draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-00.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-01.txt 
Network Working Group X. Xu, Ed. OSPF Working Group X. Xu, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Internet-Draft Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track B. Decraene, Ed. Intended status: Standards Track B. Decraene, Ed.
Expires: April 15, 2016 Orange Expires: April 16, 2017 Orange
R. Raszuk R. Raszuk
Mirantis Inc. Bloomberg LP
U. Chunduri U. Chunduri
Ericsson
L. Contreras L. Contreras
Telefonica I+D Telefonica I+D
L. Jalil L. Jalil
Verizon Verizon
October 13, 2015 October 13, 2016
Advertising Tunnelling Capability in OSPF Advertising Tunnelling Capability in OSPF
draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-00 draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-01
Abstract Abstract
Some networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons. A large variety Some networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons. A large variety
of tunnel types are defined and the ingress needs to select a type of of tunnel types are defined and the ingress needs to select a type of
tunnel which is supported by the egress. This document defines how tunnel which is supported by the egress. This document defines how
to advertise egress tunnel capabilities in OSPF Router Information. to advertise egress tunnel capabilities in OSPF Router Information.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
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
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 April 15, 2016. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 16, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Advertising Encapsulation Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Advertising Encapsulation Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Tunnel Encapsulation Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Tunnel Encapsulation Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. Tunnel Parameters sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.1. Tunnel Parameters sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. Encapsulated Protocol sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.2. Encapsulated Protocol sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.3. End Point sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.3. End Point sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.4. Color sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.4. Color sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1. OSPF Router Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1. OSPF Router Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.2. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Types Registry . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Types Registry . . . . . . . . . 6
6.3. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types Registry . . . . 7 6.3. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types Registry . . . . 7
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Some networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons, such as: Some networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons, such as:
o Partial deployment of MPLS-SPRING as described in o Partial deployment of MPLS-SPRING as described in
[I-D.xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip], where IP tunnels are [I-D.xu-mpls-spring-islands-connection-over-ip], where IP tunnels
used between MPLS-SPRING-enabled routers so as to traverse non- are used between MPLS-SPRING-enabled routers so as to traverse
MPLS routers. non- MPLS routers.
o Partial deployment of MPLS-BIER as described in Section 6.9 of o Partial deployment of MPLS-BIER as described in Section 6.9 of
[I-D.ietf-bier-architecture], where IP tunnels are used between [I-D.ietf-bier-architecture], where IP tunnels are used between
MPLS-BIER-capable routers so as to traverse non MPLS-BIER MPLS-BIER-capable routers so as to traverse non MPLS-BIER
[I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation] routers. [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation] routers.
o Partial deployment of IPv6 (resp. IPv4) in IPv4 (resp. IPv6) o Partial deployment of IPv6 (resp. IPv4) in IPv4 (resp. IPv6)
networks as described in [RFC5565], where IPvx tunnels are used networks as described in [RFC5565], where IPvx tunnels are used
between IPvx-enabled routers so as to traverse non-IPvx routers. between IPvx-enabled routers so as to traverse non-IPvx routers.
o Remote Loop Free Alternate repair tunnels as described in o Remote Loop Free Alternate repair tunnels as described in
[RFC7490], where tunnels are used between the Point of Local [RFC7490], where tunnels are used between the Point of Local
Repair and the selected PQ node. Repair and the selected PQ node.
The ingress needs to select a type of tunnel which is supported by The ingress needs to select a type of tunnel which is supported by
the egress. This document describes how to use OSPF Router the egress. This document describes how to use OSPF Router
Information to advertise the egress tunnelling capabilities of nodes. Information to advertise the egress tunnelling capabilities of nodes.
In this document, OSPF means both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. In this document, OSPF means both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC4970]. This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7770].
3. Advertising Encapsulation Capability 3. Advertising Encapsulation Capability
Routers advertises their supported encapsulation type(s) by Routers advertises their supported encapsulation type(s) by
advertising a new TLV of the OSPF Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA advertising a new TLV of the OSPF Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA
[RFC4970], referred to as Encapsulation Capability TLV. This TLV is [RFC7770], referred to as Encapsulation Capability TLV. This TLV is
applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. The Encapsulation Capability applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. The Encapsulation Capability
TLV SHOULD NOT appear more than once within a given OSPF Router TLV SHOULD NOT appear more than once within a given OSPF Router
Information (RI) Opaque LSA. The scope of the advertisement depends Information (RI) Opaque LSA. The scope of the advertisement depends
on the application but it is recommended that it SHOULD be domain- on the application but it is recommended that it SHOULD be domain-
wide. The Type code of the Encapsulation Capability TLV is TBD1, the wide. The Type code of the Encapsulation Capability TLV is TBD1, the
Length value is variable, and the Value field contains one or more Length value is variable, and the Value field contains one or more
Tunnel Encapsulation Type sub-TLVs. Each Encapsulation Type sub-TLVs Tunnel Encapsulation Type sub-TLVs. Each Encapsulation Type sub-TLVs
indicates a particular encapsulation format that the advertising indicates a particular encapsulation format that the advertising
router supports. router supports.
skipping to change at page 4, line 15 skipping to change at page 4, line 5
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Tunnel Type (2 Octets) | Length (2 Octets) | | Tunnel Type (2 Octets) | Length (2 Octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
| Value | | Value |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
* Tunnel Type (2 octets): identifies the type of tunneling technology Tunnel Type (2 octets): identifies the type of tunneling
being signaled. This document defines the following types: technology being signaled. This document defines the following
types:
1. L2TPv3 over IP [RFC3931] : Type code=1; 1. L2TPv3 over IP [RFC3931] : Type code=1;
2. GRE [RFC2784] : Type code=2; 2. GRE [RFC2784] : Type code=2;
3. Transmit tunnel endpoint [RFC5566] : Type code=3; 3. Transmit tunnel endpoint [RFC5566] : Type code=3;
4. IPsec in Tunnel-mode [RFC5566] : Type code=4; 4. IPsec in Tunnel-mode [RFC5566] : Type code=4;
5. IP in IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode [RFC5566] : Type 5. IP in IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode [RFC5566] : Type
code=5; code=5;
6. MPLS-in-IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode [RFC5566] : Type 6. MPLS-in-IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode [RFC5566] : Type
code=6; code=6;
7. IP in IP [RFC2003] [RFC4213]: Type code=7; 7. IP in IP [RFC2003] [RFC4213]: Type code=7;
8. VXLAN [RFC7348]: Type code=8; 8. VXLAN [RFC7348] : Type code=8;
9. NVGRE [RFC7637]: Type code=9; 9. NVGRE [RFC7637] : Type code=9;
10. MPLS [RFC3032]: Type code=10; 10. MPLS [RFC3032] : Type code=10;
11. MPLS-in-GRE [RFC4023]: Type code=11; 11. MPLS-in-GRE [RFC4023] : Type code=11;
12. VXLAN GPE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]: Type code=12; 12. VXLAN GPE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe] : Type code=12;
13. MPLS-in-UDP [RFC7510]: Type code=13; 13. MPLS-in-UDP [RFC7510] : Type code=13;
14. MPLS-in-UDP-with-DTLS [RFC7510]: Type code=14; 14. MPLS-in-UDP-with-DTLS [RFC7510] : Type code=14;
15. MPLS-in-L2TPv3 [RFC4817]: Type code=15; 15. MPLS-in-L2TPv3 [RFC4817] : Type code=15;
16. GTP: Type code=16; 16. GTP: Type code=16;
Unknown types are to be ignored and skipped upon receipt.
* Length (2 octets): unsigned integer indicating the total number of Unknown types are to be ignored and skipped upon receipt.
octets of the value field.
* Value (variable): zero or more Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute sub- Length (2 octets): unsigned integer indicating the total number of
TLVs as defined in Section 5. octets of the value field.
Value (variable): zero or more Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute sub-
TLVs as defined in Section 5.
5. Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute 5. Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute
The Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute sub-TLV is structured as as The Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute sub-TLV is structured as as
follows: follows:
+-----------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------+
| Sub-TLV Type (1 Octet) | | Sub-TLV Type (1 Octet) |
+-----------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------+
| Sub-TLV Length (1 Octet) | | Sub-TLV Length (1 Octet) |
+-----------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------+
| Sub-TLV Value (Variable) | | Sub-TLV Value (Variable) |
| | | |
+-----------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------+
* Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): each sub-TLV type defines a certain Sub-TLV Type (1 octet): each sub-TLV type defines a certain
property about the tunnel TLV that contains this sub-TLV. The property about the tunnel TLV that contains this sub-TLV. The
following are the types defined in this document: following are the types defined in this document:
1. Encapsulation Parameters: sub-TLV type = 1; (See Section 5.1) 1. Encapsulation Parameters: sub-TLV type = 1; (See Section 5.1)
2. Encapsulated Protocol: sub-TLV type = 2; (See Section 5.2) 2. Encapsulated Protocol: sub-TLV type = 2; (See Section 5.2)
3. End Point: sub-TLV type = 3; (See Section 5.3) 3. End Point: sub-TLV type = 3; (See Section 5.3)
4. Color: sub-TLV type = 4; (See Section 5.4) 4. Color: sub-TLV type = 4; (See Section 5.4)
* Sub-TLV Length (1 octet): unsigned integer indicating the total Sub-TLV Length (1 octet): unsigned integer indicating the total
number of octets of the sub-TLV value field. number of octets of the sub-TLV value field.
* Sub-TLV Value (variable): encodings of the value field depend on Sub-TLV Value (variable): encodings of the value field depend on
the sub-TLV type as enumerated above. The following sub-sections the sub-TLV type as enumerated above. The following sub-sections
define the encoding in detail. define the encoding in detail.
Any unknown sub-TLVs MUST be ignored and skipped. However, if the Any unknown sub-TLVs MUST be ignored and skipped. However, if the
TLV is understood, the entire TLV MUST NOT be ignored just because it TLV is understood, the entire TLV MUST NOT be ignored just because it
contains an unknown sub-TLV. contains an unknown sub-TLV.
If a sub-TLV is erroneous, this specific Tunnel Encapsulation MUST be If a sub-TLV is erroneous, this specific Tunnel Encapsulation MUST be
ignored and skipped. However, others Tunnel Encapsulations MUST be ignored and skipped. However, others Tunnel Encapsulations MUST be
considered. considered.
5.1. Tunnel Parameters sub-TLV 5.1. Tunnel Parameters sub-TLV
skipping to change at page 6, line 42 skipping to change at page 6, line 33
The color value is user defined and configured locally on the The color value is user defined and configured locally on the
routers. It may be used by the service providers to define policies. routers. It may be used by the service providers to define policies.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
6.1. OSPF Router Information 6.1. OSPF Router Information
This document requests IANA to allocate a new code point from This document requests IANA to allocate a new code point from
registry OSPF Router Information (RI). registry OSPF Router Information (RI).
Value TLV Name Reference Value TLV Name Reference
----- ------------------------------------ ------------- ----- ------------------------------------ -------------
TBD1 Tunnel Capabilities This document TBD1 Tunnel Capabilities This document
6.2. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Types Registry 6.2. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Types Registry
This document requests IANA to create a new registry "IGP Tunnel This document requests IANA to create a new registry "IGP Tunnel
Encapsulation Types" with the following registration procedure: Encapsulation Types" with the following registration procedure:
Registry Name: IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Type. Registry Name: IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Type.
Value Name Reference Value Name Reference
------- ------------------------------------------ ------------- ------- ------------------------------------------ -------------
0 Reserved This document 0 Reserved This document
1 L2TPv3 over IP This document 1 L2TPv3 over IP This document
2 GRE This document 2 GRE This document
3 Transmit tunnel endpoint This document 3 Transmit tunnel endpoint This document
4 IPsec in Tunnel-mode This document 4 IPsec in Tunnel-mode This document
5 IP in IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode This document 5 IP in IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode This document
6 MPLS-in-IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode This document 6 MPLS-in-IP tunnel with IPsec Transport Mode This document
skipping to change at page 7, line 39 skipping to change at page 7, line 39
Assignments of Encapsulation Types are via Standards Action Assignments of Encapsulation Types are via Standards Action
[RFC5226]. [RFC5226].
6.3. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types Registry 6.3. IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types Registry
This document requests IANA to create a new registry "IGP Tunnel This document requests IANA to create a new registry "IGP Tunnel
Encapsulation Attribute Types" with the following registration Encapsulation Attribute Types" with the following registration
procedure: procedure:
Registry Name: IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types. Registry Name: IGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Types.
Value Name Reference Value Name Reference
0 Reserved This document ------- ------------------------------------ -------------
1 Encapsulation parameters This document 0 Reserved This document
2 Protocol This document 1 Encapsulation parameters This document
3 End Point This document 2 Protocol This document
4 Color This document 3 End Point This document
5-250 Unassigned 4 Color This document
251-254 Experimental This document 5-250 Unassigned
255 Reserved This document 251-254 Experimental This document
255 Reserved This document
Assignments of Encapsulation Types are via Standards Action Assignments of Encapsulation Attribute Types are via Standards Action
[RFC5226]. [RFC5226].
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
Security considerations applicable to softwires can be found in the Security considerations applicable to softwires can be found in the
mesh framework [RFC5565]. In general, security issues of the tunnel mesh framework [RFC5565]. In general, security issues of the tunnel
protocols signaled through this IGP capability extension are protocols signaled through this IGP capability extension are
inherited. inherited.
If a third party is able to modify any of the information that is If a third party is able to modify any of the information that is
skipping to change at page 9, line 15 skipping to change at page 9, line 15
[RFC3931] Lau, J., Ed., Townsley, M., Ed., and I. Goyret, Ed., [RFC3931] Lau, J., Ed., Townsley, M., Ed., and I. Goyret, Ed.,
"Layer Two Tunneling Protocol - Version 3 (L2TPv3)", "Layer Two Tunneling Protocol - Version 3 (L2TPv3)",
RFC 3931, DOI 10.17487/RFC3931, March 2005, RFC 3931, DOI 10.17487/RFC3931, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3931>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3931>.
[RFC4213] Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms [RFC4213] Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms
for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213, for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4213, October 2005, DOI 10.17487/RFC4213, October 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4213>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4213>.
[RFC4970] Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and
S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional
Router Capabilities", RFC 4970, DOI 10.17487/RFC4970, July
2007, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4970>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[RFC7770] Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and
S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional
Router Capabilities", RFC 7770, DOI 10.17487/RFC7770,
February 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7770>.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-architecture] [I-D.ietf-bier-architecture]
Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T., and Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T., and
S. Aldrin, "Multicast using Bit Index Explicit S. Aldrin, "Multicast using Bit Index Explicit
Replication", draft-ietf-bier-architecture-02 (work in Replication", draft-ietf-bier-architecture-04 (work in
progress), July 2015. progress), July 2016.
[I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation] [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation]
Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Tantsura, J., and Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Tantsura, J.,
S. Aldrin, "Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation for Bit Index
Replication in MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-bier-mpls- Explicit Replication in MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-bier-
encapsulation-02 (work in progress), August 2015. mpls-encapsulation-05 (work in progress), July 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe] [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]
Quinn, P., Manur, R., Kreeger, L., Lewis, D., Maino, F., Kreeger, L. and U. Elzur, "Generic Protocol Extension for
Smith, M., Agarwal, P., Yong, L., Xu, X., Elzur, U., Garg, VXLAN", draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-02 (work in progress),
P., and D. Melman, "Generic Protocol Extension for VXLAN", April 2016.
draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-00 (work in progress), May 2015.
[I-D.xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip]
Xu, X., Raszuk, R., Chunduri, U., and L. Contreras,
"Connecting MPLS-SPRING Islands over IP Networks", draft-
xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-04 (work in
progress), March 2015.
[IANA-OSPFv2] [I-D.xu-mpls-spring-islands-connection-over-ip]
IANA, "Open Shortest Path First v2 (OSPFv2) Parameters", Xu, X., Raszuk, R., Chunduri, U., Contreras, L., and L.
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters/ Jalil, "Connecting MPLS-SPRING Islands over IP Networks",
ospfv2-parameters.xhtml>. draft-xu-mpls-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-00 (work
in progress), October 2016.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998, DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.
[RFC3032] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y., [RFC3032] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y.,
Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack
Encoding", RFC 3032, DOI 10.17487/RFC3032, January 2001, Encoding", RFC 3032, DOI 10.17487/RFC3032, January 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3032>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3032>.
skipping to change at page 11, line 27 skipping to change at page 11, line 22
RFC 7637, DOI 10.17487/RFC7637, September 2015, RFC 7637, DOI 10.17487/RFC7637, September 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7637>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7637>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Xiaohu Xu (editor) Xiaohu Xu (editor)
Huawei Huawei
Email: xuxiaohu@huawei.com Email: xuxiaohu@huawei.com
Bruno Decraene (editor) Bruno Decraene (editor)
Orange Orange
Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Robert Raszuk Robert Raszuk
Mirantis Inc. Bloomberg LP
Email: robert@raszuk.net Email: robert@raszuk.net
Uma Chunduri Uma Chunduri
Ericsson
Email: uma.chunduri@ericsson.com Email: uma.chunduri@gmail.com
Luis M. Contreras Luis M. Contreras
Telefonica I+D Telefonica I+D
Ronda de la Comunicacion, s/n
Sur-3 building, 3rd floor
Madrid, 28050
Spain
Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com
URI: http://people.tid.es/LuisM.Contreras/
Luay Jalil Luay Jalil
Verizon Verizon
Email: luay.jalil@one.verizon.com Email: luay.jalil@verizon.com
 End of changes. 60 change blocks. 
115 lines changed or deleted 106 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/