Intradomain Routing Protocols - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

intradomain routing protocols n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Intradomain Routing Protocols PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Intradomain Routing Protocols

play fullscreen
1 / 35
Download Presentation
Intradomain Routing Protocols
Download Presentation

Intradomain Routing Protocols

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Intradomain Routing Protocols By Behzad Akbari These slides are based in part upon slides of Prof. Shivkumar (Rpi university) and Sanjay Rao (Purdue university)

  2. Outline • Intradomain routing protocols • Distance Vector • RIP, RIPv2, EIGRP • Link State • OSPF, IS-IS • Intradomain Traffic Engineering

  3. 60 4 1 50 x z y RIP: Routing Information Protocol • Uses hop count as metric (max: 16 is infinity) • Tables (vectors) “advertised” to neighbors every 30 s. • Each advertisement: up to 25 entries • No advertisement for 180 sec: neighbor/link declared dead • routes via neighbor invalidated • new advertisements sent to neighbors (Triggered updates) • neighbors in turn send out new advertisements (if tables changed) • link failure info quickly propagates to entire net • poison reverse used to prevent ping-pong loops (infinite distance = 16 hops) • If Z routes through Y to get to X : • Z tells Y its (Z’s) distance to X is infinite (so Y won’t route to X via Z) • will this completely solve count to infinity problem?

  4. RIPv1 Problems (Continued) • Split horizon/poison reverse does not guarantee to solve count-to-infinity problem • 16 = infinity => RIP for small networks only! • Slow convergence • Broadcasts consume non-router resources • It sends updates as broadcasts on • RIPv1 does not support subnet masks (VLSMs) • It does not send subnet mask information in its updates. • It does not support authentication

  5. RIPv2 • Why ? Installed base of RIP routers • Provides: • VLSM support • Authentication • Multicasting • Uses reserved fields in RIPv1 header. • First route entry replaced by authentication info.

  6. EIGRP (Interior Gateway Routing Protocol) • CISCO proprietary; successor of RIP (late 80s) • Several metrics (delay, bandwidth, reliability, load etc) • Uses TCP to exchange routing updates • Loop-free routing via Distributed Updating Alg. (DUAL) based on diffused computation • Freeze entry to particular destination • Diffuse a request for updates • Other nodes may freeze/propagate the diffusing computation (tree formation) • Unfreeze when updates received. • Tradeoff: temporary un-reachability for some destinations

  7. Link State vs. Distance Vector • Link State (LS) advantages: • More stable (aka fewer routing loops) • Faster convergence than distance vector • Easier to discover network topology, troubleshoot network. • Can do better source-routing with link-state • Type & Quality-of-service routing (multiple route tables) possible

  8. Link State Protocols • Key: Create a network “map” at each node. • 1. Node collects the state of its connected links and forms a “Link State Packet” (LSP) • 2. Flood LSP => reaches every other node in the network and everyone now has a network map. • 3. Given map, run Dijkstra’s shortest path algorithm (SPF) => get paths to all destinations • 4. Routing table = next-hops of these paths. • 5. Hierarchical routing: organization of areas, and filtered control plane information flooded.

  9. Link State Issues • Reliable Flooding: sequence #s, age • LSA types, Neighbor discovery and maintenance (hello) • Efficiency in Broadcast LANs, NBMA, Pt-Mpt subnets: designated router (DR) concept • Areas and Hierarchy • Area types: Normal, Stub, NSSA: filtering • External Routes (from other ASs), interaction with inter-domain routing.

  10. X A C B D Sending Link States by Flooding X A • X Wants to Send Information • Sends on all outgoing links • When Node Y Receives Information from Z • Send on all links other than Z • Naïve Approach: • Floods indefinitely. • Prevent through sequence numbers C B D (a) (b) X A X A C B D C B D (c) (d)

  11. OSPF Reliable Flooding • Transmit Link State Advertisements • Originating Router • List of directly connected neighbors of that node with the cost of the link to each one • Sequence Number • Incremented each time sending new link information • Link State Age • Packet expires when a threshold is reached,

  12. OSPF Flooding Operation • Node X Receives LSA from Node Y • With Sequence Number q • Looks for entry with same origin/link ID • Cases • No entry present • Add entry, propagate to all neighbors other than Y • Entry present with sequence number p < q • Update entry, propagate to all neighbors other than Y • Entry present with sequence number p > q • Send entry back to Y • To tell Y that it has out-of-date information • Entry present with sequence number p = q • Ignore it

  13. Flooding Issues • When Should it be Performed • Periodically • When status of link changes • Detected by connected node • What Happens when Router Goes Down & Back Up • Sequence number reset to 0 • Other routers may have entries with higher sequence numbers • Router will send out LSAs with number 0 • Will get back LSAs with last valid sequence number p • Router sets sequence number to p+1 & resends

  14. a b a b Max 0 Max 0 a < b a < b Flooding Issues (Cont.) • What if Sequence Number Wraps Around • Use circular comparison • OSPF v1 • Force sequence number back to 0 • OSPF v2 • With 32-bit counter, doesn’t happen very often

  15. OSPF Load Balancing E C 3 1 • Modification to Dijkstra’s algorithm • Keep track of all links giving optimum cost d(v) • Only get multiple routes when exactly same cost • Routing • Alternate link used • Tends to cause packets to arrive out of order F 1 1 6 1 D 3 A 3 B

  16. Type of Service (TOS) Metrics • Link Characteristic Vary in Multiple Dimensions • Latency • Throughput • Cost • Reliability • Example • Satellite link • High throughput, long latency • Fiber optic link • High throughput, low latency • Routing Requirements Vary • Typing at terminal: minimize latency for short packet • Sending video data: maximize throughput

  17. Proposed OSPF Support for TOS • Support up to Five Different Routing Metrics • Normal service • Don’t do anything extreme • Minimize cost • For networks that charge for traffic • Maximize reliability • Maximize throughput • Minimize delay • Link Can Have Different LSA for each TOS • Expressed in units where lower value is better • Path cost either sum or maximum of link costs

  18. Designated Router (DR)  Dijkstra algo view Encoding of LSAs, Flooding/DB sync model New Question: Who creates the network-LSA?

  19. Designated Router (…) • One router elected as a designated router (DR) on LAN • Each router maintains flooding adjacency with the DR, I.e., sends acks of LSAs to DR • DR informs each router of other routers on LAN • DR generates the network-LSA on subnet’s behalf after synchronizing with all routers

  20. Primary/Backup: DR, BDR (…) • Backup DR (BDR) also syncs with all routers, and takes over if DR dies (typically 5 s wait) • Total: 2N – 1 adjacencies • DR election: • First router on net = DR, second = BDR • RouterPriority: [0, 127] indicated in Hello packet=> highest priority router becomes DR • If network is partitioned and healed, the two DRs are reduced to one by looking at RouterPriority

  21. Hierarchical Routing

  22. Why Hierarchy? • Information hiding (filtered) => computation, bandwidth, storage saved => efficiency => scalability • But filtering in control plane, not data plane • Address abstraction vs. Topology Abstraction • Multiple paths possible between two adj. areas 

  23. Area • Configured area ID • A set of address prefixes • Do not have to be contiguous • So a prefix can be in only one area • A set of router IDs • Router functions may be interior, inter-area, or external

  24. Hierarchical OSPF • Two-level hierarchy: local area, backbone. • Link-state advertisements only in area • each nodes has detailed area topology; only know direction (shortest path) to nets in other areas. • Two-level restriction avoids count-to-infinity issues in backbone routing. • Area border routers (ABR):“summarize” distances to nets in own area, advertise to other Area Border routers. • Backbone routers: uses a DV-style routing between backbone routers • Boundary routers (AS-BRs): connect to other ASs (generate “external” records)

  25. Hierarchical OSPF

  26. Sample Area Configuration

  27. IS-IS Overview • The Intermediate Systems to Intermediate System Routing Protocol (IS-IS) was originally designed to route the ISO Connectionless Network Protocol (CLNP) . (ISO10589 or RFC 1142) • Adapted for routing IP in addition to CLNP (RFC1195) as Integrated or Dual IS-IS (1990) • IS-IS is a Link State Protocol similar to the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF). OSPF supports only IP • IS-IS competed neck-to-neck with OSPF. • OSPF deployed in large enterprise networks • IS-IS deployed in several large ISPs

  28. IS-IS Terminology Intermediate system (IS)- Router Designated Intermediate System (DIS)- Designated Router Pseudonode- Broadcast link emulated as virtual node by DIS End System (ES)- Network Host or workstation Network Service Access Point (NSAP)-Network Layer Address Subnetwork Point of attachment (SNPA)- Datalink interface Packet data Unit (PDU)- Analogous to IP Packet Link State PDU (LSP)- Routing information packet Level 1 and Level 2 –Area 0 and lower areas

  29. Functional Comparison • Protocols are recognizably similar in function and mechanism (common heritage) • Link state algorithms • Two level hierarchies • Designated Router on LANs • Widely deployed (ISPs vs. enterprises) • Multiple interoperable implementations • OSPF more “optimized” by design (and therefore significantly more complex)

  30. Sample comparison points • Encapsulation • OSPF runs on top of IP=> Relies on IP fragmentation for large LSAs • IS-IS runs directly over L2 (next to IP) => fragmentation done by IS-IS • Media support • Both protocols support LANs and point-to-point links in similar ways • IS-IS supports NBMA in a manner similar to OSPF pt-mpt model: as a set of point-to-point links • OSPF NBMA mode is configuration-heavy and risky (all routers must be able to reach DR; bad news if VC fails)

  31. Packet Encoding • OSPF is “efficiently” encoded • Positional fields, 32-bit alignment • Only LSAs are extensible (not Hellos, etc.) • Unrecognized types not flooded. Opaque-LSAs recently introduced. • IS-IS is mostly Type-Length-Value (TLV) encoded • No particular alignment • Extensible from the start (unknown types ignored but still flooded) • All packet types are extensible • Nested TLVs provide structure for more granular extension

  32. No. of Octets Intra-domain Routing Protocol Discriminator 1 Length Indicator 1 Version/Protocol ID Extension 1 ID Length 1 R R R PDU Type 1 Version 1 1 Reserved Maximum Area Addresses 1 Packet-Specific Header Fields TLV Fields IS-IS LS Database: Generic Packet Format

  33. Links AB and BD are overloaded Links AC and CD are overloaded B 1 1 2 B B A 1 1 D 1 4 E 2 2 1 2 A C D D E E 1 2 Can not do this with OSPF 1 2 A C C Traffic Engineering: Motivation • TE: “…that aspect of Internet network engineering dealing with the issue of performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP networks …’’ • 90’s approach to TE was by changing link weights in IGP (OSPF, IS-IS) or EGP (BGP-4) • Performance limited by the shortest/policy path nature • Assumptions: Quasi-static traffic, knowledge of demand matrix

  34. Traffic Engineering • What is traffic engineering? • Control and optimization of routing, to steer traffic through the network in the most effective way • Two fundamental approaches to adaptation • Adaptive routing protocols • Distribute traffic and performance measurements • Compute paths based on load, and requirements • Adaptive network-management system • Collect measurements of traffic and topology • Optimize the setting of the “static” parameters • Big debates still today about the right answer QoS routing = optimization of user QoS objectives TE = optimization of user AND network QoS objectives

  35. Outline: Three Alternatives • Load-sensitive routing at packet level • Routers receive feedback on load and delay • Routers re-compute their forwarding tables • Fundamental problems with oscillation • Load-sensitive routing at circuit (or aggregate) level • Routers receive feedback on load and delay • Router compute a path for the next circuit • Less oscillation, as long as circuits last for a while • Traffic engineering as a management problem • Routers compute paths based on “static” values • Network management system sets the parameters to influence the mapping of traffic to paths • Acting on network-wide view of traffic and topology