Advanced BGP Convergence Techniques.ppt

《Advanced BGP Convergence Techniques.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Advanced BGP Convergence Techniques.ppt（29页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Advanced BGP Convergence Techniques,Pradosh Mohapatra ,Apricot 2006,Agenda,Terminology Convergence Scenarios Core Link Failure Edge Node Failure Edge Link Failure,Basic Terminology,Prefix A route that is learnt by routing protocols. 12.0.0.0/16 Pathlist A list of Next Hop paths learnt by routing pro

2、tocols. 12.0.0.0/16 Via POS1/0 Via GE2/0, 5.5.5.510.0.0.0/16 Via 5.5.5.5,Non-recursive,Recursive (Depends on the resolution of the next-hop),Forwarding Table Structure,Intf1/NH1,Intf2/NH2,Intf3/NH3,Intf4/NH4,Salient Features,Pathlist Sharing: All BGP prefixes that have the same set of paths point to

3、 a single pathlist. Hierarchical Structure: BGP prefixes (recursive) point to IGP prefixes (non-recursive).,Core Link Failure,6,6,6,Multipath BGP, Multipath IGP, IGP path goes down,Initial organization before failure of IGP path 1. Link to Path 1 goes down.,Multipath BGP, Multipath IGP, IGP path goe

4、s down,IGP pathlist modified after Path 1 failure. BGP Convergence = IGP Convergence.,Multipath BGP, Multipath IGP, IGP prefix is deleted,Initial organization before deletion of IGP prefix 1. IGP Prefix 1 gets deleted. Fix-up BGP PL to point to the second path.,Multipath BGP, Multipath IGP, IGP pref

5、ix is deleted,BGP pathlist modified after deletion of IGP prefix 1. BGP Convergence = IGP Convergence.,Multipath BGP, Multipath IGP, IGP path modified,Initial organization before modification of IGP Path 1. IGP Path 1 gets modified. BGP Convergence = IGP Convergence,Conclusion,In case of core link f

6、ailure: Sub-second convergence. BGP Prefix-independent & In-place modification of the forwarding table. Make-before-break solution,Edge Node Failure,13,13,13,Edge node failure,PE1 has selected PE2 as bestpath and has installed that path only in forwarding table. What PE1 needs upon PE2s failure is f

7、ast detection of Unreachability. Unreachability status requires all the IGP neighbors to have detected the failure and have sent their LSPs to PE1. PE1 now needs to point to PE3.,PE2,PE3,PE1,P1,P2,BGP Next-Hop Tracking,Event-driven reaction to BGP next-hop changesBGP communicates its next-hops to RI

8、B.If RIB gets a modify/delete/add of an entry covering these next-hops, it notifies BGP.BGP runs bestpath algorithm. Stability requirementFast reaction to isolated eventsDelayed reaction to too frequent events Classification of EventsNext-hop unreachable is critical: React faster. Metric Change is n

9、on-critical: React slower.,BGP NHT Implementation highlights,RIB implements dampening algorithmNext-hops flapping too often are dampened. RIB classifies next-hop changes as critical or non-critical.Critical events are sent immediately to BGP. Non-critical events are delayed up-to 3 seconds. BGP has

10、an initial delay before it reacts to next-hop changes.Default: 5s. Configurable.Capture as many changes as possible within the initial delay before running bestpath.,router bgp 1bgp nexthop-trigger-delay 1,BGP NHT - example,RIB sends 1st NH notification,IGP CV,Lk Dn,T2,NHScan + BestPath,T1,T3,T1: Li

11、nk failure triggering IGP convergence. T2: First next-hop notification to BGP. T3: BGP reads the next-hop updates and starts initial delay timer. T4: Initial delay period expires. BGP does Nhscan and bestpath change (a function of the table size).,T4,BGP NHT,Principle: The first SPF must declare PE2

12、 as unreachableWe want to make sure that if PE2 fails, then all its neighbors have had the time to detect the failure, originate their LSP and have flooded it to PE1We want to make sure that when PE1 starts its SPF, all PE2s neighbors LSPs are in PE1s database Dependencyfast failure detectionfast fl

13、oodingSPF Initial-wait conservative enough,BGP NHT Typical Timing,0: PE2 failure 50ms: PE1 receives the 1st LSP and schedules SPF at T=200msthe other LSPs will have all the time to arrive in the meantime 200ms: PE1 starts SPF we account a duration of 30ms but with iSPF it will be 1ms 232ms: PE1 dele

14、tes PE2s loopback and schedules BGP NHT at T=1232msthere are few prefixes to modify as this is a node failure 1232ms: PE1 runs BGP NHTtable scan: 6us per entry: if PE1 has 20k routes: 120msRIB modify: 140us per entry: if PE1 has 5k routes from PE2, it takes 700ms70ms distribution download 2122ms: PE

15、1/LC has finished modifying the BGP entries to use nh=PE3. We still need to resolve themresolution starts 0, 1000msresolution lasts: 100us per entry 3622ms: Convergence is finished in the worst case,Conclusion Edge node failure,Sub-5s is achievableanalyzed scenario leads to WC 3500ms Sub-Second is c

16、hallenging Ongoing work to improve this further: Backup path,Backup Path,Intf3/NH3,Intf4/NH4,No Multipath. Prefix always points to Path 1. Reroute triggered per IGP prefix: fix-up Path 1 to point to the backup path.,Backup Path Contd.,Problem: How to know the backup path? BGP advertises only one pat

17、h. Peering with RRs: RR sends only the bestpath it computes. Solution: Add-path draft.,ADD-PATH,Mechanism that allows the advertisement of multiple paths for the same prefix without the new paths implicitly replacing any previous ones. Add a path identifier to the encoding to distinguish between dif

18、ferent prefixes.,+-+ | Path Identifier (4 octets) | +-+ | Length (1 octet) | +-+ | Label (3 octets) | +-+ . +-+ | Prefix (variable) | +-+,+-+ | Path Identifier (4 octets) | +-+ | Length (1 octet) | +-+ | Prefix (variable) | +-+,ADD-PATH - Operation,New capability: Add-path Advertisement of the capab

19、ility indicates ability to receive multiple paths for all negotiated AFI/SAFI. Advertisement of specific AFI/SAFI information in the capability indicates the intent to send multiple paths. Only in these cases must the new encoding be used. Concerns: Cost of multiple paths advertisement outweigh the

20、benefits on convergence?,Edge Link Failure,25,25,25,Example: PE-CE Link Failure,CE2,CE3,CE1,VPN1 site,VPN1 HQ,PE1,PE2,PE3,RRA1,RRA2,RRB1,RRB2,Edge Link Failure scenarios,Edge Link Failure: Next-hop on the peering link Convergence behavior same as the last two scenarios. Edge Link Failure: Next-hop-self Default behavior for L3VPN In-place modification and/or BGP NHT do not help. Advanced BGP signaling required.,Any Questions ?,