Reducing or eliminating routing microloops in networks having a CLOS topology, such as data center CLOS networks employing the exterior border gateway protocol (EBGP) for example
The problem of routing micro-loops in networks having a CLOS topology, such as data center CLOS networks employing the exterior border gateway protocol (eBGP) for example, is solved by: (a) receiving, on an interface of one of the nodes, a datagram, the datagram including destination information; (b...
Gespeichert in:
1. Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Format: | Patent |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The problem of routing micro-loops in networks having a CLOS topology, such as data center CLOS networks employing the exterior border gateway protocol (eBGP) for example, is solved by: (a) receiving, on an interface of one of the nodes, a datagram, the datagram including destination information; (b) determining a next hop and an egress interface using (1) an identifier of the interface on which the datagram was received, (2) the destination information of the received datagram, and (3) stored forwarding information such that a routing micro-loop is avoided without discarding the datagram; and (c) forwarding the datagram via the egress interface. For example, this problem may be solved by (a) receiving, on an interface a node of the CLOS network, a datagram, the datagram including destination information; (b) looking up, using the destination information of the received datagram and stored forwarding information, a next hop egress interface on the node; (c) determining whether or not the next hop egress interface on the node is the same as the interface on which the datagram was received; and (d) responsive to a determination that the next hop egress interface on the node is the same as the interface on which the datagram was received, (1) replacing the next hop egress interface with a safe multipath next hop egress interface, and (2) forwarding the datagram via the safe multipath next hop egress interface, and otherwise, responsive to a determination that the next hop egress interface on the node is not the same at the interface on which the datagram was received, simply forwarding the datagram via the next hop egress interface. |
---|