Advertising SID Algorithm Information in BGP
draft-peng-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-attr-06
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (candidate for idr WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Yao Liu , Shaofu Peng | ||
| Last updated | 2023-09-26 | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | Call For Adoption By WG Issued | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-peng-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-attr-06
IDR Y. Liu
Internet-Draft S. Peng
Intended status: Experimental ZTE
Expires: 29 March 2024 26 September 2023
Advertising SID Algorithm Information in BGP
draft-peng-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-attr-06
Abstract
This document defines new Segment Types and proposes extensions for
BGP to provide algorithm information for SR-MPLS Adjacency-SIDs when
delivering SR Policy via BGP.
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 29 March 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 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.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. New Segment Types for SR-MPLS Adjacency with optional
Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Type L: IPv4 Address and Local Interface ID with optional
Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Type M: IPv4 Addresses for link endpoints as Local, Remote
pair with optional Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Type N: IPv6 Prefix and Interface ID for link endpoints as
Local, Remote pair, with optional Algorithm for SR-MPLS . 6
3.4. Type O: IPv6 Addresses for link endpoints as Local, Remote
pair, with optional Algorithm for SR-MPLS . . . . . . . . 8
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction
Segment Routing (SR) [RFC8402] allows a headend node to steer a
packet flow along any path. [RFC9256] details the concepts of SR
Policy and steering into an SR Policy. These apply equally to the
MPLS and IPv6 data plane instantiations of Segment Routing with their
respective representations of segments as SR-MPLS SID and SRv6 SID as
described in [RFC8402].
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] specifies the way to use BGP
to distribute one or more of the candidate paths of an SR Policy to
the headend of that policy. It defines a new BGP address family
(SAFI), i.e., SR Policy SAFI NLRI. In UPDATE messages of that
address family, the NLRI identifies an SR Policy Candidate Path, and
the attributes encode the segment lists and other details of that SR
Policy Candidate Path.
11 segment-descriptor types (from type A all the way to type K) for
SR segments are defined [RFC9256] section 4.
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] specifies the encoding for
segment types A and B in BGP SR Policy SAFI. And the encoding for
the remaining 9 types are specified in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext].
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
As specified in [RFC9256], the SR algorithm can be optionally
specified for Segment Types C(IPv4 Node and SID), D(IPv6 Node and SID
for SR-MPLS), I(IPv6 Node and SID for SRv6), J(IPv6 Node, index for
remote and local pair, and SID for SRv6), and K(IPv6 Local/Remote
addresses and SID for SRv6). That is, currently the algorithm can be
carried along with SR-MPLS prefix SID, SRv6 prefix SID and SRv6
adjacency SID when delivering SR Policy.
[I-D.ietf-lsr-algorithm-related-adjacency-sid] complements that,
besides the SR-MPLS prefix SID, the algorithm can be also included as
part of an SR-MPLS Adjacency-SID advertisement, in scenarios where
multiple algorithm share the same link resource. In this case, an
SR-MPLS Policy advertised to the headend may also contain algorithm
specific Adjacency-SID.
This document defines new Segment Types and proposes extensions for
BGP to provide algorithm information for SR-MPLS Adjacency-SIDs when
delivering SR Policy via BGP.
2. 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.
3. New Segment Types for SR-MPLS Adjacency with optional Algorithm
This section defines four new Segment types and the corresponding
Segment Sub-TLVs of Segment List Sub-TLV to provide algorithm
information for SR-MPLS Adjacency-SIDs.
The processing procedures for SID with algorithm specified in
[RFC9256] and [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] are still applicable
for the new segment types. When the algorithm is not specified for
the SID types above which optionally allow for it, the headend SHOULD
use the Strict Shortest Path algorithm if available; otherwise, it
SHOULD use the default Shortest Path algorithm.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
3.1. Type L: IPv4 Address and Local Interface ID with optional
Algorithm
This type allows for identification of an Adjacency SID or BGP Peer
Adjacency SID (as defined in [RFC8402]) SR-MPLS label for point-to-
point links including IP unnumbered links. The headend is required
to resolve the specified IPv4 Prefix Address to the node originating
it and then use the Local Interface ID to identify the point-to-point
link whose adjacency is being referred to. The Local Interface ID
link descriptor follows semantics as specified in [RFC5307]. This
type can also be used to indicate indirection into a layer 2
interface (i.e., without IP address) like a representation of an
optical transport path or a layer 2 Ethernet port or circuit at the
specified node. The SR Algorithm (refer to Section 3.1.1 of
[RFC8402]) MAY also be provided.
The encoding for Type L Segment Sub-TLV is as follows:
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 | SR Algorithm |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 Node Address (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SR-MPLS SID (optional, 4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:
Type: TBD1
SR Algorithm: 1 octet specifying SR Algorithm as described in
Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402]) when A-Flag as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] is present. SR Algorithm is used
by SRPM as described in Section 4 of [RFC9256]). When A-Flag is not
encoded, this field SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be
ignored on receipt.
Other fields have the same meaning as the Type E Segment Sub-TLV in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext], where:
Length: Specifies the length of the value field (i.e., not including
Type and Length fields) in terms of octets. The value MUST be 14
when the SR-MPLS SID is present else it MUST be 10.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
Flags: 1 octet of flags as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext].
Local Interface ID: 4 octets of interface index as defined in
[RFC8664].
IPv4 Node Address: a 4-octet IPv4 address representing a node.
SR-MPLS SID: optional, 4-octet field containing label, TC, S and TTL
as defined in Section 2.4.4.2.1 of
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]).
3.2. Type M: IPv4 Addresses for link endpoints as Local, Remote pair
with optional Algorithm
This type allows for identification of an Adjacency SID or BGP Peer
Adjacency SID (as defined in [RFC8402]) SR-MPLS label for links. The
headend is required to resolve the specified IPv4 Local Address to
the node originating it and then use the IPv4 Remote Address to
identify the link adjacency being referred to. The Local and Remote
Address pair link descriptors follow semantics as specified in
[RFC7752]. The SR Algorithm (refer to Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402])
MAY also be provided.
The format of Type M Segment Sub-TLV is as follows:
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 | SR Algorithm |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local IPv4 Address (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote IPv4 Address (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SR-MPLS SID (optional, 4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:
Type: TBD2
Length: Specifies the length of the value field (i.e., not including
Type and Length fields) in terms of octets. The value MUST be 14
when the SR-MPLS SID is present else it MUST be 10.
Flags: 1 octet of flags as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext].
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
SR Algorithm: 1 octet specifying SR Algorithm as described in
Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402]) when A-Flag as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] is present. SR Algorithm is used
by SRPM as described in Section 4 of [RFC9256]). When A-Flag is not
encoded, this field SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be
ignored on receipt.
Local IPv4 Address: a 4-octet IPv4 address representing the local
link address of the node.
Remote IPv4 Address: a 4-octet IPv4 address representing the link
address of the neighbor node.
SR-MPLS SID: optional, 4-octet field containing label, TC, S and TTL
as defined in Section 2.4.4.2.1 of
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]).
3.3. Type N: IPv6 Prefix and Interface ID for link endpoints as Local,
Remote pair, with optional Algorithm for SR-MPLS
This type allows for identification of an Adjacency SID or BGP Peer
Adjacency SID (as defined in [RFC8402]) label for links including
those with only Link-Local IPv6 addresses. The headend is required
to resolve the specified IPv6 Prefix Address to the node originating
it and then use the Local Interface ID to identify the point-to-point
link whose adjacency is being referred to. For other than point-to-
point links, additionally the specific adjacency over the link needs
to be resolved using the Remote Prefix and Interface ID. The Local
and Remote pair of Prefix and Interface ID link descriptor follows
semantics as specified in [RFC7752]. This type can also be used to
indicate indirection into a layer 2 interface (i.e., without IP
address) like a representation of an optical transport path or a
layer 2 Ethernet port or circuit at the specified node. The SR
Algorithm (refer to Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402]) MAY also be provided.
The format of Type N Segment Sub-TLV is as follows:
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
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 | SR Algorithm |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IPv6 Local Node Address (16 octets) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Interface ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IPv6 Remote Node Address (16 octets) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SR-MPLS SID (optional, 4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:
Type: TBD3
Length: Specifies the length of the value field (i.e., not including
Type and Length fields) in terms of octets. The value MUST be 14
when the SR-MPLS SID is present else it MUST be 10.
Flags: 1 octet of flags as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext].
SR Algorithm: 1 octet specifying SR Algorithm as described in
Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402]) when A-Flag as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] is present. SR Algorithm is used
by SRPM as described in Section 4 of [RFC9256]). When A-Flag is not
encoded, this field SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be
ignored on receipt.
Local Interface ID: 4 octets of interface index as defined in
[RFC8402].
IPv6 Local Node Address: a 16-octet IPv6 address representing the
node.
Remote Interface ID: 4 octets of interface index as defined in
[RFC8402]. The value MAY be set to zero when the local node address
and interface identifiers are sufficient to describe the link.
IPv6 Remote Node Address: a 16-octet IPv6 address. The value MAY be
set to zero when the local node address and interface identifiers are
sufficient to describe the link.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
SR-MPLS SID: optional, 4-octet field containing label, TC, S and TTL
as defined in Section 2.4.4.2.1 of
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]).
3.4. Type O: IPv6 Addresses for link endpoints as Local, Remote pair,
with optional Algorithm for SR-MPLS
This type allows for identification of an Adjacency SID or BGP Peer
Adjacency SID (as defined in [RFC8402]) label for links with Global
IPv6 addresses. The headend is required to resolve the specified
Local IPv6 Address to the node originating it and then use the Remote
IPv6 Address to identify the link adjacency being referred to. The
Local and Remote Address pair link descriptors follow semantics as
specified in [RFC7752]. The SR Algorithm (refer to Section 3.1.1 of
[RFC8402]) MAY also be provided.
TThe format of Type O Segment Sub-TLV is as follows:
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 | SR Algorithm |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// Local IPv6 Address (16 octets) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// Remote IPv6 Address (16 octets) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SR-MPLS SID (optional, 4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:
Type: TBD4
Other fields have the same meaning as the Type H Segment Sub-TLV
Section 2.4.4.2.8 of [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]),
where:
Length: Specifies the length of the value field (i.e., not including
Type and Length fields) in terms of octets. The value MUST be 14
when the SR-MPLS SID is present else it MUST be 10.
Flags: 1 octet of flags as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext].
SR Algorithm: 1 octet specifying SR Algorithm as described in
Section 3.1.1 of [RFC8402]) when A-Flag as defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] is present. SR Algorithm is used
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
by SRPM as described in Section 4 of [RFC9256]). When A-Flag is not
encoded, this field SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be
ignored on receipt.
Local IPv6 Address: a 16-octet IPv6 address representing the local
link address of the node.
Remote IPv6 Address: a 16-octet IPv6 address representing the link
address of the neighbor node.
SR-MPLS SID: optional, 4-octet field containing label, TC, S and TTL
as defined in Section 2.4.4.2.1 of
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]).
4. IANA Considerations
This document requests codepoint allocations for new Sub-TLVs of the
"Segment List sub-TLV" under the "BGP Tunnel Encapsulation".
Value Description Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TBD1 Segment Type L sub-TLV This document
TBD2 Segment Type M sub-TLV This document
TBD3 Segment Type N sub-TLV This document
TBD4 Segment Type O sub-TLV This document
5. Security Considerations
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the security considerations discussed in [RFC9256] and
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
6. Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Ketan Talaulikar for his comments and
suggestions.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext]
Talaulikar, K., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Mattes, P., and
D. Jain, "Segment Routing Segment Types Extensions for BGP
SR Policy", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext-00, 22 September 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-
sr-segtypes-ext-00>.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Mattes, P., and
D. Jain, "Advertising Segment Routing Policies in BGP",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-segment-
routing-te-policy-23, 25 July 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-
segment-routing-te-policy-23>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
7.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-lsr-algorithm-related-adjacency-sid]
Peng, S., Chen, R., Talaulikar, K., and P. Psenak,
"Algorithm Related IGP-Adjacency SID Advertisement", Work
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lsr-algorithm-
related-adjacency-sid-05, 25 May 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-
algorithm-related-adjacency-sid-05>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
[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>.
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft BGP SID Algo September 2023
[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>.
[RFC8665] Psenak, P., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Gredler,
H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8665,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8665, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8665>.
[RFC8666] Psenak, P., Ed. and S. Previdi, Ed., "OSPFv3 Extensions
for Segment Routing", RFC 8666, DOI 10.17487/RFC8666,
December 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8666>.
[RFC8667] Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Ed., Filsfils, C.,
Bashandy, A., Gredler, H., and B. Decraene, "IS-IS
Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8667,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8667, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8667>.
[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>.
Authors' Addresses
Yao Liu
ZTE
Nanjing
China
Email: liu.yao71@zte.com.cn
Shaofu Peng
ZTE
Nanjing
China
Email: peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn
Liu & Peng Expires 29 March 2024 [Page 11]