Internet DRAFT - draft-xpbs-pce-topology-filter
draft-xpbs-pce-topology-filter
PCE Q. Xiong
Internet-Draft S. Peng
Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corporation
Expires: 8 September 2023 V. Beeram
T. Saad
Juniper Networks
M. Koldychev
Cisco Systems
7 March 2023
Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for
Topology Filter
draft-xpbs-pce-topology-filter-02
Abstract
This document proposes a set of extensions for Path Computation
Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to support the topology filter
during path computation.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 8 September 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Topology Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Topology Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. PCEP Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. TOPOLOGY Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.1. Source Protocol TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.2. Multi-topology TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.3. Area TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1.4. Algorithm TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. IRO Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.1. Link ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.2. Admin Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.3. Source Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3. XRO Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. TOPOLOGY Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. IRO and XRO Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
[RFC5440] describes the Path Computation Element Computation Protocol
(PCEP) which is used between a Path Computation Element (PCE) and a
Path Computation Client (PCC) (or other PCE) to enable computation of
Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) for Traffic Engineering Label
Switched Path (TE LSP). PCEP Extensions for the Stateful PCE Model
[RFC8231] describes a set of extensions to PCEP to enable active
control of MPLS-TE and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) tunnels. As depicted
in [RFC4655], a PCE MUST be able to compute the path of a TE LSP by
operating on the TED and considering bandwidth and other constraints
applicable to the TE LSP service request.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
A PCE always perform path computation based on the network topology
information collected through BGP-LS [RFC7752]. BGP-LS can get
multiple link-state data from multiple IGP instance, or multiple
virtual topologies from a single IGP instance. It is necessary to
restrict the PCE to a sub-topology during path computation. The PCE
MUST take the topology constraint into consideration during path
computation.
The sub-topology may be considered as a TE topology or a specific IGP
domain. As defined in [I-D.bestbar-teas-yang-topology-filter], a
topology filter is a data construct that can be applied on either a
native topology or a user specified topology. The topology filter
can be viewed as a set of filtering rules to construct the sub-
topology. The topology filter specifies the topology reference or a
set of include-any, include-all and exclude filtering rules.
This document proposes a set of extensions for PCEP to support the
topology filter during path computation.
1.1. Terminology
The terminology is defined as [RFC5440], [RFC7752] and [RFC8795].
1.2. Requirements Language
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 [RFC2119].
2. Topology Filter
As defined in [I-D.bestbar-teas-yang-topology-filter], a topology
filter is a data construct that can be applied on either a native
topology or a user specified topology. The topology filter can be
viewed as a set of filtering rules to construct the sub-topology.
The topology filter specifies the topology reference or a set of
include-any, include-all and exclude filtering rules.
2.1. Topology Reference
The topology reference indicates the topology on which the existing
referenced filtering rules need to be applied. The referenced
topology could be a predefined TE topology or a specific IGP domain.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
As defined in [RFC7752], the IGP domain has a unique IGP
representation by using the combination of Area-ID, Router-ID,
Protocol-ID, Multi-Topology ID, and Instance-ID. This document
defines TOPOLOGY object and new TLVs for the topology filter such as
Source Protocol TLV, Multi-Topology ID, Area-ID and Algorithm TLV.
2.2. Filters
The topology filters carries a list of filters. Each filter
specifies a set of include-any, include-all and exclude filtering
rules that can be applied on the native topology. The filtering
rules specify the a set of constraints on the topology, that are to
be used to compute path at PCE. This document proposes a set of
extensions for IRO and XRO object and defines new subobjects such as
Link ID, Link affinity and Source Protocol.
3. PCEP Extensions
3.1. TOPOLOGY Object
This document defines a new TOPOLOGY object to carry the topology
filter.
The TOPOLOGY object is optional and specifies the sub-topology to be
taken into account by the PCE during path computation. The TOPOLOGY
object can be carried within a PCReq message, or a PCRep message in
case of unsuccessful path computation.
TOPOLOGY Object-Class is TBD1.
TOPOLOGY Object-Type is TBD2.
The format of the TOPOLOGY object body is:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
// Optional TLVs //
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: TOPOLOGY Body Object Format
Reserved (24 bits): This field MUST be set to zero on transmission
and MUST be ignored on receipt.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
Flags (8 bits): No flags are currently defined. Unassigned flags
MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
The format of optional TLVs is defined in [RFC5440] and may be used
to carry topology filter information as defined in section.
3.1.1. Source Protocol TLV
The Source Protocol TLV is optional and is defined to carry the
protocol ID and Instance ID.
The format of the Source Protocol TLV is:
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=TBD3 | Length=12 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Protocol-ID | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance-ID |
| (64 bits) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Source Protocol TLV
The code point for the TLV type is TBD3. The TLV length is 12
octets.
Protocol-ID (8 bits): defined in [RFC7752] section 3.2. IS-IS
[RFC8202] and OSPF [RFC6549] MAY run multiple routing protocol
instances identified by the Protocol-ID over the same link.
Reserved (24 bits): This field MUST be set to zero on transmission
and MUST be ignored on receipt.
Instance-ID (64 bits): defined in [RFC7752] section 3.2.
3.1.2. Multi-topology TLV
The Multi-topology TLV is optional and is defined to carry the multi-
topology ID.
The format of the Multi-topology TLV is :
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
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=TBD4 | Length=4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|R R R R| Multi-Topology ID | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Multi-topology TLV
The code point for the sub-TLV type is TBD4. The sub-TLV length is 4
octets.
Multi-Topology ID (12 bits): Semantics of the IS-IS MT-ID are defined
in Section 7.2 of [RFC5120]. Semantics of the OSPF MT-ID are defined
in Section 3.7 of [RFC4915]. As defined in section 3.2.1.5 of
[RFC7752], if the value is derived from OSPF, then the upper 9 bits
MUST be set to 0. Bits R are reserved and SHOULD be set to 0 when
originated and ignored on receipt.
Reserved (16 bits): This field MUST be set to zero on transmission
and MUST be ignored on receipt.
3.1.3. Area TLV
The Area TLV is optional and is defined to carry the Area ID.
The format of the Area TLV is :
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=TBD5 | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// Area ID (variable) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: Area TLV
The code point for the TLV type is TBD3. The TLV length is variable.
Area-ID: Area identifier as defined in [RFC7752].
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
3.1.4. Algorithm TLV
The Algorithm TLV is optional and is defined to carry the Algorithm
ID.
The Algorithm TLV MAY be inserted so as to provide the Flex-algo
plane information for the computed path. The format of the TLV is
defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-sid-algo] section 3.4.
3.2. IRO Object
As per [RFC5440], IRO can be used to specify that the computed path
needs to traverse a set of specified network elements or abstract
nodes. This document proposed a set of extensions for topology
filter.
3.2.1. Link ID
The Link ID is used to include the link that is used during the path
calculation.
The Link ID subobject is defined:
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=TBD6 | Length | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Link ID (4 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Link ID subobject in IRO
The code point for the TLV type is TBD6. The TLV length is 12
octets.
Link ID (32bits ): defined in IS-IS [RFC5307] and OSPF [RFC3630].
3.2.2. Admin Group
The Admin Group is used to include the links that is used during the
path calculation.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
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=TBD7 | Length | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Extended Admin Group |
+- -+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: Admin Group subobject in IRO
The code point for the TLV type is TBD7. The TLV length is variable.
Extended Administrative Group: Extended Administrative Group as
defined in [RFC7308].
3.2.3. Source Protocol
The format of the Source Protocol subobject is:
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=TBD8 | Length | Reserved | Protocol-ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance-ID |
| (64 bits) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7: Source Protocol subobject in IRO
The code point for the TLV type is TBD8. The TLV length is 12
octets.
Protocol-ID (8 bits): defined in [RFC7752] section 3.2. IS-IS
[RFC8202] and OSPF [RFC6549] MAY run multiple routing protocol
instances identified by the Protocol-ID over the same link.
Reserved (24 bits): This field MUST be set to zero on transmission
and MUST be ignored on receipt.
Instance-ID (64 bits): defined in [RFC7752] section 3.2.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
3.3. XRO Object
As per [RFC5521], XRO is an optional object used to specify exclusion
of certain abstract nodes or resources from the whole path. This
document proposed a set of extensions for topology filter.
The XRO is made of sub-objects identical to the ones defined in IRO,
where the XRO sub-object type is identical to the sub-object type
defined in this documents.
The following sub-object types are supported.
Type Sub-object
TBD6 Link ID
TBD7 Admin Group
TBD8 Source Protocol
3.4. Procedures
A PCC MAY insert a TOPOLOGY object to indicate the sub-topology of an
IGP domain that MUST be considered by the PCE. The PCE will perform
path computation based on the sub-topology identified by the topology
filter rules that can be applied on either the native topology or a
user specified topology. The absence of the TLVs related topology
reference indicates that the filtering rules are to be applied on the
native topology.
4. IANA Considerations
4.1. TOPOLOGY Object
IANA is requested to make allocations for Topology Object from the
registry, as follows:
TOPOLOGY Object-Class is TBD1.
TOPOLOGY Object-Type is TBD2.
The TLVs for Topology Object is as follows:
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
+======+=====================+=================+
| Type | TLV | Reference |
+======+=====================+=================+
| TBD3 | Source Protocol TLV | [this document] |
+------+---------------------+-----------------+
| TBD4 | Multi-topology TLV | [this document] |
+------+---------------------+-----------------+
| TBD5 | Area TLV | [this document] |
+------+---------------------+-----------------+
Table 1: TLVs for Topology Object
4.2. IRO and XRO Object
IANA is requested to make allocations for IRO and ERO Object from the
registry, as follows:
+======+=================+=================+
| Type | Subobject | Reference |
+======+=================+=================+
| TBD6 | Link ID | [this document] |
+------+-----------------+-----------------+
| TBD7 | Admin Group | [this document] |
+------+-----------------+-----------------+
| TBD8 | Source Protocol | [this document] |
+------+-----------------+-----------------+
Table 2: Subobjects for IRO and XRO Object
5. Acknowledgements
TBA
6. Security Considerations
TBA
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.bestbar-teas-yang-topology-filter]
Beeram, V. P., Saad, T., Gandhi, R., and X. Liu, "YANG
Data Model for Topology Filter", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-bestbar-teas-yang-topology-filter-
04, 24 October 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-
yang-topology-filter-04>.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
[I-D.ietf-pce-sid-algo]
Tokar, A., Sidor, S., Peng, S., Sivabalan, S., Saad, T.,
Peng, S., and M. S. Negi, "Carrying SID Algorithm
information in PCE-based Networks.", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-00, 22 February
2022, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
pce-sid-algo-00>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.-P., and J. Ash, "A Path
Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655>.
[RFC4915] Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P.
Pillay-Esnault, "Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in OSPF",
RFC 4915, DOI 10.17487/RFC4915, June 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4915>.
[RFC5120] Przygienda, T., Shen, N., and N. Sheth, "M-ISIS: Multi
Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to
Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)", RFC 5120,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5120, February 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5120>.
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>.
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
[RFC5521] Oki, E., Takeda, T., and A. Farrel, "Extensions to the
Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for
Route Exclusions", RFC 5521, DOI 10.17487/RFC5521, April
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5521>.
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
[RFC6549] Lindem, A., Roy, A., and S. Mirtorabi, "OSPFv2 Multi-
Instance Extensions", RFC 6549, DOI 10.17487/RFC6549,
March 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6549>.
[RFC7308] Osborne, E., "Extended Administrative Groups in MPLS
Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE)", RFC 7308,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7308, July 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7308>.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
[RFC8202] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and W. Henderickx, "IS-IS
Multi-Instance", RFC 8202, DOI 10.17487/RFC8202, June
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8202>.
[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.
[RFC8795] Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H., and
O. Gonzalez de Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic
Engineering (TE) Topologies", RFC 8795,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8795, August 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8795>.
Authors' Addresses
Quan Xiong
ZTE Corporation
China
Email: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn
Shaofu Peng
ZTE Corporation
No.50 Software Avenue
Nanjing
Jiangsu, 210012
China
Email: peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft PCEP Extensions for Topology Filter March 2023
Vishnu Pavan Beeram
Juniper Networks
Email: vbeeram@juniper.net
Tarek Saad
Juniper Networks
Email: tsaad@juniper.net
Mike Koldychev
Cisco Systems
Canada
Email: mkoldych@cisco.com
Xiong, et al. Expires 8 September 2023 [Page 13]
