On providing fast protection with remote loop-free alternates

Csikor, Levente; Rétvári, Gábor

doi:10.1007/s11235-015-0006-9

Cited by 20 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LFA does not assume any signaling or coordination between nodes. Basic LFA currently cannot provide full repair coverage …”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A related IPFRR mechanism is the Remote LFA (RLFA) . This mechanism is an enhanced version of the classic LFA.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The tunnel is used to span a part of network that would otherwise route the native (that is, untunneled) packets for the affected destination back to the source router S or through the failed link or node. The RLFA router may be several hops away from the source router S. The RLFA mechanism can provide a higher repair coverage than the basic LFA, but at the cost of higher computational complexity . Another existing, though less common IPFRR mechanisms are Equal‐cost multi‐path (ECMP), Multiple Routing Configurations (MRC), Not‐Via Addresses, tunnel based approaches, Maximally Redundant Trees (MRT) and other spanning tree based IPFRR approaches; we will not discuss these in detail.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, an M‐REP alternative path does not represent the shortest possible path (see Figure ). However, other IPFRR mechanisms generally do not provide the shortest alternative paths, either …”

Section: Proposal Of a New M‐rep Ipfrr Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has been the key principle behind IPFRR mechanisms: precomputing backup paths for possible failure scenarios before the failure actually occurs so that the backup path is readily available and can be used at the very moment when the failure occurs. Switching over to a precomputed backup path is orders of magnitude faster than waiting for the ordinary convergence process in the network to be completed …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The new Multicast Repair (M‐REP) IP fast reroute mechanism

Papán

Segeč

Palúch

et al. 2018

Concurrency and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The network convergence time may take hundreds of milliseconds or more. Since this repair performance may be unsatisfactory, IP fast reroute (IPFRR) approaches have been developed to decrease the network convergence time and minimize traffic loss. These IPFRR mechanisms are usually based on the proactive precomputation of a backup path before a failure occurs. Once a failure is detected, the router running IPFRR will immediately use this backup path in response to the failure, rather than computing a replacement path only after a failure has occurred. The computation of an alternative path in many IPFRR mechanisms requires that the computing node (router) knows the exact network topology. In this paper, we present a new IPFRR mechanism called the multicast repair (M‐REP) IPFRR mechanism, which provides an advanced fast reroute technique for Internet service providers‘ (ISP‘s) core networks. The M‐REP IPFRR mechanism is based on IP multicast and utilizes Protocol Independent Multicast – Dense Mode (PIM‐DM) with the modification of an internal reverse path forwarding (RPF) check. The M‐REP IPFRR mechanism does not depend on any particular routing protocol type (distance‐vector or link‐state) and requires less system resources because of its precomputation‐less character but still provides immediate reaction to failure.

show abstract

“…LFA does not assume any signaling or coordination between nodes. Basic LFA currently cannot provide full repair coverage …”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A related IPFRR mechanism is the Remote LFA (RLFA) . This mechanism is an enhanced version of the classic LFA.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%