idnits 2.17.1 draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. RFC 2119 keyword, line 100: '... pairs SHOULD be inserted in...' Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (Feb 18, 2020) is 1528 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(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-26) exists of draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-08 Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 IDR Working Group J. Zhou 3 Internet-Draft Shaofu. Peng 4 Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corp. 5 Expires: August 21, 2020 Feb 18, 2020 7 BGP Extension for SR-MPLS Entropy Label Position 8 draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-00 10 Abstract 12 This document proposed an extension for BGP to configure the entropy 13 label position for SR-MPLS networks. 15 Status of This Memo 17 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 18 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 21 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 22 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 23 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 21, 2020. 32 Copyright Notice 34 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 35 document authors. All rights reserved. 37 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 38 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 39 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 40 publication of this document. Please review these documents 41 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 42 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 43 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 44 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 45 described in the Simplified BSD License. 47 Table of Contents 49 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 50 2. BGP Extensions of Segment Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 51 3. Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 52 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 53 5. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 54 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 1. Introduction 58 Entropy Label(EL)[RFC6790] is a technology that can be used for load- 59 balancing in Segment Routing (SR) MPLS. 60 [I-D.ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label] discusses in detail the factors 61 to be considered when inserting EL in SR, analyzes the possible 62 insertion positions of entropy labels, and gives a specific algorithm 63 for calculating the position of entropy labels. 65 An MPLS label stack can contain multiple ELs, so multiple EL 66 insertion positions may be calculated. When calculating the 67 position, it is necessary to consider the Maximum SID Depth(MSD) 68 capability of the head node and Entropy Readable Label Depth(ERLD) 69 capability of the intermediate node in combination with the 70 algorithm. The position calculation of EL is usually completed by 71 the controller, which is issued by the controller to the head node. 73 [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] defines the specific process 74 of how the controller in the SR network passes the path calculation 75 result of the SR-TE policy to the head node of the network through 76 BGP. 78 In this document, the EL position information is transmitted by 79 extending the flags of Segment List Sub-TLV in the BGP. 81 2. BGP Extensions of Segment Flags 83 The Segment Flags is defined in Section 2.4.3.2.12 of 84 [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]. 86 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 87 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 88 |V|A|E| | 89 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 91 E-Flag: This flag indicates that presence of label pairs 92 are inserted after this segment. It is applicable to all Segment 93 Types. 95 3. Operations 97 Supposed the head end had received a SR-TE path from the controller 98 with multiple Segment List Sub-TLVs, for example, , especially S3 and S6 with E-flag. It indicates that two 100 pairs SHOULD be inserted into the label stack of the SR-TE 101 forwarding entry, respectively after the Label for S3 and Label for 102 S6. With EL information, the label stack for SR-MPLS would be 103 . 105 4. IANA Considerations 107 This document requests bit 2 for Entropy Label Flag. 109 Bit Description Reference 110 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 111 2 Entropy Label Flag(E-Flag) This document 113 5. Normative References 115 [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] 116 Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Mattes, P., 117 Rosen, E., Jain, D., and S. Lin, "Advertising Segment 118 Routing Policies in BGP", draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing- 119 te-policy-08 (work in progress), November 2019. 121 [I-D.ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label] 122 Kini, S., Kompella, K., Sivabalan, S., Litkowski, S., 123 Shakir, R., and J. Tantsura, "Entropy label for SPRING 124 tunnels", draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label-12 (work in 125 progress), July 2018. 127 [RFC6790] Kompella, K., Drake, J., Amante, S., Henderickx, W., and 128 L. Yong, "The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding", 129 RFC 6790, DOI 10.17487/RFC6790, November 2012, 130 . 132 Authors' Addresses 134 Jin Zhou 135 ZTE Corp. 137 Email: zhou.jin6@zte.com.cn 138 Shaofu Peng 139 ZTE Corp. 141 Email: peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn