< draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe-13.txt		draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe-14.txt >
	Network Working Group S. Previdi, Ed.		Network Working Group S. Previdi, Ed.
	Internet-Draft C. Filsfils		Internet-Draft C. Filsfils
	Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.		Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Expires: December 22, 2017 K. Patel		Expires: June 22, 2018 K. Patel
	Arrcus, Inc.		Arrcus, Inc.
	S. Ray		S. Ray
	Individual Contributor		Individual Contributor
	J. Dong		J. Dong
	Huawei Technologies		Huawei Technologies
	June 20, 2017		December 19, 2017
	BGP-LS extensions for Segment Routing BGP Egress Peer Engineering		BGP-LS extensions for Segment Routing BGP Egress Peer Engineering
	draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe-13		draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe-14
	Abstract		Abstract
	Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a		Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a
	packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by		packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by
	prepending the packet with an SR header. A segment can represent any		prepending the packet with an SR header. A segment can represent any
	instruction, topological or service-based. SR allows to enforce a		instruction, topological or service-based. SR allows to enforce a
	flow through any topological path and service chain while maintaining		flow through any topological path and service chain while maintaining
	per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.		per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 49 ¶
	document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 http://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 December 22, 2017.		This Internet-Draft will expire on June 22, 2018.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2017 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		(https://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 respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	skipping to change at page 3, line 8 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 8 ¶
	6.6. Peer-Adj-SID for Node E, Link 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		6.6. Peer-Adj-SID for Node E, Link 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	8.1. New BGP-LS Protocol-ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		8.1. New BGP-LS Protocol-ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	8.2. Node Descriptors and Link Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . 18		8.2. Node Descriptors and Link Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . 18
	9. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		9. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a		Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a
	packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by		packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by
	prepending the packet with an SR header with segment identifiers		prepending the packet with an SR header with segment identifiers
	(SID). A SID can represent any instruction, topological or service-		(SID). A SID can represent any instruction, topological or service-
	based. SR allows to enforce a flow through any topological path and		based. SR allows to enforce a flow through any topological path and
	skipping to change at page 19, line 35 ¶		skipping to change at page 19, line 35 ¶
	China		China
	Email: mach.chen@huawei.com		Email: mach.chen@huawei.com
	Acee Lindem		Acee Lindem
	Cisco Systems Inc.		Cisco Systems Inc.
	US		US
	Email: acee@cisco.com		Email: acee@cisco.com
			Ketan Talaulikar
			Cisco Systems Inc.
			India
			Email: ketant@cisco.com
	12. Acknowledgements		12. Acknowledgements
	The authors would like to thank Jakob Heitz, Howard Yang, Hannes		The authors would like to thank Jakob Heitz, Howard Yang, Hannes
	Gredler, Peter Psenak, Ketan Jivan Talaulikar, Arjun Sreekantiah and		Gredler, Peter Psenak, Arjun Sreekantiah and Bruno Decraene for their
	Bruno Decraene for their feedback and comments.		feedback and comments.
	13. References		13. References
	13.1. Normative References		13.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B.,
	and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-ietf-		Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing
	spring-segment-routing-11 (work in progress), February		Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-13 (work
	2017.		in progress), October 2017.
	[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,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A		[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
	Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,		Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,		DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
	[RFC5065] Traina, P., McPherson, D., and J. Scudder, "Autonomous		[RFC5065] Traina, P., McPherson, D., and J. Scudder, "Autonomous
	System Confederations for BGP", RFC 5065,		System Confederations for BGP", RFC 5065,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5065, August 2007,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5065, August 2007,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5065>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5065>.
	[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions		[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
	in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching		in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
	(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,		(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>.
	[RFC6286] Chen, E. and J. Yuan, "Autonomous-System-Wide Unique BGP		[RFC6286] Chen, E. and J. Yuan, "Autonomous-System-Wide Unique BGP
	Identifier for BGP-4", RFC 6286, DOI 10.17487/RFC6286,		Identifier for BGP-4", RFC 6286, DOI 10.17487/RFC6286,
	June 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6286>.		June 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6286>.
	13.2. Informative References		13.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext]		[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext]
	Previdi, S., Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., Chen,		Previdi, S., Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., and M.
	M., and j. jefftant@gmail.com, "BGP Link-State extensions		Chen, "BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing",
	for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-		draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-03 (work in
	routing-ext-01 (work in progress), February 2017.		progress), July 2017.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Aries, E., and D. Afanasiev,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Dawra, G., Aries, E., and D.
	"Segment Routing Centralized BGP Egress Peer Engineering",		Afanasiev, "Segment Routing Centralized BGP Egress Peer
	draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-05 (work in		Engineering", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-
	progress), March 2017.		epe-08 (work in progress), December 2017.
	[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and		[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
	S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and		S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
	Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,		Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,		DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
	[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running		[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
	Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,		Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
	RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,		RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Stefano Previdi (editor)		Stefano Previdi (editor)
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Email: stefano@previdi.net		Email: stefano@previdi.net
	Clarence Filsfils		Clarence Filsfils
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
End of changes. 20 change blocks.
	29 lines changed or deleted		34 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/