5G transport network benchmarking
draft-contreras-bmwg-5g-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2019-07-08
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Benchmarking Methodology Working Group                     LM. Contreras
Internet-Draft                                              J. Rodriguez
Intended status: Experimental                                   L. Luque
Expires: January 9, 2020                                      Telefonica
                                                            July 8, 2019

                   5G transport network benchmarking
                       draft-contreras-bmwg-5g-00

Abstract

   New 5G services are starting to be deployed in operational networks,
   leveraging in a number of novel technologies and architectural
   concepts.  The purpose of this document is to overview the
   implications of 5G services in transport networks and to provide
   guidance on bechmarking of the infratructures supporting those
   services.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      5G transport network benchmarking          July 2019

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  5G services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   4.  Benchmarking aspects of transport networks in 5G  . . . . . .   3
   5.  Guidance on 5G transport benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   5G services are starting to be introduced in real operational
   networks.  The challenges of 5G are multiple, impacting in different
   technological areas such as radio access, mobile core and transport
   network.  From all those technological areas, the transport network
   is the focus of this document.

   It is important for operators to have a good basis of benchmarking
   solutions, technologies and architectures before moving them into
   production.  With such aim, this document intends to overview
   available guidelines to assist on the benchmarking of 5G transport
   networks, identifying gaps that could require further work and
   details.

   As result, it is expected to provide guidance on benchmarking of 5G
   transport network infrastructures ready for experimentation in lab
   environments or real deployment in operational networks.

2.  Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119].

3.  5G services

   5G transport networks will need to accommodate different kind of
   services with very distinct needs and requirements leveraging on the
   same infrastructure. 5G services can be grouped in three main

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft      5G transport network benchmarking          July 2019

   categories, namely enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB), ultra-Reliable
   and Low Latency Communications (URLLC), and massive Machine Type
   Communications (mMTC).  Each of them presents different inherent
   characteristics spanning from ultra-low latency to high bandwidth and
   high reliability.  For instance, eMMB services are expected to
   provide peak bit rates of up to 1 Gbps, uRRLC services will require
   latencies as lower as below microsecond delays, and mMTC will demand
   to support up to 100 times the number of current sessions.  All these
   features impose great constraints to the networks deployed today in
   backhaul and aggregation, in terms of not only network capacity but
   also in terms of data processing, especially for guaranteeing very
   low latencies.

   The impact in the transport network of those challenges is increased
   by some other additional challenges introduced by the emergence of
   two new technological paradigms: the network virtualization and the
   network programmability.

   In one hand, virtualization will introduce uncertainty on the traffic
   patterns due to the flexibility and scalability in the deployment
   traffic sources in the transport network.  On the other hand,
   programmability will potentially enable automated reconfiguration of
   the transport network which requires coordination mechanisms to avoid
   misconfigurations.

   A final consideration is the introduction of the network slicing
   concept in 5G networks.  According to that, the objective is to
   provide customized and tailored logical networks to different
   customers, allocating resources for the specific customer service
   request.

4.  Benchmarking aspects of transport networks in 5G

   The benchmarking aspects of 5G transport networks can be then
   structured in the following manner:

   Data plane benchmarking:  aspects to consider in data plane
      benchmarking refer to both hardware capabilities as well as to
      transport encapsulations.  Examples of hardware capabilities are
      recent developments such as IEEE TSN, and example of encapsulation
      is SRv6 [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming].

   Control plane benchmarking:  aspects to consider for control plane
      relates to transport infrastructure programmability.  In this case
      some previous works exists such as RFC8456 [RFC8456].

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft      5G transport network benchmarking          July 2019

   Management plane benchmarking:  one specific aspect of management
      benchmarking in 5G refers to the capability of managing the
      transport network slice lifecycle.

   Architecture benchmarking:  new architectural frameworks are being
      conceived to support advanced services like 5G.  An example of
      these architectures is [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture].

5.  Guidance on 5G transport benchmarking

   To be completed.

6.  Security Considerations

   This draft does not include any security considerations.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This draft does not include any IANA considerations

8.  Acknowledgements

   This work has been partly funded by the European Commission through
   the H2020 project 5G-EVE (Grant Agreement no. 815074).

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture]
              Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
              "Deterministic Networking Architecture", draft-ietf-
              detnet-architecture-13 (work in progress), May 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]
              Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J.,
              daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6
              Network Programming", draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-
              programming-01 (work in progress), July 2019.

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft      5G transport network benchmarking          July 2019

   [RFC8456]  Bhuvaneswaran, V., Basil, A., Tassinari, M., Manral, V.,
              and S. Banks, "Benchmarking Methodology for Software-
              Defined Networking (SDN) Controller Performance",
              RFC 8456, DOI 10.17487/RFC8456, October 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8456>.

Authors' Addresses

   Luis M. Contreras
   Telefonica
   Ronda de la Comunicacion, s/n
   Sur-3 building, 3rd floor
   Madrid  28050
   Spain

   Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com
   URI:   http://lmcontreras.com/

   Juan Rodriguez
   Telefonica
   Zurbaran, 12
   Madrid  28010
   Spain

   Email: juan.rodriguezmartinez@telefonica.com

   Lourdes Luque
   Telefonica
   Zurbaran, 12
   Madrid  28010
   Spain

   Email: lourdes.luquecanto@telefonica.com

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 5]