The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Doubt in MPLS-VPN ....
Shirish Indurkar wrote 29 October 2001 11:29 > My question is how we can be sure that the MPLS-VPN Packet > is really Safe > when it traverses through the P routers ? I mean how the > corporate information > is still secured when it passes through the P routers ? It is > still traversing > through the Public infrastructure unencrypted . NH=> One mechanism that you can consider for using is to make sure each LSP has a unique means of identification in the data-plane. In the MPLS OAM work this is indeed a primary consideration wrt fault detection/handling. We define a CV (connectivity verification) packet that is periodically sent from the source to the sink of the LSP....its very similar to having a 'hello' function, but here its only relevant to the data-plane and decoupled from the routing/processing of any control-plane which is present. The CV contains a network-wide unique identifier. This allows all the following faults to be automatically detected by the operator: - simple breaks in connectivity (either below or within the MPLS fabric) - swapped LSPs - unintended merging of LSPs (where the offending LSP may or may not be affected). So if a VPN's traffic is leaking out (or being leaked into) you can detect this by noting the occurrence of the unexpected CV flow....and you can then take the appropriate action which is dependent on the specific defect type (eg suppress traffic to protect customer traffic integrity) as necessary. It should also help Ops people diagnose the problem more efficiently, and allow operators to develop consistent QoS/availability SLAs (since these are based on well-defined defect states). The customer can still encrypt the traffic of course for complete security......the above is primarily targeted at making fault-management simpler and more efficient for the operator, though it clearly allows the operator to offer some stronger integrity verification mechanisms and a provides basis for SLA specification. Note - the technique is not dependent on having any specific server technology (under MPLS) or client technology (over MPLS). It is also decoupled from whatever control-plane is being used (inc none). It therefore has generic application, eg ATM/MPLS interworking say. |
|