draft-ietf-idr-large-community-02.txt   draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03.txt 
IDR J. Heitz IDR J. Heitz, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Internet-Draft Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track K. Patel Intended status: Standards Track J. Snijders, Ed.
Expires: April 11, 2017 Arrcus Expires: April 19, 2017 NTT
J. Snijders K. Patel
NTT Arrcus
I. Bagdonas I. Bagdonas
Equinix Equinix
A. Simpson A. Simpson
Nokia Nokia
October 8, 2016 N. Hilliard
INEX
October 16, 2016
Large BGP Communities Large BGP Communities
draft-ietf-idr-large-community-02 draft-ietf-idr-large-community-03
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the Large BGP Community attribute, an This document describes the Large BGP Communities attribute, an
extension to BGP-4. This attribute provides a mechanism to signal extension to BGP-4. This attribute provides a mechanism to signal
opaque information within separate namespaces to aid in routing opaque information within separate namespaces to aid in routing
management. The attribute is suitable for use in 4-octet ASNs. management. The attribute is suitable for use in four-octet ASNs.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [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
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 48
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 11, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
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
2. Large BGP Communities Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Large BGP Communities Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Textual Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Canonical Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Reserved Large BGP Community values . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Reserved Large BGP Community values . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 5 8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 5
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
BGP implementations typically support a routing policy language to BGP implementations typically support a routing policy language to
control the distribution of routing information. Network operators control the distribution of routing information. Network operators
attach BGP communities to routes to identify intrinsic properties of attach BGP communities to routes to identify intrinsic properties of
these routes. These properties may include information such as the these routes. These properties may include information such as the
route origin location, or specification of a routing policy action to route origin location, or specification of a routing policy action to
be taken, or one that has been taken, and may apply to an individual be taken, or one that has been taken, and may apply to an individual
route or to a group of routes. Because BGP communities are optional route or to a group of routes. Because BGP communities are optional
transitive BGP attributes, BGP communities may be acted upon or transitive BGP attributes, BGP communities may be acted upon or
otherwise used by routing policies in other Autonomous Systems (ASes) otherwise used by routing policies in other Autonomous Systems (ASes)
on the Internet. on the Internet.
[RFC1997] BGP Communities Attributes are four-octet values split into [RFC1997] BGP Communities attributes are four-octet values split into
two individual two-octet words. The most significant word is usually two two-octet words. The most significant word is usually
interpreted as an Autonomous System Number (ASN) and the least interpreted as an Autonomous System Number (ASN) and the least
significant word is a locally defined value whose meaning is assigned significant word is a locally defined value whose meaning is assigned
by the operator of the Autonomous System in the most significant by the operator of the Autonomous System in the most significant
word. word.
Since the adoption of four-octet ASNs [RFC6793], the BGP Communities Since the adoption of four-octet ASNs [RFC6793], the BGP Communities
Attribute can no longer accommodate this encoding, as the attribute can no longer accommodate the above encoding, as a two-
specification in [RFC1997] contains only four octets. This does not octet word cannot fit a four-octet ASN. The BGP Extended Communities
allow operators to specify any locally significant values. attribute [RFC4360] is also unsuitable, as the protocol limit of six
octets cannot accommodate both a four-octet Global Administrator
value and a four-octet Local Administrator value, which precludes the
common operational practice of encoding a target ASN in the Local
Administrator field.
To address these shortcomings, this document defines a Large To address these shortcomings, this document defines a Large BGP
Community BGP Attribute encoded as one or more 12-octet values, each Communities attribute encoded as one or more twelve-octet values,
consisting of a four-octet ASN and two four-octet operator-defined each consisting of a four-octet ASN and two four-octet operator-
values, each of which can be used to denote properties or actions defined values, each of which can be used to denote properties or
significant to that ASN. actions significant to that ASN.
2. Large BGP Communities Attribute 2. Large BGP Communities Attribute
This document creates the Large Communities BGP path attribute as an This document creates the Large BGP Communities attribute as an
optional transitive attribute of variable length. All routes with optional transitive path attribute of variable length. All routes
the Large Communities attribute belong to the community specified in with the Large BGP Communities attribute belong to the community
the attribute. specified in the attribute.
The attribute consists of one or more 12-octet values. Each 12-octet The attribute consists of one or more twelve-octet values. Each
Large Communities value represents three 4-octet values, as follows: twelve-octet Large BGP Communities value represents three four-octet
values, as follows:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Global Administrator | | Global Administrator |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Data Part 1 | | Local Data Part 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Data Part 2 | | Local Data Part 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Global Administrator: A four-octet namespace identifier. This Global Administrator: A four-octet namespace identifier. This
SHOULD be an Autonomous System Number. SHOULD be an Autonomous System Number.
Local Data Part 1: A four-octet operator-defined value. Local Data Part 1: A four-octet operator-defined value.
Local Data Part 2: A four-octet operator-defined value. Local Data Part 2: A four-octet operator-defined value.
The Global Administrator field is intended to allow different The Global Administrator field is intended to allow different
Autonomous Systems to define Large Communities without collision. Autonomous Systems to define Large BGP Communities without collision.
Implementations MUST allow the operator to specify any value for the Implementations MUST allow the operator to specify any value for the
Global Administrator field. Global Administrator field.
There is no significance to the order in which Large Communities are There is no significance to the order in which Large BGP Communities
encoded in a path attributes field and a receiving speaker MAY are encoded in a path attributes field and a receiving speaker MAY
retransmit them in an order different from which it received them. retransmit them in an order different from which it received them.
Duplicate Large Communities SHOULD NOT be transmitted. A receiving Duplicate Large BGP Communities SHOULD NOT be transmitted. A
speaker SHOULD silently remove duplicate Large Communities from a BGP receiving speaker SHOULD silently remove duplicate Large BGP
UPDATE message. Communities from a BGP UPDATE message.
3. Aggregation 3. Aggregation
If a range of routes is aggregated and the resulting aggregates If a range of routes is aggregated, then the resulting aggregate
attribute section does not carry the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE attribute, then should have a Large BGP Communities attribute which contains all of
the resulting aggregate should have a Large Communities path the Large BGP Communities attributes from all of the aggregated
attribute which contains all of the large communities from all of the routes.
aggregated routes.
4. Textual Representation
BGP Communities [RFC1998] are usually represented in routing policy
languages as two individual two-octet unsigned integers separated by
a colon; for example, 64496:12345.
BGP Large Communities implementations MUST represent Large 4. Canonical Representation
Communities in a manner similar to their representation of BGP
Communities [RFC1998]. Large Communities MUST be represented as
three separate four-octet unsigned integers in decimal format with no
leading zeros. These integers MUST NOT be omitted, even when zero.
For example, 64496:4294967295:2 or 64496:0:0.
Vendors MAY provide other textual representations. For example, a Large BGP Communities MUST be represented as three separate unsigned
vendor's routing policy language may use a separator other than a decimal numbers, without leading zeros, in the following order:
colon or may require keywords or characters prepending or postpending Global Administrator, Local Data 1, Local Data 2. Numbers MUST not
the Large Communities attribute. Such differences are permitted. be omitted, even when zero. For example: 64496:4294967295:2 or
However, each implementation MUST make a representation available 64496:0:0 or (64496, 111, 222).
that depicts the integers in decimal and in the following order:
Global Administrator, Local Data Part 1, Local Data Part 2.
5. Reserved Large BGP Community values 5. Reserved Large BGP Community values
The Large BGP Community attribute values in the following ranges are The Large BGP Community attribute values in the following ranges are
reserved: reserved:
0:0:0 - 0:4294967295:4294967295 0:0:0 - 0:4294967295:4294967295
65535:0:0 - 65535:4294967295:4294967295 65535:0:0 - 65535:4294967295:4294967295
4294967295:0:0 - 4294967295:4294967295:4294967295 4294967295:0:0 - 4294967295:4294967295:4294967295
6. Error Handling 6. Error Handling
The error handling of Large Communities is as follows: The error handling of Large BGP Communities is as follows:
o A Large Communities BGP Path Attribute with a length of zero MUST o A Large BGP Communities attribute with a length of zero MUST be
be ignored upon receipt and removed when sending. ignored upon receipt and removed when sending.
o A Large Communities attribute SHALL be considered malformed if its o A Large BGP Communities attribute SHALL be considered malformed if
length is not a non-zero multiple of 12 bytes. its length is not a non-zero multiple of 12 bytes.
o A BGP UPDATE message with a malformed Large Communities attribute o A BGP UPDATE message with a malformed Large BGP Communities
SHALL be handled using the approach of "treat-as-withdraw" as attribute SHALL be handled using the approach of "treat-as-
described in section 2 [RFC7606]. withdraw" as described in section 2 [RFC7606].
The BGP Large Communities Global Administrator field may contain any The Large BGP Communities Global Administrator field may contain any
value, and a Large Communities attribute MUST NOT be considered value, and a Large BGP Communities attribute MUST NOT be considered
malformed if the Global Administrator field contains an unallocated, malformed if the Global Administrator field contains an unallocated,
unassigned or reserved ASN or is set to one of the reserved Large BGP unassigned or reserved ASN or is set to one of the reserved Large BGP
Community values defined in Section 5. Community values defined in Section 5.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
This extension to BGP has similar security implications as BGP This extension to BGP has similar security implications as BGP
Communities [RFC1997]. Communities [RFC1997].
This document does not change any underlying security issues This document does not change any underlying security issues
associated with any other BGP Communities mechanism. Specifically, associated with any other BGP Communities mechanism. Specifically,
an AS relying on the Large BGP Community attribute carried in BGP an AS relying on the Large BGP Communities attribute carried in BGP
must have trust in every other AS in the path, as any intermediate must have trust in every other AS in the path, as any intermediate
Autonomous System in the path may have added, deleted or altered the Autonomous System in the path may have added, deleted or altered the
Large BGP Community attribute. Specifying the mechanism to provide Large BGP Communities attribute. Specifying the mechanism to provide
such trust is beyond the scope of this document. such trust is beyond the scope of this document.
Network administrators should note the recommendations in Section 11 Network administrators should note the recommendations in Section 11
of BGP Operations and Security [RFC7454]. of BGP Operations and Security [RFC7454].
8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION
This section records the status of known implementations of the This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942]. Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
skipping to change at page 6, line 8 skipping to change at page 5, line 47
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist. exist.
As of today these vendors have produced an implementation of Large As of today these vendors have produced an implementation of Large
BGP Community: BGP Communities:
o Cisco IOS XR o Cisco IOS XR
o ExaBGP o ExaBGP
o GoBGP o GoBGP
o BIRD o BIRD
o OpenBGPD o OpenBGPD
o pmacct
The latest implementation news is tracked at The latest implementation news is tracked at
http://largebgpcommunities.net/ [1]. http://largebgpcommunities.net/ [1].
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
IANA has made an Early Allocation of the value 30 (LARGE_COMMUNITY) IANA has made an Early Allocation of the value 30 (LARGE_COMMUNITY)
in the "BGP Path Attributes" registry under the "Border Gateway in the "BGP Path Attributes" registry under the "Border Gateway
Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group and is now asked to make that Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group and is now asked to make that
Permanent. Permanent.
10. Acknowledgments 10. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Ruediger Volk, Russ White, Acee The authors would like to thank Ruediger Volk, Russ White, Acee
Lindem, Shyam Sethuram, Jared Mauch, Joel M. Halpern, Nick Hilliard, Lindem, Shyam Sethuram, Jared Mauch, Joel M. Halpern, Jeffrey Haas,
Jeffrey Haas, John Heasley, Gunter van de Velde, Marco Marzetti, John Heasley, Gunter van de Velde, Marco Marzetti, Eduardo Ascenco
Eduardo Ascenco Reis, Mark Schouten, Paul Hoogsteder, Martijn Reis, Mark Schouten, Paul Hoogsteder, Martijn Schmidt, Greg Hankins,
Schmidt, Greg Hankins, Acee Lindem, Bertrand Duvivier, Barry Acee Lindem, Bertrand Duvivier, Barry O'Donovan, Grzegorz Janoszka,
O'Donovan, Grzegorz Janoszka, Linda Dunbar, Marco Davids, Gaurab Raj Linda Dunbar, Marco Davids, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya, Jeff Tantsura, Teun
Upadhaya, Jeff Tantsura, Teun Vink, Adam Davenport, Theodore Baschak, Vink, Adam Davenport, Theodore Baschak, Pier Carlo Chiodi, Nabeel
Pier Carlo Chiodi, Nabeel Cocker, Ian Dickinson, Jan Baggen, Duncan Cocker, Ian Dickinson, Jan Baggen, Duncan Lockwood, David Farmer,
Lockwood, David Farmer, Randy Bush, Wim Henderickx, Stefan Plug, Kay Randy Bush, Wim Henderickx, Stefan Plug, Kay Rechthien, Rob Shakir,
Rechthien, Rob Shakir, Warren Kumari, Gert Doering, Thomas King, Warren Kumari, Gert Doering, Thomas King, Mikael Abrahamsson, Wesley
Mikael Abrahamsson, Wesley Steehouwer, Sander Steffann, Brad Steehouwer, Sander Steffann, Brad Dreisbach, Martin Millnert,
Dreisbach, Martin Millnert, Christopher Morrow, Jay Borkenhagen, Christopher Morrow, Jay Borkenhagen, Arnold Nipper, Joe Provo, Niels
Arnold Nipper, Joe Provo, Niels Bakker, Bill Fenner, Tom Daly, Ben Bakker, Bill Fenner, Tom Daly, Ben Maddison, Alexander Azimov, Brian
Maddison, Alexander Azimov, Brian Dickson, Peter van Dijk, Julian Dickson, Peter van Dijk, Julian Seifert, Tom Petch, Tom Scholl, Arjen
Seifert, Tom Petch and Tom Scholl for their support, insightful Zonneveld, and Remco van Mook for their support, insightful review
review and comments. and comments.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[RFC1997] Chandra, R., Traina, P., and T. Li, "BGP Communities [RFC1997] Chandra, R., Traina, P., and T. Li, "BGP Communities
Attribute", RFC 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC1997, August 1996, Attribute", RFC 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC1997, August 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1997>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1997>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
skipping to change at page 7, line 30 skipping to change at page 7, line 22
DOI 10.17487/RFC6793, December 2012, DOI 10.17487/RFC6793, December 2012,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6793>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6793>.
[RFC7606] Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K. [RFC7606] Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K.
Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages", Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages",
RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015, RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7606>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7606>.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[RFC1998] Chen, E. and T. Bates, "An Application of the BGP [RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
Community Attribute in Multi-home Routing", RFC 1998, Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1998, August 1996, February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4360>.
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1998>.
[RFC7454] Durand, J., Pepelnjak, I., and G. Doering, "BGP Operations [RFC7454] Durand, J., Pepelnjak, I., and G. Doering, "BGP Operations
and Security", BCP 194, RFC 7454, DOI 10.17487/RFC7454, and Security", BCP 194, RFC 7454, DOI 10.17487/RFC7454,
February 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7454>. February 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7454>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205, Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
11.3. URIs 11.3. URIs
[1] https://largebgpcommunities.net [1] http://largebgpcommunities.net
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Jakob Heitz
Jakob Heitz (editor)
Cisco Cisco
170 West Tasman Drive 170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95054 San Jose, CA 95054
USA USA
Email: jheitz@cisco.com Email: jheitz@cisco.com
Job Snijders (editor)
Keyur Patel
Arrcus, Inc
Email: keyur@arrcus.com
Job Snijders
NTT Communications NTT Communications
Theodorus Majofskistraat 100 Theodorus Majofskistraat 100
Amsterdam 1065 SZ Amsterdam 1065 SZ
NL NL
Email: job@ntt.net Email: job@ntt.net
Keyur Patel
Arrcus, Inc
Email: keyur@arrcus.com
Ignas Bagdonas Ignas Bagdonas
Equinix Equinix
London London
UK UK
Email: ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com Email: ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com
Adam Simpson Adam Simpson
Nokia Nokia
600 March Road 600 March Road
Ottawa Ontario K2K 2E6 Ottawa Ontario K2K 2E6
Canada Canada
Email: adam.1.simpson@nokia.com Email: adam.1.simpson@nokia.com
Nick Hilliard
INEX
4027 Kingswood Road
Dublin 24
IE
Email: nick@inex.ie
 End of changes. 38 change blocks. 
102 lines changed or deleted 95 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/