rfc9602.original | rfc9602.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
6man S. Krishnan | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Krishnan | |||
Internet-Draft Cisco | Request for Comments: 9602 Cisco | |||
Intended status: Informational 15 February 2024 | Category: Informational June 2024 | |||
Expires: 18 August 2024 | ISSN: 2070-1721 | |||
SRv6 Segment Identifiers in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture | Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Segment Identifiers in the IPv6 | |||
draft-ietf-6man-sids-06 | Addressing Architecture | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
The data plane for Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) is built using | The data plane for Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) is built using | |||
IPv6 as the underlying forwarding plane. Due to this underlying use | IPv6 as the underlying forwarding plane. Thus, Segment Identifiers | |||
of IPv6, Segment Identifiers (SIDs) used by SRv6 can resemble IPv6 | (SIDs) used by SRv6 can resemble IPv6 addresses and behave like them | |||
addresses and behave like them while exhibiting slightly different | in some situations while exhibiting slightly different behaviors in | |||
behaviors in some situations. This document explores the | others. This document explores the characteristics of SRv6 SIDs and | |||
characteristics of SRv6 SIDs and focuses on the relationship of SRv6 | focuses on the relationship of SRv6 SIDs to the IPv6 Addressing | |||
SIDs to the IPv6 Addressing Architecture. This document allocates | Architecture. This document allocates and makes a dedicated prefix | |||
and makes a dedicated prefix available for SRv6 SIDs. | available for SRv6 SIDs. | |||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | published for informational purposes. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | ||||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | ||||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | ||||
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | ||||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | received public review and has been approved for publication by the | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents | |||
approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet | ||||
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841. | ||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 August 2024. | Information about the current status of this document, any errata, | |||
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at | ||||
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9602. | ||||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2024 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the | |||
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. | Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described | |||
in the Revised BSD License. | ||||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction | |||
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 2. Terminology | |||
3. SRv6 SIDs and the IPv6 Addressing Architecture . . . . . . . 3 | 3. SRv6 SIDs and the IPv6 Addressing Architecture | |||
4. Special Considerations for Compressed SIDs . . . . . . . . . 4 | 4. Special Considerations for Compressed SIDs | |||
5. Allocation of a Global Unicast Prefix for SIDs . . . . . . . 5 | 5. Allocation of a Global Unicast Prefix for SIDs | |||
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 7. Security Considerations | |||
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 8. References | |||
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 8.1. Normative References | |||
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 8.2. Informative References | |||
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | Acknowledgments | |||
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | Author's Address | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) [RFC8754] uses IPv6 as the | Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) [RFC8754] uses IPv6 as the | |||
underlying data plane. In SRv6, SR source nodes initiate packets | underlying data plane. In SRv6, SR source nodes initiate packets | |||
with a segment identifier in the Destination Address of the IPv6 | with a Segment Identifier (SID) in the Destination Address of the | |||
header, and SR segment endpoint nodes process a local segment present | IPv6 header, and SR segment endpoint nodes process a local segment | |||
in the Destination Address of an IPv6 header. Thus Segment | present in the Destination Address of an IPv6 header. Thus, SIDs in | |||
Identifiers (SIDs) in SRv6 can and do appear in the Destination | SRv6 can, and do, appear in the Destination Address of IPv6 datagrams | |||
Address of IPv6 datagrams by design. This document explores the | by design. This document explores the characteristics of SRv6 SIDs | |||
characteristics of SRv6 SIDs and focuses on the relationship of SRv6 | and focuses on the relationship of SRv6 SIDs to the IPv6 Addressing | |||
SIDs to the IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC4291]. This document | Architecture [RFC4291]. This document allocates and makes a | |||
allocates and makes a dedicated prefix available for SRv6 SIDs. | dedicated prefix available for SRv6 SIDs. | |||
2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8402]. | The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8402]. | |||
* Segment Routing (SR) | * Segment Routing (SR) | |||
* SR Domain | * SR Domain | |||
* Segment | * Segment | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at line 91 ¶ | |||
The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8402]. | The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8402]. | |||
* Segment Routing (SR) | * Segment Routing (SR) | |||
* SR Domain | * SR Domain | |||
* Segment | * Segment | |||
* Segment Identifier (SID) | * Segment Identifier (SID) | |||
* SRv6 | * SRv6 | |||
* SRv6 SID | * SRv6 SID | |||
The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8754]. | The following terms are used as defined in [RFC8754]. | |||
* Segment Routing Header (SRH) | * Segment Routing Header (SRH) | |||
* SR Source Node | * SR Source Node | |||
* Transit Node | * Transit Node | |||
* SR Segment Endpoint Node | * SR Segment Endpoint Node | |||
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 BCP | "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | |||
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. | |||
3. SRv6 SIDs and the IPv6 Addressing Architecture | 3. SRv6 SIDs and the IPv6 Addressing Architecture | |||
[RFC8754] defines the Segment List of the SRH as a contiguous array | [RFC8754] defines the Segment List of the SRH as a contiguous array | |||
of 128-bit IPv6 addresses, and that each of the elements in this list | of 128-bit IPv6 addresses; further, it states that each of the | |||
are SIDs. But all of these elements are not necessarily made equal. | elements in this list are SIDs. But all of these elements are not | |||
Some of these elements may represent a local interface as described | necessarily made equal. Some of these elements may represent a local | |||
in Section 4.3 of [RFC8754] as "A FIB entry that represents a local | interface as described in Section 4.3 of [RFC8754] as "A FIB entry | |||
interface, not locally instantiated as an SRv6 SID". From this it | that represents a local interface, not locally instantiated as an | |||
follows that not all the SIDs that appear in the SRH are SRv6 SIDs as | SRv6 SID". It follows that not all the SIDs that appear in the SRH | |||
defined by [RFC8402]. | are SRv6 SIDs as defined by [RFC8402]. | |||
As stated above, the non-SRv6-SID elements that appear in the SRH SID | As stated above, the non-SRv6-SID elements that appear in the SRH SID | |||
list are simply IPv6 addresses assigned to local interfaces and they | list are simply IPv6 addresses assigned to local interfaces, and they | |||
need to conform to [RFC4291]. So, the following discussions are | need to conform to [RFC4291]. So, the following discussions are | |||
applicable solely to SRv6 SIDs that are not assigned to local | applicable solely to SRv6 SIDs that are not assigned to local | |||
interfaces. | interfaces. | |||
One of the key questions to address is how these SRv6 SIDs appearing | One of the key questions to address is how these SRv6 SIDs appearing | |||
as IPv6 Destination Addresses are perceived and treated by "transit | as IPv6 Destination Addresses are perceived and treated by "transit | |||
nodes" (that are not required to be capable of processing a Segment | nodes" (that are not required to be capable of processing a Segment | |||
or the Segment Routing Header). | or the Segment Routing Header). | |||
Section 3.1. of [RFC8986] describes the format of an SRv6 SID as | Section 3.1 of [RFC8986] describes the format of an SRv6 SID as being | |||
composed of three parts LOC:FUNCT:ARG, where a locator (LOC) is | composed of three parts, LOC:FUNCT:ARG, where a locator (LOC) is | |||
encoded in the L most significant bits of the SID, followed by F bits | encoded in the L most significant bits of the SID followed by F bits | |||
of function (FUNCT) and A bits of arguments (ARG). If L+F+A < 128, | of function (FUNCT) and A bits of arguments (ARG). If L+F+A < 128, | |||
the ARG is followed by enough zero bits to fill the 128 bit SID. | the ARG is followed by enough zero bits to fill the 128-bit SID. | |||
Such an SRv6 SID is assigned to a node within a prefix defined as a | Such an SRv6 SID is assigned to a node within a prefix defined as a | |||
Locator of length L. When an SRv6 SID occurs in the IPv6 Destination | Locator of length L. When an SRv6 SID occurs in the IPv6 Destination | |||
Address of an IPv6 header, only the longest match prefix | Address of an IPv6 header, only the longest match prefix | |||
corresponding to the Locator [BCP198] is used by the transit node to | corresponding to the Locator [BCP198] is used by the transit node to | |||
forward the packet to the node identified by the Locator. | forward the packet to the node identified by the Locator. | |||
It is clear that this format for SRv6 SIDs is not compliant with the | It is clear that this format for SRv6 SIDs is not compliant with the | |||
requirements set forth in [RFC4291] for IPv6 addresses but it is also | requirements set forth in [RFC4291] for IPv6 addresses, but it is | |||
clear that SRv6 SIDs are not intended for assignment onto interfaces | also clear that SRv6 SIDs are not intended for assignment onto | |||
on end hosts. They look and act similarly to other mechanisms that | interfaces on end hosts. They look and act like other mechanisms | |||
use IPv6 addresses with different formats such as [RFC6052] that | that use IPv6 addresses with different formats, such as [RFC6052] | |||
defines the IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators and [RFC7343] | (which defines the IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators) and | |||
that describes ORCHIDv2 (a cryptographic hash identifier format). | [RFC7343] (which describes Overlay Routable Cryptographic Hash | |||
Identifiers version 2 (ORCHIDv2) (a cryptographic hash identifier | ||||
format)). | ||||
While looking at the transit nodes it becomes apparent that these | While looking at the transit nodes, it becomes apparent that these | |||
addresses are used purely for forwarding and not for packet delivery | addresses are used purely for forwarding and not for packet delivery | |||
to end hosts. Hence the relevant specification to apply here is | to end hosts. Hence, the relevant specification to apply here is | |||
[BCP198] that requires implementations to support the use of variable | [BCP198], which requires implementations to support the use of | |||
length prefixes in forwarding while explicitly decoupling IPv6 | variable-length prefixes in forwarding while explicitly decoupling | |||
routing and forwarding from the IPv6 address/prefix semantics | IPv6 routing and forwarding from the IPv6 address/prefix semantics | |||
described in [RFC4291]. Please note that [BCP198] does not override | described in [RFC4291]. Please note that [BCP198] does not override | |||
the rules in [RFC4291], but merely limits where their impact is | the rules in [RFC4291]: it merely limits where their impact is | |||
observed. | observed. | |||
Furthermore, in the SRv6 specifications, all SIDs assigned within a | Furthermore, in the SRv6 specifications, all SIDs assigned within a | |||
given Locator prefix are located inside the node identified by | given Locator prefix are located inside the node identified by | |||
Locator. Therefore there does not appear to be a conflict with | Locator. Therefore, there does not appear to be a conflict with | |||
section 2.6.1 of [RFC4291] since subnet-router anycast addresses are | Section 2.6.1 of [RFC4291] since subnet-router anycast addresses are | |||
neither required nor useful within a node. | neither required nor useful within a node. | |||
4. Special Considerations for Compressed SIDs | 4. Special Considerations for Compressed SIDs | |||
[CSID] introduces an encoding for compressed segment lists (C-SIDs), | [CSID] introduces an encoding for compressed segment lists (C-SIDs), | |||
and describes how to use a single entry in the Segment list as a | and describes how to use a single entry in the Segment list as a | |||
container for multiple SIDs. A node taking part in this mechanism | container for multiple SIDs. A node taking part in this mechanism | |||
accomplishes this by using the ARG part [RFC8986] of the Destination | accomplishes this by using the ARG part [RFC8986] of the Destination | |||
Address of the IPv6 header to derive a new Destination Address. i.e., | Address of the IPv6 header to derive a new Destination Address. That | |||
the Destination Address field of the packet changes at a segment | is, the Destination Address field of the packet changes at a segment | |||
endpoint in a way similar to how the address changes as the result of | endpoint in a way similar to how the address changes as the result of | |||
processing a segment in the SRH. | processing a segment in the SRH. | |||
One key thing to note here is that the Locator Block at the beginning | One key thing to note here is that the Locator Block at the beginning | |||
of the address does not get modified by the operations needed for | of the address does not get modified by the operations needed for | |||
supporting compressed SIDs. As we have established that the SRv6 | supporting compressed SIDs. As we have established that the SRv6 | |||
SIDs are being treated simply as routing prefixes on transit nodes | SIDs are being treated simply as routing prefixes on transit nodes | |||
within the SR domain this does not constitute a modification to the | within the SR domain, this does not constitute a modification to the | |||
IPv6 data plane on such transit nodes and any changes are restricted | IPv6 data plane on such transit nodes: any changes are restricted to | |||
to SR aware nodes. | SR-aware nodes. | |||
5. Allocation of a Global Unicast Prefix for SIDs | 5. Allocation of a Global Unicast Prefix for SIDs | |||
All of the SRv6 related specifications discussed above are intended | All of the SRv6-related specifications discussed above are intended | |||
to be applicable to a contained SR Domain or between collaborating SR | to be applicable to a contained SR Domain or between collaborating SR | |||
Domains. Nodes either inside or outside the SR Domains that are not | Domains. Nodes either inside or outside the SR Domains that are not | |||
SR-aware will not perform any special behavior for SRv6 SIDs and will | SR-aware will not perform any special behavior for SRv6 SIDs and will | |||
treat them solely as IPv6 routing prefixes. | treat them solely as IPv6 routing prefixes. | |||
As an added factor of security, it is desirable to allocate some | As an added factor of security, it is desirable to allocate some | |||
address space that explicitly signals that the addresses within that | address space that explicitly signals that the addresses within that | |||
space cannot be expected to comply with [RFC4291]. As described in | space cannot be expected to comply with [RFC4291]. As described in | |||
Section 3 above, there is precedent for mechanisms that use IPv6 | Section 3, there is precedent for mechanisms that use IPv6 addresses | |||
addresses in a manner different from that specified in [RFC4291]. | in a manner different from that specified in [RFC4291]. This would | |||
This would be useful in identifying and potentially filtering packets | be useful in identifying and potentially filtering packets at the | |||
at the edges of the SR Domains to make it simpler for the SR domain | edges of the SR Domains to make it simpler for the SR domain to fail | |||
to fail closed. | closed. | |||
At the present time, global DNS [RFC8499] SHOULD NOT reference | At the present time, global DNS [RFC9499] SHOULD NOT reference | |||
addresses assigned from this block. Further specifications are | addresses assigned from this block. Further specifications are | |||
needed to describe the conventions and guidelines for the use of this | needed to describe the conventions and guidelines for the use of this | |||
newly allocated address block. The SRv6 operational community, which | newly allocated address block. The SRv6 operational community, which | |||
is the first intended user of this block, is requested to come up | is the first intended user of this block, is requested to come up | |||
with such conventions and guidelines in line with their requirements. | with such conventions and guidelines in line with their requirements. | |||
6. IANA Considerations | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
IANA is requested to assign the following /16 address block from the | IANA has assigned the following /16 address block from the "IPv6 | |||
IPv6 Unicast Address Registry [UNICAST] for the purposes described in | Unicast Address Assignments" registry [UNICAST] for the purposes | |||
Section 5 and record the allocation in the IPv6 Special-Purpose | described in Section 5 and recorded the allocation in the "IANA IPv6 | |||
Address Registry [SPECIAL]. | Special-Purpose Address Registry" [SPECIAL] as follows: | |||
Address Block: 5f00::/16 | Address Block: | |||
Name: Segment Routing (SRv6) SIDs | 5f00::/16 | |||
RFC: This document | ||||
Allocation Date: Allocation Date | Name: | |||
Termination Date: N/A | Segment Routing (SRv6) SIDs | |||
Source: True | ||||
Destination: True | RFC: | |||
Forwardable: True | RFC 9602 | |||
Globally Reachable: False | ||||
Reserved-by-Protocol: False | Allocation Date: | |||
2024-04 | ||||
Termination Date: | ||||
N/A | ||||
Source: | ||||
True | ||||
Destination: | ||||
True | ||||
Forwardable: | ||||
True | ||||
Globally Reachable: | ||||
False | ||||
Reserved-by-Protocol: | ||||
False | ||||
7. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
The security considerations for the use of Segment Routing [RFC8402], | The security considerations for the use of Segment Routing [RFC8402], | |||
SRv6 [RFC8754], and SRv6 network programming [RFC8986] apply to the | SRv6 [RFC8754], and SRv6 network programming [RFC8986] apply to the | |||
use of these addresses. The use of IPv6 tunneling mechanisms | use of these addresses. The use of IPv6 tunneling mechanisms | |||
(including SRv6) also brings up additional concerns such as those | (including SRv6) also brings up additional concerns such as those | |||
described in [RFC6169]. The usage of the prefix allocated by this | described in [RFC6169]. The usage of the prefix allocated by this | |||
document improves security by making it simpler to filter traffic at | document improves security by making it simpler to filter traffic at | |||
the edge of the SR domains. | the edge of the SR domains. | |||
In case the deployments do not use this allocated prefix, additional | In case the deployments do not use this allocated prefix, additional | |||
care needs to be exercised at network ingress and egress points so | care needs to be exercised at network ingress and egress points so | |||
that SRv6 packets do not leak out of SR domains and they do not | that SRv6 packets do not leak out of SR domains and do not | |||
accidentally enter SR unaware domains. Similarly, as stated in | accidentally enter SR-unaware domains. Similarly, as stated in | |||
Section 5.1 of [RFC8754], the SR domain needs to be configured to | Section 5.1 of [RFC8754], the SR domain needs to be configured to | |||
filter out packets entering that use the selected prefix. | filter out packets entering that use the selected prefix. | |||
8. Acknowledgments | 8. References | |||
The author would like to extend a special note of thanks to Brian | ||||
Carpenter and Erik Kline for their precisely summarized thoughts on | ||||
this topic that provided the seed of this draft. The author would | ||||
also like to thank Andrew Alston, Fred Baker, Ron Bonica, Nick | ||||
Buraglio, Bruno Decraene, Dhruv Dhody, Darren Dukes, Linda Dunbar, | ||||
Reese Enghardt, Adrian Farrel, Clarence Filsfils, Jim Guichard, Joel | ||||
Halpern, Ted Hardie, Bob Hinden, Murray Kucherawy, Cheng Li, Acee | ||||
Lindem, Jen Linkova, Gyan Mishra, Yingzhen Qu, Robert Raszuk, Alvaro | ||||
Retana, Michael Richardson, John Scudder, Petr Spacek, Mark Smith, | ||||
Dirk Steinberg, Ole Troan, Eduard Vasilenko, Eric Vyncke, Rob Wilton, | ||||
Jingrong Xie, Chongfeng Xie and Juan Carlos Zuniga for their ideas | ||||
and comments to improve this document. | ||||
9. References | 8.1. Normative References | |||
9.1. Normative References | [BCP198] Best Current Practice 198, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp198>. | ||||
At the time of writing, this BCP comprises the following: | ||||
[BCP198] Boucadair, M., Petrescu, A., and F. Baker, "IPv6 Prefix | Boucadair, M., Petrescu, A., and F. Baker, "IPv6 Prefix | |||
Length Recommendation for Forwarding", BCP 198, RFC 7608, | Length Recommendation for Forwarding", BCP 198, RFC 7608, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC7608, July 2015, | DOI 10.17487/RFC7608, July 2015, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7608>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7608>. | |||
[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>. | |||
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing | [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing | |||
skipping to change at page 7, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at line 310 ¶ | |||
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>. | |||
[RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer, | [RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer, | |||
D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6 | D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6 | |||
(SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986, | (SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021, | DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>. | |||
9.2. Informative References | 8.2. Informative References | |||
[CSID] Cheng, W., Filsfils, C., Li, Z., Decraene, B., and F. | [CSID] Cheng, W., Filsfils, C., Li, Z., Decraene, B., and F. | |||
Clad, "Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding in SRH", Work | Clad, "Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding", Work in | |||
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh- | Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh- | |||
compression-09, 23 October 2023, | compression-17, 16 May 2024, | |||
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-spring-srv6- | ||||
srh-compression-09.txt>. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-spring-compression-analysis] | ||||
Bonica, R., Cheng, W., Dukes, D., Henderickx, W., Li, C., | ||||
Peng, S., and C. Xie, "Compressed SRv6 SID List Analysis", | ||||
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-spring- | ||||
compression-analysis-03, 3 April 2023, | ||||
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring- | <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring- | |||
compression-analysis-03>. | srv6-srh-compression-17>. | |||
[RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X. | [RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X. | |||
Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052, | Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC6052, October 2010, | DOI 10.17487/RFC6052, October 2010, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6052>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6052>. | |||
[RFC6169] Krishnan, S., Thaler, D., and J. Hoagland, "Security | [RFC6169] Krishnan, S., Thaler, D., and J. Hoagland, "Security | |||
Concerns with IP Tunneling", RFC 6169, | Concerns with IP Tunneling", RFC 6169, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC6169, April 2011, | DOI 10.17487/RFC6169, April 2011, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6169>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6169>. | |||
[RFC7343] Laganier, J. and F. Dupont, "An IPv6 Prefix for Overlay | [RFC7343] Laganier, J. and F. Dupont, "An IPv6 Prefix for Overlay | |||
Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers Version 2 | Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers Version 2 | |||
(ORCHIDv2)", RFC 7343, DOI 10.17487/RFC7343, September | (ORCHIDv2)", RFC 7343, DOI 10.17487/RFC7343, September | |||
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7343>. | 2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7343>. | |||
[RFC8499] Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS | [RFC9499] Hoffman, P. and K. Fujiwara, "DNS Terminology", BCP 219, | |||
Terminology", BCP 219, RFC 8499, DOI 10.17487/RFC8499, | RFC 9499, DOI 10.17487/RFC9499, March 2024, | |||
January 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8499>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9499>. | |||
[SPECIAL] IANA, "IANA IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry", | [SPECIAL] IANA, "IANA IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry", | |||
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special- | <https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special- | |||
registry/>. | registry>. | |||
[UNICAST] IANA, "IPv6 Global Unicast Address Assignments", | [UNICAST] IANA, "IPv6 Global Unicast Address Assignments", | |||
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-unicast-address- | <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-unicast-address- | |||
assignments/ipv6-unicast-address-assignments.xhtml>. | assignments>. | |||
Acknowledgments | ||||
The author would like to extend a special note of thanks to Brian | ||||
Carpenter and Erik Kline for their precisely summarized thoughts on | ||||
this topic that provided the seed of this document. The author would | ||||
also like to thank Andrew Alston, Fred Baker, Ron Bonica, Nick | ||||
Buraglio, Bruno Decraene, Dhruv Dhody, Darren Dukes, Linda Dunbar, | ||||
Reese Enghardt, Adrian Farrel, Clarence Filsfils, Jim Guichard, Joel | ||||
Halpern, Ted Hardie, Bob Hinden, Murray Kucherawy, Cheng Li, Acee | ||||
Lindem, Jen Linkova, Gyan Mishra, Yingzhen Qu, Robert Raszuk, Alvaro | ||||
Retana, Michael Richardson, John Scudder, Petr Spacek, Mark Smith, | ||||
Dirk Steinberg, Ole Troan, Eduard Vasilenko, Éric Vyncke, Rob Wilton, | ||||
Jingrong Xie, Chongfeng Xie, and Juan Carlos Zuniga for their ideas | ||||
and comments to improve this document. | ||||
Author's Address | Author's Address | |||
Suresh Krishnan | Suresh Krishnan | |||
Cisco | Cisco | |||
Email: suresh.krishnan@gmail.com | Email: suresh.krishnan@gmail.com | |||
End of changes. 38 change blocks. | ||||
143 lines changed or deleted | 161 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. |