Cos/Qos: (Class of Service) / (Quality of Service)

Day 7
CoS/QoS
(Class of Service)/(Quality of Service)
Johnson Liu
johnsonl@juniper.net reserved. 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights
| www.juniper.net
Jan.12 , 2012
CoS Overview
2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. | www.juniper.net
Class of Service Overview

What is CoS?
Ability to treat packets differently as they transit a network device End-to-end mechanism
Does not pertain to only a single network device
Why CoS?
Convergence of voice and data networks Differentiation between applications Guaranteed bandwidth
2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.juniper.net | 3
CoS Defined
www.juniper.net | 4
CoS for Converged Networks

Identify traffic and its requirements
Divide traffic into classes
Define CoS policies for each class
www.juniper.net | 5
CoS is Unidirecrional
CoS configuration is unidirectional
You must explicitly configure settings in both directions
egress
C2
fe-0/0/3
PE2
fe-1/1/1 fe-2/0/1
P1
Traffic flow
ingress
CoS Domain
egress
P2
fe-1/0/2
PE1
fe-1/1/1 fe-0/0/2
C1
Traffic flow
ingress
2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. www.juniper.net | 6
A Historic Perspective
Circuit-switched networks
Designed around service levels needed for telephony
Connection-oriented; one user per connection
Suitable for real-time, loss-sensitive applications

Low (fixed) delay Blocking of new connections during congestion
CoS is not required in the historic environment

The network is purpose-built to support application (telephony) requirements
PSTN Voice Voice
www.juniper.net | 7
Network Advances
Packet-switched networks
Developed to optimize efficiency for machine-to-machine communications
Multiple users share a connection Unexpected delays and loss during congestion
CoS is still not applicable

The network is purpose-built to support application requirements Applications do not require CoS (Expand bandwidth to solve congestion issue when needed)
Data
www.juniper.net | 8
Network Convergence Drives CoS

Convergence drives the need for CoS
Multiple applications supported over a common network infrastructure
Traffic from specific applications must be recognized and treated accordingly Special handling is necessary to ensure that unique applications perform as expected in the face of congestion or queuing delays User bandwidth usage must be controlled
IP is the convergence technology of choice
Voice Video
Data
Definition of CoS Parameters

CoS parameters
Bandwidth: End-to-end information carrying capacity Delay: End-to-end delay for information delivery Jitter(Delay variation): Variation in end-to-end delays caused by packet queuing Loss: Percentage of packets not delivered, usually related to congestion
Network CoS parameters affect a users perception of performance
www.juniper.net | 10
Three Models for Quality of Service

Best-Effort: No QoS is applied to packets. IntServ: Applications signal to the network that they require special QoS. DiffServ: The network recognizes classes that require special QoS.
Best-Effort Model
Internet initially based on a best-effort packet delivery service The default mode for all traffic No differentiation between types of traffic Like using standard mail
It will get there when it gets there.
IntServ Model
Some applications have special bandwidth or delay requirements or both IntServ introduced to guarantee a predictable behavior of the network for these applications Guaranteed delivery: no other traffic can use reserved bandwidth Like having your own private courier plane
It will be there by 10:30 a.m.
DiffServ Model
Network traffic identified by class Network QoS policy enforces differentiated treatment of traffic classes You choose level of service for each traffic class Like using a package delivery service
Do you want overnight delivery? Do you want two-day air delivery? Do you want three- to seven-day ground delivery?
A Brief History of IP CoSIntServ

Integrated Services(InterServ):
IETFs first attempt at extending IP for other than besteffort services RSVP signaling used to describe specific CoS requirements to the network(Host-to-Host)
Routers reserve resources across the network Resembled a circuit-switched call setup
Never deployed
Scalability issues
A Brief History of IP CoS Type-of-Service Field

Type-of-Service(TOS) byte in the IP header
Defined in RFC 791 IP Precedence(0~7) field to prioritize discards
Industry supported precedence bits to minimize loss of networkcontrol packets
MSB
3 D
4 T
5 R
LSB
Bits
IP Precedence
Reserved
DiffServ architecture
DiffServ architecture:
Defined in RFCs 2474 and 2475 Redefined the IPv4 ToS field to support a 6-bit DiffServ Code Point (DSCP) DiffServ has no signaling component
Operates on hop-by-hop basis
MSB
LSB
Bits
------------------------------------ DSCP ---------------- ------- ECN ------------------------- 2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. www.juniper.net | 17
DiffServ Terminology (1 of 2)
Key DiffServ terms:
IP Precedence
3-bit value (0~7) Original IPv4 ToS byte
DSCP
6-bit value (0~63) This is the CoS value for a packet
Behavior Aggregate (BA)

Classification based on DSCP Packets with a common DSCP belong to the same BA
DSCP Encoding
DiffServ field: The IP version 4 header ToS octet or the IPv6 traffic class octet, when interpreted in conformance with the definition given in RFC 2474 DSCP: The first six bits of the DiffServ field, used to select a PHB (forwarding and queuing method)
DiffServ Terminology (2 of 2)
Key DiffServ terms (contd.):
Per-Hop Behavior (PHB)
Forwarding treatment associated with a given BA Packets with the same DSCP value have the same PHB
PHB group
A set of one or more PHBs with related forwarding behavior Example: assured forwarding (AF) is a PHB group, consisting of multiple PHBs : AF1, AF2, AF3, and AF4
Per-Hop Behavior
Per Hop Behavior (PHB)
description of the externally observable forwarding behavior of a DS node applied to a the set of packets with the same DSCP PHB may be defined in terms of
DS nodes resources priority relative to other PHBs observable traffic characteristics (delay, loss, )
PHBs are defined as black box

does NOT mandate particular implementation mechanisms !
Different boxes implement PHBs in different ways which are optimised for each platform
Per-Hop Behaviors
DSCP selects PHB throughout the network.

Default (FIFO, Tail drop) EF (Expedited Forwarding) AF (Assured Forwarding) CS (Class-Selector) mapping to IPP(IP Precedence)
Per-Hop Behaviors (Cont.)
Each AF class uses three DSCP values. Each AF class is independently forwarded with its guaranteed bandwidth.
Standardized DiffServ PHBs (1 of 2)

Expedited Forwarding(EF)
Designed to provide for low loss, low delay, and low jitter services
Example: Voice Recommended code point: 101110(usually mapped to IPP(5))
Assured Forwarding(AF)
Primarily concerned with controlling packet loss
Four classes: AF1, AF2, AF3, and AF4 Each class supports three drop probabilities; for example, AF11 (low), AF12 (medium), and AF13 (high)
AF 11/12/13 Low Medium High
AF 21/22/23 010010 010100 010110
AF 31/32/33 011010 011100 011110
AF 41/42/43 100010 100100 100110

001010 001100 001110
Standardized DiffServ PHBs (2 of 2)

Class Selector(CS)
Provide IP precedence compatibility Typically used for network control traffic
Best effort is not specifically defined

Best effort is the default PHB
EF PHB Definition
RFC 2598 Expedited Forwarding PHB, June 99 EF PHB can be used to build a low loss, low latency, low jitter, assured bandwidth, end-toend service targets VoIP, Virtual Leased Lines
Assured traffic sees no (or very small) queues/delay Constraint: at every transit node, the aggregates max arrival rate is less than the aggregate min departure rate
An example of how EF can be implemented is a Priority Queue (with rate limit). Recommended DSCP=101110 (46)
AF PHB Group Definition

RFC2597, Assured Forwarding PHB Group, June 99 Assured Forwarding (AF) PHB Group is meant to offer different levels of forwarding assurances for IP packets received from a customer DS domain Olympic Service (Gold, Silver, Bronze)
gold (C1) >= silver (C2) >= bronze (C3)
No quantifiable timing requirements!

delay or delay variation
Recommended DSCPs
IANA maintains a list of recommended DSCPs
Based on RFC recommendations for defined PHBs
Name CS0 CS1 CS2 CS3 CS4 CS5 CS6 CS7 DSCP 000000 (0) 001000 (8) 010000 (16) 011000 (24) 100000 (32) 101000 (40) 110000 (48) 111000 (56) Name AF11 DSCP 001010 (10)
AF12
AF13 AF21
001100 (12)
001110 (14) 010010 (18)
AF22
AF23 AF31 AF32 AF33 AF41 AF42 AF43 EF
010100 (20)
010110 (22) 011010 (26) 011100 (28) 011110 (30) 100010 (34) 100100 (36) 100110 (38) 101110 (46)
Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerEthernet 802.1Q Class of Service
IEEE specification 802.1P user priority field Supports up to 8 classes of service
Focuses on support for QoS over LANs and 802.1Q ports
Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerFrame Relay/ATM QoS
Frame Relay DTE devices can set the DE bit of a frame so that if the network becomes congested, Frame Relay devices will discard frames with the DE bit set before discarding those that do not have the DE bit set. Preserved throughout the Frame Relay network.
The CLP bit indicates that the cell should be discarded if it encounters congestion as it moves through the network. Preserved throughout the ATM network.
Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerMPLS Experimental Bits
MPLS uses a 32-bit label field (shim header) which is inserted between Layer 2 and Layer 3 headers (frame mode). Supports up to 8 classes of service. The IP precedence or DSCP field is not directly visible to MPLS label switch routers. In most casen, routers will copy the three most significant bits of the DSCP or the IP precedence of the IP packet to the EXP field. Preserved throughout the MPLS network.
Comparison
Best-Effort Service Connectivity No isolation No guarantees End-to-end No set-up Diffserv Per aggregation isolation Per aggregation guarantee Domain Long term setup Intserv Per flow isolation Per flow guarantee
Service Scope Complexity
End-to-end Per flow setup
Scalability
Highly scalable Scalable (edge routers (nodes maintain maintains per only routing state) aggregate state; core routers per class state)
Not scalable (each router maintains per flow state)
CoS Processing Stages
2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. | www.juniper.net
What is Class of Service ?

CoS provides mechanisms for categorizing traffic and meeting performance requirements within a network
Voice
Packet A
Video
Packet A Packet B Packet C Packet B
Data
Packet C
Note: CoS does not make a network faster or reduce congestion!

CoS Components
CoS components:
Traffic classification Policing Queuing Scheduling Rewrite rules
Overview of CoS Processing

Ingress
BA Classifier
Policing (Ingress)
Multifield Classifier
Forwarding Policy
Forwarding Class Loss Priority
Fabric
Egress Rewrit e Marker

Scheduler Shaper RED
Policing (Egress)
Meeting Performance Requirements

CoS meets a networks performance requirements by:
Prioritizing latency-sensitive traffic such as VoIP Controlling congestion to ensure service level agreement(SLA) maintenance Allocating bandwidth for different classes of traffic
VoIP Data VoIP Data
Voice
Voice
Data
Data
Devices should treat traffic consistently throughout the entire network
Forwarding Classes
Forwarding classes:
Identify traffic that should receive common treatment Used to assign traffic to output queues
Forwarding Class
Voice Packet A Queue 2
Output Queue
Video Packet A Packet B Packet C Packet B Queue 1
Data Packet C Queue 0
Loss Priority
Loss priority:
Identifies the priority a system should give to dropping a packet Used to select the drop profile used in the RED(Random Early Detection) process
If congestion exists Voice VoIP Data Drop first Data
JUNOS CoS Defaults

4 Queues Assigned to 4 Forwarding classes(up to 8 Queues/16 Forwarding classes)
Queue Forwarding Class Priority Transmit Rate Drop Profile
0 1
2 3
Best-effort (BE) Expedited-Forwarding (EF)

Assured-Forwarding (AF) Network-Control (NC)
Low
Low
95%
5%
Tail drop
Tail drop
In a default configuration, input BA classification is performed by the ipprec-compatibility table
Typical CoS Processing Stages

Input Processing
C l a s s i f y
Class 0
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class n
Ingress
Policing or Rate Limit
To Fabric
Output Processing
Queue 0 (Class 0)
From Fabric
Queue 1 (Class 1) Queue 2 (Class 2)

Queue 3 (Class 3)
Congestion Control (WRED)
Header Rewrite Scheduling and Prioritization
Egress
The order of stages can vary slightly across Junos devices.

Traffic Classification
Classifiers map traffic to a forwarding class at ingress
Can match on existing CoS values
BA classification
Can match on protocol, port, addresses, and so forth

Multifield classification
Support for IP precedence, DSCP (IPv4 and IPv6), MPLS Basic Service EXP, and IEEE 802.1p (BE)
Packet C Packet B Packet A
Classifier
Premium Service (EF) Control Traffic (NC)

NC: Network control class

Policing
Policing limits traffic volume and burstiness
Enforces and protects CoS SLAs Excess traffic can be marked or discarded Functions at ingress, egress, or both
Ingress Interface
Interface Policer
Policer within MF Classifier
Interface Policer
Egress Interface
MF: Multifield
Policing vs Shaping
These mechanisms must classify packets before policing or shaping the traffic rate. Shaping queues excess packets to stay within the desired traffic rate. Policing typically drops or marks excess traffic to stay within a traffic rate limit.
Policing vs. Shaping
Out-of-profile packets are dropped Dropping causes TCP retransmits Less buffer usage (shaping requires an additional shaping queuing system)
Out-of-profile packets are queued until a buffer gets full Buffering minimizes TCP retransmits Shaping supports interaction with Frame Relay congestion indication
CoS and Forwarding Policy

Policy can select the forwarding next hop for traffic associated with a particular forwarding class
CoS-Based Forwarding (CBF)
R3
EF packet BE packet
EF packet R1 R2 R4
CBF in place at R2 for the BE forwarding class
Schedulers
Schedulers define the prioritization properties of forwarding classes (queues):
Transmission rate
Guaranteed and maximum rates
Queue priority
Support for five priority levels
Delay buffer
Storage space for traffic bursts
Congestion management and avoidance

Support for RED for equal, random dropping of traffic Support for WRED for weighted, preferred dropping of traffic
First In First Out(FIFO)
First packet in is first packet out Simplest of all One queue All individual queues are FIFO
Priority Queuing(PQ)
Uses multiple queues Allows prioritization Always empties first queue before going to the next queue:
Empty Queue 1 If Queue 1 empty, then dispatch one packet from Queue 2 If both Queue 1 and Queue 2 empty, then dispatch one packet from Queue 3
Queues 2 and 3 may starve
Round Robin
Uses multiple queues No prioritization Dispatches one packet from each queue in each round
One packet from Queue 1
One packet from Queue 2 One packet from Queue 3 Then repeat
Weighted Round Robin(WRR)

Allows prioritization Assign a weight to each queue Dispatches packets from each queue proportionally to an assigned weight:
Dispatch up to 4 from Queue 1 Dispatch up to 2 from Queue 2 Dispatch 1 from Queue 3 Go back to Queue 1
RED Modes
RED has three modes:
No drop: When the average queue size is between 0 and the minimum threshold Random drop: When the average queue size is between the minimum and the maximum threshold Full drop (tail drop): When the average queue size is at maximum threshold or above
Random drop should prevent congestion (prevent tail drops)
Weighted RED
Without RED
Packet Drop Probability Queue Length
Queue Max
With RED
Packet Drop Probability
Slope is adjustable (Random drop)

Queue Length Queue Max
Packet Drop Probability
With WRED
Premium Service Standard Service
Queue Length
Std. Min.
Prem. Min.
Queue Max
Weighted Random Early Detection(WRED)

Standard Premium Upon congestion, packets from lower precedence are selectively discarded first Minimize the congestion impact on higher precedence services
TCP Traffic Before RED
TCP synchronization prevents average link utilization close to the link bandwidth. Tail drops cause TCP sessions to go into slow-start.
TCP Traffic After RED
Average link utilization is much closer to link bandwidth. Random drops cause TCP sessions to reduce window sizes.
Scheduling Overview
Components of scheduling:
Priority Transmission rate Buffer size RED configuration
Defines the order in which packets transmit Defines the storage and dropping of packets
Queue 0
Dat a
Queue 1 Queue 2
Scheduler Map
Dat a
Queue 3
Dat a Dat a
Queue Priority
Queues receive service according to their assigned priority; common priorities include:
Strict-High(might starve low priority queue) High Medium high Medium low Data Low
Queue 4 (SH) 3 Queue 3 (H) 6 4 Queue 2 (MH) 2 Queue 1 (ML) 7 Queue 0 (L) 5 1
Serviced first
Scheduler Map
5 1 7 2 6 4 3
Serviced last
Rewrite Markers
The packet header rewrite sets CoS values for outbound traffic
Can be used by BA classification in downstream nodes Support for IP precedence, DSCP (IPv4 and IPv6), MPLS EXP, and IEEE 802.1p
The inbound classifier assigns a packet to forwarding class

DSCP = 000000 Packet
Rewrite sets the packets DSCP coding based on the forwarding class
DSCP = 0001001 Packet
Review of CoS Processing

Ingress
BA Classifier
Policing (Ingress)
Forwardin g Policy
Forwarding Class Loss Priority
Fabric
Egress
Rewrit e Marker
Scheduler
Shaper
RED
Multifiel d Classifie r
Policing (Egress )
Reference: JUNOS CoS Configurtion Guide (JUNOS 11.4)

Cos/Qos: (Class of Service) / (Quality of Service)

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

Cos/Qos: (Class of Service) / (Quality of Service)

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Day 7

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. | www.juniper.net

Class of Service Overview

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

CoS for Converged Networks

Divide traffic into classes

Define CoS policies for each class

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Suitable for real-time, loss-sensitive applications

CoS is not required in the historic environment

PSTN Voice Voice

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

CoS is still not applicable

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Network Convergence Drives CoS

IP is the convergence technology of choice

Definition of CoS Parameters

Network CoS parameters affect a users perception of performance

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Three Models for Quality of Service

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

It will be there by 10:30 a.m.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

A Brief History of IP CoSIntServ

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

A Brief History of IP CoS Type-of-Service Field

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Behavior Aggregate (BA)

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

PHBs are defined as black box

DSCP selects PHB throughout the network.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Per-Hop Behaviors (Cont.)

Standardized DiffServ PHBs (1 of 2)

AF 21/22/23 010010 010100 010110

AF 31/32/33 011010 011100 011110

AF 41/42/43 100010 100100 100110

001010 001100 001110

Standardized DiffServ PHBs (2 of 2)

Best effort is not specifically defined

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

AF PHB Group Definition

No quantifiable timing requirements!

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerEthernet 802.1Q Class of Service

IEEE specification 802.1P user priority field Supports up to 8 classes of service

Focuses on support for QoS over LANs and 802.1Q ports

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerFrame Relay/ATM QoS

Classification and Marking at the Data-Link LayerMPLS Experimental Bits

Service Scope Complexity

End-to-end Per flow setup

Not scalable (each router maintains per flow state)

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.

CoS Processing Stages

2011 Juniper Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. | www.juniper.net

What is Class of Service ?