Advertising LSPs with Segment Routing
draft-bowers-spring-advertising-lsps-with-sr-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2014-09-25
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
SPRING Working Group                                           C. Bowers
Internet-Draft                                                H. Gredler
Intended status: Standards Track                        Juniper Networks
Expires: March 29, 2015                                      U. Chunduri
                                                           Ericsson Inc.
                                                      September 25, 2014

                 Advertising LSPs with Segment Routing
            draft-bowers-spring-advertising-lsps-with-sr-00

Abstract

   Segment routing uses globally-known labels to accomplish forwarding
   along shortest paths, and label stacks to accomplish explicit routing
   along arbitrary paths.  These labels are advertised using an IGP.
   This draft describes how label bindings corresponding to RSVP, LDP,
   BGP labeled-unicast, and static LSPs are advertised in segment
   routing and how these labels can be combined with other segment
   routing labels to create forwarding paths.  This draft also describes
   how context labels for egress node protection are advertised in using
   segment routing IGP extensions.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on March 29, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of

Bowers, et al.           Expires March 29, 2015                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    Advertising LSPs with Segment Routing   September 2014

   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Segment routing label binding advertisements  . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Conventions used in the following examples  . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Advertising an RSVP-TE LSP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Advertising a backup ERO  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Advertising an LDP LSP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Advertising a BGP labeled-unicast LSP . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Advertising a static LSP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Advertising a context label for egress node protection  . . .  11
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   10. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   12. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   13. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     13.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     13.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   [I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing] describes the segment routing
   architecture.  In segment routing, LDP-like forwarding behavior along
   shortest paths is achieved using globally-known node labels.
   Globally-known node labels can be distributed in one of two ways.
   Each router can directly advertise a globally unique node label in
   the IGP.  Or each router can advertise a globally unique node index
   value as well a locally assigned label block, allowing any router in
   the IGP area to determine the mapping of locally-assigned label to
   globally unique node index for any other router in the area.

   In order to forward traffic along explicit paths, segment routing
   uses stacks of adjacency labels.  Each router uses the IGP to
   advertise locally significant adjacency labels corresponding to each
   of the router's outgoing interfaces.  This allows any router in the
   IGP area to construct an arbitrary forwarding path by imposing a
   stack of adjacency labels on a packet.  Forwarding is accomplished at
Show full document text