Advanced Topics and Future Directions in MPLS - · PDF fileFuture Directions in MPLS Matt Gillies ... Seamless MPLS MPLS transport profile (MPLS-TP) L2VPN enhancements (PBB-EVPN, VPMS)

© 2011 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Connect 1 1 © 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.

Toronto, Canada

May 30, 2013

Advanced Topics and Future Directions in MPLS

Matt Gillies

Customer Solutions Architect

© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Connect 2

Agenda

• IETF Update

• Unified MPLS

• Ethernet Virtual Private Network

• Segment Routing

• Summary

2


IETF update


Internet Engineering Task Force

• Responsible for MPLS standardization

• Six active working groups

MPLS

Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (L3VPN)

Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge (PWE3)

Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPN)

Common Control and Measurement Plane (CCAMP)

Path Computation Element (PCE)

4


MPLS Working Group

• Defined MPLS architecture and base protocols (LDP, RSVP-TE)

• Over 130 RFCs published to date

• Mature set of IP/MPLS specifications for both unicast and multicast

• Areas of focus

MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP)

Seamless MPLS (building large scale, consolidated MPLS networks)

5


L2VPN WG

Mature specifications for: -Virtual Private Wire Service (VPWS): point-to-point L2 service

-Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS): multipoint-to-multipoint Ethernet service

New service definition: - Virtual Private Multicast Service (VPMS): point-to-multipoint L2 service

Areas of focus

-Enhancing VPLS - Ethernet VPN (E-VPN) and PBB Ethernet VPN (PBB-EVPN)

-Optimizing E-Tree support over VPLS

No major RFC publications in recent past

6


IETF Summary

• Rich set of MPLS specifications covering

MPLS forwarding (unicast and multicast)

Layer-3 and layer-2 services (unicast and multicast)

• Current main focus areas:

Seamless MPLS

MPLS transport profile (MPLS-TP)

L2VPN enhancements (PBB-EVPN, VPMS)

Segment Routing ( ISIS WG )

7


Unified MPLS


Introduction

End-to-end, high-scale MPLS transport architecture for any service

Simplifies end to end architecture by eliminating control and management plane translations inherent in legacy designs (MPLS, Ethernet, IP, ATM, etc)

Enables flexible placement of the L3 and L2 service termination

Delivers a new level of scale for MPLS transport with RFC-3107 hierarchical labeled BGP LSPs

Provides simplified carrier class operations with end to end OAM, Performance Monitoring and protection

9


Evolving MPLS Networks

10

MPLS

L2VPN

PW

L2VPN PE

L3VPN PE

L2VPN PE

L3VPN PE

EDGE EDGE CORE AGG ACCESS ACCESS AGG

L2 L2 IP

IP L2+ IP L2 + IP

L2VPN PE

L3VPN PE L3VPN PE

L2VPN PE

MPLS

MPLS

IP IP IP L3VPN PE L3VPN PE

L2VPN PE L2VPN PE


IP NGN Scaling – Number of Nodes

11

Transport CPE / NT

100,000s–1,000,000

Access Nodes

10,000s–100,000s

Distribution Nodes

100s–1,000s

IP Edge Nodes

10–100s

Core Nodes

few–10s

Aggregation Nodes

1,000s–10,000s

As MPLS moves into aggregation and access number of nodes increases sharply


Unified MPLS Requirements

• Minimize management touch points for service provisioning

• Minimize network state

• Flexibility in service termination

• High network availability (protection or fast restoration)

• End-to-end MPLS forwarding with a single routing domain

12

Access Access

MPLS MPLS MPLS

Aggregation Core Aggregation

PE ABR ABR PE


Scale Challenges with Traditional MPLS Network Designs

• Building end-to-end LSPs between access devices requires flooding loopback prefixes

• IGP protocol would be required to support 100K prefixes

• Access devices would need to support 100K prefixes and 200K label (assuming two paths per prefix)

• Prefix aggregation with LDP inter-area LSPs can only partially alleviate scale challenge

13

Access Access

MPLS MPLS MPLS


PE ABR ABR PE


Hierarchal End-to-End LSP

• Hierarchical LSP approach with two transport labels (intra domain and inter domain)

Intra domain (IGP+LDP or RSVP-TE)

Inter domain (iBGP+label per RFC3107)

• No IP prefix redistribution between IGP domains

• Only access nodes and ABRs have reachability information for other access nodes

• BGP Inbound prefix filtering and Outbound Route Filtering (ORF) help reduce network state

14

Access Access

MPLS MPLS MPLS


PE ABR ABR PE

Inter-domain

LSP Intra-domain

LSP

Intra-domain

LSP Intra-domain

LSP


Control Plane Operation (Pseudowire)

PE1 P ABR1 ABR2 P P PE2

LDP /

RSVP-TE

iBGP

IP+Label

LDP /

RSVP-TE

LDP /

RSVP-TE

LDP /

RSVP-TE

LDP /

RSVP-TE

LDP /

RSVP-TE

iBGP

IP+Label

iBGP

IP+Label

T-LDP


Forwarding Plane Operation (Pseudowire)

PE1 P ABR1 ABR2 P P PE2

Payload

Push

Push

Push

Pop Pop

Pop

PW Label

BGP Label

IGP Label

Payload

PW Label

BGP Label

Payload

PW Label

BGP Label

IGP Label

Payload

PW Label

BGP Label

Payload

PW Label

IGP Label

Payload

PW Label

Payload Payload

Swap

Push Pop

Push

Pop


Network Availability

17

• Restoration/protection for intra-domain LSP can rely on IGP Fast Convergence, IP FRR or MPLS-TE FRR

• Restoration/protection for inter-domain (iBGP IP+Label) can use BGP Prefix Independent Convergence

Access Access

MPLS MPLS MPLS


PE ABR ABR PE

iBGP (IP+Label)

iBGP (IP+Label) iBGP (IP+Label)


Applicability and Deployment Considerations

• Unified MPLS benefits become more compelling as network scale increases

• Architecture leverages existing mechanisms (no major protocol extensions required)

• Architecture allows for numerous design variations (e.g. MPLS to access, MPLS to aggregation, static labels, LDP DoD, etc.)

18


Ethernet VPN


Motivation for EVPN

• Technology evolution requirements

Multi-homing

Scale (MAC-addresses, Number of Service Instances)

Load balancing

Optimal Forwarding

Multicast optimization

Multi-tenancy

• Enhancements bring benefits to L2 services:

Business services

Mobile backhaul

Data center interconnect (DCI) solution

20

SP DC1 SP DC2

Ent DC1 Ent DC2

SP NGN DCPE

DCPE

DCE DCE

PE PE

CE CE

Enterprise DCI “back door”

Standalone DCI network


• Next generation solution for Ethernet multipoint connectivity services

• PEs run Multi-Protocol BGP to advertise & learn MAC addresses over Core

• Learning on PE Access Circuits via data-plane transparent learning

• No pseudowires Unicast: use MP2P tunnels

Multicast: use ingress replication over MP2P tunnels or use LSM

Full-Mesh of PW no longer required !!

• Under standardization at IETF – draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn

Ethernet VPN Highlights

MPLS

PE1

CE1

PE2

PE3

CE3

PE4

VID 100

SMAC: M1

DMAC: F.F.F

BGP MAC adv. Route

E-VPN NLRI

MAC M1 via PE1

Data-plane address

learning from Access

Control-plane address

advertisement / learning

over Core


• Combines Ethernet Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB - IEEE 802.1ah) with Ethernet VPN

PEs perform as PBB Backbone Edge Bridge (BEB)

• Reduces number of BGP MAC advertisements routes by aggregating Customer MACs (C-MAC) via Provider Backbone MAC (B-MAC)

Addresses virtualized data centers with C-MAC count into the millions

PEs advertise local Backbone MAC (B-MAC) addresses in BGP

C-MAC and C-MAC to B-MAC mapping learned in data-plane

• Under standardization at IETF – draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn

PBB Ethernet VPN Highlights

MPLS

PE1

CE1

PE2

PE3

CE3

PE4

B-MAC:

B-M1 B-M2

B-M2

BGP MAC adv. Route

E-VPN NLRI

MAC B-M1 via PE2

B-MAC:

B-M1

Control-plane address

advertisement / learning

over Core (B-MAC)

Data-plane address

learning from Access

• Local C-MAC to local B-

MAC binding

Data-plane address

learning from Core

• Remote C-MAC to remote

B-MAC binding


• Active / Active Multi-Homing with flow-based load balancing in CE to PE direction

Maximize bisectional bandwidth

Flows can be L2/L3/L4 or combinations

• Flow-based load balancing in PE to PE direction

Multiple RIB entries associated for a given MAC

Exercises multiple links towards CE

23

Solution Requirements All-Active Redundancy and Load Balancing

P

E

P

E

P

E

P

E

Vlan X - F1

Vlan X –

F2

Flow Based Load-balancing – CE to PE direction

P

E

P

E

P

E

P

E

Flow Based Load-balancing – PE to PE direction

Vlan X - F1 Vlan X –

F2


• Optimal forwarding for unicast and multicast

• Shortest path – no triangular forwarding at steady-state

• Loop-Free & Echo-Free Forwarding

• Avoid duplicate delivery of flooded traffic

• Multiple multicast tunneling options:

Ingress Replication

P2MP LSM tunnels

MP2MP

24

Solution Requirements Optimal Forwarding

PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4

CE1 CE2

Echo !

PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4

CE1 CE2 Duplicate !

CE1 CE2 PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4 Triangular

Forwarding!


Solution Requirements

• Server Virtualization fueling growth in MAC Address scalability:

1 VM = 1 MAC address.

1 server = 10’s or 100’s of VMs

• MAC address scalability most pronounced on Data Center WAN Edge for Layer 2 extensions over WAN.

Example from a live network: 1M MAC addresses in a single SP data center

MAC Address Scalability

25

WAN

DC Site 1

DC Site 2 DC Site N

1K’s

10K’s

1M’s

N * 1M


E-VPN / PBB-EVPN Concepts

Ethernet Segment

• Represents a ‘site’

connected to one or more

PEs

• Uniquely identified by a 10-

byte global Ethernet

Segment Identifier (ESI)

• Could be a single device or

an entire network

Single-Homed Device (SHD)

Multi-Homed Device (MHD)

Single-Homed Network (SHN)

Multi-Homed Network (MHN)

BGP Routes

• E-VPN and PBB-EVPN

define a single new BGP

NLRI used to carry all E-

VPN routes

• NLRI has a new SAFI (70)

• Routes serve control plane

purposes, including:

MAC address reachability

MAC mass withdrawal

Split-Horizon label adv.

Aliasing

Multicast endpoint discovery

Redundancy group discovery

Designated forwarder election

E-VPN Instance (EVI)

• EVI identifies a VPN in the

network

• Encompass one or more

bridge-domains,

depending on service

interface type

Port-based

VLAN-based (shown above)

VLAN-bundling

VLAN aware bundling (NEW)

BGP Route Attributes

• New BGP extended

communities defined

• Expand information

carried in BGP routes,

including:

MAC address moves

C-MAC flush notification

Redundancy mode

MAC / IP bindings of a GW

Split-horizon label encoding

PE

BD

BD

EV

I E

VI

PE1

PE2

CE1

CE

2

SHD

MHD

ESI1

ESI2

Route Types

[1] Ethernet Auto-Discovery (AD) Route

[2] MAC Advertisement Route

[3] Inclusive Multicast Route

[4] Ethernet Segment Route

Extended Communities

ESI MPLS Label

ES-Import

MAC Mobility

Default Gateway


Split Horizon For Ethernet Segments – E-VPN

• PE advertises in BGP a split-horizon label (ESI MPLS Label) associated with each multi-homed Ethernet Segment

• Split-horizon label is only used for multi-destination frames (Unknown Unicast, Multicast & Broadcast)

• When an ingress PE floods multi-destination traffic, it encodes the Split-Horizon label identifying the source Ethernet Segment in the packet

• Egress PEs use this label to perform selective split-horizon filtering over the attachment circuit

PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4

CE1 CE3

ESI-1 ESI-2

CE4

CE5

Challenge:

How to prevent flooded traffic from echoing

back to a multi-homed Ethernet Segment? Echo !


Split Horizon For Ethernet Segments – PBB-EVPN

• PEs connected to the same MHD use the same B-MAC address for the Ethernet Segment

1:1 mapping between B-MAC and ESI (for All-Active Redundancy with flow-based LB)

• Disposition PEs check the B-MAC source address for Split-Horizon filtering

Frame not allowed to egress on an Ethernet Segment whose B-MAC matches the B-MAC source address in the PBB header

PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4

CE1 CE3

ESI-1 ESI-2

CE4

CE5

Challenge:

How to prevent flooded traffic from echoing

back to a multi-homed Ethernet Segment? Echo !

B-MAC1

B-MAC1


Designated Forwarder (DF) DF Election

• PEs connected to a multi-homed Ethernet Segment discover each other via BGP

• These PEs then elect among them a Designated Forwarder responsible for forwarding flooded multi-destination frames to the multi-homed Segment

• DF Election granularity can be:

Multiple DFs for load-sharing

Per Ethernet Tag on Ethernet Segment (E-VPN)

Per I-SID on Ethernet Segment (PBB-EVPN)

PE1

PE2

PE3

PE4

CE1 CE2

ESI-1 ESI-2 Challenge:

How to prevent duplicate copies of flooded

traffic from being delivered to a multi-homed

Ethernet Segment? Duplicate !


Comparison of L2VPN Solutions

30

Requirement VPLS PBB-VPLS E-VPN PBB-EVPN

Multi-Homing with All-Active Forwarding

VLAN Based Load-balancing CE-to-PE ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Flow Based Load-balancing CE-to-PE x x ✔ ✔

Flow Based Load-balancing PE-to-PE x x ✔ ✔

Flow Based Multi-Pathing in the Core ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

MAC Scalability

Scale to Millions of C-MAC Addresses x ✔ x ✔

Confinement of C-MAC entries to PE with active flows ✔ ✔ x ✔

MAC Summarization x x ✔ ✔

MAC Summarization co-existence with C-MAC Mobility x x x ✔

Flexible VPN Policies

Per C-MAC Forwarding Control Policies x x ✔ x

Per-Segment Forwarding Control Policies x x ✔ ✔


Summary

• E-VPN / PBB-EVPN are next-generation L2VPN solutions based on a BGP control-plane for MAC distribution/learning over the core

• E-VPN / PBB-EVPN were designed to address following requirements:

–All-active Redundancy and Load Balancing

–Simplified Provisioning and Operation

–Optimal Forwarding

–Fast Convergence

• In addition, PBB-EVPN and its inherent MAC-in-MAC hierarchy provides:

–Scale to Millions of C-MAC (Virtual Machine) Addresses

–MAC summarization co-existence with C-MAC (VM) mobility

• E-VPN / PBB-EVPN applicability goes beyond DCI into Carrier Ethernet use cases

31


Segment Routing

Key Takeaways • Simple to deploy and operate

Leverage MPLS services & hardware

straightforward ISIS/OSPF extension

• Provide for optimum scalability, resiliency and virtualization

• Perfect integration with applications


Operators ask drastic LDP/RSVP improvement

• Simplicity

– less protocols to operate

– less protocol interactions to troubleshoot

– avoid directed LDP sessions between core routers

– deliver automated FRR for any topology

• Scale

– avoid millions of labels in LDP database

– avoid millions of TE LSP’s in the network

– avoid millions of tunnels to configure


Segment Routing Key Concepts

• Forwarding state (segment) is established by IGP

– LDP and RSVP-TE are not required

– Agnostic to forwarding dataplane: IPv6 or MPLS

• MPLS Dataplane is leveraged without any modification

– push, swap and pop: all what we need

– segment = label

• Source Routing

– source encodes path as a label or stack of segments

– two segments: node or adjacency


Adjacency Segments

• Nodes advertises adjacency label per link

– simple IGP extension

• Only advertising node installs adjacency segment in data plane

• Enables source routing along any explicit path (segment list)

B C

N O

Z

D

P

A

9101

9105

9107

9103

9105

9101

9105

9107

9103

9105

9105

9107

9103

9105

9107

9103

9105

9103

9105

9105


Node Segment

• Nodes advertise a node segment

– simple IGP extension

• All remote nodes install node segment ids in data plane

A packet injected anywhere

with top label 65 will reach Z

via IGP shortest path A B C

Z

D

65

FEC Z

push 65

swap 65

to 65

swap 65

to 65 pop 65

Packet

to Z

Packet

to Z

65

Packet

to Z

65

Packet

to Z

65

Packet

to Z


Combining Segments

• Source Routing

• Any explicit path can be expressed: ABCOPZ

A B C

M N O

Z

D

P

Pop

9003

Packet to Z

65

9003

Packet to Z

65

Packet to Z

Packet to Z

65

Packet to Z

65

9003

72

Packet to Z

65

9003

72

72 72

65

65


ISIS automatically installs segments

• Simple extension

• Excellent Scale: a node installs N+A FIB entries

– N node segments and A adjacency segments

A B C

M N O

Z

D

P

Nodal segment to C

Nodal segment to Z

Adj Segment

Nodal segment to C

3

9


Automated & Guaranteed FRR

• IP-based FRR is guaranted in any topology

– 2002, LFA FRR project at Cisco

– draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-03.txt

• Directed LFA (DLFA) is guaranteed when metrics are symetric

• No extra computation (RLFA)

• Simple repair stack

– node segment to P node

– adjacency segment from P to Q

Backbone

C1 C2

E1 E4

E3 E2

1000

Node segment

to P node

Default metric: 10


Scalable TE and Segment Routing

• An SR core router scales much than with RSVP-TE

– The state is not in the router but in the packet

– N+A vs N^2

N: # of nodes in the network

A: # of adjacencies per node

4

1

MPLS Control and Forwarding Operation with Segment Routing

PE1 PE2

IGP PE1 PE2

Services

IPv4 IPv6 IPv4

VPN

IPv6

VPN VPWS VPLS

Packet

Transport

LDP

MPLS Forwarding

RSVP BGP Static IS-IS OSPF

No changes to

control or

forwarding plane

IGP label

distribution, same

forwarding plane

BGP / LDP


Reality

• SR EFT is available!

– 12k, ASR9k, CRS1, CRS3

– get it to your lab

• Working aggressively with lead customers towards productization


IETF

• Simple ISIS/OSPF extension

• Welcoming contribution


Segment Routing Use Cases


Application controls – network delivers

Path ABCOPZ is ok. I account the BW.

Then I steer the traffic on this path

FULL

66

65

68

Tunnel AZ onto

{66, 68, 65}

The network is simple, highly programmable and responsive to rapid changes

2G from A to Z please


Simple and Efficient Transport of MPLS services

• Efficient packet networks leverage ecmp-aware shortest-path!

– node segment!

• Simplicity

– one less protocol to operate

– No complex LDP/ISIS synchronization to troubleshoot

A B

M N

PE2 PE1

All VPN services ride on the node segment

to PE2


Simple Disjointness

Non-Disjoint Traffic

A sends traffic with [65] Classic ecmp “a la IP”

Disjoint Traffic

A sends traffic with [111, 65] Packet gets attracted in blue plane and then

uses classic ecmp “a la IP”

SR avoids state in the core

SR avoids enumerating RSVP-TE

tunnels for each ECMP paths

ECMP-awareness!


CoS-based TE

• Tokyo to Brussels

– data: via US: cheap capacity

– VoIP: via Russia: low latency

• CoS-based TE with SR

– IGP metric set such as

> Tokyo to Russia: via Russia

> Tokyo to Brussels: via US

> Russia to Brussels: via Europe

– Anycast segment “Russia” advertised by Russia core routers

• Tokyo CoS-based policy

– Data and Brussels: push the node segment to Brussels

– VoIP and Brussels: push the anycast node to Russia, push Brussels

Node segment to Brussels

Node segment to Russia

LFIB with Segment Routing

PE

PE

PE

PE

PE

PE

PE

PE

P

In Label Out Label Out

Interface

L1 L1 Intf1

L2 L2 Intf1

… … …

L8 L8 Intf4

L9 Pop Intf2

L10 Pop Intf2

… … …

Ln Pop Intf5

Node

Segment

Ids

Adjacency

Segment

Ids

Forwarding

table remains

constant

• LFIB populated by IGP (ISIS / OSPF)

• Forwarding table remains constant (Nodes + Adjacencies) regardless of number of paths

• Other protocols (LDP, RSVP, BGP) can still program LFIB


Segment Routing Configuration

L3VPN Using Segment Routing

PE2 PE1

VRF RED

192.168.255.1/32

VRF RED

192.168.255.2/32

IP/MPLS

(segment routing)

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

Topology

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

asr9000-pe1

!

router isis DEFAULT

is-type level-2-only

net 49.0000.1720.1625.5001.00

address-family ipv4 unicast

metric-style wide

!

interface Loopback0

passive


nodal-sid sid-value 16001

!

!

interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/4

point-to-point


!

!


point-to-point


!

!

!

Edge Configuration (Node Segment Id)

Packets with label

16001 forwarded

towards PE1 via IS-IS

shortest path. PHP

enabled by default.

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

asr9000-p2

!

router isis DEFAULT

is-type level-2-only

net 49.0000.1720.1625.5102.00


metric-style wide

!

interface Loopback0

passive


nodal-sid sid-value 16102 PHP-disable

!

!


point-to-point


!

!


point-to-point


!

!


point-to-point


!

!

!

Core Configuration (Node Segment Id)

Packets with label

16102 forwarded

towards P2 via IS-IS

shortest path. PHP

disabled.

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#sh isis database detail verbose asr9000-pe2.00

Tue May 7 12:49:07.939 PDT

IS-IS DEFAULT (Level-2) Link State Database

LSPID LSP Seq Num LSP Checksum LSP Holdtime ATT/P/OL

asr9000-pe2.00-00 0x0000076b 0xe36c 1123 0/0/0

Area Address: 49.0000

NLPID: 0xcc

Hostname: asr9000-pe2

IP Address: 172.16.255.2

Metric: 10 IS-Extended asr9000-p2.00


Metric: 10 IP-Extended 172.16.0.0/31



Nodal-SID: 16002 PHP-off:1 Ext:0

Total Level-2 LSP count: 1 Local Level-2 LSP count: 0

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#

IS-IS Database Verification for Edge Node (Node Segment Id)

Node segment id

associated with PE2

loopback

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#sh isis database detail verbose asr9000-p2.00

Tue May 7 12:54:57.779 PDT

IS-IS DEFAULT (Level-2) Link State Database

LSPID LSP Seq Num LSP Checksum LSP Holdtime ATT/P/OL

asr9000-p2.00-00 0x0000001a 0x39d4 1169 0/0/0

Area Address: 49.0000

NLPID: 0xcc

Hostname: asr9000-p2

IP Address: 172.16.255.102

Metric: 10 IS-Extended asr9000-pe2.00

Metric: 10 IS-Extended asr9000-pe1.00






Nodal-SID: 16102 PHP-off:1 Ext:0

Total Level-2 LSP count: 1 Local Level-2 LSP count: 0


IS-IS Database Verification for Core Node (Node Segment Id)

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

Node segment id

associated with P2

loopback

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#sh mpls forwarding

Tue May 7 12:22:53.650 PDT

Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes

Label Label or ID Interface Switched

------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------

16001 Aggregate default: Per-VRF Aggr[V] \

default 59

16002 16002 No ID Gi0/0/0/4 172.16.0.4 18722

16002 No ID Gi0/0/0/5 172.16.0.7 0

16020 Aggregate RED: Per-VRF Aggr[V] \

RED 4500

16101 16101 No ID Gi0/0/0/5 172.16.0.7 0

16102 16102 No ID Gi0/0/0/4 172.16.0.4 0


Edge Forwarding Plane Verification (Node Segment Id) Local node segment id

Node segment id to

reach PE1 via ECMP

Node segment id to

reach P1

Node segment id to

reach P2

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-p2#sh mpls forwarding

Tue May 7 13:17:35.480 PDT

Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes

Label Label or ID Interface Switched

------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------

16001 Pop No ID Gi0/0/0/4 172.16.0.5 0

16002 16002 No ID Gi0/0/0/6 172.16.0.2 21258

16101 16101 No ID Gi0/0/0/5 172.16.0.8 0

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-p2#

Core Forwarding Plane Verification (Node Segment Id)

Node segment id to

reach PE1 (PHP)

Node segment id to

reach P1

Node segment id to

reach PE2

172.16.255.101/32

SID=16101

PE2

P1

P2

PE1

172.16.255.102/32

SID=16102

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

PE2 PE1

VRF RED

192.168.255.1/32

VRF RED

192.168.255.2/32

IP/MPLS

(segment routing)

hostname asr9000-pe1

!

vrf RED


import route-target

65172:0

!

export route-target

65172:0

!

!

!

interface Loopback11

vrf RED

ipv4 address 192.168.255.1 255.255.255.255

!

router bgp 65172


!

address-family vpnv4 unicast

!

neighbor 172.16.255.2

remote-as 65172

update-source Loopback0


!

address-family vpnv4 unicast

!

!

vrf RED

rd 65172:0


redistribute connected

!

!

!

L3VPN Configuration (Node Segment Id)

L3VPN usual

configuration

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#sh bgp vpnv4 unicast labels

Tue May 7 13:21:11.106 PDT

BGP router identifier 172.16.255.1, local AS number 65172

BGP generic scan interval 60 secs

BGP table state: Active

Table ID: 0x0 RD version: 1269798720

BGP main routing table version 23

BGP scan interval 60 secs

Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best

i - internal, r RIB-failure, S stale, N Nexthop-discard

Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

Network Next Hop Rcvd Label Local Label

Route Distinguisher: 65172:0 (default for vrf RED)

*> 192.168.255.1/32 0.0.0.0 nolabel 16020

*>i192.168.255.2/32 172.16.255.2 16000 nolabel

Processed 2 prefixes, 2 paths


RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:asr9000-pe1#sh cef vrf RED 192.168.255.2

Tue May 7 13:20:58.960 PDT

192.168.255.2/32, version 15, internal 0x14004001 (ptr 0xad279764) [1], 0x0 (0x0), 0x410

(0xadf7a4b0)

Updated May 7 09:41:16.371

Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 3

via 172.16.255.2, 3 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6010]

path-idx 0 [0xae0429a8 0x0]

next hop VRF - 'default', table - 0xe0000000

next hop 172.16.255.2 via 16002/0/21

next hop 172.16.0.4/32 Gi0/0/0/4 labels imposed {16002 16000}

next hop 172.16.0.7/32 Gi0/0/0/5 labels imposed {16002 16000}


L3VPN Control and Forwarding Plane Verification (Node Segment Id)

Label stack to

forward traffic to

192.168.255.2/32

(VRF RED) via

ECMP (as usual)

PE2 PE1

VRF RED

192.168.255.1/32

VRF RED

192.168.255.2/32

IP/MPLS

(segment routing)

172.16.255.1/32

SID=16001

172.16.255.2/32

SID=16002

BGP local/remote

labels for VPNv4

prefixes (as usual)


Summary

• New MPLS enhancements focus on

Increased deployment scale (unified MPLS)

L2VPN (VPLS) efficiency and scaling (PBB-EVPN)

• Unified MPLS defines scalable (hierarchical) architecture to extend MPLS to access/aggregation for an SP IP NGN

• PBB-EVPN defines BGP extensions to enhance scale and resiliency of existing VPLS deployments and meet data centers requirements

• Segment Routing offers an elegant way to scale SP networks and support application interaction with SDN’s

62

Complete Your Paper “Session Evaluation”

Give us your feedback and you could win

1 of 2 fabulous prizes in a random draw.

Complete and return your paper

evaluation form to the room attendant

as you leave this session.

Winners will be announced today.

You must be present to win!

..visit them at BOOTH# 100

http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&ai=CG2awSZxqUdmnIPKh6QGc2oHwAZDV48gCqLGXwTvI1sycSQgGEAMoA1Dburb5BGDJ1q6KpKTEEaAB3OuE_QPIAQeqBCNP0LNQhqdgW7cj9_QLmL6qjhzmt6ofFchKKiN01DpGJxLdTboFEwiblL75j8q2AhUrGjQKHR8zALrABQXKBQCgBiaAB4yU-wLgEsza__m9m6rV0QE&ei=SJxqUZvQF6u00AGf5oDQCw&sig=AOD64_3c0ay6iHU-GGkY5JlWB4p4X2vmXw&ctype=5&rct=j&frm=1&q=kobo+vox&sqi=2&ved=0CKUBEPMO&adurl=http://www.digitaldeliverydownloads.com/kobo-vox-ereader.html


Thank you.


PBB-EVPN: A Closer Look DF Election with VLAN Carving

Prevent duplicate delivery of flooded frames.

Uses BGP Ethernet Segment Route.

Non-DF ports are blocked for flooded traffic (multicast, broadcast, unknown unicast).

Performed per Segment rather than per (VLAN, Segment).

Split Horizon for Ethernet Segment

Prevent looping of traffic originated from a multi-homed segment.

Performed based on B-MAC source address rather than ESI MPLS Label.

Aliasing

PEs connected to the same multi-homed Ethernet Segment advertise the same B-MAC address.

Remote PEs use these MAC Route advertisements for aliasing load-balancing traffic destined to C-MACs reachable via a given B-MAC.

65

PE PE

PE PE

PE PE

PE PE

PE PE

PE

B-MAC1

B-MAC1


PBB-EVPN: Dual Homed Device

• Each PE advertises a MAC route per Ethernet Segment (carries B-MAC associated with Ethernet Segment).

Both PEs advertise the same B-MAC for the same Ethernet Segment.

• Remote PE installs both next hops into FIB for associated B-MAC.

Hashing used to load-balance traffic among next hops.

• PE1 MAC Routes:

Route: RD11, B-MAC1, RT2, RT3

• PE2 MAC Routes:

Route: RD22, B-MAC1, RT2, RT3

66

VPN B-MAC NH

RT3 B-MAC1 PE1

RT3 B-MAC1 PE2

RT2 B-MAC1 PE1

RT2 B-MAC1 PE2

RIB

VPN B-MAC NH

RT3 B-MAC1 PE1, PE2

RT2 B-MAC1 PE1, PE2

FIB

PE1

PE2

VLAN 2, 3

VLAN 2,3

B-MAC1

PE3

MPLS/ IP

Documents

Advanced Topics and Future Directions in MPLS - · PDF fileFuture Directions in MPLS Matt Gillies ... Seamless MPLS MPLS transport profile (MPLS-TP) L2VPN enhancements (PBB-EVPN, VPMS)