Segment Routing Advanced Use Cases - Cisco Live 2016 USA

Segment Routing: Technology Update and Advanced Use-Cases

Steve Braaten, Solutions Architect

BRKRST-3122

• Segment Routing Executive Summary

• Reminders

• Incremental Deployment Use-Cases

• Inter-Domain Policy at Scale

• Topology Independent LFA (TI-LFA)

• Microloop Avoidance

• Conclusion

Agenda

Segment RoutingExecutive Summary

© 2016 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public

Segment Routing

• Source Routing

• the source chooses a path and encodes it in the packet header as an ordered list of segments

• the rest of the network executes the encoded instructions

• Segment: an identifier for any type of instruction

• forwarding or service

• Forwarding Plane:

• MPLS: an ordered list of segments is represented as a stack of labels

• IPv6: an ordered list of segments is encoded in a routing extension header

• Multi-Vendor solution

BRKRST-3122 5


Deployed !

• First deployments in 2015 – just 15 months after FCS !!!

• Strong start in 2016 with many new deployments

BRKRST-3122 6


IETF

• Strong commitment for standardization andmulti-vendor support

• SPRING Working-Group (started Nov 2013)

• All key documents are WG-status

• Over 25 drafts maintained by SR team

• Over 50% are WG status

• Over 75% have a Cisco implementation

• Several interop reports are available

• First RFC document - RFC 7855 (May 2016)

www.segment-routing.nettools.ietf.org/wg/spring/

BRKRST-3122 7

http://www.segment-routing.net/

https://tools.ietf.org/wg/spring/


Foundation for modern IP/MPLS networking

• Simplicity

• Set of few, well-chosen building blocks

• Solution to unsolved problems

• End-to-end policy, local and/or centralized PCE, 50msec protection, microloop avoidance, and more…

• Scale

• Granular traffic engineering with minimal network state

• Seamless Deployment

• SR/LDP interworking, SR/RSVP-TE interworking, ship-in-the-night co-existence

• Decoupled data and control planes

• Low-cost

1

BRKRST-3122 8


Session Assumptions

• Thorough understanding of SR tutorial

• http://www.segment-routing.net/home/tutorial

• You should know

• SRGB

• IGP Prefix and Adj SID’s

• Anycast SID

• SR/LDP interworking

• BGP Prefix SID and the MSDC use-case

• Use-Cases in this presentation described for SR/MPLS

• Same concept applies to SRv6 (native IPv6 SR extension header, no MPLS)

BRKRST-3122 9

http://www.segment-routing.net/home/tutorial

Reminders


Prefix segment

• Shortest-path to the prefix• Equal Cost MultiPath (ECMP)-aware

• Global Segment

• Label = 16000 + Index• Advertised as index

• Distributed by ISIS/OSPF/BGP

1 2

3 4

5

16004

16004

16004

16004

16004

16004

16004

1.1.1.4/32

All nodes use default SRGB

16,000 – 23,999

BRKRST-3122 11


Adjacency segment

• Forward on the IGP adjacency

• Local Segment

• Advertised as label value

• Distributed by ISIS/OSPF

• But only local adjacency SID’s are installed in FIB!

1 2

3 4

524024

24025

Adj to 5

Adj to 4

All nodes use default SRGB

16,000 – 23,999

BRKRST-3122 12


SR operations illustration• Steer traffic on any path through the

network

• Path is specified by list of segments in packet header, a stack of labels

• No path is signaled

• No per-flow state is created

• IS-IS, OSPF, BGP all supported

Node Z56056

1 3 5 7

2 4 6 8

101

Payload to Z

16101

56056

16005

Payload to Z

16101

56056

16005

Payload to Z

16101

56056

Payload to Z

16101

Payload to Z

16101

Payload to Z

Goal: Go to Z but avoid node 7

BRKRST-3122 13

Incremental Deployment Use-Cases


SR Innovation VPN /

Service

Transport

Topology

Independent

IP FRR

Traffic

Engineering

Egress

Peering

Engineering

Data Center

Fabric

Microloop

Avoidance

Demand

Matrix

Application

Engineered

Routing

Inter-Domain

Policy at

ScaleIncremental

Use Case

Deployment

http://blogs.cisco.com/sp/supercharge-your-network-with-segment-routing-innovations

BRKRST-3122 15



SR Innovation Topology

Independent

IP FRR

Traffic

Engineering

Egress

Peering

Engineering

Data Center

Fabric

Microloop

Avoidance

Demand

Matrix

Application

Engineered

Routing

Inter-Domain

Policy at

ScaleIncremental

Use Case

Deployment

VPN /

Service

Transport


BRKRST-3122 16


Inter-Domain Policy at Scale

draft-filsfils-spring-large-scale-interconnect


Use-Case Description

• Segment Routing use-case aiming to scale the network to support hundreds of thousands of network nodes, and tens of millions of physical underlay endpoints

• Applicable to the interconnection of massive-scale DC's and/or large aggregation networks

• Principles are equally applicable to a network of any size

vPE1 ToR Spine LSR LSR vPE2ToRSpineLSR

DC A1 METRO A METRO BWAN DC B2

Datacenter Datacenter

Metro Metro

Core

BRKRST-3122 18


SRGB and SID allocation

• Homogenous end-to-end SRGB for simplicity

• Globally Unique Prefix SIDs for devices WAN and Metro domains

• Locally Unique Prefix SIDs for Datacenters

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


20k-24k 20k-24k

17k-18k 18k-19k

16k-17k

16k-24k

BRKRST-3122 19


IGP/SR within WAN and Metro Domains

• Each domain runs ISIS/OSPF SR

• Incremental deployment and seamless interworking with LDP

DCI1

17001LSR

17002LSR

16003

DCI2

18001

LSR

18002

METRO A METRO BWAN

IGP / SR 2 IGP / SR 3IGP / SR 1

BRKRST-3122 20


Segment Routing in the Datacenter

• Datacenter fabric runs BGP SR

• Example: 20006 is the BGP Prefix SID to DCI6

• ECMP-aware

• Simple (no LDP/RSVP)

• Policy-driven

vPE1

20001

ToR2

20002

Spine4

20004

Leaf3

20003DCI6

20006

vPE11

20011

ToR12

20012

Spine14

20014

Leaf13

20013Leaf15

20015

DCI16

20016

AS2

AS11

AS3 AS4 AS5 AS6AS1

Leaf5

20005

BRKRST-3122 21

Inter-Domain Policy at ScaleSR connectivity across domains


Intra-Domain Routing – DC A1 and DC B2

• BGP SR in the DC

• Often eBGP would be used but iBGP can also be used (see tutorial)

• Smart AS (ClusterID) allocation in eBGP (iBGP) provides automated path filtering (see tutorial)

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


vPE1/32

NH: vPE1

BGP-LU LABEL: POP

PREFIX-SID: 20001

(relative 4001)

vPE1/32

NH: TOR

BGP-LU LABEL: 20001

PREFIX-SID: 20001

(relative 4001)

vPE1/32

NH: SPINE

BGP-LU LABEL: 20001

PREFIX-SID: 20001

(relative 4001)

DCI2/32

NH: DCI2

BGP-LU LABEL: POP

PREFIX-SID: 18001

(relative 2001)

DCI2/32

NH: SPINE

BGP-LU LABEL: 18001

PREFIX-SID: 18001

(relative 2001)

DCI2/32

NH: TOR

BGP-LU LABEL: 18001

PREFIX-SID: 18001

(relative 2001)

BRKRST-3122 23


Intra-Domain Routing – Metro A and Metro B

• In a metro, BGP/SR or ISIS-OSPF/SR are likely, both illustrated here

• Example: Metro A: BGP/SR

• Example: Metro B: ISIS/SR

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


DCI1/32

NH: DCI1

BGP-LU LABEL: POP

PREFIX-SID: 17001

(relative 1001)

DCI1/32

NH: LSR

BGP-LU LABEL: 17001

PREFIX-SID: 17001

(relative 1001)

ISIS LSP of AGG2

Leaf: Agg2

PREFIX-SID: 16002

(relative 2)

BRKRST-3122 24


Intra-Domain Routing – WAN

• ISIS / OSPF SR in WAN

• During a migration, benefit from SR seamless interworking with LDP and ship-in-the-night with RSVP

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


ISIS LSP of AGG1

Leaf: Agg1

PREFIX-SID: 16001

(relative 1)

BRKRST-3122 25


Inter-Domain Routing

• WAN aggs are re-distributed down to Metro and DC

• Nothing is redistributed up !!!

• How does vPE1 reaches vPE2?

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


WAN Aggs WAN AggsWAN AggsWAN Aggs

BRKRST-3122 26


Inter-Domain Routing

• Redistribution: from center to leaves

• WAN redistributes (only) its AGG’s into metro’s

• Metro redistributes (only) the WAN AGG’s into DC’s

• Redistribution: from leaves to center

• Nothing

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


ISIS LSP of AGG2

Leaf: AGG1

PREFIX-SID: 16001

(relative 1)

AGG1

NH: DCI2

BGP-LU LABEL: 16001

PREFIX-SID: 16001

(relative 1)

AGG1

NH: SPINE

BGP-LU LABEL: 16001

PREFIX-SID: 16001

(relative 1)

AGG1

NH: ToR

BGP-LU LABEL: 16001

PREFIX-SID: 16001

(relative 1)

BRKRST-3122 27


Inter-Domain Routing (Cont’d)

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


ISIS LSP of AGG1

Leaf: AGG2

PREFIX-SID: 16002

(relative 2)

AGG2

NH: DCI1

BGP-LU LABEL: 16002

PREFIX-SID: 16002

(relative 2)

AGG2

NH: SPINE

BGP-LU LABEL: 16002

PREFIX-SID: 16002

(relative 2)

AGG2

NH: TOR

BGP-LU LABEL: 16002

PREFIX-SID: 16002

(relative 2)

BRKRST-3122 28

Inter-Domain Policy at ScaleSR PCE


SR PCE

• Multi-Domain topology

• Real-time reactive feed via BGP-LS/ISIS/OSPF from multiple domains

• Including ip address and SID

• Compute: stateful with native SRTE algorithms

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


Multi-Domain TopologySR PCE

Compute

Demo

BRKRST-3122 30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xtysG86Fik



Circuit Optimization vs SR Optimization2

4

15

3

6

7

8 9

Classic TE is circuit-based

CSPF => non-ECMP path

SID List: {4, 5, 7, 3}

Poor ECMP, big SR list, ATM optimized

2

4

15

3

6

7

8 9

SR-native TE algorithms needed

Recognized Innovation - Sigcomm 2015

SID List: {7, 3}

ECMP, Small SR list, IP-optimized

BRKRST-3122 31


Four SR-native TE algorithms developed

• Metric optimization with inclusion/exclusion constraint and bound

• Metric: IGP metric, TE metric, extended TE-latency metric

• Inclusion/exclusion: IP address, SRLG, TE affinity, Link Loss

• Margin: any solution within the margin of the optimum is accepted

• Favor more ECMP or shorter SID list instead of insignificant optimization increment

• Also available on the router-based SRTE functionality

• Disjointness

• (A to Z) or ((A, B) to (Y, Z))

• With minimized latency diff, ECMP and shorter SID list

• (A to Z) also available on the router-based SRTE functionality

• Tactical BW optimization

• Multi-Constrained

• Sigcomm 2015 [url]

• Furthermore … TI-LFA and Microloop avoidance algorithms

BRKRST-3122 32

http://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2015/pdf/papers/p15.pdf


SR PCE - Fundamentally Distributed

• SR PCE not to be considered as a single “God” box

• SR PCE deployment model more like BGP Route Reflectors

• Different vPE’s can use different pairs of SR PCE’s

• SR PCE preference can either be based on proximity or service

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

SR

PCE

SR

PCE

SR

PCESR

PCE

SR

PCE

SR

PCE

SR

PCE

BRKRST-3122 33

Inter-Domain Policy at ScaleOn-Demand SR Next Hop (ODN)


Service Provisioning

• vPE1 learns about a service route with nhop vPE2

• RR shown could be any flavor of overlay controller

• How does vPE1 reach the nhop?

• vPE1 only has routes within DC A1 and to the AGG’s of the WAN domain

• Solution: On-Demand SR Next Hop (ODN)

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


BGP

RR2: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

1: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

BRKRST-3122 35


On-Demand SR Next-HopOverview

• When the vPE’s does not have any RIB entry for the (locator, policy), the On-Demand SR Next-Hop automatically sends a stateful PCEP request to the SR PCE

• Key benefit: provide the glue between the overlay and underlay controllers while decoupling them

• E.g. overlay controller does not need to react to multi-domain underlay topology change, nor compute TE policies

• E.g. underlay controller does not need to be involved in service orchestration, does not store any a priori TE policy

• E.g. no direct API or coupled workflow between the controllers

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

3: vPE2 ?

4: {SID List}

Demo

BGP

RR2: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

1: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

BRKRST-3122 36




On-Demand SR Next-HopReachability

• vPE1’s ODN functionality automatically request a solution from SR PCE

• Scalable: vPE1 only gets the inter-domain paths that it needs

• Simple: no BGP3107 pushing all routes everywhere

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

1600316002

vPE2

20001ToR

20002Spine

2000318001LSR

18002


SR

PCE

3: vPE2 ?

4: {16002, 18001, 20001}2: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

1: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

Demo

BGP

RR

BRKRST-3122 37




On-Demand SR Next-HopSLA enabled

• Inter-domain SLA with scale and simplicity

• No RSVP, no midpoint state, no tunnel to configure !!

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

3: vPE2 with Low-

Latency?

4: {16001, 16003,

16002, 18001, 20001}

2: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

EXT-COM: LATENCY

1: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

EXT-COM: LATENCY

Demo

BGP

RR

BRKRST-3122 38




Anycast SID’s for pairs of border nodes

• Anycast SID’s provide for better ECMP and High Availability

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003

LSR

17002

LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003

LSR

18002


17901 16901 16902 18901

16902 1890117901 16901

16902 1890117901 16901

BRKRST-3122 39


On-Demand SR Next-HopReachability with Anycast SID

• Better load-balancing: ECMP across border routers

• Better availability: sub-50msec upon remote aggregation router failure

• Better control plane scalability: no PCE re-computation, no PCEP update, no FIB update

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

3: vPE2 ?

4: {16902, 18901, 20001}

16902 18901

vPE2

20001

2: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

1: V via vPE2

VPN-LABEL: 99999

16902 1890117901 16901

16902 1890117901 16901

BGP

RR

BRKRST-3122 40


Binding SID to stitch Policies

• End-to-end policies can be composed from more basic ones

• An SRTE policy is bound by default to a Binding SID

• RSVP-TE tunnels can also be bound to a Binding SID and hence RSVP-TE tunnels can be used within an end-to-end SR policy

• Shorter SID list and churn isolation between domains

• Even if the WAN-MetroA sub-path changes, the related Binding SID 4001 is constant

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

2: vPE2 with Min LAT?

1: REPORT {16003, 16002, 18002, 18001}, UP,

BindingSID 4001

3: REPLY {16001, 4001, 20001}

instead of

{16001, 16003, 16002, 18002, 18001, 20001}

BRKRST-3122 41


Seamless Transition

• Best-effort reachability could be provided by BGP3107

• ODN and SRTE / PCE provides interdomain reachability with SLA requirements

• Eventually, migration of more/all services over SR PCE

vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003LSR

18002


SR

PCE

3: vPE2 with Low Latency?

4: {16001, 16002, 18001, 20001}

BGP

RRvPE2/32 via DCI2

PREFIX-SID: 20001DCI2/32 via AGG2

PREFIX-SID: 180012:

vPE2/32 via DCI2

PREFIX-SID: 20001DCI2/32 via AGG2

PREFIX-SID: 18001

1:

BRKRST-3122 42

Inter-Domain Policy at ScaleInter-Domain Disjoint Services


Example: Two Disjoint Inter-domain PW’s

• ODN/SR-PCE automated compute disjoint paths for PW1 and PW2

• PW1 and PW2 do not share the same headend, neither the same tailend



SR

PCEvPE2 disjoint group 7

{20003, 16001, 16002,

18001, 20001}

vPE22 disjoint group 7

vPE1

20001

ToR2

20002

Spine3

20003LSR

17002LSR

16003

vPE2

20001

ToR3

20002Spine4

20003LSR

18002


vPE11

20011

ToR12

20012

Spine13

20013vPE22

20021

ToR23

20022Spine24

20023

{20013, 16011, 16012,

18011, 20021}

PW1

PW2

BRKRST-3122 44


Example: Inter-Domain PW - Disjoint Primary / Backup paths

• ODN/SR-PCE automatically computes disjoint primary/sec paths for the PW

• sBFD runs at 3x50msec on each SRTE path

• Upon failure detection of the primary, the secondary SRTE Path is used



vPE1

20001

ToR

20002

Spine1

20003

DCI1

17001

17901

LSR

17002

AGG1

16001

16901

LSR

16003

AGG2

16002

16902

vPE2

20001

ToR

20002Spine

20003

DCI2

18001

18901

LSR

18002


DCI11

17011

17901

AGG11

16011

16901

AGG12

16012

16902

DCI11

18011

18901

Spine2

20004

Spine2

20004

SR

PCE1

Primary

1: Two disjoint paths to vPE2

2: PRIMARY: {17001, 16001, 16003,

18001, 20001}

SECONDARY: {17011, 16011, 16013,

18011, 20001}

Pri

Sec

BRKRST-3122 45

Topology Independent LFA (TI-LFA)


TI-LFA - Benefits

• 50msec Protection upon local link, node or SRLG failure

• Simple to operate and understand

• automatically computed by the router’s IGP process (ISIS and OSPF)

• 100% coverage across any topology

• predictable (backup = post convergence)

• Optimum backup path

• leverages the post-convergence path, planned to carry the traffic

• avoid any intermediate flap via alternate path

• Incremental deployment

• also protects LDP and IP traffic

BRKRST-3122 47


Automated Per-Destination optimization

• 2’s computes a primary path to 5

100 100

PE4 5

2 31

6 7 8

Source

Dest2Default metric: 10

FIB of 2 for destination 5

Incoming Label: 16005

Primary: SWAP 16005 for 16005, oif: 3

Demo

BRKRST-3122 48

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dttw2nc5FrA



Flexible Link vs Node vs SRLG protection

• 2 checks the protection preference for the primary interface of the destination

• Link protection (illustration assumption)

• Node protection

• SRLG protection

100 100

PE4 5

2 31

6 7 8

Source


Demo

BRKRST-3122 49




Automated and Optimum

• 2 computes the post-convergence path if the preferred failure would occur

• Optimality: the operator planned and dimensioned the post-convergence path to carry the traffic in the failure case

• 2 uses SR to encode the post-convergence path in a loop-free manner

• 2 updates the FIB with the backup path to 5

100 100

PE4 5

2 31

6 7 8

Source


FIB of 2 for destination 5

Incoming Label: 16005

Primary: SWAP 16005 for 16005, oif: 3

Backup: SWAP 16005 for 16005, PUSH 16007, oif: 6

Demo

BRKRST-3122 50




Do we need many SID’s? No!

BRKRST-3122 51

Microloop Avoidance


Microloops are a day-1 IP drawback

• IP hop-by-hop routing may induce microloop at any topology transition

• Link up/down, metric up/down

Upon link down convergence

Illustration for the post-convergence microloop

impacting traffic from 1 to 9 after link45 going

down. Default link metric 10

2 3 4

5

8 7 6

1

1000

9

Pre-convergence Path

Post-convergence Path

BRKRST-3122 53


SR Microloop Avoidance

• Prevent any microloop upon isolated convergence due to

• link up/down event & metric increase/decrease event

• 2-stage convergence

• Stage 1: non-looping SID lists to implement the post-convergence path

• Stage 2: post-convergence path

• If multiple back-to-back convergences, fall back to native IP convergence

FIB @ 1 for Destination 9

Initially: {16009} OIF 2

Stage1: {16006, 24065, 16009}

Stage2: {16009} OIF 8

2 3 4

5

8 7 6

1

1000

9



Explicit Post-convergence Path

microloop avoidance segment-routing

Demo

BRKRST-3122 54

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfnp-dnUHk



Illustration – Link Down

• No microloop can occur thanks to the 2-stage convergence and the use of non-looping SID lists to implement the post-convergence path in stage1

2 3 4

5

8 7 6

1

Default link metric 10

1000




Initially: OIF to 2

Stage1: {16006, 24065, 16009}

Finally (stage2): OIF 8

9


Initially: OIF to 1

Stage1: {16006, 24065, 16009}



Initially: OIF to 8

Stage1: {16006, 24065, 16009}



Initially: OIF to 7

Stage1: {24065, 16009}


Illustration for the post-convergence

microloop impacting traffic from 1 to 9

after link45 going down

Demo

BRKRST-3122 55



Conclusion


Conclusion

• Functionality never seen before

• SR is fundamental architecture for modern IP network

• Unified Fabric with Policy through DC, Metro and WAN

• Simplification through Automation and protocol removal

• Strong operator endorsement

• Multi vendor consensus

• Impressive deployment and velocity

BRKRST-3122 57


Resources• Stay Informed - Tutorials, Conferences, IETF, Open-source SW

• http://www.segment-routing.net/

• Join us – Segment Routing @ LinkedIN

• Get in Touch

• [email protected]

• “Latest” SR Demonstrations

• On-demand Next-Hop and SR PCE

• TI-LFA Node protection

• Microloop Avoidance

• SRv6 “Spray” use-case

• Segment Routing book

• Pre-order available now!

BRKRST-3122 58

http://wikicentral.cisco.com/display/SLA/Segment+Routing

https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8266623

http://wikicentral.cisco.com/display/SLA/Segment+Routing




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-q4T-vN0Q4&list=PLinuRwpnsHacUlfUCrVstvpzURnK_M3iI&index=7

https://www.amazon.com/Segment-Routing-Clarence-Filsfils-ebook/dp/B01I58LSUO


Complete Your Online Session Evaluation

Don’t forget: Cisco Live sessions will be available for viewing on-demand after the event at CiscoLive.com/Online

• Give us your feedback to be entered into a Daily Survey Drawing. A daily winner will receive a $750 Amazon gift card.

• Complete your session surveys through the Cisco Live mobile app or from the Session Catalog on CiscoLive.com/us.

BRKRST-3122 59

CiscoLive.com/Online

http://ciscolive.com/Online

http://ciscolive.com/Online

http://ciscolive.com/us

http://ciscolive.com/us


Continue Your Education

• Demos in the Cisco campus

• Walk-in Self-Paced Labs

• Lunch & Learn

• Meet the Engineer 1:1 meetings

• Related sessions…

BRKRST-3122 60


Segment Routing opportunities at CiscoLive!

• BRKRST-2124: Introduction to Segment Routing

• Presented Monday – view session materials on CiscoLive.com

• LABSPG-2012: Next Generation Service Provider Network using Segment Routing & BIER

• In the Walk-in Self-Paced (WISP) lab area of the hub until 5pm today!

• BRKDCN-2050: Segment Routing in Datacenter using Nexus 9000 and 3000

• At 1pm today! South Pacific B, Lower Level

• LTRMPL-2104: Cisco WAN Automation Engine (WAE) Network Programmability with Segment Routing

BRKRST-3122 61

Thank you