Segment Routing Traffic Engineering

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MPLS VPN.
Advertisements

Release 5.1, Revision 0 Copyright © 2001, Juniper Networks, Inc. Advanced Juniper Networks Routing Module 9: Static Routes & Routing Table Groups.
© 2009 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Public Presentation_ID 1 BGP-Prefix Segment in large-scale data centers draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-msdc-00.
The Impact of SDN On MPLS Networks Adrian Farrel Juniper Networks
Extensions to PCEP for Distributing Label across Domains draft-chen-pce-label-x-domains-00 Huaimo Chen Autumn Liu
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 1 MPLS Scale to 100k endpoints with resiliency and simplicity Clarence.
1 LAYER 3 TSN – DRAFT 4 Jouni Korhonen, Philippe Klein July 2014 LAYER 3 FOR TSN.
Why SDN and MPLS? Saurav Das, Ali Reza Sharafat, Guru Parulkar, Nick McKeown Clean Slate CTO Summit 9 th November, 2011.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—8-1 MPLS TE Overview Understanding MPLS TE Components.
All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### Scalability of IP/MPLS networks Lieven Levrau 30 th April, 2008 France Telecom, Cisco Systems, uawei Technologies,
© 2010 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1 Segment Routing Clarence Filsfils – Distinguished Engineer Christian Martin –
N Group0/1: Yangfei WANG z Amrita Manayil z Thangappan Madavan V K z Peng Fu z Shuo Sun z Total Slides :19 In-Operation.
IPv4 and IPv6 Mobility Support Using MPLS and MP-BGP draft-berzin-malis-mpls-mobility-00 Oleg Berzin, Andy Malis {oleg.berzin,
Best Practices for ISPs
MPLS additions to RSVP Tunnel identification Tunnel parameter negotiation Routing policy distribution Routing debugging information Scalability improvements.
Draft-li-isdnrg-seamless-mpls-mbh-00IETF 92 SDNRG1 Inter-SDN in Seamless MPLS for Mobile Backhaul Zhenbin Li, Rober Tao Huawei Technologies IETF 92, Dallas,
December 20, 2004MPLS: TE and Restoration1 MPLS: Traffic Engineering and Restoration Routing Zartash Afzal Uzmi Computer Science and Engineering Lahore.
MPLS H/W update Brief description of the lab What it is? Why do we need it? Mechanisms and Protocols.
MPLS and Traffic Engineering
Seamless MPLS for Mobile Backhaul draft-li-mpls-seamless-mpls-mbh-00
MPLS L3 and L2 VPNs Virtual Private Network –Connect sites of a customer over a public infrastructure Requires: –Isolation of traffic Terminology –PE,
A Study of MPLS Department of Computing Science & Engineering DE MONTFORT UNIVERSITY, LEICESTER, U.K. By PARMINDER SINGH KANG
SMUCSE 8344 Constraint-Based Routing in MPLS. SMUCSE 8344 Constraint Based Routing (CBR) What is CBR –Each link a collection of attributes (performance,
BGP L3VPN Virtual PE draft-fang-l3vpn-virtual-pe-01
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. MPLS v2.2—4-1 MPLS VPN Technology Forwarding MPLS VPN Packets.
Draft-li-ccamp-auto-mbb-te-path-00IETF 88 CCAMP1 IGP Extensions for Automatic Computation of MPLS Traffic Engineering Path Using Traffic Engineering Layers.
Draft-li-mpls-seamless-mpls-mbb-00IETF 87 MPLS1 Seamless MPLS for Mobile Backhaul draft-li-mpls-mbb-seamless-mpls-00 Zhenbin Li, Lei Li (Huawei) Manuel.
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.
BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing
I2RS Use Cases Summary Sue Hares. Plea to Authors Please help me make this readable I need your help to put in the right text.
MULTI-PROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING Brandon Wagner. Lecture Outline  Precursor to MPLS  MPLS Definitions  The Forwarding Process  MPLS VPN  MPLS Traffic.
Extensions to PCEP for Hierarchical Path Computation Elements PCE draft-zhang-pcep-hierarchy-extensions-00 Fatai Zhang Quintin Zhao.
Internet Traffic Engineering Motivation: –The Fish problem, congested links. –Two properties of IP routing Destination based Local optimization TE: optimizing.
VS (Virtual Subnet) draft-xu-virtual-subnet-03 Xiaohu Xu IETF 79, Beijing.
Draft-chen-rtgwg-resource-management-yang-00IETF 94 RTGWG1 PCE-initiated IP Tunnel draft-chen-pce-pce-initiated-ip-tunnel-00 Xia Chen, Zhenbin Li(Huawei)
Segment Routing: An Architecture build with SDN in mind and addressing the evolving network requirements Brian Meaney Cisco SP Consulting Team.
The Role of the Path Computation Element Centralized Controller in SDN & NFV draft-zhao-teas-pce-central-controller-use-cases-00.txt draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-03.txt.
EVPN: Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the BGP
draft-zhao-teas-pcecc-use-cases-03
Konstantin agouros Omkar deshpande
Multi-layer Multi-domain Inter-op Test based on ACTN Architecture
Examples based on draft-cheng-supa-applicability-00.txt
Zhenbin Li, Kai Lu Huawei Technologies IETF 98, Chicago, USA
OpenDaylight BGP Use-Cases
Adrian Farrel : Old Dog Consulting
Virtual Subnet : A L3VPN-based Subnet Extension Solution
Segment Routing (SR) Introduction and Tutorial
Use Cases for Using PCE to act as a Central Controller (PCECC) Component draft-zhao-teas-pce-central-controller-use-cases-00.txt 95th Buenos Aires.
PCEP Extension for Native IP ietf
Yimin Shen (Juniper) Rahul Aggarwal (Arktan Inc)
Multi-domain MPLS Deployment Enhancement
Evolution Network SEAMLESS NETWORK EVOLUTION AT COLT APRICOT 2018
Architecture for Use of BGP as Central Controller
PCE in Native IP Network (Dynamic Network Resource Scheduling)
Segment Routing MENOG 18 From HAMIM Corporation
Explicitly advertising the TE protocols enabled on links in ISIS
N. Kumar, C. Pignataro, F. Iqbal, Z. Ali (Presenter) - Cisco Systems
Zhenbin Li, Shunwan Zhuang Huawei Technologies
Separating Routing Planes using Segment Routing draft-gulkohegde-spring-separating-routing-planes-using-sr-00 IETF 98 – Chicago, USA Shraddha Hegde
IETF South Korea PCEP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing draft-li-pce-pcep-ls-sr-extension-01 Zhenbin Li (Huawei) Xia Chen (Huawei) Nan.
EVPN a very short introduction
DetNet Information Model Consideration
Aijun Wang China Telecom Nov 2017
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.
SDN Controllers in the WAN
BGP-Based SPF IETF 98, Chicago
FlexE Design Team Presenter: Mach
draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy-00
IP RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for P2P IP-TE LSP Tunnels Tarek Saad, Juniper Networks Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Juniper.
Royi Zigler(Broadcom)
Presentation transcript:

Segment Routing Traffic Engineering Diptanshu Singh

Why Traffic Engineering ? High bandwidth paths Low Latency paths Disjoint paths Avoid resources avoid low bandwidth links avoid high utilized links Optimize Network Capacity Ad-Hoc Calendaring

Distributed or Centralized computing ? Policy Single-Domain Multi-Domain Reachability IGP’s Centralized Low Latency Distributed or Centralized Disjoin from same node Disjoin from different node Avoiding resources Capacity optimization Low Priority Others… TBD

High level Architecture SR PCE have multi-domain topology view --feed via BGP-LS from multiple domains Stateful PCE with native SRTE algorithms. PCEP Messages: PCEP Request (PCC -> PCE) PCEP Reply (PCE -> PCC) PCC Report (PCC -> PCE) PCE Update (PCE -> PCC) PCE Initiate (PCE -> PCC) PCE controller LSP-DB TED PCEP BGP-LS BGP-LS Router PCC Router Area Y Area X Router Area Z Router

SR Basics: Binding Segment Binding Segment represents a tunnel at SR The Binding Segment is a local segment Has local significance A Binding-Segment ID identifies a SRTE Policy Each SRTE Policy is associated 1-for-1 with a Binding-SID Packets received with Binding-SID as top label are steered into the SRTE Policy associated with the Binding-SID Binding-SID label is popped, SRTE Policy’s SID list is pushed

SR Basics: Binding Segment Binding-SID use-case examples: Label stack “compression”: nesting and stitching SRTE Policies BGP SRTE Dynamic: use local Binding-SID(later) PCEP Request Could you provide me the ERO for AC1? PCE controller 2 3 PCC Report 17002,17003,17004 Binding SID 4001 PCEP Reply 17001,4001 Instead of 17001,17002,17003,17004 1 WAN DC TOR WAN Headend AC1 IP 4001 Unicast-SID 17002 IP 17004 17003 IP Unicast-SID 17001 Unicast-SID 17003 IP 17004 Unicast-SID 17004 IP 4001 17001 IP 17004 17003 17002

Segment Routing Traffic Engineering: On Demand Next Hop BGP SR-TE dynamic HA with PCE SR controller

On demand SR Next Hop DC WAN Access BGP Link State Unicast-SID 17001 Anycast-SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast-SID 17002 Unicast-SID 17003 Anycast-SID 18002 Unicast-SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Including ip address and SID BGP Route Reflector BGP Link State ISIS SR2 SRGB 16000-16999 ISIS SR1 SRGB 17k-18k ISIS SR3 SRGB 16000-16999

On demand SR Next Hop DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service XML YANG: PW-123 from ToR1 to AC1 BGP Route Reflector XML YANG: PW-123 from AC1 to ToR1

On demand SR Next Hop DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS NMS/OSS to configure service ToR1 check if he has LSP to AC1 Yes -> use it No -> next slide Do I have LSP to AC1 ? BGP Route Reflector

On demand SR Next Hop DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service ToR1 check if he has LSP to AC1 ToR1 request LSP to PCE PCEP request - Could you provide me the ERO to reach AC1 ? BGP Route Reflector 1 PCEP reply ERO is: 18001,18002,16001 2 3

On demand SR Next Hop DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator Unicast-SID 17001 Anycast-SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast-SID 17002 Unicast-SID 17003 Anycast-SID 18002 Unicast-SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service ToR1 check if he has LSP to AC1 ToR1 request LSP to PCE ToR1 report service state to orchestrator XML YANG notification: PW-123 is UP BGP Route Reflector Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet PW 16001 18002 18001 Ethernet PW 16001 18002 Ethernet PW 16001

ODN with policy DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator PCE controller Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service XML YANG: PW-123 from ToR1 to AC1 PW-124 from ToR2 to AC2 Policy: Disjoin GID 123 BGP Route Reflector XML YANG: PW-123 from AC1 to ToR1 PW-124 from AC2 to ToR2 Policy: Disjoin GID 123

ODN with policy DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator PCE controller Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service ToR1 and ToR2 check if they has LSP to AC1 and AC2 respectively. ToR1 and ToR2 request LSP to PCE PCEP request Could you provide me the ERO to reach AC1 ? Policies are G-ID 123 BGP Route Reflector PCEP request Could you provide me the ERO to reach AC2 ? Policies are G-ID 123 1 2

ODN with policy (Cont) DC WAN Access Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast-SID 16001 Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17002 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast SID 17004 ToR1 ToR2 ABR1 ABR2 ABR3 ABR4 AC1 Unicast-SID 16002 PCE controller AC2 Hint: PCE collect topology and SID via BGP LS Service Orchestrator to configure service ToR1 and ToR2 check if they has LSP to AC1 and AC2 respectively. ToR1 and ToR2 request LSP to PCE PCE sees the same Disjoint ID and computes two Disjoint paths 3 BGP Route Reflector PCEP reply ERO is: 17001,17003,16001 4 PCEP reply ERO is: 17002,17004,16002 Ethernet PW 16001 17003 17001 Ethernet PW 16001 17003 Ethernet PW 16001 Ethernet PW 16002 17004 17002 Ethernet PW 16002 17004 Ethernet PW 16002

On demand steering for BGP services Technical name: BGP SR-TE dynamic Hint: Isolated domains with no redistribution. CPE send BGP update for prefix X and add LL community ex: 100:777 PCE controller BGP Route Reflector BGP-LS BGP-LS L3VPN Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 BGP-LS Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 ABR1 ABR3 AC1 CPE2 DC WAN Access ToR2 ABR2 ABR4 AC2 Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

On demand steering for BGP services Technical name: BGP SR-TE dynamic Hint: Isolated domains with no redistribution. CPE send BGP update for prefix X and add LL community ex: 100:777 PCE controller BGP Route Reflector L3VPN NLRI: 1.1.1.1/32 Community: 100:777 Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 ABR1 ABR3 AC1 CPE2 DC WAN Access ToR2 ABR2 ABR4 AC2 Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

On demand steering for BGP services Technical name: BGP SR-TE dynamic Hint: CPE send BGP update for prefix X and add LL community AC1 PE announce VPN prefix X with LL community PCE controller BGP Route Reflector L3VPN NLRI: 1.1.1.1/32 Community: 100:777 Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 ABR1 ABR3 AC1 CPE2 DC WAN Access ToR2 ABR2 ABR4 AC2 Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

On demand steering for BGP services Technical name: BGP SR-TE dynamic Hint: CPE send BGP update for prefix X and add LL community AC1 PE announce VPN prefix X with LL community On demand Next Hop LL to PCE controller Install explicit path for prefix X in VRF PCE controller PCEP request Could you provide me the ERO to reach AC1 ? Policy is LL BGP Route Reflector 1 PCEP reply ERO is: 17001,17003,16001 2 Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 ABR1 ABR3 AC1 CPE2 3 DC WAN Access ToR2 ABR2 ABR4 AC2 Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

On demand steering for BGP services TE installs SRTE Policy in FIB: Binding-SID (e.g. 24006): push {Label 17001, Label 17003,Label 16001} TE provides the Binding-SID of the SRTE Policy to BGP BGP 1.1.1.1/32; NH: AC1 Received VPN label: L_VPN Community 100:777 Binding Label: 24006 TE SRTE Policy to AC1: SID List {17001,17003,16001},OIF 3 Binding Label: 24006 FIB Local label: 24006 out label: POP OIF: SRTE; Label stack {17001 17003 16001}

On demand steering for BGP services RIB installs in FIB: 1.1.1.1/32 via 24006 Push VPN label and steer in SRTE Policy TE installs SRTE in FIB BGP, RIB and FIB aware of BSID BGP 1.1.1.1/32; NH: AC1 Received VPN label: L_VPN Community 100:777 Binding Label: 24006 TE SRTE Policy to AC1: SID List {17001,17003,16001},OIF 3 Binding Label: 24006 FIB 1.1.1.1/32; recursion-via-label label L_VPN, NH via 24006 Local label: 24006 out label: POP OIF: SRTE; Label stack {17001 17003 16001}

PCE HA DC WAN Access PCE2 Secondary PCE1 Primary BGP Route Reflector Service Provisioned via Overlay RR,Orchestrator Request via PCEP to PCE primary with TE policy PCE replies with ERO 17001,17003,16001 ToR1 Reports to PCE Primary and Secondary via PCC Report Primary PCE fails ToR1 waits for some time ToR1 Reports PCE2 of becoming master 5 PCE2 Secondary PCE1 Primary 2 3 4 7 BGP Route Reflector 1 Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 ABR1 ABR3 AC1 CPE2 6: wait for some timer DC WAN Access ToR2 ABR2 ABR4 AC2 Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

ODN HA model DC Access WAN Service Orchestrator PCEP BGP LS PCEP CPE1 SR-PCE not to be considered as a Single “god” box SR-PCE is closer to RR Different TOR’s can use different pairs of SR-PCE SR PCE preference can be either based on proximity or service Service Orchestrator Unicast SID 17001 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17003 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16001 Unicast-SID 16001 CPE1 ToR1 PCEP ABR1 BGP LS ABR3 PCE PCEP AC1 CPE2 PCE RR RR DC Access WAN ToR2 ABR2 PCE ABR4 PCE AC2 RR RR Unicast-SID 16002 Unicast SID 17002 Anycast SID 18001 Unicast SID 17004 Anycast SID 18002 Unicast-SID 16002

References http://www.segment-routing.net/ Current IETF Drafts for SR: http://www.segment-routing.net/home/ietf PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06 Binding SID https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sivabalan-pce-binding-label-sid-00 Anycast Segments in MPLS based Segment Routing https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-psarkar-spring-mpls-anycast-segments-01 BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gredler-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-01