draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-02.txt   draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-03.txt 
PCE working group D. Lopez PCE working group D. Lopez
Internet-Draft Telefonica I+D Internet-Draft Telefonica I+D
Updates: 5088,5089 (if approved) Q. Wu Updates: 5088,5089 (if approved) Q. Wu
Intended status: Standards Track D. Dhody Intended status: Standards Track D. Dhody
Expires: March 5, 2020 Z. Wang Expires: May 2, 2020 Z. Wang
Huawei Huawei
D. King D. King
Old Dog Consulting Old Dog Consulting
September 2, 2019 October 30, 2019
IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in the PCE discovery IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in the PCE discovery
draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-02 draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-03
Abstract Abstract
When a Path Computation Element (PCE) is a Label Switching Router When a Path Computation Element (PCE) is a Label Switching Router
(LSR) participating in the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), or even a (LSR) participating in the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), or even a
server participating in IGP, its presence and path computation server participating in IGP, its presence and path computation
capabilities can be advertised using IGP flooding. The IGP capabilities can be advertised using IGP flooding. The IGP
extensions for PCE discovery (RFC 5088 and RFC 5089) define a method extensions for PCE discovery (RFC 5088 and RFC 5089) define a method
to advertise path computation capabilities using IGP flooding for to advertise path computation capabilities using IGP flooding for
OSPF and IS-IS respectively. However these specifications lack a OSPF and IS-IS respectively. However these specifications lack a
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
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 March 5, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 2, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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
skipping to change at page 5, line 42 skipping to change at page 5, line 42
Router Information LSA. This document updates [RFC5088] by allowing Router Information LSA. This document updates [RFC5088] by allowing
the two new sub-TLVs defined in this document to be carried in the the two new sub-TLVs defined in this document to be carried in the
PCED TLV of the for use in the Router Information LSA. PCED TLV of the for use in the Router Information LSA.
Section 4 of [RFC5089] states that no new sub-TLVs will be added to Section 4 of [RFC5089] states that no new sub-TLVs will be added to
the PCED TLV, and no new PCE information will be carried in the the PCED TLV, and no new PCE information will be carried in the
Router CAPABLITY TLV. This document updates [RFC5089] by allowing Router CAPABLITY TLV. This document updates [RFC5089] by allowing
the two new sub-TLVs defined in this document to be carried in the the two new sub-TLVs defined in this document to be carried in the
PCED TLV of the for use in the Router CAPABILITY TLV. PCED TLV of the for use in the Router CAPABILITY TLV.
The introduction of the additional sub-TLVs should be viewed as an
exception to the [RFC5088][RFC5089] policy justified by the need to
know the new information prior to establishing a PCEP session. The
restrictions defined in [RFC5089][RFC5089] should still be considered
to be in place.
5. Backward Compatibility Consideration 5. Backward Compatibility Consideration
An LSR that does not support the new IGP PCE capability bits An LSR that does not support the new IGP PCE capability bits
specified in this document silently ignores those bits. specified in this document silently ignores those bits.
An LSR that does not support the new KEYNAME sub-TLV specified in An LSR that does not support the new KEYNAME sub-TLV specified in
this document silently ignores the sub-TLV. this document silently ignores the sub-TLV.
IGP extensions defined in this document do not introduce any new IGP extensions defined in this document do not introduce any new
interoperability issues. interoperability issues.
 End of changes. 5 change blocks. 
4 lines changed or deleted 10 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/