Subject: RE: QoS for BGP/MPLS VPNs in 2547bis

From: "Reddy, Vikram" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 00:10:55 -0500

Hi Robert,

Could you please point me to a draft/RFC which talks about propagating 
QoS policy in BGP update msg?

In the VPN-VR model QoS per VPN is achieved as follows.
When MPLS tunnels are set up between VRs belonging to a VPN, use
the configured QoS for the VPN to set up the LSP.

Thanks,
Vikram

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Raszuk [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:10 AM
To: Reddy, Vikram
Cc: 'Metz, Eduard'; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Subject: Re: QoS for BGP/MPLS VPNs in 2547bis

Reddy,

> My requirement is to be able to apply QoS to an entire VPN and to
> be able to do it automatically. No manual configuring should be
> done for each route.

Per incomming interface EXP bit setting is possible at least in both
commercial MPLS-VPN implementations I am familiar with. 

> We must also be able to reserve QoS dynamically when a the first route
> for the VPN is reserved and must be able to give all the routes learnt
later
> in the VPN the same QoS.

Giving QoS to the _routes_ is not a new concept. Why don't you use
regular qos policy propagation with bgp for all VPN routes or a subset
of those.

> Since 2547bis does not provide anything to uniquely identify a VPN
> and to identify traffic belonging to the VPN, there probably should
> be an extension/draft yo include that.

Appling different QoS per VPN is a pretty bad idea in itself. 

Now I am not sure if you are going to use LDP in the core or full mesh
of PE-PE traffic engineer tunnels. Both ways are possible to achive
decent diffserv with current 2547bis draft btw.

> VPN-VR does allow us to uniquely identify a VPN based on VPN-ID.
> This will give us more control on the policies we want to apply to the
> VPN.

Could you be a bit more specific how you are going to use this VPNID, in
particular how this VPN-ID will help you to identify the vpn data
belonging to this or different VPN for a selective qos treatment ?

R.

---

From: Eric Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:29:04 -0500

Vikram> In the VPN-VR model QoS per VPN is achieved as follows.
Vikram> When MPLS tunnels are set up between VRs belonging to a VPN, use
Vikram> the configured QoS for the VPN to set up the LSP.

If this is the functionality you seek in the context of 2547bis, I don't see
why you think you need any protocol extensions to provide it.

The VRFs corresponding to a particular  VPN would be configured for QoS, and
when a VPN-IP route  arrives with a new BGP next hop,  RSVP-TE could be used
to set up  a QoS-enabled tunnel to  that next hop, and this  tunnel could be
made  to be the  outgoing interface  for all  packets from  that VRF  to the
remote tunnel endpoint. 

Have I  misunderstood the functionality  you're discussing?  If not,  why do
you think you need protocol extensions?