leaving legacy moving to next generation communications n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 42

Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 165 Views
  • Uploaded on

Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications. Presented by: Motty Anavi VP Business Development. Entelec Conference Spring 2013. Agenda. Utility Network Migration Process Factors and Influencers on Migration Migration Options Process Technology

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

Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications


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
leaving legacy moving to next generation communications
Leaving Legacy, Moving to Next Generation Communications

Presented by:

Motty Anavi

VP Business Development

Entelec Conference

Spring 2013

agenda
Agenda
  • Utility Network Migration Process
  • Factors and Influencers on Migration
  • Migration Options
    • Process
    • Technology
    • Looking at the New Technology
    • Reliability
    • Services
  • Still Outstanding
  • Summary
the legacy utility network
The Legacy Utility Network

Sub-Station

  • Only TDM based
  • Strict and well known and tested protocols
  • Cyber Security in not a major concern
  • Delay is not an issue
  • Ubiquitously supported by carriers and service providers

Control Center

RTU

RTU

T1/E1

RS-232

RS-232

Multiplexer

Multiplexer

Tele-Protection

Control Console

C37.94

PBX

Server

ADM

ADM

ADM

T1/E1

NMS

Sub-Station

Power Line

PBX

Phone

4W

migrating to packet networks
Migrating to Packet Networks
  • Obsolescence of equipment
  • Lack of support for 4W service
  • Improving and streamlining of Telecom network
  • New standards for Sub Station Services
    • IEC61850
    • M2M communications
  • New challenges with Packet Networks
    • Cyber Security
    • New Characteristics of transport (More Delay, Compatibility)
the evolving telecom network
The Evolving Telecom Network

Sub-Station

Control Center

RTU

RTU

RTU

T1/E1

RS-232

RS-232

RS-232

Multiplexer

Multiplexer

Multiplexer

Tele-Protection

Tele-Protection

Control Console

C37.94

C37.94

PBX

PBX

Server

ADM

ADM

ADM

T1/E1

T1/E1

Sub-Station

NMS

Power Line

PBX

Switch

PMU/ Small SS

Packet Network

RF-3080

challenges next generation migration uncertainty
Challenges: Next Generation Migration Uncertainty

Challenges in switching to All Packet

  • Not all critical application capable of migration
  • Maintain smooth operation of current networks, despite discontinued vendor products
  • Avoid over-burdening network operations and management due to TDM/PSN transport co-existence
  • Reconcile required investment in SDH/SONET equipment with decommissioning plans
  • Avoid CapEx hikes related to increase in number of network devices:
    • Continue using legacy installed-base while introducing IP/Ethernet devices
    • Ensure service quality for mission critical apps (e.g., Teleprotection)
challenges next generation migration technology aspect
Challenges: Next Generation Migration Technology Aspect

Smart Communications over Packet

  • Service assurance for mission critical apps in PSN environment:
    • Low end-to-end delay
    • High Availability
    • SDH/SONET-level Resiliency
  • Differentiated quality of service for SCADA, video surveillance, voice, Teleprotection, radio and data traffic
  • Remote operations, administration and maintenance (OAM) for fault management and lower OpEx
  • Efficient connectivity for IEC 61850 intelligent electronic devices (IEDs)
the migrated telecom network
The Migrated Telecom Network

Sub-Station

Control Center

RTU

RTU

RTU

RS-232

RS-232

RS-232

Next Gen MS

Next Gen MS

MS Gateway

Tele-Protection

Tele-Protection

Control Console

C37.94

C37.94

PBX

PBX

Server

Sub-Station

ADM

T1/E1

T1/E1

NMS

Power Line

PBX

PS Network

PMU/ Small SS

Firewall

Firewall

Firewall

the challenges
The Challenges
  • Selecting the “winning” packet network
  • Not all applications can be transported over packet
    • Application issues
    • Security concerns
  • Upgrading ancillary equipment to be “Packet Compatible”
    • Or making adjustment to the network
  • Training or retraining of workforce
  • Massive capital expense with a complete upgrade
  • Complexity of maintaining two or more networks
  • Buying more equipment with a short usability timeframe
addressing the challenges the options
Addressing the Challenges: The Options

Evolution instead of Revolution…

Move everything to packet!

  • Keep my legacy forever!
  • Utilize existing assets
  • Deterministic performance
  • No learning curve
  • Flexible & scalable
  • Low OpEx
  • Future support
  • Asset lifespan
  • Gradual migration
  • Guaranteed performance
  • Moderate learning curve
  • Future ready design
  • High equipment costs
  • Non-deterministic
  • Steep learning curve
  • High operating costs
  • Low scalability
  • Not flexible
the core replacement choices
The Core Replacement Choices
  • IP/MPLS
    • Added deterministic paths to IP
    • Used as a core Technology
    • No Built-in Security Mechanism
    • Still untried as access technology
  • CoE (aka Carrier Ethernet)
    • Mature Technology
    • Enhanced and updated
    • Established Security Protocol support
    • Connection Oriented Ethernet
ip mpls highlights
IP/MPLS Highlights
  • Mature Technology
  • Widely used
  • Deterministic routing
  • No Built-in Security
  • All paths for packets setup on connection establishment
  • Well established resiliency mechanisms
  • No built-in security (very susceptible for cyber attacks)
  • Different in architecture than existing SONET/TDM
  • Fairly unaffordable
coethernet highlights
CoEthernet Highlights
  • Mature Technology
  • Newly enhanced Connection Oriented Ethernet technology
  • Built in Security including Source authentication
  • Similar to SONET/SDH in terms of architecture and Terminology
  • CoE developed mechanisms for:
    • Deterministic network performance
    • Detection of Network failure
    • Measurement of network performance
    • Very fast restoration of service (Sub 10ms)
  • Very affordable
an ip mpls based network
An IP/MPLS Based Network
  • Architecture is very different than SONET/SDH (Similar to IP)
    • New set of addressable values
    • Each device now requires new management connection
  • Training is a challenge
  • Susceptible to cyber attacks with no source authentication
  • Network performance is predictable
  • In network delay is manageable and could be designed to be low
  • Extremely high equipment costs
  • Built in fast resiliency
a coe based network
A CoE Based Network
  • Architecture similar SONET/SDH
    • Connection based virtual circuits
    • Similar OAM terms (AIS/RDI etc….)
  • Training simple
  • More resilient to cyber attacks with source authentication
  • Network performance guaranteed by CoE OAM measurements
  • In network delay can be designed to be low
  • Relatively low equipment cost – regardless of network size or number of nodes
  • Built in fast resiliency
comparing the technologies
Comparing The Technologies
  • Connection Setup
    • SONET : Hard coded paths mapped through ADMs
    • CoE: Hard coded EVCs mapped through Switches with pre-determined priorities
    • MPLS: Dynamic path setup based on IP addressing and exchanging routing tables
  • Vulnerability of connections
    • SONET: All connections are initiated by NMS
    • COE: All connections are initiated by NMS
    • MPLS: Connections made dynamically and are vulnerable to errored/malicious routing information
comparing the technologies1
Comparing The Technologies
  • Troubleshooting
    • SONET : Comprehensive troubleshooting built in with OAM bits propagating faults
    • CoE: Comprehensive troubleshooting built in with OAM packets propagating faults
    • MPLS: No built-in OAM mechanism for localizing faults relies on other overlays to initiate backup paths
  • Resiliency
    • SONET: Ring resiliency to a predetermined path
    • COE: Ring and path resiliency to a pre-determined path within 10ms
    • MPLS: Ring or Mesh resiliency depending on topology
comparing security
Comparing Security
  • Source Authentication:
    • MPLS – No source authentication, once entering an CE/PE – local id is erased.
    • Ethernet – Universal address is maintained (MAC address), Standard for source authentication 802.1X
  • Snooping / Scouting:
    • MPLS – LSPs used as transparent pipes from one location to another.
    • Ethernet - Individual frames screened at global level (MAC) for validity
  • Control Plane:
    • MPLS - BGP and other routing protocols very susceptible for attacks that can crash entire network
    • Ethernet - Control plane isolated and access controlled by corporate access control
the future iec 61850
The Future: IEC 61850
  • Standard design for Sub Station Communications
  • Establishes standard:
    • Architecture (Process/Station Bus)
    • Protocols and formats (e.g. Goose)
    • Open interconnection points
    • Equipment requirements
    • Common communications: Ethernet
comparing the contenders
Comparing the Contenders
  • CoE has the advantage over the other packet technologies when it comes to similarity to SONET/SDH which make this technology the technological and business winner
drivers for ethernet oam
Drivers for Ethernet OAM
  • OAM benchmarks
    • Set by TDM and existing WAN technologies
  • Operational Efficiency
    • Reduce OPEX, avoid truck-rolls
    • Downtime cost
  • Management Complexity
    • Large Span Networks
    • Multiple constituent networks belong to disparate organizations/companies
ethernet oam capabilities
Ethernet OAM Capabilities
  • Fault Management
    • Fault Detection
    • Fault Verification
    • Fault Isolation
    • Fault Recovery
    • Fault Notification
  • Performance Management
    • Frame Loss Measurement
    • Delay Measurement
    • Delay Variation Measurement
    • Availability Measurement

Configuration Management

Ethernet

OAM

ethernet oam1
Ethernet OAM
  • IEEE 802.1ag
    • Connectivity Fault Management (CFM)
    • Also referred as Service OAM
  • IEEE 802.3ah (clause 57)
    • Ethernet Link OAM
    • Also referred as 802.3 OAM, Link OAM or Ethernet in the First Mile (EFM) OAM
  • ITU-T Y.1731
    • OAM functions and mechanisms for Ethernet-based networks
standards ethernet oam
Standards: Ethernet OAM

A summary of available Ethernet OAM mechanisms

what is pseudowire pw
What is Pseudowire (PW)?
  • Pseudo = Simulated, Seemingly
  • Emulation of a native service over a Packet Switched Network (PSN).
  • The native services can be ATM, TDM, Frame Relay or ETH, while the PSN can be ETH, IP or MPLS.
  • Supports voice, data and video
  • Provides a transparent tunnel through the PSN
  • Provides clock distribution and synchronization over PSN
what is pseudowire pw1
What is Pseudowire (PW)?

PSN Network

SCADA

SCADA

PW-GW

PW-GW

Analog

Analog

TDM

TDM

ieee 1588
IEEE 1588

IEEE-1588 is a standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems

  • Defines a Precision Time Protocol (PTP) designed to synchronize real-time clocks in a hierarchical distributed system
  • Intended for LAN using multicast communications
  • Targeted accuracy of microseconds or sub-microsecond (v1)
  • v1 approved in September 2002 and published November 2002
  • v2 approved in June 2007
what is ieee1588v2
What is IEEE1588v2?
  • IEEE1588v2 is designed to distribute frequency and time to a higher accuracy and precision, to the scale of nanoseconds and fractional nanoseconds.
  • The protocol operates over packet switched networks. The standard is currently defined to run over IEEE 802.3, UDP/IPv4, UDP/IPv6, DeviceNet, ControlNet and PROFINET.
  • Designed to operate automatically to establish master slave hierarchy for time distribution. (not for Telecomm industry)
  • Introduces “Transparent Clocks” to overcome the network’s delay variation.
  • C37.238 Power Profile based on IEEE-1588v2 required for Syncrophasor accuracy
g 8031 protection
G.8031 Protection
  • Protection as per ITU-T G.8031
    • 1:1 Mode
    • Unidirectional Only
    • Using APS messages
  • Triggers
    • Port Signal loss
    • CCM LOC , ETH-AIS
  • Protection time
    • 10ms protection for one pair of EVC
    • As low as 40ms protection 4 pairs of EVCs
  • Topologies
    • EVC protection with one fiber (both EVC’s running on the same Fiber)
    • EVC protection with 2 fiber each path on different fiber (dual link)
    • EVC protection with dual fiber working with MC-LACP to dual PE
    • EVC protection with Dual NTU (Future development)
g 8031 applications end to end path protection
G.8031 Applications – End to End path protection
  • Redundancy on S-Tags in the network
  • APS is running over one standby EVC only
  • Revertive and Non revertive modes
  • End to end service shell be maintained
    • TLS , Accesses to L3 VPN
  • CCM or ETH-AIS is used to trigger protection event

Customer Premises

CustomerPremises

Ethernet

NID

CPE

CPE

NID

X

L2PE

Metro /

VPLS

L2PE

L2PE

End to End path protection

Online EVC

Redundant EVC

teleprotection
Teleprotection

• Deliver Teleprotection signals with mission-critical accuracy over dedicated fiber, TDM or IP

• C37.94-compliant Teleprotection communication channels allow reliable transmission by minimizing data errors due to EM and RF interference, or ground potential rise (GPR)

•Ultra-low end-to-end propagation delay supports immediate delivery of Transfer Trip commands from protective relay/contact transfer to remote-end substations

•Maintain performance levels when migrating to packet networks with hard QoS, as well as robust latency and jitter protection

teleprotection requirements
Teleprotection Requirements
  • Very strict delay
    • 80ms total
    • 40ms for network
  • Differential Teleprotection
    • Constant delay
    • During failover – Delay could change
  • Packet solutions do not factor differential delays on redundancy
the ideal migration strategy
The Ideal Migration Strategy
  • Select a new technology
    • Reliability
    • Longevity
    • Affordability
  • Selectively migrate application
    • Check availability of solutions
    • Migrate only when application validate
    • Minimize cyber security threat
  • Complete migration within timeframe
migration steps
Migration Steps

Infrastructure

Required Services

ETH to PSN

SDH/SONET

Legacy to SDH/SONET

Legacy to PSN

Data

ETH to SDH/SONT

PSN

VoIP

NMS

Aggregation Network

Access Aggregation

Access

summary
Summary
  • The energy industry is being forced to migrate to packet technologies
  • Caution should be used when selecting a new technology
  • Established Standards such as IEC61850, C37.238 (IEEE-1588v2) use Ethernet as their transport of choice
  • An evolutionary approach to migration can ease the pain
  • Some applications may not be suitable today for migration to NGN
  • Migrating to NGN is unavoidable and should be designed today to optimize available funds and reduce future issues
slide42

For More Information:

Motty Anavi

VP of Business Development

Motty_a@rad.com

(201) 378-0213