Introducing MPLS Concepts

Abdul Qader

Outline
Traditional IP Routing
- Forwarding and routing - Problems with IP routing - Motivations behind MPLS

MPLS Terminology and Operation

- MPLS Label, LSR and LSP, LFIB Vs FIB
- Transport of an IP packet over MPLS - More MPLS terminology

Traffic Engineering [with MPLS]

- Nomenclature - Requirements - Examples
2

Routing, Forwarding, IP Routing, MPLS Routing

Routing: Computing the best path to the destination Forwarding: Passing a packet to the next hop router (no computation) IP routing: includes routing and forwarding. Each router makes the forwarding decision and each router makes the routing decision

MPLS routing: Only one router (source) makes the routing decision, Intermediate router make the forwarding decision

Traditional IP Routing (Draw Backs)

Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing, like Forwarding and routing. Routing protocols in tradition IP are used to distribute Layer 3routing information. Routing lookups are performed on every hop Forwarding is based on the destination address only

IP Routing
Address Prefix I/F 1 1 Address Prefix I/F 0 1

Address Prefix

I/F 0

128.89
171.69

128.89
171.69

128.89

Route Update
0 1 128.89

128.89.25.4 Data
1

128.89.25.4 Data

128.89.25.4 Data

128.89.25.4 Data

Packets Forwarded Based on IP Address

171.69

Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing: Traditional IP Forwarding

Every router may need full Internet routing, information (may be more than 100,000 routes). Destination-based routing lookup is needed on every hop. Greater the size of routing table time consuming for making routing decisions

Problems with IP routing

Too slow
- IP lookup (longest prefix matching) was a major bottleneck in high performance routers - This was made worse by the fact that IP forwarding requires complex lookup operation at every hop along the path

Too rigid no flexibility

- Routing decisions are destination-based

Not scalable in some desirable applications

- e.g When mapping IP traffic onto ATM
7

Drawbacks of Traditional IP Routing: IP over ATM

Layer 2 devices have no knowledge of Layer 3 routing informationvirtual circuits must be manually established. Layer 2 topology may be different from Layer 3 topology,resulting in suboptimal paths and link use. Even if the two topologies overlap, the hub-and-spoke topologyis usually used because of easier management.

IP Routing Rigidity Examples

D

A
S

A
1

Packet 1: Destination A Packet 2: Destination B S computes shortest paths to A and B; finds D as next hop

Both packets will follow the same path

- Leads to IP hotspots!

Solution?
- Try to divert the traffic onto alternate paths
9

IP Routing Rigidity Examples

D

A
S

A
1

Increase the cost of link DA from 1 to 4 Traffic is diverted away from node D A new IP hotspot is created!

Solution(?): Network Engineering

- Put more bandwidth where the traffic is! - Leads to underutilized links; not suitable for large networks

10

IP Routing Rigidity Examples

Most traffic goes between large sites A and B, and uses only the primary link.
Destination-based routing does not provide any mechanism for load balancing across unequal paths. Therefore, Policy-based routing can be used to forward packets based on other parameters, but this is not a scalable solution.
11

Basic MPLS Concepts

Effort to Avoid [slow] IP lookup Led to the development of IP switching in 1996, that Provided some scalability for IP over ATM (Layer 2 Switching), base on forwarding mechanism. Evolution of routing functionality led to some other benefits - Explicit path routing - Provision of service differentiation (QoS) MPLS is a new forwarding mechanism in which packets are forwarded based on labels. Labels usually correspond to IP destination networks (equal to traditional IP forwarding). Labels can also correspond to other parameters, such as QoS or source address. MPLS was designed to support forwarding of other protocols as well.

12

Basic MPLS Concepts Example

Only edge (source) routers must perform a routing lookup. Core routers switch packets based on simple label lookups and swap labels.

13

MPLS vs. IP over ATM

Layer 2 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.
14

Traffic Engineering with MPLS

Traffic can be forwarded based on other parameters (QoS, source, and so on). Load sharing across unequal paths can be achieved.
15

Outline
Traditional IP Routing
- Forwarding and routing - Problems with IP routing - Motivations behind MPLS

MPLS Terminology and Operation

- MPLS Label, LSR and LSP, LFIB Vs FIB
- Transport of an IP packet over MPLS - More MPLS terminology

Traffic Engineering [with MPLS]

- Nomenclature - Requirements - Examples
16

MPLS Architecture

MPLS has two major components:

Control plane: Exchanges Layer 3 routing information
and labels; contains complex mechanisms to exchange routing information, such as OSPF, EIGRP, IS-IS, and BGP, and to exchange labels; such as LDP, and RSVP

Data plane: Forwards packets based on labels; has a

simple forwarding engine

17

MPLS Architecture

Router functionality is divided into two major parts: the control plane and the data plane

18

MPLS labels
To avoid IP lookup MPLS packets carry extra information called Label

Packet forwarding decision is made using labelbased lookups

Label IP Datagram

Labels have local significance only!

How routing along explicit path works?

19

Label, LSP and LSR

Label

01234567890123456789012345678901 Label | Exp|S| TTL

Label = 20 bits Exp = Experimental, 3 bits S = Bottom of stack, 1bit TTL = Time to live, 8 bits

Router that supports MPLS is known as label switching router (LSR)

An Edge LSR is also known as LER (edge router)

Path which is followed using labels is called LSP
20

Label Switch Routers

21

MPLS Labels
MPLS technology is intended to be used anywhere regardless of Layer 1 media and Layer 2 protocol.

MPLS uses a 32-bit label field that is inserted between Layer 2 and Layer 3 headers (framemode MPLS). MPLS over ATM uses the ATM header as the label (cell-mode MPLS).

22

MPLS Labels: Frame-Mode MPLS

23

Label Switch Routers: Architecture of Edge LSRs

24

LFIB versus FIB

Labels are searched in LFIB whereas normal IP Routing uses FIB to search longest prefix match for a destination IP address Why switching based on labels is faster?
- LFIB has fewer entries - Routing table FIB has very large number of entries

- In LFIB, label is an exact match - In FIB, IP is longest prefix match

25

Mpls Flow Progress

R1 LSR1

LSR4

R2
D

LSR6 LSR3 LSR2 LSR5

destination

R1 and R2 are regular routers

1 - R1 receives a packet for destination D connected to R2

26

Mpls Flow Progress

R1

LSR4 LSR1

R2
D

LSR6 LSR3 LSR2 LSR5

destination

2 - R1 determines the next hop as LSR1 and forwards the packet (Makes a routing as well as a forwarding decision)
27

Mpls Flow Progress

R1 LSR1
31 D

LSR4

R2
D

LSR6 LSR3 LSR2 LSR5

destination

3 LSR1 establishes a path to LSR6 and PUSHES a label (Makes a routing as well as a forwarding decision)
28

Mpls Flow Progress

R1 LSR1

LSR4

R2
D

LSR6 LSR3 LSR2 LSR5

17 D

destination

Labels have local signifacance!

4 LSR3 just looks at the incoming label LSR3 SWAPS with another label before forwarding
29

MPLS Flow Progress

R1 LSR1

LSR4

R2
D

LSR6 LSR3 LSR2 LSR5

17 D

destination

Path within MPLS cloud is pre-established: LSP (label-switched path)

5 LSR6 looks at the incoming label LSR6 POPS the label before forwarding to R2
30

MPLS and explicit routing recap

Who establishes the LSPs in advance?
- Ingress routers

How do ingress routers decide not to always take the shortest path?
- Ingress routers use CSPF (constrained shortest path first) instead of SPF

- Examples of constraints:
oDo not use links left with less than 7Mb/s bandwidth oDo not use blue-colored links for this request oUse a path with delay less than 130ms

31

CSPF
What is the mechanism?
- First prune all links not fulfilling constrains - Now find shortest path on the rest of the topology

Requires some reservation mechanism Changing state of the network must also be recorded and propagated
- For example, ingress needs to know how much bandwidth is left on links - The information is propagated by means of routing protocols and their extensions

32

More MPLS terminology

Upstream

Downstream
172.68.10/24

LSR1 Data

LSR2

33

Label advertisement
Always downstream to upstream label advertisement and distribution Upstream Downstream
171.68.32/24
MPLS Data Packet with label 5 travels

Use label 5 for destination 171.68.32/24

LSR2

LSR1

34

Label advertisement
Label advertisement can be downstream unsolicited or downstream on-demand
Upstream
Sends label Without any Request

Downstream 171.68.32/24

LSR1
Upstream
Sends label ONLY after receiving request

LSR2 Downstream 171.68.32/24

LSR1

Request For label

LSR2

35

Label distribution
Label distribution can be ordered or unordered First we see an example of ordered label distribution

Label

Ingress LSR

Egress LSR

36

Label retention modes

Label retention can be conservative or liberal

?
Label

Destination

LSR1

Label

37

Label operations
Advertisement
- Downstream unsolicited

- Downstream on-demand

Distribution
- Ordered - Unordered

Retention
- Liberal - Conservative
38

Outline
Traditional IP Routing
- Forwarding and routing - Problems with IP routing - Motivations behind MPLS

MPLS Terminology and Operation

- MPLS Label, LSR and LSP, LFIB Vs FIB
- Transport of an IP packet over MPLS - More MPLS terminology

Traffic Engineering [with MPLS]

- Nomenclature - Requirements - Examples
39

Traffic Engineering with MPLS

Traffic Engineering

(Application of CSPF)

40

What is traffic engineering?

Performance optimization of operational networks - optimizing resource utilization

- optimizing traffic performance

- reliable network operation How is traffic engineered?

- measurement, modeling, characterization, and control of Internet traffic

Why?
- high cost of network assets
- service differentiation
41

Traffic engineering
Recall the IP hotspot problem

The ability to move traffic away from the shortest path calculated by the IGP (such as OSPF) to a less congested path
IP: changing a metric will cause ALL the traffic to divert to the less congested path MPLS: allows explicit routing (using CSPF) and setup of such explicitly computed LSPs
42

MPLS-TE: How to do it?

LSPs are set up by LSRs based on information they learn from routing protocols (IGPs) This defeats the purpose!
- If we were to use shortest path, IGP was okay

43

MPLS TE: How we actually do it?

MPLS TE Requires:
- Enhancements to routing protocols
oOSPF-TE
oISIS-TE

- Enhancement to signaling protocols to allow explicit constraint based routing

oRSVP-TE and CR-LDP

- Constraint based routing

oExplicit route selection oRecovery mechanisms defined
44

Signaling mechanisms
RSVP-TE
- Extensions to RSVP for traffic engineering

BGP-4
- Carrying label information in BGP-4

CR-LDP
- A label distribution protocol that distributes labels determined based on constraint based routing

RSVP-TE and CR-LDP both do label distribution and path reservation use any one of them!
45

RSVP-TE PATH Message

PATH message is used to establish state and request label assignment R1 transmits a PATH message addressed to R9

46

RSVP-TE RESV Message

RESV is used to distribute labels after reserving resources R9 transmits a RESV message, with label=3, to R8

R8 and R4 store outbound label and allocate an inbound label. They also transmits RESV with inbound label to upstream LSR
R1 binds label to forwarding equivalence class (FEC)

47

Rerouting LSP tunnels

When a more optimal route/path becomes available

When a failure of a resource occurs along a TE LSP Make-before-break mechanism

- Adaptive, smooth rerouting and traffic transfer before tearing down the old LSP

- Not disruptive to traffic

48

Recovering LSP tunnels

LSP Set-up

49

Protection LSP set up

50

Protection LSP

51

References
RFC 2702 Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS

RFC 3031 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture

RFC 3272 Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering RFC 3346 Applicability Statement for Traffic Engineering with MPLS

MPLS Forum (http://www.mplsforum.org)

52