We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byCruz Bloomer
Modified over 2 years ago
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-1 MPLS TE Overview Understanding MPLS TE Components
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-2 Outline Overview Traffic Tunnels: Concepts Traffic Tunnels: Characteristics Traffic Tunnels: Attributes Network Links and Link Attributes Constraint-Based Path Computation TE Processes Role of RSVP in Path Setup and Trunk Admission Control Forwarding Traffic to a Tunnel Summary
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-3 The concept of MPLS TE traffic tunnels was introduced to overcome the limitations of hop-by- hop IP routing: A tunnel is an aggregation of traffic flows that are placed inside a common MPLS label-switched path. Flows are then forwarded along a common path within a network. Traffic Tunnels: Concepts
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-4 Traffic Tunnels: Concepts (Cont.) Unidirectional single class of service model encapsulates all of the traffic between an ingress and an egress router. Different classes of service model assigns traffic into separate tunnels with different characteristics.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-5 Traffic Tunnels – Characteristics A traffic tunnel is distinct from the MPLS LSP through which it traverses: –More than one TE tunnel can be defined between two points: Each tunnel may pick the same or different paths through the network Each tunnel will use different MPLS labels –A traffic tunnel can be moved from one path onto another based on resources in the network. A traffic tunnel is configured by defining its required attributes and characteristics.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-6 Traffic Tunnels – Attributes Attributes are explicitly assigned through administrative action. A traffic tunnel is characterized by: –Its ingress (headend) and egress (tailend) label switch routers –The forwarding equivalence class that is mapped onto it –A set of attributes that determine its characteristics
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-7 Traffic Tunnels–Attributes (Cont.) The administrator enters the relevant information (attributes) at the headend of the traffic tunnel: Traffic parameter—Resources required for tunnel (for example, required bandwidth) Generic path selection and management—Path can be administratively specified or computed by the IGP Resource class affinity—Include or exclude certain links for certain traffic tunnels Adaptability—Should the traffic tunnel be reoptimized? Priority and preemption—Importance of a traffic tunnel and possibility for a preemption of another tunnel Resilience—Desired behavior under fault conditions
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-8 Network Links and Link Attributes Resource attributes (link availability) are configured locally on the router interfaces: Maximum bandwidth –The amount of bandwidth available Link affinity string –To allow the operator to administratively include or exclude links in path calculations Constraint-based specific metric –TE default metric
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-9 Constraint-Based Path Computation Constraint-based routing is demand-driven. Resource-reservation-aware routing paradigm: –Based on criteria including, but not limited to, network topology –Calculated at the edge of a network: Modified Dijkstra’s algorithm at tunnel headend (CSPF [Constraint-based SPF] or PCALC [path calculation]). Output is a sequence of IP interface addresses (next- hop routers) between tunnel endpoints.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-10 Constraint-Based Path Computation (Cont.) Constraint-based routing takes into account: –Policy constraints associated with the tunnel and physical links –Physical resource availability –Network topology state Two types of tunnels can be established across those links with matching attributes: –Dynamic—Using the least-cost path computed by OSPF or IS-IS –Explicit—Definition of a path by using Cisco IOS configuration commands
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-11 Constraint-Based Path Computation (Cont.)
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-12 Constraint-Based Path Computation (Cont.)
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-13 Traffic Engineering Processes Information distribution Path selection and calculation Path setup Trunk admission control Forwarding traffic on to tunnel Path maintenance
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-14 When the path has been determined, a signaling protocol is needed: –To establish and maintain label-switched paths (LSPs) for traffic tunnels –For creating and maintaining resource reservation states across a network (bandwidth allocation) The Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) was adopted by the MPLS workgroup of the IETF. Role of RSVP in Path Setup Procedures
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-15 Path Setup with RSVP When the path has been calculated, it must be signaled across the network. –Reserve any bandwidth to avoid “double booking” from other TE reservations. –Priority can be used to preempt low priority existing tunnels. RSVP is used to set up TE LSP. –PATH message (from head to tail) carries LABEL_REQUEST. –RESV message (from tail to head) carries LABEL. When RESV messages reaches headend, tunnel interface is up. RSVP messages exist for LSP teardown and error signaling.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-16 RSVP and Trunk Admission Control On receipt of PATH message: –Router checks whether there is bandwidth available to honor the reservation. –If bandwidth is available, then RSVP is accepted. On receipt of a RESV message: –Router actually reserves the bandwidth for the TE LSP. –If preemption is required, lower priority LSPs are torn down. OSPF or IS-IS updates are triggered.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-17 Forwarding Traffic to a Tunnel IP routing is separate from LSP routing and does not see internal details of the LSP. The traffic has to be mapped to the tunnel: –Static routing—The static route in the IP routing table points to an LSP tunnel interface. –Policy routing—The next-hop interface is an LSP tunnel. –Autoroute—SPF enhancement: The headend sees the tunnel as a directly connected interface (for modified SPF only). The default cost of a tunnel is equal to the shortest IGP metric regardless of the used path.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-18 Autoroute feature enables the headend to see the LSP as a directly connected interface: –This feature is used only for the SPF route determination, not for the constraint-based path computation. –All traffic directed to prefixes topologically behind the tunnel endpoint (tailend) is forwarded onto the tunnel. Autoroute affects the headend only; other routers on the LSP path do not see the tunnel. Tunnel is treated as a directly connected link to the tailend: –When tunnel tail is seen in PATH list during IGP SPF, replace outgoing physical interface with tunnel interface. –Inherit tunnel to all downstream neighbors of tailend. IP Forwarding Database Modification with Autoroute
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-19 Autoroute Topology (OSPF and ISIS) Tunnel1: R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Tunnel2: R1 R6 R7 R4
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-20 Autoroute Topology (OSPF and ISIS) From R1 Router Perspective: Next hop to R5 is Tunnel1. Next hop to R4 and R8 is Tunnel2. All nodes behind tunnel are routed via tunnel. 20
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-21 Summary Traffic tunnels are configured with a set of resource requirements, such as bandwidth and priority. CSPF augments the link cost by considering other factors such as bandwidth availability or link latency when choosing a path. RSVP with TE extensions is used for establishing and maintaining LSPs. TE tunnels do not appear in the IP routing table.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-22
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v MPLS TE Overview Configuring MPLS TE on Cisco IOS Platforms.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-1 MPLS TE Overview Introducing the TE Concept.
1 Traffic Engineering With MPLS By Behzad Akbari Fall 2008 These slides are based in parts on the slides of Shivkumar (RPI)
MPLS and Traffic Engineering Ji-Hoon Yun Computer Communications and Switching Systems Lab.
CS Summer 2003 Lecture 11. CS Summer 2003 MPLS TE Application MPLS TE application allows establishment of tunnels and forwarding of IP traffic.
MPLS and Traffic Engineering
Multi-protocol Label Switching
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—2-1 Label Assignment and Distribution Introducing Typical Label Distribution in Frame-Mode MPLS.
1 Multi Protocol Label Switching Presented by: Petros Ioannou Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, UCY.
SMUCSE 8344 Constraint-Based Routing in MPLS. SMUCSE 8344 Constraint Based Routing (CBR) What is CBR –Each link a collection of attributes (performance,
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS Introduction Module 4: Frame Mode MPLS Implementation.
Inter-area MPLS TE Architecture and Protocol Extensions
Connecting Networks © 2004 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Exploring How Routing Works INTRO v2.0—4-1.
Introduction to MPLS and Traffic Engineering Zartash Afzal Uzmi.
© 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public 1 Version 4.1 Routing Working at a Small-to-Medium Business or ISP – Chapter 6.
1 © 1999, Cisco Systems, Inc. Mosaddaq Turabi MPLS Traffic Engineering -SESSION A- (MPLS BOOTCAMP) Mosaddaq Turabi MPLS Traffic Engineering.
1 © 2004, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. CCNA 2 v3.1 Module 6 Routing and Routing Protocols.
Routing and Routing Protocols
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.