The document discusses two models for deploying multicast VPN (mVPN): Classic mVPN and Next Generation (NG) mVPN. Classic mVPN uses PIM in the provider core and mGRE tunnels, which limits scalability. NG mVPN uses BGP/MPLS, retaining the scalability of MPLS L3 VPNs while supporting multicast traffic through extensions. The key differences are that Classic mVPN has a separate PIM instance per mVPN in the control plane and uses PIM in the data plane, while NG mVPN uses a single BGP instance and supports different tunneling methods without dependency between control and data planes. NG mVPN also allows for routing information aggregation and inter-AS
The document discusses two models for deploying multicast VPN (mVPN): Classic mVPN and Next Generation (NG) mVPN. Classic mVPN uses PIM in the provider core and mGRE tunnels, which limits scalability. NG mVPN uses BGP/MPLS, retaining the scalability of MPLS L3 VPNs while supporting multicast traffic through extensions. The key differences are that Classic mVPN has a separate PIM instance per mVPN in the control plane and uses PIM in the data plane, while NG mVPN uses a single BGP instance and supports different tunneling methods without dependency between control and data planes. NG mVPN also allows for routing information aggregation and inter-AS
The document discusses two models for deploying multicast VPN (mVPN): Classic mVPN and Next Generation (NG) mVPN. Classic mVPN uses PIM in the provider core and mGRE tunnels, which limits scalability. NG mVPN uses BGP/MPLS, retaining the scalability of MPLS L3 VPNs while supporting multicast traffic through extensions. The key differences are that Classic mVPN has a separate PIM instance per mVPN in the control plane and uses PIM in the data plane, while NG mVPN uses a single BGP instance and supports different tunneling methods without dependency between control and data planes. NG mVPN also allows for routing information aggregation and inter-AS
The document discusses two models for deploying multicast VPN (mVPN): Classic mVPN and Next Generation (NG) mVPN. Classic mVPN uses PIM in the provider core and mGRE tunnels, which limits scalability. NG mVPN uses BGP/MPLS, retaining the scalability of MPLS L3 VPNs while supporting multicast traffic through extensions. The key differences are that Classic mVPN has a separate PIM instance per mVPN in the control plane and uses PIM in the data plane, while NG mVPN uses a single BGP instance and supports different tunneling methods without dependency between control and data planes. NG mVPN also allows for routing information aggregation and inter-AS
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 9
Multicast VPN: Architecture
There are two basic models for mVPN deployment: Classic mVPN and NG mVPN.
The Classic mVPN version (PIM/GRE) is based on the Draft Rosen and requires PIM in the Core of the provider network to be able to support mVPN traffic. This requirement introduces new protocols (PIM) and encapsulation mechanisms (mGRE) in the control and data planes. As we will discuss here, this model has a poor scalability and flexibility.
NG mVPN model (BGP/MPLS) uses the same protocols used in MPLS L3 VPN unicast service (RFC 2547, RFC 4364 BGP MPLS VPNs) but with some extensions to the control and data plane protocols as necessary to be able to support multicast traffic. This model retains the good scalability and flexibility of the unicast VPN service.
mVPN Model Classic mVPN NG mVPN Service MPLS L3 VPN Multicast MPLS L3 VPN Unicast and Multicast Overlay, Signaling, Control Plane PIM BGP Underlay, Transport, Data Plane, Multicast Distribution Trees (MDT) PIM/GRE - mGRE tunneling MDTs per VRF in Global RT mLDP, P2MP TE, IR
Bandwidth Res., TE and FRR Core tree types Default MDT, Data MDT Default MDT, Data MDT, Partitioned MDT
Classic mVPN (PIM/GRE)
Classic mVPN model is the original solution for transporting multicast data between customer sites over a SP multicast-enabled core. This model is based on the Virtual
Juniper Business Use Only Router (VR) model, where each VR in the VPN domain is running an instance of a routing protocol in charge of exchanging VPN reachability information between VRs.
The Classic model uses different instances of a routing protocol (PIM) among PEs. One instance per mVPN. This means that we’ll end up with one different control plane per mVPN, and as a consequence, with a large number of routing peers and adjacencies per PE device.
PIM is a soft state protocol and it is timer-based by design. This means that if the number of mVPN grows, control plane traffic needed to maintain PIM adjacencies will grow with it, limiting the scalability of the overall solution.
In the underlay, this model uses PIM too. PIM in the underlay is needed to setup specific mVPN tunnels (mGRE) between PE devices (MDTs). These tunnels are logical tunnels that interconnect mVRF instances and can be used as a regular link. Customer routing protocol data is tunneled over them, resulting in coupling between the data and control planes.
NG mVPN (BGP/MPLS)
NG mVPN model defines an extension of the MPLS L3 VPN unicast model for multicast traffic. This model is based on the Aggregated Routing (AR) VPN model. In the aggregated routing model a backbone routing protocol is responsible for disseminating the VPN membership and reachability information for all the VPNs.
Juniper Business Use Only
With NG mVPN model, one single instance of a routing protocol (BGP) carries mVPN routing information for all the mVPN, resulting in routing information aggregation in one common control plane. In this case, the routing protocol only needs one adjacency per pair of edge devices (PE devices in full-mesh) or one adjacency per Route Reflector (RR).
BGP is a hard-state protocol, meaning that it uses incremental updates when there is a change on the routing information and is not based on timers and periodic information refresh, helping to keep a quieter control plane.
The data plane setup supports different tunneling technologies and it’s not limited to PIM. mLDP, P2MP TE and IR can be used as encapsulation mechanisms maintaining the same control plane (BGP) and allowing for aggregation in the data plane.
The exchange of routing information is decoupled from the transport of mVPN data as the control plane protocol doesn’t use the data plane tunnels to perform the routing information exchange. There is not a dependency between planes as in the previous model.
Juniper Business Use Only The introduction of BGP as a control plane protocol in this model brings some solution advantages seen in the MPLS L3 VPN unicast case, like scalability, hierarchy and aggregation. There are as well some other capabilities specific to the multicast case that should be considered, like end-point Auto Discovery (AD) and Automatic Tunnel Binding (ATB) incorporated into the BGP multicast AF (mVPNv4 and mVPNv6).
Inter-AS peering
The inter-AS integration is not easy for inter-AS options B and C when using the Classic model. In the control plane, this model needs direct exchange of control plane traffic (PIM) across PEs. IN PIM/GRE models the interconnection between PE devices NEED TO BE DIRECTLY CONNECTED (Emulated LAN).
In the data plane, all the SPs must support mGRE tunneling in the core and their PE peer each other directly. The PE devices need to look like directly connected even if they belong to different AS, and this is rarely a desirable situation.
NG model inter-AS integration is much more flexible, allowing for different tunneling technologies in different AS and segmented inter-as trees support. BGP/MPLS based routing can be able to consider inter-PE distance and take that into account into the mVPN route selection process (not possible with Emulated LAN).
In this case, PE devices don’t need to be directly connected to each other as in the PIM/GRE case.
Summary
This table summarizes the most relevant mVPN design topics by comparing side-by- side the Classical and NG model.
Scope Design Topic Classic mVPN NG mVPN Control Plane VPN model
Juniper Business Use Only Virtual Router (VR) Model Aggregated Routing (AR) Model Control plane protocol PIM (overlay) MP-BGP Routing protocol instances 1 per mVPN 1 BGP instance Number of adjacencies 1 per PE per mVPN instance 1 per RR per PE Routing information aggregation No Yes Coupling between data and control planes Highly Coupled No dependency Periodic refresh Soft State (Timer based) Hard State (BGP Update based) Inter-AS connectivity Direct peering Indirect peering Routing efficiency Suboptimal (emulated LAN) Optimizable (BGP distances) Data Plane Tunneling protocols PIM (underlay) mLDP, P2MP TE, IR Tunneling protocol flexibility No Yes Encapsulation mGRE MPLS LSPs MDT configuration Manual BGP tunnel auto discovery and binding MDT aggregation No, 1 MDT per mVPN (minimum) Supports aggregation
Juniper Business Use Only General Efficiency Low High Hierarchical control plane No Yes State High (due to lack of aggregation) Low Scalability Low (due to PIM) High (due to BGP) Deployment Hard (new protocols) Easy (extensions to existing protocols) OPEX High Medium
mVPN Additional References
These normative references could be useful for obtaining additional information of Classic and NG mVPN models.
Network based IP VPN Architecture
o https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-vpn-vr-03 Draft Rosen o https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosen-rfc2547bis-03 NG mVPN solution o https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6513 Multicast BGP extensions o https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-raggarwa-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp-02
I hope you find it useful.
CCDE CERTIFICATION COMMUNITY
Juniper Business Use Only Like Answer Share
8 answers 396 views
Gus
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
Hi Juan, I really enjoyed learning about Multicast VPN: Architecture. Another great reading!! Excellent summary chart of mVPN design topics, I like the way you structure it with: Design Topic, Classic mVPN and NG mVPN, It makes it easy to understand each section and visualize differences. Also very good that you included additional resources at the end. Great job! Keep it up. Regards, Gus
Expand Post
LikeReply
Juan Garcia
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
Thank you for your time and review Gus.
mVPN is a huge topic that can't be summarized in a discussion easily. I've tried to keep it short and understandable at the same time. If anyone is
Juniper Business Use Only interested in expanding some particular topic, can go straight to the normative reference where all is covered in detail. Cheers.
LikeReply
Gus
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
You're welcome Juan. I agree with you that mVPN is a huge topic. You did a good job summarizing it.
LikeReply
oakintad
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
Well written Juan. Thank you! I'll be using that summary chart definitely!
LikeReply
Juan Garcia
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
Thank you Olushile.
The Summary section should be useful for a quick review. I'm glad you liked it. Regards.
LikeReply
Juniper Business Use Only
arteq
3 years ago
very nice... thank you juan
LikeReply
Juan Garcia
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
You're welcome
LikeReply
design888
Edited by Admin February 16, 2020 at 1:48 AM
This is great, thank you! Also another good resource here from Mr De Ghain too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RlFxc588DM
