draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-16.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-17.txt 
Network Working Group Y. Rekhter Network Working Group Y. Rekhter
Internet Draft E. Rosen Internet Draft E. Rosen
Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks
Expiration Date: August 2015 R. Aggarwal Expiration Date: August 2015 R. Aggarwal
Arktan Arktan
T. Morin T. Morin
France Telecom
I. Grosclaude I. Grosclaude
France Telecom France Telecom
N. Leymann N. Leymann
Deutsche Telekom AG Deutsche Telekom AG
S. Saad S. Saad
AT&T AT&T
February 2015 February 2015
Inter-Area P2MP Segmented LSPs Inter-Area P2MP Segmented LSPs
draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-16.txt draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-17.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document describes procedures for building inter-area point-to- This document describes procedures for building inter-area point-to-
multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs by partitioning such LSPs multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs by partitioning such LSPs
into intra-area segments and using BGP as the inter-area routing and into intra-area segments and using BGP as the inter-area routing and
label distribution protocol. Within each IGP area the intra-area label distribution protocol. Within each IGP area the intra-area
segments are either carried over intra-area P2MP LSPs, using P2MP LSP segments are either carried over intra-area P2MP LSPs, using P2MP LSP
hierarchy, or instantiated using ingress replication. The intra-area hierarchy, or instantiated using ingress replication. The intra-area
P2MP LSPs may be signaled using P2MP RSVP-TE or P2MP mLDP. If ingress P2MP LSPs may be signaled using P2MP RSVP-TE or P2MP mLDP. If ingress
skipping to change at page 7, line 26 skipping to change at page 7, line 26
This document defines a new BGP Extended Community "Inter-area P2MP This document defines a new BGP Extended Community "Inter-area P2MP
Next-Hop" Extended Community. This is an IP-address specific Extended Next-Hop" Extended Community. This is an IP-address specific Extended
Community of an extended type and is transitive across AS boundaries Community of an extended type and is transitive across AS boundaries
[RFC4360]. [RFC4360].
A PE or an ABR or an ASBR constructs the Inter-area P2MP Segmented A PE or an ABR or an ASBR constructs the Inter-area P2MP Segmented
Next-Hop Extended Community as follows: Next-Hop Extended Community as follows:
- The Global Administrator field MUST be set to an IP address of - The Global Administrator field MUST be set to an IP address of
the PE or ASBR or ABR that originates or advertises the route, the PE or ASBR or ABR that originates or advertises the route
which carries the P2MP Next-Hop Extended Community. For example that carries the P2MP Next-Hop Extended Community. For example
this address may be the loopback address or the PE, ASBR or ABR this address may be the loopback address or the PE, ASBR or ABR
that advertises the route. that advertises the route.
- The Local Administrator field MUST be set to 0. - The Local Administrator field MUST be set to 0.
The detailed usage of this Extended Community is described in the The detailed usage of this Extended Community is described in the
following sections. following sections.
5. Discovering P2MP FEC of Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP 5. Discovering P2MP FEC of Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP
skipping to change at page 39, line 36 skipping to change at page 39, line 36
65535 from the "Route Distinguisher Type Field" registry to "For Use 65535 from the "Route Distinguisher Type Field" registry to "For Use
Only in Certain Leaf A-D Routes", with this document as the Only in Certain Leaf A-D Routes", with this document as the
reference. reference.
16. Security Considerations 16. Security Considerations
Procedures described in this document are subject to similar security Procedures described in this document are subject to similar security
threats as any MPLS deployment. It is recommended that baseline threats as any MPLS deployment. It is recommended that baseline
security measures are considered as described in Security Framework security measures are considered as described in Security Framework
for MPLS and GMPLS networks [RFC5920], in the mLDP specification for MPLS and GMPLS networks [RFC5920], in the mLDP specification
[RFC6388] and in P2MP RSVP-TE specification [RFC3209]. [RFC6388] and in P2MP RSVP-TE specification [RFC3209]. The security
considerations of [RFC6513] are also applicable.
17. Acknowledgements 17. Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Eric Rosen for his comments. We also would We would like to thank Eric Rosen for his comments. We also would
like to thank Loa Andersson and Qin Wu for their review and comments. like to thank Loa Andersson and Qin Wu for their review and comments.
18. References 18. References
18.1. Normative References 18.1. Normative References
 End of changes. 4 change blocks. 
5 lines changed or deleted 5 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/