| rfc9272v2.txt | rfc9272.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| skipping to change at line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at line 13 ¶ | |||
| Request for Comments: 9272 A. Przygienda | Request for Comments: 9272 A. Przygienda | |||
| Updates: 8401, 8444 Juniper Networks | Updates: 8401, 8444 Juniper Networks | |||
| Category: Standards Track A. Dolganow | Category: Standards Track A. Dolganow | |||
| ISSN: 2070-1721 Individual | ISSN: 2070-1721 Individual | |||
| H. Bidgoli | H. Bidgoli | |||
| Nokia | Nokia | |||
| IJ. Wijnands | IJ. Wijnands | |||
| Individual | Individual | |||
| A. Gulko | A. Gulko | |||
| Edward Jones Wealth Management | Edward Jones Wealth Management | |||
| August 2022 | September 2022 | |||
| Underlay Path Calculation Algorithm and Constraints for Bit Index | Underlay Path Calculation Algorithm and Constraints for Bit Index | |||
| Explicit Replication (BIER) | Explicit Replication (BIER) | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document specifies general rules for the interaction between the | This document specifies general rules for the interaction between the | |||
| BIER Algorithm (BAR) and the IGP Algorithm (IPA) used for underlay | BIER Algorithm (BAR) and the IGP Algorithm (IPA) used for underlay | |||
| path calculation within the Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) | path calculation within the Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) | |||
| architecture. The semantics defined in this document update RFC 8401 | architecture. The semantics defined in this document update RFC 8401 | |||
| skipping to change at line 109 ¶ | skipping to change at line 109 ¶ | |||
| "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 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | |||
| capitals, as shown here. | capitals, as shown here. | |||
| 2. Updated Definitions for IPA and BAR Fields | 2. Updated Definitions for IPA and BAR Fields | |||
| The definitions for the IPA and BAR fields in Section 6.1 of | The definitions for the IPA and BAR fields in Section 6.1 of | |||
| [RFC8401] and Section 2.1 of [RFC8444] are updated as follows. | [RFC8401] and Section 2.1 of [RFC8444] are updated as follows. | |||
| IPA: IGP Algorithm. Specifies a generic Routing Algorithm (RA) and | IPA: IGP Algorithm. Specifies a generic Routing Algorithm and | |||
| related Routing Constraints (RC) to calculate underlay paths to | related Routing Constraints to calculate underlay paths to reach | |||
| reach other Bit-Forwarding Routers (BFRs). Values are from the | other Bit-Forwarding Routers (BFRs). Values are from the "IGP | |||
| "IGP Algorithm Types" registry. One octet. | Algorithm Types" registry. One octet. | |||
| BAR: BIER Algorithm. Specifies a BIER-specific Algorithm (BA) and | BAR: BIER Algorithm. Specifies a BIER-specific Algorithm and BIER- | |||
| BIER-specific Constraints (BC) used to either modify, enhance, or | specific Constraints used to either modify, enhance, or replace | |||
| replace the calculation of underlay paths to reach other BFRs as | the calculation of underlay paths to reach other BFRs as defined | |||
| defined by the IPA value. Values are allocated from the "BIER | by the IPA value. Values are allocated from the "BIER Algorithm" | |||
| Algorithm" registry. One octet. | registry. One octet. | |||
| When a BAR value is defined, the corresponding BA and BC semantics | When a BAR value is defined, the corresponding BIER-specific | |||
| SHOULD be specified. For an IGP Algorithm to be used as a BIER | Algorithm (BA) and BIER-specific Constraint (BC) semantics SHOULD | |||
| IPA, its RA and RC semantics SHOULD be specified. If any of these | be specified. For an IGP Algorithm to be used as a BIER IPA, its | |||
| semantics is not specified, it MUST be interpreted as the "NULL" | Routing Algorithm (RA) and Routing Constraint (RC) semantics | |||
| algorithm or constraint. For example, the IGP Algorithm 0 defined | SHOULD be specified. If any of these semantics is not specified, | |||
| in [RFC8665] is treated as having a NULL RC, i.e., no constraints | it MUST be interpreted as the "NULL" algorithm or constraint. For | |||
| (see Section 3). | example, the IGP Algorithm 0 defined in [RFC8665] is treated as | |||
| having a NULL RC, i.e., no constraints (see Section 3). | ||||
| If a specification is not available for a specific BAR value, its | If a specification is not available for a specific BAR value, its | |||
| value MUST be from the Private or Experimental Use range of the | value MUST be from the Private or Experimental Use range of the | |||
| registry. | registry. | |||
| 3. General Rules for the BAR and IPA Interaction | 3. General Rules for the BAR and IPA Interaction | |||
| For a particular sub-domain, all BFRs MUST be provisioned with and | For a particular sub-domain, all BFRs MUST be provisioned with and | |||
| signal the same BAR and IPA values. If a BFR discovers another BFR | signal the same BAR and IPA values. If a BFR discovers another BFR | |||
| advertising a different BAR or IPA value for a sub-domain, it MUST | advertising a different BAR or IPA value for a sub-domain, it MUST | |||
| End of changes. 4 change blocks. | ||||
| 17 lines changed or deleted | 18 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. | ||||