1. The Future of Packet Handling
9:40am
Alan Taylor

2. The Future of Packet Handling From Internet to Infrastructure
Maintain reliability and quality
Cap
Legacy Data
Legacy Data
Public IP
Grow
New Public Network
Internet
Internet
Cap
Cable
Mobile
Voice
Voice
Grow IP to Multi-terabit

3. Agenda Packet Handling Routing Nodes
Packet Handling across the Network
Diffserv Traffic Engineering
Packet Handling with Optical Paths
GMPLS

4. Agenda Packet Handling Routing Nodes
Packet Handling across the Network
Diffserv Traffic Engineering
Packet Handling with Optical Paths
GMPLS

5. System Partitioning Optimum System Partitioning
Update
Forwarding Table
Packet
Processor
Switch Fabric
Routing Software OS
I/O Card
Optimum System Partitioning
Clean division of tasks
Each partition is a consistent interface
Light traffic levels across partition
Independent scaling design decisions
Each block works well within its limits #1 #2 #3

6. System Partitioning Partition #1 Routing Engine-Packet Processor
Update
Forwarding Table
Packet
Processor
Switch Fabric
Routing Software OS
I/O Card
Partition #1
Routing Engine-Packet Processor
RE software never in forwarding path
Software capabilities independent of platform size
RE processing power scaling independent of forwarding capacity
Atomic updates to forwarding and processing tables
Packet Processor dedicated to all packet-by-packet tasks

7. System Partitioning Partition #2 Packet Processor-Switch Fabric Update
Forwarding Table
Packet
Processor
Switch Fabric
Routing Software OS
I/O Card
Partition #2
Packet Processor-Switch Fabric
Packet Processor dedicated to all packet-by-packet tasks
Protocol Specific
Packet Services
Independent scaling decision at each level
Packet processing services independent of platform size
Switch fabric dedicated to packet transport from interface to interface
Protocol independent

8. System Partitioning Partition #3 Switch Fabric-I/O cards Update Packet
Forwarding Table
Packet
Processor
Switch Fabric
Routing Software OS
I/O Card
Partition #3
Switch Fabric-I/O cards
Switch fabric dedicated to packet transport from interface to interface
Interface media independent
Optimal support for CoS functions
I/O card technology specific to interface
I/O card technology independent of platform size
Facilitates live-swap without disruption

9. Routing Software OS Purpose built for Internet scale
Optimised for stability as never in forwarding path
Modular design for high reliability
Processes run in their own protected memory space
Modules can be restarted independently and gracefully
Best-in-class routing protocol implementations
Operating System
Protocols
Adjacency Mgmt
Chassis Mgmt
SNMP
Security

10. Optimised Software Partitioning
Co-Operative Multi-tasking
Process run until finished
Good data consistency
Real time functions poorly served
Pre-Emptive Multi-tasking
Scheduled time slices to each process
UNIX-like kernel operation
Separate real time functions
Not appropriate for shared data functions
Operating System
Protocols
Adjacency Mgmt
Chassis Mgmt
SNMP
Security

11. Agenda Packet Handling Routing Nodes
Packet Handling across the Network
Diffserv Traffic Engineering
Packet Handling with Optical Paths
GMPLS

12. What Is Traffic Engineering?
Source
Destination
Layer 3 Routing
Traffic Engineering
Ability to control traffic flows in the network
Optimize available resources
Move traffic from IGP path to less congested path

13. Traffic Engineering with MPLS
Egress LSR
Ingress LSR
User defined LSP
constraints
Common IP control plane
Explicitly routed MPLS path
Controlled from ingress using RSVP signalling
Constraint Based Routing extensions to IS-IS or OSPF
Fast Reroute reliability options

14. Constraint-Based Routing: Service Model
Operations Performed by the Ingress LSR
Routing Table
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained
Shortest Path First
User
Constraints
Explicit Route
1) Store information from IGP flooding
2) Store traffic engineering information
3) Examine user defined constraints
RSVP Signaling
4) Calculate the physical path for the LSP
5) Represent path as an explicit route
6) Pass ERO to RSVP for signaling

15. Constraint-Based Routing Example
label-switched-path madrid_to_stockholm{
to Stockholm;
from Madrid;
admin-group {include red, green}
cspf}
Stockholm
London
Paris
Munich
Geneva
Madrid
Rome

16. Diffserv Aware Traffic Engineering
Combines Traffic Engineering with Diffserv
MPLS paths meeting per class service requirements
Constraint Based Routing per Class
Bandwidth constraints per Class
Admission Control per Class over different bandwidth pools
Independent Preemption Priority
Specified in draft-lefaucheur-diff-te-proto-01.txt

17. Constraint-Based Routing: Service Model
Operations Performed by the Ingress LSR
Routing Table
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained
Shortest Path First
User
Constraints
Explicit Route
1) Store information from IGP flooding
2) Store traffic engineering information
3) Examine user defined constraints
RSVP Signaling
4) Calculate the physical path for the LSP
5) Represent path as an explicit route
6) Pass ERO to RSVP for signaling

18. Constraint-Based Routing: Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)
User
Constraints
Routing Table
Distributes topology and traffic engineering information
IGP Extensions
Maximum reservable bandwidth per CT
Remaining reservable bandwidth per CT
Link administrative groups (colour)
Mechanisms
Opaque LSAs for OSPF
New TLVs for IS-IS
Explicit Route
RSVP Signaling

19. Constraint-Based Routing: TED
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)
User
Constraints
Routing Table
Maintains traffic engineering information learned from the extended IGP
Contents
Up-to-date network topology information
Current reservable bandwidth of links per CT
Link administrative groups (colours)
Explicit Route
RSVP Signaling

20. Constraint-Based Routing: User Constraints
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)
User
Constraints
Routing Table
User-defined constraints applied to path selection
Bandwidth requirements per CT
Hop limitations
Administrative groups (colors)
Priority (setup and hold)
Explicit route (strict or loose)
Overbooking per CT
Preemption Priority for each class
Explicit Route
RSVP Signaling

21. Constraint-Based Routing: CSPF Algorithm
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)
User
Constraints
Routing Table
For LSP = (highest priority) to (lowest priority)
Prune links with insufficient bandwidth for CT
Prune links that do not contain an included color
Prune links that contain an excluded color
Calculate shortest path from ingress to egress
Select among equal-cost paths
Pass explicit route to RSVP
END FOR
Explicit Route
RSVP Signaling

22. Constraint-Based Routing: with DS-TE
Seattle
Chicago
New
York
San
Francisco
Kansas
City
Los
Angeles
Atlanta
label-switched-path SF_to_NY {
to New_York;
from San_Francisco;
CT EF
BW 100 MB; }
Dallas

23. Agenda Packet Handling Routing Nodes
Packet Handling across the Network
Diffserv Traffic Engineering
Packet Handling with Optical Paths
GMPLS

24. The Emerging Two-Layer Network
IP Service
(Routers)
Optical Core
Optical Transport
(OXCs, WDMs)
Packet Routing Layer provides-
Any-to-any datagram connectivity
Packet Processing granularity
Class of Service classification and handling
IP service delivery
Optical Layer provides flexible optical bandwidth
Dynamic provisioning of optical bandwidth provides growth and innovative service creation

25. Extends MPLS control plane to support multiple switching types
Generalized MPLS
Extends MPLS control plane to support multiple switching types
Packet switching
TDM switching (SONET/SDH)
Wavelength switching (lambda)
Physical port switching (fiber)
GMPLS sets up LSPs of a particular type (therefore between like devices / ports)
Eg, Router-to-Router using TDM or l-switch;
Or, TDM-to-TDM using l-switch;
Etc.

26. Uses existing and evolving technologies
Generalized MPLS
Uses existing and evolving technologies
Based on IP routing and signaling
Builds on MPLS, and includes MPLS
Distinction: packet vs. non-packet MPLS
Is not a protocol, but a suite of protocols
Just as MPLS is not a protocol
Facilitates parallel evolution in the IP and transmission domains
“Supports” peer and overlay models

27. Overlay and Peer Models
Overlay model
Two independent control planes
IP/MPLS routing
Optical domain routing
Router is client of optical domain
Optical topology invisible to routers
Peer model
Single integrated control plane
Router and optical switches are peers
Optical topology is visible to routers ?
11:43am

28. GMPLS Mechanisms Extensions to OSPF and IS-IS Forwarding adjacency
LSP hierarchy
Constraint-based routing
Signaling extensions
Link Management Protocol (LMP)
Link bundling
12:00 noon

29. GMPLS: IGP Extensions ISIS extensions to carry GMPLS information
New sub-TLVs for Extended IS Reachability TLV
Outgoing/Incoming Interface Identifier
Maximum LSP Bandwidth
Link protection
New TLVs
Link descriptor (encoding and transmission rate)
Shared risk link group (list of SRLGs)
Defined in draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-09.txt

30. GMPLS: IGP Extensions OSPF extensions to carry GMPLS information
New sub-TLVs for the Link TLV within the TE Opaque LSA
Outgoing/Incoming Interface Identifier
Link protection type
Link descriptor (encoding and transmission rate)
Shared risk link group (list of SRLGs)
Maximum LSP bandwidth sub-TLV (replaces maximum link bandwidth)
Defined in draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-05.txt

31. GMPLS: Forwarding Adjacency
Ingress Node
(low order LSP)
Egress Node
SONET/SDH
ADM
SONET/SDH
ADM
Ingress Node
(high order LSP)
Egress Node
FA-LSP
ATM
Switch
ATM
Switch
A node can advertise an LSP into IGP
Establish LSP using RSVP/CR-LDP signaling
IGP floods FA-LSP
Link state database and traffic engineering database maintains conventional links & FA-LSPs
A second node wanting to create an LSP can use an FA-LSP as a”link” in the path for a new lower order LSP
The second node uses RSVP to establish label bindings for the lower order LSP

32. (multiplex low-order LSPs) (demultiplex low-order LSPs)
GMPLS: LSP Hierarchy
PSC
Cloud
TDM
Cloud
LSC
Cloud
LSC
Cloud
TDM
Cloud
PSC
Cloud
FSC Cloud
Fiber 1
Bundle
Fiber n
FA-PSC
FA-TDM
FA-LSC
Explicit
Label LSPs
Time-slot
LSPs
Time-slot
LSPs
Explicit
Label LSPs
l LSPs
l LSPs
Fiber LSPs
(multiplex low-order LSPs)
(demultiplex low-order LSPs)
Improves scalability through LSP aggregation
Packet capable links can support multiple levels via label stacking
Allows hierarchy of link aggregation mechanisms
LSPs always start and terminate on similar interface types
Achieved via construction of LSP regions

33. (multiplex low-order LSPs) (demultiplex low-order LSPs)
GMPLS: LSP Hierarchy
PSC
Cloud
TDM
Cloud
LSC
Cloud
LSC
Cloud
TDM
Cloud
PSC
Cloud
FSC Cloud
Fiber 1
Bundle
Fiber n
FA-PSC
FA-TDM
FA-LSC
Explicit
Label LSPs
Time-slot
LSPs
Time-slot
LSPs
Explicit
Label LSPs
l LSPs
l LSPs
Fiber LSPs
(multiplex low-order LSPs)
(demultiplex low-order LSPs)
LSP interface hierarchy
Packet Switch Capable (PSC) Lowest
Time Division Multiplexing Capable (TDM)
Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)
Fiber Switch Capable (FSC) Highest
Defined in the IGP by Link Mux Capability sub-TLV

34. GMPLS: Constraint-Based Routing
Extended IGP
Routing Table
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)
Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)
User
Constraints
Reduce the level of manual configuration
Input to CSPF:
Path performance constraints
Resource availability
Topology information (including FA-LSPs)
Output: Explicit route for GMPLS signaling
Explicit Route
RSVP Signaling

35. GMPLS: RSVP Signaling Extensions
PATH
RESV
SONET/SDH
ADM
SONET/SDH
ADM
Label Related Formats
Generalized Label Request
Link Protection Type
LSP Encoding Type
Generalized Label Object supports implicit TDM, λ, or fiber labels
Suggested Label
Label Set
Support for bidirectional LSPs

36. GMPLS: Signaling Extensions
PATH
RESV
SONET/SDH
ADM
SONET/SDH
ADM
Expedited failure and event notification
Initiate restoration of failed paths
Path state removal following failures
Egress control (output interface & LSP splicing)
Extend ERO or Label ER-hop
See
draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06.txt
draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-07.txt

37. GMPLS: Link Management Protocol
LMP
LMP
LMP
LMP
Core functions of the Link Management Protocol
Control channel management
Link property correlation
Additional tools specified for LMP
Link connectivity verification
Fault isolation
See draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-03.txt

38. Conclusion Routing Nodes based on clean and consistent partitioning
Hardware and software
Handling different traffic classes across the Network
Diffserv Traffic Engineering
Routing Layer interaction with Optical Paths
GMPLS

39. Thank You
12:26am