MPLS interworking (Native IP, RSVP-TE, LDP, ...)

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by anouch, Apr 5, 2006.

  1. anouch

    anouch Guest


    I'm new in this forum and don't know if it's the right place to ask
    this question. If not, please point me to the right discussion list.

    Implementing MPLS in an IP network may be not too complicated but when
    thinking about the reason of migration and benefits, you end up with
    several reasons not always compatible because each reason comes from
    some different needs and applications.

    For example i'm thinking of a good way to implement VoD on an IP
    network. Then i'll need some CAC system in order to control resources
    and to not degrade already established VoD sessions. The best standard
    choice seems to be RSVP.

    Now, although i could use RSVP on a plain IP network (preferably with
    DiffServ rather than IntServ for scalability reasons), MPLS can bring
    me some other advantages like aggregation of many VoD sessions in few
    LSPs. They are clearly other MPLS advantages also like traffic
    engineering with RSVP.

    As you see i've introduced many features/protocols that i'll need (not
    all for a single purpose, i recognize) but i'm wondering if all these
    things can interwork in a single network and this is exactly my
    problem. (If similar discussions took place anywhere in the web i'd be
    happy to be pointed to).

    There are various interworking scenarii . For example, one could
    geographically partition the network into regions with/without each
    protocol but this is not the most interesting (nor practical) one.

    Another scenario could be to implement on each router, a set of
    protocols on one interface and another set of protocols on another and
    so on. For example, one interface could have MPLS enabled while another
    one still working on plain IP routing. This is also a simple scenario
    and most likely will work.

    But how about enabling on all routers and on all of their interfaces
    all protocols and decide by a policy mechanism to treat some flows with
    some protocols. Clearly, i want on a single interface :
    some flows to be label-switched with LDP,
    some flows to be natively routed,
    some flows to be label-switched on LSPs established by RSVP,
    some flows to be natively routed for which RSVP previousely reserved
    some resources,
    and some flows to be label-switched on Traffic Engineered tunnels

    Is this possible or am i just day dreaming ?

    Obviousely each protocol has its own advantages and i'm not arguing at
    all on pros & cons of them (that could be another discussion).
    I need MPLS for different reasons (RFC 2547bis/VPLS services, ...), i
    need RSVP for CAC, i need LDP because it's simple and automatique, i
    need TE for load balancing and iBGP full mesh problem and i need plain
    IP routing because it simply works and i can't afford the risk to
    migrate everything in one night.

    I can however delay implementation of some features and/or decide to
    not enable a protocol if it's not compatible with other more
    interesting ones.

    Any help and idea would be grately appreciated.
    anouch, Apr 5, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Catelecom

    MPLS TE: Confused by IGP and RSVP.

    Catelecom, Dec 29, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Dec 29, 2003
  2. Herbert Haas
    Herbert Haas
    Jan 9, 2004
  3. Garry
    Ivan Ostres
    Apr 20, 2005
  4. Jimmi
    Aug 16, 2005
  5. ttripp
    Nov 12, 2007

Share This Page