[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-gredler-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Inter-Domain Routing                                          S. Previdi
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track                      K. Talaulikar, Ed.
Expires: September 9, 2019                                   C. Filsfils
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                              H. Gredler
                                                            RtBrick Inc.
                                                                 M. Chen
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           March 8, 2019


             BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing
              draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-12

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".  These segments are advertised by routing protocols e.g.
   by the link state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3) within
   IGP topologies.

   This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in
   order to carry segment routing information via BGP.

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."



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 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.  BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Node Attributes TLVs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.1.  SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.2.  SR Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       2.1.3.  SR Algorithm TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       2.1.4.  SR Local Block TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.1.5.  SRMS Preference TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.2.  Link Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.1.  Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.2.  LAN Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       2.2.3.  L2 Bundle Member Attribute TLV  . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     2.3.  Prefix Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       2.3.1.  Prefix SID TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       2.3.2.  Prefix Attribute Flags TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       2.3.3.  Source Router Identifier (Source Router-ID) TLV . . .  18
       2.3.4.  Range TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     2.4.  Equivalent IS-IS Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs  . . . . .  21
     2.5.  Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs  .  21
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     3.1.  TLV/Sub-TLV Code Points Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   4.  Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   6.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


1.  Introduction

   Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
   paths by combining sub-paths called "segments".  A segment can
   represent any instruction, topological or service-based.  A segment
   can have a local semantic to an SR node or global within a domain.
   Within IGP topologies an SR path is encoded as a sequence of
   topological sub-paths, called "IGP segments".  These segments are
   advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2 and
   OSPFv3).

   [RFC8402] defines the Link-State IGP segments - Prefix, Node, Anycast
   and Adjacency segments.  Prefix segments, by default, represent an
   ECMP-aware shortest-path to a prefix, as per the state of the IGP
   topology.  Adjacency segments represent a hop over a specific
   adjacency between two nodes in the IGP.  A prefix segment is
   typically a multi-hop path while an adjacency segment, in most of the
   cases, is a one-hop path.  Node and Anycast Segments are variations
   of the Prefix Segment with their specific characteristics.

   When Segment Routing is enabled in an IGP domain, segments are
   advertised in the form of Segment Identifiers (SIDs).  The IGP link-
   state routing protocols have been extended to advertise SIDs and
   other SR-related information.  IGP extensions are described in: IS-IS
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions], OSPFv2
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and OSPFv3
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].  Using these
   extensions, Segment Routing can be enabled within an IGP domain.

   Segment Routing (SR) allows advertisement of single or multi-hop
   paths.  The flooding scope for the IGP extensions for Segment routing
   is IGP area-wide.  Consequently, the contents of a Link State
   Database (LSDB) or a Traffic Engineering Database (TED) has the scope
   of an IGP area and therefore, by using the IGP alone it is not enough
   to construct segments across multiple IGP Area or AS boundaries.

   In order to address the need for applications that require
   topological visibility across IGP areas, or even across Autonomous
   Systems (AS), the BGP-LS address-family/sub-address-family have been
   defined to allow BGP to carry Link-State information.  The BGP
   Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI) encoding format for
   BGP-LS and a new BGP Path Attribute called the BGP-LS attribute are
   defined in [RFC7752].  The identifying key of each Link-State object,
   namely a node, link, or prefix, is encoded in the NLRI and the
   properties of the object are encoded in the BGP-LS attribute.






Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


                           +------------+
                           |  Consumer  |
                           +------------+
                                 ^
                                 |
                                 v
                       +-------------------+
                       |    BGP Speaker    |         +-----------+
                       | (Route-Reflector) |         | Consumer  |
                       +-------------------+         +-----------+
                             ^   ^   ^                       ^
                             |   |   |                       |
             +---------------+   |   +-------------------+   |
             |                   |                       |   |
             v                   v                       v   v
       +-----------+       +-----------+             +-----------+
       |    BGP    |       |    BGP    |             |    BGP    |
       |  Speaker  |       |  Speaker  |    . . .    |  Speaker  |
       +-----------+       +-----------+             +-----------+
             ^                   ^                         ^
             |                   |                         |
            IGP                 IGP                       IGP

                   Figure 1: Link State info collection

   Figure 1 describes a typical deployment scenario.  In each IGP area,
   one or more nodes are configured with BGP-LS.  These BGP speakers
   form an IBGP mesh by connecting to one or more route-reflectors.
   This way, all BGP speakers (specifically the route-reflectors) obtain
   Link-State information from all IGP areas (and from other ASes from
   EBGP peers).  An external component connects to the route-reflector
   to obtain this information (perhaps moderated by a policy regarding
   what information is or isn't advertised to the external component) as
   described in [RFC7752].

   This document describes extensions to BGP-LS to advertise the SR
   information.  An external component (e.g., a controller) then can
   collect SR information from across an SR domain (as described in
   [RFC8402]) and construct the end-to-end path (with its associated
   SIDs) that need to be applied to an incoming packet to achieve the
   desired end-to-end forwarding.  The SR domain may be comprised of a
   single AS or multiple ASes.

2.  BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing

   This document defines SR extensions to BGP-LS and specifies the TLVs
   and sub-TLVs for advertising SR information within the BGP-LS




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   Attribute.  Section 2.4 and Section 2.5 lists the equivalent TLVs and
   sub-TLVs in IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 protocols.

   BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines the BGP-LS NLRI that can be a Node NLRI, a
   Link NLRI or a Prefix NLRI.  BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines the TLVs that
   map link-state information to BGP-LS NLRI within the BGP-LS
   Attribute.  This document adds additional BGP-LS Attribute TLVs in
   order to encode SR information.  It does not introduce any changes to
   the encoding of the BGP-LS NLRIs.

2.1.  Node Attributes TLVs

   The following Node Attribute TLVs are defined:

                +------+-----------------+---------------+
                | Type | Description     |       Section |
                +------+-----------------+---------------+
                | 1161 | SID/Label       | Section 2.1.1 |
                | 1034 | SR Capabilities | Section 2.1.2 |
                | 1035 | SR Algorithm    | Section 2.1.3 |
                | 1036 | SR Local Block  | Section 2.1.4 |
                | 1037 | SRMS Preference | Section 2.1.5 |
                +------+-----------------+---------------+

                       Table 1: Node Attribute TLVs

   These TLVs should only be added to the BGP-LS Attribute associated
   with the Node NLRI describing the IGP node that is originating the
   corresponding IGP TLV/sub-TLV described below.

2.1.1.  SID/Label Sub-TLV

   The SID/Label TLV is used as a sub-TLV by the SR Capabilities
   (Section 2.1.2) and Segment Routing Local Block (SRLB)
   (Section 2.1.4) TLVs and 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             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      SID/Label (variable)                     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                    Figure 2: SID/Label sub-TLV Format

   Where:



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


      Type: 1161

      Length: Either 3 or 4 depending whether the value is encoded as a
      label or an index/SID.

      SID/Label: If length is set to 3, then the 20 rightmost bits
      represent a label (the total TLV size is 7).  If length is set to
      4, then the value represents a 32 bit SID (the total TLV size is
      8).

2.1.2.  SR Capabilities TLV

   The SR Capabilities TLV is used in order to advertise the node's SR
   Capabilities including its Segment Routing Global Base (SRGB)
   range(s).  In the case of IS-IS, the capabilities also include the
   IPv4 and IPv6 support for the SR-MPLS forwarding plane.  This
   information is derived from the protocol specific advertisements.

   o  IS-IS, as defined by the SR Capabilities sub-TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

   o  OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the SID/Label Range TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The SR Capabilities 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    |   Reserved    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Range Size                   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                SID/Label sub-TLV (variable)                 //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                   Figure 3: SR Capabilities TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1034




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


      Length: Variable.  Minimum length is 12.

      Flags: 1 octet of flags as defined in
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] for IS-IS.  The flags
      are not currently defined for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 and SHOULD be set
      to 0 and MUST be ignored on receipt.

      Reserved: 1 octet that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      One or more entries, each of which have the following format:

         Range Size: 3 octet with a non-zero value indicating the number
         of labels in the range.

         SID/Label sub-TLV (as defined in Section 2.1.1) which encodes
         the first label in the range.  Since the SID/Label sub-TLV is
         used to indicate the first label of the SRGB range, only label
         encoding is valid under the SR Capabilities TLV.

2.1.3.  SR Algorithm TLV

   The SR Algorithm TLV is used in order to advertise the SR Algorithms
   supported by the node.  This information is derived from the protocol
   specific advertisements.

   o  IS-IS, as defined by the SR Algorithm sub-TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

   o  OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the SR Algorithm TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The SR Algorithm 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             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Algorithm 1  |  Algorithm... |  Algorithm N |                |
   +-                                                             -+
   |                                                               |
   +                                                               +


                     Figure 4: SR Algorithm TLV Format




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   Where:

      Type: 1035

      Length: Variable.  Minimum length is 1 and maximum can be 256.

      Algorithm: 1 octet identifying the algorithm.

2.1.4.  SR Local Block TLV

   The SR Local Block (SRLB) TLV contains the range(s) of labels the
   node has reserved for local SIDs.  Local SIDs are used, e.g., in IGP
   (IS-IS, OSPF) for Adjacency-SIDs, and may also be allocated by
   components other than IGP protocols.  As an example, an application
   or a controller may instruct a node to allocate a specific local SID.
   Therefore, in order for such applications or controllers to know the
   range of local SIDs available, it is required that the node
   advertises its SRLB.

   This information is derived from the protocol specific
   advertisements.

   o  IS-IS, as defined by the SR Local Block sub-TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

   o  OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the SR Local Block TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The SRLB 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    |   Reserved    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Range Size                   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                SID/Label sub-TLV (variable)                 //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                         Figure 5: SRLB TLV Format




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   Where:

      Type: 1036

      Length: Variable.  Minimum length is 12.

      Flags: 1 octet of flags.  None are defined at this stage.

      Reserved: 1 octet that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      One or more entries, each of which have the following format:

         Range Size: 3 octet value indicating the number of labels in
         the range.

         SID/Label sub-TLV (as defined in Section 2.1.1) which encodes
         the first label in the range.  Since the SID/Label sub-TLV is
         used to indicate the first label of the SRLB range, only label
         encoding is valid under the SR Local Block TLV.

2.1.5.  SRMS Preference TLV

   The Segment Routing Mapping Server (SRMS) Preference TLV is used in
   order to associate a preference with SRMS advertisements from a
   particular source.  [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop]
   specifies the SRMS functionality along with SRMS preference of the
   node advertising the SRMS Prefix-to-SID Mapping ranges.

   This information is derived from the protocol specific
   advertisements.

   o  IS-IS, as defined by the SRMS Preference sub-TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

   o  OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the SRMS Preference TLV in
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The SRMS Preference TLV has the following format:











Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 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             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Preference    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                   Figure 6: SRMS Preference TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1037

      Length: 1.

      Preference: 1 octet.  Unsigned 8 bit SRMS preference.

   The use of the SRMS Preference TLV is defined in
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

2.2.  Link Attribute TLVs

   The following Link Attribute TLVs are are defined:

             +------+-----------------------+---------------+
             | Type | Description           |       Section |
             +------+-----------------------+---------------+
             | 1099 | Adjacency SID TLV     | Section 2.2.1 |
             | 1100 | LAN Adjacency SID TLV | Section 2.2.2 |
             | 1172 | L2 Bundle Member TLV  | Section 2.2.3 |
             +------+-----------------------+---------------+

                       Table 2: Link Attribute TLVs

   These TLVs should only be added to the BGP-LS Attribute associated
   with the Link NLRI describing the link of the IGP node that is
   originating the corresponding IGP TLV/sub-TLV described below.

2.2.1.  Adjacency SID TLV

   The Adjacency SID TLV is used in order to advertise information
   related to an Adjacency SID.  This information is originated as in
   Adj-SID sub-TLV of IS-IS [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   OSPFv2 [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and OSPFv3
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The Adjacency SID 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         |     Weight    |             Reserved          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                   SID/Label/Index (variable)                  |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+


                    Figure 7: Adjacency SID TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1099

      Length: Variable, 7 or 8 depending on Label or Index encoding of
      the SID

      Flags. 1 octet value which sould be parsed as:

      *  IS-IS Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] section 2.2.1.

      *  OSPFv2 Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 6.1.

      *  OSPFv3 Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 7.1.

      Weight: Weight used for load-balancing purposes.

      Reserved: 2 octets that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      SID/Index/Label:

      *  IS-IS: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],

      *  OSPFv2: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


      *  OSPFv3: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions],

   The Flags and, as an extension, the SID/Index/Label fields of this
   TLV need to be interpreted accordingly to the respective underlying
   IS-IS, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 protocol.  The consumer of the BGP-LS
   interested in this TLV information MUST check the Protocol-ID of the
   BGP-LS Link NLRI and refer to the underlying protocol specification
   in order to parse these fields.

2.2.2.  LAN Adjacency SID TLV

   For a LAN, normally a node only announces its adjacency to the IS-IS
   pseudo-node (or the equivalent OSPF Designated and Backup Designated
   Routers).  The LAN Adjacency Segment TLV allows a node to announce
   adjacencies to all other nodes attached to the LAN in a single
   instance of the BGP-LS Link NLRI.  Without this TLV, the
   corresponding BGP-LS link NLRI would need to be originated for each
   additional adjacency in order to advertise the SR TLVs for these
   neighbor adjacencies.

   This information is originated as in LAN Adj-SID sub-TLV of IS-IS
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions], OSPFv2
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and OSPFv3
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The LAN Adjacency SID 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     |     Weight    |            Reserved           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |             OSPF Neighbor ID / IS-IS System-ID                |
   +                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    SID/Label/Index (variable)                 |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+


                  Figure 8: LAN Adjacency SID TLV Format



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   Where:

      Type: 1100

      Length: Variable.  For IS-IS it would be 13 or 14 depending on
      Label or Index encoding of the SID.  For OSPF it would be 11 or 12
      depending on Label or Index encoding of the SID.

      Flags. 1 octet value which sould be parsed as:

      *  IS-IS LAN Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] section 2.2.2.

      *  OSPFv2 LAN Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 6.2.

      *  OSPFv3 LAN Adj-SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 7.3.

      Weight: Weight used for load-balancing purposes.

      Reserved: 2 octets that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      Neighbor ID: 6 octets for IS-IS for the System-ID and 4 octets for
      OSPF for the OSPF Router-ID of the neighbor.

      SID/Index/Label:

      *  IS-IS: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],

      *  OSPFv2: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],

      *  OSPFv3: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions],

   The Neighbor ID, Flags and, as an extension, the SID/Index/Label
   fields of this TLV need to be interpreted accordingly to the
   respective underlying IS-IS, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 protocol.  The consumer
   of the BGP-LS interested in this TLV information MUST check the
   Protocol-ID of the BGP-LS Link NLRI and refer to the underlying
   protocol specification in order to parse these fields.







Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


2.2.3.  L2 Bundle Member Attribute TLV

   The L2 Bundle Member Attribute TLV identifies an L2 Bundle Member
   link which in turn is associated with a parent L3 link.  The L3 link
   is described by the Link NLRI defined in [RFC7752] and the L2 Bundle
   Member Attribute TLV is associated with the Link NLRI.  The TLV MAY
   include sub-TLVs which describe attributes associated with the bundle
   member.  The identified bundle member represents a unidirectional
   path from the originating router to the neighbor specified in the
   parent L3 Link.  Multiple L2 Bundle Member Attribute TLVs MAY be
   associated with a Link NLRI.

   This information is originated as in L2 Bundle Member Attributes TLV
   of IS-IS [I-D.ietf-isis-l2bundles].  The equivalent functionality has
   not been specified as yet for OSPF.

   The L2 Bundle Member Attribute 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               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                     L2 Bundle Member Descriptor               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                  Link attribute sub-TLVs(variable)          //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


             Figure 9: L2 Bundle Member Attributes TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1172

      Length: Variable.

      L2 Bundle Member Descriptor: A Link Local Identifier as defined in
      [RFC4202].

   Link attributes for L2 Bundle Member Links are advertised as sub-TLVs
   of the L2 Bundle Member Attribute TLV.  The sub-TLVs are identical to
   existing BGP-LS TLVs as identified in the table below.





Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   +-----------+----------------------------+--------------------------+
   |  TLV Code | Description                | Reference Document       |
   |   Point   |                            |                          |
   +-----------+----------------------------+--------------------------+
   |    1088   | Administrative group       | [RFC7752]                |
   |           | (color)                    |                          |
   |    1089   | Maximum link bandwidth     | [RFC7752]                |
   |    1090   | Max. reservable link       | [RFC7752]                |
   |           | bandwidth                  |                          |
   |    1091   | Unreserved bandwidth       | [RFC7752]                |
   |    1092   | TE default metric          | [RFC7752]                |
   |    1093   | Link protection type       | [RFC7752]                |
   |    1099   | Adjacency Segment          | Section 2.2.1            |
   |           | Identifier (Adj-SID) TLV   |                          |
   |    1100   | LAN Adjacency Segment      | Section 2.2.2            |
   |           | Identifier (Adj-SID) TLV   |                          |
   |    1114   | Unidirectional link delay  | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |    1115   | Min/Max Unidirectional     | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |           | link delay                 |                          |
   |    1116   | Unidirectional Delay       | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |           | Variation                  |                          |
   |    1117   | Unidirectional packet loss | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |    1118   | Unidirectional residual    | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |           | bandwidth                  |                          |
   |    1119   | Unidirectional available   | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |           | bandwidth                  |                          |
   |    1120   | Unidirectional bandwidth   | [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] |
   |           | utilization                |                          |
   +-----------+----------------------------+--------------------------+

     Table 3: BGP-LS Attribute TLVs also used as sub-TLVs of L2 Bundle
                           Member Attribute TLV

2.3.  Prefix Attribute TLVs

   The following Prefix Attribute TLVs are defined:

             +------+------------------------+---------------+
             | Type | Description            | Section       |
             +------+------------------------+---------------+
             | 1158 | Prefix SID             | Section 2.3.1 |
             | 1159 | Range                  | Section 2.3.4 |
             | 1170 | Prefix Attribute Flags | Section 2.3.2 |
             | 1171 | Source Router-ID       | Section 2.3.3 |
             +------+------------------------+---------------+

                      Table 4: Prefix Attribute TLVs




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   These TLVs should only be added to the BGP-LS Attribute associated
   with the Prefix NLRI describing the prefix of the IGP node that is
   originating the corresponding IGP TLV/sub-TLV described below.

2.3.1.  Prefix SID TLV

   The Prefix SID TLV is used in order to advertise information related
   to a Prefix SID.  This information is originated as in Prefix-SID
   sub-TLV of IS-IS [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions], OSPFv2
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and OSPFv3
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

   The Prefix SID 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   |           Reserved            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       SID/Index/Label (variable)              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                     Figure 10: Prefix SID TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1158

      Length: Variable, 7 or 8 depending on Label or Index encoding of
      the SID

      Flags: 1 octet value which sould be parsed as:

      *  IS-IS Prefix SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] section 2.1.

      *  OSPFv2 Prefix SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 5.

      *  OSPFv3 Prefix SID flags are defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 5.

      Algorithm: 1 octet value identify the algorithm.





Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


      Reserved: 2 octets that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      SID/Index/Label:

      *  IS-IS: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions],

      *  OSPFv2: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],

      *  OSPFv3: Label or index value as defined in
         [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions],

   The Flags and, as an extension, the SID/Index/Label fields of this
   TLV need to be interpreted accordingly to the respective underlying
   IS-IS, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 protocol.  The consumer of the BGP-LS
   interested in this TLV information MUST check the Protocol-ID of the
   BGP-LS Prefix NLRI and refer to the underlying protocol specification
   in order to parse these fields.

2.3.2.  Prefix Attribute Flags TLV

   The Prefix Attribute Flags TLV carries IPv4/IPv6 prefix attribute
   flags information.  These flags are defined for OSPFv2 in [RFC7684],
   for OSPFv3 in [RFC5340] and for IS-IS in [RFC7794].

   The Prefix Attribute Flags 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 (variable)                      //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


               Figure 11: Prefix Attribute Flags TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1170

      Length: variable.






Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


      Flags: a variable length flag field (according to the length
      field).  Flags are routing protocol specific and are to be parsed
      as below:

      *  IS-IS flags correspond to the IPv4/IPv6 Extended Reachability
         Attribute Flags defined in [RFC7794]

      *  OSPFv2 flags correspond to the Flags field of the OSPFv2
         Extended Prefix TLV defined in [RFC7684]

      *  OSPFv3 flags map to the Prefix Options field defined in
         [RFC5340] and extended via [RFC8362]

   The Flags field of this TLV need to be interpreted accordingly to the
   respective underlying IS-IS, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 protocol.  The consumer
   of the BGP-LS interested in this TLV information MUST check the
   Protocol-ID of the BGP-LS Prefix NLRI and refer to the underlying
   protocol specification in order to parse this field.

2.3.3.  Source Router Identifier (Source Router-ID) TLV

   The Source Router-ID TLV contains the IPv4 or IPv6 Router-ID of the
   originator of the Prefix.  For IS-IS protocol this is as defined in
   [RFC7794] IPv4 or IPv6 Router-ID of the originating router.  For OSPF
   protocol, this is as defined in [I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator]
   and is a 32 bit OSPF Router-ID of the originating router..

   The Source Router-ID 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             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                  4 or 6 octet Router-ID                     //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                  Figure 12: Source Router-ID TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1171

      Length: 4 or 16 in case of IS-IS and 4 in case of OSPF.

      Router-ID: the IPv4 or IPv6 Router-ID in case of IS-IS and the
      OSPF Router-ID in the case of OSPF.



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 18]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


2.3.4.  Range TLV

   The range TLV is used in order to advertise a range of prefix-to-SID
   mappings as part of the Segment Routing Mapping Server (SRMS)
   functionality [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop], as
   defined in the respective underlying IGP SR extensions
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] and
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

   A consumer of the BGP-LS information MUST NOT mis-interpret a Prefix
   NLRI, that been advertised with a Range TLV associated with it on
   account of an SRMS prefix-to-SID mapping in the underlying IGP, as a
   normal routing prefix (i.e. prefix reachability) unless there is also
   an IGP metric TLV (TLV 1095) attached to it.

   The format of the Range 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     | Reserved      |             Range Size        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                          sub-TLVs                           //
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                        Figure 13: Range TLV Format

   Where:

      Type: 1159

      Length: Variable, 11 or 12 depending on Label or Index encoding of
      the SID

      Flags: as defined in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] and
      [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions].

      Reserved: 1 octet that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
      receipt.

      Range Size: 2 octets as defined in
      [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions].




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 19]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   The Flags field of this TLV need to be interpreted accordingly to the
   respective underlying IS-IS, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 protocol.  The consumer
   of the BGP-LS interested in this TLV information MUST check the
   Protocol-ID of the BGP-LS Prefix NLRI and refer to the underlying
   protocol specification in order to parse this field.

   Within the Range TLV, the prefix-to-SID mappings are advertised using
   sub-TLVs as below:

   Range TLV
      Prefix-SID TLV (used as a sub-TLV in this context)

   Where:

   o  The Range TLV is defined in Section 2.3.4.

   o  The Prefix-SID TLV (used as sub-TLV in this context) is defined in
      Section 2.3.1.

   The following sub-sections describe the procedures for mapping of
   information from the underlying IGP protocols into the Range TLV.

2.3.4.1.  Advertisement Procedure for OSPF

   The OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV is encoded in the Range
   TLV.  The flags of the Range TLV have the semantic mapped to the
   definition in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 4 or
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] section 4.

   Then the prefix-to-SID mapping from the OSPF Prefix SID sub-TLV is
   encoded using the BGP-LS Prefix-SID TLV as defined in Section 2.3.1
   with the flags set according to the definition in
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] section 5 or
   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] section 5.

2.3.4.2.  Advertisement Procedure for IS-IS

   The IS-IS SID/Label Binding TLV, when used to signal mapping server
   label bindings, is encoded in the Range TLV.  The flags of the Range
   TLV have the sematic mapped to the definition in
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] section 2.4.1.

   Then the prefix-to-SID mappings from the IS-IS Prefix SID sub-TLV is
   encoded using the BGP-LS Prefix-SID TLV as defined in Section 2.3.1
   with the flags set according to the definition in
   [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] section 2.4.4.1.





Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 20]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


2.4.  Equivalent IS-IS Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs

   This section illustrate the IS-IS Segment Routing Extensions TLVs and
   sub-TLVs mapped to the ones defined in this document.

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

   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | Descriptio | IS-IS TLV  | Reference                               |
   | n          | /sub-TLV   |                                         |
   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | SR Capabil | 2          | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | ities      |            | extensions section-3.1                  |
   | SR         | 19         | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | Algorithm  |            | extensions section-3.2                  |
   | SR Local   | 22         | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | Block      |            | extensions section-3.3                  |
   | SRMS       | 19         | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | Preference |            | extensions section-3.2                  |
   | Adjacency  | 31         | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | SID        |            | extensions section-2.2.1                |
   | LAN        | 32         | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   | Adjacency  |            | extensions section-2.2.2                |
   | SID        |            |                                         |
   | Prefix SID | 3          | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-2.1                  |
   | Range      | 149        | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-2.4                  |
   | SID/Label  | 1          | draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-2.3                  |
   | Prefix     | 4          | RFC7794 section-2.1                     |
   | Attribute  |            |                                         |
   | Flags      |            |                                         |
   | Source     | 11/12      | RFC7794 section-2.2                     |
   | Router-ID  |            |                                         |
   | L2 Bundle  | 25         | draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles section-2     |
   | Member     |            |                                         |
   | Attributes |            |                                         |
   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+

          Table 5: IS-IS Segment Routing Extensions TLVs/Sub-TLVs

2.5.  Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs

   This section illustrate the OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 Segment Routing
   Extensions TLVs and sub-TLVs mapped to the ones defined in this
   document.



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 21]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   The following table, illustrates for each BGP-LS TLV, its equivalence
   in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.

   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | Descriptio | OSPFv2 TLV | Reference                               |
   | n          | /sub-TLV   |                                         |
   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | SR Capabil | 9          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | ities      |            | extensions section-3.2                  |
   | SR         | 8          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | Algorithm  |            | extensions section-3.1                  |
   | SR Local   | 14         | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | Block      |            | extensions section-3.3                  |
   | SRMS       | 15         | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | Preference |            | extensions section-3.4                  |
   | Adjacency  | 2          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | SID        |            | extensions section-6.1                  |
   | LAN        | 3          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   | Adjacency  |            | extensions section-6.2                  |
   | SID        |            |                                         |
   | Prefix SID | 2          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-5                    |
   | Range      | 2          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-4                    |
   | SID/Label  | 1          | draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-        |
   |            |            | extensions section-2.1                  |
   | Prefix     | 4          | RFC7684 section-2.1                     |
   | Attribute  |            |                                         |
   | Flags      |            |                                         |
   | Source     | TBD        | draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator   |
   | Router-ID  |            | section-4                               |
   +------------+------------+-----------------------------------------+

         Table 6: OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions TLVs/Sub-TLVs

















Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 22]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   +-----------+------------+------------------------------------------+
   | Descripti | OSPFv3 TLV | Reference                                |
   | on        | /sub-TLV   |                                          |
   +-----------+------------+------------------------------------------+
   | SR Capabi | 9          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | lities    |            | extensions section-3.2                   |
   | SR        | 8          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | Algorithm |            | extensions section-3.1                   |
   | SR Local  | 14         | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | Block     |            | extensions section-3.3                   |
   | SRMS Pref | 15         | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | erence    |            | extensions section-3.4                   |
   | Adjacency | 5          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | SID       |            | extensions section-6.1                   |
   | LAN       | 6          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | Adjacency |            | extensions section-6.2                   |
   | SID       |            |                                          |
   | Prefix    | 4          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   | SID       |            | extensions section-5                     |
   | Range     | 9          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   |           |            | extensions section-4                     |
   | SID/Label | 7          | draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-  |
   |           |            | extensions section-2.1                   |
   | Prefix    | 4          | RFC8362 section-3.1                      |
   | Attribute |            |                                          |
   | Flags     |            |                                          |
   | Source    | TBD        | draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator    |
   | Router-ID |            | section-4                                |
   +-----------+------------+------------------------------------------+

         Table 7: OSPFv3 Segment Routing Extensions TLVs/Sub-TLVs

3.  IANA Considerations

   Early allocation of codepoints has been done by IANA for this
   document from the registry "BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor,
   Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs" based on Table 8.  The column
   "IS-IS TLV/Sub-TLV" defined in the registry does not require any
   value and should be left empty.

3.1.  TLV/Sub-TLV Code Points Summary

   This section contains the global table of all TLVs/sub-TLVs defined
   in this document.







Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 23]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


     +----------------+-----------------------------+---------------+
     | TLV Code Point | Description                 |     Reference |
     +----------------+-----------------------------+---------------+
     |      1034      | SR Capabilities             | Section 2.1.2 |
     |      1035      | SR Algorithm                | Section 2.1.3 |
     |      1036      | SR Local Block              | Section 2.1.4 |
     |      1037      | SRMS Preference             | Section 2.1.5 |
     |      1099      | Adjacency SID               | Section 2.2.1 |
     |      1100      | LAN Adjacency SID           | Section 2.2.2 |
     |      1158      | Prefix SID                  | Section 2.3.1 |
     |      1159      | Range                       | Section 2.3.4 |
     |      1161      | SID/Label                   | Section 2.1.1 |
     |      1170      | Prefix Attribute Flags      | Section 2.3.2 |
     |      1171      | Source Router-ID            | Section 2.3.3 |
     |      1172      | L2 Bundle Member Attributes | Section 2.2.3 |
     +----------------+-----------------------------+---------------+

             Table 8: Summary Table of TLV/Sub-TLV Codepoints

4.  Manageability Considerations

   This section is structured as recommended in [RFC5706].

   The new protocol extensions introduced in this document augment the
   existing IGP topology information that is distributed via [RFC7752].
   Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
   affect the BGP protocol operations and management other than as
   discussed in the Manageability Considerations section of [RFC7752].
   Specifically, the malformed attribute tests for syntactic checks in
   the Fault Management section of [RFC7752] now encompass the new BGP-
   LS Attribute TLVs defined in this document.  The semantic or content
   checking for the TLVs specified in this document and their
   association with the BGP-LS NLRI types or their BGP-LS Attribute is
   left to the consumer of the BGP-LS information (e.g. an application
   or a controller) and not the BGP protocol.

   A consumer of the BGP-LS information retrieves this information from
   a BGP protocol component that is doing the signaling over a BGP-LS
   session, via some APIs or a data model (refer Section 1 and 2 of
   [RFC7752]).  The handling of semantic or content errors by the
   consumer would be dictated by the nature of its application usage and
   hence is beyond the scope of this document.

   This document only introduces new Attribute TLVs and any syntactic
   error in them would result in only that specific attribute being
   discarded with an error log.  The SR information introduced in BGP-LS
   by this specification, may be used by BGP-LS consumer applications
   like a SR path computation engine (PCE) to learn the SR capabilities



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 24]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   of the nodes in the topology and the mapping of SR segments to those
   nodes.  This can enable the SR PCE to perform path computations based
   on SR for traffic engineering use-cases and to steer traffic on paths
   different from the underlying IGP based distributed best path
   computation.  Errors in the encoding or decoding of the SR
   information may result in the unavailability of such information to
   the SR PCE or incorrect information being made available to it.  This
   may result in the SR PCE not being able to perform the desired SR
   based optimization functionality or to perform it in an unexpected or
   inconsistent manner.  The handling of such errors by applications
   like SR PCE may be implementation specific and out of scope of this
   document.

   The extensions, specified in this document, do not introduce any new
   configuration or monitoring aspects in BGP or BGP-LS other than as
   discussed in [RFC7752].  The manageability aspects of the underlying
   SR features are covered by [I-D.ietf-spring-sr-yang],
   [I-D.ietf-isis-sr-yang] and [I-D.ietf-ospf-sr-yang].

5.  Security Considerations

   The new protocol extensions introduced in this document augment the
   existing IGP topology information that was distributed via [RFC7752].
   The Security Considerations section of [RFC7752] also applies to
   these extensions.  The procedures and new TLVs defined in this
   document, by themselves, do not affect the BGP-LS security model
   discussed in [RFC7752].

   BGP-LS SR extensions enable traffic engineering use-cases within the
   Segment Routing domain.  SR operates within a trusted domain (refer
   Security Considerations section in [RFC8402] for more detail) and its
   security considerations also apply to BGP-LS sessions when carrying
   SR information.The SR traffic engineering policies using the SIDs
   advertised via BGP-LS are expected to be used entirely within this
   trusted SR domain (e.g. between multiple AS/domains within a single
   provider network).  Therefore, precaution is necessary to ensure that
   the SR information collected via BGP-LS is limited to specific
   controllers or applications in a secure manner within this SR domain.

   The isolation of BGP-LS peering sessions is also required to ensure
   that BGP-LS topology information (including the newly added SR
   information) is not advertised to an external BGP peering session
   outside an administrative domain.








Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 25]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


6.  Contributors

   The following people have substantially contributed to the editing of
   this document:

   Peter Psenak
   Cisco Systems
   Email: ppsenak@cisco.com

   Les Ginsberg
   Cisco Systems
   Email: ginsberg@cisco.com

   Acee Lindem
   Cisco Systems
   Email: acee@cisco.com

   Saikat Ray
   Individual
   Email: raysaikat@gmail.com

   Jeff Tantsura
   Apstra Inc.
   Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com

7.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Jeffrey Haas, Aijun Wang, Robert
   Raszuk and Susan Hares for their review of this document and their
   comments.  The authors would also like to thank Alvaro Retana for his
   extensive review and comments which helped correct issues and improve
   the document.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp]
              Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and C.
              Filsfils, "BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering
              Performance Metric Extensions", draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-
              bgp-18 (work in progress), December 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-isis-l2bundles]
              Ginsberg, L., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Nanduri, M., and
              E. Aries, "Advertising L2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in
              IS-IS", draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles-07 (work in progress),
              May 2017.



Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 26]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 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-22 (work in progress), December 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator]
              Wang, A., Lindem, A., Dong, J., Talaulikar, K., and P.
              Psenak, "OSPF Extension for Prefix Originator", draft-
              ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-00 (work in progress),
              February 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions]
              Psenak, P. and S. Previdi, "OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment
              Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-
              extensions-23 (work in progress), January 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]
              Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
              Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
              Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-
              routing-extensions-27 (work in progress), December 2018.

   [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>.

   [RFC4202]  Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
              in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
              (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, DOI 10.17487/RFC4202, October 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4202>.

   [RFC5340]  Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
              for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.

   [RFC7684]  Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W.,
              Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute
              Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.

   [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>.




Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 27]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


   [RFC7794]  Ginsberg, L., Ed., Decraene, B., Previdi, S., Xu, X., and
              U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix Attributes for Extended IPv4
              and IPv6 Reachability", RFC 7794, DOI 10.17487/RFC7794,
              March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>.

   [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>.

   [RFC8362]  Lindem, A., Roy, A., Goethals, D., Reddy Vallem, V., and
              F. Baker, "OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA)
              Extensibility", RFC 8362, DOI 10.17487/RFC8362, April
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-isis-sr-yang]
              Litkowski, S., Qu, Y., Sarkar, P., Chen, I., and J.
              Tantsura, "YANG Data Model for IS-IS Segment Routing",
              draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-04 (work in progress), June 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-ospf-sr-yang]
              Yeung, D., Qu, Y., Zhang, Z., Chen, I., and A. Lindem,
              "YANG Data Model for OSPF SR (Segment Routing) Protocol",
              draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-07 (work in progress), March 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop]
              Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., and
              S. Litkowski, "Segment Routing interworking with LDP",
              draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-15 (work in
              progress), September 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-spring-sr-yang]
              Litkowski, S., Qu, Y., Lindem, A., Sarkar, P., and J.
              Tantsura, "YANG Data Model for Segment Routing", draft-
              ietf-spring-sr-yang-12 (work in progress), February 2019.

   [RFC5706]  Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and
              Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions",
              RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>.

   [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>.





Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 28]


Internet-Draft    BGP LS extensions for Segment Routing       March 2019


Authors' Addresses

   Stefano Previdi
   Huawei Technologies
   Rome
   Italy

   Email: stefano@previdi.net


   Ketan Talaulikar (editor)
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   India

   Email: ketant@cisco.com


   Clarence Filsfils
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Brussels
   Belgium

   Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com


   Hannes Gredler
   RtBrick Inc.

   Email: hannes@rtbrick.com


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei Technologies
   Huawei Building, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com













Previdi, et al.         Expires September 9, 2019              [Page 29]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/