Route Hardware Programming in Network Devices

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Network devices face challenges in efficiently processing and advertising route updates during the boot phase, as they may lack complete route information and risk dropping packets by advertising unprogrammed routes, leading to inefficiencies in routing data packets.

Innovation Solution

A method involving a routing information base (RIB) agent and a forwarding information base (FIB) agent, where route updates are processed, timestamped, segmented into batches, and programmed into a hardware-implemented FIB, with successful programming confirmed before advertising routes to peer devices, ensuring only validated routes are advertised.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Speed

If route updates are advertised immediately during boot phase, then routing convergence speed is improved, but packet drops occur due to advertising unprogrammed routes

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverouting convergence speedVSAvoidpacket delivery reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by assigning timestamps to routes in advance and establishing a verification mechanism before advertising. The FIB agent checks whether routes are successfully programmed into hardware FIB before the RIB agent advertises them, preventing packet drops while maintaining convergence speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback loop where the FIB agent monitors the successful programming of routes into hardware FIB and reports this status back to the RIB agent. This feedback mechanism ensures that only verified, programmed routes are advertised, resolving the contradiction between speed and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If all routes are programmed into hardware FIB before advertising, then routing reliability is improved, but processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverouting reliabilityVSAvoidroute processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by advertising routes incrementally as they are successfully programmed into hardware FIB, rather than waiting for all routes to be programmed. This allows the network to begin using valid routes sooner, reducing overall processing time while maintaining reliability through the timestamp verification mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The RIB agent performs preliminary assignment of timestamps to routes before they are programmed into hardware FIB. This preliminary action establishes a verification framework that enables incremental advertising, reducing the total time required while ensuring reliability through timestamp-based validation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Device complexity

If route programming is performed in single batch, then simplicity is maintained, but efficiency decreases during high route volume

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprogramming process complexityVSAvoidroute programming efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the route programming process into multiple batches, where the FIB agent programs routes into hardware FIB in incremental batches rather than a single batch. This segmentation improves efficiency during high route volume by allowing parallel processing and incremental verification, while the timestamp mechanism maintains process simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Speed

If routes are advertised before hardware FIB programming confirmation, then convergence speed is improved, but routing accuracy deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconvergence speedVSAvoidrouting accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses feedback from the FIB agent regarding successful hardware FIB programming to determine when routes should be advertised. This feedback ensures routing accuracy by confirming programming success before advertisement, while the timestamp mechanism allows this verification to occur efficiently without significantly delaying convergence.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The timestamp assignment performed in advance creates a framework that allows rapid verification of routing accuracy. By having timestamps预先 assigned, the system can quickly determine which routes are ready for advertisement without compromising accuracy, thus maintaining both speed and precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS9729427B2Method and system for route hardware programming in network devices
Publication Date: 2017.08.08 ARISTA NETWORKS INC
  • US9729427B2 patent drawing
  • US9729427B2 patent drawing
  • US9729427B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for programming route hardware in network devices. The method includes: receiving, by a network device, route updates, selecting from the route updates, a set of selected routes to be used for routing, assigning multiple timestamps to the set of selected routes, programming the set of selected routes into a software-implemented forwarding information base (FIB), segmenting the set of selected routes in the software-implemented FIB into at least a first batch of routes and a second batch of routes, programming the first batch of routes into a hardware-implemented FIB, after the programming, determining a last timestamp, where the last time stamp is the oldest timestamp of the timestamps where all routes associated with the last timestamp have been successfully programmed into the hardware-implemented FIB, and advertising all routes of the first batch that are associated with a timestamp that is no older than the last timestamp.