The MPLS-OPS Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]
RE: IGP
-
From: Christopher Lewis <chrlewis@cisco.com>
-
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:22:41 -0500
-
Cc: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
-
Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:35:49 -0400
-
To: Mathew Lodge <mathew@cplane.com>
-
X-Sender: chrlewis@fargo.cisco.com
Matthew, I don't understand what you're saying here. We may be
talking at cross purposes.
Traffic engineering (to me at least) is about controlling how traffic
flows on your network. OSPF and IS-IS extensions allow those protocols to
communicate resource reservations made on a router. MPLS is one means of
instantiating paths through a network for selected traffic.
I thought off-line TE referred to looking at traffic flows and altering
the way you setup TE in terms of how it directs traffic, how that TE is
implemented is another question. Some other observations in-line
At 08:25 PM 7/8/2002, you wrote:
At 08:25 AM 7/5/2002 -0500, Christopher Lewis
wrote:
Plain MPLS or MPLS VPN will work fine with
distance vector protocols like EIGRP, but as mentioned a link state
routing protocol is needed for MPLS traffic engineering, as each node
needs the topology information those protocols provide and OSPF and IS-IS
have the opaque LSA extensions necessary for traffic
engineering.
To add to Chris' comments, note that this is for online "on the
router" traffic engineering only. If you're doing off-line traffic
engineering, any routing protocol that allows the control plane to
operate will do.
Three benefits that offline TE offers vs. OSPF/IS-IS TE:
1) You can implement a routing algorithm that does a lot better than
Dijkstra shortest path. For example, you can minimize overall network
utilization and avoid bottlenecks.
MPLS TE using OSPF or IS-IS to communicate reserved resources does not
rely on the Dijkstra algorthim to compute a path.
2) You can pre-calculate and install backup
LSPs and ensure that there are no single points of failure, thereby
dramatically improving LSP restoration time and guaranteeing
resiliency.
As you can with MPLS TE and have fast re-route handle swap overs in less
than 50 ms without operator intervention.
3) You can support LSP constraints that are
non-additive in nature -- since shortest path works by adding hop
metrics.
As you can with MPLS TE using OSPF or IS-IS extensions, things like
affinity allow you to have the path include or exclude specified types of
links in the path selection process for example.
Chris
Cheers,
Mathew
At 08:03 AM 7/4/2002, Roger Clark Williams
wrote:
Zeevik has it right, but to add emphasis, OSPF
and IS-IS are the only IGPs that support MPLS TE tunnels. Keep in mind,
however, that Cisco IOS to my understanding supports only 32 routing
processes per router, and OSPF must start a separate process each time it
is used (unlike RIP and BGP). I am not sure right now whether IS-IS
supports the use of address families within a single routing process
(anyone?), but OSPF does not. Therefore, OSPF is good as an IGP in an
MPLS cloud but has some limitations when used on a PE as both an IGP and
a VPN routing protocol.
Roger Williams
At 02:07 PM 7/4/2002, you wrote:
Note
that both IS-IS and OSPF have TE extensions to support Traffic
Engineering. Thus means that the IGP also holds the amount of reserved
and unreserved bandwidth on each link, affinity of links, etc. so
protocols like RSVP-TE can find a path with the appropriate attributes of
the tunnel.
- -----Original Message-----
- From: Gowda, Sidde
[mailto:sidde.gowda@intel.com]
- Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 07:43
- To: 'amos'; mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
- Subject: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: IGP
- Hi
-
- Not necessarily,
- Any Link state protocols are OK for TE
- But currently we have two ie OSPF and IS-IS.
- So MPLS network uses them.
-
- Siddu
- -----Original Message-----
- From: amos
[mailto:slick@inter.net.il]
- Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 9:24 PM
- To: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
- Subject: [MPLS-OPS]: IGP
- Hi
-
- from all the examples i saw, the interior gateway routing protocol
for an mpls network is alwayes
- ospf or is-is. is there any particular reason for that ?
- i have a production network runing eigrp as the igp, we are now
starting to employ mpls in the network,
- and i would like to avoid migrating into a different igp at the
moment.
-
- 10x
-
- Amos
-
------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
- Follow-Ups:
- RE: IGP
- From: Roger Clark Williams <rogerw@nordlink.com>
- RE: IGP
- From: Mathew Lodge <mathew@cplane.com>
- References:
- RE: IGP
- From: Christopher Lewis <chrlewis@cisco.com>
- RE: IGP
- From: Roger Clark Williams <rogerw@nordlink.com>
- RE: IGP
- From: "Zeevik Neuman" <zeevikn@seriqa.com>
- RE: IGP
- From: Mathew Lodge <mathew@cplane.com>
| |
|