draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-12.txt   rfc8354.txt 
Spring J. Brzozowski Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Brzozowski
Internet-Draft J. Leddy Request for Comments: 8354 J. Leddy
Intended status: Informational Comcast Category: Informational Comcast
Expires: June 21, 2018 C. Filsfils ISSN: 2070-1721 C. Filsfils
R. Maglione, Ed. R. Maglione, Ed.
M. Townsley M. Townsley
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
December 18, 2017 March 2018
IPv6 SPRING Use Cases Use Cases for IPv6 Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING)
draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-12
Abstract Abstract
The Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture The Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture
describes how Segment Routing can be used to steer packets through an describes how Segment Routing can be used to steer packets through an
IPv6 or MPLS network using the source routing paradigm. This IPv6 or MPLS network using the source routing paradigm. This
document illustrates some use cases for Segment Routing in an IPv6 document illustrates some use cases for Segment Routing in an
only environment. IPv6-only environment.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. published for informational purposes.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2018. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8354.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. IPv6 SPRING use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. IPv6 SPRING Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. SPRING in the Small Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.1. SPRING in the Small Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. SPRING in the Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. SPRING in the Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. SPRING in Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. SPRING in Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. SPRING in Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.4. SPRING in Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5. SPRING in Core networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.5. SPRING in Core Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages
the source routing paradigm. An ingress node steers a packet by the source routing paradigm. An ingress node steers a packet by
including a controlled set of instructions, called segments, in the including a controlled set of instructions, called segments, in the
SPRING header. The SPRING architecture is described in SPRING header. The SPRING architecture is described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. This document illustrates some [SEGMENT-ROUTING]. This document illustrates some use cases for
use cases for SPRING/Segment Routing in an IPv6 only environment. SPRING / Segment Routing in an IPv6-only environment.
2. IPv6 SPRING use cases 2. IPv6 SPRING Use Cases
The use cases described in the section do not constitute an The use cases described in this section do not constitute an
exhaustive list of all the possible scenarios: this section only exhaustive list of all the possible scenarios: this section only
includes some of the most common envisioned deployment models for includes some of the most common envisioned deployment models for
IPv6 Segment Routing. Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6).
In addition to the use cases described in this document, all the In addition to the use cases described in this document, all the
SPRING use cases [RFC7855] are also applicable to the SRv6 data SPRING use cases [RFC7855] are also applicable to the SRv6 data
plane. plane.
2.1. SPRING in the Small Office 2.1. SPRING in the Small Office
An IPv6-enabled small office (SOHO) provides ample globally routed IP An IPv6-enabled Small Office, Home Office (SOHO) provides ample
addresses for all devices in the SOHO. An IPv6 small office with globally routed IP addresses for all devices in the SOHO. An IPv6
multiple egress points and associated provider-assigned prefixes small office with multiple egress points and associated provider-
will, in turn, provide multiple IPv6 addresses to hosts. A small assigned prefixes will, in turn, provide multiple IPv6 addresses to
office performing Source and Destination Routing hosts. A small office performing source and destination routing
([I-D.ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming]) will ensure that packets [PA-MULTIHOMING] will ensure that packets exit the SOHO at the
exit the SOHO at the appropriate egress based on the associated appropriate egress based on the associated delegated prefix for that
delegated prefix for that link. link.
A SPRING enabled SOHO provides the ability to steer traffic into a A SPRING-enabled SOHO provides the ability to steer traffic into a
specific path from end-hosts in the SOHO, or from a customer edge specific path from end hosts in the SOHO or from a customer edge
router in the SOHO. If the selection of the source routed path is router in the SOHO. If the selection of the source-routed path is
enabled at the customer edge router, that router is responsible for enabled at the customer edge router, that router is responsible for
classifying traffic and steering it into the correct path. If hosts classifying traffic and steering it into the correct path. If hosts
in the SOHO have explicit source selection rules, classification can in the SOHO have explicit source selection rules, classification can
be based on source address or associated network egress point, be based on the source address or associated network egress point,
avoiding the need for DPI-based implicit classification techniques. thus avoiding the need for implicit classification techniques based
If the traffic is steered into a specific path by the host itself, it on Deep Packet Inspection (DPI). If the traffic is steered into a
is important to know which networks can interpret the SPRING header. specific path by the host itself, it is important to know which
This information can be provided as part of host configuration as a networks can interpret the SPRING header. This information can be
property of the configured IP address. provided as part of the host configuration as a property of the
configured IP address.
The ability to steer traffic to an appropriate egress or utilize a The ability to steer traffic to an appropriate egress or utilize a
specific type of media (e.g., low-power, WIFI, wired, femto-cell, specific type of media (e.g., low power, Wi-Fi, wired, femtocell,
bluetooth, MOCA, HomePlug, etc.) within the home itself are obvious Bluetooth, Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA), HomePlug, etc.)
cases which may be of interest to an application running within a within the home itself are obvious cases that may be of interest to
SOHO. an application running within a SOHO.
Steering to a specific egress point may be useful for a number of Steering to a specific egress point may be useful for a number of
reasons, including: scenarios, including:
o Regulatory o regulatory compliance;
o Performance of a particular service associated with a particular o performance of a particular service associated with a particular
link link;
o Cost imposed due to data-caps or per-byte charges o cost imposed due to data caps or per-byte charges;
o Home vs. work traffic in homes with one or more teleworkers, etc. o distinguishing between personal vs. work traffic in homes with one
or more teleworkers; and
o Specific services provided by one ISP vs. another o provision of specific services by one ISP vs. another.
Information included in the SPRING header, whether imposed by the Information included in the SPRING header, whether imposed by the end
end-host itself, a customer edge router, or within the access network host itself, a customer edge router, or within the access network of
of the ISP, may be of use at the far ends of the data communication the ISP, may be of use at the far ends of the data communication as
as well. For example, an application running on an end-host with well. For example, an application running on an end host with
application-support in a data center can utilize the SPRING header as application support in a data center can utilize the SPRING header as
a channel to include information that affects its treatment within a channel to include information that affects its treatment within
the data center itself, allowing for application-level steering and the data center itself, which allows for application-level steering
load-balancing without relying upon implicit application and load balancing without relying upon implicit application-
classification techniques at the data-center edge. Further, as more classification techniques at the edge of the data center. Further,
and more application traffic is encrypted, the ability to extract as more and more application traffic is encrypted, the ability to
(and include in the SPRING header) just enough information to enable extract (and include in the SPRING header) just enough information to
the network and data center to load-balance and steer traffic enable the network and data center to load balance and steer traffic
appropriately becomes more and more important. appropriately becomes more and more important.
2.2. SPRING in the Access Network 2.2. SPRING in the Access Network
Access networks deliver a variety of types of traffic from the Access networks deliver a variety of types of traffic from the
service provider's network to the home environment and from the home service provider's network to the home environment and from the home
towards the service provider's network. towards the service provider's network.
For bandwidth management or related purposes, the service provider For bandwidth management or related purposes, the service provider
may want to associate certain types of traffic to specific physical may want to associate certain types of traffic to specific physical
or logical downstream capacity pipes. or logical downstream capacity pipes.
This mapping is not the same thing as classification and scheduling. This mapping is not the same thing as classification and scheduling.
In the Cable access network, each of these pipes are represented at In the cable access network, these pipes are represented at the Data-
the DOCSIS [DOCSIS] layer as different service flows, which are Over-Cable Service Interface Specification [DOCSIS] layer as
better identified as differing data links. As such, creating this different service flows, which are better identified as distinct data
separation allows an operator to differentiate between different links. As such, creating this separation allows an operator to
types of content and perform a variety of differing functions on differentiate between different types of content and perform a
these pipes, such as byte capping, regulatory compliance functions, variety of differing functions on these pipes, such as byte capping,
and billing. regulatory compliance functions, and billing.
In a cable operator's environment, these downstream pipes could be a In a cable operator's environment, these downstream pipes could be a
specific QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) [QAM], a DOCSIS (Data DOCSIS [DOCSIS] service flow, a service group, or a specific
Over Cable Service Interface Specification) [DOCSIS] service flow or Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) as in Annex B of [ITU.J83].
a service group.
Similarly, the operator may want to map traffic from the home sent Similarly, the operator may want to map traffic from the home sent
towards the service provider's network to specific upstream capacity towards the service provider's network to specific upstream capacity
pipes. Information carried in a packet's SPRING header could provide pipes. Information carried in a packet's SPRING header could provide
the target pipe for this specific packet. The access device would the target pipe for this specific packet. The access device would
not need to know specific details about the packet to perform this not need to know specific details about the packet to perform this
mapping; instead the access device would only need to know the mapping; instead, the access device would only need to know the
interpretation of the SPRING header and how to map it to the target interpretation of the SPRING header and how to map it to the target
pipe. pipe.
2.3. SPRING in Data Center 2.3. SPRING in Data Center
Some Data Center operators are transitioning their Data Center Some data center operators are transitioning their data center
infrastructure from IPv4 to native IPv6 only, in order to cope with infrastructure from IPv4 to native IPv6 only, in order to cope with
IPv4 address depletion and to achieve larger scale. In such IPv4 address depletion and to achieve larger scale. In such an
environment, source routing, as enabled by Segment Routing IPv6, can environment, source routing (as enabled by SRv6) can be used to steer
be used to steer traffic across specific paths through the network. traffic across specific paths through the network. The specific path
The specific path may also include a given function one or more nodes may also include a given function that one or more nodes in the path
in the path are requested to perform. are requested to perform.
In addition one of the fundamental requirements for Data Center Additionally, one of the fundamental requirements for data center
architecture is to provide scalable, isolated tenant networks. In architecture is to provide scalable, isolated tenant networks. In
such scenarios, Segment Routing can be used to identify specific such scenarios, Segment Routing can be used to build a construct to
nodes, tenants, and functions and to build a construct to steer the steer the traffic across that specific path and to identify specific
traffic across that specific path. nodes, tenants, and functions.
2.4. SPRING in Content Delivery Networks 2.4. SPRING in Content Delivery Networks
The rise of online video applications and new, video-capable IP The rise of online video applications and new, video-capable IP
devices has led to an explosion of video traffic traversing network devices has led to an explosion of video traffic traversing network
operator infrastructures. In the drive to reduce the capital and operator infrastructures. In the drive to reduce the capital and
operational impact of the massive influx of online video traffic, as operational impact of the massive influx of online video traffic, as
well as to extend traditional TV services to new devices and screens, well as to extend traditional TV services to new devices and screens,
network operators are increasingly turning to Content Delivery network operators are increasingly turning to Content Delivery
Networks (CDNs). Networks (CDNs).
Several studies showed the benefits of connecting caches in a Several studies showed the benefits of connecting caches in a
hierarchical structure following the hierarchical nature of the hierarchical structure following the hierarchical nature of the
Internet. In a cache hierarchy one cache establishes peering Internet. In a cache hierarchy, one cache establishes peering
relationships with its neighbor caches. There are two types of relationships with its neighbor caches. There are two types of
relationship: parent and sibling. A parent cache is essentially one relationships: parent and sibling. A parent cache is essentially one
level up in a cache hierarchy. A sibling cache is on the same level. level up in a cache hierarchy. A sibling cache is on the same level.
Multiple levels of hierarchy are commonly used in order to build Multiple levels of hierarchy are commonly used in order to build an
efficient caches architecture. efficient cache architecture.
In an environment, where each single cache system can be uniquely In an environment where each single cache system can be uniquely
identified by its own IPv6 address, a list containing a sequence of identified by its own IPv6 address, a list containing a sequence of
the caches in a hierarchy can be built. At each node (cache) in the the caches in a hierarchy can be built. At each node (cache) in the
list, the presence of the requested content is checked. If the list, the presence of the requested content is checked. If the
requested content is found at the cache (cache hits scenario) the requested content is found at the cache (a cache hits scenario), the
sequence ends, even if there are more nodes in the list; otherwise sequence ends even if there are more nodes in the list; otherwise,
next element in the list (next node/cache) is examined. the next element in the list (the next node/cache) is examined.
2.5. SPRING in Core networks 2.5. SPRING in Core Networks
While the overall amount of traffic offered to the network continues While the overall amount of traffic offered to the network continues
to grow and considering that multiple types of traffic with different to grow, and considering that multiple types of traffic with
characteristics and requirements are quickly converging over single different characteristics and requirements are quickly converging
network architecture, the network operators are starting to face new over a single network architecture, the network operators are
challenges. starting to face new challenges.
Some operators are currently building, or plan to build in the near Some operators are currently building, or plan to build in the near
future, an IPv6 only native infrastructure for their core network. future, an IPv6-only native infrastructure for their core network.
These operators are also looking at the possibility to setup an These operators are also looking at the possibility to set up an
explicit path based on the IPv6 source address for specific types of explicit path based on the IPv6 source address for specific types of
traffic in order to efficiently use their network infrastructure. In traffic in order to efficiently use their network infrastructure. In
case of IPv6 some operators are currently assigning or plan to assign the case of IPv6, some operators are currently assigning or plan to
IPv6 prefix(es) to their IPv6 customers based on regions/geography, assign IPv6 prefix(es) to their IPv6 customers based on regions/
thus the subscriber's IPv6 prefix could be used to identify the geography, thus the subscriber's IPv6 prefix could be used to
region where the customer is located. In such environment the IPv6 identify the region where the customer is located. In such an
source address could be used by the Edge nodes of the network to environment, the IPv6 source address could be used by the edge nodes
steer traffic and forward it through a specific path other than the of the network to steer traffic and forward it through a specific
optimal path. path other than the optimal path.
The need to setup a source-based path, going through some specific The need to set up a source-based path that goes through some
middle/intermediate points in the network may be related to different specific middle/intermediate points in the network may be related to
requirements: different requirements:
o The operator may want to be able to use some high bandwidth links o The operator may want to be able to use some high-bandwidth links
for specific type of traffic (like video) avoiding the need for for a specific type of traffic (like video) and thus avoid the
over-dimensioning all the links of the network; need for overdimensioning all the links of the network;
o The operator may want to be able to setup a specific path for o The operator may want to be able to set up a specific path for
delay sensitive applications; delay-sensitive applications;
o The operator may have the need to be able to select one (or o The operator may have the need to be able to select one (or
multiple) specific exit point(s) at peering points when different multiple) specific exit point(s) at peering points when different
peering points are available; peering points are available;
o The operator may have the need to be able to setup a source based o The operator may have the need to be able to set up a source-based
path for specific services in order to be able to reach some path for specific services in order to be able to reach some
servers hosted in some facilities not always reachable through the servers hosted in some facilities that are not always reachable
optimal path; through the optimal path; or
o The operator may have the need to be able to provision guaranteed o The operator may need to be able to provision guaranteed disjoint
disjoint paths (so-called dual-plane network) for diversity paths (a so-called "dual-plane network") for diversity purposes.
purposes
All these scenarios would require a form of traffic engineering All these scenarios would require a form of traffic engineering
capabilities in an IPv6 only network environment. capabilities in an IPv6-only network environment.
3. Contributors
Many people contributed to this document. The authors of this
document would like to thank and recognize them and their
contributions. These contributors provided invaluable concepts and
content for this document's creation.
Ida Leung
Rogers Communications
8200 Dixie Road
Brampton, ON L6T 0C1
CANADA
Email: Ida.Leung@rci.rogers.com
Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems
Via Del Serafico, 200
Rome 00142
Italy
Email: sprevidi@cisco.com
Christian Martin
Cisco Systems
Email: martincj@cisco.com
4. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Brian Field, Robert Raszuk, Wes
George, Eric Vyncke, Fred Baker, John G. Scudder, Adrian Farrel,
Alvaro Retana, Bruno Decraene and Yakov Rekhter for their valuable
comments and inputs to this document.
5. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any action from IANA. This document has no IANA actions.
6. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This document presents use cases to be considered by the SPRING This document presents use cases to be considered by the SPRING
architecture and potential IPv6 extensions. As such, it does not architecture and potential IPv6 extensions. As such, it does not
introduce any security considerations. However, there are a number introduce any security considerations. However, there are a number
of security concerns with source routing at the IP layer [RFC5095]. of security concerns with source routing at the IP layer [RFC5095].
It is expected that any solution that addresses these use cases to It is expected that any solution that addresses these use cases also
also address any security concerns. addresses any security concerns.
7. References 5. References
7.1. Informative References 5.1. Normative References
[DOCSIS] "DOCSIS Specifications Page", [RFC7855] Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Decraene, B.,
<http://www.cablelabs.com/news/ Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "Source
Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement
and Requirements", RFC 7855, DOI 10.17487/RFC7855,
May 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7855>.
5.2. Informative References
[DOCSIS] CableLabs, "New Generation of DOCSIS Technology", October
2013, <http://www.cablelabs.com/news/
new-generation-of-docsis-technology/>. new-generation-of-docsis-technology/>.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming] [ITU.J83] ITU-T, "Digital multi-programme systems for television,
sound and data services or cable distribution", ITU-T
Recommendation J.83, December 2007,
<https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-J.83/en>.
[PA-MULTIHOMING]
Baker, F., Bowers, C., and J. Linkova, "Enterprise Baker, F., Bowers, C., and J. Linkova, "Enterprise
Multihoming using Provider-Assigned Addresses without Multihoming using Provider-Assigned Addresses without
Network Prefix Translation: Requirements and Solution", Network Prefix Translation: Requirements and Solution",
draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming-02 (work in Work in Progress, draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-
progress), October 2017. multihoming-03, February 2018.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing
Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-13 (work
in progress), October 2017.
[QAM] "QAM specification", <ITU-T Recommendation J.83 Annex B
(J.83b)>.
[RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation [RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation
of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095, of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5095>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5095>.
7.2. Normative References [SEGMENT-ROUTING]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing
Architecture", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-spring-
segment-routing-15, January 2018.
[RFC7855] Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Decraene, B., Acknowledgements
Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "Source
Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement The authors would like to thank Brian Field, Robert Raszuk, Wes
and Requirements", RFC 7855, DOI 10.17487/RFC7855, May George, Eric Vyncke, Fred Baker, John G. Scudder, Adrian Farrel,
2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7855>. Alvaro Retana, Bruno Decraene, and Yakov Rekhter for their valuable
comments and inputs to this document.
Contributors
Many people contributed to this document. The authors of this
document would like to thank and recognize them and their
contributions. These contributors provided invaluable concepts and
content for this document's creation.
Ida Leung
Independent
Email: ida@brumund.ca
Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems
Via Del Serafico, 200
Rome 00142
Italy
Email: stefano@previdi.net
Christian Martin
Arista Networks
Email: cmartin@arista.com
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
John Brzozowski John Brzozowski
Comcast Comcast
Email: john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com Email: john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com
John Leddy John Leddy
Comcast Comcast
Email: John_Leddy@cable.comcast.com Email: John_Leddy@cable.comcast.com
Clarence Filsfils Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Brussels Brussels
BE Belgium
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Roberta Maglione (editor) Roberta Maglione (editor)
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Via Torri Bianche 8 Via Torri Bianche 8
Vimercate 20871 Vimercate 20871
Italy Italy
Email: robmgl@cisco.com Email: robmgl@cisco.com
 End of changes. 63 change blocks. 
200 lines changed or deleted 195 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/