This application related to data communications and more particularly to load balancing on link aggregation in a data communications network.
Network devices such as Ethernet switches are interconnected by communication links for receiving and transmitting data packets through physical ports. In order to provide redundancy or larger aggregate bandwidth, some network devices bundle multiple communication links to form link aggregations (LAGs) with their peering network devices. See
In many typical implementations, load sharing is statically configured. For example, packet distribution is based on an algorithm that selects a port based on addresses and session information: source address, destination address, or both source and destination addresses. Packets with the same addresses and session information are always sent to the same port in the LAG to prevent out-of-order packet delivery. Static load balancing algorithms do not take into account the amount of traffic assigned to each port and variation in traffic over time, and they therefore results in suboptimal utilization of the link bandwidth.
Some dynamic load balancing algorithms for LAG have been published. They primarily focus on the idea of calculating hash values based on the packets' addresses and session information and mapping the hash values to physical ports based on the measurements of the traffic load on the physical ports. The weakness of said algorithms is that changing the mappings of hash values to physical ports affects all packet flows with the same hash values, and said algorithms fail to address the impact on preventing out-of-order packet delivery when a large number of packet flows are momentarily assigned to different egress ports. Also, said dynamic load balancing algorithms do not deal with the quality of service (QoS) requirements of packet flows.
A method for QoS-aware dynamic load balancing of packet flows on link aggregation is disclosed. Said method relies on a static load balancing algorithm until near congestion, and in near-congestion condition overrides the default decisions from static load balancing algorithm based on traffic load on physical ports and QoS requirements on a per-flow basis.
In our preferred embodiment, said static load balancing algorithm comprises: calculating a hash value based on the quintuple: destination IP address, source IP address, IP protocol number, destination port number, and source port number; and assigning the egress port based on said hash value. We shall refer to the decisions from said static load balancing algorithm as default port assignments. We shall also use the quintuples to uniquely identify packet flows.
Said near-congestion condition is detected by observing the utilization of the transmit queues of the physical ports in link aggregations. When the transmit queues are full or nearly full, the default port assignments are to be overridden, and the current packet flow is assigned to the physical port that is least congested in the LAG. Also, a flow database is maintained. Each flow entry in said flow database comprises the quintuple of the packet flow, the selected egress port, the selected transmit queue, and the age of the flow entry.
When a packet is to be transmitted over a LAG, the flow database is consulted first and looked up by the quintuple of the packet. When there is a current matching flow entry, the egress port in the flow entry overrides the default port assignment. When there is no current matching flow entry, the default port assignment is used when the default egress port is not in near-congestion condition.
Whether a flow entry is current or not is determined by the age of the flow entry and the current counter value. In our preferred embodiment, a counter and a tag are maintained per transmit queue per physical port. Said counter advances by one unit when a packet, marked by said tag and enqueued in the transmit queue, is transmitted. At any instance, there is at most one packet in a transmit queue marked by said tag. When the packet marked with the tag is transmitted, the tag is free to be attached to the next packet being enqueued in the transmit queue, and the corresponding counter is advanced. When the counter value is significantly different from the age of the flow entry, the flow entry is considered stale and replaceable.
The present disclosure will be understood more fully from the detailed description that follows and from the accompanying drawings, which however, should not be taken to limit the disclosed subject matter to the specific embodiments shown, but are for explanation and understanding only.
A method for QoS-aware dynamic load balancing of packet flows on link aggregation (LAG) is disclosed. Said method relies on a static load balancing algorithm until near congestion, and in near-congestion condition overrides the default decisions from static load balancing algorithm based on traffic load on physical ports and QoS requirements on a per-flow basis.
Static load balancing algorithms are adequate when congestion is far from sight. Taking advantage of that premise, a device that uses the method disclosed herein can dedicate less resource by focusing on dynamic load balancing in near-congestion condition.
In our preferred embodiment, the static load balancing algorithm comprises: calculating a hash value based on a quintuple of the packet consisting of destination IP address, source IP address, IP protocol number, destination port number, and source port number; and assigning the egress port based on said hash value. We shall refer to the decisions from said static load balancing algorithm as default port assignments. We shall also use the quintuples to uniquely identify packet flows. All packets belong to the same packet flow if they have the same quintuple.
As an example, the hash value H is the 16-bit CRC value using the quintuple. One of the P physical ports in the LAG, where P is a positive integer, is selected to be the default egress port by taking modulo P on the hash value.
In our preferred embodiment, we assume that the device using our method disclosed herein comprises a plurality of transmit queues per physical port, and the transmit queues correspond to different scheduling priorities. For example, there is one high-priority transmit queue, one medium-priority transmit queue, and one low-priority transmit queue for each physical port. A transmit queue is a FIFO for scheduling packets for transmissions. Each packet to be transmitted must first be enqueued to one of the transmit queues of the egress port and scheduled to be transmitted on the physical link.
Near-congestion or congestion condition is detected by monitoring the utilization of the transmit queues of the physical ports in the LAGs. When a transmit queue is 100 percent utilized or full, congestion has occurred, and no more packet can be enqueued in the transmit queue. When a transmit queue is more than T-percent utilized, where T is arbitrarily chosen between 0 and 100, the near-congestion condition has occurred. It is reasonable to choose a very high T value. For example, T is 99.
In near-congestion or congestion condition, the default port assignment should be overridden, and the packet being enqueued and its corresponding packet flow are assigned to the least congested physical port in the LAG that offers the targeted scheduling priority. If all transmit queues that correspond to the targeted scheduling priority of all physical ports in the LAG are full and if reducing the targeted scheduling priority of the packet flow under that circumstance is considered desirable, the packet being enqueued can be assigned to a lower scheduling priority transmit queue of one of the physical ports, bearing in mind that out-of-order delivery might occur. If all transmit queues of all ports in the LAG that can offer the targeted scheduling priority of the packet flow are full, the current packet must be discarded.
In order to memorize which packet flows have their default port assignments overridden, a flow database is maintained in the device. In our preferred embodiment, each flow entry in said flow database comprises the quintuple of the packet flow, the selected egress port, the selected transmit queue, and the age of the flow entry. Refer to
When a packet is going through the load balancing decision process, the flow database is consulted first and looked up by the quintuple of the packet. When there is a current matching flow entry, the egress port in the flow entry overrides the default port assignment. When there is no current matching flow entry, the default port assignment is used when the default egress port is not in near-congestion condition. Refer to
In our preferred embodiment, a counter and a tag are maintained per transmit queue per physical port. Whether a flow entry is current or not is determined by the age of the flow entry and the counter value. Said counter advances by one unit when a packet, marked by said tag and enqueued in the transmit queue, is transmitted. At any time, there is at most one packet in a transmit queue marked by said tag. Marking packet with said tag can be implemented as setting a flag in a packet descriptor, modifying a field in the packet, or appending a field to the packet. That is just a way to differentiate a packet from others. When the packet marked with the tag is transmitted, the next packet being enqueued in the transmit queue is marked with the tag, and the corresponding counter is advanced by one. When a flow entry is inserted into the flow database, the age of the flow entry stores the counter value corresponding to the transmit queue of the egress port assigned, and the transmit queue of the flow entry stores the transmit queue assigned. When the counter value is the same as the age of the flow entry or larger than the age of the flow entry by one, the flow entry is considered current; otherwise, the flow entry is considered stale and replaceable. When the counter is advanced through its upper limit, the counter is allowed to be wrapped around. Because of the wrap-around, some flow entries may be evaluated as current even though they are actually stale. Such side-effect is harmless, only that some entries that would have been replaceable are tied up temporarily. Such side-effect can be removed by removing the stale flow entries in the flow database from time to time.
The purpose of marking packet with said tag and using a counter to count the marking of packet with said tag is for detecting when previous packets of a packet flow has finished transmission at the current moment and therefore new packets of the packet flow can be assigned to different ports in the LAG without the risk of out-of-order delivery for the packet flow.
In the example of
In our preferred embodiment, the flow database is implemented as a hash table. Refer to
The embodiments described above are illustrative examples and it should not be construed that the present invention is limited to these particular embodiments. Thus, various changes and modifications may be effected by one skilled in the art without departing from the spirit or scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5533021 | Branstad et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
6363077 | Wong et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6498781 | Bass et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6510135 | Almulhem et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6512742 | Alexander, Jr. et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6535504 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6614758 | Wong et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6952401 | Kadambi et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6970420 | Kalkunte et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6977892 | Kalkunte et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6981054 | Krishna | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6993027 | Kadambi et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7145869 | Kadambi et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7382728 | Chen et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7545814 | Hiironniemi | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7668103 | Pannell et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7898959 | Arad | Mar 2011 | B1 |
7936770 | Frattura et al. | May 2011 | B1 |
20040015599 | Trinh et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20050232274 | Kadambi et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060098573 | Beer et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060198381 | Elangovan et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070041321 | Sasaki et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070147238 | Kadambi et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20080181103 | Davies | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080291826 | Licardie et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080298236 | Ervin et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090190580 | Kailasam et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090207857 | Alexander, Jr. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20100091780 | Varanasi et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106866 | Aybay et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20110051602 | Matthews et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110051735 | Matthews et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110090789 | Fung | Apr 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110090789 A1 | Apr 2011 | US |