1 / 5

Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires Extension for BGP draft-keyupate-l2vpn-fat-pw-bgp

Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires Extension for BGP draft-keyupate-l2vpn-fat-pw-bgp. IETF 88. Keyur Patel – keyupate@cisco.com Bin Wen – bin_wen@cable.comcast.com Sami Boutros – sboutros@cisco.com Jose Liste – jliste@cisco.com. Problem Statement.

carl
Download Presentation

Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires Extension for BGP draft-keyupate-l2vpn-fat-pw-bgp

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. Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires Extension for BGPdraft-keyupate-l2vpn-fat-pw-bgp IETF 88 Keyur Patel – keyupate@cisco.com Bin Wen – bin_wen@cable.comcast.com Sami Boutros – sboutros@cisco.com Jose Liste – jliste@cisco.com

  2. Problem Statement • Ethernet services have become an important component of a SP product offering • However, demand for high-speed Ethernet services (e.g. multi-GE or higher speeds) pose a problem for Network Operators as traffic from a given PW is not able to utilize all available paths (e.g. ECMP or LAGs) in the Core • Flow-based load-balancing in the Core becomes an important design consideration Flow Based Multi-Pathing in the Core Vlan X - F1 PW Vlan X – F2 PE PE Vlan X – F3 P P Vlan X – F4 P P CE CE

  3. Proposal • This memo provides a solution for load-balancing of PW traffic with the following characteristics: • Based on Flow Aware Transport PW (IETF RFC 6391) • Applicable to deployments with BGP-signaled VPLS (RFC4761) and BGP-signaled VPWS (RFC6624) • Does not require any forwarding behavior changes on transit LSRs; i.e. NO changes to load-balancing hash functions on deployed P routers • RFC4761 includes a Layer2 Info Extended Community in VPLS NLRI to convey information such as CW support, MTU, etc. • PROPOSAL – Use two (2) unused bits in Control Flag Bit vector to encode “T” and “R” bits as defined in RFC6391

  4. Next Steps • Incorporate comments (feedback welcomed) • Move document to WG status

  5. THANK YOU !

More Related