draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd-13.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd-14.txt 
OSPF Working Group J. Tantsura OSPF 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: November 18, 2018 Huawei Technologies Expires: November 29, 2018 Huawei Technologies
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Google, Inc Google, Inc
P. Psenak P. Psenak
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
May 17, 2018 May 28, 2018
Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using OSPF Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using OSPF
draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd-13 draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd-14
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a way for an OSPF Router to advertise multiple This document defines a way for an OSPF 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 defines only one type of supported in a given network. This document defines only one type of
MSD, but defines an encoding that can support other MSD types. Here MSD, but defines an encoding that can support other MSD types. Here
the term OSPF means both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. the term OSPF means both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
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 November 18, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 29, 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 4, line 9 skipping to change at page 4, line 9
SID: Segment Identifier SID: Segment Identifier
LSA: Link state advertisement LSA: Link state advertisement
RI: OSPF Router Information LSA RI: OSPF Router Information LSA
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. Node MSD Advertisement 2. Node MSD Advertisement
The node MSD TLV within the body of the OSPF RI Opaque LSA is defined The node MSD TLV within the body of the OSPF RI Opaque LSA is defined
to carry the provisioned SID depth of the router originating the RI to carry the provisioned SID depth of the router originating the RI
LSA. Node MSD is the smallest MSD supported by the node on the set LSA. Node MSD is the smallest MSD supported by the node on the set
of interfaces configured for use by the advertising IGP instance. of interfaces configured for use by the advertising IGP instance.
MSD values may be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned.. MSD values may be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned..
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 7, line 13 skipping to change at page 7, line 13
service/transport/special 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.
Assignment of MSD-Type for BMI-MSD is defined in Assignment of MSD-Type for BMI-MSD is defined in
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd]. [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd].
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to allocate TLV type (TBD1) from the OSPF This document requests IANA to allocate TLV type (TBD1) from the OSPF
Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry as defined by [RFC4970]. IANA Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry as defined by [RFC7770]. IANA
has allocated the value 12 through the early assignment process. has allocated the value 12 through the early assignment process.
Also, this document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type (TBD2) Also, this document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type (TBD2)
from the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV Sub-TLVs registry. IANA has from the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV Sub-TLVs registry. IANA has
allocated the the value 6 through the early assignment process. allocated the the value 6 through the early assignment process.
Finally, this document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type Finally, this document requests IANA to allocate a sub-TLV type
(TBD3) from the OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLV registry. (TBD3) from the OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLV registry.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
Security concerns for OSPF are addressed in [RFC7474]. Further Security concerns for OSPF are addressed in [RFC7474]. Further
skipping to change at page 8, line 17 skipping to change at page 8, line 17
Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg, Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg,
"Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS", draft- "Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS", draft-
ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-12 (work in progress), May ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-12 (work in progress), May
2018. 2018.
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., [RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W.,
Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute
Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>. 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
13 lines changed or deleted 8 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/