< draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-05.txt		draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06.txt >
	Network Working Group S. Sivabalan		Network Working Group S. Sivabalan
	Internet-Draft J. Medved		Internet-Draft J. Medved
	Intended status: Standards Track C. Filsfils		Intended status: Standards Track C. Filsfils
	Expires: December 2, 2015 Cisco Systems, Inc.		Expires: February 10, 2016 Cisco Systems, Inc.
	E. Crabbe		E. Crabbe
	R. Raszuk		R. Raszuk
	Mirantis Inc.		Mirantis Inc.
	V. Lopez		V. Lopez
	Telefonica I+D		Telefonica I+D
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Ericsson		Ericsson
	W. Henderickx		W. Henderickx
	Alcatel Lucent		Alcatel Lucent
	J. Hardwick		J. Hardwick
	Metaswitch Networks		Metaswitch Networks
	May 31, 2015		August 9, 2015
	PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing		PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing
	draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-05.txt		draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06.txt
	Abstract		Abstract
	Segment Routing (SR) enables any head-end node to select any path		Segment Routing (SR) enables any head-end node to select any path
	without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling technique (e.g., LDP or		without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling technique (e.g., LDP or
	RSVP-TE). It depends only on "segments" that are advertised by Link-		RSVP-TE). It depends only on "segments" that are advertised by Link-
	State Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). A Segment Routed Path can		State Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). A Segment Routed Path can
	be derived from a variety of mechanisms, including an IGP Shortest		be derived from a variety of mechanisms, including an IGP Shortest
	Path Tree (SPT), explicit configuration, or a Path Computation		Path Tree (SPT), explicit configuration, or a Path Computation
	Element (PCE). This document specifies extensions to the Path		Element (PCE). This document specifies extensions to the Path
	skipping to change at page 2, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 15 ¶
	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 2, 2015.		This Internet-Draft will expire on February 10, 2016.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2015 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 16, line 16 ¶		skipping to change at page 16, line 16 ¶
	This document defines a new sub-object type for the PCEP explicit		This document defines a new sub-object type for the PCEP explicit
	route object (ERO), and a new sub-object type for the PCEP record		route object (ERO), and a new sub-object type for the PCEP record
	route object (RRO). The code points for sub-object types of these		route object (RRO). The code points for sub-object types of these
	objects is maintained in the RSVP parameters registry, under the		objects is maintained in the RSVP parameters registry, under the
	EXPLICIT_ROUTE and ROUTE_RECORD objects. IANA is requested to		EXPLICIT_ROUTE and ROUTE_RECORD objects. IANA is requested to
	allocate code points in the RSVP Parameters registry for each of the		allocate code points in the RSVP Parameters registry for each of the
	new sub-object types defined in this document, as follows:		new sub-object types defined in this document, as follows:
	Object Sub-Object Sub-Object Type		Object Sub-Object Sub-Object Type
	--------------------- -------------------------- ------------------		--------------------- -------------------------- ------------------
	EXPLICIT_ROUTE SR-ERO (PCEP-specific) TBD (recommended 5)		EXPLICIT_ROUTE SR-ERO (PCEP-specific) TBD (recommended 36)
	ROUTE_RECORD SR-RRO (PCEP-specific) TBD (recommended 6)		ROUTE_RECORD SR-RRO (PCEP-specific) TBD (recommended 36)
	9.2. PCEP-Error Object		9.2. PCEP-Error Object
	IANA is requested to allocate code-points in the PCEP-ERROR Object		IANA is requested to allocate code-points in the PCEP-ERROR Object
	Error Types and Values registry for the following new error-values:		Error Types and Values registry for the following new error-values:
	Error-Type Meaning		Error-Type Meaning
	---------- -------		---------- -------
	10 Reception of an invalid object.		10 Reception of an invalid object.
	skipping to change at page 18, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 18, line 49 ¶
	Hardwick, "PCE communication protocol (PCEP) Management		Hardwick, "PCE communication protocol (PCEP) Management
	Information Base", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-mib-04 (work in		Information Base", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-mib-04 (work in
	progress), February 2013.		progress), February 2013.
	[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]		[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]
	Crabbe, E., Medved, J., Minei, I., and R. Varga, "PCEP		Crabbe, E., Medved, J., Minei, I., and R. Varga, "PCEP
	Extensions for Stateful PCE", draft-ietf-pce-stateful-		Extensions for Stateful PCE", draft-ietf-pce-stateful-
	pce-05 (work in progress), July 2013.		pce-05 (work in progress), July 2013.
	[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, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
			DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP. and JL. Le Roux, "Path Computation Element		[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
	(PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, March		Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
	2009.		DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
	[RFC5462] Andersson, L. and R. Asati, "Multiprotocol Label Switching		[RFC5462] Andersson, L. and R. Asati, "Multiprotocol Label Switching
	(MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic		(MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic
	Class" Field", RFC 5462, February 2009.		Class" Field", RFC 5462, DOI 10.17487/RFC5462, February
			2009, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5462>.
	12.2. Informative References		12.2. Informative References
	[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, December 2001.		Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.
	[RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching		[RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
	(GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic		Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-
	Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003.		Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473,
			DOI 10.17487/RFC3473, January 2003,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3473>.
	[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, January 2003.		(RSVP-TE)", RFC 3477, DOI 10.17487/RFC3477, January 2003,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3477>.
	[RFC4657] Ash, J. and J. Le Roux, "Path Computation Element (PCE)		[RFC4657] Ash, J., Ed. and J. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
	Communication Protocol Generic Requirements", RFC 4657,		Element (PCE) Communication Protocol Generic
	September 2006.		Requirements", RFC 4657, DOI 10.17487/RFC4657, September
			2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4657>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Siva Sivabalan		Siva Sivabalan
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	2000 Innovation Drive		2000 Innovation Drive
	Kanata, Ontario K2K 3E8		Kanata, Ontario K2K 3E8
	Canada		Canada
	Email: msiva@cisco.com		Email: msiva@cisco.com
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	19 lines changed or deleted		28 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/