One document matched: draft-jiang-l2vpn-vpls-ring-01.txt

Differences from draft-jiang-l2vpn-vpls-ring-00.txt


Networking Working Group                                        A. Jiang
Internet Draft                                                   X. Song
Intended status: Informational                                     Y. Qu
Expires: September, 2010                                           S. Wu
                                                                     ZTE

                                                         March 23, 2010

                                VPLS Ring
                      draft-jiang-l2vpn-vpls-ring-01.txt


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2010.

Abstract

   This document describes ring based VPLS architecture. This
   architecture is an alternative to existing VPLS architecture. It can
   simplify full mesh connections and provide a standard based
   protection mechanism, especially when underlying infrastructure is
   ring based. It can also reduce unnecessary customer multicast traffic
   compared with existing full mesh based VPLS.









Jiang                   Expires September, 2010                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


Table of Contents

   1. Introduction.................................................2
   2. Conventions used in this document............................3
   3. Analysis of related documents................................3
   4. Ethernet Ring Based VPLS.....................................3
      4.1. Native Ethernet Ring....................................3
      4.2. MPLS Services & Their Native Form.......................5
      4.3. CE-PE Ring..............................................5
      4.4. PE-PE Ring..............................................6
      4.5. Inter-VPLS Ring.........................................6
      4.6. Customer Multicast Traffic..............................7
   5. Security Considerations......................................7
   6. IANA Considerations..........................................7
   7. Conclusions..................................................7
   8. References...................................................8
      8.1. Normative References....................................8
      8.2. Informative References..................................8
   9. Acknowledgments..............................................8

1. Introduction

   VPLS uses MPLS to deliver Ethernet service over WAN.

   Currently, VPLS architecture is based on VPLS framework [RFC 4664].
   And full mesh +split horizon is the most widely deployed mode.

   In this mode, VSIs belonging to the same VPLS VPN connect with each
   other via full mesh PWs, and use split horizon forwarding scheme to
   avoid loop.

   Full mesh imposes burden on forwarding, control & management plane,
   and is not scalable. Hierarchical VPLS discussed in LDP VPLS [RFC
   4762] (Hub-Spoke) and BGP VPLS [RFC 4761] (Route Reflector) are
   proposed to fix the problem.

   However, if underlying infrastructure is ring, which is common for
   many service providers, there is another option - ring based VPSL.

   Mapping full mesh or hierarchical connections to ring is not
   efficient. It will also cause unnecessary copies of customer
   multicast traffic.

   Ring based Ethernet forwarding and protection scheme can be used to
   construct a more efficient VPLS solution.




Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


2. Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119].



3. Analysis of related documents

   There are several works on ring based VPLS.

   1) VPLS protection switching with ring access [draft-song-l2vpn-vpls-
   ring-access]

   In this document, ring based technology is deployed in the access
   part of VPLS, which includes CE and the connected PE. They can use
   ring for multi-homing access and protection. It covers single, dual
   and multiple CE multi-homing scenarios.

   2) Pseudowire (PW) Redundancy Framework [draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy]

   In this document, PW redundancy is used to provide multi-homing
   solution for VPLS. It has discussed the scenario of PW redundancy for
   dual-homing between PEs in ring topology, and has a very brief
   overview of the possible solutions.

   3) BGP based VPLS Multi-homing [draft-kothari-henderickx-l2vpn-vpls-
   multihoming]

   This is to use BGP as provisioning mechanism for multi-homing VPLS.

   4) There are also some ring solutions for MPLS-TP. But VPLS
   forwarding is closely related to Ethernet, and is inherently
   different from MPLS-TP.



4. Ethernet Ring Based VPLS

4.1. Native Ethernet Ring

   There are some documents on this topic.

   In [ITU-T G.8032] Ethernet Ring Protection Switching, native Ethernet
   ring protection protocol and switching mechanism is defined.



Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


   In [RFC 3619] Ethernet Automatic Protection Switching, a similar
   design is presented.

   The main idea is to define a control node adjacent to a protection
   link. As shown in figure below, Node 1 is the control node and the
   link between 1 and 6 is the protection link.

    2 ----- 1 (X) - 6                    2 ----- 1 ----- 6

    |      Ring     |        <---->      |      Ring     |

    3 ----- 4 ----- 5                    3 ----- 4 -(X)- 5

   Node 1 will block its port in the protection link to prevent loop.

   When there is link or node failure, node adjacent to the failure will
   detect failure and inform the control node via OAM. Or control node
   detects failure via OAM.

   When control node is informed, it will unblock the previously blocked
   port. When fault is cleared, control node will block the port again
   to prevent loop.

   In this example, when link between node 4 and 5 is broken, control
   node 1 will detect the failure and will unblock port in the
   protection link. When the failure is cleared, node 1 will block the
   port in protection link again.

                    N ----- N (X) - N

                    |    Sub-ring   |

    N ----- N ----- 2 ----- 1 (X) - 6 ----- N ----- N

    (X)  Sub-ring   |     Ring      |   Sub-ring   (X)

    N ----- N ----- 3 ----- 4 ----- 5 ----- N ----- N

                    |    Sub-ring   |

                    N (X) - N ----- N

   Interconnected rings are also supported, as shown above. This is a
   hierarchical structure of a ring and several sub-rings. Ring is
   viewed by sub-ring as a permanent link. Each sub-ring will run its
   own ring control protocol for loop prevention and protection.



Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


4.2. MPLS Services & Their Native Form

   MPLS provides a scalable encapsulation mechanism for multiple
   services. MPLS has been adapted by wide range of services including
   L3VPN, L2VPN (PW, VPLS), TE, FRR, multicast, QoS, BGP free core
   network, transport (MPLS-TP), etc.

   Some of these services are widely deployed and deemed a success, such
   as L3VPN, L2VPN (PW, VPLS), TE and FRR. Some are still under
   development, such as Transport and multicast. And some may have
   difficulty to take off, such as BGP free core.

   When we look at the winner, we can find that all successful MPLS
   services are successful in their native form, and vice versa.

   L3VPN's native form is IP service, which is the foundation of
   Internet and broadband network. Native form of PW is legacy WAN
   services, which is dominant in traditional telecom world. Native form
   of VPLS is Ethernet, which is dominant in enterprise world.

   While multicast in its native form is not as widely deployed as
   unicast due to its inherent complexity. So does multicast in MPLS
   format.

   If we apply the same rule to Ethernet ring, we expect its native form
   to be deployed and accepted before its MPLS encapsulated version to
   be success.

4.3. CE-PE Ring

   (CE) ----- CE1 ------ PE1

    (x)       (x)          |

   (CE) ---- (CE2) ----- PE2

     :          :         |

   (CE)...... (CE)..... (PE)

   As stated in [draft-song-l2vpn-vpls-ring-access], ring is formed
   among CE and PE. It can be ring with 1 CE & 2 PEs, ring with 2 CEs &
   2PEs, ring with n CEs & n PEs. It can be single ring or
   interconnected rings. PW between PE is treated by PE as virtual link.
   Ethernet ring control protocol is running in CE and PE for loop
   prevention and protection. We can use this mechanism to build



Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


   scalable and flexible VPLS access network. It is also the convenient
   way to build CE-PE multi-homing.

4.4. PE-PE Ring

                   PE ---- PE(x)--- PE

                    |    Sub-ring   |

    PE----- PE-----PE ---- PE(x)--- PE----- PE -----PE ----- CE

    (x)  Sub-ring   |     Ring      |   Sub-ring    (x)       |

    PE----- PE-----PE ---- PE ----- PE----- PE -----PE ----- CE

                    |    Sub-ring   |

                   PE(x) - PE ----- PE

   Ring can be formed among PEs. It can be single ring or interconnected
   rings. This design is simple & neat for service providers with ring
   fiber/cable infrastructure. PE ring can also interconnect with CE-PE
   ring.

   Its forwarding process is different from that of full mesh VPLS. Each
   PE will turn on MAC learning. Ethernet packet will go through each PE
   in ring, and PE will forward Ethernet packet based on MAC forwarding
   table. There is only 1 bi-directional PW (virtual link) between each
   pair of PEs. For VPLS with N nodes, there are only N PWs in ring
   based VPLS as compared with N*(N-1)/2 PWs in full mesh VPLS.

   VPLS ring is Ethernet ring using PW as virtual link between PE nodes.
   MPLS protection mechanism is used to protect the PW locally. Ethernet
   ring protection mechanism is used to protect the VPLS service. Ring
   can also support PE redundancy.

   Other benefit is reduction of unnecessary customer multicast traffic,
   which will be discussed later.

4.5. Inter-VPLS Ring

    (VPLS 1 Border PE) ----- (VPLS 2 Border PE)(x)--- (VPLS 2 Border PE)

           |                                                  |

    (VPLS 1 Border PE) ----- (VPLS 3 Border PE) ----- (VPLS 3 Border PE)



Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


   Ring can also be used to provide inter-VPLS connection. Each VPLS can
   connect to other VPLS via border PE. Inter-VPLS ring can also
   interconnect with PE ring or CE-PE ring. Protection mechanism is
   similar to PE ring. It also provides inter-VPLS PE redundancy.

4.6. Customer Multicast Traffic

            CE1 -->--PE1 ==>== PE2 -->-- CE2

                      |        |

                      V        v

            CE3 --<--PE3 ---- PE4 -->-- CE4

   In full mesh VPLS, there will be multiple copies of customer
   multicast traffic in inter-PE PW.

   For example, multicast traffic from CE1 to CE2~CE4 will be sent in PW
   from PE1 to PE2~PE4. There will be 2 copies of traffic in link
   between PE1 and PE2. If the number of multicast receiving node is N,
   there will be copies (around N/2~1) of traffic along the root to leaf
   path.

   In ring VPLS, there will be only 1 copy of customer multicast traffic
   along the path from root to leaf. Its forwarding mechanism is similar
   to Ethernet multicast forwarding mechanism.

5. Security Considerations



6. IANA Considerations



7. Conclusions

   In this document, Ethernet ring based VPLS is presented. This
   architecture is most suitable to be deployed on infrastructure with
   fiber/cable ring. It can greatly reduce the number of inter-PE PWs
   compared with full mesh design. It can also eliminate the unnecessary
   copies of customer multicast traffic in full mesh design. Ring can
   also provide a convenient way for node and link protection.





Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


8. References

8.1. Normative References

   [RFC 2119]    Bradner, S., Editor, "Key words for use in RFCs to
                 Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC2119, March
                 1997.

   [RFC 4664]    Andersson, L., Rosen, E., "Framework for Layer 2
                 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 4664,
                 September 2006.



8.2. Informative References

   [VPLS RING ACCESS] Song, X., Wu, S., Shao, H., "VPLS protection
                  switching with ring access", ID draft-song-l2vpn-vpls-
                  ring-access-00, October 2008.

9. Acknowledgments

   This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.

























Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft                VPLS RING                      March 2010


Authors' Addresses

   Albert Jiang
   ZTE
   Email: albert.john@zte.com.cn


   Xiaojuan Song
   ZTE
   Email: song.xiaojuan@zte.com.cn

   Yanfeng Qu
   ZTE
   Email: qu.yanfeng@zte.com.cn

   Shaoyong Wu
   ZTE
   Email: wu.shaoyong@zte.com.cn

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.
   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
   Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)
   in effect on the date of publication of this document.  Please
   review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and
   restrictions with respect to this document.

















Jiang                   Expires September 2010                 [Page 9]


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-22 23:18:57