draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt   draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt 
TEAS Working Group Zafar Ali TEAS Working Group Zafar Ali
Internet Draft George Swallow Internet Draft George Swallow
Intended status: Standard Track Clarence Filsfils Intended status: Standard Track Clarence Filsfils
Expires: February 27, 2017 Matt Hartley Expires: May 12, 2018 Matt Hartley
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Kenji Kumaki Kenji Kumaki
KDDI Corporation KDDI Corporation
Ruediger Kunze Ruediger Kunze
Deutsche Telekom AG Deutsche Telekom AG
September 28, 2016 November 13, 2017
Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)
extension for recording TE Metric of a Label Switched Path extension for recording TE Metric of a Label Switched Path
draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05 draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 27, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 12, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 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 (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 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s)
controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not
be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative
works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process,
skipping to change at page 3, line 4 skipping to change at page 3, line 4
3.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection Flags ... 5 3.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection Flags ... 5
3.2. RRO Cost Subobject ................................. 6 3.2. RRO Cost Subobject ................................. 6
3.3. RRO Delay Subobject ................................ 7 3.3. RRO Delay Subobject ................................ 7
3.4. RRO Delay Variation Subobject ...................... 7 3.4. RRO Delay Variation Subobject ...................... 7
4. Signaling Procedures ................................. 8 4. Signaling Procedures ................................. 8
4.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection ......... 9 4.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection ......... 9
4.2. Metric Update ......................................12 4.2. Metric Update ......................................12
4.3. Domain Boundaries ..................................12 4.3. Domain Boundaries ..................................12
4.4. Endpoint processing ................................12 4.4. Endpoint processing ................................12
4.5. Compatibility ......................................13 4.5. Compatibility ......................................13
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
5. Manageability Considerations .........................13 5. Manageability Considerations .........................13
5.1. Policy Configuration ...............................13 5.1. Policy Configuration ...............................13
6. Security Considerations ..............................14 6. Security Considerations ..............................14
7. IANA Considerations ..................................14 7. IANA Considerations ..................................14
7.1. RSVP Attribute Bit Flags ...........................14 7.1. RSVP Attribute Bit Flags ...........................14
7.2. ROUTE_RECORD subobject .............................15 7.2. ROUTE_RECORD subobject .............................15
7.3. Policy Control Failure Error subcodes ..............15 7.3. Policy Control Failure Error subcodes ..............15
8. Acknowledgments ......................................15 8. Acknowledgments ......................................15
9. References ...........................................16 9. References ...........................................16
skipping to change at page 4, line 5 skipping to change at page 4, line 5
In summary, there is a requirement for the ingress and egress In summary, there is a requirement for the ingress and egress
nodes to learn the cost, delay and delay variation information nodes to learn the cost, delay and delay variation information
of the TE link formed by a LSP. This document provides a of the TE link formed by a LSP. This document provides a
mechanism to collect the cost, delay and delay variation mechanism to collect the cost, delay and delay variation
information of a LSP, which can then be advertised as properties information of a LSP, which can then be advertised as properties
of the TE-link formed by that LSP. Note that specification of of the TE-link formed by that LSP. Note that specification of
the use of the collected cost, delay and delay variation the use of the collected cost, delay and delay variation
information is outside the scope of this document. information is outside the scope of this document.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
1.1. Use Cases 1.1. Use Cases
This section describes some of the use cases for the TE metric This section describes some of the use cases for the TE metric
recording. recording.
1.1.1. GMPLS 1.1.1. GMPLS
In Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks In Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks
signaling bidirectional LSPs, the egress node cannot determine signaling bidirectional LSPs, the egress node cannot determine
skipping to change at page 5, line 4 skipping to change at page 5, line 4
for cost and/or delay and/ or delay variation to be collected for cost and/or delay and/ or delay variation to be collected
without an explicit request for it being made by the ingress without an explicit request for it being made by the ingress
node. node.
It may be preferable for the cost and/ or delay and/ or delay It may be preferable for the cost and/ or delay and/ or delay
variation collection request to be understood by all nodes along variation collection request to be understood by all nodes along
the LSP's path, or it may be more important for the LSP to be the LSP's path, or it may be more important for the LSP to be
established successfully even if it traverses nodes that cannot established successfully even if it traverses nodes that cannot
supply the requested information or have not implemented the supply the requested information or have not implemented the
procedures specified in this document. It is desirable for the procedures specified in this document. It is desirable for the
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
ingress node to make the cost, delay and delay variation ingress node to make the cost, delay and delay variation
collection request in a manner that best suits its own policy. collection request in a manner that best suits its own policy.
2.2. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection 2.2. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection
If requested, the cost and/or delay and/ or delay variation If requested, the cost and/or delay and/ or delay variation
information is collected during the setup of an LSP. Each of the information is collected during the setup of an LSP. Each of the
cost, delay or delay variation can be collected independently. cost, delay or delay variation can be collected independently.
Cost and/ or delay and/ or delay variation information is for Cost and/ or delay and/ or delay variation information is for
skipping to change at page 6, line 4 skipping to change at page 6, line 4
. Simple addition of costs for different sections of a path . Simple addition of costs for different sections of a path
must make sense. must make sense.
3. Encoding 3. Encoding
3.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection Flags 3.1. Cost, Delay and Delay Variation Collection Flags
In order to indicate nodes that cost and/or Delay and/ or Delay In order to indicate nodes that cost and/or Delay and/ or Delay
variation collection is desired, this document defines the variation collection is desired, this document defines the
following new flags in the Attribute Flags TLV (see RFC 5420 following new flags in the Attribute Flags TLV (see RFC 5420
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
[RFC5420]), which MAY be carried in an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES [RFC5420]), which MAY be carried in an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES
or LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object: or LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object:
- Cost Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by IANA) - Cost Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by IANA)
- Delay Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by IANA) - Delay Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by IANA)
- Delay Variation Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by - Delay Variation Collection flag (Bit number to be assigned by
IANA) IANA)
skipping to change at page 7, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
Length: The Length field contains the total length of the Length: The Length field contains the total length of the
sub-object in bytes, including the Type and Length fields. sub-object in bytes, including the Type and Length fields.
The Length value is set to 8. The Length value is set to 8.
Direction bit (D-bit) Direction bit (D-bit)
If not set, the cost contained in this sub-object applies to If not set, the cost contained in this sub-object applies to
the downstream direction. If set, it applies to the upstream the downstream direction. If set, it applies to the upstream
direction. direction.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
Reserved: This field is reserved for future use. It MUST be Reserved: This field is reserved for future use. It MUST be
set to 0 on transmission and MUST be ignored when received. set to 0 on transmission and MUST be ignored when received.
Cost: Cost of the local TE link along the route of the LSP. Cost: Cost of the local TE link along the route of the LSP.
3.3. RRO Delay Subobject 3.3. RRO Delay Subobject
This document defines a new RRO sub-object (ROUTE_RECORD sub- This document defines a new RRO sub-object (ROUTE_RECORD sub-
object) to record the delay information of the LSP. Its format object) to record the delay information of the LSP. Its format
skipping to change at page 8, line 5 skipping to change at page 8, line 5
Delay: Delay of the local TE link along the route of the LSP, Delay: Delay of the local TE link along the route of the LSP,
encoded as 24-bit integer, as defined in RFC 7471 [RFC7471]. encoded as 24-bit integer, as defined in RFC 7471 [RFC7471].
When set to the maximum value 16,777,215 (16.777215 sec), the When set to the maximum value 16,777,215 (16.777215 sec), the
delay is at least that value and may be larger. delay is at least that value and may be larger.
3.4. RRO Delay Variation Subobject 3.4. RRO Delay Variation Subobject
This document defines a new RRO sub-object (ROUTE_RECORD sub- This document defines a new RRO sub-object (ROUTE_RECORD sub-
object) to record the delay variation information of the LSP. object) to record the delay variation information of the LSP.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
Its format is modeled on the RRO sub-objects defined in RFC 3209 Its format is modeled on the RRO sub-objects defined in RFC 3209
[RFC3209]. [RFC3209].
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 |D| Reserved (must be zero) | | Type | Length |D| Reserved (must be zero) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A| Reserved | Delay Variation | |A| Reserved | Delay Variation |
skipping to change at page 9, line 5 skipping to change at page 9, line 5
collection is similar, many parts of this section are written collection is similar, many parts of this section are written
such that they apply equally to cost, delay and delay variation such that they apply equally to cost, delay and delay variation
collection. There is also very strong similarity of these collection. There is also very strong similarity of these
procedures with SRLG recording [DRAFT-SRLG-RECORDING]. procedures with SRLG recording [DRAFT-SRLG-RECORDING].
The ingress node of the LSP MUST be capable of indicating The ingress node of the LSP MUST be capable of indicating
whether the Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation whether the Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation
information of the LSP is to be collected during the signaling information of the LSP is to be collected during the signaling
procedure of setting up an LSP. procedure of setting up an LSP.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
A node MUST NOT push Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation A node MUST NOT push Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation
sub-object(s) in the RECORD_ROUTE without also pushing either an sub-object(s) in the RECORD_ROUTE without also pushing either an
IPv4 sub-object, an IPv6 sub-object, an Unnumbered Interface ID IPv4 sub-object, an IPv6 sub-object, an Unnumbered Interface ID
sub-object or a Path Key sub-object or an SRLG sub-object. sub-object or a Path Key sub-object or an SRLG sub-object.
As described in RFC 3209 [RFC3209], the RECORD_ROUTE object is As described in RFC 3209 [RFC3209], the RECORD_ROUTE object is
managed as a stack. The Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay managed as a stack. The Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay
Variation sub-object(s) SHOULD be pushed by the node before the Variation sub-object(s) SHOULD be pushed by the node before the
node IP address or link identifier. These sub-object(s) SHOULD node IP address or link identifier. These sub-object(s) SHOULD
skipping to change at page 10, line 4 skipping to change at page 10, line 4
message with: message with:
o Error Code 2 (policy) and o Error Code 2 (policy) and
o Error subcode "Cost Recording Rejected" (value to be o Error subcode "Cost Recording Rejected" (value to be
assigned by IANA) assigned by IANA)
to reject the Path message. Similarly, when a node receives a to reject the Path message. Similarly, when a node receives a
Path message which carries an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES Object Path message which carries an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES Object
with the Delay Collection Flag set, if local policy determines with the Delay Collection Flag set, if local policy determines
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
that the Delay information is not to be provided to the that the Delay information is not to be provided to the
endpoints, it MUST return a PathErr message with: endpoints, it MUST return a PathErr message with:
o Error Code 2 (policy) and o Error Code 2 (policy) and
o Error subcode "Delay Recording Rejected" (value to be o Error subcode "Delay Recording Rejected" (value to be
assigned by IANA) assigned by IANA)
to reject the Path message. Likewise, when a node receives a to reject the Path message. Likewise, when a node receives a
skipping to change at page 11, line 4 skipping to change at page 11, line 4
Resv processing described below. Resv processing described below.
If the addition of Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation If the addition of Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation
information to the RRO would result in the RRO exceeding its information to the RRO would result in the RRO exceeding its
maximum possible size or becoming too large for the Path message maximum possible size or becoming too large for the Path message
to contain it, the requested information MUST NOT be added. If to contain it, the requested information MUST NOT be added. If
the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation collection request the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation collection request
was contained in an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES Object, the was contained in an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES Object, the
processing node MUST behave as specified by RFC 3209 [RFC3209] processing node MUST behave as specified by RFC 3209 [RFC3209]
and drop the RRO from the Path message entirely. If the Cost and drop the RRO from the Path message entirely. If the Cost
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation collection request was and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation collection request was
contained in an LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object, the processing node MAY contained in an LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object, the processing node MAY
omit some or all of the corresponding information from the RRO; omit some or all of the corresponding information from the RRO;
otherwise it MUST behave as specified by RFC 3209 [RFC3209] and otherwise it MUST behave as specified by RFC 3209 [RFC3209] and
drop the RRO from the Path message entirely. drop the RRO from the Path message entirely.
Following the steps described above, the intermediate nodes of Following the steps described above, the intermediate nodes of
the LSP can collect the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation the LSP can collect the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation
information in the RRO during the processing of the Path message information in the RRO during the processing of the Path message
skipping to change at page 12, line 4 skipping to change at page 12, line 4
the downstream data link from the local node. In this the downstream data link from the local node. In this
case, the node MUST include the metric information in the case, the node MUST include the metric information in the
same order for both Path messages and Resv messages. That same order for both Path messages and Resv messages. That
is, the Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation sub- is, the Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation sub-
object(s) for the upstream link is added to the RRO before object(s) for the upstream link is added to the RRO before
the corresponding sub-object for the downstream link. the corresponding sub-object for the downstream link.
If Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation data is added If Cost and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation data is added
for both the upstream and downstream links, the two sets of for both the upstream and downstream links, the two sets of
the data MUST be added in separate corresponding sub- the data MUST be added in separate corresponding sub-
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
object(s). A single Cost or Delay or Delay Variation sub- object(s). A single Cost or Delay or Delay Variation sub-
object MUST NOT contain a mixture of the applicable data object MUST NOT contain a mixture of the applicable data
for upstream and downstream directions. When adding a Cost for upstream and downstream directions. When adding a Cost
or Delay or Delay Variation sub-object to an RRO, the D-bit or Delay or Delay Variation sub-object to an RRO, the D-bit
MUST be set appropriately to indicate the direction of the MUST be set appropriately to indicate the direction of the
TE Link. If the same value applies in both directions, it TE Link. If the same value applies in both directions, it
SHOULD be added to both the corresponding upstream and SHOULD be added to both the corresponding upstream and
downstream sub-objects. downstream sub-objects.
skipping to change at page 13, line 4 skipping to change at page 13, line 4
and/or Delay variation metric is beyond the scope of this and/or Delay variation metric is beyond the scope of this
document. document.
4.4. Endpoint processing 4.4. Endpoint processing
Based on the procedures described above, the endpoints can get Based on the procedures described above, the endpoints can get
the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation information the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation information
automatically. Then the endpoints can for instance advertise it automatically. Then the endpoints can for instance advertise it
as a TE link to the routing instance based on the procedure as a TE link to the routing instance based on the procedure
described in [RFC6107] and configure the corresponding TE metric described in [RFC6107] and configure the corresponding TE metric
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
information of the Forwarding Adjacency (FA) or Routing information of the Forwarding Adjacency (FA) or Routing
Adjacency (RA) automatically. How the end point uses the Adjacency (RA) automatically. How the end point uses the
collected information is outside the scope of this document. collected information is outside the scope of this document.
The ingress and egress nodes of a LSP may calculate the end-to- The ingress and egress nodes of a LSP may calculate the end-to-
end Cost, Delay and/or Delay variation properties of the LSP end Cost, Delay and/or Delay variation properties of the LSP
from the supplied values in the Resv or Path RRO, respectively. from the supplied values in the Resv or Path RRO, respectively.
Typically, Cost and Delay are additive metrics, but Delay Typically, Cost and Delay are additive metrics, but Delay
skipping to change at page 14, line 5 skipping to change at page 14, line 5
following Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation processing following Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation processing
policy SHOULD be capable of being configured: policy SHOULD be capable of being configured:
o Whether the node is allowed to participate in Cost or Delay o Whether the node is allowed to participate in Cost or Delay
or Delay Variation collection. or Delay Variation collection.
o Whether the node should notify changes to collected Cost o Whether the node should notify changes to collected Cost
and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation information to and/ or Delay and/ or Delay Variation information to
endpoint nodes as described in section 4.2. endpoint nodes as described in section 4.2.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
o Whether the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation of the o Whether the Cost and/or Delay and/or Delay Variation of the
domain or specific layer network can be exposed to the domain or specific layer network can be exposed to the
nodes outside the domain or layer network, or whether they nodes outside the domain or layer network, or whether they
SHOULD be summarized, mapped to values that are SHOULD be summarized, mapped to values that are
comprehensible to nodes outside the domain or layer comprehensible to nodes outside the domain or layer
network, or removed entirely. network, or removed entirely.
A node using RFC 5553 [RFC5553] and PKS MAY apply the same A node using RFC 5553 [RFC5553] and PKS MAY apply the same
policy. policy.
skipping to change at page 15, line 4 skipping to change at page 15, line 4
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------- --- ------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ----------- --- -------
TBA by Cost Yes No Yes This I-D TBA by Cost Yes No Yes This I-D
IANA Collection IANA Collection
Flag Flag
TBA by Delay Yes No Yes This I-D TBA by Delay Yes No Yes This I-D
IANA Collection IANA Collection
Flag Flag
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
TBA by Delay Yes No Yes This I-D TBA by Delay Yes No Yes This I-D
IANA Variation IANA Variation
Collection Collection
Flag Flag
7.2. ROUTE_RECORD sub-object 7.2. ROUTE_RECORD sub-object
IANA manages the "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at IANA manages the "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. This document http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. This document
skipping to change at page 16, line 5 skipping to change at page 16, line 5
TBA by IANA Delay Recoding Rejected This I-D TBA by IANA Delay Recoding Rejected This I-D
TBA by IANA Delay Variation Recoding Rejected This I-D TBA by IANA Delay Variation Recoding Rejected This I-D
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
Authors would like to thank Ori Gerstel, Gabriele Maria Authors would like to thank Ori Gerstel, Gabriele Maria
Galimberti, Luyuan Fang and Walid Wakim for their review Galimberti, Luyuan Fang and Walid Wakim for their review
comments. comments.
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[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, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan,
V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for
skipping to change at page 17, line 4 skipping to change at page 17, line 4
[RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010.
[DRAFT-SRLG-RECORDING] F. Zhang, O. Gonzalez de Dios, M. [DRAFT-SRLG-RECORDING] F. Zhang, O. Gonzalez de Dios, M.
Hartley, Z. Ali, C. Margaria,, "RSVP-TE Extensions for Hartley, Z. Ali, C. Margaria,, "RSVP-TE Extensions for
Collecting SRLG Information", draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te- Collecting SRLG Information", draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-
srlg-collect.txt, work in progress. srlg-collect.txt, work in progress.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-te-metric-recording-06.txt
Zafar Ali Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: zali@cisco.com Email: zali@cisco.com
George Swallow George Swallow
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
swallow@cisco.com swallow@cisco.com
Clarence Filsfils Clarence Filsfils
 End of changes. 25 change blocks. 
36 lines changed or deleted 35 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/