The present invention generally relates to Ethernet access and, in particular, to bandwidth efficient Ethernet grid networking systems.
Ethernet is rapidly becoming the protocol of choice for consumer, enterprise and carrier networks. It is expected that most networks will evolve such that Ethernet will be the technology used to transport all the multimedia applications including, for example, triple-play, fixed-mobile-convergence (FMC), and IP multimedia sub-systems (IMS). Existing network elements which offer network access using Ethernet technology are not designed to make maximum use of the legacy network links existing at the edge of the carrier networks. The edge of the network is quickly becoming a bottleneck as the new applications are becoming more and more demanding for bandwidth.
Telecommunications carriers are constantly looking for new revenue sources. They need to be able to deploy rapidly a wide ranging variety of services and applications without the need to constantly modify the network infrastructure. Ethernet is a promising technology that is able to support a variety of application requiring different quality of service (QoS) from the network. The technology is now being standardized to offer different types of services which have different combinations of quality objectives, such as loss, delay and bandwidth. Bandwidth objectives are defined in terms committed information rate (CIR) or excess information rate (EIR). The CIR guarantees bandwidth to a connection while the EIR allows it to send at higher bandwidth when available.
Path Association
Using MPLS, bidirectional connections are set up using two uni-directional tunnels. A concept of pseudo-wire has been standardized to pair the two tunnels at both end-points of the tunnels (see
This capability existed in ATM and frame relay technologies because they were inherently connection-oriented and both paths of a connection (forward and backward) always went through the same route.
Carriers need the ability to set up flexible Ethernet OAM path in-service and out-of-service anywhere in the network in order to efficiently perform troubleshooting.
E-LINE Protection
In order to provide reliable carrier-grade Ethernet services, the Ethernet technology has to be able to support stringent protection mechanisms for each Ethernet point-to-point (E-LINE) link.
There are two main types of protection required by a carrier, link protection and path protection. There are a number of standard link protection techniques in the marketplace, such as ring protection and bypass links which protect against a node going down. Generally connection oriented protocols such as MPLS use path protection techniques. Most path protection techniques assume a routed network where the routes are dynamically configured and protected based on the resource requirements.
One issue with all these existing protection protocols is that they do not take into account business policies, such as desired level of protection, for determining the protected path.
Another issue with the current way protection paths are set up is that they only trigger when intermediate nodes or links encounter failure. If the end-point outside of the tunnel, receiving the traffic fails, the source continues to send the traffic unaware of the failure, until application-level reaction is triggered, thus wasting precious bandwidth. Such reaction can take up to several minutes.
Zero-Loss Proctection Switching
Some communication applications, such as medical and security applications, require a very reliable service. In these cases, a 50-ms switch over time may be inadequate due to the critical data lost during this time period. For example, a 50-ms switch over in a security monitoring application could be misconstrued as a “man-in-the-middle” attack, causing resources to be wasted resolving the cause of the “glitch.”
One embodiment provides a telecommunications system comprising a network for transporting packets on a path between selected subscriber end points. The network has multiple nodes connected by links, with each node (a) pairing the forward and backward paths of a connection and (b) allowing for the injection of messages in the backward direction of a connection from any node in the path without needing to consult a higher OSI layer. In one implementation, each node switches to a backup path when one of the paired paths fails, and a new backup path is created after a path has switched to a backup path for a prescribed length of time.
In another embodiment, a system is provided for protecting connection paths for transporting data packets through an Ethernet telecommunications network having a multiplicity of nodes interconnected by a multiplicity of links. Primary and backup paths are provided through the network for each of multiple connections, with each path including multiple links. Data packets arriving at a first node common to the primary and backup paths are duplicated, and one of the duplicate packets is transported over the primary path, the other duplicate packet is transported over the backup path, and the duplicate packets are recombined at a second node common to the primary and backup paths.
The invention will be better understood from the following description of preferred embodiments together with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:
a illustrates the management of rules
Path Association
Given the ability of the VMS to ensure that each direction of the connection uses the same path (as per
Other examples of uses for this path association could be where two uni-directional paths with different characteristics are paired (such as different labels and traffic engineering information in the case of MPLS), or where a single backward path is used in the hairpin connections for multiple forward unidirectional paths.
The hairpin allows nodes in the network to send messages (such as port-state) back to their ingress point by sending packets back along the hairpin path without the need to hold additional information about the entire path without the need to consult higher level functions outside of the datapath, or to involve the transit end of the path. If the path is already bidirectional, no hairpin is required for pairing.
Using the hairpin to its full potential requires the use of a new subsystem referred to herein as a “packet treatment rule” or “rules” for short. These rules are assigned to an ingress interface and consist of two parts (
(1) ingress matching criteria 407: this is a check to see if the packet in question is to be acted upon or to simply pass though the rule subsystem with no action.
(2) an action mechanism 408 that is called if a packet does meet the criteria of a packet to be acted upon. An example of an action mechanism is where a rule was placed on an ingress interface looking for a prescribed bit-pattern within the packet. When the system receives a packet that matches the prescribed bit-pattern, the action mechanism is run. This action mechanism may be one that directs the system to send this packet back out the interface at which it was received after altering it in some way. All other packets pass through the system unaffected.
Rules can be placed at each node along a path to use the hairpin to loop-back one or more types of packet, or all packets crossing a port. Rules can also be activated by types of packets or other rules, allowing complicated rules that activate other rules upon receiving an activation packet or and deactivate rules on receiving a deactivation packet.
As exemplified in
The creation of path snakes is also easily implementable using hairpins (see
In the case of
The hairpin is always available at each node for each connection. Rules can be enabled (and later disabled) to look for specific types of control messages (e.g., loop-back) and act on them.
Hairpins can also used for other mechanisms described below such as protection switching, network migration and flow control.
E-LINE Protection Configuration and Operation
One embodiment provides sub-50msec path protection switching for Ethernet point-to-point path failures in order to meet the reliability requirements of the carriers is without using a large amount of control messages. Furthermore, the back-up path is established and triggered based not only on available resources but also on business policies as described above.
The back-up path is calculated using the VMS, and not via typical signaling mechanisms, which configures the switches' 201 control plane with the protected path. The back-up path is set up by the VMS and does not require use of routing protocols such as OSPF. Once the back-up path is set up, the VMS is not involved in the protection switching. The process is illustrated in FIG. EP-1. When a node 201 detects a link failure 501 (via any well-known method, such as loss of signal), it creates a control message 504 and sends the message back along the system using the hairpin 303 (as described above) to indicate to the source endpoint of each connection using the failed link that they need to switch to the back-up path. The switching is then done instantaneously to the back-up path 505. If the uni-directional paths are MPLS-Label switched paths, the hairpin allows the system to send the message back to the path's origination point without the need to consult a higher-level protocol.
The node can use the same mechanisms to notify the sources that the primary path failure has been restored. Depending on the business policies set up by the carrier, the connection can revert to the primary path.
After a connection has been switched to a back-up path, the VMS is notified via messaging that the failure has occurred. The VMS can be configured to make the current path the primary path and to recalculate a new back-up path for the connection after some predetermined amount of time has elapsed and the primary path was not restored (e.g., after 1 minute). The information about the new back-up path is then sent down to the nodes without impact to the current data flow, and the old configuration (failed path) is removed from the configuration. Alternatively, the VMS can also be configured to find a new primary path and send a notification for switch over. The backup protection path remains as configured previously.
If the a User-Network-Interface (UNI) or Network-Network-Interface (NNI) at an end-point of a path fails, the endpoint can also use hairpins to send a control message to the traffic source to stop the traffic flow until the failure is restored or a new path to the destination can be created by the VMS, which is notified of the failure via messaging.
Zero-Loss Protection Switching
Leveraging the E-line protection scheme, the Switch 201 can create duplicate packet streams using the active and the backup paths. Sequence numbers are used to re-combine the traffic streams and provide a single copy to the server application. If the application does not provide native sequence numbers, they are added by the system.
One implementation of this behavior is shown in
One example of a packet duplication routine is depicted in
A packet recombination routine 611 listens for the sequenced packets and provides a single copy to the server application 601. It removes the sequence numbers if these are not natively provided by the client application 600 data.
One example of a packet recombination routine is shown in
This system does the duplication at the more relevant packet level as opposed to the bit level of other previous implementations (as data systems transport packets not raw bit-streams) and that both streams are received and examined, with a decision to actively discard the duplicate packet after it has been received at the far end. Thus, a switch or link failure does not result in corrupted packets while the system switches to the other stream, because the system simply stops receiving duplicated packets.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that various modifications and changes could be made to the invention without departing from the spirit and scope thereof. It should therefore be understood that the claims are not to be considered as being limited to the precise embodiments set forth above, in the absence of specific limitations directed to each embodiment.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5398234 | O'Connell et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5452297 | Hiller et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5553059 | Emerson et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5574723 | Killian et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5778003 | Puppa et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5859837 | Crayford | Jan 1999 | A |
6154448 | Petersen et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6269082 | Mawhinney et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6674754 | Ofek | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6680913 | Malmivirta et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6904286 | Dantu | Jun 2005 | B1 |
7042835 | de Boer et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7245627 | Goldenberg et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7420928 | Lobig | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7519004 | Kamity et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
20020181396 | Chen et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030058880 | Sarkinen et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030063560 | Jenq et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030112749 | Hassink et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030133406 | Fawaz et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030142629 | Krishnamurthi et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030147347 | Chen et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030156542 | Connor | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030231632 | Haeberlen | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040037223 | Harrison et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040081090 | Hara et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040151181 | Chu et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040156310 | Fredette et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040156345 | Steer et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040170179 | Johansson et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040170186 | Shao et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050007960 | Chen et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050008014 | Mitra et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050073961 | Paik et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050111418 | Yang et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050141523 | Yeh et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050152269 | Liu | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050201273 | Shimizu | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050220033 | DelRegno et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050243711 | Alicherry et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259589 | Rozmovits et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050262264 | Ando et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050265365 | Wan | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060045021 | Deragon et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060126496 | Filsfils et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060203717 | Puppa et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060274750 | Babbar et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070121486 | Guichard et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070180104 | Filsfils et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1124356 | Aug 2001 | EP |
WO 2004057817 | Jul 2004 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080031129 A1 | Feb 2008 | US |