draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-10.txt		draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-11.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 20, 2021 Juniper Networks, Inc.		Expires: March 14, 2021 Juniper Networks, Inc.
	C. Filsfils		C. Filsfils
	K. Talaulikar		K. Talaulikar
	Cisco Systems, Inc.		Cisco Systems, Inc.
	A. Gulko		A. Gulko
	Individual		Individual
	August 19, 2020		September 10, 2020
	IGP Flexible Algorithm		IGP Flexible Algorithm
	draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-10.txt		draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-11.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 20, 2021.		This Internet-Draft will expire on March 14, 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 33 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 33 ¶
	2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	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 . 12
	6.4. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 12		6.4. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 12
	6.5. ISIS Flexible Algorithm Exclude SRLG Sub-TLV . . . . . . 13		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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	7.1. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 13		7.1. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV . . . 14
	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 . 15
	7.4. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition Flags Sub-TLV . . . . 15		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 . . . . . . . . 17
	9. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 17		9. OSPF Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 18
	10. Advertisement of Node Participation in a Flex-Algorithm . . . 18		10. Advertisement of Node Participation in a Flex-Algorithm . . . 19
	10.1. Advertisement of Node Participation for Segment Routing 19		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 . . . . . 20
	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 . . . . . . . 22
	13. Flex-Algorithm and Forwarding Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23		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 . . . . . . . . . . . 24
	13.3. Other Applications' Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 24		13.3. Other Applications' Forwarding for Flex-Algorithm . . . 25
	14. Operational considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25		14. Operational considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
	14.1. Inter-area Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25		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 . . . . . 26
	14.3. Max-metric consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26		14.3. Max-metric consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
	15. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26		15. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
	16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26		16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
	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 . . . . 29
	17.3.3. Sub-Sub-TLVs for Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-		17.3.3. Sub-Sub-TLVs for Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-
	TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29		TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
	17.4. OSPF IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29		17.4. OSPF IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
	17.4.1. OSPF Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry . . . . . 30		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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
	17.4.5. Link Attribute Applications Registry . . . . . . . . 31		17.4.5. Link Attribute Applications Registry . . . . . . . . 32
	18. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32		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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36		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
	skipping to change at page 6, line 51 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 51 ¶
	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 [RFC8570],		1: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC8570],
	section 4.2, encoded in the Application Specific Link		section 4.2, encoded as application specific link attribute as
	Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app].		specified in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] and Section 11 of this
			document.
	2: Traffic Engineering Default Metric as defined in [RFC5305],		2: Traffic Engineering Default Metric as defined in [RFC5305],
	section 3.7, encoded in the Application Specific Link		section 3.7, encoded as application specific link attribute as
	Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app].		specified in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] and Section 11 of this
			document.
	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 34 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 36 ¶
	Flex-Algorithm:: Flex-Algorithm number. Value between 128 and 255		Flex-Algorithm:: Flex-Algorithm number. Value between 128 and 255
	inclusive.		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 [RFC7471],		1: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC7471],
	section 4.2, encoded in the Application Specific Link		section 4.2, encoded as application specific link attribute as
	Attributes Sub-TLV [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse].		specified in [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse] and Section 11
			of this document.
	2: Traffic Engineering metric as defined in [RFC3630], section		2: Traffic Engineering metric as defined in [RFC3630], section
	2.5.5, encoded in the Application Specific Link Attributes Sub-		2.5.5, encoded as application specific link attribute as
	TLV [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse].		specified in [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse] and Section 11
			of this document.
	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 19, line 48 ¶		skipping to change at page 20, line 15 ¶
	11. Advertisement of Link Attributes for Flex-Algorithm		11. Advertisement of Link Attributes for Flex-Algorithm
	Various link attributes may be used during the Flex-Algorithm path		Various link attributes may be used during the Flex-Algorithm path
	calculation. For example, include or exclude rules based on link		calculation. For example, include or exclude rules based on link
	affinities can be part of the Flex-Algorithm definition as defined in		affinities can be part of the Flex-Algorithm definition as defined in
	Section 6 and Section 7.		Section 6 and Section 7.
	Link attribute advertisements that are to be used during Flex-		Link attribute advertisements that are to be used during Flex-
	Algorithm calculation MUST use the Application-Specific Link		Algorithm calculation MUST use the Application-Specific Link
	Attribute (ASLA) advertisements defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] or		Attribute (ASLA) advertisements defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] or
	[I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse]. In particular, the Min		[I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse]. In the case of IS-IS, this
	Unidirectional Link Delay, TE Default Metric, Administrative Group,		includes use of the L-flag as defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]
	Extended Administrative Group and Shared Risk Link Group TLVs MUST be		Section 4.2 subject to the constraints discussed in Section 6 of the
	encoded in the ASLA advertisements for use with FlexAlgo.		[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]. The mandatory use of ASLA advertisements
			applies to link attributes specifically mentioned in this document
			(Min Unidirectional Link Delay, TE Default Metric, Administrative
			Group, Extended Administrative Group and Shared Risk Link Group) and
			any other link attributes that may be used in support of Flex-
			Algorithm in the future.
	A new Application Identifier Bit is defined to indicate that the ASLA		A new Application Identifier Bit is defined to indicate that the ASLA
	advertisement is associated with the Flex-Algorithm application.		advertisement is associated with the Flex-Algorithm application.
	This bit is set in the Standard Application Bit Mask (SABM) defined		This bit is set in the Standard Application Bit Mask (SABM) defined
	in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] or [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse]:		in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] or [I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse]:
	Bit-3: Flexible Algorithm (X-bit)		Bit-3: Flexible Algorithm (X-bit)
	ASLA Admin Group Advertisements to be used by the Flexible Algorithm		ASLA Admin Group Advertisements to be used by the Flexible Algorithm
	Application MAY use either the Administrative Group or Extended		Application MAY use either the Administrative Group or Extended
	skipping to change at page 32, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 33, line 8 ¶
	[BCP14] , <https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14>.		[BCP14] , <https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14>.
	[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]		[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]
	Ginsberg, L., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Henderickx, W., and		Ginsberg, L., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Henderickx, W., and
	J. Drake, "IS-IS Application-Specific Link Attributes",		J. Drake, "IS-IS Application-Specific Link Attributes",
	draft-ietf-isis-te-app-19 (work in progress), June 2020.		draft-ietf-isis-te-app-19 (work in progress), June 2020.
	[I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions]		[I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions]
	Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and		Psenak, P., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and
	Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extension to Support Segment Routing over		Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extension to Support Segment Routing over
	IPv6 Dataplane", draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-08		IPv6 Dataplane", draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-09
	(work in progress), April 2020.		(work in progress), September 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-01 (work in progress), August 2020.		ospfv3-srv6-extensions-01 (work in progress), August 2020.
	skipping to change at page 34, line 42 ¶		skipping to change at page 35, line 17 ¶
	[I-D.gulkohegde-routing-planes-using-sr]		[I-D.gulkohegde-routing-planes-using-sr]
	Hegde, S. and a. arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com,		Hegde, S. and a. arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com,
	"Separating Routing Planes using Segment Routing", draft-		"Separating Routing Planes using Segment Routing", draft-
	gulkohegde-routing-planes-using-sr-00 (work in progress),		gulkohegde-routing-planes-using-sr-00 (work in progress),
	March 2017.		March 2017.
	[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]		[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa]
	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-04 (work in
	progress), March 2020.		progress), August 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		[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
	(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,		(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,		DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
End of changes. 24 change blocks.
	39 lines changed or deleted		48 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/