SEEFIRE CEF network design including crossborder fibre issues
SEEFIRE CEF network design (including cross-border fibre issues) www. seefire. org Stanislav Šíma CESNET The SEEFIRE project is co-funded by the European Commission under the FP 6 IST contract no. 15817
Network construction and parts (what is really our task) Collins COBUILD English Dictionary for Advanced Learners: „If you construct something such as an idea, piece of writing or system, you create it by putting different parts together. “ For network construction we need to elaborate specifications of: Network services Network building parts (elements) Implementation of services by connecting elements Elaboration of above specifications is called network design Network design is semantically similar to computer design or electronic circuit design, but big difference makes complexity and cost of some building parts: Building elements, implementation and operation of large scale networks are procured Procurement is long process (especially if public funding is used): e. g. 7 -24 month (but legal system in some countries is not so restrictive to research) Returns and corrections of decisions could be very difficult or impossible in such procurement process (details depend on SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2 procurement regulations in 2005 given country)
Legacy procedure of REN design (ISP for R&E community) Decide about REN Po. Ps needed and then: Procure SDH or lambda services Procure „ISP-like“ equipment Procure network operation and maintenance The first goal is service for researchers (research in networking is secondary) Main Advantages: Relatively simple design and operation (we use large and matured building elements and services, with guarantee) Transparency for donators and users (element selection is the best in the current commercial sense) Main Weakness and Risk: The „best in current commercial sense“ is not the best generally (monopoly or dominant position of some vendors prevents it) Construction simplicity and network reliability received are very expensive, i. e. network is based on outdated technology, adaptation to user needs is far from perfect, both CAPEX and OPEX are high Vendors prevent some improvements of network after installation (to safe their exclusive delivery position) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 3
New possibilities in REN design Main source of innovation is optical technology Fibres and fibre lighting devices Free Space Optics (up to 2. 5 Gb/s per line) with microwave backup Change of P 2 P services by P 2 P fibres is first step only New types of transmitters, receivers, amplifiers, gratings etc. are available, some of them even with Multi. Source Agreements New network services are enabled, for example E 2 E lightpath on demand, fibre switching, facilities based networking … New architecture for cost-effectivness: Overcome distances by light only (see CESNET 2 and GEANT 2 core) OEO conversion and switches should be rare (use OADM and SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 4
CEF Network approach to REN design Decide about REN Po. Ps needed and then: Procure Dark fibres including optical first mile Procure Open (multi-vendor) network equipment Procure Network Integrator (if external support for design, deployment and operation is needed) The goal is still service for researchers, but role of research in design is stronger CEF Network approach is field proved: procurement of dark fibres instead services: proved by many NRENs, RONs, National Lambda. Rail, partially GEANT 2 procurement of open (multi-vendor) equipment: proved by SWITCH (including external design support), Czech. Light (including CESNET-made Optical Amplifiers), partially CESNET 2 Many metropolitan CEF RENs has experience with network integration by own staff Save own improvement freedom and independency on vendors Save own ability to quick return and correct design (including re-tendering etc. ) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 5
Main strategies for SEE NRENs development Short characteristics of main possibilities for SEE NRENs: „Safe way“: Step-wise repeat NREN development seen in other countries (it is slow, quite expensive and preserves gap) „Brute force way“: Use big investment to make „the second instance“ of some leading NREN (this approach is limited mainly by missing first mile fibres and by unsufficient funds) „Innovation way“: Strong use of research results to solve NREN design problem. Search for cost-effective technology successively deployed in testbeds and tested in NRENs (or prepared for future NRENs) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 6
Possible Government Support for R&E Remove telecommunication regulations for research and education Simplify tendering regulations for research and education Establish fibre lines for research and education as infrastructure donated by state (such as roads) Support municipalities deploying first mile fibres for research and education It helps to national R&E and to national development. It helps to EU development too (by better connecting of SEE research capacity) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 7
GEANT 2 design characteristics GEANT 2 is hybrid network: Lambda services (Layer 2 OEO services) is offered to participants besides IP service (Layer 3 services) Small changes in network topology, local movings of GEANT Po. Ps requested by n. RENs Mixed procurement of services and dark fibres Extensive comparisons of dark fibres to services costs, despite that reasons for dark fibres are strategic rather than financial, and result of comparison strongly depends on question: How many lambdas will users need in next years? ? ? GEANT 2 is CEF network in the sense, that core is on leased dark fibres and lighting equipment is owned by DANTE Separated procurement of transmission system and SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 8
Our example presented on TNC 2004 Rhodes SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 9
Initial GEANT 2 topology (dark fibre core footprint) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 10
GEANT 2 and SEE countries GEANT 2 will be one of world-leading continent-wide R&E network using dark fibres (another one will be National Lambda. Rail after merging with Abilene 2 in USA) Further work is strongly needed, for example: GN 2 procurement of dark fibres failed for connection of some countries, despite that dark fibres where available (good offer was missing), for example to Ireland, Portugal, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania: re-tendering in GN 2 is possible Transmission and switching equipment are from single-vendor: multi-vendor interoperability problems must be solved on demarcation line GEANT 2 -NRENs Important and feasible tasks: acquire international dark fibres to GN 2 countries Romania, Bulgaria and Greece SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 11
International dark fibre acquiring and using Cross border fibre (CBF) issue GCBF are GEANT 2 cross border fibres, connecting GEANT 2 Po. Ps RCBF are Regional corss border fibres, connecting neighbours NRENs In principle, by means NRENs fibres and RCBF is possible to implement European-wide lambdas and GCBF looks redundant Situation is of course much more complicated: GCBF could be sometimes less expensive (imagine quantity discounts) Lambdas implemented on GCBF should be more reliable GCBF could be used for lambdas inside country (using OADMs etc. ) In general, CBF procurement results achieved by NRENs and by DANTE are (and will be) different SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 12
Cross border fibre issues (lines are examples only) SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 13
CBF connection needed For GN 2 members to Bucharest Sofiya Athena For GN 2 observers to Beograde Skopje For GN 2 non-members to Tirana Sarajevo We should agree in SEEFIRE now about required steps, including suggestion to GN 2 SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 14
Acknowledgement Lada Altmannova for topology maps Czech. Light team members for collaboration SEEFIRE technical meeting – Sofia, July 15, 2005 15
- Slides: 15