Experience of Implementing IPTV in an ISP Network by Thong Hawk Yen
3 likes1,705 views
This document summarizes the challenges of implementing IPTV in an ISP network based on a presentation. It discusses 1) the lack of local references and experience, 2) issues with choosing between multiple technology options, 3) multivendor challenges, 4) traditional multicast not fitting the needs, 5) platform requirements, 6) difficulties testing without a live network, 7) integrating third party content, and 8) stringent latency and jitter requirements. It also covers challenges dimensioning the network and sharing experiences gained.
Experience of Implementing IPTV in an ISP Network by Thong Hawk Yen
- 1. Experience Implementing IPTV in an ISP Network Thong Hawk Yen MyNOG – 4 August 2014 Time dotCom Bhd Confidential
- 2. Today Agenda • Challenges in Implementing IPTV in an ISP network • Dimensioning Concerns • Experience Sharing • Misconception August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 1
- 3. The Requirement August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 2
- 4. Simple Requirement – Multiple Challenges 1. No references within Malaysia, no experience. 2. Plenty of choices and variances in terms of technology. ( in fact too many ) 3. Multivendor challenges. 4. Traditional multicast ( PIM over IP ) did not fit. 5. Platform Requirement. 6. Service testing – New network was not up, early adopters were in the field. 7. 3rd party content. 8. Much more stringent latency/ jitter requirement than other IP/MPLS applications. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 3
- 5. Challenge # 1/2 : No real life reference. No experience. To many variances. • YES, there were references. BUT they were our competitors. • Other sources white papers and RFCs. • Vendors implementation documents. • Conference papers from SANOG and NANOG. • Most resources and reference were not multi-vendors. • Research, research and research. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 4 And a lot of tests.
- 6. Challenge #3 :Why Multivendor ? (Why make your life difficult ?) Pros • Wider choice of hardware selection • Allow for feature comparison across different platforms. • Keeping price down. Cons • Issue involving 2 or more vendors may result gray areas. • Inter-op test takes longer time. • More complex engineering skill required. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 5 • It is our tradition ( it is our way of life ). • Old network were also multivendor • We believe the Pros outweight the Cons. • Just a matter of preference. Our Direction.
- 7. Challenges #3 – Traditional Multicast Did Not Fit August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 6 MVPN NG- MVPN mLDP MBPG Draft Rosen
- 8. Challenges #1 – Traditional Multicast Did Not Fit August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 7 MVPN NG- MVPN mLDP MBPG Draft Rosen
- 9. Challenges #1 – Traditional Multicast Did Not Fit August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 8 MVPN NG- MVPN mLDP MBPG Draft Rosen ???
- 10. Quick Glance at Draft Rosen August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 9 IP Network Forwarding Plane GRE Tunnels Signaling Plane PIM L3VPN (multicast)
- 11. Quick Glance at NG-MVPN August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 10 IP/MPLS Network Forwarding Plane MPLS LSP Signaling Plane MBGP / mLDP L3VPN (multicast) Multicast was made possible with the implementation of P2MP LSP Multicast was made possible with the implementation of P2MP LSP
- 12. Challenge #5 : IPTV Network Components August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 11 er-01-glsfb MX480 JUNOS 10.4R4.5 Primary Sender PE (Upstream) cum RP Secondary Sender PE ( Upstream ) cum RP Receiver PE (Downstream ) Receiver PE (Downstream ) P2MP LSP P2MP LSP P2MP LSP P2MP LSP Secondary Source Primary Source IP/MPLS Core PIM and eBGP BGP Signaled MVPN GPON Access Network STB TV L2 GPON iBGP iBGP iBGP iBGP RR
- 13. Challenge #5 : Platform Requirements Some important criteria but can be easily missed are as follow : • PE router : Junos with 8.5 or later that can support P2MP LSP • RR : Any model that support L3VPN signaling ( VPNv4 in Cisco term ) with BGP multicast VPN signaling. • Core : Juniper M320 or Cisco CRS that is P2MP LSP aware. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 12
- 14. Challenge #6 : Service Test • Lab test was not good enough. • POC with real traffic and customer raise confidence level. • Real test with a couple of hundred customer in the field on voluntary basis. • Carefully carve out test customers with VLAN separation. • Months of gathering customer feedback and fine tuning. • Customer is good but it is not scientific that led us to our next challenge. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 13
- 15. Challenge # 7/8 : 3rd Party Content and Stringent Performance Requirement • Eye-ball quality assurance were note enough for commercial delivery of the IPTV service. • Probing at various point in the network were required. • Probing at ingress to the IP/MPLS network. • Probing at egress of the IP/MPLS network. • Probing at the customer ( only when problem was reported by that customer ) August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 14
- 16. Probing and Monitoring Is Required. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 15
- 17. How the Probe Works ? • IGMP for all the channels. • OOB for Probe Management. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 16
- 18. How the Probe Works ? August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 17 Probe sends IGMP join msgs Router sends “PIM” RP RP sends PIM join source Source sends IPTV traffic Ingress router tag MPLS label sends in P2MP LSP Egress router removes MPLS label and sends to probe Probe digests multicast data and send unicast report to NMS
- 19. A Quick Glance at the Probe Output August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 18
- 20. Probe Output Zoomed In August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 19 IAT = Inter-Arrival Time MLR = Media Loss Rate Threshold
- 21. Today Agenda • Challenges in Implementing IPTV in an ISP network √ • Dimensioning Concern • Experience Sharing. • Misconceptions August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 20
- 22. Dimensioning Concerns August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 21 Upstream link SD channel is 2-3.5Mbps HD channel is 9Mbps Subnet size depends on how many customer can each access node handle Increases as the number of channels increases. Licensing for the probes Special Hardware for tunnels L3VPN license
- 23. Dimensioning Concerns - continued August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 22 QoS bandwidth allocation for EF Subcriber license scale DHCP relay. Routing table size. Fiber splitting ratio
- 24. Today Agenda • Challenges in Implementing IPTV in an ISP network √ • Dimensioning Concern √ • Experience Sharing. • Misconceptions August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 23
- 25. Experience Sharing • Minimum requirement for NG-MVPN at the PE is Junos 8.5 but there is still improvement in 11.4 for NG-MVPN in some specific area. • Some IPTV quality issue was resolved by making sure fiber readings at each links ( cable and SFPs ) were clean to make sure it is not point to consider when troubleshooting IPTV quality issue. • Selection of probing solution was critical. Need to be on the same page with the content provider. • SLA standards – DVB’s ETSI TS 102 034 • SLA setting – Provide opportunity to benchmark and increase level by at least 2 phases. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 24
- 26. Today Agenda • Challenges in Implementing IPTV in an ISP network √ • Dimensioning Concern √ • Experience Sharing. √ • Misconceptions August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 25
- 27. Misconception • Multicast network is very bandwidth efficient protocol. Bandwidth is required only when there is a downstream IPTV client requesting for that channel. YES BUT NOT QUITE. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 26
- 28. The probes is asking all the channels all the time. August 27, 2014 ConfidentialTemplate Presentation 27 Probe sends IGMP join msgs Router sends “PIM” RP RP sends PIM join source Source sends IPTV traffic Ingress router tag MPLS label sends in P2MP LSP Egress router removes MPLS label and sends to probe Probe digests multicast data and send unicast report to NMS
- 29. Other reference 1. draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-07.txt 2. ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp-05.txt 3. http://www.juniper.net/us/en/training/jnbooks/day-one/junos-learning- sphere/vday-one-intro-bgp-multicast-vpns/ 4. http://www.sanog.org/resources/sanog14/sanog14-amitdash-multicast-vpn.pdf Time dotCom Bhd Confidential
- 30. Appreciations go to individuals who have contributed to the design and the build of NG-MVPN architecture.