Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) is a cell relay network protocol which encodes data traffic into small fixed-sized (53 byte; 48 bytes of data and 5 bytes of header information) cells instead of variable sized packets (sometimes known as frames) as in packet-switched networks (such as the Internet Protocol or Ethernet). It is a connection-oriented technology, in which a connection is established between the two endpoints before the actual data exchange begins.
ATM sought to resolve the conflict between circuit-switched networks and packet-switched networks by mapping both bitstreams and packet-streams onto a stream of small fixed-size 'cells' tagged with virtual circuit identifiers. The cells are typically sent on demand within a synchronous time-slot pattern in a synchronous bit-stream: what is asynchronous here is the sending of the cells, not the low-level bitstream that carries them.
In its original conception, ATM was to be the enabling technology of the 'Broadband Integrated Services Digital Network' (B-ISDN) that would replace the existing PSTN. The full suite of ATM standards provides definitions for layer 1 (physical connections), layer 2 (data link layer) and layer 3 (network) of the classical OSI seven-layer networking model. The ATM standards drew on concepts from the telecommunications community, rather than the computer networking community. For this reason, extensive provision was made for integration of most existing telco technologies and conventions into ATM.
As a result, ATM provides a highly complex technology, with features intended for applications ranging from global telco networks to private local area computer networks. ATM has been a partial success as a technology, with widespread deployment, but generally only used as a transport for IP traffic; its goal of providing a single integrated technology for LANs, public networks, and user services has largely failed.
Many people, particularly in the Internet protocol-design community, considered this vision to be mistaken. Their argument went something like this: We know that there will always be both brand-new and obsolescent link-layer technologies, particularly in the LAN area, and it is fair to assume that not all of them will fit neatly into the SDH model that ATM was designed for. Therefore, some sort of protocol is needed to provide a unifying layer over both ATM and non-ATM link layers, and ATM itself cannot fill that role. Conveniently, we have this protocol called "IP" which already does that. Ergo, there is no point in implementing ATM at the network layer.
In addition, the need for cells to reduce jitter has disappeared as transport speeds increased (see below), and improvements in voice over IP have made the integration of speech and data possible at the IP layer, again removing the incentive for ubiquitous deployment of ATM. Most telcos are now planning to integrate their voice network activities into their IP networks, rather than their IP networks into the voice infrastructure.
Many technically sound ideas from ATM were adopted by MPLS, a generic Layer 2 packet switching protocol. ATM remains widely deployed, and is used as a multiplexing service in DSL networks, where its compromises fit DSL's low-data-rate needs well. In turn, DSL networks support IP (and IP services such as VoIP) via PPP over ATM.
ATM will remain deployed for some time in higher-speed interconnects where carriers have already committed themselves to existing ATM deployments; ATM is used here as a way of unifying PDH/SDH traffic and packet-switched traffic under a single infrastructure.
However, ATM is increasingly challenged by speed and traffic shaping requirements of converged networks. In particular, the complexity of SAR imposes a performance bottleneck, as the fastest SARs known run at 2.5 Gbit/s and have limited traffic shaping capabilities.
Currently it seems like Ethernet implementations (10Gbit-Ethernet, Metro Ethernet) will replace ATM in many locations.
This is because the conversion of digitized voice back into an analog audio signal is an inherently real-time process, and to do a good job, the codec that does this needs an evenly spaced (in time) stream of data items. If the next data item is not available when it is needed, the codec has no choice but to produce silence - and if the data does arrive, but late, it is useless, because the time period when it should have been converted to a signal has already passed.
Now consider a speech signal reduced to packets, and forced to share a link with bursty data traffic (i.e. some of the data packets will be large). No matter how small the speech packets could be made, they would always encounter full-size data packets, and under normal queuing conditions, might experience maximum queuing delays.
At the time ATM was designed, 155 Mbit/s SDH (135 Mbit/s payload) was considered a fast optical network link, and many PDH links in the digital network were considerably slower, ranging from 1.544 to 45 Mbit/s in the USA (2 to 34 Mbit/s in Europe).
At this rate, a typical full-length 1500 byte (12000 bit) data packet would take 89 µs to transmit. In a lower-speed link, such as a 1.544 Mbit/s T1 link, a 1500 byte packet would take up to 7.8 milliseconds.
A queueing delay induced by several such data packets might be several times the figure of 7.8 ms, in addition to any packet generation delay in the shorter speech packet. This was clearly unacceptable for speech traffic, which needs to have low jitter in the data stream being fed into the codec if it is to produce good-quality sound. A packet voice system can produce this in a number of ways:
ATM was designed to implement a low-jitter network interface. However, to be able to provide short queueing delays, but also be able to carry large datagrams, it had to have cells. ATM broke all packets, data, and voice streams up into 48-byte chunks, adding a 5-byte routing header to each one so that they could be reassembled later. The choice of 48 bytes was, as is all too often the case, political instead of technical. When the CCITT was standardizing ATM, parties from the United States wanted a 64-byte payload because having the size be a power of 2 made working with the data easier and this size was felt to be a good compromise between larger payloads optimized for data transmission and shorter payloads optimized for real-time applications like voice; parties from Europe wanted 32-byte payloads because the small size (and therefore short transmission times) simplify voice applications with respect to echo cancellation. Most of the interested European parties eventually came around to the arguments made by the Americans, but France and a few allies held out until the bitter end. With 32 bytes, France would have been able to implement an ATM-based voice network with calls from one end of France to the other requiring no echo cancellation. 53 bytes was chosen as a compromise between the two sides, but it was ideal for neither and everybody has had to live with it ever since. 5-byte headers were chosen because it was thought that 10% of the payload was the maximum price to pay for routing information. ATM multiplexed these 53-byte cells instead of packets. Doing so reduced the worst-case queuing jitter by a factor of almost 30, removing the need for echo cancellers.
Since the time ATM was designed, networks have become much faster. As of 2001, a 1500 byte (12000 bit) full-size Ethernet packet will take only 1.2 µs to transmit on a 10 Gbit/s optical network, removing the need for small cells to reduce jitter. Some consider that this removes the need for ATM in the network backbone. Additionally, the hardware for implementing the service adaptation for IP packets is expensive at very high speeds. Specifically, the cost of segmentation and reassembly (SAR) hardware at OC-3 and above speeds makes ATM less competitive for IP than Packet Over SONET (POS). SAR performance limits mean that the fastest IP router ATM interfaces are OC12 - OC48 (STM4 - STM16), while (as of 2004) POS can operate at OC-192 (STM64) with higher speeds expected in the future.
On slow links (2 Mbit/s and below) ATM still makes sense, and this is why so many ADSL systems use ATM as an intermediate layer between the physical link layer and a Layer 2 protocol like PPP or Ethernet.
At these lower speeds, ATM's ability to carry multiple logical circuits on a single physical or virtual medium provides a compelling business advantage. DSL can be used as an access method for an ATM network, allowing a DSL termination point in a telephone central office to connect to many internet service providers across a wide-area ATM network. In the United States, at least, this has allowed DSL providers to provide DSL access to the customers of many internet service providers. Since one DSL termination point can support multiple ISPs, the economic feasibility of DSL is substantially improved.
As these cells traverse an ATM network, switching is achieved by changing the VPI/VCI values. Although the VPI/VCI values are not necessarily consistent from one end of the connection to the other, the concept of a circuit is consistent (unlike IP, where any given packet could get to its destination by a different route than the others).
Another advantage of the use of virtual circuits is the ability to use them as a multiplexing layer, allowing different services (such as voice, Frame Relay, n*64 channels, IP, SNA, etc.) to share a common ATM connection without interfering
ATM traffic contracts are part of the mechanism by which "Quality of Service" (QoS) is ensured. There are four basic types (and several variants) which each have a set of parameters describing the connection.
VBR has real-time and non-real-time variants, and is used for "bursty" traffic.
Most traffic classes also introduce the concept of Cell Delay Variation Tolerance (CDVT) which defines the "clumping" of cells in time.
Traffic contracts are usually maintained by the use of "Shaping", a combination of queuing and marking of cells, and enforced by "Policing".
PVPs and PVCs are conceptually simple, but require significant effort in large networks. They also do not support the re-routing of service in the event of a failure. Dynamically built PVPs (soft PVPs or SPVPs) and PVCs (soft PVCs or SPVCs), in contrast, are built by specifying the characteristics of the circuit (the service "contract") and the two endpoints.
Finally, switched virtual circuits (SVCs) are built and torn down on demand when requested by an end piece of equipment. One application for SVCs is to carry individual telephone calls when a network of telephone switches are inter-connected by ATM. SVCs were also used in attempts to replace local area networks with ATM.
ATM defines two different cell formats: NNI (Network-network interface) and UNI (User-network interface). Most ATM links use UNI cell format.
|
Diagram of the UNI ATM Cell
{| style="width: 50%; text-align: left;" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | - | 7 | | | 4 | 3 | | | 0 | - | GFC | VPI | - | VPI | VCI | - | VCI | - | VCI | PT | CLP | - | HEC | - | |
Diagram of the NNI ATM Cell
{| style="width: 50%; text-align: left;" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" | - | 7 | | | 4 | 3 | | | 0 | - | VPI | - | VPI | VCI | - | VCI | - | VCI | PT | CLP | - | HEC | - | | |||||||||||||
GFC = Generic Flow Control (4 bits) (default: 4-zero bits) VPI = Virtual Path Identifier (8 bits UNI) or (12 bits NNI) VCI = Virtual Channel Identifier (16 bits) PT = Payload Type (3 bits) CLP = Cell Loss Priority (1 bit) HEC = Header Error Correction (8bits) (checksum of header only)
The PT field is used to designate various special kinds of cells for Operation and Management (OAM) purposes, and to delineate packet boundaries in some AALs.
Several of ATM's link protocols use the HEC field to drive a CRC-Based Framing algorithm which allows the position of the ATM cells to be found with no overhead required beyond what is otherwise needed for header protection.
In a UNI cell the GFC field is reserved for an (as yet undefined) local flow control/submultiplexing system between network and user. All four GFC bits must be zero by default.
The NNI cell format is almost identical to the UNI format, except that the 4 bit GFC field is re-allocated to the VPI field, extending the VPI to 12 bits. Thus, a single NNI ATM interconnection is capable of addressing almost 212 VPs of up to almost 216 VCs each (in practice some of the VP and VC numbers are reserved).
ITU-T recommendations | Network protocols
Mode de transferència asíncrona | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | Asynchronous transfer mode | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | ATM | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | ATM | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | Asynchronous Transfer Mode | ATM | ATM | ATM | Asynchronous Transfer Mode
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Asynchronous Transfer Mode".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world