find future internet design informational meeting november 7 2006 l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
FIND: Future Internet Design Informational Meeting November 7, 2006 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
FIND: Future Internet Design Informational Meeting November 7, 2006

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

FIND: Future Internet Design Informational Meeting November 7, 2006 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated on

FIND: Future Internet Design Informational Meeting November 7, 2006. Darleen Fisher CISE National Science Foundation FIND Challenge to the Research Community: Create the Future Internet you want to have in 10-15 years. The Future Internet. Must

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

FIND: Future Internet Design Informational Meeting November 7, 2006

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
    1. FIND: Future Internet DesignInformational Meeting November 7, 2006 Darleen Fisher CISE National Science

    2. FIND Challenge to the Research Community:Create the Future Internet you want to have in 10-15 years

    3. The Future Internet Must • Be worthy of our society’s trust • Even for managing and operating critical infrastructures • Provide a bridge between physical and virtual worlds • Via instrumented and managed sensorized physical environment • Support pervasive computing • From wireless devices to supercomputers • From wireless channels to all optical light-paths • Enable further innovations in S&E research • Seamless access to networked instruments, supercomputers, storage, etc. • Create a social world in which we would want to live

    4. What is Different This Time? • Clean-slate approach • To overcome Internet ossification • Research not constrained by the features of the current Internet • But does not mandate rejecting what currently works • A comprehensive coordinated effort • Ability to try different approaches (We do not have a preconceived idea of what they are) • Ability to experiment at scale • With real users and applications

    5. Success Scenarios • Internet evolution influenced by clean-slate approach • Alternate Internet architecture emerges • Alternate architecture(s) coexist with the current Internet • Virtualization becomes the norm with plurality of architectures • Single architecture emerges and dominates • New services and applications enabled • Many other payoffs • Some unexpected

    6. FIND - Different Process • “Goal” oriented  Future Internet • Not typical for NSF research programs • Area has a longer timescale with sustained funding • Three phases -- iterative and overlapping • Exploration of architectural components and 1st cut overarching architectures • Convergence into multiple full-scale architectures • Experimentation of architectures at scale • “Competitive cooperation” model • Competition to bring out the best • Cooperation to build on each others work to deliver Future Internet • Competition – Proposal reviews • Cooperation – Among awardees • Regular meetings -- three times a year • Commitment to openness and transparency

    7. Stages of Research2006-2007 • Research on architectural elements • Naming, identities, forwarding, interdomain protocols, etc. • 1st Cut overarching architectures • Cross-cutting requirements of built-in security, robustness, and manageability etc. • Transformational architectural ideas (like packet switching was for the Internet)

    8. Stages of Research2007 and Later Coordinated effort to assemble overarching coherent architectures • Multiple PI meetings to formulate architectures • FIND awardees • But also other “architectural” researchers e.g. funded by NeTS, CyberTrust, DARPA, industry, internationally funded researchers, etc. • Small number of architectures developed

    9. Stages of Research2008 and Later Architectures as they emerge will be made operational and tested • Simulation • Emulation • Run on a large-scale GENI facility • Experiment with new architectures at scale

    10. Where are we now?

    11. FIND 2006 26 of 98 projects awarded • some 1 year seed investments NeTS = $40M FIND = ~$15M (38% of NeTS)

    12. FIND 2007 • NSF 07-507; January 22, 2007 deadline • First FIND PI meetings • Begin to create a FIND community and identify areas of commonality and differences, open research areas • FIND project descriptions at: • Process for including FIND-like researchers from industry, international and academics funded elsewhere

    13. FIND Portfolio • New architecture principles • Composable architectural building blocks • Recursive network architecture • Delay tolerant network architectures • Disaster networks • Cache and forward network (for large files) • Network technology and architectures • Wireless Networks • Optical Networks • Higher bar—be more architectural • Services architectures

    14. FIND Portfolio • Virtualization • New “layer 2+” hour glass • New e2e services from virtual nodes & links (multiple hour glasses) • Sensor networks • Security • Default off and least knowledge • Packet attribution with privacy preservation • Routing • User controlled routes

    15. FIND Portfolio • Object identity and naming • Handles for naming, security & communication paradigms • Usable namespaces for small devices • Economics and network architectures • Market enabling architectures • Management • Manageability in routing systems • Model-based diagnosis of the knowledge plane

    16. Lessons from FIND 2006 • Is it networking? Does it belong in NeTS? • Is it architectural? Does it belong in FIND? How well does it address architectural issues? • Is it “clean slate”? Is it appropriate for a “Future Network”? • Is there evidence of a deep understanding of the (hard) issues? • Will it scale? • Can it be secure? • What about overhead or complexity? • Is it economically viable? • Have ideas already been tried?—need good understanding of the literature and history of the field when rethinking old ideas

    17. Lessons from FIND 2006 • Is there a unifying theme of ideas—or just a “grab bag” of ideas? • Is there an evaluation plan for the new ideas? • Is there a well developed plan for the integration of education and research? • How will the PIs involve students in the FIND research? • What is the broader impact if successful? Does the idea matter? Want to hear “if successful, these ideas would have a profound positive impact on the Future Network.”

    18. Lessons from FIND 2006 • Too many ideas merely extensions of current Internet or P2P networks • Too many were technology, not architecture proposals • Too many use assumptions appropriate for the current Internet • Not just “fix the Internet” mentality • It does NOT have to fit within today’s vision of GENI’s capability—GENI will evolve

    19. Guidance to FIND Proposers • Think of creative yet well-considered ideas • Clearly show how the proposed work addresses one or more Future Internet requirements (e.g. built-in security, economic viability, manageability) • May submit architectural components, architectural theory, 1st cut overarching Architectures (not just critique of Internet) • Discuss how your work would fit into a larger overall network architecture

    20. FIND Review Criteria • Intellectual Merit • Broader Impact • How well the work addresses architectural requirements • How well the proposed work relates to and enhances overall architectural framework • Importance of work to framing a new architecture

    21. NeTS Program Directors 2007 • FIND—Darleen Fisher & Allison Mankin • NBD—Darleen Fisher • WN—David Goodman (leaves 2/06) • Recruiting new PD with wireless networking expertise • NOSS—David Du

    22. Allison Mankin • Co-program director FIND (with Darleen Fisher) • Co-program director GENI (with Guru Parulkar) • Consultant, Shinkuro, Inc., Bell Labs, USC/ISI, NRL, U. Wisc (visiting scientist), MITRE • Author of many published networking research papers • Co-editor IPng: Internet Protocol Next Generation 1995 • Co-Director, IETF Process for Selection of the Next Generation Internet Protocol • Director, CAIRN (successor to DARTnet) • Internet2 Abilene Technical AC • Area Director, Internet Engineering Steering Group • Chair, IETF Geolocation Privacy WG (ongoing) • ICANN Security & Stability Committee • Member of various boards, directorates, and working groups

    23. David Clark “FIND Architecture and Outreach Coordinator” • Remain a member of the research community, but work with NSF & community • Plan PI meetings • Identify FIND research priorities • Lead FIND team-building • Help FIND researchers frame new architectures • Outreach to researchers funded elsewhere • Outreach to international FIND-like researchers • Provide linkage between FIND and GENI

    24. 9:00-10:15Welcome(Grand Dominion I-IV) Darleen Fisher, Program Director, NeTS       FIND Program Past and Future       Introduction of Allison Mankin, Program Director, NeTS Introduction of David Clark, MIT, FIND Architecture and Outreach Coordinator The Challenge of Thinking Architecturally -- David Clark 10:15 Break (Upper Rotunda) 10:30-12:00FIND Principal Investigator Panel-Experience in Writing Funded FIND Proposals (Grand Dominion I-IV) Nick McKeown, Stanford       Nick Feamster, GA Tech       Ken Calvert, University of Kentucky 12:00-1:00 Lunch (Fairfax Dining Room 13) 1:00-2:00FIND Reviewer Panel—Advice about Writing FIND Proposals (Grand Dominion I-IV)       Jorg Liebeherr, University of Toronto       Craig Partridge, BBN       K. K. Ramakrishnan, AT&T Labs-Research 2:00-3:00 Questions and Answers