1 / 12

An Approach to IP Network Traffic Engineering

An Approach to IP Network Traffic Engineering. NANOG Miami, FL Chris Liljenstolpe Cable & Wireless chris@cw.net. Scope and Purpose. Describes C&W’s Traffic Engineering methodology as well as some of the reasoning behind it. Not “The One True Way,” but a method that works for us.

mostyn
Download Presentation

An Approach to IP Network Traffic Engineering

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. An Approach to IP Network Traffic Engineering NANOG Miami, FL Chris Liljenstolpe Cable & Wireless chris@cw.net

  2. Scope and Purpose • Describes C&W’s Traffic Engineering methodology as well as some of the reasoning behind it. • Not “The One True Way,” but a method that works for us.

  3. Scale of the Previous Design • Originally a flat network - one layer of routers interconnected over a complete PVC mesh. • A Network “event” in 1998 on AS3561 “educated” the engineering staff on IGP scaling issues. • This “event” lead to a week of network instability as it was re-engineered. • At one time there were 380+ routers in the direct mesh, accounting for 30k PVCs in the network & 760+ direct IGP associations per router.

  4. Hierarchy • At one time there were 380+ routers in the direct mesh, accounting for 30k PVCs & IGP associations. • Currently there are no more than 80 routers in any one mesh due to the addition of hierarchy. • Due to the shrinking mesh sizes, and code optimization efforts, calculation times have dropped from 4 hours to 20 minutes.

  5. Online vs. Offline • We like to always know where our traffic is and where it is routed. • Calculating optimal routing takes time on dedicated compute platforms…

  6. Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 • Utilizing IGP metrics to adjust traffic flows on an IP network leads to network-wide (and sometimes/usually, unplanned) effects in a large network, due to flooding. • This can lead to the network equivalent of the midway game “Hit the groundhog”

  7. IGP Use • The IGP (in our case 2 level IS-IS) is only used for link state signaling in normal and most failure mode conditions. • In the worst case dual failure mode condition, the IGP does provide real next-hop calculations.

  8. IGP Metrics • Because of the direct router-router adjacencies provided by the underlying network, a large set of IGP metrics are not needed. • The set in use is small, and only used to select primary vs. secondary path, and discourage “expensive” link utilization in a multi-point failure that leads to multi-hop routing.

  9. ATM to MPLS for TE • ATM w/ PVC’s worked quite nicely • Except for ATM overhead • And lack of high-speed router interfaces • For our traffic engineering network, we are treating MPLS as an IP friendly ATM (actually more like Frame Relay, but never mind)

  10. Will ’s Replace MPLS? • Only when the bandwidth required for any router-router pair approaches the bandwidth available from a single  on the DWDM plant AND the cost of a port on an OXC is significantly cheaper than an equivalent bandwidth port on an MPLS switch. • When that occurs, the ’s will be provisioned just as the MPLS LSP’s are – statically with resilience. • GMPLS may be the technology used to signal the path over the OXC, just as MPLS is used for the LSP’s today.

  11. Tools • Currently the tools that compute the paths, and configure the layer 2 and layer 3 equipment with those paths are all developed and maintained in-house. • Some have been in continual development and “tweak” mode for 6 years.

  12. Futures • Most link failures will be detected and handled at the layer 2 traffic engineering layer, instead of at layer 3. • Path redundancy will grow from 2 to 4 paths per router-router pair. • Developments optimization mathematics originally researched for circuit path layout and analog circuit design will be utilized in the path layout tools. • Networks other than the IP backbone will utilize the traffic engineering core.

More Related