| < draft-chen-pce-bier-te-path-02.txt | draft-chen-pce-bier-te-path-03.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group H. Chen | Network Working Group H. Chen | |||
| Internet-Draft M. McBride | Internet-Draft M. McBride | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Futurewei | Intended status: Standards Track Futurewei | |||
| Expires: 20 April 2022 A. Wang | Expires: October 20, 2022 A. Wang | |||
| China Telecom | China Telecom | |||
| G. Mishra | G. Mishra | |||
| Verizon Inc. | Verizon Inc. | |||
| Y. Liu | Y. Liu | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| Y. Fan | Y. Fan | |||
| Casa Systems | Casa Systems | |||
| L. Liu | L. Liu | |||
| Fujitsu | Fujitsu | |||
| X. Liu | X. Liu | |||
| Volta Networks | Volta Networks | |||
| 17 October 2021 | April 18, 2022 | |||
| PCE for BIER-TE Path | PCE for BIER-TE Path | |||
| draft-chen-pce-bier-te-path-02 | draft-chen-pce-bier-te-path-03 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes extensions to Path Computation Element (PCE) | This document describes extensions to Path Computation Element (PCE) | |||
| communication Protocol (PCEP) for supporting Bit Index Explicit | communication Protocol (PCEP) for supporting Bit Index Explicit | |||
| Replication (BIER) Traffic Engineering (TE) paths. | Replication (BIER) Traffic Engineering (TE) paths. | |||
| Requirements Language | Requirements Language | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 4 ¶ | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on 20 April 2022. | This Internet-Draft will expire on October 20, 2022. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | ||||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.1. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. Overview of PCE for BIER-TE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2. Overview of PCE for BIER-TE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.1. Example BIER-TE Topology with PCE . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2.1. Example BIER-TE Topology with PCE . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.2. A Brief Flow of PCEP Messages for a BIER-TE Path . . . . 6 | 2.2. A Brief Flow of PCEP Messages for a BIER-TE Path . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.3. Procedures on Ingress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.3. Procedures on Ingress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3. Extensions to PCEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3. Extensions to PCEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.1. BIER-TE Path Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.1. BIER-TE Path Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.2. Extensions to SRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 3.2. Extensions to SRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 3.2.1. SRP Object Flag Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 3.2.1. SRP Object Flag Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 3.2.2. Reuse of Multicast Flow Specification TLV . . . . . . 11 | 3.2.2. Reuse of Multicast Flow Specification TLV . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 3.3. Ingress Node Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 3.3. Ingress Node Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 3.4. Objective Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.4. Objective Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.5. BIER-TE Path Subobject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.5. BIER-TE Path Subobject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 3.6. BIER-TE Path Subobject in ERO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 3.6. BIER-TE Path Subobject in ERO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 3.7. BIER-TE Path Subobject in RRO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 3.7. BIER-TE Path Subobject in RRO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 4. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 4. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 4.1. BIER-TE Path Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 4.1. BIER-TE Path Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 4.2. BIER-TE Path Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 4.2. BIER-TE Path Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 4.3. BIER-TE Path Deletion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 4.3. BIER-TE Path Deletion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 5. The PCEP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 5. The PCEP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 5.1. The PCRpt Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 5.1. The PCRpt Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 5.2. The PCUpd Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 5.2. The PCUpd Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 5.3. The PCInitiate Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 5.3. The PCInitiate Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 5.4. The PCReq Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 5.4. The PCReq Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 5.5. The PCRep Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 5.5. The PCRep Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 6.1. PST for BIER-TE Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.1. PST for BIER-TE Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 6.2. PCE-BIER-TE-Path Capability sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.2. PCE-BIER-TE-Path Capability sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 6.3. SRP Object Flag Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.3. SRP Object Flag Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 6.4. Ingress Node Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.4. Ingress Node Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 6.5. OF Code Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 6.5. OF Code Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 6.6. PCEP BIER-TE Path Subobjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 6.6. PCEP BIER-TE Path Subobjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 22 ¶ | |||
| This document proposes a comprehensive solution for computing and | This document proposes a comprehensive solution for computing and | |||
| establishing BIER-TE P2MP paths. | establishing BIER-TE P2MP paths. | |||
| 1.1. Terminologies | 1.1. Terminologies | |||
| The following terminologies are used in this document. | The following terminologies are used in this document. | |||
| PCE: Path Computation Element | PCE: Path Computation Element | |||
| PCEP: PCE communication Protocol | PCEP: PCE communication Protocol | |||
| PCC: Path Computation Client | PCC: Path Computation Client | |||
| CE: Customer Edge | CE: Customer Edge | |||
| PE: Provider Edge | PE: Provider Edge | |||
| BIER: Bit Index Explicit Replication. | BIER: Bit Index Explicit Replication. | |||
| BIER-TE: BIER Traffic/Tree Engineering. | BIER-TE: BIER Traffic/Tree Engineering. | |||
| BFR: Bit-Forwarding Router. | BFR: Bit-Forwarding Router. | |||
| BFIR: Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router. | BFIR: Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router. | |||
| BFER: Bit-Forwarding Egress Router. | BFER: Bit-Forwarding Egress Router. | |||
| BFR-id: BFR Identifier. It is a number in the range [1,65535]. | BFR-id: BFR Identifier. It is a number in the range [1,65535]. | |||
| BFR-NBR: BFR Neighbor. | BFR-NBR: BFR Neighbor. | |||
| BFR-prefix: An IP address (either IPv4 or IPv6) of a BFR. | BFR-prefix: An IP address (either IPv4 or IPv6) of a BFR. | |||
| BIRT: Bit Index Routing Table. It is a table that maps from the | BIRT: Bit Index Routing Table. It is a table that maps from the BFR- | |||
| BFR-id (in a particular sub-domain) of a BFER to the BFR-prefix | id (in a particular sub-domain) of a BFER to the BFR-prefix of | |||
| of that BFER, and to the BFR-NBR on the path to that BFER. | that BFER, and to the BFR-NBR on the path to that BFER. | |||
| BIFT: Bit Index Forwarding Table. | BIFT: Bit Index Forwarding Table. | |||
| LSP-DB: Label Switching Path DataBase. | LSP-DB: Label Switching Path DataBase. | |||
| TED: Traffic/Tree Engineering DataBase. | TED: Traffic/Tree Engineering DataBase. | |||
| 2. Overview of PCE for BIER-TE | 2. Overview of PCE for BIER-TE | |||
| This section briefly describes PCE for BIER-TE and illustrates some | This section briefly describes PCE for BIER-TE and illustrates some | |||
| details through a simple example BIER-TE topology. | details through a simple example BIER-TE topology. | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 48 ¶ | |||
| During a PCEP session establishment, PCEP Speakers (PCE or PCC) | During a PCEP session establishment, PCEP Speakers (PCE or PCC) | |||
| indicate their ability to support BIER-TE paths. The OPEN object in | indicate their ability to support BIER-TE paths. The OPEN object in | |||
| the Open message contains the PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY TLV, which | the Open message contains the PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY TLV, which | |||
| is defined in [RFC8408]. The TLV contains a list of Path Setup Types | is defined in [RFC8408]. The TLV contains a list of Path Setup Types | |||
| (PSTs) and optional sub-TLVs associated with the PSTs. The sub-TLVs | (PSTs) and optional sub-TLVs associated with the PSTs. The sub-TLVs | |||
| convey the parameters that are associated with the PSTs supported by | convey the parameters that are associated with the PSTs supported by | |||
| a PCEP speaker. | a PCEP speaker. | |||
| This document defines a new PST value: | This document defines a new PST value: | |||
| * PST = TBD1: Path is setup using BIER-TE. | * PST = TBD1: Path is setup using BIER-TE. | |||
| A new sub-TLV associated with this new PST is defined, which is | A new sub-TLV associated with this new PST is defined, which is | |||
| called PCE-BIER-TE-Path-Capability sub-TLV. The format of this new | called PCE-BIER-TE-Path-Capability sub-TLV. The format of this new | |||
| sub-TLV is illustrated in the figure below. | sub-TLV is illustrated in the figure below. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Type = TBD2 | Length = 4 | | | Type = TBD2 | Length = 4 | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 17 ¶ | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| |ObjectClass=TBD| OT=1 |Res|P|I| Object Length (bytes) | | |ObjectClass=TBD| OT=1 |Res|P|I| Object Length (bytes) | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Ingress Node IPv4 address | | | Ingress Node IPv4 address | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Cost to Ingress Node | | | Cost to Ingress Node | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| ~ Optional TLVs ~ | ~ Optional TLVs ~ | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Figure 3: Ingress Node Object for IPv4 | Figure 3: Ingress Node Object for IPv4 | |||
| ObjectClass: TBD is to be assigned by IANA. | ObjectClass: TBD is to be assigned by IANA. | |||
| OT: 1 for IPv4. | OT: 1 for IPv4. | |||
| Res, P, I and Object Length: Same as those defined in Common Object | Res, P, I and Object Length: Same as those defined in Common Object | |||
| Header in [RFC5440]. | Header in [RFC5440]. | |||
| Ingress Node IPv4 address: Indicates an IPv4 address of an ingress | Ingress Node IPv4 address: Indicates an IPv4 address of an ingress | |||
| node. | node. | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 19 ¶ | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Ingress Node IPv6 address | | | Ingress Node IPv6 address | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Cost to Ingress Node | | | Cost to Ingress Node | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| ~ Optional TLVs ~ | ~ Optional TLVs ~ | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Figure 4: Ingress Node Object for IPv6 | ||||
| Figure 4: Ingress Node Object for IPv6 | ||||
| TBD, Res, P, I, Object Length, and Cost to Ingress Node: Same as | TBD, Res, P, I, Object Length, and Cost to Ingress Node: Same as | |||
| those defined in Ingress Node Object for IPv4. | those defined in Ingress Node Object for IPv4. | |||
| OT: 2 for IPv6. | OT: 2 for IPv6. | |||
| Ingress Node IPv6 address: Indicates an IPv6 address of an ingress | Ingress Node IPv6 address: Indicates an IPv6 address of an ingress | |||
| node. | node. | |||
| No optional TLV is defined so far. | No optional TLV is defined so far. | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 5 ¶ | |||
| For PCE-Initiated BIER-TE path, the stateful PCE MUST compute a BIER- | For PCE-Initiated BIER-TE path, the stateful PCE MUST compute a BIER- | |||
| TE path per request from network management systems or applications | TE path per request from network management systems or applications | |||
| automatically based on the network resource availability in the TED | automatically based on the network resource availability in the TED | |||
| and send a PCInitiate message with the path information to the PCC. | and send a PCInitiate message with the path information to the PCC. | |||
| After receiving the PCInitiate message, the PCC creates the BIER-TE | After receiving the PCInitiate message, the PCC creates the BIER-TE | |||
| path. | path. | |||
| For both PCC-Initiated and PCE-Initiated BIER-TE paths: | For both PCC-Initiated and PCE-Initiated BIER-TE paths: | |||
| * The stateful PCE MUST update its local LSP-DB and TED with the | o The stateful PCE MUST update its local LSP-DB and TED with the | |||
| paths. | paths. | |||
| * Upon receiving the PCUpd message or PCInitiate message for the | o Upon receiving the PCUpd message or PCInitiate message for the | |||
| path from the PCE with a found path, the PCC determines that it is | path from the PCE with a found path, the PCC determines that it is | |||
| a BIER-TE path by the PST = TBD1 for path setup using BIER-TE in | a BIER-TE path by the PST = TBD1 for path setup using BIER-TE in | |||
| the PATH-SETUP-TYPE TLV of the SRP object in the message. | the PATH-SETUP-TYPE TLV of the SRP object in the message. | |||
| 4.2. BIER-TE Path Update | 4.2. BIER-TE Path Update | |||
| After a BIER-TE path is created in a BIER-TE domain, when some | After a BIER-TE path is created in a BIER-TE domain, when some | |||
| network events such as a node failure happen on the path (called old | network events such as a node failure happen on the path (called old | |||
| path) or a leaf/egress joins/leaves, the PCE computes a new BIER-TE | path) or a leaf/egress joins/leaves, the PCE computes a new BIER-TE | |||
| path and replaces the old path with the new path. The new path | path and replaces the old path with the new path. The new path | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 30 ¶ | |||
| 8. Acknowledgements | 8. Acknowledgements | |||
| The authors would like to thank Dhruv Dhody, and others for their | The authors would like to thank Dhruv Dhody, and others for their | |||
| comments to this work. | comments to this work. | |||
| 9. References | 9. References | |||
| 9.1. Normative References | 9.1. Normative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-te-arch] | [I-D.ietf-bier-te-arch] | |||
| Eckert, T., Cauchie, G., and M. Menth, "Tree Engineering | Eckert, T., Menth, M., and G. Cauchie, "Tree Engineering | |||
| for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER-TE)", Work in | for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER-TE)", draft-ietf- | |||
| Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-te-arch-10, 9 | bier-te-arch-12 (work in progress), January 2022. | |||
| July 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- | ||||
| bier-te-arch-10.txt>. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec] | [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec] | |||
| Dhody, D., Farrel, A., and Z. Li, "PCEP Extension for Flow | Dhody, D., Farrel, A., and Z. Li, "Path Computation | |||
| Specification", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- | Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for Flow | |||
| ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec-13, 14 October 2021, | Specification", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec-13 (work in | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-pcep- | progress), October 2021. | |||
| flowspec-13.txt>. | ||||
| [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, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation | [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation | |||
| Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, | Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 23, line 7 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 50 ¶ | |||
| [RFC8408] Sivabalan, S., Tantsura, J., Minei, I., Varga, R., and J. | [RFC8408] Sivabalan, S., Tantsura, J., Minei, I., Varga, R., and J. | |||
| Hardwick, "Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE Communication | Hardwick, "Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE Communication | |||
| Protocol (PCEP) Messages", RFC 8408, DOI 10.17487/RFC8408, | Protocol (PCEP) Messages", RFC 8408, DOI 10.17487/RFC8408, | |||
| July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8408>. | July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8408>. | |||
| 9.2. Informative References | 9.2. Informative References | |||
| [I-D.chen-pce-bier] | [I-D.chen-pce-bier] | |||
| Chen, R., Zhang, Z., Chen, H., Dhanaraj, S., Qin, F., and | Chen, R., Zhang, Z., Chen, H., Dhanaraj, S., Qin, F., and | |||
| A. Wang, "PCEP Extensions for BIER-TE", Work in Progress, | A. Wang, "PCEP Extensions for BIER-TE", draft-chen-pce- | |||
| Internet-Draft, draft-chen-pce-bier-09, 12 July 2021, | bier-09 (work in progress), July 2021. | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-chen-pce-bier- | ||||
| 09.txt>. | ||||
| [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., | [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., | |||
| Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment | Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment | |||
| Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, | Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, | |||
| July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. | July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Huaimo Chen | Huaimo Chen | |||
| Futurewei | Futurewei | |||
| Boston, MA, | Boston, MA | |||
| United States of America | USA | |||
| Email: Huaimo.chen@futurewei.com | Email: Huaimo.chen@futurewei.com | |||
| Mike McBride | Mike McBride | |||
| Futurewei | Futurewei | |||
| Email: michael.mcbride@futurewei.com | Email: michael.mcbride@futurewei.com | |||
| Aijun Wang | Aijun Wang | |||
| China Telecom | China Telecom | |||
| Beiqijia Town, Changping District | Beiqijia Town, Changping District | |||
| Beijing | Beijing 102209 | |||
| 102209 | ||||
| China | China | |||
| Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn | Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn | |||
| Gyan S. Mishra | Gyan S. Mishra | |||
| Verizon Inc. | Verizon Inc. | |||
| 13101 Columbia Pike | 13101 Columbia Pike | |||
| Silver Spring, MD 20904 | Silver Spring MD 20904 | |||
| United States of America | USA | |||
| Phone: 301 502-1347 | Phone: 301 502-1347 | |||
| Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com | Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com | |||
| Yisong Liu | Yisong Liu | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | |||
| Yanhe Fan | Yanhe Fan | |||
| Casa Systems | Casa Systems | |||
| United States of America | USA | |||
| Email: yfan@casa-systems.com | Email: yfan@casa-systems.com | |||
| Lei Liu | Lei Liu | |||
| Fujitsu | Fujitsu | |||
| United States of America | USA | |||
| Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com | Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com | |||
| Xufeng Liu | Xufeng Liu | |||
| Volta Networks | Volta Networks | |||
| McLean, VA | McLean, VA | |||
| United States of America | USA | |||
| Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com | Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com | |||
| End of changes. 31 change blocks. | ||||
| 52 lines changed or deleted | 48 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/ | ||||