The present invention relates generally to communication networks, and particularly to methods and systems for performing link aggregation in tunneled networks.
Multiprotocol Label Switching
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) has gained popularity as a method for efficient transportation of data packets over connectionless networks, such as Internet Protocol (IP) networks. MPLS is described in detail by Rosen et al., in Request for Comments (RFC) 3031 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), entitled “Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture” (January, 2001), which is incorporated herein by reference. This RFC, as well as other IETF RFCs cited herein below, is available at www.ietf.org/rfc.
In MPLS, each packet is assigned to a Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) when it enters the network, depending on its destination address. The packet receives a fixed-length label, referred to as an “MPLS label” identifying the FEC to which it belongs. All packets in a given FEC are passed through the network over the same path by label-switching routers (LSRs). The flow of packets along a label-switched path (LSP) under MPLS is completely specified by the label applied at the ingress node of the path. Therefore, an LSP can be viewed as a tunnel through the network.
MPLS defines a label distribution protocol (LDP) by which one LSR informs another of the meaning of labels used to forward traffic between and through them. Another example is RSVP-TE, which is described by Awduche et al., in IETF RFC 3209 entitled “RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels” (December, 2001), which is incorporated herein by reference. RSVP-TE extends the well-known Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP), allowing the establishment of explicitly-routed LSPs using RSVP as a signaling protocol. RSVP itself is described by Braden et al., in IETF RFC 2205, entitled “Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP)—Version 1 Functional Specification” (September, 1997), which is incorporated herein by reference.
Section 1 of RFC 2205 defines an “admission control” decision module, which is used during reservation setup to determine whether a node has sufficient available resources to supply the requested quality of service. The admission control module is used in RSVP-TE for setting up MPLS tunnels.
U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2002/0110087 A1, entitled “Efficient Setup of Label-Switched Connections,” whose disclosure is incorporated herein by reference, describes methods and systems for carrying layer 2 services, such as Ethernet frames, through label-switched network tunnels.
Ethernet Link Aggregation
Link aggregation (LAG) is a technique by which a group of parallel physical links between two endpoints in a data network can be joined together into a single logical link (referred to as a “LAG group”). Traffic transmitted between the endpoints is distributed among the physical links in a manner that is transparent to the clients that send and receive the traffic. For Ethernet networks, link aggregation is defined by Clause 43 of IEEE Standard 802.3ad, Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications (2002 Edition), which is incorporated herein by reference. Clause 43 defines a link aggregation protocol sub-layer, which interfaces between the standard Media Access Control (MAC) layer functions of the physical links in a link aggregation group and the MAC clients that transmit and receive traffic over the aggregated links.
U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2004/0228278 A1, entitled “Bandwidth Allocation for link Aggregation,” the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference, describes methods for bandwidth allocation in a link aggregation system. The methods described in this publication are meant to ensure that sufficient bandwidth will be available on the links in the group in order to meet service guarantees, notwithstanding load fluctuations and link failures.
Embodiments of the present invention provide tunnel provisioning with link aggregation. Briefly described, a first aspect of the present invention is directed to a method for assigning and utilizing an Ethernet physical data port in an Ethernet Link Aggregation Group (LAG) in a Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network. The method includes the steps of selecting, by a first MPLS/LAG switch, from a plurality of physical data ports in said first MPLS/LAG switch, a single physical tunnel port which meets a bandwidth requirement of a network tunnel, wherein said single physical tunnel port has a port serial number, assigning, by said first MPLS/LAG switch, said single physical tunnel port to said network tunnel, preparing, by said first MPLS/LAG switch, a data packet label by which said single physical tunnel port may be identified, receiving, by said first MPLS/LAG switch, a data packet including said data packet label at said first MPLS/LAG switch, and switching, by said first MPLS/LAG switch, said data packet to said single physical tunnel port according to said serial port number, and sending said data packet to a second MPLS/LAG switch via said single physical tunnel port.
A second aspect of the present invention includes a method for tagging a packet for transport through an Ethernet physical data port in an Ethernet Link Aggregation Group (LAG) located downstream from a preceding node in a Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network tunnel employing Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) tunnel provisioning. The method includes the steps of sending downstream to a MPLS/LAG switch, by the preceding node, an RSVP-TE PATH message, the RSVP-TE PATH message including a LABEL_REQUEST object requesting a network tunnel, and a bandwidth requirement, receiving, by the preceding node, a packet label sent by the MPLS/LAG switch, said packet label including a serial number of a single physical tunnel port in the MPLS/LAG switch, and wherein the single physical tunnel port meets the bandwidth requirement, attaching by the preceding node, said data packet label to a data packet sent by the preceding node, wherein the data packet is intended to be forwarded via the single physical tunnel port, and sending downstream to the MPLS/LAG switch, by the preceding node, a data packet including said data packet label.
A third aspect of the present invention includes an apparatus for assigning and utilizing an Ethernet physical data port in an Ethernet Link Aggregation Group (LAG) located downstream from a preceding node in a Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) network tunnel employing Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) tunnel provisioning, the LAG having a first MPLS/LAG switch and a second MPLS/LAG switch. The apparatus includes a processor, which is configured to receive a tunnel configuration request message from the preceding node make a selection from a plurality of physical data ports in said first MPLS/LAG switch, of a single physical tunnel port which meets a bandwidth requirement of the network tunnel, wherein said single physical tunnel port has a port serial number, assign said single physical tunnel port to the network tunnel, prepare a data packet label, by which said single physical tunnel port may be identified, dedicate a sub-set of bits of said data packet label to encode said port serial number of said single physical tunnel port, and publish said packet label upstream.
The apparatus includes a mapper configured to receive a data packet from an upstream node, detect said data packet label in said data packet, and if said data packet contains said data packet label, to direct the first MPLS/LAG switch to switch said data packet to said single physical tunnel port, and send said data packet to the second MPLS/LAG switch via said single physical tunnel port.
Other systems, methods and features of the present invention will be or become apparent to one having ordinary skill in the art upon examining the following drawings and detailed description. It is intended that all such additional systems, methods, and features be included in this description, be within the scope of the present invention and protected by the accompanying claims.
An MPLS tunnel 28 (a label switched path, or LSP, according to the MPLS specification cited above) is established from an ingress node in MPLS network A, through the two switches and the LAG group, to an egress node in MPLS network B. (The ingress and egress nodes are not shown in the figure.) The tunnel forms a path over which data frames traverse from the ingress node to the egress node. In the exemplary configuration of
As part of the MPLS tunnel provisioning process (which is described in RFC 3031) each LSR along tunnel 28 attaches an MPLS label to the packets it transmits downstream to the next LSR, identifying the packets that belong to tunnel 28. Thus, in the example shown in
The exemplary network configuration shown in
Switch 26 has an RSVP-TE processor 30 and a CAC (Connection Admission Control) processor 32, which handle MPLS tunnel provisioning and the associated signaling. Although processors 30 and 32 are shown, for the sake of conceptual clarity, as separate functional units, in practice these two functions are typically implemented as software processes on the same processor. Practically speaking, they may generally be regarded as a single processor, regardless of implementation. Switch 26 also has a mapper 34, which maps each MPLS payload to a specific physical Ethernet port 24 (following the payload encapsulation into an Ethernet frame), according to methods which will be described below.
The methods described herein typically address a unidirectional packet flow, i.e., packets flowing from MPLS network A to MPLS network B. The methods are presented in this way because MPLS tunnels are unidirectional by definition. This fact does not limit the disclosed methods in any way to unidirectional message flows. Bidirectional packet flow is typically implemented by setting up two separate, independent MPLS tunnels.
MPLS/LAG switch 26 may be implemented using a network processor, which is programmed in software to carry out the functions described herein and is coupled to suitable hardware for interfacing with the MPLS network and Ethernet ports. Switch 26 may either include a standalone unit or may alternatively be integrated with other computing functions of the network processor. Some or all of the functions of switch 26 can also be implemented using a suitable general-purpose computer, a programmable logic device, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or a combination of such elements.
Mapper 34 of switch 26 performs a mapping function that uses information carried in one or more fields of the encapsulated MPLS packet to select the physical Ethernet port for mapping the packet. The IEEE 802.3ad standard cited above does not dictate any particular mapping method for link aggregation, other than forbidding frame duplication and requiring that frame ordering be maintained over all frames in a given flow. In practice, to meet these requirements, the mapper typically maps all frames in a given MPLS tunnel to the same physical port.
The mapping function typically uses MPLS label 52 for mapping, since the MPLS label uniquely identifies MPLS tunnel 28, and it is required that all MPLS packets belonging to the same tunnel be switched through the same physical port 24. Additionally or alternatively, the mapping function uses a “PW” label (pseudo wire label, formerly known as a virtual connection, or VC label), which is optionally added to MPLS header 50. The PW label includes information that the egress node requires for delivering the packet to its destination, and is optionally added during the encapsulation of MPLS packets. Additional details regarding the VC label can be found in an IETF draft by Martini et al. entitled “Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Ethernet Frames Over IP/MPLS Networks” (IETF draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-07.txt, May, 2004), which is incorporated herein by reference. In some embodiments, mapper 34 applies a hashing function to the MPLS and/or PW label, as will be described below.
Port Coding
The method of
CAC processor 32 of switch A receives the PATH message and extracts the requested service properties. The CAC processor examines the available bandwidth of all ports 24 in LAG group 25 and selects a single physical port (“the selected physical port”) on which to allocate bandwidth for MPLS tunnel 28, responsively to the requested service properties, at a port selection step 62. The selected physical port should be capable of providing sufficient peak and average bandwidths, as requested by the preceding node (and, originally, by the ingress node).
In one embodiment the CAC processor selects the physical port having a maximum available bandwidth out of the ports of LAG group 25. This approach attempts to distribute the packet flows evenly among the physical ports. In an alternative embodiment, the CAC processor may follow a “first-to-fill” strategy, i.e., select a physical port that will reach the highest utilization after allocating the requested bandwidth to tunnel 28. Any other suitable selection criteria may be applied by CAC processor 32. In the event that none of physical ports 24 has sufficient available bandwidth to comply with the requested service properties, the CAC processor returns an error message to the preceding node and denies the provisioning of tunnel 28. After successfully selecting the physical port, the CAC processor allocates and reserves the requested bandwidth for tunnel 28.
Regardless of the selection criterion used, the results of step 62 are that (1) a single physical port is explicitly selected and assigned to MPLS tunnel 28, and (2) sufficient bandwidth is allocated to tunnel 28, considering only the available bandwidth of the selected physical port, rather than the total available bandwidth of LAG group 25. All packets belonging to tunnel 28 will be switched through the same selected physical port, using the port coding technique described herein below.
Having selected a physical port, RSVP-TE processor 30 of switch A now generates a suitable MPLS label, at a label generation step 64. The preceding node upstream of switch A will subsequently attach this MPLS label to all MPLS packets transmitted through tunnel 28 to switch A. The label is assigned, in conjunction with the mapping function of mapper 34, so as to ensure that all MPLS packets carrying this label are switched through the physical port that was selected for this tunnel at step 62. For this purpose, RSVP-TE processor 30 of switch A dedicates a sub-set of the bits of MPLS label 52 to encode the serial number of the selected physical port. For example, the four least-significant bits of MPLS label 52 may be used for encoding the selected port number. This configuration is suitable for representing LAG groups having up to 16 physical ports (N<16). The remaining bits of MPLS label 52 may be chosen at random or using any suitable method known in the art.
RSVP-TE processor of switch 26 sends the generated MPLS label upstream to the preceding node, using an RSVP-TE RESV message augmented with a LABEL object, at a label sending step 66. At this stage, the part of tunnel 28 between the preceding node and switch A is provisioned and ready for use. The preceding node attaches the aforementioned MPLS label to all subsequent MPLS packets that it sends downstream through tunnel 28 to MPLS/LAG switch A, at a packet sending step 68.
Mapper 34 of switch A maps the received packets belonging to tunnel 28 to the selected physical Ethernet port at a mapping step 70. For this purpose, mapper 34 extracts the MPLS label from each received packet and decodes the selected physical port number from the dedicated sub-set of bits, such as the four LSB, as described in step 64 above. The decoded value is used for mapping the packet to the selected physical port, which was allocated by the CAC processor at step 62 above. In the four-bit example described above, the mapping function may be written explicitly as: Selected port number=((MPLS label) and (0x0000F)), wherein “and” denotes the “bitwise and” operator.
In an alternative embodiment, RSVP-TE processor 30 generates an arbitrary MPLS label at step 64 and stores this label together with the corresponding serial number of the selected physical port in a lookup table or other data structure. At step 70, the mapper extracts the MPLS label from each received MPLS packet and queries the lookup table with the MPLS label value to determine the physical port through which to switch the packet.
Inverse Hashing
In this method, the mapping function used by mapper 34 of switch A is a hashing function. Various hashing functions are known in the art, and any suitable hashing function may be used in mapper 34. Since the hashing operation is performed for each packet, it is desirable to have a hashing function that is computationally simple.
As mentioned above, the hashing function typically hashes the value of MPLS label 52 to determine the selected physical port, as the MPLS label uniquely identifies tunnel 28. For example, the following hashing function may be used by mapper 34: Selected port number=1+((MPLS label) mod N), wherein N denotes the number of physical Ethernet ports in LAG group 25, and “mod” denotes the modulus operator. Assuming the values of MPLS labels are distributed uniformly over a certain range, this function achieves a uniform distribution of port allocations for the different MPLS labels. It can also be seen that all packets carrying the same MPLS label (in other words—belonging to the same MPLS tunnel) will be mapped to the same physical port.
Returning to the description of
Having generated the MPLS label, RSVP-TE processor of switch A sends the MPLS label upstream to the preceding node, at a label sending step 86, which is identical to label sending step 66 of
Mapper 34 of switch A maps each received packet to the selected physical port of LAG group 25 using the hashing function, at a hashing step 90. Mapper 34 extracts the MPLS label from each received packet and uses the hashing function to calculate the serial number of the selected physical port, which was selected by the CAC processor at step 82. Following the numerical example given above, the mapper extracts MPLS label=65647 from the packet. Substituting this value and N=3 into the hashing function gives: Selected port number=1+(65647 mod 3)=2, which is indeed the port number selected in the example above.
Lag Protection
The IEEE 802.3ad standard cited above describes a protection mechanism for cases in which one of ports 24 fails or is intentionally taken out of service for any reason. In this case, the mapping function should distribute the data packets among the remaining ports. When using link aggregation in conjunction with tunneling methods such as MPLS, all packets belonging to a given tunnel should be switched through a single port 24. This property should be maintained in case of failure or port reconfiguration.
In an embodiment of the present invention, one of the N ports 24 of LAG group 25 is not used under normal network conditions and is maintained as a backup port. In the event that one of the active N−1 ports 24 fails or is taken out of service, switch A replaces the failed port with the backup port. As all ports 24 typically have equal bandwidths, the service properties required by tunnel 28 can be maintained.
In one embodiment, switch A may revert to the original port as soon as it recovers or returned into service. In an alternative embodiment, once the backup port has replaced a failed port, it continues to function as an ordinary port. The failed port, once recovered, begins to function as a backup port.
Although the methods and systems described hereinabove address mainly MPLS and Ethernet link aggregation, the principles of the present invention may also be used in conjunction with other communication protocols. For example, the methods described above may be adapted for use with other types of labeled traffic flows, such as flows labeled in accordance with other tunneling methods, and other link aggregation methods.
It will thus be appreciated that the embodiments described above are cited by way of example, and that the present invention is not limited to what has been particularly shown and described hereinabove. Rather, the scope of the present invention includes both combinations and sub-combinations of the various features described hereinabove, as well as variations and modifications thereof which would occur to persons skilled in the art upon reading the foregoing description and which are not disclosed in the prior art.
This application is a continuation of, and claims priority to co-pending U.S. non-provisional patent application entitled “Tunnel Provisioning With Link Aggregation,” having U.S. Ser. No. 15/972,249, filed May 7, 2018, which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 15/679,179, filed Aug. 17, 2017 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,967,180, issued May 8, 2018), which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 15/415,933, filed Jan. 26, 2017 2015 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,749,228, issued Aug. 29, 2017), which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 14/834,480, filed Aug. 25, 2015 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,590,899, issued Mar. 7, 2017), which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 13/969,520, filed Aug. 17, 2013 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,118,602, issued Aug. 25, 2015), which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 13/116,696, filed May 26, 2011 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,837,682, issued Sep. 17, 2013), which is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. Ser. No. 11/123,801, filed May 6, 2005 (U.S. Pat. No. 7,974,202, issued Jul. 5, 2011), each of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3411507 | Wingrove | Nov 1968 | A |
4535785 | van den Honert et al. | Aug 1985 | A |
4608985 | Crish et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4573481 | Bullara | Apr 1986 | A |
4602624 | Naples et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4628942 | Sweeney et al. | Dec 1986 | A |
4649936 | Ungar et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4702254 | Zabara | Oct 1987 | A |
4739764 | Lue et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4867164 | Zabara | Sep 1989 | A |
4962751 | Krauter | Oct 1990 | A |
5025807 | Zabara | Jun 1991 | A |
5188104 | Wernicke et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5199430 | Fang et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5205285 | Baker, Jr. | Apr 1993 | A |
5215086 | Terry, Jr. et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5263480 | Wernicke et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5282468 | Klepinski | Feb 1994 | A |
5299569 | Wernicke et al. | May 1994 | A |
5285441 | Bansal et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5292344 | Douglas | Aug 1994 | A |
5335657 | Terry, Jr. et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5423872 | Cigaina | Jun 1995 | A |
5440549 | Min | Aug 1995 | A |
5571150 | Wernicke et al. | May 1996 | A |
5540730 | Terry, Jr. et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5540734 | Zabara | Jul 1996 | A |
5634006 | Baugher et al. | May 1997 | A |
5690691 | Chen et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5707400 | Terry, Jr. et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5716385 | Mittal et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5755750 | Petruska et al. | May 1998 | A |
5836994 | Bourgeois | Nov 1998 | A |
6026326 | Bardy | Feb 2000 | A |
6083249 | Familoni | Jul 2000 | A |
6091992 | Bourgeois et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6097984 | Douglas | Aug 2000 | A |
6104955 | Bourgeois | Aug 2000 | A |
6128292 | Kim | Oct 2000 | A |
6147993 | Kloth et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6151297 | Congdon et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6205359 | Boveja | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205488 | Casey et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6275493 | Morris et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304575 | Carroll et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6339595 | Rekhter et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6466985 | Goyal et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6499061 | Benayoun | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6553029 | Alexander | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6563793 | Golden | May 2003 | B1 |
6600741 | Chrin et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6604136 | Chang et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6628624 | Mahajan et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6665273 | Goguen et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6700894 | Shung | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6735198 | Edsall et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6760775 | Anerousis et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6765921 | Stacey et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6788681 | Hurren et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6778496 | Meempat et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785226 | Oltman et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6795394 | Swinkels et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6886043 | Mauger et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6963578 | Akahane et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6977932 | Hauck | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7092356 | Rabie et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7126907 | Carpini | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7212490 | Kao et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7197008 | Shabtay et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7203762 | Yamada et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7248561 | Ishibashi et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7260097 | Casey | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7277386 | Ferguson | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7345991 | Shabtay et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7466697 | Raz | Dec 2008 | B1 |
7477657 | Murphy et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7519056 | Ishwar et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7606235 | Ayyangar et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
7623455 | Hilla et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7974284 | Chen et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7983286 | Rekhter | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8005096 | Hardy | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8312145 | Rabie et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8315255 | Casey | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8693323 | McDysan | Apr 2014 | B1 |
20010032271 | Allen | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020101868 | Clear | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020110087 | Zelig | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020176450 | Kong et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030009582 | Qiao et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030020976 | Krishnaswamy et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030185217 | Ganti et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030103449 | Barsheshet et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030147352 | Ishibashi et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030152024 | Yang et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030174706 | Shankar et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030227919 | Zelig et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040008687 | Matsubara | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040017816 | Ishwar et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040052207 | Charny | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040073694 | Frank | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040107285 | Larson et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040109408 | Mesh et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040125745 | Dang | Jul 2004 | A9 |
20040156313 | Hofmeister et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040202171 | Hama | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040228278 | Bruckman et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050071335 | Kadatch | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050083928 | Sivabalan et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050090275 | Wang | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050125490 | Ramia | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050160171 | Rabie et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050163115 | Dontu et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050169279 | Magd | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050249121 | Matsunaga | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060251106 | Nakagawa | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070038767 | Miles et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20080031263 | Ervin et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080037988 | Bullock | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20110206057 | Rekhter | Aug 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2005020492 | Jan 2005 | JP |
0110375 | Feb 2001 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Kireeti Kompella, “Internet Draft: Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering,” Dec. 2004, Internet Engineering Task Force, <tools.ietf.org/id/d raft-ietf-mpls-bu ndle-06.txt>. |
D. Awduche, et al., Request for Comments (RFC) 3209 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Dec. 2001. |
Baker, et al., in IEFT RFC 1638, “PPP Bridging Control Protocol (BCP)” Jun. 1994. |
R. Braden, et al., Request for Comments (RFC) 2892 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Aug. 2000. |
Bradley, et al., in IETF RFC 1490, “Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay”, Jul. 1993. |
Deering, RFC 1112, “Host Extensions for IP Multicasting,” Aug. 1989. |
Finlayson, R., et al., “A Reverse Address Resolution Protocol” RFC 903, Jun. 1984, pp. 1-5. |
Malkin, G., “RIP Version 2,” FRC 2453, Nov. 1998, pp. 1-39. |
Mamakos, et al. “A Method for Transmitting PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE)”, in IETF RFC 2516, Feb. 1999. |
Martini, et al., in an IETF Draft Entitiled: “Encapsulation Methods for transport of layer 2 Frames over MPLS”, May 2001 (Available at: search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/drafts-martini-12circuit-encap-mpls-02.txt.). |
Martini, et al., Internet Draft, entitled: “Transport of Layer 2 Frames over MPLS”, May 2001. (Available at: search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/drafts-martini-12circuit-encap-mpls-02.txt.). |
Plummer, D. “An Ethernet address Resolution Protocol,” RFC 826, Nov. 1982, pp. 1-9. |
Rosen, et al., in Request for Comments (RFC) 3031 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), entitled: “Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture”, Jan. 2001. (Available at: www.ietf.orgrfc.html). |
D. Tsiang, et al., Request for Comments (RFC) 2892 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Aug. 2000. |
Braden, et al., RFC 2205, entitled “Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP)-Version 1 Functional Specification”, Sep. 1997. |
M. Kodialam, “Dynamic Routing of Locally Restorable Bandwidth Guaranteed Tunnels Using Aggregated Link Usage Information,” Apr. 22, 2001, INFOCOM 2001, Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communication Socieities, vol. 1, p. 376-385. |
Mwingira et al., Link Aggregation, over view of the IEEE 802.3ad-2000 (clause 43), 28 pages, 2003. |
RFC 3021, “Using 31-Bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links”, Dec. 2000 (10 pages). |
IEEE Std 802.3ad-2000, “Amendment to Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications—Aggregation of Multiple Link Segments” Approved Mar. 30, 2000 (183 pages). |
Nadeau, Thomas D., “Multi-Protocol Label Switching”, MPLS Network Management, 2003 (25 pages). |
Request for Comments 3031 “Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture”, Jan. 2001 (61 pages). |
Yan, Peter Y., et al., “Multi-channel Deflection Crossbar (MCDC): A VLSI Optimized Architecture For Multi-channel ATM Switching”, 1997 (8 pages). |
Request for Comments 1583, “OSPF Version 2”, Mar. 1994 (132 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220377010 A1 | Nov 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17143189 | Jan 2021 | US |
Child | 17882572 | US | |
Parent | 16693307 | Nov 2019 | US |
Child | 17143189 | US | |
Parent | 16358847 | Mar 2019 | US |
Child | 16693307 | US | |
Parent | 15972249 | May 2018 | US |
Child | 16358847 | US | |
Parent | 15679179 | Aug 2017 | US |
Child | 15972249 | US | |
Parent | 15415933 | Jan 2017 | US |
Child | 15679179 | US | |
Parent | 14834480 | Aug 2015 | US |
Child | 15415933 | US | |
Parent | 13969520 | Aug 2012 | US |
Child | 14834480 | US | |
Parent | 13116696 | May 2011 | US |
Child | 13969520 | US | |
Parent | 11123801 | May 2005 | US |
Child | 13116696 | US |