1 / 6

Comprehensive MPLS/IP Header Compression Draft Summary

Explore the draft on MPLS/IP header compression for enhanced traffic optimization, with detailed options, pros, and cons for various compression approaches including end-to-end and link-by-link methods. Understand key considerations and comparison of compression strategies.

fidels
Download Presentation

Comprehensive MPLS/IP Header Compression Draft Summary

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. MPLS/IP Header Compression(draft-berger-mpls-hdr-comp-00.txt)MPLS/IP Header Compression over PPP(draft-berger-mpls-hdr-comp-over-ppp-00.txt) Lou Berger LabN Consulting, LLC Jason Jeffords Integral Access Inc. March, 2000

  2. MPLS/IP Header Compression • Being worked on in MPLS working group Goals: • Enable header compression for MPLS encapsulated traffic • Optimize for maximum compression • End-to-end (LSP ingress to egress) compression not a requirement • Targeted at “lower speed” links • Definition of “lower speed” is hardware specific

  3. Option Considerations Uncompressed Option:MPLS Stack Not Compressed Option:MPLS Stack Compressed Link Link Link MPLS 1-n MPLS 1-n Comp. Hdr IP Comp. Hdr data TCP or UDP data [RTP] data • Different options considered to meet objectives • Key consideration: • Are MPLS headers compressed

  4. Options LSR A Ingress LSR B LSR C Egress End-to-End Link-by-Link • End-to-end • With header compression over MPLS • Link-by-link • With compression of MPLS/IP headers

  5. Pros Transparently traverses non-compressing LSRs Uses less node resources Can operate at higher rates Link layer independent Cons Not very byte efficient (52% savings) No MPLS Header compression “Simple” Header Compression draft-swallow-mpls-simple-hdr-compress-00.txt Pros Very efficient (>90-95% savings) Compressed header fixed No increase with more MPLS labels Cons Requires link layer support Node resource requirements limit operation to lower data rates ==> MPLS/IP Header Compression Objective: Optimize for maximum compression Options (continued) Link Link MPLS 1-n Comp. Hdr Comp. Hdr data data End-to-End with Header compression over MPLS Link-by-Link withCompression of MPLS/IP headers

  6. Comparison of Compression Approaches (*1) 1 MPLS Header/IP/UDP/RTP - no RTP CSRC, no UDP checksum (*2) 1 MPLS Header/IP/UDP/RTP - no RTP CSRC Full Header = 44 bytes

More Related