< draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-09.txt		draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-10.txt >
	Networking Working Group L. Ginsberg, Ed.		Networking Working Group L. Ginsberg, Ed.
	Internet-Draft S. Previdi		Internet-Draft S. Previdi
	Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.		Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Expires: August 17, 2018 Q. Wu		Expires: September 22, 2018 Q. Wu
	Huawei		Huawei
	H. Gredler
	S. Ray
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Individual		Individual
	C. Filsfils		C. Filsfils
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	February 13, 2018		March 21, 2018
	BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric		BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric
	Extensions		Extensions
	draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-09		draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-10
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines new BGP-LS TLVs in order to carry the IGP		This document defines new BGP-LS TLVs in order to carry the IGP
	Traffic Engineering Extensions defined in IS-IS and OSPF protocols.		Traffic Engineering Extensions defined in IS-IS and OSPF protocols.
	Requirements Language		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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 4 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 47 ¶
	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 August 17, 2018.
			This Internet-Draft will expire on September 22, 2018.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 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
	(https://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions . . . . . . . . 3		2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions . . . . . . . . 2
	3. TLV Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. TLV Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3.1. Unidirectional Link Delay TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3.1. Unidirectional Link Delay TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TLV . . . . . . . . . . 4		3.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TLV . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.4. Unidirectional Link Loss TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		3.4. Unidirectional Link Loss TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . . 5		3.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . . 5
	3.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . 5		3.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . 5
	3.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . . 6		3.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TLV . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
			8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	BGP-LS ([RFC7752]) defines NLRI and attributes in order to carry		BGP-LS ([RFC7752]) defines NLRI and attributes in order to carry
	link-state information. New BGP-LS Link-Attribute TLVs are required		link-state information. New BGP-LS Link-Attribute TLVs are required
	in order to carry the Traffic Engineering Metric Extensions defined		in order to carry the Traffic Engineering Metric Extensions defined
	in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].		in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
	2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions		2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions
	skipping to change at page 7, line 31 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 31 ¶
	1116 Unidirectional Delay Variation		1116 Unidirectional Delay Variation
	1117 Unidirectional Packet Loss		1117 Unidirectional Packet Loss
	1118 Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth		1118 Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth
	1119 Unidirectional Available Bandwidth		1119 Unidirectional Available Bandwidth
	1120 Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization		1120 Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization
	6. Acknowledgements		6. Contributors
			The following people have substantially contributed to this document
			and should be considered co-authors:
			Saikat Ray
			Individual
			Email: raysaikat@gmail.com
			Hannes Gredler
			RtBrick Inc.
			Email: hannes@rtbrick.com
			7. Acknowledgements
	The authors wish to acknowledge comments from Ketan Talaulikar.		The authors wish to acknowledge comments from Ketan Talaulikar.
	7. References		8. References
	7.1. Normative References		8.1. 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,		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>.
	[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,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
	skipping to change at page 8, line 21 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 35 ¶
	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,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
	[RFC7810] Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and		[RFC7810] Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and
	Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions",		Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions",
	RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016,		RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>.
	7.2. Informative References		8.2. Informative References
	[RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",		[RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
	RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,		RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.
	[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of		[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
	BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying		BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
	and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design		and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
	Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,		Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.
	skipping to change at page 9, line 4 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 15 ¶
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	US		US
	Email: ginsberg@cisco.com		Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
	Stefano Previdi		Stefano Previdi
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	IT		IT
	Email: stefano@previdi.net		Email: stefano@previdi.net
	Qin Wu		Qin Wu
	Huawei		Huawei
	101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District		101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
	Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012		Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
	China		China
	Email: bill.wu@huawei.com		Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
	Hannes Gredler
	Individual
	AT
	Email: hannes@gredler.at
	Saikat Ray
	Individual
	US
	Email: raysaikat@gmail.com
	Jeff Tantsura		Jeff Tantsura
	Individual		Individual
	US		US
	Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com		Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
	Clarence Filsfils		Clarence Filsfils
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Brussels		Brussels
	BE		BE
End of changes. 15 change blocks.
	29 lines changed or deleted		31 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/