< draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-01.txt		draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-02.txt >
	IS-IS for IP Internets S. Previdi, Ed.		IS-IS for IP Internets S. Previdi, Ed.
	Internet-Draft C. Filsfils		Internet-Draft C. Filsfils
	Intended status: Standards Track A. Bashandy		Intended status: Standards Track A. Bashandy
	Expires: December 8, 2014 Cisco Systems, Inc.		Expires: December 20, 2014 Cisco Systems, Inc.
	H. Gredler		H. Gredler
	Juniper Networks, Inc.		Juniper Networks, Inc.
	S. Litkowski		S. Litkowski
	B. Decraene		B. Decraene
	Orange		Orange
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Ericsson		Ericsson
	June 06, 2014		June 18, 2014
	IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing		IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing
	draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-01		draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-02
	Abstract		Abstract
	Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end		Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
	paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of		paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of
	topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are		topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are
	advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).		advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
	This draft describes the necessary IS-IS extensions that need to be		This draft describes the necessary IS-IS extensions that need to be
	introduced for Segment Routing.		introduced for Segment Routing.
	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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://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 8, 2014.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 20, 2014.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2014 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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 28 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 28 ¶
	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
	2. Segment Routing Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Segment Routing Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	2.1. Prefix Segment Identifier (Prefix-SID Sub-TLV) . . . . . 4		2.1. Prefix Segment Identifier (Prefix-SID Sub-TLV) . . . . . 4
	2.1.1. E and P Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		2.1.1. E and P Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV . . . 8		2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV . . . 9
	2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs . . . . . . . . 10		2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs . . . . . . . . 11
	2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	2.4.1. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		2.4.1. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	2.4.2. Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		2.4.2. Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	2.4.3. Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		2.4.3. Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	2.4.4. Prefix Length, Prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		2.4.4. Prefix Length, Prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	2.4.5. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		2.4.5. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	2.4.6. ERO Metric sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		2.4.6. ERO Metric sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	2.4.7. IPv4 ERO subTLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		2.4.7. IPv4 ERO subTLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	2.4.8. IPv6 ERO subTLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		2.4.8. IPv6 ERO subTLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	skipping to change at page 6, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 37 ¶
	SID/Index/Label: according to the V and L flags, it contains		SID/Index/Label: according to the V and L flags, it contains
	either:		either:
	A 32 bit index defining the offset in the SID/Label space		A 32 bit index defining the offset in the SID/Label space
	advertised by this router using the encodings defined in		advertised by this router using the encodings defined in
	Section 3.1.		Section 3.1.
	A 24 bit label where the 20 rightmost bits are used for		A 24 bit label where the 20 rightmost bits are used for
	encoding the label value.		encoding the label value.
	A variable length SID (e.g.: an IPv6 address SID).
	Multiple Prefix-SIDs Sub-TLVs MAY appear on the same prefix in which		Multiple Prefix-SIDs Sub-TLVs MAY appear on the same prefix in which
	case each SID is encoded as a separate Sub-TLV. When multiple		case each SID is encoded as a separate Sub-TLV. When multiple
	Prefix-SID Sub-TLVs are present, the receiving router MUST use the		Prefix-SID Sub-TLVs are present, the receiving router MUST use the
	first encoded SID and MAY use the subsequent ones.		first encoded SID and MAY use the subsequent ones.
			When propagating TLVs that contain multiple Prefix-SIDs between
			levels, an implementation SHOULD preserve the ordering such that the
			first Prefix-SID remains the first, so that implementations that only
			recognize a single Prefix-SID will have a consistent view across
			levels.
	The R-Flag MUST be set for prefixes that are not local to the router		The R-Flag MUST be set for prefixes that are not local to the router
	and either:		and either:
	advertised because of propagation (Level-1 into Level-2);		advertised because of propagation (Level-1 into Level-2);
	advertised because of leaking (Level-2 into Level-1);		advertised because of leaking (Level-2 into Level-1);
	advertised because redistribution (e.g.: from another protocol).		advertised because redistribution (e.g.: from another protocol).
	In the case where a Level-1-2 router has local interface addresses		In the case where a Level-1-2 router has local interface addresses
	configured in one level, it may also propagate these addresses into		configured in one level, it may also propagate these addresses into
	the other level. In such case, the Level-1-2 router MUST NOT set the		the other level. In such case, the Level-1-2 router MUST NOT set the
	R bit. The R-bit MUST be set only for prefixes that are not local to		R bit. The R-bit MUST be set only for prefixes that are not local to
	the router and advertised by the router because of propagation and/or		the router and advertised by the router because of propagation and/or
	leaking.		leaking.
	skipping to change at page 13, line 17 ¶		skipping to change at page 13, line 22 ¶
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type | Length |		| Type | Length |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| SID/Label (variable) |		| SID/Label (variable) |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	where:		where:
	Type: TBD, suggested value 1		Type: TBD, suggested value 1
	Length: variable (3 or 4)		Length: variable
	SID/Label: if length is set to 3 then the 20 rightmost bits		SID/Label: if length is set to 3 then the 20 rightmost bits
	represent a MPLS label. If length is 4 then the value represents		represent a MPLS label.
	a 32 bits SID.
	The receiving router MUST silently ignore SID/Label sub-TLVs whose
	length is different from 3 and 4.
	2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV		2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV
	The SID/Label Binding TLV MAY be originated by any router in an IS-IS		The SID/Label Binding TLV MAY be originated by any router in an IS-IS
	domain. The router may advertise a SID/Label binding to a FEC along		domain. The router may advertise a SID/Label binding to a FEC along
	with at least a single 'nexthop style' anchor. The protocol supports		with at least a single 'nexthop style' anchor. The protocol supports
	more than one 'nexthop style' anchor to be attached to a SID/Label		more than one 'nexthop style' anchor to be attached to a SID/Label
	binding, which results into a simple path description language. In		binding, which results into a simple path description language. In
	analogy to RSVP the terminology for this is called an 'Explicit Route		analogy to RSVP the terminology for this is called an 'Explicit Route
	Object' (ERO). Since ERO style path notation allows to anchor SID/		Object' (ERO). Since ERO style path notation allows to anchor SID/
	skipping to change at page 30, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 30, line 37 ¶
	[RFC6119] Harrison, J., Berger, J., and M. Bartlett, "IPv6 Traffic		[RFC6119] Harrison, J., Berger, J., and M. Bartlett, "IPv6 Traffic
	Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, February 2011.		Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, February 2011.
	9.2. Informative References		9.2. Informative References
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing]		[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,
	Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Milojevic, I., Shakir, R.,		Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Milojevic, I., Shakir, R.,
	Ytti, S., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., and E. Crabbe,		Ytti, S., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., and E. Crabbe,
	"Segment Routing Architecture", draft-filsfils-spring-		"Segment Routing Architecture", draft-filsfils-spring-
	segment-routing-02 (work in progress), May 2014.		segment-routing-03 (work in progress), June 2014.
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases]		[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases]
	Filsfils, C., Francois, P., Previdi, S., Decraene, B.,		Filsfils, C., Francois, P., Previdi, S., Decraene, B.,
	Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Milojevic, I., Shakir, R.,		Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Milojevic, I., Shakir, R.,
	Ytti, S., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., Kini, S., and E.		Ytti, S., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., Kini, S., and E.
	Crabbe, "Segment Routing Use Cases", draft-filsfils-		Crabbe, "Segment Routing Use Cases", draft-filsfils-
	spring-segment-routing-use-cases-00 (work in progress),		spring-segment-routing-use-cases-00 (work in progress),
	March 2014.		March 2014.
	[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]		[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]
	Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., and I. Leung, "IPv6		Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., and I. Leung, "IPv6
	Segment Routing Header (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-		Segment Routing Header (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-
	routing-header-00 (work in progress), March 2014.		routing-header-01 (work in progress), June 2014.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Stefano Previdi (editor)		Stefano Previdi (editor)
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Via Del Serafico, 200		Via Del Serafico, 200
	Rome 00142		Rome 00142
	Italy		Italy
	Email: sprevidi@cisco.com		Email: sprevidi@cisco.com
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	17 lines changed or deleted		16 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/