draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-05.txt   draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-06.txt 
Network Working Group S. Litkowski Network Working Group S. Litkowski
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track A. Bashandy Intended status: Standards Track A. Bashandy
Expires: May 19, 2021 Individual Expires: August 5, 2021 Individual
C. Filsfils C. Filsfils
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
P. Francois
INSA Lyon
B. Decraene B. Decraene
Orange Orange
D. Voyer D. Voyer
Bell Canada Bell Canada
November 15, 2020 February 1, 2021
Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing
draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-05 draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-06
Abstract Abstract
This document presents Topology Independent Loop-free Alternate Fast This document presents Topology Independent Loop-free Alternate Fast
Re-route (TI-LFA), aimed at providing protection of node and Re-route (TI-LFA), aimed at providing protection of node and
adjacency segments within the Segment Routing (SR) framework. This adjacency segments within the Segment Routing (SR) framework. This
Fast Re-route (FRR) behavior builds on proven IP-FRR concepts being Fast Re-route (FRR) behavior builds on proven IP-FRR concepts being
LFAs, remote LFAs (RLFA), and remote LFAs with directed forwarding LFAs, remote LFAs (RLFA), and remote LFAs with directed forwarding
(DLFA). It extends these concepts to provide guaranteed coverage in (DLFA). It extends these concepts to provide guaranteed coverage in
any IGP network. A key aspect of TI-LFA is the FRR path selection any IGP network. A key aspect of TI-LFA is the FRR path selection
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 48
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 May 19, 2021. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 5, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 3, line 10 skipping to change at page 3, line 10
6.3.1. MPLS dataplane considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.3.1. MPLS dataplane considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.3.2. SRv6 dataplane considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.3.2. SRv6 dataplane considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. TI-LFA and SR algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. TI-LFA and SR algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Usage of Adjacency segments in the repair list . . . . . . . 16 8. Usage of Adjacency segments in the repair list . . . . . . . 16
9. Measurements on Real Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9. Measurements on Real Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
12. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 12. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
13. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 13. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Acronyms 1. Acronyms
o DLFA: Remote LFA with Directed forwarding. o DLFA: Remote LFA with Directed forwarding.
o FRR: Fast Re-route. o FRR: Fast Re-route.
skipping to change at page 22, line 38 skipping to change at page 22, line 38
backup path for every primary path so as to be able to protect backup path for every primary path so as to be able to protect
against the failure of a directly connected link, node, or SRLG. The against the failure of a directly connected link, node, or SRLG. The
mechanism is able to calculate the backup path irrespective of the mechanism is able to calculate the backup path irrespective of the
topology as long as the topology is sufficiently redundant. topology as long as the topology is sufficiently redundant.
13. Contributors 13. Contributors
In addition to the authors listed on the front page, the following In addition to the authors listed on the front page, the following
co-authors have also contributed to this document: co-authors have also contributed to this document:
Pierre Francois, INSA Lyon
Francois Clad, Cisco Systems Francois Clad, Cisco Systems
Pablo Camarillo, Cisco Systems Pablo Camarillo, Cisco Systems
14. Acknowledgments 14. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Stewart Bryant, Alexander We would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Stewart Bryant, Alexander
Vainsthein, Chris Bowers, Shraddha Hedge for their valuable comments. Vainsthein, Chris Bowers, Shraddha Hedge for their valuable comments.
15. References 15. References
skipping to change at page 23, line 6 skipping to change at page 23, line 4
Francois Clad, Cisco Systems Francois Clad, Cisco Systems
Pablo Camarillo, Cisco Systems Pablo Camarillo, Cisco Systems
14. Acknowledgments 14. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Stewart Bryant, Alexander We would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Stewart Bryant, Alexander
Vainsthein, Chris Bowers, Shraddha Hedge for their valuable comments. Vainsthein, Chris Bowers, Shraddha Hedge for their valuable comments.
15. References 15. References
15.1. Normative References 15.1. Normative References
[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-24 (work in draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-28 (work in
progress), October 2020. progress), December 2020.
[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>.
[RFC7916] Litkowski, S., Ed., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Raza, K., [RFC7916] Litkowski, S., Ed., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Raza, K.,
Horneffer, M., and P. Sarkar, "Operational Management of Horneffer, M., and P. Sarkar, "Operational Management of
Loop-Free Alternates", RFC 7916, DOI 10.17487/RFC7916, Loop-Free Alternates", RFC 7916, DOI 10.17487/RFC7916,
July 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7916>. July 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7916>.
skipping to change at page 23, line 39 skipping to change at page 23, line 36
[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,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
15.2. Informative References 15.2. Informative References
[I-D.bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-uloop] [I-D.bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-uloop]
Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B.,
Francois, P., and P. Psenak, "Loop avoidance using Segment Francois, P., and P. Psenak, "Loop avoidance using Segment
Routing", draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-uloop-09 Routing", draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-uloop-10
(work in progress), June 2020. (work in progress), December 2020.
[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-13 (work in progress), October 2020. algo-13 (work in progress), October 2020.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and
P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft- P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft-
ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-09 (work in progress), ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-09 (work in progress),
skipping to change at page 25, line 4 skipping to change at page 24, line 44
Individual Individual
Email: abashandy.ietf@gmail.com Email: abashandy.ietf@gmail.com
Clarence Filsfils Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Brussels Brussels
Belgium Belgium
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Pierre Francois
INSA Lyon
Email: pierre.francois@insa-lyon.fr
Bruno Decraene Bruno Decraene
Orange Orange
Issy-les-Moulineaux Issy-les-Moulineaux
France France
Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Daniel Voyer Daniel Voyer
Bell Canada Bell Canada
Canada Canada
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
13 lines changed or deleted 17 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/