1 generalized multiprotocol label switching konstantinos lizos phd student – [email protected]...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching
Konstantinos LizosPhD Student – [email protected]
Spring 2015
University of Oslo (UiO)The Faculty of Mathematics and Natural SciencesDepartment of InformaticsCourse INF9050 - http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/ifi/INF9050
Materials mainly extracted by [1] A. Banerjee, J. Drake, J. Lang and B. Turner, “GMPLS: An Overview of Signaling Enhancements and Recovery Techniques”
![Page 2: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Principles of MPLS
• Constraint-based routing as opposed to best effort internet service
• MPLS addition : connectivity abstraction (end-to-end)
• Explicitly routed point-to-point path as opposed to multipoint to point (unicast) path in conventional IP networks
![Page 3: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
MPLS Limitations
• MPLS’s inability to establish bidirectional connections in a single request and the absence of mechanisms to account for protection bandwidth in lower-priority traffic.
• A link or node failure along the routes of established service connections can only be handled locally or along the nodes of the path
3
![Page 4: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Evolution of GMPLS
4
MPLambaS Proposal
GMPLS
Extensions to IP signaling RSVP-TE & CRLDP
Extensions to IP Routing OSPF-TE & ISIS-TE
IETF TE
Working Group
IETF MPLS
Working Group
Requirements for TE over MPLS
![Page 5: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Origins
• Traces back to multi-protocol lambda switching (MPλS) originally proposed by Awduche and Rekhter (1999)
• GMPLS has generalized the MPλS concept, so that the same control plane concepts can be used in other switched transport technologies, such as TDM, optical as well as cell switched networks.
5
![Page 6: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
GMPLS extends the concept of label
1) in a packet-switched network, a label represents a short tag attached to a packet.
2) in a TDM network, a label represents a time slot
3) in a wavelength-switched network, a label represents a wavelength
4) In a fiber-switched network, a label represents a fiber.
6
![Page 7: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
GMPLS Interface Expansion
7
PSC
Expand MPLS functionality to sustain extra interfaces in addition to packet switch
Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC)Packet Switch Capable (PSC)
Router/ATM Switch/Frame Reply Switch
Time Division Multiplexing Capable (TDMC)
SONET/SDH ADM/Digital Crossconnects
Lambda Switch Capable (LSC))All Optιcal ADM or Optical Crossconnects (OXC)
LSPs of diverse interfaces can be nested inside LSPs of diverse interfaces can be nested inside anotheranother
LSC
TDMC
TDMCLSC
FSC
Copyright ® Lizos
![Page 8: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Techniques by GMPLS devices
• Protection and restoration techniques used by GMPLS devices– Fault isolation– Fault localization– Fault notification– Fault mitigation
8
![Page 9: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Signaling
• GMPLS requires that an LSP starts and ends on similar types of devices.
• MPLS is designed so that the control plane is logically separate from data plane
• GMPLS extends this concept, by allowing the control plane to be physically diverse from the associated data plane.
9
![Page 10: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Hierarchical LSPs
• GMPLS supports the concept of hierarchical LSPs, which occurs when an LSP is tunneled inside an existing higher-order LSP so that the preexisting LSP serves as a link along the path of the new LSP.
10
![Page 11: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
R10
Nested LSP
11
Fiber LSP4
λ LSP3
Time slot (TDM) LSP2
Packet LSP1
LSP4LSP3LSP2LSP1
500 m from a 500 m from a Gigabit EnetGigabit Enet
OC-12cOC-12c
OC-192OC-192
FiberFiber
Router acting Router acting
as an IP LSRas an IP LSR
SONET SONET switch/mixswitch/mix
Optical OEO Optical OEO switchswitch
Photonic Photonic switchswitch
O
R
S
P
P4 P5 P6O3 O7S2
S8
R1 R9R0
![Page 12: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Process of creating an LSP
• Assumption: RSVP-TE signaling extension (defined in GMPLS) assumes required bandwidth is available on each of the links
• Residual bandwidth available in LSP hierarchy is advertised by the Interior Gateway Routing Protocols (IGP) – R1 announces packet-switch capable link
(PSC)– S2 announces time division multiplex (TDM)
link– O3 announces lambda-switch capable (LSC)
links12
![Page 13: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Creating an LSP
13
TimelineTimelineR0 R1 S2 O3 P4 P5 P6 O7 S8 R9 R10
Path 1
Path 2
Path 3
Path 4
Resv 4LSP4
completesResv 3
LSP3 completes
LSP2 completes
LSP1 completes
Resv 2
Resv 1
![Page 14: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Bidirectional LSP Setup
• Bidirectional optical LSPs (or lightpaths) is supported by GMPLS
• Supposedly, both directions of such LSPs have the same TE requirements
• Initiator: starting establishing an LSP• Terminator: LSP destination node• Bidirectional LSP: only one initiator and one
terminator• MPLS defines unidirectional LSP. To attain
bidirectional LSP setup, two independent LSPs must be formed in opposite directions.
Disadvantages: I) high latency, II) increased control overhead, III) P(A,B)=P(A)P(B)min{P(A),P(B)}
14
![Page 15: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Notify messages• Central requirement: response to network failures must
be quick and decisions must be made intelligently• A node passing transit connections can notify node(s)
responsible for restoring connections when failures occur.
• Notify message has been added to RSVP-TE for GMPLS to convey to non-adjacent nodes of LSP-related failures.
Applications for Notify message Inform about a degraded link (control plane failed, data
plane still functional*)* Control plane failures may limit management features
but doesn’t always justify termination of an LSP.
15
![Page 16: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
GMPLS Protection and Restoration Techniques
• Key feature for constructing a common control plane involves coordination among signaling, routing and link management protocols to enable intelligent fault management consisting of
I) Detection, II) LocalizationIII) Notification and IV) Mitigation
16
![Page 17: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Achieving the goal for protection and restoration
Protection and restoration can traditionally been addressed by using two techniques:Path switching: failure is addressed at the path endpoints (i.e. the path initiating and terminating nodes)
Path protection: secondary protection paths are preallocated
Path restoration: connections are rerouted, either dynamically (could have precalculated paths)
Line Switching: failure is addressed at the transit node where the failure is detected
Span protection: traffic is switched to an alternate parallel channel or link connecting the same two nodes
Line restoration: traffic is switched to an alternative route between the two nodes
17
![Page 18: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Protection mechanisms
In summary, protection mechanisms are1+1 protection: payload is transmitted simultaneously over two disjoint paths (selector chooses best signal)M:N protection: M predesignated backup paths are shared between N primary paths1:N protection: 1 preallocated backup path is shared among N primary paths1:1 protection: 1 dedicated backup path is preallocated for 1 primary path
18
![Page 19: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Restoration mechanisms
• Typically takes more time to react & resolve failures by switching to alter-nate paths, due to dynamic nature.
• Restoration can be implemented both at the source or an intermediate node, once the responsible node has been notified.
• Failure notification is performed using notify procedures or standard error messages
19
![Page 20: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Conclusions
• GMPLS provides the necessary linka-ge between the IP and photonic layers, allowing interoperable, scalab-le, parallel and cohesive evolution of networks in the IP and photonic dimensions.
• Basically, GMPLS resolves the main problem of scalability by segregating the transport network from the data.
20
![Page 21: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Conclusions / Q & A
• New traffic flows and proliferation of mobile terminals require robust high-capacity structures that support fast provisioning, other than voice.
• GMPLS-based products can be applied in existing networks to decrease costs without impacting service quality.
• Flexible M:N protection and restoration capabilities of GMPLS allow efficient addressing of network survivability.
21
![Page 22: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
References
• A. Banerjee, J. Drake, J. Lang and B. Turner, “GMPLS: An Overview of Signaling Enhancements and Recovery Techniques”, IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol:39, Issue:7, p.p: 144-151, doi: 10.1109/35.933450
• Daniel O. Awduche, Bijan Jabbari, "Internet traffic engineering using multi-protocol label switching (MPLS)", Computer Networks 40 (2002) 111-129
22
![Page 23: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Types of switches
Multiplexing technique on
data-plane linksAdmissioncontrol in control plane?
Circuit switch (CS)- position based (port, time, lambda)
Packet switch (PS)- header based
Connectionless (CL) - no admission control
Not an option
e.g., Ethernet
Connection-oriented (CO)- admission control
e.g., telephoneSONET WDM
Virtual-circuit e.g., MPLS, ATM
![Page 24: 1 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Konstantinos Lizos PhD Student – klizos@ifi.uio.no Spring 2015 University of Oslo (UiO) The Faculty of Mathematics](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56649d345503460f94a0b5ae/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Types of networks
Support function
Networktype
Addressing(in data or control plane?)
Routing Signaling
Connectionless (CL)
Data plane
Circuit Switched (CS)
Control plane
Virtual circuit (VC)
Control plane
Connection-oriented