Availability definition in ITU-T Presentation for MEF

Dvid Jocha (ETH/RLN)

Overview
This slideset is an overview of ITU-T's Ethernet Availability definition for the MEF Aligning Availability ad hoc group Contents
Related ITU-T recommendations ATM, IP, MPLS, Sliding window comparison Y.1563 (Ethernet) Definition Answers to questions from previous meeting Universal definition

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Related ITU-T Recommendations

Earlier definitions, e.g.:
X.137 (1988, 1997): Availability performance values for public data networks when providing international packetswitched services

ATM

I.357 (1996, 2000): B-ISDN semi-permanent connection availability

PDH/OTN
G.827 (1996, 2003): Availability performance parameters and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit-rate digital paths

IP

Y.1540 (1999, 2007): Internet protocol data communication service - IP packet transfer and availability performance parameters Y.1544 (2008): Multicast IP performance parameters

Common
G.7710 / Y.1701 (2001, 2007): Common equipment management function requirements

MPLS

Y.1561 (2004): Performance and availability parameters for MPLS networks

Ethernet
Y.1731 (2006, 2008): OAM functions and mechanisms for Ethernet based networks The definition of Availability is outside the scope of this Recommendation. However, the mechanisms defined in this Recommendation can contribute to Availability-related measurements Y.1563 (approval ongoing): Ethernet frame transfer and availability performance

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

ITU-T I.357 (ATM)

A given second is considered to be an SESATM if:
User information cells are presented during this period of time to the connection portion and either the Cell Loss Ratio (CLR) > 1/1024 or the Severely Errored Cell Block Ratio (SECBR) > 1/32, where CLR and SECBR are computed over the considered period of time; NOTE The above CLR threshold is intended to support QoS classes in which the CLR objective is 105. Appropriate CLR thresholds for other QoS classes are for further study. User information cells are not presented during this period of time to the connection portion, but the ATM connection is considered to be unable to provide acceptable cell transfer performance, because an interruption has occurred within the connection portion. This interruption prevents cells from being transmitted on the connection portion during the considered one-second period of time, should the user attempt to transmit cells. An interruption corresponds to a failure occurring within the connection portion, either of the physical layer or of the ATM layer. The onset of unavailability begins with the occurrence of ten consecutive SESATM. These ten seconds are part of unavailable time. A period of unavailability ends with the occurrence of ten consecutive seconds, none of which are SESATM. These ten seconds are part of available time. The ten-second criteria are supported using a sliding window with one-second granularity. The AR is defined as the proportion of scheduled service time that the connection portion is in the available state. The AR is calculated by dividing the total service available time by the duration of the scheduled service time. During the scheduled service time the user may or may not transmit cells.

Availability

Availability Ratio

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

ITU-T G.827 (CBR Paths)

Availability
A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of ten consecutive Severely Errored Second (SES) events. These ten seconds are considered to be part of unavailable time. A new period of available time begins at the onset of ten consecutive non-SES events (a non-SES event is a second that is an errored second, but not an SES, or is error free). These ten seconds are considered to be part of available time. A bidirectional path or connection is in the unavailable state if either one or both directions are in the unavailable state The specification of SESs is dependent upon the system under consideration (please refer to the appropriate Recommendation). Available time is obtained by adding all the periods of available time from the observation period in a generic observation period. Unavailable time is derived by adding all the periods of unavailable time during a generic observation period. Availability is defined as the percentage of available time (to total time) in a generic observation period. This is also known as the Availability Ratio (AR). Unavailability is defined as the percentage of unavailable time (to total time) in a generic observation period. This is also known as the Unavailability Ratio (UR).

SES

Available time

Time 10 s <10 s 10 s
Forward direction

Unavailability detected Unavailable period Severely Errored Second

Availability detected Available period

G.827_F2

Backward direction

Bidirectional path or connection

G.827_F1

Unavailable state

Errored Second (non-SES) Error-free Second

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

ITU-T Y.1561 (MPLS)

SLB
A severe loss block (SLB) outcome occurs for a block of packets observed during time interval Tlb (=1 second ) at ingress MP0 when the ratio of lost packets at egress MPi to total packets in the block exceeds s1(=0.15). Evaluation of successive blocks (time intervals) should be non-overlapping. The minimum number of packets that should be used in evaluating the severe loss block outcome is Mlb.(=FFS) The onset of unavailability begins with the occurrence of ten consecutive SLBs. These ten seconds are part of unavailable time. A period of unavailability ends with the occurrence of ten consecutive seconds, none of which are SLB. These ten seconds are part of available time. The ten-second criteria are supported using a sliding window with one-second granularity. Percent MPLS service unavailability (PIU): The percentage of total scheduled service time that is categorized as unavailable using the MPLS service availability function. Percent MPLS service availability (PIA): The percentage of total scheduled service time that is categorized as available using the MPLS service availability function.

Availability: MPLS service availability function

Percentages

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

ITU-T Y.1540 (IP)

Availability
IP service availability function: The IP service is available on an end-to-end basis if the packet loss ratio for that end-to-end case is smaller than a given threshold. If IPLR > 0.75 unavailable state If IPLR <= 0.75 available state The minimum number of packets that should be used in evaluating the IP service availability function is Mav = 1000 The minimum duration of an interval of time during which the IP service availability function is to be evaluated is Tav = 5 minutes Percent IP service unavailability (PIU): The percentage of total scheduled IP service time (the percentage of Tav intervals) that is (are) categorized as unavailable using the IP service availability function. Percent IP service availability (PIA) The percentage of total scheduled IP service time (the percentage of Tav intervals) that is (are) categorized as available using the IP service availability function. This unidirectional definition of availability is motivated by the fact that IP packets often traverse very different routes from SRC to DST than they traverse from DST to SRC. If, from an IP network user perspective, a bidirectional availability definition is needed, a bidirectional definition can be easily derived from this unidirectional definition.

Percentages

Directionality

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

ITU-T Y.1544 (multipoint IP)

Point-to-Multipoint IP service availability parameters
The point-to-point unidirectional availability service function defined in Y.1540 should be used to evaluate the availability of the multicast path between a Source and any individual Destination. Group IP Service Availability: Given D, a set of N Destinations (or group) intending to receive packets from a Source, the Point-toMultipoint IP Service Availability parameter is defined as the ratio of Destinations in the (point-to-point) available state, Nav, (during a specific evaluation interval Tav), and the total destinations N (where point to-point availability is as specified in Y.1540). The fraction of destinations in the available state during Tav can be expressed as: Mean Group IP Service Availability: The mean fraction of available destinations over a result-recording interval,
Tr I Tav

, is

mean ( A(Tav ), Tr ) I 1 A(Tav ) i

i

where I is an integer.

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

G.7710 (EMF)
Parameters (definitons from G.828)
Errored Block (EB): A block in which one or more bits are in error Errored Second (ES): A one second period with one or more errored blocks or at least one defect Severely Errored Second (SES): A one-second period which contains 30% errored blocks or at least one defect. SES is a subset of ES. Background Block Error (BBE): An errored block not occurring as part of an SES Severely Errored Period (SEP): A sequence of between 3 to 9 consecutive SES. The sequence is terminated by a second which is not a SES Background Block Count (BBC) UnAvailable Second (UAS) A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of x consecutive SES events. These x seconds are considered to be part of unavailable time. A new period of available time begins at the onset of x consecutive non-SES events. These x seconds are considered to be part of available time. SEP indicates a severe error condition, which does not result in unavailability.
Time 10 s Unavailability detected Period of unavailable time <10 s 10 s Availability detected Period of available time
T1316650-99

Definition

Severely Errored Second (SES) Severely Errored Period (SEP) Errored Second (ES) Error-free Second
MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc 9 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

Sliding window

The (non-)sliding window effect

Non-sliding window:
available available available available available

Indicator:

Sliding window:

available

unavailable

available

In this simplified example n=3, which is the number of consecutive small time intervals over which we assess availability. Problematic sequences for any "n can be found, except n=1, but in this case availability turns into SES (severely errored seconds) or SLB (severe loss block). The threshold(s), Cu and Ca are neglected in this example (note: ITU-T uses only one threshold). The "indicator" shows if the small time interval is considered as
0 = "acceptable" ~ non_SES ~ non_SLB, or 1 = "unacceptable" ~ SES ~ SLB.
11 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

"n" is usually 10 in the ITU-T definitions, 4 in the MEF example.

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Simulation
Simulations were made to compare the sliding and non-sliding window approach
Non-real data, non-real loss

The input signal was simplified to be over or under the threshold

As seen on the figure in previous slide Was created by a two-state Markow-chain with 0.05 and 0.25 change probabilities, the run length was 1000.

The window size was 4 (except for the last figure)

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

12

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Results (1)
The sliding-window provides finer granularity
Details and zoomed parts of the figure on next slides
6

4 signal 3 sliding non-sliding 2

0 192137536985105133161185213241265293321345373401 429457485 513541569 597625653 681709737761789817 845873901 929957985 5173349658197117145173197225253277305333357385413437465493517545573 601629657 685713741765793821 849877905 933961989 132945617793113141169193221249273301329353381409433461489 521549577 605633661 689717745769797825 853881909 937965993 2541577389109137165189217245269297325349377405 441469497 525553581 609637665 693721749773801829 857885913 941969997 101129157181209237261289317 361389417 445473501 529557585 613641669 697725753777805833 861889917 945973 121149177201229257281309337 365393421 449477505 533561589 617645673 701729757781809837 865893921 949977 125153 205233 285313341 369397425 453481509 537565593 621649677 705733 785813841 869897925 953981

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

13

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Results (2)
The sliding window will declare more (shorter) intervals to be unavailable.
For example consider the unavailable pink interval. Its length is more than 4 seconds, but only less than 4 seconds fall to a given non-sliding window period, therefore it is not recognized as unavailable by the non-sliding window method.
6 5

4 signal 3 sliding non-sliding 2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

14

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Results (3)
The sliding-window provides better accuracy.
The unavailable interval is long enough to be recognized by both methods, but because of the unlucky interval borders, in this example the start of unavailability according to the non-sliding window is delayed by 1, the end of the interval is delayed by 2 units.
6

4 signal 3 sliding non-sliding 2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

15

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Results (4)
6 5

Top figure is the original Bottom figure: only the probabilities were changed (to 0.99 and 0.95)

4 signal 3 sliding non-sliding 2

0 112137536985105129 157185209233261285309337361385 413441465489517541565593617641669693717745769793 821849873897925949973 5173349658197117145169193221245269297321345373397421449473497 525553577601629653677705729753781805829 857885909933961985 932945617793113137161189213237 265293317341369393417445469493521545569597621645 673701725749777801825853877901929953977 2541577389109133 165 197225249273301325349 377405429453481505529557581605633657681 709737761785813837861889913937965989 101125153177201 229257281305333357381409433457485509533 561589613637665689713741765789817841865893917941 969997 121149173 205 241 277 313 353 389 425 461 501 537 573 609 649 685 721 757 797 833 869 905 945 981 141 181 217 253 289 329 365 401 437 477 513 549 585 625 661 697 733 773 809 845 881 921 957 993

Here small differences similar to previous figures are still present, but they can be neglected

4 signal 3 sliding non-sliding 2

0 161425374961738597111129146164182200218236254272290308326344362380398415433450468485503520538555573591609627644662679697714732749767784802820838856874892909927944962979997 2715263850627486100118135153170188206224242260278296314332350368386403421438456473491508526543561579597615633651668686703721738756773791808826844862880897915932950967985 381627395163758798112130147165183201219237255273291309327345363381399417435453471489507525544562580598616634652670688706724742760778796814832850868886904921939956974991 491728405264768899113131148166184202220238256274292310328346364382400418436454472490509527545563581599617635653671689707725743761779797815833851869887905923941959977995 513 294153657789103121139157174192209227244262279297315333351369387405423441459477495513531549567585603621639656674691709726744762780798816834852870888906924942960978996 1021324354667890104122140158176194212230248266284302320338356374392410427445462480497515532550568586604622640658676694712730748766785803821839857875893911929947965983 1122334455677991105123141159177195213231249267285303321339357375393411429447465483501519537556574592610628646664682700718736754772790809827845863881899917935953971989 1223344556688092106124142160178196214232250268286304322340358376394412430448466484502521539557575593611629647665683701719737755774792810828846864882900918936954972990 183042 57698193107125143161179197215233251269287305323341359377395413431449467486504522540558576594612630648666684702720739757775793811829847865883901919937955973992 1931 4658708294108126144162180198216234252270288306324342360378396414432451469487505523541559577595613631649667685704722740758776794812830848866884902920938957975993 20 354759718395109127145163181199217235253271289307325343361379397416434452470488506524542560578596614632650669687705723741759777795813831849867885903922940958976994 24364860728496110128 149167185203221239257275293311329347365383401419437455474492510528546564582600618636654672690708727745763781799817835853871889907925943961980998 101119136154171189207225243261280298316334352370388406424442460478496514533551569587605623641659677695713731750768786804822840858876894912930948966984 102120137155172190208226245263281299317335353371389407425443461479498516534552570588606624642660678696715733751769787805823841859877895913931949968986 114132150168186204222240258276294312330348366384402420439457475493511529547565583601619637655673692710728746764782800818836854872890908926945963981999 115133151169187205223241259277295313331349367385404422440458476494512530548566584602620638657675693711729747765783801819837855873891910928946964982 116134152 173191210228246264282300318336354372390408426444463481499517535553571589607625643661680698716734752770788806824842860878896914933951969987 117 138156175193211229247265283301319337355373391409428446464482500518536554572590608626645663681699717735753771789807825843861879898916934952970988 1000

In conclusion if there are relatively short unavailable intervals, then the difference between the sliding and the non-sliding window results is significant
Sliding window is recommended

However, if the unavailable intervals are relatively rare, but long then the difference is not significant
Both methods are suitable
16 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Y.1563

SES
The Ethernet service availability definition is based on a model which uses two states corresponding to the ability or inability of the network to sustain the service in the available state. Transitions between the states of the model are governed by the occurrence of patterns of Severe Errored Seconds in the Ethernet layer (SESETH). This Recommendation views availability from the network perspective, where availability performance is characterized independently of user behaviour. A Severe Errored Second (SESETH) outcome occurs for a block of frames observed during a one second interval at ingress MP0 when the corresponding FLR (i.e. the ratio of lost frames to total frames in the block) at egress MPi exceeds s1.

A provisional value s1 of 0.5 is proposed, and different values may also be chosen depending on the Class of Service (CoS). Evaluation of successive one second intervals is non-overlapping. The provisional minimum number of frames that should be used in evaluating the SESETH outcome is M equal to 100 packets. Note that provisional values are subject to change following additional study and real network experience.

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

18

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Availability
A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of 10 consecutive SESETH outcomes. The corresponding period of time is considered to be part of unavailable time. During the unavailable time period, the Ethernet network is in unavailable state. A new period of available time begins at the onset of 10 consecutive non-SESETH outcomes. The corresponding period of time is considered to be part of available time. During the available time period, the Ethernet network is in available state. Figure 9 illustrates the definition of criteria for transition to/from the unavailable state. This definition of availability has been chosen to allow comparison with other link layer techniques.

Because Ethernet service is bidirectional, Ethernet network is in the unavailable state if either one, or both directions, are in the unavailable state. The unidirectional availability can be measured by the criteria mentioned above.
19 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Availability Performance Parameters

Percent Ethernet service unavailability (PEU)
The percentage of total scheduled Ethernet service time that is categorized as unavailable using the Ethernet service availability function. The percentage of total scheduled Ethernet service time that is categorized as available using the Ethernet service availability function: PEU = 100 PEA

Percent Ethernet service availability (PEA)

Typically, the users of performance parameters need to make comparisons with objectives. This section treats the point-to-multipoint parameters as a general case. Results collected for a population of interest and a set of registered destinations should be compared with an objective, O, as follows:
percent meeting objective (PMO): The percentage of total destinations with point-to-point performance that is categorized as meeting the stated objective for a specific population of interest. The objectives are evaluated over sets of point-to-point parameters

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

20

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Considerations
Availability definition in Y.ETHperf to be compatible with:
Y.1540, because the traditional Ethernet is a connectionless unreliable service, a server layer for the IP layer. Therefore the availability description should be similar to IPs. No window Y.1561, because recent Ethernet extensions, like IEEE 802.1Qay (PBB-TE) realize a connection-oriented approach, like MPLS. Therefore Ethernets availability description should be similar to MPLSs. Sliding window MEF 10.1, because it defines also availability for an Ethernet service, and compatibility is recommended Non-sliding window

Consider universal definition Liaison

The MEF liaison also inquired about the derivation of the Availability Service Function currently defined in Y.ETHperf. A point was made that a comparable MEF definition has been standardized for 4 years. There were several contributions that led to the current definition, including an examination of many definitions covering different technologies, and a communication from SG 15. The consensus is to use a long-standing ITU-T definition as a basis for the definition on Ethernet Service Availability. The contributions and presentations that led to this consensus are available below (from our recent Expert's meeting in Red Bank, NJ): In summary, we looked at most/all the existing definitions, including MEF's, before adopting the current definition. The main technical merits are simplicity, familiarity, and consistency with other ITU-T Definitions.
21 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Answers to Questions from previous meetings

Directionality of availability
Loss/SES: unidirectional Availability: calculated as unidirectional Because Ethernet service is bidirectional, Ethernet network is in the unavailable state if either one, or both directions, are in the unavailable state. The speed, accuracy, and dependability parameters of this Recommendation are intended to characterize Ethernet service in the available state. However, no measurements of these parameters made during periods of unavailable time are ever used for determining long-term frame transfer performance and mechanisms must be established to exclude all performance measurement results collected during unavailable periods from any estimations of long-term Ethernet frame performance parameters. A provisional value s1 of 0.5 is proposed, and different values may also be chosen depending on the Class of Service (CoS). Note that provisional values are subject to change following additional study and real network experience. The Percent meeting objective (PMO) approach can be used to interpret availability for a multipoint scenario Availability: categorized without considering scheduled up/down time PEU/ PEA: only scheduled time is taken into account
22 Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T 2008-12-02

Performance parameters in the unavailable state

Loss threshold

Availability as a multipoint parameter

Scheduled uptime/downtime

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

Universal definition

Comparison
Y.1540 Loss threshold for the transition: available unavailable Loss threshold for the transition: unavailable available Length of the atomic measurement interval, the loss threshold refers to Minimal number of samples for a decision Number of atomic measurement intervals the decision is based on Is the window sliding? (no:0 yes:1) Availability performance objective requirement Measurement interval, the requirement refers to Time interval the decision is made for Time interval the transition is based on Is there a hysteresis? May current availability status affect the next status? 0.75 0.75 Tav 5 min Mav 1000 1 0 1*Tav 1*Tav no 10 1 1*Tlb 10*Tlb no Mlb Tlb 1s 10 1 1*Tav 1s n*delta t yes 10*Tav 10 s no yes n*Tlb S1 0.15 delta t Tav 1s Mlb Y.1561 S1 0.15 Ca S1 0.5 Tlb MEF 10.1 Cu Y.1563 S1 0.5 S2 Universal S1

n
0 A T n*delta t

n
Optional, SW = 0 or 1 (1-SW)*(n-1)*Tlb + Tlb

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

24

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Old proposal for Y.ETHperf

Notes
It was an old proposal from Ericsson to Y.1563 Was too complex Showed how could ITU-T be compatible with MEF Focus was on ITU-T Something similar to MEF new Option 3 (Number of consecutive t for assessing an indicator) was not considered Option was included for sliding window

Current conclusion
Its easier for MEF to achieve compatibility with ITU-T than for ITU-T to be compatible with MEF

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

25

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

Old proposal text for Y.ETHperf

A severe loss block (SLB) outcome occurs for a block of packets observed during time interval Tlb at ingress MP0 when the ratio of lost packets at egress MPi to total packets in the block exceeds s1.
Evaluation of successive blocks (time intervals) should be non-overlapping. The minimum number of packets that should be used in evaluating the severe loss block outcome is Mlb.

A severe non-loss block (SNLB) outcome occurs for a block of packets observed during time interval Tlb at ingress MP0 when the ratio of lost packets at egress MPi to total packets in the block not more than s2.
Evaluation of successive blocks (time intervals) should be non-overlapping. The minimum number of packets that should be used in evaluating the severe nonloss block outcome is Mlb.

Ethernet service availability function

The onset of unavailability begins with the occurrence of n consecutive SLBs. These n times Tlb time intervals are part of unavailable time. A period of unavailability ends with the occurrence of n consecutive SNLBs. These n times Tlb time intervals are part of available time. The n times Tlb criteria are supported depending on the value of SW using a Non-sliding window (0) with n*Tlb granularity or a Sliding window (1) with Tlb granularity.

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

26

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02

MEF Aligning Availability Ad Hoc

27

Availability presentation for MEF about ITU-T

2008-12-02