Ip/Mpls Qos Over ATM

IP/MPLS QoS
over ATM
1
Clarence Filsfils
cfilsfil@cisco.com
Tech. Consulting - EMEA
2
Agenda
• IP COS over ATM

• IP COS over MPLS
• MPLS CoS over ATM
• IP QoS for Tag VPNs
• Conclusion
Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 3

IP COS over ATM: Overlay Model
How do I map
the two worlds ???
ATM Backbone:
ATMF/ITU-T Qos mechanisms
IP Layer: Diff-Serv • Per Connection Qos
Mechanisms • Very strict Qos
• Connectionless Per packet • Traffic classes:
precedence (DS-byte) indicating CBR, VBR, VBR-RT, UBR, ABR
“priority” for each packet
• Traffic Parameters:
• limited number of COSs
PCR, MCR, SCR,..
IOS “IP ATM COS”: Principles
• Router’s traffic • The ATM service
must be compliant contracted must be
with respect to provided! (at least, loss
ATM service less!)
contracted

IOS “IP ATM COS”: Principles
• Congestion pushed back at the edge
• per-VC IP Queue develops
• IP-intelligent QoS Mechanisms in the
router
• Because: ATM switch does not
understand IP

IP ATM COS-Ph1: Per-VC WRED
VC1
VC2
• Single VC per Pair of Routing Peers

• Multiple Service Classes on same VC
• WRED runs on each VC queue
Distributed VIP2 Architecture
• Distributed Switching
• Distributed Services
• Distributed WRED/WFQ
Route Switch Processors

Packet
i Memory Port
P Adapter
C C
y I
B
u P
s C
I Port
xIP VIP2 xIP VIP2 VIP2
Switch Adapter
Cisco 7500 Processor

ATM PA-A3 Architecture
DS3
Single-wide port E3
adapter for Cisco OC3c/STM1 MM
7200/7500 OC3c/STM1 SM-IR
OC3c/STM1 SM-LR
SAR
PCI
Per-VC Queues/
Traffic Shaping
ATM Shaping: CBR,
VBR, ABR (all 3
modes) and UBR High-performance
SAR
Per-VC WRED : Intelligent
IP Packet Discard Traffic
Threshold Exceeded Shaping
VIP2-50 PA-A3-XX
VC1
VC2
VC3
No discard
Per-VC Per-VC on PA
WRED: Queues
Intelligent Discard
Per-VC WRED (cont.)
• ATM router interface “shapes” according to VBR,
CBR or ABR* requirements
• Very low loss on ATM network is essential
–Easy with CBR, VBR
–Good match to ABR allowing elastic use of all available
bandwidth (assuming low loss implementation, e.g. BPX)
–Not effective with UBR VCs
• VCs not backlogged are unaffected!

• VC dimensioned so that all COSs get their
appropriate quality
* ABR : Future
Per-VC WRED CLI
WRED profile:
random-detect group <group-name>
exponential weighting constant <1.16>
precedence <0..7, rsvp> <min-th> <max-th> <mark-p>
To activate a WRED profile on a PVC:

atm pvc <vcd> <vpi> <vci> <aal-encap> [[<mid_low> <mid_high>]
[<peak> <average> <burst>]] [oam <seconds>] [inarp [<minutes>]
[random-detect [<group_name>]

Per-VC WRED CLI
WRED parameters bound to a VC:

show queueing red int <atm_subinterface>
[vc
[[<vpi>/]<vci>]]
Queuing statistics of an ATM PVC:

show queueing int <atm_subintf>
[vc [[<vpi>/]<vci>]]

IPATMCOS-Ph1 CLI
• Cf “IPATMCoS-Ph1” Design Guide

Per-VC WRED CLI
nf-7505-1# show run
interface ATM1/1/0.47 point-to-point
atm pvc 47 0 47 aal5snap 10 10 1 random-detect wredgroup1
nf-7505-1#show queueing red

VC 0/47 -
random-detect group default:
exponential weight 9
precedence min-threshold max-threshold mark-probablity
---------------------------------------------------------------
0: 20 40 1/10
1: 22 40 1/10
2: 24 40 1/10
3: 26 40 1/10

Per-VC WRED CLI
7513-1-31#sh queueing int atm 11/0/0.103 VC 5/103
ATM11/0/0.103 queue size 83

packets output 1345843, drops 1590472
WRED: queue average 82
weight 1/512, max available buffers 1021
Precedence 0: 40 min threshold, 81 max threshold, 1/10 mark weight
1344366 packets output, drops: 134304 random, 1456168 threshold
(no traffic)
(no traffic)
(no traffic)

IP ATM COS-Ph2: Bundle
1! IGP neighborship
Prec: 5 - 7 VC1: VBR-nrt
Prec: 0 - 4 VC2: ABR
• A single Bundle routing neighborship!

• Flexible IP CoS mapping to VCs
• RED (WRED) runs on each VC queue
942
flefauch@cisco.com
NW’98 © 1998, Cisco Systems, Inc. 17
Precedence to VC Mapping
• Mapping of precedence to VCs

– 1 Precedence to 1 VC
– Several Precedences to 1 VC
Prec: 5 - 7 VC1: VBR-nrt
Prec: 0 - 4 VC2: ABR

VC Provisioning
VC1: VBR-nrt ??? SCR, PCR, MBS
VC2: ABR ??? PCR, MCR
• VCs are dimensioned based on expected

load for the precedence(s) level transported
on that VC
• More isolation between classes
• At the expense of
– less statistical multiplexing,
– more complex provisioning/engineering
VC Bundle Mgnt
• Two Modes:
– Protected VC rule : when a protected VC goes
down, the bundle goes down
– Protected group rule : when all members in the
protected group fail, the bundle is delared DOWN
–When a bundle is declared down, no traffic is
forwarded out of the bundle (EVEN some VCs are
still up).

Bumping
• VC bumping: possibility for a traffic

mapped to a VC X to be forwarded onto
another VC Y, in case of failure of X.
–Implicit bumping rule : Y is the next lower
precedence level VC is selected,
–Explicit bumping rule : Y is explicitely specified.

Bumping (Cont.)
• Traffic is restored to the original VC

when it comes back.
• « Reject Bumping »: It is possible for a
VC to be configured not to accept the
bumped traffic
• When no alternate VC for some bumped
traffic, the bundle will be declared down.

Bumping (Cont.)
• To prevent from declaring a bundle DOWN due

to the failure of the lowest precedence VC,
explicit bumping should be configured on the
lowest precedence.
• Should be used in conjunction with the
protected group rule
• If the VC which carries the bumped traffic fails
also, the traffic will follow the bumping rules
specified for that VC.

Bundle example
TOS 6-7 <-> VC 1 - ATM VBR-nrt

Protected VC

Protected Group- bump explicit 7

Protected Group - bump implicit
TOS 0-1 <-> VC 4 - ATM UBR

Protected Group

VC1 Failure
Protected VC

VC2 Failure
Explicit
bumping

VC3 Failure
Implicit
bumping

VC2 & 3 & 4 Failures
Protected
group

CLI details
• Cf “atmvcbundle.doc” or Manuals

IP ATM COS Roadmap
• Phase 1 - Per-VC WRED (single VC)
–Cisco 7500 (VIP2-50/PA-A3)
–FCS since 11.1(22)CC
• Phase 2 - Precedence Mapping (multiple VC)
– Cisco 7200 (NPE-200/PA-A3)
– Bundle Management
– 12.0(3)T FCS 1Q99 (planned)*
• Phase 3 - Per-VC WFQ
– Per-VC WFQ

IP ATM COS Summary
• IP gateway uses/conforms to ATM
service contract (ATM QoS)
• Queues are developed in router where
intelligent decisions can be made (IP
QoS)
• Does not requires any proprietary
features onto ATM switches
Still OVERLAY!
Agenda
• IP COS over ATM

• Conclusion

Agenda
• IP COS over ATM


What is Tag/MPLS COS ?
Support of Consistent IP Diff-Serv Classes
of Service end-to-end when part of the
network is running MPLS
ATM-TSR
Tag
IP Diff-Serv COS
end-to-end
Non-Tag
Conventional
Router Non-Tag
Tag Edge
Routers Frame-TSR
MPLS CoS: 3 steps
STEP2
IPv4 MPLS
IPv4
STEP1 STEP3
• Step1: NON-MPLS
– CAR/QPPB/CiscoAssure
– WFQ/WRED

MPLS CoS: 3 steps
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label | CoS |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
• Step2: Label Imposition

– LER sets MPLS CoS bits = IPv4 Prec; or
– CoS is associated with label via LDP
Non-MPLS MPLS Domain

Domain
IPv4 Packet MPLS Hdr
Prec: xyz MPLS CoS: Prec: xyz

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential xyz 36
MPLS CoS: 3 steps
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label | UUU |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
• Step2: Label Imposition

– LER sets MPLS CoS bits = IPv4 Prec; or
– CoS is associated with label via LDP
Dest-CoS Label
P/p CoS1 17
IPv4 Packet P/p CoS2 22
P/p CoS3 25
Prec: xyz
P/p CoS4 12
MPLS CoS: 3 steps
• Step 3: DiffServ inside MPLS domain

based on MPLS-CoS field or CoS
associated with Label
– 3a: Frame MPLS CoS
– 3b: ATM MPLS CoS

Frame MPLS CoS
• Straightforward!!!
• Same Mechanisms as IP CoS
• Class Marker
– MPLS CoS instead of Precedence; or
– MPLS Label instead of Precedence
• Undistinguishable from IPv4 DiffServ

ATM MPLS CoS
• Great Opportunity!
• Peer Model instead of Overlay
– IP intelligence at every hop
– IP-friendly mech. on ATM switches!
• Diffserv instead of per-VC ATM QoS

– Superior Resource Utilisation
– Simpler Resource Allocation

Peer vs Overlay
Overlay Model:
IP Intelligence
Around
Peer Model:
IP Intelligence
at every hop

Agenda
• IP COS over ATM

• Conclusion

Challenges
• No CoS field in ATM cells

• No WRED in switches
– WFQ is often available in atm switches
under the form of a WRR implementation

Two Modes
• Single LSP in ABR mode

• Multi-LSP in TBR mode
– Each has advantage and drawbacks
TBR: Tag Bit Rate: ATM service

category designed for Differv/MPLS

Single `VC’ ABR mode
ABR TSP
ATM TSR
• Extention of “IPATMCoS” feature

• ABR control algorithms are enabled on LSPs
• ATM-LSRs push congestion towards edge LSRs
• Edge-LSRs: WRED/WFQ per-LSP queues

Single VC ABR mode
• ATM-LSR Scheduling = per-VC ABR

• ABR parameters:
– MCR is effectively zero (to avoid
loss/blocking)
– “Relative bandwidth”
bandwidth parameter carried by
TDP and used by ABR algorithm

Single VC ABR: Example
KleinStadt
B
London Paris
A
Per VC
ABR
Tarifa
• Equal sharing of link A-B is not always desirable:
– Configure relative bandwidth on router-pair basis,
e.g. Tarifa-KleinStadt = 1; London-Paris = 100
• Resource Allocation :
– Sharing of Bandwidth across Edge Pairs via “Relative BW” on a per
TSP basis
– Sharing of Bandwidth across COS performed
through WRED on Edge
Multi-VC TBR mode
Control Plane
ATM TSR
Parallel TBR TSPs
• Up to 4 parallel TSPs for the same prefix

• CoS <--> TSPs mapping
• Optional setting of CLP for some CoS

Multi-VC TBR mode
CoS Mechanism in cell Data path
ATM TSR
Parallel TBR TSPs
• Edge ATM-LSR:
per CoS WFQ + per CoS WRED
• ATM-LSR:
per CoS WFQ + per CoS WEPD

Multi-VC TBR mode: Example
Per COS
WFQ
• Queuing on all links is per-class WFQ (not per TSP)

• Resource allocation
– Assign weight to each class on per-link basis
(e.g. Premium gets 80% of link, Standard gets 20%)
– Choice of weights based on expected load & desired
performance PER CLASS
– No per-router-pair configuration (config independent of
topology & geography)
Multi-VC TBR Mode: Example
• EPD is not RED, but...

• EPD thresholds can be set to different levels
for different classes ---> WEPD
• Threshold scaling ensures that buffers are
not wasted
–allocation to each class decreases as total free buffer space
decreases

Single-ABR vs Multi-TBR
• Multi-VC TBR Mode:

– Congestion managed directly at every hop (IP and ATM hops)
– Possible Discard at every hop
– Resource Allocation per COS per link; does not have to concern
itself with topology and geography
• Single-VC ABR:
– No Loss in the ATM fabric
– Discard possible only on the Edge performed by Routers
– Resource Allocation optionally per Pair of Edge Routers. Sharing of
bandwidth across COS indirect via WRED profiles

ATM MPLS CoS: other cases
• MPLS CoS over ATM-Forum PVC’s

• MPLS CoS over MPLS VP

Tag over ATMF/ITU-T ATM PVC
ATM Forum ATM Tag ATM
ATM PVC TSPs
TDP TDP
TDP
TDP
• Generic Frame MPLS CoS Case!

– A Frame TSR use “normal” ATM PVC with chosen ATM QoS
– Perform all Service Differentiation on Frame TSRs at edge of ATM

Tag COS over Tag VP Tunnels
Tag Switching
L2
L1 ATM Forum ATM
TDP
TDP
ATM VP
TDP
• ATM-LSR runs MPLS CoS inside an ATM VPs

• ATM VP is a virtual trunk between L1 and L2

Agenda
• IP COS over ATM

• Conclusion

Tag VPN QoS
• 2 very distinct point of views:

– How the SP will market the service (SLA)
– What are the mechanisms for SP to meet the
commitments/SLA
• FR analogy:
– sell 64 kb/s CIR for 99.5% of the time
– reserve 64/overbooking kb/s + admission
control + selective discard + …

How to market MPLS VPN CoS?
VPN_A
ECR site 4
128k
ICR
ECR VPN 256k
VPN_A 128k SP
site 2 ICR ECR
256k 128k
ICR
VPN_A
256k site 3

Proposed SLA for CoS C1
• As long as for each site S of VPN X:

– S sends less than ICR
– S receives less than ECR
• Then:
– loss property is 10^(-n1)
– RTT is < m1 ms

Should offer different CoS!
CoS X: [nx, mx], price Px

Gold: [-10, 100ms], $$$
Silver: [-8, 200ms], $$
BE: [be, be], $

How it should not be marketed
• Should not be marketed as Frame Relay
QoS:
– N1 kb/s guaranteed from Site 1 to Site 2
–…
• Layer 2 based VPNs (ie FR or ATM)

address that need

How to meet SLA
• Enforcement of ICR:
– CAR: policing in/out of profile
• MPLS CoS in the SP’s backbone

– single-ABR, multi-TBR mode
– DiffServ engineering
– Per-Class LSP Traffic Engineering in the backbone
• Enforcement of ECR

DiffServ Engineering
• Scalability: no per-VPN QoS in BB

• Per-Class Scheduling/Discarding at every hop
• Resource Allocation based on ICR/ECR sold
– share each trunk between different Classes
– start conservative
– then monitor traffic per class and fine tune
– Optimise with per-class Traffic Engineering
– Cisco Service Management tool for Tag VPN QoS
provisioning

Per-VPN WFQ
Per VPN WFQ
VPN_1 Per VC Q on Tag ABR-VC to Remote PE
Per COS VPN_2
WRED
VPN_3
ATM Tag Backbone
Single-VC ABR Mode
PE
• For ATM-ABR model or ATMF PVC

• Scalability: only at edge!

MPLS VPN CoS: Sum up
• Frame, single LSP

• ATM, single-ABR mode
• ATM, multi-TBR mode
• ATM, ATM-Forum/ITU pvc

Frame, single LSP VPN_A
11.5
CE
VPN_B -4- non Tag COS
10.2 CE P P on output:
PE PE 3
WRED, TS
VPN_A CE P P VPN_A
11.6 10.1
PE PE 4 CE
-1-CAR:
Mark in-profile (eg -3-P: Single TSP
Silver VPN) -2 PE: Single TSP
per COS Scheduling per COS
Mark out-profile
(Optionally Mark per & Discard Scheduling/Discard
application, per user…)
Per COS WFQ

COS_0
Per COS
COS_1 WRED
Per COS
WRED
Per COS WFQ
COS_7

ATM, single-ABR mode
VPN_A
CE 11.5
VPN_B
10.2 -4- non Tag COS
CE P P on output:
PE PE 3
WRED, TS
VPN_A CE P P VPN_A
11.6
PE 4 CE 10.1
PE
-1-CAR:
Mark in-profile (eg
Silver VPN) -2- PE Scheduling
& Discard -3- ABR TSP
Mark out-profile
(Optionally Mark per
Per VPN WFQ Per VC Queuing,
VPN_1 “Relative
Per COS VPN_2 Per VC Q Bandwidth”
Bandwidth used
WRED (to PE 3) to apportion
VPN_N
bandwidth
Per VPN WFQ
across competing
VPN_1
Per COS ABR VCs
WRED VPN_2
Per VC Q
(to PE 4)
VPN_N
ATM, multi-TBR
VPN_A
CE 11.5
VPN_B
CE P P
PE PE 3 on output:
WRED, TS
VPN_A CE P P VPN_A
11.6 10.1
PE PE 4 CE
-1-CAR:
Mark in-profile (eg -3- TBR Multi-VC
Silver VPN) -2 PE Scheduling
Mark out-profile & Discard
Per COS WFQ Per COS
Dynamic
WEPD
COS_0
Per Class WFQ
Per COS COS_1
WRED
COS_7

ATM, ATM-forum/ITU PVC
Non-Tag Capable VPN_A
ATM Switches CE
11.5
VPN_B
CE PE PE 3 on output:
WRED, TS
VPN_A CE VPN_A
11.6 10.1
PE PE 4 CE
-1-CAR:
Mark in-profile (eg
Silver VPN) -2- PE Scheduling
& Discard -3- ATM Forum/ITU-T
Mark out-profile
ATM PVC (CBR, VBR,
Per VPN WFQ ABR)
VPN_1
“Normal”ATM Forum/ITU-T
Per COS VPN_2 Per VC Q scheduling/discarding
WRED (to PE 3) (CBR, VBR, ABR)
VPN_N
Per VPN WFQ

VPN_1
Per COS
WRED VPN_2 Per VC Q
(to PE 4)
VPN_N
Agenda
• IP COS over ATM

• Conclusion

IP COS over ATM: Conclusions
• IP is the end2end QoS enabler

–Applications are running on IP, and Networks are
constituted of diverse media's. Therefore QoS end-to-
end has to be provided by IP
• DiffServ model for IP CoS

–IETF’s Differentiated Services is an extremely scalable
COS model and is likely to become widespread

• IP Diff-Serv’s CoS over ATM:

– Overlay: IOS “IP ATM COS “
– Peer: MPLS COS
 ATM-LSR’s: IP controlled and IP QoS aware
 tighter IP/ATM integration

• Perfect illustration: MPLS VPN’s

– Scalability of Diff-Serv COS
– Several SLA’s (Gold, Silver, BE)
– integration IP & ATM

Ip/Mpls Qos Over ATM

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ip/Mpls Qos Over ATM

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

IP/MPLS QoS

• IP COS over ATM

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 3

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 5

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 6

• Single VC per Pair of Routing Peers

Route Switch Processors

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 8

• VCs not backlogged are unaffected!

To activate a WRED profile on a PVC:

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 12

WRED parameters bound to a VC:

Queuing statistics of an ATM PVC:

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 13

• Cf “IPATMCoS-Ph1” Design Guide

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 14

nf-7505-1#show queueing red

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 15

ATM11/0/0.103 queue size 83

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 16

Prec: 0 - 4 VC2: ABR

• A single Bundle routing neighborship!

• Mapping of precedence to VCs

Prec: 5 - 7 VC1: VBR-nrt

Prec: 0 - 4 VC2: ABR

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 18

• VCs are dimensioned based on expected

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 20

• VC bumping: possibility for a traffic

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 21

• Traffic is restored to the original VC

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 22

• To prevent from declaring a bundle DOWN due

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 23

TOS 6-7 <-> VC 1 - ATM VBR-nrt

TOS 4-5 <-> VC 2 - ATM VBR-nrt

TOS 2-3 <-> VC 3 - ATM VBR-nrt

TOS 0-1 <-> VC 4 - ATM UBR

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 24

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 25

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 26

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 27

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 28

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 29

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 30

• IP COS over ATM

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 32

• IP COS over ATM

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 33

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 35

• Step2: Label Imposition

Non-MPLS MPLS Domain

Prec: xyz MPLS CoS: Prec: xyz

• Step2: Label Imposition

• Step 3: DiffServ inside MPLS domain

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 38

• Undistinguishable from IPv4 DiffServ

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 39

• Diffserv instead of per-VC ATM QoS

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 40

Clarence Filsfils - atm-mpls-cos Cisco Systems Confidential 41

• IP COS over ATM