draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04.txt   draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-05.txt 
Link State Routing L. Ginsberg, Ed. Link State Routing L. Ginsberg, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc.
Obsoletes: 7810 (if approved) S. Previdi, Ed. Obsoletes: 7810 (if approved) S. Previdi, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: June 21, 2019 S. Giacolone Expires: June 23, 2019 S. Giacolone
Microsoft Microsoft
D. Ward D. Ward
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
J. Drake J. Drake
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
Q. Wu Q. Wu
Huawei Huawei
December 18, 2018 December 20, 2018
IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04 draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-05
Abstract Abstract
In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial
information networks (e.g., stock market data providers), network- information networks (e.g., stock market data providers), network-
performance criteria (e.g., latency) are becoming as critical to performance criteria (e.g., latency) are becoming as critical to
data-path selection as other metrics. data-path selection as other metrics.
This document describes extensions to IS-IS Traffic Engineering This document describes extensions to IS-IS Traffic Engineering
Extensions (RFC 5305) such that network-performance information can Extensions (RFC 5305) such that network-performance information can
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
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 June 21, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 23, 2019.
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 18, line 31 skipping to change at page 18, line 31
the ambiguity. the ambiguity.
The choice made here is to omit the unused RESERVED field from these The choice made here is to omit the unused RESERVED field from these
sub-TLVs and use the length of 4. This matches the corresponding sub-TLVs and use the length of 4. This matches the corresponding
advertisements specified in the equivalent OSPF specification advertisements specified in the equivalent OSPF specification
[RFC7471] and the corresponding BGP-LS specification [RFC7471] and the corresponding BGP-LS specification
[I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp]. [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp].
Some minor editorial corrections have also been made. Some minor editorial corrections have also been made.
As a means of interoperating with implementations which do not
conform to the corrections defined in this document, implementers may
wish to consider temporarily supporting sending and/or receiving the
form of the sub-TLVs using a length of 5 and including the RESERVED
field. However, the intent of this revision is to specify one and
only one normative behavior. Any existing implementations which
encode the sub-TLVs using a length of 5 are expected to be revised to
conform to the normative behavior specified in this document.
Errata ID: 5486 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5486) Errata ID: 5486 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5486)
identified that in [RFC7810] Section 4.6 the definition of available identified that in [RFC7810] Section 4.6 the definition of available
bandwidth on bundled links used a circular definition i.e., it used bandwidth on bundled links used a circular definition i.e., it used
"sum of the component link available bandwidths" when it should have "sum of the component link available bandwidths" when it should have
used "sum of the component link residual bandwidths". This has been used "sum of the component link residual bandwidths". This has been
corrected and clarified. corrected and clarified.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Les Ginsberg (editor) Les Ginsberg (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: ginsberg@cisco.com Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
Stefano Previdi (editor) Stefano Previdi (editor)
Huawei Huawei
Email: stefano@previdi.net Email: stefano@previdi.net
Spencer Giacolone Spencer Giacolone
Microsoft Microsoft
Email: spencer.giacalone@gmail.com Email: spencer.giacalone@gmail.com
Dave Ward Dave Ward
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: wardd@cisco.com Email: wardd@cisco.com
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 5 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/