%% You should probably cite draft-wu-pce-discovery-pceps-support-07 instead of this revision. @techreport{wu-pce-discovery-pceps-support-05, number = {draft-wu-pce-discovery-pceps-support-05}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-pce-discovery-pceps-support/05/}, author = {Diego Lopez and Qin Wu and Dhruv Dhody and Daniel King and Zitao Wang}, title = {{IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in the PCE discovery}}, pagetotal = 6, year = 2016, month = feb, day = 2, abstract = {When a Path Computation Element (PCE) is a Label Switching Router (LSR) participating in the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), or even a server participating in IGP, its presence and path computation capabilities can be advertised using IGP flooding. The IGP extensions for PCE discovery (RFC 5088 and RFC 5089) define a method to advertise path computation capabilities using IGP flooding for OSPF and IS-IS respectively. However these specifications lack a method to advertise PCEP security (e.g., Transport Layer Security(TLS),TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO)) support capability. This document proposes new capability flag bits for PCE-CAP-FLAGS sub- TLV that can be announced as attribute in the IGP advertisement to distribute PCEP security support information.}, }