# MPLS-TE MPLS Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) is a networking mechanism for establishing explicitly routed MPLS label-switched paths subject to traffic-engineering constraints, supporting resource optimization, quality-of-service guarantees, and failure recovery. This is one page of public article previews, not the complete archive. Follow Next page to continue. Summaries are not the original full articles. ## On MPLS Paths, Tunnels and Interfaces DevFeed: [On MPLS Paths, Tunnels and Interfaces]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2026-01-20T06:29:00Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [Network](), [MPLS-TE](), [Routing (disambiguation)](), [IP routing](), [Protocol (disambiguation)](), [VXLAN]() Tags: [gre](), [ip-routing](), [mpls](), [network](), [networking-fundamentals](), [protocol](), [routing](), [vxlan]() ### AI overview The article explains the fundamental difference between overlay tunnels such as GRE, IPsec, and VXLAN and MPLS paths. Tunnels connect separate overlay segments across an underlay, while MPLS paths improve forwarding within the same network; routing protocols are used differently in these designs. ### Source excerpt One of my readers attempted to implement a multi-vendor multicast VPN over MPLS but failed. As a good network engineer, he tried various duct tapes but found that the only working one was a GRE tunnel within a VRF, resulting in considerable frustration. In his own words: How is a GRE tunnel different compared to an MPLS LSP? I feel like conceptually, they kind of do the same thing. They just tunnel traffic by wrapping it with another header (one being IP/GRE, the other being MPLS). Instead of going down the "how many angels are dancing on this pin" rabbit hole (also known as "Is MPLS tunneling?"), let's focus on the fundamental differences between GRE/IPsec/VXLAN tunnels and MPLS paths. Read more ... ## Multi-Layer Switching and Tunneling DevFeed: [Multi-Layer Switching and Tunneling]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2025-05-30T06:20:00Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [networking](), [Routing (disambiguation)](), [MPLS-TE](), [BGP](), [Ethernet](), [Protocol (disambiguation)]() Tags: [bgp](), [ethernet](), [mpls](), [mpls-te](), [networking](), [networking-fundamentals](), [protocol](), [router](), [routing](), [switching]() ### AI overview The article explains multi-layer switching, where edge devices forward traffic at a higher networking layer while core devices forward it at a lower layer. It describes IP forwarding over bridged Ethernet and virtual-circuit-like approaches using MPLS, MPLS-TE, BGP, and segment routing. ### Source excerpt When deep-diving into the confusing terminology of switching, routing, and bridging, I mentioned you could perform packet forwarding at different layers of a networking stack. In this blog post, we'll explore what happens when we combine packet forwarding on multiple layers within a single network, resulting in multi-layer switching, where edge devices perform Layer n forwarding (usually Layer 3), and core devices perform Layer n-1 forwarding (typically Layer 2). Each layer can use any forwarding paradigm you choose. However, since we generally use IP at Layer 3, edge devices typically perform hop-by-hop destination-based forwarding, while core devices can use alternative methods. 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 ... ## Running Routing Protocols over Tunnels DevFeed: [Running Routing Protocols over Tunnels]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Published: 2024-11-05T07:14:00Z Content type: article Language: en Sources: [ipSpace.net blog]() Topics: [networking](), [Routing (disambiguation)](), [Protocol (disambiguation)](), [BGP](), [IS-IS](), [MPLS-TE](), [MPLS VPN](), [evpn](), [VXLAN](), [Reason]() Tags: [bgp](), [evpn](), [ip-routing](), [is-is](), [mpls](), [mpls-te](), [ospf](), [protocol](), [recursion](), [routing](), [vxlan]() ### AI overview This article explains why routing protocols over tunnels can cause recursive routing and infinite encapsulation. It distinguishes traffic-engineering and IPsec tunnels from VPN designs, where routing protocols exchange customer and transport prefixes using separated address spaces or families. ### Source excerpt James got confused by a statement made by Hannes Gredler in his IS-IS book: Things behave really badly if the total IGP cost over the tunnel undermines the total topologies' cost. What happens next is that the tunnel "wraps" around itself, ultimately causing a meltdown of the entire network. Let's unpack that, starting with "Why would you need a tunnel?" Read more ...