draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-09.txt   draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-10.txt 
Network Working Group P. Psenak, Ed. Network Working Group P. Psenak, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track S. Hegde Intended status: Standards Track S. Hegde
Expires: February 15, 2021 Juniper Networks, Inc. Expires: February 20, 2021 Juniper Networks, Inc.
C. Filsfils C. Filsfils
K. Talaulikar K. Talaulikar
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
A. Gulko A. Gulko
Refinitiv Individual
August 14, 2020 August 19, 2020
IGP Flexible Algorithm IGP Flexible Algorithm
draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-09.txt draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-10.txt
Abstract Abstract
IGP protocols traditionally compute best paths over the network based IGP protocols traditionally compute best paths over the network based
on the IGP metric assigned to the links. Many network deployments on the IGP metric assigned to the links. Many network deployments
use RSVP-TE based or Segment Routing based Traffic Engineering to use RSVP-TE based or Segment Routing based Traffic Engineering to
steer traffic over a path that is computed using different metrics or steer traffic over a path that is computed using different metrics or
constraints than the shortest IGP path. This document proposes a constraints than the shortest IGP path. This document proposes a
solution that allows IGPs themselves to compute constraint-based solution that allows IGPs themselves to compute constraint-based
paths over the network. This document also specifies a way of using paths over the network. This document also specifies a way of using
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
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 February 15, 2021. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 20, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 34 skipping to change at page 2, line 34
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Flexible Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Flexible Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Flexible Algorithm Definition Advertisement . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Flexible Algorithm Definition Advertisement . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-TLV . . . . . . . 6 5.1. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-TLV . . . . . . . 6
5.2. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV . . . . . . . . . 7 5.2. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. Common Handling of Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV . . 9 5.3. Common Handling of Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV . . 9
6. Sub-TLVs of ISIS FAD Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Sub-TLVs of ISIS FAD Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 10 6.1. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 10
6.2. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Include-Any Admin Group Sub-TLV . 11 6.2. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Include-Any Admin Group Sub-TLV . 11
6.3. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Include-All Admin Group Sub-TLV . 11 6.3. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Include-All Admin Group Sub-TLV . 11
6.4. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 11 6.4. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 12
6.5. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Exclude SRLG Sub-TLV . . . . . . 12 6.5. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Exclude SRLG Sub-TLV . . . . . . 13
7. Sub-TLVs of OSPF FAD TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7. Sub-TLVs of OSPF FAD TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 13 7.1. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 13
7.2. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Include-Any Admin Group Sub-TLV . 14 7.2. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Include-Any Admin Group Sub-TLV . 14
7.3. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Include-All Admin Group Sub-TLV . 14 7.3. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Include-All Admin Group Sub-TLV . 14
7.4. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 14 7.4. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 15
7.5. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude SRLG Sub-TLV . . . . . . 16 7.5. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude SRLG Sub-TLV . . . . . . 16
8. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 16 8. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 16
9. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 17 9. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 17
10. Advertisement of Node Participation in a Flex-Algorithm . . . 18 10. Advertisement of Node Participation in a Flex-Algorithm . . . 18
10.1. Advertisement of Node Participation for Segment Routing 18 10.1. Advertisement of Node Participation for Segment Routing 19
10.2. Advertisement of Node Participation for Other 10.2. Advertisement of Node Participation for Other
Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11. Advertisement of Link Attributes for Flex-Algorithm . . . . . 19 11. Advertisement of Link Attributes for Flex-Algorithm . . . . . 19
12. Calculation of Flexible Algorithm Paths . . . . . . . . . . . 20 12. Calculation of Flexible Algorithm Paths . . . . . . . . . . . 20
12.1. Multi-area and Multi-domain Considerations . . . . . . . 21 12.1. Multi-area and Multi-domain Considerations . . . . . . . 21
13. Flex-Algorithm and Forwarding Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 13. Flex-Algorithm and Forwarding Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13.1. Segment Routing MPLS Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 23 13.1. Segment Routing MPLS Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 23
13.2. SRv6 Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . 23 13.2. SRv6 Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13.3. Other Applications' Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 24 13.3. Other Applications' Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 24
14. Operational considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 14. Operational considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.1. Inter-area Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 14.1. Inter-area Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.2. Usage of SRLG Exclude Rule with Flex-Algorithm . . . . . 25 14.2. Usage of SRLG Exclude Rule with Flex-Algorithm . . . . . 25
14.3. Max-metric consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 14.3. Max-metric consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
15. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 15. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
17. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 17. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
17.1. IGP IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 17.1. IGP IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
17.1.1. IGP Algorithm Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 17.1.1. IGP Algorithm Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
17.1.2. IGP Metric-Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 17.1.2. IGP Metric-Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
17.2. Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Registry . . . . . . 28 17.2. Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Registry . . . . . . 28
17.3. ISIS IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 17.3. ISIS IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
17.3.1. Sub TLVs for Type 242 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 17.3.1. Sub TLVs for Type 242 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
17.3.2. Sub TLVs for for TLVs 135, 235, 236, and 237 . . . . 28 17.3.2. Sub TLVs for for TLVs 135, 235, 236, and 237 . . . . 28
17.3.3. Sub-Sub-TLVs for Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub- 17.3.3. Sub-Sub-TLVs for Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-
TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
17.4. OSPF IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 17.4. OSPF IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
17.4.1. OSPF Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry . . . . . 29 17.4.1. OSPF Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry . . . . . 30
17.4.2. OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . 30 17.4.2. OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . 30
17.4.3. OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 17.4.3. OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
17.4.4. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV Sub-TLV 17.4.4. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV Sub-TLV
Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
17.4.5. Link Attribute Applications Registry . . . . . . . . 31 17.4.5. Link Attribute Applications Registry . . . . . . . . 31
18. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 18. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
19. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 19. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
19.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 19.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
19.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 19.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
An IGP-computed path based on the shortest IGP metric must often be An IGP-computed path based on the shortest IGP metric must often be
replaced by a traffic-engineered path due to the traffic requirements replaced by a traffic-engineered path due to the traffic requirements
which are not reflected by the IGP metric. Some networks engineer which are not reflected by the IGP metric. Some networks engineer
the IGP metric assignments in a way that the IGP metric reflects the the IGP metric assignments in a way that the IGP metric reflects the
link bandwidth or delay. If, for example, the IGP metric is link bandwidth or delay. If, for example, the IGP metric is
reflecting the bandwidth on the link and the application traffic is reflecting the bandwidth on the link and the application traffic is
delay sensitive, the best IGP path may not reflect the best path from delay sensitive, the best IGP path may not reflect the best path from
skipping to change at page 6, line 50 skipping to change at page 6, line 50
Length: variable, dependent on the included Sub-TLVs Length: variable, dependent on the included Sub-TLVs
Flex-Algorithm: Single octet value between 128 and 255 inclusive. Flex-Algorithm: Single octet value between 128 and 255 inclusive.
Metric-Type: Type of metric to be used during the calculation. Metric-Type: Type of metric to be used during the calculation.
Following values are defined: Following values are defined:
0: IGP Metric 0: IGP Metric
1: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in 1: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC8570],
[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]. section 4.2, encoded in the Application Specific Link
Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app].
2: TE default metric as defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]. 2: Traffic Engineering Default Metric as defined in [RFC5305],
section 3.7, encoded in the Application Specific Link
Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app].
Calc-Type: value from 0 to 127 inclusive from the "IGP Algorithm Calc-Type: value from 0 to 127 inclusive from the "IGP Algorithm
Types" registry defined under "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Types" registry defined under "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP)
Parameters" IANA registries. IGP algorithms in the range of 0-127 Parameters" IANA registries. IGP algorithms in the range of 0-127
have a defined triplet (Calculation Type, Metric, Constraints). have a defined triplet (Calculation Type, Metric, Constraints).
When used to specify the Calc-Type in the FAD Sub-TLV, only the When used to specify the Calc-Type in the FAD Sub-TLV, only the
Calculation Type defined for the specified IGP Algorithm is used. Calculation Type defined for the specified IGP Algorithm is used.
The Metric/Constraints MUST NOT be inherited. If the required The Metric/Constraints MUST NOT be inherited. If the required
calculation type is Shortest Path First, the value 0 SHOULD appear calculation type is Shortest Path First, the value 0 SHOULD appear
in this field. in this field.
skipping to change at page 8, line 28 skipping to change at page 8, line 28
where: where:
Type: 16 Type: 16
Length: variable, dependent on the included Sub-TLVs Length: variable, dependent on the included Sub-TLVs
Flex-Algorithm:: Flex-Algorithm number. Value between 128 and 255 Flex-Algorithm:: Flex-Algorithm number. Value between 128 and 255
inclusive. inclusive.
Metric-Type: as described in Section 5.1 Metric-Type: Type of metric to be used during the calculation.
Following values are defined:
0: IGP Metric
1: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC7471],
section 4.2, encoded in the Application Specific Link
Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse].
2: Traffic Engineering metric as defined in [RFC3630], section
2.5.5, encoded in the Application Specific Link Attributes Sub-
TLV [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse].
Calc-Type: as described in Section 5.1 Calc-Type: as described in Section 5.1
Priority: as described in Section 5.1 Priority: as described in Section 5.1
Sub-TLVs - optional sub-TLVs. Sub-TLVs - optional sub-TLVs.
When multiple OSPF FAD TLVs, for the same Flexible-Algorithm, are When multiple OSPF FAD TLVs, for the same Flexible-Algorithm, are
received from a given router, the receiver MUST use the first received from a given router, the receiver MUST use the first
occurrence of the TLV in the Router Information LSA. If the OSPF FAD occurrence of the TLV in the Router Information LSA. If the OSPF FAD
skipping to change at page 27, line 40 skipping to change at page 27, line 48
Registry": Registry":
Type: 0 Type: 0
Description: IGP metric Description: IGP metric
Reference: This document (Section 5.1) Reference: This document (Section 5.1)
Type: 1 Type: 1
Description: Min Unidirectional Link Delay [RFC8570] Description: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in
[RFC8570], section 4.2, and [RFC7471], section 4.2.
Reference: This document (Section 5.1) Reference: This document (Section 5.1)
Type: 2 Type: 2
Description: TE Default Metric [RFC5305] Description: Traffic Engineering Default Metric as defined in
[RFC5305], section 3.7, and Traffic engineering metric as defined
in [RFC3630], section 2.5.5
Reference: This document (Section 5.1) Reference: This document (Section 5.1)
17.2. Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Registry 17.2. Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Registry
IANA is requested to set up a registry called "ISIS Flexible IANA is requested to set up a registry called "ISIS Flexible
Algorithm Definition Flags Registry" under a "Interior Gateway Algorithm Definition Flags Registry" under a "Interior Gateway
Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA registries. The registration policy Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA registries. The registration policy
for this registry is "Standards Action" ([RFC8126] and [RFC7120]). for this registry is "Standards Action" ([RFC8126] and [RFC7120]).
skipping to change at page 32, line 42 skipping to change at page 32, line 51
(work in progress), April 2020. (work in progress), April 2020.
[I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-reverse-metric] [I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-reverse-metric]
Talaulikar, K., Psenak, P., and H. Johnston, "OSPF Reverse Talaulikar, K., Psenak, P., and H. Johnston, "OSPF Reverse
Metric", draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-reverse-metric-01 (work in Metric", draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-reverse-metric-01 (work in
progress), June 2020. progress), June 2020.
[I-D.ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions] [I-D.ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions]
Li, Z., Hu, Z., Cheng, D., Talaulikar, K., and P. Psenak, Li, Z., Hu, Z., Cheng, D., Talaulikar, K., and P. Psenak,
"OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6", draft-ietf-lsr- "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6", draft-ietf-lsr-
ospfv3-srv6-extensions-00 (work in progress), February ospfv3-srv6-extensions-01 (work in progress), August 2020.
2020.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse] [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse]
Psenak, P., Ginsberg, L., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., Psenak, P., Ginsberg, L., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J.,
and J. Drake, "OSPF Application-Specific Link Attributes", and J. Drake, "OSPF Application-Specific Link Attributes",
draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-16 (work in progress), draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-16 (work in progress),
June 2020. June 2020.
[ISO10589] [ISO10589]
International Organization for Standardization, International Organization for Standardization,
"Intermediate system to Intermediate system intra-domain "Intermediate system to Intermediate system intra-domain
skipping to change at page 34, line 45 skipping to change at page 34, line 49
Litkowski, S., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B.,
Francois, P., Voyer, D., Clad, F., and P. Camarillo, Francois, P., Voyer, D., Clad, F., and P. Camarillo,
"Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing", "Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing",
draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-03 (work in draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-03 (work in
progress), March 2020. progress), March 2020.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998, DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
[RFC3906] Shen, N. and H. Smit, "Calculating Interior Gateway [RFC3906] Shen, N. and H. Smit, "Calculating Interior Gateway
Protocol (IGP) Routes Over Traffic Engineering Tunnels", Protocol (IGP) Routes Over Traffic Engineering Tunnels",
RFC 3906, DOI 10.17487/RFC3906, October 2004, RFC 3906, DOI 10.17487/RFC3906, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3906>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3906>.
[RFC4552] Gupta, M. and N. Melam, "Authentication/Confidentiality [RFC4552] Gupta, M. and N. Melam, "Authentication/Confidentiality
for OSPFv3", RFC 4552, DOI 10.17487/RFC4552, June 2006, for OSPFv3", RFC 4552, DOI 10.17487/RFC4552, June 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4552>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4552>.
[RFC5304] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic [RFC5304] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic
skipping to change at page 35, line 26 skipping to change at page 35, line 35
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5310>. 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5310>.
[RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF [RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008, for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
[RFC7120] Cotton, M., "Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code [RFC7120] Cotton, M., "Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code
Points", BCP 100, RFC 7120, DOI 10.17487/RFC7120, January Points", BCP 100, RFC 7120, DOI 10.17487/RFC7120, January
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7120>. 2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7120>.
[RFC7471] Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., Atlas, A., and S.
Previdi, "OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric
Extensions", RFC 7471, DOI 10.17487/RFC7471, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7471>.
[RFC7474] Bhatia, M., Hartman, S., Zhang, D., and A. Lindem, Ed., [RFC7474] Bhatia, M., Hartman, S., Zhang, D., and A. Lindem, Ed.,
"Security Extension for OSPFv2 When Using Manual Key "Security Extension for OSPFv2 When Using Manual Key
Management", RFC 7474, DOI 10.17487/RFC7474, April 2015, Management", RFC 7474, DOI 10.17487/RFC7474, April 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7474>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7474>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
skipping to change at page 36, line 28 skipping to change at page 36, line 45
Ketan Talaulikar Ketan Talaulikar
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
S.No. 154/6, Phase I, Hinjawadi S.No. 154/6, Phase I, Hinjawadi
PUNE, MAHARASHTRA 411 057 PUNE, MAHARASHTRA 411 057
India India
Email: ketant@cisco.com Email: ketant@cisco.com
Arkadiy Gulko Arkadiy Gulko
Refinitiv Individual
Email: arkadiy.gulko@refinitiv.com Email: arkadiy.gulko@gmail.com
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
26 lines changed or deleted 51 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/