Segment Routing

Craig Hill PONC – 2015, Herndon VA

Distinguished SE
U.S. Federal
CCIE #1628 – [email protected]

draft-previdi-filsfils-isis-segment-routing-02
Segment Routing

 Balance of
distributed intelligence and
centralized optimization and programming
 simplify the operation of MPLS (lower opex)
 enable application-based service creation (new revenue)
 enable scalable/reactive network programmability (SDN)
 allow for better utilization of the installed infrastructure (lower capex)
 apply to OTT, SP, Large Entreprises across WAN, DC, Access.

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 2

reserved.
Segment Routing
• Simple to deploy and operate
– Leverage existing MPLS forwarding, HW, and services
– straight-forward ISIS/OSPF extension to distribute labels
– LDP/RSVP not required
– exponentially less state in the routing elements for TE
– agnostic control-plane also applicable to IPv6

• Provide for optimum scalability, resiliency and virtualization

• Tighter integration with application
– simpler network, highly programmable
– highly responsive

The state is no longer in the network but in the packet

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 6
Segment
• Nodal segment
– a path (any path definition) to a node
– represented by a unique global label within the ISIS domain (operator
configurable)
• Adjacency segment
– a hop over an adjacent datalink to a neighbor
– represented by a unique local label of the advertising node (system configured)

• Flooded and automatically computed by ISIS

– SR subTLV for TLV 22 and 135

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 9

reserved.
IGP Segments

Node segment to C
Node segment to C
A B C D

Adj Segment Z

M N O P

Node segment to Z

 Simple extension to let IGP install segments in the MPLS dataplane

 Excellent Scale: a node installs N+A FIB entries
 N node segments and A adjacency segments

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 10

reserved.
Node Segment
FEC Z swap 16065 push swap 16065
16065 to 16065 to 16065
pop 16065
A B C D
A packet injected
16065 16065 16065
Z
16065 anywhere with top
Packet to Packet to Packet to Packet to Packet to segment 16065 will
Z Z
Z Z Z reach Z via
shortest-path

• Z advertises a global node segment 16065 with its loopback

– simple ISIS sub-TLV extension
> default SRGB [16000, 23999] at all nodes is a request from all lead operators for operational
simplicity. The protocol and implementation allows for different SRGB at every node

• All remote nodes install in their FIB the node segment 16065 to Z
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 11
reserved.
Node Segment

A B C D

M N O P

16078

• ECMP
– A node segment to 16078 distributes traffic across all ECMP paths to O

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 12

reserved.
Adjacency Segment

A B C D
A packet injected at
node C with segment
Pop Z
29003 29003 is forced
M N O P through datalink CO

• C allocates a local segment 29003 and maps it to the instruction “complete

the segment and forward along the interface CO”
• C advertises the adjacency segment in ISIS
– simple sub-TLV extension
• C is the only node to install the adjacency segment in FIB
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 13
reserved.
 Label advertisement within ISIS

B C D

C’s linkstate LSP advertises

O Leaf C/C with global nodal label 67
Adjacency CB with local label 9001
Adjacency CD with local label 9002
Adjacency CP with local label 9003
• Simple extension
– One single 4-byte Segment sub-TLV

• Nodal segment: sub-TLV attached to leaf TLV

– leaf is loopback

• Adjacency segment: sub-TLV attached to adjacency TLV

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 14
Explicit path as Segment List

• ECMP 16072 16072

– Node segment 16078 16078

16078
16065 16065 16065
• Per-flow state only at head-end Packet to Z Packet to Z Packet to Z
16072
– not at midpoints 16072
A B C D
• Source Routing
16078 Z
– the path state is in the packet M N O P
16065
header Packet to Z
16065
16065 16065

Packet to Z Packet to Z

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 15

reserved.
 Verifying MPLS Forwarding
RP/0/0/CPU0:xrvr-3#show mpls forwarding
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ---------
--- Remote prefix-SID
16001 16001 No ID Gi0/0/0/0 10.0.0.1 0
16002 Exp-Null-v4 No ID Gi0/0/0/0 10.0.0.1 0 Neighbor prefix-SID
16004 Pop No ID Gi0/0/0/1 10.0.0.6 0 Explicit-Null
16005 16005 No ID Gi0/0/0/1 10.0.0.6 0
16010 16010 No ID Gi0/0/0/0 10.0.0.1 0 Neighbor prefix-SID
1 Gi0/0/0/1 10.0.0.6 0 PHP on
24000 P 6010 No ID Gi0/0/0/0 10.0.0.1 0 Remote prefix-SIDs
24001 P op No ID Gi0/0/0/1 10.0.0.6 0 ECMP
op No ID

R3 R2 R1
Local Label == Outgoing Label
Gi0/0/0/0

Gi0/0/0/1
R4 R5 R10
Rn advertises prefix-SID 16000+n

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 16

© 2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 16
Use-Cases and Benefits
IPv4 MPLS Transport with IP FRR
Any service resolving on
A B IGP IPv4 Prefix SID
- Internet
PE1 PE2
- VPNv4
M N - 6PE
- PW
All VPN services ride on the prefix segment to PE2

• IPv4 over MPLS: the obvious way it should have been done
– Just the IGP to operate
– Sub50msec FRR integrated and automated

• Seamless migration
– SR/LDP interworking

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 20

reserved.
SDN WAN Orchestration Platform
Client
• Application platform for placing traffic demands
MATE Cross Domain
Ap ps pps A Or chestra
tion
and paths across an IP/MPLS WAN
APIs
• North-Bound API: Java/REST
SDN WAN
• South-Bound (Bi-Directional): BGP-LS (update Databases
Application
Engine
link-state TO controller), stateful PCEP (programs
network elements FROM controller), Netc/YANG Collector Programming

• Intelligent collector, planner, and optimizer engine

BGP-LS PCEP
and can leverage “what if” exercises for load
placement
• Multi-vendor enabled & extensible WAN
IP/MPLS Segment
• Leverages OpenDaylight Infrastructure with “WAN Multi- Routing

Layer
Orchestration” applications (uses REST to
controller)
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 23
Centralized Traffic Engineering

16065
2G from Ato Z please
FULL

16065

Link CD is full, I cannot use the

shortest-path 65 straight to Z

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 24

reserved.
Centralized Traffic Engineering
Tunnel AZ onto
{66, 68, 65} 16066
FULL

16068
160
65

Path ABCOPZ is ok. I account the BW.

Then I steer the traffic on this path

• Highly programmable and responsive to rapid changes

– perfect support for centralized optimization efficiency, if required
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 25
reserved.
 Beta Available

Disjoint TE Service
• A to Z any plane
– IGP shortest-path
16065
– PrefixSID of Z (65)
pkt
• A to Z via blue plane
– SRTE policy pushes one additional
segment “Blue Anycast” (111)

• Benefits
– ECMP
– No hop-by-hop signalling load and delay
16111
– No midpoint state
16065
pkt

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 29

reserved.
Latency TE Service
• Data from Tokyo to Brussels
– IGP shortest-path via US, higher and cheaper apacity
– PrefixSID of Brussels

• Voice from Tokyo to Brussels

– SRTE policy pushes one additional segment “Russia Anycast” Node segment to Brussels
– Low-latency path Node segment to Russia
• Benefits
– ECMP Russia
– Availability of the anycast segment against node failure Brussels Brussels
– No hop-by-hop signalling load and delay pkt pkt

– No midpoint state
Data Voice

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 30

reserved.
SR and RSVP co-existence Service A
over SR

 SR flows can be auto-routed over

existing RSVP-TE tunnels

SR only

SR and RSVP-TE
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights RSVP-TE only
reserved. F
Cis co
Ju ne
31

C S i on fiden tia

n l
Topology-Independent LFA

• 100%-coverage
• 50-msec
• Link and Node protection
• Automated and Simple to operate and understand
• Prevents transient congestion and suboptimal routing
– leverages the post-convergence path, planned to carry the traffic
• Incremental deployment
– applicable to primary IP, LDP and SR traffic
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Beta av
Cisco Confidential
reserved. ail a
3 2

ble
Industry Acceptance &
Standardization
Strong Operator Partnership

Fundamental to the velocity

and success
 Significant commitment
 technical transparency
 multi-vendor commitment
 beta and poc

 Many more operators now involved

 Deployments in a few months

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 34

reserved.
 www.segment-routing.net
IETF

• Working-Group is created
• Use-Case is WG status
• Architecture is WG status
• Protocol Extension is WG status
• ~ 25 drafts maintained by SR team
Over 50% are WG status
Over 75% have a Cisco implementation

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 35

reserved.
Segment Routing Header S. Previdi, Ed.
C. Filsfils
Cisco Systems, Inc.
B. Field
Comcast
• Segment Routing introduces a new I. Leung
Rogers Communications
Routing Header Type: March 5, 2014

– The Segment Routing Header (SRH) IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)
– Contains the list of segments the packet should draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-header-00

traverse
– VERY close to what already specified in RFC2460 J. Brzozowski
J. Leddy
– Changes are introduced for: Comcast
I. Leung
> Better flexibility
Rogers
> Addressing security concerns raised by RFC5095 Communicat
ions
S. Previdi
• Two SR-IPv6 drafts: M. Townsley
C. Martin
– draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-header
C. Filsfils
– draft-martin-spring-segment-routing-ipv6-use-cases R. Maglione
Cisco Systems
March 5, 2014

IPv6 Segment
© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights 36
Cisco Confidential
reserved.
Routing
Use Cases
draft-martin-
spring-
segment-
routing-
ipv6-use-
cases-00
Conclusion
Segment Routing

 Leverage MPLS dataplane and services

 Drastically improve MPLS control-plane while enabling new services
 Simplicity, Scale, Functionality, Centralized Optimization and Programmability
 Strong operator adoption and tight involvement
 Innovation and Standardization
 Aggressive productization by Cisco
 PoC and Beta code available

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 48

reserved.
Stay Informed

 http://www.segment-routing.net/

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 49

reserved.
Get involved

• All of these use-cases are either FCS or beta available

• Leverage dcloud.cisco.com virtual labs
• Get involved and provide ideas and requirements
• SR is operator driven
• Your help is key

© 2013-2014 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights Cisco Confidential 50

reserved.
Thank you.