idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.1 on line 19. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 219. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 143. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 150. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 156. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 1 longer page, the longest (page 2) being 110 lines == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 5 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'SHOULD not' in this paragraph: Link excluded from local protection path (0x02). When set, this link SHOULD not be included in any computation of a repair path by any other router in the routing area. The triggers for setting up this bit are out of the scope of this document. -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (May 2005) is 6921 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: 'RFC' is defined on line 167, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IS-IS' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3784 (ref. 'IS-IS-TE') (Obsoleted by RFC 5305) == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of draft-ali-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-01 Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 7 warnings (==), 8 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 ISIS WG 3 Internet Draft Jean-Philippe Vasseur 4 Stefano Previdi 5 Cisco Systems 7 Proposed Status : Standard 8 Expires: November 2005 May 2005 10 Definition of an IS-IS Link Attribute sub-TLV 12 draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-01.txt 14 Status of this Memo 16 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 17 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 18 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 19 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other 23 groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 28 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 30 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 33 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 34 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 36 Abstract 38 This document defines a sub-TLV called "Link-attributes" carried 39 within the TLV 22 and used to flood some link characteristics. 41 Conventions used in this document 43 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 44 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 45 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [i]. 47 Table of contents 49 1. Introduction...................................................2 50 2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format.................................2 51 3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this capability...3 52 4. Security considerations........................................3 53 5. IANA considerations............................................3 54 6. Intellectual Property Considerations...........................3 55 7. Acknowledgments................................................4 56 8. References.....................................................4 57 8.1 Normative references.......................................4 58 8.2 Informative references.....................................4 59 9. Authors' Addresses.............................................5 60 Full Copyright Statement..........................................5 62 1. Introduction 64 [IS-IS] specifies the IS-IS protocol (ISO 10589) with extensions to 65 support IPv4 in [IS-IS-IP]. A router advertises one or several Link 66 State Protocol data units which are composed of variable length 67 tuples called TLVs (Type-Length-Value). 69 [IS-IS-TE] defines a set of new TLVs whose aims are to add more 70 information about links characteristics, increase the range of IS-IS 71 metrics and optimize the encoding of IS-IS prefixes. 73 This document defines a new sub-TLV named "Link-attributes" carried 74 within the extended IS reachability TLV (type 22) specified in [IS- 75 IS-TE]. 77 2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format 79 The link-attribute sub-TLV is carried within the TLV 22 and has a 80 format identical to the sub-TLV format used by the Traffic 81 Engineering Extensions for IS-IS [IS-IS-TE]: 1 octet of sub-type, 1 82 octet of length of the value field of the sub-TLV followed by the 83 value field in this case, a 16 bit flags field. 85 The Link-attribute sub-type is 19 (to be assigned by IANA) and has a 86 length of 2 octets. 88 This sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MAY appear at most once for a single IS 89 neighbor. 91 The following bits are defined: 93 Local Protection Available (0x01). When set, this indicates that the 94 link is protected by means of some local protection mechanism (e.g 95 [FRR]). 97 Link excluded from local protection path (0x02). When set, this link 98 SHOULD not be included in any computation of a repair path by any 99 other router in the routing area. The triggers for setting up this 100 bit are out of the scope of this document. 102 Such link characteristics has several applications such as 103 constrained shortest path computation for a Traffic Engineering Label 104 Switched (TE LSP) path or the triggering of specific actions in the 105 context of IS-IS SPF computation. 107 Local maintenance required (0x04). When set, this indicates that the 108 link will be put out of service and will consequently be shortly 109 unavailable. The set of actions triggered by other nodes is out of 110 the scope of this document. An example of the usage of this bit is 111 provided in [GR-SHUT]. 113 3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this capability 115 A router not supporting the link-attribute sub-TLV MUST just silently 116 ignore this sub-TLV. 118 Where the information in the link attributes sub-TLV is used to 119 affect the IS-IS SPF calculation, additional information indicating 120 which routers are using this information is required to insure such 121 usage does not result in loops or black holes. How this additional 122 information is conveyed is outside the scope of this document. 124 4. Security considerations 126 No new security issues are raised in this document. 128 5. IANA considerations 130 IANA will assign a new codepoint for the link-attribute sub-TLV 131 defined in this document and carried within TLV 22. Suggested value 132 is 19 (to be assigned by IANA). 134 6. Intellectual Property Considerations 136 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 137 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 138 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 139 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 140 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 141 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 142 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 143 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 145 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 146 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 147 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 148 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 149 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 150 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 152 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 153 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 154 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 155 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- 156 ipr@ietf.org. 158 7. Acknowledgments 160 The authors would like to thank Mike Shand and Les Ginsberg for their 161 useful comments. 163 8. References 165 8.1 Normative references 167 [RFC] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 168 Levels," RFC 2119. 170 [IS-IS] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain 171 Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the Protocol 172 for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", 173 ISO 10589. 175 [IS-IS-IP] Callon, R., RFC 1195, "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in 176 TCP/IP and dual environments", RFC 1195, December 1990. 178 [IS-IS-TE] H. Smit, T. Li, "IS-IS extensions for traffic 179 engineering", RFC 3784. 181 8.2 Informative references 183 [FRR] Ping Pan, et al, "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP 184 Tunnels", draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-fastreroute-07.txt. Work in 185 progress. 187 [GR-SHUT], Z. Ali et al, "Graceful Shutdown in MPLS Traffic 188 Engineering Networks", draft-ali-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-01.txt. 189 Work in progress. 191 9. Authors' Addresses 193 Jean-Philippe Vasseur 194 CISCO Systems, Inc. 195 300 Beaver Brook 196 Boxborough, MA 01719 197 USA 198 Email: jpv@cisco.com 200 Stefano Previdi 201 CISCO Systems, Inc. 202 Via Del Serafico 200 203 00142 - Roma 204 ITALY 205 Email: sprevidi@cisco.com 207 Full Copyright Statement 209 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject 210 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and 211 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 213 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 214 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 215 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 216 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 217 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 218 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 219 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.