Support C-Bidir with Ingress Replication



Similar documents
UNDERSTANDING JUNOS OS NEXT-GENERATION MULTICAST VPNS

BUILDING MPLS-BASED MULTICAST VPN SOLUTION. DENOG3 Meeting, /Frankfurt Carsten Michel

MPLS L3 VPN Supporting VoIP, Multicast, and Inter-Provider Solutions

Routed VPLS using BGP draft-sajassi-l2vpn-rvpls-bgp-00.txt

Virtual Private LAN Service

Implementing MPLS VPN in Provider's IP Backbone Luyuan Fang AT&T

Transition to IPv6 in Service Providers

Junos MPLS and VPNs (JMV)

Introduction to BGP-MPLS Ethernet VPN

Virtual Subnet: A Scalable Cloud Data Center Interconnect Solution

IP/MPLS-Based VPNs Layer-3 vs. Layer-2

MPLS VPN Services. PW, VPLS and BGP MPLS/IP VPNs

Implementing VPN over MPLS

A Resilient Path Management for BGP/MPLS VPN

MPLS VPN Security BRKSEC-2145

Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Conformance and Performance Testing Sample Test Plans

RFC 2547bis: BGP/MPLS VPN Fundamentals

Enterprise Network Simulation Using MPLS- BGP

S ITGuru Exercise (3: Building the MPLS BGP VPN) Spring 2006

DD2491 p MPLS/BGP VPNs. Olof Hagsand KTH CSC

VPLS Technology White Paper HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. Issue 01. Date

Why Do IPv6 over MPLS?

VPN Technologies A Comparison

MPLS Layer 3 and Layer 2 VPNs over an IP only Core. Rahul Aggarwal Juniper Networks. rahul@juniper.net

Moonv6 Test Suite. MPLS Provider Edge Router (6PE) Interoperablility Test Suite. Technical Document. Revision 0.1

S ITGuru Excercise 3: BGP/MPLS VPN. Spring Timo-Pekka Heikkinen, Juha Järvinen and Piia Töyrylä

MP PLS VPN MPLS VPN. Prepared by Eng. Hussein M. Harb

MPLS Layer 2 VPNs Functional and Performance Testing Sample Test Plans

Multicast transmission in VPN Networks (mvpn)

Jerry Ash AT&T Bur Goode AT&T George Swallow Cisco Systems, Inc.

IPv6 over IPv4/MPLS Networks: The 6PE approach

MPLS Security Considerations

Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)

Network Working Group Request for Comments: March 1999

JUNIPER DATA CENTER EDGE CONNECTIVITY SOLUTIONS. Michael Pergament, Data Center Consultant EMEA (JNCIE 2 )

BGP-MPLS IP VPN Network Security

Network Virtualization with the Cisco Catalyst 6500/6800 Supervisor Engine 2T

MPLS L2VPN (VLL) Technology White Paper

Computer Network Architectures and Multimedia. Guy Leduc. Chapter 2 MPLS networks. Chapter 2: MPLS

Kingston University London

Introduction to Carrier Ethernet VPNs: Understanding the Alternatives

Testing Edge Services: VPLS over MPLS

Performance Evaluation of Multicast Transmission on MPLS Network Using PIM SM

Quality of Service using Traffic Engineering over MPLS: An Analysis. Praveen Bhaniramka, Wei Sun, Raj Jain

Expert Reference Series of White Papers. An Overview of MPLS VPNs: Overlay; Layer 3; and PseudoWire

Privacy and Security in MPLS Networks

Tackling the Challenges of MPLS VPN Testing. Todd Law Product Manager Advanced Networks Division

Demonstrating the high performance and feature richness of the compact MX Series

QoS Performance Evaluation in BGP/MPLS VPN

SEC , Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

L2 VPNs. Pseudowires. Virtual Private LAN Services. Metro/Carrier Ethernet.

MPLS in Private Networks Is It a Good Idea?

MPLS VPN over mgre. Finding Feature Information. Prerequisites for MPLS VPN over mgre

MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching

Department of Communications and Networking. S /3133 Networking Technology, Laboratory course A/B

MPLS VPN Security in Service Provider Networks. Peter Tomsu Michael Behringer Monique Morrow

DD2491 p BGP-MPLS VPNs. Olof Hagsand KTH/CSC

IMPLEMENTING CISCO MPLS V3.0 (MPLS)

COMPREHENSIVE MPLS VPN SOLUTIONS

Requirements for VoIP Header Compression over Multiple-Hop Paths (draft-ash-e2e-voip-hdr-comp-rqmts-01.txt)

Advanced IPSec with GET VPN. Nadhem J. AlFardan Consulting System Engineer Cisco Systems

AMPLS - Advanced Implementing and Troubleshooting MPLS VPN Networks v4.0

MPLS/BGP Network Simulation Techniques for Business Enterprise Networks

Cisco 7600/Catalyst 6500: Scaling Up for MPLS VPN Service with 10 Gigabit Ethernet

Virtual Private Networks More, Much More than IPSec Tunnels

Fundamentals Multiprotocol Label Switching MPLS III

A New Approach to Construct Multicast Trees in MPLS Networks

Disjoint Path Algorithm for Load Balancing in MPLS network

Implementing Cisco MPLS

The Essential Guide to Deploying MPLS for Enterprise Networks

Introduction to ISIS. ISP/IXP Workshops

Introducing Basic MPLS Concepts

MPLS-based Virtual Private Network (MPLS VPN) The VPN usually belongs to one company and has several sites interconnected across the common service

For internal circulation of BSNLonly

Riverstone Networks. Carrier Ethernet Standards Progress. Igor Giangrossi Sr. Systems Engineer, CALA

SBSCET, Firozpur (Punjab), India

Independent Submission. R. Huang L. Andersson M. Chen. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. August 2015

Lesson 13: MPLS Networks

Routing Overlays and Virtualization. Nick Feamster CS 7260 March 7, 2007

AT&T Managed IP Network Service (MIPNS) MPLS Private Network Transport Technical Configuration Guide Version 1.0

ETHERNET VPN (EVPN) OVERLAY NETWORKS FOR ETHERNET SERVICES

Multicast Traffic Aggregation in MPLS-based VPN networks

Cisco Exam CCIE Service Provider Written Exam Version: 7.0 [ Total Questions: 107 ]

MPLS VPNs: Layer 2 or Layer 3? Understanding the Choice

White Paper. Cisco MPLS based VPNs: Equivalent to the security of Frame Relay and ATM. March 30, 2001

IMPLEMENTING CISCO MPLS V2.3 (MPLS)

Regaining MPLS VPN WAN Visibility with Route Analytics. Seeing through the MPLS VPN Cloud

MPLS over IP-Tunnels. Mark Townsley Distinguished Engineer. 21 February 2005

What Is a Virtual Private Network?

MPLS Peter Raedler Systems Engineer 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. Agenda Overview of MPLS Business Opportunities Security

ETHERNET VPN (EVPN) NEXT-GENERATION VPN FOR ETHERNET SERVICES

Quidway MPLS VPN Solution for Financial Networks

Virtual Private Networks. Juha Heinänen Song Networks

Innovation in. Guiding Innovation

MPLS Implementation MPLS VPN

Implementation of Traffic Engineering and Addressing QoS in MPLS VPN Based IP Backbone

A Review Paper on MPLS VPN Architecture

Experiences with Class of Service (CoS) Translations in IP/MPLS Networks

OVERLAYING VIRTUALIZED LAYER 2 NETWORKS OVER LAYER 3 NETWORKS

Migrating to MPLS Technology and Applications

Transcription:

Support C-Bidir with Ingress Replication draft-zzhang-l3vpn-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication Jeffrey Zhang Yakov Rekhter Andrew Dolganow 87 th IETF, Berlin

MVPN support for C-bidir C-bidir: PE-CE multicast protocol being PIM-Bidir PIM-Bidir: Designated Forwarder election required on LAN MVPN backbone is a simulated LAN Ways to avoid DF election in the MVPN backbone Backbone becomes the RPL: Section 11.1, RFC 6513 Partitioned set of PEs: Section 11.2, RFC 6513 2 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

Partitioned set of PEs PEs are grouped into partitions wrt a particular C-RPA A partition includes all PEs selecting the same UMH wrt the C-RPA A PE only accepts traffic from PEs in the same partition Traffic carry a label corresponding to the UMH: Section 11.2.2 Advertised as PE Distinguisher (PED) label Upstream allocated by tunnel root Cumbersome for Ingress Replication (IR) P-tunnel Each partition uses its own Bidirectional P-tunnel: Section 11.2.3 Partial Mesh of MP2MP P-Tunnels What if one wants to use IR? 3 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

Simulating Partial Mesh of MP2MP P-tunnels with IR: The normal way An MP2MP tunnel could be simulated by a set of IR tunnels One IR tunnel rooted at each PE on the MP2MP tunnel Consisting of a set of P2P LSPs One P2P LSP to each other PE on the tunnel Each PE originates a Leaf A-D route for each IR tunnel N-square 4 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

Simulating Partial Mesh of MP2MP P-tunnels with IR: Proposed Optimization One S-PMSI A-D route from the UMH wrt a C-RPA Identifying the MP2MP tunnel PTA specifies IR and includes a label that the UMH would not allocate for any other PE For other PEs to send traffic to the UMH Typically, different labels are allocated for different PEs So that traffic can be associated with the sending PEs In this case, we want to associate the traffic with the partition (represented by the UMH) One Leaf A-D route responded from each PE in the same partition When it has relevant local states details later Imported by all PEs: Not just by the S-PMSI originator PTA includes a label corresponding to the UMH For other PEs to send traffic to the Leaf A-D route s originator Associate the traffic with the partition (represented by the UMH) 5 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

S-PMSI A-D Routes Originated only by PEs that have local routes (through a VRF interface) to one or more C-RPAs A (C-*,C-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route is always originated From each PE that has a local route to any C-RPA A single (C-*,C-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route is originated even if a PE has local routes to multiple C-RPAs One or more (C-*,C-G-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D routes can be originated by a PE with local routes to the C-G-BIDIR s C-RPA By typical triggers for S-PMSI An S-PMSI A-D route identifies an MP2MP tunnel With leaves including the originators of the matching S-PMSI and Leaf A-D routes 6 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

When to respond with Leaf A-D routes A PE responds to a (C-*,C-G-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route If it has local C-G-BIDIR join states learned from its CEs A PE responds to a (C-*,C-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route If it has ANY local C-G-BIDIR join states learned from its CEs Where S-PMSI A-D route s originator is the UMH wrt the C-G- BIDIR s C-RPA Optionally, a PE may respond even when the UMH is not the S- PMSI A-D route s originator In this case, traffic will arrive from PEs outside its own petition, with a label corresponding to a PE different from the UMH, and shall be discarded May be useful for live-live protection 7 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

PIM-Bidir Forwarding States PIM-Bidir has (*,G) and (*,G-prefix) forwarding states Implementation dependent but assumed in this proposal for exemplary purpose (*,G) states for groups with explicit joins (*,G-prefix) states for sender-only-branches (no joins) A G-prefix is a group range, where all groups in the range have the same RPA 8 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

PIM-Bidir Forwarding States in VRFs Denoted as (C-*,C-G-Bidir) or (C-*,C-G-Bidir-prefix) OIF List = local OIFs + P-Tunnel branches For a (C-*,C-G-Bidir) S-PMSI A-D route from the UMH Install (C-*,C-G-Bidir) forwarding state with P-tunnel branches determined by the S-PMSI A-D route and matching Leaf-AD routes For a (C-*,C-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route Install (C-*,C-G-Bidir-prefix) routes, with P-tunnel branches determined by the S-PMSI A-D route and matching Leaf A-D routes If the S-PMSI A-D route s originator is the UMH wrt C-G-Bidir-prefix s C-RPA For a (C-*,C-G-bidir) local join state w/o (C-*,C-G-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route: Install (C-*,C-G-Bidir) forwarding state, with P-tunnel branches determined by the (C-*,C-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route and matching Leaf A-D routes 9 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net

Plan Seek review and comments Revision to be posted soon to address comments from Eric Rosen Seek WG adoption 10 Copyright 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. www.juniper.net