Aggregate Label Switched Path Scaling in MPLS VPNs
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)/Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Internet Protocol (IP) in Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) face challenges in scaling label switched paths due to the requirement for end-to-end availability of the /32 host address, which complicates the setup of Label Switched Paths (LSPs and limits efficient routing.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of aggregate and de-aggregate labels within label switched paths, using algorithms to generate and swap labels across networks, allows for efficient routing by advertising aggregate labels and deriving de-aggregate labels for specific routes, enabling scalable label switching in VPNs.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If end-to-end availability of /32 host address is required for LSP setup, then routing reliability is improved, but network scalability deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the routing information by introducing aggregate labels that summarize multiple /32 host addresses into a single routing entry. This allows the network to maintain reliable routing for individual hosts while reducing the overall routing table size and complexity through aggregation, thereby improving scalability without sacrificing per-host routing reliability
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses aggregate labels as intermediary elements between the detailed /32 host addresses and the routing infrastructure. These aggregate labels act as mediators that enable efficient routing decisions while maintaining the necessary end-to-end address availability, thus resolving the contradiction between reliability and scalability
2Device complexity
If aggregate labels are used for routing summaries, then network scalability is improved, but routing precision deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies segmentation by creating a two-level labeling structure where aggregate labels provide broad routing summaries for scalability, while de-aggregate labels maintain precise routing information for individual /32 addresses. This segmentation allows the system to achieve both scalability through aggregation and precision through de-aggregation when needed
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces dynamic label manipulation where aggregate labels can be de-aggregated into specific de-aggregate labels based on the routing requirements. This dynamic behavior allows the system to adapt between using aggregated routes for general scalability and specific de-aggregated routes for precise routing, thus resolving the precision-scalability trade-off
Data Source
AI summary
In one example embodiment, a system and method are shown that includes receiving information defining a route to a network device. Further, a routing summary summarizing the route to the network device is generated. Additionally, an aggregate label is selected that corresponds to a defined class and to the routing summary. Moreover, the aggregate label and the defined class are advertised into a domain.