1 MPLS Concepts Overview This module explains the features of Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) compared to traditional ATM and hop-by-hop IP routing. MPLS concepts and terminology as well as MPLS label format and Label Switch Router (LSR) architecture and operations are explained. The module contains the following topics: Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing Basic MPLS Concepts MPLS Labels and Label Stack MPLS Applications Differences Between Tag Switching and MPLS Objectives Upon completion of this module, the learner will be able to perform the following tasks: Identify the drawbacks of traditional IP routing Describe basic MPLS concepts and LSR types Describe how different MPLS applications coexist on the same platform using the same underlying technology List the standard bodies that are working on MPLS technology and the relationship between Tag Switching and MPLS
3 Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, the learner will be able to identify the drawbacks of traditional IP routing. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-3
4 Traditional IP Forwarding Traditional IP forwarding is based on the following: Routing protocols are used to distribute Layer 3 (L3) routing information Forwarding is based on the destination address only Routing lookups are performed on every hop 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v2.1-5 Before explaining basic MPLS functionality, three drawbacks of traditional IP forwarding should be highlighted: Routing protocols are used on all devices to distribute the routing information. Regardless of the routing protocol, routers always forward packets based on the destination address only. The only exception is policy-based routing (PBR) that bypasses the destination-based routing lookup. Routing lookups are performed on every router. Each router in the network makes an independent decision when forwarding packets. MPLS helps reduce the number of routing lookups, possibly changes the forwarding criteria, and eliminates the need to run a particular routing protocol on all the devices. 1-4 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
5 Traditional IP Forwarding (Cont.) Routing lookup Update: / Update: /8 Routing lookup Routing lookup Destination-based routing lookup is needed on every hop Every router may need full Internet routing information (more than 100,000 routes) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v2.1-6 This figure illustrates how routers in a service provider network forward packets based on their destination addresses. The figure also shows that all the routers need to run a routing protocol (BGP) to get all the Internet routing information. Every router in the path performs a destination-based routing lookup in a large forwarding table. Forwarding complexity is usually related to the size of the forwarding table and the switching mechanism. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-5
6 IP over ATM Layer 2 (L2) topology may be different from L3 topology resulting in suboptimal paths and link utilization L2 devices have no knowledge of L3 routing information virtual circuits must be manually established Even if the two topologies overlap, the hub-and-spoke topology is usually used because of easier management 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v2.1-7 This figure illustrates a worst-case scenario where Layer 2 (L2) and Layer 3 (L3) topologies do not overlap. The result is that a single packet could be propagated with three L2 hops but instead requires 7 hops. The reason is that L2 devices have static information about how to interconnect L3 devices. Routers use a routing protocol to propagate L3 routing information through the intermediary router. Even in another L2 topology, where the forwarding to the hub router was more optimal, the packet forwarding from the rightmost router to the leftmost router would still require unnecessary hops. The only possible solution to get optimal forwarding from any router to any other router would be to have a full mesh of virtual circuits. But this is rarely used due to its complexity. 1-6 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
7 Traffic Engineering with Traditional IP Forwarding Large site A Primary OC-192 link Large site B Backup OC-48 link Small site C Most traffic goes between large sites A and B and only uses the primary link Destination-based routing does not provide any mechanism for load balancing across unequal paths Policy-based routing can be used to forward packets based on other parameters, but this is not a scalable solution 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v2.1-8 This figure illustrates a topology with unequal links. Traffic patterns illustrate that most of the traffic goes between sites A and B. Traditional IP forwarding does not have a scalable mechanism to allow the utilization of the backup link (unequal load balancing). Policy-based routing could be used to select some packets and route those along the backup link. But this is not possible in high volume traffic due to performance limitations. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-7
8 Summary After completing this lesson, you should be able to identify the following drawbacks of traditional IP routing: Routing protocols with full routing information are required on all routers. Routers make a destination-based forwarding decision only. Routers must make a routing lookup on every hop. Lesson Review 1. List major drawbacks of traditional IP routing. 2. Based on what information do routers forward IP packets? 3. What mechanism can be used to forward packets based on other parameters? 4. Why is this mechanism not suitable for large networks? 1-8 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
9 Basic MPLS Concepts Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, the learner will be able to perform the following tasks: Describe MPLS architecture Describe the MPLS approach to IP routing Describe the difference between data plane and control plane in MPLS Describe the difference between packet-mode and cell-mode MPLS List LSR types Describe LSR architecture Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-9
10 Basic MPLS Concepts MPLS is a new forwarding mechanism in which packets are forwarded based on labels Labels may correspond to IP destination networks (equal to traditional IP forwarding) Labels can also correspond to other parameters (QoS, source address, etc.) MPLS was designed to support forwarding of other protocols as well 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS is a new switching mechanism that uses labels (numbers) to forward packets. Labels usually correspond to L3 destination addresses (equal to destination-based routing). Labels can also correspond to other parameters (Quality of Service [QoS], source address, etc.). MPLS was designed to support other protocol stacks than IP as well. Label switching is performed regardless of the L3 protocol Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
11 MPLS Example L=3 L=5 Label removal and routing lookup L=3 Label swapping L=5! L=3 Routing lookup and label assignment /8! L=5 Only edge routers must perform a routing lookup Core routers switch packets based on simple label lookups and swap labels 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates a situation where the intermediary router does not have to perform a time-consuming routing lookup. Instead this router simply swaps a label with another label (5 is replaced by 3) and forwards the packet based on the received label (3). In larger networks the result of MPLS labeling is that only the edge routers perform a routing lookup. All the core routers forward packets based on the labels. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-11
12 MPLS vs. IP-over-ATM L=17 L=3 L= L2 devices run a L3 routing protocol and establish virtual circuits dynamically based on L3 information L2 devices are IP-aware and run a routing protocol There is no need to manually establish virtual circuits MPLS provides a virtual full-mesh topology 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates how MPLS is used in ATM networks to provide optimal routing across L2 ATM switches. In order for MPLS to work with ATM switches, the switches must be somewhat L3 aware. The ATM switches must run a L3 routing protocol and thus have knowledge about how to reach L3 subnets. The ATM switches automatically create a full mesh of virtual circuits based on L3 routing information. The VCs are used to forward the user data segmented into ATM cells. Another benefit of this setup is that there is no longer a need to manually establish virtual circuits Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
13 Traffic Engineering with MPLS Large site A Primary OC-192 link Large site B Secondary OC-48 link Small site C Traffic can be forwarded based on other parameters (QoS, source, etc.) Load sharing across unequal paths can be achieved 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS also supports traffic engineering. Traffic engineered tunnels can be created based on traffic analysis to provide load balancing across unequal paths. Multiple traffic engineering tunnels can lead to the same destination but can use different paths. Traditional IP forwarding would force all traffic to use the same path based on the destination-based forwarding decision. Traffic engineering determines the path at the source based on additional parameters (available resources and constraints in the network). Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-13
14 MPLS Architecture MPLS has two major components: Control plane exchanges L3 routing information and labels Data plane forwards packets based on labels Control plane contains complex mechanisms to exchange routing information (OSPF, EIGRP, IS-IS, BGP, etc.) and labels (Tag Distribution protocol [TDP], Label Distribution protocol [LDP], BGP, RSVP, etc.) Data plane has a simple forwarding engine Control plane maintains the contents of the label switching table (label forwarding information base or LFIB) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v To better understand the inner workings of MPLS its two major components have to be introduced: Control plane: Takes care of the routing information exchange and the label exchange between adjacent devices Data plane: Takes care of forwarding either based on destination addresses or labels There is a large number of different routing protocols such as OSPF, IGRP, EIGRP, IS-IS, RIP, BGP, etc. that can be used in the control plane. The control plane also requires protocols to exchange labels, such as: Tag Distribution Protocol [TDP] (MPLS) Label Distribution Protocol [LDP] (MPLS) BGP (MPLS virtual private networks [VPNs]) Resource-Reservation Protocol [RSVP] (MPLS Traffic Engineering [MPLS- TE]) CR-LDP (MPLS-TE) The data plane however, is a simple label-based forwarding engine that is independent of the type of routing protocol or label exchange protocol. A Label Forwarding Information Base (LFIB) is used to forward packets based on labels. The LFIB table is populated by the label exchange protocols used in the control plane Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
15 MPLS Architecture (Cont.) OSPF: /8 Control plane OSPF OSPF: /8 LDP: /8 Label 17 LDP LDP: /8 Label 4 Labeled packet Label 17 Data plane LFIB 4!17 Labeled packet Label 4 Router s functionality is divided into two major parts: control plane and data plane 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v A simple MPLS implements destination-based forwarding that uses labels to make forwarding decisions. A L3 routing protocol is still needed to propagate L3 routing information. A label exchange mechanism is simply an add-on to propagate labels that are used for L3 destinations. This figure illustrates the two components of the control plane: OSPF that receives IP network /8 from the left neighbor and forwards it to the right neighbor. LDP that receives label 17 from the left neighbor to be used for packets with a destination address 10.x.x.x when forwarded to that neighbor. A local label 4 is generated and sent to upstream neighbors so these neighbors can label packets with the appropriate label. LDP inserts an entry into Data Plane s LFIB table where label 4 is mapped to label 17. The data plane then forwards all packets with label 4 through the appropriate interfaces and replaces the label with label 17. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-15
16 MPLS Modes of Operation MPLS technology is intended to be used anywhere regardless of Layer 1 (L1) media and L2 protocol MPLS uses a 32-bit label field which is inserted between L2 and L3 headers (frame-mode) MPLS over ATM uses the ATM header as the label (cell-mode) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS is designed for use on virtually any media and L2 encapsulation. Most L2 encapsulations are frame-based and MPLS simply inserts a 32-bit label between the L2 and L3 headers ( frame-mode MPLS). ATM is a special case where fixed-length cells are used and a label cannot be inserted on every cell. MPLS uses the virtual path identifier/ virtual channel identifier (VPI/VCI) fields in the ATM header as a label ( cell-mode MPLS) Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
17 Label Format LABEL EXP S TTL MPLS uses a 32-bit label field that contains the following information: 20-bit label 3-bit experimental field 1-bit bottom-of-stack indicator 8-bit time-to-live field (TTL) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v A 32-bit label contains the following fields: 20-bit label: The actual label 3-bit experimental field: It is used to define a class of service (i.e. IP precedence) Bottom-of-stack bit: MPLS allows multiple labels to be inserted; this bit is used to determine if this is the last label in the packet 8-bit time-to-live (TTL) field: It has the same purpose as the TTL field in the IP header Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-17
18 Frame-Mode MPLS Frame header IP header Layer 2 Layer 3 Routing lookup and label assignment Payload Frame header Label IP header Payload Layer 2 Layer 2½ Layer , Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates an edge router that receives a normal IP packet. The router then performs the following actions: Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Routing lookup to determine the outgoing interface Label is assigned and inserted between L2 frame header and L3 packet header if the outgoing interface is enabled for MPLS and a next-hop label for the destination exists The labeled packet is sent Other routers in the core simply forward packets based on the label Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
19 Cell-Mode MPLS Frame header IP header Layer 2 Layer 3 Payload Frame header Label IP header Payload Layer 2 Layer 2½ Layer 3 Cell 1 Cell 2 ATM header ATM header VPI/VCI fields are used for label switching AAL5 header Label IP header Payload Layer 2 Layer 2½ Layer 3 Payload 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Cell-mode MPLS uses the ATM header s VPI/VCI field for forwarding decisions while the 32-bit label is still preserved in the frame but not used in the ATM network. The original label is only present in the first cell of a packet. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-19
20 LSR MPLS Domain L=3 L= L=31 L= Edge LSR LSR LSR primarily forwards labeled packets (label swapping) Edge LSR primarily labels IP packets and forwards them into MPLS domain, or removes labels and forwards IP packets out of the MPLS domain 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Before proceeding with a detailed description of MPLS, some of the terminology that is used in this course is presented: LSR: A device that primarily forwards packets based on labels Edge LSR: A device that primarily labels packets or removes labels LSRs and Edge LSRs are usually devices that are capable of doing both label switching and IP routing. Their names are based on their position in an MPLS domain. Routers that have all interfaces enabled for MPLS are called LSRs because they mostly forward labeled packets. Routers that have some interfaces that are not enabled for MPLS are usually at the edge of an MPLS domain (autonomous system). These routers also forward packets based on IP destination addresses and label them if the outgoing interface is enabled for MPLS Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
21 ATM LSR MPLS Domain L=1/3 L=1/3 L=1/3 L=1/5 L=1/5 L=1/ L=1/6 L=1/6 L=1/6 L=1/9 L=1/9 L=1/ ATM Edge LSR ATM LSR ATM LSR can only forward cells ATM Edge LSR segments packets into cells and forwards them into an MPLS ATM domain, or reassembles cells into packets and forwards them out of an MPLS ATM domain 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v LSRs that perform cell-mode MPLS are called: ATM LSR if they are ATM switches. All interfaces are enabled for MPLS and forwarding is done of cells only, based on labels. ATM Edge LSR if they are routers connected to an MPLS-enabled ATM network. Some interfaces are traditional IP interfaces where IP packets are exchanged. The IP packets are segmented into cells and forwarded into the MPLS ATM domain on cell-mode MPLS enabled interfaces. Cell traffic in the other direction is reassembled into IP packets. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-21
22 Architecture of LSRs LSRs, regardless of the type, perform the following three functions: Exchange routing information Exchange labels Forward packets (LSRs and edge LSRs) or cells (ATM LSRs and ATM edge LSRs) The first two functions are part of the control plane The last function is part of the data plane 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v LSRs of all types must perform the following functions: Exchange L3 routing information (ATM LSRs must also exchange L3 routing information) Exchange labels Forward packets or cells Frame-mode and cell-mode MPLS use a different data plane: Frame-mode MPLS forwards packets based on the 32-bit label Cell-mode MPLS forwards packets based on labels encoded into the VPI/VCI fields in the ATM header The control plane performs the following functions: Exchange routing information regardless of the type of LSR Exchange labels according to the type of MPLS (frame-mode or cell-mode) 1-22 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
23 Architecture of LSRs (Cont.) LSR Exchange of routing information Control plane Routing protocol IP routing table Exchange of labels Label distribution protocol Incoming labeled packets Data plane Label forwarding table Outgoing labeled packets LSRs primarily forward labeled packets or cells (ATM LSRs) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v The primary function of an LSR is to forward labeled packets. Therefore, every LSR needs a L3 routing protocol (OSPF, EIGRP, IS-IS, etc.) and a label exchange protocol (LDP, TDP, etc.). The label exchange protocol populates the LFIB table in the data plane that is used to forward labeled packets. Note LSRs may not be able to forward unlabeled packets either because they are ATM LSRs, or they do not have all the routing information. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-23
24 Architecture of Edge LSRs Edge LSR Exchange of routing information Control plane Routing protocol IP routing table Exchange of labels Label distribution protocol Incoming IP packets Incoming labeled packets Data plane IP forwarding table Label forwarding table Outgoing IP packets Outgoing labeled packets Note: ATM edge LSRs can only forward cells 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Edge LSRs also forward IP packets based on their IP destination addresses and optionally label them if a label exists. The following combinations are possible: A received IP packet is forwarded based on the IP destination address and sent as an IP packet A received IP packet is forwarded based on the IP destination address and sent as a labeled packet A received labeled packet is forwarded based on the label; the label is changed and the packet is sent A received labeled packet is forwarded based on the label; the label is removed and the packet is sent out is an IP packet The following scenarios are possible if the network is misconfigured: A received labeled packet is dropped if the label is not found in the LFIB table even if the IP destination exists in the FIB table A received IP packet is dropped if the destination is not found in the FIB table even if there is a label-switched path (LSP) available for the destination 1-24 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
25 Summary MPLS architecture is divided into two parts: Control plane that takes care of routing information and label propagation Data plane that takes care of the forwarding of packets MPLS has two modes: Frame-mode MPLS that is used on all frame-based media Cell-mode MPLS that is used in MPLS-enabled ATM networks MPLS networks use the following devices: LSR to forward packets based on a 32-bit label Edge LSR to forward labeled packets or label IP packets or remove labels ATM LSRs to forward cells based on labels encoded into the VPI/VCI fields in the ATM header ATM Edge LSRs that segment labeled or unlabeled packets into ATM cells where a label is encoded into VPI/VCI fields in the ATM header Lesson Review 1. What are the major drawbacks of traditional IP forwarding and how does MPLS solve them? 2. What functions does an LSR perform? 3. List the types of LSRs. 4. Name the two modes of MPLS. 5. Explain the difference between an LSR and an Edge LSR. 6. Explain the difference between an LSR and an ATM LSR. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-25
27 MPLS Labels and Label Stack Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, the learner will be able to perform the following tasks: Describe the format of MPLS label Explain the concept of the MPLS Label Stack Describe the way MPLS labels are used in Packet-mode and ATM environment Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-27
28 MPLS Label Format LABEL EXP S TTL MPLS uses a 32-bit label field that contains the following information: 20-bit label (a number) 3-bit experimental field (usually used to carry IP precedence value) 1-bit bottom-of-stack indicator (indicates whether this is the last label before the IP header) 8-bit TTL (equal to the TTL in IP header) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS uses a 32-bit label that is inserted between the L2 and L3 header. An MPLS label contains four fields: The actual label Experimental field Bottom-of-stack bit TTL field 1-28 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
29 MPLS Labels Labels are inserted between the L2 (frame) header and the L3 (packet) header There can be more than one label (label stack) Bottom-of-stack bit indicates if the label is the last label in the label stack TTL field is used to prevent indefinite looping of packets Experimental bits are usually used to carry the IP precedence value 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Labels are inserted between the L2 (frame) header and the L3 (packet) header. In some MPLS applications (e.g. MPLS VPN) more than one label is required. In those cases the multiple labels form label stack. Each label contains the following fields: 20-bit label: The actual label, which is a simple 20-bit number that has local significance and changes on every hop. 3-bit experimental field: Currently used to define a class of service such by reflecting the IP precedence of the encapsulated IP packet. Cisco routers automatically assign the IP precedence value to this field. Bottom-of-stack bit: MPLS allows multiple labels to be inserted. The bottom-of-stack bit is used to determine if this is the last label in the packet. This bit is set to 1 in the last label in the packet. 8-bit TTL field: It has the same purpose as the TTL field in the IP header. This field is decreased on every hop. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-29
30 MPLS Label Stack Frame header Label 1 Label 2 Label 3 IP header Payload PID=MPLS-IP S=0 S=0 S=1 Protocol identifier in a L2 header specifies that the payload starts with a label (labels) and is followed by an IP header Bottom-of-stack bit indicates whether the next header is another label or a L3 header Receiving router uses the top label only 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v A label does not contain any information about the L3 protocol being carried in a packet. A new protocol identifier is used for every MPLS enabled L3 protocol. This list shows the ethertype values used to identify L3 protocols with most L2 encapsulations: Unlabeled IP unicast: PID=0x0800 identifies that the frame payload is an IP packet. Labeled IP unicast: PID=0x8847 identifies that the frame payload is a unicast IP packet with at least one label preceding the IP header. The bottomof-bit indicates when the IP header actually starts. Labeled IP multicast: PID=0x8848 identifies that the frame payload is a multicast IP packet with at least one label preceding the IP header. The bottom-of-bit indicates when the IP header actually starts. A router that receives a frame where the PID indicates that it is a labeled packet uses only the top label in stack for forwarding decisions Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
31 MPLS Label Stack (Cont.) Usually there is only one label assigned to a packet The following scenarios may produce more than one label: MPLS VPNs (two labels the top label points to the egress routers and the second label identifies the VPN) Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) (two or more labels the top label points to the endpoint of the traffic engineering tunnel and the second label points to the destination) Any Transport over MPLS (two labels the top label points to the egress routers and the second label identifies the outgoing interface) MPLS VPNs combined with Traffic Engineering (three or more labels) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v As previously noted, MPLS supports multiple labels in one packet. Simple MPLS uses just one label in each packet. The following applications may add additional labels to packets: MPLS VPNs use multiprotocol BGP to propagate a second label that is used in addition to the one propagated by TDP or LDP. MPLS-TE uses RSVP to establish label-switched tunnels. RSVP also propagates labels that are used in addition to the one propagated by LDP or TDP. Any Transport over MPLS (AToM) uses a directed multihop LDP session between the edge routers to propagate a second label that is used in addition to the one propagated by the per link LDP- or TDP-sessions. A combination of the above mentioned mechanisms with some other features might result in three or more labels being inserted into one packet. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-31
32 MPLS Forwarding An LSR can perform the following functions: Insert (impose) a label or a stack of labels on ingress. Swap a label with a next-hop label or a stack of labels in the core. Remove (pop) a label on egress. ATM LSRs can only swap a label with one label (VPI/VCI fields change) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v An IP packet going through an MPLS domain experiences the following: A label or a stack of labels is inserted (imposed) on an Edge LSR The top label is swapped with a next-hop label or a stack of labels on an LSR The top label is removed on the LSP endpoint (usually one hop before the egress Edge LSR or on the egress edge LSR itself) ATM LSRs only support the swapping of one label (normal ATM operation) Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
33 MPLS Forwarding (Frame-Mode) MPLS Domain IP Lookup /8! label 3 LFIB label 8! label 3 IP Lookup /8! label 5 LFIB label 3! label 5 IP Lookup /8! next hop LFIB label 5! pop On ingress a label is assigned and imposed by the IP routing process LSRs in the core swap labels based on the contents of the label forwarding table On egress the label is removed and a routing lookup is used to forward the packet 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates an MPLS network using frame-mode MPLS. All LSRs are capable of forwarding IP packets or labeled packets. The ingress edge LSR performs a routing lookup and assigns a label. The middle router simply swaps the label. The egress LSR removes the label (penultimate hop popping is covered later) and optionally performs a routing lookup. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-33
34 MPLS Forwarding (Cell-Mode) MPLS Domain /3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/5 1/5 1/5 1/ IP Lookup /8! label 1/3 LFIB label 8! label 1/3 IP Lookup /8! label 1/5 LFIB label 1/3! label 1/5 IP Lookup /8! Next hop LFIB label 1/5! pop Labels (VPI/VCI) are imposed during the IP lookup process on ingress ATM edge LSRs. Packets are segmented into cells. ATM LSRs in the core swap labels based on the contents of the ATM switching table. ATM LSRs cannot forward IP packets. On egress ATM edge LSRs the labels are removed (cells are reassembled into packets) and a routing lookup is used to forward packets. 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Cell-mode MPLS is similar to frame-mode MPLS. The difference is that ATM LSRs (ATM switches) are not capable of forwarding IP packets: The ingress ATM edge LSR (router) performs an IP routing table lookup and finds the outgoing interface and the label to use. It segments the IP packet into cells and assigns each cell s VPI/VCI field the label value. The ATM LSR in the core (ATM switch) receives ATM cells and uses the VPI/VCI field to forward those cells. This is equivalent to ATM switching. The ATM LSR does not have any concept of packets or frames. It can only handle individual cells. Therefore it can never do any forwarding of IP packets. On the egress ATM edge LSR (router), the cells are reassembled to form an AAL5 frame. The label values in each cell are lost during the reassembly. Also the label between the AAL5 header and the IP header is removed and the IP packet is forwarded Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
35 Summary MPLS uses a 32-bit label that contains the following fields: 20-bit label Three experimental bits Bottom-of-stack bit 8-bit time-to-live (TTL) field MPLS supports multiple labels in a single packet (label stack). Bottom-of-stack bit is used to determine the last label in the stack. Lesson Review 1. What fields does a label have? 2. How does a receiving router know if the packet is labeled or not? 3. How does a receiving router know if there is another label? 4. Why is more than one label needed? 5. What are the major differences between frame-mode and cell-mode MPLS? Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-35
37 MPLS Applications Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, the learner will be able to perform the following tasks: Identify various MPLS applications Describe the overall structure of each MPLS application Explain the interactions between several MPLS applications running on the same platform Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-37
38 MPLS Applications MPLS is already used in many different applications: Unicast IP routing Multicast IP routing MPLS-TE Quality of Service (QoS) Virtual private networks (MPLS VPNs) Any Transport over MPLS (AToM) Regardless of the application, the functionality is always split into the control and the data plane: The applications differ only in the control plane They all use a common label switching data plane Edge LSR L3 data planes may differ In general a label is assigned to a Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS can be used in different applications: Unicast IP routing is the most common application for MPLS Multicast IP routing is treated separately because of different forwarding requirements MPLS-TE is an add-on to MPLS that provides better and more intelligent link utilization Differentiated QoS can also be provided with MPLS MPLS VPNs are implemented using labels to allow overlapping address space between VPNs AToM is allowing transport of L2 frames (or cells) across an MPLS cloud The data plane is the same regardless of the application. The control plane however needs appropriate mechanisms to exchange routing information and labels. The term Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) is used to describe the packets that are using the same Labeled Switched Path (LSP) across the network Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
39 Unicast IP Routing We need two mechanisms on the control plane: IP routing protocol (OSPF, IS-IS, EIGRP, etc.) Label distribution protocol (LDP or TDP) A routing protocol carries the information about the reachability of networks Label distribution protocol binds labels to networks learned via a routing protocol FEC is equal to a destination network, stored in IP routing table 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Unicast IP routing setup usually requires two components: IP routing protocol (OSPF, EIGRP, IS-IS, etc.) Label exchange protocol (TDP or LDP) These two components are enough to create a full mesh of LSPs. A label is assigned to every destination network found in the IP forwarding table. Therefore, a FEC corresponds to an IP destination network. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-39
40 Multicast IP Routing A dedicated protocol is not needed to support multicast traffic across an MPLS domain PIM version 2 with extensions for MPLS is used to propagate routing information as well as labels FEC is equal to a destination multicast addresses, stored in the multicast routing table 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Multicast IP routing can also use MPLS. PIM version 2 with extensions for MPLS is used to propagate routing information and labels. A FEC is equal to a destination multicast address Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
41 MPLS-TE Traffic engineering requires OSPF or IS-IS with extensions for MPLS-TE as the internal gateway protocol (IGP) OSPF and IS-IS with extensions hold the entire topology in their databases OSPF and IS-IS should also have some additional information about network resources and constraints RSVP or CR-LDP are used to establish MPLS- TE tunnels and propagate labels 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS-TE has special requirements: Every LSR must see the entire topology of the network (only OSPF and IS-IS hold the entire topology). Every LSR needs additional information about links in the network (available resources and constraints). OSPF and IS-IS have extensions to propagate this additional information. Every edge LSR must be able to create an LSP (Label Switched Path) on demand. RSVP or Constraint-based Routing LDP (CR-LDP) is used to create an LSP and to propagate labels for MPLS-TE tunnels. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-41
42 QoS QoS is an extension to unicast IP routing that provides differentiated services Extensions to TDP or LDP are used to propagate different labels for different classes FEC is a combination of a destination network and a class of service 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Differentiated QoS is achieved by using MPLS experimental bits or by creating separate LSPs for different classes. Extensions to TDP or LDP are used to create multiple LSPs for the same destination (one for each class). FEC corresponds to the combination of a destination network and the class of service Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
43 VPN Networks are learned via an IGP (OSPF, EBGP, RIPv2 or static) from a customer or via BGP from other internal routers Labels are propagated via multi-protocol BGP Two labels are used: Top label points to the egress router (assigned through LDP or TDP) Second label identifies the outgoing interface on the egress router or a routing table where a routing lookup is performed FEC is equal to a VPN site descriptor or VPN routing table 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS VPNs use an additional label to determine the VPN and the corresponding VPN destination network. BGP with multiprotocol extensions is used to propagate VPN routing information and labels across the MPLS domain. TDP or LDP is still needed to link edge LSRs with a single LSP. FEC corresponds to a VPN destination network. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-43
44 AToM Layer 2 connectivity across MPLS backbone Ethernet, ATM, Frame-Relay or HDLC/PPP are tunneled across MPLS network Labels are propagated via a directed LDP session Two labels are used: Top label points to the egress router (assigned through LDP or TDP) Second label identifies the outgoing interface on the egress router FEC is equal to an outgoing interface descriptor 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v AToM provides forwarding of L2 frames (or cells) across an MPLS backbone. Ethernet, Frame-Relay, High-Level Data Link Control/Point-to-Point Protocol (HDLC/PPP) frames or ATM cells are received by the ingress edge LSR. The L2 frames (or cells) are MPLS encapsulated and assigned a stack of two labels. The top most label will direct the frame to the egress edge LSR. The second label will indicate the outgoing interface on the egress edge LSR. A directed multihop LDP session between the ingress and egress edge LSRs is used to exchange the second label. FEC correspond to an outgoing interface Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
45 Interaction Between MPLS Applications Control plane Unicast IP Routing Multicast IP Routing MPLS Traffic Engineering Quality of Service MPLS/VPN AToM Any IGP OSPF or IS-IS Any IGP Any IGP Unicast IP routing table Multicast IP routing table Unicast IP routing table Unicast IP routing table Unicast IP routing tables LDP/TDP PIM version 2 LDP RSVP LDP/TDP LDP BGP LDP Data plane Label forwarding table 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates the complete architecture when all applications are used. Each application may use a different routing protocol and a different label exchange protocol, but all applications use one single label-forwarding engine. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-45
46 Case Study: MPLS-TE R8 R2 R3 R4 R5 R1 R6 R7 IP (mostly) uses destination based least-cost routing. Flows from R8 and R1 merge at R2. From R2, traffic to R3, R4, and R5 use the upper route. The dashed arrow denotes an underutilized alternative path. 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v This figure illustrates the result of traditional IP forwarding: Step 1 Step 2 Traffic flows from both R1 and R8 towards R5 takes the upper path via R3. This is the result of destination based forwarding in R2. R2 does not make any difference if the packets arrive from R8 or from R1. R2 only cares about the destination. As a result, the upper path may become over utilized while the lower path (via R6 and R7) may become under utilized Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
47 Case Study: MPLS-TE (Cont.) R8 R2 R3 R4 R5 R1 R6 R7 A traffic engineering tunnel is established from R1 via R2, R6 and R7 to R4. Traffic from R1 to R5 is directed into the tunnel. Traffic from R8 to R5 is still using the upper route. 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v When the network operators are detecting the situation with an over utilized primary path and an under utilized alternative path, they want to move some traffic volume from the over utilized to the under utilized path. When using traffic engineering to perform this operation, a traffic engineering tunnel is configured from R1 to R4. This tunnel is engineered to take the lower, under utilized, path. Traffic from R1 to destinations behind R4 can now be directed by R1 into the tunnel. This moves a subset of the volume of traffic that use to take the upper path to now take the lower path. The traffic from R8 is not injected into any tunnel and still takes the upper path. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-47
48 Case Study: VPN Service Provider MPLS network Customer A Customer B Customer B Router-X Router-Y Router-Z Customer C Customer C Customer A The service provider network provides services to customer A, B and C No leaking of packets between different customers should be possible 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v In this case study, a service provider is operating an MPLS based network to provide VPN services to customer A, B and C. Customer A should be able to exchange traffic between all customer A sites, customer B between all customer B sites and the same goes for customer C. But there should be no leaking of packets between the customers. The problem is solved by the MPLS VPN solution: Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Router-X (ingress edge router) receives an IP packet from customer A This packet is MPLS encapsulated and assigned a label stack of two labels The top most label indicates how the packet should be forwarded to reach router-z (egress edge router) The second label indicates for router-z to forward the packet out to the customer-a site 1-48 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
49 Case Study: AToM Service Provider MPLS network F/R PVC End to end Customer Router Customer F/R switch Router-X Router-Y Router-Z Customer F/R switch Customer Router AToM is used to carry Frame Relay (F/R) over MPLS F/R frames received by Router-X is tunneled across the MPLS network to Router-Z where they are delivered to the F/R switch 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v In this case study the service provider, who is operating an MPLS network, is providing forwarding of Frame Relay frames: Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Router-X (ingress edge router) receives Frame Relay (F/R) frames on a serial interface from the customer s left most F/R switch Router-X MPLS encapsulates them and forward them into the MPLS cloud This forwarding can be done on any media type supported by MPLS Each MPLS packet is assigned a stack of two labels. The top most label will indicate how the packet should be forwarded to reach router-z (egress edge router). The second label indicates for router-z to forward the packet out on to the serial interface to the right most F/R switch. For the customer s devices, this appears as transparent F/R link. This means that the two F/R switches can be configured to provide a PVC between the two customer routers. The customer routers now appear as L3 neighbors. Any traffic between them (including routing protocols) will be tunneled across the MPLS cloud. Router-X, router-y and router-z will not see those packets as IP packets at all. Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-49
50 Summary MPLS currently supports the following applications: Unicast IP routing Multicast IP routing QoS MPLS-TE MPLS VPNs AToM Different applications differ in the mechanisms used in the control plane. All applications use the same label forwarding mechanism in the data plane. Lesson Review 1. Where is MPLS used today? 2. Where can MPLS potentially be used in the future? 3. What do the different applications of MPLS have in common? 4. What are the differences between the various applications of MPLS? 1-50 Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
51 Differences Between Tag Switching and MPLS Objectives Upon completion of this lesson, the learner will be able to perform the following tasks: Explain the differences between Tag Switching and MPLS List the IETF standards defining MPLS Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-51
52 MPLS Standardization MPLS functionality has been available in Cisco routers since Cisco IOS software version 11.1CT. It is called Tag Switching and the switching part is equal to standard MPLS The only difference between MPLS and Tag Switching is in the label distribution protocol: Cisco proprietary implementation uses TDP IETF specifies LDP as the standard label distribution protocol Although TDP and LDP are also functionally equivalent, they are not compatible: They can, however, coexist in an MPLS domain as long as any two peers are using the same protocol 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS functionality has been available since Cisco IOS software version 11.1CT and was called Tag Switching. Cisco developed a proprietary label exchange protocol called TDP. IETF s LDP is a standard label exchange protocol which is very similar to Cisco s TDP. The only difference between MPLS and Tag Switching is that MPLS uses LDP and Tag Switching uses TDP as their label distribution protocols. TDP and LDP are not compatible but they can coexist in an MPLS networks as long as any two peers support the same protocol Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
53 MPLS Standards MPLS is basically a standardized version of Tag Switching The following are just some of the many drafts defining MPLS: draft-ietf-mpls-arch draft-ietf-mpls-label-encaps draft-ietf-mpls-ldp Many other drafts can be found at , Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS is a standardized version of Tag Switching. A large number of drafts or RFCs can be found at Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-53
54 TDP vs. LDP MPLS and Tag Switching are equal on the data plane The only difference is on the control plane where Tag Switching uses Cisco proprietary TDP and MPLS uses standard LDP TDP and LDP are functionally equivalent but not compatible TDP uses UDP and TCP port number 711 LDP uses UDP and TCP port number , Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Standard MPLS and Cisco s Tag Switching use the same label format and are therefore, compatible on the data plane. TDP and LDP on the other hand, are different: TDP uses TCP and UDP port number 711 LDP uses TCP and UDP port number 646 TDP and LDP can, generally speaking, perform the same functions. There are only a few exceptions where some new functionality has been added to LDP. But the two protocols are incompatible in the sense that two routers must use a common protocol, otherwise they will not interoperate Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
55 Combining TDP and LDP TDP TDP TDP & LDP TDP LDP LDP TDP LDP LDP TDP TDP to LDP This example shows possible combinations of TDP and LDP TDP is used by default but it may be necessary to enable LDP for non-cisco peering routers 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v Mixing TDP and LDP in the same MPLS domain is possible during a migration from a pure TDP domain into a pure LDP domain. Many existing networks are using TDP but are gradually changed to use LDP when new functions are required which are only added to LDP and not to the legacy TDP protocol. This figure illustrates all possible combinations of using TDP and LDP in the same MPLS domain: TDP to TDP works LDP to LDP works TDP to LDP does not work Due to this incompatibility the recommendation is to avoid using a mix of LDP and TDP on the same link as on the LAN segment in the figure. During a migration phase, a single MPLS domain could very well use LDP on some links and TDP on others, but not LDP and TDP on one and the same link for any sustainable period of time. An LSR may use both TDP and LDP on the same interface to allow label exchange with other Cisco routers (TDP) and non-cisco routers (LDP). Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-55
56 MPLS Implementation MPLS is enabled per interface by enabling one or both distribution protocols The moment LDP or TDP is enabled a router will try to find neighbors through the interface and establish a TDP/LDP session TDP is the default label distribution protocol 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS v MPLS is enabled per interface by enabling one or both of the label distribution protocols (LDP or TDP). Cisco routers use TDP by default. TDP is enabled automatically when Tag Switching or MPLS is enabled on an interface. When LDP is needed, it must either be specifically enabled per interface or the default behavior must be changed. Changing the default behavior requires configuration in global configuration mode. Both TDP and LDP automatically try to find neighbors and establish a session with them Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.1 Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc.
57 Summary Tag Switching and MPLS are compatible on the data plane but not the control plane. TDP is used with Tag Switching and LDP is used with MPLS. Lesson Review 1. What is the difference between Tag Switching and MPLS on the data plane? 2. What is the difference between Tag Switching and MPLS on the control plane? 3. How can Tag Switching and MPLS be combined? 4. Which label switching mechanism is the default switching mechanism on Cisco routers? Copyright 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. MPLS Concepts 1-57
Module 1-1 Introducing Basic MPLS Concepts 2004 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 1-1 Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing Routing protocols are used to distribute Layer 3 routing information. Forwarding
MPLS WAN Topologies 1 Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) IETF standard, RFC3031 Basic idea was to combine IP routing protocols with a forwarding algoritm based on a header with fixed length label instead
IMPLEMENTING CISCO MPLS V3.0 (MPLS) COURSE OVERVIEW: Multiprotocol Label Switching integrates the performance and traffic-management capabilities of data link Layer 2 with the scalability and flexibility
Autumn 2010 firstname.lastname@example.org MULTIPROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING (MPLS) AND MPLS VPNS How Routers Forward Packets Process switching Hardly ever used today Router lookinginside the packet, at the ipaddress,
MEE09:44 BLEKINGE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY School of Engineering Department of Telecommunication Systems Investigation of different VPN Solutions And Comparison of MPLS, IPSec and SSL based VPN Solutions
Expert Reference Series of White Papers An Overview of MPLS VPNs: Overlay; Layer 3; and PseudoWire 1-800-COURSES www.globalknowledge.com An Overview of MPLS VPNs: Overlay; Layer 3; and PseudoWire Al Friebe,
MPLS Environment Introduction to MPLS Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) is a highly efficient and flexible routing approach for forwarding packets over packet-switched networks, irrespective of the
A Silicon Valley Insider MPLS VPN Services PW, VPLS and BGP MPLS/IP VPNs Technology White Paper Serge-Paul Carrasco Abstract Organizations have been demanding virtual private networks (VPNs) instead of
Implementing Cisco MPLS Course MPLS v2.3; 5 Days, Instructor-led Course Description This design document is for the refresh of the Implementing Cisco MPLS (MPLS) v2.3 instructor-led training (ILT) course,
Computer Network Architectures and Multimedia Guy Leduc Chapter 2 MPLS networks Chapter based on Section 5.5 of Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach, 6 th edition. Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley,
1 ISTANBUL 1.1 MPLS overview 1 1.1.1 Principle Use of a ATM core network 2 Overlay Network One Virtual Circuit per communication No routing protocol Scalability problem 2 1.1.1 Principle Weakness of overlay
IMPLEMENTING CISCO MPLS V2.3 (MPLS) COURSE OVERVIEW: The course will enable learners to gather information from the technology basics to advanced VPN configuration. The focus of the course is on VPN technology
Slide supporting material Lesson 13: MPLS Networks Giovanni Giambene Queuing Theor and Telecommunications: Networks and Applications 2nd edition, Springer All rights reserved IP Over ATM Once defined IP
Multiprotocol Label Switching (), originating in IPv4, was initially proposed to improve forwarding speed. Its core technology can be extended to multiple network protocols, such as IPv6, Internet Packet
White Paper RFC 2547bis: BGP/MPLS VPN Fundamentals Chuck Semeria Marketing Engineer Juniper Networks, Inc. 1194 North Mathilda Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA 408 745 2001 or 888 JUNIPER www.juniper.net
Multiprotocol Label Switching Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks with Open ShortestPath First protocol PRASAD ATHUKURI Sreekavitha engineering info technology,kammam Abstract This paper aims at implementing
1 2 3 4 -Lower yellow line is graduate student enrollment -Red line is undergradate enrollment -Green line is total enrollment -2008 numbers are projected to be near 20,000 (on-campus) not including distance
MikroTik RouterOS Introduction to MPLS Prague MUM Czech Republic 2009 Q : W h y h a v e n 't y o u h e a r d a b o u t M P LS b e fo re? A: Probably because of the availability and/or price range Q : W
Enterprise Network Simulation Using MPLS- BGP Tina Satra 1 and Smita Jangale 2 1 Department of Computer Engineering, SAKEC, Chembur, Mumbai-88, India email@example.com 2 Department of Information Technolgy,
International Journal of Computer Science and Telecommunications [Volume 5, Issue 6, June 2014] 9 ISSN 2047-3338 Implementation of Traffic Engineering and Addressing QoS in MPLS VPN Based IP Backbone Mushtaq
White Paper Network Virtualization with the Cisco Catalyst 6500/6800 Supervisor Engine 2T Introduction Network virtualization is a cost-efficient way to provide traffic separation. A virtualized network
IPv6 over IPv4/MPLS Networks: The 6PE approach Athanassios Liakopoulos Network Operation & Support Manager (firstname.lastname@example.org) Greek Research & Technology Network (GRNET) III Global IPv6 Summit Moscow, 25
ICTTEN6172A Design and configure an IP- MPLS network with virtual private network tunnelling Release: 1 ICTTEN6172A Design and configure an IP-MPLS network with virtual private network tunnelling Modification
MPLS and MPLS VPNs: Basics for Beginners Christopher Brandon Johnson Abstract Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) is a core networking technology that operates essentially in between Layers 2 and 3 of
Kingston University London Thesis Title Implementation and performance evaluation of WAN services over MPLS Layer-3 VPN Dissertation submitted for the Degree of Master of Science in Networking and Data
www.ijcsi.org 289 MPLS - A Choice of Signaling Protocol Muhammad Asif 1, Zahid Farid 2, Muhammad Lal 3, Junaid Qayyum 4 1 Department of Information Technology and Media (ITM), Mid Sweden University Sundsvall
Chair for Network Architectures and Services Prof. Carle Department for Computer Science TU München Master Course Computer Networks IN2097 Prof. Dr.-Ing. Georg Carle Christian Grothoff, Ph.D. Chair for
Using OSPF in an MPLS VPN Environment Overview This module introduces the interaction between multi-protocol Border Gateway Protocol (MP-BGP) running between Provider Edge routers (s) and Open Shortest
From the MPLS Forum Multi-Protocol Switching (MPLS) An Overview Mario BALI Turin Polytechnic Mario.Baldi@polito.it www.polito.it/~baldi MPLS is the enabling technology for the New Broadband (IP) Public
Introduction Cisco IOS MPLS configuration MPLS can be configured over different platforms It can be implemented on a purely router-based Internet backbone over an ATM switchednetwork -MPLS enables an ATM
troduction to MPLS and Traffic Engineering Session 2 Topics Motivations for MPLS MPLS Overview Applications Roadmap 3 Why MPLS? tegrate best of Layer 2 and Layer 3 Keep up with growth Reduce operations
Implementing Multiprotocol Label Switching with Altera PLDs January 2001, ver. 1.0 Application Note 132 Introduction Emerging Internet applications such as voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) and real-time
MPLS L2VPN (VLL) Technology White Paper Issue 1.0 Date 2012-10-30 HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. 2012. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any
Comparative Analysis of Mpls and Non -Mpls Network Madhulika Bhandure 1, Gaurang Deshmukh 2, Prof. Varshapriya J N 3 1, 2, 3 (Department of Computer Science and IT, VJTI, Mumbai-19 ABSTRACT A new standard
Course overview HP Networking BGP and MPLS technology training (HL046_00429577) The HP Networking BGP and MPLS technology training provides networking professionals the knowledge necessary for designing,
Peter Njogu Kimani Protection Methods in Traffic Engineering MPLS Networks Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences Bachelor of Engineering Information technology Thesis 16 th May 2013 Abstract
MPLS Concepts MPLS: Multi Protocol Label Switching MPLS is a layer 2+ switching MPLS forwarding is done in the same way as in VC (Virtual Circuit) switches Packet forwarding is done based on Labels MPLS
i Zelalem Temesgen Weldeselasie Layer 3 Multiprotocol Label Switching Virtual Private Network Technology and Communication 2014 1 VAASAN AMMATTIKORKEAKOULU UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES Information Technology
Technical Report, IDE1008, February 2010 Multi-Protocol Label Switching To Support Quality of Service Needs Master s Thesis in Computer Network Engineering - 15hp AMJAD IFTIKHAR AOON MUHAMMAD SHAH & FOWAD
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS A PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF BGP/MPLS VPN FAILOVER FUNCTIONALITY by Guan Chye Tan December 2006 Thesis Advisor: Second Reader: Geoffrey Xie John Gibson
This chapter covers the following topics: Introduction to ATM-Based MPLS VPNs Service providers and carriers that currently provide ATM and Frame Relay services can utilize their existing ATM infrastructure
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012 1 MPLS Architecture for evaluating end-to-end delivery Nikita Wadhera Lovely Professional University Abstract-
NETWORKS NetIron XMR 16000 NETWORKS NetIron XMR 16000 NETWORKS NetIron XMR 16000 Introduction MPLS in the Enterprise Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) as a technology has been around for over a decade
White Paper Virtual Private LAN Service on Cisco Catalyst 6500/6800 Supervisor Engine 2T Introduction to Virtual Private LAN Service The Cisco Catalyst 6500/6800 Series Supervisor Engine 2T supports virtual
Testing Edge Services: VPLS over MPLS White Paper Introduction Virtual Private LAN Services (VPLS) is an emerging technology for transparently connecting corporate LANs over the Internet so they appear
MPLS Multi-Protocol Label Switching Agenda Review Datagram- versus Virtual Call Service IP over WAN Problems (Traditional Approach) MPLS Principles Label Distribution Methods MPLS Details (Cisco) RFC s
Technical report, IDE1104, February 2011 MPLS VPNs with DiffServ A QoS Performance study Master s Thesis in Computer Network Engineering Azhar Shabbir Khan Bilal Afzal School of Information Science, Computer
Virtual Lease Lines - Martini Virtual Leased Lines - Martini Martini Drafts draft -martini-l2circuit-encap-mpls -04.txt defines the handling and encapsulation of layer two packets. draft -martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls
IP Switching: Issues and Alternatives Professor of Computer and Information Sciences http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~jain/ 6-1 Overview LANE, IPOA, NHRP, MPOA IP Switch Cell Switched Router Tag Switching
MPLS Traffic Engineering - A Choice Of Signaling Protocols Analysis of the similarities and differences between the two primary MPLS label distribution protocols: RSVP and CR-LDP Paul Brittain, email@example.com
MPLS in Private Networks Is It a Good Idea? Jim Metzler Vice President Ashton, Metzler & Associates March 2005 Introduction The wide area network (WAN) brings indisputable value to organizations of all
The leading edge in networking information White Paper Cisco MPLS based VPNs: Equivalent to the security of Frame Relay and ATM March 30, 2001 Abstract: The purpose of this white paper is to present discussion
MPLS VPN l.cittadini, m.cola, g.di battista motivations customer s problem a customer (e.g., private company, public administration, etc.) has several geographically distributed sites and would like to
MPLS Virtual Private Networks Luca Cittadini Giuseppe Di Battista Maurizio Patrignani Summary This chapter is devoted to Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) designed with Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
MPLS Innovations: The Next Phase Technology for Today s Service Providers Introduction MPLS technology enables a smooth evolution of core networks within today s service provider infrastructures. In particular,
The feature overcomes the requirement that a carrier support multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) by allowing you to provide MPLS connectivity between networks that are connected by IP-only networks. This
Design of Virtual Private Networks with MPLS Luca Cittadini Giuseppe Di Battista Maurizio Patrignani Summary This chapter is devoted to Virtual Private Networks(VPNs) designed with Multi Protocol Label
MPLS/BGP Network Simulation Techniques for Business Enterprise Networks Nagaselvam M Computer Science and Engineering, Nehru Institute of Technology, Coimbatore, Abstract Business Enterprises used VSAT
IJVD: 3(1), 2012, pp. 15-20 DESIGN AND VERIFICATION OF LSR OF THE MPLS NETWORK USING VHDL Suvarna A. Jadhav 1 and U.L. Bombale 2 1,2 Department of Technology Shivaji university, Kolhapur, 1 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Network Working Group Request for Comments: 2547 Category: Informational E. Rosen Y. Rekhter Cisco Systems, Inc. March 1999 BGP/MPLS VPNs Status of this Memo This memo provides information for the Internet
Migrating to MPLS Technology and Applications Serge-Paul Carrasco June 2003 asiliconvalleyinsider.com Table Of Content Why to migrate to MPLS? Congestion on the Internet Traffic Engineering MPLS Fundamentals
Volume 3, Issue 9, September 2013 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Layer Based
Campus Network Virtualization using Multiprotocol Label Switching Virtual Private Networks (MPLS-VPNs) Frank Ibikunle Electrical and Information Engineering Dept, Covenant University Ota, Nigeria Segun
Broadband Network Architecture Jan Martijn Metselaar May 24, 2012 Winitu Consulting Klipperaak 2d 2411 ND Bodegraven The Netherlands slide Broadband Services! Dual play, Triple play, Multi play! But what
Building VPNs With IPSec and MPLS Nam-Kee Tan CCIE #4307 S& -.jr."..- i McGraw-Hill New York Chicago San Francisco Lisbon London Madrid Mexico City Milan New Delhi San Juan Seoul Singapore Sydney Toronto
Internetworking II: VPNs, MPLS, and Traffic Engineering 3035/GZ01 Networked Systems Kyle Jamieson Lecture 10 Department of Computer Science University College London Taxonomy of communica@on networks Virtual
INTRODUCTION TO L2VPNS 4 Introduction to Layer 2 and Layer 3 VPN Services CE Layer 3 VPN Link Comprised of IP Traffic Passed Over IP Backbone LEGEND Layer 3 VPN Layer 2 VPN CE CE PE IP Backbone PE CE Layer
Data Networking and Architecture The course focuses on theoretical principles and practical implementation of selected Data Networking protocols and standards. Physical network architecture is described