Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic Class" Field

Andersson, Loa

doi:10.17487/rfc5462

Cited by 40 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this case, the packet is said having a stack of labels. Each LSE is made of four fields: a 20-bit label value used for forwarding the packet to the next router, a 3-bit Traffic Class field for quality of service (QoS), priority, and Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) [9], a 1-bit bottom of stack flag (when set the current label is the last in the stack [10]), and an 8-bit timeto-live (LSE-TTL) field having the same purpose as the IP-TTL field [11]. MPLS routers, called Label Switching Routers (LSRs), exchange labelled packets over Label Switched Paths (LSPs).…”

Section: Mpls Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Brief History of MPLS Usage in IPv6

Vanaubel¹,

Mérindol²,

Pansiot³

et al. 2016

Passive and Active Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Recent researches have stated the fast deployment of IPv6. It has been demonstrated that IPv6 grows much faster, being so more and more adopted by both Internet service providers but also by servers and end-hosts. In parallel, researches have been conducted to discover and assess the usage of MPLS tunnels. Indeed, recent developments in the ICMP protocol make certain categories of MPLS tunnels transparent to traceroute probing. However, these studies focus only on IPv4, where MPLS is strongly deployed. In this paper, we provide a first look at how MPLS is used under IPv6 networks using traceroute data collected by CAIDA. At first glance, we observe that the MPLS deployment and usage seem to greatly differ between IPv4 and IPv6, in particular in the way MPLS label stacks are used. While label stacks with at least two labels are marginal in IPv4 (and mostly correspond to a VPN usage), they are prevalent in IPv6. After a deeper analysis of the label stack typical content in IPv6, we show that such tunnels result from the use of 6PE. This is not really surprising since this mechanism was specifically designed to forward IPv6 traffic using MPLS tunnels through networks that are not fully IPv6 compliant. However, we show that it does not result from non dual-stack routers but rather from the absence of native IPv6 MPLS signaling protocols. Finally, we investigate a large Tier-1 network, Cogent, that stands out with an original set-up.

show abstract

Section: Mpls Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Brief History of MPLS Usage in IPv6

Vanaubel¹,

Mérindol²,

Pansiot³

et al. 2016

Passive and Active Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Optionally, the reference model implements separate queues with Diffserv based on Traffic Class (TC) bits [RFC5462]. For example, these queues may include two Expedited Forwarding (EF) priority queues, with the highest priority assigned to Emergency Telecommunications Service (ETS) traffic and the second priority assigned to normal-priority real-time traffic (alternatively, there could be a single EF queue with dual policers [RFC5865]).…”

Section: Mpls Gcac Algorithm Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Generic Connection Admission Control (GCAC) Algorithm Specification for IP/MPLS Networks

Ash¹,

McDysan²

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document presents a generic connection admission control (GCAC) reference model and algorithm for IP-/MPLS-based networks. Service provider (SP) IP/MPLS networks need an MPLS GCAC mechanism, as one motivational example, to reject Voice over IP (VoIP) calls when additional calls would adversely affect calls already in progress. Without MPLS GCAC, connections on congested links will suffer degraded quality. The MPLS GCAC algorithm can be optionally implemented in vendor equipment and deployed by service providers. MPLS GCAC interoperates between vendor equipment and across multiple service provider domains. The MPLS GCAC algorithm uses available standard mechanisms for MPLS-based networks, such as RSVP, Diffservaware MPLS Traffic Engineering (DS

show abstract

“…Quality of Service (QoS) capabilities, in the form of the Differentiated Services architecture, apply to MPLS as specified in [RFC3270] and [RFC5462]. Different classes of traffic are distinguished by the three-bit Traffic Class (TC) field of an MPLS Label Stack Entry (LSE).…”

Section: Quality Of Servicementioning

confidence: 99%

Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks

Frost¹,

Bryant²

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many service provider service level agreements (SLAs) depend on the ability to measure and monitor performance metrics for packet loss and one-way and two-way delay, as well as related metrics such as delay variation and channel throughput. This measurement capability also provides operators with greater visibility into the performance characteristics of their networks, thereby facilitating planning, troubleshooting, and network performance evaluation. This document specifies protocol mechanisms to enable the efficient and accurate measurement of these performance metrics in MPLS networks.

show abstract

Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic Class" Field

Cited by 40 publications

References 13 publications

A Brief History of MPLS Usage in IPv6

A Brief History of MPLS Usage in IPv6

Generic Connection Admission Control (GCAC) Algorithm Specification for IP/MPLS Networks

Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About