Light Reading
Extensive testing of new 400 Gbit/s systems is critical for network operators if they are to save themselves from post-deployment performance and opex pressures.

Are You Really Getting 400 Gbit/s Performance?

Sterling Perrin
9/11/2013
0%
100%

Driven by continuing IP traffic growth, a new generation of 400 Gbit/s network processors is beginning to emerge. Such processors have been announced by a handful of vendors, with more to come.

However, scaling from 100 Gbit/s to 400 Gbit/s processors is not an easy feat. Recently, we witnessed some 400 Gbit/s network processor performance testing in a lab and were surprised by some of the results. Based on this data, we believe that there may be some wide variations between what is claimed on spec sheets and the real world performance that is achievable.

We believe that service providers evaluating new higher capacity systems must perform extensive testing on their own in order to ensure that the high-end systems perform as advertised under a variety of conditions that mirror real-world traffic mixes and traffic growth. Otherwise, service providers may be stuck with true performance that is far below the advertised 400G sticker. In fact, under certain conditions, true performance may not even be better than the legacy routers that are being replaced.

One important test is the packet sweep test. The packet sweep tests router performance over a spectrum of different packet sizes, from small (64 bytes) to large (1,500 bytes or greater), in order to ensure consistent performance across the full range of incoming packet variants. It is somewhat counterintuitive, but the greatest demands on the processor occur at the smallest packet sizes. The reason is that small packet sizes force greater amounts of table look-ups per second, and this burdens the processor.

The test we reviewed showed a 400 Gbit/s processor consistently dropping packets at all sizes, both small and large. As the packet size increased, the performance did not improve. On a few occasions, packets dropped by as much as 50 percent, and we never saw more than 80 percent throughput at any point in the test.

A second test, known as the Internet mix (or IMIX) test, was reviewed. Just as there is no typical packet size, there is no typical service provider IP traffic mix. It varies greatly from provider to provider. The test we reviewed used a couple of different real-world IMIX samples provided by service providers, based on their network scenarios. The results showed poor performance across a range of IMIX profiles. The processor appeared to suffer from problems related to storing packets for lookup, which resulted in severe performance impact on all traffic types tested. Significantly, when comparing two generations of processor performance, the new 400 Gbit/s processor demonstrated anywhere from 20 percent to 50 percent less performance based on serviceable bandwidth.

A third test measured the performance of a processor while enabling service level agreements (SLAs). Here, the results showed that enabling SLAs on connections reduced the actual throughput of the processor from 400 Gbit/s to 100 Gbit/s, meaning that only 50 percent of the advertised 100 GigE ports would be available with SLAs turned on.

The tests above are tied closely to the conventional views of scale, meaning the ability to handle more and more bits through the processor and on the network. As the Internet evolves from person-to-person communications to the machine-to-machine dominated Internet of things, another component of scale is becoming increasingly important: the ability to handle more and more flows through the network.

For next-generation routers, this means they must not only process massive amounts of bits, but they must also be able to process massive numbers of flows. Routers equipped with 400 Gbit/s processors must be tested in their abilities to handle tens of thousands of flows. As a rule of thumb, a 10 GigE port will typically serve 500 customers. If we assume just four classes of service per customer (a low assumption), this creates 2,000 different flows per 10 GigE port. With 20 x 10 GigE ports per line card (the state-of-the-art in existing designs), this creates 40,000 different flows per card. As we move to an Internet of things, it is very possible that these next-gen routers could hit performance limits on supported flows long before they hit their maximum capacities in bit/s. It is another dimension of scale that must be accounted for and tested in evaluating core routers.

The final point we will touch upon is efficiency in power consumption and footprint. It is well understood that these opex factors are of critical importance to service providers. In some regions, where power costs are well above global averages or where equipment is deployed in dense urban areas where space is severely limited, power and space requirements may make or break a buying decision. Even in the US, however, we have had discussions with large service providers who place power and space at the top of their lists.

Here again, service providers need to dig deeper than the power and space requirements that are advertised. To get a true understanding of space and power, these advertised specs must be placed in the context of the overall performance of the system -- as determined by packet sweep tests, IMIX tests, flow limitations, and any other tests that are performed on the system.

For example, if performance testing and evaluations show that a system will perform at 80 percent of its capacity limits under real-world network conditions, then this needs to be taken into account for space and power consumption. In this case, 20 percent more space and 20 percent greater power consumption would be needed to achieve 400 Gbit/s of capacity. Failing to account for any performance limitations sets service providers up for unwelcome opex surprises when these new systems start to fill up in the network.

In summary, vendors rolling out new 400 Gbit/s silicon promise routers that are smarter, faster, and greener than previous generations, but some in-depth test results we've seen indicate that this may not be the case. Service providers cannot afford to rely on vendor claims in this area. Rather, extensive testing -- of the kind we’ve described in this article -- is a must. The added time and costs of upfront testing will pay dividends for years to come.

This blog was commissioned by Cisco Systems. The blog was created independently of Cisco, and Heavy Reading is wholly responsible for its contents.

— Sterling Perrin, Senior Analyst, Heavy Reading


Interested in learning more on this topic? Then come to Ethernet & SDN Expo, a Light Reading Live event that takes place on October 2-3, 2013 at the Javits Center in New York City. Co-located with Interop, Light Reading's Ethernet & SDN Expo will focus on how the convergence of Carrier Ethernet 2.0 with emerging carrier software-defined networking (SDN) and network functions virtualization (NFV) technologies could change the whole telecom landscape for service providers. For more information, or to register,
click here
.


(15)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
mfaisalk
50%
50%
mfaisalk,
User Rank: Lightning
9/14/2013 | 11:05:32 PM
400G performance
We need to be careful with our judgements here. It is one vendor testing another vendor. What good you can expect here ?

 

Faisal
David Burns
50%
50%
David Burns,
User Rank: Light Beer
9/13/2013 | 2:05:16 PM
Check the math
Quote (snipped for conciseness):
if performance testing and evaluations show that a system will perform at 80 percent of its capacity limits under real-world network conditions ... 20 percent more space and 20 percent greater power consumption would be needed to achieve 400 Gbit/s of capacity.

Wrong. If actual performance is 20% lower, you need to provision 25% more equipment to achieve the targeted performance. Simple example: 8 x 400 Gbit/s should give you 3200 Gbit/s. If processors perform at 80%, actual performance of one processor is 320 GBit/s, so you need 10 to reach your target - 25% more than 8.
desiEngineer
50%
50%
desiEngineer,
User Rank: Light Beer
9/13/2013 | 1:17:08 PM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Sterling,

If you can guarantee that the tests were fair and impartial, then yes, enquiring minds want to know.

If not, don't attach your name (and LightReading's), and then hide behind some "this is newsworthy" BS.  And I don't care how sophisticated and expensive the lab is, I am not ingenuous enough to believe that the lab was created for the purpose of the general public.  Clue#1: I haven't seen one report come out of that lab that showed a single Cisco product in a negative light.

No vendor has a vested interest in impartiality.  Knowing how much marketing is attached to all claims, it behooves the operators to do their due diligence, but to pretend that Cisco can do that due diligence for all of us is naive at best.

-desi
Surfer Blue
50%
50%
Surfer Blue,
User Rank: Light Beer
9/13/2013 | 12:54:07 PM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Service providers do extensive testing before deploying any new hardware in their networks.  FP3 cards have been available for a couple of years and are widely deployed – clearly they have been thouroughly vetted in the field.  Personally I'd take real world testing and deployment experience over contrived competitor lab testing any day.  

 
sterlingperrin
50%
50%
sterlingperrin,
User Rank: Lightning
9/13/2013 | 9:36:34 AM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Yarn,

You are correct - I have no interest in standing in the middle. Here's the thing. Cisco has a test lab that would be the envy of all but the very largest tier 1 operators. They conduct very thorough and very expensive testing of their competitors' products, which they've been doing for 13 years (probably not something they want publicized). In this case, they came to us - and some other media as well - with information from their labs that was compelling and newsworthy.

Are we saying that Cisco's results are conclusive about ALU, or any particular competitor? Absolutely not!! But we do believe there was enough in there to raise broad questions and write this piece.

I have received calls from people at ALU who are understandably upset. They are getting calls from customers who are asking questions. It's not an easy thing to go through, I'm sure, but as media, it is our job to bring the right topics of debate to the forefront and spark the dialogue. We made a judgment that 400G performance testing is a legitimate topic and that questions should be asked of all 400G NP players - ALU, Cisco, Huawei, Juniper, and any other market entrants that emerge.

Sterling

 
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
9/12/2013 | 7:28:34 PM
Re: Which network processor tests?
We note the sponsorship of the blog for full-disclosure purposes. We also note that Heavy Reading is wholly responsible for the content. The post by Sterling calls attention to the fact that performance claims often do not pass scrutiny, which means operators should do their own evaluations before making purchase decisions.
tb100
50%
50%
tb100,
User Rank: Moderator
9/12/2013 | 6:01:11 PM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Wait a minute. Did you just say, and I quote: "It is Cisco's testing of Alcatel-Lucent's 400G processor"? (and 'blog was commissioned by Cisco Systems')?

So Cisco paid you to write an article that shows the 'results' of their testing of a competitor's product? Aren't the results pretty much predetermined, no matter what the capabilities of the product?

 

I am at a loss for words....
yarn
100%
0%
yarn,
User Rank: Light Sabre
9/12/2013 | 2:06:22 PM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Sterling,

Why lend your name to help Cisco get credibility for this type of quasi-technical FUD bs articles they're so well known for? Now you're caught in the middle and have to stand up for their crap, and tarnish your own credibility in the process.  
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
9/12/2013 | 11:53:53 AM
Re: Which network processor tests?
All product testing -- including tests from independent labs -- should come with a big "grain of salt" warning. And in the case of vendor-run tests, results are clearly subject to question, especially from competing suppliers who had no influence on how the testing was done. From the point of view of prospective customers, though, it's important to understand when performance claims come with an asterisk or two.
sterlingperrin
50%
50%
sterlingperrin,
User Rank: Lightning
9/12/2013 | 11:11:34 AM
Re: Which network processor tests?
Manish,

Correct, we thought there was value in the piece as a call for due diligence.

If service providers are testing these systems at their limits across scenarios applicable to their network (including growth and possible changes to traffic patterns, etc.) then they are covered.

400 Gbit/s is very new. I don't how much testing has been done by anyone yet.

Sterling

 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
More Blogs from Heavy Lifting Analyst Notes
Enterprises increasingly realize that in order to run their businesses economically they need to fundamentally change ways in which they operate their businesses in the connected IP world.
There's plenty of activity in the emerging G.fast broadband technology sector, but will it come to anything?
Here are some steps that service providers could take to boost the reach, awareness and success of their multiscreen video ventures.
Telecom operators are deploying new technologies in their data center environments to reduce costs and increase revenues.
The cloud debate has moved on to the network capabilities needed to meet customers' demands, with SDN and NFV at the heart of discussions.
Flash Poll
From The Founder
It's clear to me that the communications industry is divided into two types of people, and only one is living in the real world.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With Rick Talbot, Principal Analyst, Current Analysis

10|31|14   |   2:12   |   (0) comments


At the NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014, Rick Talbot shared his positive feedback about the holistic and open approach that Huawei adopts for SDN and NFV. He also found the open sharing at the event valuable as it features different perspectives from Huawei experts, telecom operators, industry analysts as well as security experts.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With David Snow, Principal Analyst, Current Analysis

10|31|14   |   2:24   |   (0) comments


David Snow talked about his understanding of Huawei and its SoftCOM strategy at the NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014, saying that Huawei's wide approach combining IT and CT expertise, introducing big data and analytics into solutions and contributing to the OpenStack community particularly resonate with him and make the company stand out in the industry.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With Roz Roseboro, Senior Analyst, Heavy Reading

10|31|14   |   3:13   |   (0) comments


Roz Roseboro commented on Huawei's data center capabilities and NFV solutions at the NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014, saying that in addition to covering all three key domains of compute, storage and networking, the company also emphasizes the importance of management capabilities and professional services, which are essential in making NFV a reality.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With Michael Howard, Co-founder & Principal Analyst, Infonetics Research

10|31|14   |   5:25   |   (0) comments


Michael Howard talked about SDN, NFV, and OpenStack adoption at Huawei's NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014. Particularly, he pointed out that Virtual Enterprise CPE is the top NFV use case that operators plan to invest in over 2014 and 2015 to deliver new enterprise services through virtualized functions.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With Jerry Caron, Senior Vice President, Current Analysis

10|31|14   |   3:11   |   (0) comments


At Huawei's NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014, Jerry Caron from Current Analysis said that orchestration and management are key to realizing SDN and NFV for global carriers, and the approach that Huawei is taking, with its FusionSphere Cloud OS at the core, is in the right direction to address the challenges.
LRTV Documentaries
Broadband Battles

10|31|14   |   01:39   |   (0) comments


This year's Broadband World Forum featured a number of show floor battles focused on access gear, components and coffee.
Jonestown
Mobile Backhaul: Going to the Dark Side?

10|30|14   |   2:26   |   (1) comment


Heavy Reading's Patrick Donegan shares his view on a dark trend that bubbled up at Light Reading's annual backhaul conference in NYC.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
2014 Huawei Electric Power Industry Summit: Interview With CEO of SwitchCom

10|30|14   |   4:13   |   (0) comments


SwitchCom, an IT company based in Angola, recommends a variety of Huawei solutions and hardware to their customers in the energy industry.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
2014 Huawei Electric Power Industry Summit: Interview With Ethiopia's Ministry of Water Irrigation & Energy

10|30|14   |   4:08   |   (0) comments


Gosaye Mengistie of Ethiopia's Ministry of Water Irrigation & Energy discusses the collaboration with Huawei in that country.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
2014 Huawei Electric Power Industry Summit: Interview with Dongfang Electronics Corporation

10|30|14   |   5:46   |   (0) comments


Dongfang Electronics Corporation, headquartered in Chengdu, China, is one of China's largest manufacturers of power generators and contractors of power station projects.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
2014 Huawei Electric Power Industry Summit: Interview with Zimbabwe's Customers

10|30|14   |   3:31   |   (0) comments


Representatives of Zimbabwe's Ministry of Power and Development discuss the energy needs of their country as well as new areas of improvement due to enhanced ICT capabilities.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
2014 Huawei Electric Power Industry Summit: Interview With Colbún Chile

10|30|14   |   4:29   |   (0) comments


In Chile, an aging energy infrastructure was in dire need of a modern update. Claudio Valenzuela of Colbún discusses how Huawei's ICT solutions continue to provide crucial information to improve the grid and how an in-country engineer is a cricial asset.
Upcoming Live Events
November 6, 2014, Santa Clara
November 11, 2014, Atlanta, GA
December 2, 2014, New York City
December 3, 2014, New York City
December 9-10, 2014, Reykjavik, Iceland
February 10, 2015, Atlanta, GA
May 6, 2015, McCormick Convention Center, Chicago, IL
May 30, 2015, The Westin Peachtree, Atlanta, GA
June 9-10, 2015, Chicago, IL
Infographics
WhoIsHostingThis.com presents six of the world's most extreme WiFi hotspots, enabling the most epic selfies you can imagine.
Hot Topics
Microsoft's Skype Embraces WebRTC on IE
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 10/27/2014
FTC Slaps AT&T With Throttling Lawsuit
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 10/28/2014
Wheeler Gets Down With OTT
Mari Silbey, Independent Technology Editor, 10/29/2014
China's MVNOs Hit the Wall
Robert Clark, 10/27/2014
Let's Not Kill SDN & NFV With Silos
Francois Locoh-Donou, Senior VP, Global Products Group, Ciena, 10/28/2014
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed