Service Provider Transformation
Juniper Employee , Juniper Employee Juniper Employee
Service Provider Transformation
Juniper's Contrail Cloud Platform Shows off at NFV Interoperability Test.
Jun 6, 2016

 


In the world’s first independent interoperability evaluation of NFV infrastructure, carried out by NIA and EANTC, Juniper's Contrail Cloud Platform CCP flexed its muscles in front of Cisco, NOKIA, and other vendors. The ongoing testing initiative that started in 2015 is divided in multi-phases, and the latest round of testing (Phase III) was a breeze for Juniper's Contrail Cloud Platform CCP.

Phase III took place last month in Austin, Texas, where multiple vendors dared to participate in the 3rd phase of testing. The testing involved solutions by 12 vendors, with a goal of demonstrating successful multi-vendor interop of vCPE use cases. In total, Juniper’s CCP passed 13 test combinations (10 unique) – more than any other competitor – while running CCP on standard x86 servers. All other vendors used their own branded servers. This interop testing was a great opportunity to demonstrate Juniper’s open NFV solution.

I am excited to share more details about the testing below! The official whitepaper of phase III testing has been published by Light Reading.

 

 

Phase I & II 

 

The first phase was carried out in Berlin in late 2015, and the results of phase I were published by Light Reading.  That phase focused on NFVi and VNF interoperability, to showcase basic cross-vendor NFV functionalities such as VNF onboarding and resource allocation.

 

Then Phase II went further by introducing VNF Manager to work with NFVi in managing VNFs. Juniper chose not to participate because we viewed it as a subset of Phase III, which involves NFVO, VNFM, NFVi, and VNF.

 

 

Phase III – Austin, Texas.

 

Phase III took place at Austin Convention Center in Texas, and ran from May 2-6, 2016. Vendors contributed NVFO, NFVi, and VNFs products as noted below.  Note that names of some vendors that could not successfully complete tasting are not shown below or in whitepaper!

 

Participants:

 

NFVO

NFVI

VNF

1.     ADVA Ensemble

2.     Ciena Blue Planet

3.     Cisco NFVO

4.     NOKIA” used plain OpenStack NFVO”

5.     UBIqube MSActivator

1.     ADVA Ensemble

2.     Cisco ESC

3.     Juniper Contrail Cloud Platform

4.     Nokia Cloudband

1.     ADTRAN vAOS

2.     Allot Service Gateway

3.     NetNumber TITA

4.     Frontinet Fortigate

5.     Ixia vLOAD

 

 

Setup environment:

 

The test setup included management network, through which NFVO/NFVi/VNFs can be reached. VNFs data network are reachable within the virtual network.  A gateway router that EANTC was supposed to provide for facilitating connectivity was not present. Instead, Juniper’s MX80 router that was sent to work with Contrail Cloud as an external router was used as a gateway router for all vendors’ networks!

 

It’s worth noting that there was no internet connectivity provided to the testing platform; participants who needed to update solutions could not do so, and data had to be copied on external disks. Additionally, allowing Development (back office) access to the setup was difficult, and was arranged using public convention Center wireless network, which as you may imagine, slow! I guess more work on organizing setup environment should be excreted in future testing!

 

 

Test Cases:

 

Phase III was intended to demonstrate vCPE interoperability, along with service chaining to mimic real world scenarios. Various test cases covering different scenarios where planned, however, due to time limitations only five test cases where carried out as shown below.  

 

 

No.

Title

Complexity

Description

1

Point-to-Point connectivity

Basic

Two VNFs are connected and generic traffic is sent between them (using vIXIA).

2

Static bandwidth provisioning

Intermediate

Two VNFs are connected and traffic with fixed bandwidth rate sent. If more traffic is sent, then loss is expected.

3

Dynamic bandwidth provisioning

Intermediate

Intermediate: Two VNFs are connected and traffic with flexible bandwidth rate sent. If more traffic is sent then bandwidth will be allocated dynamically and no loss is expected.

4

Static forwarding graph

Intermediate

intermediate: Three VNFs are chained, and generic traffic is sent.  If  the middle VNF fails, total traffic loss is expected.

5

Flow-based Forwarding graph

Advanced

Three VNFs are chained, and two traffic flows are sent; one will traverse two VNFs and the other goes thru all three. If the VNF carrying flow1 only fails, second flow will experience no loss.

 

 

Passed Test Cases:

 

Getting around networking issues and working with other vendors’ NFVO took the whole first day, and by the 2nd day, May 3rd, Juniper’s Contrail Cloud Platform was up and running. By Wednesday, May 4th, we successfully completed the first two test cases with Ciena NFVO.  Needless to say that NFVO/NFVi interop is not as easy as plug-and-play, rather some manual config was needed to provision templates into formatting that NFVO can support/understand.  However, vendors participating with NFVO/NFVI combinations (single package) were expected to have no or minimum issues making this combination work.  Still some vendors could not sort that out easily!

 

 

The passed test cases matrix is below. vIXIA VNF was used to run traffic.

 

NFVO

NFVi

VNFs

vCPE1, vCPE2, 3rd chained VNF

Test case 1

Test case 2

Test case

 3

Test case 4

(involves 3 VNS)

Test case 5

(involves 3 VNS)

Ciena

Juniper Contrail Cloud

Adtran Adtran

Fortinet

 

    

    X

 

    X

 

   X 

 

    X

 

   X

Ubiqube

Juniper Contrail Cloud

Adtran Adtran

Fortinet

 

    

    X

    

    X

    

   X 

 

    X

 

Ciena

Juniper Contrail Cloud

Adtran Adtran

NetNumber

 

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

 

Cisco NFVO

Cisco ESC

Adtran Adtran

Allot

    

    X

 

    

   

 

X

 

Plain OpenStack on Dell servers

NOKIA Cloudband NFVi

Allot

    

    X

 

 

 

 

ADVA

ADVA

Adtran Adtran

Fortinet

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

 

ADVA

ADVA

Adtran Adtran

Allot

 

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

    

    X

 

ADVA

ADVA

Fortinet

    

   X

    

    X

    

    X

 

 

 

 

 

In total, Juniper’s Contrail Cloud Platform completed 13 test combinations as per the table above, however, since three identical combinations were run twice, the total number of unique test combinations that Juniper successfully completed was 10. The following provides more details on each of the test combinations. Please note that images are borrowed from EANTC’s whitepaper.

 

  1. Test case 1: Virtual CPE - Point-to-point connectivity.

 

Test case 1 was a simple and straightforward case, where two VNFs (or vCPEs) are spawned, and traffic is sent across the solution. Two combinations were successfully completed; one with Ciena as NFVO and the other with UBIqube.

 

  • Test combination # 1

 TC1.png

  • Test combination # 2

 TC2.png

 

  1. Test case 2: Virtual CPE - Static bandwidth provisioning.

Test case 2 added another element of complexity by testing solution’s (in this case vCPE’s) ability to rate limit traffic based on configured bandwidth limit. Traffic sent about the permitted traffic rate is dropped. Two combinations were successfully completed with Ciena and UBIqube NFVOs.

 

  •  Test combination # 3

NFVI

NVFO

vCPE

Juniper Contrail Cloud Platform

Ciena Blue Planet

ADTRAN vCPE

 

  •  Test combination # 4

NFVI

NVFO

vCPE

Juniper Contrail Cloud Platform

UBIqube MSActivator

ADTRAN vCPE

 

 

  1. Test case 3: Virtual CPE - Dynamic bandwidth provisioning.

 

Test case 3 verified that vCPEs can dynamically adjust rate limiting in response to traffic crossing threshold (rate adjusted on demand). Also, two combinations were successfully completed with Ciena and UBIqube NFVOs.

 

 

  • Test combination # 5

NFVI

NVFO

vCPE

Juniper Contrail Cloud Platform

Ciena Blue Planet

ADTRAN vCPE

 

 

  • Test combination # 6

NFVI

NVFO

vCPE

Juniper Contrail Cloud Platform

UBIqube MSActivator

ADTRAN vCPE

 

 

  • Test case 4: Service Function Chaining- Static forwarding graph.

Test case 4 introduced service chaining by adding a third VNF to the setup. Traffic was sent thru the two vCPEs and the third VNF. If vCPE in the middle is suspended, the traffic is expected to be dropped. Two combinations with Ciena’s NFVO were completed; one with Fortinet and ADTRAN, and the second with NetNumber and ADTRAN. The third combination of test case 4 was completed with UBIqube as NFVO and Fortinet/ADTRAN as VNFs. This test case featured five different vendors cohesively working to enable and end-to-end vCPE solution.

 

  • Test combination # 7

 TC7.png                       

 

  • Test combination # 8

 TC8.png                  

 

  • Test combination # 9

 

 TC9.png                             

 

  • Test case 5: Service Function Chaining- Flow-based forwarding graph.

Test case 5 was the most advanced test case among all, where flow-based traffic was sent and Contrail Cloud Platform’s capability to carry UDP and TCP traffic over two separate service chains was tested. A Network event was generated to impact one flow, and the result was as expected; only one flow was impacted.  Only one combination with Ciena’s NFVO and ADTRAN/Fortinet as VNFs was completed due to time limitations.  This test case also featured five different vendors smoothly enabling an end-to-end vCPE use case.

 

  • Test combination # 10

 TC10.png                        

        

 

Contrail Service Orchestration CSO Participation:

 

As the plan was to interop with other vendors, our initial plan and priority was to demonstrate Contrail Cloud Platform NFVi with other vendor’s NFVO.  However, when we learned that other vendors were coming with combined NFVO/NFVi packages, we scrambled to prepare and dispatch a server with CSO to Austin, Texas.  Unfortunately, the server reached there late on Thursday afternoon, and it was too late to do the setup and testing as testing concluded Friday.

 

vSRX and vMX Kept waiting for the right NFVi!!! Smiley Sad

 

 

vMX and vSRX were listed to interoperate with other vendors’ NFVIs, however, as other vendors’ setups were not ready on time, both vMX and vSRX, along with some other participating VNFs, did not have the opportunity to test.

 

In conclusion, Juniper has sent clear and strong messages in this event about its commitment to openness.  Our first message was using a standard x86 server to run Contrail Cloud platform, whereas other vendors used their own branded servers to tie their solution to own hardware! The testing results conveyed the second and major message that Juniper’s solution can successfully interop with 3rd party vendors. This interop testing experience was a great opportunity to demonstrate that Juniper’s claim to have an open NFV solution is not just a claim; it’s in fact a reality! Smiley Happy

 

 

 

Jun 8, 2016
Juniper Employee

Good read. These results validates the OPENESS of Juniper's solution.  

Feedback