This document provides an overview of MPLS (Multi-Protocol Label Switching). It discusses the basic idea behind MPLS, the history and components. MPLS assigns labels to IP flows to create label switched paths between ingress and egress routers. Routers forward packets based on lookups of these labels rather than long IP addresses. MPLS supports traffic engineering and quality of service across networks while integrating technologies like IP, ATM, and Frame Relay.

1. MPLS (MULTI-PROTOCOL LABEL
SWITCHING)
By: SAIF ULLAH KHAN

2. Overview
 Basic Idea
 History
 Components, Definitions
 Operation
 Performance Measurements
 Summary

3. Basic Idea
 MPLS is a hybrid model adopted by IETF to incorporate best properties in both packet routing &
circuit switching
 A label is assigned for each IP flow
 A LSP is created between ingress and egress
 Packet forwarding at each router by table lookup (based on label)
 MPLS supports a range of access technologies, including T1/E1, ATM, Frame Relay, and DSL.
 Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is a mechanism in high-performance telecommunications
networks that directs data from one network node to the next based on short path labels rather
than long network addresses, avoiding complex lookups in a routing table.
IP Router MPLS ATM Switch
Control: Control: Control:
IP Router IP Router ATM Forum
Software Software Software
Forwarding: Forwarding: Forwarding:
Longest-match Label Swapping Label Swapping
Lookup

4. History
 In Mid-90s, many ISPs migrated from router based cores to IP-over-
ATM, this provided:
 Greater Bandwidth
 Deterministic forwarding performance
 Traffic engineering support
 No specific Internet backbone networking equipment available for
ISPs.
 However, Continued Internet growth increased stress on ATM
networks:
 Bandwidth limitations
 20 percent ―cell tax‖
 Designed for different tasks (IP—connectionless, ATM—connection-
oriented)
 Standard being developed by IETF (Internet Engineering Task
Force) since 1997

5. History (Cont.)
 Packets labeled and sent through network on paths rather than hop-to-hop
as in IP data-grams
Each multilayer switch ran standard IP routing software (OSPF, BGP-4)
 Different label binding approaches
 Data-driven model
 Label bindings created when data packets arrive.
 Labels created either when first packet in a flow or after a number of
packets in a flow have arrived.
 IP Switching and CSR used this technique.
 Control-driven model
 Label bindings created when control information arrives.
 Assigned in response to processing of protocol traffic, control traffic (such
as RSVP), or static configuration.
--Control-driven model used in MPLS!
Note:
OSPF-Open Shortest-Path First BGP-Border Gateway Protocol RSVP-Resource Reservation Protocol

6. Terminology/Components
 LSR (Label Switched Router)
 High speed routers which switch data traffic within MPLS domain
 Swaps labels on packets in core of network.
 LSP (Label Switch Path)
 A unidirectional path to transport packets within MPLS domain.
 The path is setup before the data transmission similar to circuit
switching
 Path through network based on a FEC (simplex in nature).
 LER (Label Edge Router)
 Attach Labels to packets based on a FEC.
 Operates at the edge of the access network & MPLS network
 Responsible for assignment and removal of labels
 Supports Multiple Protocols connected to dissimilar networks (such as frame
relay, ATM and Ethernet)

7. Terminology/Components
 LIB (Label Information Base)
 Table maintained by the Routers
 MPLS equivalent to IP routing table, contains FEC-to-Label bindings.
 FEC (Forwarding Equivalence Class)
 Group of packets sharing the same type of transport.
 A path is a representation of a FEC
 Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
 IETF defined protocol for explicit signaling and management

8. MPLS Operation
1a. Routing protocols (e.g. OSPF-TE, IS-IS-TE) exchange reach ability to destination networks
4. LER at egress
1b. Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
removes label and
establishes label mappings to destination
delivers packet
network
IP
IP
2. Ingress LER receives packet and
“label's packets
3. LSR forwards packets
using label swapping

9. LSRs and LERs
 The devices used for MPLS can be classified into label edge routers
(LERs) and label switching routers (LSRs).
 A LSR is a high-speed router device in the core of an MPLS
network.
 Participates in the establishment of LSPs, using the appropriate label
signaling protocol
 Does high-speed switching of the data traffic based on the established
paths.
 A LER is a device that operates at the edge of the access network
and MPLS network.
 Supports multiple ports connected to dissimilar networks (such as frame
relay, ATM, and Ethernet)
 Forwards this traffic on to the MPLS network after establishing
LSPs, using the label signaling protocol at the ingress and distributing
the traffic back to the access networks at the egress.
 Plays important role in the assignment and removal of labels, as traffic
enters or exits an MPLS network.

10. Labels
 The MPLS forwarding component is based on the label-
swapping algorithm.
 Label encapsulated in MPLS header, which is in
between the Layer 2 and IP header.
 If Layer 2 technology supports labels (ATM VPI/VCI,
Frame Relay DLCI), MPLS label and header
encapsulated in the Layer 2 label field.

11. Why Label Swap?
 Label swapping provides a significant number of operational benefits
when compared to conventional hop-by-hop network layer routing.
 Gives an ISP flexibility in the way that it assigns packets to FECs.
 Destination address (like conventional IP routing)
 Source address.
 Application type.
 Point of entry/exit to/from the label-swapping network.
 CoS conveyed in the packet header.
 Any combination of the above.
 ISPs can construct customized LSPs that support specific
application requirements (for instance, VPNs). LSPs can be
designed to:
 minimize the number of hops
 bandwidth requirements
 bypass points of congestion
 Offer ISPs precise control over the flow of traffic in their networks.

12. MPLS header
 Label field- Actual MPLS label (20bits).
 CoS field- ―Class of Service‖ can effect queuing and
discard algorithms applied to packets (3 bits).
 S (Stack) field- supports a hierarchical label stack (1 bit).
 TTL field- ―Time-to-live‖ provides conventional IP TTL
functionality (8 bits).

13. Label Creation
 Topology-based method
 uses normal processing of routing protocols (such
as OSPF and BGP)
 Request-based method
 uses processing of request-based control traffic
(such as RSVP)
Note:
OSPF-Open shortest-path first BGP- Border Gateway Protocol RSVP-Resource Reservation Protocol

14. Label Spaces
 Labels used by an LSR for FEC-label bindings
are split into 2 categories:
 Per platform-label values are unique across an
entire LSR.
 Per interface-label values are associated w/
interfaces. Label values provided on different
interfaces could be the same.

15. Label Distribution
 No single method of signaling required
 Enhancements of existing routing protocols (to allow
piggybacking of label information) include:
 Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)
 Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP)
 LDP (Label Distribution Protocol)- Defined by IETF for
signaling and management of label space.
--Extensions have been defined to support explicit
routing based on QoS and CoS requirements.

16. Label Distribution schemes
 LDP—maps unicast IP destinations into labels
 RSVP, CR–LDP—used for traffic engineering
and resource reservation
 BGP—external labels (VPN)

17. MPLS features and security
 Traffic Engineering  MPLS networks provide
 Efficient Link Utilization separation of address and
 Class of Service (CoS) traffic
 Packets from one VPN do not
 Differentiated types of service
inadvertently go to another
across an MPLS network.
VPN
 Virtual Private Networks
(VPNs)  Malicious spoofing is
impossible
 A VPN is a private connection
over an shared network

18. Summary
 Improves packet-forwarding performance in the network
 MPLS enhances and simplifies packet forwarding through routers using Layer-2 switching
paradigms.
 MPLS is simple, which allows for easy implementation.
 MPLS increases network performance because it enables routing by switching at wireline speeds.
 Supports QoS and CoS for service differentiation
 MPLS uses traffic-engineered path setup and helps achieve service-level guarantees.
 MPLS incorporates provisions for constraint-based and explicit path setup.
 Supports network scalability
 MPLS can be used to avoid the N2 overlay problem associated with meshed IP–ATM networks.
 Integrates IP and ATM in the network
 MPLS provides a bridge between access IP and core ATM.
 MPLS can reuse existing router/ATM switch hardware, effectively joining the two disparate
networks.
 Builds interoperable networks
 MPLS is a standards-based solution that achieves synergy between IP and ATM networks.
 MPLS facilitates IP–over-synchronous optical network (SONET) integration in optical switching.
 MPLS helps build scalable VPNs with traffic-engineering capability.

19. …However
 Some Internet Purists complain that MPLS
breaks some critical Internet architectural
principles:
 MPLS supports tunneling, which breaks the
transparency paradigm.
 MPLS supports sessions, it breaks the datagram
model.
 But MPLS provides great value to ISPs, such
as lower operating costs and ability to provide
QoS to businesses.

20. References
1. Yin, Li, PowerPoint Presentation: ―MPLS and GMPLS,‖ University of California,
Berkeley, Summer 2002.
2. R. Ramaswami and K. N. Sivarajan, Optical Networks: A Practical Perspective 2nd Ed.,
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
3. Nortel Networks, ―MPLS—An introduction to multiprotocol label switching,‖ 2001,
http://www.nortelnetworks.com/corporate/technology/mpls/collateral/55053.25-04-
01.pdf.
4. Semeria, Chuck, Juniper Networks, ―Multiprotocol Label Switching: Enhancing Routing
in the New Public Network,‖ 2000.
5. International Engineering Consortium, ―Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS),‖ 2003,
http://www.iec.org/online/tutorials/mpls/
6. Farkas, K. et al. ―IP Traffic Engineering of OMP Technique,‖ Technical University of
Budapest, Hungary, 2000.
7. Johnson, J., ―Despite criticism, MPLS is here to stay,‖ Network World, April 2002.
http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2002/0408eye.html
8. Bayle, T. et al. ―Performance Measurements of MPLS Traffic Engineering and QoS,‖
Hiroshima University,
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences/inet/01/CD_proceedings/T43/ .
9. Nortel Networks, ―MPLS Tutorial,‖ May, 1999, http://www.nanog.org/mtg-9905/ppt/mpls/
.
10. Gallaher, R, ―Advanced MPLS Signaling,‖ December 2001,
http://www.convergedigest.com/tutorials/mpls3/page1.htm .
11. Network Sorcery Inc., ―LDP,‖
http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/LabelDistributionProtocol.htm#Glossary .