Generic Framing Procedure (GFP) for

NG-SONET/SDH: An Overview

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia
Lucent Technologies

IEEE Seminars
July 11, 2002
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid SONET/DATA NEs
Summary
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 2
Generic Framing Procedure - GFP

A generic mechanism to adapt multiple client

traffic types as either:
a physical link (Layer 1) client
a logical data link (Layer 2) client
into a bit synchronous or octet-synchronous
transmission channel

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 3
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid SONET/DATA NEs
Summary

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 4
The Problem:
Public Multi-Service Transport

Voice Data (IP, IPX, MPLS, etc.) SANs Video

Private Lines Ethernet*

Fibre Channel*

DVB ASI*
ESCON*

FICON*
RPR

How to support multiple traffic types over

the existing transport network infrastructure?
Applications
MACs SONET/SDH
SONET/SDH
Circuits
OTN
OTN
Networking
Transport Channels Fiber
Fiber or
or WDM
WDM
* May also run directly on fiber

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 5
The Solutions:
A Fragmented Solution Space

Voice Data (IP, IPX, MPLS, etc.) SANs Video

Private Lines Ethernet*

Fibre Channel*

DVB ASI*
ESCON*

FICON*
X.86
Application Services RPR
MAC Services
PPP
Circuit Services
FR
Networking Services POS

Transport Services
ATM HDLC GFP
Transport Channels
SONET/SDH

OTN

Fiber or WDM
* May also run directly on fiber

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 6
Example 1:
Ethernet over LAPS (ITU-T X.86)
LAPS Frame
Ethernet Frame

Flag HDLC HDLC LAPS Ethernet Frame LAPS Flag

Ethernet
Address Control SAPI FCS
1 Byte 1 Bytes 1 Bytes 2 Bytes 64-1500 Bytes 4 bytes 1 Byte on LAPS

LAPS over
SONET/SDH
(X.86)
Byte Stuffing needed!
0x7E => 0x7D5E Excess traffic
0x7D => 0x7D5D
SONET/SDH

Capacity
SPE
Optimal min. bandwidth

Transport Capacity
Time
Ethernet in HDLC-like Framing
Non-deterministic transport overhead
Byte stuffing interferes with QoS/bandwidth management
Flag-based delineation computationally expensive as speed increases
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 7
Example 2:
Ethernet over ATM (IETF RFC 1483)
ATM/AAL5 Frame
Ethernet Frame

LLC OUI PID Ethernet Frame Padding UU/CPI & FCS Ethernet
Length on AAL5
3 bytes 3 bytes 2 bytes 64-65527 bytes 0-47 bytes 4 bytes 4 bytes

48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48
bytes bytes bytes bytes bytes bytes
bytes bytes bytes bytes bytes bytes

ATM over
SONET/SDH
(G.707)
Segmentation & SAR overhead

SONET/SDH re-assembly (SAR)

SPE needed!

Capacity
Optimal min. bandwidth

Transport Capacity
Ethernet over ATM Time

Excellent QoS management capabilities

Large transport overhead for small packets
SAR expensive for simple connectivity services
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 8
Example 3:
Ethernet over GFP-F (ITU-T G.7041)
GFP Frame
Ethernet Frame

Core Payload Ethernet Frame

Ethernet Ethernet
Header Header on GFP on GFP
4 Bytes 4 Bytes 1500 Bytes

GFP over
SONET/SDH
(G.707/G.7041) No Byte Stuffing or
SAR No excess traffic
SONET/SDH needed!

Capacity
SPE
Optimal min. bandwidth

Transport Capacity
Time
Ethernet over GFP
Deterministic transport overhead
No adaptation interference with QoS/bandwidth management
Low complexity frame delineation that scales ups as speed increases
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 9
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid SONET/DATA NEs
Summary

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 10
Why GFP?

Simple and scaleable

Proven technology at 1G, 2.5G and 10G
Scalable beyond 40G

Supports both Layer 1 and Layer 2 traffic

Alternative transport mechanism to ATM (ITU-T I.341.1/IETF RFC 1483)
Alternative transport mechanism to HDLC-framing (ISO-3309/IETF RFC
2615)

Standards based:
ITU-T G.7041(2001) & ANSI T1.105.02 (2002)
Endorsed by IETF (RFC 2823)
Endorsed by RPR WG (IEEE 802.17)

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 11
Sample Applications

Channel Types: Client Types:

Bit-Synchronous Channel: Physical Coding (Layer 1):

Dark Fiber Fibre Channel
WDM FICON
ESCON
Gigabit Ethernet
Infiniband
DVB ASI

Octet-Synchronous Channel: Data Links (Layer 2):

SONET (T1.105.02) PPP/IP/MPLS
SDH (ITU-T G.707) Ethernet
OTN (ITU-T G.709) MAPOS
RPR

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 12
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid SONET/DATA NEs
Summary

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 13
Functional Model

Ethernet

MAPOS

ESCON

Signals
FICON
IP/PPP

Client
Other
RPR

FC
GFP Client Specific Aspects
(Client Dependent)
Frame Mapped Transparent Mapped

GFP Common Aspects

(Client Independent)

SONET/SDH Path OTN ODUk Path

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 14
Frame Types

GFP Frames

Client Frames Control Frames

Client Data Client Idle Frames OA&M Frames

Frames Management (under study)

Frames

Client Client Idle Link

Payload Traffic Time OA&M
Transfer Management Fills

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 15
Generic Frame Structure

Payload Length MSB PTI PFI EXI

Payload Type MSB
Client Data Frames Payload Length LSB UPI
Payload Type LSB
Core HEC MSB
Type HEC MSB
Core HEC LSB
Core Header
Type HEC LSB
CID

0-60 Bytes of Spare

Payload Header
Extension Headers
Payload (Optional)
Extension HEC MSB

Area Payload Extension HEC LSB

Information
Fixed Length Linear Extension
N x [536,520]
Header shown
or
Variable Length (others may apply)
Packets
Payload FCS MSB
Bit Transmission Client Control Frames
Order Payload FCS Payload FCS
Byte 0x00 (0xB6)
Transmission
Order Payload FCS
0x00 (0xAB)

Payload FCS LSB

0x00 (0x31)

0x00 (0xE0)

Idle Frame (scrambled)

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 16
Basic GFP Frame Format
GFP Frame
Core Payload Payload
Header Area FCS

Payload
PLI cHEC Payload Area pFCS GFP GFP
16 bits 16 bits Header 4~65,535 bytes (framed PDU) 32 bits Frame Frame
4 Bytes

PLI := Payload Length Indicator

cHEC := Core Header CRC (ITU-T CRC-16)
Payload Area := Framed PDU (PPP, IP, Ethernet, etc.)
Payload Header := Client PDU management
pFCS := Optional Payload FCS (ITU-T CRC-32)

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 17
Frame Structure:
Summary
All GFP OAM&P functions handled via the GFP Core
Header
Payload Header supports any payload specific
adaptation functions
Client types (Ethernet, IP, MPLS, Fibre Channel, etc.)
Client multiplexing (via Extension Headers)
Client link management (via Client Management Frames)
Optional Payload FCS on a per frame basis
Asynchronous rate adaptation via Idle Frames

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 18
GFP Procedures

Frame Delineation
Frame/Client Multiplexing
Adaptation Modes
Scrambling
Core Header
Payload Area
Error Handling
Headers
Payload
Client Management
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 19
Frame Delineation:
GFP State Machine
Frame-by-Frame Frame-by-Frame
Core Header Core Header
Correction Disabled 2nd cHEC Correction Enabled
match
Pre-Sync Sync
State State
Correctable
No 2nd Core Header
cHEC match Error
Non Correctable
cHEC Core Header
match Error
Hunt
State
No cHEC
match

Octet-by-Octet
Core Header
Correction Disabled

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 20
Frame Delineation
An Example
Two consecutive cHEC field matches vs. computed CHEC
Pointer-based (PLI field) offset to next incoming frame

Octet or Bit synchronous stream

cHEC

cHEC
cHEC
Payload Payload Payload

PLI

PLI
PLI

Area Area Area

PLI cHEC
cHEC Fail
PLI cHEC
Hunt State cHEC Fail
PLI cHEC
cHEC Fail
PLI cHEC

CRC Valid PLI Bytes PLI Bytes PLI Bytes

PLI cHEC PLI cHEC

cHEC Match cHEC Match

Hunt Pre-Sync Sync

State State State
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 21
Multiplexing

Frame Multiplexing via PTI field:

Client Data Frames have priority over Client Mgmt. Fames
Client Management Frames have priority over Idle Frames
Client Multiplexing via Extension Headers:
Null Extension Header on dedicated transport channels per client
Linear Extension Header (point-to-point configurations)
Ring Extension Header (ring configuration)
PTI PFI EXI
Frame Muxing:
Core Header Payload Type MSB PTI: Payload Type Id
Payload Type LSB UPI
Payload Header
Type HEC MSB
Type HEC LSB CID

Payload 0-60 Bytes of

Client Muxing:
Spare
Area Extension EXI: Extension Hdr ID
Headers Extension HEC MSB
(Optional) CID: Customer ID
Extension HEC LSB

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 22
Linear Extension
Header shown
(others may apply)
Adaptation Modes:
Frame-Mapped GFP
1-to-1 mapping of L2 PDU to GFP payload
UPI field indicates L2 PDU type
Example: IEEE 802.3/Ethernet MAC frames

GFP- F Frame

Core Payload
Header Area

PLI cHEC Payload

Header Ethernet Frame
2 Bytes 2 Bytes 4 Bytes 0 -65531 Bytes

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 23
Adaptation Modes:
Transparent-Mapped GFP
N-to-1 mapping of L1 codewords to GFP payload
Example: 8B/10B codewords

G F P -T F r a m e

C o re P a y lo a d GFP
Header Area FCS

PLI cHEC P a y lo a d FCS

Header #1 #2 8x64B/65B + 16 # N -1 #N (Optional

2 B y te s 2 Bytes 4 Bytes
Superblocks 4 Bytes

64B/65B # 1 1 | CCL#1 | CCI#1

64B/65B Superblock
64B/65B # 2
6 4 B /6 5 B b l o c k
( F la g b its c a r r i e d i n l a s t N | CCL#n | CCI#n
(minus Flag bit)
6 4 B / 6 5 B # N- 1 DCI#1
o c t e t o f t h e s u p e r - b lo c k )
64B/65B # N
F1 | F2 | F8 DCI#8-n
CRC-16 MSB
CRC-16 LSB

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 24
Scrambling:
DC Balance & Payload Scrambler
Header (PLI Field + CHEC) XORd with the 32 bit value
0xB6AB31E0 before transmission for DC balance.
Payload scrambled with ATM-style self-synchronous scrambler

PLI cHEC Payload

x43+1Scrambler
0xB6AB31E0 + + +
D0 D1 ... D42

Transmission
Channel
? ?????? ?? ? ? ? ? ??? ? ???? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 25
Error Handling

Multi-bit Error Detection & Correction:

Core Header cHEC (ITU-T CRC-16):
1-bit error correction
Payload Type Field tHEC (ITU-T CRC-16)
GFP-T payload (Optimized CRC-16) 3-bit error correction

Multi-bit Error Detection:

Payload Extension Header eHEC (ITU-T CRC-16)
Payload Information Field pFCS (ITU-T CRC-32)

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 26
Client Management

Client Signal Fail (CSF) indications sent periodically upon

detection of a failure/degradation event
Cleared by new Client Data Frame or CSF timeout

GFP Link

CSF

Client Signal Fail:

LOS
Loss
Loss ofof Signal
Signal (LOS)
(LOS) LCS
Loss
Loss ofof Client
Client Character
Character Sync
Sync (LCS)
(LCS)
Loss
Loss of
of clock/frame
clock/frame
Running
Running disparity
disparity violations
violations

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 27
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures

GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid SONET/DATA NEs
Summary

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 28
Performance:
Synchronization Loss Events
Re-sync required whenever cHEC test fails
Low synchronization loss probability for typical fiber BER
Example: 40Bytes PDU at 40G. Loss event frequency
decreases with increasing PDU size or decreasing BER
BER Prob [Sync Loss] Frequency
-7
10 5x10 -12 ~ 48 min
-8
10 5x10 -14 ~ 3.3 Days
-9
10 5x10 -16 ~ 1 Year

10 -10 5x10 -18 ~100 Years

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 29
Performance:
Missed Frame Delineation Events
Low probability of frame unavailability after LOF events
Essentially insensitive to random errors for practical BERs

1.00E-02 1.00E-03 1.00E-04 1.00E-05 1.00E-06 1.00E-07 1.00E-08 1.00E-09

1.E+00
40
64
Probability of Next Frame Unavailability

128
1.E-02 256
384
512
1024
1.E-04
2048
3072
4096

1.E-06 8192
16384
Typical Ethernet
32768
Operational
65535
Range
1.E-08
Frame Size
BER

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 30
Performance:
Mean Time To Frame
Datalink syncs after 2 consecutive cHEC matches
Fast Mean Time to Frame (MTTF) delineation
Largely insensitive to BER & line rate over the region of
interest for (first order approximation)

2.00
Typical
MTTF (PDUs)

Ethernet
Operational
Range
1.75

1.50
64

2
6

24

72

92
48

96

5
12

38

51
25

38

76

53
10

30

81
20

40

16

32

GFP Frame Size (Octets) 65

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 31
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
- Performance

Applications:
Hybrid SONET/Data NEs
Summary

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 32
Hybrid Network Elements
NG SONET/Data Systems
Three basic building blocks
GFP (ITU-T G.7041/ANSI T1.105.02)
Virtual Concatenation (ITU-T G.707/ANSI T1.105.02)
LCAS (ITU-T G.707/ANSI T1.105.02)

Native 1
Interfaces: Repeater
Repeater 2
or L
FE GFP
GbE Store GFP C 3
PHY & Encap-
Adaptation
PPP/IP/MPLS A
Forward sulation STS-ns
Fibre Channel Fabric S X (Och-ns)
FICON
ESCON (G)MII SPI-3/4 STS-n-Xv (OCh-n-Xv)

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 33
Hybrid Network Elements
Virtual Concatenation
Multiple SONET STS-Ncs (VC-ns) grouped into single
STM-N-Xv Virtual Concatenation Group (VCG)
Component STS-Ncs may be routed separately
Compensates differential network delays up to 32 ms

Network Operator provisions no. of channels (X) in VCG

Solves SONET/SDH & OTN bandwidth granularity problem

Completely transparent to intermediate NEs.

Only termination nodes need to support this feature

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 34
Hybrid Network Elements
Virtual Concatenation - Example

Legacy Add/Drop Multiplexer

Legacy Broadband X-Connect

Public
Network
VC-n-Xv
Concatenation

VC-n-Xv

Concatenation
or
Virtual

or

Virtual
STS-n-Xv STS-n-Xv
VCG VCG

Hybrid Hybrid
Network Network
Element Element

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 35
Hybrid Network Elements
Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS)
Controls hitless addition/removal of STS-Ns (VC-ns)
to/from VCG under management control
In-service hitless bandwidth modification
Address the dynamic management of bandwidth for data transport
services over SONET/SDH
Manages automatic removal/addition of failed/repaired
STS-Ns from/to VCG
Supports virtual channel protection through load sharing
on STS-Ns
Works best on point-to-point links

ITU-T Recommendation G.7042 / ANSI T1.105.02

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 36
GFP, Virtual Concatenation & LCAS
Transport Efficiency
SONET SDH
Traffic
Type
Contiguous Virtual Contiguous Virtual

STS-1 VT-1.5-7v VC-3 VC-12-5v

10Mbps Ethernet
(20%) (89%) (20%) (92%)

100Mbit/s Fast STS-3c STS-1-2v VC-4 VC-3-2v (100%)

Ethernet (67%) (100%) (67%) VC-12-46v (100%)

200Mbit/s (ESCON) STS-6c STS-1-4v VC-4-4c VC-3-4v (100%)

(66%) (100%) (33%) VC-4-2v (66%)
STS-21c STS-1-18v VC-4-16c VC-4-6v
1Gbps Fibre Channel
(85%) (95%) (35%) (95%)
STS-24c STS-1-21v VC-4-16c VC-4-7v
1Gbit/s Ethernet
(83%) (92%) (42%) (95%)
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 37
 Outline
What is GFP?
Problem Statement
GFP Value Proposition
GFP Model
- Frame Structure
- Procedures
GFP Performance
Applications:
Hybrid WDM/TDM/DATA NEs

Summary
Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002
Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 38
Summary
GFP Advantages
Versatility: Enables transport services for either Layer 1 or
Layer payloads:
PPP, IP, MPLS, Ethernet, HDLC & MAPOS at Layer 2
Fibre Channel, FICON, ESCON, Infiniband, DVB ASI at Layer 1
Endorsed by multiple communities including IEEE RPR WG & IETF
Scalability: Demonstrate transport capabilities at rates from
10Mbps to 10Gbps (and soon beyond)
Simplicity: Eliminates need for ATM and HDLC networking
for simple connectivity services resulting in more efficient,
lower-risk component designs
Component availability: Broader user demand expected to
drive future applications, feature maturity, interface
commonality and lower cost

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 39
GFP Characteristics and Benefits

Simple Header Error Control (HEC) based synchronization:

Generalizes ATMs HEC synchronization (inexpensive table lookup)
Supports variable or fixed length packets (IP/Ethernet datagrams, block
codes or ATM cells)

Simple pointer-based frame delineation:

Low processing complexity without payload expansion
Low (deterministic) adaptation overhead
High data link efficiency (scalable to 10Gbps and beyond)
Amenable to strict/loose QoS support, particularly for real-time services

Flexible traffic adaptation modes:

Frame-Mapped GFP (GFP-F): Suitable for elastic applications
Transparent-Mapped GFP (GFP-T): Suitable for in-elastic applications

Enrique Hernandez-Valencia; IEEE Seminar 2002

Lucent Technologies
July 2002, 2002 GFP Overview; Page 40