1. Object-Oriented Design and Implementation of Fault Management Function for MPLS network Sung-Jin Lim, Ryung-Min Kim, and Young-Tak Kim Advanced Networking Technology Lab. Dept. of Information & Communication Engineering Graduate School Yeungnam University, Korea Email: genie@yumail.ac.kr, degger@nownuri.net, ytkim@yu.ac.kr http://antl. yu.ac.kr

2. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (2)(2) APNOM 2003 Introduction Traffic engineering has been emphasized to offer end-to-end QoS-guaranteed multimedia services in Next Generation Internet. Fault restoration in traditional IP network vs. MPLS network The primary goals of fast restoration by fault management function. –QoS guaranteed differentiated path protection. –Guaranteed bandwidth of backup LSP at fault occurrence. We propose a fault management with fast rerouting restoration scheme in MPLS network. –Design and implement differentiated path protection and link. preemption priority among LSPs. Key technologies –Traffic Engineering, Differentiated Service, Restoration, Protection, and Object-Oriented Design.

3. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (3)(3) APNOM 2003 Related works Fault restoration model –Rerouting vs. protection switching Rerouting Protection switching : –Pre-established backup path SRLG-disjoint with working LSP –1:1, 1:N, M:N, 1+1 path protection switching –Local repair vs. path protection (A) Link protection(B) Node protection(C) Path protection Figure 1. Protection switching model

4. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (4)(4) APNOM 2003 Related works (cont.) Fault Management Architecture of Next Generation Internet –Fault Management Components in TINA –Fault Management MOs in TMN Fault Management Activities –Alarm surveillance –Testing –Fault localization –Fault correction –Trouble administration MPLS Fault Management System –RATES, –Cisco MPLS Tunnel Builder, –Sheer Networks Broadband Operating Supervisor(BOS)

5. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (5)(5) APNOM 2003 Restoration Schemes Differentiated Path Protection Option –Example scenario of applying protection path options according to MPLS service class. Preemption Priority based restoration of LSPs –Guaranteed bandwidth of backup LSP for the protected working LSP. MPLS Service Class Bandwidth Reservation Setup Priority Preemption Priority Application Platinum100%, 1+1Highest High Priority VPN Gold100%, 1:1Higher QoS-guaranteed VPN Silver100%, M:NNormal Premium service Bronze100%, 1:NLower Controlled traffic Best effort0Lowest Best Effort Table 1. Differentiated Path Protection scheme

6. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (6)(6) APNOM 2003 Design and Implementation of Fault Management System Fault restoration procedure with Managed Objects (MOs) Figure 2. Fault Restoration on MOs

7. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (7)(7) APNOM 2003 Design and Implementation of Fault Management System (cont.) Fault Restoration Function – SNMP trap handler implementation – Alarm Manager GUI Figure 3. Event Log GUI Figure 4. Alarm Log GUI

8. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (8)(8) APNOM 2003 Design and Implementation of Fault Management System (cont.) Design and Implementation of NMS Core Figure 5. MO Classes of MPLS LSP Fault Management Figure 6. MO Classes of link/node Fault Management

9. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (9)(9) APNOM 2003 Performance Analysis of Fast Restoration Test Network Configuration –Three core routers LER_E, LER_ F, and LER_G –Four CE router CE_A, CE_ B, CE_ C, and CE_ D –Two link types POS (Packet Over SONET ) with 155Mbps – Solid line Serial with 2Mbps – Dashed line Figure 7. Test network configuration

10. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (10) APNOM 2003 End-to-end Performance Comparisons of Differentiated Protection Options(1) End-to-end Performance Comparisons of Differentiated Protection Options Figure 8. Fast-reroute by NMS Figure 9. M:N fast-reroute by NMS Figure 10. Standby mode by Cisco Figure 11. Path-Option mode by Cisco Figure 12. Link-Protection by Cisco

11. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (11) APNOM 2003 End-to-end Performance Comparison by Differentiated Protection Options Differentiated Restoration performance by precedence Figure 13. Same priorityFigure 14. Different priority Working LSP (Tunnel 100) Low-Priority LSP (Tunnel 120) Note (After failure occurrence) Same priority–based restoration Bandwidth sub-pool 1500 (backup LSP : Tunnel 110) Bandwidth sub-pool 1500 - does not satisfy required bandwidth - does not create backup TE-LSP - Working traffic: Transfer to dynamic LSP Different priority-based restoration Bandwidth sub-pool 1500 (backup LSP: Tunnel 110) Bandwidth sub-pool 1500 - satisfy required bandwidth - Preemption link with high Priority - create backup TE-LSP Table 2. Priority and bandwidth between LSPs

12. Yeungnam Univ. ANTLab. (12) APNOM 2003 Conclusion We proposed an object-oriented design and implementation scheme for –1:1, 1:N, M:N fast-reroute by NMS –Standby mode, Path-option and link/node protection scheme in Cisco MPLS Routers. The Proposed Fault Management Scheme for MPLS Network Provides –Reliability that guarantee the required bandwidth of backup LSP after fault restoration –Differentiated protection path option –Object-Oriented MO design and implementation of network nodes and links for better expansibility with equipments form various vendors.