Japan Telecom Information & Communication Labs

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
QoS Strategy in DiffServ aware MPLS environment Teerapat Sanguankotchakorn, D.Eng. Telecommunications Program, School of Advanced Technologies Asian Institute.
Advertisements

International Telecommunication Union Workshop on End-to-End Quality of Service.What is it? How do we get it? Geneva, 1-3 October 2003 ITU-T Recs. Y.1541.
Traffic Engineering over MPLS
Identifying MPLS Applications
IETF Differentiated Services Concerns with Intserv: r Scalability: signaling, maintaining per-flow router state difficult with large number of flows r.
William Stallings Data and Computer Communications 7 th Edition Chapter 13 Congestion in Data Networks.
Tiziana Ferrari Differentiated Services Test: Report1 Differentiated Service Test REPORT TF-TANT Tiziana Ferrari Frankfurt, 1 Oct.
Introducing MPLS Labels and Label Stacks
CPSC Topics in Multimedia Networking A Mechanism for Equitable Bandwidth Allocation under QoS and Budget Constraints D. Sivakumar IBM Almaden Research.
Differentiated Services. Service Differentiation in the Internet Different applications have varying bandwidth, delay, and reliability requirements How.
ACN: IntServ and DiffServ1 Integrated Service (IntServ) versus Differentiated Service (Diffserv) Information taken from Kurose and Ross textbook “ Computer.
QoS Protocols & Architectures by Harizakis Costas.
MPLS Multiple Protocol Label Switching 2003/2/19.
CS Summer 2003 Lecture 8. CS Summer 2003 Populating LFIB with LDP Assigned/Learned Labels Changes in the LFIB may be triggered routing or.
Protocols for QoS Support
15-744: Computer Networking
Supporting Differentiated Services in MPLS Networks Ilias Andrikopoulos and George Pavlov University of Surrey, UK IEEE/IFIP Workshop on Quality of Service.
DiffServ QoS in internet
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Implementing Secure Converged Wide Area Networks (ISCW) Module 4: Frame Mode MPLS Implementation.
School of Information Technologies IP Quality of Service NETS3303/3603 Weeks
1 Network Architecture and Design Internet QoS Differentiated Services (DiffServ) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Reference Zheng Wang, Internet QoS,
Internet QoS Syed Faisal Hasan, PhD (Research Scholar Information Trust Institute) Visiting Lecturer ECE CS/ECE 438: Communication Networks.
1 Network Architecture and Design Internet QoS Differentiated Services (DiffServ) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Reference Zheng Wang, Internet QoS,
MPLS Evan Roggenkamp. Introduction Multiprotocol Label Switching High-performance Found in telecommunications networks Directs data from one network node.
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) presented by: chitralekha tamrakar (B.S.E.) divya krit tamrakar (B.S.E.) Rashmi shrivastava(B.S.E.) prakriti.
Tiziana FerrariQuality of Service for Remote Control in the High Energy Physics Experiments CHEP, 07 Feb Quality of Service for Remote Control in.
{vp, sra, Security in Differentiated Services Networks Venkatesh Prabhakar Srinivas R.
QoS in MPLS SMU CSE 8344.
1 Multi Protocol Label Switching Presented by: Petros Ioannou Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, UCY.
Integrated Services (RFC 1633) r Architecture for providing QoS guarantees to individual application sessions r Call setup: a session requiring QoS guarantees.
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.
Introduction to MPLS and Traffic Engineering Zartash Afzal Uzmi.
1 Multiprotocol Label Switching. 2 “ ” It was designed to provide a unified data-carrying service for both circuit-based clients and packet-switching.
CS Spring 2011 CS 414 – Multimedia Systems Design Lecture 23 - Multimedia Network Protocols (Layer 3) Klara Nahrstedt Spring 2011.
IP QoS for 3G. A Possible Solution The main focus of this network QoS mechanism is to provide one, real time, service in addition to the normal best effort.
Quality of Service (QoS)
QOS مظفر بگ محمدی دانشگاه ایلام. 2 Why a New Service Model? Best effort clearly insufficient –Some applications need more assurances from the network.
IP/MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching
CSC 336 Data Communications and Networking Lecture 8d: Congestion Control : RSVP Dr. Cheer-Sun Yang Spring 2001.
MultiProtocol Label Switching (MPLS) July 29, 2000TECON 2000 Pramoda Nallur Alcatel Internetworking Division.
Class-based QoS  Internet QoS model requires per session state at each router  1000s s of flows  per session RSVP is complex => reluctance.
MPLS Forwarder Preliminary 1 Outline MPLS Overview MPLS Overview MPLS MRD MPLS Data Path HLD 48K MPLS Fwder HLD IPE MPLS Fwder HLD Issues Summary.
1 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services MPLS.
Slide 3-1 Class of Service (CoS) & Quality of Service (QoS) Sources: MPLS Forum V. Alwayn, Advanced MPLS Design and Implementation, Cisco Press E. W.
Quality of Service in IP Networks Presented by: John Rick Sharing the Knowledge Behind the Network.
Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Copyright © 2006 Heathkit Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Presentation 10 – Quality of Service (QoS)
MPLS (MultiProtocol Labeling Switching) School of Electronics and Information Kyung Hee University. Choong Seon HONG.
Differentiated Services MPLS Doug Young Suh Last updated : Aug 1, 2009 diffServ/RSVP.
MULTI-PROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING Brandon Wagner. Lecture Outline  Precursor to MPLS  MPLS Definitions  The Forwarding Process  MPLS VPN  MPLS Traffic.
Supporting DiffServ with Per-Class Traffic Engineering in MPLS.
Module 2 MPLS Concepts.
Multiple Protocol Support: Multiprotocol Level Switching.
Differentiated Services IntServ is too complex –More focus on services than deployment –Functionality similar to ATM, but at the IP layer –Per flow QoS.
VP Technology Strategy Marconi Communications
An End-to-End Service Architecture r Provide assured service, premium service, and best effort service (RFC 2638) Assured service: provide reliable service.
Mar-16 1 Cairo University Faculty of Engineering Electronics &Communication dpt. 4th year Linux-based Implementation Of a Router (B.Sc Graduation project)
Quality of Service Frameworks Hamed Khanmirza Principles of Network University of Tehran.
1 Lecture 15 Internet resource allocation and QoS Resource Reservation Protocol Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Routing algorithms provide support for performance goals – Distributed and dynamic React to congestion Load balance.
Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) RFC 3031 MPLS provides new capabilities: QoS support Traffic engineering VPN Multiprotocol support.
Chapter 30 Quality of Service Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.
Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Performance Measurements of MPLS Traffic Engineering and QoS
Requirements for LER Forwarding of IPv4 Option Packets
Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
MPLS Basics 2 2.
CHAPTER 8 Network Management
Dynamic Management for End-to-end IP QoS
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.
EE 122: Differentiated Services
Presentation transcript:

Japan Telecom Information & Communication Labs Achieving Multimedia QOS over Hybrid IP/PSTN Infrastructures: IP Traffic and Congestion Control April 26, 2001 Susumu Yoneda Japan Telecom Information & Communication Labs

Outline IP Transfer Capabilities Generic Traffic & Congestion Controls Service models Traffic descriptors Conformance definitions QoS commitments Generic Traffic & Congestion Controls Specific Mechanisms e.g., Diffserv, MPLS Conclusion

IP Transfer Capabilities: ITU-T SG13 Draft Rec. Y.iptc Dedicated Bandwidth (DBW) IP Transfer Capability Statistical Bandwidth (SBW) IP Transfer Capability Best-Effort (BE) IP Transfer Capability IP Transfer Capability: a set of network capabilities provided by IP based network to transfer a set of IP packets under a given classification.

Service Models & Traffic Descriptors DBW SBW BE Service Model Conforming Packets Assure the negotiated QoS Non-conforming Packets Discarded Delivered corresponding to the associated QoS Delivered within the limits of available resources All Packets Forwarded by use of available resources Traffic Descriptors Peak Rate, Peak Bucket Size, The maximum allowed packet size DBW’s descriptors + Sustainable Rate, Sustainable Token Bucket Size

Conformance Definitions & QoS Commitments DBW SBW BE Conformance Definition Packet Arrival Conforming to the GBRA(Rp,Bp) Packet Length Not exceed the maximum allowed packet size Conforming to the peak GBRA(Rp,Bp) and the sustainable GBRA(Rs,Bs) QoS Commitments Specified Loss and Delay commitments Include IP QoS Class 0 and 1 Specified Loss commitment Include IP QoS Class 2 No absolute commitment

Generic Traffic & Congestion Controls Traffic Control Functions Network Resource Management Admission Control Parameter Control Packet Marking Traffic Shaping Packet Scheduling Congestion Control Functions Packet Discard Control Routing (Proposed)

Differentiated Services [DiffServ] Two standard per hop behaviors (PHBs) defined that effectively represent two service levels Expedited Forwarding (EF): A single codepoint (DiffServ value). EF minimizes delay and jitter and provides the highest level of aggregate quality of service. Any traffic that exceeds the traffic profile (which is defined by local policy) is discarded. Assured Forwarding (AF): Four classes and three drop-precedences within each class (so a total of twelve codepoints). Excess AF traffic is not delivered with as high probability as the traffic “within profile,” which means it may be demoted but not necessarily dropped.

Diffserv Functions (1) Classifier Marker Behavior Aggregate (BA): Uses only the Diffserv Code Point (DSCP) value Multi-Field (MF): Uses other header info (like protocol, or port numbers, etc.) Marker Adds DSCP when none exists Adds DSCP as mapped from RSVP reservation Changes to Map from DSCP to IP TOS, or back Changes DSCP as local policy dictates

Diffserv Functions (2) Meter Conditioner Accumulates statistics, and provides the inputs to conditioning Conditioner Provides queue selection and treatment, policing (shaping traffic) by adding delay or dropping packets in order to conform to the traffic profile described in the SLA with destination or source (depending whether this is an egress or ingress point). Authenticates the traffic for admission control.

MPLS Mechanisms At the first hop router in the MPLS network, the router makes a forwarding decision based on the destination address (or any other information in the header, as determined by local policy) then determines the appropriate label value -- which identifies the Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) -- attaches the label to the packet and forwards it to the next hop. At the next hop, the router uses the label value as an index into a table that specifies the next hop and a new label. The LSR attaches the new label, then forwards the packet to the next hop.

MPLS Routing protocols Start with existing IGP’s OSPF IS-IS BGP-4 Enhance to carry constraint data OSPF-TE IS-IS –TE Distribute topology information only The first part of automating the establishment of LSP’s is to have a routing protocol distribute topology information, and the current IGP’s OSPF, IS-IS and RIP do that. However these protocols simply enable an individual router to decide the port that is on the shortest path to the destination IP address Traffic engineering is seen as an essential element of running an effective large best effort IP network, and to address the needs of traffic engineering the routing protocols must be enhanced to provide much more data. For example the capacity of all the links between the ingress and egress node, the current utilization of each link, the delay across the link, whether the whole span has protection switching or not and so on. We may also want to set by management some link characteristics ie resource classes that allow the ingress LSR to include or exclude certain resources Constraint based routing is the key to Traffic engineering Constraint data Link capacity,Link utilization Resource class Priority Pre-emption etc Constraint based routing is the key to Traffic Engineering

Label Distribution Protocols LDP CR-LDP RSVP-TE Hop by Hop routing Ensures routers agree on bindings between FEC’s and the labels. Label paths follow same route as conventional routed path Explicit constraint based routing Route determined by ingress LSR based on overall view of topology, and constraints Traffic engineering CoS and (QoS) fast (50ms) rerouting

MPLS Shim Header Structure ... Layer 2 Header IP Packet Label: 20-bit value, (0-16 reserved) Exp.: 3-bits Experimental ( ToS) S: 1-bit Bottom of stack TTL: 8-bits Time To Live Label Exp. S TTL 4 Octets Label Switching Look up inbound label + port (+Exp) to determine outbound label + port + treatment Header operations Swap (label) Push (a new header) Pop (a header from stack) This is the basic MPLS packet format. The 32-bit MPLS field is known as a "shim header". This comes from an engineering term - a "shim" is a thin strip of material used to makes parts fit correctly. When you fold up a beer mat to stop a bar table from wobbling you are using a shim! The first 20 bits of the field actually represent the label. The next three bits are currently "experimental" and must be set to zero. The next bit indicates if this label is part of a stack of labels. If the S-bit is zero, then this is the only label. The Time To Live (TTL) field is as per a normal IP packet, and is there for the same purpose (loop detection). MPLS encapsulations are also defined for ATM and Frame relay.

Hierarchy via Label stack = Network scalability Layer 2 Header Label 3 Label 2 Label 1 IP Packet Within each domain the IGP simply needs to allow the Boarder (ingress) routers to determine the appropriate egress boarder router Reducing drastically size of routing table in transit routers MPLS Domain 1 MPLS Domain 2 Let's look a bit more closely at those labels. MPLS labels can be stacked one on top of another. The way that this stacking is build up and stripped off can lead to nested MPLs domains, as I show above... MPLS Domain 3

Dynamic-Bandwidth Setting traffic time Link traffic monitor and dynamic-bandwidth setting.

Conclusion Provide a summary of Y.iptc: IP Transfer Capabilities, Service models, Traffic descriptors, Conformance definitions, QoS commitments How does it work with many other existing traffic engineering mechanisms? Traffic engineering as well as congestion controls would work well when traffics are effectively monitored and conformance is checked. Utilize Y.iptc for the conformance monitoring purposes.