Segment Routing Policy Extension for Network Resource Partition
draft-ietf-spring-sr-policy-nrp-02
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (spring WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Shengnan Yue , Ran Chen , Jie Dong , Changwang Lin , Jiang Wenying | ||
| Last updated | 2026-07-06 | ||
| Replaces | draft-jiang-spring-sr-policy-nrp | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-spring-sr-policy-nrp-02
SPRING S. Yue
Internet-Draft China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track R. Chen
Expires: 7 January 2027 ZTE Corporation
J. Dong
Huawei Technologies
C. Lin
New H3C Technologies
W. Jiang
China Mobile
6 July 2026
Segment Routing Policy Extension for Network Resource Partition
draft-ietf-spring-sr-policy-nrp-02
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) Policy is a set of candidate paths, each
consisting of one or more segment lists and the associated
information. A Network Resource Partition (NRP), is a subset of the
resources and associated policies in the underlay network. In SR
networks with multiple NRPs, an SR Policy can be associated with a
particular NRP. In that case, SR Policy can be used for steering and
forwarding traffic which is mapped to the NRP, so that the packets
can be processed with the subset of network resources and policy of
the NRP for guaranteed performance. Thus the association between SR
Policy and NRP needs to be specified.
This document defines extensions to the SR Policy Architecture to
allow the association of the SR Policy candidate paths with NRPs.
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 7 January 2027.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. SR Policy Extension for NRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. NRP ID of a Candidate Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Candidate Path Validity Verification . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Steering into an SR Policy with NRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
A Segment Routing Policy (SR Policy) [RFC9256] is a set of candidate
paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists and the
associated information. The headend node is said to steer a flow
into an SR Policy. The packets steered into an SR Policy have an
ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy written into
them. [RFC8660] describes the representation and processing of this
ordered list of segments as an MPLS label stack for SR-MPLS, while
[RFC8754] and [RFC8986] describe the same for Segment Routing over
IPv6 (SRv6) with the use of the Segment Routing Header (SRH).
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
[RFC9543] provides the definition of IETF network slice for use
within the IETF and discusses the general framework for requesting
and operating IETF Network Slices, their characteristics, and the
necessary system components and interfaces. It also introduces the
concept Network Resource Partition (NRP), which is a subset of the
resources and associated policies in the underlay network.
In SR networks, an NRP can be realized using NRP-specific resource-
aware segments as defined in
[I-D.ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments]. With this approach, for
each NRP, a separate set of resource-aware SIDs need to be assigned,
thus the amount of SR SIDs would be proportional to the number of
NRPs.
As described in [I-D.ietf-teas-nrp-scalability], one scalable data
plane approach to support network slicing is to carry a dedicated NRP
Selector ID in the data packet to identify the NRP the packet belongs
to, so that the packet can be processed and forwarded using the
subset of network resources allocated to the NRP.
In SR networks with multiple NRPs, an SR Policy can be associated
with a particular NRP. In that case, SR Policy can be used for
steering and forwarding traffic which is mapped to the NRP, so that
the packets can be processed with the subset of network resources and
policy of the NRP for guaranteed performance. Thus the association
between SR Policy and NRP needs to be specified.
This document defines extensions to the SR Policy Architecture for
associating SR Policy with NRP.
1.1. 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.
1.2. Terminology
The following terminology is used in this document:
Network Resource Partition (NRP): refer to the definition in
[RFC9543].
NRP Identifier (NRP ID): refer to the definition in
[I-D.ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls].
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
NRP Selector ID: refer to the definition in
[I-D.ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls].
2. Use Case
----------------------------------------
( |PE|.............|PE|.............|PE| )
( -- SR Policy-1 -- SR Policy-1 -- )<---------+
---------------------------------------- |
SR Policy-1 with NRP 1 |
|
---------------------------------------- |
( |PE|..............................|PE| ) |
( -- SR Policy-2 -- )<-------+
---------------------------------------- |
SR Policy-2 with NRP 2 |
|
---------------------------------------------- |
( |PE|.....-.....|PE|...... |PE|.......|PE| ) |
( -- |P| -- :-...:-- -..:-- ) |
( : -:.............|P|.........|P| )--+
( -......................:-:..- - )
( |P|.........................|P|......: )
( - - )
----------------------------------------------
Underlay Network
Figure 1
In each NRP for network slices, the connectivity among PEs is
achieved by SR Policies. The segment lists of these SR Policies
composed with segments associated with the dedicated data plane NRP
Selector ID. Traffics are steered into the SR Policies, so that the
resources allocated to the corresponding NRPs will be used for
forwarding.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
Physical Interface 1
+---------------------------------------+
| |
| Layer-3 Sub-interface 1-1: 1Gbps |
|=======================================|
|>>>>>> Queue 1-1: NRP-1, 100Mbps >>>>>>|
|>>>>>> Queue 1-2: NRP-2, 200Mbps >>>>>>|
|>>>>>> ... >>>>>>|
|=======================================|
| |
| Layer-3 Sub-interface 1-2: 2Gbps |
|====================================== |
|>>>>>> Queue 1-1: NRP-1, 100Mbps >>>>>>|
|>>>>>> Queue 1-2: NRP-2, 200Mbps >>>>>>|
|>>>>>> ... >>>>>>|
|=======================================|
| |
+---------------------------------------+
Underlay Network
Figure 2
As shown in the example in Figure 2, the bandwidth resource of a
physical interface is partitioned in two NRPs.
The NRPs are sliced by HQoS queues with dedicated bandwidth under the
layer-3 sub-interface. NRP needs to be identified by using an extra
dimension. On both MPLS-SR and SRv6 data plane, there are several
options for realizing NRP Selector ID, such as
[I-D.ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id],
[I-D.cheng-spring-srv6-encoding-network-sliceid],
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector] and
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-psd-nrp-selector]. As mentioned above, the
traffics of network slice are forwarded according to the segment list
of SR Policy. Firstly, the outgoing interface associated segment
will be the layer-3 sub-interface. Then, the HQoS queue will be
selected according to the NRP Selector ID carried in the packets, and
the bandwidth resource of NRP will be used.
3. SR Policy Extension for NRP
As defined in [RFC9256], an SR Policy is associated with one or more
candidate paths. A candidate path is the unit for signaling of an SR
Policy to a headend via protocol extensions like the Path Computation
Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) [RFC8664]
[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp] or BGP SR Policy [RFC9830].
A candidate path consists of one or multiple segment lists. The
segment lists are used for load balancing purpose. When an SR Policy
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
is associated with an NRP, the SR Policy is instantiated using
candidate paths which are built within a particular NRP. Hence the
association between SR Policy and NRP is specified at the candidate
path level. All the segment lists of the candidate path are
associated with the same NRP and share the set of resources of the
NRP.
The candidate paths of an SR Policy determine the path that packets
will traverse, while NRP reserves resources along the candidate path
designated by the SR Policy. Through the integration of SR Policy
and NRP, it ensures both the forwarding path and resource reservation
along the candidate path.
3.1. NRP ID of a Candidate Path
The NRP ID of a candidate path is utilized to identify the resources
corresponding to the forwarding paths of all segment lists within an
SR Policy. It is a 32-bit value serving as an identifier for the
Network Resource Partition. The NRP ID associated with a candidate
path of an SR Policy from a specific Protocol-Origin as specified
below:
* When provisioning is via configuration, it is specific to the
implementation's configuration model.
* When signaling is via PCEP, the method to uniquely signal an
individual candidate path along with its NRP ID is described in
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-nrp].
* When signaling is via BGP SR Policy, the method to uniquely signal
an individual candidate path along with its NRP ID is described in
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp]. The state of candidate paths
associated with NRP can be collected via BGP-LS
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp].
Under the same Candidate Path, all segment lists must share the same
NRP ID. While the proposed mechanism allows for different candidate
paths within a single SR Policy to be associated with different NRPs,
in typical network scenarios, it is expected that the association
between an SR Policy and an NRP remains consistent. In such cases,
all candidate paths of a single SR Policy SHOULD be associated with
the same NRP ID.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
By associating NRP IDs with Candidate Paths, the assurance of both
the SR Policy's path and its resources is achieved. For specific
data plane, the NRP ID is linked to the data plane NRP Selector ID
carried in the packets, which is used by network nodes to identify
the NRP and the set of network resources allocated for processing the
received packets. The process involves the following steps:
* Planning the network topology resources and assigning NRP Selector
IDs.
* At the headend node, performing path arrangement. During the path
planning process of the SR Policy, resources are considered for
different candidate paths, and NRP Selector IDs are configured
under each Candidate path to establish the association between the
path and resources.
3.2. Candidate Path Validity Verification
A candidate path is considered usable when it is valid, with the
validation rules outlined in Section 5 of [RFC9256], augmented by the
validation procedures described in this document.
When a Candidate Path contains an NRP ID, a segment list of a
candidate path may be declared invalid if the set of network
resources corresponding to the NRP ID on the segment list path do not
exist. The successful reservation of NRP resources along the entire
path can be verified through OAM (Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance) detection mechanisms. Additionally, if the head-end is
unable to perform path resolution for the first SID into one or more
outgoing interfaces and next-hops, along with the corresponding NRP
resources, the status of that segment list is set to invalid.
When running fast detection protocols, such as Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection (BFD), the headend may compute and validate
backup candidate paths and provision them into the forwarding plane
as a backup for the active path. In such cases, it is necessary to
include the NRP Selector ID encapsulation in the detection packets
along the backup paths, ensuring the availability of both the path
and resources.
NRP ID is used in candiate path validation, while it does not
participate in candidate path selection.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
3.3. Summary
For an SR Policy associated with an NRP, each of its candidate paths
must be associated with an NRP. The NRP ID of each candidate path
can be the same or different. All segment lists of the candidate
path are associated with the same NRP and share the set of resources
allocated to that NRP.
In summary, the information model is the following:
SR Policy POL1
Candidate Path CP1
Preference 200
NRP ID 100
Segment List 1 <SID11...SID1i>, Weight 1
Segment List 2 <SID21...SID2j>, Weight 1
Segment List 3 <SID31...SID3k>, Weight 1
Candidate Path CP2
Preference 100
NRP ID 100
Segment List 4 <SID41...SID4i>, Weight 1
Segment List 5 <SID51...SID5j>, Weight 1
Segment List 6 <SID61...SID6k>, Weight 1
SR Policy POL1 has two Candidate Paths, CP1 and CP2. CP1 is the
active candidate path (valid and with the highest Preference). NRP
ID 100 is configured under CP1 and CP2. The NRP ID 100 is mapped to
the data plane NRP Selector IDs (e.g. 100). The three segment lists
of CP1 with NRP Selector ID 100 are installed as the forwarding
instantiation of SR Policy POL1. NRP Selector ID 100 needs to be
configured and the resources reserved on network nodes along the
paths traversed by segment list 1, segment list 2, and segment list
3. When traffic is steered on POL1 and flow-based hashed on segment
list [SID11...SID1i], NRP Selector ID 100 is added into the data
packet, and forwarding is based on the resources pointed to by the
NRP Selecor ID.
4. Steering into an SR Policy with NRP
The method of traffic steering aligns with the description in
Section 8 of [RFC9256]. If the SR Policy candidate path selected as
the best candidate path is associated with an NRP, the headend node
of the SR Policy MUST encapsulate both the segment list and the NRP
Selector ID of the associated NRP to the header of packets steered to
the SR Policy. The segment list is used to instruct the path the
packets need to traverse, and the NRP Selector ID is used by each
node along the path to identify the set of local network resources
allocated to the NRP for the processing of the packet. The handling
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
of NRP ID in SR Policy traffic steering applies to all the methods
described in Section 8 of [RFC9256].
5. Operational Considerations
Operators can choose to deploy network slices at varying scales. The
use of either NRP Selector ID [I-D.ietf-teas-nrp-scalability] or
resource-aware SR segments [I-D.ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments]
for specific service is based on operators' local policy.
Resource-aware segments require to introduce additional SR-MPLS SIDs
or SRv6 Locators/SIDs for different subsets of network resources.
This would increase the amount of SR SIDs to be managed, and would
also increase the amount of state to be maintained by network nodes.
Although with the SR paradigm, per-path state can be avoided in the
network, operators need to be aware of the additional cost of
introducing resource-aware segments, and provide careful planning of
the resource groups, so that the resource-aware segments can meet the
service requirements without introducing unacceptable complexity to
network operation and management.
As the number of required network slice services increases, more NRPs
may be needed, and when data plane scalability is a primary concern,
a dedicated NRP Selector ID can be introduced in the data packet to
decouple the resource-specific identifiers from the topology and
path-specific identifiers in the data plane, thereby reducing the
number of IP addresses or SR SIDs needed to support a large number of
NRPs.
6. Security Considerations
By default, SR operates within a trusted domain. The security
considerations described in [RFC8402] and [RFC9256] apply to this
document.
The NRP to which an SR Policy is associated with is critical for
network resource isolation. Misconfiguration or error in setting the
NRP ID of an SR Policy can result in the forwarding of packets in an
undesired NRP, which may lead to the compromise in network resource
isolation.
When the NRP related information is advertised via the control plane
(e.g., in BGP, BGP-LS, or PCEP), it is important to make sure the NRP
information is not exposed to unwanted entities, otherwise it could
lead to attacks that compromise network resource isolation and may
impact the performance of services carried using the SR Policy
associated with the NRP.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
7. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
8. Contributors
The following people have contributed to this document:
Ran Pang
China Unicom
Beijing
China
Email: pangran@chinaunicom.cn
Ka Zhang
Huawei Technologies
Beijing
China
Email: zhangka@huawei.com
Wei Gao
CAICT
Beijing
China
Email: gaowei@caict.ac.cn
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
[RFC8660] Bashandy, A., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing with the MPLS Data Plane", RFC 8660,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8660, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8660>.
[RFC8664] Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,
and J. Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8664,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8664, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8664>.
[RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J.,
Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header
(SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>.
[RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer,
D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6
(SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>.
[RFC9256] Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Ed., Voyer, D., Bogdanov,
A., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture",
RFC 9256, DOI 10.17487/RFC9256, July 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9256>.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.cheng-spring-srv6-encoding-network-sliceid]
Cheng, W., Ma, P., Ren, F., Lin, C., Gong, L., Zadok, S.,
Wu, M., and X. wang, "Encoding Network Slice
Identification for SRv6", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-cheng-spring-srv6-encoding-network-sliceid-
13, 2 July 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-cheng-spring-srv6-encoding-network-sliceid-13>.
[I-D.ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id]
Dong, J., Li, Z., Xie, C., Ma, C., and G. S. Mishra,
"Carrying Network Resource (NR) related Information in
IPv6 Extension Headers", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-16, 10 June 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-
enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-16>.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp]
Chen, R., Dong, J., Zhao, D., Gong, L., Zhu, Y., and R.
Pang, "SR Policies Extensions for Network Resource
Partition in BGP-LS", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-02, 3 September 2025,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-
ls-sr-policy-nrp-02>.
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp]
Dong, J., Hu, Z., and R. Pang, "BGP SR Policy Extensions
for Network Resource Partition", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp-12, 6 July
2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
idr-sr-policy-nrp-12>.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]
Li, T., Beeram, V. P., Drake, J., Saad, T., and I. Meilik,
"MPLS Network Actions for Network Resource Partition
Selector", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
mpls-mna-nrp-selector-07, 11 June 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-nrp-selector-07>.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-psd-nrp-selector]
Li, Z. and J. Dong, "Carrying NRP related Information in
MPLS Packets", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-mpls-mna-psd-nrp-selector-01, 2 March 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-psd-nrp-selector-01>.
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-nrp]
Dong, J., Zhang, L., Xiong, Q., Peng, S., Han, L., Wang,
M., Beeram, V. P., Saad, T., and S. Fang, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Network Resource Partition (NRP)", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pce-pcep-nrp-01, 6
July 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
ietf-pce-pcep-nrp-01>.
[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp]
Koldychev, M., Sivabalan, S., Sidor, S., Barth, C., Peng,
S., and H. Bidgoli, "Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment
Routing (SR) Policy Candidate Paths", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-
27, 4 April 2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-27>.
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
[I-D.ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments]
Dong, J., Miyasaka, T., Zhu, Y., Qin, F., and Z. Li,
"Introducing Resource Awareness to SR Segments", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-spring-resource-
aware-segments-18, 14 May 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-
resource-aware-segments-18>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-nrp-scalability]
Dong, J., Li, Z., Gong, L., Yang, G., and G. S. Mishra,
"Scalability Considerations for Network Resource
Partition", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
teas-nrp-scalability-09, 11 February 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-
nrp-scalability-09>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls]
Saad, T., Beeram, V. P., Dong, J., Halpern, J. M., and S.
Peng, "Realizing Network Slices in IP/MPLS Networks", Work
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls-
08, 24 June 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls-08>.
[RFC9543] Farrel, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Rokui, R., Homma, S.,
Makhijani, K., Contreras, L., and J. Tantsura, "A
Framework for Network Slices in Networks Built from IETF
Technologies", RFC 9543, DOI 10.17487/RFC9543, March 2024,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9543>.
[RFC9830] Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Ed., Mattes,
P., and D. Jain, "Advertising Segment Routing Policies in
BGP", RFC 9830, DOI 10.17487/RFC9830, September 2025,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9830>.
Authors' Addresses
Shengnan Yue
China Mobile
China
Email: yueshengnan@chinamobile.com
Ran Chen
ZTE Corporation
China
Email: chen.ran@zte.com.cn
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft SR Policy Extension for NRP July 2026
Jie Dong
Huawei Technologies
Beijing
China
Email: jie.dong@huawei.com
Changwang Lin
New H3C Technologies
Beijing
China
Email: linchangwang.04414@h3c.com
Wenying Jiang
China Mobile
Beijing
China
Email: jiangwenying@chinamobile.com
Yue, et al. Expires 7 January 2027 [Page 14]