Andy Reid, BT Founding Member of ETSI NFV ISG
Transcript of Andy Reid, BT Founding Member of ETSI NFV ISG
ETSI NFV ISGAndy Reid, BT
Founding Member of ETSI NFV ISG
Background to ETSI NFV ISG
• Many carriers independently progressing research on NFV technology
– independently concluded that technology is ready but would not be commercialised quickly
for scale deployment without industry cooperation and support
• Cooperation amongst the carriers began with informal discussions in April 2012
• With wide carrier support, started informal discussions on convening an industry
forum
• A meeting in Sept 2012 decided - after consideration of several options - to
parent under ETSI as an “Industry Specification Group”
© British Telecommunications plc
parent under ETSI as an “Industry Specification Group”
• The joint white paper on Network Functions Virtualisation was published to
coincide with presentations at the OpenFlow/SDN World Congress, Darmstadt
(Oct 2012), and the ETSI Board approved creation of the NFV ISG (Nov 2012)
• Founding members:
– AT&T, BT, Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Telecom Italia, Telefonica, Verizon
• First formal meeting in ETSI HQ, Sophia Antipolis, Jan 2013
Why we believe NFV is the future for Networks
© British Telecommunications plc
3
• Standard high volume servers have sufficient packet processing performance to cost effectively virtualise network appliances.
• The hypervisor need not be a bottleneck.
• LINUX need not be a bottleneck.
• TCO advantages are scenario specific but expect significant benefits.
• Plus a significant reduction in energy consumption.
ETSI NFV
The basic concept
NFV ApproachClassical Network Appliance Approach
CDN WAN
Acceleration
Message
Router
Session Border
Controller Independent
SoftwareVendors
Co
mp
etitive
& In
no
vative
Eco
system
ISVs
© British Telecommunications plc
BRAS
FirewallDPI Tester/QoE
monitor
Radio Access
Network
Controller
Carrier
Grade NAT
PE RouterSGSN/GGSN
Vendors
High volume
Ethernet switches
High volume
standard servers
High volume
standard storage
Orchestrated, automatic, & remote install
Co
mp
etitive
& In
no
vative
NFV Infrastructure
• Fragmented non-commodity hardware.• Physical install per appliance per site.• Hardware development large barrier to entry for
new vendors, constraining innovation & competition.
NVF Organization and Structure
Technical Mgt
© British Telecommunications plc
Technical Steering Committee (chaired by Technical Manager)
WGExpert
Task
GroupWG WG…
ETSI NFV 5
NFV Scope
© British Telecommunications plc
ETSI NFV 6
NFV Applications Domain
VI Container Interface
Carrier
Management
12
5
43
4
Basic Domain Architecture
© British Telecommunications plc
Infrastructure Network Domain
Virtual Network Container Interface
Orchestration and Management Domain
Compute Domain
Compute Container Interface
Hypervisor Domain
Virtual Machine Container Interface
Exi
stin
g N
etw
ork
5
6 7
8
9
10
11
12
13 14
Example Use Cases
• Mobile networks:
– HLR/HSS, MME, SGSN, GGSN/PDN-GW, Base Station, vEPC
• NGN signalling:
– SBCs, IMS
• Switching elements:
• Security functions:
– Firewalls, virus scanners, intrusion detection systems, spam protection
• Tunnelling gateway elements:
– IPSec/SSL VPN gateways
• Converged and network-wide
© British Telecommunications plc
• Switching elements:
– BNG, CG-NAT, routers
• Home environment:
– home router, set top box
• Application-level optimisation:
– CDNs, Cache Servers, Load Balancers, Application Accelerators
• Converged and network-wide functions:
– AAA servers, policy control and charging platforms
• Traffic analysis/forensics:
– DPI, QoE measurement
• Traffic Monitoring,
– Service Assurance, SLA monitoring, Test and Diagnostics
Benefits
• Reduced equipment costs (CapEx) through equipment consolidation equipment and due to economies of scale
• Reduced operational costs (OpEx): labor, power, space
• Increased speed of Time to Market by minimising the typical network
operator cycle of innovation.
• Availability of network appliance multi-version and multi-tenancy, which allows use of a single platform for different applications, users and
© British Telecommunications plc
allows use of a single platform for different applications, users and tenants.
• Flexibility to easily, rapidly dynamically provision and instantiate new
services in various locations (no need for new equipment install)
• Improved operational efficiency by taking advantage of the higher
uniformity of the physical network platform and its homogeneity to other
support platforms.
• Encouraging innovation to bring new services and generate new
revenue streams
• Mobility of skillset and talent (easy to move around, on need basis)
ETSI NFV ISG
• Carrier-led Industry Specification Group (ISG) under the auspices of ETSI (20 carriers and mobile operators). Wide industry support (more than 50 vendors).
• Open membership to everyone
– ETSI members sign the “Member Agreement”
– Non-ETSI members sign the “Participant Agreement”
• Operates by consensus (formal voting only when required)
• Deliverables: White papers addressing challenges and operator requirements, as input to standardisation bodies
© British Telecommunications plc
• Face-to-face meetings quarterly
• Currently four (4) WGs and two (2) expert groups (EG)
– WG1: Infrastructure Architecture EG: Security
– WG2: Management and Orchestration EG: Performance and Portability
– WG3: Software Architecture
– WG4: Reliability & Availability
• Network Operators Council (NOC)
– governing and technical advisory body
• Technical Steering Committee:
– Technical Manager
– WG Chairs, EG Leaders
Do join and contribute
© British Telecommunications plc
© British Telecommunications plc
EXTRAS
Implementing Hierarchical-QoS in Software
Progress� The January 2012 vBRAS test implemented Priority QoS and implementing
Hierarchical-QoS in software was seen as a barrier.
� BT & Intel ® initiated a project to implement high performance H-QoS in
software.
� Currently implemented a Hierarchical scheduler with:
5 levels, 64K queues, traffic shaping, strict priority and weighted round robin.
� Preliminary performance per CPU core is close to line rate for hierarchical
scheduling and packet transmission for one 10GbE port at 64 byte packet size
i.e. 13.3 Mpps
13
© British Telecommunications plc
Slide 13
i.e. 13.3 Mpps
� Hardware: 2x Intel Xeon E5-2680 CPUs @2.7GHz, 8 cores, 20MB L3 cache, 8GT/s QPI, 4x DDR3
memory, 32 GB DDR3 memory: 2x 2GB DIMMs per each of the 4x memory channels of each CPU, 1x Intel X520-SR2 Dual Port 10Gbps Ethernet Controller connected to CPU0 through one PCI-Express Gen2 x8
slot.
� Software: Fedora release 16 (Verne) with Linux kernel 3.1.0-7.fc16.x86_64. Kernel boot time
configuration: 16x 1GB huge memory pages reserved (8 pager for each CPU), CPU isolation enabled to restrict kernel scheduler to CPU0 core 0; Intel DPDK 1.4 Early Access Release 1
� Subject to further development and testing.
� H-QoS may be included in the Intel ® DPDK.
Hierarchical Scheduler Performance
Gbps p
er C
PU
Core
Virtualising Content Distribution Networks� Ran Verivue (now Akamai Aura) HyperCache node and IneoQuest adaptive
stream monitor, measuring Video QoE, virtual machines on VMware ESXi 5.0 on
an HP BL460 G8 server with 2 x 10GigE ports.
Results shown below
� The video traffic from the virtual HyperCache node was “mirrored” to the virtual
IneoQuest ASM using the standard VMware Vswitch.
Currently investigating bottlenecks and testing new version of ASM.
� For BT’s UK network the virtualised solution 8Gbps level of performance would
be sufficient for 77% of Metro nodes.
Virtualisation reduces box count, saving CAPEX & OPEX.
14
© British Telecommunications plc
Slide 14
18,7
16,6
10,7
8 8 8
4,5 4,5 4,5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
All PDL All ABR VoD
All ABR Live
Peak Ntwk Thro'put Cache (Gbit/s) with ASM Off
Peak Ntwk Thro'put Cache (Gbit/s) with ASM On
ASM Monitor Capacity (Gbit/s)
Gb
ps
Rank order UK Metro Nodes
Mb
ps C
ach
e T
raff
ic P
er
No
de
<8 Gbps > 77% of
Nodes in 2013/14
<32 Gbps > 77% of
Nodes in 2017/18
PDL = Progressive DownLoad. ABR = Adaptive Bit Rate. VoD = Video on Demand. Live = live linear TV. ASM = Adaptive Stream Monitor from IneoQuest.
Running on 1 HP BL460c G8
Where Virtualisation Improves Performance
� Widely accepted that virtualisation reduces performance compared to running
on “bear metal” but here’s a real application where it improves performance:
� Scalable IPsec solutions are required for FONera roaming WiFi and LTE
services.
Investigated lowest cost IPsec solution for BT’s FON WiFi service.
Requirements: Null encryption, 3DES IKE, ~80Kbps/tunnel, millions tunnels,
high tunnel set-up rate.
� Tested the KAME solution bundled in the Linux kernel (Ubuntu 10.04 LTS)
15
With Virtualisation
© British Telecommunications plc
Slide 15
� Tested the KAME solution bundled in the Linux kernel (Ubuntu 10.04 LTS)
achieved 7K tunnels.
IPse
c tu
nn
els
pe
r DL
36
0 s
erv
er
Number of E5-2667 Cores
3.2
Gbps
3.8
Gbps
Packets
dro
pped!1.2
G
Tunnel set-uprate
= 100/sec
� Bottleneck was a single core being
used to terminate all IPsec tunnels.
� How to use more CPU cores?
� Rewrite the code �
� Or use KVM and run multiple
virtual Linux kernels to load share
the IPsec tunnels across multiple
cores ☺
Used KVM (redhat 6.3) with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS virtual machines
WithoutVirtualisation
With Virtualisation