Multiprotocol Label Switching

(MPLS)

Sookyoung Lee

Agenda
Problems

of traditional IP routing
Motivations for MPLS
Objectives of MPLS
What is MPLS?

Label, FEC, LIB, LER, LSR, and LSP

How MPLS works?

LDP, CR-LEP, TE-RSVP
Main capabilities of MPLS
Connection-oriented QoS Support, Traffic Engineering,
VPN support, Multiprotocol Support
References

Problems of traditional IP routing

Problem
Longish

of Traditional IP Routing
latency at every hop

Header

analysis Routing table lookup based on

the IP address Replace the layer 2 address

No

assurance how a packet will travel

Some

No

congested links and some underutilized links

QoS - all packets are treated equally

No

capability to prioritize packets between different

hosts and of different applications

Motivation for MPLS

Rapid

growth of Internet
Increase in traffic volumes
Voice and data convergence on a single
network infrastructure
New latency dependent applications
Ever-increasing number of ISP networks
Still IP protocol suite popular the most
predominant networking technology

Objectives of MPLS
Speed

up IP packet forwarding

By

cutting down on the amount of processing at

every intermediate router

Prioritize

IP packet forwarding

By

providing ability to engineer traffic flow and

assure differential QoS

Without

network

losing on the flexibility of IP based

What is MPLS?
A technology

to switch (forward) a packet at a

high speed at layer 2 using fixed length labels
obtained from layer 3 routing information.

Integration of layer 2 and layer 3

IP supplements

MPLS

and ISO model

MPLS Architecture
MPLS terminology
MPLS Cloud

MPLS and ISO model

7
to
5

Applications
TCP

PPP
PPP

UDP
IP
MPLS
Frame

4
3

ATM (*)
ATM

Physical (Optical - Electrical)

FR
Relay

No modification needed on the existing layers when MPLS

layer is added.
MPLS must be backward compatible.

MPLS Architecture
LSP
Routing protocol
FEC table
Attributes
Label table
Label Switch

Classification
Label assignment

Label swapping

Label removal

OSPF

OSPF

Local table

Local table

Local table

Local table

Local table

Layer 2

Layer 2

Layer 2

Layer 1

Layer 1

Layer 1

Core
Node

Egress
Node

OSPF

Local table
Precedence

Ingress
Node

MPLS terminology
Label

and Label Stack

FEC

Forward Equivalence Class

LIB Label Information Base
LER

Label Edge Router

LSR Label Switching Router
LDP

Label Distribution Protocol

LSP Label Switched Path

Label

A short, fixed length identifier (32

bits)
Sent with each packet
Local between two routers
Can have different labels if entering
from different routers
One label for one FEC
Decided by the downstream router

LSR binds a label to an FEC

It then informs the upstream LSR
of the binding

Different depending on layer 2

technology

ATM: VCI/VPI field of ATM header

Frame Relay: DLCI field of FR
header
PPP/LAN: shim header inserted
between layer 2 and layer 3

32bits
20bits

3bits 1

Label

EXP

8bits
TTL

S: bottom of stack bit

Exp: Experimental
1 to many
DLL header

label stack entry

NL header

L3 data

ATM-MPLS label
GFC

VPI

VCI

Label

PTI

CLP

HEC

DATA

Label Stack
Layer 2 Header

Label 3

Label 2

Label 1

MPLS Domain 1

MPLS supports hierarchy.

Each LSR processes the
topmost label.
If traffic crosses several
networks, it can be
tunneled across them
Advantage reduces the
LIB table of each router
drastically

Slide by ByTamrat Bayle, Reiji Aibara, Kouji Nishimura

MPLS Domain 2

MPLS Domain 3

IP Packet

FEC (Forward Equivalence Class)

A group of packets that require the same forwarding treatment

across the same path
grouped based on

Address prefix
Host address
QoS

FEC is encoded as a label

Assume packets have the destination address and QoS requirements as

124.48.45.20 qos = 1
143.67.25.77 qos = 1
143.67.84.22 qos = 3
124.48.66.90 qos = 4
143.67.12.01 qos = 3

FEC 1 label a
FEC 2 label b
143.67.25.77
124.48.45.20
143.67.12.01

FEC 3 label c
143.67.84.22

FEC 4 label d
124.48.66.90

LSR

MPLS Cloud

IP Packet
IP Packet w/ Label

LER

A router/switch that supports MPLS

Can be a router
Can be an ATM switch + label switch controller
Label swapping

Each LSR examines the label on top of the stack

Uses LIB to decide the outgoing path and the outgoing label

Removes the old label and attaches the new label

Forwards the packet on the predetermined path

L3 Routing
Ingress LER

Ordinary
IP Router

LSR

L3 Routing

L3 Routing

LER

LER

Egress LER

LSP

LSR
Label Swapping

LSR
Label Swapping

LER

L3 Routing
Can be an ATM switch or a router
Ingress LER performs the following:

Receives the packet

Adds label

Forwards the packet into the MPLS domain

Egress LER removes the label and delivers the packet

LSP

L3 Routing
LSP defines the path through LSRs from ingress to egress router
FEC is determined at the LER-ingress
LSPs are unidirectional
LSP might deviate from the IGP shortest path

Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)

LDP

is the set of procedures and messages

For LSRs to establish LSPs through a network

by mapping network-layer routing information directly to
data-link layer switched paths.
associates a FEC with each LSP it creates.

Currently,

several protocols used as LDP are

available:

CR-LDP, RSVP-TE: Provides functionality for traffic

engineering and QoS
Multiprotocol extentions of BGP-4

LDP messages
Discovery

Used to announce and maintain the presence of an LSR in a

network
LSRs multicast these messges periodically to 224.0.0.2 and all
routers listen to this group

Session

Messages - UDP

Messages - TCP

used to establish, maintain and terminate sessions between LDP

peers

Advertisement

create, change and delete label mappings for FECs

Notification

Messages - TCP

Messages - TCP

Used to provide advisory information and to signal error

information

Label Distribution Methods

Rd and Ru are said to have LDP adjacency
Ru

Rd

Ru

Label-FEC Binding

Rd discovers a next hop for a

particular FEC
Rd generates a label for the
FEC and communicates the
binding to Ru
Ru inserts the binding into its
forwarding tables

Rd

Label-FEC Binding

Downstream on Demand Label

Distribution

Unsolicited Downstream Label

Distribution

Request for Binding

Ru recognizes Rd as its nexthop for an FEC

A request is made to Rd for a
binding between the FEC and a
label
If Rd recognizes the FEC and
has a next hop for it, it creates
a binding and replies to Ru

Unsolicited Downstream
Ingress Ingress
Interface Label
1

Ingress Ingress
Interface Label

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label
3

138.120

12

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label
138.120

12
MPLS switch
3

127.20

MPLS switch
1

Mapp
in g

5
ping
p
a
M

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label
138.120

MPLS switch

192.168

MPLS switch

Ingress Ingress
Interface Label

12
2

138.120

The downstream node

defines the label and
advertises it to the
upstream node.

Downstream stream on demand

Ingress Ingress
Interface Label
1

Ingress Ingress
Interface Label

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label
3

138.120

127.20

MPLS switch
1

t
ues
Req

pin
Map

Reque
st 1

g5

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label
138.120

138.120

1
3

12

MPLS switch

192.168

MPLS switch

3
1

38.120

Mapp
in g

Ingress Ingress
Interface Label

138.120

12
MPLS switch

.12
138

12

FEC Egress Egress

Interface Label

The label is requested by the

upstream node and the
downstream node defines the
label used.

Label Distribution and Management

Label Distribution Control Mode

Independent LSP control: Each LSR makes independent decision on

when to generate labels and communicate them to upstream peers
Ordered LSP control

Label-FEC binding is communicated to peers if:

Used for explicit routing

Label Retention Mode

LSR is the egress LSR to particular FEC

Label binding has been received from upstream LSR

Conservative LSR maintains only valid bindings

Liberal - LSR maintains bindings other than the valid next hop, more
label, quick adaptation for routing change

Label Advertisement Mode

Downstream allocation
Downstream-on-Demand allocation

Label Information Base (LIB)

Table

maintained by the LSRs

Contents of the table

Incoming label
Outgoing label
Outgoing path
Address prefix
Incoming
label

Address Prefix

Outgoing
Path

Outgoing
label

MPLS forwarding example

In
A d d re s s
L a b e l P r e f ix

O ut
In tf

O ut
Label

In
A d d re s s
L a b e l P r e f ix

O ut
In tf

O ut
Label

In
A d d re s s
L a b e l P r e f ix

O ut
In tf

O ut
Label

1 2 8 .8 9

1 2 8 .8 9

1 2 8 .8 9

1 7 1 .6 9

1 7 1 .6 9

1 7 1 .6 9

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

9
4

1 2 8 .8 9 .2 5 .4 d a ta

1 2 8 .8 9 .*.*

1 2 8 .8 9 .2 5 .4 d a ta

1
1 2 8 . 8 9 .2 5 .4 d a ta

1 2 8 .8 9 .2 5 .4 d a ta

1
1 7 1 .6 9 .*.*

MPLS Protocol Stack

LER

LER

Core
MPLS
Network

End System

End System
MPLS Network
MPLS Interworking Architecture
LER
Routing
Protocol

Core LSR
LDP

TCP/UDP

Routing
Protocol

IP

LDP
TCP/UDP

LER
Routing
Protocol

IP

LDP
TCP/UDP

IP

MPLS Control protocol Stack Architecture

End
System

LER

IP

IP

Layer2

Layer2

PHY

PHY

Core LSR
MPLS

MPLS

LER

End
System

IP

IP

MPLS

Layer2

Layer2

Layer2

Layer2

PHY

PHY

PHY

PHY

MPLS Data Protocol Stack Architecture

Layer2

Layer2

PHY

PHY

Four main capabilities of MPLS

Connection-oriented
Traffic
VPN

QoS Support

Engineering

support

Multiprotocol

Support

Connection-oriented QoS Support

Connection-oriented

network has powerful

traffic management and QoS capabilities.

MPLS

imposes a connection-oriented framework on a

connectionless IP-based Internet providing the
foundation for sophisticated and reliable QoS traffic
contracts.
Flow-by-flow QoS (End-to-end) not packet-by-packet
QoS (Hop-by-hop)

Traffic Engineering (TE)

What is TE?

Dynamically define routes

Maximize Bandwidth Utilization by spreading the network traffic
across network
Ensure available spare link capacity for re-routing traffic on
failure
Meet policy requirements imposed by the network operator

MPLS

has a primitive form of automated TE.

is aware of flows of packet not just individual packets
With MPLS, Routes are changed on a flow-by-flow basis (Explicit
routing), instead of simply changing the route on a packet-bypacket basis

Constrained-Based Routed LDP

(CR-LDP)

Modified LDP to set up the Explicit Routing (ER-LSP)

Strict ER-LSP: Specifies list of nodes using actual address of each
node to traverse.
Loose ER-LSP: Specifies list of nodes to act as one of the abstract
nodes to traverse.
It can co-exist with the pure LDP.
Introduces additional constraints (new parameters) for traffic
regulation

LER1

LSR2

Advantages of Explicit Routing

Can use routes other than shortest path

Operator has routing flexibility
Traffic engineering

LSR3

LER4

Explicitly Routed LSP

Overload !!
LER 1
Overload !!
Forward to
LSR 2
LSR 3
LSR 4
LSR X

LSR 2

LER 4

LSR 3

End-to-End forwarding decision determined by ingress node.

Enables Traffic Engineering

CR-LDP Traffic Engineering

QoS and Traffic parameters

Path Preemption
Path Re-optimization 0 1
Failure Notification
U F
Loop Detection
Flags

15

31

Traffic Para TLV

Frequency

Length
Reserved

Peak Data Rate

Peak Rate Maximum rate at which traffic
should be sent to CR-LDP
Committed Rate The rate that the MPLS
domain commits to be available to the CRLSP
Excess Burst Size Measures the extent by
which the traffic sent on CR-LSP exceeds the
committed rate
Frequency constraints delay

Peak Burst Size

Committed Data Rate
Committed Burst Size
Excess Burst Size

Weight

TE-RSVP

QoS and Traffic parameters

Failure Notification
Loop Detection
Multi Protocol Support
Path Preemption

Slide by ByTamrat Bayle, Reiji Aibara, Kouji Nishimura

VPN support

With VPN, the traffic of a given enterprises or group passes transparently through
the Internet in a way that effectively segregates that traffic from other packets on
the Internet.

MPLS provides an efficient mechanism for supporting VPNs proving performance

guarantees and security.

LSP - Label Switched Path

VPN A

LDP
VPN
LDP
VPN

VPN B

P3
P5

P1
VPN A

VPN B

LDP
VPN

P2

P4

LDP
VPN

VPN A

Multiprotocol Support

MPLS can be used on many networking technologies.

MPLS supports IPv4, IPv6, IPX, AppleTalk at the network layer.

MPLS supports Ethernet, Token Ring, FDDI, ATM, FR, PPP at
the link layer.

Universal nature of MPLS

MPLS enabled routers can coexist with ordinary IP routers.

MPLS-enabled ATM switches and MPLS-enabled FR switches
can be configured to co-exist wit ordinary ATM or FR switches.

MPLS is a good solution to optimize resources and

expand QoS support over mixed network technologies.

References

MPLS Charter:
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mpls-charter.html
MPLS Resource Center: http://www.mplsrc.com
MPLS Forum: http://www.mplsforum.org
Basic RFCs
RFC 3031/3032 MPLS Forwarding/Architecture
RFC 3036 MPLS LDP Specification
RFC 3215 LDP State Machine
RFC 2205 MPLS Signaling RSVP
RFC 3209 MPLS Signaling RSVP-TE