dynamically provisioned networks as a substrate for science
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Dynamically Provisioned Networks as a Substrate for Science

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 12

Dynamically Provisioned Networks as a Substrate for Science - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 90 Views
  • Uploaded on

Dynamically Provisioned Networks as a Substrate for Science. David Foster CERN. Objectives. T o explain in a high-level way why dynamic circuits are needed to serve demanding scientific users.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Dynamically Provisioned Networks as a Substrate for Science' - lalo


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
objectives
Objectives
  • To explain in a high-level way why dynamic circuits are needed to serve demanding scientific users.
  • To put the activities into an overall context of global research networking and show the future directions.

David Foster, CERN

environment
Environment
  • Science projects are global enterprises
    • Megascience: LHC, ITER, LoFAR, JIVE, SKA …….
    • ESFRI projects funded under FP7:
      • http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=ri_projects_fp7
    • Increasing coordination on an increasingly global scale.
  • Computing for science is increasingly distributed
    • Clouds and Grids
  • People are mobile but lifestyle choice is important
    • Work anywhere, anytime.
    • “Think Globally but act Locally”
  • Open access to information is empowering
    • “Bring Science to the Scientists” - Bring the best minds to the problem.

David Foster, CERN

situation
Situation
  • As perceived by the user community, networks are a victim of their own success
    • Expected to be transparent. “Networking is not a problem”
    • Assumed to be infinite and free (or nearly so).
  • Data volumes are increasing
    • LHC creates 6-7 PB raw data per year , all 4 experiments together.
    • CERN generates in total 15 PB of data per year, all 4 experiments together.
    • The raw data, 6-7PB/year, is distributed and there are more than 120PB/year of data products that are created and stored world-wide.
    • Other science project collaborations will generate equivalent or more data.

David Foster, CERN

characterization of the user marketplace
Characterization of the User Marketplace

Cees de Laat

http://ext.delaat.net/talks/cdl-2005-02-13.pdf

David Foster, CERN

issues with d emanding u sers
Issues With Demanding Users
  • There are more and more of them.
  • The swamping of IP infrastructures with traffic from “well connected sites”
    • Occurs when the capability of a site are approaching that of the routed IP network.
    • Looks like a “denial of service” to the other users.
  • Solution 1: Build a bigger routed IP network.
    • A big investment to solve a problem for relatively few users.
    • All domains in any end-end path must do the same.
    • Only temporary, new users will come with bigger requirements.
  • Solution 2: Give the sites “what they need when they need it”.
    • May be considered as “Just in time provisioning”
    • Has led to the circuit approach.

David Foster, CERN

how circuits are used
How Circuits are Used
  • For efficiently using resources:
    • Long term or static circuits if the number of sites is small (~10)
    • Dynamic circuit provisioning for a community that is manageable and has continual needs (~100 sites)
    • Dynamic circuit provisioning for a large community that has occasional needs (periodic data transfer)
  • For traffic management:
    • Separates flows from the general IP infrastructure.

David Foster, CERN

lhc case study
LHC: Case Study
  • LHC tier-1 sites are connected at 10G in a semi-mesh.
    • LHCOPN
  • Tier-2 sites (originally) needed 1Gbps to realistically be “part of” the grid community.
    • A dedicated circuit to India enabled and effectively empowered the TIFR.
  • Now, tier-2 sites are increasingly connected at 10G to be able to dynamically access all data products wherever they are (remember the 120PB/year?)
    • But connected to where? The association between Tier-1 and Tier-2 has “disappeared”.
    • All sites must be able to access all sites, so IP is the best fit!
      • Probably so at 1Gbps/site, but not at 10Gbps/site.
  • A new approach was needed
    • LHCONE: http://lhcone.net

David Foster, CERN

what is lhcone
What is LHCONE?
  • A sociology
    • Has helped to raise awareness of end site needs.
    • T2’s in Europe are requesting increasing capacity from the NREN’s
  • A process
    • Transatlantic bandwidth review of all R&E circuits
    • Discussions on really how to make a cross domain network.
    • Process is perhaps more important than outcome in delivering collaboration and focus
      • as long as the outcome works!
  • An architecture
    • Use of open exchanges to empower networks and users
    • Use of software for managing network capacity through dynamic provisioning.
      • OpenFlowis the flavour of the month
  • A model
    • The internet-2 OS3E is an open exchange architecture to support all sciences. Experience with LHCONE will be important.

David Foster, CERN

open exchanges
Open Exchanges
  • A growing consensus on the way forward
    • I2 members meeting discussion with Bill St Arnaud.
    • A paper in preparation on a “definition”
  • Why is there so much interest?
    • They promote customised bilateral relationships by the exchange point owner not interfering
      • “lightweight” rules for connecting, link policies controlled by the link owners.
    • They have no specific commercial allegiance
      • So-called “carrier-neutral”
    • Users of the exchange point (can be NREN’s or end users) like them because they remain in control and directly manage the relationships.
      • no third-party involvement
    • They provide the possibility to create diverse solutions by working with different partners.
      • risk management
    • They do not impose technical decisions, so everyone can go at their own speed.
      • Avoids “lowest common denominator” solutions
    • They allow for organic growth and new entrants are welcome both as exchange operators and connected parties
      • Avoids single point of failure in the system as a whole
    • Optical exchanges permit provisioning of circuits of different transport protocols to exchange traffic.
      • http://www.broadnets.org/2004/workshop-papers/Gridnets/DijkstraF.pdf
    • They allow for activities to follow means and ambition.
      • They can be “pay as you go” and not “subscription based”

David Foster, CERN

to be resolved
To Be Resolved
  • Costs incurred to connect to an open exchange.
    • Depends on the exchange operator and the “last mile” provider.
    • Will be born by the end-site connecting.
  • Costs incurred to interconnect open exchanges
    • Currently born by the exchange owners, but is this scalable?
    • Might be also the responsibility of the science community but they are classically not structured to fund central network resources.
      • Needs to be more awareness that networks are not free inside the science communities.
  • Management of multi-domain circuit based infrastructures
    • Is a hot topic and has been for some time.
      • Buzzword heaven: Oscars, ION, Dragon, DRAC, Federica, OpenFlow, DICE, NSI …
    • Many software solutions are used and under development.
      • But some are moving much faster than others. We need some consolidation.
    • Somecollaboration activities underway to develop domain interworking.
      • But we need a more open and inclusive process.
    • Operations and management processes are still to be agreed.
      • No real process addressing this at present.

David Foster, CERN

summary
Summary
  • Science needs are increasing and diversifying rapidly
    • Big growth in large international projects in all areas needing global high bandwidth connectivity.
    • The pressure is to always seek Open, Neutral and Diverse solutions.
      • The best service at the best price.
  • Circuit based approaches are inevitable
    • They address the needs of the network providers to serve the high-end users with resource efficiency and manageability.
    • The downward pressure on bandwidth costs from commercial operators make them increasingly cost effective.
  • Open Exchanges are inevitable
    • Because of the compelling combination of sociological, business and technical rationale.
    • We are not a strict hierarchy of users, nren’s, operators at world or european level and perhaps becoming less so as time goes on.

David Foster, CERN

ad