Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
2
A General approach to MPLS Path Protection using Segments Ashish Gupta Ashish Gupta
3
1 Overview Intro to MPLS —Difference from IP Why Path Protection ? —Existing Schemes Segment Based Approach —Its Mechanisms —Algorithm for segment setup —Simulation Results —Detection, Notification and Path Switching
4
2 MPLS BUILT ON STANDARD IP 47.1 47.2 47.3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Destination based forwarding tables as built by OSPF, IS-IS, RIP, etc.
5
3 IP FORWARDING USED BY HOP- BY-HOP CONTROL 47.1 47.2 47.3 IP 47.1.1.1 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3
6
4 MPLS Label Distribution 47.1 47.2 47.3 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 Mapping: 0.40 Request: 47.1 Mapping: 0.50 Request: 47.1
7
5 Label Switched Path (LSP) 47.1 47.2 47.3 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 IP 47.1.1.1
8
6 MPLS : ROUTE AT EDGE, SWITCH IN CORE IP Forwarding LABEL SWITCHING IP Forwarding IP #L1IP#L2IP#L3 IP Applies concept of VC routing Packet forwarding is done based on Label Switching FEC: Destination address prefix, Traffic Engineering tunnel, Class of Service.
9
7 WHY MPLS ? Ultra fast forwarding IP Traffic Engineering —Constraint-based Routing Virtual Private Networks —Controllable tunneling mechanism Voice/Video on IP —Delay variation + QoS constraints
10
8 BEST OF BOTH WORLDS PACKET ROUTING CIRCUIT SWITCHING MPLS + IP form a middle ground that combines the best of IP and the best of circuit switching technologies. MPLS +IP IPATM HYBRID
11
9 Path Protection and its Purpose What happens if fault occurs in a network element ? For traffic with critical QOS requirements, fast rerouting is required IP rerouting can take order of seconds Solution : Protect the path with another backup path
12
10 Existing Schemes Global Path Protection Local Path Protection Link Failure Node Failure 1+1 Path Protection Sharing Modes - 1 : 1, 1 : N, M : N r Original LSP Backup LSP No flexibility in providing path protection for a MPLS network Segment Based Approach : A General Scheme for Path Protection
13
11 Example Global Path Protection : Large Notification Delay Local Path Protection : Small delay but large number of backup paths These solutions lie at two extremes. Segment Based Approach : A General Scheme for Path Protection
14
12 Segment Based Approach Protect each segment separately : Each segment seen as a single unit of failure SSR – Segment Switching router Flexibility in creating segments -> flexibility in Path Protection ( delay and backup paths ) SBPP – Segment Based Path Protection
15
13 Steps in SBPP Creation of LSP Creation of segments - Greedy Algorithm Reservation of Backup Paths —Backup paths as tunnels A new combined Algorithm —Advantages Label Management in SBPP Label Distribution Mechanisms Signaling mechanisms Buffering to avoid packet loss and reordering Steps in recovery : —Fault Detection and Location —Fault Notification– How does it work in MPLS ? —Switching the path —Backup Path recovery Experimental Results
16
14 Steps in SBPP For setting up a path request - Local Computation Information needed —Topology —Link Delays and congestion information —Bandwidth of each link – primary, backup, free After computation – Label information disseminated
17
15
18
16 Fault Detection, Location and Notification Fault can be detected by periodically sending liveness messages – Absence of response indicates link/node failure For faster detection, each node sends periodic messages to its neighbors Timing Analysis for Detection and Notification
19
17 Fault Detection, Localization and Notification
20
18 Creation of Segments Created according to QOS criteria —Delay or Reliability or a combination Ensure each segment individually meets the criteria Example - Bounded Delay on switching —Greedy Algorithm Some Problems - Experiments
21
19
22
20 Reservation of Backup Paths Advantage of SBPP – Flexibility in reservation of backup paths, not rigid Issues —Avoiding Loops Sharing of backup paths important —Cases : –1. Multiple LSPs, Multiple Segments –2. Multiple LSPs, Same Segment —Assumptions : Only one failure at a time Problem with the previous approach – see figure
23
21 Loops in Backup Paths
24
22 Problem with Greedy Algorithm
25
23 A New Combined Algorithm Possible approaches —Exhaustive search for a suitable path – computationally exhaustive – need a heuristic The Combined Path Setup Algorithm —1. Setup a primary path ( based on a constraint e.g. min delay) —2. Start from egress node and find the largest possible segment which satisfies bounded delay switching time constraint ( call the SSR of this segment S1 ) —3. Find a backup path for this segment starting from S1 —4. If no backup path can be found, shrink the segment and try to find the backup path from the new SSR. If no further shrinking is possible then Reject request( or try another primary path - see below) —5. Repeat Step 4 until a segment with a backup path is found. —6. Repeat from step 2 for creating the next segment —7. Do this until the complete LSP is segmented.
26
24 Advantages of this algorithm Ensures that if segmentation is possible on the primary path, then it will be performed. Here we have multiple starting nodes possible for finding the backup paths, so possibility of finding backup paths is more Can add more flexibility for the choice of SSR in forming segments e.g. case of overloaded LSR – won’t be made a SSR
27
25 Description of Simulation Setup An MPLS network with —100 Nodes —200 Edges RTT of each link = 10 ms Periodicity of Liveness messages = 2 ms BW – 50 to 100 Generated large number of random LSP requests and observed various parameters Results indicate advantages of SBPP
28
26 Segment Size vs BW reserved
29
27 Segment Size vs BW reserved
30
28 Segment Size vs Rejection Rate ( for 250 LSPs )
31
29 No. of Requested LSPs vs Rejection Rate
32
Effect of Backup Path Sharing
33
31 Bandwidth reserved vs No. of LSPs setup
34
32 Crossover - Effects of backup path sharing
35
33 Further Analysis – Improvement to Algorithm Delay over Backup Path also affects jitter ! Long backup paths : Higher end-to-end delay : Higher Switching time so have to constrain backup path construction also New expression for switching time —T p + RTT + (t2-t1) < max. switching delay Improvements to our Algorithm due to this
36
Steps in Rerouting
37
35 A Mechanism for Notification After a fault is detected, notification needs to be sent to the SSR for switching the traffic Some nodes will participate in notification and the SSR will switch the route What information will be passed after a fault occurs ? What changes do we need in the LSR tables for switching? Case of Multiple LSPs : All LSPs using that segment may not pass through the faulty node/link – Only concerned LSPs should be switched
38
36 A Mechanism for Notification
39
37 Other work Creating Backup paths using tunnels Analysis of Liveness message periodicity
40
38 Future Work Label Management and Distribution Issues Formal Definition of Protocol and Signaling Mechanisms required for detection, notification and other parts of our scheme Use of buffering to reduce packet loss during switchover Recovery Issues Implementation of our scheme in MPLS emulator.
41
39 Targets specified in Mid-sem December 1 st 2001 —Error detection and notification issues in Segment based protection (SBP) —Work out example scenarios using SBP —An algorithm for SBP —Label management issues in SBP May 1 st 2002 —Simulations to test performance and resource usage vs. other schemes —Explore other issues like Buffering —Documenting our work
42
Thank You
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.