1 / 54

2008. 4. 2 CJK NGN Test-bed Ad-hoc Group

2008. 4. 2 CJK NGN Test-bed Ad-hoc Group. CJK NGN Test-bed Activities Phase I & II Testing Result. Topics. Terms of Reference Testing Schedule Testing Scenarios Testing Items Testing Network & Service Configurations Testing Activities Testing Results Next Steps. Terms of Reference.

rdoris
Download Presentation

2008. 4. 2 CJK NGN Test-bed Ad-hoc Group

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. 2008. 4. 2 CJK NGN Test-bed Ad-hoc Group CJK NGN Test-bed Activities Phase I & II Testing Result

  2. Topics • Terms of Reference • Testing Schedule • Testing Scenarios • Testing Items • Testing Network & Service Configurations • Testing Activities • Testing Results • Next Steps

  3. Terms of Reference

  4. TOR: NGN Test-bed Objectives • Interconnecting CJK NGN Test-beds and building a common NGN technology testing infrastructure • Feasibility testing prior to NGN commercial deployment • Interoperability testing for Standard-based NGN components developed by CJK • Providing NGN service development platform especially focusing on inter-country issues • Reflection of testing results into corresponding standardization activities periodically • Cooperation with other international NGN related testbeds and their activities such as MOONv6, Plugtests, GMI, etc.

  5. TOR: Work Plan • Phase 1 (March 2005 ~ March 2006): Preparation Stage • Pick up the study items which include our target services for the evaluations on the test-bed • Check the participants who are interested in the studies again • Plan the schedule of the implementation and evaluation of the test-bed • Prepare the test-bed in each SDO • Establish each administration’s NOC for each SDO’s test-bed • Agree on first and second set of target services and components and test scenarios • Build test case suits for the agreed target services including a specific milestone • Phase II (April 2006 ~ December 2007): First Interoperability Testing Stage • Construct CJK NGN test-bed • common operation and management infrastructure • Test agreed first set of target services, especially focusing on transport functionality such as QoS, adimission control, traffic monitoring, etc. • Especially main interest is in inter-domain/inter-operator issues • Phase III (January 2008~ December 2010): Second Interoperability Testing Stage • Test agreed second set of target services, especially focusing on application/service functionality and its binding with transport functionality • Test other advanced NGN services yet to be defined NOTE: Phase III and later phases are being updated. Refer to Phases III and IV plans.

  6. TOR: Action Plan for Phase I • Define Objectives of the CJK interoperability tests for NGN (4th Meeting) • Define Roadmap (4th Meeting) • Define Network Architecture (Physical, Transport and Service Topologies and underlying technologies (e.g., MPLS, etc.)) of the testbed both intra- and inter-domain scope (4th Meeting) • In Intra-domain case, each administration decides its own network (e.g., KOREN or APII in case of Korea) and enhances its functionalities to conform to NGN • Define Implementation Agreements for inter-domain connectivity (5th Meeting) • Define target services, target components, test scenarios and test case suits (5th Meeting) • Recruit participants for equipment and services at each testbed site (5th Meeting) • Establish a dedicated reflector for detailed discussion

  7. Testing Schedule

  8. Testing Schedule • Phase I: 2006 3rd/4th Quarter • Network Connectivity • Senario1 only (Feb. 26 ~ Mar. 2) • Conducted by CATR and ETRI • First Report/Demo during 9th CJK NGN Meeting (April 2007) • Phase II: 2007 1st/2nd Quarter • Scenario 2 ~ 5 (Feb. 26 ~ Mar. 2) • Conducted by CATR and ETRI • Second Report/Demo during 9th CJK NGN Meeting (April 2007) • Phase III: 2007 4th ~ 2010 1st/2nd Quarter • Scenario 6 ~ 7 • Testing details will further be defined depending on the technology availability status • CATR, KDDI, NTT, and ETRI will participate in the testing • Third Report/Demo 13th CJK NGN Meeting NOTE: Phase III and later phases are being updated. Refer to Phases III and IV plans.

  9. Testing Scenarios

  10. Test Scenarios • Scenario 1: Single Call Server within a single NGN Network Domain without PSTN • Scenario 2: Call Servers across multiple IP Network Domains without PSTN • Scenario 3: Single Call Server within a single NGN Network Domain with PSTN • Scenario 4: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with PSTN • Scenario 5: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with PSTN & Value Added Services • This scenario adds Value Added Services to scenario 4 using Media Servers and Application Servers • Scenario 6: Performance Evaluation • Scenario 7: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with PSTN, Value Added Services and RACF Involvement

  11. Scenario 1: Single Call Server within a single IP Network Domain without PSTN IP Network Domain Call Server SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP(-I),H.323 AG SG SG AG Enterprise Access Enterprise Access Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  12. Scenario 1 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Access Gateway – Access Gateway • SIP phone – Access Gateway • SIP phone – SIP phone • Subscriber Gateway – Access Gateway • Subscriber Gateway – SIP phone • Subscriber Gateway – Subscriber Gateway • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  13. Scenario 2: Call Servers across multiple IP Network Domains without PSTN IP Network Domain 1 IP Network Domain 2 Call Server 2 Call Server 1 SIP-I SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP(-I),H.323 Enterprise Access Enterprise Access SG AG AG Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  14. Scenario 2 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Same cases with scenario 1 • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • SIP-I • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  15. Scenario 3: Single Call Server within a single NGN Network Domain with PSTN IP Network Domain SG PSTN Sigtran(SCTP/M3UA) Call Server MGCP H.248/Megaco Class4/5 SW TG SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP(-I),H.323 Enterprise Access Enterprise Access SG SG AG AG Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  16. Scenario 3 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Same cases with scenario 1 • Access Gateway – Class4/5 SW • Subscriber Gateway – Class4/5 SW • SIP Phone – Class4/5 SW • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • SIGTRAN • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  17. Scenario 4: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with PSTN IP Network Domain 1 Class4/5 SW IP Network Domain 2 SG SG PSTN TG Call Server 2 Call Server 1 TG SIP-I SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP(-I),H.323 SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* Enterprise Access Enterprise Access SG SG AG AG Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  18. Scenario 4 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Same cases with scenario 1 • Access Gateway – Class4/5 SW • Subscriber Gateway – Class4/5 SW • SIP Phone – Class4/5 SW • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • SIP-I • SIGTRAN • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  19. Scenario 5: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with Value Added Services & PSTN Back-End Servers Back-End Servers MS MS SIP Application Server SIP Application Server Class4/5 SW Diameter RADIUS Proprietary SIP MGCP H.248/Megaco Diameter RADIUS Proprietary SIP MGCP H.248/Megaco SG SG SIP(-) SIP(-I) PSTN TG TG IP Network Domain 1 IP Network Domain 2 Call Server 2 Call Server 1 SIP-I SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 Enterprise Access Enterprise Access SG SG AG AG Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  20. Scenario 5 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Same cases with scenario 1 • Access Gateway – Class4/5 SW • Subscriber Gateway – Class4/5 SW • SIP Phone – Class4/5 SW • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • SIP-I • SIGTRAN • Application Servers Feature Testing • SIP Application Server Features: IP conferencing, Voice mail, etc. • Media Server Features: Generic conference bridge, Voice mail media processing, etc. • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  21. Scenario 6 – Performance Evaluation • Network Performance Testing cases • E2E Call Setup Delay • Call Completion Rate • Each Segment & E2E IPTD/IPDV/IPLR/Path unavailability • Call Traffic Accounting • Harmonization Testing ofService QoS class differences among CJK • User Terminal Performance Testing cases • Various User Terminal Performance Testing

  22. Scenario 7: Call Servers across multiple NGN Network Domains with Value Added Services, PSTN, and RACF Involvement Back-End Servers Back-End Servers MS MS SIP Application Server SIP Application Server Class4/5 SW Diameter RADIUS Proprietary SIP MGCP H.248/Megaco Diameter RADIUS Proprietary SIP MGCP H.248/Megaco SG SG SIP(-I) SIP(-I) PSTN TG IP Network Domain 2 TG IP Network Domain 1 Call Server 2 Call Server 1 SIP-I RACF RACF SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 SIP H.323 MGCP H.248/Megaco* SIP(-I),H.323 Enterprise Access Enterprise Access SG SG AG AG Residential Access Residential Access Country 1 Country 2

  23. Scenario 7 - Testing Cases • Basic Call with the following combinations • Same cases with scenario 7 • SIP phone – RACF • Access Gateway – RACF • Subscriber Gateway – RACF • Application Server - RACF • Protocols to test • SIP • H.323 • MGCP • H.248/Megaco • SIP-I • SIGTRAN • Rq • Application Servers Feature Testing • SIP Application Server Features: IP conferencing, Voice mail, etc. • Media Server Features: Generic conference bridge, Voice mail media processing, etc. • RACF Feature Testing • Resource Admission Control Performance • NAT/Gate Control Performance • Testing Residential & Business Features • Call Transfer, Call Waiting, Call Diversion, Calling Numbering and Name Delivery, Three-party conference • Centrex, Private numbering plan, DDI/DDO

  24. Testing Items

  25. Detailed Test Items

  26. Detailed Test Items

  27. Testing Item Description Ex. 1

  28. Testing Item Description Ex. 1 EXPECTED SIGNAL SEQUENCE:： Call-setup flow： • SIP user1 sends an INVITE to SS1 to setup a session，SS1 responses 100 Trying.SS1 forwards the INVITE request to SS2. • SS2 sends an Add request to creat a new context in AG .AG sends back a Reply message with the RTP port and the stream descriptor. • SS2 sends an Modify to AG ,AG sends the ringtone to user2 and monitors user2 hook-off. • SS2 sends a 180Ringing response to SS1,SS1 forwards this message to SS2. • User2 answers the call ,AG sends a Notify to SS2 and SS2 sends back a Reply. • SS2 sends a 200 OK response to SS1 and SS1 forwards to user1. • User1 sends back ACK . • SS2 sends AG a Modify command to stop ringtone and monitor user2 hook-on.

  29. Testing Item Description Ex. 1 Call-release flow： • Caller releases the call, user1 sends a BYE to SS1,and SS1 sends BYE to SS2. • SS2 sends a Modify command to AG to send a busy tone to user2. • SS2 sends a 200 OK response to SS1.SS1 sends 200 ok to user1. • User2 hungs up,and AG sends Notify to AG,then SS2 sends Subtract(TDM)+Subtract(RTP)to AG to delete the context. • SS2 sends Modify to AG to monitor hook-oof.

  30. Testing Item Description Ex. 2

  31. Testing Item Description Ex. 2 EXPECTED SIGNAL SEQUENCE:： • SIP user1 sends INVITE to SS1 to setup a session，SS1 responses 100 Trying.SS1 forwards the INVITE request to SS2. • SS2 knows that the called party is busy now,then SS2 sends a 486 response to SS1. • SS1 forwards the 486 to user1.

  32. Testing Item Description Ex. 3

  33. Testing Item Description Ex. 3 EXPECTED SIGNAL SEQUENCE:： (1) SIP user1 sends an INVITE request to SS1 to setup a session，SS1 responses 100 Trying.SS1 forwards the INVITE request to SS2 then to user2. (6) SIP user1 rings .User 2 sends a 180Ringing response to SS2,SS2 forwards this message to SS1 then to user1. (9)User2 answers the call ,User 2 sends a 200 OK response to SS2 then to User1. (10)User1 sends ACK back. User1 and user2 setups a multimedia session.

  34. Testing Network & Service Configurations

  35. CATR’s CS Lab Configuration SCP SoftX3000 SIP IOSS U - NICA FTP/FTAM SIP/MGCP /H.248/H.323 SIP SIGTRAN Lanswitch INAP USAU SIGTRAN MGCP MRS6100 STP ISUP IP Network SG7000 ISUP SNMP STUN UMSN2000 FE PSTN Eudemon E1 Lanswitch Lanswitch H.248 H.323 MGCP SIP UMG 8900+UA5000 POTS / BRI/ADSL POTS / BRI/ADSL … OpenEye VedioPhone SoftPhone IAD

  36. Signaling Link Bearer Link ETRI’s CS Lab Network Configuration Japan CERNET 155M POS Internet Border Router 2G Ethernet Support Facility GBE Management/ Monitoring System, GW, SIP phones, … GBE, 100BT, 10BT Meeting Room 100BT SBC 100BT(VLAN) L2 Switch 100BT 100BT 100BT 100BT 100BT AS/MS CS SG/TG RACF Packet Monitor E1 TDM 100BT PSTN Network

  37. TestingServices, Venders & Terminals • Interworking services: • voice and video • Interworking venders: • CATR (Huawei) and ETRI (Xener) • Interworking terminals: • ETRI SIP phone and CATR SIP, MGCP IAD and PSTN terminal(H.248 TG) • 25 test items

  38. Testing Activities

  39. Testing Processes and Schedules • Started at Sept.25, 2006 • Four Phases • Network connection: Sept.25-30, 2006 • Data configuration: Jan.30-Feb.1, 2007 • Test: Feb.26-March 2 • Test: March 5-9

  40. Testing Result Examples • The following several testing result examples provide a few failed cases and successful cases • Ethereal was used to capture the SIP messages exchanged in each Call Server site • The failures were fixed during the testing process • The failures were two kinds: intentional (i.e., abnormal) and non-intentional • The former were used to check the correctness of the system behavior. For example, a call attempt was used to non-existing callee • The latter were mainly for the message format mismatches and/or IP address misuses

  41. Failed Testing Example 1 • This example shows the receiving Call Server doesn’t understand the SIP Invite request message

  42. Failed Testing Example 2 • This example shows call attempt to non-existing callee

  43. Successful Testing: Normal

  44. Successful Testing: Busy

  45. Testing Results

  46. TestingResults

  47. Testing Results

  48. Testing Results

  49. Lessons Learned from Testing • First successful interconnection of CK NGN Test-beds and build of a common NGN technology testing infrastructure • Successful interoperability testing for CJK-driven ITU-T Standard-based NGN components and services (i.e., call server) • Provided NGN service development platform especially focusing on inter-country issues • First attempt to bridge the standard and implementation by the reflection of testing results into corresponding standardization activities • Stimulation of further test-bed activities, for example, RTP/RTCP-based Performance Measurement testing

  50. Next Steps NOTE: Information here is at April 2008. Further updates will be made.

More Related