MTNL MPLS Tutorial DrVishalSharma 2006-04-26

Metanoia, Inc.
Critical Systems Thinking
Multi-Protocol Label Switching: Basics & Applications

Dr. Vishal Sharma Email: v.sharma@ieee.org Web: http://www.metanoia-inc.com
Copyright 2002-2005 All Rights Reserved
Metanoia, Inc.
The Start: Routing Process at a Router

Destination address (DA)
Receive incoming pkt. Yes Deliver datagram to protocol module (TCP/UDP) specified in IP hdr.
based forwarding
Longest prefix matching
DA=my_add or DA= IP brdcst add. ? No RT entry = complete DA?
Routing Table
DA Host entry Host entry Host entry Host entry N/w entry N/w entry Default
Yes
Send pkt. to next-hop router or to directly connected interface.
Next hop router 198.168.7.3 X 198.168.7.4 X
Network Interface 2 3
No Yes
RT entry = Destn. n/w id?
198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5 1 198.168.7.2 198.168.7.5 1 198.100.x.x 198.100.9.1 4 128.72.x.x x.x.x.x 128.72.55.4 5 128.84.73.1 6
No Yes
Send pkt. to nexthop router or to directly connected interface.
Default entry exists? No
Send pkt. to next-hop router.
Datagram undeliverable. (Use ICMP to inform source.)

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005
Metanoia, Inc.
How Routing Works Today

Packet generated
DA = 198.100.9.75
198.168.7.3 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5
Longest prefix match gives next hop router as 198.100.9.1 and outgoing interface as 4.
DA Host entry Host entry Host entry Host entry N/w entry N/w entry
Next hop router 198.168.7.3 X 198.100.9.75 198.168.7.4 X 198.100.9.75
N/w Int. 2 3
198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5 1 198.100.9.75 198.168.7.2 198.168.7.5 1 198.100.9.75 198.100.x.x 198.100.9.1 4 198.100.9.75 128.72.x.x x.x.x.x 128.72.55.4 5 128.84.73.1 6
198.168.7.4
198.100.x.x 3 4 5 198.100.9.1
Default
1
198.168.7.2 198.168.7.6 6 128.84.x.x
Routing table (RT) at 198.168.7.6
198.100.9.7 5 128.72.x.x
128.84.73.1
128.72.55.4
How do routers build their routing tables? By exchanging information with each other using routing protocols
Metanoia, Inc.
How it Would be with Labels

Packet generated
DA = 198.100.9.75
Attach label
198.168.7.3 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5
Exact matching label swapping gives outgoing label as and outgoing interface as 4.
198.168.7.4
Incoming label
Outgoing label
Address prefix N/w Int. X 2 198.100.x.x 128.72.x.x 4 5
Label Forwarding Table at 198.168.7.6

2 198.100.x.x 3 4 5 6 198.100.9.1 198.100.9.7 5 128.72.x.x
1
198.168.7.2 198.168.7.6
128.84.x.x
128.84.73.1
128.72.55.4
How do routers learn the labels? By interpreting routing information and through signaling
(as we will learn later)

Metanoia, Inc.
Shortest-Path Routing: Little Flexibility

DA
198.101.84.21 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5 198.168.7.4
Host entry Host entry Host entry N/w entry N/w entry
Next hop router 198.168.7.4 X 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5 198.168.7.2 198.168.7.5 198.101.x.x 198.168.7.4 198.100.x.x 198.100.9.1 128.72.x.x x.x.x.x 128.72.55.4 128.84.73.1
N/w Int. 3 1 1 3 4 5 6
R3
R1
1 198.168.7.2 198.168.7.6 6 128.84.x.x 128.84.73.1
N/w entry Default

198.100.9.7 198.100.9.1 5 128.72.x.x 198.100.x.x
R2
Routing table (RT) at 198.168.7.6
R4
128.72.55.4
Shortest path converges traffic on a few network links Significant increase in congestion Unbalanced resource utilization
Labels De-couple Routing and Forwarding: Much more Flexibility

Incoming label
198.101.84.21 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5 198.168.7.4
Metanoia, Inc.
Outgoing label
Address Prefix N/w Int. X 2 198.101.x.x 4 3
R3
198.101.x.x
R1
1 198.168.7.2 198.168.7.6 6 128.84.x.x 128.84.73.1
3 4
Label Forwarding Table at 198.168.7.6
R2
198.100.9.7 198.100.9.1 5 128.72.x.x 198.100.x.x
R4
128.72.55.4
Labels enable:
Differentiation based on criteria other than shortest path
Permit policy routing

Metanoia, Inc.
Basic Concept of MPLS

DA Next hop router 128.89.10.x 198.168.7.6 179.69.x.x 198.168.7.6 N/w Int. 1 1
DA
Next hop router 128.89.10.x 128.89.10.1 179.69.x.x 179.69.42.3
N/w Int. 1 2
Routing Table
128.89.10.x
In label
X X
Out label
Address Prefix N/w Int.
In label
Out label
128.89.10.12
Label Table R3
3 4
128.89.10.x 179.69.x.x
1 1
3 4
5 7
128.89.10.x 179.69.x.x
1 2
1
R1
Advertises binding <5, 128.89.10.x>
R2
198.168.7.6 Advertises bindings <3, 128.89.10.x> <4, 179.69.x.x>
Advertises binding <7, 179.69.x.x> 179.69.x.x

R4
Routing fills routing table

Signaling fills label forwarding table
179.69.42.3
7
Metanoia, Inc.
Basic Concept of MPLS

Pop label
In label
X
X
Out label
In label
Out label
Forward packet
3 4
128.89.10.x 179.69.x.x
1 1
3 4
5 7
128.89.10.x 179.69.x.x
1 2
128.89.10.x
128.89.10.12
R3
Swap Label
3 R1 3 Packet arrives DA=128.89.10.25 R3 Push Label
1
R2
198.168.7.6
179.69.x.x
R4
179.69.42.3
Metanoia, Inc.
A Word on Network Layer Routing

Control Component
Responsible for construction and maintenance of forwarding table. Consists of: Routing protocols for exchange of routing info.
Algorithms to convert this into forwarding table

Forwarding/data Component
Control Plane
Algos. used to make forwarding decision on packet The algorithms define: Information from packet used to find an entry in the forwarding table
Forwarding /Data Plane
Exact procedures
used to find that entry
For unicast routing Information = Network layer (IP) address Procedure = Longest prefix matching
So What about MPLS Control and Forwarding?

Superset of conventional router control
Control Component
Metanoia, Inc.
Distribute routing info. via network layer routing (OSPF, BGP, etc.) Algos. to convert routing info. into forwarding table for fwding component
Create binding from FEC (derived from routing info.) --> label Assign and distribute labels to peer LSRs via signaling
Uses a label switching forwarding table (or LIB), looking as:

Incoming Label Map First Subentry Forwarding Component Outgoing label Outgoing inf. Next hop address Second Subentry (for multicast or load balancing) Outgoing label Outgoing inf. Next hop address
Incoming Label
Next hop label forwarding entry (NHFLE)
Forwarding algorithm = label swapping, independent of control component (implementable in optimized hardware or software)
10
What does a label represent? The issue of label granularity

Packets treated identically by participating routers form
Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC Assigned the same label
Metanoia, Inc.
Membership of a FEC must be determinable from

IP header Info. that ingress router has about the packet
Entities grouped into a FEC are flexible, and could involve

A connection between two IP ports on two hosts
All traffic between two IP hosts All traffic headed for a particular network with same TOS bits All destination networks with a certain prefix All traffic headed to a particular router (e.g. an egress) A manually configured connection and many others
11
Metanoia, Inc.
Lets Recap: Elements of MPLS

Label Forwarding
Use data link addressing, e.g. ATM VPI/VCI, FR DLCI Put shim header between data link and IP header
Data Plane
Variable L2 header
4 bytes MPLS shim header
20 bytes L3 IP header Higher Layers
EXP/
Label 20 bits
CoS
TTL 8 bits
3 bits 1 bit
Label Creation and Binding

Control Plane
Label Assignment and Distribution
Ride piggyback on routing protocols, where possible (BGP) Use separate label distribution protocol RSVP, LDP/CR-LDP
Reliability: TCP or separate ACK/NACK
12
Metanoia, Inc.
Benefits over Conventional Routing

MPLS forwarding possible by:
Switches incapable of analyzing network layer headers Unable to do so at adequate speeds
Ingress can use any info. about packet to assign to FEC/LSP

Conventional forwarding only considers info. in the packet
Forwarding decisions can depend on ingress router

Conventional routing, identity of ingress router does not travel with packet
Packet FEC assignment can use complex decision process

No impact on forwarding of labeled packets!
Explicit routing packet need not carry encoding of entire route

Unlike source routing in conventional IP forwarding
13
Metanoia, Inc.
MPLS Header over POS or IEEE 802.3

4 octets Label (20 bits) EXP S (3 bits) (1 bit) TTL (8 bits)
Layer 2 Hdr (e.g., PPP or 802.3)

MPLS Shim Header
IP Header
IP Payload
For labeled packets, Layer 2 header indicates whether it is MPLS unicast packet or MPLS multicast packet The label stack: sequence of 4-octet label stack entries (no limit on stack depth) Network layer packet immediately follows the label stack entry that has the S bit set. Label values 0 -->16 are reserved
14
Metanoia, Inc.
MPLS Header over ATM

4 octets Label=0 (20 bits) EXP S TTL (3 bits) (1 bit) (8 bits)
MPLS Shim Header
IP Header
IP Payload
AAL5 Trailer (length, CRC32, ...) 48 octets
48 octets ATM ATM Header Payload
ATM ATM Header Payload
Top stack of shim carries placeholder label value of 0. VPI/VCI value in header represent actual label value (no SNAP/LLC encapsulation used) Upstream LSR connected to first ATM-LSR adjusts TTL value based on how many ATM-LSRs are consecutively connected downstream (learnt via LDP) For ATM LSRs, UNI gives 24-bit VPI/VCI label, NNI gives 28-bit VPI/VCI label If two ATM-LSRs connected via VPC through ATM cloud, 16-bit VCI label used
15
Label Assignment and Distribution (Control Component)

Data Labels Labels
Metanoia, Inc.
Data
Direction from which labels flow
Downstream Solicited (On Demand) Unsolicited Solicited (On Demand) Unsolicited
Upstream Solicited Unsolicited Solicited Unsolicited
Ordered Independent
Whether LSR waits to hear from its upstream/downstream nbrs. before responding to a request for label(s)
Refers to whether LSR distributes labels on demand or voluntarily
Label Retention: Liberal or Conservative

Whether LSR keeps labels from a neighbor who is not currently the next hop for a FEC
16
Example Label Assignment and Distribution Modes

Edge LSR 1 Requests 2 6 5 4
Metanoia, Inc.
Downstream-on-demand with Ordered Control
Assignments
Edge LSR
Edge LSR
Requests 2
Assignments
2 3 4 3
Downstream-on-demand with Independent Control
Edge LSR
17
Comparison of ATM Switch, IP Router, LSR, and Optical X-connect

ATM switch Control Plane Dynamic routing PNNI protocol for route exchange Signaling protocols Data Plane Forwarding Engine
UNI, PNNI
Metanoia, Inc.
IP router LSR
OXC
BGP, OSPF, ISIS, RIP RSVP
ASICs
Software, ASICs
BGP, OSPF, IS-IS, RIP LDP/CRLDP, extended RSVP Software, ASICs
OSPF, IS-IS
LDP/CRLDP, extended RSVP ASICs
Switched entity ATM SVC,

PVC.
IP packets LSPs or flows
SONET channels, Wavelengths, fibers

18
More on the MPLS Control Plane: Hop-by-hop Routed LSPs

Shortest path, based on destination IP address of packet
Effectively creates labels for each route in forwarding table
Metanoia, Inc.
LSPs whose routes are determined by IP routing protocols
Label distribution for hop-by-hop routed LSPs

LDP (Label Distribution Protocol)
Defined by IETF MPLS Working Group LDP messages:
Notification, Hello, Initialization, KeepAlive, Address, Address Withdraw, Label Mapping, Label Request, Label Withdraw, Label Release
Peer discovery msgs. over UDP, rest over TCP for reliability
Piggyback on existing IP routing protocols

Example: Add label information to BGP Not all IP interfaces may be enabled for dynamic routing protocols
19
Hop-by-hop Routed LSP Setup using LDP

Edge LSR Label Req. Label Req.
Metanoia, Inc.
LSR1 learns new IP network prefix 1.1.1.0/24 via dynamic IP routing
Label Req. Label Mapping. Label Mapping. Edge LSR Label Mapping.
Each LSR forwards Label Req. along hop-by-hop routed path to 1.1.1.0/24
1.1.1.0/24.
Path established via a dynamic IP routing protocol
When next hop to 1.1.1.0/24 changes in LSR2 (e.g. due to topology or link metric change) LSR2 releases original LSP Starts setting up new LSP from that point on
Several other options available
20
Metanoia, Inc.
ER-LSPs: Explicitly Routed LSPs

Routes determined by operators or n/w management apps
Based on specific TE policy, QoS, or VPN membership
Significantly more efficient than conventional IP source routing
Label distribution for ER-LSPs

Extended RSVP (significantly different from original RSVP)
Associates labels with RSVP flows, supports aggregate flows Control messages run on raw IP transport, requiring refreshes
CR-LDP (Constraint-based Routed LDP)

Now mostly of historical value
21
Metanoia, Inc.
Strict ER-LSP Setup using CR-LDP

Edge LSR Label Req. <1.1.1.2, 2.2.2.2, 3.3.3.2> Label Req. <2.2.2.2, 3.3.3.2>
Network operator or network management creates ER-LSP request with path and traffic parameters
Label Req. <3.3.3.2> Label Mapping 1.1.1.2 Label Mapping Edge LSR Label Mapping 2.2.2.2
Traffic parameter TLV contains: 3.3.3.2 Frequency, weight Peak data rate, Peak burst rate Committed data rate, committed burst rate, excess burst size
Frequency specifies granularity at which CDR is made available Weight determines excess bandwidth possible above CDR
22
Metanoia, Inc.
Loose ER-LSP Setup using CR-LDP
Label Req. <as100, 3.3.3.2>

Edge LSR
AS100 Label Req. <as100, 3.3.3.2>
Network operator or network management creates ER-LSP request with path and traffic parameters
Label Mapping.
4.4.5.6 Label Mapping.
4.4.5.7
Label Req. <3.3.3.2>
Edge LSR Label Mapping. 3.3.3.2
23
Are there any implications for hardware/ASICS?

Label stacking depth (if any) supported depends on hardware processing capabilities and speeds
Metanoia, Inc.
Hardware engine needs ability to examine both EXP bits and LABEL, and map it to any control hardware used for scheduling MPLS packets
Ability to push and/or pop labels determines whether switch can be
an edge LSR, or only a core LSR (doing only swapping)

Number of queues in the switch/router determines per-label queueing or per-class queueing ability Label merging capability determined by ability to re-assemble packets from interleaved cells
24
Metanoia, Inc.
Advantages of MPLS
Original justification was fast, amortized, ATM hardware
Eliminated by hardware forwarding engines at multi-gigabit rates
Current justifications include:

Separates forwarding from control, enabling
Evolution of routing functionality independently of forwarding algorithm
(which can continue to be label swapping)

Use of MPLS to control non-packet technologies like SONET/SDH
channels or optical light-paths
Facilitates scalable hierarchical routing (via label stacking) Scalability by reducing number of IP peers/neighbors Provides explicit, manageable IP routes: enables policy routing and traffic engineering (can setup routes different than default shortest-path)
25
Metanoia, Inc.
Reducing number of IP Peers

IP routing peers Router IP routing peers
ATM Network ATM Switch
LSR (runs IP routing)
VCs between routers connected over

ATM network
Interior switches participate in IP

as LSRs run IP routing protocols
O(n^2) VCs for full adjacency O(n^4) routing info. exchange

overwhelms routers and network
routing protocols minimizes IP nbrs.
Eliminates full VC mesh for adjacency,
26
Metanoia, Inc.
Hierarchical Label Stacking/Switching

Inside transit AS each interior router must keep track
of all networks reachable through it

With hierarchical labels, an arrangement is possible
where only Border Routers need to know what networks might eventually be reached through them
All transit traffic can tunneled through interior routers
of the AS using LSPs with stacked labels
27
Metanoia, Inc.
Utility of Hierarchical Label Switching

Border LSRs
Swap Swap and Push
Pop
Interior LSRs
28
Explicit Manageable Routes -Policy Routing, Traffic Engineering

This type of network engineering:
Keeps network loads balanced Enhances network stability and reliability Enables better QoS and performance assurances Allows carriers to meet SLAs
Metanoia, Inc.
Carriers want certain traffic to go over certain routes
Constraint-based routing + MPLS

Allows carriers to bind specific traffic to an LSP Place (or route) LSP over a desired sequence of LSRs
29
Metanoia, Inc.
Constraint Based Routing

A class of routing systems that computes routes through a
network subject to a set of constraints and requirements
QoS-based Routing
Path of flows determined by
Knowledge of resource availability in network QoS requirements of flows
Policy-based Routing
Path/routing decision based
on administrative policy
Can be on-line or off-line

30
Metanoia, Inc.
CB Routing System
Inputs
Flow/path attributes:
Resources
required b/w, hop count, ...

Resource attributes:
Attributes
properties of nodes/links
Network topology & state
Topology
Constraint-Based Routing Process
Outputs
Computed feasible path Explicit route of the path
1 4 2
Feasible Path ERO {1,3,4,5}

3 5
31
TE Topology versus Regular Routed Topology

E
Metanoia, Inc.
Network Diagram
A C D
Best effort shortest path from D to E

Link weights 2 A 3 1 1 B C 1 3 E 4 D
TE Path from D E avoiding green links with at least STS-3 b/w

E
OC-3 A C
DS3 D OC-12
OC-192
Regular Routed Topology

Traffic Engineering Topology

OC-12
32
Automatic Reroute Using MPLS RSVP-TE

Rerouting is done when
A better path is available Upon failure along LSP
Src
Metanoia, Inc.
Originates LSPs with IDs 1 and 2 Here they are treated as different LSPs within the same Session
Rcvr
Use SESSION Obj. & SE style

Tunnel uniquely identified by
Destination IP address
LSP ID = L1
Tunnel ID in Session Obj
Tunnel ID
Ingress IP address
Tunnel ingress made to appear as 2 different senders to the RSVP session (via LSP ID)
LSP ID = L2
On these links the LSPs share resources
LSPs 1 and 2 have a common SESSION Obj, but a new LSP ID in the SENDER_TEMPLATE and a different ERO (with possibly common hops)
33
So what did we look at? Lets summarize

Looked at conventional IP routing and its limitations
Metanoia, Inc.
Saw how labels decouple data plane from control plane Examined basics of MPLS
Control and forwarding components
Label granularity (forwarding equivalence class, FEC) Benefits over conventional routing
Label assignment and distribution methods

Downstream-on-demand, with ordered or independent control
Hop-by-hop routed LSPs, strict- and loosely explicitly-routed LSPs
Advantages of MPLS efficient hierarchical routing, reduces
number of IP peers, facilitates explicit routing

Use of MPLS for traffic engineering, protection, automatic
rerouting
34

MTNL MPLS Tutorial DrVishalSharma 2006-04-26

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MTNL MPLS Tutorial DrVishalSharma 2006-04-26

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Metanoia, Inc.

Critical Systems Thinking

Multi-Protocol Label Switching: Basics & Applications

The Start: Routing Process at a Router

DA=my_add or DA= IP brdcst add. ? No RT entry = complete DA?

Send pkt. to next-hop router or to directly connected interface.

Next hop router 198.168.7.3 X 198.168.7.4 X

RT entry = Destn. n/w id?

Send pkt. to nexthop router or to directly connected interface.

Default entry exists? No

Send pkt. to next-hop router.

Datagram undeliverable. (Use ICMP to inform source.)

How Routing Works Today

198.168.7.3 198.168.7.1 198.168.7.5

Next hop router 198.168.7.3 X 198.100.9.75 198.168.7.4 X 198.100.9.75

Routing table (RT) at 198.168.7.6

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

How it Would be with Labels

Address prefix N/w Int. X 2 198.100.x.x 128.72.x.x 4 5

Label Forwarding Table at 198.168.7.6

(as we will learn later)

Shortest-Path Routing: Little Flexibility

N/w entry Default

Routing table (RT) at 198.168.7.6

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

Labels De-couple Routing and Forwarding: Much more Flexibility

Address Prefix N/w Int. X 2 198.101.x.x 4 3

Label Forwarding Table at 198.168.7.6

198.100.9.7 198.100.9.1 5 128.72.x.x 198.100.x.x

Permit policy routing

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

Basic Concept of MPLS

Next hop router 128.89.10.x 128.89.10.1 179.69.x.x 179.69.42.3

Address Prefix N/w Int.

Address Prefix N/w Int.

Advertises binding <5, 128.89.10.x>

198.168.7.6 Advertises bindings <3, 128.89.10.x> <4, 179.69.x.x>

Advertises binding <7, 179.69.x.x> 179.69.x.x

Routing fills routing table

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

Basic Concept of MPLS

Address Prefix N/w Int.

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

A Word on Network Layer Routing

Algorithms to convert this into forwarding table

Forwarding /Data Plane

used to find that entry

Copyright 2002-2005 All Rights Reserved

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

So What about MPLS Control and Forwarding?

Uses a label switching forwarding table (or LIB), looking as:

Next hop label forwarding entry (NHFLE)

Copyright 2002-2005 All Rights Reserved

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

What does a label represent? The issue of label granularity

Membership of a FEC must be determinable from

Entities grouped into a FEC are flexible, and could involve

MPLS Seminar, MTNL CETTM, Mumbai, 26th April 2005

Lets Recap: Elements of MPLS

4 bytes MPLS shim header

20 bytes L3 IP header Higher Layers

Label Creation and Binding

Label Assignment and Distribution

Reliability: TCP or separate ACK/NACK