| < draft-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framework-00.txt | draft-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framework-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPRING Working Group Dave Allan, Jeff Tantsura | SPRING Working Group Dave Allan | |||
| Internet Draft Ericsson | Internet Draft Ericsson | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track | Intended status: Standards Track Jeff Tantsura | |||
| Expires: August 2016 | Expires: December 2016 | |||
| February 2016 | June 2016 | |||
| A Framework for Computed Multicast applied to MPLS based Segment | A Framework for Computed Multicast applied to MPLS based Segment | |||
| Routing | Routing | |||
| draft-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framework-00 | draft-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framework-01 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes a multicast solution for Segment Routing with | This document describes a multicast solution for Segment Routing with | |||
| MPLS data plane. It is consistent with the Segment Routing | MPLS data plane. It is consistent with the Segment Routing | |||
| architecture in that an IGP is augmented to distribute information in | architecture in that an IGP is augmented to distribute information in | |||
| addition to the link state. In this solution it is multicast group | addition to the link state. In this solution it is multicast group | |||
| membership information sufficient to synchronize state in a given | membership information sufficient to synchronize state in a given | |||
| network domain. Computation is employed to determine the topology of | network domain. Computation is employed to determine the topology of | |||
| any loosely specified multicast distribution tree. | any loosely specified multicast distribution tree. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 45 ¶ | |||
| documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- | documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- | |||
| Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work | Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work | |||
| in progress". | in progress". | |||
| The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | |||
| The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on August 2016. | This Internet-Draft will expire on December 2016. | |||
| Copyright and License Notice | Copyright and License Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 34 ¶ | |||
| 3. Solution Overview..............................................4 | 3. Solution Overview..............................................4 | |||
| 3.1. Mapping source specific trees onto the segment routing | 3.1. Mapping source specific trees onto the segment routing | |||
| architecture......................................................5 | architecture......................................................5 | |||
| 3.2. Role of the Routing System...................................5 | 3.2. Role of the Routing System...................................5 | |||
| 3.3. MDT Construction Requirements................................6 | 3.3. MDT Construction Requirements................................6 | |||
| 3.4. Pruning - theory of operation................................6 | 3.4. Pruning - theory of operation................................6 | |||
| 4. Elements of Procedure..........................................7 | 4. Elements of Procedure..........................................7 | |||
| 4.1. Triggers for Computation.....................................7 | 4.1. Triggers for Computation.....................................7 | |||
| 4.2. FIB Determination............................................7 | 4.2. FIB Determination............................................7 | |||
| 4.2.1. Information in the IGP.....................................7 | 4.2.1. Information in the IGP.....................................7 | |||
| 4.2.2. Computation of individual segments.........................7 | 4.2.2. Computation of individual segments.........................8 | |||
| 4.3. FIB Generation..............................................10 | 4.3. FIB Generation..............................................10 | |||
| 4.4. FIB installation............................................10 | 4.4. FIB installation............................................11 | |||
| 5. Related work..................................................11 | 5. Related work..................................................11 | |||
| 5.1. IGP Extensions..............................................11 | 5.1. IGP Extensions..............................................11 | |||
| 5.2. BGP Extensions..............................................11 | 5.2. BGP Extensions..............................................11 | |||
| 6. Observations..................................................11 | 6. Observations..................................................12 | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements..............................................12 | 7. Acknowledgements..............................................12 | |||
| 8. Security Considerations.......................................12 | 8. Security Considerations.......................................12 | |||
| 9. IANA Considerations...........................................12 | 9. IANA Considerations...........................................12 | |||
| 10. References...................................................12 | 10. References...................................................12 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References.......................................12 | 10.1. Normative References.......................................12 | |||
| 10.2. Informative References.....................................12 | 10.2. Informative References.....................................12 | |||
| 11. Authors' Addresses...........................................13 | 11. Authors' Addresses...........................................13 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 23 ¶ | |||
| nodes determined to have a role. Therefore state only need be | nodes determined to have a role. Therefore state only need be | |||
| installed in nodes that have one of these three roles to fully | installed in nodes that have one of these three roles to fully | |||
| instantiate an MDT. | instantiate an MDT. | |||
| Although this approach is computationally intensive, a significant | Although this approach is computationally intensive, a significant | |||
| amount of computation can be avoided when the computing agent | amount of computation can be avoided when the computing agent | |||
| determines that the node it is computing for has no role in a given | determines that the node it is computing for has no role in a given | |||
| MDT. This permits a computed approach to multicast convergence to be | MDT. This permits a computed approach to multicast convergence to be | |||
| computationally tractable. | computationally tractable. | |||
| 1.1. Authors | 1.1. Authors | |||
| David Allan, Jeff Tantsura | Dave Allan, Jeff Tantsura | |||
| 1.2. Requirements Language | 1.2. Requirements Language | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
| document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119]. | document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119]. | |||
| 2. Conventions used in this document | 2. Conventions used in this document | |||
| 2.1. Terminology | 2.1. Terminology | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 13 ¶ | |||
| or more leaves for a given multicast distribution tree | or more leaves for a given multicast distribution tree | |||
| Multicast convergence - is when all computation and state | Multicast convergence - is when all computation and state | |||
| installation to ensure the FIB reflects the multicast information in | installation to ensure the FIB reflects the multicast information in | |||
| the IGP is complete. | the IGP is complete. | |||
| MDT - multicast distribution tree. Is a tree composed of one or more | MDT - multicast distribution tree. Is a tree composed of one or more | |||
| multicast segments. | multicast segments. | |||
| Multicast segment - is a portion of the multicast tree where only the | Multicast segment - is a portion of the multicast tree where only the | |||
| root and the leaves have been specified, and computation based upon | root and the leaves have been specified, and computation based upon | |||
| the current state of the IGP database will be employed to determine | the current state of the IGP database is employed to determine and | |||
| and install the required state to implement the segment. A multicast | install the required state to implement the segment. For MPLS a | |||
| segment is identified by a multicast SID. | multicast segment is implemented as a p2mp LSP. A multicast segment | |||
| is identified by a multicast SID. | ||||
| Multicast SID - Is the data plane identifier that is used to | ||||
| implement a multicast segment. As per a unicast MPLS segment, the | ||||
| rightmost 20 bits of a multicast SID is encoded as a label. It is | ||||
| drawn from an SRGB that is global to the SR domain. | ||||
| Pinned path - Is a unique shortest path extending from a leaf | Pinned path - Is a unique shortest path extending from a leaf | |||
| upstream towards the root for a given multicast segment. Therefore is | upstream towards the root for a given multicast segment. Therefore is | |||
| a component of the multicast segment that it has been determined must | a component of the multicast segment that it has been determined must | |||
| be there. It will not necessarily extend from the leaf all the way to | be there. It will not necessarily extend from the leaf all the way to | |||
| the root during intermediate computation steps. A pinned path can | the root during intermediate computation steps. A pinned path can | |||
| result from pruning operations. | result from pruning operations. | |||
| Role - refers specifically to a node that is either a root, a leaf, a | Role - refers specifically to a node that is either a root, a leaf, a | |||
| replication node, or a pinned waypoint for a given MDT. | replication node, or a pinned waypoint for a given MDT. | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 13 ¶ | |||
| information in the IGP database. | information in the IGP database. | |||
| Explicitly routed MDTs are expressed as a tree of concatenated | Explicitly routed MDTs are expressed as a tree of concatenated | |||
| multicast segments where both the leaves of each segment and the | multicast segments where both the leaves of each segment and the | |||
| waypoints coupling a given segment to the upstream and/or downstream | waypoints coupling a given segment to the upstream and/or downstream | |||
| segment(s) is specified in information flooded in the IGP by the | segment(s) is specified in information flooded in the IGP by the | |||
| overall root of the MDT. The segments themselves will be computed as | overall root of the MDT. The segments themselves will be computed as | |||
| per a loosely specified MDT. | per a loosely specified MDT. | |||
| A PE acting as an overall root for a given tree is expected to be | A PE acting as an overall root for a given tree is expected to be | |||
| configured by management as to where to source multicast traffic | configured by the operator as to where to source multicast traffic | |||
| from, be it an attachment circuit, interworking function for client | from, be it an attachment circuit, interworking function for client | |||
| technology or other. Similarly a leaf for a given tree is expected to | technology or other. Similarly a leaf for a given tree is expected to | |||
| be configured by management as to the disposition of received | be configured by the operator as to the disposition of received | |||
| multicast traffic. | multicast traffic. | |||
| A computed segment is guaranteed to be loop free in a stable system. | A computed segment is guaranteed to be loop free in a stable system. | |||
| A concatenation of segments to construct an MDT will similarly be | A concatenation of segments to construct an MDT will similarly be | |||
| loop free as any collision of segments can be disambiguated in the | loop free as any collision of segments can be disambiguated in the | |||
| data plane via the SIDs. | data plane via the SIDs. | |||
| This architecture significantly reduces the amount of state that | This architecture significantly reduces the amount of state that | |||
| needs to be installed in the data plane to support multicast. This | needs to be installed in the data plane to support multicast. This | |||
| also means that the impact of many failures in the network on | also means that the impact of many failures in the network on | |||
| multicast traffic distribution will be recovered by unicast local | multicast traffic distribution will be recovered by unicast local | |||
| repair or unicast convergence with subsequent multicast convergence | repair or unicast convergence with subsequent multicast convergence | |||
| acting in the role of network re-optimization (as opposed to | acting in the role of network re-optimization (as opposed to | |||
| restoration). | restoration). | |||
| 3.1. Mapping source specific trees onto the segment routing architecture | 3.1. Mapping source specific trees onto the segment routing architecture | |||
| A computed source specific tree for a given multicast group | A computed source specific tree for a given multicast group | |||
| corresponds to one or more multicast segments in the SR architecture, | corresponds to one or more multicast segments in the SR architecture. | |||
| each of which is assigned a SID, typically by management | Each multicast segment is assigned a SID, typically by management | |||
| configuration of the node that will be the overall root for the | configuration of the node that will be the overall root for the | |||
| source specific tree, which then uses the IGP to advertise this | source specific tree. The root node then uses the IGP to advertise | |||
| information to the root"s peers. | this information to all nodes in the IGP area/domain. | |||
| A multicast group is implemented as the set of source specific trees | A multicast group is implemented as the set of source specific trees | |||
| from all nodes that have registered transmit interest to all nodes | from all nodes that have registered transmit interest to all nodes | |||
| that have registered receive interest in a multicast group. | that have registered receive interest in a multicast group. | |||
| 3.2. Role of the Routing System | 3.2. Role of the Routing System | |||
| The role of the IGP is to communicate topology information, multicast | The role of the IGP is to communicate topology information, multicast | |||
| registrations, unicast to SID bindings, multicast to SID bindings and | capability and associated algorithm, multicast registrations, unicast | |||
| waypoints in multi-segment MDTs. No changes to topology or unicast to | to SID bindings, multicast to SID bindings and waypoints in multi- | |||
| SID bindings advertisement are proposed by this memo. | segment MDTs. No changes to topology or unicast to SID binding | |||
| advertisements are proposed by this memo. | ||||
| The multicast registrations/bindings will be in the form of source, | The multicast registrations/bindings will be in the form of source, | |||
| group, transmit/receive interest and the SID to use for the source | group, transmit/receive interest and the SID to use for the source | |||
| specific multicast tree. Registrations are originated by any node | specific multicast tree. Registrations are originated by any node | |||
| that has send or receive interest in a given multicast group. Nodes | that has send or receive interest in a given multicast group. Nodes | |||
| will use the combination of topology and multicast registrations to | will use the combination of topology and multicast registrations to | |||
| determine the nodes that have a role in each source specific tree and | determine the nodes that have a role in each source specific tree and | |||
| the SID information to then derive the required FIB state. | the SID information to then derive the required FIB state. | |||
| The definition of the required IGP TLVs is out of scope of this memo | ||||
| and will be done in relevant IGP drafts. | ||||
| 3.3. MDT Construction Requirements | 3.3. MDT Construction Requirements | |||
| A multicast segment in an MDT is constructed such that between any | A multicast segment in an MDT is constructed such that between any | |||
| pair of nodes that have a role in the segment and are connected by a | pair of nodes that have a role in the segment and are connected by a | |||
| unicast tunnel, there is not another node on the shortest path | unicast tunnel, there is not another node on the shortest path | |||
| between the two with a role in that segment. This ensures that copies | between the two with a role in that segment. This ensures that copies | |||
| of a packet forwarded by an multicast segment will traverse a link | of a packet forwarded by an multicast segment will traverse a link | |||
| only once in a stable system. | only once in a stable system. | |||
| Note that this can be satisfied by a minimum cost shortest path tree, | Note that this can be satisfied by a minimum cost shortest path tree, | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 36 ¶ | |||
| Group membership information for a multicast segment is obtained from | Group membership information for a multicast segment is obtained from | |||
| the IGP. This is true for single segment MDTs as well as multi- | the IGP. This is true for single segment MDTs as well as multi- | |||
| segment MDTs. Included in the multi-segment MDT specification is the | segment MDTs. Included in the multi-segment MDT specification is the | |||
| waypoint nodes in MDT and the upstream and downstream SIDs. The | waypoint nodes in MDT and the upstream and downstream SIDs. The | |||
| specified node is expected to cross connect the SIDs to join the | specified node is expected to cross connect the SIDs to join the | |||
| segments together acting in the role of leaf for the upstream segment | segments together acting in the role of leaf for the upstream segment | |||
| and root for the downstream segment. | and root for the downstream segment. | |||
| When a waypoint in an MDT descriptor does not exist in the IGP, the | When a waypoint in an MDT descriptor does not exist in the IGP, the | |||
| assumption is that the node has failed. The response of the other | assumption is that the node identified by the waypoint SID has | |||
| nodes in the system in FIB determination is to add the leaves of the | failed. The response of the other nodes in the system in FIB | |||
| downstream segment to the upstream segment. | determination is to add the leaves of the downstream segment to the | |||
| upstream segment. | ||||
| An example of this would be consider a node "x", and another node | ||||
| "y". At some point in time, "x" advertises a tree that identifies "y" | ||||
| as a waypoint that cross connects upstream SID "a" to downstream SID | ||||
| "b". At some later point node "y" fails. The other nodes in the | ||||
| network will compute segment "a" as if it included all leaves and | ||||
| waypoints in segment "b". All apriori state installed for segment "b" | ||||
| would be removed as the failure of "y" has required "b" to be | ||||
| subsumed by "a". | ||||
| 4.2.2. Computation of individual segments | 4.2.2. Computation of individual segments | |||
| FIB generation for a multicast segment is the result of computation, | FIB generation for a multicast segment is the result of computation, | |||
| ultimately as applied to all source specific trees in the network. | ultimately as applied to all source specific trees in the network. | |||
| All computing nodes implement a common algorithm for tree generation, | All computing nodes implement a common algorithm for tree generation, | |||
| as all MUST agree on the solution. | as all MUST agree on the solution. | |||
| One algorithm is as follows: | One algorithm is as follows: | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 41 ¶ | |||
| Root---------A----------B | Root---------A----------B | |||
| B is a leaf. A is not but is in a potential shortest path from root | B is a leaf. A is not but is in a potential shortest path from root | |||
| to B. However A will have no role in the MDT that serves B as it | to B. However A will have no role in the MDT that serves B as it | |||
| provides simple transit therefore is replaced with a direct | provides simple transit therefore is replaced with a direct | |||
| connection between the root and B. | connection between the root and B. | |||
| Root--------------------B | Root--------------------B | |||
| Note that such pruning also needs to avoid the creation of | Note that such pruning also needs to avoid the creation of | |||
| duplicate links. For example: | duplicate parallel links. For example: | |||
| /----------A----------\ | /----------A----------\ | |||
| Root B | Root B | |||
| \----------C----------/ | \----------C----------/ | |||
| Where A and C have no role, they can be replaced with a single link | Where A and C have no role and the cost root-A-B = cost root-C-B, | |||
| from Root to B. | they can be replaced with a single link from Root to B. | |||
| 3) Simplify via the elimination of fewer hop paths | 3) Simplify via the elimination of fewer hop paths | |||
| When for a given set of leaves, a node has multiple downstream | When for a given set of leaves, a node has multiple downstream | |||
| links that converge on a common downstream point, and that set of | links that converge on a common downstream point, and that set of | |||
| leaves is only a subset of the leaves reachable on one or more of | leaves is only a subset of the leaves reachable on one or more of | |||
| the links, any link that only serves that subset of leaves can be | the links, any link that only serves that subset of leaves can be | |||
| pruned. | pruned. | |||
| For example: | For example: | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 18 ¶ | |||
| links that converge on a common downstream point, and that set of | links that converge on a common downstream point, and that set of | |||
| leaves is only a subset of the leaves reachable on one or more of | leaves is only a subset of the leaves reachable on one or more of | |||
| the links, any link that only serves that subset of leaves can be | the links, any link that only serves that subset of leaves can be | |||
| pruned. | pruned. | |||
| For example: | For example: | |||
| --A---------------------------B | --A---------------------------B | |||
| \ / | \ / | |||
| -----------C----------- | -----------C----------- | |||
| \ | \ | |||
| ----D | ----D | |||
| Link AB is cost 2, link AC and CB are cost 1 (cost of link CD does | ||||
| not affect the example). | ||||
| B and D are leaves of a root upstream of A. From A, link AB can | B and D are leaves of a root upstream of A. From A, link AB can | |||
| reach leaf B. Path AC can reach leaf B and D. In this case path A-B | reach leaf B. Path AC can reach leaf B and D. In this case path A-B | |||
| can be pruned from consideration. The set of leaves reachable via | can be pruned from consideration. The set of leaves reachable via | |||
| link A-B is a subset of that reachable by A-C, and the paths from A | link A-B is a subset of that reachable by A-C, and the paths from A | |||
| that serves that subset converges at B. | that serves that subset converges at B. | |||
| 4) Prune via the elimination of upstream links where the nearest | 4) Prune via the elimination of upstream links where the nearest | |||
| reachable leaf is further than the closest leaf or pinned path, | reachable leaf is further than the closest leaf or pinned path, | |||
| and that path does not have a candidate replication point closer | and that path does not have a candidate replication point closer | |||
| than the closet leaf or pinned path, as the resulting tree will | than the closet leaf or pinned path, as the resulting tree will | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 36 ¶ | |||
| the given segment. | the given segment. | |||
| b. Installation of state for waypoints in multi-segment MDTs. | b. Installation of state for waypoints in multi-segment MDTs. | |||
| 2) After T1: Update state for nodes that both had and have a role in | 2) After T1: Update state for nodes that both had and have a role in | |||
| a given multicast segment. | a given multicast segment. | |||
| 3) After T2: Removal of state for nodes that transition from having a | 3) After T2: Removal of state for nodes that transition from having a | |||
| role to not having a role for a given multicast segment. | role to not having a role for a given multicast segment. | |||
| T1 and T2 will be network wide configurable values. | T1 and T2 are network wide configurable values. | |||
| 5. Related work | 5. Related work | |||
| 5.1. IGP Extensions | 5.1. IGP Extensions | |||
| RFC 6329 provides a useful example of some of the type of IGP changes | The required IGP changes are documented in [MCAST-ISIS] and [MCAST- | |||
| that will be required. There are two aspects in RFC 6329 that are | OPSF]. | |||
| worth emulating: | ||||
| - The advertisement of multicast registrations | ||||
| - The negotiation of the algorithm to be used for MDT computation | ||||
| The required changes for both IS-IS and OSPF will be documented in | ||||
| separate WG targeted I-Ds. | ||||
| 5.2. BGP Extensions | 5.2. BGP Extensions | |||
| This memo will require the specification of a new PMSI Tunnel | This memo will require the specification of a new PMSI Tunnel | |||
| Attribute (SPRING P2MP tunnel, tentatively 0x09) to order to | Attribute (SPRING P2MP tunnel, tentatively 0x09) to order to | |||
| integrate into the multicast framework documented in RFC 6514 | integrate into the multicast framework documented in RFC 6514 | |||
| 6. Observations | 6. Observations | |||
| This technique is not confined to segment routing, and with the | This technique is not confined to segment routing, and with the | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 24 ¶ | |||
| speakers and converge independently so is written in a form that | speakers and converge independently so is written in a form that | |||
| assumes a node, computing node and IGP speaker are one in the same. | assumes a node, computing node and IGP speaker are one in the same. | |||
| It should be observed that the relative frugality of data plane state | It should be observed that the relative frugality of data plane state | |||
| would suggest that separation of computation from nodes in the data | would suggest that separation of computation from nodes in the data | |||
| plane combined with management or "software defined networking" based | plane combined with management or "software defined networking" based | |||
| population of the multicast FIB entries may also be useful modes of | population of the multicast FIB entries may also be useful modes of | |||
| network operation. | network operation. | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements | 7. Acknowledgements | |||
| Thanks to Uma Chunduri for his detailed review and suggestions. | ||||
| 8. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
| For a future version of this document. | For a future version of this document. | |||
| 9. IANA Considerations | 9. IANA Considerations | |||
| For a future version of this document. | This document requires the allocation of a PMSI tunnel type to | |||
| identify a SPRING P2MP tunnel type from the P-Multicast Service | ||||
| Interface Tunnel (PMSI Tunnel) Tunnel Types registry. | ||||
| 10. References | 10. References | |||
| 10.1. Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| 10.2. Informative References | 10.2. Informative References | |||
| [RFC6379] Ashwood-Smith et.al., "IS-IS Extensions Supporting IEEE | [MCAST-ISIS] Allan et.al., "IS-IS extensions for Computed Multicast | |||
| 802.1aq Shortest Path Bridging", IETF RFC 6329, April 2012 | applied to MPLS based Segment Routing", IETF work in progress, | |||
| draft-allan-isis-spring-multicast-00, July 2016 | ||||
| [MCAST-OSPF] Allan et.al., "OSPF extensions for Computed Multicast | ||||
| applied to MPLS based Segment Routing", IETF work in progress, | ||||
| draft-allan-ospf-spring-multicast-00, July 2016 | ||||
| [RFC6514] Aggarwal et.al., "BGP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast | [RFC6514] Aggarwal et.al., "BGP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast | |||
| in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", IETF RFC 6514, February 2012 | in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", IETF RFC 6514, February 2012 | |||
| [RFC7385] Andersson & Swallow "IANA Registry for P-Multicast Service | [RFC7385] Andersson & Swallow "IANA Registry for P-Multicast Service | |||
| Interface (PMSI) Tunnel Type Code Points", IETF RFC 7385, | Interface (PMSI) Tunnel Type Code Points", IETF RFC 7385, | |||
| October 2014 | October 2014 | |||
| 11. Authors' Addresses | 11. Authors' Addresses | |||
| Dave Allan (editor) | Dave Allan (editor) | |||
| Ericsson | Ericsson | |||
| 300 Holger Way | 300 Holger Way | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134 | San Jose, CA 95134 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: david.i.allan@ericsson.com | Email: david.i.allan@ericsson.com | |||
| Jeff Tantsura | Jeff Tantsura | |||
| Ericsson | Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com | |||
| 200 Holger Way | ||||
| San Jose, CA 95134 | ||||
| Email: jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com | ||||
| End of changes. 27 change blocks. | ||||
| 45 lines changed or deleted | 64 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||