Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC 2018)

IEEE Conference Record # 42656; IEEE Xplore ISBN:978-1-5386-3452-3

Design and Simulation of Traffic Engineering using

MPLS in GNS3 Environment
Mohd. Imran, Mohd Amir Khan, Mohammed Abdul Qadeer
Department of Computer Engineering
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh-202002, India
{mohd.imran, maqadeer}@zhcet.ac.in, mak6174@gmail.com

Abstract ---Traffic engineering[1] is one of the best
solution of IP routing when the routes are overloaded.
Generally the router uses the shortest path solution from
source to destination, so if at the same time all routers are
looking for shortest path, their might be possibility of
overloading and delay. So MPLS not just rely on shortest
path. It utilized the underutilized paths, when all shortest
paths are over utilized. The main objective of this work is
to simulate the workings of MPLS with Traffic
Engineering[2] in a network and to perform analysis of
the advantages provided by MPLS as opposed to other
commonly used network protocols. Additional objective is
to assimilate exhaustive information on MPLS basics and
fundamentals which helps beginners. Also, simulation of
IP, ATM, FR etc based networks forms a part of the
additional targets of this article. We have used GNS3
Simulator and Cisco 2691 Router iso image.
Keywords— MPLS, OVERLAY MODELING ATM,
BGP, IGP, IS-IS, OSPF
I. Introduction
In last decades numerous technologies have been unearthed
for the understanding of network traffic in both the
termination as well as transmission of the network traffic
form source to destination. Some of the most commonly
used technologies includes ATM (Asynchronous Transfer
Mode)[3], PPP, Ethernet and frame relay etc. The listed
network technology has their own pros and cons which
make them effective in traffic routing but what made it
complicated is internetwork routing of traffic. Besides their
effective capabilities, the companies also have to make a
trade-off between performance and cost of the actual
implementation of network design. So the technologies
which have been listed above can be taken as a solution of
the arising problem; for example in order to connect various
offices of the same company, one might configure VPN
between various offices or one can purchase a dedicated
lease line at premium cost.
In order of handling such a problem, the network designer
came up with the idea of Tag switching[4]. This technology
was first introduced by one of the leading network designer
company of its time CISCO. It was then further processed
and formalized as MPLS i.e. Multiprotocol Label
Switching[5]. The terms tag and label are synonymous to
each other.
The key idea is labeling of each packet when it is injected
into network. After a packet is labeled, the routing is
performed across the network using a label forwarding table
or in other words Label Forwarding Instance based. The
another notable thing here is that the network still depend on
the basic routing protocol for trafficking of the packets
from source to destination using traditional routing
protocols like OSPF, EIGRP or BGP for internetwork[6].
The MPLS is an integration of framework for packet
transfer by using an added advantages of labeling. In this
procedure, the formation of IP routing table is similar in
manner as always with another routing table at network
layer with added layer of labeling. Hence separating the
traffic which is not provided by IP without setting up VPN`s
on an individual system.
If we insight of the operating layer of MPLS, it seems that
neither it is working in layer 2 of TCP/IP for e.g. ATM,
relay, Ethernet nor on layer 3 of the same protocol but it
switched in between. Because of this nature, it is also called
as layer 2.5 protocol.
Construction of routing table is same mostly similar to other
routing with added advantageous layer of label forwarding
which enhances the routing speed of packets equipped with
label nos. Hence a traffic segregation is performed by
MPLS which is absent in other routing protocols like IP
routing.
The MPLS[7] is a layer 2.5 protocol which means that it
works in between data link layer and network layer which
enhances forwarding of packet in more reliable way. Some
of the data link protocols are ATM. relay, Ethernet and in
layer 3, IP as well as IPv6 fit in. So at 2.5 layer, MPLS

978-1-5386-3452-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 1026

 Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC 2018)
IEEE Conference Record # 42656; IEEE Xplore ISBN:978-1-5386-3452-3
performs its function by adding additional header indicating
labels which is attached to each packet.
LDP[8] aka label distribution protocol is also utilized by the
MPLS traffic protocol. Which works when a network is not
running in BGP in order to distribute labels. Generally when
BGP protocol is in inactive mode or not running, advertises
labels within protocols. But the main problem is that it is not
supported by natively protocol likewise IGP protocol,
OSPF, EIGRP etc.
The organization of the rest of paper contains various
section where section II gives briefing of MPLS traffic
engineering and its importance as well as necessity in
modern networking. Section III describes the design and
implementation of traffic engineering[9] on GNS3
Simulator using Cisco 2691 Router iso image. Simulation
results and analysis is described in section IV. Conclusion
of the MPLS simulation is contained in section V.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. MPLS Traffic Engineering
The basic of networking is to transfer the packets between
endpoints also known as source and destination. The
tendency of any routing protocol is finding always the least
distance path to travel with lower cost generated[10][11]. In
some network. In exploration of possibility for finding the
least cost path, it also leads to recurrence of traffic within
network.
Such a scenario can be tackled by using TE aka traffic
engineering[12]. IGP protocols like EIGRP etc. collects the
blueprint of the network topology and hence determines the
all the available path lead to source to destination from
various hop counts i.e. availability of resources.
A. Characteristics of MPLS
a. Enhanced transmission capacity
b. act as a backbone for service providers
c. Enhanced protocols for mapping the packet for
efficient network flow
d. MPLS packet labeling
e. Effective utilization of available resources by
determining the used resources in traffic flow
f. Constraint-based routing
g. promising bandwidth, media and priority
implementation across network
h. Adaptation capability in case of node failure
i. acts as mediator between layer 2 and layer 3
protocol, hence named layer 2.5 protocol
978-1-5386-3452-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
B. Necessity of MPLS
Network flow across network is an exhaustive task[13]. In
order to maintain a trade-off between routing cost,
bandwidth requirement, and better resource utilization, the
only promising solution is traffic engineering. It is an
optimal solution to provide a better framework for ISPs in
terms of latency and delay.
Traffic engineering[1] is an alternative approach over
overlay modeling. This model is currently used by some of
service providers. The overlay model is used by layer 2
switching in terms of transmission of packets across
network[14]. In such type of model, the connecting routers
on the network is able to view only virtual topology.
Besides all of facilities provided by overlay modeling, it
also have some flaws which is overcame by traffic
engineering. Traffic engineering need not to run a separate
network and also it also removes the requirement for the
non-scalable[15], fully interconnected mesh network.
MPLS traffic engineering has the following features[12]:
➢ MPLS packet forwarding over Multihop Label-
Switched path (LSP).
➢ Understanding of better network topology and
better resource utilization.
➢ capability of determining the link bandwidth and
traffic flow strength by creating separate account
for such parameter
➢ The network adaptation mechanism is fully
automated and dynamic in nature, which makes
reduced possibility of network failure.
III. DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION
The MPLS can be designed using a network simulator
which consists of agents and a classifier. In MPLS an agent
work as an entity that sends/receives the data packets while
on other hand classifier classified the received data packets.
In order to realize the MPLS, Label switching is used.
Fig 1 Architecture of MPLS node for Label Switching
1027
 Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC 2018)
IEEE Conference Record # 42656; IEEE Xplore ISBN:978-1-5386-3452-3

The MPLS node labeling architecture consists of two tables

for label forwarding
a. Partial forwarding table
b. Label information base

The partial forwarding table PFT is a mapping table for IP

packet to LSP, and consists of PHB (Per-Hop-Behavior),
FEC and LIB pointer. After the establishment of LSP, each
table has its own meaningful information. For instance ERB
consists of information about ER-LSP`s. Fig 1. Shows the
architecture of MPLS node. In This arrangement, when the
MPLS controller receives the packet, PFT table is activated.
The packet can be either labeled or unlabeled. If the packet
is unlabeled, the MPLS Classifier checks for the PFT entry.
It uses packets FEC information as an index into the PFT
table. In case of labeled packet entry, MPLS classifier
checks LIB entry for the incoming packet. b. Configuration Router R1

Simulation

For the simulation of MPLS network traffic engineering, we

have used the GNS3 simulator. This is a great graphical
network tool enriched with multiple for feature for
performing the simulation of network engineering protocols
like BGP. EIGRP, OSPF etc.

Figure 2: GNS3 Simulator

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

a. Network Design
Similarly all the routers are configured in the same manner.
c. Verifying MPLS

978-1-5386-3452-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 1028

Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC 2018)
IEEE Conference Record # 42656; IEEE Xplore ISBN:978-1-5386-3452-3

d. Verifying MPLS Traffic Engineering

Figure 1: mpls forwarding-table

Figure 5: mpls traffic-eng tunnels; 1n router R1: Tunnel from R1 to R2

Figure 2: mpls ldp neighbor detail

Figure 6: mpls traffic-eng tunnels; in router R12: Tunnel from R12 to R4

V. CONCLUSION

In this paper we have performed simulation of various

network topology protocol like IS-IS, OSPF and tunneling
using GNS3 simulation environment. We have learnt various
cisco command for configuration and implementation of
MPLS traffic engineering which is a revolutionary technology
which enhances the adaptation capability of traffic flow
across the network. In general, existing network topologies
Figure 3: mpls interfaces determines the shortest path from source to destination by
calculating the distance. But some time the lowest path is
overloaded; hence network flow is affected. The MPLS
reduced the possibility of routing overloading by added extra
layer of packet labeling. Hence the underutilized resources
are now fully optimized. MPLS TE is applicable in ISP
maintenance, router only networks and also those networks
where virtual circuits are used as an interconnection
between routers.

REFERENCES

[1] S. Yadav and A. Jeyakumar, “Design of traffic engineered MPLS

VPN for protected traffic using GNS simulator,” in 2016
Figure 4: mpls ldp bindings International Conference on Wireless Communications, Signal

978-1-5386-3452-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 1029

 Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC 2018)
IEEE Conference Record # 42656; IEEE Xplore ISBN:978-1-5386-3452-3

Processing and Networking (WiSPNET), 2016, pp. 405–409.

[2] E. D. Osborne and A. Simha, Traffic engineering with MPLS.
Cisco, 2003.
[3] B. Davie et al., “MPLS using LDP and ATM VC Switching,”
Jan. 2001.
[4] B. S. Davie, P. Doolan, and Y. Rekhter, Switching in IP
networks : IP switching, tag switching, and related technologies.
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1998.
[5] D. Awduche and Y. Rekhter, “Multiprotocol lambda switching:
combining MPLS traffic engineering control with optical
crossconnects,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 111–
116, Mar. 2001.
[6] M. Haque, T. Ahmad, and M. Imran, “Review of Hierarchical
Routing Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks,” Springer,
Singapore, 2018, pp. 237–246.
[7] D. O. Awduche, “MPLS and traffic engineering in IP networks,”
IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 42–47, 1999.
[8] P. Ashwood-Smith and L. Berger, “Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Constraint-based Routed
Label Distribution Protocol (CR-LDP) Extensions.”
[9] Gaeil Ahn and Woojik Chun, “Design and implementation of
MPLS network simulator supporting LDP and CR-LDP,” in
Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Networks 2000
(ICON 2000). Networking Trends and Challenges in the New
Millennium, pp. 441–446.
[10] D. A. Kozlowski, D. C. James, and T. Schallert, “Use-dependent
exaggeration of neuronal injury after unilateral sensorimotor
cortex lesions.,” J. Neurosci., vol. 16, no. 15, pp. 4776–86, Aug.
1996.
[11] M. Haque, T. Ahmad, and M. Imran, “Performance Evaluation of
MOSPF , ODMRP , DVMRP and MAODVAd-Hoc Routing
Protocols,” Int. ournal Control theory Appl., vol. 10, no. 13, pp.
189–199, 2017.
[12] D. O. Awduche and J. Agogbua, “Requirements for Traffic
Engineering Over MPLS.”
[13] M. Imran, T. Jamal, and M. A. Qadeer, “Performance analysis of
LTE networks in varying spectral bands,” in 2016 IEEE
International Conference on Engineering and Technology
(ICETECH), 2016, pp. 50–55.
[14] M. Imran and M. A. Qadeer, “Evaluation Study of Performance
Comparison of Topology based Routing Protocol ; AODV and
DSDV in MANET,” 2016.
[15] J. Barakovic, H. Bajric, and A. Husic, “Multimedia Traffic
Analysis of MPLS and non-MPLS Network,” in Proceedings
ELMAR 2006, 2006, pp. 285–288.

978-1-5386-3452-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 1030