An Architecture for splicing TE-LSPs in Hierarchical CsC scenarios
draft-balaji-mpls-csc-te-lsp-splice-02

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Bhargav Bhikkaji , Balaji Venkataswami  , Shankar Raman  , Gaurav Raina 
Last updated 2013-08-29 (latest revision 2013-02-25)
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-balaji-mpls-csc-te-lsp-splice-02.txt

Abstract

Hierarchical Carrier Supporting Carrier deployments involve a Carrier Core which hereinafter is called the Tier-1 provider and two or more VPN sites that are carriers themselves hereinafter called Tier-2 providers that offer MPLS VPN services to their own customers. In such cases normally LDP is used to distribute labels amongst the routers (P and PE devices) in the Tier-2 provider's sites. When RSVP based TE-LSPs are constructed to explicitly route traffic for Tier-2 ISP's customers from the Tier-2 PEs to the CE of the Tier-1 provider and such TE-LSPs exist on multiple sites of the Tier-2 provider, the Tier-2 ISP may require splicing together through an "auto-match-and- splice-together" facility such that traffic flows from the PE of the Tier-2 ISP through the TE-LSP onto the CE of the Tier-1 ISP and then onto the other site and takes a path through a specific TE-LSP from the CE of the other site to the destination Tier-2 PE and then onto the final customer. This solution offers a lot of advantages such as providing adequate assurance that the bandwidth for the traffic flowing through these spliced TE-LSPs is met. It also provides a explicit routing of the traffic rather than through the regular LDP (which follows IGP) scenarios. Such explicitly routed TE-LSPs would have been constructed taking into account factors such as using under-utilized links for example. Splicing together these TE-LSPs in various sites and doing the splicing on an auto-match based on bandwidth or delay metrics would be a good service to offer to the Tier-2 ISPs customers. This draft outlines a scheme that offers such a feature and service to the Tier-2 ISPs through the addition of certain additional label exchanges and some additional labels such as the RSVP-stitch label and the RSVP-splicing-LDP label in the label stack which can be used to splice together these tunnels. In case of re-optimization of the LSP end-to-end there is a wide variety of choices for the near-end PE to hook up with a suitable far-end tunnel in the other Tier-2 site. Explicit tunnel setup can be obviated by merely choosing from a set of already constructed tunnels based on criterion that may involve various parameters. Also fast-reroute in case of remote tunnel failure is taken care of.

Authors

Bhargav Bhikkaji (bhargav_bhikkaji@dell.com)
Balaji Venkataswami (balaji_venkat_venkat@dell.com)
Shankar Raman (mjsraman@cse.iitm.ac.in)
Gaurav Raina (gaurav@ee.iitm.ac.in)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)