--- 1/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-17.txt 2018-03-27 09:13:57.509528903 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-18.txt 2018-03-27 09:13:57.549529849 -0700 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ IDR S. Previdi, Ed. Internet-Draft C. Filsfils Intended status: Standards Track A. Lindem, Ed. -Expires: August 24, 2018 Cisco Systems +Expires: September 28, 2018 Cisco Systems A. Sreekantiah H. Gredler RtBrick Inc. - February 20, 2018 + March 27, 2018 Segment Routing Prefix SID extensions for BGP - draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-17 + draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-18 Abstract The Segment Routing (SR) architecture allows a node to steer a packet flow through any topological path and service chain by leveraging source routing. The ingress node prepends an SR header to a packet containing a set of segment identifiers (SID). Each SID represents a topological or a service-based instruction. Per-flow state is maintained only on the ingress node of the SR domain. @@ -41,21 +41,21 @@ 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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on August 24, 2018. + This Internet-Draft will expire on September 28, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -381,21 +381,21 @@ If multiple different prefixes are received with the same label index, all of the different prefixes MUST have their BGP Prefix-SID attribute considered as "conflicting". If multiple valid paths for the same prefix are received from multiple BGP speakers or, in the case of [RFC7911], from the same BGP speaker, and the BGP Prefix-SID attributes do not contain the same label index, then the label index from the best path BGP Prefix-SID attribute SHOULD be chosen with a notable exception being when - [RFC5005] is being used to dampen route changes. + [RFC5004] is being used to dampen route changes. When a BGP speaker receives a path from a neighbor with an "acceptable" BGP Prefix-SID attribute and that path is selected as the best path, it SHOULD program the derived label as the label for the prefix in its local MPLS dataplane. When a BGP speaker receives a path from a neighbor with an "invalid" or "conflicting" BGP Prefix-SID attribute or when a BGP speaker receives a path from a neighbor with a BGP Prefix-SID attribute but is unable to process it (e.g., local policy disables the @@ -621,24 +621,24 @@ 12.1. Normative References [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-15 (work in progress), January 2018. [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls] - Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., + Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing with MPLS - data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-11 - (work in progress), October 2017. + data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-12 + (work in progress), February 2018. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, . @@ -679,36 +679,37 @@ [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext] Previdi, S., Talaulikar, K., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., and M. Chen, "BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-04 (work in progress), January 2018. [I-D.ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing-epe] Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Patel, K., Ray, S., and J. Dong, "BGP-LS extensions for Segment Routing BGP Egress Peer Engineering", draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-segment-routing- - epe-14 (work in progress), December 2017. + epe-15 (work in progress), March 2018. [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc] Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Mitchell, J., Aries, E., and P. Lapukhov, "BGP-Prefix Segment in large-scale data centers", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-08 (work in progress), December 2017. [IANA-MPLS-SPECIAL-LABEL] "IANA Special-Purpose Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Values Registry", . - [RFC5005] Nottingham, M., "Feed Paging and Archiving", RFC 5005, - DOI 10.17487/RFC5005, September 2007, . + [RFC5004] Chen, E. and S. Sangli, "Avoid BGP Best Path Transitions + from One External to Another", RFC 5004, + DOI 10.17487/RFC5004, September 2007, . [RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752, DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016, . Authors' Addresses Stefano Previdi (editor)