BESS Working Group G. Dawra, Ed. Internet-Draft LinkedIn Intended status: Standards Track C. Filsfils Expires: January 12, 2021 Cisco Systems R. Raszuk Bloomberg LP B. Decraene Orange S. Zhuang Huawei Technologies J. Rabadan Nokia July 11, 2020 SRv6 BGP based Overlay services draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-03 Abstract This draft defines procedures and messages for SRv6-based BGP services including L3VPN, EVPN and Internet services. It builds on RFC4364 "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)" and RFC7432 "BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN". Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on January 12, 2021. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 1] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. SRv6 Services TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. SRv6 Service Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.1. SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Encoding SRv6 SID information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. BGP based L3 service over SRv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.1. IPv4 VPN Over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2. IPv6 VPN Over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.3. Global IPv4 over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.4. Global IPv6 over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. BGP based Ethernet VPN (EVPN) over SRv6 . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1. Ethernet Auto-discovery route over SRv6 Core . . . . . . 13 6.1.1. Per-ES A-D route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.1.2. Per-EVI A-D route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.2. MAC/IP Advertisement route over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . 14 6.2.1. MAC/IP Advertisement route with MAC Only . . . . . . 15 6.2.2. MAC/IP Advertisement route with MAC+IP . . . . . . . 16 6.3. Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route over SRv6 Core . . 16 6.4. Ethernet Segment route over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.5. IP prefix route over SRv6 Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.6. EVPN multicast routes (Route Types 6, 7, 8) over SRv6 core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 8. Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 9.1. BGP Prefix-SID TLV Types registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 9.2. SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Types registry . . . . . . . . . . . 21 9.3. SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Types registry . . . . . . 21 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 12. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 2] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 1. Introduction SRv6 refers to Segment Routing [RFC8402] instantiated on the IPv6 dataplane [RFC8754]. SRv6 based BGP services refers to the L3 and L2 overlay services with BGP as control plane and SRv6 as dataplane. SRv6 SID refers to a SRv6 Segment Identifier as defined in [RFC8402]. SRv6 Service SID refers to an SRv6 SID associated with one of the service specific behavior on the advertising Provider Edge (PE) router, such as (but not limited to), END.DT (Table lookup in a VRF) or END.DX (cross-connect to a nexthop) behaviors in the case of L3VPN service as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]. To provide SRv6 service with best-effort connectivity, the egress PE signals an SRv6 Service SID with the BGP overlay service route. The ingress PE encapsulates the payload in an outer IPv6 header where the destination address is the SRv6 Service SID provided by the egress PE. The underlay between the PEs only need to support plain IPv6 forwarding [RFC8200]. To provide SRv6 service in conjunction with an underlay SLA from the ingress PE to the egress PE, the egress PE colors the overlay service route with a Color extended community [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]. The ingress PE encapsulates the payload packet in an outer IPv6 header with the segment list of SR policy associated with the related SLA followed by the SRv6 Service SID associated with the route. The underlay nodes whose SRv6 SID's are part of the segment list MUST support SRv6 data plane. BGP is used to advertise the reachability of prefixes of a particular service from an egress PE to ingress PE nodes. This document describes how existing BGP messages between PEs may carry SRv6 Service SIDs as a means to interconnect PEs and form VPNs. 1.1. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 3] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. 2. SRv6 Services TLVs This document extends the BGP Prefix-SID attribute [RFC8669] to carry SRv6 SIDs and associated information. The SRv6 Service TLVs are defined as two new TLVs of the BGP Prefix- SID Attribute to achieve signaling of SRv6 SIDs for L3 and L2 services. o SRv6 L3 Service TLV: This TLV encodes Service SID information for SRv6 based L3 services. It corresponds to the equivalent functionality provided by an MPLS Label when received with a Layer 3 service route. Some behaviors which MAY be encoded, but not limited to, are End.DX4, End.DT4, End.DX6, End.DT6, etc. o SRv6 L2 Service TLV: This TLV encodes Service SID information for SRv6 based L2 services. It corresponds to the equivalent functionality provided by an MPLS Label1 for EVPN Route-Types as defined in[RFC7432]. Some behaviors which MAY be encoded, but not limited to, are End.DX2, End.DX2V, End.DT2U, End.DT2M etc. When an egress PE is enabled for BGP Services over SRv6 data-plane, it MUST signal one or more SRv6 Service SIDs enclosed in SRv6 Service TLV(s) within the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute attached to MP-BGP NLRIs defined in [RFC4760] [RFC4659] [I-D.ietf-bess-rfc5549revision] [RFC7432] [RFC4364] where applicable as described in Section 5 and Section 6. The following depicts the SRv6 Service TLVs encoded in the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type | TLV Length | RESERVED | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ // SRv6 Service Sub-TLVs // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ o TLV Type (1 octet): This field is assigned values from the IANA registry "BGP Prefix-SID TLV Types". It is set to 5 for SRv6 L3 Service TLV. It is set to 6 for SRv6 L2 Service TLV. o TLV Length (2 octets): Specifies the total length of the TLV Value. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 4] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 o RESERVED (1 octet): This field is reserved; it SHOULD be set to 0 by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. o SRv6 Service Sub-TLVs (variable): This field contains SRv6 Service related information and is encoded as an unordered list of Sub- TLVs whose format is described below. A BGP speaker receiving a route containing BGP Prefix-SID Attribute with one or more SRv6 Service TLVs observes the following rules when advertising the received route to other peers: o if the nexthop is unchanged during advertisement, the SRv6 Service TLVs, including any unrecognized Types of Sub-TLV and Sub-Sub-TLV, SHOULD be propagated further. In addition, all Reserved fields in the TLV or Sub-TLV or Sub-Sub-TLV MUST be propagated unchanged. o if the nexthop is changed, the TLVs, Sub-TLVs and Sub-Sub-TLVs SHOULD be updated as appropriate. Any unrecognized received sub- TLVs and Sub-Sub-TLVs MUST be removed. 3. SRv6 Service Sub-TLVs The format of a single SRv6 Service Sub-TLV is depicted below: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SRv6 Service | SRv6 Service | SRv6 Service // | Sub-TLV | Sub-TLV | Sub-TLV // | Type | Length | value // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ o SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): Identifies the type of SRv6 service information. It is assigned values from the IANA Registry "SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Types". o SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Length (2 octets): Specifies the total length of the Sub-TLV Value field. o SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Value (variable): Contains data specific to the Sub-TLV Type. In addition to fixed length data, it contains other properties of the SRv6 Service encoded as a set of SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs whose format is described in Section 3.2 below. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 5] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 3.1. SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Type 1 is assigned for SRv6 SID Information Sub- TLV. This Sub-TLV contains a single SRv6 SID along with its properties. Its encoding is depicted below: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SRv6 Service | SRv6 Service | | | Sub-TLV | Sub-TLV | | | Type=1 | Length | RESERVED1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ // SRv6 SID Value (16 bytes) // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SRv6 SID Flags| SRv6 Endpoint Behavior | RESERVED2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ // SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ o SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): This field is set to 1 to represent SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV. o SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Length (2 octets): This field contains the total length of the Value field of the Sub-TLV. o RESERVED1 (1 octet): SHOULD be set to 0 by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. o SRv6 SID Value (16 octets): Encodes an SRv6 SID as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming] o SRv6 SID Flags (1 octet): Encodes SRv6 SID Flags - none are currently defined. SHOULD be set to 0 by sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. o SRv6 Endpoint Behavior (2 octets): Encodes SRv6 Endpoint behavior codepoint value from the IANA registry defined in section 9.2 of [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming] that is associated with SRv6 SID. The opaque behavior (i.e. value 0xFFFF) or an unrecognized behavior MUST NOT be considered as invalid by the receiver. o RESERVED2 (1 octet): SHOULD be set to 0 by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 6] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Value (variable): Used to advertise properties of the SRv6 SID. It is encoded as a set of SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs. When multiple SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLVs are present, the ingress PE SHOULD use the SRv6 SID from the first instance of the Sub-TLV. An implementation MAY provide a local policy to override this selection. 3.2. SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs The format of the SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV is depicted below: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Service Data | Sub-Sub-TLV Length |Sub-Sub TLV // | Sub-Sub-TLV | | Value // | Type | | // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): Identifies the type of Sub-Sub-TLV. It is assigned values from the IANA Registry "SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs". o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Length (2 octets): Specifies the total length of the Sub-Sub-TLV Value field. o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Value (variable): Contains data specific to the Sub-Sub-TLV Type. 3.2.1. SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Type 1 is assigned for SRv6 SID structure Sub-Sub-TLV. SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV is used to advertise the lengths of each individual parts of the SRv6 SID as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]. It is carried as Sub-Sub-TLV in SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 7] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | SRv6 Service | SRv6 Service | Locator Block | | Data Sub-Sub | Data Sub-Sub-TLV | Length | | -TLV Type=1 | Length=6 | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Locator Node | Function | Argument | Transposition | | Length | Length | Length | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Transposition | | Offset | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): This field is set to 1 to represent SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV. o SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Length (2 octets): This field contains the total length of 6 bytes. o Locator Block Length (1 octet): Contains length of SRv6 SID locator Block in bits. o Locator Node Length (1 octet): Contains length of SRv6 SID locator Node in bits. o Function Length (1 octet): Contains length of SRv6 SID Function in bits. o Argument Length (1 octet): Contains length of SRv6 SID argument in bits. o Transposition Length (1 octet): Size in bits for the part of SID that has been transposed (or shifted) into a label field o Transposition Offset (1 octet): The offset position in bits for the part of SID that has been transposed (or shifted) into a label field. Section 4 describes mechanisms for signaling of the SRv6 Service SID by transposing a variable part of the SRv6 SID value (function and/or the argument parts) and carrying them in existing label fields to achieve more efficient packing of those service prefix NLRIs in BGP update messages. The SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV contains appropriate length fields when the SRv6 Service SID is signaled in split parts to enable the receiver to put together the SID accurately. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 8] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 Transposition Offset indicates the bit position and Transposition Length indicates the number of bits that are being taken out of the SRv6 SID value and put into high order bits of label field. The bits that have been shifted out MUST be set to 0 in the SID value. Transposition Length of 0 indicates nothing is transposed and that the entire SRv6 SID value is encoded in the SID Information sub-TLV. In this case, the Transposition Offset MUST be set to 0. Since size of label field is 24 bits, only that many bits can be transposed from the SRv6 SID value into it. As an example, when the entire function part of size 16 of an SRv6 SID is transposed and the sum of the locator block and locator node parts is 64, then the transposition offset would be set to 64 and the transposition length is set to 16. BGP speakers that do not support this specification may misinterpret, on reception of an SRv6-based BGP service route update, the function and/or argument parts of the SRv6 SID encoded in label field(s) as MPLS label values for MPLS-based services. Implementations supporting this specification SHOULD provide a mechanism to control advertisement of SRv6-based BGP service routes on a per neighbor and per service basis. Arguments MAY be generally applicable for SIDs of only specific behaviors (e.g. End.DT2M) and therefore the argument length MUST be set to 0 for SIDs where the argument is not applicable. 4. Encoding SRv6 SID information The SRv6 Service SID(s) for a BGP Service Prefix are carried in the SRv6 Services TLVs of the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute. For certain types of BGP Services like L3VPN where a per-VRF SID allocation is used (i.e. End.DT4 or End.DT6 behaviors), the same SID is shared across multiple NLRIs thus providing efficient packing. However, for certain other types of BGP Services like EVPN VPWS where a per-PW SID allocation is required (i.e. End.DX2 behavior), each NLRI would have its own unique SID there by resulting in inefficient packing. To achieve efficient packing, this document allows the encoding of the SRv6 Service SID either as a whole in the SRv6 Services TLVs or the encoding of only the common part of the SRv6 SID (e.g. Locator) in the SRv6 Services TLVs and encoding the variable (e.g. Function and Argument parts) in the existing label fields specific to that service encoding. This later form of encoding is referred to as the Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 9] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 Transposition Scheme where the SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV describes the sizes of the parts of the SRv6 SID and to also indicate offset of variable part along with its length in SRv6 SID value. The use of the Transposition Scheme is RECOMMENDED for the specific service encodings that allow it as described further in Section 5 and Section 6. As an example, for the EVPN VPWS service prefix described further in Section 6.1.2, the function part of the SRv6 SID is encoded in the MPLS Label field of the NLRI and the SID value in the SRv6 Services TLV carries only the locator part with the SRv6 SID Structure Sub- Sub-TLV. The SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV defines the lengths of locator block, locator node and function parts (arguments are not applicable for the End.DX2 behavior). Transposition Offset indicates the bit position and Transposition Length indicates the number of bits that are being taken out of the SID and put into label field. In yet another example, for the EVPN Per-ES A-D route described further in Section 6.1.1, only the argument of the SID needs to be signaled. This argument part of the SRv6 SID MAY be transposed in the ESI Label field of the ESI Label Extended Community and the SID value in the SRv6 Services TLV is set to 0 with the SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV. The SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV defines the lengths of locator block, locator node, function and argument parts. The offset and length of argument part SID value moved to label field is set in transposition offset and length of SID structure TLV. The receiving router is then able to put together the entire SRv6 Service SID (e.g. for the End.DT2M behavior) placing the label value received in the ESI Label field of the Per-ES A-D route into the correct transposition offset and length in the SRv6 SID with the End.DT2M behavior received for a EVPN Route Type 3 value. 5. BGP based L3 service over SRv6 BGP egress nodes (egress PEs) advertise a set of reachable prefixes. Standard BGP update propagation schemes[RFC4271], which may make use of route reflectors [RFC4456], are used to propagate these prefixes. BGP ingress nodes (ingress PEs) receive these advertisements and may add the prefix to the RIB in an appropriate VRF. Egress PEs which supports SRv6 based L3 services advertises overlay service prefixes along with a Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L3 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute. This TLV serves two purposes - first, it indicates that the egress PE supports SRv6 overlay and the BGP ingress PE receiving this route MUST choose to perform IPv6 encapsulation and optionally insert an SRH [RFC8754] when required; second ,it indicates the value of the Service SID to be used in the encapsulation. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 10] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 The Service SID thus signaled only has local significance at the egress PE, where it may be allocated or configured on a per-CE or per-VRF basis. In practice, the SID may encode a cross-connect to a specific Address Family table (END.DT) or next-hop/interface (END.DX) as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]. The SRv6 Service SID SHOULD be routable within the AS of the egress PE and serves the dual purpose of providing reachability between ingress PE and egress PE while also encoding the endpoint behavior. When the egress PE sets the next-hop to a value that is not covered by the SRv6 Locator from which the SRv6 Service SID is allocated, then the ingress PE SHOULD perform reachability check for the SRv6 Service SID in addition to the BGP next-hop reachability procedures. At an ingress PE, BGP installs the received prefix in the correct RIB table, recursing via an SR Policy leveraging the received SRv6 Service SID. Assuming best-effort connectivity to the egress PE, the ingress PE encapsulates the payload in an outer IPv6 header where the destination address is the SRv6 Service SID associated with the related BGP route update. However, when the received route is colored with an extended color community 'C' and Next-Hop 'N', and the ingress PE has a valid SRv6 Policy (C, N) associated with SID list [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy], then the effective SR Policy is . Multiple VPN routes MAY resolve recursively via the same SR Policy. 5.1. IPv4 VPN Over SRv6 Core The MP_REACH_NLRI for SRv6 core is encoded according to IPv4 VPN Over IPv6 Core defined in [I-D.ietf-bess-rfc5549revision]. Label field of IPv4-VPN NLRI is encoded as specified in [RFC8277] with the Label Value set to the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. SRv6 Service SID is encoded as part of the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. The behavior of the SRv6 SID is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is End.DX4 or End.DT4. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 11] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 5.2. IPv6 VPN Over SRv6 Core The MP_REACH_NLRI for SRv6 core is encoded according to IPv6 VPN over IPv6 Core is defined in [RFC4659]. Label field of the IPv6-VPN NLRI is encoded as specified in [RFC8277] with the Label Value set to the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. SRv6 Service SID is encoded as part of the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. The behavior of the SRv6 SID is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is End.DX6 or End.DT6. 5.3. Global IPv4 over SRv6 Core The MP_REACH_NLRI for SRv6 core is encoded according to IPv4 over IPv6 Core is defined in [I-D.ietf-bess-rfc5549revision]. SRv6 Service SID is encoded as part of the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. The behavior of the SRv6 SID is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is End.DX4 or End.DT4. 5.4. Global IPv6 over SRv6 Core The MP_REACH_NLRI for SRv6 core is encoded according to [RFC2545] SRv6 Service SID is encoded as part of the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. The behavior of the SRv6 SID is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is End.DX6 or End.DT6. 6. BGP based Ethernet VPN (EVPN) over SRv6 [RFC7432] provides an extendable method of building an Ethernet VPN (EVPN) overlay. It primarily focuses on MPLS based EVPNs and [RFC8365] extends to IP based EVPN overlays. [RFC7432] defines Route Types 1, 2 and 3 which carry prefixes and MPLS Label fields; the Label fields have specific use for MPLS encapsulation of EVPN traffic. Route Type 5 carrying MPLS label information (and thus encapsulation information) for EVPN is defined in [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement]. Route Types 6,7 and 8 are defined in [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy]. o Ethernet Auto-discovery Route (Route Type 1) o MAC/IP Advertisement Route (Route Type 2) o Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route (Route Type 3) Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 12] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 o Ethernet Segment route (Route Type 4) o IP prefix route (Route Type 5) o Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag route (Route Type 6) o IGMP join sync route (Route Type 7) o IGMP leave sync route (Route Type 8) To support SRv6 based EVPN overlays, one or more SRv6 Service SIDs are advertised with Route Type 1,2,3 and 5. The SRv6 Service SID(s) per Route Type are advertised in SRv6 L3/L2 Service TLVs within the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute. Signaling of SRv6 Service SID(s) serves two purposes - first, it indicates that the BGP egress device supports SRv6 overlay and the BGP ingress device receiving this route MUST perform IPv6 encapsulation and optionally insert an SRH [RFC8754] when required; second, it indicates the value of the Service SID(s) to be used in the encapsulation. The SRv6 Service SID SHOULD be routable within the AS of the egress PE and serves the dual purpose of providing reachability between ingress PE and egress PE while also encoding the endpoint behavior. When the egress PE sets the next-hop to a value that is not covered by the SRv6 Locator from which the SRv6 Service SID is allocated, then the ingress PE SHOULD perform reachability check for the SRv6 Service SID in addition to the BGP next-hop reachability procedures. 6.1. Ethernet Auto-discovery route over SRv6 Core Ethernet Auto-Discovery (A-D) routes are Route Type 1 defined in [RFC7432] and may be used to achieve split horizon filtering, fast convergence and aliasing. EVPN Route Type 1 is also used in EVPN- VPWS as well as in EVPN flexible cross-connect; mainly used to advertise point-to-point services ID. As a reminder, EVPN Route Type 1 is encoded as follows: +---------------------------------------+ | RD (8 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ |Ethernet Segment Identifier (10 octets)| +---------------------------------------+ | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | MPLS label (3 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 13] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 6.1.1. Per-ES A-D route Per-ES A-D route for SRv6 overlay is advertised as follows: o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of an egress PE o Ethernet Tag ID: set as per [RFC7432] o MPLS Label: set as per [RFC7432] o ESI label extended community ESI label field: carries the Argument part of the SRv6 SID when ESI filtering approach is used along with the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. A Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L2 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the A-D route. The behavior of the Service SID thus signaled is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. When ESI filtering approach is used, the Service SID is used to signal Arg.FE2 SID argument for applicable End.DT2M SIDs. When local-bias approach is used, the Service SID MAY be of value 0. 6.1.2. Per-EVI A-D route Per-EVI A-D route for SRv6 overlay is advertised as follows: o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of an egress PE o Ethernet Tag ID: Set as per [RFC7432], [RFC8214] and [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc] o MPLS Label: carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. A Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L2 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the A-D route. The behavior of the Service SID thus signaled is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is END.DX2, END.DX2V or END.DT2U. 6.2. MAC/IP Advertisement route over SRv6 Core EVPN Route Type 2 is used to advertise unicast traffic MAC+IP address reachability through MP-BGP to all other PEs in a given EVPN instance. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 14] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 As a reminder, EVPN Route Type 2 is encoded as follows: +---------------------------------------+ | RD (8 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ |Ethernet Segment Identifier (10 octets)| +---------------------------------------+ | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | MAC Address Length (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | MAC Address (6 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Address Length (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Address (0, 4, or 16 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | MPLS Label1 (3 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | MPLS Label2 (0 or 3 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of an egress PE o MPLS Label1: Is associated with the SRv6 L2 Service TLV. It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. o MPLS Label2: Is associated with the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. Service SIDs enclosed in SRv6 L2 Service TLV and optionally in SRv6 L3 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the MAC/IP Advertisement route. Described below are different types of Route Type 2 advertisements. 6.2.1. MAC/IP Advertisement route with MAC Only o MPLS Label1: Is associated with the SRv6 L2 Service TLV. It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 15] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 A Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L2 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the route. The behavior of the Service SID thus signaled is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is END.DX2 or END.DT2U. 6.2.2. MAC/IP Advertisement route with MAC+IP o MPLS Label1: Is associated with the SRv6 L2 Service TLV. It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. o MPLS Label2: Is associated with the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. An L2 Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L2 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the route. In addition, an L3 Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L3 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute MAY also be advertised along with the route. The behavior of the Service SID(s) thus signaled is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is END.DX2 or END.DT2U for the L2 Service SID, and END.DT6/4 or END.DX6/4 for the L3 Service SID. 6.3. Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route over SRv6 Core EVPN Route Type 3 is used to advertise multicast traffic reachability information through MP-BGP to all other PEs in a given EVPN instance. As a reminder, EVPN Route Type 3 is encoded as follows: +---------------------------------------+ | RD (8 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Address Length (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | Originating Router's IP Address | | (4 or 16 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of egress PE Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 16] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 PMSI Tunnel Attribute [RFC6514] is used to identify the P-tunnel used for sending BUM traffic. The format of PMSI Tunnel Attribute is encoded as follows for SRv6 Core: +---------------------------------------+ | Flag (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | Tunnel Type (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | MPLS label (3 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | Tunnel Identifier (variable) | +---------------------------------------+ o Flag: zero value defined per [RFC7432] o Tunnel Type: defined per [RFC6514] o MPLS label: It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when ingress replication is used and the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise it is set as defined in [RFC6514] o Tunnel Identifier: IP address of egress PE A Service SID enclosed in a SRv6 L2 Service TLV within the BGP Prefix-SID attribute is advertised along with the route. The behavior of the Service SID thus signaled, is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior of the SRv6 SID is as follows: o END.DT2M behavior. o When ESI-based filtering is used for Multi-Homing or E-Tree procedures, the ESI Filtering argument (Arg.FE2) of the Service SID carried along with EVPN Route Type 1 route SHOULD be merged together with the applicable End.DT2M SID of Type 3 route advertised by remote PE by doing a bitwise logical-OR operation to create a single SID on the ingress PE. Details of split-horizon ESI-based filtering mechanisms for multihoming are described in [RFC7432]. Details of filtering mechanisms for Leaf-originated BUM traffic in EVPN E-Tree services are provided in [RFC8317]. o When "local-bias" is used as the Multi-Homing split-horizon method, the ESI Filtering argument SHOULD NOT be merged with the corresponding End.DT2M SID on the ingress PE. Details of the "local-bias" procedures are described in [RFC8365]. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 17] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 The setup of multicast trees for use as P-tunnels is outside the scope of this document. 6.4. Ethernet Segment route over SRv6 Core As a reminder, an Ethernet Segment route i.e. EVPN Route Type 4 is encoded as follows: +---------------------------------------+ | RD (8 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Address Length (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | Originating Router's IP Address | | (4 or 16 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of egress PE SRv6 Service TLVs within BGP Prefix-SID attribute are not advertised along with this route. The processing of the route has not changed - it remains as described in [RFC7432]. 6.5. IP prefix route over SRv6 Core EVPN Route Type 5 is used to advertise IP address reachability through MP-BGP to all other PEs in a given EVPN instance. IP address may include host IP prefix or any specific subnet. As a reminder, EVPN Route Type 5 is encoded as follows: +---------------------------------------+ | RD (8 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ |Ethernet Segment Identifier (10 octets)| +---------------------------------------+ | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Prefix Length (1 octet) | +---------------------------------------+ | IP Prefix (4 or 16 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | GW IP Address (4 or 16 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ | MPLS Label (3 octets) | +---------------------------------------+ Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 18] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 o BGP next-hop: IPv6 address of egress PE o MPLS Label: It carries the Function part of the SRv6 SID when the Transposition Scheme of encoding (Section 4) is used and otherwise set to Implicit NULL. SRv6 Service SID is encoded as part of the SRv6 L3 Service TLV. The function of the SRv6 SID is entirely up to the originator of the advertisement. In practice, the behavior is End.DT4/6 or End.DX4/6. 6.6. EVPN multicast routes (Route Types 6, 7, 8) over SRv6 core These routes do not require the advertisement of SRv6 Service TLVs along with them. Similar to EVPN Route Type 4, the BGP Nexthop is equal to the IPv6 address of egress PE. 7. Implementation Status The [I-D.matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status] describes the current deployment and implementation status of SRv6 which also includes the BGP services over SRv6 as specified in this document. 8. Error Handling In case of any errors encountered while processing SRv6 Service TLVs, the details of the error SHOULD be logged for further analysis. If multiple instances of SRv6 L3 Service TLV is encountered, all but the first instance MUST be ignored. If multiple instances of SRv6 L2 Service TLV is encountered, all but the first instance MUST be ignored. An SRv6 Service TLV is considered malformed in the following cases: o the TLV Length is less than 1 o the TLV Length is inconsistent with the length of BGP Prefix-SID attribute o at least one of the constituent Sub-TLVs is malformed An SRv6 Service Sub-TLV is considered malformed in the following cases: o the Sub-TLV Length is inconsistent with the length of the enclosing SRv6 Service TLV Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 19] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 An SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV is considered malformed in the following cases: * the Sub-TLV Length is less than 21 * the Sub-TLV Length is inconsistent with the length of the enclosing SRv6 Service TLV * at least one of the constituent Sub-Sub-TLVs is malformed An SRv6 Service Data Sub-sub-TLV is considered malformed in the following cases: o the Sub-Sub-TLV Length is inconsistent with the length of the enclosing SRv6 service Sub-TLV Any TLV or Sub-TLV or Sub-Sub-TLV is not considered malformed because its Type is unrecognized. Any TLV or Sub-TLV or Sub-Sub-TLV is not considered malformed because of failing any semantic validation of its Value field. SRv6 overlay service requires Service SID for forwarding. The treat- as-withdraw action [RFC7606] MUST be performed when at least one malformed SRV6 Service TLV is present in the BGP Prefix-SID attribute. SRv6 SID value in SRv6 Service Sub-TLV is invalid when SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV transposition length is greater than 24 or addition of transposition offset and length is greater than 128. Path having such Prefix-SID Attribute should be ineligible during the selection of best path for the corresponding prefix. 9. IANA Considerations 9.1. BGP Prefix-SID TLV Types registry This document introduces three new TLV Types of the BGP Prefix-SID attribute. IANA has assigned Type values in the registry "BGP Prefix-SID TLV Types" as follows: Value Type Reference -------------------------------------------- 4 Deprecated 5 SRv6 L3 Service TLV 6 SRv6 L2 Service TLV Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 20] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 The value 4 previously corresponded to the SRv6-VPN SID TLV, which was specified in previous versions of this document and used by early implementations of this specification. It was deprecated and replaced by the SRv6 L3 Service and SRv6 L2 Service TLVs. 9.2. SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Types registry IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry called "SRv6 Service Sub-TLV Types". The allocation policy for this registry is: 0 : Reserved 1-127 : IETF Review 128-254 : First Come First Served 255 : Reserved The following Sub-TLV Types are defined in this document: Value Type Reference ---------------------------------------------------- 1 SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV 9.3. SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Types registry IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry called "SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLV Types". The allocation policy for this registry is: 0 : Reserved 1-127 : IETF Review 128-254 : First Come First Served 255 : Reserved The following Sub-Sub-TLV Types are defined in this document: Value Type Reference ---------------------------------------------------- 1 SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV 10. Security Considerations This document specifies extensions to BGP protocol for signalling of services for SRv6. As such, techniques related to authentication of BGP sessions for securing messages between BGP peers as discussed in the BGP specification [RFC4271] and in the security analysis for BGP [RFC4272] apply. The discussion of the use of the TCP Authentication option to protect BGP sessions is found in [RFC5925], while [RFC6952] includes an analysis of BGP keying and authentication issues. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 21] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 This document does not introduce new services or BGP NLRI types but extends the signaling of existing ones for SRv6. Therefore, the security considerations for the respective BGP services [I-D.ietf-bess-rfc5549revision] [RFC4659] [RFC2545] [RFC7432] [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement] also apply. SRv6 operates within a trusted SR domain with filtering of traffic at the domain boundaries. These and other security aspects of SRv6 are discussed in the security considerations of [RFC8402] [RFC8754] and apply for deployment of BGP services using SRv6. The SRv6 SIDs used for the BGP Services in this document are defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming] and hence the security considerations of that document also apply. The service flows between PE routers using SRv6 SIDs advertised via BGP are expected to be limited within the trusted SR domain (e.g. within a single AS or between multiple ASes within a single provider network). Therefore, precaution is necessary to ensure that the BGP service information (including associated SRv6 SID) advertised via BGP sessions is limited to peers within this trusted SR domain. Security consideration section of [RFC8669] discuss mechanisms to prevent leaking of BGP Prefix-SID attribute, that carries SRv6 SID, outside the SR domain. In the event that these filtering mechanisms, both in the forwarding and control plane, are not implemented properly, it may be possible for nodes outside the SR domain to learn the VPN Service SIDs and use them to direct traffic into VPN networks from outside the SR domain. 11. Acknowledgments The authors of this document would like to thank Stephane Litkowski, Rishabh Parekh and Xiejingrong for their comments and review of this document. 12. Contributors Satoru Matsushima SoftBank Email: satoru.matsushima@g.softbank.co.jp Dirk Steinberg Steinberg Consulting Email: dws@steinberg.net Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 22] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 Daniel Bernier Bell Canada Email: daniel.bernier@bell.ca Daniel Voyer Bell Canada Email: daniel.voyer@bell.ca Jonn Leddy Individual Email: john@leddy.net Swadesh Agrawal Cisco Email: swaagraw@cisco.com Patrice Brissette Cisco Email: pbrisset@cisco.com Ali Sajassi Cisco Email: sajassi@cisco.com Bart Peirens Proximus Belgium Email: bart.peirens@proximus.com Darren Dukes Cisco Email: ddukes@cisco.com Pablo Camarilo Cisco Email: pcamaril@cisco.com Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 23] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 Shyam Sethuram Cisco Email: shyam.ioml@gmail.com Zafar Ali Cisco Email: zali@cisco.com Ketan Talaulikar Cisco Email: ketant@cisco.com 13. References 13.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy] Sajassi, A., Thoria, S., Patel, K., Drake, J., and W. Lin, "IGMP and MLD Proxy for EVPN", draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp- mld-proxy-05 (work in progress), April 2020. [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement] Rabadan, J., Henderickx, W., Drake, J., Lin, W., and A. Sajassi, "IP Prefix Advertisement in EVPN", draft-ietf- bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-11 (work in progress), May 2018. [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc] Sajassi, A., Brissette, P., Uttaro, J., Drake, J., Lin, W., Boutros, S., and J. Rabadan, "EVPN VPWS Flexible Cross-Connect Service", draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-01 (work in progress), June 2019. [I-D.ietf-bess-rfc5549revision] Litkowski, S., Agrawal, S., ananthamurthy, k., and K. Patel, "Advertising IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information with an IPv6 Next Hop", draft-ietf-bess- rfc5549revision-04 (work in progress), July 2020. [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming] Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J., Voyer, D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6 Network Programming", draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16 (work in progress), June 2020. Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 24] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC2545] Marques, P. and F. Dupont, "Use of BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions for IPv6 Inter-Domain Routing", RFC 2545, DOI 10.17487/RFC2545, March 1999, . [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, . [RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February 2006, . [RFC4456] Bates, T., Chen, E., and R. Chandra, "BGP Route Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP (IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006, . [RFC4659] De Clercq, J., Ooms, D., Carugi, M., and F. Le Faucheur, "BGP-MPLS IP Virtual Private Network (VPN) Extension for IPv6 VPN", RFC 4659, DOI 10.17487/RFC4659, September 2006, . [RFC4760] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter, "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760, DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007, . [RFC6514] Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012, . [RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A., Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February 2015, . [RFC7606] Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K. Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages", RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015, . Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 25] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, . [RFC8214] Boutros, S., Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Drake, J., and J. Rabadan, "Virtual Private Wire Service Support in Ethernet VPN", RFC 8214, DOI 10.17487/RFC8214, August 2017, . [RFC8277] Rosen, E., "Using BGP to Bind MPLS Labels to Address Prefixes", RFC 8277, DOI 10.17487/RFC8277, October 2017, . [RFC8317] Sajassi, A., Ed., Salam, S., Drake, J., Uttaro, J., Boutros, S., and J. Rabadan, "Ethernet-Tree (E-Tree) Support in Ethernet VPN (EVPN) and Provider Backbone Bridging EVPN (PBB-EVPN)", RFC 8317, DOI 10.17487/RFC8317, January 2018, . [RFC8365] Sajassi, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Bitar, N., Shekhar, R., Uttaro, J., and W. Henderickx, "A Network Virtualization Overlay Solution Using Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", RFC 8365, DOI 10.17487/RFC8365, March 2018, . [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, July 2018, . [RFC8669] Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Lindem, A., Ed., Sreekantiah, A., and H. Gredler, "Segment Routing Prefix Segment Identifier Extensions for BGP", RFC 8669, DOI 10.17487/RFC8669, December 2019, . [RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020, . Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 26] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 13.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Mattes, P., Rosen, E., Jain, D., and S. Lin, "Advertising Segment Routing Policies in BGP", draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing- te-policy-09 (work in progress), May 2020. [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft- ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-08 (work in progress), July 2020. [I-D.matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status] Matsushima, S., Filsfils, C., Ali, Z., Li, Z., and K. Rajaraman, "SRv6 Implementation and Deployment Status", draft-matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status-07 (work in progress), April 2020. [RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis", RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006, . [RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925, June 2010, . [RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013, . Authors' Addresses Gaurav Dawra (editor) LinkedIn USA Email: gdawra.ietf@gmail.com Clarence Filsfils Cisco Systems Belgium Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 27] Internet-Draft SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services July 2020 Robert Raszuk Bloomberg LP USA Email: robert@raszuk.net Bruno Decraene Orange France Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com Shunwan Zhuang Huawei Technologies China Email: zhuangshunwan@huawei.com Jorge Rabadan Nokia USA Email: jorge.rabadan@nokia.com Dawra, et al. Expires January 12, 2021 [Page 28]