3 ms·

Yes! However LDP and and especially RSVP weren't. Thankfully with Segment Routing and PCE it's kind of solved problem now.

by betaby 4y ago

craigching 4y ago
What are all these acronyms? I read the first paragraph but it really doesn't give much context if you're an outsider.
- tushar-r 4y ago
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3031#page-6 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3031#page-6 or if you'd prefer wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching
- nu11ptr 4y ago
  Here you go - it might not help much, this is a pretty specialized field of network engineering. If you were in a service provider, you were likely aware of this tech otherwise probably not at all. From my head: LDP = Label Distribution Protocol RSVP = ReSource Reservation Protocol PCE = Path Computation Element BGP = Border Gateway Protocol L2VPN = Layer 2 Virtual Private Network IGP = Interior Gateway Protocol MPLS = Multi Protocol Label Switching TE = Traffic Engineering FRR = Fast ReRoute SR = Segment Routing SP = Service Provider
great_wubwub 4y ago
LDP gave us BGP-free cores. Don't underestimate how much that changed the game in large networks. BGP converged faster and core routers didn't need to do anywhere near as much. SR is a better way to do that now and LDP/IGP sync was a huge pain, but IMO BGP-free cores changed the SP game as much as route reflectors did. LDP also enabled L2VPN and was an IGP-bound mechanism to enable MPLS VPN, which was always the killer app for MPLS. LDP by itself? Meh. But it opened up a whole lot of other possibilities.
kazen44 4y ago
im my opinion, segment routing is more complex then a proper RSVP implementation. running a PCE also adds a massive failure domain compared to the decentralised nature of RSVP. Does RSVP have a million bells and whistles? yes. Segment routing also has a billion different bells and whistles, and those are far less mature.
teleforce 4y ago
We have just performed basic delay performance comparison with MPLS, SR-MPLS, and SRv6 in a small network case study with Cisco Modeling Lab (CML) and the initial results are very promising. SRv6 has about 48% improvement over original MPLS and 10% improvement over SR-MPLS. This delay improvement mainly due to the lack of LDP in Segment Routing approach. Perhaps later we can check other performance metrics as well and without LDP the node processing overheads will also be much better as well compared to the original MPLS. Scaling to the size of the global internet should further increase the improvement margins even more.

Yes! However LDP and and especially RSVP weren't. Thankfully with Segment Routing and PCE it's kind of solved problem now.

by betaby 4y ago

Yes! However LDP and and especially RSVP weren't. Thankfully with Segment Routing and PCE it's kind of solved problem now.

craigching 4y ago

What are all these acronyms? I read the first paragraph but it really doesn't give much context if you're an outsider.

tushar-r 4y ago
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3031#page-6 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3031#page-6 or if you'd prefer wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching
nu11ptr 4y ago
Here you go - it might not help much, this is a pretty specialized field of network engineering. If you were in a service provider, you were likely aware of this tech otherwise probably not at all. From my head: LDP = Label Distribution Protocol RSVP = ReSource Reservation Protocol PCE = Path Computation Element BGP = Border Gateway Protocol L2VPN = Layer 2 Virtual Private Network IGP = Interior Gateway Protocol MPLS = Multi Protocol Label Switching TE = Traffic Engineering FRR = Fast ReRoute SR = Segment Routing SP = Service Provider

great_wubwub 4y ago

LDP gave us BGP-free cores. Don't underestimate how much that changed the game in large networks. BGP converged faster and core routers didn't need to do anywhere near as much. SR is a better way to do that now and LDP/IGP sync was a huge pain, but IMO BGP-free cores changed the SP game as much as route reflectors did. LDP also enabled L2VPN and was an IGP-bound mechanism to enable MPLS VPN, which was always the killer app for MPLS. LDP by itself? Meh. But it opened up a whole lot of other possibilities.

kazen44 4y ago

im my opinion, segment routing is more complex then a proper RSVP implementation. running a PCE also adds a massive failure domain compared to the decentralised nature of RSVP. Does RSVP have a million bells and whistles? yes. Segment routing also has a billion different bells and whistles, and those are far less mature.

teleforce 4y ago

We have just performed basic delay performance comparison with MPLS, SR-MPLS, and SRv6 in a small network case study with Cisco Modeling Lab (CML) and the initial results are very promising. SRv6 has about 48% improvement over original MPLS and 10% improvement over SR-MPLS. This delay improvement mainly due to the lack of LDP in Segment Routing approach. Perhaps later we can check other performance metrics as well and without LDP the node processing overheads will also be much better as well compared to the original MPLS. Scaling to the size of the global internet should further increase the improvement margins even more.