the earnest foresight study 2006 - 2007 results from the earnest technical study licia florio,...
Post on 18-Dec-2015
220 views
TRANSCRIPT
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Results from the EARNEST Technical Study
Licia Florio, TERENA
EARNEST Workshop, Amsterdam, 8 May 2007
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Agenda
• Technical study– Lower layers preliminary results– Middleware preliminary results
• More details on this part of the study
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Technical Study • Transmission technologies
– Equipment evolution, next-generation standards, transmission protocols & fibre provisioning.
• Operations and performance
– End-to-end performance, network management (optical & IP), VPN provisioning & PERT.
• Control plane technologies
– Switching & routing matrices (optical & IP), multicasting, IPvX, QoS provisioning.
• Middleware (new element)
– Authentication and authorisation infrastructures, identity federations and related technologies, mobility, support for network infrastructure, virtual organisations.
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Technical Study Panel • Lower layers:
– Lars Fischer (Nordunet) – Transmission– John Graham (Indiana University) - Transmission
Otto Kreiter (DANTE) - Transmission– Gigi Karmous-Edwards (MCNC) - Control Plane (Optical)– Alexander Gall (SWITCH) - Control Plane (IP routing)– Stig Venaas (Uninett) - Control Plane (Multicast)– Dimitra Simeonidou (University of Essex) – Operations &
Performance (Optical)– Luca Deri (University of Pisa/Netikos) - Operations &
Performance (IP)– Simon Leinen (SWITCH) - Operations & Performance (IP)
• Middleware:– Diego Lopez (RedIRIS) - Middleware– Milan Sova (CESNET) - Middleware– Klaas Wierenga (SURFnet) - Middleware (Mobility)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Lower Layers First Results
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
1. This part of the study was conducted by my colleague,Kevin Meynell
2. Study conducted via interviews with some major vendors:> So far only router & ethernet switching vendors interviewed.> Some results could different after talking to the network operators
Disclaimer
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Lower Layer First Results
• Currently only a few OC-768 (40 Gbps) customers, mostly in oil and gas industries
• Reluctance to upgrade transport network to support 40 Gbps, as expensive (x20 the cost of 4 x 10 GE) and seen as interim step before higher speed standards.
• SUN seem to move away from 40Gbps
• Running into problems with n x 10 Gbps, due to link aggregation and load-balancing performance.
• Cisco, Juniper and Force10 pushing for 100 Gigabit Ethernet standard.
– 100 GE standard expected by 2009, with implementations by 2010.
– Copper standard for 100 GE being considered.
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Lower Layers First Results • Routing scalability becoming problematic (again)
– Huge rise in number of hosts, fragmentation of service provider hierarchy, and amount of traffic.
– Global routing table now >200,000 entries, which is causing memory and processing problems (0.5-1 GB memory required).
– Other reasons – more multihoming, traffic engineering, plus IPv6.
– Proposed to split IP addresses into identifiers and locators. [Possible implications for AAA as well]
• Improvements to TCP for sustained high-bandwidth transmissions
• Juniper pushing (G)MPLS, but Cisco less interested
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Middleware First Results
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Why a middleware sub-study?
• It is not just the current ‘buzzword’ :-) • NRENs mission broader:
– Not only network provisioning, but also services provisioning
• NRENs more involved in middleware developments/deployment over the last years– Federations, eduroam, Grid– TERENA EuroCAMPs
• GEANT2/JRA5 working to create a European middleware framework – All NRENs are moving in the same direction– Not all NRENs move at the same pace
• EARNEST will look at how middleware technologies are expected to evolve in the next couple of years
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
What is Identity Management?
• Identity Management = IdM =– Giving each user an electronic identity– Set of technologies and policies to
control users’ access to resources
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life CycleRes1
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life CyclebasicAuthN Res1
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life Cycle
basicAuthN
Res1
Res2
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life Cycle
basicAuthN
Res1
Res2
Res1
Res2SSO
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life Cycle
basicAuthN
Res1
Res2
Res1
Res2SSO
Resources…Resources…Resources…
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life CycleRes1
Res2SSO
basicAuthN
Res1
Res2
Federat ion
Resources…Resources…Resources…
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM Life CycleRes1
Res2SSO
basicAuthN
Res1
Res2
Resources…Resources…Resources…
Federat ion
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Key Federation Technology
• SAML, in particular SAML2.0 – Security Assertion Markup
Language
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM in the European higher education
• In Europe different technologies used for higher education federations:– Liberty Alliance (ID-FF)
• Norway– Shibboleth (SAML-based)
• UK, Switzerland, Finland, • Under development: Denmark, Italy, Germany
– PAPI• Spain
– A-Select• The Netherlands
• In US:– Mainly Shibboleth
• Many IdM solutions – Interoperability one of the key factors
• SAML (2.0) the way to go
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Identity Federation Model
Identity Provider Service Provider
SAML request
SAML response
Trust
redirect
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
IdM from the vendors perspective
• Identity Management is definitely a big area of interest for vendors
• Different approaches for SSO:– Identity Federations: Liberty Alliance and SUN – User centric Identity model
• Fairly new concept• Implemented by Microsoft and OpenID
– Abstract identity framework (Higgins, IBM)• Close to the usercentric identity
• Some alliances between vendors• Probably to compete/cooperate with Microsoft
• Trust is a big concern for vendors– The user centric approach seems to guarantee
more privacy to the users
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
User Centric Identity Model
Service Provider
• User = Identity provider – Resource request for user identity information is handled
by the user– Users decide which credentials and other personal
information to present to the resource• In the same way users choose which credit card to use
for payment
Identity Provider
12
3
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Middleware Sub-Study Preliminary Findings
• IBM and Microsoft seem to be working on the same track
• OpenId has announced cooperation with Microsoft– It seems like something will appear on the
market in the next ~6 months• Shibboleth developers are also talking to Microsoft• It is likely that there will be two major tracks:
– User-centric identity model – SAML2-based IdM federations
• How will these two approaches evolve?
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Middleware Sub-Study Preliminary Findings
• Grid – Sufficient interest from vendors in what is
happening in the ‘Grid space’• The new user-centric model might fit Grid
requirements, but no concrete plans in this direction
• Middleware to support lightpaths– Middleware can be used, for instance, to create
lightpaths– Different lightpaths for different users
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Conclusions
• Some interviews to be finalised on the control-plane and performances side
• A report will contain all the findings on the technical study– Initial report is expected to be available
in July 2007