draft-ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution-12.txt		draft-ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution-13.txt
	Network Working Group S. Previdi		Network Working Group S. Previdi
	Internet-Draft		Internet-Draft
	Intended status: Standards Track K. Talaulikar, Ed.		Intended status: Standards Track K. Talaulikar, Ed.
	Expires: April 16, 2020 Cisco Systems, Inc.		Expires: October 29, 2020 Cisco Systems, Inc.
	J. Dong, Ed.		J. Dong, Ed.
	M. Chen		M. Chen
	Huawei Technologies		Huawei Technologies
	H. Gredler		H. Gredler
	RtBrick Inc.		RtBrick Inc.
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Apstra		Apstra
	October 14, 2019		April 27, 2020
	Distribution of Traffic Engineering (TE) Policies and State using BGP-LS		Distribution of Traffic Engineering (TE) Policies and State using BGP-LS
	draft-ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution-12		draft-ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution-13
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document describes a mechanism to collect the Traffic		This document describes a mechanism to collect the Traffic
	Engineering and Policy information that is locally available in a		Engineering and Policy information that is locally available in a
	node and advertise it into BGP Link State (BGP-LS) updates. Such		node and advertise it into BGP Link State (BGP-LS) updates. Such
	information can be used by external components for path computation,		information can be used by external components for path computation,
	re-optimization, service placement, network visualization, etc.		re-optimization, service placement, network visualization, etc.
	Requirements Language
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
	"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
	14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
	capitals, as shown here.
	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 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 April 16, 2020.
			This Internet-Draft will expire on October 29, 2020.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2020 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
			1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	2. Carrying TE Policy Information in BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2. Carrying TE Policy Information in BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	3. TE Policy NLRI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		3. TE Policy NLRI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4. TE Policy Descriptors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4. TE Policy Descriptors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	4.1. Tunnel Identifier (Tunnel ID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		4.1. Tunnel Identifier (Tunnel ID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	4.2. LSP Identifier (LSP ID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		4.2. LSP Identifier (LSP ID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	4.3. IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-End Address . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		4.3. IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-End Address . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	4.4. IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-End Address . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		4.4. IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-End Address . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	4.5. SR Policy Candidate Path Descriptor . . . . . . . . . . . 10		4.5. SR Policy Candidate Path Descriptor . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	4.6. Local MPLS Cross Connect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		4.6. Local MPLS Cross Connect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	4.6.1. MPLS Cross Connect Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		4.6.1. MPLS Cross Connect Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	skipping to change at page 5, line 24 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 18 ¶
	BGP has been extended to distribute link-state and traffic		BGP has been extended to distribute link-state and traffic
	engineering information to external components [RFC7752]. Using the		engineering information to external components [RFC7752]. Using the
	same protocol to collect Traffic Engineering Policy and state		same protocol to collect Traffic Engineering Policy and state
	information is desirable for these external components since this		information is desirable for these external components since this
	avoids introducing multiple protocols for network information		avoids introducing multiple protocols for network information
	collection. This document describes a mechanism to distribute		collection. This document describes a mechanism to distribute
	traffic engineering policy information (MPLS, SR, IPv4 and IPv6) to		traffic engineering policy information (MPLS, SR, IPv4 and IPv6) to
	external components using BGP-LS.		external components using BGP-LS.
			1.1. Requirements Language
			The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
			"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
			"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
			14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
			capitals, as shown here.
	2. Carrying TE Policy Information in BGP		2. Carrying TE Policy Information in BGP
	TE Policy information is advertised in BGP UPDATE messages using the		TE Policy information is advertised in BGP UPDATE messages using the
	MP_REACH_NLRI and MP_UNREACH_NLRI attributes [RFC4760]. The "Link-		MP_REACH_NLRI and MP_UNREACH_NLRI attributes [RFC4760]. The "Link-
	State NLRI" defined in [RFC7752] is extended to carry the TE Policy		State NLRI" defined in [RFC7752] is extended to carry the TE Policy
	information. BGP speakers that wish to exchange TE Policy		information. BGP speakers that wish to exchange TE Policy
	information MUST use the BGP Multiprotocol Extensions Capability Code		information MUST use the BGP Multiprotocol Extensions Capability Code
	(1) to advertise the corresponding (AFI, SAFI) pair, as specified in		(1) to advertise the corresponding (AFI, SAFI) pair, as specified in
	[RFC4760]. New TLVs carried in the Link_State Attribute defined in		[RFC4760]. New TLVs carried in the Link_State Attribute defined in
	[RFC7752] are also defined in order to carry the attributes of a TE		[RFC7752] are also defined in order to carry the attributes of a TE
	skipping to change at page 46, line 31 ¶		skipping to change at page 46, line 31 ¶
	13.1. Normative References		13.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe]		[I-D.ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe]
	Previdi, S., Talaulikar, K., Filsfils, C., Patel, K., Ray,		Previdi, S., Talaulikar, K., Filsfils, C., Patel, K., Ray,
	S., and J. Dong, "BGP-LS extensions for Segment Routing		S., and J. Dong, "BGP-LS extensions for Segment Routing
	BGP Egress Peer Engineering", draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-		BGP Egress Peer Engineering", draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-
	segment-routing-epe-19 (work in progress), May 2019.		segment-routing-epe-19 (work in progress), May 2019.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]		[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
	Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d.,		Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and
	bogdanov@google.com, b., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing		P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft-
	Policy Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-		ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-06 (work in progress),
	policy-03 (work in progress), May 2019.		December 2019.
	[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,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC2205] Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.		[RFC2205] Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
	Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1		Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
	Functional Specification", RFC 2205, DOI 10.17487/RFC2205,		Functional Specification", RFC 2205, DOI 10.17487/RFC2205,
	September 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2205>.		September 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2205>.
	skipping to change at page 47, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 47, line 37 ¶
	[RFC4873] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., and A. Farrel,		[RFC4873] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., and A. Farrel,
	"GMPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, DOI 10.17487/RFC4873,		"GMPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, DOI 10.17487/RFC4873,
	May 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4873>.		May 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4873>.
	[RFC4874] Lee, CY., Farrel, A., and S. De Cnodder, "Exclude Routes -		[RFC4874] Lee, CY., Farrel, A., and S. De Cnodder, "Exclude Routes -
	Extension to Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic		Extension to Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
	Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 4874, DOI 10.17487/RFC4874,		Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 4874, DOI 10.17487/RFC4874,
	April 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4874>.		April 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4874>.
	[RFC5420] Farrel, A., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Vasseur, JP., and A.		[RFC5420] Farrel, A., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Vasseur, JP., and A.
	Ayyangarps, "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP		Ayyangar, "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP
	Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic		Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic
	Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 5420, DOI 10.17487/RFC5420,		Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 5420, DOI 10.17487/RFC5420,
	February 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5420>.		February 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5420>.
	[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation		[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
	Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,		Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
	[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and		[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
End of changes. 10 change blocks.
	18 lines changed or deleted		20 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/