1 / 12

MPLS-TP OAM OAM for an MPLS Transport Profile

MPLS-TP OAM OAM for an MPLS Transport Profile. Loa Andersson , Acreo AB IAB, MPLS WG co-chair. MPLS-TP Starting points. PHP is part of the MPLS architecture It is a powerful It solves more problems than it creates Removing it creates more problems than it solves

becka
Télécharger la présentation

MPLS-TP OAM OAM for an MPLS Transport Profile

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. MPLS-TP OAMOAM for an MPLS Transport Profile Loa Andersson, Acreo ABIAB, MPLS WG co-chair

  2. MPLS-TP Starting points • PHP is part of the MPLS architecture • It is a powerful • It solves more problems than it creates • Removing it creates more problems than it solves • We should try ti see how we can use the PHP, rather than to remove it

  3. MPLS-TP OAM Forwarding MEP A B MIP-1 C MIP-2 D MEP TT TT-1 TT-2 TT-3 PHP TL TL’ TL TL TL TL’ PHP TL TL TL TL TL TL’ PHP TL’ TL TL TL TL TL TL TL

  4. Legend for the previous slide • The “cylinder” indicates links between LSRs. • At an ingress LSR one or more labels are pushed onto a packet • At intermediate LSRs labels are swapped • At pen ultimate LSRs Labels are popped • At egress LSRs actions are taken on the top label • The LSRs are in the gaps between the links. • LSRs that don’t have a MEP or MEP are called A, B, C and D, if they have the are called MEP or MIP • The thinner cylinder represents the OAM channel

  5. Naming of tunnels • The outermost (top of label stack) tunnel is called Transport Tunnel (TT) • Transport Tunnels that is carried in other Transport Tunnels is called TT-n • In the figures we have TT, TT-1, TT-2 and TT-3 • On every level below the TT it is possible to multiple TTs, e.g. TT-1, TT-1’, TT-1’’ etc. • There is only a single tunnel for OAM between a pair of MEP and MEP/MIP.

  6. Forwarding • When a LSR sends a packet across the transport LSP it pushes the entire Label stack needed. • When a packet reaches the pen-ultimate hop of the current of a transport LSP level, the top label is popped and the packet forwarded with the next label on top • At the egress LSR the packet is forwarded based on the label on the top of the stack

  7. LFU TL LFU TL LFU TL FLU TL LFU TL TL LFU LFU TL TL’ LFU MPLS-TP OAM MEP to MEP MEP A B MIP-1 C MIP-2 D MIP-3 MEP TT TT-1 TT-2 TT-3 PHP TL TL’ TL TL TL TL’ PHP TL TL TL TL TL TL’ PHP

  8. Communication MEP to MEP • When an MEP sends an OAM packet the LSR pushes a label stack where the transport label that is comes to the top of the stack at the PHP before the MIP that the OAM packet is addressed to is replaced by the LFU • When a packet with the LFU at the top of the stack is received the LSR locates the ACH after the label with the BoS bit set • Apart from information indicating what OAM procedures that is required the ACH needs to carry information on what LSP this is requested for, this may require an aggreate LSPid

  9. MPLS-TP OAM MEP to MIP-1 MEP A B MIP-1 C MIP-2 D MEP PHP TL TL’ LFU LFU LFU

  10. MPLS-TP OAM MEP to MIP-2 MEP A B MIP-1 C MIP-2 D MEP PHP TL TL’ TL TL TL TL’ PHP LFU LFU LFU FLU LFU

  11. MEP to MIP communication • The only difference between MEP to MIP communication and MEP to MEP communication is that the label stack only needs to be populated to take the the packet to the LSR with the MIP, the rest of the label stack may be omitted. • If the redundant part of the label stack is present the LFU will not have the BoS set • The MPLS architecture has been operating with uni-directional LSPs. This works for bi-directional LSPs as well. It is not clear if the response OAM channel needs to be bundled with the LSP in the reverse direction or if direct communication between originating MEP and the responder is allowed. Both schemes works with this architeture.

  12. Questions • Is MIP to MIP communication needed? • Is MIP to MEP communication needed for other purposes than responses on communications that were initiated by the MEP? • If one set up LSPs from a NMS or manually this is fiarly straightforward. • If one is using a control plane it might require extensions to the signaling protocol, especially the concept of an aggregate LSPid needs to be investigated.

More Related