MPLS Te

Diffserv-aware MPLS-TE
Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 1

Why combine DiffServ and TE?
R1,R2 -> R8 is 40Mbps each, 20Mbps is voice.
Also voice is limited to 25% of link
R1
R4
R5 R8
R3
100 Mbps
R2
R6 R7

When TE is not enough
Traffic engineering operates at an aggregate level across all classes of
service.
The applications that generate most revenue are usually tied to strict
SLAs, and require strict QoS (delay, jitter, loss).
Traffic engineering alone cannot solve all application scenarios.

Examples:
• Limiting the proportion of traffic on a link (for voice services)
• Providing guaranteed bandwidth services
Copyright ©©2004
Copyright 2003Juniper
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
Inc. Proprietary andConfidential
Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net
www.juniper.net 3
Can Diffserv solve the problem?
DiffServ dictates the scheduling/queuing behavior
given to traffic at every hop, but does not control
the path the traffic is taking.
If links are congested packets will be dropped

(cannot guarantee low-loss).
If queues are long, queuing delays are long (cannot

guarantee overall-delay).
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 4
QoS using over-provisioning
If the amount of delay-sensitive traffic is small and
the available bandwidth is plentiful – there is
nothing to do, it just works.
Problems:
• Wastes a lot of resources.
• Problematic to guarantee for failure scenarios.
• What happens when the traffic increases?
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 5
The case against over provisioning
Over provisioning gives no guarantees in case of failure scenarios:

•Under normal conditions voice traffic takes the A-C-D which is the shortest path
•The links are large so the percentage of voice on each link is acceptable
•When the failure happens the traffic fails over on A-C-G-D path
•The link C-G is low capacity, and thus the percentage of voice becomes
unacceptable
•The traffic should have re-routed on A-C-E-F-D

QoS – the requirements
If links are congested packets will be dropped -> avoid
congestion by mapping the traffic to paths that have
enough resources, both in the steady-state case and in the
failure case.
If queues are long, queuing delays are long -> ensure that
queues are short – limit the amount of delay-sensitive
traffic on a link.
In addition to DiffServ, need Traffic Engineering => MPLS

TE
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 7
The goal of MPLS DS-TE
Support different queuing behaviors per DiffServ
class, give different forwarding behavior based on
the class.
Do traffic engineering at a per-class level rather

than at an aggregate level.
Enforce different bandwidth constraints for

different classes of traffic.
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 8
Components of DS-TE
Three components:
• Per-class traffic engineering – RSVP extensions, IGP extensions
• Per-class input policing at the edge – LSP Policing
• Per-class scheduling (one queue for all traffic of a given class) – Diffserv
Per-class traffic engineering + policing at the edge + dedicated queue = QoS
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 9
What is DS-TE good for?
Guaranteed QoS for services – VoIP, “guaranteed
BW” service.
Quality-based transport of all traffic types
Emulating ATM and FR over MPLS
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 10
Terminology – Class-type (CT)
Class-Type (CT or traffic class): collection of traffic flows that will be
treated equivalently from a DS-TE perspective.
Maps to a queue, equivalent to the class-of-service “forwarding-class”

concept.
• CT0: Best effort
• CT1: Expedited forwarding
• CT2: Assured forwarding
• CT3: Network control
The CoS configuration determines the BW available for each CT in JUNOS.
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 11
Terminology: TE Class
Each IGP needs to advertise the available
bandwidth per CT at each priority level on every
link
There are 8 CTs and 8 priority levels resulting on
64 values that need to be stored and propagated
for each link
IETF decided to limit the advertisements to 8
values (from possible 64 values)
TE Class is defines as (CT, priority)

Picking Eight TE-Classes

How DS-TE operates
Extended IGP
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

Routing Table
Database (TED) Path First (CSPF) Constraints
Distributes topology and traffic engineering information
IGP Extensions and mechanisms Explicit Route

• Maximum reservable bandwidth per CT
• Remaining reservable bandwidth per CT
• Link administrative groups (color) RSVP Signaling
• Opaque LSAs for OSPF, New TLVs for IS-IS
2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

Copyright © 2003 Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 14
How DS-TE operates
Extended IGP
Traffic Engineering
Database (TED)

Routing Table
Maintains traffic engineering information

learned from the extended IGP & contains: Explicit Route
• Up-to-date network topology information

• Current reservable bandwidth of links per
CT RSVP Signaling
• Link administrative groups (colors)

How DS-TE operates
Extended IGP User Constraints

Routing Table
User-defined constraints applied to path

selection
• Bandwidth requirements per CT Explicit Route
• Hop limitations
• Administrative groups (colors)
• Priority (setup and hold)
RSVP Signaling
• Explicit route (strict or loose)

How DS-TE operates
Extended IGP Constrained Shortest
Path First (CSPF)

Routing Table
For LSP = (highest priority) to (lowest priority)

Prune links with insufficient bandwidth for the
Explicit Route
CT
Prune links that do not contain an included color
Prune links that contain an excluded color
Calculate shortest path from ingress to egress RSVP Signaling
Select among equal-cost paths
Pass explicit route to RSVP

How DS-TE operates
Extended IGP RSVP signaling and BW
accounting

Routing Table
RSVP signals the LSP.

The available BW is updated on every link.
Explicit Route
The new available BW is fed to the IGPs.
RSVP Signaling

Diffserv-aware MPLS-TE
Dimensions
There are 3 types of LSPs for Diffserv aware MPLS-TE
• Multi-class DSTE E-LSPs - An LSP with multiple classes, with each class
represented by EXP bits, is traffic engineered across the network
• Single class DSTE E-LSPs - An LSP with a single class, with the class
represented by EXP bits, is traffic engineered across the network
• Single class DSTE L-LSPs - An LSP with a single class, with the class
represented by the label and EXP bits, is traffic engineered across the
network
• There is often confusion among the last two

Summary: E and L LSPs

How is bandwidth accounted?
The IETF defined bandwidth models.
They determine the partitioning of BW among the

different CTs
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 21
BW model RDM (Russian dolls)
The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs.

Sharing is allowed.
Requires using preemption to ensure bandwidth guarantees to CTs.
Available in 6.4.
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 22
BW model MAM (maximum allocation)
The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs

No sharing is allowed.
Unused resources cannot be used by other CTs. Good or
bad? Both…
Available in 6.3
Copyright ©©2004
JuniperNetworks,
Networks, Inc.
www.juniper.net 23
Thank You!

MPLS Te

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

MPLS Te

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Diffserv-aware MPLS-TE

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 1

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 2

 Traffic engineering alone cannot solve all application scenarios.

 If links are congested packets will be dropped

 If queues are long, queuing delays are long (cannot

Over provisioning gives no guarantees in case of failure scenarios:

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 6

 In addition to DiffServ, need Traffic Engineering => MPLS

 Do traffic engineering at a per-class level rather

 Enforce different bandwidth constraints for

• Per-class traffic engineering – RSVP extensions, IGP extensions

• Per-class input policing at the edge – LSP Policing

 Per-class traffic engineering + policing at the edge + dedicated queue = QoS

 Quality-based transport of all traffic types

 Emulating ATM and FR over MPLS

 Maps to a queue, equivalent to the class-of-service “forwarding-class”

 The CoS configuration determines the BW available for each CT in JUNOS.

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 12

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 13

Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

 Distributes topology and traffic engineering information

 IGP Extensions and mechanisms Explicit Route

• Remaining reservable bandwidth per CT

• Link administrative groups (color) RSVP Signaling

• Opaque LSAs for OSPF, New TLVs for IS-IS

2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

 Maintains traffic engineering information

• Up-to-date network topology information

• Link administrative groups (colors)

2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

 User-defined constraints applied to path

2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

For LSP = (highest priority) to (lowest priority)

2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

Traffic Engineering Constrained Shortest User

RSVP signals the LSP.

2004 Juniper Networks, Inc.

• There is often confusion among the last two

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 19

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 20

 They determine the partitioning of BW among the

 The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs.

 The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs

Copyright © 2004 Juniper Networks, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential www.juniper.net 24

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi

Traffic engineering alone cannot solve all application scenarios.

If links are congested packets will be dropped

If queues are long, queuing delays are long (cannot

In addition to DiffServ, need Traffic Engineering => MPLS

Do traffic engineering at a per-class level rather

Enforce different bandwidth constraints for

Per-class traffic engineering + policing at the edge + dedicated queue = QoS

Quality-based transport of all traffic types

Emulating ATM and FR over MPLS

Maps to a queue, equivalent to the class-of-service “forwarding-class”

The CoS configuration determines the BW available for each CT in JUNOS.

Distributes topology and traffic engineering information

IGP Extensions and mechanisms Explicit Route

Maintains traffic engineering information

User-defined constraints applied to path

They determine the partitioning of BW among the

The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs.

The available bandwidth is partitioned between the CTs