Abstract
Objective: To propose a solution to support traffic engineering in IPv6 networks; such proposal is based on IPv6 capabilities. Methods/Analysis: Our proposal uses the IPv6 flow label field for packet switching in IPv6 networks and it also uses extended traffic engineering protocols like RSVP-TE and OSPFv3-TE. An advantage of our approach is that an MPLS transport network is not required to support traffic engineering. Our solution makes use of the tunneling concept, which has a high potential to support traffic engineering because it allows separation of different traffic among service/users in different tunnels. In this paper, we describe the main characteristics of our proposal and also, we present the evaluation of load balancing, which is a typical situation in traffic engineering studies. We compare our approach with MPLS performance because it is a technology commonly used to support traffic engineering. Findings/Results: Results show that load balancing in our solution has similar performance than MPLS when the number of tunnels over links is optimized. Improvements: This evaluation proves that our layer-3 proposal has traffic engineering capabilities in IPv6 networks independently of lower layers. Keywords: IPv6, IPv6 Flow Label, Load Balancing, Packet Switching, Traffic Engineering
Highlights
An important problem in the current Internet is the use of the shortest path routing algorithm, which leads to congestion of certain common paths to many communications
In order to evaluate PSA-TE6 and compare it with Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) performance, we assume that bandwidth percentage of each demand that differentiates one technology from the other according to the length of the packetis represented as parameter λ; we take as reference to PSA-TE6 as λ=1, and λ>1 for MPLS case
IPv6 networks would occupy less bandwidth than MPLS
Summary
An important problem in the current Internet is the use of the shortest path routing algorithm, which leads to congestion of certain common paths to many communications. Both solutions (PSA-TE6 and MPLS) use the tunneling concept (referred as Label Switching Path or LSP), which has a great traffic engineering potential that allows separation of diverse traffic for different service/users in different tunnels In both cases (PSA-TE6 and MPLS) overload difficulties in routers can be presented if the number of tunnels is not limited and the load balancing is not optimized. PSA-TE6 is a new solution proposed to support traffic engineering in IPv6 networks The goal of this architecture is to use the IPv6 flow label field for packet switching in IPv6 networks in a manner similar to how MPLS1 works but without the need of an MPLS architecture being installed. Our proposal and the two mentioned above use the label switching concept via IPv6 flow label switching in a similar manner to how MPLS works, our proposal presents important differences that strengthen traffic engineering support in IPv6 networks.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
