draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06.txt   draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-07.txt 
Inter-Domain Routing S. Previdi, Ed. Inter-Domain Routing S. Previdi, Ed.
Internet-Draft K. Talaulikar Internet-Draft
Intended status: Standards Track C. Filsfils Intended status: Standards Track K. Talaulikar
Expires: October 13, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc. Expires: November 16, 2018 C. Filsfils
Cisco Systems, Inc.
H. Gredler H. Gredler
RtBrick Inc. RtBrick Inc.
M. Chen M. Chen
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
April 11, 2018 May 15, 2018
BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06 draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-07
Abstract Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called
"segments". These segments are advertised by routing protocols e.g. "segments". These segments are advertised by routing protocols e.g.
by the link state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3) within by the link state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3) within
IGP topologies. IGP topologies.
This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in
skipping to change at page 1, line 48 skipping to change at page 1, line 49
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 October 13, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 16, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Node Attributes TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Node Attributes TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1.1. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1.1. SID/Label Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2. SR-Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1.2. SR-Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.3. SR-Algorithm TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1.3. SR-Algorithm TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.4. SR Local Block TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.1.4. SR Local Block TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.5. SRMS Preference TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1.5. SRMS Preference TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2. Link Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2. Link Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1. Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.1. Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.2. LAN Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.2. LAN Adjacency SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.3. L2 Bundle Member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.2.3. L2 Bundle Member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3. Prefix Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.3. Prefix Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.1. Prefix-SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.3.1. Prefix-SID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.2. Prefix Attribute Flags TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.3.2. Prefix Attribute Flags TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3.3. Source Router Identifier (Source Router-ID) TLV . . . 16 2.3.3. Source Router Identifier (Source Router-ID) TLV . . . 16
2.3.4. Range TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.3.4. Range TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4. Equivalent IS-IS Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs . . . . . 18 2.4. Equivalent IS-IS Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs . . . . . 18
2.5. Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs . 18 2.5. Equivalent OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Segment Routing TLVs/Sub-TLVs . 18
3. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 3. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.1. TLV/Sub-TLV Code Points Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.1. TLV/Sub-TLV Code Points Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1.1. Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
9.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 9.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
skipping to change at page 5, line 9 skipping to change at page 5, line 9
one or more nodes are configured with BGP-LS. These BGP speakers one or more nodes are configured with BGP-LS. These BGP speakers
form an IBGP mesh by connecting to one or more route-reflectors. form an IBGP mesh by connecting to one or more route-reflectors.
This way, all BGP speakers (specifically the route-reflectors) obtain This way, all BGP speakers (specifically the route-reflectors) obtain
Link-State information from all IGP areas (and from other ASes from Link-State information from all IGP areas (and from other ASes from
EBGP peers). An external component connects to the route-reflector EBGP peers). An external component connects to the route-reflector
to obtain this information (perhaps moderated by a policy regarding to obtain this information (perhaps moderated by a policy regarding
what information is or isn't advertised to the external component). what information is or isn't advertised to the external component).
This document describes extensions to BGP-LS to advertise the SR This document describes extensions to BGP-LS to advertise the SR
information. An external component (e.g., a controller) then can information. An external component (e.g., a controller) then can
collect SR information in the "northbound" direction across IGP areas collect SR information from across an SR domain and construct the
or ASes and construct the end-to-end path (with its associated SIDs) end-to-end path (with its associated SIDs) that need to be applied to
that need to be applied to an incoming packet to achieve the desired an incoming packet to achieve the desired end-to-end forwarding.
end-to-end forwarding. Here the SR domain is defined as a single administrative domain that
may be comprised of a single AS or multiple ASes under consolidated
global SID administration.
2. BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing 2. BGP-LS Extensions for Segment Routing
This document defines SR extensions to BGP-LS and specifies the TLVs This document defines SR extensions to BGP-LS and specifies the TLVs
and sub-TLVs for advertising SR information. Section 2.4 and and sub-TLVs for advertising SR information. Section 2.4 and
Section 2.5 illustrates the equivalent TLVs and sub-TLVs in IS-IS, Section 2.5 illustrates the equivalent TLVs and sub-TLVs in IS-IS,
OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 protocols. OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 protocols.
BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines the BGP-LS NLRI that can be a Node NLRI, a BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines the BGP-LS NLRI that can be a Node NLRI, a
Link NLRI or a Prefix NLRI. The corresponding BGP-LS attribute is a Link NLRI or a Prefix NLRI. The corresponding BGP-LS attribute is a
skipping to change at page 16, line 19 skipping to change at page 16, line 19
[RFC7794]. The Source Router-ID TLV may be used to carry the OSPF [RFC7794]. The Source Router-ID TLV may be used to carry the OSPF
Router-ID of the prefix originator. Router-ID of the prefix originator.
The Source Router-ID TLV has the following format: The Source Router-ID TLV has the following format:
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 | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IPv4/IPv6 Address (Router-ID) // // 4 or 6 octet Router-ID //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Type: TBD, see Section 4. Type: TBD, see Section 4.
Length: 4 or 16. Length: 4 or 16.
IPv4/IPv6 Address: 4 octet IPv4 address or 16 octet IPv6 address. IPv4/IPv6 Address: 4 octet IPv4 address or 16 octet IPv6 address.
The semantic of the Source Router-ID TLV is defined in [RFC7794].
2.3.4. Range TLV 2.3.4. Range TLV
The Range TLV can ONLY be added to the Prefix Attribute whose local The Range TLV can ONLY be added to the Prefix Attribute whose local
node in the corresponding Prefix NLRI is the node that originates the node in the corresponding Prefix NLRI is the node that originates the
corresponding SR TLV. corresponding SR TLV.
When the range TLV is used in order to advertise a range of prefix- When the range TLV is used in order to advertise a range of prefix-
to-SID mappings as defined in to-SID mappings as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions], [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions],
[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] and [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] and
skipping to change at page 21, line 31 skipping to change at page 21, line 31
| 1171 | Source Router-ID | Section 2.3.3 | | 1171 | Source Router-ID | Section 2.3.3 |
| 1172 | L2 Bundle Member TLV | Section 2.2.3 | | 1172 | L2 Bundle Member TLV | Section 2.2.3 |
+-------------+-------------------------------------+---------------+ +-------------+-------------------------------------+---------------+
Table 8: Summary Table of TLV/Sub-TLV Codepoints Table 8: Summary Table of TLV/Sub-TLV Codepoints
5. Manageability Considerations 5. Manageability Considerations
This section is structured as recommended in [RFC5706]. This section is structured as recommended in [RFC5706].
The new protocol extensions introduced in this document augment the
existing IGP topology information that was 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].
5.1. Operational Considerations 5.1. Operational Considerations
5.1.1. Operations No additional operation considerations are defined in this document.
Existing BGP and BGP-LS operational procedures apply. No additional 5.2. Management Considerations
operation procedures are defined in this document.
No additional management considerations are defined in this document.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
The new protocol extensions introduced in this document augment the
existing IGP topology information that was distributed via [RFC7752].
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the BGP security model. See the 'Security Considerations' affect the BGP security model other than as discussed in the Security
section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP security. Also refer to Considerations section of [RFC7752].
[RFC4272] and [RFC6952] for analysis of security issues for BGP.
7. Contributors 7. Contributors
The following people have substantially contributed to the editing of The following people have substantially contributed to the editing of
this document: this document:
Peter Psenak Peter Psenak
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: ppsenak@cisco.com Email: ppsenak@cisco.com
Les Ginsberg Les Ginsberg
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: ginsberg@cisco.com Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
Acee Lindem Acee Lindem
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: acee@cisco.com Email: acee@cisco.com
Saikat Ray Saikat Ray
Individual Individual
skipping to change at page 22, line 39 skipping to change at page 22, line 49
[I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp]
Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and C. Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and C.
Filsfils, "BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Filsfils, "BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering
Performance Metric Extensions", draft-ietf-idr-te-pm- Performance Metric Extensions", draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-
bgp-10 (work in progress), March 2018. bgp-10 (work in progress), March 2018.
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]
Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A.,
Gredler, H., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and J. Tantsura, Gredler, H., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and J. Tantsura,
"IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis- "IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-
segment-routing-extensions-15 (work in progress), December segment-routing-extensions-16 (work in progress), April
2017. 2018.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions] [I-D.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions]
Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Gredler, H., Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Gredler, H.,
Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPFv3 Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPFv3
Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3- Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-
segment-routing-extensions-11 (work in progress), January segment-routing-extensions-12 (work in progress), April
2018. 2018.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]
Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment- Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-
routing-extensions-24 (work in progress), December 2017. routing-extensions-25 (work in progress), April 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4202, DOI 10.17487/RFC4202, October 2005, (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, DOI 10.17487/RFC4202, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4202>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4202>.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF [RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008, for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
[RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., [RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W.,
Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute
Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>. 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and [RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
skipping to change at page 24, line 5 skipping to change at page 24, line 11
March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>. March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing
Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-15 (work Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-15 (work
in progress), January 2018. in progress), January 2018.
[RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.
[RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and [RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and
Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions", Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions",
RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009, RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>.
[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205, Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
9.3. URIs 9.3. URIs
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing- [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-
extensions-05#section-3.1 extensions-05#section-3.1
skipping to change at page 25, line 45 skipping to change at page 25, line 42
routing-extensions-05#section-5 routing-extensions-05#section-5
[22] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment- [22] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-
routing-extensions-05#section-2.1 routing-extensions-05#section-2.1
[23] http://tools.ietf.org/html/RFC5340#section-A.4.1.1 [23] http://tools.ietf.org/html/RFC5340#section-A.4.1.1
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Stefano Previdi (editor) Stefano Previdi (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Via Del Serafico, 200 Via Del Serafico, 200
Rome 00142 Rome 00142
Italy Italy
Email: stefano@previdi.net Email: stefano@previdi.net
Ketan Talaulikar Ketan Talaulikar
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
S.No. 154/6, Phase I, Hinjawadi S.No. 154/6, Phase I, Hinjawadi
Pune 411 057 Pune 411 057
India India
 End of changes. 23 change blocks. 
42 lines changed or deleted 36 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/