RSVP Setup Protection draft-shen-mpls-rsvp-setup-protection-00 Yimin Shen (Juniper Networks) Yuji Kamite (NTT Communication) IETF 83, Paris, France.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Pseudowire freeze mechanism draft-jin-pwe3-pw-freeze-00 Lizhong Jin Bhumip. Khasnabish.
Advertisements

LDP extensions for Explicit Pseudowire to transport LSP mapping draft-cao-pwe3-mpls-tp-pw-over-bidir-lsp-02.txt Mach Chen Wei Cao.
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching: An Overview of Signaling Enhancements and Recovery Techniques IEEE Communications Magazine July 2001.
1 Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol For Fast Reroute of Traffic Engineering GMPLS LSPs draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute-05 Author.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-1 MPLS TE Overview Understanding MPLS TE Components.
Requirement and protocol for WSON and non-WSON interoperability CCAMP WG, IETF 81th, Quebec City, Canada draft-shimazaki-ccamp-wson-interoperability-00.
Refresh Interval Independent facility FRR draft-chandra-mpls-enhanced-frr-bypass-01 Chandrasekar Ramachandran Markus.
1 Reoptimization of Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Loosely Routed LSPs draft-tsaad-mpls-p2mp-loose-path-reopt-00 Author list: Tarek Saad
Pseudowire Endpoint Fast Failure Protection draft-shen-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-00 Rahul Aggarwal Yimin Shen
PW Endpoint Fast Failure Protection draft-shen-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-02 Yimin Shen (Juniper Networks) Rahul Aggarwal (Arktan Inc) Wim Henderickx.
PW Endpoint Fast Failure Protection draft-shen-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-03 Yimin Shen (Juniper) Rahul Aggarwal (Arktan Inc) Wim Henderickx (Alcatel-Lucent)
MPLS additions to RSVP Tunnel identification Tunnel parameter negotiation Routing policy distribution Routing debugging information Scalability improvements.
CS Summer 2003 Lecture 12 FastReRoute (FRR) - Big Picture.
October 8, 2004MPLS: TE and Restoration1 MPLS: Traffic Engineering and Restoration Routing Basics Zartash Afzal Uzmi Computer Science and Engineering Department.
MPLS H/W update Brief description of the lab What it is? Why do we need it? Mechanisms and Protocols.
MPLS and Traffic Engineering
A General approach to MPLS Path Protection using Segments Ashish Gupta Ashish Gupta.
A General approach to MPLS Path Protection using Segments Ashish Gupta Ashish Gupta.
Control and Traffic Management Paper: Banerjee et al.: ” Generalized multiprotocol label switching: an overview of signaling enhancements and recovery.
SMUCSE 8344 Constraint-Based Routing in MPLS. SMUCSE 8344 Constraint Based Routing (CBR) What is CBR –Each link a collection of attributes (performance,
1 Fabio Mustacchio - IPS-MOME 2005 – Warsaw, March 15th 2005 Overview of RSVP-TE Network Simulator: Design and Implementation D.Adami, C.Callegari, S.Giordano,
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS). 2 MPLS Overview A forwarding scheme designed to speed up IP packet forwarding (RFC 3031) Idea: use a fixed length.
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.
MPLS and Traffic Engineering Ji-Hoon Yun Computer Communications and Switching Systems Lab.
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,
1 Traffic Engineering With MPLS By Behzad Akbari Fall 2008 These slides are based in parts on the slides of Shivkumar (RPI)
1 Reoptimization of Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Loosely Routed LSPs draft-tsaad-mpls-p2mp-loose-path-reopt-03 Author list: Tarek Saad
Protection and Restoration Definitions A major application for MPLS.
A Snapshot on MPLS Reliability Features Ping Pan March, 2002.
1 IETF- 56 – TE WG- SAN FRANCISCO Inter-AS MPLS Traffic Engineering draft-vasseur-inter-AS-TE-00.txt Jean-Philippe Vasseur – Cisco Systems Raymond Zhang.
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.
1 Traffic Engineering With MPLS By Behzad Akbari Fall 2008 These slides are based in parts on the slides of Shivkumar (RPI)
Draft-torvi-mpls-rsvp-ingress-protection-00IETF 84 MPLS: 30 July Ingress Protection for RSVP-TE p2p and p2mp LSPs draft-torvi-mpls-rsvp-ingress-protection-00.
IP Traffic Engineering RSP draft-shen-ip-te-rsp-01.txt Naiming Shen Albert Tian Jun Zhuang
PIM Extension For Tunnel Based Multicast Fast Reroute (TMFRR) draft-lwei-pim-tmfrr-00 IETF 76, Hiroshima.
Refresh Interval Independent facility FRR draft-chandra-mpls-enhanced-frr-bypass-00 Chandra Ramachandran Yakov Rekhter.
A Snapshot on MPLS Reliability Features Ping Pan March, 2002.
Label Distribution Protocols LDP: hop-by-hop routing RSVP-TE: explicit routing CR-LDP: another explicit routing protocol, no longer under development.
1 Protection in SONET Path layer protection scheme: operate on individual connections Line layer protection scheme: operate on the entire set of connections.
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-
Establishing P2MP MPLS TE LSPs draft-raggarwa-mpls-p2mp-te-02.txt Rahul Aggarwal Juniper Networks.
82 nd Taipei Protection Mechanisms for LDP P2MP/MP2MP LSP draft-zhao-mpls-mldp-protections-00.txt Quintin Zhao, Emily Chen, Huawei.
1 RSVP-TE Extensions For Fast Reroute of Bidirectional Co-routed LSPs draft-tsaad-mpls-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute-00.txt Author list: Mike Taillon
Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Ingress Local Protection draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-ingress-protection-04 Huaimo Chen, Raveendra Torvi Autumn Liu, Tarek Saad,
Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP-based LSPs draft-esale-mpls-ldp-node-frr-02 Raveendra Torvi Luay Jalil
Analysis on Two Methods in Ingress Local Protection.
RSVP Setup Protection draft-shen-mpls-rsvp-setup-protection-03
Zhenbin Li, Li Zhang(Huawei Technologies)
Jean-Philippe Vasseur – Cisco Systems Raymond Zhang - Infonet
P2MP MPLS-TE Fast Reroute with P2MP Bypass Tunnels
RSVP-TE Extensions for Associated Co-routed Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs) draft-gandhishah-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-01 Author list: Rakesh.
Presenter: Jeffrey Zhang
MPLS LSP Instant Install draft-saad-mpls-lsp-instant-install-00
RSVP Setup Protection draft-shen-mpls-rsvp-setup-protection-02
IETF 96 (MPLS WG) Abhishek Deshmukh Kireeti Kompella (presenting)
Yimin Shen (Juniper) Rahul Aggarwal (Arktan Inc)
PLR Designation in RSVP-TE FRR
Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol For Fast Reroute of Traffic Engineering GMPLS LSPs draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-06 Authors: Mike Taillon.
MPLS Traffic Engineering
Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP- based LSPs
draft-sitaraman-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-00
IETF 98 (MPLS WG) Abhishek Deshmukh (presenting) Kireeti Kompella
LSP Fast-Reroute Using RSVP Detours
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS). 2 MPLS Overview A forwarding scheme designed to speed up IP packet forwarding (RFC 3031) Idea: use a fixed length.
Label Switched VPNs – Scalability and Performance Analysis
Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP- based LSPs
IETF 102 (TEAS WG) Abhishek Deshmukh (presenting) Kireeti Kompella
IP RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for P2P IP-TE LSP Tunnels Tarek Saad, Juniper Networks Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Juniper.
Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang
Inter-AS OAM for SR Networks IETF 105, Montreal
Presentation transcript:

RSVP Setup Protection draft-shen-mpls-rsvp-setup-protection-00 Yimin Shen (Juniper Networks) Yuji Kamite (NTT Communication) IETF 83, Paris, France

What is setup protection?  A mechanism that protects LSPs during initial Path message signaling time.  Based on RSVP facility-backup fast reroute. Why setup protection?  To improve the chances of establishment for LSPs whose explicit paths (EROs) are: Pre-computed; Statically configured; Computed based on a topology that may not reflect the state of every link/node in the network. Overview

RSVP Fast Reroute Establishment: 1.Signaling of protected LSP  Path message signals the desired path (ERO).  Resv message distributes labels and records route (RRO). 2.Setting up of local protection on each router  Next-hop address and label (Resv RRO).  Next-next-hop address and label (Resv RRO). Observation:  Local protection can only be established after the protected LSP has been set up.

Problem Description What will happen, if there is a link/node failure along the path when the initial Path message is being signaled? Typical behavior today:  RSVP sends PathErr.  IGP floods update-to-date TE info.  Ingress router computes a new path around the failure, and signals the new path.  Existing bypass LSP is ignored. bypass LSP i1i2i3 P 0 P 1 P 2 P 3 2. PathErr P 4 3. Path (dest = PE2, ERO = i1, i4, i2, i3) i4 1. Path (dest = PE2, ERO = i1, i2, i3) 4. Path 5. Path 6. Path

Problem Description (cont.) Issues:  If the desired path is pre-computed or fixed, an alternative path may not be possible.  Control plane convergence and path re-computation may introduce a significant delay, which can impact LSP signaling performance.  Existing bypass LSP will not be used, even if it is the preferred alternative path.

Setup Protection PLR (point of local repair) reroutes LSP through an existing bypass LSP.  Detects downstream link/node failure based on strict ERO.  Searches for an existing bypass LSP that is protecting the failed link/node.  Signals a backup LSP through the bypass LSP, using “sender template specific” method. MP (merge point) terminates the backup LSP, and re-creates the protected LSP. Two new LSP Attribute TLVs are defined:  Protected LSP Sender IPv4 Address TLV.  Protected LSP Sender IPv6 Address TLV.  Carried by the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES of Path message of the backup LSP.  Used by MP for recreating the protected LSP. bypass LSP i1i2i3 P 0 P 1 PLR P 2 MP P 3 6. Resv P 4 i4 1. Path (dest = PE2, ERO = i1, i2, i3) 2. Path 3. Path 4. Resv 5. Resv

Setup Protection (cont.) The LSP appears as if it was originally set up along the desired path and failed over to the bypass LSP.  PLR sends Resv with “local protection available” and “local protection in use” in RRO.  PLR sends PathErr of “tunnel locally repaired”. PLR may perform local reversion after the failed link/node is restored. bypass LSP i1i2i3 P 0 P 1 PLR P 2 MP P 3 P 4 i4 Backup LSP protected LSP

Next Steps  Questions and comments?  WG adoption?