Resilient Satellite-Backhaul Architecture for Interference-Prone Regions

This document presents a carrier-grade satellite backhaul design optimized for post-conflict and interference-prone environments.
The primary objective is not continuous uptime at all costs, but guaranteed recoverability under degraded power, packet loss, and intentional radio interference.

This architecture does not compete with satellite connectivity providers.
Instead, it provides an operations-resilient overlay that runs on top of existing commercial satellite infrastructure.

Design Principles — Recovery Before Availability

Non-Competitive Overlay on Existing Satellite Networks

This design assumes the use of existing commercial satellite networks already operating in Northern Europe and adjacent regions.
The goal is to strengthen operational resilience without competing with connectivity providers.

Key principles:

• Use existing satellite backhaul as the underlay
• Provide resilience at the network-operations layer
• Support multi-operator satellite environments
• Avoid replacing or competing with satellite carriers
• Deliver recovery-oriented design rather than bandwidth

The system is positioned as an operations resilience layer, not a connectivity product.

L3-First Overlay Architecture (EVPN/VXLAN)

Traditional L2 extension across unstable infrastructure leads to cascading failures.
Therefore, this architecture prioritizes Layer-3 VXLAN (L3VNI) segmentation.

Core components:

• EVPN control plane (MP-BGP)
• VXLAN data plane
• L3VNI for VRF segmentation
• Minimal L2 extension (site-local only when required)

Benefits:

• Fault containment within VRFs
• Prevention of broadcast storms and loops
• Faster recovery after link degradation
• Simplified post-outage convergence

This approach ensures that local misconfigurations or infrastructure instability do not propagate across the entire network.

Operations-First Connectivity (OAM VRF)

Operational connectivity is isolated into a dedicated VRF:

VRF-OAM (Operations and Management)

Functions carried within this VRF:

• Device management (SSH/HTTPS)
• Telemetry and monitoring
• EVPN/BGP control plane
• Logging and diagnostics
• Remote recovery actions

Design rules:

• OAM traffic shares the same satellite link as service traffic
• Strict QoS prioritization ensures OAM survives congestion
• Bandwidth requirements are minimal (sub-Mbps acceptable)
• OAM traffic is strictly limited to recovery-critical functions
• No large data transfers permitted in OAM VRF

Even when service traffic collapses, recovery control remains available.

Interference-Aware Satellite Operations

Jamming-Resilient Control Behavior

This design assumes persistent low-intensity radio interference such as:

• Packet loss bursts
• Latency fluctuations
• Short intermittent outages
• Throughput degradation

The objective is not to defeat jamming at the physical layer, but to prevent network instability caused by control-plane overreaction.

Key measures:

• Conservative BGP and EVPN timers
• Avoid aggressive failover triggers
• Introduce hysteresis in path selection
• Prevent control-plane flapping
• Maintain stable session state under degraded conditions

The system prioritizes stability under degradation rather than rapid failover.

Minimal OAM Survival Channel

Operational traffic is intentionally constrained to a minimal footprint.

Allowed traffic:

• Management access
• Monitoring
• Control-plane signaling
• Emergency configuration actions

Disallowed traffic:

• Bulk log transfers
• Backups
• File transfers
• Heavy dashboards
• Continuous telemetry streams

The objective is to ensure that OAM traffic remains viable under severe bandwidth constraints without congesting the satellite link.

Failure Sequence and Recovery Order

Recovery is orchestrated in a defined sequence:

1. Power stabilization
2. OAM VRF recovery
3. Control-plane re-establishment
4. Service restoration

The design deliberately avoids attempting full service restoration simultaneously.
Instead, it ensures that operators regain control first.

Validation Using Cisco CML

Simulation Environment

Cisco Modeling Labs (CML) is used to reproduce the architecture and failure scenarios.

Simulated conditions include:

• High latency satellite links
• Packet loss
• Link instability
• Interference-like degradation
• Power interruption scenarios

Failure Scenarios Tested

Service Collapse Test
Service VRF failure is induced while verifying that OAM VRF remains reachable.

Interference Simulation
Variable packet loss and latency introduced to emulate radio interference.
Goal: prevent control-plane flapping.

Full Outage Recovery
Complete link loss followed by restoration.
Recovery order and convergence time are measured.

Automation and Reproducibility

Configuration and recovery procedures are automated.

• Legacy TeraMacro scripts translated into Python
• Automated configuration deployment
• Reproducible failure injection
• Publicly documented test outputs

This ensures that the architecture can be independently validated.

Collaboration Model

artnership with Satellite Operators

This architecture is designed to operate in cooperation with existing satellite providers.

Value delivered:

• Operational resilience
• Faster recovery after outages
• Fault containment
• Stable control-plane operation under interference

The design does not replace satellite connectivity.
It enhances survivability and recoverability.

Deployment Context

Applicable environments:

• Northern European infrastructure resilience programs
• Post-conflict reconstruction
• Disaster recovery communications
• Power-unstable regions
• Carrier ground station operations

Final Statement

The goal of this architecture is not absolute uptime.

The goal is recoverability.

When interference persists,
when latency fluctuates,
when power fails,

operators must retain control.

Operations survive first.
Services return second.

That is the foundation of resilient communications in unstable environments.