draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-06.txt   draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-07.txt 
Networking Working Group S. Previdi, Ed. Networking Working Group L. Ginsberg, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. Internet-Draft S. Previdi
Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: December 27, 2017 Huawei Expires: February 3, 2018 Q. Wu
Huawei
H. Gredler H. Gredler
S. Ray S. Ray
J. Tantsura J. Tantsura
Individual Individual
C. Filsfils C. Filsfils
L. Ginsberg
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
June 25, 2017 August 2, 2017
BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric
Extensions Extensions
draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-06 draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-07
Abstract Abstract
This document defines new BGP-LS TLVs in order to carry the IGP This document defines new BGP-LS TLVs in order to carry the IGP
Traffic Engineering Extensions defined in IS-IS and OSPF protocols. Traffic Engineering Extensions defined in IS-IS and OSPF protocols.
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
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
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 December 27, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 3, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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 (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 3, line 9 skipping to change at page 3, line 9
BGP-LS ([RFC7752]) defines NLRI and attributes in order to carry BGP-LS ([RFC7752]) defines NLRI and attributes in order to carry
link-state information. New BGP-LS Link-Attribute TLVs are required link-state information. New BGP-LS Link-Attribute TLVs are required
in order to carry the Traffic Engineering Metric Extensions defined in order to carry the Traffic Engineering Metric Extensions defined
in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions 2. Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions
The following new Link Attribute TLVs are defined: The following new Link Attribute TLVs are defined:
TLV Type Value TLV Name
-------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------
1104 (Suggested) Unidirectional Link Delay Unidirectional Link Delay
1105 (Suggested) Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay
1106 (Suggested) Unidirectional Delay Variation Unidirectional Delay Variation
1107 (Suggested) Unidirectional Packet Loss Unidirectional Packet Loss
1108 (Suggested) Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth
1109 (Suggested) Unidirectional Available Bandwidth Unidirectional Available Bandwidth
1110 (Suggested) Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization
3. TLV Details 3. TLV Details
3.1. Unidirectional Link Delay TLV 3.1. Unidirectional Link Delay TLV
This TLV advertises the average link delay between two directly This TLV advertises the average link delay between two directly
connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is
described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 3, line 45 skipping to change at page 3, line 45
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A| RESERVED | Delay | |A| RESERVED | Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Figure 1 Figure 1
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1104). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
3.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TLV 3.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the minimum and maximum delay values between This sub-TLV advertises the minimum and maximum delay values between
two directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the two directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the
TLV is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. TLV is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 4, line 25 skipping to change at page 4, line 25
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A| RESERVED | Min Delay | |A| RESERVED | Min Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| RESERVED | Max Delay | | RESERVED | Max Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Figure 2 Figure 2
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1105). Type: TBA
Length: 8. Length: 8.
3.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation TLV 3.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the average link delay variation between two This sub-TLV advertises the average link delay variation between two
directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV
is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 4, line 47 skipping to change at page 4, line 47
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| RESERVED | Delay Variation | | RESERVED | Delay Variation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Figure 3 Figure 3
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1106). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
3.4. Unidirectional Link Loss TLV 3.4. Unidirectional Link Loss TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the loss (as a packet percentage) between two This sub-TLV advertises the loss (as a packet percentage) between two
directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV
is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
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 | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A| RESERVED | Link Loss | |A| RESERVED | Link Loss |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1107). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
3.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TLV 3.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the residual bandwidth between two directly This sub-TLV advertises the residual bandwidth between two directly
connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is
described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
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 | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Residual Bandwidth | | Residual Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1108). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
3.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TLV 3.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the available bandwidth between two directly This sub-TLV advertises the available bandwidth between two directly
connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is
described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 6, line 17 skipping to change at page 6, line 17
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Available Bandwidth | | Available Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Figure 4 Figure 4
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1109). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
3.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TLV 3.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the bandwidth utilization between two This sub-TLV advertises the bandwidth utilization between two
directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV
is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471]. is described in [RFC7810] and [RFC7471].
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 6, line 39 skipping to change at page 6, line 39
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Utilized Bandwidth | | Utilized Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where: where:
Figure 5 Figure 5
Type: TBA (suggested value: 1110). Type: TBA
Length: 4. Length: 4.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the BGP security model. See the 'Security Considerations' affect the BGP security model. See the 'Security Considerations'
section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP security. Also refer to section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP security. Also refer to
[RFC4272] and [RFC6952] for analysis of security issues for BGP. [RFC4272] and [RFC6952] for analysis of security issues for BGP.
skipping to change at page 8, line 35 skipping to change at page 8, line 35
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.
[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of [RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013, Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Stefano Previdi (editor) Les Ginsberg (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
US
Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
IT IT
Email: stefano@previdi.net Email: stefano@previdi.net
Qin Wu Qin Wu
Huawei Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
China China
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
Hannes Gredler Hannes Gredler
Individual Individual
AT AT
Email: hannes@gredler.at Email: hannes@gredler.at
Saikat Ray Saikat Ray
Individual Individual
US US
skipping to change at page 9, line 20 skipping to change at page 9, line 28
Saikat Ray Saikat Ray
Individual Individual
US US
Email: raysaikat@gmail.com Email: raysaikat@gmail.com
Jeff Tantsura Jeff Tantsura
Individual Individual
US US
Email: jefftant@gmail.com Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
Clarence Filsfils Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Brussels Brussels
BE BE
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Les Ginsberg
Cisco Systems, Inc.
US
Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
27 lines changed or deleted 33 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/