1 / 37

How networks can fulfil today‘s and tomorrow‘s Grid demands

How networks can fulfil today‘s and tomorrow‘s Grid demands - Organisational and Technical Challenges - Marcus Pattloch, Karin Schauerhammer, Klaus Ullmann (DFN-Verein, Germany, pattloch@dfn.de) 29. March 2007, ISGC 2007, Taipei. Contents. User Collaboration Structure

vachel
Download Presentation

How networks can fulfil today‘s and tomorrow‘s Grid demands

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. How networks can fulfil today‘s and tomorrow‘s Grid demands - Organisational and Technical Challenges - Marcus Pattloch, Karin Schauerhammer, Klaus Ullmann (DFN-Verein, Germany, pattloch@dfn.de) 29. March 2007, ISGC 2007, Taipei

  2. Contents • User Collaboration Structure • Economical and Technical Challenges • Some Technical Definitions • Examples: X-WiN, Geant2 and the LHCOPN • OPN Building Blocks • Forecasts • VPNs/OPNs, Grids’ Role for Networking, Transmission Technology, User Demands • Conclusions • Bandwidth Provision, Future Developments and Needs • Organisational Challenges

  3. How do networked users collaborate? • Research collaboration has in almost all cases an international dimension • Example: For LHC collaborations the processes for the four experiment‘s data evaluation has an international dimension of networking which is vital for success • NRENs (National Research Networks) and Geant2 (Pan European Network) have to adapt to that situation - not only for the LHC experiment evaluation process

  4. Economical and Technical Challenges

  5. Some Technical Definitions • VPN: Virtual Private Network • a „user-owned network“ which is built from a basic technical platform (IP / SDH / DWDM...) • OPN: Optical (Virtual) Private Network • a VPN based on optical technology • Hybrid Network • Router based network using a VPN / OPN as a platform

  6. Forecast (F1) • Communication Market • F1: Liberalisation of communication market in all European countries will continue, will (amongst others) give better opportunities for research networks and will decrease the „digital divide“ (or the economic conditions for that divide)

  7. Example 1: X-WiN (German NREN)

  8. Fibre B AWI Fibre C Fibre D Fibre A PSNC Surfnet X-WiN (1): Topology inc. cross-border fibre KIE DKRZ ROS DES HAM FFO BRE TUB POT ZEU HAN HUB BIE MUE ZIB BRA MAG ADH DUI DRE FZJ LEI AAC BIR JEN CHE ILM FRA Geant2 BAY GSI ESF KAI SAA ERL HEI REG FZK Renater KEH STU GAR Richtung Basel 13.10.2006 Switch/GARR

  9. X-WiN (2): (Hybrid network) Features • Platform available for national VPNs/OPNs and for the national part of international VPNs/OPNs • Possible due to lively fibre market in Germany • Optical technology delivers ample bandwidth, i.e. 160*10 Gbit/s per link • Costs per 10 Gbit/s link are relatively low (as in Geant2) - in the order of 90 K€/a for 10 Gbit/s

  10. X-WiN (3): Targets (network design) • More performance • performance increase by factor 4 since 01/06 (same costs) • more performance available as of 01/07 (for the same price) • More flexibility • no volume charging (and no usage limitation) • Ethernet as additional access technology • hybrid PoPs enable VPNs • Higher availability • during design for backbone implicitly taken into account

  11. X-WiN (4): Optical platform • Toolbox for the provision of • DFNInternet (10 Gbps to 10 Mbps) • VPNs/OPNs based on optical links • services like DFNVideoConference, DFN-PKI, DFN-CERT, DFNRoaming, DFNNews unchanged • New cost structures for optical networks enable very economic network solutions for specialised services like Grids (for example OPNs)

  12. X-WiN (5): Router Platform for IP EWE KIE ROS GRE DES HUB BRE HAM FFO TUB ADH DRE BRA HAN MAG GOE ZIB CRS- BIE POT POT CHE KAS MUE BAY LEI CRS- DUI HAN CRS- JEN ERL AAC GSI CRS- MAR ILM XR FRA FRA ERL BIR FZK GIE HEI REG GAR STU 1GE KAI SAA AUG WUE 2x10GE AWI FZJ 43 CISCO7609 KR 10GE

  13. X-WiN (6) - Status • Technical concept backbone • backbone consists of (dark) fibre and leased circuits • operational responsibility: DFN • more than before bought in partial services like 24/7 hotline • much more than before DFN PoPs • Economic concept • backbone put together from different service offerings from the market and integrated under DFN responsibility • most effective usage of competition on the market

  14. X-WiN (7): Scalability of architecture • Options for transfer • 10 Gbit/s ~ 1014 Byte/d or 100 TByte/d • eleven 10 Gbit/s links -> more than 1 PByte/d or roughly 0.5 ExaByte/a • If one 10 Gbit/s link per T1 is not sufficient • installation of just another 10 Gbit/s link T0 - T1 if possible on physically separated fibre path • architecture covers this completely • upper limit of the technology is 160 links per optical path

  15. Conclusion (C1) • Bandwidth Provision • C1: Bandwidth provision, which has been a major economic problem for any research network over the past decade, will not be a big problem in the future (for 10 Gbit/s and below)

  16. Forecasts (F2 & F3) • VPNs / OPNs • F2: VPNs/OPNs will in a few years carry the bulk of scientific data in European networks (NRENs/Geant) and perhaps also world-wide • F3: Migration to that scenario is an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary process defined by user group’s needs and available new network technology

  17. Forecasts (F4 & F5) • Role of Grids • F4: Grids and Grid like systems will for the time being be a major driver for the VPN migration scenario process (examples LHCOPN, DEISA network etc.) • F5: Networking technology developments like network management (example: monitoring of VPNs/OPNs in multi domain environments) or network security are still needed for serving „Grid infrastructures“

  18. OPN Building Blocks

  19. OPN Building Blocks (1): E2E Links • E2E Links are dedicated optical multi-gigabit connections • Essentially P2P links, usually using SDH/SONET or Ethernet • E2E Links are planned as a regular service of Géant2: • Cooperation of several NRENs needed to operate E2E Links • Users need Single Point of Contact (SPOC) • E2E Link Coordination Unit (E2ECU) brings together Users and NRENs during operations GEANT2 NREN1 NREN2 NREN3 E1 E3 E2E Link 3 E2E Link 2 E2

  20. OPN Building Blocks (2):Workflow E2ECU • Workflows define the interaction between Actors • Actors: Authorized Users (no End Users), e.g. • LHC GGUS (Global Grid User Support) • E2ECU (End-to-End Link Coordination Unit ) • NREN TNOCs (Thin Network Operation Centres of NRENs) • Mostly human/organisational communication • Full life cycle of E2E links is covered • For now, only Workflows for technical aspects are defined • Refinements still under discussion in GN2-JRA4/WI3

  21. OPN Building Blocks (3):E2E Link Monitoring • Status information corresponds to network layers 1/2 • Multiple technologies / vendors used to provide an E2E service • Status information is logical abstraction from vendor solution • No information about physical devices necessary • Status of partial links (within domains and connecting domains) is provided by NRENs • E2E link status is an aggregation of partial links

  22. Demo Monitoring • http://cnmdev.lrz-muenchen.de/e2e

  23. Example 2: Geant2

  24. Geant2 topology as of 09/06

  25. Example 3: LHCOPN

  26. LHC TIER0 – TIER1 OPN, scenario based on work by R. Sabatino (DANTE) RAL NorduGrid TRIUMF BNL FNAL S-Janet ASCC CERN T0 NorduNet SWITCH Surfnet SARA GEANT2 DFN Renater GARR GRIDKa Rediris IN2P3 PIC CNAF

  27. LHCOPN in Europe • T1-T0 primary connection • for „Geant2 fibre cloud NRENs“ through Geant2 • T1-T1 secondary connection • on separate fibre paths through other fibre. Secondary connections provide resilience • OPN approach • high data volume expected, Grid middleware driving this approach; „low“ prices for optical links due to liberalised situation per country enables it

  28. T2 communication to T1 in DE (1) • Open Issues • Which access pattern is requested by the T2s to T1? Only GridKa or other T1s as well? „Other T1s“ would be T1s in other NRENs. • Which access pattern is requested by the T2s to other T2s or T3s? • What are quantitative access patterns of T2s?

  29. T2 communication to T1 in DE (2) • No specification available yet • In Germany T2- and T3-sites are known, networking them is now on the agenda • Principles for this part of networking could be: • T2 sites need 1 Gbit/s access to T1 (which one?) • Build resilient ring of core-T2 sites in Germany • T3 sites access data through extended DFNInternet service • Problem has to be solved in 2007

  30. Forecasts (F6 - F8) • Transmission Technology • F6: On a (per user-) stream basis 10 Gbit/s will be the main bandwidth to be used for the next 2-3 years, perhaps even longer - the difficulty is to get data from sources to sinks at higher speeds than 10 Gbit/s • F7: 40 Gbit/s or 100 Gbit/s per (user-) stream will follow • F8: 10 Gbit/s equipment will be very „cheap“

  31. Forecasts (F9 & F10) • Qualitative User Demands • F9: The user (group) demand in the research area is in almost all cases „multi-domain / multi vendor“ in networking terms (--> see LCG example) • F10: Users will require „intelligent networks“, i.e. network technology which adapts (at best dynamically) to their requirements

  32. Conclusions (C2 & C3) • Developments • C2: One of the main future challenges for the developments of research networking is to further work out solutions for multi-domain environments for operational purposes • C3: Work started in Geant2 („E2E“) but solutions have to be driven further according to developing demands for example from Grid communities like the particle physics community

  33. Conclusion (C4) • Future Needs • C4: Intelligent networks (i.e. „intelligent“ VPNs / OPNs adaptable and more flexible to user needs) have to be further developed in the future, i.e. VPNs „on demand“ or dynamic VPNs

  34. Organisational Background

  35. Governing Structure • Presently the NREN Policy Committee (NRENPC) is successfully governing the networking policy definition and always devised a flexible substructure (for example Exec) to adapt to management needs

  36. The NRENPC as of 01/07 CountryNREN Austria(ACOnet) Belgium (BELNET) Bulgaria (BREB/ISTF) Croatia (CARNet) Czech Republic (CESNET) Cyprus (CYNET) Germany (DFN) Estonia (EENet) France (RENATER) Greece (GRNET) Hungary (HUNGARNET) Ireland (HEANet) Israel (IUCC) Italy (GARR) Latvia (LATNET) Lithuania (LITNET) Luxembourg (RESTENA) Malta (UoM) Netherlands (SURFNET) CountryNREN Nordic Countries (NorduNet) Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden Poland (PSNC) Portugal (FCCN) Romania (RoEduNet) Russia (JSCC) Slovakia (SANET) Slovenia (ARNES) Spain (RedIRIS) Switzerland (SWITCH) Turkey (ULAKBIM) United Kingdom (UKERNA) Plus Non-Voting Members: DANTE, TERENA Perm. Observers: CERN, AMREJ, MARNET

  37. Summary • Economic situation for data networks improved drastically within the last 10 years • 10 Gbit/s VPNs economically achievable today • High performance network technology is/has been introduced in a couple of NRENs and Geant2; they will be upgraded according to available new network technology • Main development topic: multi-domain issues • Close coordination between demanding user groups and networkers is absolutely necessary

More Related