< draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-07.txt		draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-08.txt >
	Network Working Group C. Filsfils, Ed.		Network Working Group C. Filsfils, Ed.
	Internet-Draft S. Previdi, Ed.		Internet-Draft S. Previdi, Ed.
	Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.		Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Expires: June 17, 2016 B. Decraene		Expires: November 12, 2016 B. Decraene
	S. Litkowski		S. Litkowski
	Orange		Orange
	R. Shakir		R. Shakir
	Jive Communications		Jive Communications
	December 15, 2015		May 11, 2016
	Segment Routing Architecture		Segment Routing Architecture
	draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-07		draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-08
	Abstract		Abstract
	Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node		Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node
	steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called		steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called
	segments. A segment can represent any instruction, topological or		segments. A segment can represent any instruction, topological or
	service-based. A segment can have a local semantic to an SR node or		service-based. A segment can have a local semantic to an SR node or
	global within an SR domain. SR allows to enforce a flow through any		global within an SR domain. SR allows to enforce a flow through any
	topological path and service chain while maintaining per-flow state		topological path and service chain while maintaining per-flow state
	only at the ingress node to the SR domain.		only at the ingress node to the SR domain.
	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 June 17, 2016.		This Internet-Draft will expire on November 12, 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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 42 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 42 ¶
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	1.1. Companion Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		1.1. Companion Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	3. Link-State IGP Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		3. Link-State IGP Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	3.1. IGP Segment, IGP SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		3.1. IGP Segment, IGP SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	3.2. IGP-Prefix Segment, Prefix-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		3.2. IGP-Prefix Segment, Prefix-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	3.2.1. Prefix-SID Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		3.2.1. Prefix-SID Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	3.2.2. MPLS Dataplane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		3.2.2. MPLS Dataplane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	3.2.3. IPv6 Dataplane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		3.2.3. IPv6 Dataplane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	3.3. IGP-Node Segment, Node-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		3.3. IGP-Node Segment, Node-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	3.4. IGP-Anycast Segment, Anycast SID . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		3.4. IGP-Anycast Segment, Anycast SID . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	3.5. IGP-Adjacency Segment, Adj-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		3.5. IGP-Adjacency Segment, Adj-SID . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	3.5.1. Parallel Adjacencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		3.5.1. Parallel Adjacencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	3.5.2. LAN Adjacency Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		3.5.2. LAN Adjacency Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	3.6. Binding Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		3.6. Binding Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	3.6.1. Mapping Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		3.6.1. Mapping Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	3.6.2. Tunnel Headend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		3.6.2. Tunnel Headend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	3.7. Inter-Area Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		3.7. Inter-Area Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	4. BGP Peering Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		4. BGP Peering Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	5. IGP Mirroring Context Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		5. IGP Mirroring Context Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	6. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		6. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	With Segment Routing (SR), a node steers a packet through an ordered		With Segment Routing (SR), a node steers a packet through an ordered
	list of instructions, called segments. A segment can represent any		list of instructions, called segments. A segment can represent any
	instruction, topological or service-based. A segment can have a		instruction, topological or service-based. A segment can have a
	local semantic to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR		local semantic to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR
	allows to enforce a flow through any path and service chain while		allows to enforce a flow through any path and service chain while
	maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.		maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
	skipping to change at page 8, line 47 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 47 ¶
	Details of the two defined algorithms are defined in		Details of the two defined algorithms are defined in
	[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],		[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],
	[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and		[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
	[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].		[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].
	3.2.2. MPLS Dataplane		3.2.2. MPLS Dataplane
	When SR is used over the MPLS dataplane:		When SR is used over the MPLS dataplane:
	o the IGP signaling extension for IGP-Prefix segment includes the		o the IGP signaling extension for IGP-Prefix segment includes the
	P-Flag. A Node N advertising a Prefix-SID SID-R for its attached		P-Flag ([I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]) or the NP-Flag
	prefix R resets the P-Flag to allow its connected neighbors to		([I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]). A Node N
	perform the NEXT operation while processing SID-R. This behavior		advertising a Prefix-SID SID-R for its attached prefix R unset the
	is equivalent to Penultimate Hop Popping in MPLS. When set, the		P-Flag (or NP-Flag) in order to instruct its connected neighbors
	neighbors of N must perform the CONTINUE operation while		to perform the NEXT operation while processing SID-R. This
			behavior is equivalent to Penultimate Hop Popping in MPLS. When
			the flag is unset, the neighbors of N MUST perform the NEXT
			operation while processing SID-R. When the flag is set, the
			neighbors of N MUST perform the CONTINUE operation while
	processing SID-R.		processing SID-R.
	o A Prefix-SID is allocated in the form of an index in the SRGB (or		o A Prefix-SID is allocated in the form of an index in the SRGB (or
	as a local MPLS label) according to a process similar to IP		as a local MPLS label) according to a process similar to IP
	address allocation. Typically the Prefix-SID is allocated by		address allocation. Typically the Prefix-SID is allocated by
	policy by the operator (or NMS) and the SID very rarely changes.		policy by the operator (or NMS) and the SID very rarely changes.
	o While SR allows to attach a local segment to an IGP prefix (using		o While SR allows to attach a local segment to an IGP prefix (using
	the L-Flag), we specifically assume that when the terms "IGP-		the L-Flag), we specifically assume that when the terms "IGP-
	Prefix Segment" and "Prefix-SID" are used, the segment is global		Prefix Segment" and "Prefix-SID" are used, the segment is global
	skipping to change at page 9, line 25 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 29 ¶
	segments attached to IGP prefixes.		segments attached to IGP prefixes.
	o The allocation process MUST NOT allocate the same Prefix-SID to		o The allocation process MUST NOT allocate the same Prefix-SID to
	different IP prefixes.		different IP prefixes.
	o If a node learns a Prefix-SID having a value that falls outside		o If a node learns a Prefix-SID having a value that falls outside
	the locally configured SRGB range, then the node MUST NOT use the		the locally configured SRGB range, then the node MUST NOT use the
	Prefix-SID and SHOULD issue an error log warning for		Prefix-SID and SHOULD issue an error log warning for
	misconfiguration.		misconfiguration.
	o A node N attaching a Prefix-SID SID-R to its attached prefix R		o If a node N advertises Prefix-SID SID-R for a prefix R that is
	MUST maintain the following FIB entry:		attached to N, N MUST either clear the P-Flag in the advertisement
			of SID-R, or else maintain the following FIB entry:
	Incoming Active Segment: SID-R		Incoming Active Segment: SID-R
	Ingress Operation: NEXT		Ingress Operation: NEXT
	Egress interface: NULL		Egress interface: NULL
	o A remote node M MUST maintain the following FIB entry for any		o A remote node M MUST maintain the following FIB entry for any
	learned Prefix-SID SID-R attached to IP prefix R:		learned Prefix-SID SID-R attached to IP prefix R:
	Incoming Active Segment: SID-R		Incoming Active Segment: SID-R
	Ingress Operation:		Ingress Operation:
	skipping to change at page 10, line 7 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 17 ¶
	When SR is used over the IPv6 dataplane:		When SR is used over the IPv6 dataplane:
	o The Prefix-SID is the prefix itself. No additional identifier is		o The Prefix-SID is the prefix itself. No additional identifier is
	needed for Segment Routing over IPv6.		needed for Segment Routing over IPv6.
	o Any address belonging to any of the node's prefixes can be used as		o Any address belonging to any of the node's prefixes can be used as
	Prefix-SIDs.		Prefix-SIDs.
	o An operator may want to explicitly indicate which of the node's		o An operator may want to explicitly indicate which of the node's
	prefixes can be used as Prefix-SIDs through the setting of a flag		prefixes can be used as Prefix-SIDs through the setting of a flag
	(e.g.: using the IGP prefix attribute defined in		(e.g.: using the IGP prefix attribute defined in [RFC7794]) in the
	[I-D.ietf-isis-prefix-attributes]) in the routing protocol used		routing protocol used for advertising the prefix.
	for advertising the prefix.
	o A global SID is instantiated through any globally advertised IPv6		o A global SID is instantiated through any globally advertised IPv6
	address.		address.
	o A local SID is instantiated through a local IPv6 prefix not being		o A local SID is instantiated through a local IPv6 prefix not being
	advertised and therefore known only by the local node.		advertised and therefore known only by the local node.
	A node N advertising an IPv6 address R usable as a segment identifier		A node N advertising an IPv6 address R usable as a segment identifier
	MUST maintain the following FIB entry:		MUST maintain the following FIB entry:
	skipping to change at page 20, line 46 ¶		skipping to change at page 21, line 20 ¶
	[RFC4206] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Label Switched Paths (LSP)		[RFC4206] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Label Switched Paths (LSP)
	Hierarchy with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching		Hierarchy with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
	(GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4206,		(GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4206,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC4206, October 2005,		DOI 10.17487/RFC4206, October 2005,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4206>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4206>.
	11.2. Informative References		11.2. Informative References
	[I-D.filsfils-spring-large-scale-interconnect]		[I-D.filsfils-spring-large-scale-interconnect]
	Filsfils, C., Cai, D., Previdi, S., Henderickx, W.,		Filsfils, C., Cai, D., Previdi, S., Henderickx, W.,
	Shakir, R., Cooper, D., Ferguson, F., Laberge, T., Lin,		Shakir, R., Cooper, D., Ferguson, F., Lin, S., Laberge,
	S., Decraene, B., Jalil, L., and J. Tantsura,		T., Decraene, B., Jalil, L., and J. Tantsura,
	"Interconnecting Millions Of Endpoints With Segment		"Interconnecting Millions Of Endpoints With Segment
	Routing", draft-filsfils-spring-large-scale-		Routing", draft-filsfils-spring-large-scale-
	interconnect-01 (work in progress), November 2015.		interconnect-02 (work in progress), April 2016.
	[I-D.francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]		[I-D.francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]
	Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., and B. Decraene,		Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., and B. Decraene,
	"Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing",		"Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing",
	draft-francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-00 (work in		draft-francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-00 (work in
	progress), August 2015.		progress), August 2015.
	[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]		[I-D.ietf-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-ietf-6man-segment-routing-		Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-
	header-00 (work in progress), December 2015.		header-01 (work in progress), March 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-isis-prefix-attributes]
	Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Litkowski, S.,
	Previdi, S., Xu, X., and U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix
	Attributes for Extended IP and IPv6 Reachability", draft-
	ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-02 (work in progress),
	December 2015.
	[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]
	Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Gredler, H.,		Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Gredler, H.,
	Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and J. Tantsura, "IS-IS		Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and J. Tantsura, "IS-IS
	Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-segment-		Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-segment-
	routing-extensions-06 (work in progress), December 2015.		routing-extensions-06 (work in progress), December 2015.
	[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions]
	Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,		Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
	Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPFv3		Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPFv3
	Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-		Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-
	segment-routing-extensions-03 (work in progress), June		segment-routing-extensions-05 (work in progress), March
	2015.		2016.
	[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]
	Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,		Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
	Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF		Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
	Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-		Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-
	routing-extensions-05 (work in progress), June 2015.		routing-extensions-08 (work in progress), April 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing]		[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing]
	Sivabalan, S., Medved, J., Filsfils, C., Crabbe, E.,		Sivabalan, S., Medved, J., Filsfils, C., Crabbe, E.,
	Lopez, V., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W., and J. Hardwick,		Lopez, V., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W., and J. Hardwick,
	"PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-pce-		"PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-pce-
	segment-routing-06 (work in progress), August 2015.		segment-routing-07 (work in progress), March 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases]		[I-D.ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases]
	Brzozowski, J., Leddy, J., Leung, I., Previdi, S.,		Brzozowski, J., Leddy, J., Leung, I., Previdi, S.,
	Townsley, W., Martin, C., Filsfils, C., and R. Maglione,		Townsley, W., Martin, C., Filsfils, C., and R. Maglione,
	"IPv6 SPRING Use Cases", draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-		"IPv6 SPRING Use Cases", draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-
	cases-05 (work in progress), September 2015.		cases-06 (work in progress), March 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-oam-usecase]		[I-D.ietf-spring-oam-usecase]
	Geib, R., Filsfils, C., Pignataro, C., and N. Kumar, "Use		Geib, R., Filsfils, C., Pignataro, C., and N. Kumar, "A
	Case for a Scalable and Topology-Aware Segment Routing		Scalable and Topology-Aware MPLS Dataplane Monitoring
	MPLS Data Plane Monitoring System", draft-ietf-spring-oam-		System", draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-03 (work in
	usecase-01 (work in progress), October 2015.		progress), April 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-problem-statement]		[I-D.ietf-spring-problem-statement]
	Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,		Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,
	Horneffer, M., and r. rjs@rob.sh, "SPRING Problem		Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "SPRING Problem Statement
	Statement and Requirements", draft-ietf-spring-problem-		and Requirements", draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement-08
	statement-06 (work in progress), December 2015.		(work in progress), April 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases]		[I-D.ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases]
	Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., and r.		Francois, P., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., and R. Shakir,
	rjs@rob.sh, "Use-cases for Resiliency in SPRING", draft-		"Use-cases for Resiliency in SPRING", draft-ietf-spring-
	ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-02 (work in progress),		resiliency-use-cases-03 (work in progress), April 2016.
	December 2015.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsburg, D., and D. Afanasiev,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsburg, D., and D. Afanasiev,
	"Segment Routing Centralized Egress Peer Engineering",		"Segment Routing Centralized BGP Peer Engineering", draft-
	draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-00 (work in		ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-01 (work in
	progress), October 2015.		progress), March 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and
	S. Litkowski, "Segment Routing interoperability with LDP",		S. Litkowski, "Segment Routing interworking with LDP",
	draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-00 (work in		draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-01 (work in
	progress), October 2015.		progress), April 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,
	Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., rjs@rob.sh, r., Tantsura,		Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Shakir, R., Tantsura, J.,
	J., and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing with MPLS data plane",		and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing with MPLS data plane",
	draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-02 (work in		draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-04 (work in
	progress), October 2015.		progress), March 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc]
	Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Mitchell, J., and P. Lapukhov,		Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Mitchell, J., and P. Lapukhov,
	"BGP-Prefix Segment in large-scale data centers", draft-		"BGP-Prefix Segment in large-scale data centers", draft-
	ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-00 (work in progress),		ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-01 (work in progress),
	October 2015.		April 2016.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement]		[I-D.ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement]
	Kumar, N., Pignataro, C., Akiya, N., Geib, R., Mirsky, G.,		Kumar, N., Pignataro, C., Akiya, N., Geib, R., Mirsky, G.,
	and S. Litkowski, "OAM Requirements for Segment Routing		and S. Litkowski, "OAM Requirements for Segment Routing
	Network", draft-ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement-00 (work in		Network", draft-ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement-01 (work in
	progress), June 2015.		progress), December 2015.
	[RFC4915] Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P.		[RFC4915] Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P.
	Pillay-Esnault, "Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in OSPF",		Pillay-Esnault, "Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in OSPF",
	RFC 4915, DOI 10.17487/RFC4915, June 2007,		RFC 4915, DOI 10.17487/RFC4915, June 2007,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4915>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4915>.
	[RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation		[RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation
	of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095,		of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5095>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5095>.
	skipping to change at page 23, line 36 ¶		skipping to change at page 23, line 49 ¶
	[RFC6549] Lindem, A., Roy, A., and S. Mirtorabi, "OSPFv2 Multi-		[RFC6549] Lindem, A., Roy, A., and S. Mirtorabi, "OSPFv2 Multi-
	Instance Extensions", RFC 6549, DOI 10.17487/RFC6549,		Instance Extensions", RFC 6549, DOI 10.17487/RFC6549,
	March 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6549>.		March 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6549>.
	[RFC6822] Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Shand, M., Roy, A., and D.		[RFC6822] Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Shand, M., Roy, A., and D.
	Ward, "IS-IS Multi-Instance", RFC 6822,		Ward, "IS-IS Multi-Instance", RFC 6822,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC6822, December 2012,		DOI 10.17487/RFC6822, December 2012,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6822>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6822>.
			[RFC7794] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Decraene, B., Previdi, S., Xu, X., and
			U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix Attributes for Extended IPv4
			and IPv6 Reachability", RFC 7794, DOI 10.17487/RFC7794,
			March 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Clarence Filsfils (editor)		Clarence Filsfils (editor)
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	Brussels		Brussels
	BE		BE
	Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com		Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
	Stefano Previdi (editor)		Stefano Previdi (editor)
End of changes. 29 change blocks.
	63 lines changed or deleted		64 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/