VPLS Extensions for Provider Backbone Bridging - draft-balus-l2vpn-vpls-802.1ah-01.txt John Hoffmans – KPN Geraldine Calvignac - France Telecom Raymond Zhang - British Telecom Nabil Bitar - Verizon Florin Balus, Mustapha Aissoui, Matthew Bocci - Alcatel-Lucent

Scope Extensions to existing VPLS Solution to accommodate IEEE 802.1ah Follows RFC 4762 template Focus of this version  Intra-domain use case  Integrated PBB VPLS Model

PBB VPLS Requirements VPLS Domain 2 VPLS Domain 1 VPLS Domain 3 PE1PE2 PE3 PE4 PE5PE6 Ethernet CE Add useful PBB capabilities to VPLS  MAC hiding, VPN Aggregation Maintain MPLS Benefits  Avoid running STP in the Core  Traffic Engineered, Resilient Backbone Selective introduction of PBB  Large VPNs, lots of CE switches  No PBB awareness in core PEs Maintain Interoperability  Native Ethernet Access  Coexist w/ Regular VPLS/PWE3 Support both 1:1 and M:1 models  ISID to VPLS B B BB B B I1

Solution Details - PBB VPLS PBB VPLS running in Edge PEs  Handles both I and B components  CMAC to BMAC mapping  No BVID tunneling  1:1 Model (ISID to B-VPLS)  Using only PBB MAC Hiding  No need to manage ISIDs Regular VPLS in PE3, PE4  B-MAC based forwarding  No ISID, CMAC - awareness  Only PWs, no Ethernet UNIs VPLS Domain 2 VPLS Domain 1 VPLS Domain 3 PE1PE2 PE3 PE4 PE5PE6 Ethernet CE B B BB B B I1 C-DA C-SA Payload B-DA B-SA I-TAG C-VID Ethertype TL SL

Extensions to LDP MAC Withdraw Potential Blackholing issue in PBB  Dual-Homing of CE to PE1, PE2  Access Topology Change – i.e. failure of the active link to PE1  I1 Traffic Blackholed to BM1 (PE1) Existing MAC Withdraw in Backbone VPLS should not be used  BM1 is still reachable, no need to flush  Flush only CMAC -> BMAC entries Proposed Solution  “Flush all CMACs in I1 except the ones owned by PE2 (BM2)”  New LDP TLV in Address Withdraw message indicates the impacted ISID domain(s) (I1) and the BMAC (BM2) VPLS PE1 (BM1) PE2 (BM2) PE4 PE5 (BM5) PE3 CE B B BB B I1 X-> BM1 I2 BM5 BM1 C-DA C-SA Payload B-DA B-SA I-TAG C-VID Ethertype TL SL CMACs X1-100 CMAC Y YXYX

PBB VPLS – M:1 Model Many ISIDs aggregated inside one B-VPLS  Less provisioning, PWs in the core  Good fit for ISIDs that share same PEs What if flood containment is required?  e.g. contain I2 Flooding to PE1, PE2 & PE5 Solution – create per ISID Flooding Trees  ISID-based Group BMAC used by PBB for flooding  Use LDP to declare, register ISID (Group BMAC) location in the B-VPLS context VPLS Domain 2 VPLS Domain 1 VPLS Domain 3 PE2 PE3 PE4 B B BB B B I1 I2 PE1 PE6 PE5 I2 CE I1 CE

Next Steps More details on Flood containment, Multicast Handling Interworking between PBBN and MPLS Authors would like to request WG Feedback on mailing list