< draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-04.txt		draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-05.txt >
	Network Working Group Z. Hu		Network Working Group Z. Hu
	Internet-Draft Huawei		Internet-Draft Huawei
	Intended status: Standards Track H. Chen		Intended status: Standards Track H. Chen
	Expires: 20 April 2022 Futurewei		Expires: October 20, 2022 Futurewei
	H. Chen		H. Chen
	China Telecom		China Telecom
	P. Wu		P. Wu
	Huawei		Huawei
	M. Toy		M. Toy
	Verizon		Verizon
	C. Cao		C. Cao
	T. He		T. He
	China Unicom		China Unicom
	L. Liu		L. Liu
	Fujitsu		Fujitsu
	X. Liu		X. Liu
	Volta Networks		Volta Networks
	17 October 2021		April 18, 2022
	SRv6 Path Egress Protection		SRv6 Path Egress Protection
	draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-04		draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-05
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document describes protocol extensions for protecting the egress		This document describes protocol extensions for protecting the egress
	node of a Segment Routing for IPv6 (SRv6) path or tunnel.		node of a Segment Routing for IPv6 (SRv6) path or tunnel.
	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 9 ¶		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 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 October 20, 2022.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on 20 April 2022.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
			described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. SR Path Egress Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3. SR Path Egress Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.1. Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3.1. Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.2. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		3.2. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4. Extensions to IGP for Egress Protection . . . . . . . . . . . 9		4. Extensions to IGP for Egress Protection . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	4.1. Extensions to IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		4.1. Extensions to IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	4.2. Extensions to OSPF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		4.2. Extensions to OSPF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	6.1. SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		6.1. SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	6.2. IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		6.2. IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	6.3. OSPFv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		6.3. OSPFv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The fast protection of a transit node of a Segment Routing (SR) path		The fast protection of a transit node of a Segment Routing (SR) path
	or tunnel is described in [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] and		or tunnel is described in [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] and
	[I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding]. [RFC8400]		[I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding]. [RFC8400]
	specifies the fast protection of egress node(s) of an MPLS TE LSP		specifies the fast protection of egress node(s) of an MPLS TE LSP
	tunnel including P2P TE LSP tunnel and P2MP TE LSP tunnel in details.		tunnel including P2P TE LSP tunnel and P2MP TE LSP tunnel in details.
	However, these documents do not discuss the fast protection of the		However, these documents do not discuss the fast protection of the
	skipping to change at page 5, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 44 ¶
	******* ******* SIDa		******* ******* SIDa
	[PE1]-----[P1]-----[PEA]---[CE2] PEA Egress		[PE1]-----[P1]-----[PEA]---[CE2] PEA Egress
	/ | |& | \ / PEB Backup Egress		/ | |& | \ / PEB Backup Egress
	/ | |& | \ / CEx Customer Edge		/ | |& | \ / CEx Customer Edge
	[CE1] | |& | X Px Non-Provider Edge		[CE1] | |& | X Px Non-Provider Edge
	\ | |& | / \ *** SR Path		\ | |& | / \ *** SR Path
	\ | |& &&&&& | / \ &&& Backup Path		\ | |& &&&&& | / \ &&& Backup Path
	[PE2]-----[P2]-----[PEB]---[CE3]		[PE2]-----[P2]-----[PEB]---[CE3]
	Mirror SID		Mirror SID
	Figure 1: PEB Protects Egress PEA of SR Path		Figure 1: PEB Protects Egress PEA of SR Path
	Where node PEA is the egress of the SR path from PE1 to PEA, and has		Where node PEA is the egress of the SR path from PE1 to PEA, and has
	SIDa which is the active segment in the packet from the SR path at		SIDa which is the active segment in the packet from the SR path at
	PEA. Node PEB is the backup egress (or say protector) to provide the		PEA. Node PEB is the backup egress (or say protector) to provide the
	protection for egress (or say primary egress) PEA. Node P1 is the		protection for egress (or say primary egress) PEA. Node P1 is the
	direct previous hop of egress PEA and acts as PLR to support the		direct previous hop of egress PEA and acts as PLR to support the
	protection for PEA.		protection for PEA.
	When PEB is selected as a backup egress to protect the egress PEA, a		When PEB is selected as a backup egress to protect the egress PEA, a
	Mirror SID (refer to Section 5.1 of [RFC8402]) is configured on PEB		Mirror SID (refer to Section 5.1 of [RFC8402]) is configured on PEB
	skipping to change at page 7, line 32 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 18 ¶
	/ | |& | \ / PE4 Backup Egress		/ | |& | \ / PE4 Backup Egress
	/ | |& | \ / CEx Customer Edge		/ | |& | \ / CEx Customer Edge
	[CE1] | |& | X Px Non-Provider Edge		[CE1] | |& | X Px Non-Provider Edge
	\ | |& | / \ *** SR Path		\ | |& | / \ *** SR Path
	\ | |& &&&&& | / \ &&& Backup Path		\ | |& &&&&& | / \ &&& Backup Path
	[PE2]-----[P2]-----[PE4]---[CE3]		[PE2]-----[P2]-----[PE4]---[CE3]
	Locator: A4:1::/64		Locator: A4:1::/64
	VPN SID: A4:1::B100		VPN SID: A4:1::B100
	Mirror SID: A4:1::3, protect A3:1::/64		Mirror SID: A4:1::3, protect A3:1::/64
	Figure 2: PE4 Protects Egress PE3 of SR Path		Figure 2: PE4 Protects Egress PE3 of SR Path
	Where node P1's pre-computed backup path for PE3 is from P1 to PE4		Where node P1's pre-computed backup path for PE3 is from P1 to PE4
	via P2. In normal operations, after receiving a packet with		via P2. In normal operations, after receiving a packet with
	destination PE3, P1 forwards the packet to PE3 according to its FIB.		destination PE3, P1 forwards the packet to PE3 according to its FIB.
	When PE3 receives the packet, it sends the packet to CE2.		When PE3 receives the packet, it sends the packet to CE2.
	When PE3 fails, P1 as PLR detects the failure through using a failure		When PE3 fails, P1 as PLR detects the failure through using a failure
	detection mechanism such as BFD and forwards the packet to PE4 via		detection mechanism such as BFD and forwards the packet to PE4 via
	the backup path. When PE4 receives the packet, it sends the packet		the backup path. When PE4 receives the packet, it sends the packet
	to the same CE2.		to the same CE2.
	skipping to change at page 10, line 33 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 17 ¶
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type (TBD2) | Length |		| Type (TBD2) | Length |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Locator-Size | Locator (variable) ~		| Locator-Size | Locator (variable) ~
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	: :		: :
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Locator-Size | Locator (variable) ~		| Locator-Size | Locator (variable) ~
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Figure 4: IS-IS Protected Locators sub-TLV		Figure 4: IS-IS Protected Locators sub-TLV
	Type: TBD2 (suggested value 1) is to be assigned by IANA.		Type: TBD2 (suggested value 1) is to be assigned by IANA.
	Length: variable.		Length: variable.
	Locator-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits (1 - 128) in the Locator		Locator-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits (1 - 128) in the Locator
	field.		field.
	Locator: 1-16 octets. This field encodes an SRv6 Locator to be		Locator: 1-16 octets. This field encodes an SRv6 Locator to be
	protected by the SRv6 mirror SID. The Locator is encoded in the		protected by the SRv6 mirror SID. The Locator is encoded in the
	skipping to change at page 11, line 17 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 45 ¶
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type (TBD3) | Length |		| Type (TBD3) | Length |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| SID-Size | SID (variable) ~		| SID-Size | SID (variable) ~
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	: :		: :
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| SID-Size | SID (variable) ~		| SID-Size | SID (variable) ~
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Figure 5: IS-IS Protected SIDs sub-TLV		Figure 5: IS-IS Protected SIDs sub-TLV
	Type: TBD3 (suggested value 2) is to be assigned by IANA.		Type: TBD3 (suggested value 2) is to be assigned by IANA.
	Length: variable.		Length: variable.
	SID-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits in the SID field. It is from 1		SID-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits in the SID field. It is from 1
	to 128. When it is less than 128, the SID field is a locator.		to 128. When it is less than 128, the SID field is a locator.
	When it is 128, the SID field is an SRv6 SID.		When it is 128, the SID field is an SRv6 SID.
	SID: 1-16 octets. This field encodes an SRv6 SID or locator to be		SID: 1-16 octets. This field encodes an SRv6 SID or locator to be
	skipping to change at page 12, line 20 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 42 ¶
	| Flags | SRv6 Endpoint Function |		| Flags | SRv6 Endpoint Function |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| SID (16 octets) |		| SID (16 octets) |
	: :		: :
	| |		| |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| sub-TLVs |		| sub-TLVs |
	: :		: :
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Figure 6: OSPF SRv6 Mirror SID sub-TLV		Figure 6: OSPF SRv6 Mirror SID sub-TLV
	Type: TBD4 (suggested value 8) is to be assigned by IANA.		Type: TBD4 (suggested value 8) is to be assigned by IANA.
	Length: variable.		Length: variable.
	Flags: 1 octet. No flags are currently defined.		Flags: 1 octet. No flags are currently defined.
	SRv6 Endpoint Function: 2 octets. It contains the endpoint function		SRv6 Endpoint Function: 2 octets. It contains the endpoint function
	74 for End.M SID.		74 for End.M SID.
	skipping to change at page 14, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 14, line 20 ¶
	+==============+=========================+===============+		+==============+=========================+===============+
	| Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Name | Reference |		| Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Name | Reference |
	+==============+=========================+===============+		+==============+=========================+===============+
	| 8 | SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV | This document |		| 8 | SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV | This document |
	+--------------+-------------------------+---------------+		+--------------+-------------------------+---------------+
	IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry for sub-sub-		IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry for sub-sub-
	TLVs of the SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV. The suggested registry name is		TLVs of the SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV. The suggested registry name is
	o Sub-Sub-TLVs for SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV		o Sub-Sub-TLVs for SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV
	Initial values for the registry are given below. The future		Initial values for the registry are given below. The future
	assignments are to be made through IETF Review [RFC5226].		assignments are to be made through IETF Review [RFC5226].
	Value Sub-Sub-TLV Name Definition		Value Sub-Sub-TLV Name Definition
	----- ----------------------- -------------		----- ----------------------- -------------
	0 Reserved		0 Reserved
	1 Protected Locators Sub-Sub-TLV This Document		1 Protected Locators Sub-Sub-TLV This Document
	2 Protected SIDs Sub-Sub-TLV		2 Protected SIDs Sub-Sub-TLV
	3-255 Unassigned		3-255 Unassigned
	skipping to change at page 15, line 20 ¶		skipping to change at page 14, line 47 ¶
	+==============+=========================+===============+		+==============+=========================+===============+
	| Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Name | Reference |		| Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Name | Reference |
	+==============+=========================+===============+		+==============+=========================+===============+
	| 8 | SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV | This document |		| 8 | SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV | This document |
	+--------------+-------------------------+---------------+		+--------------+-------------------------+---------------+
	IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry for sub-sub-		IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry for sub-sub-
	TLVs of the SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV. The suggested registry name is		TLVs of the SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV. The suggested registry name is
	o Sub-Sub-TLVs for SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV		o Sub-Sub-TLVs for SRv6 Mirror SID Sub-TLV
	Initial values for the registry are given below. The future		Initial values for the registry are given below. The future
	assignments are to be made through IETF Review [RFC5226].		assignments are to be made through IETF Review [RFC5226].
	Value Sub-Sub-TLV Name Definition		Value Sub-Sub-TLV Name Definition
	----- ----------------------- -------------		----- ----------------------- -------------
	0 Reserved		0 Reserved
	1 Protected Locators Sub-Sub-TLV This Document		1 Protected Locators Sub-Sub-TLV This Document
	2 Protected SIDs Sub-Sub-TLV		2 Protected SIDs Sub-Sub-TLV
	3-65535 Unassigned		3-65535 Unassigned
	skipping to change at page 15, line 45 ¶		skipping to change at page 15, line 25 ¶
	Li, Alexander Vainshtein, Greg Mirsky, Bruno Decraene, Jeff Tantsura,		Li, Alexander Vainshtein, Greg Mirsky, Bruno Decraene, Jeff Tantsura,
	Chris Bowers and Ketan Talaulikar for their comments to this work.		Chris Bowers and Ketan Talaulikar for their comments to this work.
	8. References		8. References
	8.1. Normative References		8.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions]
	Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and		Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and
	Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over		Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over
	IPv6 Dataplane", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-		IPv6 Dataplane", draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-18
	ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-17, 18 June 2021,		(work in progress), October 2021.
	<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-
	extensions-17.txt>.
	[I-D.ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions]
	Li, Z., Hu, Z., Cheng, D., Talaulikar, K., and P. Psenak,		Li, Z., Hu, Z., Cheng, D., Talaulikar, K., and P. Psenak,
	"OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6", Work in Progress, Internet-		"OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6", draft-ietf-lsr-
	Draft, draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-02, 15		ospfv3-srv6-extensions-03 (work in progress), November
	February 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-		2021.
	ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-02.txt>.
	[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>.
	[RFC7356] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and Y. Yang, "IS-IS Flooding		[RFC7356] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and Y. Yang, "IS-IS Flooding
	Scope Link State PDUs (LSPs)", RFC 7356,		Scope Link State PDUs (LSPs)", RFC 7356,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC7356, September 2014,		DOI 10.17487/RFC7356, September 2014,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7356>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7356>.
	skipping to change at page 17, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 16, line 37 ¶
	[RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer,		[RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer,
	D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6		D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6
	(SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986,		(SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>.
	8.2. Informative References		8.2. Informative References
	[I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding]		[I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding]
	Hu, Z., Chen, H., Yao, J., Bowers, C., Yongqing, and		Hu, Z., Chen, H., Yao, J., Bowers, C., Yongqing, and
	Yisong, "SR-TE Path Midpoint Restoration", Work in		Yisong, "SR-TE Path Midpoint Restoration", draft-hu-
	Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-hu-spring-segment-routing-		spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding-19 (work in
	proxy-forwarding-14, 29 April 2021,		progress), April 2022.
	<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-hu-spring-segment-
	routing-proxy-forwarding-14.txt>.
	[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]		[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]
	Litkowski, S., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Francois, P.,		Litkowski, S., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Francois, P.,
	Decraene, B., and D. Voyer, "Topology Independent Fast		Decraene, B., and D. Voyer, "Topology Independent Fast
	Reroute using Segment Routing", Work in Progress,		Reroute using Segment Routing", draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-
	Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-		routing-ti-lfa-08 (work in progress), January 2022.
	07, 29 June 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-
	ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-07.txt>.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
	Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and		Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and
	P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", Work in		P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft-
	Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-spring-segment-		ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-22 (work in progress),
	routing-policy-13, 28 May 2021,		March 2022.
	<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-spring-
	segment-routing-policy-13.txt>.
	[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an		[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
	IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226,		IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
	[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, DOI 10.17487/RFC5462, February		Class" Field", RFC 5462, DOI 10.17487/RFC5462, February
	2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5462>.		2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5462>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Zhibo Hu		Zhibo Hu
	Huawei		Huawei
	Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.		Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
	Beijing		Beijing 100095
	100095
	China		China
	Email: huzhibo@huawei.com		Email: huzhibo@huawei.com
	Huaimo Chen		Huaimo Chen
	Futurewei		Futurewei
	Boston, MA,		Boston, MA
	United States of America		USA
	Email: Huaimo.chen@futurewei.com		Email: Huaimo.chen@futurewei.com
	Huanan Chen		Huanan Chen
	China Telecom		China Telecom
	109, West Zhongshan Road, Tianhe District		109, West Zhongshan Road, Tianhe District
	Guangzhou		Guangzhou 510000
	510000
	China		China
	Email: chenhn8.gd@chinatelecom.cn		Email: chenhn8.gd@chinatelecom.cn
	Peng Wu		Peng Wu
	Huawei		Huawei
	Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.		Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
	Beijing		Beijing 100095
	100095
	China		China
	Email: baggio.wupeng@huawei.com		Email: baggio.wupeng@huawei.com
	Mehmet Toy		Mehmet Toy
	Verizon		Verizon
	United States of America		USA
	Email: mehmet.toy@verizon.com		Email: mehmet.toy@verizon.com
	Chang Cao		Chang Cao
	China Unicom		China Unicom
			Beijing China
	Email: caoc15@chinaunicom.cn		Email: caoc15@chinaunicom.cn
	Tao He		Tao He
	China Unicom		China Unicom
			Beijing China
	Email: het21@chinaunicom.cn		Email: het21@chinaunicom.cn
	Lei Liu		Lei Liu
	Fujitsu		Fujitsu
	United States of America		USA
	Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com		Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com
	Xufeng Liu		Xufeng Liu
	Volta Networks		Volta Networks
	McLean, VA		McLean, VA
	United States of America		USA
	Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com		Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
End of changes. 34 change blocks.
	62 lines changed or deleted		52 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/