quality of service:Label Switching and MPLS

5.4.5 Label Switching and MPLS

While IETF was working out integrated services and differentiated services, several router vendors were working on better forwarding methods. This work focused on adding a label in front of each packet and doing the routing based on the label rather than on the destination address. Making the label an index into an internal table makes finding the correct output line becomes just a matter of table lookup. Using this technique, routing can be done very quickly and any necessary resources can be reserved along the path.

Of course, labeling flows this way comes perilously close to virtual circuits. X.25, ATM, frame relay, and all other networks with a virtual-circuit subnet also put a label (i.e., virtual-circuit identifier) in each packet, look it up in a table, and route based on the table entry. Despite the fact that many people in the Internet community have an intense dislike for connection-oriented networking, the idea seems to keep coming back, this time to provide fast routing and quality of service. However, there are essential differences between the way the Internet handles route construction and the way connection-oriented networks do it, so the technique is certainly not traditional circuit switching.

This ''new'' switching idea goes by various (proprietary) names, including label switching and tag switching. Eventually, IETF began to standardize the idea under the name MPLS (MultiProtocol Label Switching). We will call it MPLS below. It is described in RFC 3031 and many other RFCs.

As an aside, some people make a distinction between routing and switching. Routing is the process of looking up a destination address in a table to find where to send it. In contrast, switching uses a label taken from the packet as an index into a forwarding table. These definitions are far from universal, however.

The first problem is where to put the label. Since IP packets were not designed for virtual circuits, there is no field available for virtual-circuit numbers within the IP header. For this reason, a new MPLS header had to be added in front of the IP header. On a router-to-router line using PPP as the framing protocol, the frame format, including the PPP, MPLS, IP, and TCP headers, is as shown in Fig. 5-41. In a sense, MPLS is thus layer 2.5.

Figure 5-41. Transmitting a TCP segment using IP, MPLS, and PPP.

The generic MPLS header has four fields, the most important of which is the Label field, which holds the index. The QoS field indicates the class of service. The S field relates to stacking multiple labels in hierarchical networks (discussed below). If it hits 0, the packet is discarded. This feature prevents infinite looping in the case of routing instability.

Because the MPLS headers are not part of the network layer packet or the data link layer frame, MPLS is to a large extent independent of both layers. Among other things, this property means it is possible to build MPLS switches that can forward both IP packets and ATM cells, depending on what shows up. This feature is where the ''multiprotocol'' in the name MPLS came from.

When an MPLS-enhanced packet (or cell) arrives at an MPLS-capable router, the label is used as an index into a table to determine the outgoing line to use and also the new label to use. This label swapping is used in all virtual-circuit subnets because labels have only local significance and two different routers can feed unrelated packets with the same label into another router for transmission on the same outgoing line. To be distinguishable at the other end, labels have to be remapped at every hop. We saw this mechanism in action in Fig. 5-3. MPLS uses the same technique.

One difference from traditional virtual circuits is the level of aggregation. It is certainly possible for each flow to have its own set of labels through the subnet. However, it is more common for routers to group multiple flows that end at a particular router or LAN and use a single label for them. The flows that are grouped together under a single label are said to belong to the same FEC (Forwarding Equivalence Class). This class covers not only where the packets are going, but also their service class (in the differentiated services sense) because all their packets are treated the same way for forwarding purposes.

With traditional virtual-circuit routing, it is not possible to group several distinct paths with different end points onto the same virtual-circuit identifier because there would be no way to distinguish them at the final destination. With MPLS, the packets still contain their final destination address, in addition to the label, so that at the end of the labeled route the label header can be removed and forwarding can continue the usual way, using the network layer destination address.

One major difference between MPLS and conventional VC designs is how the forwarding table is constructed. In traditional virtual-circuit networks, when a user wants to establish a connection, a setup packet is launched into the network to create the path and make the forwarding table entries. MPLS does not work that way because there is no setup phase for each connection (because that would break too much existing Internet software).

Instead, there are two ways for the forwarding table entries to be created. In the data-driven approach, when a packet arrives, the first router it hits contacts the router downstream where the packet has to go and asks it to generate a label for the flow. This method is applied recursively. Effectively, this is on-demand virtual-circuit creation.

The protocols that do this spreading are very careful to avoid loops. They often use a technique called colored threads. The backward propagation of an FEC can be compared to pulling a uniquely colored thread back into the subnet. If a router ever sees a color it already has, it knows there is a loop and takes remedial action. The data-driven approach is primarily used on networks in which the underlying transport is ATM (such as much of the telephone system).

The other way, used on networks not based on ATM, is the control-driven approach. It has several variants. One of these works like this. When a router is booted, it checks to see for which routes it is the final destination (e.g., which hosts are on its LAN). It then creates one or more FECs for them, allocates a label for each one, and passes the labels to its neighbors. They, in turn, enter the labels in their forwarding tables and send new labels to their neighbors, until all the routers have acquired the path. Resources can also be reserved as the path is constructed to guarantee an appropriate quality of service.

MPLS can operate at multiple levels at once. At the highest level, each carrier can be regarded as a kind of metarouter, with there being a path through the metarouters from source to destination. This path can use MPLS. However, within each carrier's network, MPLS can also be used, leading to a second level of labeling. In fact, a packet may carry an entire stack of labels with it. The S bit in Fig. 5-41 allows a router removing a label to know if there are any additional labels left. It is set to 1 for the bottom label and 0 for all the other labels. In practice, this facility is mostly used to implement virtual private networks and recursive tunnels.

Although the basic ideas behind MPLS are straightforward, the details are extremely complicated, with many variations and optimizations, so we will not pursue this topic further. For more information, see (Davie and Rekhter, 2000; Lin et al., 2002; Pepelnjak and Guichard, 2001; and Wang, 2001).