internet2 update eric boyd deputy technology officer october 20, 2008

Internet2 UpdateEric Boyd

Deputy Technology Officer

October 20, 2008

Internet2 Strategic Plan

On July 8, 2008, the Internet2 Board adopted

the Internet2 Strategic Plan

Goals:• Support next generation of collaborative discovery

• Design, operate, and continually advance a leading-edge

research and education network as a national asset

• Transform communities through cyberinfrastructure

• Operate Internet2 as an exemplary membership organization

http://www.internet2.edu/strategicplanning/

Supporting Next Generation of Collaborative Discovery

• Research communities are increasingly

distributed across the globe

• A good deal of collaboration is done through

sharing large amounts of data via networks

• Science applications must operate in an

environment of multiple, heterogeneous

networks

Supporting Large-scale Distributed Sensor Networks• Ecology

• Seismology

• Meteorology

Access to Unique Scientific Instruments

• Astronomy

• High-Energy and Nuclear Physics

Hi-fidelity Collaboration• HD-quality video

• CD-quality audio

Tele-health

• Medical instruction

• Clinical practice

• Research

LHC / iHDTV Demo

Behind the Scenes:LHC / iHDTV Demo

Behind the Scenes: Distance Learning /

Ultragrid Demo

• Instrumentation

•Data Storage

•Networking

•Computation

•User support

•Policy and Funding

•Management Security and Access

Cyberinfrastructure: Defined

CI Encompasses Physical Assets, Information,

People, and Skills Working as a System

Instrumentation

Security

Control

DataGeneration

Computation

Analysis

Simulation

Program

Security

ManagementSecurity and

Access

AuthenticationAccessControl

Authorization

Researcher

ControlProgram

ViewingSecurity

3DImaging

Display andVisualization

.

DisplayTools Security

DataInput

CollabTools Publishing

HumanSupportHelp

Desk

Policy andFunding

ResourceProviders

FundingAgencies

Campuses

SearchData SetsStorage

Security

RetrievalInput

SchemaMetadata

DataDirectories

Ontologies

Archive

EducationAnd

Outreach

Network

Training

Cyberinfrastructure and the Internet2 Community

• Operating advance services by and for the

community

–e.g. Networks, Observatories, Federations

• Experimenting with developmental services

–e.g. Dynamic Circuits, Distributed Monitoring,

Hybrid Networking

• Adopting new technologies

–e.g. Workshops, Targeted Communities

• Partnering with like-minded organizations

Integrated Systems Approach

Middleware Infrastructure

• Focus:

• Inter-institutional collaboration

• Scalable authenticated/authorized access to remote resources

• Internet2 role:

• Defining/creating architecture: Shibboleth

• Tools to implement: Shibboleth, Grouper, Signet

• Infrastructure/Services to scale: InCommon, USHER

Shibboleth

• Lead universities: Brown, Ohio State, Univ of Washington, Duke, USC

•Adoption: more than 10,000 deployed sites; national federating software for more than 20 countries

•Commercial adoption: Microsoft, Google, Elsevier, OCLC, etc…

•Current uses: content acquisition, collaboration tools, access to federal applications, access to domain applications

Grouper

•Group management tool

• Lead institution – Univ of Chicago; other key players include Duke, Brown, Georgia Tech, Univ of Penn, Univ of Memphis, Univ of Newcastle

•Adoption accelerating (~15 operational deployments now) as versions add capabilities, GUI refines, performance improves

•Under consideration in some key commercial services

Comanage

•Collaboration management platform – externalize identity management from collaboration applications

•Supports collaborations, virtual organizations, enterprises. VO service centers, etc

• Lead institution Stanford, with MIT support

• Leverages Shib, Grouper, Signet

•Early versions, but adoption rapid – LIGO, OOI, campuses

perfSONAR• A collaboration

• Production network operators focused on designing and building tools that they will deploy and use on their networks to provide monitoring and diagnostic capabilities to themselves and their user communities.

• An architecture & a set of protocols

• Web Services Architecture

• Protocols based on the Open Grid Forum Network Measurement Working Group Schemas

• Several interoperable software implementations

• Java, Perl, Python…

• A Deployed Measurement infrastructure

Gmaps (pingER)

Dynamic Circuit Networking

• Provides short-term dedicated bandwidth

• Similar and complementary to IP (Internet Protocol) networking:

• Protocol-based connections

• Connect to anyone else on the network

• Supports high-bandwidth and real-time applications Being developed and deployed by a number of R&E networks

• More flexible (and potentially more cost-effective) than long-term dedicated circuits

Phoebus

• Phoebus is a framework and protocol to enable hybrid networking across high-performance networks

• Transparently splits end-to-end network path into distinct segments

• Minimizes the negative effects of high latency and packet loss on data transfer

• By localizing their effects

• By allocating dedicated resources to mitigate the issues

• Transparent adaptation for existing applications

• Perform well to nearest Phoebus Gateway and allow the system to do the rest

• No modification necessary for most applications

• Optimize the performance with a variety of techniques and insights into the state of the network

DC Network

End-to-EndSession

Phoebus-Enabled DC Network

Integrated Systems Approach

Integrated Systems Approach

•What does “Integrated” mean?•Interoperable•Widely Deployed•Community Best Practices•Extensible

•Observation: Building distributed systems that operate as a larger distributed system

Distributed System Design Goals

•Take existing scientific applications, without recompilation or awareness of circuits, e.g.• Bulk File Transfer

• Real Time

• Video

•Exploit performance possibilities of new networking technologies

•Preserve “current politics of business,” (don’t upset the apple cart)

• Improve efficiency of problem diagnosis (eliminate reliance on “old boy network”)

Distributed Systems for Networks

• To build next generation networks, we need distributed software systems on top of the network hardware• Session-Application (Session-Layer tools [e.g. Phoebus],

Community-specific abstraction applications [e.g. Lambda Station, Terapaths], true applications)

• Dynamic Circuit Networks (DCN, e.g. Internet2 DCN, ESnet SDN, GÉANT2 Autobahn)

• Performance Measurement Framework (e.g. perfSONAR)

• Information Services (IS)

• Discovery

• Topology

• Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA, e.g. Shibboleth, etc.)

Distributed System Requirements

•These distributed systems share common requirements:

• Heterogeneous network architecture

• Multiple administrative entities; no central authority

• Local customization of operational environment

• Applications driven by orthogonal virtual organizations

•Suggests parallel design approach

• Toolkit approach

• Web services / defined APIs

Multi-Layer Distributed System

•Design is “parallel” for each system

•Hierarchical dependency relationship

•Suggests abstracting common components, publication/polling architecture across boundaries

Federated Trust

Information Services

Performance Monitoring Framework

Control Plane Framework

Dependencies

Session-Application

Multi-Layer Distributed System

Session-Application

Control Plane FrameworkPerformance Monitoring

Information ServicesFederated

Trust

Layer 3

Layer 2

Layer 1

Hard

war

eSoftware/

Servers

•Design is “parallel” for each system

•Hierarchical dependency relationship

•Suggests abstracting common components, publication/polling architecture across boundaries

•Creates a common network abstraction toolkit to present to application

Scientific Application

Multi-Layer Distributed System

Session-Layer Abstraction

Control Plane FrameworkPerformance MonitoringInformation Services

Federated Trust

Layer 3

Layer 2

Layer 1

Hard

war

eSoftware/

Servers

•Design is “parallel” for each system

•Hierarchical dependency relationship

•Suggests abstracting common components, publication/polling architecture across boundaries

•Creates a common network abstraction toolkit to present to application

Scientific Application

Diagnostic Analysis and Visualization

Tools

Importance of Standards

• Note the importance of standards

• Between distributed software systems

• Between discipline community application and network abstraction toolkit

• Assumes standards-compatible components of network abstraction toolkit deployed across autonomous networks

• Suggests need for reference implementation(s)

Join the Effort:Community WGs

• Network Technical Advisory Committee

• Chair: Paul Schopis

• Dynamic Circuit WG

• Chair: Linda Winkler

• Information Services WG

• Chair: Martin Swany

• Performance WG

• Chair: Carla Hunt

• Transport WG

• Chairs: Chet Ruscyzk, Steve Senger

www.internet2.edu

eboyd@internet2.edu