Juniper Networks M40 BGP Layer 3 MPLS VPN Scalability Test Report
Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
-
Upload
doan-dangthai -
Category
Documents
-
view
242 -
download
4
Transcript of Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
1/68
1
MPLS
John Jamison
University of Illinois at Chicago
November 17, 2000
Whats in it for Research& Education Networks?
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
2/68
2
Juniper Networks Product Family
Nov 1999M20
Sept 1998M40
Mar 2000M160
Sept 2000
M5
Sept 2000M10
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
3/68
3
Juniper NetworksResearch and Education Customers
MCI Worldcom vBNS/vBNS+
Department of Energy ESnet
DANTE - TEN-155 (Pan-EuropeanResearch & Education Backbone)
NYSERNet New York State Education& Research Network
Georgia Tech SOX GigaPoP
University of WashingtonPacific/Northwest GigaPoP
STAR TAP (International Research &Education Network Meet Point)
APAN (Asia Pacific Advanced Network)Consortium
NOAA (National Oceanographic andAtmospheric Administration)
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
NIH (National Institutes of Health)
DoD (Department of Defense)
US Army Engineer Research and
Development Center
University of Illinois NCSA (NationalCenter for Supercomputing
Applications)
University of California, San Diego -SDSC (San Diego SupercomputerCenter)
University of Southern California,
Information Sciences Institute
Indiana University
Stanford University
University of California, Davis
California Institute of Technology
North Carolina State University
University of Alaska
University of Hiroshima, Japan
Korea Telcom Research Lab
ETRI (Electronic and TransmissionResearch Institute), Korea
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
4/68
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
5/68
5
Our Agenda
MPLS Overview
Traffic Engineering
VPNs
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
6/68
6
What are we missing out on?
A bunch of pure marketing slides
A bunch of filler slides
Slides with content that is of interest mainly to
ISPs Here is how you can use MPLS to bring in more revenue,
offer different services, etc.
Some Details of MPLS Signaling Protocols and RFC
2547 VPNsYou can (and should) only cover so much in one talk
Some MP(Lambda)S Details
Seems too much like slide ware right now
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
7/687
What are we gaining?
Besides being spared marketing and ISP centricstuff:
We will see some examples from networks andapplications we are familiar with
We will save some time and cover almost as muchinformation
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
8/688
Why Is MPLSan Important Technology?
Fully integrates IP routing & L2 switching
Leverages existing IP infrastructures
Optimizes IP networks by facilitating
traffic engineering
Enables multi-service networking
Seamlessly integrates private and public networks
The natural choice for exploring new and richerIP service offerings
Dynamic optical bandwidth provisioning
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
9/689
What Is MPLS?
IETF Working Group chartered in spring 1997
IETF solution to support multi-layer switching:
IP Switching (Ipsilon/Nokia)
Tag Switching (Cisco)
IP Navigator (Cascade/Ascend/Lucent)
ARIS (IBM)
Objectives
Enhance performance and scalability of IP routing
Facilitate explicit routing and traffic engineering
Separate control (routing) from the forwarding mechanismso each can be modified independently
Develop a single forwarding algorithm to support a widerange of routing and switching functionality
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
10/6810
MPLS Terminology
Label Short, fixed-length packet identifier
Unstructured
Link local significance
Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC)
Stream/flow of IP packets:
Forwarded over the same path
Treated in the same manner
Mapped to the same label
FEC/label binding mechanism
Currently based on destination IP address prefix
Future mappings based on SP-defined policy
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
11/68
11
MPLS Terminology
Label Swapping Connection table maintains mappings
Exact match lookup Input (port, label) determines:
Label operation
Output (port, label)
Same forwarding algorithm used in Frame Relay and ATM
Port 1
Port 3
Port 2
Port 4
Connection Table
In(port, label)
Out(port, label)
(1, 22)
(1, 24)
(1, 25)(2, 23)
(2, 17)
(3, 17)
(4, 19)(3, 12)
LabelOperation
Swap
Swap
SwapSwap
25IP
19IP
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
12/68
12
MPLS Terminology
Label-Switched Path (LSP)
Simplex L2 tunnel across a network
Concatenation of one or more label switched hops
Analogous to an ATM or Frame Relay PVC
SanFrancisco
New York
LSP
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
13/68
13
MPLS Terminology
SanFrancisco
New York
LSP
LSR
LSR
LSRLSR
Label-Switching Router (LSR)
Forwards MPLS packets using label-switching
Capable of forwarding native IP packets
Executes one or more IP routing protocols
Participates in MPLS control protocols
Analogous to an ATM or Frame Relay Switch (that also
knows about IP)
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
14/68
14
MPLS Terminology
SanFrancisco
NewYork
LSP
Ingress LSR (head-end LSR)
Examines inbound IP packets and assigns them to an FEC
Generates MPLS header and assigns initial label
Transit LSR
Forwards MPLS packets using label swapping
Egress LSR (tail-end LSR)
Removes the MPLS header
IngressLSR Transit
LSR TransitLSR
EgressLSR
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
15/68
15
MPLS Header
Fields Label
Experimental (CoS)
Stacking bit Time to live
IP packet is encapsulated by ingress LSR
IP packet is de-encapsulated by egress LSR
TTLLabel (20-bits) CoS S
IP Packet
32-bits
L2 Header MPLS Header
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
16/68
16
134.5.1.5
200.3.2.7200.3.2.1
134.5.6.1
Routing Table
Destination Next Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
12.29.31.5
12.29.31.5
Destination
Routing TableNext Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
134.5.6.1
200.3.2.1
IP Packet Forwarding Example
200.3.2.7
200.3.2.7
3 5
2
12.29.31.412.29.31.1
Routing Table
Destination Next Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
12.29.31.5
12.29.31.9
12.29.31.5
Routing Table
Destination Next Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
12.29.31.5
12.29.31.4
12.29.31.9
200.3.2.7
200.3.2.7
200.3.2.7
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
17/68
17
134.5.1.5
200.3.2.7
1 2
200.3.2.1
134.5.6.1
Ingress Routing Table
Destination Next Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
(2, 84)
(3, 99)
MPLS TableIn Out
(1, 99) (2, 56)
MPLS TableIn Out
(3, 56) (5, 0)
DestinationEgress Routing Table
Next Hop
134.5/16
200.3.2/24
134.5.6.1
200.3.2.1
MPLS Forwarding Example
200.3.2.7
MPLS TableIn Out
(2, 84) (6, 0)
200.3.2.7
3 5
2
3
2 6
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
18/68
18
How Is Traffic Mappedto an LSP?
Map LSP to the BGP next hop
FEC = {all BGP destinations reachable via egress LSR}
134.5.1.5
Egress LSR
AS 45 AS 63
AS 77
Transit SP
LSP 32
I-BGP peers
134.5.1.5 E-BGPpeers
E-BGPpeers
BGP BGP
BGP BGP
Routing Table134.5/16 LSP 32
Ingress LSR
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
19/68
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
20/68
20
MPLS Signaling Protocols
The IETF MPLS architecture does not assumea single label distribution protocol
LDP
Executes hop-by-hop
Selects same physical path as IGP Does not support traffic engineering
RSVP
Easily extensible for explicit routes and label distribution
Deployed by providers in production networks
CR-LDP
Extends LDP to support explicit routes
Functionally identical to RSVP
Not deployed
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
21/68
21
How Is the LSP PhysicalPath Determined?
Two approaches:
Offline path calculation (in house or 3rd party tools)
Online path calculation (constraint-based routing)
A hybrid approach may be used
LSP
IngressLSR
EgressLSR
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
22/68
22
Offline Path Calculation
Simultaneously considers
All link resource constraints
All ingress to egresstraffic trunks
Benefits Similar to mechanisms used
in overlay networks
Global resource optimization
Predictable LSP placement
Stability
Decision support system
In-house and third-party tools
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
23/68
23
IngressLSR
EgressLSR
LSP
Offline Path Calculation
Input to offline path calculation utility:
Ingress and egress points Physical topology
Traffic matrix (statistics about city - router pairs)
Output: Set of physical paths, each expressed
as an explicit route
R1
R3
R2
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
Explicit route ={R1, R4, R8, R9}
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
24/68
24
Explicit Routes: Example 1
LSP from R1 to R9
Partial explicit route: {loose R8, strict R9}
LSP physical path
R1 to R8 follow IGP path
R8 to R9 directly connected
IngressLSR
EgressLSRR1
R3
R2
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
25/68
25
IngressLSR
EgressLSRR1
R3
R2
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
Explicit Routes: Example 2
LSP from R1 to R9
Full explicit route:
{strict R3, strict R4, strict R7, strict R9} LSP physical path
R1 to R3 directly connected
R3 to R4 directly connected
R4 to R7 directly connected
R7 to R9 directly connected
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
26/68
26
Constraint-Based Routing
IngressLSR
EgressLSR
Online LSP path calculation
Operator configures LSP constraints at ingress LSR Bandwidth reservation
Include or exclude a specific link(s)
Include specific node traversal(s)
Network actively participates in selecting an LSP
path that meets the constraints
User defined LSPconstraints
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
27/68
27
Constraint-Based Routing
Thirty-two named groups, 0 through 31 Groups assigned to interfaces
San
Francisco
Gold
Bronze
Silver
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
28/68
28
Constraint-Based Routing
Choose the path from A to I using:admin group {
include [gold sliver];
}
C
D
E
F
G
H
B
A
I
6
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
29/68
29
Constraint-Based Routing
A-C-F-G-I uses only gold or silver links
C
D
E
F
G
H
B
A
I
16
2
C t i t B d R ti
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
30/68
30
NewYork
Atlanta
Chicago
Seattle
LosAngeles
SanFrancisco
KansasCity
Dallaslabel-switched-path SF_to_NY {to New_York;from San_Francisco;admin-group {exclude green}cspf}
Constraint-Based Routing:Example 1
C t i t B d R ti
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
31/68
31
Paris
London
Stockholm
Madrid
Rome
Geneva
Munich
label-switched-path madrid_to_stockholm{to Stockholm;from Madrid;admin-group {include red, green}cspf}
Constraint-Based Routing:Example 2
31
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
32/68
32
Other Neat MPLS Stuff
Secondary LSPs
Fast Reroute
Label Stacking
GMPLS
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
33/68
33
MPLS Secondary LSPs
Standard LSP failover
Failure signaledto ingress LSR
Calculate & signal new LSP
Reroute traffic to new LSP
Standby Secondary LSP
Pre-established LSP
Sub-second failover
New YorkData CenterSan Francisco
Data Center
Primary LSP
Secondary LSP
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
34/68
34
MPLS Fast Reroute
Ingress signals fast reroute during LSP setup Each LSR computes a detour path
(with same constraints)
Supports failover in ~100s of ms
New YorkData CenterSan Francisco
Data Center
Primary LSP
Active Detour
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
35/68
35
MPLS Label Stacking
A label stack is an ordered set of labels
Each LSR processes the top label Applications
Routing hierarchy
Aggregate individual LSPs into a trunk LSP
VPNs
21
3
LSP 1
LSP 2
Trunk LSP
2
54
TTLLabel (20-bits) CoS S
3 6 2 5
3
5 2
1
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
36/68
36
3
5 2
1
21
3
2
5
4
Trunk LSP
MPLS Label Stack: Example 1
MPLS Table
In Out
(5, 42) (6, 18)
MPLS Table
In Out(2, 18) (5, Pop)
MPLS Table
In Out(4, 25) (2, 56)
In Out
(1, 25) (2, Push [42])
MPLS Table
(4, 35) (5, 17)(3, 35) (2, Push [42])
5 6 2 5
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
37/68
37
3
5 2
1
21
3
2
5
4
Trunk LSP
MPLS Label Stack: Example 2
MPLS Table
In Out
(5, 42) (6, 18)
MPLS Table
In Out(2, 18) (5, Pop)
MPLS Table
In Out(4, 25) (2, 56)
(4, 35) (5, 17)
In Out
(1, 25) (2, Push [42])
(3, 35)
MPLS Table
(2, Push [42])
5 6 2 5
Label Stacking allows you to
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
38/68
38
Label stacking to create a hierarchy of LSP trunks
LSP 4
LSP 3
LSP 1
LSP 2
LSP 1
LSP Trunkof Trunks
LSP 2
LSP 4
LSPTrunk
LSP 3LSP
Trunk
Label Stacking allows you toReduce the Number of LSPs
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
39/68
39
IP Service(Routers)
Optical Transport(OXCs, WDMs)
Optical Core
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)Formally known as MPL(amda)S
Reduce complexity
Reduce cost
Router subsumes functions performed by other layers
Fast router interfaces eliminate the need for MUXs MPLS replaces ATM/FR for traffic engineering
MPLS fast reroute obviates SONET APS restoration
Dynamic provisioning of optical bandwidth is requiredfor growth and innovative service creation
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
40/68
40
GMPLS: LSP Hierarchy
Nesting LSPs enhances system scalability
LSPs always start and terminate on similar interface types
LSP interface hierarchy Packet Switch Capable (PSC) Lowest
Time Division Multiplexing Capable (TDM)
Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)
Fiber Switch Capable (FSC) Highest
FA-LSC
FA-TDM
FA-PSC
BundleFiber n
Fiber 1
FSC CloudLSCCloudTDMCloudPSCCloud LSCCloud TDMCloud PSCCloud
ExplicitLabel LSPs
Time-slotLSPs Fiber LSPsLSPs
ExplicitLabel LSPs
Time-slotLSPsLSPs
(multiplex low-order LSPs) (demultiplex low-order LSPs)
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
41/68
41
AGENDA
MPLS Overview
Traffic Engineering
VPNs
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
42/68
42
What Is Traffic Engineering?
Ability to control traffic flows in the network
Optimize available resources
Move traffic from IGP path to less congested path
Source Destination
Layer 3 Routing Traffic Engineering
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
43/68
43
Brief History
Early 1990s Internet core was connected with T1 and T3
links between routers
Only a handful of routers and links to manage
and configureHumans could do the work manually
Metric-based traffic control was sufficient
Metric-Based Traffic
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
44/68
44
Metric-Based TrafficEngineering
Traffic sent to A or B follows path withlowest metrics
1 1
1 2
A B
C
Metric-Based
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
45/68
45
Metric-BasedTraffic Engineering
DrawbacksRedirecting traffic flow to A via C causes traffic
for B to move also!
Some links become underutilized or
overutilized
1 4
1 2
A B
C
Metric-Based
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
46/68
46
Metric-BasedTraffic Engineering
DrawbacksComplexity made metric control tricky
Adjusting one metric might destabilize network
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
47/68
47
Discomfort Grows
Mid 1990s ISPs became uncomfortable with size of
Internet core
Large growth spurt imminent
Routers too slowMetric engineering too complex
IGP routing calculation was topology driven,not traffic driven
Router based cores lacked predictability
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
48/68
48
Overlay Networks are Born
ATM switches offered performance andpredictable behavior
ISPs created overlay networks that presented avirtual topology to the edge routers in theirnetwork
Using ATM virtual circuits, the virtual networkcould be reengineered without changing thephysical network
Benefits
Full traffic control Per-circuit statistics
More balanced flow of traffic across links
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
49/68
49
Overlay Networks
ATM core ringed by routersPVCs overlaid onto physical network
PhysicalView
A
BC
A
B
CLogicalView
BNS ATM D i
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
50/68
50
vBNS ATM Design
Full UBR PVP mesh between terminal switches to carry BestEffort traffic
Los
Angeles
Chicago
Cleveland
Boston
San
Francisco
Denver
Atlanta
Washington
DC
New
York City
Houston
SeattlePerryman,
MD
vBNS Backbone Network Map
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
51/68
51
San Francisco
National Center forAtmospheric Research
San DiegoSupercomputer Center
Houston
Denver
Ameritech NAP
Chicago
National Center forSupercomputingApplications
Cleveland
Perryman, MD
Sprint NAP
MFS NAP
PittsburghSupercomputing
Center
Los Angeles
A
Atlanta
ANew York City
vBNS Backbone Network Map
Boston
Washington, DC
Seattle
A
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
CJ
J
Ascend GRF 400
Cisco 7507
Juniper M40
FORE ASX-1000
NAP
A
C
DS-3
OC-3C
OC-12C
OC-48
J
l d b k
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
52/68
52
Overlay Nets Had Drawbacks
Growth in full mesh of ATM PVCs stresseseverything
Router IGP runs out of steam
Practical limitation of updating configurations in
each switch and routerATM 20% Cell Tax
ATM SAR speed limitations
OC-48 SAR very difficult/expensive to build
OC-192 SAR?
h i
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
53/68
53
In the mean time:
Routers caught upCurrent generation of routers have
High speed, wire-rate interfaces
Deterministic performance
Software advances
MPLS came along Fuses best aspects of ATM PVCs with high-
performance routing engines
Uses low-overhead circuit mechanism
Automates path selection and configuration
Implements quick failure recovery
MPLS f T ffi E i i
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
54/68
54
MPLS for Traffic Engineering
Low-overhead virtual circuits for IP Originally designed to make routers faster
Fixed label lookup faster than longest match used by IProuting
Not true anymore
Value of MPLS is now in traffic engineering Other MPLS Benefits:
No second network
A fully integrated IP solution no second technology
Traffic engineering
Lower cost
A CoS enabler
Failover/link protection
Multi-service and VPN support
AGENDA
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
55/68
55
AGENDA
MPLS Overview
Traffic Engineering
VPNs
What Is a Virtual Private
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
56/68
56
What Is a Virtual PrivateNetwork?
A private network constructed over a shared infrastructure Virtual
An artificial object simulated by computers (not really there!)
Private Separate/distinct environments Separate addressing and routing systems
Network A collection of devices that communicate among themselves
SharedInfrastructure Mobile users
andtelecommuters
Intranet
Extranet
Remote access
Branchoffice
Corporate
headquarters
Suppliers,partnersand customers
Deploying VPNs using Overlay
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
57/68
57
Deploying VPNs using OverlayNetworks
Provider Frame Relay Network
CPE
CPE
CPE
CPE
CPE
DLCI
DLCI
DLCIFR
switch
FRswitch
FRswitch
FRswitch
FRswitch
FRswitch
FRswitch
Operational model PVCs overlay the shared infrastructure (ATM/Frame Relay) Routing occurs at CPE
Benefits
Mature technologies Inherently secure Service commitments (bandwidth, availability, etc.)
Limitations Scalability and management of the overlay model Not a fully integrated IP solution
CPE
MPLS: A VPN Enabling
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
58/68
58
MPLS: A VPN EnablingTechnology
Benefits
Seamlessly integrates multiple networks
Permits a single connection to the service provider Supports rapid delivery of new services
Minimizes operational expenses
Provides higher network reliability and availability
Service Provider Network
Site 1
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 2
Site 3
Th Th T f VPN
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
59/68
59
There are Three Types of VPNs
End to End (CPE Based) VPNs L2PT & PPTP
IPSEC
Layer 2 VPNsCCC
CCC & MPLS Hybrid
Layer3 VPNsRFC 2547bis
End to End VPNs:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
60/68
60
End to End VPNs:L2TP and PPTP
Dial Access Provider
V.x modem
PPP dial-upService Provider or VPN
L2TPaccess server
Dial accessserver
L2TP tunnel
Dial accessserver
PPTPaccess serverPPTP tunnel
Application: Dial access for remote users Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP)
RFC 2661 Combination of L2F and PPTP
Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP) Bundled with Windows/Windows NT
Both support IPSec for encryption Authentication & encryption
at tunnel endpoints
End to End VPNs:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
61/68
61
End to End VPNs:The IP Security Protocol (IPSec)
Defines the IETFs layer 3 security architectureApplications:
Strong security requirements
Extend a VPN across multiple service providers
Security services include:Access control
Data origin authentication
Replay protection
Data integrity Data privacy (encryption)
Key management
End to End VPNs:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
62/68
62
End to End VPNs:IPSec Example
Routing must be performed at CPE
Tunnels terminate on subscriber premise Only CPE equipment needs to support IPSec
Modifications to shared resources are not required
ESP tunnel mode Authentication insures integrity from CPE to CPE
Encrypts original header/payload across internet
Supports private address space
Public Internet
CorporateHQ
BranchofficeCPE CPE
IPSec ESP Tunnel Mode
Layer 2 VPNs:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
63/68
63
Layer 2 VPNs:CCC/MPLS
ATM (orFrame Relay)
PE
PE
PE
ATM (orFrame Relay)
LSPs
CCC Function
In Out
LSP 2 in LSP 5DLCI 600
LSP 6 in LSP 5DLCI 610
CCC Table
LSP 2LSP 6
LSP 5
In Out
LSP 2 in LSP 5 DLCI 506
LSP 6 in LSP 5 DLCI 408
CCC Table
DLCI600
DLCI610
DLCI506
DLCI408(MPLS core)
CPECPE
Benefits
Reduces provider configuration complexity
MPLS traffic engineered core
Subscriber can run any Layer 3 protocol
User Nets do not know there is a cloud in the middle
Limitations Circuit type (ATM/FR) must be like to like
CCC Example:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
64/68
64
pAbilene and ISP Service on one link
University X
ATM Access
Big I Internet Traffic:ATM VC1 terminated, IP packets delivered to Qwest ISP
Abilene Traffic:ATM VC2 mapped to port facing Abilene
An M20/40/160 can both terminate ATM PVCs (layer 3 lookup) andsupport CCC pass-through on the same port.
Abilene
Qwest ISP
M40
vBNS used CCC and MPLS to tunnel
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
65/68
65
IPv6 across their backbone for SC2000
Chicago
SC2000
in Dallas
IPv6
IPv6
vBNS/vBNS+
IPv4
ATMATM
CCCCCC
Layer 3 VPNs:
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
66/68
66
yRFC 2547 - MPLS/BGP VPNs
Service Provider Network
CPE
CPE
CPE
PE PE
PE
CPE
CPE
CPE
Site 1
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 2
Site 3P
P
P
P
P
PE
FT
FT
FT
FTFT
FT
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
67/68
67
Questions?
-
7/30/2019 Juniper MPLS for R&E Nets
68/68
Thank You
http://www.juniper.net