BGP Link-State extensions for BIER
draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-11

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (bier WG)
Authors Ran Chen  , Zheng Zhang  , Vengada Prasad Govindan  , IJsbrand Wijnands 
Last updated 2021-08-03
Stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex
Stream WG state In WG Last Call
Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WGLC
Document shepherd Gyan Mishra
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2020-11-03)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Networking Working Group                                         R. Chen
Internet-Draft                                                 Zh. Zhang
Intended status: Standards Track                         ZTE Corporation
Expires: February 5, 2022                                    V. Govindan
                                                            IJ. Wijnands
                                                                   Cisco
                                                          August 4, 2021

                   BGP Link-State extensions for BIER
                   draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-11

Abstract

   Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that
   provides optimal multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without
   requiring intermediate routers to maintain any multicast related per-
   flow state.  BIER also does not require any explicit tree-building
   protocol for its operation.  A multicast data packet enters a BIER
   domain at a "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the
   BIER domain at one or more "Bit-Forwarding Egress Routers" (BFERs).
   The BFIR router adds a BIER header to the packet.  The BIER header
   contains a bitstring in which each bit represents exactly one BFER to
   forward the packet to.  The set of BFERs to which the multicast
   packet needs to be forwarded is expressed by setting the bits that
   correspond to those routers in the BIER header.

   BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) enables the collection of various topology
   informations from the network, and the topology informations are used
   by the controller to calculate the fowarding tables and then
   propagate them onto the BFRs(instead of having each node to calculate
   on its own) and that can be for both inter-as and intra-as
   situations.

   This document specifies extensions to the BGP Link-state address-
   family in order to advertise the BIER informations.

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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   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 February 5, 2022.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2021 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
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   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.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  BGP-LS Extensions for BIER  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Prefix Attributes TLVs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       3.1.1.  The BIER information TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       3.1.2.  The BIER MPLS Encapsulation TLV . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.1.3.  The BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation TLV . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Equivalent IS-IS BIER TLVs/Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFV3 BIER TLVs/Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.1.  Normative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.2.  Informative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that
   provides optimal multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without
   requiring intermediate routers to maintain any multicast related per-
   flow state.  BIER also does not require any explicit tree-building
   protocol for its operation.  A multicast data packet enters a BIER

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   domain at a "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the
   BIER domain at one or more "Bit-Forwarding Egress Routers" (BFERs).
   The BFIR router adds a BIER header to the packet.  The BIER header
   contains a bitstring in which each bit represents exactly one BFER to
   forward the packet to.  The set of BFERs to which the multicast
   packet needs to be forwarded are expressed by setting the bits that
   correspond to those routers in the BIER header.

   When BIER is enabled in an IGP domain, BIER-related informations will
   be advertised via IGP link-state routing protocols.  IGP extensions
   are described in ISIS[[RFC8401]],OSPFv2[[RFC8444]] and
   OSPFv3[[I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]].The flooding scope for the
   IGP extensions for BIER is IGP area-wide. by using the IGP alone it
   is not enough to construct fowarding tables across multiple IGP Area.

   The BGP-LS address-family/sub-address-family have been defined to
   allow BGP to carry Link-State informations.  This document specifies
   extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in order to advertise
   BIER-specific informations, Similar to BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP
   Traffic Engineering Performance Metric Extensions([RFC8571]).  An
   external component (e.g., a controller/a PCE(see [RFC4655] for PCE-
   Based Architecture ,[RFC5440] for PCEP and [RFC5376] for Inter-AS
   Requirements for the PCEP.))then can learn the BIER informations in
   the "northbound" direction and calculate BIRT/BIFT and then propagate
   them onto BFRs (instead of having each BFR to calculate on its own),
   and that can be for both inter-as and intra-as situations.

2.  Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119.

3.  BGP-LS Extensions for BIER

   [RFC8279] defines the BFR - A router that supports BIER is known as a
   "Bit-Forwarding Router"(BFR), and each BFR MUST be assigned a "BFR-
   Prefix".  A BFR's Prefix MUST be an IP address (either IPv4 or IPv6)
   of the BFR, and MUST be unique and routable within the BIER domain as
   described in section 2 of [RFC8279], and then external component
   (e.g., a controller) need to collect BIER informations of BIER
   routers are associated with the BFR-Prefix in the "northbound"
   direction within the BIER domain.

   Given that the BIER informations are associated with the prefix, the
   Prefix Attribute TLV [RFC7752] can be used to carry the BIER
   informations.  A new Prefix Attribute TLVs are defined for the
   encoding of BIER informations.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

3.1.  Prefix Attributes TLVs

   The following Prefix Attribute TLVs are defined:

                +------+---------------------------+---------------+
                | Type | Description               |     Section   |
                +------+---------------------------+---------------+
                | TBD1 |BIER information           | Section 3.1.1 |
                | TBD2 |BIER MPLS Encapsulation    | Section 3.1.2 |
                | TBD3 |BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation| Section 3.1.3 |
                +------+---------------------------+---------------+

                   Table 1:The new Prefix Attribute TLVs

3.1.1.  The BIER information TLV

   A new Prefix Attribute TLV (defined in [RFC7752] is defined for
   distributing BIER informations.  The new TLV is called the BIER
   information TLV.  The BIER information TLV may appear multiple times.

   The following BIER information TLV is defined:

      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type             |             Length            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | sub-domain-id |     MT-ID     |              BFR-id           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    BAR        |    IPA        |            Reserved           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 2: The BIER information TLV

   Type: A 2-octet field with value TBD, see IANA Considerations
   section.

   Length: 2 octets.

   Subdomain-id: Unique value identifying the BIER sub-domain, 1 octet.

   MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID that identifies the topology that is
   associated with the BIER sub-domain.1 octet.

   BFR-id: A 2-octet field encoding the BFR-id, as documented in
   [RFC8279].  If the BFR-id is zero, it means, the advertising router

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   is not advertising any BIER-id.In some environment, BFR-id can be
   configured by NMS, The BFR-id should be sent to a controller.

   BAR: A 1-octet field encoding the BIER Algorithm, used to calculate
   underlay paths to reach BFERs.  Values are allocated from the "BIER
   Algorithms" registry which is defined in [RFC8401].

   IPA: A 1-octet field encoding the IGP Algorithm, used to either
   modify,enhance, or replace the calculation of underlay paths to reach
   BFERs as defined by the BAR value.  Values are from the IGP Algorithm
   registry.

   Reserved: MUST be 0 on transmission, ignored on reception.  May be
   used in future versions.

   If the MT-ID value is outside of the values specified in [RFC4915],
   the BIER Sub-TLV MUST be ignored.

3.1.2.  The BIER MPLS Encapsulation TLV

   The BIER MPLS Encapsulation TLV is used in order to advertise MPLS
   specific informations used for BIER.  It MAY appear multiple times.

   In some environment, each router allocates its labels, and advertises
   it to the controller.That solution is simpler as the controller does
   not need to deal with label allocation.  If the controller has to
   deal with Label allocation , there needs to be a (global) range
   carved out such there are no conflicts.  We can avoid all that by
   having the router allocate the BIER Label range and advertise it to
   the controller.

   The following the BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is defined:

        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |            Type               |                Length         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |      Max SI   |                      Label                    |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |BS Len |                          Reserved                     |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                 Figure 3: The BIER MPLS Encapsulation TLV

   Type: A 2-octet field with value TBD, see IANA Considerations
   section.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   Length: 2 octets.

   Max SI: A 1-octet field encoding the maximum Set Identifier(as
   defined in [RFC8279]), used in the encapsulation for this BIER
   subdomain for this BitString length.

   Label: A 3-octet field, where the 20 rightmost bits represent the
   first label in the label range.

   BS Len: A 4-bit field field encoding the Bitstring length as per
   [RFC8296].

   BS length in multiple BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV inside the same
   BIER Sub-TLV MUST NOT repeat, otherwise only the first BIER MPLS
   Encapsulation Sub-TLV with such BS length MUST be used and any
   subsequent BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLVs with the same BS length
   MUST be ignored.

3.1.3.  The BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation TLV

   The BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation TLV is used in order to advertise
   non-MPLS encapsulation(e.g. ethernet encapsulation ) capability and
   other associated parameters of the encapsulation.It MAY appear
   multiple times.

   The following the BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is defined:

      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type             |             Length            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Max SI    |                   BIFT-id                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |BS Len |                     Reserved                          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

               Figure 4: The BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation TLV

   Type:A 2-octet field with value TBD, see IANA Considerations section.

   Length: 2 octets.

   Max SI:A 1-octet field encoding the maximum Set Identifier(as defined
   in [RFC8279]), used in the encapsulation for this BIER subdomain for
   this BitString length.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   BIFT-id:A 3-octet field, where the 20 rightmost bits represent the
   first BIFT-id in the BIFT-id range.  The 4 leftmost bits MUST be
   ignored.

   The "BIFT-id range" is the set of 20-bit values beginning with the
   BIFT-id and ending with (BIFT-id + (Max SI)).  A unique BIFT-id range
   is allocated for each BitString length and sub-domain-id.  These
   BIFT-id's are used for BIER forwarding as described in [RFC8279])and
   [RFC8296].

   Local BitString Length (BS Len): A 4-bit field encoding the Bitstring
   length as per [RFC8296].

   Reserved:SHOULD be set to 0 on transmission and MUST be ignored on
   reception.

4.  Equivalent IS-IS BIER TLVs/Sub-TLVs

   This section illustrates the IS-IS BIER Extensions Sub-TLVs/Sub-Sub-
   TLVs mapped to the ones defined in this document.

   The following table illustrates for each BGP-LS TLV, and its
   equivalence in IS-IS.

   +--------------+----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
   | Descriptio   |     IS-IS TLV              |       Reference                          |
   | n            |     /Sub-TLV               |                                          |
   +--------------+----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
   | BIER         | BIER Info Sub-TLV          |          [RFC8401]                       |
   | information  |                            |                                          |
   |              |                            |                                          |
   | BIER MPLS    |BIER MPLS Encapsulation     |          [RFC8401]                       |
   | Encapsulation|Sub-Sub-TLV                 |                                          |
   |              |                            |                                          |
   | BIER non-MPLS| BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation| [I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions]  |
   | Encapsulation| Sub-Sub-TLV                |                                          |
   +--------------+----------------------------+------------------------------------------+

            Table 2:IS-IS BIER Extensions Sub-TLVs/Sub-Sub-TLVs

5.  Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFV3 BIER TLVs/Sub-TLVs

   This section illustrates the BIER Extensions TLVs/Sub-TLVs mapped to
   the ones defined in this document.

   The following table illustrates for each BGP-LS TLV, and its
   equivalence in OSPFv2/OSPFV3.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   +--------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | Descriptio   |   OSPFv2/OSPFV3 sub-TLV     |       Reference                         |
   | n            |   /Sub-Sub-TLV              |                                         |
   +--------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | BIER         |     BIER Sub-TLV            |[RFC8444] &                              |
   | information  |                             |[I-D. ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions        |
   |              |                             |                                         |
   | BIER MPLS    |BIER MPLS Encapsulation      |[RFC8444]&                               |
   | Encapsulation|Sub-TLV                      |[I-D. ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions        |
   |              |                             |                                         |
   | BIER non-MPLS| BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation |[I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions]  |
   | Encapsulation| Sub-TLV                     |                                         |
   +--------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+

                 Table 3: OSPFv2/OSPFV3 BIER TLVs/Sub-TLVs

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests assigning code-points from the registry for
   the new Prefix Attribute TLVs.

           +-------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------+
           |   TLV Code Point  |  Description                | Value defined   |
           +-------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------+
           |       TBD1        | BIER information            | this document   |
           +-------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------+
           |       TBD2        | BIER MPLS Encapsulation     | this document   |
           +-------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------+
           |       TBD3        | BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation | this document   |
           +-------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------+

                  Table 4: The new Prefix Attribute TLVs

7.  Security Considerations

   Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
   affect the BGP security model.  See the "Security
   Considerations"section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP
   security.Security considerations for acquiring and distributing BGP-
   LS informations are discussed in [RFC7752].

   The TLVs introduced in this document are used to propagate the Bit
   Index Explicit Replication (BIER) defined in [[RFC8401]], [[RFC8444]]
   , [[I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]] and
   [[I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions]] . These TLVs represent the

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   bier informations associated with the prefix.  It is assumed that the
   IGP instances originating these TLVs will support all the required
   security and authentication mechanisms in [[RFC8401]], [[RFC8444]]
   [[I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]] and
   [[I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions]] in order to prevent any
   security issues when propagating the TLVs into BGP-LS.  The
   advertisement of the link attribute informations defined in this
   document present no additional risk beyond that associated with the
   existing link attribute informations already supported in [RFC7752].

8.  Acknowledgements

   The authors thank Peter Psenak, Ketan Talaulikar, Zhaohui Zhang, Gyan
   Mishra and Benchong Xu and many others for their suggestions and
   comments.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative references

   [I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions]
              Dhanaraj, S., Yan, G., Wijnands, I., Psenak, P., Zhang,
              Z., and J. Xie, "LSR Extensions for BIER over Ethernet",
              draft-ietf-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions-02 (work in
              progress), December 2020.

   [I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]
              Psenak, P., Nainar, N. K., and I. Wijnands, "OSPFv3
              Extensions for BIER", draft-ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions-04
              (work in progress), May 2021.

   [RFC4655]  Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation
              Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655>.

   [RFC4915]  Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P.
              Pillay-Esnault, "Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in OSPF",
              RFC 4915, DOI 10.17487/RFC4915, June 2007,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4915>.

   [RFC7752]  Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
              S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
              Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

   [RFC8279]  Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A.,
              Przygienda, T., and S. Aldrin, "Multicast Using Bit Index
              Explicit Replication (BIER)", RFC 8279,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8279, November 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8279>.

   [RFC8296]  Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A.,
              Tantsura, J., Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation
              for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) in MPLS and Non-
              MPLS Networks", RFC 8296, DOI 10.17487/RFC8296, January
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8296>.

   [RFC8401]  Ginsberg, L., Ed., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., and Z.
              Zhang, "Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Support via
              IS-IS", RFC 8401, DOI 10.17487/RFC8401, June 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8401>.

   [RFC8444]  Psenak, P., Ed., Kumar, N., Wijnands, IJ., Dolganow, A.,
              Przygienda, T., Zhang, J., and S. Aldrin, "OSPFv2
              Extensions for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)",
              RFC 8444, DOI 10.17487/RFC8444, November 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8444>.

   [RFC8571]  Ginsberg, L., Ed., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and
              C. Filsfils, "BGP - Link State (BGP-LS) Advertisement of
              IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric Extensions",
              RFC 8571, DOI 10.17487/RFC8571, March 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8571>.

9.2.  Informative references

   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
              Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.

   [RFC5376]  Bitar, N., Zhang, R., and K. Kumaki, "Inter-AS
              Requirements for the Path Computation Element
              Communication Protocol (PCECP)", RFC 5376,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5376, November 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5376>.

   [RFC5440]  Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
              Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft         BGP-LS extensions for BIER            August 2021

Authors' Addresses

   Ran Chen
   ZTE Corporation
   No.50 Software Avenue,Yuhuatai District
   Nanjing, Jiangsu Province  210012
   China

   Phone: +86 025 88014636
   Email: chen.ran@zte.com.cn

   Zheng Zhang
   ZTE Corporation
   No.50 Software Avenue,Yuhuatai District
   Nanjing, Jiangsu Province  210012
   China

   Email: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn

   Vengada Prasad Govindan
   Cisco

   Email: venggovi@cisco.com

   IJsbrand Wijnands
   Cisco
   De Kleetlaan 6a
   Diegem 1831
   Belgium

   Email: ice@cisco.com

Chen, et al.            Expires February 5, 2022               [Page 11]