CS 520 – Fall 2003 - Lecture 15

MPLS and its Applications

(with modifications for CS

520)
Philip Matthews
Nortel Networks
April 2000
(Material prepared by
Dr. Bilel Jamoussi and
Peter Ashwood-Smith)
1
What This Lecture is About

• What MPLS is
• What MPLS is good for
• MPLS protocol/mode comparisons & opinions
• Some applications of MPLS
• MPLS future

• Good tutorial information at www.mplsrc.com.

2
What This Lecture is NOT About

• General networking
• Product comparisons
• Marketing

3
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint-Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

4
What is MPLS?

• MPLS is an IETF Standardized mechanism for

controlling packet routing.
• Framework and Architecture
— Define the scope, the various components and their interactions

• Encapsulations
— Labels used at the data plane to make forwarding decisions

• Signaling Protocols
— Distribution of Labels to establish Label Switched Paths

• Routing Protocol Traffic Engineering Extensions

— Distribution of Bandwidth and other link attributes

5
“Label Substitution” what is it?
Have a friend go to B ahead of you. At every road they
reserve a lane just for you. At every intersection they post
a big sign that says for a given lane which way to turn and
what new lane to take.

LANE#1 TURN RIGHT USE LANE#2

LANE#1

LANE#2

6
Label Switched Path (LSP)

#1 RIGHT #2

#2 LEFT #1 #1 RIGHT #2

#2 LEFT #1

7
What is a “LABEL”?

A property that uniquely identifies a

flow on a logical or physical interface

Labels may be platform wide unique or more

commonly interface wide unique.
But are not globally unique, so label values can be
reused in many places.

8
 Label Switched Path

#3 Right #7
IP #3

#7
#7 LEFT #99
#99 RIGHT #9
#99

#9
#9 LEFT #4072

#4072 IP

9
Another context: An Optical Label Switched Path – “labels” are
colors of light
RED RIGHT BLUE
IP RED

BLUE

BLUE LEFT WHITE WHITE RIGHT ORANGE

WHITE

ORANGE

ORANGE LEFT RED

RED
IP

10
MPLS Labels

• Hop-by-hop or source routing to establish labels

— Hop-by-hop can use OSPF, RIP, etc. to define labels
— Source routing lets sources define routes and their labels

• Multiple levels of labels (stacks of labels within

labels).
— Allows groups of flows to carry the same label for part of a
route.

11
ROUTE AT EDGE, SWITCH IN CORE

IP IP #L1 IP #L2 IP #L3 IP

IP Forwarding LABEL SWITCHING IP Forwarding

12
Routers Do Both Routing and Switching
• Routing
— Deciding the next hop based on
the destination address.
— A Layer 3 (L3) function.

• Switching
— Moving a packet from an input
port to an output port and out.
— A layer 2 function.
INPUT PORTS OUTPUT PORTS

13
MPLS Turns Routing into Switching
• So we can avoid performing the layer 3 function.
— Use labels to decide next hops.

• What benefit does this provide?

• In what situations would this benefit not be very

significant?

14
MPLS: Flexible Forwarding
IP: Packets are forwarded based on Destination Address (DA). We can
call this “destination based routing”.

IP DA IP DA IP DA IP DA IP DA

MPLS:
• Map packets to LSP based on (Source Address, Destination Address,
protocol, port, DSCP, interface, etc.)
• Forward packets based on the Label

IP IP #L1 IP #L2 IP #L3 IP

IP to LSP LABEL SWITCHING LSP to IP

15
MPLS-based Solutions

• Enable QoS in IP Networks

— Support Diffserv + connection-oriented QoS

• IP Traffic Engineering
— Use constraint-based routing to adapt to latest network
loading and QoS performance

• Virtual Private Networks

— Use controllable tunneling mechanisms

• L2/L3 Integration
— Integrate with L1 and L2 technologies like Optical Cross
Connects (OXC’s) and ATM
• Resilient Network Design
— Automatic Failover and Backup

16
 BEST OF BOTH WORLDS
PACKET CIRCUIT
HYBRID SWITCHING
Forwarding

IP MPLS ATM
+IP
• MPLS + IP forms a middle ground that combines
the best of IP and the best of circuit switching
technologies.

17
MPLS Terminology

• LDP: Label Distribution Protocol

• LSP: Label Switched Path
• LER: Label Edge Router (edge of an area
that supports MPLS)
• LSR: Label Switching Router (inside an area
that supports MPLS)

• FEC: Forwarding Equivalence Class

18
LER’s and LSR’s

IP IP #L1 IP #L2 IP #L3 IP

IP to LSP LABEL SWITCHING LSP to IP

LER LSR’s LER

19
Forwarding Equivalence Classes
• FEC = “A subset of packets that are all treated the same way by a router”
• The concept of FECs provides for a great deal of flexibility and
scalability. Traffic can be aggregated or differentiated in many ways
• In conventional routing, a packet is assigned to an FEC at each hop (i.e.
L3 look-up), in MPLS it is only done once at the network ingress.

LSR LSR
LER LER

LSP

IP1 IP1
IP1 #L1 IP1 #L2 IP1 #L3
IP2 #L1 IP2 #L2 IP2 #L3
IP2 IP2

Packets are destined for different address prefixes, but can be

mapped to common path
20
Label Switched Path (Two Types)

#427
#216

#819

#18 #77

#963
#14
#612 #462

#99 #311
#5

Two types of Label Switched Paths:

• Hop by hop (“Vanilla” LDP)
• Explicit Routing (LDP+”ER”)
21
LABEL SWITCHED PATH (vanilla)
#14 #311
#216 #99 #311
#963 #311

#963
#14
#612 #462

#99 #311
#5

- A Vanilla LSP creates MPLS paths for standard IP

routing (from IP routing tables).
- A Vanilla LSP is actually part of a tree from every source
to that destination (unidirectional).

22
STANDARD IP
Dest Out
47.1 1
Dest Out 47.2 2
47.1 1 47.3 3
47.2 2
47.3 3
1 47.1

1 2
3
Dest Out
2
47.1 1
47.2 2
47.3 3
1
3 47.2

Network 47.3 2

• Destination based forwarding tables as built by OSPF, IS-IS, RIP, etc.

23
STANDARD IP
Dest Out
47.1 1
Dest Out 47.2 2
47.1 1 47.3 3
47.2 2
47.3 3
1 47.1
IP 47.1.1.1
1 2 IP 47.1.1.1
Dest Out 3
47.1 1 2
47.2 2
47.3 3 IP 47.1.1.1
1
47.3 3 47.2

2
IP 47.1.1.1

24
Label Switched Path (LSP)

IntfIn
IP 47.1.1.1
1 47.1
3 3

Intf D
2
1
1
2
47.3 3 47.2
2
IP 47.1.1.1

25
MPLS Label Distribution

IntfIn
1 47.1
Request: 47.1
3
47.1

Intf D
s t : 2
ue 3
Req 1
Mapping: 40
1 2
0
47.3 3 p i ng: 5 47.2
p
Ma
2

26
Benefits and Limitations
• Why might this approach be better than normal IP
forwarding that does not use MPLS?
— Remember, all packets still travel the same paths.

• What else might we be able to do with MPLS that could

be even more powerful?

27
Route= EXPLICITLY ROUTED OR ER-LSP
{A,B,C}
#14 #972
#216
B

#14
C
A #972

#462

- ER-LSP follows the route that source chooses. In other

words, the control message to establish the LSP (label
request) is source routed.

28
EXPLICITLY ROUTED LSP ER-LSP
This entry gives the
longest prefix match.

IntfIn
IP 47.1.1.1
1 47.1

Intf D
3 3
2
1
1
2
47.3 3 47.2
2
IP 47.1.1.1

Explicitly Routing LSP

that does not follow
the standard IP path.

29
ER LSP - Advantages

• Operator has routing flexibility

— Can establish LSP’s based on policy, QoS, etc.
— Can have pre-established LSP’s that can be used in case of failures.

• Can use routes other than shortest path

• Can compute routes based on dynamic constraints

(available bandwidth, delay, etc.) in exactly the same manner
as ATM based on a distributed topology database.
(traffic engineering)

30
ER LSP - Discord!
• Two signaling options proposed in the standards: CR-LDP, RSVP
extensions:
– CR-LDP = Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) + Explicit Routing
– RSVP-TE = Traditional Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) + Explicit Route +
Scalability Extensions

• RSVP was established several years ago to be able to reserve

resources along a path.
— To ensure QoS by making sure each flow had enough resources.
— Had significant scalability problems.

• ITU has decided on LDP/CR-LDP for public networks.

31
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

32
Upper Layer Consistency Across
Lower Layers

WDM
Ethernet GigEthernet Optical Cross Frame
Connect (OXC) ATM
Relay

• MPLS is “multiprotocol” below (link layer)

• Provides for consistent operations, engineering across multiple
technologies
• Allows operators to leverage existing infrastructure
• Co-existence with other protocols is provided for

33
MPLS Encapsulation - PPP & LAN Data Links
MPLS ‘Shim’ Headers (1-n)
n ••• 1
Layer 2 Header Network Layer Header
(eg. PPP, 802.3) and Packet (eg. IP)

4 Octets
Label Stack
Label Exp. S TTL
Entry Format
Label: Label Value, 20 bits (Values 0 through 16 are reserved)
Exp.: Experimental, 3 bits (was Class of Service)
S: Bottom of Stack, 1 bit (1 = last entry in label stack)
TTL: Time to Live, 8 bits

• Network layer must be inferable from value of bottom label of the stack

MPLS
MPLSononPPP
PPPlinks
linksand
andLANs
LANsuses
uses‘Shim’
‘Shim’Header
HeaderInserted
Inserted
Between Layer 2 and Layer 3 Headers
Between Layer 2 and Layer 3 Headers
(other
(othertechnologies
technologiesuse
usedifferent
differentapproaches)
approaches)

34
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint-Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

35
Label Distribution Protocols

• Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)

• Constraint-based Routing LDP (CR-LDP)
• Extensions to RSVP

36
Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) - Purpose
Label distribution ensures that adjacent routers have
a common view of bindings of FEC’s to labels
Routing
Routing Table:
Table:
Routing
Routing Table:
Table:
Addr-prefix
Addr-prefix Next Hop
Addr-prefix
Addr-prefix Next
Next Hop
Hop 47.0.0.0/8
47.0.0.0/8 LSR3
LSR3
47.0.0.0/8
47.0.0.0/8 LSR2
LSR2

LSR1 LSR2 LSR3

IP Packet 47.80.55.3

Label
Label Information
Information Base:
Base:
For 47.0.0.0/8 Label
Label Information
Information Base:
Label-In
Label-In FEC
FEC Label-Out
Label-Out use label ‘17’
XX
XX 47.0.0.0/8
47.0.0.0/8 17
17 Label-In
Label-In FEC Label-Out
Label-Out
17
17 47.0.0.0/8
47.0.0.0/8 XX

Step 3: LSR inserts label Step 2: LSR communicates Step 1: LSR creates binding
value into forwarding base binding to adjacent LSR between FEC and label value

Common understanding of which FEC the label is referring to!

Label distribution can either piggyback on top of an existing routing protocol,

or a dedicated label distribution protocol (LDP) can be created.

37
Labels are Downstream Assigned
• Note that label assignments are decided at the
downstream node and communicated to the upstream
node.
• Why does it need to be done this way?

• What flexibility does this approach provide?

38
Label Distribution Protocols

• Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)

• Constraint-based Routing LDP (CR-LDP)
• Extensions to RSVP

39
Traffic Engineering Requirements
Constraint-Based Routing is one method of Traffic Engineering. Traffic
Engineering seeks to engineer the best use of capacity.

RFC 2702:
• Strict & Loose ER
• Specification of QoS
• Specification of Traffic Parameters
• Route Pinning
• Preemption
• Failure Recovery

40
Constraint Based Routing using LDP (CR-
LDP)
• Built on existing LDP messages over TCP.
• Defines an Explicit Route:
— Detailed path that can traverse any links supporting CR-LDP.

• Defines a set of constraints for LSP computation and

admission:
— Expectation and Allocation of resources:
– Peak burst & rate, Committed burst & rate,
Excess burst, Frequency, Weight.
— Preemption Level:
– Setup and Holding Priority with respect to other LSPs.
— Resource Class:
– Color of traffic inclusion, exclusion rules for links.
41
CR-LDP Preemption

• Preemption may or may not be a good idea in a

particular context – recall our discussion in
previous lectures.
• A CR-LSP carries an LSP priority. This priority can
be used to allow new LSPs to bump existing LSPs
of lower priority in order to steal their resources.
• This is especially useful during times of failure and
allows you to rank the LSPs such that the most
important obtain resources before less important
LSPs.
• These are called the setup-Priority and a holding-
Priority and 8 levels are provided.

42
CR-LDP Preemption

• When an LSP is established, its setup-Priority is

compared with the holding-Priority of existing
LSPs, any with lower holding-Priority may be
bumped to obtain their resources.
• This process may continue in a domino fashion
until the lowest holding-Priority LSPs either clear
or are on the worst routes.

43
Preemption A.K.A. Bumping
This LSP must be
Route= preempted.
{A,B,C} Now this one can
proceed.
#216
B

#14
C
A #972

#462

44
Label Distribution Protocols

• Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)

• Constraint-based Routing LDP (CR-LDP)
• Extensions to RSVP

45
ER-LSP setup using RSVP-TE
• TE (Traffic Engineering) extensions to RSVP
• Built on RSVP messages over IP.
— In RSVP, a source requests resources along a path.
— Then the source regularly sends refresh messages to keep the reservations
active.
• Extensions to RSVP:
— Explicit Route Object
— Label Request
— Label Object
— Session Attribute
— Record Route Object
• Defines a set of constraints for LSP computation and admission:
— Expectation and Allocation of resources: Uses Inserv-style reservations
— Preemption Level: Setup and Holding Priority with respect to other LSPs.

46
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

47
 IP Follows a Tree to the Destination

Dest=a.b.c.d

a.b.c.d
Dest=a.b.c.d

Dest=a.b.c.d

- IP will over-utilize best paths and under-utilize

not-so-good paths.
48
HOP-BY-HOP (A.K.A Vanilla) LDP

#216

#963
#14
#612 #462

#99 #311
#5

- Ultra fast, simple forwarding a.k.a switching

- Follows same route as normal IP datapath
- So like IP, LDP will over-utilize best paths and
under-utilize less good paths.
49
Label Switched Path (Two Types)

#427
#216

#819

#18 #77

#963
#14
#612 #462

#99 #311
#5

Two types of Label Switched Paths:

• Hop by hop (“Vanilla” LDP)
• Explicit Routing (LDP+”ER”)
50
CR-LDP
CR = “Constraint” based “Routing”
Example: USE: (links with sufficient resources) AND
(links of type “someColor”) AND
(links that have delay less than 200 ms)

& &

=
51
Traffic Engineering
B C
Demand
A D

Traffic engineering is the process of mapping traffic demand onto a network

Network
Topology

Purpose of traffic engineering:

• Maximize utilization of links and nodes throughout the network
• Engineer links to achieve required delay, grade-of-service
• Spread the network traffic across network links to minimize impact of failure
• Ensure available spare link capacity for re-routing traffic on failure
• Meet policy requirements imposed by the network operator

Traffic engineering is key to optimizing cost/performance 52

MPLS Traffic Engineering Methods
• MPLS can use the source routing capability to
steer traffic on desired paths
• An operator may manually configure LSRs along
the desired paths.
• What are limitations of manual configuration?

53
MPLS Traffic Engineering Methods
• The ingress LSR may be specify an LSP to have one or more
other LSR’s along the desired path
— hop-by-hop routing may be used to set up the rest of the path in between
those LSR’s
— a.k.a. loose source routing, less configuration required

• If desired for control, a route discovered by hop-by-hop

routing can be frozen
— a.k.a “route pinning”
— to stay with the same route for a period of time

• In the future, constraint-based routing will offload traffic

engineering tasks from the operator to the network itself
— Automated LSP assignments

54
WHEN SHOULD TE BE USED?

• When it is not acceptable to simply rank packets and

throw away the least important traffic first.
• When traffic is being thrown away but you have other
viable routes that are unused or underutilized.
• Don’t use TE if it is not necessary. In fact don’t use
MPLS if vanilla IP is working for you. Use LDP, CR-LDP
and RSVP-TE if/when they are needed.

55
Reactive traffic engineering

Wait till you have a problem and then patch

around it.

1- Identify a flow to move

Q: how?

2- Establish an LSP on some other route

Q: what route?
56
 How to identify a flow to move?
Good Statistics!

A) move the flow that has packets being discarded. For

this you need to have stats that show {src, dest,
protocol} that are being thrown away. (note this is TE of
least important traffic)
B) move some other high priority user on the link
somewhere else. For this you need to have stats that
show {src, dest, protocol} of high users. (note, this is TE
of more important traffic)
57
 What route should be used for an LSP?
An non-shortest path!

A) Explicitly route without help of constraint based

routing.
B) Use constraint “not this link” so that MPLS can pick
all the other links dynamically but is not allowed to pick
the congested one.
Neither of these approaches will result in shortest paths
and both are hard to administer as things scale up.
58
Pro-active traffic engineering (plan ahead)
S1
S2
S3
D
S4

S5
S6

1- Start with rough idea on {Si, D} B/W

requirements.
2- Establish constraint based tunnels {Si -> D}
3- repeat forever at regular planning intervals
(days, weeks, months)
3a- Remeasure {Si -> D} B/W utilization.
3b- Adjust reservations on {Si ->D} to be closer
59
 MPLS Traffic engineering
•Imperative to be able to monitor flow rates to
the granularity of {source, dest, protocol} .

•Use MPLS constraint based routing to assign

paths to flows based on a reservation.

•Try to adjust the reservations periodically to

reflect changes in utilization.

•MPLS aims to do a really good job of placing

routes given the reservations are accurate.

•MPLS allows dynamic changes to reservations

so they can slowly converge to reality over
time.
60
 MPLS Traffic engineering
interactions with vanilla IP.

•There are non trivial interaction issues to deal with

when some of the traffic is traffic engineered (MPLS)
and the rest (vanilla IP) is not.

•What problems might occur?

61
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

62
MPLS Provides Benefits for Establishing
Virtual Private Networks
• Virtual Private Network (VPN)
— Connects two or more separate sites over the Internet
— Allows them to function as if they were a single, private network.
— Key Features: Security, control over performance, management
ability.

• Use of MPLS for VPN’s

— MPLS can set up one or more LSP’s between sites.
— Organizations can choose how they use the LSP’s.
— Can view the LSP’s as virtual “network links”.
— Significant debate is in progress on how to use MPLS for VPN’s.

• Will study VPN’s more in a later lecture.

63
Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

64
The need for MPLS protection
• MPLS-based services have been growing
— VPN’s
— Migration of ATM and Frame Relay onto MPLS
— Traffic Engineering

• MPLS-based services are more demanding of resiliency

and reliability
— Because MPLS promises more reliability.
— That’s one reason why customers would use MPLS-based services.

65
The need for MPLS protection
• Layer 3 recovery is also too slow.
— OSPF, RIP, etc. require a redistribution updated link status
information in response to a fault.
— Then routers must recompute their routes.
— Takes on the order of seconds.
— Can have looping and lost packets in the meantime.

• Other technologies are very fast.

— SONET can establish an alternate route around a failure within
50 milliseconds.
— By having active backup resources immediately available.

• It would be good to have millisecond failovers with

MPLS.

66
MPLS protection approaches
• Headend reroute
— Recompute LSP’s to find a new LSP after a failure.
— Initiated by the source or LER.
— Just has slow as using OSPF or RIP – not good.

• Pre-signaled standby LSP’s

— Backup LSP is signaled in advance from primary ingress to egress.
— That does not share any links or LSR’s with the primary path.
— Called “link and node disjoint”.
— Has of millisecond failover, around 500 milliseconds.
— These backup LSP’s need to have resources reserved for them, but
these resources are not used very often.

67
Pre-signaled Standby LSP’s

• Planning occurs before failure

— Then LSP ingress learns of the failure
— Moves traffic to use standby LSP

• Ingress must first know about the failure

— The farther away the failure, the longer it will take to start the
reroute.
68
MPLS protection approaches
• MPLS Fast Reroute
— During the establishment of a primary LSP, a protected path for each
possible link or node failure is pre-signaled.
— Even faster failover, around 50 milliseconds.
— But many more LSP’s are established, with resources reserved to
them
— Much more to manage.

• Midpoint LSR’s make their own LSP’s to the egress.

— To go around the immediate downstream link or node that could fail.
— LSP’s are established using the same criteria used for the primary
LSP.
— Since the PLR (Protection Label-Switched Router) is immediately
connected to the failed link, it will know about the failure very quickly
from the hardware.
— Then the backup LSP can be used.
69
MPLS Fast Reroute

— A merge node joins traffic back onto the primary LSP.

70
Tutorial Outline

• Overview
• Label Encapsulations
• Label Distribution Protocols
• Constraint Based Routing
• MPLS and VPNs
• Network Survivability
• Summary

71
Summary of Motivations for MPLS

• Simplified forwarding based on an exact match of a fixed

length label
— Initial driver for MPLS was based on the existence of cheap, fast
ATM switches

• Separation of routing and forwarding in IP networks

— Facilitates evolution of routing techniques by fixing the forwarding
method
— New routing functionality can be deployed without changing the
forwarding techniques of every router in the Internet

• Facilitates the integration of ATM and IP

— Allows carriers to leverage their large investment of ATM equipment

72
Summary of Motivations for MPLS

• Enables the use of explicit routing/source routing in IP

networks
— Can easily be used for such things as traffic management, QoS
routing

• Promotes the partitioning of functionality within the

network
— Move detailed processing of packets to the edge; restrict core to
simple packet forwarding
— Assists in maintaining scalability of IP protocols in large networks

73
Summary of Motivations for MPLS
• Applicability to both cell and packet link-layers
— Can be deployed on both cell (eg. ATM) and packet (eg. FR, Ethernet)
media
— Common management and techniques simplifies engineering

• But MPLS is much more complex than traditional IP

forwarding
— Routers need to be able to forward based on labels (in addition to their
normal functions).
— LSP’s must be signalled and maintained.
— Some ISP’s have said they are not using MPLS and do not plan to.
– This will continue to be true if overprovisioning remains effective.
– But MPLS is more seriously being considered to carry legacy ATM and
Frame Relay traffic (connection-oriented traffic).
– And some of these ISP’s are realizing that their customers want MPLS
to provide more assurance about their IP-based services.
74
MPLS: Partitioning Routing and Forwarding
Routing Based on:
Classful Addr. Prefix?
OSPF, IS-IS, BGP, RIP Classless Addr. Prefix?
Multicast Addr.?
Forwarding Table Port No.?
ToS Field?

Forwarding
Based on:
MPLS Exact Match on Fixed Length Label

• Current network has multiple forwarding paradigms

- classful longest prefix match (Class A,B,C boundaries)
- classless longest prefix match (variable boundaries)
- multicast (exact match on source and destination)
- type-of-service (longest prefix. match on addr. + exact match on ToS)
• As new routing methods change, new route look-up algorithms are required
- like when CIDR was introduced
• Next generation routers will be based on hardware for route look-up
- changes will require new hardware with new algorithms
• MPLS has a consistent algorithm for all types of forwarding; partitions routing/fwding
- minimizes impact of the introduction of new forwarding methods
MPLS introduces flexibility through a consistent
forwarding paradigm 75
Summary

• MPLS is an important emerging technology.

• MPLS/LDP/CR-LDP have been recommended by the ITU

for IP transport on ATM in public networks.
• Basic functionality (Encapsulation and basic Label
Distribution) has been defined by the IETF.
• Traffic Engineering based on MPLS/CR-LDP is being
developed (protocols and research).

76