DOCSLIB.ORG

A Exploration of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (Mpls) Network: a Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Exploration of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (Mpls) Network: a Review ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 13, 2020 A EXPLORATION OF MULTI-PROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING (MPLS) NETWORK: A REVIEW Nisha 1, Dr. Rashid Hussain 2 Ph.D. Scholar 1, Associate Professor 2 Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Mahal Jagatpura, Jaipur 1, 2 Received: 14 March 2020 Revised and Accepted: 8 July 2020 ABSTRACT: The central principle of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Network (MPLS) utilizes Label Switching Path (LSP) technology that provides high efficiency in packet transmission without needing to check for routing tables. Nevertheless, where a connection breakdown happens in an MPLS network, the reconstruction of a new path may entail further overhead. The MPLS (Multi-Protocol Label Switching) network is increasingly moving into a general and converged network capable of exchanging multi-service (voice, data, and video) information on the same IP-based network. Quality of service (QoS) has been progressively a critical requirement for new applications carrying MPLS networks. It realization helps service companies to develop the methods of network design and include full network services and to resolve any loss. This article describes a standard network loss (the loss would contribute to the restoration of the path in the MPLS network by using MPLS) and the network failure on the basis of exploratory study findings. KEYWORD: Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS), Label Switch Path (LSP), Quality of Service (QoS) I. INTRODUCTION MPLS (Multi-Protocol Label Switching) is used as the core technologies of multiple autonomous systems in many business networks and public infrastructures. This is a connection-oriented infrastructure intended to solve the challenges of today’s network in terms of volume, scalability and traffic engineering. Most of the time, MPLS is deemed to be at the peak of the transmission network (SDH or WDM depends on the connection speed required). In addition, the forwarding of MPLS data packets is tag-based, rather than encapsulated text-based parsing at high level. It is a multiprotocol system that supports any network protocol at the lower layer (link or physical) and any system. MPLS is used as a traffic management tool that more easily guides traffic across the network than navigating the initial shortest IP path. Network routes can be designated for critical traffic, and for these traffic secure connections and routers with uncertain faults will be used. The problem, however, is whether it is acceptable to place MPLS nodes at the edge of the network to receive packet traffic from consumers, or to add MPLS facilities on a subset of core nodes to take advantage of packet switching’s versatility and multiplexing. , contributing to greater delivery of Broadband [14-17]. Based on the context and the research to be performed with this network model the network specifications for all networks can be split into several components. End-to - end features are calculated in the direction of one or more traffic flowing through various network equipment, which may be applied across the entire network. MPLS does, though, start offering specific support rates depending on the business specifications. They have to be versatile. You should choose the recovery method, choose the protected traffic granularity, and choose the particular form of protected traffic, so that this payout can be best managed by service. MPLS network recovery is based on the method used for identifying faults and flows of path data on alternate routes. The following principle can guide MPLS restoration: There are limitations on improving the restore time of current routing algorithms. Regarding MPLS-based backbones, the problem of fault tolerance focuses on whether to shield traffic from node and connection failures on Label Switch Path (LSP). Two well-known methods of recovery (switch security and redirect) have been suggested at the IETF, but other researchers come up with new solutions each year, although they have their own advantages and drawbacks. Both models in an MPLS system can support an end-to - end working path, but they cannot prevent node failures on input or output tag switching (LSR) routers. Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is the cornerstone of the IP world, it is the latest fastest expanding network of communication that will increase network efficiency and scalability. The MPLS network is distinguished by promoting traffic management tunnels by reducing congestion and by allowing good use of all usable network bandwidth. MPLS network traffic engineering primary feature is resource allocation, fault tolerance and optimal usage of resources. Multiprotocol Mark Swapping (MPLS) technology allows traffic 2664 ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 13, 2020 engineering (TE) and increases efficiency in conventional IPv4 networks with different protocols. For the upcoming large-scale backbone network MPLS is likely to be chosen as the IP network operator. The MPLS network’s primary goal is to apply brief fixed-length labels to packets inside the MPLS domain's inbound router. The delivery of data packets to the network relies on the marked tag, not the longest address match as conventional IP transmission. Routers or nodes positioned at the edge of the MPLS network, called label edge routers (LER), are labeled with labels dependent on the peer forwarding class (FEC). The internal router that performs tag-based packet switching and forwarding in an MPLS network is named a mark switching router (LSR) [18-19]. II. RESEARCH BACKGROUND Xu et al. (2010) the multi-domain network is a significant focus field, and the return signal approach offers tremendous recovery potential after loss. Most research in this area, however, have neglected to resolve numerous cases of failure, such as similar deficiencies such as those triggered by assaults on weapons of mass destruction. This paper therefore suggests a novel loopback recovery approach in IP / MPLS networks after intra domain / inter domain faults (which can also be applied to optical DWDM networks). In particular, in order to enhance the recovery method, the routing status information of the route / distance vector between domains is combined with the hierarchical node / bridge breakdown and the path status information inside the domain. Analyze instead the efficiency of the approach introduced for several failure scenarios. This paper suggests a modern recursive approach for the recovery under several failures of large-scale multi domain backbones (i.e. assaults of the WMD). This approach uses an optimized technique for the next-hop domain collection, coupled with a robust rollback background monitoring function to increase the recovery phase performance. In turn, a dual crank reverse counter approach is implemented to reduce the amount of attempts to retry intra-domain / inter-domain, which allows end-to - end which intermediate recovery modes. Detailed performance results indicate that the recovery rate after failure is very strong for fault events linked to different severity rates, especially for E2E rollback. Future studies should concentrate on expanding this work by restore behavior and alignment of security approaches across theoretical models. Capone et al. (2015) the suggested framework is based on Open State, which is an open-flow extension that enables programmers to decide how to autonomously change the forwarding rules on a state-dependent basis, thus minimizing reliance on remote controllers. They implemented the scheme and two separate formulas used for the backup route estimation. We introduced a modern fault management system for SDN in this paper, and a statistical simulation approach expressly developed to take advantage of open state technology. The system finds failure of single connection as well as failure of single node. The security strategy is based on the following idea: if a fault is observed, it is easy to label and track the data packet along the main path and deliver the malfunction signal to the first suitable redirect point, thereby immediately creating a detour path. Such method of scheme is designed to render the loss of data packets negligible after the malfunction has been observed, which does not demand that the controller interfere. The model was evaluated on three established topologies and tests of contrast were obtained demonstrating the supremacy of this system over the classical end-to - end route security scheme and the approach focused on the process of open-flow rapid failover. They are presently researching size issues and designing open-state systems of tests to validate the suggested approach. Almandhari & Shiginah (2015) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) implemented by the IETF (Internet Technology Task Force) is commonly used in communication networks to have a QoS security assurance. Network errors will seriously disrupt essential data traffic in this connection-oriented protocol which is undesirable to clients needing extremely stable services. Engineers also established numerous recovery protocols for MPLS to ensure traffic is diverted from the initial failed path to the replacement path in order to maintain high QoS and boost network stability during faults. This paper provides an in-depth analysis into the process of MPLS recovery to secure and restore traffic after failure. A modern MPLS restoration simulation system focused on the multilayer approach was developed to model the restoration process in the MPLS network. The latest architecture concept is robust and flexible: with various MPLS recovery methods, you can easily model network
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Control Plane Overview Subnet 1.2 Subnet 1.2
    The Network Layer: Control Plane Overview Subnet 1.2 Subnet 1.2 R3 R2 R6 Interior Subnet 1.2 R5 Subnet 1.2 Subnet 1.2 R7 1. Routing Algorithms: Link-State, Distance Vector R8 R4 R1 Subnet 1.2 Dijkstra’s algorithm, Bellman-Ford Algorithm Exterior Subnet 1.2 Subnet 1.2 2. Routing Protocols: OSPF, BGP Raj Jain 3. SDN Control Plane Washington University in Saint Louis 4. ICMP Saint Louis, MO 63130 5. SNMP [email protected] Audio/Video recordings of this lecture are available on-line at: Note: This class lecture is based on Chapter 5 of the textbook (Kurose and Ross) and the figures provided by the authors. http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain 5-1 5-2 Network Layer Functions Overview Routing Algorithms T Forwarding: Deciding what to do with a packet using 1. Graph abstraction a routing table Data plane 2. Distance Vector vs. Link State T Routing: Making the routing table Control Plane 3. Dijkstra’s Algorithm 4. Bellman-Ford Algorithm Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain 5-3 5-4 Rooting or Routing Routeing or Routing T Rooting is what fans do at football games, what pigs T Routeing: British do for truffles under oak trees in the Vaucluse, and T Routing: American what nursery workers intent on propagation do to T Since Oxford English Dictionary is much heavier than cuttings from plants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Network Layer: Control Plane
    CHAPTER 5 The Network Layer: Control Plane In this chapter, we’ll complete our journey through the network layer by covering the control-plane component of the network layer—the network-wide logic that con- trols not only how a datagram is forwarded among routers along an end-to-end path from the source host to the destination host, but also how network-layer components and services are configured and managed. In Section 5.2, we’ll cover traditional routing algorithms for computing least cost paths in a graph; these algorithms are the basis for two widely deployed Internet routing protocols: OSPF and BGP, that we’ll cover in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, respectively. As we’ll see, OSPF is a routing protocol that operates within a single ISP’s network. BGP is a routing protocol that serves to interconnect all of the networks in the Internet; BGP is thus often referred to as the “glue” that holds the Internet together. Traditionally, control-plane routing protocols have been implemented together with data-plane forwarding functions, monolithi- cally, within a router. As we learned in the introduction to Chapter 4, software- defined networking (SDN) makes a clear separation between the data and control planes, implementing control-plane functions in a separate “controller” service that is distinct, and remote, from the forwarding components of the routers it controls. We’ll cover SDN controllers in Section 5.5. In Sections 5.6 and 5.7 we’ll cover some of the nuts and bolts of managing an IP network: ICMP (the Internet Control Message Protocol) and SNMP (the Simple Network Management Protocol).
    [Show full text]
  • IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support
    IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support The Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) protocol provides short-duration detection of failures in the path between adjacent forwarding engines while maintaining low networking overheads. The BFD IS-IS Client Support feature enables Intermediate System-to-Intermediate System (IS-IS) to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) support, which improves IS-IS convergence as BFD detection and failure times are faster than IS-IS convergence times in most network topologies. The IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support feature enables the network to identify whether a BFD session failure is genuine or is the result of a control plane failure due to a router restart. When planning a router restart, you should configure this feature on all neighboring routers. • Finding Feature Information, on page 1 • Prerequisites for IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support, on page 1 • Information About IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support, on page 2 • How to Configure IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support, on page 2 • Configuration Examples for IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support, on page 3 • Additional References, on page 4 • Feature Information for IS-IS Client for BFD C-Bit Support, on page 4 Finding Feature Information Your software release may not support all the features documented in this module. For the latest caveats and feature information, see Bug Search Tool and the release notes for your platform and software release. To find information about the features documented in this module, and to see a list of the releases in which each feature is supported, see the feature information table.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Network Reachability Analysis Using a Succinct Control Plane Representation
    Efficient Network Reachability Analysis using a Succinct Control Plane Representation Seyed K. Fayaz Tushar Sharma Ari Fogel∗ Ratul Mahajany Todd Millsteinz Vyas Sekar George Varghesez CMU ∗Intentionet yMicrosoft Research zUCLA Abstract— To guarantee network availability and se- curity, operators must ensure that their reachability poli- cies (e.g., A can or cannot talk to B) are correctly im- plemented. This is a difficult task due to the complexity Routers Environment at )me t configura)on files of network configuration and the constant churn in a net- Network work’s environment, e.g., new route announcements ar- Environment at )me t+1 control plane rive and links fail. Current network reachability analysis Environment at )me t+2 … … techniques are limited as they can only reason about the data plane at )me t+2 current “incarnation” of the network, cannot analyze all data plane at )me t+1 configuration features, or are too slow to enable explo- data plane at )me t ration of many environments. We build ERA, a tool for A B efficient reasoning about network reachability. Instead of Figure 1: Reachability behavior of a network (e.g., A reasoning about individual incarnations of the network, can talk to B) is determined by its data plane, which, ERA directly reasons about the network “control plane” in turn, is the current incarnation of the control plane. that generates these incarnations. We address key expres- siveness and scalability challenges by building (i) a suc- To highlight this challenge, it is useful to consider prior cinct model for the network control plane (i.e., various work on network verification.
    [Show full text]
  • The Network Layer Data Plane
    The Network Layer: Data Plane Overview Net 1 R1 Net 2 R2 Net 3 R3 Net 4 1. Network Layer Basics Raj Jain 2. What’s inside a router? Washington University in Saint Louis 3. Forwarding Protocols: IPv4, DHCP, NAT, IPv6 Saint Louis, MO 63130 4. Software Defined Networking [email protected] Audio/Video recordings of this lecture are available on-line at: Note: This class lecture is based on Chapter 4 of the textbook http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ (Kurose and Ross) and the figures provided by the authors. Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain 4-1 4-2 Overview Network Layer Basics Forwarding and Routing 1. Forwarding and Routing T Forwarding: Input link to output link via Address prefix lookup in a table. 2. Connection Oriented Networks: ATM Networks T Routing: Making the Address lookup table 3. Classes of Service T Longest Prefix Match 4. Router Components 5. Packet Queuing and Dropping 125.200.1.3 126.23.45.67 125.200.1.1 125.200.1.2 128.272.15.2 2 1 Prefix Next Router Interface 126.23.45.67/32 125.200.1.1 1 128.272.15/24 125.200.1.2 2 128.272/16 125.200.1.1 1 Ref: Optional Homework: R3 in the textbook Washington University in St. Louis http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse473-16/ ©2016 Raj Jain Washington University in St.
    [Show full text]
  • Tesseract: a 4D Network Control Plane Hong Yan†, David A
    Tesseract: A 4D Network Control Plane Hong Yany, David A. Maltzz, T. S. Eugene Ngx, Hemant Gogineniy, Hui Zhangy, Zheng Caix yCarnegie Mellon University zMicrosoft Research xRice University Abstract example, load balanced best-effort forwarding may be implemented by carefully tuning OSPF link weights to We present Tesseract, an experimental system that en- indirectly control the paths used for forwarding. Inter- ables the direct control of a computer network that is un- domain routing policy may be indirectly implemented by der a single administrative domain. Tesseract’s design setting OSPF link weights to change the local cost met- is based on the 4D architecture, which advocates the de- ric used in BGP calculations. The combination of such composition of the network control plane into decision, indirect mechanisms create subtle dependencies. For in- dissemination, discovery, and data planes. Tesseract pro- stance, when OSPF link weights are changed to load bal- vides two primary abstract services to enable direct con- ance the traffic in the network, inter-domain routing pol- trol: the dissemination service that carries opaque con- icy may be impacted. The outcome of the synthesis of trol information from the network decision element to the indirect control mechanisms can be difficult to predict nodes in the network, and the node configuration service and exacerbates the complexity of network control [1]. which provides the interface for the decision element to The direct control paradigm avoids these problems be- command the nodes in the network to carry out the de- cause it forces the dependencies between control policies sired control policies. to become explicit.
    [Show full text]
  • Single-Chip Control/Data-Plane Processors Trends, Features, Deployment
    Single-Chip Control/Data-Plane Processors Trends, Features, Deployment By Linley Gwennap Principal Analyst June 2008 www.linleygroup.com Single-Chip Control/Data-Plane Processors By Linley Gwennap, Principal Analyst, The Linley Group This paper examines the trend toward combining control-plane and data-plane processing on a single chip. It discusses the technologies driving this trend, the common features of these chips, their advantages and disadvantages, and how they are being deployed today and into the future. What Is an SCDP? A single-chip control/data-plane processor (SCDP) combines control-plane and data- plane processing on a single chip. In networking or communications equipment, the data plane processes each packet as it passes through the system. Data-plane tasks may include converting packets from one protocol to another, encrypting or decrypting data, filtering unwanted packets, prioritizing packets, and routing them to their next destina- tion. A relatively simple processor with a small amount of software can perform these tasks, but they must be done quickly. Packets must be processed at least at wire speed, that is, the speed of the incoming network connection (e.g., 1Gbps for a Gigabit Ethernet connection). The control plane handles packets that require extra processing, typically about 5% to 10% of all packets. The most common example is a routing update (e.g., RIP, BGP); the control plane maintains the route table. The control plane may also process other protocols (e.g., ARP) that are too complex for the data plane, or legacy protocols (e.g., SNA, AppleTalk) that are rarely encountered. Finally, the control plane also handles management tasks such as system configuration and logging.
    [Show full text]
  • REDDIG II – Computer Networking Training
    REDDIG II – Computer Networking Training JM SANCHEZ / PH RASSAT - 20/06/2012 IP Addressing and Subnetting Invierno 2011 | Capacitacion en fabrica - CORPAC IP Addressing and Subnetting IP Addresses An IP address is an address used to uniquely identify a device on an IP network. The address is made up of 32 binary bits which can be divisible into a network portion and host portion with the help of a subnet mask. 32 binary bits are broken into four octets (1 octet = 8 bits) Dotted decimal format (for example, 172.16.254.1) REDDIG II | Network Course | Module 2 | 3 IP Addressing and Subnetting Binary and Decimal Conversion REDDIG II | Network Course | Module 2 | 4 IP Addressing and Subnetting IP Address Classes • IP classes are used to assist in assigning IP addresses to networks with different size requirements. • Classful addressing: REDDIG II | Network Course | Module 2 | 5 IP Addressing and Subnetting Private Address Range • Private IP addresses provide an entirely separate set of addresses that still allow access on a network but without taking up a public IP address space. • Private addresses are not allowed to be routed out to the Internet, so devices using private addresses cannot communicate directly with devices on the Internet. REDDIG II | Network Course | Module 2 | 6 IP Addressing and Subnetting Network Masks • Distinguishes which portion of the address identifies the network and which portion of the address identifies the node. • Default masks: Class A: 255.0.0.0 Class B: 255.255.0.0 Class C: 255.255.255.0 • Once you have the address and the mask represented in binary, then identification of the network and host ID is easier.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to MPLS
    Introduction to MPLS Steve Smith Systems Engineer 2003 Technical Symposium © 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Agenda • Background • Technology Basics What is MPLS? Where Is it Used? • Label Distribution in MPLS Networks LDP, RSVP, BGP • Building MPLS Based Services VPNs AToM Traffic Engineering • Configurations Configuring MPLS, LDP, TE • Summary RST-1061 8216_05_2003_c1 © 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 2 Background 2003 Technical Symposium © 1999, Cisco Systems,© 2003, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 3 Terminology • Acronyms PE—provider edge router P—Provider core router CE—Customer Edge router (also referred to as CPE) ASBR—Autonomous System Boundary Router RR—Route Reflector • TE—Traffic Engineering TE Head end—Router that initiates a TE tunnel TE Midpoint—Router where the TE Tunnel transits • VPN—Collection of sites that share common policies • AToM—Any Transport over MPLS Commonly known scheme for building layer 2 circuits over MPLS Attachment Circuit—Layer 2 circuit between PE and CE Emulated circuit—Pseudowire between PEs RST-1061 8216_05_2003_c1 © 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 4 Evolution of MPLS • From Tag Switching • Proposed in IETF—Later combined with other proposals from IBM (ARIS), Toshiba (CSR) Cisco Calls a MPLS Croup Cisco Ships Traffic Engineering BOF at IETF to Formally Chartered MPLS TE Deployed Standardize by IETF Tag Switching Cisco Ships MPLS VPN Large Scale MPLS (Tag Deployed Deployment Switching) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Time RST-1061 8216_05_2003_c1
    [Show full text]
  • Nsa Cybersecurity Report
    NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY CYBERSECURITY REPORT A GUIDE TO BORDER GATEWAY PROTOCOL (BGP) BEST PRACTICES A TECHNICAL REPORT FROM NETWORK SYSTEMS ANALYSIS BRANCH U/OO/202911-18 PP-18-0645 10 September 2018 1 s NSA CYBERSECURITY REPORT DOCUMENT CHANGE HISTORY DATE VERSION DESCRIPTION 07/24/18 01 Initial Release 08/24/18 02 Re-templated DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND ENDORSEMENT The information and opinions contained in this document are provided “as is” and without any warranties or guarantees. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. U/OO/202911-18 PP-18-0645 10 September 2018 2 s NSA CYBERSECURITY REPORT A Guide to Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Best Practices CONTACT INFORMATION Client Requirements and Inquiries or General Cybersecurity Inquiries CYBERSECURITY REQUIREMENTS CENTER (CRC) 410-854-4200 [email protected] U/OO/202911-18 PP-18-0645 10 September 2018 3 s NSA CYBERSECURITY REPORT Executive Summary The dominant routing protocol on the Internet is the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). BGP has been deployed since the commercialization of the Internet and version 4 of BGP is over a decade old. BGP works well in practice, and its simplicity and resilience enabled it to play a fundamental role within the global Internet. However, BGP inherently provides few performance or security protections.
    [Show full text]
  • LTRDCT-2223.Pdf
    Implementing VXLAN In a Data Center Lilian Quan, Principle Engineer, INSBU Erum Frahim, Technical Leader, Services Kevin Cook, Solution Architecture LTRDCT-2223 Agenda . VxLAN Overview . Flood-&-Learn VXLAN . VXLAN with MP-BGP EVPN Control Plane . VXLAN Design Options . MP-BGP EVPN VXLAN Configuration . Lab Introduction Agenda . VxLAN Overview . Flood-&-Learn VXLAN . VXLAN with MP-BGP EVPN Control Plane . VXLAN Design Options . MP-BGP EVPN VXLAN Configuration . Lab Introduction Recap – What is VXLAN ? Tunnel Ethernet Frames Endpoints NETWORK OVERLAY Host Host 1 4 IP Addr IP Network IP Addr Host 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2 Host 2 Switch Switch 5 Host Host 3 IP/UDP Packets 6 PLANE DATA DATA Outer Outer Outer Outer Outer Outer VXLAN Inner Inner Optiona Original CRC MAC MAC MAC MAC l Inner Ethernet 802.1Q IP DA IP SA UDP ID CRC DA SA (24 bits) DA SA 802.1Q Payload VXLAN Encapsulation Original Ethernet Frame • VXLAN uses MAC in UDP encapsulation (UDP destination port 4789) 5 Why VXLAN? VXLAN provides a Network with Segmentation, IP Mobility, and Scale • “Standards” based Overlay • Leverages Layer-3 ECMP – all links forwarding • Increased Name-Space to 16M identifier • Segmentation and Multi-Tenancy • Integration of Physical and Virtual • It’s SDN 6 VXLAN VTEP VXLAN terminates its tunnels on VTEPs (Virtual Tunnel End Point). Each VTEP has two interfaces, one is to provide bridging function for local hosts, the other has an IP identification in the core network for VXLAN encapsulation/decapsulation. Underlay Network (IP Routing) VTEP VTEP IP Interface IP Interface Local LAN Segment Local LAN Segment Host Host Host Host 7 VXLAN Underlay Network – IP Routing • IP routed Network • Flexible topologies IP Transport Network • Recommend a network with redundant paths using ECMP for load sharing • Support any routing protocols --- OSFP, EIGRP, IS-IS, BGP, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • PIM in Omnet++
    ICNS 2014 : The Tenth International Conference on Networking and Services Protocol Independent Multicast in OMNeT++ Vladimír Veselý, Ondřej Ryšavý, Miroslav Švéda Department of Information Systems Faculty of Information Technology, Brno University of Technology (FIT BUT) Brno, Czech Republic e-mail: {ivesely, rysavy, sveda}@fit.vutbr.cz Abstract—Multicast transmission for one-to-many data computer network design suggests deployment of delivery and for online media streaming are becoming more IGMP/MLD on the access layer and PIM on the distribution and more popular. Interest in proper simulation and modeling layer of hierarchical internetworking model. has increased together with those two trends. This paper The project ANSA (Automated Network Simulation and introduces simulation modules for dynamic multicast routing, Analysis) running at the Faculty of Information Technology namely Protocol Independent Multicast and its variants Dense is dedicated to develop the variety of software tools that can Mode and Sparse Mode. Both of them are now parts of our create simulation models based on real networks and ANSA extension developed within the INET framework for subsequently allow for formal analysis and verification of OMNeT++ discrete event simulator. target network configurations. One of our future goals is to Keywords–Multicast Routing; PIM-DM; PIM-SM. model multicast flows in the Brno University of Technology network and thus implementing PIM models is one of our I. INTRODUCTION milestones. This report outlines two simulation modules (first one revisited and second one new), which are part of The multicast transfers prove to be more efficient for the ANSA project and which are extending functionality of one-to-many data delivery if there is one (or more) known the INET framework in OMNeT++.
    [Show full text]