Transcript EWS-based Network Management

Object-Oriented Design and
Implementation of Fault Management
Function for MPLS network
Sung-Jin Lim , Ryung-Min Kim, and Young-Tak Kim
Advanced Networking Technology Lab.
Dept. of Information & Communication Engineering
Graduate School Yeungnam University, Korea
Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
http://antl. yu.ac.kr
Introduction
• Traffic engineering has been emphasized to offer end-to-end
QoS-guaranteed multimedia services in Next Generation
Internet.
• Fault restoration in traditional IP network vs. MPLS network
• The primary goals of fast restoration by fault management
function.
– QoS guaranteed differentiated path protection.
– Guaranteed bandwidth of backup LSP at fault occurrence.
• We propose a fault management with fast rerouting restoration
scheme in MPLS network.
– Design and implement differentiated path protection and link.
preemption priority among LSPs.
• Key technologies
– Traffic Engineering, Differentiated Service, Restoration, Protection, and
Object-Oriented Design.
APNOM 2003
(2)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Related works
• Fault restoration model
– Rerouting vs. protection switching
• Rerouting
• Protection switching :
– Pre-established backup path SRLG-disjoint with working LSP
– 1:1, 1:N, M:N, 1+1 path protection switching
– Local repair vs. path protection
Working LSP
A
B
E
C
F
Working LSP
D
G
(A) Link protection
A
B
E
C
F
Working LSP
D
G
(B) Node protection
A
B
E
C
F
D
G
(C) Path protection
Figure 1. Protection switching model
APNOM 2003
(3)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Related works (cont.)
• Fault Management Architecture of Next Generation Internet
– Fault Management Components in TINA
– Fault Management MOs in TMN
• Fault Management Activities
–
–
–
–
–
Alarm surveillance
Testing
Fault localization
Fault correction
Trouble administration
• MPLS Fault Management System
– RATES,
– Cisco MPLS Tunnel Builder,
– Sheer Networks’ Broadband Operating Supervisor(BOS)
APNOM 2003
(4)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Restoration Schemes
• Differentiated Path Protection Option
– Example scenario of applying protection path options
according to MPLS service class.
Table 1. Differentiated Path Protection scheme
MPLS Service
Class
Bandwidth
Reservation
Setup
Priority
Preemption
Priority
Application
Platinum
100%, 1+1
Highest
Highest
High Priority VPN
Gold
100%, 1:1
Higher
Higher
QoS-guaranteed VPN
Silver
100%, M:N
Normal
Normal
Premium service
Bronze
100%, 1:N
Lower
Lower
Controlled traffic
Best effort
0
Lowest
Lowest
Best Effort
• Preemption Priority based restoration of LSPs
– Guaranteed bandwidth of backup LSP for the protected
working LSP.
APNOM 2003
(5)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Design and Implementation of Fault
Management System
• Fault restoration procedure with Managed Objects
(MOs)
Figure 2. Fault Restoration on MOs
APNOM 2003
(6)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Design and Implementation of Fault
Management System (cont.)
• Fault Restoration Function
– SNMP trap handler implementation
– Alarm Manager GUI
Figure 3. Event Log GUI
Figure 4. Alarm Log GUI
APNOM 2003
(7)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Design and Implementation of Fault
Management System (cont.)
• Design and Implementation of NMS Core
Figure 5. MO Classes of MPLS LSP
Fault Management
APNOM 2003
Figure 6. MO Classes of link/node
Fault Management
(8)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Performance Analysis of Fast Restoration
• Test Network Configuration
– Three core routers LER_E, LER_ F, and LER_G
– Four CE router CE_A, CE_ B, CE_ C, and CE_ D
– Two link types
•
•
POS (Packet Over SONET ) with 155Mbps – Solid line
Serial with 2Mbps – Dashed line
Host A-1
AS 500
AS 300
Service Provider Ne twork
MPLS Network
Host A-2
A Router
C router
Host C
F Router
Customer Ne twork C
Customer Ne twork A
Host B
AS 400
AS 200
G router
E Rouer
3620_D
B Router
D router
Host D
Customer Ne twork B
Customer Ne twork D
Figure 7. Test network configuration
APNOM 2003
(9)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
End-to-end Performance Comparisons of
Differentiated Protection Options(1)
• End-to-end Performance Comparisons of
Protection Options
Figure 8. Fast-reroute by NMS
Figure 10. Standby mode by Cisco
APNOM 2003
Differentiated
Figure 9. M:N fast-reroute by NMS
Figure 11. Path-Option mode by Cisco
(10)
Figure 12. Link-Protection by Cisco
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
End-to-end Performance Comparison by
Differentiated Protection Options
• Differentiated Restoration performance by precedence
Table 2. Priority and bandwidth between LSPs
Working LSP
(Tunnel 100)
Low-Priority
LSP
(Tunnel 120)
Same priority–based
restoration
Bandwidth
sub-pool 1500
(backup LSP : Tunnel 110)
Bandwidth
sub-pool 1500
Different priority-based
restoration
Bandwidth
sub-pool 1500
(backup LSP: Tunnel 110)
Bandwidth
sub-pool 1500
Figure 13. Same priority
APNOM 2003
Note
(After failure occurrence)
- does not satisfy required bandwidth
- does not create backup TE-LSP
- Working traffic: Transfer to dynamic LSP
- satisfy required bandwidth
- Preemption link with high Priority
- create backup TE-LSP
Figure 14. Different priority
(11)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.
Conclusion
• We proposed an object-oriented design and implementation
scheme for
– 1:1, 1:N, M:N fast-reroute by NMS
– Standby mode, Path-option and link/node protection scheme in Cisco
MPLS Routers.
• The Proposed Fault Management Scheme for MPLS Network
Provides
– Reliability that guarantee the required bandwidth of backup LSP after
fault restoration
– Differentiated protection path option
– Object-Oriented MO design and implementation of network nodes and
links for better expansibility with equipments form various vendors.
APNOM 2003
(12)
Yeungnam Univ.
ANTLab.