L2 Network Interconnect Node Resilient Frame Forwarding
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing solutions for network interconnect nodes lack the ability to tunnel frames between L2 NI nodes of the same provider, fail to utilize network internal routing protocols for protection, and are not compatible with Virtual Private Local Area Network (VPLS) services, thereby not addressing emerging requirements for state change resiliency and congruent service management.
Innovation Solution
A method and apparatus for a network interconnect node that forwards frames using VLAN tagging, determining activity status and encapsulating or decapsulating frames based on service association, allowing for internal and external network communication while supporting non-congruent and congruent services, and utilizing overlay tunnels or direct physical links, with options for control plane integration.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If existing service access protection methods are used, then Class III service interfaces provide link and node redundancy, but state changes spread over customer and provider networks causing network instability
Solution Approach 1:
The invention segments the network into customer network and provider network domains, confining state changes to the customer network only. The L2 NI node acts as a boundary that prevents provider network state changes from spreading to interconnected networks, thus maintaining provider network stability while preserving customer network resiliency.
Solution Approach 2:
The L2 NI node serves as an intermediary between customer and provider networks. It receives frames from the customer network, determines whether the local node is active or passive for the service, and either forwards frames directly or encapsulates them for tunneling to the peer L2 NI node, preventing state changes from propagating to the provider network.
2Reliability
If frames are encapsulated for tunneling between L2 NI nodes, then state change resiliency is achieved, but device complexity increases due to additional encapsulation/decapsulation operations
Solution Approach 1:
The L2 NI node performs preliminary determination of its activity status for each service before frame forwarding. This pre-assessment allows the node to decide in advance whether to forward frames directly or to encapsulate them for tunneling, streamlining the processing logic and reducing runtime complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The invention implements dynamic frame handling where the forwarding behavior (direct forwarding vs. encapsulation) changes based on the node's activity status. The system adapts its operation mode per service, using direct forwarding when active and encapsulation when passive, optimizing performance while maintaining resiliency.
3Reliability
If network internal routing protocols are not used for tunnel protection, then implementation is simpler, but the tunnel between L2 NI nodes lacks protection from failures
Solution Approach 1:
The invention leverages the existing network internal routing protocol to serve dual purposes: both regular network routing and tunnel protection between L2 NI nodes. This multi-functionality approach provides tunnel protection without requiring a separate dedicated protocol, thus avoiding additional complexity while enhancing reliability.
4Reliability
If existing solutions are used, then Class III service interfaces support node redundancy, but they are not compatible with VPLS services
Solution Approach 1:
The L2 NI node is designed to handle multiple service types including both traditional Ethernet services and VPLS services. The frame forwarding and encapsulation mechanisms are service-agnostic, allowing the same infrastructure to provide node redundancy for various service types without requiring service-specific modifications.
Solution Approach 2:
The invention changes the operational parameters of the L2 NI node based on service type. For VPLS services, the node applies appropriate forwarding rules and encapsulation methods while maintaining the same underlying resiliency mechanism, thus achieving both node redundancy and VPLS compatibility through parameter adaptation rather than structural changes.
Data Source
AI summary
A network interconnect node of an internal network may communicate with an external network interconnect node of an external network, other internal network interconnect node(s) and internal network node(s). The network interconnect node may receive frames from the external network interconnect node and forward them according to a Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN) tagging forwarding process to other internal network interconnect node(s) or internal network node(s) based on whether the network interconnect node is active for the service associated with the frames. The network interconnect node may receive frames from other internal network interconnect node(s) or from internal network nodes and forward them according to the VLAN tagging forwarding process to other internal network interconnect nodes, internal network nodes or the external network interconnect node based on whether the frames are encapsulated frames and/or whether the network interconnect node is active for the service.