handled by backhauling them from spoke(s) to metro hub, where IP routing is done
IP routing capability not needed in spoke COs
IP or IP/MPLS
Mesh IP/MPLS routers by co-locating with Ethernet switches in all or some CO/POPs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-12
Why Parallel Networks?
Useful when the provider L2 (Ethernet) and L3 (IP/MPLS) networks have
Shared POPs/Cos
MSPPs with both IP/MPLS and Ethernet capabilities
Applicable for operators that wish for both technologies to co-exist with service aggregation
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-13
Parallel Networks: Network Layout
PB, PBB, PBB-TE Network
IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network
IP/MPLS Router
Ethernet Switch
Co-located IP/MPLS Router & Ethernet
SwitchIP/MPLS
Ethernet
Hybrid system with two types of line cards
Ethernet Linecard
IP/MPLSLinecard
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-14
Parallel Networks: Logical Structure
IP/MPLS Router
Ethernet Switch
Co-located IP/MPLS Router & Ethernet
Switch
Logical IP/MPLSLink
Hybrid system with two types of line cards
Ethernet Switch
Ethernet Linecard
IP/MPLSLinecard
Logical Ethernet Link
Logical IP/MPLSLink
Logical Ethernet Link
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-15
Parallel Networks: IP/MPLS Network Realization
Logical Mesh IP/MPLS Layer
Bi-directional logical links
p2p LSPs
mp2p LSPs
Physical links can have Ethernet or SONET/SDH framing
L1 L2
L3
L4 L5
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
(a) Logical MPLS Network
(b) LSP Realization of Logical Network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-16
Parallel Networks: Ethernet Network Realization
Logical links
E-Line
Physical links with Ethernet framing
Logical Mesh at Ethernet Layer
(Realization via Ethernet entities)
(a) Logical Ethernet Network
(b) E-Line Realization of Logical Network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-17
Parallel Networks: Protocol Stack
In parallel networks, the protocol stack is trivial, since each network is fully independent of the other
For Ethernet it is:
For IP/MPLS it is:
Payload
Ethernet Header
IP Header
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
Varies depending on whether the Ethernet network is PB, PBB, or PBB-TE-based
May vary if further nesting of LSPs is used
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-18
Parallel Networks: Assessment
Pros Flexible
IP/Ethernet networks/services can grow independently
Fault isolation Faults in one n/w, do not affect
service in the other
Service independence L2 svcs. not affected by L3 svcs.
and visa-versa
Cons Higher CapEX relative to uniform
network Need 2x fibers, lambdas, or
SDH/SONET channels More systems, cabling; thus,
CO/POP space & power Different mgt. s/w – one for each
network: IP, Ethernet
Greater OpEX More vendors, maintenance Greater number of s/w and mgt.
tools
Good choice if a provider has either an Ethernet- or IP/MPLS-dominant network, and wishes to expand into the other incrementally
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-19
Overlay Networks: IP/MPLS over Ethernet
Metro is built using Ethernet switches PB, or PBB, or PBB-TE capable
Requires transport network SDH/SONET, lambda’s or fiber to interconnect switches
Ethernet layer is transmission network Interconnects IP/MPLS routers – using p2p, mp2mp, p2mp constructs
Ethernet network is oblivious to IP/MPLS layer
IP/MPLS routers (U-PE, N-PE, PE) connected in logical mesh or hub-and-spoke, or some mix of two
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-20
Why Overlay Networks with IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet?
If majority of metro services are ...
Ethernet
IP/MPLS connections handled by backhauling them from spoke(s) to metro hub, where IP routing is done
IP routing capability not needed in spoke COs
IP or IP/MPLS
Mesh IP/MPLS routers by co-locating with Ethernet switches in all or some CO/POPs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-21
IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Network Layout
PB, PBB, or PBB-TE Ethernet Network
CE
CE
Co-LocatedSystems
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
Co-LocatedSystems
Ethernet
IP/MPLS
Customer Edge Device
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-22
IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Logical Structure
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
PB, PBB, or PBB-TE Network
Logical Links
Logical Mesh
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-23
IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Realization via E-Line
p2p E-Line service (offered by underlying
Ethernet network)
Logical Links
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
The “transmission network” here is the Ethernet network
Logical network is thus realized using this network’s entities: E-lines
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-24
IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Realization via E-LAN
mp2mp Ethernet (E-LAN)
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
The “transmission network” here is the Ethernet network
Logical network is thus realized using this network’s entities: E-LAN
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-25
IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet Overlay Network: Protocol Stack
Ethernet Svc
Co-located Systems
Ethernet
Ethernet
Payload
Ethernet
IP
Payload
MPLS
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
CECE
CE
Ethernet
Payload
Ethernet Network
IP/MPLS
IP/MPLS
Combined IP/Ethernet Switch
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
IP
Payload
Ethernet
IP
Payload
Ethernet
MPLS
PB/PBBPBB-TE
Ethernet
IP
Payload
MPLS
IP
Payload
Ethernet
MPLS
PB/PBBPBB-TE
IP
Payload
Ethernet
MPLS
PB/PBBPBB-TE
IP Service
IP Service orIP/MPLS Service
Ethernet Service
IP
Payload
Ethernet
IP Service
Ethernet Svc
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-26
Overlay Networks IP/MPLS-over-Ethernet: Assessment
Pros
Lower CapEX relative to Parallel n/wks Potentially fewer systems (need only
one set for underlying txn. network – here Ethernet)
Less fiber – due to common transport
Simpler mgt – due to fewer systems, and hybrid systems (IP+Ethernet)
Lower OpEx Potentially, one vendor
Single s/w and mgt. tools
Single dept. to manage network
Cons
Lower flexibility relative to Parallel network IP/MPLS & Ethernet networks coupled
Cannot grow independently
Resilience issues Faults in Ethernet network may affect
IP/MPLS service
Good choice if a provider has primarily an Ethernet infrastructure, and wishes to expand into IP/MPLS services
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-27
Overlay Networks: Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Metro is built using IP/MPLS devices
p2p, mp2mp IP/MPLS, MPLS-TP/T-MPLS network or any mix
Requires one transport network SDH/SONET, lambda’s or fiber to interconnect IP/MPLS routers
MPLS layer is transmission network Interconnects Ethernet switches – using p2p (VPWS) or mp2mp (VPLS) constructs
VPWS interconnection MPLS network provides a transparent tunnel (network interworking)
VPLS interconnection MPLS network participates in Ethernet switching via VSI (service interworking)
Ethernet switches connected as logical mesh or hub-and-spoke or mesh-star topology
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-28
Why Overlay Networks with Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS?
If majority of metro services are ...
IP/MPLS
Ethernet connections are backhauled to metro hub, where Ethernet switching is done
Ethernet switching capability not needed in spoke COs/PoPs
Ethernet
Mesh Ethernet switches by co-locating with IP/MPLS routers in all or some CO/POPs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-29
Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Network Layout
CE
CE Co-Located Systems
Ethernet SVC
IP SVC
IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network
Co-Located Systems
IP/MPLS
Ethernet
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
Customer EdgeDevice
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-30
Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Logical Structure
IP/MPLS or T-MPLS or MPLS-TP Network
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
Logical Links
Logical Mesh
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-31
Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Realization via VPWS
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
Logical Links
Logical Mesh
p2p PW in IP/MPLS network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-32
Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Realization via VPLS
PW full-mesh (VPLS) withVSI-based routing
Single IP/Ethernet Platform
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-33
Ethernet-over-IP/MPLS Overlay Network: Protocol Stack
Ethernet SVC
Co-located Systems
IP
Payload
MPLS Label
Ethernet
IP
Payload
Ethernet
Payload
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
Ethernet
Payload
IP/MPLS Network
IP
Payload
MPLS Label
IP
Payload
MPLS Label
CE
CECE
CE
Ethernet
IP
Payload
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
PWE3 Label
MPLS Label
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
Ethernet SVC
IP Service
Ethernet Service
IP Service
IP/MPLS
Ethernet
Ethernet SVC
IP Service
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
PWE3 Label
MPLS Label
Ethernet
Payload
PB/PBBPBB-TE
PWE3 Label
MPLS Label
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-34
Ethernet-over-PB-over-IP/MPLS (VPWS) Interworking: Protocol Stack
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
LSP Label
VC Label
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
LSP Label
VC Label
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
CustomerPacket
Ethernet SwitchPacket
IP/MPLSRouter Packet
(MPLS)
(PWE3)
Ethernet SVC
Co-located Systems Ethernet
IP/MPLS, T-MPLS, MPLS-TP Network
IP/MPLSEthernet SVC
CE
CE
CE
CE
One-to-one Mapping (No MAC Lookup)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-35
Ethernet-over-PBB-over-IP/MPLS (VPWS) Interworking: Protocol Stack
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
(MPLS)
(PWE3)
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
LSP Label
VC Label
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
LSP Label
VC Label
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
Ethernet SVC
Co-located Systems Ethernet
IP/MPLS, T-MPLS,MPLS-TP Network
IP/MPLSEthernet SVC
CE
CE
CE
CE
One-to-one Mapping (no MAC
lookup)
CustomerPacket
Ethernet SwitchPacket
IP/MPLSRouter Packet
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-36
Ethernet-over-PB-over-IP/MPLS (VPLS) Interworking: Protocol Stack
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
LSP Label
VC Label
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
LSP Label
VC Label
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
C-DA
5-tag
C-SA
Payload
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
CustomerPacket
Ethernet SwitchPacket
IP/MPLSRouter Packet
(MPLS)
(PWE3)
Ethernet SVC
Co-located Systems Ethernet
IP/MPLS, T-MPLS, MPLS-TP Network
IP/MPLSEthernet SVC
CE
CE
CE
CE
Ethernet bridging VPLS
(VSI MAC Lookup)
VPLSVSI
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-37
Ethernet-over-PBB-over-IP/MPLS (VPLS) Interworking: Protocol Stack
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
C-tag
Payload
C-SA
C-DA
(MPLS)
(PWE3)
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
LSP Label
VC Label
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
LSP Label
VC Label
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
Ethernet SVC
Co-located Systems Ethernet
IP/MPLS, T-MPLS,MPLS-TP Network
IP/MPLSEthernet SVC
CE
CE
CE
CE
CustomerPacket
Ethernet SwitchPacket
IP/MPLSRouter Packet
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
C-SA
C-tag
Payload
C-DA
S-tag
B-tag
I-tag
B-SA
B-DA
Ethernet bridging VPLS
(VSI MAC Lookup)
VPLSVSI
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-38
Uniform Networks: Network Architecture
One technology used throughout (for all three metro segments) Access, Aggregation, and Core
Technology could be either Ethernet or IP/MPLS
Ethernet-only option Access can be 802.1ad (Q-in-Q)
Metro can be 802.1ah (MAC-in-MAC)
Core can be 802.1Qay (Provider Backbone Bridging – TE)
IP/MPLS-only option Access uses p2p PWs in hub-and-spoke design
Metro uses a meshed VPLS design
Core uses a hierarchically meshed H-VPLS design
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-39
Uniform Networks: Ethernet-Only
Network Architecture Comprised typically of access, metro, core segments
Access PB (802.1ad), metro PBB (802.1ah), core PBB/PBB-TE (802.1Qay)
Logical Structure Service-Layer is Ethernet, with remote CE’s knowing each other’s MAC address
Devices at service-layer connected by p2p or p2mp Ethernet tunnels
Physical Realization (of logical structure) Transport layer could be Ethernet or SDH/SONET
Protocol Stack Illustrated ahead ...
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-40
Uniform Networks: Ethernet OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack
CE
Access Network(802.1ad)
Aggregation Network(802.1ah)
Core Network(802.1Qay)
Aggregation Network(802.1ah)
Access Network(802.1ad)
PB
IB-BEB
BCB
BCB
PE
PE
B-BEB
B-BEB
BCB
B-BEB B-BEB
BCB
IB-BEB
PB
PE
PE
B-BEB
802.1ad/Q-in-Qencapsulation
802.1ahencapsulation
802.1ahdecapsulation
802.1ad/Q-in-Qdecapsulation
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
CEIB-BEB
IB-BEB
CE
CE
B-BEB
BCB
B-BEB
Provider Bridging (PBB) Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)
Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)
Provider Bridging (PBB)
PBB – Traffic Engineered (PBB-TE)
Switching based on pre-configured fwding tables
- Pinned paths- Based only on B-DA, B-SA, B-Tag - No STP- No MAC learning
Last MileLast Mile
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-41
Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS-Only Network Architecture
Comprised typically of access, aggregation (metro), core segments Two options exist: Option 1: Access/Metro (Aggregation) p2p spoke PWs to backbone (core)
PEs, Core H-VPLS mesh between backbone PEs Option 2: Access p2p spoke PWs to aggregation PEs, Metro
(Aggregation)/Core H-VPLS mesh between all aggregation PEs
Logical Structure Service-Layer is still Ethernet; remote CE’s/nPE’s learn MAC addresses Devices at service-layer connected by p2p MPLS LSPs
Physical Realization (of logical structure) Construct used at transport layer are IP/MPLS p2p PWs in p2p LSPs
Protocol Stacks Illustrated ahead ...
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-42
Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack (1)
CE
Access Network(p2p PW)
Aggregation Network(p2p PW)
Core Network(PW full mesh, H-VPLS)
Aggregation Network(p2p PW)
Access Network(p2p PW)
VPWS (p2p PW)decapsulation
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
LSP Label
PW Label
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
Payload
CE
CE
CE uPE
P
uPE
PE
PE
P
P
PE
PE
P
P
P
uPE
P
uPE
P
nPE
nPE
P
nPE
nPE
PE
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
Tunnel
Spoke(PW)
Tunnel
Mesh(VPLS
Instance)
Tunnel
Spoke(PW)
Spoke PW
Spoke PWVPWS (p2p) PW encapsulation VPLS
encapsulationVPLS
decapsulation
Full PW Mesh per service
Access + Aggregation spanned by spoke PWs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-43
Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS OnlyNetwork Layout and Protocol Stack (2)
CE
Access Network(p2p PW)
Aggregation Network(PW full mesh)
Core Network(PW full mesh, H-VPLS)
Aggregation Network(PW full mesh)
Access Network(p2p PW)
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
Payload
LSP Label
PW Label
S/C-Tag
Payload
S/C-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
Payload
CE
CE
CE uPE
P
uPE
nPE
nPE
P
P
nPE
nPE
P
P
P
uPE
P
uPE
P
PE
PE
P
PE
PE
PE
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
LSP Label
PW Label
C-DA
C-SA
Tunnel
Spoke(PW)
Tunnel
Mesh(VPLS
Instance)
Tunnel
Spoke(PW)
Spoke PW
Spoke PW
VPWS (p2p) PW encapsulation
VPLS encapsulation
VPLSdecapsulation
Aggregation and Core spanned by Full PW Mesh
VPWS (p2p PW)decapsulation
PW Full Mesh
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-44
Uniform Networks: IP/MPLS-OnlyObservations
Trade-offs exist between Option 1 and Option 2 in terms of MAC learning and PW scalability
Option 1: PW full mesh in core, spoke PWs upto core nPEs nPEs must learn all customer MAC addresses PW mesh confined to core, thus only core PEs must be meshed Requires one PW mesh per customer’s service instance
Option 2: PW full mesh in agg. + core, spoke PWs upto agg. nPEs nPEs learn all customer MACs, but fewer than in Option 1 PW mesh, however, is between nPEs in all aggregation networks (thus
much larger with more PWs than in Option 1) Requires one PW mesh per customer’s service instance
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-45
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Overlay
Parallel
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul (presented in detail later)
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-46
Our Analysis Approach For Hybrid Architectures
Network Overview
Overall architecture/layout of the network
Protocol Stack
Explain tunneling/interworking in different network segments
Assessment
Key observations about the architecture
Benefits and drawbacks of approach
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-47
Hybrid Architectures: Overview
Involve a combination of IP/MPLS and Ethernet (PB, PBB, PBB-TE)
Access network, customer-edge to provider-edge, is common and typically one of three Ethernet types (so not shown in figures)
Vanilla Ethernet (802.1d)
V-LAN capable Ethernet (802.1q)
S-VLAN capable Ethernet or Q-in-Q (802.1ad)
Two principal hybrid architectures
H-VPLS with PB or PBB Aggregation
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-48
Hybrid Architectures Taxonomy
H-VPLS w/ Homogeneous PBB Aggregation
Type I Svc. Interface(S-Tag (B-VID) as delimiter)
Type II Svc. Interface(I-SID as delimiter)
H-VPLS with Heterogeneous PB/PBB Aggregation
Modified PB PE Modified PBB PE
H-VPLS with PB/PBB Aggregation
PBB-capable uPE(PBB uPE, for short)
PBB Migration
PB service frames over H-VPLS core
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation
PBB-capable nPE(PBB nPE, for short)
PBB service frames over H-VPLS core
PB and PBB service frames over H-VPLS core
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-49
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type I Interface -- Overview
Type I i/f is a B-tagged i/f with B-VID as service delimiter
Handoff between BCB and N-PE is B-tagged PBB frame
N-PE itself can be transparent to the frames
Treats them as 802.1ad frames
Only need support 802.1ad-style frames
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-50
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type I i/f – Operation & Protocol Stack
X X
N-PE N-PE
IP/MPLSPBB PBB
BCBU-PE BCB U-PECECE
C1 D1A1 B1
PBB
Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
IB-BEBIB-BEB
S-Tag I/f (B-VID is Svc. delimiter)
S-Tag I/f (B-VID is Svc. delimiter)
Supports VPLS for B-Tag (need not be PBB-aware)
Raw or Tagged-mode Ethernet PW
All 3 operational modes supported:- Port Mode- VLAN Mode- VLAN Bundling Mode
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-51
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation Type I Interface: Assessment
Benefits
No new functionality in VPLS PE
Reduces C-MAC learning and PW mesh in core PEs
Due to I-SID bundling, multiple svc. instances map to one bridge domain (B-VID)
Separates service layer (I-SID) from network layer (B-VID)
Drawbacks
Needs extra replication in core (relative to w/o I-SID bundling)
Unknown unicast, brdcast, or mcast in a single svc. instance (I-SID) leads to full brdcast in core
May be addressed by per-I-SID flood containment
Application of the overlay model Use case: SP has converged to an MPLS core, but prefers Ethernet
aggregation to connect 802.1ad-based access networks A “steady-state” model, once all aggregation networks are 802.1ah-capable
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-52
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type II Interface -- Overview
Type II i/f: I-tagged i/f with I-SID as service delimiter
B-Tag is locally significant in PBB cloud, not sent over core
PE must support B-BEB and VPLS functionality
Must interpret I-Tag
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-53
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation: Type II i/f – Operation & Protocol Stack
B-Tag
X X
N-PE N-PE
IP/MPLSPBB PBB
B-BEBU-PE B-BEB U-PECECE
C1 D1A1 B1
PBB
Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload Payload
B-DA
B-SA
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
B-DA
B-SA
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
PBB PBB
I-tag I/f(Type II)
I-tag I/f (Type II)(I-SID is svc. delimiter)
Must support B-BEBand VPLS capability
B-VID locally significant in PBB, not xported over core
B-BEB B-BEB
Internal B-VID, enables I-SID
bundling
2 Mapping options-- I-SID à VPLS -- I-SID à B-VID à VPLS
VD-Label
LSP-LabelB-BEB removes
PBB-specificB-Tag
PBB
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-54
H-VPLS with PBB Aggregation Type II Interface: Assessment
Benefits
Less replication in core, w/o needing per-I-SID flood containment
Supports tightly & loosely-coupled service domains
Drawbacks
N-PE complex with new capability – needs B-comp for I-SID processing
Potentially larger # of PWs in core, for same # of services (relative to Type I)
Increased segregation of svc. instances (by I-SID) over disjoint PW meshes
Application of the overlay model Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but prefers Ethernet
aggregation to connect 802.1ad-based access networks Good for customers with mcast traffic (w/o mcast pruning fn. at VPLE-PE)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-55
H-VPLS with Heterogeneous Access Modified PB PE -- Overview
Used to interoperate existing 802.1ad (PB) networks with new 802.1ah (PBB) aggregation networks
Both networks connect to an H-VPLS core/backbone
PE interfacing with PB network must support VPLS and IB-BEB functionality
Mapping of S-VID to I-SID
I-SID bundling into B-VID and mapping to a VPLS instance
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-56
H-VPLS with Modified PB PEOperation & Protocol Stack
IP/MPLS PBB
CECE
A1 B1
PBB
Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
B-DA
B-SA
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
U-PE2B-BEBN-PE1
C1
X
D1
X
N-PE2
Q-in-Q
S-tag I/f(Type 1)
I-tag I/f(Type II)
Must supportB-BEB and
VPLS
C-DA
S-Tag
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
S-Tag
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
S-Tag
C/S-Tag
S-Tag
-- Participates in local I-SID domain of MPLS core-- Supports I-SID bundling-- 1:1 mapping of S-VID à I-SID
Must supportIB-BEB and
VPLS
U-PE1 BCB
Q-in-Q
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-57
H-VPLS with Modified PB PE: Assessment
Benefits
Reduces PW mesh in core
Via I-SID bundling, where group of I-SIDs is mapped to B-VID and to a VPLS instance
Supports tightly, loosely-coupled, and different service domains
Drawbacks
N-PE is complex with new capability – needs IB-BEB functionality
PB PE (N-PE1) needs to learn many C-MAC addresses
Overlay with cascade of IP/MPLS and Ethernet networks Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but has different Ethernet
aggregation/access networks, which have not converged to a single Ethernet technology
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-58
H-VPLS with Heterogeneous Access Modified PBB PE -- Overview
Used to interoperate existing 802.1ad (PB) networks with new 802.1ah (PBB) aggregation networks
Both networks connect to an H-VPLS core/backbone
PE interfacing with PBB network must support VPLS and IB-BEB functionality
B-component faces PBB cloud
I-component faces MPLS core, connects to VPLS forwarder
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-59
H-VPLS with Modified PBB PEOperation & Protocol Stack
X X
N-PE1 N-PE2
IP/MPLSQ-in-Q PBB
PCBU-PE1 B-BEB U-PE2CECE
1P 1P1P 1P
Q-in-Q
Ethernet EthernetMPLS/PW
C-DA
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S-Tag
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VD-Label
C-SA
C-Tag
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
S-Tag
B-DA
B-SA
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
PBB
S-tag I/f(Type I)
I-tag I/f(Type II)
Must support IB-BEB
and VPLS
Must support VPLS for B-tag
(not PBB aware)
C-Tag
S-Tag
I-Comp
B-Comp
-- 1:1 mapping of S-VID to VPLS instance-- S-VID bundle has no counterpart in PBB n/w
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-60
H-VPLS with Modified PBB PE: Assessment
Benefits VPLS core can operate without any
modifications Maps tags (I-tag) to VPLS instance
Supports tightly, loosely-coupled, and different service domains
Viable option to incrementally at PBB aggregation networks to existing PB networks over IP/MPLS core
Drawbacks N-PE2 needs IB-BEB functionality
PB PE (N-PE1) must learn C-MAC addresses
Absence of S-VID bundling, implies each I-SID maps to independent PW mesh in core no scaling in PWs
Need same I-SID domain across all PBB aggregation networks for consistent C-VID grouping
Overlay with cascade of Ethernet and IP/MPLS networks Use case: SP has converged to MPLS core, but has different Ethernet
aggregation/access networks, which have not converged to a single Ethernet technology
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-61
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE -- Overview
Used to integrate 802.1ah (PBB) functionality into an IP/MPLS provider network
PBB functionality is embedded in uPE to restrict MAC learning as close to customer as possible
PE at the IP/MPLS core is unchanged, and only needs IP/MPLS and PW capability
Bridging over VPLS network need be only 802.1ad capable as
MAC forwarding is based on B-MAC address space
Service delimiter is based on B-VLAN ID or B-VID
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-62
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE: Operation & Protocol Stack
X X
N-PE N-PE
IP/MPLS
CECE
C1 D1A1 B1
PBB
MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
Must support IB-BEB and MPLS/PW encap of C-MAC frames into B- MAC frames
MPLSI/f
MPLSI/f
-- Port Mode-- VLAN Mode-- VLAN-bundling ModeMaps svcs. to I-SIDI-SID à B-Tag (bridge domain)B-Tag à VPLS instance
Spoke PWs per VPLS instance
IB-BEB IB-BEB
Must support MPLS/PWOperates on B-DA, B-SA, B-VID only (not I-SID), so need be 802.1ad capable
Full PW mesh per VPLS instance
MPLSMPLS
LSRU-PE LSR U-PE
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-63
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB uPE: Assessment
Benefits PBB functionality at uPE improves
scalability
Multiple I-SIDs per B-VLAN fewer core PWs
N-PE only learns uPE MACs MAC addresses scale
Drawbacks Customer broadcast/mcast frames
must be sent over entire B-VLAN
Greater replication over VPLS PW mesh
As B-VLAN mesh is larger than scope of any particular I-SID
Overlay with IP/MPLS transmission n/w and Ethernet service Use case: SP converged to MPLS in core and aggregation networks I-SID allocation
Global across MPLS networksno I-SID translation needed
I-SID bundling must be consistent across all participating PEs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-64
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE -- Overview
Used to integrate 802.1ah (PBB) functionality into an IP/MPLS provider network
PBB function embedded in nPE, when uPE is not capable
Bridging over VPLS n/w must be 802.1ah capable, as nPE
Assigns an I-SID for each service of a customer
Muxes I-SIDs into a common bridge domain, or B-VLAN
Maps either I-SIDs or B-VLANs to VPLS instances
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-65
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE: Operation & Protocol Stack
X X
N-PE N-PE
IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS
CECE
C1 D1A1 B1
PBB
MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VD-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VD-Label
LSP-Label
VD-Label
S-Tag S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VD-Label
LSP-Label
VD-Label
Q-in-Q Q-in-Q
MPLSI/f
MPLSI/f
Must support VPLS and PBB
PWs per customer (one service per PW, no service muxing)
Full PW mesh per customer or cust. grp
Supports-- Port Mode-- VLAN Mode-- VLAN-bundling Mode
IB-BEB
IB-BEB
LSRU-PE LSR U-PE
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-66
H-VPLS with MPLS Aggregation PBB nPE: Assessment
Benefits
PBB functionality at nPE improves VPLS PW scalability
nPE maps multipe I-SIDs into a B-VLAN fewer core PW meshes
Drawbacks
Spoke PWs terminate at nPE
nPE must learn all customer MAC addresses
Per-service spoke PWs needs significantly more spoke PWs
Since uPE is not PBB aware
Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, but
aggregation n/w is not PBB capable Needs integration of PBB functionality into H-VPLS PE
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-67
H-VPLS with PBB Migration
Provides migration path for operators with investments in IP/MPLS (and VPLS) deployments
Enables incremental induction of PBB into the network
Expands scalability benefits of PBB over time with deployment
Three migration scenarios: Non-PBB (802.1ad) encapsulated frames over VPLS core
PBB-encapsulated (802.1ah) frames over VPLS core
Mixed frames (802.1ad and 802.1ah) over VPLS core Depends on capabilities of different edge devices in network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-68
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ad Frames in Core -- Overview
Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks Unchanged – need no modifications
nPE’s require no changes, and need no knowledge of PBB
New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks with PBB functionality on uPE Need IB-BEB functionality on nPE
Required to terminate PBB encap. on incoming frames
Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ad format VPLS core operation is unchanged
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-69
H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration 802.1ad Frames in Core: Operation & Protocols
X X
N-PE1 N-PE2
IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS
CECE
C1 D1A1 B1
MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
S/C-Tag
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
Must supportVPLS
S-Tag S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
Q-in-Q PBB
Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2
IB-BEBMPLSI/f
MPLSI/f
I-Comp
B-Comp
I-Comp
B-Comp
IB-BEB
PWs could be per VPLS instance or per service
Spoke PWs per customer (one service per PW)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-70
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ad Frames in Core: Assessment
Benefits
Requires no change to existing access/aggregation n/wk (Q-in-Q)
No change to existing VPLS nPEs (those not facing 802.1ah n/wks)
Drawbacks
nPE1 must learn all customer MAC addresses (as spoke PWs terminate at nPE1)
PBB benefit cannot be leveraged
nPEs need full mesh of PWs
Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, but all
access/aggregation networks are not PBB capable Ideal when SP has single PBB-capable aggregation/access network
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-71
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core -- Overview
Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks Unchanged – need no modifications
nPE’s must be upgraded for PBB-based processing (IB-BEB) All Ethernet svc frames over VPLS core are PBB-encapsulated
New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks have PBB functionality on uPE Need IB-BEB functionality on remote nPE PBB encap. of incoming frames terminated at far-end nPE
Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ah format Thus, VPLS core operation is modified
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-72
H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration 802.1ah Frames in Core: Operation & Protocols
X X
N-PE1 N-PE2
IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS
CECE
C1 D1A1 B1
MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
LSP-Label
VC-Label
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-DA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2
IB-BEBMPLSI/f
MPLSI/f
I-Comp
B-Comp
I-Comp
B-Comp
IB-BEB
PWs per VPLS instance Spoke PWs per customer
(one service per PW)
Must supportonly VPLS
Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
B-DA
B-SA
B-Tag
I-Tag
S-Tag
C-DA
C-SA
C-Tag
Payload
LSP-Label
VC-Label
PBBQ-in-Q
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-73
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core: Assessment
Benefits Reduces MAC learning at nPEs
Due to PBB at nPEs, thus giving MAC address scalability
Lowers PW mesh counts in core Multiple customer instances can
be bound to a single B-VLAN and VPLS instance
Drawbacks Must upgrate nPEs of all existing
MPLS access/aggregation n/wks nPE needs IB-BEB functions
Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, and
wishes to have the benefit of PBB scaling in the VPLS core Useful for the operator whose MPLS access/aggregation networks are
being upgraded to support PBB IB-BEB at uPEs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-74
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: Mixed Frames in Core -- Overview
Existing 802.1ad access/aggregation n/wks unchanged Exchange Ethernet frames with 802.1ad format over PWs in core
nPE’s must be upgraded for PBB-based processing (IB-BEB) All Ethernet svc frames over VPLS core are PBB-encapsulated
New MPLS-based access/aggregation networks have PBB functionality on uPE Exchange PBB-encap frames over VPLS core
Interworking b/ween PBB-capable and PB-capable requires that nPE of PBB network has IB-BEB functionality
Ethernet frames in VPLS/H-VPLS core use 802.1ah/802.1ad format
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-75
H-VPLS w/ PBB Migration Mixed Frames in Core: Operation
X X
N-PE1 N-PE2
IP/MPLSMPLS MPLS
CECE
C1 D1A1 B1
MPLS/PW MPLS/PWMPLS/PW
Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
LSRU-PE1 LSR U-PE2
IB-BEBMPLSI/f
MPLSI/f
I-Comp
B-Comp
I-Comp
B-Comp
IB-BEB
PWs per VPLS instance
Spoke PWs per customer (one service per PW)
Must supportonly VPLS
-- Must terminate PBB and MPLS/PW
-- Needs IB-BEB and B-BEB capability
-- Should be aware of remote PEs’ capabilities – via static config. or extended VPLS control plane
Non-PBB CapableExisting Access Networks
PBB- CapableNew Access Networks
B-BEB
Q-in-QPBB
PBBQ-in-Q
Protocol stack is a combination of those shown earlier for 802.1ad and 802.1ah in core
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-76
H-VPLS with PBB Migration: 802.1ah Frames in Core: Assessment
Benefits
Core can serve both PB-encapsulated and PBB-encapsulated frames
Lowers PW mesh counts in core
For PBB-capable aggregation networks
Drawbacks
Must upgrate nPEs of PBB-capable access/aggregation n/wks. nPE needs
IB-BEB to interface with PBB network
B-BEB to interface with PB network
PE must be aware of remote peer’s capability
Requires either static config. or VPLS control plane extensions
Overlay with IP/MPLS txn network and Ethernet service Use Case: SP has converged to MPLS in core and aggregation n/ws, has a
mix of PB- and PBB-capable access/aggregation networks
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-77
Workshop Outline
Overview of Architectural Options
Applicability of Key Technologies to Access/Metro/Core Q-in-Q (PB), MAC-in-MAC (PBB), 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) and PVT, IP/MPLS,
MPLS-TP
Basic Architectures and Their Analysis Overlay
Parallel
Uniform
Mobile-Backhaul
Hybrid Architectures and Their Analysis
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-78
Mobile Backhaul Architectures
Mobile backhaul architectures derive from the basic and hybrid architectures presented earlier
We examine them separately due to their unique needs:
Interface with the core network
Timing and synchronization requirements
Evolution requirements – from TDM or ATM to IP/MPLS and/or Ethernet
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-79
Evolution of Cellular Technology: 2G to 4G 2G
GSM (TDM, 56-114 kbps)
2.5G GPRS, EDGE (TDM, 236-473 kbps) CDMA 1XRTT (HDLC, TDM, 144 kbps)
3G WCDMA/UMTS (3GPP) (R99, R4) (ATM, 384 kbps uplink, 2Mbps downlink) UMTS (3GPP) (R5 (HSDPA), R6 (HSUPA))( IP, 2-3 Mbps) EV-DO (3GPP2) (Rev0, RevA, RevB, RevC) (IP, 1.8 Mbps uplink, 3.1Mbps
downlink)
4G (LTE) 3GPP (R7/R8) (IP, >50 Mbps uplink, >100 Mbps downlink) WiMAX (802.16e, 802.16m) (IP, 50-100 Mbps)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-80
Evolution of Cellular Technology and Backhaul Types
Network Speed Interface
GSM/GPRS
EDGE
3G (UMTS/WCDMA) R3, R4
3G, R5 (HSDPA), R6 (HSUPA)
LTE R8 (20 Mhz)
CDMA1X-RTT
CDMA EV-DORev A/B
WiMAX (10 Mhz)
56-114 Kbps TDM
236 – 473 Kbps
384 Kbps Uplink14.4 Kbps Downlink
500 Mbps Uplink>100 Mbps Downlink
100 Kbps
1.8 Mbps Uplink1.8 to 5 Mbps Downlink
384 Kbps Uplink384 Kbps Downlink
TDM
ATM
IP/Ethernet
IP/Ethernet
IP/Ethernet
TDM
IP/Ethernet50 Mbps
Backhaul Types
2G
2.5G
3G
4G
Legend
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-81
Mobile Backhaul Components Backhaul network – defined as the network that connects
Base Transceiver Station (BTS, or Base Station) to Base Station Controller (BSC) in 3GPP2 – GSM-based cellular networks
Node-B to Radio Network Controller (RNC) in 3GPP – CDMA-based cellular networks
Traditional backhaul networks have used ... E1/T1 leased lines SONET/SDH TDM channels (for higher rate aggregation)
Mobile transport infrastructure has hitherto been ... Microwave links Optical fiber with SDH/SONET
Evolution to packet-based wireless services creates a push for the transport itself to be packet-based: Ethernet or IP/MPLS or a combination
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-82
Traditional Backhaul Evolution
SDH/SONET Network
BSC
RNC
TDMTI/EI Cellsite
Gateway
ATM
nxE1
T1/E1/STM
E1
ATM
3G BTS
2G BTS
ATM Switch
SONET/SDH XConnect
SONET/SDH XConnect
Separate transmission facilities for different technologies (TDM and packets)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-83
Mobile Backhaul Challenges
Exponential growth in mobile subscribers 3 Billion subscribers (2007) Expected to touch 5 Billion by 2013! Leads to massive increase in traffic volume
Shift in mobile traffic patterns High-speed data, including multimedia traffic (video, VoIP, IMS) Bandwidth insensitive but QoS sensitive applications! With increasing speed, revenue-per-bit is decreasing
Result is that traffic and revenue are decoupled !
These trends lead to massive increase in traffic volume
Backhaul accounts for 30% of OpEX (Per Yankee Group 2005)
Traditional backhaul unsustainable with such traffic growth
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-84
Key Performance Requirements for Mobile Backhaul
Delay – budget for entire RAN is 100ms
Backhaul segment delay must be < 3-4 ms
Loss – Target BER is
2G networks = 10-7
3G networks = 10-5 to 10-4
Synchronization – Frequency and Time accuracy
2G: 50 ppb freq. accuracy at radio interface
3G: 50 ppb freq. accuracy and 2.5 s time accuracy for TDD
WiMAX: 8 ppm freq. for FDD/TDD, and 5-25 s time accuracy for TDD
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-85
Backhaul Strategy Fundamentals
Future-Proof Should support existing legacy (TDM) infrastructure Evolving new packet-based and IP services using diverse and
coexistent technologies
Scalable Grow b/w to support next-gen. wireless access technology LTE/4G Ethernet interfaces versus nxT1/E1
Cost Effective – reduce OpEx
Must meet timing and synchronization targets
Simplify provisioning & planning – advanced OAM, troubleshooting
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-86
Timing and Synchronization
ITU-T G.8261 specifies timing & synchronization in packet networks
Synchronization needed for Radio framing accuracy, hand-off control, backhaul transport
reliability
Three Methods Synch. Ethernet: Similar to SONET/SDH -- embed clock in PHY layer
Requires changes in PHY chip
IEEE 1588 (Precision Time Protocol) Distributed protocol: specifies how real-time PTP clocks synchronize
IEEE 802.1as Aimed at adapting IEEE 1588 to Carrier Ethernet
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-87
Clock Distribution Methods Used
Physical Layer Clock Via synchronous TDM i/fs e.g. PDH/SDH/SONET Via Sync. Ethernet as per G.8261/G.8262
GPS-receiver based synchronization
Clock distribution over packet network IEEE 1588v2 – being looked at in ITU-T Q13/SG15, who are developing
a telecom profile for 1588 v2 NTP – IETF currently working on NTP v4
Adaptive and Differential clock synchronization
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-88
Packet Transport for Mobile Backhaul
Packet-based transport can provide high bandwidth at lower cost (than TDM transport)
Ideal choice for LTE and 4G technologies
Challenges ...
Support legacy traffic (TDM and ATM ) via circuit emulation
Meet timing and synchronization requirements
Provide QoS and protection switching
Furnish advanced OAM capabilities
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-89
Pseudowires (PW) for Legacy Transport
Encapsulation
Structure-Agnostic TDM-over-IP (SAToIP) (RFC 4553)
Structure-Aware TDM Circuit Emulation (CESoPSN) (RFC 5086)
ATMoPSN (RFC 4717)
Carrier EthernetNetwork
PE PECE
(BTS)
BSC
WirelessCore
AC AC
PSN Tunnel
PW
AC: Attachment CktPE: Provider Edge
CE : Customer Edge (BTS)BSC: Base Station Controller
PSN Tunnels May be IP/MPLS, T-MPLS/MPLS-TP, or
PB/PBB/PBB-TE based
PW Signaling
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-90
PBB/PBB-TE for Mobile Backhaul
Connection-oriented p2p tunnels b/ween BTS (BS) -- BSC (NC)
Provides MEF-style EVPL/EVP-Tree between RAN BS and RAN NC
IEEE 802.1ag OAM enables carrier-grade OAM tools
Delay/loss ensured via admission control & 802.1Q PCP
Supporting Legacy TDM over PBB/PBB-TE
IETF has draft on PW over PBB-TE
802.1ah supports encap. of non-Ethernet frames (via short I-TAG TCI)
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-91
PBB/PBB-TE for TDM Encapsulation
We show I-SID with C-DA and C-SA but without Ethernet encapsulation
IEEE 802.1ah PBB Short & Long I-Tag
DEIEtc.
I-SID(Service Identifier)
C-DA C-SA
Long I-TAG Tag Control Information
DEIEtc.
I-SID(Service Identifier)
Short I-Tag(Only I-SID used for encapsulation of multiple protocols)
EtherType used to indicate encapsulation of Ethernet or multiple protocols
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-92
MEF Services for Mobile Backhaul
Metro EthernetEVC EVC
RNC
BSC
Service Multiplexing
BTS BTS
RNC
BSC
BTSBTS
BTS
mp2mp EVC
Metro Ethernet
Services muxed at RNC UNI Needed when inter-BS communication is permitted like in LTE/802.16m (WiMAX)
EVPL Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks
EP-LAN Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-93
MEF Services for Mobile Backhaul
Metro Ethernet
EVC EVC
RNC
BSC
Service Multiplexing
BS/BTS
BS/BTS
BS/BTS
EP-Tree Service for Backhaul using Metro Ethernet Networks
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-94
IP/MPLS for Mobile Backhaul
MPLS PW/VPLS can provide effective backhaul
Traditional circuit-based services are offered using PWs
PW signaling – uses either BGP or LDP
Protection switching
Achieved via MPLS Fast Reroute (FRR) on LSP tunnel
OAM provided by
LSP Ping, VCCV
BFD
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-95
IP/MPLS and PBB/PBB-TE Caveats
Poor support for P2MP LSPs in MPLS
Such support is desirable:
For Clock Distribution from BSC to BTSs
When BSs allowed to communicate with each other and cooperate as in WiMAX/LTE
PW over PBB-TE is not fully developed
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-96
Migration Strategies for Service Providers
HSDPA/3G Data Off-load
Separation of transport
GSM/UMTS voice sent over SONET/SDH
Data traffic transported over PSN tunnel
Packet-based Backhaul
TDM/ATM/Ethernet/IP all transported over PSN tunnel via PWs
Converged Transport
Single packet-switched infrastructure for wireline, broadband and mobile services
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-97
HSDPA/3G Data Off-Load
SDH/SONET Network
TDMTI/EI
Cellsite Gateway
ATM
TI/EI/STM
3G BTS
2G BTS
Carrier EthernetNetwork
2G BSC
3G RNC
Ethernet
Multi-ServiceAggregation
Router
nxE1
Wireless Core
SONET/SDH XConnect
SONET/SDH XConnect
Ethernet Switch
Ethernet Switch
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-98
Packet-Based Backhaul
BSC
RNC/GW
TDMCellsite
Gateway
ATMTI/EI/STM
3G/4G BTS
2G BTS
Ethernet
Carrier EthernetNetwork (PSN)
PE PE
IP/ATM/Ethernet/TDM are all transported over the PSNTunnel using PWs
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-99
Converged Packet-Based Transport
Converged Service Delivery Platform
3G/4G Base Station Aggregation
NetworkConverged Metro Core
AccessNetwork
Internet
Common packet-switched infrastructure for both wireline and wireless services
Copyright 2009All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.Critical Systems Thinking™
Carrier Ethernet Technology Strategies & Evolving Operator Best Practices M1-100
Backhaul References MEF White Paper, “Carrier Ethernet Access for Mobile Backhaul Networks”, Feb
2008.
MEF Technical Specification Draft 2, “Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement- Phase 1”, Feb 2008
Nortel Networks White Paper, “Mobile Network Evolves with Carrier Ethernet”, 2008.
ITU-T G.8261, “Timing and Synchronization Aspects in Packet Networks”, Sept 2007.
IP/MPLS Forum White Paper, “Use of MPLS Technology in Mobile Backhaul Networks”, Feb 2008
Kireeti Kompella and Mallik Tatipamula, “IP/MPLS in Next Gen Mobile Backhaul Networks”, MPLS 2007.