Skip to main content

IS-IS Extensions to Support Routing over IPv6 Dataplane
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 9352.
Authors Peter Psenak , Clarence Filsfils , Ahmed Bashandy , Bruno Decraene , Zhibo Hu
Last updated 2019-05-31
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Formats
Reviews
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state Became RFC 9352 (Proposed Standard)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-00
Networking Working Group                                  P. Psenak, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                               C. Filsfils
Intended status: Standards Track                           Cisco Systems
Expires: December 2, 2019                                    A. Bashandy
                                                                  Arrcus
                                                             B. Decraene
                                                                  Orange
                                                                   Z. Hu
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                            May 31, 2019

        IS-IS Extensions to Support Routing over IPv6 Dataplane
               draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-00.txt

Abstract

   Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
   paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called
   "segments".  Segment routing architecture can be implemented over an
   MPLS data plane as well as an IPv6 data plane.  This draft describes
   the IS-IS extensions required to support Segment Routing over an IPv6
   data plane.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

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/.

   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 December 2, 2019.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Advertising Supported Algorithms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Advertising Maximum SRv6 SID Depths . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Maximum Segments Left MSD Type  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Maximum End Pop MSD Type  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.3.  Maximum T.Insert MSD Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.4.  Maximum T.Encaps MSD Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.5.  Maximum End D MSD Type  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  SRv6 SIDs and Reachability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Advertising Locators and End SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.1.  SRv6 Locator TLV Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.2.  SRv6 End SID sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Advertising SRv6 End.X SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.1.  SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.2.  SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  Advertising Endpoint Behaviors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.1.  SRv6 Locator TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       9.1.1.  SRv6 End SID sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       9.1.2.  Revised sub-TLV table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.2.  SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.3.  SRv6 End.X SID and SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLVs  . . . . .  17
     9.4.  MSD Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   11. Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

1.  Introduction

   With Segment Routing (SR) [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing], a node
   steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called
   segments.

   Segments are identified through Segment Identifiers (SIDs).

   Segment Routing can be directly instantiated on the IPv6 data plane
   through the use of the Segment Routing Header defined in
   [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].  SRv6 refers to this SR
   instantiation on the IPv6 dataplane.

   The network programming paradigm
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] is central to SRv6.
   It describes how any function can be bound to a SID and how any
   network program can be expressed as a combination of SID's.

   This document specifies IS-IS extensions that allow the IS-IS
   protocol to encode some of these functions.

   Familiarity with the network programming paradigm
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] is necessary to
   understand the extensions specified in this document.

   This document defines one new top level IS-IS TLV and several new IS-
   IS sub-TLVs.

   The SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV announces the ability to support SRv6
   and some Endpoint functions listed in Section 7 as well as
   advertising limitations when applying such Endpoint functions.

   The SRv6 Locator top level TLV announces SRv6 locators - a form of
   summary address for the set of topology/algorithm specific SIDs
   associated with a node.

   The SRv6 End SID sub-TLV, the SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV, and the SRv6
   LAN End.X SID sub-TLV are used to advertise which SIDs are
   instantiated at a node and what Endpoint function is bound to each
   instantiated SID.

2.  SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV

   A node indicates that it has support for SRv6 by advertising a new
   SRv6- capabilities sub-TLV of the router capabilities TLV [RFC7981].

   The SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV may contain optional sub-sub-TLVs.  No
   sub-sub-TLVs are currently defined.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   The SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV has the following format:

      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    |            Flags              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   optional sub-sub-TLVs...

        Type: Suggested value 25, to be assigned by IANA

        Length: 2 + length of sub-sub-TLVs

        Flags: 2 octets  The following flags are defined:

         0                   1
          0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
         | |O|                           |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

         where:

           O-flag: If set, the router supports use of the O-bit
           in the Segment Routing Header(SRH) as defined in
           [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam].

3.  Advertising Supported Algorithms

   SRv6 capable router indicates supported algorithm(s) by advertising
   the SR Algorithm TLV as defined in
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

4.  Advertising Maximum SRv6 SID Depths

   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd] defines the means to advertise
   node/link specific values for Maximum SID Depths (MSD) of various
   types.  Node MSDs are advertised in a sub-TLV of the Router
   Capabilities TLV [RFC7981].  Link MSDs are advertised in a sub-TLV of
   TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223.

   This document defines the relevant SRv6 MSDs and requests MSD type
   assignments in the MSD Types registry created by
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd].

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

4.1.  Maximum Segments Left MSD Type

   The Maximum Segments Left MSD Type specifies the maximum value of the
   "SL" field [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] in the SRH of a
   received packet before applying the Endpoint function associated with
   a SID.

      SRH Max SL Type: 41 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA)

      If no value is advertised the supported value is assumed to be 0.

4.2.  Maximum End Pop MSD Type

   The Maximum End Pop MSD Type specifies the maximum number of SIDs in
   the top SRH in an SRH stack to which the router can apply "PSP" or
   USP" as defined in [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]
   flavors.

     SRH Max End Pop Type: 42 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA)

     If the advertised value is zero or no value is advertised
     then it is assumed that the router cannot apply PSP or USP flavors.

4.3.  Maximum T.Insert MSD Type

   The Maximum T.Insert MSD Type specifies the maximum number of SIDs
   that can be inserted as part of the "T.insert" behavior as defined in
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming].

    SRH Max T.insert Type: 43 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA)

    If the advertised value is zero or no value is advertised
    then the router is assumed not to support any variation
    of the "T.insert" behavior.

4.4.  Maximum T.Encaps MSD Type

   The Maximum T.Encaps MSD Type specifies the maximum number of SIDs
   that can be included as part of the "T.Encaps" behavior as defined in
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] .

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

    SRH Max T.encaps Type: 44 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA)

    If the advertised value is zero then the router can apply T.Encaps
    only by encapsulating the incoming packet in another
    IPv6 header without SRH the same way IPinIP encapsulation is
    performed.

    If the advertised value is non-zero then the router supports both
    IPinIP and SRH encapsulation subject to the SID limitation
    specified by the advertised value.

4.5.  Maximum End D MSD Type

   The Maximum End D MSD Type specifies the maximum number of SIDs in an
   SRH when performing decapsulation associated with "End.Dx" functions
   (e.g., "End.DX6" and "End.DT6") as defined in
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming].

      SRH Max End D Type: 45 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA)

      If the advertised value is zero or no value is advertised
      then it is assumed that the router cannot apply
      "End.DX6" or "End.DT6" functions if the extension
      header right underneath the outer IPv6 header is an SRH.

5.  SRv6 SIDs and Reachability

   As discussed in [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming], an
   SRv6 Segment Identifier (SID) is 128 bits and represented as

   LOC:FUNCT

   where LOC (the locator portion) is the L most significant bits and
   FUNCT is the 128-L least significant bits.  L is called the locator
   length and is flexible.  Each operator is free to use the locator
   length it chooses.

   A node is provisioned with topology/algorithm specific locators for
   each of the topology/algorithm pairs supported by that node.  Each
   locator is a covering prefix for all SIDs provisioned on that node
   which have the matching topology/algorithm.

   Locators MUST be advertised in the SRv6 Locator TLV (see
   Section 6.1).  Forwarding entries for the locators advertised in the
   SRv6 Locator TLV MUST be installed in the forwarding plane of
   receiving SRv6 capable routers when the associated topology/algorithm
   is supported by the receiving node.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   Locators are routable and MAY also be advertised in Prefix
   Reachability TLVs (236 or 237).

   Locators associated with algorithm 0 (for all supported topologies)
   SHOULD be advertised in a Prefix Reachability TLV (236 or 237) so
   that legacy routers (i.e., routers which do NOT support SRv6) will
   install a forwarding entry for algorithm 0 SRv6 traffic.

   In cases where a locator advertisement is received in both in a
   Prefix Reachability TLV and an SRv6 Locator TLV, the Prefix
   Reachability advertisement MUST be preferred when installing entries
   in the forwarding plane.  This is to prevent inconsistent forwarding
   entries on SRv6 capable/SRv6 incapable routers.

   SRv6 SIDs are advertised as sub-TLVs in the SRv6 Locator TLV except
   for SRv6 End.X SIDs/LAN End.X SIDs which are associated with a
   specific Neighbor/Link and are therefore advertised as sub-TLVs in
   TLVs 22, 23, 222, 223, and 141.

   SRv6 SIDs are not directly routable and MUST NOT be installed in the
   forwarding plane.  Reachability to SRv6 SIDs depends upon the
   existence of a covering locator.

   Adherence to the rules defined in this section will assure that SRv6
   SIDs associated with a supported topology/algorithm pair will be
   forwarded correctly, while SRv6 SIDs associated with an unsupported
   topology/algorithm pair will be dropped.  NOTE: The drop behavior
   depends on the absence of a default/summary route covering a given
   locator.

   In order for forwarding to work correctly, the locator associated
   with SRv6 SID advertisements MUST be the longest match prefix
   installed in the forwarding plane for those SIDs.  There are a number
   of ways in which this requirement could be compromised

   o  Another locator associated with a different topology/algorithm is
      the longest match

   o  A prefix advertisement (i.e., from TLV 236 or 237) is the longest
      match

6.  Advertising Locators and End SIDs

   The SRv6 Locator TLV is introduced to advertise SRv6 Locators and End
   SIDs associated with each locator.

   This new TLV shares the sub-TLV space defined for TLVs 135, 235, 236
   and 237.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

6.1.  SRv6 Locator TLV Format

   The SRv6 Locator TLV has the following format:

    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    |R|R|R|R|    MTID               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Followed by one or more locator entries of the form:

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          Metric                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Flags       |  Algorithm    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Loc Size     | Locator (variable)...
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Sub-tlv-len  |         Sub-TLVs (variable) . . .             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Type: 27 (Suggested value to be assigned by IANA)

     Length: variable.

     MTID: Multitopology Identifier as defined in [RFC5120].
     Note that the value 0 is legal.

     Locator entry:

     Metric: 4 octets. As described in [RFC5305].

     Flags: 1 octet. The following flags are defined

       0
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |D|A|  Reserved |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      where:
        D bit: When the Locator is leaked from level-2 to level-1, the D
        bit MUST be set.  Otherwise, this bit MUST be clear.  Locators
        with the D bit set MUST NOT be leaked from level-1 to level-2.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

        This is to prevent looping.

        A bit: When the Locator is configured as anycast, the A bit
        SHOULD be set. Otherwise, this bit MUST be clear.

        The remaining bits are reserved for future use. They SHOULD be
        set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.

     Algorithm: 1 octet. Associated algorithm. Algorithm values
      are defined in the IGP Algorithm Type registry.

     Loc-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits in the Locator field.
     (1 - 128)

     Locator: 1-16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6
     Locator. The Locator is encoded in the minimal number of
     octets for the given number of bits.

     Sub-TLV-length: 1 octet. Number of octets used by sub-TLVs

     Optional sub-TLVs.

6.2.  SRv6 End SID sub-TLV

   The SRv6 End SID sub-TLV is introduced to advertise SRv6 Segment
   Identifiers (SID) with Endpoint functions which do not require a
   particular neighbor in order to be correctly applied
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming].  SRv6 SIDs associated
   with a neighbor are advertised using the sub-TLVs defined in
   Section 6.

   This new sub-TLV is advertised in the SRv6 Locator TLV defined in the
   previous section.  SRv6 End SIDs inherit the topology/algorithm from
   the parent locator.

   The SRv6 End SID sub-TLV has the following format:

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

       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    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Flags      | SRv6 Endpoint Function        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (128 bits) . . .                                          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Sub-sub-tlv-len|         sub-sub-TLVs (variable) . . .         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Type: 5 (Suggested value to be assigned by IANA)

      Length: variable.

      Flags: 1 octet. No flags are currently defined.

      SRv6 Endpoint Function: 2 octets. As defined in
      [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]
      Legal function values for this sub-TLV are defined in Section 7.

      SID: 16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6 SID.

      Sub-sub-TLV-length: 1 octet. Number of octets used by sub-sub-TLVs

      Optional sub-sub-TLVs

   The SRv6 End SID MUST be a subnet of the associated Locator.  SRv6
   End SIDs which are NOT a subnet of the associated locator MUST be
   ignored.

   Multiple SRv6 End SIDs MAY be associated with the same locator.  In
   cases where the number of SRv6 End SID sub-TLVs exceeds the capacity
   of a single TLV, multiple Locator TLVs for the same locator MAY be
   advertised.  For a given MTID/Locator the algorithm MUST be the same
   in all TLVs.  If this restriction is not met all TLVs for that MTID/
   Locator MUST be ignored.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

7.  Advertising SRv6 End.X SIDs

   Certain SRv6 Endpoint functions
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] must be associated
   with a particular neighbor, and in case of multiple layer 3 links to
   the same neighbor, with a particular link in order to be correctly
   applied.

   This document defines two new sub-TLVs of TLV 22, 23, 222, 223, and
   141 - namely "SRv6 End.X SID" and "SRv6 LAN End.X SID".

   IS-IS Neighbor advertisements are topology specific - but not
   algorithm specific.  End.X SIDs therefore inherit the topology from
   the associated neighbor advertisement, but the algorithm is specified
   in the individual SID.

   All End.X SIDs MUST be a subnet of a Locator with matching topology
   and algorithm which is advertised by the same node in an SRv6 Locator
   TLV.  End.X SIDs which do not meet this requirement MUST be ignored.

7.1.  SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV

   This sub-TLV is used to advertise an SRv6 SID associated with a point
   to point adjacency.  Multiple SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLVs MAY be
   associated with the same adjacency.

   The SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV has the following format:

      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    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   Flags       |   Algorithm   |   Weight      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    SRv6 Endpoint Function     |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | SID (128 bits) . . .                                          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Sub-sub-tlv-len|         Sub-sub-TLVs (variable) . . .         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

       Type: 43 (Suggested value to be assigned by IANA)

       Length: variable.

       Flags: 1 octet.

           0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
          +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
          |B|S|P|Reserved |
          +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       where:

        B-Flag: Backup flag.  If set, the End.X SID is eligible
        for protection (e.g., using IPFRR) as described in [RFC8355].

        S-Flag.  Set flag.  When set, the S-Flag indicates that the
        End.X SID refers to a set of adjacencies (and therefore
        MAY be assigned to other adjacencies as well).

        P-Flag.  Persistent flag.  When set, the P-Flag indicates that
        the End.X SID is persistently allocated, i.e., the
        End.X SID value remains consistent across router restart
        and/or interface flap.

        Other bits: MUST be zero when originated and ignored when
        received.

       Algorithm: 1 octet. Associated algorithm. Algorithm values
       are defined in the IGP Algorithm Type registry.

       Weight: 1 octet.  The value represents the weight of the
       End.X SID for the purpose of load balancing.  The use
       of the weight is defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing].

       SRv6 Endpoint Function: 2 octets. As defined in
       [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]
       Legal function values for this sub-TLV are defined in Section 7.

       SID: 16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6 SID.

       Sub-sub-TLV-length: 1 octet. Number of octets used by sub-sub-
       TLVs

   Note that multiple TLVs for the same neighbor may be required in
   order to advertise all of the SRv6 End.X SIDs associated with that
   neighbor.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 12]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

7.2.  SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLV

   This sub-TLV is used to advertise an SRv6 SID associated with a LAN
   adjacency.  Since the parent TLV is advertising an adjacency to the
   Designated Intermediate System(DIS) for the LAN, it is necessary to
   include the System ID of the physical neighbor on the LAN with which
   the SRv6 SID is associated.  Given that a large number of neighbors
   may exist on a given LAN a large number of SRv6 LAN END.X SID sub-
   TLVs may be associated with the same LAN.  Note that multiple TLVs
   for the same DIS neighbor may be required in order to advertise all
   of the SRv6 End.X SIDs associated with that neighbor.

   The SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLV has the following format:

       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    |    System ID (6 octets)       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Flags       |   Algorithm   |   Weight      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    SRv6 Endpoint Function     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (128 bits) . . .                                          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | SID (cont . . .)                                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Sub-sub-tlv-len|      sub-sub-TLVs (variable) . . .            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

       Type: 44 (Suggested value to be assigned by IANA)
       Length: variable.

       System-ID: 6 octets of IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as
       defined in [ISO10589].

       Flags: 1 octet.

           0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
          +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
          |B|S|P|Reserved |
          +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 13]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

       where B,S, and P flags are as described in Section 6.1.
       Other bits: MUST be zero when originated and ignored when
       received.

       Algorithm: 1 octet. Associated algorithm. Algorithm values
       are defined in the IGP Algorithm Type registry.

       Weight: 1 octet.  The value represents the weight of the
       End.X SID for the purpose of load balancing.  The use
       of the weight is defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing].

       SRv6 Endpoint Function: 2 octets. As defined in
       [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]
       Legal function values for this sub-TLV are defined in Section 7.

       SID: 16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6 SID.

       Sub-sub-TLV-length: 1 octet. Number of octets used by sub-sub-
        TLVs.

8.  Advertising Endpoint Behaviors

   Endpoint behaviors are defined in
   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming] and
   [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam].  The numerical identifiers for the
   Endpoint behaviors are defined in the "SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors"
   registry defined in [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming].
   This section lists the Endpoint behaviors and their identifiers,
   which MAY be advertised by IS-IS and the SID sub-TLVs in which each
   type MAY appear.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 14]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   Endpoint              |Endpoint            |  End  | End.X | Lan End.X |
   Behavior              |Behavior Identifier |  SID  | SID   |   SID     |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End   (PSP, USP, USD) | 1-4, 28-31         |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.X (PSP, USP, USD) | 5-8, 32-35         |   N   |   Y   |    Y      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.T (PSP, USP, USD) | 9-12, 36-39        |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.DX6               | 16                 |   N   |   Y   |    Y      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.DX4               | 17                 |   N   |   Y   |    Y      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.DT6               | 18                 |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.DT4               | 19                 |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.DT64              | 20                 |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.OP                | 40                 |   Y   |   N   |    N      |
  -----------------------|--------------------|-------|-------|-----------|
   End.OTP               | 41                 |   Y   |   N   |    N      |

9.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests allocation for the following TLVs, sub- TLVs,
   and sub-sub-TLVs as well updating the ISIS TLV registry and defining
   a new registry.

9.1.  SRv6 Locator TLV

   This document adds one new TLV to the IS-IS TLV Codepoints registry.

   Value: 27 (suggested - to be assigned by IANA)

   Name: SRv6 Locator

   This TLV shares sub-TLV space with existing "Sub-TLVs for TLVs 135,
   235, 236 and 237 registry".  The name of this registry needs to be
   changed to "Sub-TLVs for TLVs 27, 135, 235, 236 and 237 registry".

9.1.1.  SRv6 End SID sub-TLV

   This document adds the following new sub-TLV to the (renamed) "Sub-
   TLVs for TLVs 27, 135, 235, 236 and 237 registry".

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 15]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   Value: 5 (suggested - to be assigned by IANA)

   Name: SRv6 End SID

   This document requests the creation of a new IANA managed registry
   for sub-sub-TLVs of the SRv6 End SID sub-TLV.  The registration
   procedure is "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC7370].  Suggested
   registry name is "sub-sub-TLVs for SRv6 End SID sub-TLV".  No sub-
   sub-TLVs are defined by this document except for the reserved value.

   0: Reserved

   1-255: Unassigned

9.1.2.  Revised sub-TLV table

   The revised table of sub-TLVs for the (renamed) "Sub-TLVs for TLVs
   27, 135, 235, 236 and 237 registry" is shown below:

      Type  27 135 235 236 237

      1     n   y   y   y   y
      2     n   y   y   y   y
      3     n   y   y   y   y
      4     y   y   y   y   y
      5     y   n   n   n   n
      11    y   y   y   y   y
      12    y   y   y   y   y

9.2.  SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV

   This document adds the definition of a new sub-TLV in the "Sub- TLVs
   for TLV 242 registry".

   Type: 25 (Suggested - to be assigned by IANA)

   Description: SRv6 Capabilities

   This document requests the creation of a new IANA managed registry
   for sub-sub-TLVs of the SRv6 Capability sub-TLV.  The registration
   procedure is "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC7370].  Suggested
   registry name is "sub-sub-TLVs for SRv6 Capability sub-TLV".  No sub-
   sub-TLVs are defined by this document except for the reserved value.

   0: Reserved

   1-255: Unassigned

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 16]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

9.3.  SRv6 End.X SID and SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLVs

   This document adds the definition of two new sub-TLVs in the "sub-
   TLVs for TLV 22, 23, 25, 141, 222 and 223 registry".

   Type: 43 (suggested - to be assigned by IANA)

   Description: SRv6 End.X SID

   Type: 44 (suggested - to be assigned by IANA)

   Description: SRv6 LAN End.X SID

      Type  22 23 25 141 222 223

      43     y  y  y  y   y   y
      44     y  y  y  y   y   y

9.4.  MSD Types

   This document defines the following new MSD types.  These types are
   to be defined in the IGP MSD Types registry defined in
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd] .

   All values are suggested values to be assigned by IANA.

   Type  Description
   ------------------
    41    SRH Max SL
    42    SRH Max End Pop
    43    SRH Max T.insert
    44    SRH Max T.encaps
    45    SRH Max End D

10.  Security Considerations

   Security concerns for IS-IS are addressed in [ISO10589], [RFC5304],
   and [RFC5310].

11.  Contributors

   The following people gave a substantial contribution to the content
   of this document and should be considered as co-authors:

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 17]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

     Stefano Previdi
     Huawei Technologies
     Email: stefano@previdi.net

     Paul Wells
     Cisco Systems
     Saint Paul,
     Minnesota
     United States
     Email: pauwells@cisco.com

     Daniel Voyer
     Email:  daniel.voyer@bell.ca

     Satoru Matsushima
     Email: satoru.matsushima@g.softbank.co.jp

     Bart Peirens
     Email: bart.peirens@proximus.com

     Hani Elmalky
     Email: hani.elmalky@ericsson.com

     Prem Jonnalagadda
     Email: prem@barefootnetworks.com

     Milad Sharif
     Email: msharif@barefootnetworks.com>

     Robert Hanzl
     Cisco Systems
     Millenium Plaza Building, V Celnici 10, Prague 1,
     Prague, Czech Republic
     Email rhanzl@cisco.com

     Ketan Talaulikar
     Cisco Systems, Inc.
     Email: ketant@cisco.com

12.  References

12.1.  Normative References

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 18]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam]
              Ali, Z., Filsfils, C., Kumar, N., Pignataro, C.,
              faiqbal@cisco.com, f., Gandhi, R., Leddy, J., Matsushima,
              S., Raszuk, R., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Dawra, G.,
              Peirens, B., Chen, M., and G. Naik, "Operations,
              Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in Segment Routing
              Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)", draft-ali-spring-
              srv6-oam-02 (work in progress), October 2018.

   [I-D.filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming]
              Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J.,
              daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6
              Network Programming", draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-network-
              programming-07 (work in progress), February 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
              Filsfils, C., Dukes, D., Previdi, S., Leddy, J.,
              Matsushima, S., and d. daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "IPv6 Segment
              Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-
              header-19 (work in progress), May 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]
              Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A.,
              Gredler, H., and B. Decraene, "IS-IS Extensions for
              Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-
              extensions-25 (work in progress), May 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd]
              Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg,
              "Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS", draft-
              ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-19 (work in progress),
              October 2018.

   [ISO10589]
              Standardization", I. ". O. F., "Intermediate system to
              Intermediate system intra-domain routeing information
              exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol
              for providing the connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO
              8473), ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition.", Nov 2002.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 19]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

   [RFC5120]  Przygienda, T., Shen, N., and N. Sheth, "M-ISIS: Multi
              Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to
              Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)", RFC 5120,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5120, February 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5120>.

   [RFC5304]  Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic
              Authentication", RFC 5304, DOI 10.17487/RFC5304, October
              2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5304>.

   [RFC5305]  Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
              Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
              2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.

   [RFC5310]  Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Li, T., Atkinson, R., White, R.,
              and M. Fanto, "IS-IS Generic Cryptographic
              Authentication", RFC 5310, DOI 10.17487/RFC5310, February
              2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5310>.

   [RFC7370]  Ginsberg, L., "Updates to the IS-IS TLV Codepoints
              Registry", RFC 7370, DOI 10.17487/RFC7370, September 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7370>.

   [RFC7981]  Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions
              for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7981>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

12.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
              Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B.,
              Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing
              Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-15 (work
              in progress), January 2018.

   [RFC8355]  Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Decraene, B., and R.
              Shakir, "Resiliency Use Cases in Source Packet Routing in
              Networking (SPRING) Networks", RFC 8355,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8355, March 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8355>.

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 20]
Internet-Draft     draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions          May 2019

Authors' Addresses

   Peter Psenak (editor)
   Cisco Systems
   Pribinova Street 10
   Bratislava 81109
   Slovakia

   Email: ppsenak@cisco.com

   Clarence Filsfils
   Cisco Systems
   Brussels
   Belgium

   Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com

   Ahmed Bashandy
   Arrcus

   Email: abashandy.ietf@gmail.com

   Bruno Decraene
   Orange
   Issy-les-Moulineaux
   France

   Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com

   Zhibo Hu
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: huzhibo@huawei.com

Psenak, et al.          Expires December 2, 2019               [Page 21]