Abstract:
If an active router Master Control Processor (MCP) fails, a backup MCP switches over without interrupting peer network router connections, because all previously established connection parameters are replicated on both MCPs. Once the MCP programs line cards, the packet forwarding modules and embedded system function without further involvement of the MCP until the next programming update. Messages flow through the backup MCP and then through the active MCP, which outputs messages through the backup MCP. Thus the backup MCP captures state changes before and after the active MCP. Both MCPs maintain replicated queues in which they store replicated messages awaiting processing or retransmission. If acknowledgment of receiving a transmitted message is received from a destination peer router, that message is deleted from both MCPs. If acknowledgment is not received within a predetermined interval, the stored message is retransmitted. Message splicing prevents lost and partially transmitted messages during and after switchovers.

Description:
RELATED APPLICATIONS  
       [0001]    This application is related to co-pending and commonly assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 09/703,057, entitled “System And Method For IP Router With an Optical Core,” filed Oct. 31, 2000, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference. 
     
    
     
       TECHNICAL FIELD  
         [0002]    This application relates to the field of optical communication networks, and particularly to TCP connection protection switching.  
         BACKGROUND  
         [0003]    Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) is an underlying connection protocol that is typically used for all types of network communication. Different network routers set up connections with their peer routers using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) over TCP to get route information from their peer routers allowing them to construct essentially an internal map of the network and to select the route that they should use, as well as verification that their peers are operating correctly. This is accomplished by sending various keep-alive and route update packets back and forth to make sure that their peers are still correctly functioning.  
           [0004]    Peer routers view a conventional host router to which they are connected as a single logical entity represented essentially by the Master Control Processor (MCP). The MCP constructs route maps by establishing BGP adjacencies with peer routers using Dynamic Routing Protocol (DRP). Peer routers therefore infer that, if the MCP goes down or if their connection with it is terminated, the entire host router must have failed, and they will route around it. Conventional routers sometimes have dual redundant MCPs, but when the active MCP fails, the backup MCP essentially reboots and starts a new copy of the DRP software, which must then reestablish connections with all peer network routers. This switch-over event is visible to those peer routers, because they had established connections with the active MCP, the BGP protocol had established adjacencies with the conventional host router&#39;s BGP protocol, so they had an active link with the active MCP about which they had negotiated various parameters and routes they wanted to use. When the active MCP went down for whatever reason, those TCP connections were terminated and peer routers at the other ends of the connections knew that. They saw the connection as being closed, because a certain period of time after a link terminates, if the peer router at the other end tries to send traffic and receives no acknowledgments back, it infers that it has either lost a network path to the other end point of the link or that the other party has failed. Similar to talking through a telephone system, if there is a click and then silence, one party assumes they have lost the connection with the other party. Accordingly, if an active MCP were to fail, even if the backup MCP came on line in a conventional host router and started the routing protocol all over again, it basically would have to establish new connections. In the telephone analogy, if the phone hangs up during a conversation, one party must call the other party back.  
           [0005]    Desired in the art are a system and method for network connection protocol, which maintains connections transparently between routers in the event of failure of an active MCP, such that a new set of connections between host router and peer routers does not have to be reestablished.  
         SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
         [0006]    The present invention is directed to a system and method in which a router contains redundant Master Control Processors, such that if for example the active MCP fails for some reason, then the backup MCP takes over, without other peer routers being aware of the switch-over between the redundant active and backup MCPs. Both MCPs run replicated DRP protocol software on duplicated application sockets. Consequently these peer routers perceive an active connection that is up and remains up across the switch-over and furthermore has the same state as before. Despite the fact that peer routers are actually connected to a different MCP as a result of a switch-over, all the parameters that they had previously established about the connection are still valid since they are replicated on both MCPs.  
           [0007]    The present large distributed router system can pass traffic, even without the presence of the MCP. Once the MCP programs packet forwarding modules (PFMs) on the line cards for certain information based tables and the like, then the hardware, the line card processors, and the embedded system are able to forward traffic without direct involvement of the MCP on a packet-by-packet basis. Thus the MCP generates the control tables and distributes those across the router, but once so programmed, the router passes traffic according to the way it was programmed, until the DRP software in cooperation with other routers decides to change or update and distribute some routes. Accordingly, the present system is not a monolithic entity, but rather a decentralized set of entities. Nevertheless, peer routers, when they see those connections close, perceive that as a failure of the entire router. To avoid this, TCP connections are kept open across switch-over events from the active MCP to the backup MCP.  
           [0008]    During normal operation, messages in some embodiments are routed in an input data stream through both the active and backup MCPs, such that the input data stream passes first through the backup MCP and second through the active MCP. Thus the backup MCP has read every incoming message and captured any state change before it reaches the active MCP, maintaining synchronism between the two MCPs. Outgoing messages from the active MCP then return to the backup MCP, which thus reads both incoming and outgoing messages. Additionally, in some embodiments both MCPs maintain replicated sets of output queues in which they store replicated messages that are transmitted to the peer router. If an acknowledgment for a transmitted message is received from the destination peer router, then the replicated message is deleted from queues in both MCPs. If acknowledgment is not received within a predetermined time period, then the stored replica message is retransmitted by either MCP.  
           [0009]    This approach can be applied to protocols other than TCP, for example User Datagram Protocol (UDP) over Internet Protocol (IP). In some embodiments message splicing is performed in connection with a switch-over between active and backup MCPs, assuring that no messages are lost and that no partial message is received in a peer router.  
           [0010]    Elements utilized in some embodiments of the invention are described in co-pending and commonly assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 09/703,057, entitled “System And Method For IP Router With an Optical Core,” filed Oct. 31, 2000, the disclosure of which has been incorporated herein by reference.  
           [0011]    The foregoing has outlined rather broadly the features and technical advantages of the present invention in order that the detailed description of the invention that follows may be better understood. Additional features and advantages of the invention will be described hereinafter which form the subject of the claims of the invention. It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the conception and specific embodiment disclosed may be readily utilized as a basis for modifying or designing other structures for carrying out the same purposes of the present invention. It should also be realized by those skilled in the art that such equivalent constructions do not depart from the spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims. The novel features which are believed to be characteristic of the invention, both as to its organization and method of operation, together with further objects and advantages will be better understood from the following description when considered in connection with the accompanying figures. It is to be expressly understood, however, that each of the figures is provided for the purpose of illustration and description only and is not intended as a definition of the limits of the present invention.  
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING  
       [0012]    For a more complete understanding of the present invention, reference is now made to the following descriptions taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawing, in which:  
         [0013]    [0013]FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating a duplicate processing approach to peer router connection protection in a TCP environment, according to an embodiment of the present invention;  
         [0014]    [0014]FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram representing rerouted message flows in the event of a failure of backup MCP;  
         [0015]    [0015]FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram representing rerouted message flows in the event of loss of active MCP and switch-over of active MCP functions to backup MCP;  
         [0016]    [0016]FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram illustrating the redundant communication paths that are used between MCPs and Packet Forwarding Modules (PFMs) in some embodiments of the present invention;  
         [0017]    [0017]FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating a protocol for seamless splicing of outgoing messages in the event of a switchover from active MCP to backup MCP, according to an embodiment of the present invention; and  
         [0018]    [0018]FIG. 6 is a flow diagram illustrating seamless splicing of the input message stream received by the DRP application in the event of a switch-over.  
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION  
       [0019]    [0019]FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating a duplicate processing approach to peer router connection protection in a TCP environment, according to an embodiment of the present invention. TCP is a reliable connection oriented protocol, which means that once an application sends data over to this protocol, the underlying protocol by way of the operating system guarantees that the data will be received on the other end, or else the connection is closed. So in other words, it is not a lossy protocol in the sense that some data is received and some is not. This is complicated, because the networks that the protocol is using to transmit the data are lossy, i.e., they lose data. One complication then is that every bit of data that is to be sent out must be stored in case it is not received by the peer router, and after a certain period of time, the peer either acknowledges it using conventional protocols, or the sender assumes that the data has been lost and it retransmits that data.  
         [0020]    [0020]FIG. 1 illustrates a redundant Master Control Processor (MCP) unit  10  containing an active MCP  11  and a backup MCP  12 . Each MCP  11 ,  12  contains a respective socket  13 ,  14  for duplicate copies of the connection application and Dynamic Routing Protocol (DRP). Active MCP  11  includes queues  23 ,  24 , and  25  associated with application socket  13 , and backup MCP  12  includes queues  21 ,  22 ,  26 , and  27  associated with application socket  14 , which are used for storage of incoming and outgoing messages and for retransmission of messages if necessary. An input link  101  carries incoming control and configuration messages into backup MCP  12 . An output link  114  sends out control and configuration messages and response messages to peer routers across the network. Queues  21  through  27  and application sockets  13  and  14  are interconnected through data links  102  through  113 .  
         [0021]    In some embodiments output queue  25  and retransmission queue  24 , both associated with application socket  13 , are combined into a single queue. Similarly, in some embodiments queues  26  and  27 , both associated with application socket  14 , are combined with one another. It should be noted that data links  102 ,  103 ,  104 ,  106 ,  107 ,  108 ,  110 , and  111  each lying entirely within respective MCP  11 ,  12  are typically not physical data links, but represent message flows only. Nevertheless, for purposes of simplicity these are referred to herein as data links.  
         [0022]    To maintain a TCP connection across two router systems during MCP switch-over, a number of considerations are of importance. First, it is important to arrange that any data transmitted over a connection can be received by the peer router at the other end of the connection, independent of whether active application socket  13  is still functioning or whether a switch-over has occurred and backup application socket  14  has taken over. This means that the retransmission queues, for example queue  24 , maintained on active MCP  11  have to be replicated on backup MCP  12 . Accordingly, outgoing packets from active DRP application socket  13  flow out from that socket to a peer router along a path through data link  107  and queues  24  and  25 , and then through data links  109  and  110  into corresponding queues  26  and  27  of backup MCP  12  before going out through output link  114  to the peer router. Outgoing packets are stored for retransmission in queue  24  on active MCP  11 , but they also flow through the backup system across data links  109  and  110 . Outgoing packets are then also stored in backup MCP  12  on a retransmission queue  26  similar to retransmission queue  24  of active MCP  11 . Thus outgoing packets can be retransmitted from either active or backup MCP  11  or  12 . The net result is that once the outgoing packets arrive in both queues, if the peer router did not receive the packet and if active MCP  11  is still alive, it can retransmit the packet from queue  24 . Outgoing packets also flow from active MCP  11  through data link  109  directly into output queue  27  of backup MCP  12 , from which they are transmitted through output link  114  to the peer router. On the other hand, if active MCP  11  has failed for some reason and backup MCP  12  has taken over, then backup MCP  12  can retransmit the replicated packet from queue  26  through data link  111  and subsequently out through output data link  114 .  
         [0023]    Unless backup MCP  12  becomes active, any data written by the backup application on application socket  14  is discarded through broken data link  103 , because the peer router is not aware of backup MCP  12  and does not communicate with it. If backup MCP  12  becomes active, then connection is established between backup application socket  14  and backup retransmission queue  26  through data link  103 .  
         [0024]    There are a number of ways familiar in the art, in which the application state can be maintained consistently between the active and backup applications. For example, the active application can send explicit messages to the backup copy of the application for each transaction, and the backup copy of the application can then update its own memory image regarding the transaction. Alternatively, the backup copy of the application can maintain the transactions in a log that is replayed when it takes over. There are a number of known techniques for keeping the states in synchronism across the two copies of the application.  
         [0025]    A further requirement is to keep existing communication connections with peer routers open seamlessly across a switch-over between active and backup MCPs  11  and  12  for any reason. When an incoming packet is received from a peer router, it is directed first to backup MCP  12  and is placed into queue  21  of application socket  14  in use by the backup routing application, such that the backup application can in effect eavesdrop all the incoming communication that is really being handled by the active routing application in active MCP  11 . An advantage of this particular topology is that backup MCP  12  can read all the messages that active MCP  11  receives. Furthermore, since packets are routed through backup MCP  12  first, active MCP  11  can never process a message unless backup MCP  12 , as long as it stays alive, is guaranteed to receive that message also. This technique is important for keeping the two MCPs  11  and  12  in synchronism, because active MCP  11  can then assume that backup MCP  12  received the same message and thus each MCP can independently take appropriate action on that message, for example updating its own route tables.  
         [0026]    Queues  22 ,  25 , and  27  are essentially output queues containing messages waiting for transmission. Queues  21  and  23  are input queues where received messages are stored awaiting processing by the routing application, which receives the messages using sockets  14  and  13 .  
         [0027]    Among incoming messages are acknowledgments associated with sequence numbers of outgoing messages that were previously sent. The TCP protocol numbers each byte sequentially in a stream of bytes flowing in one given direction between two applications, using a 32-bit unsigned sequence number that wraps back around to zero after reaching a 32 maximum value of 2 32 −1. This sequence number is inserted in the TCP header of a message. An acknowledgment number, consisting of the sequence number plus one, is sent from the receiving application back to the transmitting application, identifying the next sequence number that the sender of the acknowledgment expects to receive.  
         [0028]    As an acknowledgment number is received, meaning that a message corresponding to that acknowledgment number has been received on the peer router, it is processed by backup MCP  12 , which then deletes messages that are no longer needed for retransmission from queue  26  on backup MCP  12 . Dashed data link  112  from queue  21  to queue  26  represents the processing of acknowledgment numbers. Similarly, the same incoming message is propagated over to active MCP  11  via output queue  22  through data link  105  and into input queue  23 . Active MCP  11  notices at that point the acknowledgment numbers generated by the peer router indicating what the peer has received, and uses these acknowledgment numbers to delete any messages no longer needed for retransmission from queue  24 , as represented by dashed data link  113  between queues  23  and  24 .  
         [0029]    In the event of failure of backup MCP  12 , traffic is rerouted to flow through active MCP  11  only. FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram representing rerouted message flows in the event of a failure of backup MCP  12 . Messages are received from the peer router via input link  115  and placed into queue  23  for receipt and processing by active socket  13 . Messages are transmitted from active socket  13  to the peer router by way of queues  24  and  25  and via output link  116 .  
         [0030]    Similarly, in the event of loss of active MCP  11 , then traffic is rerouted to flow through backup MCP  12  only, which has now become the new active MCP. FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram representing rerouted message flows in the event of loss of active MCP  11  and switch-over of active MCP functions to backup MCP  12 . Messages are received from the peer router by way of input link  101  as in FIG. 1 and are placed in queue  21  for receipt by new active socket  14 . The transmit path of new active socket  14  is connected to queue  26  by way of link  103 , which is completed. Messages are transmitted from new active socket  14  to the peer router by way of queues  26  and  27 , link  111 , and output link  114 .  
         [0031]    Failure of the gigabit Ethernet link between the two MCPs (link  105  and /or  109  shown in FIG. 1) results in active MCP  11  operating in a non-protected mode, as if backup MCP  12  had failed. Backup MCP  12  goes offline until link  105  and/or  109  is repaired. Thus, in the event of failure of gigabit Ethernet link  105 ,  109  between MCPs  11 ,  12 , or of either active or backup MCP  11 ,  12 , message flow is essentially reconfigured so that the surviving active MCP is the sole receiver and sender of control and configuration traffic. Rerouting of the traffic is implemented by either IP address changes, IP address aliasing, or reprogramming the media access controller (MAC) address, all of which techniques are well known in the industry.  
         [0032]    [0032]FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram illustrating the redundant communication paths that are used between MCPs and Packet Forwarding Modules (PFMs) in some embodiments of the present invention. These redundant communication paths enable the MCP to communicate with peer routers and to distribute routing and control information to the PFMs, such that the PFMs once programmed can independently forward traffic to and from peer routers without direct intervention of the MCP until a subsequent programming update is needed. Accordingly, in the present decentralized environment the router is not a monolithic entity, but rather a collection of distributed entities.  
         [0033]    On the inbound side, PFMs relay incoming information that is to be used by the MCP to determine overall network topology. If a network topology change occurs, then considerable traffic will go through the network from one MCP on one router to a different MCP on a different router enabling them to communicate with one another, such that they all understand the new network topology. Accordingly, traffic flows both from the PFMs to the MCP and in the reverse direction from the MCP back to the PFMs and eventually out to other routers within the overall network.  
         [0034]    Links  101  and  114  on the Backup MCP and links  115  and  116  on the Active MCP as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 are interconnected with peer routers through the intermediate components shown in FIG. 4. Referring to FIG. 4, each MCP  11 ,  12  has redundant internal gigabit Ethernet links  504   w  and  504   p  connected to redundant internal GigE Hubs  503   w  and  503   p . Each of these links is bi-directional and can be used by the MCP for both receiving and sending messages as depicted by links  101  and  114  or links  115  and  116  of FIGS. 1 and 2.  
         [0035]    In operation, when a peer router (not shown in FIG. 4) sends a message to active MCP  11 , it first flows from the peer router through an external data link  401  to a Packet Forwarding Module (PFM)  501 . PFM  501  determines that the message is to be routed to active MCP  11 , and sends it over one of redundant internal links  160   a ,  160   s  to one of redundant ARB Interface Modules  31 - 1   a  through  31 - 16   a  and  31 - 1   s  through  31 - 16   s . From the ARB Interface Module the message is routed over one of redundant links  502   w  and  502   p  to one of redundant internal GigE Hubs  503   w  and  503   p , where it is then routed to active MCP  11  (using FIG. 2 link  115 ) or if both MCPs are operating in a protected configuration to backup MCP  12  (using FIG. 2 link  101 ).  
         [0036]    Referring to FIGS.  1 - 3 , when an MCP  11 ,  12  sends a message to a peer router, the message flows out through link  114  or  116 , and through one of redundant paired links depicted as links  504   w  and  504   p  in FIG. 4 to one of redundant GigE Hubs  503   w ,  504   p . From GigE HUB  503   w ,  503   p  the message is routed to an appropriate one of redundant ARB Interface Modules  31 - 1   a  through  31 - 16   a  and  31 - 1   s  through  31 - 16   s  using one of redundant links  502   w  or  502   p , and from there the message is passed back to PFM  501  using one of redundant links  160   a ,  160   s , where it is sent to the peer router over external data link  401 . Other elements represented in FIG. 4 do not participate in message flows between MCPs  11 ,  12  and PFMs  501 , and are therefore not discussed herein.  
         [0037]    A technical advantage of the present embodiment is that active MCP  11  transmits and receives the same amount of traffic in the protected mode as it would have in the unprotected mode. Accordingly, for each transaction active MCP  11  effectively receives one message and sends out one message. Backup MCP  12 , however, processes two messages, namely one received from the peer router via link  101  and sent to active MCP  11  via link  105 , and one received from active MCP  11  via link  109  and sent to the peer router via link  114 . This message flow topology minimizes the computation overhead on active MCP  11 , which often performs more processing than does backup MCP  12 .  
         [0038]    One consideration involves seamlessly splicing the output message stream transmitted to the peer router, which must see a logical sequence of complete messages, and which must not receive any partial messages. The output streams can be spliced only at a logical message boundary, such that only complete messages m, ., n−1 are generated by active MCP  11 , and complete messages n, ., o are generated by backup MCP  12 , which is becoming the new active MCP. To do that requires a protocol in which the data flowing through MCP unit  10  is basically divisible into message records or transactions. TCP is a stream oriented protocol, but BGP protocol is transaction oriented and is thus a candidate to implement message splicing.  
         [0039]    [0039]FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating a protocol for seamless splicing of outgoing messages in the event of a switchover from active MCP  11  to backup MCP  12 , according to an embodiment of the present invention. At block  551  the routing application running on active MCP  11  identifies at what points the messages can be spliced, and at block  552  passes this information to active socket  13 . In the present embodiment, at block  553  active MCP  11  encapsulates messages with additional information and then transmits the encapsulated messages to backup MCP  12 . Backup MCP  12  then interprets and strips the additional information at block  554  before forwarding the message to the peer router. Included in this additional information is the identification of splice point boundaries. In the event of a switch-over, backup MCP  12  that is transitioning to active splices new messages at block  555  from new active socket  14  via data link  103  immediately after a completed message in queue  26  as indicated by the splice point information received from active MCP  11  at block  554 .  
         [0040]    The present embodiment does not provide for seamless switch-over of any application socket that is in the process of connecting. That is to say, a socket switch-over is not seamless until active MCP  11  has completed a connection and at some time slightly thereafter, when socket  13  is paired with socket  14 , and they have achieved consistent state between each other. At that point a seamless switch-over of the socket becomes possible. If the DRP software is in the process of making a connection with a peer, that activity is lost during a switch-over. However, other peer routers that are already connected on other sockets paired for high availability are not lost. This does not present a problem, because the principal concern is with established connections where the routers have already invested substantially to exchange state information between one another, and where loss of that state information would mean that one router must reroute around the second router. When the connection is reestablished, the second router must retransfer all of those route tables, which can be very large.  
         [0041]    [0041]FIG. 6 is a flow diagram illustrating seamless splicing of the input message stream received by the DRP application in the event of a switch-over. Active socket  13  is created at block  601 , and connection is established with the peer router at block  602 . Then replica socket  14  is created at block  603  and begins eaves-dropping messages to and from active socket  13  and reconciling state at block  604 , such that replica socket  14  achieves a consistent state with active socket  13 . After replica socket  14  is created and readied for use, the first receive operation on replica socket  14  must return data from the beginning of a message and not start in the middle of a message. At block  605  the active DRP application must recognize at which particular message boundary the backup DRP application will begin to receive the duplicated messages on replica socket  14 . For example, messages having sequence numbers m, . . . , n−1 are received only by the active DRP application on socket  13 , but afterwards when sockets  13  and  14  are brought to a consistent state, messages having sequence numbers n, . . . , o are replicated and received by both sockets  13  and  14 . In the present embodiment, this is accomplished at block  605  by active DRP application identifying message boundaries via active socket  13  to the operating system, which at block  606  forwards an explicit message to backup MCP  12  via queue  25  and link  110 , indicating the sequence number at which messages should start on replica socket  14 . At block  607  backup MCP  12  discards all messages received from input queue  21  prior to the indicated sequence number, but at block  608  messages received after the indicated sequence number are queued on input queue  21  for reception via replica socket  14 .  
         [0042]    Additionally, the present embodiment is advantageous, even if it does not switch over seamlessly  100  percent of the time. If there are counter cases, rare states the system might reach, in which for short periods a transparent switch-over for a particular application socket is prohibited, as long as the vast majority of the TCP router connections are maintained on other sockets, for example with  90  percent or higher success, the present embodiment nevertheless provides a substantial advantage over existing routers.  
         [0043]    Although the present invention and its advantages have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations can be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Moreover, the scope of the present application is not intended to be limited to the particular embodiments of the process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, means, methods and steps described in the specification. As one of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate from the disclosure of the present invention, processes, machines, manufacture, compositions of matter, means, methods, or steps, presently existing or later to be developed that perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding embodiments described herein may be utilized according to the present invention. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to include within their scope such processes, machines, manufacture, compositions of matter, means, methods, or steps.