1 / 12

Praveen Bhaniramka, Wei Sun, Raj Jain The Ohio State University Contact: Jain@cse.ohio-State.Edu

Quality of Service using Traffic Engineering over MPLS : An Analysis draft-bhani-mpls-te-anal-00.txt. Praveen Bhaniramka, Wei Sun, Raj Jain The Ohio State University Contact: Jain@cse.ohio-State.Edu These slides, ID, and a paper are available online at

lahela
Télécharger la présentation

Praveen Bhaniramka, Wei Sun, Raj Jain The Ohio State University Contact: Jain@cse.ohio-State.Edu

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. Quality of Service using Traffic Engineering over MPLS: An Analysisdraft-bhani-mpls-te-anal-00.txt Praveen Bhaniramka, Wei Sun, Raj Jain The Ohio State University Contact: Jain@cse.ohio-State.Edu These slides, ID, and a paper are available online at http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~jain/ietf/

  2. Overview • Traffic Engineering: Trunks, LSPs, Links • Simulation Model • Results for 4 different scenarios • Conclusions

  3. Traffic Engineering • Optimize the utilization of network resources • Using MPLS • Explicit Routing • Policy Routing • Traffic aggregation and disaggregation • Constraint Based Routing

  4. Trunk Flows LSP Link LSP Flows, Trunks, LSPs, and Links • Label Switched Path (LSP): All packets with the same label • Trunk: Same Label+Exp • Flow: Same MPLS+IP+TCP headers DL Label Exp SI TTL IP TCP

  5. Simulation Model R3 Src 1 Dest 1 • Sources 1..n send TCP and UDP packets to Dest 1..n • R2-R3-R5 is a high bandwidth (45 Mpbs) path. • R2-R4-R5 is a low bandwidth (15 Mbps) path. • All links have 5ms delay • TCP1 MSS = 512 B, TCP2 MSS = 1024 B, UDP MSS = 210B 60 Mbps 60 Mbps 45 Mbps R1 R2 R5 R6 15 Mbps Src n Dest n R4

  6. Simulation Scenarios 1. Normal IP with Best Effort routing 2. Two trunks using Label Switched Paths • Trunk 1: R1-R2-R3-R5-R6 • TCP and UDP sources are multiplexed over this trunk • Trunk 2: R1-R2-R4-R5-R6 • Only TCP sources over this trunk 3. Three trunks using Label Switched Paths • All three flows are isolated. 4. Non End-to-end trunks.

  7. Case 1: No Trunks, No MPLS • 15 Mbps path not used at all • TCP suffers as UDP increases its rate • Unfairness among TCP flows UDP TCP2 TCP1

  8. Two trunks w UDP + TCP Mixed • Total throughput > 45 Mbps (both paths used) • TCP flows sharing the trunk with UDP suffer • TCP flow not sharing with UDP do not suffer UDP TCP2 TCP1

  9. 3 Trunks w Isolated TCP, UDP • TCP flows are not affected by UDP and achieve a fairly constant throughput UDP TCP1 TCP2

  10. Non End-to-End Trunks • TCP flows are affected by UDP in the shared path UDP TCP2 TCP1

  11. Other Factors • Queue Service Policies: WFQ, WF2Q, WF2Q+ • Packet drop policies: RED, Tail drop • Round Trip Time • TCP parameters:MSS, window size, etc.

  12. Summary • Total network throughput improves significantly with proper traffic engineering • Congestion-unresponsive flows affect congestion- responsive flows • Separate trunks for different types of flows • Trunks should be end-to-end • Trunk + No Trunk = No Trunk

More Related