1 / 8

Ravi Singh (ravis@juniper) Yimin Shen (yshen@juniper) John Drake (jdrake@juniper)

draft-ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless-mpls-01 Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS. Ravi Singh (ravis@juniper.net) Yimin Shen (yshen@juniper.net) John Drake (jdrake@juniper.net). IETF-88 (Vancouver) speaker: Ravi Singh. What is this draft about?.

rafiki
Download Presentation

Ravi Singh (ravis@juniper) Yimin Shen (yshen@juniper) John Drake (jdrake@juniper)

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. draft-ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless-mpls-01 • Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS Ravi Singh (ravis@juniper.net)Yimin Shen (yshen@juniper.net)John Drake (jdrake@juniper.net) IETF-88 (Vancouver) speaker: Ravi Singh

  2. What is this draft about? • Providing benefits of entropy label (EL) for e2e MPLS data traffic when: • E2e labeled path is made from separate constituent labeled paths (that are individual portions of the e2e labeled path): • The constituent labeled paths maybe separate due to their: • using different signaling protocols, or • being setup independently • Not every constituent labeled path supports EL • Not every transit router is able to hash deep enough on label stack so as to include entropy label as a hashing input • Key concept: • Entropy Label Capability (ELC) translation rules Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  3. Feedback on “-00” @ IETF-86 (Orlando) • Is this draft beneficial for deployments? • What are the use-cases for this draft? Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  4. New in “-01” • Use-cases: • Following use-cases for this draft are listed • Inter-AS L3VPN/BGP-VPLS • CoC L3VPN • GMPLS LSP stitching • Central theme of the use-cases: • Carry through the same EL from e2e ingress LER to egress LER where possible, rather than have to do multiple insert-EL/remove-EL steps along the e2e path • Carry through the EL even on those constituent labeled paths (of the e2e LSP) whose ingress/egress LERs are not EL-capable Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  5. Carrier network: simplified view Customer 1 … Metro1 (AS-1) Backbone (AS-0) ASBR2 K J ... Q Customer 2 I L … P ... H G ASBR1 Customer 1 … … Customer 2 Metro2 (AS-2) Customer 1 … F … A Customer 1 E B Customer 2 D … C Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  6. Hybrid L3VPN: CoC + Inter-AS Option C: Customer 1 … LDP over single-hop RSVP LSP Metro1 (AS-1) Backbone (AS-0) K eBGP: labeled Unicast IPv4 J iBGP: labeled VPN-IPv4 ASBR2 I ... Q Customer 2 L … ... P G ASBR1 H RSVP LSP (implicit NULL) Customer 1 … … eBGP: labeled Unicast IPv4 Customer 2 Customer 1 … F Legend … A Customer 1 iBGP: labeled Unicast IPv4 E B Customer 2 D … E2e LSP Metro2 (AS-2) C Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  7. Addressing: Feedback on “-00” @ IETF-86 (Orlando) • Is this draft beneficial for deployments? :YES because: • Operators will not (be able to) turn-on/deploy EL in all of their routers/networks at the same time • Undesirable to insert-EL/remove-EL multiple times along e2e path • Desirable to get benefits of EL even on those constituent labeled paths that are not EL-capable • The above are enabled by the “EL-capability translation rules” listed in this draft • What are the use-cases for this draft? • Covered in earlier slides • See section 6 in draft Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

  8. Next steps? • Soliciting any more feedback • Progressing in the WG Entropy Label for Seamless MPLS IETF-88

More Related