IP Library Granted Patent US 7,808,887
Granted Patent B2
US 7,808,887 · App. 11/466,516 · Granted Oct 5, 2010

Bridge/router and method for avoiding packet replication during a failure in a network

Assignee: Alcatel Lucent
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 7,808,887
App. No.
11/466,516
Granted
Oct 5, 2010
Kind
B2
Abstract

A bridge/router and method are described herein that are capable of avoiding packet replication at layer 2 where there is a failure in a network. In one embodiment, the bridge/router is informed about a fault which occurred within the network. Then, the bridge/router makes a determination about whether or not multiple LSPs would be used to flood/carry the same IP traffic out off a single port. If yes, the first bridge/router chooses one of the LSPs to carry the IP traffic out the single port and then prevents the IP traffic from being carried on the remaining LSP(s) out the single port which avoids the packet replication on a link which is associated with the single port. If no, then the first bridge/router allows the IP traffic to be carried on the LSPs out off more than one port.

Claims (37)

1. A method implemented within a bridge/router for avoiding packet replication when there is a failure in a network, said method comprising the steps of:

determining by the bridge/router if multiple label switch paths would be used to carry Internet Protocol (IP) traffic out of a single port of the bridge/router when there is a failure in the network; and

if yes, choosing one of the label switch paths to carry the IP traffic out the single port and then preventing the IP traffic from being carried on the remaining label switch path(s) out the single port which avoids the packet replication on a link which is associated with the single port;

if no, allowing the IP traffic to be carried on the label switch paths.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein said determining step further includes accessing at least one forwarding database to determine if multiple label switch paths are to be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein if a topology of said network is known then said choosing step further includes applying hard-coded rules to choose the label switch path which is going be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein if a topology of said network is not known then said choosing step further includes:

snooping messages transmitted from a plurality of routers;

determining which router from the plurality of routers is a designated router; and

choosing the label switch path which leads to the designated router to be the one to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

5. A bridge/router, comprising:

a processor;

a memory; and

instructions which are accessible from said memory and processable by said processor to avoid packet replication when there is a failure in a network by:

determining if multiple label switch paths would be used to carry Internet Protocol (IP) traffic out of a single port when there is a failure in the network; and

if yes, choosing one of the label switch paths to carry the IP traffic out the single port and then preventing the IP traffic from being carried on the remaining label switch path(s) out the single port which avoids the packet replication on a link which is associated with the single port;

if no, allowing the IP traffic to be carried on the label switch paths.

6. The bridge/router of claim 5 , wherein said processor facilitates said determining operation by accessing at least one forwarding database to determine if multiple label switch paths are to be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

7. The bridge/router of claim 5 , wherein if a topology of said network is known then said processor facilitates said choosing operation by applying hard-coded rules to choose the label switch path which is going to be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

8. The bridge/router of claim 5 , wherein if a topology of said network is not known then said processor facilitates said choosing operation by:

snooping messages transmitted from a plurality of routers;

determining which router from the plurality of routers is a designated router; and

choosing the label switch path which leads to the designated router to be the one to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

9. A video hub office, comprising:

a first bridge/router;

a second bridge/router;

a first router; and

a second router;

wherein each of said first bridge/router and said second bridge/router avoid packet replication during a failure in a network by determining if multiple label switch paths (LSPs) would be used to carry Internet Protocol (IP) traffic out of a single port when there is a failure in the network; and

if yes, choosing one of the label paths to carry the IP traffic out the single port and then preventing the IP traffic from being carried on the remaining label switch path(s) out the single port which avoids the packet replication on a link which is associated with the single port; and

if no, allowing the IP traffic to be carried on the label switch paths.

10. The video hub office of claim 9 , wherein each of said first bridge/router and said second bridge/router facilitates said determining step by accessing at least one forwarding database to determine if multiple label switch paths are to be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

11. The video hub office of claim 9 , wherein each of said first bridge/router and said second bridge/router facilitates said choosing step by applying hard-coded rules to choose the label switch path which will be used to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

12. The video hub office of claim 9 , wherein each of said first bridge/router and said second bridge/router facilitates said choosing operation by:

snooping messages transmitted from a plurality of routers;

determining which router from the plurality of routers is a designated router; and

choosing the label switch path which leads to the designated router to be the one to carry the IP traffic out of the single port.

Assignments (9)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 28, 2021
From: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP LLC
To: RPX CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 059352/0001 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 30, 2021
From: CORTLAND CAPITAL MARKETS SERVICES LLC
To: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP HOLDINGS LLC; PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP LLC
Reel/Frame 058983/0104 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 30, 2021
From: NOKIA US HOLDINGS INC.
To: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP HOLDINGS LLC; PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP LLC
Reel/Frame 058363/0723 →
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT Recorded Feb 14, 2019
From: NOKIA USA INC.
To: NOKIA US HOLDINGS INC.
Reel/Frame 048370/0682 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Sep 13, 2017
From: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP HOLDINGS, LLC; PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP LLC
To: NOKIA USA INC.
Reel/Frame 043879/0001 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Sep 13, 2017
From: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP HOLDINGS, LLC; PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP, LLC
To: CORTLAND CAPITAL MARKET SERVICES, LLC
Reel/Frame 043967/0001 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 13, 2017
From: NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY; NOKIA SOLUTIONS AND NETWORKS BV; ALCATEL LUCENT SAS
To: PROVENANCE ASSET GROUP LLC
Reel/Frame 043877/0001 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Aug 18, 2010
From: ALCATEL
To: ALCATEL LUCENT
Reel/Frame 024852/0410 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 11, 2006
From: DAMM, GERARD; SRIDHAR, KAMAKSHI; COULTER, JOHN; DION, GINO
To: ALCATEL
Reel/Frame 018226/0024 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20080049763A1 · Feb 28, 2008