Mirrored Dataplanes for Non-Disruptive Network Edge Upgrades

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Upgrading network edge devices is disruptive due to downtime, route re-convergence, exhaustive pre- and post-upgrade checks, uncertainty in in-house testing, and potential issues in customer-specific networks, necessitating scheduled maintenance and contingency plans.

Innovation Solution

Implementing dual dataplanes, with a primary dataplane for current functionality and a shadow dataplane for verification, allowing seamless upgrades by comparing performance records in the customer's network environment, thus integrating verification testing into the upgrade process.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional upgrade methods are used for network edge devices, then upgrades can be performed, but they cause downtime and require scheduled maintenance windows

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveservice continuityVSAvoiddowntime

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the data plane into multiple independent dataplanes (e.g., dataplane 104a, 104b, 104c) that can operate in parallel. This allows the network device to perform upgrades on one dataplane while others continue processing traffic, eliminating the need to stop all services during maintenance windows.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary verification of upgraded software versions in a shadow dataplane before deploying them to production. This preliminary action in a isolated environment prevents potential failures from causing downtime, as the verified upgrade can be immediately activated without disruption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If exhaustive pre- and post-upgrade checks are performed, then upgrade reliability is improved, but the upgrade process becomes more complex and time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveupgrade verificationVSAvoidverification process complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates a shadow dataplane that is a copy of the production dataplane configuration. This shadow copy allows comprehensive verification of upgraded versions without affecting the actual production traffic. The shadow dataplane mirrors the same topology and policies, enabling safe testing of upgrades in an identical environment.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The shadow dataplane acts as an intermediary between the upgrade process and production traffic. It serves as a testing ground where upgraded versions can be verified against production-like conditions without directly impacting customer networks, thus simplifying the verification process while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Reliability

If in-house testing is performed before deployment, then some issues can be identified, but testing fails to identify issues related to unique customer network characteristics

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecompatibility assuranceVSAvoidcustomer-specific network context

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The shadow dataplane is designed to be universal in its functionality while maintaining customer-specific context. It can replicate any customer network configuration, topology, and policies, enabling testing that is both generalizable and specifically tailored to each customer's unique network characteristics.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system allows dynamic adjustment of parameters in the shadow dataplane to match specific customer network configurations. By changing parameters such as network topology, policies, and traffic patterns to reflect actual customer environments, the system enables accurate verification of upgrade compatibility with unique network characteristics.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

4Ease of operation

If dual dataplanes are implemented for verification, then seamless upgrades are enabled, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveupgrade processVSAvoiddataplane architecture

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges the verification function into the existing dataplane architecture by creating shadow dataplanes that share infrastructure with production dataplanes. This consolidation allows verification and production operations to coexist using the same hardware and software frameworks, reducing the incremental complexity of adding verification capabilities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS12407649B2Seamlessly verifying upgrades using mirrored dataplanes

Publication Date: 2025.09.02 CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC

AI summary

A system and method are provided for implementing a network component and verifying an update of the network component. The network component can be, e.g., a software-defined wide area network, a firewall, a router, or a load balancer. The network component can be an embedded network edge device that is implemented, e.g., in software, in circuitry, or using hardware acceleration (e.g., a data processing unit (DPU), a smart network interface card (SmartNIC), etc.). The updated version of the network component is verified by implementing it on a shadow dataplane concurrently with the current version operating on a primary dataplane, and comparing the performances of these two versions. Based on this comparison satisfying various verification criteria, the updated version passes a verification test and can be promoted to the primary dataplane.