1 / 14

MAC-in-MAC and Transport Scenarios

MAC-in-MAC and Transport Scenarios. Paul Buttorf, Michael Chen, Dirceu Cavendish, Marcus Holness, Pankaj Jha, Kshitij Kumar, Dinesh Mohan, Himanshu Shah, Arnold Sodder, Joris Wils. Agenda. Service Provider Transport Scenarios Flat network architecture Q-in-Q network architecture

anneliese-panagos
Download Presentation

MAC-in-MAC and Transport Scenarios

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MAC-in-MACand Transport Scenarios Paul Buttorf, Michael Chen, Dirceu Cavendish, Marcus Holness, Pankaj Jha, Kshitij Kumar, Dinesh Mohan, Himanshu Shah, Arnold Sodder, Joris Wils

  2. Agenda • Service Provider Transport Scenarios • Flat network architecture • Q-in-Q network architecture • MAC-in-MAC network architecture • Service Provider Hierarchical Architecture

  3. Reference Provider Transport Architecture PE PE Provider Network RB CE CE CE CE Customer Network Customer Network RB Regular bridges

  4. Number of MAC Addresseson flat network

  5. Transport on Flat Network • The example shows four scenarios. The first two are of a provider interconnecting the LANs of 5 customer sites per vlan. The last two are of a provider interconnecting customer routers. • The number of MAC addresses can easily climb into the 100,000’s. • Large FWD tables • Management Issues • MAC address space (customer) • VLAN tag space (customer, provider)

  6. Number of MAC Addresseswith Q-in-Q

  7. With Q-in-Q • The number of MAC addresses can easily climb into the 100,000’s. • Large FWD tables • Protocol issues • E.g. BPDU encapsulation • Management issues • E.g. unreliable customer links. • Limit on number of service instances (4094)

  8. Number of MAC Addresseswith MAC-in-MAC * * Worst case scenario

  9. Hierarchical Transport Architectures Core (10G links) MAC-in-MAC Aggregation (1G uplinks, 10/100M access links) Q-in-Q Q-in-Q CE CE CE CE Core (10G links) Q-in-Q MAC-in-MAC MAC-in-MAC Aggregation (1G uplinks, 10/100M access links) CE CE CE CE

  10. Number of MAC Addresseswith MAC-in-MAC + Q-in-Q

  11. Number of MAC Addresses with MAC-in-MAC • Equals the number of PEs regardless of the number of vlans and customer MAC addresses, because: • MAC-in-MAC bridges only need to learn the MAC addresses of PE Bridges. • Number of MAC addresses to be managed by providers unlikely to go above 1,000s.

  12. Provider Transport Technologies MAC-in-MAC Q-in-Q CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE Q-in-Q MAC-in-MAC CE CE CE CE

  13. Additional MAC-in-MAC Features • Trouble free provider protocols • Special MAC addresses mean the same for customer and provider domains. • Transparent transport of control traffic • Customer topology changes do not affect provider MAC learning - No need for MAC unlearn messages • Full isolation from customer’s (R)STP (single homed). • Provider Bridges’ addresses can be configured local MAC addresses.

  14. Final remarks • Message • MAC-in-MAC is an attractive technology with unique characteristics, besides Q-in-Q for Ethernet Service Providers. • Open Issue • Where is it most appropriate to use Q-in-Q and MAC-in-MAC in a Hierarchical L2 Network.

More Related