COMBO Architecture Demo Day Lannion 28’th of Apri l · COMBO Architecture Demo Day ......

This presentation is property of the COMBO Consortium and shall not be distributed or reproduced without the formal approval of the Project Board

COMBO Architecture

Demo Day Lannion 28’th of April


Fixed and Mobile Convergence (FMC)

2

Common architecture for fixed and mobile network requires interaction at different points: §  Structural convergence

§  Common use of resources e.g. infrastructure, technology, interfaces, transport mechanisms

§  Functional convergence §  Unification of fixed and mobile

network functions

Fixed and mobile networks §  are developed independently of

each other §  have only very limited joint

usage of infrastructure §  have independent network

operation, control and management

FMC only at service level (e.g. IP Multimedia Subsystem)

Aggregation Network

Fixed Core

Mobile Core

Fixed access

Radio access

Today‘s network architecture Potential converged architecture

Aggregation

Network

Fixed Core

Mobile Core

Fixed access

Radio access

Functional convergence

Structural convergence



COMBO – Lannion - April 2016


Structural Convergence

3

λ1

λ2 λ3

λ5

λ4

λN

Core network

Converged broadband fixed and mobile Access/Aggregation transport network

OLT

BBU-H

λ1 λN

λ1 λNOLT

BBU-H

CoreCOHome/Building CO MainCOMacro site Small Cell

structural convergence

RGW

Technical challenges: •  Common transport architecture for

fixed, mobile and Wi-Fi clients for back/fronthaul?

•  Impact of RAN co-ordination and centralization?

•  Impact of future 5G?

Keyques=on:Whatistechno-economicallyfeasible?



Functional Convergence Simplified, flexible network architecture

6

λ1

λ2 λ3

λ5

λ4

λN

Core network

OLT

BBU-H

λ1 λN

λ1 λNOLT

BBU-H

CoreCOHome/Building CO MainCOMacro site Small Cell

RGW

functional convergence

Converged broadband fixed and mobile Access/Aggregation transport network

•  Functional convergence for fixed, mobile and Wi-Fi networks with respect to

•  converged subscriber and session management •  advanced interface selection and route control

•  Analysis of centralized vs. de-centralized architecture for functional distribution

SDN/NFV



COMBO T3.3 – Structural convergence


COMBO – Lannion - April 2016 6

Introduction & Requirements


Structural convergence? Key determining factors

§  Traffic requirements and network dimensioning •  Mobile/fixed traffic, capacity, latency, etc

§  RAN configuration and architecture •  Site/antenna configuration, radio coordination schemes, RAN system split

§  Geo-areas (dense urban, urban, suburban, rural) •  Area sizes, area densities, existing site structures, existing infrastructure..

§  Technology maturity and system performance •  Power budget, system reach, feasible system configurations, optical amplifiers

§  Equipment and component cost •  Optical components, boards, chassis, etc

7 COMBO – Lannion - April 2016


Structural convergence? Key determining factors

§  Traffic requirements and network dimensioning •  Mobile/fixed traffic, capacity, latency, etc

§  RAN configuration and architecture •  Site/antenna configuration, radio coordination schemes, RAN system split

§  Geo-areas (dense urban, urban, suburban, rural) •  Area sizes, area densities, existing site structures, existing infrastructure..

§  Technology maturity and system performance •  Power budget, system reach, feasible system configurations, optical amplifiers

§  Equipment and component cost •  Optical components, boards, chassis, etc



Coordina/onClassifica/on

Coordina/onFeature MaxThroughputGain

MaxCapacityGain

DelayClass

VeryTightCoordina=on

FastULCoMP(ULjointrecep=on/selec=on)

High High 0.1-0.5ms

FastDLCoMP(coordinatedlinkadapta=on,coordinatedscheduling,coordinatedbeamforming,dynamicpointselec=on)

Medium Medium

CombinedCell Medium

TightCoordina=on

SlowULCoMP Medium Small 1-20ms

SlowDLCoMP(e.g.,PostponedDynamicPointBlanking)

Small

ModerateCoordina=on

FeICIC Medium Small 20-50ms

Small:≤20%Medium:20-50%High:≥50%Based on discussion with „mobile experts“ @ DTAG & Ericsson

Radio coordination scheme Requirements & gain

Com

bo fo

cus



Backhaul §  An interconnection of X2 interface

required, link distances between sites will cause delay

§  To support CoMP delay requirements < 0.5 ms requires interconnection of CO or Main CO location

Fronthaul §  X2 interfaces are collocated, X2

delay close to zero §  Fulfils inherently X2 delay

requirements for CoMP < 0.5 ms §  RRU-BBU delay << 1 ms (typically

0.4 ms RTT assumed)

Two main RAN deployment options

§  Backhaul: X2 interconnection on CO/Main CO required to support CoMP with delay requirements < 0.5 ms

§  Fronthaul: Fulfils inherently X2 delay requirements for CoMP < 0.5 ms



Central Office (CO) Main CO Core CO Mobile Core Node

RAA=RANAccessAreas

RAA CO

<40%(400µs)

100%

99%(400µs)

<20%(400µs)

typically<5km Assumptions §  Fibre propagation

delay only (no data processing in between)

§  Round trip time between RRH to BBU (Fronthaul) or X2-interconnection ≤ 400 µs

X2 interconnection for backhaul or BBU Hotel placement (fronthaul) has to be done at or below Main CO in order to meet the delay requirements.

Delay constraints and implications on BBU placement and X2 interconnection



12

AllFronthaul(FH) MixofSCFHandMBSBH

CentralisedinMainCO

DecentralisedSCBHtoMBS

CentralisedinMainCO CentralisedinMainCO

DecentralisedSCFHtoMBS

RCC BBUH/ RCC

BBU Hotel RCC

BNG MBScoordina=onviaX2overBNG

BNG

BBUH/ RCC

BBUH/ RCC

BBUH/ RCC

MBScoordina=onviaX2overBNG

CPRI

IPoE

CPRI

CPRI

IPoE

IPoE

CPRI

IPoEIPoE

IPoE

MainCO

AllBackhaul(BH)

S1traffictoBNG

S1traffictoBNG

S1traffictoBNG

MacroBS

Smallcell

MainCO

MainCO

MainCO

MainCO

BBU BBU BBUBBU BBU BBU

BBU BBU BBURCC RCC RCC

BBU BBUBBUBBU BBU BBU BBU

BBU BBUBBUBBU BBU BBU BBU

BBUH:BBUHotelRCC:RadioCoordina=onController

RAN architectures Backhaul and fronthaul




Architecture options and system concepts


*NG-PON2scenariowithcoexistenceonlyonfeederfibrenotshownhere

MainCO

Access solutions

WS-DWDM:Wavelengthselec=ve–DenseWDMWR-DWDM:Wavelengthrouted–DenseWDMTWDM:TDMWDMRRU:RemoteRadioUnit



Different convergence architectures

RCC:RemoteCoordinatorController

Converged NG-PON2 (backhaul) §  ODN co-existence with

typically 1:128 split for residential customers due to mass market roll out (16 wavelengths of NGPON2 are delivered to 4 Cabinets)

WR-DWDM PON (backhaul) §  Dedicated ODN for services

that require PtP wavelength services, i.e. mobile backhaul and cabinet backhaul (80 wavelengths)



Flexible system options (DWDM-centric)

Flexible optical system variants designed for both NG-PON2 w PtP overlay and WDM-PON and alternative starting scenarios §  Facilitating service

provisioning, scaling of resources

§  Flexible sharing of resources between areas, services, operators

However, §  Higher equipment cost due

to use of costly wavelength selective switches (WSSs)

§  Limited to urban deployment areas due to shorter reach (insertion loss of WSSs, power splitters)

Not yet part of techno-economic assessments RCC:RemoteCoordinatorController




Economic assessment


CO Core CO Macro Cell Building Cabinet Small Cell Main CO

Start scenario and convergence options

DWDM-PtP: Macro, Small cell, DSLAM

Convergence of TWDM and DWDM-PtP over same fibre infrastructure

TWDM: Fixed access FTTH Fiber infrastructure

OLT

DSL Copper DSLAM

DWDM and TWDM over separate fibre infrastructure

DWDM: Macro, Small cell, DSLAM OLT

TWDM: Fixed access FTTH Fiber infrastructure

Fiber infrastructure

OLT

DSL Copper DSLAM

TWDM-PON: Fixed access FTTH

CWDM-PtP: DSLAM Fiber infrastructure

Fiber infrastructure OLT

CT

CWDM-PtP: Small cell Fiber infrastructure CT

Baseline: Dedicated CWDM-PtP + TWDM CWDM-PtP: Macro Fiber infrastructure CT

DSL Copper DSLAM

TDM-PON: Fixed access FTTH PS based fiber infrastructure OLT 30% of fixed access

70% of fixed access

CWDM-PtP Fiber infrastructure CT Start scenario



Fron

thaul

Backhaul

Fibre-rich FTTH areas

•  NG-PON2 is cheapest for >12 SC per MBS (backhaul) resp. >25 SC per MBS (fronthaul) due to the increasing fibre convergence with the mass-market

•  WR WDM PON (filter based) is cheapest solution if SC <25

•  PtP CWDM (today’s approach) is most expensive solution if SC > 3

Fibre-richFTTHlowfibreadd-oncost(fibreconnec=ngonly)

Fibre-poor FTTH areas

•  Higher fibre costs arise for the other system technologies due to dedicated fibre usage leading to convergence benefit

•  NG-PON2 is cheapest independent of the SC density

Back-/fronthaul transport CAPEX Variation of small cell density (urban, 100% FTTH)



Smallcelldensity(SCperMBS)

0%

100%

WR-WDM-PONcheapest

50%

Fibre-richFTTHmass-market(add-oncostforfibreconnec=ngonly)

0%

100%

50%

Fibre-poorFTTHmass-market(add-oncostsforfibrecabling+connec=ng)

10 30 50 70 90Smallcelldensity(SCperMBS)

10 30 50 70 90

25% 25%

75% 75%

WR-WDM-PONcheapest

NG-PON2vs.WR-WDM-PONCAPEXparityFronthaulCAPEXparityBackhaul

NG-PON2withPtPWDMcheapest

BreakevenmovesincaseofFronthaul

Backhaulbreakeven

Backhaulbreakeven

FTTH

ra/o

inM

COarea


FTTH

ra/o

inM

COarea


§  High FTTH ratio and high small cell density favors convergence with mass-market solution (NG-PON2)

§  Limited fibre availablity favors convergence with mass-market solution (NG-PON2)

Sensitivity analysis (Urban) Variation of SC density, FTTH ratio, fibre availability



COMBO T3.2 – Functional convergence



Derivation of two major Focus Areas of Convergence

This presentation is property of the COMBO Consortium and shall not be distributed or reproduced without the formal approval of the Project Board 23

Today’s situation without FMC

IPBackbone

FixedIPEdge

Aggrega=onNetwork

FixedAccessNetwork

MobileIPEdge

MobileAccessNetwork

eNB

RGW

WiFiAccessPoint

FixedAccessNode

Services

Singleuser

Mul=pleSubscriber’siden==es

Mul=pleDatapaths

To/fromservice

•  Mul=plesubscriber’siden==esforasingleuser•  “Wi-Fioffload”controlledbytheuseranditsmobileterminal•  Separatefixed/mobilecontentdistribu=onarchitectures•  Limitedloadbalancingpossibili=esbetweenmul=pleaccessesofdifferenttypes



Targets of COMBO convergence


Authen/ca/on Mul=pleiden==es Singleiden=ty(universalauthen=ca=on)IPEdge

Mul=ple Common

Trafficoffload

ControlledbytheuserandUE Networkcontrolled

LoadBalancing

Limitedatapplica=onlevel

Amongmul=plepaths

Handover Hard(useraware)

Smooth(Horizontal/ver=cal)

Contentdistribu/on Independent AccessawarewithOTT

Today’ssitua=on COMBOtargetsSingleIden=ty

IPBackbone

FixedIPEdge

Aggrega=onNetwork

FixedAccessNetwork

MobileIPEdge

MobileAccessNetwork

eNB

RGW

WiFiAccessPoint

FixedAccessNode

Services

CommonIPedge


Mapping of missing functions for convergence

Keyfunc=onalgroupswithinFixed–Mobileconvergence

ForwardingAutoma/c

Configura/onManagement

PolicyandCharging

SubscriberDataandSessionManagement

Mobility

ConvergedSubscriberandSessionManagement

(uAUT)

AssociatesUEtoglobaluser’siden=tyandassociatedprofiles

Iden=fiespoliciesandbindsthemtosubscribers

GlobalAuthen=ca=on;Unifiedsessioncontroloverseveralnetworks

Controlshorizontalandver=calhandover;facilitatesloadbalancing

AdvancedInterface

Selec=onandRouteControl

(uDPM)

Interfaceselec=on,rou=ng,loadbalancing

Takesaccountofpolicies(networkandsubscriberspecific)

Appliessessionmanagementrulestomul=plepaths

Handoverbetweentechnologies,op=misesserver’schoice


Focusa

reasofcon

vergen

ce


Agenda

•  Derivation of two major Focus Areas of Convergence •  Universal Authentication (uAUT) •  Universal Data Path Management (uDPM)

•  Architectural options for a universal Access Gateway (UAG)




Universal Authentication (uAUT)


Specifiedbythe3GPPTS23.335technicalspecifica=on

SoA:TheUserDataConvergence(UDC)concept

TheUDCconceptseparatesuserdatafromapplica=onlogic

UserdataisstoredintheUDR(UserData

Repository)–theUDCdatabase

TheUDRisreplicatedforredundancy

ClientrequestsarehandledbytheUDRFE

(FrontEnds)


COMBO:Canthisschemebeextendedbeyondmobile/Wi-FitoprovideaglobalFMCauthen=ca=on?


COMBO’s proposal. uAUT: Universal Subscriber and User Authentication

uAUTisasinglefunc=onalblockthatcomplementsandimprovestheUDCconcept.•  considera=onofdatamodel•  newFrontEndapplica=ons•  databaseaccessop=miza=on•  extendedtoOTTservicesAuthen=cateonceandhaveaccessto

mul=plenetworksand/orservices.

Partofthecontrolplane,interfaceswiththemanagementplane

Allowsauthen=ca=onmechanismsbasedonWebtechnologies

uAUTserver



Facilitating user’s access to OTT services IntheframeworkofanagreementbetweentheOTTproviderandthenetworkoperator




Universal Data Path Management (uDPM)


Legacy approach: Interface selection is only up to the UE!

COMBO–Lannion-April2016

CorePOPAggrega=on

Pathsarecompletelydisjoint(UEusesdifferentinterfaces,withdifferentIPaddresses)

TheUEselectsitsinterface,andthenetworkcannotoverridethechoice

Thenetworkcannotop=mizeitsresources:

noloadbalancing,

nosplivngofasingleflowonmul=plepaths

DifferentIPaddresses

32

ContentServer


Universal Data Path Management Singleuser

SingleIden=ty


OnceuAUTisdone,thenetworkassociatessessionstoasingleuserCollabora=onbetweennetworkandUEtocontrolthedatapathsbetweenuserandserver(s)

Improvetheuseofthe(mul=ple)pathsbetweenIPedgeand(mul=ple)servers

Improvetheuseofthemul=plepathsbetweenIPedgeanduser

Improvetheuseofthemul=pleradiopathslinkingusertoaggrega=onnetwork

IPBackboneAggrega=onNetwork

FixedAccessNetwork

MobileAccessNetwork

eNB

RGW

WiFiAccessPoint

FixedAccessNode

Services

Improvementopportuni=es

CommonIPedge

Improvementopportuni=es

UAG


Formalizing Unified Data Path Management

34COMBO – Lannion - April 2016

(includesUniversalAuthen=ca=on)

Monitoring

Decisionengine

Datapathcrea=onanddestruc=on

Sessionmappingexecu=on

Pathcoordina=onandcontrol

Sessionevent

Subscribers’profilesnetwork’spolicies

uDPM

DataPlane

ControlPlane


High level view of COMBO innovations for uDPM (includesUniversalAuthen=ca=on)


Monitoring

Decisionengine

Datapathcrea=onanddestruc=on

Sessionmappingexecu=on

Pathcoordina=onandcontrol

Sessionevent

Subscribers’profilesnetwork’spolicies

uDPM


The role of a decision engine

• The DE controls how resources are used and how customers are served

• The DE is network controlled • The DE is triggered by an “event” : session initiation or

handover, QoS or performance degradation… • The DE applies rules specific to the network (e.g. roaming

agreements) and policies specific to the user • The DE is key to Network Sharing mechanisms • The DE engine may interact with service delivery



Typical Scenario for access network sharing


LTEProviderA

Wi-FiProviderB

Wi-FiProviderC

UEwithWi-FiandLTE

DecisionEngine

Monitoring

eNB

37


COMBO’s toolbox for uDPM

•  Very Tight Coupling (L2 approach): •  Improves the use of the multiple paths linking user to

aggregation network •  Extending the 802.3ad approach

•  SIPTO extensions (L3/L4 approach): •  Improves the use of the multiple paths between IP edge and

user; provides smooth handover in case of mobility, relying on MPTCP and on a new function “proxy SGW”

•  Improves the use of the (multiple) paths between IP edge and (multiple) servers; allows to correlate content distribution and FMC caching with data path management.



Standardcase(nocouplingmechanism): AlicecanmanuallychooseaWiFiAP,connecttoitandobtainanIPaddress; Shehastoenterhercreden=alsandifauthorized,canusetheservice.

WithVeryTightCoupling: thedecisiontoaddaWiFiconnec=onistakenbythenetwork→itavoidsbadQoS; NoWiFiauthen=ca=onnecessary ThesameIPaddressisusedforbothinterfaces LTE-WiFidualconnec=vityispossible 39

 Aliceisusinghersmartphoneforvideoconferenceorvideostreamingwhilewalking; ConnectedinLTEtoaveryloadedcell; Whilewalking,nearbyWiFinetworksaredetected(RGWs,hotspots,…);

Typical scenario used for “Very Tight Coupling”



40

Very Tight Coupling: data plane protocol stack

l  RGWsareconnectedtoeNBs→Only1IPaddressforthetwointerfacesl  ReuseofLTEsecurityprocedures(PDCPlayer)onWiFi→dualconnec=vityl  Interfaceselec=ondonebythesender:UEintheuplinkandmainCOinthedownlink.l  VerysimpleAdapta=onlayer:includesonlyessen=alinforma=on(RNTI,LCID,...)

LTERRH LTEBBU(inmainCO)

RGW/CeAP

BBU:BaseBandUnitCeAP:CellularOffloadAccessPointCPRI:CommonPublicRadioInterfaceLCID:LogicalChannelIDPDCP:PacketDataConvergenceProtocolRLC:RadioLinkControlRNTI:RadioNetworkTemporaryIden=fierRRH:RemoteRadioHead



Standardcase(nocaching/prefetching): Theserverisusuallyfaraway,whichintroduceslatency; IfthelinktotheInternetbecomescongested,oriftheserverbecomesoverloaded,theQoSdegrades;

Withcaching/prefetching: Context-awareenginedetectsthatcachingislocallyavailable Therequestedvideoiscached/prefetchedonthelocalcache; AlicewillswitchtothelocalcacheinordertoreceivethevideowithgoodQoS

eNB

InternetPGW

SGWEPC

Overloadedserver

Congestedlink

eNB

InternetPGW

SGWEPC

Overloadedserver

Congestedlink

41

Typical scenario used for “FMC Caching/Prefetching” Aliceisusinghersmartphoneforvideostreaming AliceisconnectedbyLTEonaserverlocatedontheInternet AlicecanbeconnectedonthesameeNodeBbySIPTOtoacacheontheFMCnetwork



Summary

42

§  Structural Convergence §  The reference PtP CWDM solution is the most costly in all cases and does not scale appropriately

§  In an FTTC deployment scenario, WR-WDM-PON always has lowest cost independent of fibre cost.

§  In an FTTH area one could re-use the mass market NG-PON2 fibre infrastructure for PtP overlay §  Fibre-poor: Convergence with NG-PON2 has lowest cost

§  Fibre-rich: Convergence with NG-PON2 has lowest cost for higher RAN densities

§  For low number of deployed small cells NG-PON2 suffers from the bad utilization of PtP WDM hardware such as AWGs

§  As both the FTTH/FTTC ratio and the RAN density increase, the NG-PON2 converged architecture has lowest cost

§  Functional Convergence §  Universal Authentication (global solution)

§  Universal Data Path Management (a versatile toolbox)

§  Multiple architectural options for operating fixed-mobile converged networks




Architectural options for a universal Access Gateway (UAG)


SecGW

Aggrega=onNetwork

AccessNetwork

What the UAG should be ?

CommonCoreInterface

(Single?)ControlInterface

Homes

Businesses

Individuals

A functionaly-convergent subscriber IP edge node i.e., a functional entity supporting subscriber IP edge common functions for : - any type of access (wired and/or wireless) - any type of customer (fixed and/or mobile)

CoreNetwork

DSLAMOLT

eNB

eNBRRH

Wi-FiAP

eNBBBU

CommonAggrega/onInterfaces?

SUBSCRIBERMANAGEMENT(AAA/PDP/PCRF/OCS/OFCS)

UAGDataPlane

UAGControlPlane

RealTimeControl(forper-packetdecision)

UserTrafficProcessing

forwarding,des/encapsula=on,marking/queuing,rate-limi=ng/

shaping,duplica=on,accoun=ng,an=-spoofing,cyphering…

UserSessionControlAuthen=ca=on/A{achment/

Addressing,Mobility/Rou=ng,NAT,QoS,Filtering,Charging…

AndtheUAGcantakeadvantageofSDNasanenablertoseparatethedataplaneandcontrolplanefunc/ons



Location options for the UAG

Cabinet

Distribution Trunk

CO Main CO Core CO

Customer Premises Network

Core Network

Feeder

Access Network

Aggregation Network

UAG

Severalop=onsforloca=ng:dataplaneUAG,controlplaneUAGEnablersareSDNandNFV


Possibleloca=onsoftheUAGdataplane

COMBOproposes2networkscenariosdependingontheloca=onofthecommonIPedgeinaNG-POP•  “distributedNG-POP”:mul=pleNG-POPslocatedinMainCOs;theIPedgeisclosertotheuserthaninlegacynetworks

•  “centralisedNG-POP”:asmallernumber(typically10)ofNG-POPslocatedinCoreCOs;theIPedgeisasinlegacynetworks


Relationships between UAG, uAUT and uDPM

CoreInterface

SUBSCRIBERMANAGEMENT3GPPUserDataConvergence

(repository)

UAGDataPlane

UAGControlPlane

UserTrafficProcessingForwarding,des/encapsula=on

Security(ACL,An=-spoofing,encrypt)Tunneling

L2/L4classifica=onCaching

QoS,PolicingShaping

Lawfulinytercep=onAccoun=ngMul=caster

TrafficMonitoring/Sta=s=cs

AccessandSessionControlAuthen=ca=on/A{achment/Addressing

SessionMgtMobilityMgt,Accesscontrol

UEMgt

ServiceControlResouceandPolicyControlEnrichedservicescontrols

EventRepor=ngAccessandSelec=on

Analy=csNetworkstatesChargingContral

EnrichedServicesProcessing

ParentcontrolTCPop=misa=on

Contentadpaptding(todevices)HTTPenrichment

ServiceQoSpolicingShaping

Accoun=ng,

uDPM

uAUT

uDPM

Aggrega/onInterface

Users

AccessNodes

DSLAMOLT

eNB

eNBBBU

Wi-FiAP

uAUTuDPMuAUT

UE

UE


uAUT


Deployment Scenarii

Core COMain CO

Aggregation

Access & Aggregation IP network

AN

ANAN

AN

AN

Distributed splitted UAG

Application Services

EdgeRouterUAG

DP

UAGCP

Appli. Services

Core COMain CO

Aggregation

Access & Aggregation

IP networkAN

ANAN

AN

AN

Distributed UAG DP with centralized UAG CP


EdgeRouter

UAGDP

Appli. Services

Core COMain CO

Aggregation


AN

ANAN

AN

AN

Centralzed splitted UAG


UAGDP

UAGCP

Appli. Services

AggregNode

Core COMain CO

Aggregation


IP networkAN

ANAN

AN

AN

Centralzed UAG DP with highly centralized CP


UAGDP

Appli. Services

AggregNode


AN

ANAN

AN

AN

UAGDP

Appli. Services

UAGCP

Aggregation


AN

ANAN

AN

AN

UAGDP

Appli. Services

AggregNode

UAGCP

Core COMain CO

Aggregation


AN

ANAN

AN

AN

Distributed standalone UAG


EdgeRouterUAG

CP&DPAppli.

Services

Core COMain CO

Aggregation


AN

ANAN

AN

AN

Centralzed standalone UAG


UAGCP&DP

Appli. Services

AggregNode

Appli. Services

Appli. Services

Appli. Services

AAAServices

AAAServices

AAAServices

AAAServices

AAAServices AAA

Services

UAG deployment scenarios




Backup Slides


Must scale in wavelength domain (WDM)

Technology selection

§  From Year-1 analysis it became clear that

‒  High dedicated per-wavelength bit rates are at least partially required

‒  Transparency / low latency is at least partially required (no TDM etc.)

§  We consider the period beyond 2020, which is only 5 years away. Solutions must have sufficiently low risk. This excludes certain potential solutions which are significantly further out (and have been rejected in standardization)

‒  UDWDM-PON doesn’t support high per-wavelength bit rates efficiently, has severe techno-economic risk, and requires bonding of sub-carriers for high-speed services (causing latency)

‒  OFDMA-PON has poor performance (direct detection) or is complexity and risk overkill (coherent detection). Therefore, as per-wavelength multiple-access scheme, we clearly favored TDMA (i.e., NG-PON2).

§  Even the variants of NG-PON2 and WDM-PON that were analyzed do not exist commercially today. Hence, these solutions were forward-looking, instead of being “current” solutions.

‒  All NG-PON2 prototypes today [Q4/15] exhibit substantial problems with crosstalk, FEC gain / budget performance, and also wavelength drift during burst on/off periods.)

§  Therefore, the choice of solutions that was made is in line with former EU projects (OASE), and also with standardization (G.989, G.metro, NG-EPON)




Technical assessment


Technical assessment

Performance-related aspects:

§  WDM channel count and impact of intra and inter-channel cross talk

§  Reach (which in turn can translate to the CapEx and OpEx aspects of running active reach extenders (RE) in the ODN)

§  Required transceiver complexity and resulting CapEx

Qualitative assessment of operations-related aspects:

§  Support of legacy ODN

§  Wavelength-agnostic bandwidth provisioning

§  Flexibility of ODN (fan-out) configurations, in terms of number and port count of cascaded remote nodes (RN)

§  Energy consumption

§  Operations and maintenance cost

§  Fibre-count requirements

WP3 - Review P2, Brussels, Dec. 09-10, 2015 51 COMBO – Lannion - April 2016


Component IL [dB] 1:40 AWG in CO / in ODN 5.0 / 6.0 1:80 AWG in CO / in ODN 6.0 / 7.0 1:8 / 1:12 AWG in CO 2.5 C/L Band Filter ONU 1.0 C/L Band Filter OLT (premium) 0.5 Tunable Filter (RX or TX) 1.0 Power Splitter 1:8 / 1:32 / 1:64 9.9 / 16.5 / 19.8 TXmin, LP [dBm] -2.0 TXmin, HP [dBm] +1.0 RXmin, 10G APD [dBm] at BER=10-12 -26.0 Fiber Loss C/L [dB/km] 0.35 Min. Distri.Fiber Loss [dB] 1.0 Max. Distr. Fiber Loss [dB] 6.0 Limits and Penalties [dB] OPP EML 10G 40 km [dB] 2.0 EOL Penalty [dB] 3.0 Crosstalk Penalty [dB] 1.0 SBS-limited max. Ch. launch [dBm] 8.0 Laser Safety Class 1M 21.0 Max. Cost-eff. Gain [dB] 21.0

R[km]=(TXmin[dBm]-RXmin[dBm]-IL[dB]-Penal=es[dB])/αF[dB/km]

ForRE,theselimita=onsareconsidered

• Max.totallaunch21dBmforLaserSafetyClass1M(CplusLband)

• Max.per-channellaunch8dBmtoavoid(an=)SBS(means)

• Max.gainof21dBofsuitablylow-costamplifiers

TRXbudgethadtobereducedaccordingtorecentfindingsforfullbandtunableTRXEveninUrbanareas,WS-WDM-PONrequiresOLT-basedReachExtenders(RE),ormustbereducedto1:32powersplit

Reach Model WR/WS-WDM-PON



Key system differences

§  NG-PON2 requires significantly fewer fibers compared to CWDM and WDM-PON without coexistence (CEMx). However, this is due to the assumption regarding already installed mass-market solutions (which in this case is NG-PON2)

§  WR-WDM and CWDM allows for greatest reduction in passive optics

WP3 - Review P2, Brussels, Dec. 09-10, 2015

Per service area (urban) Reference NG-PON2 WR-WDM-PON WS-WDM-PON Reduction in fibre count and length ● ●●● ●● ●● Reduction in number of interfaces ●●● ●● ●● ●● Reduction in passive optics ●●● ● ●●● ●● Reduction in amplifiers (reach) ●●● ● ●● ● Potential of structural convergence ●●● ● ● Number of wavelengths per fibre ● ● ●●● ●● Bitrate per wavelength ●● ●● ●● ●● Low latency (system level) ●● ●● ●● ●● Simple to operate (colourless) ●●● ●●● ●●● Reduction in active shelves in MCO ●●● ● Ethernet aggregation in Main CO ● ● ● Legacy compatibility with fixed net. ●●● Re-use network infrastructure ●● ●●● ● ●●

53

●●● ●● ● Best Worst



Fron

thaul

Backhaul

Fibre-rich FTTH areas

•  NG-PON2 is cheapest for >12 SC per MBS (backhaul) resp. >25 SC per MBS (fronthaul) due to the increasing fibre convergence with the mass-market

•  WR WDM PON (filter based) is cheapest solution if SC <25

•  PtP CWDM (today’s approach) is most expensive solution if SC > 3

Fibre-richFTTHlowfibreadd-oncost(fibreconnec=ngonly)

Fibre-poorFTTHhighfibreadd-oncost

(fibrecabling+connec=ng)

Fibre-poor FTTH areas

•  Higher fibre costs arise for the other system technologies due to dedicated fibre usage leading to convergence benefit

•  NG-PON2 is cheapest independent of the SC density

Back-/fronthaul transport CAPEX Variation of small cell density (urban, 100% FTTH)



Smallcelldensity(SCperMBS)

0%

100%

WR-WDM-PONcheapest

50%

Fibre-richFTTHmass-market(add-oncostforfibreconnec=ngonly)

0%

100%

50%

Fibre-poorFTTHmass-market(add-oncostsforfibrecabling+connec=ng)

10 30 50 70 90Smallcelldensity(SCperMBS)

10 30 50 70 90

25% 25%

75% 75%

WR-WDM-PONcheapest

NG-PON2vs.WR-WDM-PONCAPEXparityFronthaulCAPEXparityBackhaul




Backhaulbreakeven

Backhaulbreakeven

FTTH

ra/o

inM

COarea


FTTH

ra/o

inM

COarea

Sensitivity analysis (Ultra DU) Variation of SC density, FTTH ratio, fibre availability

§  For denser areas, convergence with mass-market solution is more favorable even for lower FTTH ratios



Providing a generic security transport layer over EAP

•  AGenericandExtensibleAuthen=ca=onProtocol(EAP)mechanismbasedonIEEE802.1X

•  Thesecuritylevelandtype(strong/weakauthen=ca=on,cipheringornot…)willbechosenaccordingtotherequirementsoftheaccessnetwork.



Legacy tools for Data Path Creation and Destruction

•  ANDSF and Hotspot 2.0 provide the UE with policies and network selection information for influencing how users and their devices prioritize between several non-3GPP access networks

•  Handover procedures are available in mobile networks to modify the data paths in case of mobility

•  SIPTO identifies regular data path (through SGW and PGW) and other paths through LGW or standalone distributed SGW/PGW

•  Content distribution relies on selecting one server among multiple servers containing the requested content



Approaches for Path Coordination and Control


OSI layer Criteria solution

Modification of the host protocol stack

Modification of the network architecture

Transparency to current applications

Transparency to network elements

Control entity (host or network)

Mobility area

Layer 2 802.3ad Yes No Yes Yes Host / Layer 3

MIP Yes Yes Yes No Host Full PMIP No Yes Yes No Host Local ILNP Yes No No No Host / GLI-Split Yes Yes Yes No Host Full (using MIP) NIIA Yes Yes No No Host Full LISP No Yes Yes No Host / HAIR Yes Yes Yes No Host Full Six/One router No Yes Yes No Host /

Layer 3/4

SHIM6 Yes No Yes No Host Full HIP Yes Yes No No Host Full MILSA Yes Yes No No Host Full

Layer 4

MPTCP Yes No Yes No Host Full SCTP Yes No No No Host / mSCTP Yes No No No Host Full

Layer 7

SIP No No / Yes Host Full mHTTP No No / Yes Host /

Classifica=onofmobilityandmul=-homing/bondingsolu=ons

OnlyIPv6

IPv4andIPv6

Nomod

ifica=o

ntonetworkno

rtoapplica=

ons

IPv4andIPv6


Standardcase(noSIPTO/MP-TCPextension): smoothhandoverforthesessionsontheregularpath; SIPTOsessionsarebroken,astheIPaddressischangedwhenUEa{achestoneweNB

WithSIPTO/MP-TCPextension: anewMP-TCPsub-flowisaddedwhenthenewIPaddressislearned; 3GPPhandoverproceduresareappliedthankstothe“proxySGW”func=on thestreamingsessionisnotbroken


Typical scenario for enhanced SIPTO handover

(H)eNB

UE

EPC

PGWSGW

Internet

IPcore

LGW

(H)eNB

UE

EPC

PGWSGW

Internet

IPcoreProxySGW/LGW

AuserstreamsacontentonaSIPTOdatapathusingLGWsco-locatedwitheNodeB(e.g.smallcells)astheQoEisbe{er(serverclosertouser) NewSIPTOConnec/ona[erreconnec/ngtheUE

Ini/alRegularDataPath

RegularDataPatha[ertheHO

Ini/alSIPTOConnec/onwithLGWco-locatedwith(H)eNB


Components of the SIPTO/MP-TCP extensions

(H)eNB

UE

EPC

PGWSGW

Internet

IPcoreProxySGW/LGW

TheproxySGW•  isseenasaSGWbytheeNBandtheLGW•  isseenasaeNBbytheSGW(regular)

Duringhandoverprocedures,MPTCPsignallingisonthe“regular”datapaththeMP-TCPcapableUEreceivestrafficon2differentaddresses


MPTCPcapablehost

Mul=pleinterfaces

andaddresses

SubflowA

SubflowN

MPTCPcapablehost

Singleapplica=onoverTCP


61

Coupling Content Distribution with uDPM


COMBO Architecture Demo Day Lannion 28’th of Apri l · COMBO Architecture Demo Day ......

Documents

Transcript of COMBO Architecture Demo Day Lannion 28’th of Apri l · COMBO Architecture Demo Day ......