MPLS-TP OAM in Packet Transport Network (PTN) V2

MPLS-TP OAM in Packet Transport Network (PTN)

Broadband Business Unit (BBU) Nov. 2010

Steven Chen Deputy General Manager Product Management & Marketing Broadband Business Unit October 21, 2010

UTStarcom Confidential

1

Contents •

PTN Overview and Technology Advantages – Why & What is PTN? – PTN technology and its evolution – MPLS-TP OAM Overview and standard progress

•

MPLS-TP OAM in PTN – – – –

•

Comprehensive and Hierarchical OAM in PTN MPLS-TP OAM Options: GACH+Y.1731 vs. BFD Extension/LSP Ping MPLS-TP OAM Implementation in PTN Migration to Standard MPLS-TP OAM

PTN Key Application & Case-studies – Key Applications – China Operators PTN Case Studies

•

Conclusion

UTStarcom Confidential

2

Mobile Data Growth Drivers

Data Speed

Key Catalysts

>100 Mbps 42 Mbps 14 Mbps

HSPA+ STM-1/FE(100M) HSDPA 384kbps STM-1/FE(100M) W-CDMA E1 (ATM) GSM E1 (TDM) 1990s

Society

Smart Phones Internet • • •

UTStarcom Confidential

LTE GbE (1000M)

2002

2005

2010

year

Network & Technology iPhone, Blackberry, and other smart phones driving the explosive growth in packet traffic Mobile carriers have implemented 3G and/or HSDPA to offer much higher data speeds HSPA+ and LTE to offer true broadband experience

3

Major Challenges for Service Providers

1

TDM Packet

$

Cost Revenue

2

How to improve revenue: Despite the subscriber growth, ARPU is going down. Networks are too complex, difficult to scale, and expensive to maintain. Energy and Realestate are another major challenges

3

How to offer New Services: Current transport network infrastructure is not adequate to offer evolving mobile services such as LTE and advanced enterprise services (e.g., EPL, EVPL)

New Cost Bandwidth t Voice Dominant

How to deal with Packet Traffic Growth: Rapid Growth in 3G Mobile and Broadband subscribers worldwide driving the demand for high-speed packet transport

Data Dominant

New Services

UTStarcom Confidential

4

Major Challenges for Existing Technologies No enough OAM

L2 devices have Residential difficulty assuring hard QoS Access

Lack of 50ms switch over Metro Aggregation. Transport protection

AG

L3 IP/MPLS Core BRAS

802

AG

Business

.1a d

DSL/PON Single Tier Hub & Spoke or Ring

CPE Corporate

Ethernet

Mobile 2G/3G

MSTP

ATM

MSTP Low efficiency

E1/ATM

BTS/Node B

NG-SDH/T-MPLS

IP/MPLS/VPLS

New Node B / Base Station have FE/GE interface

Transport Vendors •

•

Transport based technology –

Telecom world

–

Connection-oriented, fully controlled by Carrier

NG-SDH, T-MPLS, RPR –

Metro aggregation

Enterprise /VPN Service Complexity

Router/Switch Vendors •

Router/Switch based technology – –

•

Internet world Connectionless, loosely controlled, ”peer-to-peer”, “plug and play”

IP/MPLS/VPLS –

Metro core to Metro aggregation 5

Choices for Service Providers

1

2

3

CONTINUE deploying SDH/ SONET for transport

THINK Switch/Router for data Network

DEPLOY Packet Transport Network

UTStarcom Confidential

But… ▐ Doesn’t scale for packet traffic ▐ No support for statistical multiplexing – bandwidth inefficient ▐ High CAPEX

▐ Connection-less approach But… ▐ High OPEX – complex operation Difficult to troubleshoot – weak OAM ▐ Doesn’t meet 3.5G/4G synchronization requirements ▐ Low TCO ▐ Connected Oriented ▐ Statistical multiplexing; Powerful OAM functions ▐ Meets mobile synchronization requirements 6

What is PTN? Packet Network ▐ Statistical multiplexing, flexible transport containers ▐ Service aware ▐ Advanced QOS ▐ Scalable ▐ Cost effective (Ethernet based)

Best of both worlds

IP, Ethernet, MPLS

Convergence ▐ ▐ ▐ ▐ ▐ ▐

Transport Network Connection Oriented High clock accuracy Resilient (50ms MSTP/MSPP switch-over) (SDH/SONET) Comprehensive OAM Multi-service support Static or dynamic Provisioning

• • • • • • •

Packet Transport Network Multi-service transport over Packet Statistical Multiplexing Connection Oriented Deterministic data plane Hard QoS Comprehensive OAM Network & equipment protection

Note: PTN is sometimes also referred to as P-OTS or POTP UTStarcom Confidential

7

PTN Technology Choices PTN Technology Choices T-MPLS •

PBB-TE

A new formulation of MPLS, being standardized by ITU-T, and designed specifically for a connection-oriented packet transport network based on well-known and widely deployed IP/MPLS technology and standards

T-MPLS = MPLS (PW/LSP) + OAM – L3 Complexity

•

A subset of IEEE Provider Backbone Bridging (802.1ah) that turns Ethernet connectionless networking into a provisioned connection-oriented transport network primarily for point-to-point Ethernet virtual connections

PBT＝ Ethernet (MAC/MAC)+OAM – L2 Complexity

PBT and T-MPLS are major PTN technology choices base on different migration path UTStarcom Confidential

8

PTN Standards Overview PTN Standard organization focus on improvement and enhancement on Ethernet technology, such as: RPR、ERP、 PBB、PBT

Focus on MPLS、PWE3 and VPLS etc, standard。

focus on T-MPLS standard, formed JWT team with IETF for MPLS-TP in March 2008

formed JWT with ITUT, and promote the MPLS-TP MPLS-TP

PBB/PBT/ RPR Ethernet Ethernet IP/POS IP/POS

PBB/PBT MPLS MPLS

?

MPLS-TP MPLS-TP ATM ATM

T-MPLS T-MPLS

SDH SDH

NG-SDH NG-SDH

WDM WDM

UTS TN Product Line Pre MPLS-TP

OTN OTN UTStarcom Confidential

9

MPLS-TP Overview

Joint Working Team

••

Management Management Plane: Plane: –– ––

••

••

NMS

Control Control Plane: Plane: –– –– –– ––

MPLS-TP MPLS-TP

Statically Statically configure configure LSP LSP and and PW PW and and manage manage via via NMS NMS OAM OAM handling handling

Optional Optional LSP, LSP, PW, PW, and and OAM OAM not not dependent dependent upon upon control control plane plane Static Static provisioning provisioning via via NMS; NMS;

Dynamic Dynamic Provisioning Provisioning (e.g., (e.g., LSP: LSP: RSVP-TE, RSVP-TE, GMPLS, GMPLS, PW: PW: RFC RFC 4447) 4447) under under study study

Control Plane Working-Group Focus Areas

Data Data Plane: Plane: –– –– –– –– –– –– ––

Fully Fully compatible compatible with with MPLS MPLS Forwarding Forwarding based based on on LSP/PW LSP/PW Label Label Bi-directional Bi-directional path path (LSP) (LSP) for for traffic traffic and and OAM OAM OAM OAM support support via via Associated Associated Channel Channel (PW (PW ACH ACH & & GE GE ACH) ACH) MPLS MPLS based based Protection Protection mechanism mechanism Pseudo-wire Pseudo-wire encapsulation encapsulation for for all all traffic traffic types types (Ethernet, (Ethernet, ATM, ATM, SDH/SONET, SDH/SONET, and and PDH) PDH) Transport Transport hierarchy hierarchy similar similar to to SDH/SONET SDH/SONET –– nested nested PW PW and and LSP LSP UTStarcom Confidential

Protection OAM Forwarding

10

MPLS-TP OAM Overview •

OAM (Operation, Administration, and Maintenance) Basic Roles – – – – –

•

Fault Detection & diagnostic: Continuity Check/Connectivity Verification (CC/CV), Loopback (LB) Alarm and Alarm suppress: Generate alarm when fault happens but suppress large volume alarm through AIS/RDI (Alarm Correlation Suppression) Performance monitor: packet loss ratio (LM), delay measurement (DM) Maintenance tools: Link track (LT), Lock (LCK) APS OAM: Linear and Ring APS

MPLS-TP OAM with IETF and ITU-T –

ITU-T and IETF in many technical aspects of the compromise, MPLS-TP OAM inherited the T-MPLS G.8114 part of the agreement, but the rest of codecs and protocols supplementary part, by the major inheritance from the IETF.

MPLS-TP & MPLS UTStarcom Confidential

MPLS-TP & T-MPLS G.8114 11

MPLS-TP OAM Standard Progress Update(1)

UTStarcom Confidential

12

MPLS-TP OAM Standard Progress Update(2)

UTStarcom Confidential

13

Contents •

PTN Overview and Technology Advantages – Why & What is PTN? – PTN technology and its evolution – MPLS-TP OAM Overview and standard progress

•

MPLS-TP OAM in PTN – – – –

•

Comprehensive and Hierarchical OAM in PTN MPLS-TP OAM Options: GACH+Y.1731 vs. BFD Extension/LSP Ping MPLS-TP OAM Implementation in PTN Migration to Standard MPLS-TP OAM

PTN Key Application & Case-studies – Key Applications – China Operators PTN Case Studies

•

Conclusion

UTStarcom Confidential

14

Comprehensive & Hierarchical OAM in PTN ¾ ¾ Based Based on on Ethernet, Ethernet, ITU-T, ITU-T, and and MPLS-TP MPLS-TP standards standards ¾ ¾ Multi-layer Multi-layer OAM OAM support support ¾ ATM, SDH/SONET, SDH/SONET, and and Ethernet Ethernet ¾ Client Client Layer: Layer: ATM, ¾ PW and and LSP LSP (using (using associated associated channel channel mechanism mechanism as as shown shown below) below) ¾ MPLS-TP MPLS-TP Layer: Layer: PW ¾ Ethernet and and SDH/SONET SDH/SONET ¾ Network Network Uplink Uplink layer: layer: Ethernet LSP monitoring and alarming Generic Exception Label and Generic Associated Channel Many options including Non IP BFD is an option encapsulation of Y.1731 pdu Ethernet Header

L1

L2

LFU/BoS

Generic ACH

Channel Payload

0001 | Ver | Resv | Channel Type

Pseudo-wire monitoring and alarming PW-Associated Channel Ethernet Header

L1

L2

PWL/BoS

PWE-3 ACH

Channel Payload

0001 | Ver | Resv | Channel Type

UTStarcom Confidential

15

MPLS-TP OAM Functions and Implementation

UTStarcom Confidential

16

MPLS-TP Implementation in PTN •

Pre-standard MPLS-TP OAM Implementation in PTN –

Send OAM packet between MEP/MIP in PTN network. Detect fault and performance through OAM packet exchanges, generate alarm and related process

–

Pre-standard MPLS-TP OAM mechism is implemented in current PTN products like T-MPLS G.8114 or MPLS Y. 1711 OAM packet is sent/received/handled by PTN equipment (normally using FPGA Hardware to handle OAM packet). The CV interval can be up to 3.3ms per OAM packet. Fault can be detected within 10ms when 3 packet missed (3*3.3ms=10ms) which trigger protection switch.

–

•

MPLS-TP OAM Option 1: GACH+ Y.1731 – – – –

Draft-Bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y.1731 Use RFC 5586 GACH package OAM total solution and fulfill operator’s requirements Support proactive/on-demand CC/CV, AIS, RDI, LB, LCK, TST, APS, LM, DM UTStarcom Confidential

Pre-standard OAM: CV – packet capture •

MPLS-TP OAM Option 2: BFD/LSP Ping Extension – – –

9 other Drafts Use RFC 5586 GACH package BFD extension supports proactive CC/CV/RDI, LSP Ping support ondemand CC/CV, new tools for other functions

17

OAM Options: G.Ach+Y.1731 vs. BFD/LSP Ping Extension 1 1

2

2 3

4

5

6

7

8 1

2

3 3 4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

4 5

Tunnel label (13) 0001 MEL

0000

7

8

1

S

TC

00000000

Version

6

2

3

4

5

6

7

TTL

Channel Type（Y.1731 OAM）

OpCode

Flags

TLV offset

8

Y.1731 frame format： • use MPLS date plane (Label: 13) • Use G.ACH • use OpCode identify OAM type

OAM PDU payload area（Y.1731）

End TLV 1

2

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1

0001

Version

2 3 4

5 6 7 8

3

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

LSP label

TC

S

TTL

label (13)

TC

S

TTL

Res

Channel Type ACH TLV Header

OAM PDU payload area（BFD、LSP Ping、新定义）

BFD extensions frame format： •Use MPLS date plane (Label: 13) •Use G.ACH • use Channel Type identify OAM type

End TLV

„ Y.1731 has better fault detection function but limited in L2 and below „ BFD expansion can support fault detection up to L3 and below UTStarcom Confidential

18

GACH+Y.1731 and BFD Expansion Standard Progress Basic OAM requirements 1 2

3

GACH+Y.1731

Continuity Check/ Connectivity Verification (CC/CV) Connectivity Verification on demand (CV)

BFD Expansion •

IETF draft（draft-asm-mpls-tp-bfd-cc (close to complete) draft-ietf-mpls-tp-lsp-ping-bfdprocedures-00）(incomplete)

•

IETF draft（draft-nitinb-mpls-tp-lsp-pingextensions）(incomplete)

•

IETF draft（draft-flh-mpls-tp-oam-diagnostic-test） (incomplete)

•

IETF draft (draft-boutros-mpls-tp-loopback) (incomplete)

• •

IETF draft (draft-ietf-mpls-tp-fault) (close to complete)

Route Tracing

4

Testing Debug test

• Loopback

IETF draft （draft-bhhmpls-tp-oamy1731）, (close to complete)

5

Lock indicate

6

Lock

7

Alarm indication singal (AIS)

8

Remote Alarm Indication (RAI)

• •

IETF draft (draft-asm-mpls-tp-bfd-cc-cv) (close to complete)

9

Client Signal Failure (CSF)

• •

IETF draft（draft-he-mpls-tp-csf） (incomplete)

10

Packet loss measurement

•

11

Delay measurement

IETF draft （draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-delay） (incomplete)

•

UTStarcom Confidential

19

G.Ach+Y.1731 OAM Packet Definition 1 1

2

2 3

4

5

6

7

8 1

2

3 3 4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

4 5

Tunnel label (13) 0001 MEL

0000 Version

00000000 OpCode

6

TC

7

8

1

S

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

TTL

Channel Type（Y.1731 OAM） Flags

TLV offset

OAM PDU payload area（Y.1731）

End TLV

G.Ach MPLS-TP OAM Packet Format Definiation OAM PDU Frame definitions: a. Tunnel label:16 bits, value = 13, GAL b. TC: 3 bits, traffic classification; c. S: 1 bit, Value=1 means bottom of stack; d. TTL: 8 bit, Value=1 or MEP to MEP hops+1; e. channel type identify it is an OAM packet; f. MEL: Maintenance entity level; configurable, default = “7”; g. Version: Identify OAM protocol version, set to 0 h. OpCode define OAM PDU packet type (see right table) i. TLV offset: 8 bits, related to OAM PDU type, Value=0 means TLV offset one byte; j. OAM PDU payload area: OAM PDU packet content; k. End TLV：8 bit, identify end of OAM PDU packet UTStarcom Confidential

OpCode Definition

20

Select G.ach +Y.1731 as PTN OAM •

CMCC/China CCSA select G.ach +Y.1731 as PTN OAM standard – – – –

–

Treat draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y.1731 as option of MPLS-TP OAM Y.1731 Ethernet OAM: 0x8902 Select RFC5586 experimental Code Point 32767 (7FFF) as channel type Alliance: • PTN vendor: Al-Lu, Huawei, ZTE, Fiberhome, UTStarcom; • Operators: China Mobile, China telecom, China Unicom, TI, CJK, telefonica etc. Push the acceptance and standard process in ITU-T and IETF

Option 1: GACH+Y.1731

Option 2: MPLS-TP & MPLS

Mature, meet all the requirement at technical point of view Easy upgrade from existing PTN system to support this Mechanism Better availability, Large volume PTN deployed in CMCC and most PTN equipment can upgrade to to support it in short term

Not complete and not mature, can not meet short term requirements (at least another 2 years to be mature) Hard to upgrade from existing PTN system to support this mechanism, hardware upgrade might be necessary Consensus and might be final standard at last No equipment or vendor declare support it

UTStarcom Confidential

21

Migration to MPLS-TP OAM •

MPLS-TP standards Progress – Standards still in development by the JWT from ITU-T and IETF. – MPLS-TP is based on PWE3 and LSP forwarding architecture which is within IETF MPLS standards. So there are minimal changes in the LSP and PW datastructure

•

Upgrading to MPLS-TP OAM – More comprehensive OAM features to handle the end-to-end management of network than IP/MPLS. – MPLS-TP OAM standards are still under development, hence current installed equipment will have to be upgraded to support the new OAM formats and messages to comply with Standard

UTStarcom will ensure smooth migration to MPLSTP OAM without any service disruption

UTStarcom Confidential

22

TN OAM Upgrade Scenario

TN725

TN705

TN703

•

•

When MPLS-TP OAM standards are finalized, TN series can be upgraded to work on dual OAM formats simultaneously (Dual-Mode): one mode supports the old format, and another one supports the new format that complies with the finalized MPLS-TP standards. The whole upgrade process is divided into two steps: 1. upgrade each node to support dual OAM formats 2. activate the LSP to support new OAM format. UTStarcom Confidential

23

Contents •

PTN Overview and Technology Advantages – Why & What is PTN? – PTN technology and its evolution – MPLS-TP OAM Overview and standard progress

•

MPLS-TP OAM in PTN – – – –

•

Comprehensive and Hierarchical OAM in PTN MPLS-TP OAM Options: GACH+Y.1731 vs. BFD Extension/LSP Ping MPLS-TP OAM Implementation in PTN Migration to Standard MPLS-TP OAM

PTN Key Application & Case-studies – Key Applications – China Operators PTN Case Studies

•

Conclusion

UTStarcom Confidential

24

Mobile Backhaul using PTN Cell Site

Mobile Backhaul

Cell Site

Mobile Backhaul

A-bis E1/T1 AAL2/5

T1/E1 (Copper) 2G BTS

SDH/SONET

T1/E1 (Copper) 2G BTS

ATM IMA E1/T1

3G Node B

3G Node B

IP MLPPP

ATM (Copper or Fiber)

E1/T1 AAL2/5 ATM

ATM

3G Node B

ATM (IMA/STM-1)

Any traffic over MPLS-TP

3G Node B

STM-1 LTE UDP/IP Ethernet

Ethernet (Fiber, GPON, xDSL)

IP over Ethernet or MPLS

3G NodeB or LTE eNodeB

Ethernet (Fiber, GPON, xDSL) 3G NodeB or LTE eNodeB

Migration Migration to to Unified Unified Transport Transport Network Network UTStarcom Confidential

25

SDH/MSTP Replacement BSC

Classic 2G, 3G, HSDPA, LTE, …

BTS NB

E1

E1

TDM TDM (SDH) (SDH)

E1

RNC STM1

BSC

Hybrid 2G, 3G, HSDPA, LTE, …

TDM TDM (SDH/MSTP) (SDH/MSTP)

BTS NB

E1

E1

E1 Eth

RNC

Packet Packet (PTN) (PTN)

Packet 2G, 3G, HSDPA, Broadband Aggregation, Enterprise, LTE, …

NB

STM1 Eth

BTS

BSC

Eth

E1

Packet Packet (PTN) (PTN)

Eth

RNC

Enterprise BB access

STM1 Eth

Eth

UTStarcom Confidential

26

Migrate to PTN at China Operators China Operators’ PTN Market

China Mobile (CMCC)

China Telecom (CTC)

1. Start PTN research with PTN vendors since Q3/2007. 2. Start PTN equipment and IOP test since Q4/2008; 3. Mobile backhaul by PTN field trial Q1/2009 and 1588v2 test in Q2/09 4. First PTN purchase Q4/2009 and send phase purchase Q2/2010. More than 100K PTN nodes are installed and carrying living traffic.

China Unicom (CUC)

1. Start CE (Carry Ethernet) test at Q4/2006 and switch PTN technology later

1. Start CE (Carry Ethernet) test since 2008 and did a few trials.

2. After PTN investigation and research, start large scale PTN test since Q3/2009

2. Switch to PTN and start PTN test Q4/2009 and finished at Q1/2009

3. PTN field trail since Q1/2010; more than 3000 PTN nodes trial in the network

3. Start PTN field trial Q2/2010 and close to 2000 PTN nodes are running in the field.

Orientation has been confirmed that evolution is inevitable

UTStarcom Confidential

27

Case Study – Mobile Operator China

2G Network

3G Network Ref. clock

MS E1

E1

BTS

ATM

NodeB

SDH

BSC

SDH ATM

NodeB

Customer Background & Pain-points •• •• •• •• •• ••

Over Over 470 470 million million subscribers subscribers –– includes includes 2G 2G and and 3G 3G (400,000+ (400,000+ base base stations stations installed installed and and growing) growing) Operates Operates not not only only basic basic mobile mobile voice voice services services but but also also value-added value-added services services such such as as data,IP data,IP telephone and multimedia. telephone and multimedia. Start Start to to deploy deploy TD-SCDMA TD-SCDMA 3G 3G network network since since 2008 2008 Looking Looking for for IP IP RAN RAN solution solution scalable scalable to to support support future future data data service service and and at at the the same same time time support support TDM TDM and and other other legacy legacy services services such such as as ATM ATM Has Has deployed deployed more more than than 100K 100K PTN PTN nodes nodes network network since since 2009 2009 Start Start MPLS-TP MPLS-TP OAM OAM IOP IOP base base on on GACh+Y.7131 GACh+Y.7131 UTStarcom Confidential

28

CMCC 3G (TD-SCDMA) Network Migration •Current 2G/GSM Networks : TDM based BTS

• Current 3G/TD-SCDMA Networks : ATM IMAE1

and BSC. E1 at BTS, STM-1 and E1 at BSC

at Node B, Channelized STM-1 at RNC

Ref. clock

MS E1

E1

ATM

NodeB

SDH/MSTP

SDH RNC

BTS

BSC

ATM

NodeB

•Future 3G/TD-SCDMA Networks : FE at Node B, GE at RNC Ref. clock NodeB

PTN

GE

RNC FE

NodeB

UTStarcom Confidential

•

Sync Requirement in current 3G/TDSCDMA Networks – Base stations need frequency sync: +/0.05ppm, and phase sync: +/- 3us – For base stations, reference clock is distributed via GPS or PTN. • Time sync between NodeB and GPS/PTN: +/- 1.5us

29

Requirement Highlights •Requirements to PTN: -Converged network to support multiple type of services: legacy E1, ATM and future FE -Common network for wireless and fixed line broadband service -Reliability, QOS, OAM, controllable and manageable -Performance including delay, jitter -Privacy -Inter-working with IP/MPLS and SDH/NGSDH -Distribute Frequency and time synchronization to Base stations • MPLS-TP PTN solution address these requirements by -Multi-service support -Carries class design with hardware redundancy and OAM to support