< draft-hegde-mpls-spring-epe-oam-01.txt   draft-hegde-mpls-spring-epe-oam-02.txt >
Routing area S. Hegde Routing area S. Hegde
Internet-Draft K. Arora Internet-Draft K. Arora
Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks Inc. Intended status: Standards Track M. Srivastava
Expires: May 30, 2019 November 26, 2018 Expires: January 4, 2020 Juniper Networks Inc.
July 3, 2019
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR)
Egress Peer engineering Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes Egress Peer engineering Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes
draft-hegde-mpls-spring-epe-oam-01 draft-hegde-mpls-spring-epe-oam-02
Abstract Abstract
Egress Peer Engineering is an application of Segment Routing to solve Egress Peer Engineering is an application of Segment Routing to solve
the problem of egress peer selection. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution the problem of egress peer selection. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution
allows a centralized (Software Defined Network, SDN)controller to allows a centralized (Software Defined Network, SDN)controller to
program any egress peer. The EPE solution requires a node to program program any egress peer. The EPE solution requires a node to program
PeerNodeSID, PeerAdjSID, PeerSetSID as described in PeerNodeSID, PeerAdjSID, PeerSetSID as described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe].This document provides [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]. This document
Target FEC stack TLV definitions as defined in [RFC8029] for the EPE provides new sub-TLVs for EPE SIDs that would be used in Target stack
SIDs. TLV (Type 1) as defined in [RFC8029] for the EPE SIDs.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 30, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. FEC Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. FEC Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. PeerAdjSID Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. PeerSetSID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. PeerNodeSID Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. PeerSetSID Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) as defined in Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) as defined in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe] is an effective [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe] is an effective
mechanism to select the egress peer link based on different criteria. mechanism to select the egress peer link based on different criteria.
The EPE SIDs provide means to represent egress peer links. Many The EPE SIDs provide means to represent egress peer links. Many
network deployments have built their networks consisting of multiple network deployments have built their networks consisting of multiple
Autonomous Systems either for ease of operations or as a result of Autonomous Systems either for ease of operations or as a result of
network mergers and acquisitons. The egress links connecting the two network mergers and acquisitons. The inter-AS links connecting the
Autonomous Systems could be managed using EPE-SIDs in this case as two Autonomous Systems could be traffic engineered using EPE-SIDs in
well. It is important to be able to validate the control plane to this case as well. It is important to be able to validate the
forwarding plane synchronization for these SIDs so that any anomaly control plane to forwarding plane synchronization for these SIDs so
can be detected easily by the operator. that any anomaly can be detected easily by the operator.
This document provides Target FEC stack TLV definitions for EPE SIDs. This document provides Target FEC stack TLV definitions for EPE SIDs.
Other procedures for mpls ping and traceroute as defined in [RFC8287] Other procedures for mpls ping and traceroute as defined in [RFC8287]
are applicable for EPE-SIDs as well. are applicable for EPE-SIDs as well.
2. FEC Definitions 2. FEC Definitions
As described in [RFC8287] sec 5, 3 new type of segment IDs are As described in [RFC8287] sec 5, 3 new type of sub-TLVs for the
defined for the Target FEC stack TLV corresponding to each label in Target FEC Stack TLV are defined for the Target FEC stack TLV
the label stack corresponding to each label in the label stack
2.1. PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID 2.1. PeerAdjSID Sub-TLV
0 1 2 3 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 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 = TBD | Length | |Type = TBD | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local AS Number (4 octets) | | Local AS Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote As Number (4 octets) | | Remote As Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface address (4/6 octets) | | Local BGP router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Interface address (4/6 octets) | | Remote BGP Router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Advertising BGP router ID (4 octets) | | Local Interface address (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Receiving Node BGP Router ID (4 octets) | | Remote Interface address (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Peer Node/Adj Segment ID Sub TLV Figure 1: PeerAdjSID Sub-TLV
Type: TBD Type : TBD
Length: variable based on ipv4/ipv6 interface address Length : variable based on ipv4/ipv6 interface address
AS Number: 4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN Local AS Number :
inside the Confederation.[RFC5065]
Interface Address: BGP session IPv4/IPv6 local/remote address. 4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS to
which PeerAdjSID advertising node belongs to.
BGP Router ID: 4 octet unsigned integer representing the BGP Remote AS Number :
4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS of the
remote node for which the PeerAdjSID is advertised.
Local BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the advertising node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286]. Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
2.2. PeerSetSID Remote BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the receiving node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
Local Interface Address :
In case of PeerAdjSID BGP session IPv4/IPv6 local address shouldbe
specified in this field. For IPv4,this field is 4 octets; for IPv6,
this field is 16 octets.
Remote Interface Address :
In case of PeerAdjSID BGP session IPv4/IPv6 remote address should be
specified in this field. For IPv4,this field is 4 octets; for IPv6,
this field is 16 octets.
2.2. PeerNodeSID Sub-TLV
0 1 2 3 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 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 = TBD | Length | |Type = TBD | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| No.of elements in set | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local AS Number (4 octets) | | Local AS Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote As Number (4 octets) | | Remote As Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface address (4/6 octets) | | Local BGP router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Interface address (4/6 octets) | | Remote BGP Router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Advertising BGP router ID (4 octets) | | No.of interface pairs |AF| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Receiving Node BGP Router ID (4 octets) | | Local Interface address1 (4/6 octets) |
++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ....... | | Remote Interface address1 (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface address2 (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ...... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: PeerNodeSID Sub-TLV
Type : TBD
Length : variable based on ipv4/ipv6 interface address
Local AS Number :
4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS to
which PeerNodeSID advertising node belongs to.
Remote AS Number :
4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS of the
remote node for which the PeerNodeSID is advertised.
Local BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the advertising node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
Remote BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the receiving node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
Number of interface pairs:
There may be a number of parallel interfaces and few or all of them
may be used for the PeerNodeSID. It is very useful to traverse all
the links that the the PeerNodeSID represents and ensure
connectivity. This field carries number of interface pairs the
PeerNode SID corresponds to.
AF flag:
0 represents IPv4 address family.
1 represents IPv6 address family.
Local Interface Address :
In case of PeerNodeSID, the interface local address ipv4/ipv6 which
corresponds to the PeerNodeSID MUST be specified. For IPv4,this
field is 4 octets; for IPv6, this field is 16 octets.
Remote Interface Address :
In case of PeerNodeSID, the interface remote address ipv4/ipv6 which
corresponds to the PeerNodeSID MUST be specified. For IPv4,this
field is 4 octets; for IPv6, this field is 16 octets.
2.3. PeerSetSID Sub-TLV
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 = TBD | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local AS Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local BGP router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| No.of elements in set | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote As Number (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote BGP Router ID (4 octets) |
++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++ ++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++
| No.of interface pairs |AF| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface address1 (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Interface address1 (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Interface address2 (4/6 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ...... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Peer set SID Segment ID Sub TLV Figure 3: PeerSetSID Sub-TLV
Type : TBD Type : TBD
Length : variable based on ipv4/ipv6 interface address Length : variable based on ipv4/ipv6 interface address
No.of elements in set : Number of links in the set. Local AS Number :
AS Number : 4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN 4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
inside the Confederation.[RFC5065] Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS to
which PeerSetSID advertising node belongs to.
Interface Address : BGP session IPv4/IPv6 local/remote address. Remote AS Number :
BGP Router ID : 4 octet unsigned integer representing the BGP 4 octet unsigned integer representing the Member ASN inside the
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286] Confederation.[RFC5065]. The AS number corresponds to the AS of the
remote node for which the PeerSetSID is advertised.
Advertising BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the advertising node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
Receiving BGP Router ID :
4 octet unsigned integer of the receiving node representing the BGP
Identifier as defined in [RFC4271] and [RFC6286].
Number of interface pairs:
There may be a number of parallel interfaces and few or all of them
may be used for the PeerNodeSID. It is very useful to traverse all
the links that the the PeerNodeSID represents and ensure
connectivity. This field carries number of interface pairs the
PeerNode SID corresponds to.
AF flag:
0 represents IPv4 address family.
1 represents IPv6 address family.
Local Interface Address :
In case of PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID, the interface local address ipv4/
ipv6 which corresponds to the PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID MUST be
specified. For IPv4,this field is 4 octets; for IPv6, this field is
16 octets.
Remote Interface Address :
In case of PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID, the interface remote address ipv4/
ipv6 which corresponds to the PeerNodeSID/PeerAdjSID MUST be
specified. For IPv4,this field is 4 octets; for IPv6, this field is
16 octets.
3. Security Considerations 3. Security Considerations
TBD The EPE SIDs are advertised for egress links for Egress Peer
Engineering purposes or for inter-As links between co-operating ASes.
When co-operating domains are involved, they can allow the packets
arriving on trusted interfaces to reach the control plane and get
processed. When EPE SIDs which are created for egress TE links where
the neighbor AS is an independent entity, it may not allow packets
arriving from external world to reach the control plane. In such
deployments mpls OAM packets will be dropped by the neighboring AS.
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
New Target FEC stack sub-TLV from the "sub-TLVs for TLV types 1,16 New Target FEC stack sub-TLV from the "sub-TLVs for TLV types 1,16
and 21" subregistry of the "Multi-Protocol Label switching (MPLs) and 21" subregistry of the "Multi-Protocol Label switching (MPLs)
Label Switched Paths 9LSPs) Ping parameters" registry Label Switched Paths 9LSPs) Ping parameters" registry
PeerNode/PeerAdjSID segment ID Sub-TLV : TBD PeerAdjSID segment ID Sub-TLV : TBD
PeerNode segment ID Sub-TLV : TBD
PeerSetSID segment ID Sub-TLV : TBD PeerSetSID segment ID Sub-TLV : TBD
5. Acknowledgments 5. Acknowledgments
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]
skipping to change at line 230 skipping to change at page 10, line 19
Exora Business Park Exora Business Park
Bangalore, KA 560103 Bangalore, KA 560103
India India
Email: shraddha@juniper.net Email: shraddha@juniper.net
Kapil Arora Kapil Arora
Juniper Networks Inc. Juniper Networks Inc.
Email: kapilaro@juniper.net Email: kapilaro@juniper.net
Mukul Srivastava
Juniper Networks Inc.
Email: msri@juniper.net
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
55 lines changed or deleted 215 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/