<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-08" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="BGP-LS Advertisement of Performance Metric">BGP-LS
    Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Performance Metric
    Extensions</title>

    <author fullname="Les Ginsberg" initials="L." role="editor"
            surname="Ginsberg">
      <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <code/>

          <country>US</country>
        </postal>

        <email>ginsberg@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Stefano Previdi" initials="S." surname="Previdi">
      <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <code/>

          <country>IT</country>
        </postal>

        <email>stefano@previdi.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>

          <city>Nanjing, Jiangsu</city>

          <code>210012</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>bill.wu@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Hannes Gredler" initials="H." surname="Gredler">
      <organization>Individual</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>AT</country>
        </postal>

        <email>hannes@gredler.at</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Saikat Ray" initials="S." surname="Ray">
      <organization>Individual</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>US</country>
        </postal>

        <email>raysaikat@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Jeff Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura">
      <organization>Individual</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>US</country>
        </postal>

        <email>jefftant.ietf@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Clarence Filsfils" initials="C." surname="Filsfils">
      <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Brussels</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>BE</country>
        </postal>

        <email>cfilsfil@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="18" month="August" year="2017"/>

    <workgroup>Networking Working Group</workgroup>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document defines new BGP-LS TLVs in order to carry the IGP
      Traffic Engineering Extensions defined in IS-IS and OSPF protocols.</t>
    </abstract>

    <note title="Requirements Language">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
      target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.</t>

      <t>In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
      only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be
      interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance.</t>
    </note>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t>BGP-LS (<xref target="RFC7752"/>) defines NLRI and attributes in
      order to carry link-state information. New BGP-LS Link-Attribute TLVs
      are required in order to carry the Traffic Engineering Metric Extensions
      defined in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref target="RFC7471"/>.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Link Attribute TLVs for TE Metric Extensions">
      <t>The following new Link Attribute TLVs are defined:</t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[   TLV Name
------------------------------------------
 Unidirectional Link Delay

 Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay

 Unidirectional Delay Variation

 Unidirectional Packet Loss
 
 Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth

 Unidirectional Available Bandwidth

 Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization
]]></artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>

    <section title="TLV Details">
      <section title="Unidirectional Link Delay TLV">
        <t>This TLV advertises the average link delay between two directly
        connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is
        described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="DELAYFIG">
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A|  RESERVED   |                   Delay                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the minimum and maximum delay values
        between two directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic
        of the TLV is described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="MINMAXFIG">
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A| RESERVED    |                   Min Delay                   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   RESERVED    |                   Max Delay                   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 8.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Unidirectional Delay Variation TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the average link delay variation between
        two directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the
        TLV is described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="DELAYVARFIG">
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|  RESERVED     |               Delay Variation                 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Unidirectional Link Loss TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the loss (as a packet percentage) between
        two directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the
        TLV is described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|A|  RESERVED   |                  Link Loss                    |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="RESBW" title="Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the residual bandwidth between two directly
        connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV is
        described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                          Residual Bandwidth                   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the available bandwidth between two
        directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV
        is described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="AVAILFIG">
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                      Available Bandwidth                      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TLV">
        <t>This sub-TLV advertises the bandwidth utilization between two
        directly connected IGP link-state neighbors. The semantic of the TLV
        is described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
        target="RFC7471"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="UTILFIG">
          <artwork><![CDATA[ 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Type                      |           Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                     Utilized Bandwidth                        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

where:]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Type: TBA</t>

        <t>Length: 4.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
      affect the BGP security model. See the 'Security Considerations' section
      of <xref target="RFC4271"/> for a discussion of BGP security. Also refer
      to <xref target="RFC4272"/> and <xref target="RFC6952"/> for analysis of
      security issues for BGP.</t>

      <t>The TLVs introduced in this document are used to propagate IGP
      defined information (<xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
      target="RFC7471"/>.) These TLVs represent the state and resources
      availability of the IGP link. The IGP instances originating these TLVs
      are assumed to have all the required security and authentication
      mechanism (as described in <xref target="RFC7810"/> and <xref
      target="RFC7471"/>) in order to prevent any security issue when
      propagating the TLVs into BGP-LS.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>This document requests assigning code-points from the registry
      "BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and
      Attribute TLVs" for the new Link Attribute TLVs defined in the table
      below: <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[ TLV code-point                 Value
--------------------------------------------------------
 1114              Unidirectional Link Delay

 1115              Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay

 1116              Unidirectional Delay Variation

 1117              Unidirectional Packet Loss
 
 1118              Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth

 1119              Unidirectional Available Bandwidth

 1120              Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization]]></artwork>
        </figure></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7471"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4271"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7752"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7810"?>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4272"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6952"?>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
