Service Provider QoS

Providing e2e Guarantees

Vijay Krishnamoorthy
Cisco IOS Technologies Division
April 2001

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 1

 Agenda

• What is QoS?
• QoS Models
• Differentiated Services - DiffServ
• DiffServ in MPLS Networks
• MPLS Traffic Engineering
• DiffServ-Aware Traffic Engineering (DS-TE)
• DS-TE Solutions
• QoS Management
• Summary

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 2

 What is Quality of Service?
ARM Your Network!

“ The Pragmatic Answer: QoS is Advanced

Resource Management
The Technical Answer: The Resources!!
Set of techniques to manage:
• Delay
• Delay Variation (Jitter)
• Bandwidth
• Packet Loss

”
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 3
 The Value Proposition!

• Offer Any to Any Differentiated Services for Profitability:

Premium-Class Service – (E.g.: VoIP, Multicast Stock
Quotes, etc.)
Business-Class Service – (E.g.: SAP,Oracle,Citrix, etc.)
Best-Effort Service – (E.g.: Database Replication,
Backups, etc.)
• Icing on the profitability cake  Point-to-Point
QoS Guarantees:
P2P guarantees for Voice over IP trunks.
P2P guarantees for highly critical data traffic.
• Revenue in addition to Basic MPLS VPN & Internet Service!

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 4

 Service Provider Revenue/Margin
Potential
Today’s Basic Internet Access Monthly Revenue/Margin
Basic Internet Access @ 768 kpbs………… $500/$50

Managed Internet Access

Access prioritization by user, group………... $75/$60
Priority access during times of congestion… $75/$60
Usage reporting………………………………. $75/$60

Business Applications (ASP)

Priority to each customer’s requirements….. $100/$90

Streaming Services
Blocking delivery of undesirable services…. $50/$40

VPN Services
Low cost, software based …………………… $150/$100
TOTAL MARGIN POTENTIAL:
$460/customer = +820%
Source: Session M16C, SuperNet 2001
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 5
 But…but… Bandwidth…...

“ “Money and sex, storage and bandwidth: only too

much is ever enough”
•Arno Penzias - Former Head of Bell Labs, and Nobel prizewinner

“The worldwide services market is about $1 trillion

US. By 2005 it will be around $5-7 trillion. Look for
growth in new services.”
•Vinod Khosola - Kleiner Perkins Ventures

”According to CIMI Corporation, by 2010, 67% of

transactions will be on value networks, not the
Internet”

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc.

” 6
 So, What Will Fill Up The Pipe?

Source: Internet2 QBone WG

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 7
 QoS Models

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 8
 The IP QoS Pendulum
Time

No state Aggregated Per-flow state

state

IntServ / RSVP
Best Effort DiffServ

1. The original IP service

2. First efforts at IP QoS

3. Seeking simplicity and scale

4. Bandwidth Optimization & e2e SLAs

((IntServ+DiffServ+ Traffic
Engineering))
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 9
 The Cisco QoS Framework
Mission Critical Multimedia
VoIP Video Conference, VPNs
Services Collaborative Computing

PROVISIONING & MONITORING

POLICY-BASED NETWORKING

IntServ DiffServ MPLS Hybrid

Signaling Techniques (RSVP, DSCP*, ATM (UNI/NNI))

Classification & Marking Techniques (DSCP, MPLS EXP, NBAR, etc.)

Congestion Avoidance Techniques (WRED)

Traffic Conditioners (Policing, Shaping)

Congestion Management Techniques (WFQ, CBWFQ, LLQ)

Link Efficiency Mechanisms (Compression, Fragmentation)

Frame PPP FE,Gig.E Wireless BroadBand

SDLC ATM, POS
Relay HDLC 10GE Fixed,Mobile Cable,xDSL

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 10

 Differentiated Services
Architecture - DiffServ

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 11
 Differentiated Services
The IETF DiffServ Model

• Use 6 bits in IP header to sort traffic into “Behavior

Aggregates”…AKA Classes!
• Defines a number of “Per Hop Behaviors - PHBs”
• Two-Ingredient Recipe:
Condition the Traffic at the Edges
Invoke the PHBs in the Core
• Use PHBs to Construct Services such as Virtual
Leased Line!

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 12

 The Hook for IPv4 Classification

Referred to as Packet Classification or Coloring

Standard IPV4: Bits 0-2 Called IP Precedence (Three MSB)

Layer 3 (DiffServ Uses Six ToS bits…: Bits 0-5, with Two Reserved)
IPV4

Version ToS
Len ID offset TTL Proto FCS IP-SA IP-DA Data
Length 1 Byte

Layer 3 Mechanisms Provide End-to-End Classification

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 13

 IPv4 ToS vs. DS-Field

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 14

 Defined PHBs

• Expedited Forwarding (EF): RFC2598

dedicated low delay queue
Comparable to Guaranteed B/W in IntServ
• Assured Forwarding (AF): RFC2597
4 queues  3 drop preferences
Comparable to Controlled Load in IntServ
• Class Selector: Compat. with IP Prec
• Default (best effort)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 15

 AF PHB Group Definition
AF Class 1: 001dd0

AF Class 2: 010dd0

AF Class 3: 011dd0

AF Class 4: 100dd0

dd = drop preference

Eg. AF12 = Class 1, Drop 2, thus “001100”

• 4 independently-forwarded AF classes
• Within each AF class, 3 levels of drop priority! This is very
useful to protect conforming to a purchased, guarantee rate,
while increasing chances of packets exceeding contracted rate
being dropped if congestion is experienced in the core.

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 16

 The DiffServ Traffic Conditioner

•Classifier: selects a packet in a traffic stream based on the content of some portion
of the packet header
•Meter: checks compliance to traffic parameters (e.g., Token Bucket) and passes
result to marker and shaper/dropper to trigger particular action for in/out-of-profile
packets
•Marker: Writes/rewrites the DSCP value
•Shaper: delay some packets for them to be compliant with the profile

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 17

 The DiffServ Architecture
(RFC-2475)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 18

 Cisco IOS DiffServ

• Cisco IOS 12.1(5)T+ & 12.2+ are fully

compliant with all the Core DiffServ
RFCs (RFCs: 2474,2475,2597,2598)
• Compliant Platforms*:
C36xx, C72xx, C75xx - Now
More Platforms in the Near Future...

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 19

 An Application Note

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 20
 Source Predictability

• TCP will keep at most a certain amount of

traffic in flight
We say it is “elastic”—rate is proportional to
latency
• Voice will send only and exactly as fast as
the coding algorithm permits (Also Video to
an extent)
We say it is “inelastic”

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 21

 TCP Flow Statistics

• >90% of sessions have ten packets each

way or less
Transaction mode (mail, small web page)
• >80% of all TCP traffic results from <10%
of the sessions, in high
rate bursts
It is these that we worry about managing

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 22

 Behavior of a High-Throughput /
Bulk-Transfer TCP Session
45
40
Congestion Avoidance Phase
35
Linear Growth
30
25
20
15
10 Slow Start
5 Exponential Growth

0
0 10 20 30 40 50

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 23

 VoIP Delay Budget

Cumulative Transmission Path Delay

Satellite Quality
High Quality Fax Relay, Broadcast

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Time (msec)
Delay Target (max)

ITU’s G.114 Recommendation = 0–150 msec 1-Way Delay

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 24

 Application QoS Requirements

Voice FTP ERP and

Mission-Critical

Bandwidth Low to Moderate Low

Moderate to High

Random Drop Sensitive Low High Moderate

To High

Delay Sensitive High Low Low to

Moderate

Jitter Sensitive High Low Moderate

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 25

 DiffServ & MPLS

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 26
 DiffServ Scalability via
Aggregation
1000’s
of flows

Diff-Serv:
Diff-Serv:
Aggregated Processing in
Aggregation on Edge Core
Many flows associated with Scheduling/Dropping (PHB)
a Class (marked with DSCP) based on DSCP

DiffServ scalability comes from:

- aggregation of traffic on Edge
- processing of Aggregate only in Core

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 27

 MPLS Scalability via Aggregation
1000’s
of flows

MPLS:
MPLS:
Aggregated Processing in
Aggregation on Edge Core
Many flows associated with Forwarding based on label
a Forwarding Equivalent
Class (marked with label)

MPLS scalability comes from:

- aggregation of traffic on Edge
- processing of Aggregate only in Core
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 28
 MPLS & DiffServ - The Perfect
Match!
1000’s
of flows

MPLS: flows
associated with DS:
FEC, mapped Scheduling/Dropping
into one label based on DSCP
MPLS:
DS: flows associated Switching
with Class, mapped based on
to DSCP Label

Because of same scalability goals, both models do:

- aggregation of traffic on Edge
- processing of Aggregate only in Core

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 29

 MPLS - So What’s New?
The Shim Header!!
Non-MPLS MPLS
Diff-Serv Domain Diff-Serv Domain
IPv4 Packet MPLS Header

DSCP
DSCP

0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label | EXP |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

• DSCP field is not directly visible to MPLS Label Switch Routers

(they forward based on MPLS Header)
• Information on DiffServ must be made visible to LSR in MPLS
Header (using EXP field / Label)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 30

 DiffServ o MPLS : “Coloring”
MPLS Frames

• This describes how “DiffServ” information is conveyed to

LSRs in MPLS Header
• Two methods:
– E-LSP {{ Cisco IOS 12.1(5)T, 12.0(11)ST }}
“Queue” inferred from Label and EXP field
“Drop priority” inferred from label and EXP
field
– L-LSP {{ Planned, once an RFC }}
“Queue” inferred exclusively from Label
“Drop priority” inferred from EXP field

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 31

 The E-LSP Story...

LDP/RSVP LSR LDP/RSVP

E-LSP

AF1
EF

• E-LSPs can be established by various label binding protocols

(LDP or RSVP)…no new Signalling Needed.
• Example above illustrates support of EF and AF1 on a single
E-LSP (Note: This is the plain old LSP established for MPLS
Switching)
Note: EF and AF1 packets travel on single LSP (single label)
but are enqueued in different queues (different EXP values)
• Queue & Drop Precedence is selected based on EXP

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 32

 L- LSP Example (Tomorrow)
Supporting 64 Classes!
LDP/RSVP LDP/RSVP
LSR

L-LSPs

• L-LSPs can be established by various label binding

protocols (LDP or RSVP)…EXTENSIONS REQUIRED!
• Example above illustrates support of EF and AF1 on
separate L-LSPs
– EF and AF1 packets travel on separate LSPs and are
enqueued in different queues (different label values)
– Queue selected based on Label, Drop Precedence Selected
with Optional EXP field.

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 33

 Cisco DiffServ o MPLS

• Cisco IOS 12.1(5)T

• C72xx, C75xx, C12xxx [12.0(ST)]
• MPLS QoS Enhancements*
• Operate exclusively on EXP bits
• Leave the IP ToS Byte Untouched
• QoS is QoS!
– Some New Stuff, But Same Goals!
– Service the Applications!!

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 34

 The QoS is In the Details!

• So, What’s Changed?:

Can Classify based on the EXP bits
(MQC/CAR)
Can Mark the EXP bits
(MQC/Policer/CAR)
WRED & WFQ & MDRR act on EXP bits
(instead of Precedence/DSCP)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 35

 A Note on CoS Translation…
(Preservation of Classification e2e)
• Developed as flexible translation:
• CoS = {IP Prec., DSCP, EXP, ATM CLP, F.Relay DE-Bit, 802.1Q/p}
• CoS translation = Translation from Any (Except ATM CLP) to Any

• Extensions to the “Modular QoS CLI”:

1) Extended “matches” for “class-maps”:
match fr-de
match cos <0-7>
match ip precedence n
match ip dscp n
match mpls exp <0-7>
2) Extended “sets” for “policy-maps”:
set atm-clp
set fr-de
set cos <0-7>
set ip precedence n
set ip dscp n
set mpls exp n
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 36
 MQC CoS Translation: An
Example
Incoming IP packets with Prec=p
to be transmitted with EXP=e

LDP LSR LDP

IP LSP
MPLS

class-map inputc class-map outputc

match ip prec p match qos-group q
policy-map inputp policy-map outputp
class inputc class outputc
set qos-group q set mpls exp e
Incoming interface> service-policy input inputp Outgoing interface> service policy output outputp

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 37

 MPLS Traffic Engineering

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 38
 The “Fish” Problem

R8 R3
R4

R5
R2

R1 R6 R7

•IP Uses Shortest Path Destination-Based Routing

•Shortest Path May Not Be the only path
•Alternate Paths May Be under-Utilized while the
shortest Path Is over-Utilized
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 39
 An LSP Tunnel
(A Constrained MPLS Label Switched Path)

R8 R3
R4

R5
R2

R1 R6 R7

Labels, Like VCIs (ATM) Can Be Used to Establish Virtual Circuits

Normal Route R1->R2->R3->R4->R5
Tunnel: R1->R2->R6->R7->R4
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 40
 LSP Tunnel Setup
(a.k.a Traffic Engineering [TE] Tunnel)
R8 R9
R3
R4
R2 Pop

R5
R1
32
49
R6 R7
17

22

Setup: Path (R1->R2->R6->R7->R4->R9) Tunnel ID 5, Path ID 1

Reply: Communicates Labels and Label Operations

Reserves Bandwidth on Each Link

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 41

 Real-World MPLS TE Use!

Find route & set-up tunnel for 20 Mb/s from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel for 10 Mb/s from POP2 to POP4

WAN area

POP1 POP4

POP
POP2

POP POP
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 42
 MPLS TE & QoS –
The Relationship

• MPLS TE designed as tool to improve backbone efficiency independently of core QoS

techniques:
MPLS TE compute routes for aggregates across all PHBs.
A Single Chunk of Bandwidth requested for the
Tunnel
MPLS TE performs admission control over a global b/w pool.
Un-aware of bandwidth allocated to each Class / PHB
• MPLS TE and MPLS DiffServ:
Can run simultaneously in a network.
Can provide their own individual benefits
TE distributes aggregate load
DiffServ provides differentiation)
Are unaware of each other

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 43

 DiffServ-Aware
Traffic Engineering

©
© 2001,
2001, Cisco
Cisco Systems,
Systems, Inc.
Inc. 44
 Delay/Load Trade-Off
Delay

Good
Best-Effort
Target

Data
Premium
Target

Voice Percentage
Target Priority
Traffic
0% %  % 100%

If I can keep EF traffic <  % , I will keep EF delay under M1 ms

If I can keep AF1 traffic <  % , I will keep AF1 delay under M2 ms

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 45

 Motivation for DiffServ-Aware TE
(DS-TE)

• Thus, with DiffServ, there are additional constraints to ensure the QoS of each
class:
- Good EF behavior requires that aggregate EF traffic is less
than small  % of link
- Good AF behaviors requires that aggregate AF traffic is less
than reasonable  % of link
• =>Cannot be enforced by current Aggregate TE
• => Requires DiffServ-Aware TE
• - Constraint Based Routing per Class with different
bandwidth constraints
• - Admission Control per Class over different
bandwidth pools (ie bandwidth allocated to class
queue)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 46

 The Trouble With DiffServ
(We Want it All, We Want it Now!)

• As currently formulated, DiffServ is strong on

simplicity and weak on guarantees
• Virtual Leased Line using EF is quite firm, but how
much can be deployed?
No topology-aware admission control
mechanism
• Example: How do I reject the “last straw” VoIP
TRUNK that will degrade service of calls & trunks
currently active?

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 47

 DiffServ-Aware TE:
Protocol Components

• Current IGP(*) extensions for TE:

advertise “unreserved TE bandwidth” (at each
preemption level)
• Proposed IGP(*) extensions for DS aware TE:
Class-Types= group of DiffServ classes sharing
the same bandwidth constraint (e.g. AF1x and
AF2x)
advertise “unreserved TE bandwidth” (at each
preemption level) for each Class-Type
(*) OSPF and ISIS
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 48
 DiffServ-Aware TE:
Protocol Components

• Current LSP-signalling (*) extensions for TE:

at LSP establishment signal TE tunnel parameters
(label, explicit route, affinity , preemption,…)
• Proposed LSP-signalling (*) extensions for
DS aware TE:
also signal the Class-Type
perform Class-Type aware CAC

(*) RSVP-TE and CR-LDP

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 49
 DiffServ - Aware TE:
Protocol Components

• Current Constraint Based Routing for TE:

compute a path such that on every link :
- there is sufficient “unreserved TE
bandwidth”
• Proposed Constraint Based Routing for DS aware
TE:
same CBR algorithm but satisfy bandwidth constraint
over the “unreserved bandwidth for the relevant Class-
Type” (instead of aggregate TE bandwidth)

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 50

 DS-TE Standardization Status

• Standardization effort initiated 2 IETFs ago

• Internet Drafts submitted at Dec 2000 IETF:
draft-ietf-mpls-diff-te-reqts-01.txt
draft-ietf-mpls-diff-te-ext-00.txt
draft-lefaucheur-diff-te-ospf-00.txt
draft-lefaucheur-diff-te-isis-00.txt

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 51

 Aggregate TE in a Best Effort
Network
Find route & set-up tunnel for 20 Mb/s from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel for 10 Mb/s from POP2 to POP4

WAN area

POP1 POP4

POP
POP2

POP POP
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 52
 Aggregate TE in a DiffServ
Network
Find route & set-up tunnel for 20 Mb/s (aggregate) from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel for 10 Mb/s (aggregate) from POP2 to POP4

WAN area

POP1 POP4

POP
POP2

POP POP
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 53
 DiffServ-Aware Traffic
Engineering
Find route & set-up tunnel for 5 Mb/s of EF from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel for 3 Mb/s of EF from POP2 to POP4

WAN area

POP1 POP4

POP
POP2
Find route & set-up tunnel for 15 Mb/s of BE from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel

POPfor 7 Mb/s of BE from POP2POP
to POP4
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 54
 DS-TE Applications

Guaranteed Bandwidth Services

©©2001,
2001,Cisco
CiscoSystems,
Systems,Inc.
Inc. 55
 DiffServ-Aware Traffic
Engineering
Find route & set-up tunnel for 5 Mb/s of EF from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel for 3 Mb/s of EF from POP2 to POP4

WAN area

POP1 POP4

POP
POP2
Find route & set-up tunnel for 15 Mb/s of BE from POP1 to POP4

Find route & set-up tunnel

POPfor 7 Mb/s of BE from POP2POP
to POP4
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 56
 MPLS Guaranteed Bandwidth

• Combining MPLS DiffServ & DS-TE to achieve

strict point-to-point QoS guarantees
• A new “sweet-spot” on the QoS Spectrum
Aggregated State (DiffServ)
Aggregate Admission Control (DS-TE)
Aggregate Constraint Based Routing (DS-TE)

No state Aggregated Per-flow state

state
MPLS DiffServ
+ MPLS DS-TE
Best effort DiffServ RSVP v1/
MPLS Intserv
guaranteed
bandwidth
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 57
 MPLS Guaranteed Bandwidth

• “Guaranteed QoS” is a unidirectional point-to-point

bandwidth guarantee from Site-Sx to Site-Sy: Point-to-
Point
• “Site” may include a single host, a “pooling point”, etc.
N2 Mb/s
guarantee
CE 11.5

10.2 CE N1 Mb/s guarantee

CE
10.1
11.6 CE

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 58

 MPLS Guaranteed Bandwidth

• “Guaranteed QoS” is a unidirectional point-to-point

bandwidth guarantee from Site-Sx to Site-Sy
• “Site” may include a single host, a “pooling point”, etc.

N2 Mb/s
guarantee CE 11.5

10.2 CE N1 Mb/s guarantee

CE
11.6 CE 10.1

DS-TE LSP for AF or EF, used to transport guaranteed

bandwidth traffic edge-to-edge
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 59
 DS-TE Applications

Voice over MPLS Trunks

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 60

 Target Applications

• Voice Trunking
Solution 1: Toll Bypass with Voice Network
Solution 2: Toll Bypass with Voice/Data Converged Network
Solution 3: Toll Bypass with VoIP Network
• Virtual Leased Lines
Solution 4: Virtual Leased Lines – Serial Links
Solution 5: Virtual Leased Lines – Frame Relay
Solution 6: Virtual Leased Lines – ATM

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 61

 Solution 1: Toll Bypass with Voice
Network

PSTN – Class 5
Traditional TDM legacy
Network switches

Traditional PBX with PBX with Traditional

Telephony Packet Packet Telephony
Interface Interface
Toll Bypass

PE GB Tunnel PE

Mapping QoS on

Solution

+ =
QoS on PE Diffserv Aware
Requirements Router Traffic to
Tunnels + Core
Routers
Traffic Engineering

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 62

 Solution 2: Toll Bypass with Voice/Data
Converged Network

Class 5
PBX with PSTN –
legacy
Circuit Traditional TDM
switches
Emulation Network
Interface

CE CE

Enterprise Toll Bypass Enterprise

LAN LAN
PE GB Tunnel PE

Mapping QoS on
Solution
Requirements  QoS on CE
Router
+
QoS on PE
Router
+ Traffic to
Tunnels + Core
Routers = Diffserv Aware
Traffic Engineering

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 63

 Solution 3: Toll Bypass with VoIP
Network

PSTN – Class 5
Traditional TDM legacy
IP Phone switches IP Phone
Network

Multi-
Multi-
Service
Service
Switch
Switch

CE
CE

Enterprise Toll Bypass Enterprise

LAN LAN
PE GB Tunnel PE

Mapping QoS on
Solution
Requirements  QoS on CE
Router
+
QoS on PE
Router
+ Traffic to
Tunnels + Core
Routers =
Diffserv Aware
Traffic Engineering

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 64

 Voice Trunking - Summary
Class 5
PSTN –
Traditional TDM legacy switches
Central
Central Network
Traditional Office Office Traditional
Telephony Telephony

MPLS Network
VoIP VoIP
Gateway Gateway
Toll Bypass
Voice Trunking
PE GB Tunnel PE

PE
CE CE
Enterprise PE Enterprise
LAN LAN
PE
PE
Regular TE Tunnel
VPN Service

Internet
Internet Access
Access Router
Enterprise Router
Internet Service LAN Enterprise
LAN

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 65

 Solution 4: Virtual Leased Lines –
Serial Links

MPLS Backbone

Serial Link
Serial Link
PE PE
Virtual Leased DS-TE Tunnel
Line (DS-TE +
QoS)
CE CE
Serial IP
or PPP or Serial IP
HDLC over or PPP or
MPLS HDLC over
MPLS

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 66

 Solution 5: Virtual Leased Lines –
FR Networks

Any Transport over

MPLS (AToM)
Tunnel

MPLS
Backbone

PE PE
Virtual Leased Line DS-TE Tunnel
(DS-TE + QoS)

Frame Relay
Frame Relay

Frame Relay DLCI

CPE Router, FRAD

CPE Router, FRAD

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 67

 Solution 6: Virtual Leased Lines –
ATM Networks

Any Transport over

MPLS (AToM)
Tunnel

MPLS
Backbone

PE PE
Virtual Leased Line DS-TE Tunnel
(DS-TE + QoS)

ATM
ATM

ATM Virtual Circuits

CPE Router
CPE Router

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 68

 QoS Management

©
© 2001,
2001, Cisco
Cisco Systems,
Systems, Inc.
Inc. 69
 Complete Service Management
CONFIGURE VERIFICATION TROUBLESHOOT

XML XML
Network Wide

Qos network ServiceRWAN

level
QPM CW2000
policy configuration troubleshooting
Network
CW2000service
SMS (IPM)
level verification
Device

Per-device traffic
QDM, ... Per-device
QDM, ... traffic
class configuration class monitoring
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 70
 The Service Level Management
Architecture
A proven architecture

http interface
SNMP Data
Collector
Aggregator
ME1100 http
http XML

HTTP Interface
Local
Store CW2000 SMS http XML
SLM Server
http interface

Data http
http XML
Collector
SNMP

http XML
Aggregator Server
ME1100 Store

Local
Store
SDK
Third Party
Third Party
Application
Third Party
Application
Application
© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 71
 Summary

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 72

 How to Build
A “Point-to-Cloud” Service?

• Scenario 1:
– Constrained Access
– Unconstrained Backbone
Best-Effort o MPLS
DiffServ o IP DiffServ o IP
MPLS VPN

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 73

 How to Build
A “Point-to-Cloud” Service?
• Scenario 2:
– Constrained Access
– Constrained Backbone

DiffServ o MPLS
DiffServ o IP DiffServ o IP
MPLS VPN

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 74

 How to Build
A “Point-to-Cloud” Service?
• Scenario 3:
– Constrained Access
– Constrained Backbone
– Optimised Backbone (Traffic Eng.)

DiffServ o MPLS, GB-TE

DiffServ o IP DiffServ o IP
MPLS VPN

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 75

© 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. 76