# traffic engineering Published articles for traffic engineering. This is one page of public article previews, not the complete archive. Follow Next page to continue. Summaries are not the original full articles. ## Understanding BGP Route Types: Full Routes vs Partial vs Default vs Customer Routes DevFeed: [Understanding BGP Route Types: Full Routes vs Partial vs Default vs Customer Routes]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: j2sw Published: 2026-07-24T16:28:00Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [Justin Wilson (j2sw)]() Topics: [BGP](), [networking](), [Routing (disambiguation)](), [Internet](), [gateway](), [Networks]() Tags: [bgp](), [cpu](), [flexibility](), [internet-architecture](), [isp](), [memory](), [network-engineering](), [network-operations](), [route](), [router](), [routing](), [routing-policy](), [routing-table](), [traffic-engineering](), [visibility]() ### AI overview This article explains BGP route choices, comparing default routes, full routes, partial routes, and customer routes. It describes the tradeoffs between small routing tables, Internet visibility, traffic engineering control, and router resource requirements. ### Source excerpt 5 minute read time.Justin Wilson j2sw.com When you configure a BGP session, one of the first questions is what routes you actually want to receive. If you have ever filled out a questionnaire with Hurricane Electric or another transit provider, they ask you what "kind" of routes you want. In this article, I plan to ... Read more The post Understanding BGP Route Types: Full Routes vs Partial vs Default vs Customer Routes appeared first on Justin Wilson (j2sw). ## SR-MPLS over Unnumbered Interfaces DevFeed: [SR-MPLS over Unnumbered Interfaces]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2026-06-01T06:03:00Z Content type: tutorial Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [SR-MPLS](), [IS-IS](), [networking](), [Protocol (disambiguation)]() Tags: [container](), [demo](), [examples](), [github](), [implementation](), [installation](), [interfaces](), [ipv4](), [is-is](), [mpls](), [netlab](), [network](), [protocol](), [routing](), [sr-mpls](), [traffic-engineering]() ### AI overview This tutorial demonstrates SR-MPLS over unnumbered IPv4 point-to-point interfaces using netlab and IS-IS. It explains the resulting SR-MPLS and IS-IS advertisements, including adjacency and prefix segments, and provides steps for trying the lab through GitHub Codespaces and an Arista cEOS container. ### Source excerpt After the simple SR-MPLS demo and the dual-stack SR-MPLS setup, it was time for the next obvious question: Does SR-MPLS work over unnumbered IPv4 interfaces1, assuming the implementation of the underlying routing protocol supports them? Of course it does; let's go through the details, using the same topology I used throughout the Segment Routing workshop @ ITNOG10. Read more ... ## Traffic steering into label-switched paths (LSPs) DevFeed: [Traffic steering into label-switched paths (LSPs)]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2025-03-10T07:12:00Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [SR-MPLS](), [MPLS-TE](), [Software-defined networking](), [Network](), [NETCONF]() Tags: [mpls](), [mpls-te](), [netconf](), [network](), [sdn](), [traffic-engineering](), [worth-reading]() ### AI overview The article discusses steering network traffic into label-switched paths (LSPs) built with SR-MPLS, MPLS-TE, or an SDN controller. It explains that installing LSPs is only part of the task; network devices must also be configured to use them. ### Source excerpt You can use SR-MPLS, MPLS-TE, or an SDN controller to build virtual circuits (label-switched paths) across the network core. The controller can push the LSPs into network devices with PCEP, BGP-LU, or some sort of NETCONF/RESTCONF trickery. Unfortunately, you're only half done once you have installed the LSPs. You still have to persuade the network devices to use them. Welcome to the confusing world of traffic steering explored in the Loopback as a Service blog post by Dmytro Shypovalov. Read more ... ## Again: What Exactly Is MPLS? DevFeed: [Again: What Exactly Is MPLS?]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2024-07-11T05:26:00Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [Software-defined networking](), [MPLS VPN](), [networking](), [SD-WAN](), [Routing (disambiguation)]() Tags: [analysis](), [blog-post](), [mpls](), [mpls-vpn](), [network](), [routing](), [sd-wan](), [traffic-engineering](), [vpn]() ### AI overview This opinion piece distinguishes MPLS as a data-plane encapsulation supported by control-plane protocols from MPLS/VPN services commonly offered by service providers. It argues that cheaper public Internet, rather than a shift toward cloud computing alone, drove the decline of MPLS/VPN services, while noting that MPLS remains in use for several networking applications. ### Source excerpt Brad Casemore published an interesting analysis explaining why Cisco should accept being a mature company with mature products (yeah, you have to subscribe to view it). I always loved reading his articles, but unfortunately, this time, he briefly ventured into the "I don't think this word means what you think it means" territory: MPLS worked - and it still works - but it provided optimal value in an earlier time when the center of gravity was not the cloud. The cloud challenged the efficacy of MPLS, and it wasn't long before SD-WAN, cloud connects, and interconnects [...] represented an implacable threat to a status quo that had once seemed unassailable. The second part of the paragraph is (almost) true, but it had nothing to do with MPLS. Read more ... ## The Mythical Use Cases: Traffic Engineering for Data Center Backups DevFeed: [The Mythical Use Cases: Traffic Engineering for Data Center Backups]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2024-06-11T10:41:00Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [networking](), [datacenter](), [Disk image]() Tags: [backups](), [cisco](), [data-center](), [fabric](), [ipv6](), [network](), [routing](), [server](), [storage](), [tcp](), [traffic-engineering]() ### AI overview This commentary argues that high-volume in-band backups are an overstated justification for complex traffic-engineering features in data center fabrics. It explains that backup-server and storage performance, TCP session distribution, link ratios, dynamic load balancing, and routing can limit or spread the resulting traffic. ### Source excerpt Vendor product managers love discussing mythical use cases to warrant complex functionality in their gear. Long-distance VM mobility was one of those (using it for disaster avoidance was Mission Impossible under any real-world assumptions), and high-volume network-based backups seems to be another. Here's what someone had to say about that particular unicorn in a LinkedIn comment when discussing whether we need traffic engineering in a data center fabric. When you're dealing with a large cluster on a fabric, you will see things like inband backup. The most common one I've seen is VEEAM. Those inband backups can flood a single link, and no amount of link scheduling really solves that; depending on the source, they can saturate 100G. There are a couple of solutions; IPv6 or eBGP SID has been used to avoid these links or schedule avoidance for other traffic. It is true that (A) in-band backups can be bandwidth intensive and that (B) well-written applications can saturate 100G server links. However: Read more ... ## Stop the Network-Based Application Recognition Nonsense DevFeed: [Stop the Network-Based Application Recognition Nonsense]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2024-04-24T06:35:00Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [Networks](), [Cisco](), [Optimization](), [client]() Tags: [cisco](), [network](), [opinion](), [optimization](), [qos](), [traffic-engineering]() ### AI overview The article argues that service providers should prioritize simple, fair congestion management based on individual-user link utilization instead of relying on application recognition and Cisco Ultra Traffic Optimization AI. It also places current concerns about QUIC in the context of earlier claims that UDP, BitTorrent, or video would overwhelm networks. ### Source excerpt One of my readers sent me an interesting update on the post-QUIC round of NBAR whack-a-mole (TL&DR: everything is better with Bluetooth AI): Cloudflare (and the other hyperscalers) are full into QUIC, as it gives them lots of E2E control, taking a lot of choice away from the service providers on how they handle traffic and congestion. It is quite well outlined by Geoff Huston in an APNIC podcast. So far, so good. However, whenever there's a change, there's an opportunity for marketing FUD, coming from the usual direction. Read more ...