idnits 2.17.1 draft-matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 4 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document date (March 24, 2019) is 1859 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Missing Reference: 'WC-2015' is mentioned on line 153, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-interop' is mentioned on line 298, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic' is defined on line 622, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam' is defined on line 626, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'I-D.draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-interop' is defined on line 632, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8402' is defined on line 686, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-26) exists of draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-16 == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-01 == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-20) exists of draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic-08 == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-08) exists of draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-header-00 -- Duplicate reference: draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header, mentioned in 'SRH-REF-BY', was also mentioned in 'I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header'. Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 14 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 SPRING S. Matsushima 3 Internet-Draft Softbank 4 Intended status: Informational C. Filsfils 5 Expires: September 25, 2019 Z. Ali 6 Cisco Systems 7 Z. Li 8 Huawei Technologies 9 March 24, 2019 11 SRv6 Implementation and Deployment Status 12 draft-matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status-00 14 Abstract 16 This draft provides an overview of IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6) 17 deployment status. It lists various SRv6 features that have been 18 deployed in the production networks. It also provides an overview of 19 SRv6 implementation and interoperability testing status. 21 Requirements Language 23 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 24 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 25 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 27 Status of This Memo 29 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 30 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 32 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 33 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 34 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 35 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 37 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 38 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 39 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 40 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 42 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 25, 2019. 44 Copyright Notice 46 Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 47 document authors. All rights reserved. 49 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 50 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 51 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 52 publication of this document. Please review these documents 53 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 54 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 55 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 56 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 57 described in the Simplified BSD License. 59 Table of Contents 61 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 62 2. Deployment Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 2.1. Softbank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 2.2. China Telecom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 2.3. Additional Deployments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 3. Significant industry collaboration for SRv6 standardization . 4 67 3.1. Academic Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 4. Implementation Status of SRv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 4.1. Open-source platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 4.2. Additional Routing platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 4.3. Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 72 5. Interoperability Status of SRv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 5.1. SIGCOM 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 74 5.2. EANTC 2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75 5.3. Additional Interoperability Events . . . . . . . . . . . 9 76 6. Appendix 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 77 7. Appendix 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 78 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 79 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 80 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 81 11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 82 12. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 83 13. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 84 14. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 85 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 87 1. Introduction 89 This draft provides an overview of IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6) 90 deployment status. It lists various SRv6 features that have been 91 deployed in the production networks. It also provides an overview of 92 SRv6 implementation and interoperability testing status. 94 2. Deployment Status 96 2.1. Softbank 98 As part of the 5G rollout, Softbank have deployed a nationwide SRv6 99 network. 101 The following SRv6 features have been deployed: 103 o A Segment Routing Header [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] 104 based data plane. 106 o END (PSP), END.X (PSP), END.DT4, T.Encaps.Red and T.Insert.Red 107 functions as per [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]. 109 o ISIS SRv6 extensions [I-D.bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions]. 111 o BGP VPN SRv6 extensions [I-D.dawra-bess-srv6-services]. 113 o Topology Independent (TI-LFA) Fast Reroute mechanisms leveraging 114 SRv6 for the O(50msec) protection against node and link, as 115 described in [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]. 117 o BGP Prefix Independent Convergence (PIC) core and edge [I-D.ietf- 118 rtgwg-bgp-pic]. 120 o Support for Ping and Traceroute as defined in [I-D.ali-6man- 121 spring-srv6-oam]. 123 2.2. China Telecom 125 China Telecom (Sichuan) have deployed a multi-city SRv6 network. 127 The following SRv6 features have been deployed: 129 o A Segment Routing Header [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]. 130 based data plane. 132 o END.DT4 function as per [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network- 133 programming]. 135 o BGP VPN SRv6 extensions [I-D.dawra-bess-srv6-services]. 137 o BGP Prefix Independent Convergence (PIC) core and edge [I-D.ietf- 138 rtgwg-bgp-pic]. 140 o Support for Ping and Traceroute as defined in [I-D.ali-6man- 141 spring-srv6-oam]. 143 2.3. Additional Deployments 145 Another deployment is ongoing and several others are in preparation. 147 Details to be added after the public announcements. 149 3. Significant industry collaboration for SRv6 standardization 151 The work on SRv6 started in IETF in 2013 and was later published in 152 6man working group as [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header-00] in 153 March 2014. The first implementation was done in 2014 [WC-2015]. 155 A significant industry group of operators, academics and vendors 156 supported and refined the idea according to the IETF process: 158 o Twenty-four revisions of the document were published. 160 o Over 1000 emails were exchanged. 162 o Over 16 IETF presentations were delivered. 164 o Over 50 additional drafts were submitted to the IETF to specify 165 SRv6 protocol extensions and use-cases [SRH-REF-BY]. These 166 documents are either working group drafts or are well on their way 167 to be adopted by their respective working group. The work spans 168 13 working group, including 6man, Spring, idr, bess, pce, lsr, 169 detnet, dmm, mpls, etc. Appendix A lists IETF contribution on 170 SRv6. 172 The outcome of this significant support from the operators and 173 vendors led to the adoption of the draft by the 6man working group in 174 December 2015. 176 The first last call for the SRH document was issued in March 2018. 178 A significant industry group of operators, academics and vendors 179 supported and refined the idea according to the IETF process: 181 o 63 tickets were open. 183 o 50 have been closed. 185 o Hundreds of emails have been exchanged to support the closure. 187 o Five revisions of the document have been published to reflect the 188 work of the group and the closure of the tickets. 190 There is clear confidence that the remaining 13 tickets can be 191 formally closed during IETF 104. 193 3.1. Academic Contributions 195 Academia has made significant contribution to SRv6 work. This 196 includes both Scholastic publications as well as writing open source 197 software. 199 Appendix 2 provides a list of academic contributions. 201 4. Implementation Status of SRv6 203 The hardware and software platforms listed below are either shipping 204 or have demonstrated support for SRv6 including processing of the SRH 205 as described in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]. This section 206 also indicates the supported SRv6 functions and transit behaviors on 207 open-source software 209 4.1. Open-source platforms 211 The following open source platforms supports SRv6 including 212 processing of an SRH as described in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing- 213 header]: 215 o Linux kernel[ref-1],[ref-2]: End, End.X, End.T, End.DX2, End.DX6, 216 End.DX4, End.DT6, End.B6, End.B6.Encaps, T.Insert, T.Encaps, 217 T.Encaps.L2 219 o Linux srext module: End, End.X, End.DX2, End.DX6, End.DX4, End.AD, 220 End.AM 222 o FD.io VPP: End, End.X, End.DX2, End.DX6, End.DX4, End.DT6, 223 End.DT4, End.B6, End.B6.Encaps, End.AS, End.AD, End.AM, T.Insert, 224 T.Encaps, T.Encaps.L2 226 4.2. Additional Routing platforms 228 The following routing platforms supports SRv6 features, including 229 processing of the SRH as described in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing- 230 header]: 232 Cisco: 234 Cisco hardware platforms supports SRH processing since April 2017, 235 with current status as follows: 237 o Cisco ASR 9000 platform with IOS XR shipping code. 239 o Cisco NCS 5500 platform with IOS XR shipping code. 241 o Cisco NCS 540 platform with IOS XR shipping code. 243 o Cisco ASR 1000 platform with IOS XE engineering code. 245 Huawei: 247 o Huawei ATN with VRPV8 shipping code. 249 o Huawei CX600 with VRPV8 shipping code. 251 o Huawei NE40E with VRPV8 shipping code. 253 o Huawei ME60 with VRPV8 shipping code. 255 o Huawei NE5000E with VRPV8 shipping code. 257 o Huawei NE9000 with VRPV8 shipping code. 259 o Huawei NG-OLT MA5800 with VRPV8 shipping code. 261 Barefoot Networks: 263 o Hardware implementation in the Tofino NPU is present since May 264 2017. 266 Spirent: 268 o Support in Spirent TestCenter. 270 Ixia: 272 o Support in Ixia IxNetwork. 274 4.3. Applications 276 In addition to the aforementioned routing platforms, the following 277 open-source applications have been extended to support the processing 278 of IPv6 packets containing an SRH. For Wireshark, tcpdump, iptables 279 and nftables, these extensions have been included in the mainstream 280 version. 282 o Wireshark [ref-3] 284 o tcpdump [ref-4] 286 o iptables [ref-5], [ref-6] 287 o nftables [ref-7] 289 o Snort [ref-8] 291 5. Interoperability Status of SRv6 293 This section provides a brief inventory of publicly disclosed SRv6 294 interoperability testing, including processing of the SRH as 295 described in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header], among many 296 implementations. 298 Please refer to [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-interop] for details. 300 5.1. SIGCOM 2017 302 The following interoperability testing scenarios were publicly 303 showcased on August 21-24, 2017 at the SIGCOMM conference. 305 Five different implementations of SRv6 behaviors were used for this 306 testing: 308 o Software implementation in Linux using the srext kernel module 309 created by University of Rome, Tor Vergata, Italy. 311 o Software implementation in the FD.io Vector Packet Processor (VPP) 312 virtual router. 314 o Hardware implementation in Barefoot Networks Tofino NPU using the 315 P4 programming language. 317 o Hardware implementation in Cisco NCS 5500 router using 318 commercially available NPU. 320 o Hardware implementation in Cisco ASR 1000 router using custom 321 ASIC. 323 SRH interoperability including processing of the SRH as described in 324 [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] was validated in the following 325 scenarios: 327 o L3VPN using the SRv6 behaviors T.Encaps and End.DX6. 329 o L3VPN with traffic engineering in the underlay. The testing 330 validated the interoperability of T.Encaps and End.DX6 behaviors 331 combined with the End and End.X functions. 333 o L3 VPN with traffic engineering and service chaining. This 334 scenario validated the L3 VPN service with underlay optimization 335 and service programming using SRH. 337 The results confirm consistency among SRH [I-D.ietf-6man-segment- 338 routing-header], network programming [I.D-draft-filsfils-spring-srv6- 339 network-programming] and the dependent SRv6 drafts. 341 5.2. EANTC 2018 343 In March 2018, the European Advanced Networking Test Center (EANTC) 344 successfully validated multiple implementations of [I-D.ietf-6man- 345 segment-routing-header]. The Results from this event were showcased 346 at the MPLS + SDN + NFV World Congress conference in April 2018 347 [EANTC-18]. 349 Four different implementations of the SRv6 drafts, including SRH as 350 described in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] were used in this 351 testing: 353 o Hardware implementation in Cisco NCS 5500 router. 355 o Hardware implementation in UTStarcom UAR500. 357 o Spirent TestCenter. 359 o Ixia IxNetwork. 361 SRv6 interoperability, including SRH processing as described in [I- 362 D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header], was validated for the following 363 scenarios: 365 o L3-VPN for IPv4 traffic using the SRv6 T.Encaps and End.DT4 366 behaviors. 368 o L3VPN with traffic engineering in the underlay. The testing 369 validated the interoperability of T.Encaps and End.DT4 behaviors 370 combined with the End and End.X functions. 372 o SRH based Topology Independent (TI-LFA) Fast Reroute mechanisms 373 using T.Insert.Red. 375 The results confirm consistency among SRH [I-D.ietf-6man-segment- 376 routing-header], network programming [I.D-draft-filsfils-spring-srv6- 377 network-programming] and the dependent SRv6 drafts. 379 5.3. Additional Interoperability Events 381 Multiple vendors participated in a public interop event to validate 382 their implementation of SRH [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header], 383 Network Programming [I.D-draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-network- 384 programming] and the dependent SRv6 drafts. 386 Details and results of the testing will be shared and showcased at 387 MPLS World Congress 2019 on April 9, 2019. 389 6. Appendix 1 391 The following IETF working group documents or individual submissions 392 references SRH Draft [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] (see 393 [SRH-REF-BY] for the source of the information): 395 o draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam 397 o draft-ali-spring-ioam-srv6 399 o draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions 401 o draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services 403 o draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext 405 o draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming 407 o draft-geng-detnet-dp-sol-srv6 409 o draft-hu-mpls-sr-inter-domain-use-cases 411 o draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane 413 o draft-li-6man-service-aware-ipv6-network 415 o draft-li-spring-light-weight-srv6-ioam 417 o draft-li-spring-srv6-path-segment 419 o draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr 421 o draft-peng-spring-srv6-compatibility 423 o draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming 425 o draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr 426 o draft-bonica-6man-vpn-dest-opt 428 o draft-boutros-nvo3-geneve-applicability-for-sfc 430 o draft-carpenter-limited-domains 432 o draft-chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing 434 o draft-chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing 436 o draft-dawra-idr-bgp-ls-sr-service-segments 438 o draft-dhody-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-srv6 440 o draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn 442 o draft-dukes-spring-mtu-overhead-analysis 444 o draft-dukes-spring-sr-for-sdwan 446 o draft-dunbar-sr-sdwan-over-hybrid-networks 448 o draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-interop 450 o draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-net-pgm-illustration 452 o draft-gandhi-spring-rfc6374-srpm-udp 454 o draft-gandhi-spring-twamp-srpm 456 o draft-guichard-spring-nsh-sr 458 o draft-heitz-idr-msdc-fabric-autoconf 460 o draft-herbert-ipv4-udpencap-eh 462 o draft-herbert-simple-sr 464 o draft-homma-dmm-5gs-id-loc-coexistence 466 o draft-homma-nmrg-slice-gateway 468 o draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid 470 o draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy 472 o draft-ietf-intarea-gue-extensions 473 o draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip 475 o draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing 477 o draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6 479 o draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment 481 o draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc 483 o draft-ietf-teas-pcecc-use-cases 485 o draft-li-6man-ipv6-sfc-ifit 487 o draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6 489 o draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions 491 o draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-srv6 493 o draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities 495 o draft-raza-spring-srv6-yang 497 o draft-su-bgp-trigger-segment-routing-odn 499 o draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion 501 o RFC 7855 503 o RFC 8218 505 o RFC 8402 507 7. Appendix 2 509 The following is an partial list of SRv6 Contributions from Academia, 510 including open source implementation of SRH Draft [I-D.ietf-6man- 511 segment-routing-header], network programming [I.D-draft-filsfils- 512 spring-srv6-network-programming] draft and the related IETF drafts: 514 o An Efficient Linux Kernel Implementation of Service Function 515 Chaining for legacy VNFs based on IPv6 Segment Routing. 516 Netsoft2019, https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.00936. 517 o Flexible failure detection and fast reroute using eBPF and SRv6 518 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8584995). 519 o Zero-Loss Virtual Machine Migration with IPv6 Segment Routing 520 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8584942). 521 o SDN Architecture and Southbound APIs for IPv6 Segment Routing 522 Enabled Wide Area Networks, IEEE Journals & Magazine 523 (https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2018.2876251). 524 o Leveraging eBPF for programmable network functions with IPv6 525 Segment Routing 526 (https://doi.org/10.1145/3281411.3281426). 527 o Snort demo, http://netgroup.uniroma2.it/Stefano_Salsano/ 528 papers/18-sr-snort-demo.pdf. 529 o Performance of IPv6 Segment Routing in Linux Kernel, 530 IEEE Conference Publication, 531 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8584976). 532 o Interface Counters in Segment Routing v6: a powerful 533 instrument for Traffic Matrix Assessment 534 (https://doi.org/10.1109/NOF.2018.8597768). 535 o Exploring various use cases for IPv6 Segment Routing 536 (https://doi.org/10.1145/3234200.3234213). 537 o SRv6Pipes: enabling in-network bytestream functions 538 (http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/197480). 539 o SERA: SEgment Routing Aware Firewall for Service Function 540 Chaining scenarios 541 (http://netgroup.uniroma2.it/Stefano_Salsano/papers/ 542 18-ifip-sera-firewall-sfc.pdf). 543 o Software Resolved Networks 544 (https://doi.org/10.1145/3185467.3185471). 545 o 6LB: Scalable and Application-Aware Load Balancing 546 with Segment Routing 547 (https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2018.2799242). 548 o Implementation of virtual network function chaining through 549 segment routing in a linux-based NFV infrastructure, 550 IEEE Conference Publication, 551 (https://doi.org/10.1109/NETSOFT.2017.8004208). 552 o A Linux kernel implementation of Segment Routing with IPv6, 553 IEEE Conference Publication(https://doi.org/10.1109/ 554 INFCOMW.2016.7562234). 555 o Leveraging IPv6 Segment Routing for Service Function Chaining 556 (http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/168097) 558 8. IANA Considerations 560 None 562 9. Security Considerations 564 None 566 10. Acknowledgements 568 The authors would like to thank Darren Dukes and Pablo Camarillo. 570 11. Contributors 572 The following people have contributed to this document: 574 Francois Clad 575 Cisco Systems 576 Email: fclad@cisco.com 578 12. Normative References 580 Francois Clad 581 Cisco Systems 582 Email: fclad@cisco.com 584 13. Normative References 586 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 587 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 588 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 589 . 591 14. Informative References 593 [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] 594 Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and 595 d. daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header 596 (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-16 (work in 597 progress), February 2019. 599 [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] 600 Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J., 601 daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6 602 Network Programming", draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-network- 603 programming-07 (work in progress), February 2019. 605 [I-D.bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions] 606 Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and 607 Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extensions to Support Routing over IPv6 608 Dataplane", draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions-05 (work 609 in progress), March 2019. 611 [I-D.dawra-bess-srv6-services] 612 Dawra, G., ed., "SRv6 BGP based Overlay services", 613 draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-01 (work 614 in progress), March 2019. 616 [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] 617 Litkowski, S., et al., "Topology Independent Fast Reroute 618 using Segment Routing", 619 draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-00 (work in progress), 620 March 2019. 622 [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic] 623 Bashandy, A., et al, "BGP Prefix Independent Convergence", 624 draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic-08 (work in progress), Sept. 2018. 626 [I-D.ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam] 627 Ali, Z., et al, "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance 628 (OAM) in Segment Routing Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6), 629 draft-ali-6man-spring-srv6-oam-00 (work in progress), 630 March 2019. 632 [I-D.draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-interop] 633 Filsfils, C., et al, "SRv6 interoperability report", 634 draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-interop-02 (work in progress), 635 March 2019. 637 [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header-00] 638 Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., et al, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header 639 (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-header-00, 640 March 2014. 642 [ref-1] "Implementing IPv6 Segment Routing in the Linux Kernel", 643 July 2017, . 645 [ref-2] "Reaping the Benefits of IPv6 Segment Routing", October 646 2017, . 649 [ref-3] "Add support for Segment Routing (Type 4) Extension 650 Header", June 2016, . 654 [ref-4] "Add support for IPv6 routing header type 4", December 655 2017, . 658 [ref-5] "[net-next,v2] netfilter: add segment routing header 'srh' 659 match", January 2018, 660 . 662 [ref-6] "[iptables,v2] extensions: add support for 'srh' match", 663 January 2018, 664 . 666 [ref-7] "[nft] nftables: Adding support for segment routing header 667 'srh'", March 2018, 668 . 670 [ref-8] "IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6) aware snort", March 2018, 671 . 673 [wc-15] "MPLS World Congress", Paris, 2015. 675 [EANTC-18] "MPLS+SDN+NFVVORD@PARIS2018 Interoperability Showcase", 676 "MPLS World Congress", Paris, 2018, 677 http://www.eantc.de/fileadmin/eantc/downloads/events/2017- 678 2020/MPLS2018/EANTC-MPLSSDNNFV2018-WhitePaper-final.pdf. 680 [SRH-REF-BY] 681 "IETF Documents Referencing 682 draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header Draft", 683 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ 684 draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header/referencedby/ 686 [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., 687 Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment 688 Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, 689 July 2018, . 691 Authors' Addresses 693 Satoru Matsushima 694 Softbank 696 Email: satoru.matsushima@g.softbank.co.jp 697 Clarence Filsfils 698 Cisco Systems 700 Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com 702 Zafar Ali 703 Cisco Systems 705 Email: zali@cisco.com 707 Zhenbin Li 708 Huawei Technologies 710 Email: lizhenbin@huawei.com