draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-10.txt		draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-11.txt
	Networking Working Group P. Psenak, Ed.		Networking Working Group P. Psenak, Ed.
	Internet-Draft C. Filsfils		Internet-Draft C. Filsfils
	Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems		Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
	Expires: March 27, 2021 A. Bashandy		Expires: April 11, 2021 A. Bashandy
	Individual		Individual
	B. Decraene		B. Decraene
	Orange		Orange
	Z. Hu		Z. Hu
	Huawei Technologies		Huawei Technologies
	September 23, 2020		October 8, 2020
	IS-IS Extension to Support Segment Routing over IPv6 Dataplane		IS-IS Extension to Support Segment Routing over IPv6 Dataplane
	draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-10.txt		draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-11
	Abstract		Abstract
	Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end		Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end
	paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called		paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called
	"segments". Segment routing architecture can be implemented over an		"segments". Segment routing architecture can be implemented over an
	MPLS data plane as well as an IPv6 data plane. This draft describes		MPLS data plane as well as an IPv6 data plane. This draft describes
	the IS-IS extensions required to support Segment Routing over an IPv6		the IS-IS extensions required to support Segment Routing over an IPv6
	data plane.		data plane.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 49 ¶
	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 March 27, 2021.		This Internet-Draft will expire on April 11, 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 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 40 ¶
	5. SRv6 SIDs and Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		5. SRv6 SIDs and Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	6. Advertising Anycast Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6. Advertising Anycast Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7. Advertising Locators and End SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		7. Advertising Locators and End SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.1. SRv6 Locator TLV Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		7.1. SRv6 Locator TLV Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.2. SRv6 End SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		7.2. SRv6 End SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	8. Advertising SRv6 Adjacency SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		8. Advertising SRv6 Adjacency SIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	8.1. SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		8.1. SRv6 End.X SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	8.2. SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		8.2. SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	9. SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		9. SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	10. Advertising Endpoint Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		10. Advertising Endpoint Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	11. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	11.1. Cisco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11.1. Cisco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11.2. Huawei . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11.2. Huawei . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11.3. Juniper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11.3. Juniper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11.4. Arrcus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11.4. Arrcus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11.5. Interoperability Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		11.5. Interoperability Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	12.1. SRv6 Locator TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		12.1. SRv6 Locator TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	12.1.1. SRv6 End SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		12.1.1. SRv6 End SID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	12.1.2. Revised sub-TLV table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		12.1.2. Revised sub-TLV table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	12.2. SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		12.2. SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	skipping to change at page 8, line 51 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 51 ¶
	0 1 2 3		0 1 2 3
	0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1		0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type | Length |R|R|R|R| MTID |		| Type | Length |R|R|R|R| MTID |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Type: 27		Type: 27
	Length: variable.		Length: variable.
	R bits: reserved for future use. They SHOULD be		R bits: reserved for future use. They MUST be
	set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.		set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
	MTID: Multitopology Identifier as defined in [RFC5120].		MTID: Multitopology Identifier as defined in [RFC5120].
	Note that the value 0 is legal.		Note that the value 0 is legal.
	Followed by one or more locator entries of the form:		Followed by one or more locator entries of the form:
	0 1 2 3		0 1 2 3
	0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1		0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	skipping to change at page 9, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 38 ¶
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	|D| Reserved |		|D| Reserved |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	where:		where:
	D bit: When the Locator is leaked from level-2 to level-1, the D		D bit: When the Locator is leaked from level-2 to level-1, the D
	bit MUST be set. Otherwise, this bit MUST be clear. Locators		bit MUST be set. Otherwise, this bit MUST be clear. Locators
	with the D bit set MUST NOT be leaked from level-1 to level-2.		with the D bit set MUST NOT be leaked from level-1 to level-2.
	This is to prevent looping.		This is to prevent looping.
	The remaining bits are reserved for future use. They SHOULD be		The remaining bits are reserved for future use. They MUST be
	set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.		set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
	Algorithm: 1 octet. Associated algorithm. Algorithm values		Algorithm: 1 octet. Associated algorithm. Algorithm values
	are defined in the IGP Algorithm Type registry.		are defined in the IGP Algorithm Type registry.
	Loc-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits in the SRv6 Locator field.		Loc-Size: 1 octet. Number of bits in the SRv6 Locator field.
	(1 - 128)		(1 - 128)
	Locator: 1-16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6		Locator: 1-16 octets. This field encodes the advertised SRv6
	Locator. The Locator is encoded in the minimal number of		Locator. The Locator is encoded in the minimal number of
	skipping to change at page 16, line 35 ¶		skipping to change at page 16, line 35 ¶
	table below, and MUST NOT be advertised in the TLV[s] as indicated by		table below, and MUST NOT be advertised in the TLV[s] as indicated by
	"N" in the table below.		"N" in the table below.
	Endpoint |Endpoint | End | End.X | Lan End.X |		Endpoint |Endpoint | End | End.X | Lan End.X |
	Behavior |Behavior Codepoint| SID | SID | SID |		Behavior |Behavior Codepoint| SID | SID | SID |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End (PSP, USP, USD)| 1-4, 28-31 | Y | N | N |		End (PSP, USP, USD)| 1-4, 28-31 | Y | N | N |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.X (PSP, USP, USD)| 5-8, 32-35 | N | Y | Y |		End.X (PSP, USP, USD)| 5-8, 32-35 | N | Y | Y |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.T (PSP, USP, USD)| 9-12, 36-39 | Y | N | N |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.DX6 | 16 | N | Y | Y |		End.DX6 | 16 | N | Y | Y |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.DX4 | 17 | N | Y | Y |		End.DX4 | 17 | N | Y | Y |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.DT6 | 18 | Y | N | N |		End.DT6 | 18 | Y | N | N |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.DT4 | 19 | Y | N | N |		End.DT4 | 19 | Y | N | N |
	----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|		----------------------|------------------|-----|-------|-----------|
	End.DT64 | 20 | Y | N | N |		End.DT64 | 20 | Y | N | N |
	11. Implementation Status		11. Implementation Status
			RFC Ed.: Please remove this section prior to publication.
	This section describes the implementation status of the ISIS SRv6		This section describes the implementation status of the ISIS SRv6
	extensions.		extensions.
	11.1. Cisco		11.1. Cisco
	Cisco's ISIS SRv6 implementation supports following functionalities:		Cisco's ISIS SRv6 implementation supports following functionalities:
	Types of SID supported: End, End.X, LAN End.X, END.OP		Types of SID supported: End, End.X, LAN End.X, END.OP
	Intra/Inter area/level support: Yes		Intra/Inter area/level support: Yes
	skipping to change at page 19, line 30 ¶		skipping to change at page 19, line 30 ¶
	TLV 242 registry":		TLV 242 registry":
	Type: 25		Type: 25
	Description: SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV.		Description: SRv6 Capabilities sub-TLV.
	Reference: This document (Section 2).		Reference: This document (Section 2).
	This document requests the creation of a new IANA managed registry		This document requests the creation of a new IANA managed registry
	for sub-sub-TLVs of the SRv6 Capability sub-TLV. The registration		for sub-sub-TLVs of the SRv6 Capability sub-TLV. The registration
	procedure is "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC7370]. Suggested		procedure is "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC8126]. Suggested
	registry name is "sub-sub-TLVs for SRv6 Capability sub-TLV". No sub-		registry name is "sub-sub-TLVs for SRv6 Capability sub-TLV". No sub-
	sub-TLVs are defined by this document except for the reserved value.		sub-TLVs are defined by this document except for the reserved value.
	0: Reserved		0: Reserved
	1-255: Unassigned		1-255: Unassigned
	12.3. SRv6 End.X SID and SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLVs		12.3. SRv6 End.X SID and SRv6 LAN End.X SID sub-TLVs
	This document makes the following registrations in the "sub- TLVs for		This document makes the following registrations in the "sub- TLVs for
	skipping to change at page 20, line 26 ¶		skipping to change at page 20, line 26 ¶
	Type Description		Type Description
	------------------		------------------
	41 SRH Max SL		41 SRH Max SL
	42 SRH Max End Pop		42 SRH Max End Pop
	44 SRH Max H.encaps		44 SRH Max H.encaps
	45 SRH Max End D		45 SRH Max End D
	12.5. Sub-Sub-TLVs for SID Sub-TLVs		12.5. Sub-Sub-TLVs for SID Sub-TLVs
	This document creates the following Sub-Sub-TLV Registry within the		This document requests a new IANA registry be created under the IS-IS
	"IS-IS TLV Codepoints" registry:		TLV Codepoints Registry to control the assignment of sub-TLV types
			for the SID Sub-TLVs specified in this document - Section 7.2,
	Registry: Sub-Sub-TLVs for SID Sub-TLVs		Section 8.1, Section 8.2. The suggested name of the new registry is
			"Sub-Sub-TLVs for SID Sub-TLVs". The registration procedure is
	Registration Procedure: Expert review		"Expert Review" as defined in [RFC8126]. The following assignments
			are made by this document:
	Reference: This document (Section 7.2, Section 8.1, Section 8.2).
	This document defines the following Sub-Sub-TLV in the "Sub-Sub-TLVs
	for SID Sub-TLVs" registry:
	Type: 1
	Description: SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV.		0: Reserved
	Reference: This document (Section 9).		1: SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV (Section 9).
	12.6. Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV		12.6. Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV
	This document adds a new bit in the "Bit Values for Prefix Attribute		This document adds a new bit in the "Bit Values for Prefix Attribute
	Flags Sub-TLV" registry:		Flags Sub-TLV" registry:
	Bit #: 4		Bit #: 4
	Description: A bit		Description: A bit
	Reference: This document (Section 6).		Reference: This document (Section 6).
	13. Security Considerations		13. Security Considerations
	Security concerns for IS-IS are addressed in [ISO10589], [RFC5304],		Security concerns for IS-IS are addressed in [ISO10589], [RFC5304],
	and [RFC5310].		and [RFC5310].
	14. Contributors		14. Contributors
	The following people gave a substantial contribution to the content		The following people gave a substantial contribution to the content
	skipping to change at page 23, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 23, line 15 ¶
	[I-D.ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam]		[I-D.ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam]
	Ali, Z., Filsfils, C., Matsushima, S., Voyer, D., and M.		Ali, Z., Filsfils, C., Matsushima, S., Voyer, D., and M.
	Chen, "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)		Chen, "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)
	in Segment Routing Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)",		in Segment Routing Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)",
	draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-07 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-07 (work in progress),
	July 2020.		July 2020.
	[I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]		[I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]
	Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J., Voyer, D.,		Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J., Voyer, D.,
	Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6 Network Programming",		Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6 Network Programming",
	draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-20 (work in		draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-24 (work in
	progress), September 2020.		progress), October 2020.
	[ISO10589]		[ISO10589]
	Standardization", I. ". O. F., "Intermediate system to		Standardization", I. ". O. F., "Intermediate system to
	Intermediate system intra-domain routeing information		Intermediate system intra-domain routeing information
	exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol		exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol
	for providing the connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO		for providing the connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO
	8473), ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition.", Nov 2002.		8473), ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition.", Nov 2002.
	[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,
	skipping to change at page 24, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 24, line 15 ¶
	[RFC7794] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Decraene, B., Previdi, S., Xu, X., and		[RFC7794] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Decraene, B., Previdi, S., Xu, X., and
	U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix Attributes for Extended IPv4		U. Chunduri, "IS-IS Prefix Attributes for Extended IPv4
	and IPv6 Reachability", RFC 7794, DOI 10.17487/RFC7794,		and IPv6 Reachability", RFC 7794, DOI 10.17487/RFC7794,
	March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>.		March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7794>.
	[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>.
			[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
			Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
			RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
			<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
	[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>.
	[RFC8491] Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg,		[RFC8491] Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg,
	"Signaling Maximum SID Depth (MSD) Using IS-IS", RFC 8491,		"Signaling Maximum SID Depth (MSD) Using IS-IS", RFC 8491,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8491, November 2018,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8491, November 2018,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8491>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8491>.
	[RFC8667] Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Ed., Filsfils, C.,		[RFC8667] Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Ed., Filsfils, C.,
	skipping to change at page 24, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 24, line 45 ¶
	[RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J.,		[RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J.,
	Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header		Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header
	(SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020,		(SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>.
	15.2. Informative References		15.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo]		[I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo]
	Psenak, P., Hegde, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., and		Psenak, P., Hegde, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., and
	A. Gulko, "IGP Flexible Algorithm", draft-ietf-lsr-flex-		A. Gulko, "IGP Flexible Algorithm", draft-ietf-lsr-flex-
	algo-11 (work in progress), September 2020.		algo-12 (work in progress), October 2020.
	[RFC8355] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Decraene, B., and R.		[RFC8355] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Decraene, B., and R.
	Shakir, "Resiliency Use Cases in Source Packet Routing in		Shakir, "Resiliency Use Cases in Source Packet Routing in
	Networking (SPRING) Networks", RFC 8355,		Networking (SPRING) Networks", RFC 8355,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8355, March 2018,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8355, March 2018,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8355>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8355>.
	[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,		[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
	Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment		Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
	Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,		Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
End of changes. 17 change blocks.
	28 lines changed or deleted		28 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/