LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP draft-decraene-mpls-ldp-interarea-04 Bruno DecraeneFrance Telecom / Orange Jean-Louis Le RouxFrance Telecom / Orange Ina.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MPLS Multiple Topology Support draft-zhao-mpls-ldp-multiple-topology-01 draft-zhao-mpls-rsvp-te-multiple-topology-01 IETF 80 – Prague.
Advertisements

Leaf discovery mechanism for mLDP based P2MP/MP2MP LSP
71 th IETF – Philadelphia, USA March 2008 PCECP Requirements and Protocol Extensions in Support of Global Concurrent Optimization Young Lee (Huawei) J-L.
Deployment of MPLS VPN in Large ISP Networks
OLD DOG CONSULTING Challenges and Solutions for OAM in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS Adrian Farrel, Old Dog Consulting Ltd. Zafar Ali, Cisco Systems, Inc.
All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### Scalability of IP/MPLS networks Lieven Levrau 30 th April, 2008 France Telecom, Cisco Systems, uawei Technologies,
Draft-beckhaus-ldp-dod-00IETF 81: 25 July LDP DoD draft-beckhaus-ldp-dod-00.txt Thomas Beckhaus (Deutche Telekom AG) Bruno Decraene (France Telecom)
IPv4 and IPv6 Mobility Support Using MPLS and MP-BGP draft-berzin-malis-mpls-mobility-00 Oleg Berzin, Andy Malis {oleg.berzin,
MPLS and Traffic Engineering
1 LSP-Trace over MPLS tunnels draft-nitinb-lsp-ping-over-mpls-tunnel-00 Nitin BahadurJuniper Networks Kireeti KompellaJuniper Networks IETF 69, MPLS WG,
Extension to LDP-VPLS for Ethernet Broadcast and Multicast draft-delord-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten-03 Presenter: Zhihua Liu, China Telecom IETF79,
Introduction to MPLS and Traffic Engineering Zartash Afzal Uzmi.
1 RSVP-TE Extensions for Associated Bidirectional LSPs draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-06 Author list: Fei Zhang, ZTE
1 LSP-Trace over MPLS tunnels draft-nitinb-lsp-ping-over-mpls-tunnel-01 Nitin BahadurJuniper Networks Kireeti KompellaJuniper Networks George SwallowCisco.
IETF 68, MPLS WG, Prague P2MP MPLS-TE Fast Reroute with P2MP Bypass Tunnels draft-leroux-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-01.txt J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom) R. Aggarwal.
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) References: Juniper white papers on MPLS and DiffServ at: white_papers/
P2MP MPLS-TE FRR with P2MP Bypass Tunnel draft-leroux-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-00.txt J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom) R. Aggarwal (Juniper) IETF 67, MPLS WG,
Virtual Topologies for Service Chaining in BGP IP/MPLS VPNs draft-rfernando-bess-service-chaining-00 (previously draft-rfernando-l3vpn-service-chaining-04)
1 Reoptimization of Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Loosely Routed LSPs draft-tsaad-mpls-p2mp-loose-path-reopt-03 Author list: Tarek Saad
Draft-li-mpls-network-virtualization-framework-00IETF 88 SPRING WG1 Framework of Network Virtualization Based on MPLS Global Label draft-li-mpls-network-virtualization-framework-00.
A method to monitor active MPLS label Mapping draft-cauchie-opsawg-monitoring-mpls-label-mapping-00 Gregory Cauchie
© British Telecommunications plc MPLS-based multicast A Service Provider perspective Ben Niven-Jenkins Network Architect, BT
IPv6/IPv4 XLATE Trial Service for sharing IPv4 address Japan Internet Exchange Co., Ltd. Masataka MAWATARI.
1 IETF-61 – Washington DC Path Computation Element (PCE) BOF-2 Status - CCAMP Co-chairs: JP Vasseur/Adrian Farrel ADs: Alex Zinin/Bill Fenner.
69th IETF Chicago July 2007 An analysis of scaling issues in MPLS-TE backbone networks Seisho Yasukawa, Adrian Farrel, and Olufemi Komolafe draft-yasukawa-mpls-scaling-analysis-04.txt.
MPLS Some notations: LSP: Label Switched Path
1 IETF-81, MPLS WG, Quebec City, Canada, July, 2011 draft-ali-mpls-inter-domain-p2mp-rsvp-te-lsp-06.txt MPLS WG IETF-81 Quebec City, Canada July, 2011.
Inter-Area P2MP Segmented LSPs draft-raggarwa-seamless-mcast-03.txt
LDP signaled LSPs for external prefixes Ina Minei, Nischal Sheth - Juniper Luyuan Fang – AT&T
MPLS WG1 Targeted mLDP Base mLDP spec didn’t consider use of LDP multipoint extensions over Targeted mLDP sessions LDP speaker must choose “upstream LSR”,
Draft-asati-bgp-mpls-blackhole-avoidance-00.txt1 BGP/MPLS Traffic Blackhole Avoidance Proposal draft-asati-bgp-mpls-blackhole-avoidance-00 Rajiv Asati.
1 Multicast Routing Blackhole Avoidance draft-asati-pim-multicast-routing-blackhole-avoid-00 Rajiv Asati Mike McBride IETF 72, Dublin.
IP Traffic Engineering RSP draft-shen-ip-te-rsp-01.txt Naiming Shen Albert Tian Jun Zhuang
Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding draft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label-02
1 77th IETF, CCAMP WG, Anaheim, CA, USA March 2010 Signaling RSVP-TE P2MP LSPs in an Inter- domain Environment draft-ali-mpls-inter-domain-p2mp-rsvp-te-lsp-03.txt.
66th IETF, Montreal, July 2006 PCE Working Group Meeting IETF-66, July 2006, Montreal A Backward Recursive PCE-based Computation (BRPC) procedure to compute.
What do we put in the TED? Which TE links from the network should appear in the Traffic Engineering Database at a Label Switching Router? An attempt to.
Draft-li-rtgwg-igp-ext-mrt-frr-00IETF 85 RTGWG1 Applicability of LDP Multi-Topology for Unicast Fast-reroute Using Maximally Redundant Trees draft-li-rtgwg-ldp-mt-mrt-frr-01.
Draft-li-mpls-proxy-te-lsp-01IETF 90 MPLS1 Proxy MPLS Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path(LSP) draft-li-mpls-proxy-te-lsp-01 Zhenbin Li, Xinzong Zeng.
Signaling Color Label Switched Paths Using LDP draft-alvarez-mpls-ldp-color-lsp-00 Kamran Raza Sami Boutros Santiago.
Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidentialwww.juniper.net 1 MPLS Upstream Label Assignment for RSVP- TE and LDP draft-raggarwa-mpls-rsvp-ldp-upstream-
Precision Time Protocol over MPLS draft-ronc-ptp-mpls-00.txt PWE3 WG IETF Chicago 2007 Ron Cohen
1 IETF-70 draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth MPLS Benchmarking Methodology draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03 IETF 70 Aamer Akhter / Rajiv Asati /
Draft-beckhaus-ldp-dod-01IETF 82: 14 November LDP DoD draft-beckhaus-ldp-dod-01.txt Thomas Beckhaus (Deutsche Telekom AG) Bruno Decraene (France.
82 nd Taipei Protection Mechanisms for LDP P2MP/MP2MP LSP draft-zhao-mpls-mldp-protections-00.txt Quintin Zhao, Emily Chen, Huawei.
Support for RSVP-TE in L3VPNs Support for RSVP-TE in L3VPNs draft-kumaki-murai-ccamp-rsvp-te-l3vpn-01.txt Kenji Kumaki KDDI Corporation Tomoki Murai Furukawa.
1 MTU Extended Community for BGP-4 Q. Zeng, J. Dong (Huawei Technologies) IETF81 IDR July 2011 Quebec draft-zeng-idr-bgp-mtu-extension-00.
GSMPv3 Packet Capable Switch Support 56th IETF GSMP WG, San Francisco Kenneth Sundell
1 MPLS Source Label Mach Chen Xiaohu Xu Zhenbin Li Luyuan Fang IETF87 MPLS Aug Berlin draft-chen-mpls-source-label-00.
Advertising MPLS LSPs in the IGP draft-gredler-ospf-label-advertisement draft-gredler-isis-label-advertisement Hannes Gredler IETF87,
Konstantin agouros Omkar deshpande
BGP extensions for Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery in a BGP/MPLS IP-VPN draft-kumaki-pce-bgp-disco-attribute-03.txt Kenji Kumaki KDDI R&D Labs,
Requirements for LER Forwarding of IPv4 Option Packets
Connecting MPLS-SPRING Islands over IP Networks
IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006
P2MP MPLS-TE Fast Reroute with P2MP Bypass Tunnels
MPLS LSP Instant Install draft-saad-mpls-lsp-instant-install-00
78th IETF Meeting - Maastricht 27th, July 2010
LDP signaled LSPs for external prefixes
RFC 3036 FECs RFC 3036 defines FECs used to bind labels to address prefixes in routing table Two FECs defined: Address Prefix FEC Host Address FEC Not.
LDP Extensions for RMR draft-esale-mpls-ldp-rmr- extensions
Signaling RSVP-TE P2MP LSPs in an Inter-domain Environment draft-ali-mpls-inter-domain-p2mp-rsvp-te-lsp-01.txt Zafar Ali, Cisco Systems.
Signaled PID When Multiplexing Multiple Payloads over RSVP-TE LSPs draft-ali-mpls-sig-pid-multiplexing-case-00.txt Zafar Ali, Cisco Systems.
Update on draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-12
draft-litkowski-spring-non-protected-paths-01
Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP- based LSPs
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs
PW Control Word Stitching
Supporting Flexible Algorithm Prefix SIDs in LSP Ping/Traceroute
Inter-AS OAM for SR Networks IETF 105, Montreal
Presentation transcript:

LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP draft-decraene-mpls-ldp-interarea-04 Bruno DecraeneFrance Telecom / Orange Jean-Louis Le RouxFrance Telecom / Orange Ina MineiJuniper Networks IETF 68 – 22/03/2007

Summary of problem statement & solution Changes since lastest presentation Next steps Outline

Problem Statement MPLS VPN networks are expanding with the success of L2 & L3 VPN services and MPLS Backbones are growing In density: addition of PEs to connect new customers In footprint: MPLS is spreading in aggregation / metro networks  IGP areas are being introduced  inter area LSPs needed LDP does not set up inter area LSPs if the IGP performs IP aggregation between areas RFC 3036 mandates that the FEC should exactly match a RIB entry The draft proposes to accept the FEC if a longest match is found in the RIB.

Draft history Version 03 was presented in San Diego (IETF 67). Current version 04 addresses comments received in San Diego and on the mailing list: Some rephrasing / re-wording Thanks to Alfred Hoenes Clarification on “longest match” FEC must either exactly match the RIB entry (current situation) Or FEC must be a subset of a RIB entry Eg FEC /30 does NOT match RIB entry /32 Positioning with regards to inter-area RSVP-TE

Interaction with the RIB As per RFC 3036, LDP has interactions with the RIB and LSR needs to be aware of the following RIB events: prefix UP (a new IP prefix appears in the RIB); prefix DOWN (an existing prefix disappears); Next-Hop change (an existing prefix have a new next hop). With the longest match procedure, multiple FECs may be concerned by a single RIB prefix change: prefix UP  LSR MUST check all FEC elements which are a subset of this RIB prefix For each FEC, check if this prefix is a better match. May result in changing the LSR used as next hop and hence the NHLFE. E.g. the FEC elements /32 and /32 use the IP RIB entry 192.0/16. A new more specific IP RIB entry /24 appears. Prefix DOWN  LSR MUST check all FEC elements using this RIB prefix. For each FEC, search for a new best match in the RIB. If no match found, the LSR MUST remove the FEC binding and send a label withdraw message. Next-Hop change  LSR MUST change the NHLFE of all FEC elements using this RIB prefix.

Conclusion Straightforward specification extension Limited impact on LDP specification Solve an operational problem Existing deployments of multi-areas MPLS networks Stable specification Implementation underway Would like to request for adoption as WG document.

Thank You