SuperDREAM Testbed

1
SuperDREAM Testbed

• Pete Siemsen
• August 2007

2
Why SuperDREAM?FRGP problems

• Single Points of Failure
• Routers
• Level 3 switch
• Member circuits
• Commodity Internet
• Members cant connect at multiple sites

3
Existing Single Points of Failure

• 1200 Larimer
• Router, switch, ATM switch
• Level 3
• switch/router failure disconnects BiSON from
  Denver
• BPoP
• switch/router
• Movaz boxes not addressed here

4
FRGP logical view
BPoP
ICG
Level 3 PoP
1200 Larimer
5
SuperDREAM goals

• Redundancy
• Allow members to connect to two sites
• Provide multiple paths to Commodity providers
• Optimize
• Service offerings
• Routing

6
FRGP services

• Default service access to other FRGP members and
  to FRGP peers (Comcast, RMIX)
• Commodity Internet TransitRail
• Abilene (I2)
• NLR PacketNet

7
Proposed Solution VRFs

• VRFs - Virtual Routing and Forwarding.
• Separate routing tables allows a router to
  partition services in a natural way.
• 2 possible models per-service VRFs or
  per-permutation VRFs

8
Per-service VRF solution

• Every FRGP router will have just these VRFs
• Members peers VRF
• A Commodity/TransitRail VRF
• An NLR PacketNet VRF
• An I2 VRF

9
Per-service VRFs

• Each member will have a VLAN and a BGP session
  for each service that they buy.

10
Per-permutation VRF solution

• Every router will have a VRF for each permutation
  of services bought by members
• Members peers VRF
• A Commodity/TransitRail VRF
• An NLR VRF
• An I2 VRF
• An NLR/I2 VRF
• A Commodity/Transitrail/NLR VRF
• A Commodity/Transitrail/I2 VRF
• A Commodity/Transitrail/NLR/I2 VRF

11
Solution trade-offs
Per service Per permutation
Number of connections Higher Lower
Memory usage Lower Higher
Rate limits Easier Harder
Statistics Easier Harder
Member complexity Higher Lower
12
Commodity redundancy

• Commodity ISPs will be spread across FRGP sites.
  Commodity access will no longer depend on the
  Larimer router.
• Commodity traffic will flow to the globally
  best ISP, not necessarily the ISP nearest to
  each member.

13
Rate limits (per-service)

• Member traffic will rate limited at the members
  primary connection point. This greatly
  simplifies engineering.

14
Rate limits (per-permutation)

• Member traffic will be rate-limited at multiple
  points.

15
Load-sharing

• We cant apply a single rate limit to traffic on
  two separate routers.
• Multihomed members must have a primary and an
  idle backup per service.

Level 3
Qwest
Level 3
Larimer
member
16
Constraints

• Maintain charging algorithm
• Have one engineering solution for everyone
• All members will do BGP
• Solution must fit in router memory

17
Open issues

• Implementation difficulty
• Unknown memory limits
• Engineering troubleshooting/debug
• MPLS vs. VLANs
• Cisco/Juniper interoperability
• Long-term FRGP 10G routing solution

18
TestBed