This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
• Efficient operation - keep costs down – be competitive and profitable
11
Response to Challenges
• New Protocol Solutions– Point-to-Point Link OAM (802.3ah)– End-to-End Service Connectivity Fault OAM (802.1ag)– End-to-End Service Performance Monitoring (Y.1731)
• Introduction– Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market– MEF defined CE Services and OAM
• Link and Service OAM– OAM Components and Protocols – OAM Hierarchies and Testing
• Ethernet Services Demarcation Points– Definition of UNI and E-NNI– E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
• E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul– Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model– Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM
14
Ethernet OAM / CFM
Ethernet OAM / CFM provides a critical feature to Provider Ethernet networks to ensure they are “Carrier Grade”. OAM and E-LMI are included in the UNI Type 2 MEF standard.
“Link OAM”:– IEEE 802.3ah Clause 57– EOAM “Ethernet in the first mile” –
used on access links. • Provides four key mechanisms:
– Remote loopback– Remote failure indication– Link monitoring– Loopback Control
• Good for single links, but does not monitor across EVC
• Each layer support OAM capabilities independently• OAMs interoperate • Component responsibilities are complementary
17
Protocol Positioning
• “Link OAM” 802.3ah is run on a point-to-point L2 Ethernet link. It is a common requirement for the access link
• “Service OAM” CFM 802.1ag/Y.1731 is run over a L2 Ethernet service end-to-end. It can traverse many L2 Ethernet hops, but is tunneled over MPLS along with the other customer traffic
18
802.3ah Ethernet OAM Test Challenges
• Functional Protocol Validation– Test Discovery
• Verify capability exchange• Test Active/Passive roles• Change capabilities and verify change
– Test Loopback• Put remote port in loopback, ensure state change• Transmit data to test link
– Test Faults• Dying Gasp, Critical Events, Link Errors, Link Fault• Configure DUT to take action on fault and verify action
– Verify all counters and logs– Verify state machine stability (enable/disable/state changes)– Test OUI and Optional TLVs – (transmit and verify receive)
• Integrate OAM in Higher Scale and Performance Testing– Enable OAM on ports and run traditional tests (like RFC 2544)
• Standardized testing will be defined as part of UNI Type 2 MEF specification
19
Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) Example
This example shows Maintenance Associations (MAs) between Maintenance End Points (MEPs) at three levels within a Maintenance Domain (MD). Maintenance Intermediate Points (MIPs) can be associated per MD or per MA which depends on the visibility the administer has configured.
20
• Service– Type– MTU
• Endpoint– Service Mux– Tag ID/CoS
Preservation
• Link – Rate– L2CPs
Basic OAM Protection QoS
• Link OAM–IEEE 802.3ah
• Service OAM–IEEE 802.1ag & ITU-T Y.1731
• Link Protection– IEEE 802.3ad
(LAG)
• Service Protection
– IEEE 802.1D (STP/MSTP)
• BandwidthProfiles
– By EI – By EVC– By PCP– By DSCP
• Performance– Delay– Loss– Availability
E-NNI Attributes
Similar attribute structure as current MEF specifications
E-NNI Attributes
21
Hierarchical OAM Domains
• A flat network is difficult to manage and define accountabilities• Hierarchical Maintenance Domains will bound OAM Flows & OAM responsibilities
Network OAM
Service OAM
Customer Domain
Provider Domain
Operator Domain
Operator Domain
Customer CustomerService Provider
UNI UNIE-NNI
22
Ethernet Service OAM Test Challenges
• Basic Protocol Functionality– Ethernet CFM are new protocols and basic functionality and operation needs to
be verified and exercised in the lab
• Scalability and Performance– Generating and responding to CFM PDUs puts additional strain on network
elements. Within a single Maintenance Domain there could be over 8,000 Maintenance Associations concurrently running. Each participating Maintenance Point needs to examine and process each PDU. CC intervals can be configured as low as 3.33ms which may have performance impacts. Test hundreds of ports concurrently.
• Interoperability– Ethernet CFM standards (especially 802.1ag) have recently been updated
causing all Network Equipment Manufactures to update their implementation. Significant testing is required to ensure interoperability between various products and vendors.
• Inter-working– Testing and validating inter-working with other Carrier Ethernet technologies is
required for successful end to end service delivery
23
Ethernet Service DemarcationE-NNI and UNI
Ralph Santitoro
24
Agenda
• Introduction– Carrier Ethernet (CE) Market– MEF defined CE Services and OAM
• Link and Service OAM– OAM Components and Protocols – OAM Hierarchies and Testing
• Ethernet Services Demarcation Points– Definition of UNI and E-NNI– E-NNI Constructs and Service Attributes
• E-NNI and OAM in Mobile Backhaul– Mobile Backhaul and Carrier Ethernet model– Mobile Backhaul and Link/Service OAM
25
Ethernet Service Demarcation Points
• UNI (User-to-Network Interface)– Demarcation point between
• Ethernet Service Provider/Access Network Provider and Subscriber– Ethernet Service (EVC) starting/ending point
• E-NNI (External Network-to-Network Interface)– Demarcation/peering point between:
• Ethernet Service Provider (ESP) and Access Network Provider• ESP and Transport (Long Haul) Network Provider
E-NNI E-NNIAccess Network Access Network
ProviderProvider
E-NNI Transport Transport
Network ProviderNetwork ProviderEthernet Service Ethernet Service
ProviderProvider
UNI UNI
EVCEVCSubscriber Subscriber
26
E-NNI Constructs: Component EVC (CEVC)
• MP-to-MP EVC1 associates UNI4, UNI5 and UNI6
• EVC1 decomposed into 3 CEVCs
– CEVC A1 within Operator A’s network
– CEVC B1 within Operator B’s network
– CEVC C1 within Operator C’s network
UNI4
Operator A
UNI6
E-NNI
C1
Operator CE-NNI
A1
UNI5
EVC1
B1
Operator B
27
UNI
EVC2
EVC1
Operator 3
E-NNI Constructs: Tunnels, VUNIs and RUNIs
• Tunnels– Transit Tunnels (associates two E-NNIs)– Terminating Tunnels (associates a VUNI and an RUNI)
• VUNI (Virtual UNI)– Logical interface at endpoint of E-NNI side of Terminating Tunnel– Maps CEVC(s) to its Terminating Tunnel
• RUNI (Remote UNI)– Logical interface at end point of UNI side of the Terminating Tunnel
Terminating tunnel
EVC3
VUNI
Transit Tunnel
E-NNI
UNI
Operator 2
Operator 4
RUNI
E-NNI
EVC1
EVC2
EVC3
E-NNI
UNI
UNI
Operator 1
28
MEF E-NNI, VUNI and CEVC Service Attributes- A comparison to MEF UNI and EVC Service Attributes
• E-NNI and VUNI Service Attributes modeled after UNI Service Attributes– Ingress/Egress Bandwidth Profiles– MTU Size– Identifier
• CEVC Service Attributes modeled after EVC Service Attributes– S-VLAN ID Preservation vs. C-VLAN ID Preservation– Max. Number of VUNI Endpoints vs. Max. Number of UNIs– MTU Size
These similarities will facilitate and accelerate implementation and deploymentThese similarities will facilitate and accelerate implementation and deployment
29
E-NNI Constructs: Putting it all together
E-NNI UNI2
• Access Network Provider – Provides CEVC1 connection between Subscriber UNI1 (RUNI) and
VUNI1 at E-NNI1 with Transport Network Provider
• Transport Network Provider– Provides CEVC2 connection between E-NNI1 (VUNI2) and E-NNI2
(VUNI3) with Ethernet Service Provider
• Ethernet Service Provider– Provides connection to E-NNI2 with Transport Network Provider– Provides End-to-End Ethernet Service to Subscriber
• Provides EVC between UNI1 and UNI2
UNI1 Transport Transport
Network ProviderNetwork Provider
Ethernet Service Ethernet Service ProviderProvider
• A scenario for future Mobile backhaul IA work• RAN BS and the RAN NC are not likely to reside on
the same CEN in many mobile networks
38
Further Reasons for E-t-E E-NNI and OAM
• Business models:– In the mobile world dictate local optimization– ENNI and SOAM enables a lower cost backhaul network
• Scale: – An Ethernet service should be delivered to 000s base stations – Self own Vs. lease parts of the network need to interconnect– Different groups handle aggregation and access backhaul
• Cost:– Leverage existing networks
serving residential DSL and business services
– Lease of substantial parts of the network
– Use of multiple technologies
– Concurrent traffic delivery over different network
• E.g. DSL and Lease lines (Legacy split access)
39
Q&A Panel Members
Arie GoldbergMEF Board Member & Secretary MEFCEO and Chief TechnologistOmnitron Systems Technology, [email protected]+1 949-250-6510
Ran AvitalMEF Market Research Co-ChairVP of Strategic and Product MarketingCeragon [email protected]+972-52-5847526