draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-10.txt   draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-11.txt 
IS-IS Working Group J. Tantsura IS-IS Working Group J. Tantsura
Internet-Draft Nuage Networks Internet-Draft Nuage Networks
Intended status: Standards Track U. Chunduri Intended status: Standards Track U. Chunduri
Expires: October 11, 2018 Huawei Technologies Expires: November 11, 2018 Huawei Technologies
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Google, Inc Google, Inc
L. Ginsberg L. Ginsberg
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
April 09, 2018 May 10, 2018
Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS
draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-10 draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-11
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a way for an IS-IS Router to advertise multiple This document defines a way for an IS-IS Router to advertise multiple
types of supported Maximum SID Depths (MSDs) at node and/or link types of supported Maximum SID Depths (MSDs) at node and/or link
granularity. Such advertisements allow entities (e.g., centralized granularity. Such advertisements allow entities (e.g., centralized
controllers) to determine whether a particular SID stack can be controllers) to determine whether a particular SID stack can be
supported in a given network. This document only defines one type of supported in a given network. This document only defines one type of
MSD maximum label imposition, but defines an encoding that can MSD maximum label imposition, but defines an encoding that can
support other MSD types. support other MSD types.
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 skipping to change at page 1, line 41
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 October 11, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 11, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 18 skipping to change at page 2, line 18
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
1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Node MSD Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Node MSD Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Link MSD Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Link MSD Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Using Node and Link MSD Advertisements . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Using Node and Link MSD Advertisements . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Base MPLS Imposition MSD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Base MPLS Imposition MSD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
When Segment Routing(SR) paths are computed by a centralized When Segment Routing(SR) paths are computed by a centralized
controller, it is critical that the controller learns the Maximum SID controller, it is critical that the controller learns the Maximum SID
Depth(MSD) that can be imposed at each node/link a given SR path to Depth(MSD) that can be imposed at each node/link a given SR path to
insure that the SID stack depth of a computed path doesn't exceed the insure that the SID stack depth of a computed path doesn't exceed the
number of SIDs the node is capable of imposing. number of SIDs the node is capable of imposing.
PCEP SR extensions draft [I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing] signals MSD PCEP SR extensions draft [I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing] signals MSD
in SR PCE Capability TLV and METRIC Object. However, if PCEP is not in SR PCE Capability TLV and METRIC Object. However, if PCEP is not
supported/configured on the head-end of a SR tunnel or a Binding-SID supported/configured on the head-end of an SR tunnel or a Binding-SID
anchor node and controller does not participate in IGP routing, it anchor node and controller does not participate in IGP routing, it
has no way to learn the MSD of nodes and links which has been has no way to learn the MSD of nodes and links. BGP-LS [RFC7752]
configured. BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines a way to expose topology and defines a way to expose topology and associated attributes and
associated attributes and capabilities of the nodes in that topology capabilities of the nodes in that topology to a centralized
to a centralized controller. MSD signaling by BGP-LS has been controller. MSD signaling by BGP-LS has been defined in
defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd]. Typically, [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd]. Typically, BGP-LS is
BGP-LS is configured on a small number of nodes that do not configured on a small number of nodes that do not necessarily act as
necessarily act as head-ends. In order for BGP-LS to signal MSD for head-ends. In order for BGP-LS to signal MSD for all the nodes and
all the nodes and links in the network MSD is relevant, MSD links in the network MSD is relevant, MSD capabilites should be
capabilites should be advertised to every IS-IS router in the advertised by every IS-IS router in the network.
network.
Other types of MSD are known to be useful. For example, Other types of MSD are known to be useful. For example,
[I-D.ietf-isis-mpls-elc] defines Readable Label Depth Capability [I-D.ietf-isis-mpls-elc] defines Readable Label Depth Capability
(RLDC) that is used by a head-end to insert an Entropy Label (EL) at (RLDC) that is used by a head-end to insert an Entropy Label (EL) at
a depth, that could be read by transit nodes. a depth, that could be read by transit nodes.
This document defines an extension to IS-IS used to advertise one or This document defines an extension to IS-IS used to advertise one or
more types of MSD at node and/or link granularity. It also creates more types of MSD at node and/or link granularity. It also creates
an IANA registry for assigning MSD type identifiers. It also defines an IANA registry for assigning MSD type identifiers. It also defines
the Base MPLS Imposition MSD type. In the future it is expected, the Base MPLS Imposition MSD type. In the future it is expected,
that new MSD types will be defined to signal additional capabilities that new MSD types will be defined to signal additional capabilities
e.g., entropy labels, SIDs that can be imposed through recirculation, e.g., entropy labels, SIDs that can be imposed through recirculation,
or SIDs associated with another dataplane e.g., IPv6. or SIDs associated with another dataplane e.g., IPv6. Although MSD
advertisements are associated with Segment Routing, the
advertisements MAY be present even if Segment Routing itself is not
enabled.
1.1. Conventions used in this document 1.1. Conventions used in this document
1.1.1. Terminology 1.1.1. Terminology
BGP-LS: Distribution of Link-State and TE Information using Border BGP-LS: Distribution of Link-State and TE Information using Border
Gateway Protocol Gateway Protocol
BMI: Base MPLS Imposition is the number of MPLS labels which can be BMI: Base MPLS Imposition is the number of MPLS labels which can be
imposed inclusive of any service/transport labels imposed inclusive of all service/transport/special labels
IS-IS: Intermediate System to Intermediate System IS-IS: Intermediate System to Intermediate System
MSD: Maximum SID Depth - the number of SIDs a node or a link on a MSD: Maximum SID Depth - the number of SIDs a node or a link on a
node can support node can support
PCC: Path Computation Client PCC: Path Computation Client
PCE: Path Computation Element PCE: Path Computation Element
PCEP: Path Computation Element Protocol PCEP: Path Computation Element Protocol
SID: Segment Identifier SID: Segment Identifier
SR: Segment Routing SR: Segment Routing
1.2. Requirements Language 1.2. 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", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
BCP14 [RFC2119], [RFC8174] when, and only when they appear in all 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here . capitals, as shown here .
2. Terminology 2. Node MSD Advertisement
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC4970].
3. Node MSD Advertisement
The node MSD sub-TLV is defined within the body of the IS-IS Router The node MSD sub-TLV is defined within the body of the IS-IS Router
Capability TLV [RFC7981], to carry the provisioned SID depth of the Capability TLV [RFC7981], to carry the provisioned SID depth of the
router originating the Router Capability TLV. Node MSD is the router originating the Router Capability TLV. Node MSD is the
minimum MSD supported by the node on any interface. MSD values may smallest MSD supported by the node on the set of interfaces
configured for use by the advertising IGP instance. MSD values may
be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned. be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned.
0 1 0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MSD-Type | MSD Value | | MSD-Type | MSD Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// ................... // // ................... //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MSD-Type | MSD Value | | MSD-Type | MSD Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Node MSD Sub-TLV Figure 1: Node MSD Sub-TLV
The Type: TBD1 Type: 23 (allocated by IANA via the early assignment process)
Length: variable (minimum of 2, multiple of 2 octets) and represents Length: variable (minimum of 2, multiple of 2 octets) and represents
the total length of value field. the total length of value field.
Value: field consists of one or more pairs of a 1 octet MSD-Type Value: field consists of one or more pairs of a 1 octet MSD-Type
(IANA Registry) and 1 octet Value. (IANA Registry) and 1 octet Value.
Node MSD value is a number in the range of 0-255. 0 represents lack Node MSD value is a number in the range of 0-255. 0 represents lack
of the ability to support SID stack of any depth; any other value of the ability to support SID stack of any depth; any other value
represents that of the node. This value MUST represent the lowest represents that of the node. This value MUST represent the lowest
value supported by any link associated with the node. value supported by any link configured for use by the advertising IS-
IS instance.
This sub-TLV is optional. The scope of the advertisement is specific This sub-TLV is optional. The scope of the advertisement is specific
to the deployment. to the deployment.
4. Link MSD Advertisement 3. Link MSD Advertisement
The link MSD sub-TLV is defined for TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223 to The link MSD sub-TLV is defined for TLVs 22, 23, 25, 141, 222, and
carry the MSD of the interface associated with the link. MSD values 223 to carry the MSD of the interface associated with the link. MSD
may be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned. values may be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned.
0 1 0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MSD-Type | MSD Value | | MSD-Type | MSD Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// ................... // // ................... //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MSD-Type | MSD Value | | MSD-Type | MSD Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Link MSD Sub-TLV Figure 2: Link MSD Sub-TLV
The Type: TBD2 Type: 15 (allocated by IANA via the early assignment process)
Length: variable (minimum of 2, multiple of 2 octets) and represents Length: variable (minimum of 2, multiple of 2 octets) and represents
the total length of value field. the total length of value field.
Value: consists of one or more pairs of a 1 octet MSD-Type (IANA Value: consists of one or more pairs of a 1 octet MSD-Type (IANA
Registry) and 1 octet Value. Registry) and 1 octet Value.
Link MSD value is a number in the range of 0-255. 0 represents lack Link MSD value is a number in the range of 0-255. 0 represents lack
of the ability to support SID stack of any depth; any other value of the ability to support SID stack of any depth; any other value
represents that of the link when used as an outgoing link. represents that of the link when used as an outgoing link.
This sub-TLV is optional. The scope of the advertisement is specific This sub-TLV is optional. The scope of the advertisement is specific
to the deployment. to the deployment.
5. Using Node and Link MSD Advertisements 4. Using Node and Link MSD Advertisements
When Link MSD is present for a given MSD type, the value of the Link When Link MSD is present for a given MSD type, the value of the Link
MSD MUST take preference over the Node MSD. MSD MUST take preference over the Node MSD. When a Link MSD type is
not signalled but the Node MSD type is, then the Node MSD type value
MUST be considered as the MSD value for that link.
In order to increase flooding efficiency, it is RECOMMENDED that
routers with homogenous link MSD values advertise just the Node MSD
value.
The meaning of the absence of both Node and Link MSD advertisements The meaning of the absence of both Node and Link MSD advertisements
for a given MSD type is specific to the MSD type. Generally it can for a given MSD type is specific to the MSD type. Generally it can
only be inferred that the advertising node does not support only be inferred that the advertising node does not support
advertisement of that MSD type. However, in some cases the lack of advertisement of that MSD type. However, in some cases the lack of
advertisement might imply that the functionality associated with the advertisement might imply that the functionality associated with the
MSD type is not supported. The correct interpretation MUST be MSD type is not supported. The correct interpretation MUST be
specified when an MSD type is defined. specified when an MSD type is defined.
6. Base MPLS Imposition MSD 5. Base MPLS Imposition MSD
Base MPLS Imposition MSD (BMI-MSD) signals the total number of MPLS Base MPLS Imposition MSD (BMI-MSD) signals the total number of MPLS
labels a node is capable of imposing, including any service/transport labels a node is capable of imposing, including all
labels. service/transport/special labels.
Absence of BMI-MSD advertisements indicates solely that the Absence of BMI-MSD advertisements indicates solely that the
advertising node does not support advertisement of this capability. advertising node does not support advertisement of this capability.
7. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type (TBD1) for the This document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type for the new
new sub TLV proposed in Section 3 of this document from IS-IS Router sub TLV proposed in Section 2 of this document from IS-IS Router
Capability TLV Registry as defined by [RFC7981]. Capability TLV Registry as defined by [RFC7981].
IANA has allocated the following value through the early assignment IANA has allocated the following value through the early assignment
process: process:
Value Description Reference Value Description Reference
----- --------------- ------------- ----- --------------- -------------
23 Node MSD This document 23 Node MSD This document
Figure 3: Node MSD Figure 3: Node MSD
This document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type (TBD2) as This document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type as defined in
defined in Section 4 from Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222 and 223 Section 3 from Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 25, 141, 222 and 223
registry. registry.
IANA has allocated the following value through the early assignment IANA has allocated the following value through the early assignment
process: process:
Value Description Reference Value Description Reference
----- --------------- ------------- ----- --------------- -------------
15 Link MSD This document 15 Link MSD This document
Figure 4: Link MSD Figure 4: Link MSD
Per TLV information where Link MSD sub-TLV can be part of: Per TLV information where Link MSD sub-TLV can be part of:
TLV 22 23 25 141 222 223 TLV 22 23 25 141 222 223
--- -------------------- --- --------------------
y y y y y y y y y y y y
Figure 5: TLVs where LINK MSD Sub-TLV can be present Figure 5: TLVs where LINK MSD Sub-TLV can be present
This document requests creation of an IANA managed registry under a This document requests creation of an IANA managed registry under a
new category of "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA new category of "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA
registries to identify MSD types as proposed in Section 3 and registries to identify MSD types as proposed in Section 2 and
Section 4. The registration procedure is "Expert Review" as defined Section 3. The registration procedure is "Expert Review" as defined
in [RFC8126]. Suggested registry name is "MSD types". Types are an in [RFC8126]. Suggested registry name is "MSD types". Types are an
unsigned 8 bit number. The following values are defined by this unsigned 8 bit number. The following values are defined by this
document document
Value Name Reference Value Name Reference
----- --------------------- ------------- ----- --------------------- -------------
0 Reserved This document 0 Reserved This document
1 Base MPLS Imposition MSD This document 1 Base MPLS Imposition MSD This document
2-250 Unassigned This document 2-250 Unassigned This document
251-254 Experimental This document 251-254 Experimental This document
255 Reserved This document 255 Reserved This document
Figure 6: MSD Types Codepoints Registry Figure 6: MSD Types Codepoints Registry
8. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
Security considerations, as specified by [RFC7981] are applicable to Security considerations as specified by [RFC7981] are applicable to
this document this document.
9. Contributors Advertisement of the additional information defined in this document
that is false, e.g., an MSD that is incorrect, may result in a path
computation failing, having a service unavailable, or instantiation
of a path that can't be supported by the head-end (the node
performing the imposition).
8. Contributors
The following people contributed to this document: The following people contributed to this document:
Peter Psenak Peter Psenak
Email: ppsenak@cisco.com Email: ppsenak@cisco.com
10. Acknowledgements 9. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Acee Lindem, Stephane Litkowski and The authors would like to thank Acee Lindem, Ketan Talaulikar,
Bruno Decraene for their reviews and valuable comments. Stephane Litkowski and Bruno Decraene for their reviews and valuable
comments.
11. References 10. References
11.1. Normative References
10.1. 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, 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>.
[RFC4970] Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and
S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional
Router Capabilities", RFC 4970, DOI 10.17487/RFC4970, July
2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4970>.
[RFC7981] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions [RFC7981] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions
for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981, for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016, DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7981>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7981>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
11.2. Informative References 10.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd] [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd]
Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Mirsky, G., and S. Sivabalan, Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Mirsky, G., and S. Sivabalan,
"Signaling Maximum SID Depth using Border Gateway Protocol "Signaling Maximum SID Depth using Border Gateway Protocol
Link-State", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-01 Link-State", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-01
(work in progress), October 2017. (work in progress), October 2017.
[I-D.ietf-isis-mpls-elc] [I-D.ietf-isis-mpls-elc]
Xu, X., Kini, S., Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., and S. Xu, X., Kini, S., Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., and S.
Litkowski, "Signaling Entropy Label Capability and Litkowski, "Signaling Entropy Label Capability and
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
72 lines changed or deleted 80 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/