Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply



Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. PBB TE PBB-TE (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 1
  • 2. Agenda • Introduction • QinQ • PBB • PBB-TE • Conclusion (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 2
  • 3. Introduction (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 3
  • 4. Connection-less (CL) networking based ( L) w g on Ethernet and IP/MPLS has been around for some time. There are m y f m m . many carriers who have not only implemented these technologies, but have used them g , m to completely replace their legacy network So, why are we discussing network. So connection-oriented(CO) packet networking? t ki ? (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 4
  • 5. Carrier Ethernet options • PBB-TE MPLS TP PBB TE, MPLS-TP – no control plane (like MPLS in IP/MPLS) – uses EMS/NMS for provisioning • NMS based control plane • centralized intelligence on a server • vendor sticky – no multi point – smaller forwarding tables • MPLS (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 5
  • 6. QinQ (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 6
  • 7. QinQ = 802 1QiQ 802.1QiQ = 802.1ad = P id Bridging (PB) Provider B id i [C-VLAN inner, S-VLAN outer] In this scenario provider needs to learn scenario, all customer MACs. (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 7
  • 8. Where is it most appropriate to use Q-in-Q and MAC-in-MAC i MAC i MAC in a Hi Hierarchical L2 Network? hi l N t k? • MAC-in-MAC core domain surrounded by MAC in MAC Q-in-Q access domains. – Removes need for global Q-tag management • Locally convert MAC-in-MAC service tag to local Q g Q-tag – Reduces number of MAC addresses seen by MAC-in-MAC domain to number of Q-in-Q domains. (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 8
  • 9. Why Not VPLS End-to-End? End to End? • VPLS has scalability issues – E.g. to connect 5 PE devices requires 20 LSPs [(n*(n-1)/2)*2] 40 PEs: 1 536 [(n (n 1)/2) 2], 1,536. – Large bandwidth loss due to broadcast retransmissions. • VPLS requires new features – Protection OAM discovery Protection, OAM, (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 9
  • 10. PBB (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 10
  • 11. PBB = 802.1ah 802 1ah = Provider Backbone Bridging(PBB) = MAC in MAC i (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 11
  • 12. PBB • PBB uses STP (PBB-TE does not use STP) • PBB stops the access MAC h complexity form core. p y – Ex:- run PBB at access and VPLS in the core (so the VSI needs to learn only the S-MAC not 100,000 of C- MACs) (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 12
  • 13. PBB TE PBB-TE (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 13
  • 14. PBB TE PBB-TE = 802 1Qay 802.1Qay = Provider Backbone Bridging –Traffic Engineering E i i = PBT (Provider Backbone Transport) by p y Nortel Both PBB-TE and MPLS-TP has “SDH-like” operation (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 14
  • 15. PBB-TE builds on Ethernet • MPLS-TP requires an underlying L1/L2 p protocol …… at a time when Ethernet is migrating to the MAN and WAN as the ubiquitous underlying L1/L2 protocol • MPLS TP proposes t use a L2 switching l b l MPLS-TP to it hi label that is unrelated to Ethernet’s addressing scheme – And define its own control plane and management plane • PBB TE proposes t use a Eth PBB-TE to Ethernet’s t’ addressing scheme – And leverage Ethernet’s PBB provider header, Ethernet s header management plane and control plane (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 15
  • 16. • PBB-TE was designed to handle point- PBB TE point to-point data services in a PBB network. (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 16
  • 17. While PBB provides for Carrier-Ethernet switching, PBB-TE provides for Carrier-Ethernet Transport through the addition of the following characteristics: • Ability to provision protected virtual circuits • Improved control of the transport layer's layer s operational state through SDH-like OA&M • Improved network and survivability mechanisms such as protection and restoration as seen in SDH (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 17
  • 18. The PBB-TE Advantage • Secure Demarcation – Customer networks may have overlapping addresses, which could cause forwarding conflicts in the Telecom Operators network. • Customer Separation & Service Scalability – PBB provides 16 million unique service id id illi i i identifiers, apart from ifi f providing 2 transport tunnels. • Single-ended Provisioning – only the end-nodes have to be provisioned (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 18
  • 19. PBB/PBB-TE combination • PBB and PBB-TE can be deployed in the same network, p y , and can also share a fiber pair. • Network nodes use the B-VLAN field in the PBB header t diff h d to differentiate between th PBB and PBB TE ti t b t the d PBB-TE traffic. • While PBB traff c can be protected using ERPS (ITU- Wh le BB traffic us ng E S ( T G.8032), the PBB-TE traffic is protected using EPS (ITU-T G.8031). • H Hence, while PBB-TE can be used to transport hil PBB TE b dt t t services that require traffic-engineering, PBB can be used for any-to-any or multipoint services, all on the y y p same network. (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 19
  • 20. Conclusion (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 20
  • 21. • All three (MPLS/VPLS, MPLS-TP, PBB-TE) solve the same problem • MPLS-TP is born out of realization that M LS/V LS s MPLS/VPLS is complex and expensive expens ve – Essentially confirms providers only really have a long term choice between MPLS-TP and PBB-TE • So why chose PBB-TE over MPLS-TP, or vice- versa? (c) Anuradha Udunuwara 21