The principles of the invention relate to computer networks and, more particularly, to techniques for providing call admission control within computer networks.
Networks that primarily utilize data link layer devices are often referred to as layer two (L2) networks. A data link layer device is a device that operates within the second layer of the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) reference model, i.e., the data link layer. One example of a data link layer device is a customer premises equipment (CPE) device, such as a switch, modem or wireless access point. Traditional L2 networks include Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) networks, Frame Relay networks, networks using High Level Data Link Control (HDLC), Point-to-Point (PPP) connections, PPP sessions over Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP) tunnels, and Virtual Local Area Networks (VLANs).
Techniques may be used over some L2 and layer three (L3) networks to enable reservation of resources for packet flows from a source device to a destination device. By using one such technique, namely Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS), a source device can request a path through a network, i.e., a Label Switched Path (LSP). An LSP defines one or more distinct, dedicated, and guaranteed paths through the network to carry MPLS packets from a source to a destination. An LSP identifier associated with a particular LSP is affixed to packets that travel through the network via the LSP. A given LSP may define one or more paths between the source and destination, and each path may be used to carry MPLS network traffic associated with the LSP. Consequently, as used herein, an “LSP” refers to a defined set of one or more paths associated with a common flow of MPLS traffic, while an “path” refers to a particular network path associated with the LSP. As used herein, an LSP, therefore, may also be viewed as an MPLS tunnel having one or more paths.
In some instances, an MPLS network is used as an intermediate transport network between two or more L2 networks in order to allow communication between the L2 networks. In this manner, an LSP may be viewed as a virtual direct link created between the L2 networks, eliminating the need for expensive direct connections between the L2 networks.
In addition to providing a dedicated path through the network, MPLS-enabled routers may employ resource reservation techniques in an attempt to establish the LSP to support a specified Quality-of-Service (QoS) class having a required level of communication throughput, typically including a defined bandwidth allocation. The MPLS-enabled routers establish a defined route within the network able to commit the resources to satisfy the specified QoS class. Devices often employ resource reservation techniques to support transmission of real-time data, such as video or voice data, over packet-based networks.
L2 networks, however, typically have stringent Quality-of-Service (QoS) requirements, such as a guaranteed level of communication throughput, e.g., bandwidth. Intermediate MPLS networks generally are unable to meet these stringent QoS requirements associated with L2 networks. The lack of QoS guarantees by the intermediate MPLS network may lead to overall network inefficiencies or communication errors.
In general, the invention is directed to techniques for providing QoS guarantees when coupling layer two (L2) networks via an intermediate Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network. A Label Switched Path (LSP) through the intermediate MPLS network is selected that most closely emulates a direct L2 connection between the L2 networks by exhibiting characteristics in accordance with L2 constraint information. In accordance with the principles of the invention, the L2 constraint information may include bandwidth, color, end-to-end delay, jitter, security requirements, classification of traffic, LSP selection parameters, or other networking characteristics.
When transporting data between the L2 networks, the MPLS network selects the LSP and, in particular, one or more forwarding next hops associated with the LSP, that exhibits network characteristics that most closely satisfy L2 constraint information similar to that of a direct L2 connection between the networks. Because the LSP emulates a direct L2 connection between L2 networks, the MPLS network is essentially transparent to the L2 networks. Consequently, the MPLS network provides a “virtual” direct L2 connection, or pseudo-wire, that emulates a direct L2 connection between the L2 networks.
In practice, a customer edge router of the L2 network sends the L2 constraint information and an admission request to a provider edge router of the MPLS network. A call admission control (CAC) module of the provider edge router selects an appropriate LSP based on L2 constraint information provided by the customer edge router, thereby “admitting” an L2 connection of the L2 network into the MPLS network. Moreover, the CAC module is invoked during route resolution and applied “per-path” basis, i.e., to each path for each LSP coupling the L2 networks. In particular, the CAC module determines whether any of the LSPs define a path having an associated next hop that satisfies the L2 constraint information for the L2 connection being admitted in the MPLS network. If so, the LSP is selected, and the identified next hop of the LSP is selected as the forwarding next hop for the L2 connection being admitted. In this manner, the L2 connection is admitted into the MPLS network, and data from the L2 connection is transported via the selected LSP using the identified next hop.
Once the LSP and the appropriate forwarding next hop have been selected, the provider edge router accounts for the resources, e.g., bandwidth, within the MPLS network utilized by the admitted L2 connection. The provider edge router utilizes this accounting to monitor and adjust the resources available for admission of other L2 connections from the L2 networks.
In one embodiment, a method comprises receiving a request to transport data from a layer two (L2) connection, wherein the request specifies constraint information for one of more characteristics of the L2 connection. The method further comprises selecting an LSP based on the constraint information, and forwarding the data from the L2 connection via the selected LSP.
In another embodiment, a method comprises performing route resolution within a network router to identify one or more forwarding next hops for an LSP based on constraint information associated with a layer two (L2) connection, and forwarding network traffic from the L2 connection in accordance with the identified one or more forwarding next hops.
In another embodiment, a method comprises issuing a call admission request from a first network device to a second network device associated with a packet-based network, wherein the call admission request requests transportation of data from an L2 connection and specifies one or more characteristics of the L2 connection. The method further comprises receiving a call admission message in response to the call admission request, wherein the call admission message specifies a label associated with a LSP selected based on the characteristics of the L2 connection. The method further comprises assigning the label to the data of the L2 connection to form MPLS packets, and forwarding the MPLS packets to the network device associated with the packet-based network.
In a further embodiment, a network apparatus comprises a control unit that selects an LSP based on constraint information for one of more characteristics of the layer two (L2) connection, and forwards data from the L2 connection via the selected LSP.
In a further embodiment, a system comprises a first L2 network having a network device and at least one L2 connection, a second L2 network, and a packet-based network coupling the first L2 network and the second L2 network, wherein the packet-based network includes a router to receive a request from the network device of the first L2 network to transport data over the L2 connection to the second L2 network. In particular, the request specifies one of more characteristics of the L2 connection, and the router selects an LSP based on the characteristics of the L2 connection and forwards the data from the L2 connection to the second L2 network via the selected LSP.
In yet another embodiment, a computer-readable medium comprises instructions. The instructions cause a programmable processor to receive a request to transport data from a layer two (L2) connection, wherein the request specifies constraint information for one of more characteristics of the L2 connection. The instructions further cause the programmable processor to select an LSP based on the constraint information, and forward the data from the L2 connection via the selected LSP.
The details of one or more embodiments of the invention are set forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features, objects, and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the description and drawings, and from the claims.
In the exemplary embodiment of
PE routers 10A and 10B provide origination and termination points for Label Switched Path (LSP) 16 within MPLS network 6. In operation, PE routers 10A and 10B receive requests for admission of L2 connections into MPLS network 6. In response to these requests, PE routers 10A and 10B set up or select LSPs, such as LSP 16, that satisfy L2 constraint information associated with the requests. An LSP that satisfies the L2 constraint information more closely emulates a direct L2 connection (shown as dashed line 14 in
For example, PE router 10A may receive a “call admission request” to admit an L2 connection from CE router 8A. When issuing the call admission request, CE router 8A specifies the network destination to which data from L2 network 4A is to be transported, e.g., L2 network 4B. In addition, CE router 8A specifies end-to-end L2 constraint information for the particular L2 connection for which admission is requested. Example L2 constraint information may include bandwidth, color, end-to-end delay, jitter, security requirements, classification of traffic, LSP selection parameters, or other networking characteristics related to transportation of L2 network traffic.
In response to the request, PE router 10A selects an LSP, such as LSP 16, that defines one or more paths to the specified destination. More specifically, a single LSP between PE router 10A and PE router 10B, such as LSP 16, may be defined to include multiple paths. PE router 10A may perform route resolution to inject within its forwarding information an L2 route to the specified destination, e.g., PE router 10B. In addition, PE router 10A analyzes the paths defined by the selected LSP, and selects one or more next hops of one of the paths that best satisfy the received L2 constraint information for use as one or more forwarding next hops of the LSP.
In this manner, the L2 connection is “admitted” into MPLS network 6. Moreover, LSP 16 and the selected forwarding next hop, which have been selected to transport network traffic from the admitted L2 connection, exhibit network characteristics that more closely resemble characteristics of a direct L2 connection 14 between L2 networks 4A and 4B. For example, if the L2 networks 4 include ATM networks, the particular path and forwarding next hop for LSP 16 may be selected during route resolution because they exhibit network characteristics, such as bandwidth and jitter, more similar to those of an ATM circuit than other available paths. Because the selected path more accurately emulates direct L2 connection 14, the transparency of MPLS network 6 to L2 networks 4 may be increased.
Once the path of LSP 16 and the corresponding one or more forwarding next hop have been selected, provider edge router 10A accounts for the resources, e.g., bandwidth, within MPLS network 6 utilized by the admitted L2 connection. Provider edge router 10A utilizes this accounting to monitor and adjust the resources available for admission of other L2 connections from L2 network 4A.
PE router 10A includes L2 connection interface 33, an MPLS interface 34, and a control unit 26, which includes a call admission control (CAC) module 36. Control unit 26 maintains a Label Switched Protocol (LSP) table 38 that identifies a set of LSPs, such as LSP 16, for which PE router 10A acts as a point of origin. In addition, LSP table 38 identifies the specific paths and corresponding one or more forwarding next hops that have been selected for carrying traffic from L2 connections.
Control unit 26 monitors the paths and their corresponding one or more next hops specified by LSP table 38, and maintains path statistics 40 that provide information on one or more network characteristics for the paths and the one or more next hops. In another embodiment, path statistics 40 are stored in a location external from PE router 10A, such as within a centralized repository.
CE router 8A issues call admission requests to PE router 10A in order to request admission of L2 connections into MPLS network 6. In particular, CE router 4A issues a request that specifies L2 constraint information based upon the type of L2 connection to be admitted, i.e., the type of L2 connection from which data is to be transported through MPLS network 6. Alternatively, the L2 connections and their respective L2 constraint information may be provided by an administrator or automated agent.
Upon receiving the request, CAC module 36 of PE router 10A examines LSP table 38 and path statistics 40 to select an LSP and, more specifically, one or more forwarding next hops for the LSP, based on the L2 constraint information received from CE router 4A, thereby admitting the L2 connection to MPLS network 6. In particular, during route resolution, CAC module 36 refers to path statistics 40 and selects a path and associated one or more forwarding next hops that best satisfy the L2 constraint information. For example, path statistics 40 may include data with respect to bandwidth, color, end-to-end delay, jitter, security requirements, classification of traffic, LSP selection parameter, or other networking characteristics for each path and respective one or more forwarding next hops maintained by PE router 10A.
Once the LSP and the one or more forwarding next hops have been identified, CAC module 36 accesses LSP table 38 to retrieve L2 connection parameters associated with the selected LSP and the one or more forwarding next hops. PE router 10A then sends the L2 connection parameters to CE router 8A. CE router 8A utilizes the parameters to form, for example, L2 encapsulated packets from the network traffic of the newly admitted L2 connection, and sends the packets to PE router 22 via link 12A. PE router 10A receives the packets, encapsulates the packets in accordance with MPLS protocol and forwards these MPLS packets along the selected LSP, such as LSP 16, in MPLS network 6.
In one embodiment, control unit 26 of PE router 10A maintains resource accounting information 39 that specifies the current resources available for the paths provided by PE router 10A. PE router 10A performs an accounting of network resources, e.g., bandwidth, and updates resource accounting information 39 upon admitting or terminating an L2 connection. PE router 10A may, for example, maintain an accounting of bandwidth available through the paths defined within LSP table 38. PE router 10A utilizes this accounting to monitor and adjust the resources available for admission of other L2 connections from L2 network 4A.
In general, the functionality described in reference to control units 25 and 26 of CE router 8A and PE router 10A, respectively, may be implemented as executable instructions fetched from computer-readable media. Examples of such media may include random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), non-volatile random access memory (NVRAM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory, and the like. Moreover, the functionality may be implemented by executing the instructions of the computer-readable medium with one or more processors, discrete hardware circuitry, firmware, software executing on a programmable processor, or a combination of any of the above.
As shown, PE router 10A monitors the network characteristics of established LSPs, e.g., LSP 16, and, more specifically, paths and one or more next hops defined for the LSPs. PE router 10A maintains path statistics 40 based on the observed behavior (50). In particular, PE router 10A monitors characteristics of the LSPs that generally relate to L2 end-to-end constraints. For example, PE router 10A may monitor bandwidth, color, end-to-end delay, jitter, security requirements, classification of traffic, and other characteristics of the LSPs. The particular characteristics monitored by PE router 10A may be configurable, such as by an administrator or automated client, or may be defined by client CE routers, such as CE router 8A.
CE router 8A issues call admission requests to PE router 10A in order to request admission of an L2 connection into MPLS network 6. With each call admission request, CE router 8A specifies L2 constraint information based on the particular L2 connection for which admission is requested (52). Upon receiving the constraint information and the admission request, PE router 10A invokes CAC module 36 to select an LSP defined between PE router 10A and PE router 10B, and identifies one or more forwarding next hops for the LSP that best satisfies the L2 constraint information for the particular L2 connection for which admission is requested (54). The operation of PE router 10A in selecting an LSP and one or more forwarding next hops is described in further detail below in reference to
In the event a suitable LSP and forwarding next hop can be identified (YES of 56), PE router 10A adjusts resource accounting information 39, e.g., records the allocated bandwidth, to reflect the resources consumed by the newly admitted L2 connection (58). In particular, CAC module 36 maintains resource accounting information 39 on a per-path basis. In other words, CAC module 36 maintains resource accounting information 39 for each path defined for the LSPs originating from PE router 10A. For each path, for example, CAC module 36 reserves bandwidth for each L2 connection “admitted” to the paths, where the amount of bandwidth reserved on a path equals the desired bandwidth for the L2 connections admitted to that path. PE router 10A issues an acceptance message to CE router 8A indicating that the L2 connection has been admitted, and includes within the message an L2 connection identifier associated with the selected LSP (60).
Assuming a suitable LSP and one or more forwarding next hops are identified, CE router 8A receives the acceptance message and utilizes the L2 connection identifier to form packets or other units for the data carried by the admitted L2 connection (62). CE router 8A forwards the packets to PE router 10A, which forms MPLS packets and forwards the MPLS packets in accordance with the attached L2 connection identifier, i.e., along the selected LSP utilizing the forwarding next hop selected for the LSP based on the L2 constraint information (64). In the event the resources for a given LSP become insufficient for transporting the packets, PE router 10A may automatically attempt to select a different LSP and forwarding next hop based on the L2 constraints associated with the particular L2 connection.
Once CE router 8A finishes sending the packets along the L2 connection, the connection, or “call” may terminate (65). Upon termination, PE router 10A adjusts resource accounting information 39 to reflect the newly available resources, e.g., bandwidth, no longer allocated to the particular path (66).
In the event PE router 10A is not able to identify a suitable LSP (YES of 56), CAC module 36 issues a notification of admission control failure to CE router 8A (68 of
In general, CAC module 36 is invoked during route resolution after receiving a call admission request from CE router 8A. More specifically, upon receiving a call admission request, PE router 10A invokes route resolution (70) in an attempt to inject within its forwarding information an L2 route to the specified destination, e.g., PE router 10B. During route resolution, PE router 10A initially identifies the LSPs originating from PE router 10A and terminating with the specified destination, e.g., PE router 10B (72).
In the event one or more LSPs exist (73), PE router 10A selects one of the LSPs (76), and pre-processes the selected path to eliminate any paths that are not to be considered (78). More specifically, a single LSP between PE router 10A and PE router 10B, such as LSP 16, may be defined to include multiple paths. PE router 10A may apply, for example, policy-based next hop selection to influence the path selection process. For example, a user may define a policy that only allows certain types of traffic to be transported over the LSP.
Next, PE router 10A invokes CAC module 36 for performing constraint-based route resolution for each path of the selected LSP. In particular, CAC module 36 selects one of the paths for the LSP (79), and retrieves the associated statistics from path statistics 40 (81). CAC module 36 then assesses the next hop associated with the selected path to determine whether the next hop satisfies the L2 constraint information for the L2 connection being admitted (82). If not, CAC module 36 determines whether additional paths for the LSP remain for consideration (83), and repeats the process of selecting and assessing the paths (79, 81, 82) until either a satisfactory path is identified or all of the paths for the selected LSP have been assessed. If no path of the currently selected LSP satisfies the L2 constraints, CAC module 36 determines whether additional LSPs remain for consideration (84), and repeats the process for a different one of the LSPs between router 10A and PE router 10B (76-83).
In the event that no forwarding next hop for any path of any of the LSPs satisfies the L2 constraints (NO branch of 84) or no LSPs currently exist (NO branch of 73), PE router 10A may attempt to dynamically negotiate a new LSP with the destination router, e.g., PE router 10B, and any intermediate routers to dynamically signal an LSP that satisfies the L2 constraint information (74). In some embodiments, PE router 10B may act in accordance with a policy that dictates whether to attempt to negotiate new LSPs based on the L2 connection request or attempt to test existing LSPs against the L2 constraints.
In the event one or more next hops for one of the paths satisfy the L2 constraints (YES branch of 82) or upon successful negotiation of a new LSP (YES branch of 75), CAC module 36 selects that path and its corresponding next hop as the forwarding next hop for the LSP (85). In this manner, CAC module 36 selects the appropriate one or more forwarding next hops of an LSP between PE router 10A and PE router 10B based on the L2 constraint for the specific L2 connection being admitted. Consequently, CAC module 36 may be viewed as one or more forwarding next hops selection mechanism that is invoked during route resolution. PE router 10A injects within its forwarding information an L2 route to the specified destination (86). Specifically, the injected L2 route utilizes the identified LSP and, in particular, the identified path and its corresponding next hop.
In the event, no established LSPs satisfy the L2 constraints (NO branch of 84) and a new LSP cannot be dynamically negotiated that satisfies the L2 constraints (NO branch of 75), PE router 10A may issue a call admission failure message, as described above in reference to
Various embodiments of the invention have been described, and the principles of the invention may be readily applied to a variety of network devices. Although the techniques of the invention have been described in reference to MPLS networks, the techniques can be applied to any networks using LSPs. A Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) network, for example, is another exemplary network that can benefit by using the techniques set forth in the specification. In addition, the techniques have been described as elements that may be embodied within a single network device or distributed to multiple devices. The terms “system” and “apparatus” are used herein to generally refer to embodiments of the invention in which the described elements are embodied within a single network device or distributed to multiple network devices. These and other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6363319 | Hsu | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6522667 | Oda et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6538416 | Hahne et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6618397 | Huang | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6680943 | Gibson et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6728261 | Sasson et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6731649 | Silverman | May 2004 | B1 |
6751218 | Hagirahim et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6757298 | Burns et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6765921 | Stacey et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6778494 | Mauger | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778531 | Kodialam et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6798785 | Sasson et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6842454 | Metcalf, III | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6882643 | Mauger et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6885677 | Klevans | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6931025 | Masuda | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6937598 | Hagirahim et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6956821 | Szviatovszki et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6963561 | Lahat | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6993021 | Chuah et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7002993 | Mohaban et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7013318 | Rosengard et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7027450 | Collette et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031312 | Jayakumar et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7039706 | Parker et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7046669 | Mauger et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7065084 | Seo | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7082102 | Wright | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7164679 | Kotha et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7184434 | Ganti et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7197033 | Reeves et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7317731 | Seddigh et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7333509 | Gadagottu | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7336617 | Liu | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7336648 | Sasagawa | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7369571 | Choudhury et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7418493 | Charny et al. | Aug 2008 | B1 |
7477657 | Murphy et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7489695 | Ayyangar | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7539210 | Iovanna et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
20030028670 | Lee et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030028818 | Fujita | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030103510 | Svanberg et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030108051 | Bryden et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030117950 | Huang | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030118047 | Collette et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030137971 | Gibson et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030185217 | Ganti et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030204617 | Buchsbaum et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030210705 | Seddigh et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040004955 | Lewis | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040008718 | English et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040010617 | Akahane et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040042398 | Peleg et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20050010685 | Ramnath et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050013242 | Chen et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050125490 | Ramia | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050169270 | Mutou et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050169313 | Okamura et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050243833 | Choudhury et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259586 | Hafid et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050265258 | Kodialam et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060013232 | Xu et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060018326 | Yucel | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060034328 | Aldermeshian et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060039364 | Wright | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060039391 | Vasseur et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060126536 | Patel et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060159009 | Kim et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060182119 | Li et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060209785 | Iovanna et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060233137 | Dantu et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070133406 | Vasseur | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070177505 | Charrua et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070268821 | Levit et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070268909 | Chen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080019266 | Liu et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080049776 | Wiley et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080101239 | Goode | May 2008 | A1 |
20080144632 | Rabie et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080168510 | Small et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080259936 | Hussain et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090003200 | So | Jan 2009 | A1 |