< draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-06.txt		draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-07.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: June 16, 2016 Cisco Systems, Inc.		Expires: December 15, 2016 Cisco Systems, Inc.
	H. Gredler		H. Gredler
	Individual		Individual
	S. Litkowski		S. Litkowski
	B. Decraene		B. Decraene
	Orange		Orange
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Ericsson		Ericsson
	December 14, 2015		June 13, 2016
	IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing		IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing
	draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-06		draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-07
	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 June 16, 2016.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 15, 2016.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2015 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 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
	2. Segment Routing Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		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. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.1.1. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	2.1.2. Prefix-SID Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		2.1.2. Prefix-SID Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV . . . 9		2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV . . . 9
	2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs . . . . . . . . 11		2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs . . . . . . . . 11
	2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		2.4. SID/Label Binding TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	2.4.1. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		2.4.1. Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	2.4.2. Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		2.4.2. Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	skipping to change at page 3, line 46 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 46 ¶
	For example, when used in MPLS networks, SR paths do not require any		For example, when used in MPLS networks, SR paths do not require any
	LDP or RSVP-TE signaling. Still, SR can interoperate in the presence		LDP or RSVP-TE signaling. Still, SR can interoperate in the presence
	of LSPs established with RSVP or LDP.		of LSPs established with RSVP or LDP.
	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.
	Segment Routing architecture is described in		Segment Routing architecture is described in
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing].		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing].
	Segment Routing use cases are described in		Segment Routing use cases are described in [RFC7855].
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases].
	2. Segment Routing Identifiers		2. Segment Routing Identifiers
	Segment Routing architecture ([I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing])		Segment Routing architecture ([I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing])
	defines different types of Segment Identifiers (SID). This document		defines different types of Segment Identifiers (SID). This document
	defines the IS-IS encodings for the IGP-Prefix-SID, the IGP-		defines the IS-IS encodings for the IGP-Prefix-SID, the IGP-
	Adjacency-SID, the IGP-LAN-Adjacency-SID and the Binding-SID.		Adjacency-SID, the IGP-LAN-Adjacency-SID and the Binding-SID.
	2.1. Prefix Segment Identifier (Prefix-SID Sub-TLV)		2.1. Prefix Segment Identifier (Prefix-SID Sub-TLV)
	skipping to change at page 9, line 30 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 30 ¶
	TLV-222 [RFC5120]		TLV-222 [RFC5120]
	TLV-23 [RFC5311]		TLV-23 [RFC5311]
	TLV-223 [RFC5311]		TLV-223 [RFC5311]
	TLV-141 [RFC5316]		TLV-141 [RFC5316]
	Multiple Adj-SID sub-TLVs MAY be associated with a single IS-		Multiple Adj-SID sub-TLVs MAY be associated with a single IS-
	neighbor. Examples where more than one Adj-SID may be used per IS-		neighbor.
	neighbor are described in
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases].
	2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV		2.2.1. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) Sub-TLV
	The following format is defined for the Adj-SID sub-TLV:		The following format is defined for the Adj-SID sub-TLV:
	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 | Length | Flags | Weight |		| Type | Length | Flags | Weight |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	skipping to change at page 11, line 17 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 17 ¶
	eligible for protection (IP or MPLS).		eligible for protection (IP or MPLS).
	An SR capable router MAY allocate more than one Adj-SID to an		An SR capable router MAY allocate more than one Adj-SID to an
	adjacency.		adjacency.
	An SR capable router MAY allocate the same Adj-SID to different		An SR capable router MAY allocate the same Adj-SID to different
	adjacencies.		adjacencies.
	Examples of use of the Adj-SID sub-TLV are described in		Examples of use of the Adj-SID sub-TLV are described in
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. and		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. and
	[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header].		[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].
	The F-flag is used in order for the router to advertise the		The F-flag is used in order for the router to advertise the
	outgoing encapsulation of the adjacency the Adj-SID is attached		outgoing encapsulation of the adjacency the Adj-SID is attached
	to. Use cases of the use of the F-flag are described in		to.
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases].
	2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs		2.2.2. Adjacency Segment Identifiers in LANs
	In LAN subnetworks, the Designated Intermediate System (DIS) is		In LAN subnetworks, the Designated Intermediate System (DIS) is
	elected and originates the Pseudonode-LSP (PN-LSP) including all		elected and originates the Pseudonode-LSP (PN-LSP) including all
	neighbors of the DIS.		neighbors of the DIS.
	When Segment Routing is used, each router in the LAN MAY advertise		When Segment Routing is used, each router in the LAN MAY advertise
	the Adj-SID of each of its neighbors. Since, on LANs, each router		the Adj-SID of each of its neighbors. Since, on LANs, each router
	only advertises one adjacency to the DIS (and doesn't advertise any		only advertises one adjacency to the DIS (and doesn't advertise any
	skipping to change at page 13, line 30 ¶		skipping to change at page 13, line 30 ¶
	Each router within the level, by receiving the DIS PN LSP as well as		Each router within the level, by receiving the DIS PN LSP as well as
	the non-PN LSP of each router in the LAN, is capable of		the non-PN LSP of each router in the LAN, is capable of
	reconstructing the LAN topology as well as the set of Adj-SID each		reconstructing the LAN topology as well as the set of Adj-SID each
	router uses for each of its neighbors.		router uses for each of its neighbors.
	A label is encoded in 3 octets (in the 20 rightmost bits).		A label is encoded in 3 octets (in the 20 rightmost bits).
	An index is encoded in 4 octets.		An index is encoded in 4 octets.
	An ipv6 address SID is encoded in 16 octets (IPv6 Adj-SID is defined		An ipv6 address SID is encoded in 16 octets (IPv6 Adj-SID is defined
	in [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]).		in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]).
	2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV		2.3. SID/Label Sub-TLV
	The SID/Label sub-TLV is present in the following sub-TLVs defined in		The SID/Label sub-TLV is present in the following sub-TLVs defined in
	this document:		this document:
	Binding TLV Section 2.4.		Binding TLV Section 2.4.
	SR Capability sub-TLV Section 3.1.		SR Capability sub-TLV Section 3.1.
	skipping to change at page 26, line 52 ¶		skipping to change at page 26, line 52 ¶
	where:		where:
	I-Flag: MPLS IPv4 flag. If set, then the router is capable of		I-Flag: MPLS IPv4 flag. If set, then the router is capable of
	processing SR MPLS encapsulated IPv4 packets on all interfaces.		processing SR MPLS encapsulated IPv4 packets on all interfaces.
	V-Flag: MPLS IPv6 flag. If set, then the router is capable of		V-Flag: MPLS IPv6 flag. If set, then the router is capable of
	processing SR MPLS encapsulated IPv6 packets on all interfaces.		processing SR MPLS encapsulated IPv6 packets on all interfaces.
	H-Flag: SR-IPv6 flag. If set, then the router is capable of		H-Flag: SR-IPv6 flag. If set, then the router is capable of
	processing the IPv6 Segment Routing Header on all interfaces as		processing the IPv6 Segment Routing Header on all interfaces as
	defined in [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header].		defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].
	One or more SRGB Descriptor entries, each of which have the		One or more SRGB Descriptor entries, each of which have the
	following format:		following format:
	Range: 3 octets.		Range: 3 octets.
	SID/Label sub-TLV (as defined in Section 2.3).		SID/Label sub-TLV (as defined in Section 2.3).
	SID/Label sub-TLV contains the first value of the SRGB while the		SID/Label sub-TLV contains the first value of the SRGB while the
	range contains the number of SRGB elements. The range value MUST be		range contains the number of SRGB elements. The range value MUST be
	skipping to change at page 27, line 43 ¶		skipping to change at page 27, line 43 ¶
	preferable to add a new range rather than extending the previously		preferable to add a new range rather than extending the previously
	advertised range.		advertised range.
	The originating router MUST ensure the order is same after a graceful		The originating router MUST ensure the order is same after a graceful
	restart (using checkpointing, non-volatile storage or any other		restart (using checkpointing, non-volatile storage or any other
	mechanism) in order to guarantee the same order before and after GR.		mechanism) in order to guarantee the same order before and after GR.
	The originating router MUST NOT advertise overlapping ranges.		The originating router MUST NOT advertise overlapping ranges.
	When a router receives multiple overlapping ranges, it MUST conform		When a router receives multiple overlapping ranges, it MUST conform
	to the procedures defined in		to the procedures defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-conflict-resolution].
	[I-D.ginsberg-spring-conflict-resolution].
	Here follows an example of advertisement of multiple ranges:		Here follows an example of advertisement of multiple ranges:
	The originating router advertises following ranges:		The originating router advertises following ranges:
	SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 100		SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 100
	SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 1000		SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 1000
	SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 500		SR-Cap: range: 100, SID value: 500
	The receiving routers concatenate the ranges in the received		The receiving routers concatenate the ranges in the received
	order and build the SRGB as follows:		order and build the SRGB as follows:
	skipping to change at page 35, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 35, line 38 ¶
	Steven Luong		Steven Luong
	Cisco Systems Inc.		Cisco Systems Inc.
	US		US
	Email: sluong@cisco.com		Email: sluong@cisco.com
	10. References		10. References
	10.1. Normative References		10.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ginsberg-spring-conflict-resolution]
	Ginsberg, L., Psenak, P., and S. Previdi, "Segment Routing
	Conflict Resolution", draft-ginsberg-spring-conflict-
	resolution-00 (work in progress), October 2015.
	[I-D.ietf-isis-prefix-attributes]		[I-D.ietf-isis-prefix-attributes]
	Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Litkowski, S.,		Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Previdi, S., Xu, X., and U.
	Previdi, S., Xu, X., and U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix		Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix Attributes for Extended IP and
	Attributes for Extended IP and IPv6 Reachability", draft-		IPv6 Reachability", draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-04
	ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-02 (work in progress),		(work in progress), January 2016.
	December 2015.
			[I-D.ietf-spring-conflict-resolution]
			Ginsberg, L., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., and M. Pilka,
			"Segment Routing Conflict Resolution", draft-ietf-spring-
			conflict-resolution-00 (work in progress), May 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,
	and r. rjs@rob.sh, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-		and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-ietf-
	ietf-spring-segment-routing-06 (work in progress), October		spring-segment-routing-08 (work in progress), May 2016.
	2015.
	[ISO10589]		[ISO10589]
	International Organization for Standardization,		International Organization for Standardization,
	"Intermediate system to Intermediate system intra-domain		"Intermediate system to Intermediate system intra-domain
	routeing information exchange protocol for use in		routeing information exchange protocol for use in
	conjunction with the protocol for providing the		conjunction with the protocol for providing the
	connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", ISO/		connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", ISO/
	IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition, Nov 2002.		IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition, Nov 2002.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	skipping to change at page 37, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 37, line 5 ¶
	[RFC5308] Hopps, C., "Routing IPv6 with IS-IS", RFC 5308,		[RFC5308] Hopps, C., "Routing IPv6 with IS-IS", RFC 5308,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5308, October 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5308, October 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5308>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5308>.
	[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, DOI 10.17487/RFC6119,		Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, DOI 10.17487/RFC6119,
	February 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6119>.		February 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6119>.
	10.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-use-cases]		[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
	Filsfils, C., Francois, P., Previdi, S., Decraene, B.,
	Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Milojevic, I., Shakir, R.,
	Ytti, S., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., Kini, S., and E.
	Crabbe, "Segment Routing Use Cases", draft-filsfils-
	spring-segment-routing-use-cases-01 (work in progress),
	October 2014.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases]
	Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., and r.
	rjs@rob.sh, "Use-cases for Resiliency in SPRING", draft-
	ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-02 (work in progress),
	December 2015.
	[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]
	Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova,		Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova,
	J., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun, "IPv6 Segment		J., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun, "IPv6 Segment
	Routing Header (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-		Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-
	header-08 (work in progress), October 2015.		header-01 (work in progress), March 2016.
			[I-D.ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases]
			Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., and R. Shakir,
			"Use-cases for Resiliency in SPRING", draft-ietf-spring-
			resiliency-use-cases-03 (work in progress), April 2016.
	[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,		[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
	and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP		and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
	Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,		Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.
	[RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered Links		[RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered Links
	in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering		in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering
	(RSVP-TE)", RFC 3477, DOI 10.17487/RFC3477, January 2003,		(RSVP-TE)", RFC 3477, DOI 10.17487/RFC3477, January 2003,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3477>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3477>.
	skipping to change at page 37, line 45 ¶		skipping to change at page 37, line 36 ¶
	[RFC5311] McPherson, D., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M.		[RFC5311] McPherson, D., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M.
	Shand, "Simplified Extension of Link State PDU (LSP) Space		Shand, "Simplified Extension of Link State PDU (LSP) Space
	for IS-IS", RFC 5311, DOI 10.17487/RFC5311, February 2009,		for IS-IS", RFC 5311, DOI 10.17487/RFC5311, February 2009,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5311>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5311>.
	[RFC5316] Chen, M., Zhang, R., and X. Duan, "ISIS Extensions in		[RFC5316] Chen, M., Zhang, R., and X. Duan, "ISIS Extensions in
	Support of Inter-Autonomous System (AS) MPLS and GMPLS		Support of Inter-Autonomous System (AS) MPLS and GMPLS
	Traffic Engineering", RFC 5316, DOI 10.17487/RFC5316,		Traffic Engineering", RFC 5316, DOI 10.17487/RFC5316,
	December 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5316>.		December 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5316>.
			[RFC7855] Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Decraene, B.,
			Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "Source
			Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement
			and Requirements", RFC 7855, DOI 10.17487/RFC7855, May
			2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7855>.
	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
	Clarence Filsfils		Clarence Filsfils
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Brussels		Brussels
	BE		BE
	Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com		Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
	Ahmed Bashandy		Ahmed Bashandy
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	170, West Tasman Drive		170, West Tasman Drive
End of changes. 21 change blocks.
	49 lines changed or deleted		39 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/