1 / 21

How to Construct a Correct and Scalable iBGP Configuration

How to Construct a Correct and Scalable iBGP Configuration. Mythili Vutukuru Joint work with Paul Valiant, Swastik Kopparty and Hari Balakrishnan. BGP. R. B. A. F. E. D. C. R. R. R. eBGP and iBGP. R. eBGP. iBGP. Border routers/ Egress. BGP routers. Autonomous System (AS).

isolde
Download Presentation

How to Construct a Correct and Scalable iBGP Configuration

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. How to Construct a Correct and Scalable iBGP Configuration Mythili Vutukuru Joint work with Paul Valiant, Swastik Kopparty and Hari Balakrishnan

  2. BGP R B A F E D C R R R eBGP and iBGP R eBGP iBGP Border routers/ Egress BGP routers Autonomous System (AS) Internal routers Route

  3. Our contribution • Status quo in configuring iBGP • Full-mesh(not scalable) • Route reflection(no correctness guarantees) • Problems with both approaches • New approach to configure iBGP that is both correct and scalable • Uses elegant results from graph theory

  4. Outline of the talk • More background • What is the status quo? • What are the problems with it? • Problem statement • Our solution

  5. iBGP sessions run on TCP Overlay over the intra-domain routing protocol (IGP) like OSPF Routing messages and data packets forwarded via IGP within AS Routes from iBGP session not propagated to another iBGP session B A F E D C Background - iBGP R iBGP IGP Route

  6. R R R R Approach#1: Full-mesh iBGP R B A F E D • Every router has an iBGP session to every border router • Not scalable C iBGP session Route

  7. Approach#2: Route reflection • “Reflects” routes to and fromclient iBGP sessions • Avoids full-mesh • Hierarchy of reflectors R Route reflector B A F E D C Client iBGP session Route

  8. Problem #1: Routers may not choose best route Why? Route reflector reflects only its best route B chooses the sub-optimal route through C In full-mesh B would have chosen route through A R Problems with route reflection: #1 B A F E Client session D Route Data packets C Lower cost to egress

  9. B R2 R1 R D R A C Problem#2: Forwarding loops R: goto A To: R IGP To: R Client iBGP session R: goto D Route IGP link Data packets

  10. Background - Summary

  11. Outline of the talk • More background • What is the status quo? • What are the problems with it? • Problem statement • Our solution

  12. Problem Statement • Input: IGP (IP-level connectivity) graph • Output: iBGP configuration • Route reflectors and clients • iBGP sessions • Constraints • Emulate full-mesh • More scalable than full-mesh • Previous work [GW02] – how to check for correctness, not how to construct correct configurations [GW02] T. Griffin and G. Wilfong, “On the Correctness of iBGP Configuration”, In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM 2002, Pittsburg, PA, August 2002.

  13. Outline of the talk • More background • What is the status quo? • What are the problems with it? • Problem statement • Our solution

  14. B R2 R1 D A C Key insight for emulating full-mesh • For every router P, every egress E • P and E have iBGP session, OR • P should be the client of a route reflector on the shortest path between P and E To: R R: goto D R R To: R To: R Client iBGP session Route R: goto A IGP link Data packets

  15. S is graph separator Nodes in graph separator S are route reflectors u in G1 or G2, v in S: u is a client of v Full-mesh in G1, G2 Recurse on G1, G2 Our solution R S D A ? B G2 G1 R

  16. 2.5 to 5X fewer iBGP sessions on ISP topologies [Source: Rocketfuel] Evaluation

  17. Conclusion • First algorithm to construct correct iBGP configurations with route reflection. • Efficient implementation • 2.5 to 10X fewer iBGP sessions compared to full-mesh iBGP

  18. Questions?

  19. Best route selection • BGP best route selection rules • Local Pref • AS path length • MED • IGP cost to egress • Best route selected by route reflector might not be the best route for the client

  20. Route reflection • 2 types of iBGP sessions • Client iBGP session • Normal (“peer”) iBGP session • Route from client → all clients and peers • Route from peer → all clients • Multiple route reflectors • Hierarchy of route reflectors

  21. Problems with route reflection • Lack of complete visibility: every router is not guaranteed to see its best available route. • Forwarding loops • Some router along the forwarding path chooses a different egress • Packets do not make progress towards egress and loop forever • Not robust to IGP changes • IGP link failures trigger forwarding loops • Full-mesh iBGP has none of these problems

More Related