1. No category

Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
How to stimulate the use of experimental facilities
Lessons learned from the FOKUS Technology Playgrounds
Prof. Dr. Thomas Magedanz
Fraunhofer FOKUS / Technische Universität Berlin, Germany
thomas.magedanzfokus.fraunhofer.de
1
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Backward Compatibility is key: NGN Evolution toward Future Internet
Information Technologies
(Service Oriented Architectures
Service
Architectures
Telecommunications
& Cloud Computing)
VoIP
Fixed and Mobile
Telecommunications
FMC
Next
Generation
Network
3/4 Play
IPTV
Internet
RCS
IMS
P2P
EPC
Future
Internet
Self*
Evolution
2
Clean Slate Design
Autonomic Communications
Revolution
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
FOKUS is participating in major FI Testbed Initiatives
Deep-G Project
Work on FI Security
Open FI Testbed
Work on FI Security, Monitoring,
Service Composition, Federation
www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/go/fi-lab
FIREstation Architecture Board
www.ict-fireworks.eu
http://ict-fire.eu
www.g-lab-deep.de
Future Internet Ware
PPP Proposal
Lead in Teagle development
Testbed management
www.fire-teagle.org/tutorials.jsp Projects: Bonfire, Tefis, Novi
www.panlab.net
3
www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/go/ngn2fi
Development of AC testbed
www.onelab.eu
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Key to success for experimental facilities
Lessons learned from FOKUS / TU Berlin
4
An experimental facility needs a clear scope and identification of the customer/users
– Functional scope: networks, service platform, specific application domain ?
– Time scope: long term (clean slate) vs. medium term (evolutionary) approaches ?
– User/customer scope: support of academia or industry or both?
Different approaches for providing a testbed:
– Toolkits for inhouse testbeds vs. joint infrastructure offering vs. federated testbeds
– Example: Open Source IMS Core vs. open IMS playground vs. PII
Importance of technology backward compatibility, standards compliance and linkage to
commercial open developer platforms
– Example Open IMS Core and OpenEPC as 3GPP reference implentations
– Example: FOKUS OSTP vs Open Developer Garden Portal of DTAG
Lesson learned: The closer experimentation gets to the market (shift from "R" to "D")
the more challenging is the uss of an open platform ( IPR Protection!)
– Example: Connecting to the FOKUS FUSECO Playground vs. OpenEPC Toolkit to
establish a private FUSECO Playground
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Key to success for experimental facilities
Lessons learned from FOKUS / TU Berlin
5
Provision of an Open Source Tools for testbed setup and federation
– PII Teagle Tool
– Example: Teagle and packet tracking tools for FIRE and national facilities
– Teagle is planned to be used for ETSI IMS/EPC Plugtests in 2011
How to stimulate testbed adoption
– Create awareness via tutorials, webinars, workshops and „showrooms“
– Example: See FOKUS IMS Workshop series and new FUSECO Forum
Open Testbed Challenges:
– Legal Issues – how to provide infrastructure access to third parties?
– Payment issues - who pays for the provided testbed infrastructures
– Company security policies (testbeds run in front of the firewall!)
– Constrain resource sharing
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Useful Links
6
Fraunhofer FOKUS NGNI Competence Center: www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/go/ngni
TU Berlin Chair for Next Generation Networks: www.av.tu-berlin.de
Open IMS Core Project: www.openimscore.org
Open IMS Playground: www.open-ims.org
Open SOA Telco Playgorund: www.opensoaplayground.org
Open EPC Project: www.openEPC.net
Future Seamless Communication Playground: www.fuseco-playground.org
FUSECO FORUM: www.fuseco-forum.org
NGN to Future Internet evolution Lab: www.ngn2fi.org
Future Internet testbed tool Teagle: www.fire-teagle.org
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Backup: FOKUS provides Testbeds to both Academia and Industry
Remote Testbeds
1
Free Download
Platform
Examples:
Uni Cape Town, TU Vienna, WIT Ireland
NGN Open
NGN Open
Testbeds
NGN Open
Testbeds
Testbeds
Operators
& Vendors
Industry
Industry
Testbeds
Industry
Testbeds
Testbeds
Examples: South Africa, Korea,
Indonesia, Japan, …
7
Cooperation
FOKUS SOA
+
Components
Partner NGN
Components
2
IMS Testbed
IMS Testbed
IMS Testbed
IMS Testbed
Examples: O2, T-Com, Arcor, NSN, Ericsson
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Checklist for successful FIRE experimentation
General comment: Today we already have a number of good approaches and prototypes
but we have to align them and define a clear process on how to use them
(1) Select the best testbeds (criteria: scientific citations / industry usage)
(2) Agree on federation framework, specifically:
Control framework / provisioning interfaces
Identity Management (Ispec)
Policy description (Pspec)
Resource description (Rspec)
8
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Federation Challenges
set
m
r
r
Domain A
Federated Identity
Management & ID Policies
set
reg
r
m
r
r
reg
r
Control Framework &
Resource usage
policies
Resource Description
Domain B
set
m
reg
r
Sebastian Wahle, Thomas Magedanz, and Anastasius Gavras. Towards the Future Internet - Emerging Trends from European Research, chapter Conceptual Design and Use Cases for a FIRE Resource
Federation Framework, pages 51-62. IOS Press, April 2010. ISBN: 978-1-60750-538-9 (print), 978-1-60750-539-6 (online). http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=16471
9
control unit
domain manager
registry
resource
virtual testbed
domain
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Checklist for successful FIRE experimentation
General comment: Today we already have a number of good approaches and prototypes
but we have to align them and define a clear process on how to use them
(1) Select the best testbeds (criteria: scientific citations / industry usage)
(2) Agree on federation framework, specifically:
Control framework / provisioning interfaces
Identity Management (Ispec)
Policy description (Pspec)
Resource description (Rspec)
(3) Build a federated system based on (1) and (2). Select & implement example use cases.
(4) Demo, Demo, Demo, Tutorials, Tutorials, Tutorials
(5) Agree on methodology for defining & executing experiments
10
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
log(cost)
Real OS
Real applications
Real platforms
Real conditions
Cost = f(complexity, resource,
environmental conditions)
Real Federated System
Real systems and apps
Real conditions
Distributed resources
Real OS
Real applications
“In-lab” platforms
Synthetic conditions
Homogeneous
Federation
Models for key OS mechanisms
Algorithms and kernel apps
Abstracted platforms
Synthetic conditions
Models
Sys, Apps,
Platforms,
Conditions
Formal
model
Loss of real experimental conditions
Loss of experimental conditions,
reproducibility, repeatability, etc.
Simulation
Gavras(Ed), A. Experimentally driven research white paper, version 1, 2010.
11
Heterogeneous
Federation
Emulation
Real
systems
log(realism)
As the opposite of the
abstraction level
Competence Center NGNI
Fraunhofer FOKUS
Checklist for successful FIRE experimentation
General comment: Today we already have a number of good approaches and prototypes
but we have to align them and define a clear process on how to use them
(1) Select the best testbeds (criteria: scientific citations / industry usage)
(2) Agree on federation framework, specifically:
Control framework / provisioning interfaces
Identity Management (Ispec)
Policy description (Pspec)
Resource description (Rspec)
(3) Build a federated system based on (1) and (2). Select & implement example use cases
(4) Demo, Demo, Demo, Tutorials, Tutorials, Tutorials
(5) Agree on methodology for defining & executing experiments
(6) Fund experiments that make use of the facility
(7) Enable results publication and comparison -> FIRE Portal
(8) Evaluate results (criteria: scientific citations / industry usage/exploitation)
12