<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
  <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
  <!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc2629 version  -->

<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
]>

<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>

<rfc ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-pce-multipath-10" category="std" consensus="true">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="PCEP Extensions for Multipath">PCEP Extensions for Signaling Multipath Information</title>

    <author initials="M." surname="Koldychev" fullname="Mike Koldychev">
      <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <email>mkoldych@proton.me</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="S." surname="Sivabalan" fullname="Siva Sivabalan">
      <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
      <address>
        <email>ssivabal@ciena.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="T." surname="Saad" fullname="Tarek Saad">
      <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <email>tsaad@juniper.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="V." surname="Beeram" fullname="Vishnu Pavan Beeram">
      <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <email>vbeeram@juniper.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="H." surname="Bidgoli" fullname="Hooman Bidgoli">
      <organization>Nokia</organization>
      <address>
        <email>hooman.bidgoli@nokia.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="B." surname="Yadav" fullname="Bhupendra Yadav">
      <organization>Ciena</organization>
      <address>
        <email>byadav@ciena.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="S." surname="Peng" fullname="Shuping Peng">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <email>pengshuping@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="G." surname="Mishra" fullname="Gyan Mishra">
      <organization>Verizon Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <email>gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date year="2024" month="January" day="16"/>

    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>PCE Working Group</workgroup>
    

    <abstract>


<t>Certain traffic engineering path computation problems require solutions that
consist of multiple traffic paths, that together form a solution.
Returning just one single traffic path does not provide a valid solution.
This document defines a mechanism to encode multiple paths for a single set of
objectives and constraints.
This is a generic PCEP mechanism, not specific to
any path setup type or dataplane.
The mechanism is applicable to both stateless and stateful PCEP.</t>



    </abstract>



  </front>

  <middle>


<section anchor="introduction" title="Introduction">

<t>Segment Routing Policy for Traffic Engineering
<xref target="RFC9256"/> details the concepts of SR
Policy and approaches to steering traffic into an SR Policy.  In
particular, it describes the SR candidate-path as a collection of one
or more Segment-Lists.  The current PCEP standards only allow for
signaling of one Segment-List per Candidate-Path.  PCEP extension to
support Segment Routing Policy Candidate Paths
<xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/> specifically avoids
defining how to signal multiple Segment-Lists.</t>

<t>This document defines the required extensions that allow the signaling
of multipath information via PCEP. Although these extensions are
motivated by the SR Policy use case, they are also applicable
to other data plane types.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="terminology" title="Terminology">

<t>The key words “MUST”, “MUST NOT”, “REQUIRED”, “SHALL”, “SHALL
NOT”, “SHOULD”, “SHOULD NOT”, “RECOMMENDED”, “NOT RECOMMENDED”,
“MAY”, and “OPTIONAL” in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, 
they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>

<section anchor="terms-and-abbreviations" title="Terms and Abbreviations">

<t>The following terms are used in this document:</t>

<t>ECMP:</t>

<t><list style='empty'>
  <t>Equal Cost Multi Path, equally distributing traffic among multiple paths/links, where each path/link gets the same share of traffic as others.</t>
</list></t>

<t>W-ECMP:</t>

<t><list style='empty'>
  <t>Weighted ECMP, un-equally distributing traffic among multiple paths/links, where some paths/links get more traffic than others.</t>
</list></t>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="motivation" title="Motivation">

<t>This extension is motivated by the use-cases described below.</t>

<section anchor="signaling-multiple-segment-lists-of-an-sr-candidate-path" title="Signaling Multiple Segment-Lists of an SR Candidate-Path">

<t>The Candidate-Path of an SR Policy is the unit of signaling in PCEP, see
<xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/>.  Each Candidate-Path can
contain multiple Segment-Lists and each Segment-List is encoded by
one ERO.  However, each PCEP LSP can contain only a
single ERO, which prevents us from encoding multiple Segment-Lists 
within the same SR Candidate-Path.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="splitting-of-requested-bandwidth" title="Splitting of Requested Bandwidth">

<t>A PCC may request a path with 80 Gbps of bandwidth, but all links in the
network have only 60 Gbps capacity.  The PCE can return two paths, that can
together carry 80 Gbps. The PCC can then equally or unequally split the incoming
80 Gbps of traffic among the two paths. <xref target="WEIGHT-TLV"/> introduces a
new TLV that carries the path weight that facilitates control of load-balancing
of traffic among the multiple paths.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="reverse-path-information" title="Reverse Path Information">

<t>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Associated 
Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs) <xref target="RFC9059"/> defines a mechanism in PCEP
to associate two opposite direction SR Policy Candidate Paths. 
However, within each Candidate Path there can be multiple Segment-Lists,
and <xref target="RFC9059"/> does not define a mechanism to specify Segment-List to Segment-List
mapping between the forward and reverse Candidate Paths.
Certain applications such as Circuit Style SR Policy <xref target="I-D.schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy"/>,
require the knowledge of reverse path(s) per Segment-List, not just per Candidate path.
For example, when the headend knows the reverse Segment-List for each forward Segment-List, 
then PM/BFD can run a separate session on every Segment-List, 
by imposing a double stack (forward stack followed by reverse stack) on the packet.
If the reverse Segment-List is co-routed with the forward Segment-List, then 
the PM/BFD session would traverse the same links in the forward and reverse directions,
thus allowing to detect link/node failures in both directions.</t>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="protocol-extensions" title="Protocol Extensions">

<section anchor="path-attributes-object" title="Path Attributes Object">

<t>We define the PATH-ATTRIB object that is used to carry per-path
information and to act as a separator between several ERO/RRO objects
in the &lt;intended-path&gt;/&lt;actual-path&gt; RBNF element.
The PATH-ATTRIB object always precedes the ERO/RRO that it applies to.  If
multiple ERO/RRO objects are present, then each ERO/RRO object MUST be
preceded by an PATH-ATTRIB object that describes it.</t>

<t>The PATH-ATTRIB Object-Class value is (45).</t>

<t>The PATH-ATTRIB Object-Type value is 1.</t>

<figure title="PATH-ATTRIB object format" anchor="fig-path-attrib"><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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                         Flags                         |R|  O  |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                         Path ID                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ~                          Optional TLVs                        ~
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>O (Operational - 3 bits): operational state of the path, same 
values as the identically named field in the LSP object <xref target="RFC8231"/>.</t>

<t>R (Reverse): Indicates this path is reverse,
i.e., it
originates on the LSP destination and terminates on the
LSP source (usually the PCC headend itself).
Paths with this flag set serve only informational
purpose to the PCC.</t>

<t>Path ID: 4-octet identifier that identifies a path (encoded in the 
ERO/RRO) within the set of multiple paths under the PCEP LSP.
See <xref target="PATH-ID"/> for details.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="WEIGHT-TLV" title="Multipath Weight TLV">

<t>New MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV is optional in the PATH-ATTRIB object.</t>

<figure title="MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV format" anchor="fig-multipath-weight"><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            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                             Weight                            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Type: (61) for “MULTIPATH-WEIGHT” TLV.</t>

<t>Length: 4.</t>

<t>Weight: weight of this path within the multipath, if W-ECMP is
desired. The fraction of flows a specific ERO/RRO carries is derived
from the ratio of its weight to the sum of all other multipath ERO/RRO weights.</t>

<t>When the MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV is absent from the PATH-ATTRIB object,
or the PATH-ATTRIB object is absent from the
&lt;intended-path&gt;/&lt;actual-path&gt;, then the Weight of the corresponding
path is taken to be “1”.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="BACKUP-TLV" title="Multipath Backup TLV">

<t>New MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV is optional in the PATH-ATTRIB object.</t>

<t>This TLV is used to specify protecting path(s), similar to FRR or TI-LFA.
This functionality is not part of the SR Policy Architecture <xref target="RFC9256"/>,
but is something optional that MAY be implemented for certain 
specialized use cases.</t>

<figure title="MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV format" anchor="fig-multipath-backup"><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            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |       Backup Path Count       |             Flags           |B|
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                         Backup Path ID 1                      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                         Backup Path ID 2                      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                              ...                              |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                         Backup Path ID n                      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Type: (62) for “MULTIPATH-BACKUP” TLV</t>

<t>Length: 4 + (N * 4) (where N is the Backup Path Count)</t>

<t>Backup Path Count: Number of backup path(s).</t>

<t>B: If set, indicates a pure backup path. This is a path that only
carries rerouted traffic after the protected path fails. If this flag
is not set, or if the MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV is absent,
then the path is assumed to be primary that
carries normal traffic.</t>

<t>Backup Path ID(s): a series of 4-octet identifier(s) that identify the
backup path(s) in the set that protect this primary path.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="OPPDIR-PATH-TLV" title="Multipath Opposite Direction Path TLV">

<t>New MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV is optional in the PATH-ATTRIB object.
Multiple instances of the TLV are allowed in the same PATH-ATTRIB object.
This TLV encodes a many-to-many mapping between forward and reverse
paths.</t>

<t>Many-to-many mapping means that a single forward path MAY map
to multiple reverse paths and conversely that a single reverse
path MAY map to multiple forward paths.
Many-to-many mapping can happen for an SR Policy,
when a Segment-List contains Node Segment(s)
which traverse parallel links at the midpoint.
The reverse of this Segment-List may not be able to be expressed as a single
Reverse Segment-List, but need to return multiple Reverse Segment-Lists
to cover all the parallel links at the midpoint.</t>

<figure title="MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV format" anchor="fig-multipath-oppdir"><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 (MBZ)         |             Flags         |L|N|
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                 Opposite Direction Path ID                    |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Type: (63) for “MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH” TLV</t>

<t>Length: 16.</t>

<t>N (Node co-routed): If set, indicates this path is
node co-routed with
its opposite direction path, specified in this TLV.
Two opposite direction paths are node co-routed if they
traverse the same nodes,
but MAY traverse different links.</t>

<t>L (Link co-routed): If set, indicates this path is
link co-routed with
its opposite directions path, specified in this TLV.
Two opposite direction paths are link co-routed if they
traverse the same links (but in the opposite directions).</t>

<t>Opposite Direction Path ID: Identifies a path that
goes in the opposite direction to this path.
If no such path exists, then this field MUST be set to 0x0,
which is reserved to indicate the absense of a Path ID.</t>

<t>Multiple instances of this TLV
present in the same PATH-ATTRIB object indicate that there are multiple
opposite-direction paths corresponding to the given path. This allows for
many-to-many relationship among the paths of two opposite direction LSPs.</t>

<t>Whenever path A references another path B as being the
opposite-direction path, then path B SHOULD also reference path A as its
own opposite-direction path.
Furthermore, their values of the R-flag (Reverse) in the PATH-ATTRIB
object MUST have opposite values.</t>

<t>PCC MAY skip sending the reverse path information in PCRpt messages,
in cases when the PCE was the original source of the reverse path 
information.</t>

<t>See <xref target="OPPDIREX"/> for an example of usage.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="CCP" title="Composite Candidate Path">

<t>SR Policy Architecture <xref target="RFC9256"/> defines the concept of a
Composite Candidate Path. 
A regular SR Policy Candidate Path outputs traffic to a set of Segment-Lists, 
while an SR Policy Composite Candidate Path outputs traffic recursively to 
a set of SR Policies on the same headend.
In PCEP, the Composite Candidate Path still consists of PATH-ATTRIB objects,
but ERO is replaced by Color of the recursively used SR Policy.</t>

<t>To signal the Composite Candidate Path, we make use of the COLOR TLV, defined in
<xref target="I-D.draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color"/>. For a Composite Candidate Path, the COLOR TLV
is included in the PATH-ATTRIB Object, thus allowing each Composite Candidate Path
to do ECMP/W-ECMP among SR Policies identified by its constituent Colors.
Only one COLOR TLV SHOULD be included into the PATH-ATTRIB object. If multiple
COLOR TLVs are contained in the PATH-ATTRIB object, only the first one MUST be
processed and the others SHOULD be ignored.</t>

<t>An ERO object MUST be included as per the existing RBNF, 
this ERO SHOULD contain no sub-objects.
If the head-end receives a non-empty ERO, the contents SHOULD be ignored.</t>

<t>See <xref target="CCPEX"/> for an example of the encoding.</t>

<section anchor="PFP" title="Per-Flow Candidate Path">

<t>Per-Flow Candidate Path builds on top of the concept of the Composite Candidate Path.
Each Path in a Per-Flow Candidate Path is assigned a 3-bit forward class value, 
which allows QoS classified traffic to be steered depending on the forward class.</t>

<t>New MULTIPATH-FORWARD-CLASS TLV is optional in the PATH-ATTRIB object.</t>

<figure title="MULTIPATH-FORWARD-CLASS TLV format" anchor="fig-multipath-forward-class"><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            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                            MBZ                          | FC  |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Type: (TBD1) for “MULTIPATH-FORWARD-CLASS” TLV.</t>

<t>Length: 4.</t>

<t>FC: Forward class value that is given by the QoS classifier to traffic entering 
the given Candidate Path. Different classes of traffic that enter the given 
Candidate Path can be differentially steered into different Colors.</t>

</section>
</section>
</section>
<section anchor="OP" title="Operation">

<section anchor="capability-negotiation" title="Capability Negotiation">

<section anchor="multipath-capability-tlv" title="Multipath Capability TLV">

<t>New MULTIPATH-CAP TLV is defined. 
This TLV MAY be present in the OPEN object during PCEP session establishment.</t>

<figure title="MULTIPATH-CAP TLV format" anchor="fig-multipath-cap"><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            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |     Number of Multipaths      |            Flags    |C|F|O|B|W|
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Type: (60) for “MULTIPATH-CAP” TLV.</t>

<t>Length: 4.</t>

<t>Number of Multipaths: From PCC, it tells how many multipaths the PCC can install in forwarding. 
From PCE, it tells how many multipaths the PCE can compute.
The value 255 indicates unlimited number.
The value 0 is reserved.</t>

<t>W-flag: whether MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV is supported.</t>

<t>B-flag: whether MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV is supported.</t>

<t>O-flag: whether MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV is supported and requested. 
If this flag is set, the PCE SHOULD tell the PCC the reverse path information, if it is able to.</t>

<t>F-flag: whether MULTIPATH-FORWARD-CLASS TLV is supported.</t>

<t>C-flag: whether Composite Candidate Path (<xref target="CCP"/>) is supported.
Note that F-flag and C-flag can be set independently,
i.e., F-flag can be set, but C-flag not set, etc.</t>

<t>When PCE computes the LSP path, it MUST NOT return more forward 
multipaths than the corresponding value of “Number of Multipaths”
from the MULTIPATH-CAP TLV.  If this TLV is absent (from both OPEN
and LSP objects), then the “Number of Multipaths” is assumed to be 1.</t>

<t>From the PCC, the MULTIPATH-CAP TLV MAY also be present in the LSP object for each individual LSP, to specify per-LSP values.
The PCC MUST NOT include this TLV in the LSP object if the TLV was not
present in the OPEN objects of both PCEP peers.
TLV values in the LSP object override the session default values 
in the OPEN object.</t>

<t>For example, the PCC includes this TLV in the OPEN object at session establishment,
setting “Number of Multipaths” to 4 and “O-flag” to 0.
The PCC also includes this TLV in the LSP object for a particular LSP,
setting “Number of Multipaths” to 16 and “O-flag” to 1.
This indicates that the PCC only wants to receive the reverse path information for that
particular LSP and that this LSP can have up to 16 multipaths, 
while other LSPs can only have up to 4 multipaths.</t>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="PATH-ID" title="Path ID">

<t>The Path ID uniquely identifies a Path within the context of an LSP.
Note that when the LSP is an SR Policy Candidate Path, the 
Paths within that LSP are the Segment-Lists.</t>

<t>Value 0x0 indicates unallocated Path ID.
The value of 0x0 MAY be used when this Path is not being referenced 
and the allocation of a Path ID is not necessary.</t>

<t>Path IDs are allocated by the PCEP peer that owns the LSP.
If the LSP is delegated to the PCE, then the PCE allocates the Path IDs
and sends them in the PCReply/PCUpd/PCInit messages.
If the LSP is locally computed on the PCC, then the PCC allocates the
Path IDs and sends them in the PCReq/PCRpt messages.</t>

<t>If a PCEP speaker detects that there are two Paths with the same Path ID,
then the PCEP speaker SHOULD send PCError message with
Error-Type = 1 (“Reception of an invalid object”) and
Error-Value = 38 (“Conflicting Path ID”).</t>

</section>
<section anchor="signaling-multiple-paths-for-loadbalancing" title="Signaling Multiple Paths for Loadbalancing">

<t>The PATH-ATTRIB object can be used to signal multiple path(s) and indicate
(un)equal loadbalancing amongst the set of multipaths. In this case, the
PATH-ATTRIB is populated for each ERO as follows:</t>

<t><list style="numbers">
  <t>The PCE assigns a unique Path ID to each ERO path and populates
it inside the PATH-ATTRIB object. The Path ID is unique within the
context of a PLSP.</t>
  <t>The MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV MAY be carried inside the PATH-ATTRIB object. A
weight is populated to reflect the relative loadshare that is to be
carried by the path. If the MULTIPATH-WEIGHT is not carried inside a
PATH-ATTRIB object, the default weight 1 MUST be assumed when computing
the loadshare.</t>
  <t>The fraction of flows carried by a specific primary path is derived
from the ratio of its weight to the sum of all other multipath weights.</t>
</list></t>

</section>
<section anchor="signaling-multiple-paths-for-protection" title="Signaling Multiple Paths for Protection">

<t>The PATH-ATTRIB object can be used to describe a set of backup path(s) protecting
a primary path within a PCEP LSP. In this case, the PATH-ATTRIB is populated for each ERO as
follows:</t>

<t><list style="numbers">
  <t>The PCE assigns a unique Path ID to each ERO path and populates
it inside the PATH-ATTRIB object. The Path ID is unique within the
context of a PLSP.</t>
  <t>The MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV MAY be added inside the PATH-ATTRIB object for each
ERO that is protected. The backup path ID(s) are populated in the
MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV to reflect the set of backup path(s) protecting the
primary path. The Length field and Backup Path Number in the MULTIPATH-BACKUP
are updated according to the number of backup path ID(s) included.</t>
  <t>The MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV MAY be added inside the PATH-ATTRIB object for each
ERO that is unprotected. In this case, MULTIPATH-BACKUP does not carry
any backup path IDs in the TLV. If the path acts as a pure backup i.e.
the path only carries rerouted traffic after the protected path(s) fail then
the B flag MUST be set.</t>
</list></t>

<t>Note that primary paths which do not include the MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV are assumed
to be protected by all the backup paths. I.e., omitting the TLV is equivalent to
including the TLV with all the backup path IDs filled in.</t>

<t>Note that a given PCC may not support certain backup combinations,
such as a backup path that is itself protected by another backup path, etc.
If a PCC is not able to implement a requested backup scenario,
the PCC SHOULD send a PCError message with
Error-Type = 19 (“Invalid Operation”) and
Error-Value = 20 (“Not supported path backup”).</t>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="RBNF" title="PCEP Message Extensions">

<t>The RBNF of PCReq, PCRep, PCRpt, PCUpd and PCInit messages currently use a combination
of &lt;intended-path&gt; and/or &lt;actual-path&gt;.
As specified in Section 6.1 of <xref target="RFC8231"/>, &lt;intended-path&gt; is represented by the
ERO object and &lt;actual-path&gt; is represented by the RRO object:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
   <intended-path> ::= <ERO>

   <actual-path> ::= <RRO>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>In this standard, we extend these two elements to allow multiple ERO/RRO objects to be
present in the &lt;intended-path&gt;/&lt;actual-path&gt;:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
   <intended-path> ::= (<ERO>|
                       (<PATH-ATTRIB><ERO>)
                       [<intended-path>])
              

   <actual-path> ::= (<RRO>|
                      (<PATH-ATTRIB><RRO>)
                      [<actual-path>])
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="examples" title="Examples">

<section anchor="sr-policy-candidate-path-with-multiple-segment-lists" title="SR Policy Candidate-Path with Multiple Segment-Lists">

<t>Consider the following sample SR Policy, taken from<vspace />
<xref target="RFC9256"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
SR policy POL1 <headend, color, endpoint>
    Candidate-path CP1 <protocol-origin = 20, originator =
                        100:1.1.1.1, discriminator = 1>
        Preference 200
        Weight W1, SID-List1 <SID11...SID1i>
        Weight W2, SID-List2 <SID21...SID2j>
    Candidate-path CP2 <protocol-origin = 20, originator =
                        100:2.2.2.2, discriminator = 2>
        Preference 100
        Weight W3, SID-List3 <SID31...SID3i>
        Weight W4, SID-List4 <SID41...SID4j>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>As specified in <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/>, CP1 and CP2 
are signaled as separate state-report elements and each has 
a unique PLSP-ID, assigned by the PCC. 
Let us assign PLSP-ID 100 to CP1 and PLSP-ID 200 to CP2.</t>

<t>The state-report for CP1 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=100>
    <ASSOCIATION>
    <END-POINT>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1 <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W1>>
    <ERO SID-List1>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=2 <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W2>>
    <ERO SID-List2>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The state-report for CP2 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=200>
    <ASSOCIATION>
    <END-POINT>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1 <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W3>>
    <ERO SID-List3>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=2 <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W4>>
    <ERO SID-List4>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The above sample state-report elements only 
specify the minimum mandatory objects, 
of course other objects like SRP, LSPA, METRIC, etc., are allowed to be 
inserted.</t>

<t>Note that the syntax</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1 <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W1>>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>, simply means that this is PATH-ATTRIB object 
with Path ID field set to “1” and 
with a MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV carrying weight of “W1”.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="two-primary-paths-protected-by-one-backup-path" title="Two Primary Paths Protected by One Backup Path">

<t>Suppose there are 3 paths: A, B, C.
Where A,B are primary and C is to be used only when A or B fail.
Suppose the Path IDs for A, B, C are respectively 1, 2, 3.
This would be encoded in a state-report as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP>
    <ASSOCIATION>
    <END-POINT>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1 <BACKUP-TLV B=0, Backup_Paths=[3]>>
    <ERO A>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=2 <BACKUP-TLV B=0, Backup_Paths=[3]>>
    <ERO B>
    <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=3 <BACKUP-TLV B=1, Backup_Paths=[]>>
    <ERO C>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Note that the syntax</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1 <BACKUP-TLV B=0, Backup_Paths=[3]>>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>, simply means that this is PATH-ATTRIB object 
with Path ID field set to “1” and 
with a MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV that has B-flag cleared and contains
a single backup path with Backup Path ID of 3.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="CCPEX" title="Composite Candidate Path">

<t>Consider the following Composite Candidate Path, taken from<vspace />
<xref target="RFC9256"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
SR policy POL100 <headend = H1, color = 100, endpoint = E1>
    Candidate-path CP1 <protocol-origin = 20, originator =
                        100:1.1.1.1, discriminator = 1>
        Preference 200
        Weight W1, SR policy <color = 1>
        Weight W2, SR policy <color = 2>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>This is signaled in PCEP as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
    <LSP PLSP_ID=100>
        <ASSOCIATION>
        <END-POINT>
        <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=1
            <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W1>
            <COLOR-TLV Color=1>>
        <ERO (empty)>
        <PATH-ATTRIB Path_ID=2
            <WEIGHT-TLV Weight=W2>
            <COLOR-TLV Color=2>>
        <ERO (empty)>
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="OPPDIREX" title="Opposite Direction Tunnels">

<t>Consider the two opposite-direction SR Policies between
end-points H1 and E1.</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
SR policy POL1 <headend = H1, color, endpoint = E1>
    Candidate-path CP1
        Preference 200
        Bidirectional Association = A1
        SID-List = <H1,M1,M2,E1>
        SID-List = <H1,M3,M4,E1>
    Candidate-path CP2
        Preference 100
        Bidirectional Association = A2
        SID-List = <H1,M5,M6,E1>
        SID-List = <H1,M7,M8,E1>

SR policy POL2 <headend = E1, color, endpoint = H1>
    Candidate-path CP1
        Preference 200
        Bidirectional Association = A1
        SID-List = <E1,M2,M1,H1>
        SID-List = <E1,M4,M3,H1>
    Candidate-path CP2
        Preference 100
        Bidirectional Association = A2
        SID-List = <E1,M6,M5,H1>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The state-report for POL1, CP1 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=100>
    <BIDIRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION = A1>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=1 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=3>>
    <ERO <H1,M1,M2,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=2 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=4>>
    <ERO <H1,M3,M4,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=3 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=1>>
    <ERO <E1,M2,M1,H1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=4 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=2>>
    <ERO <E1,M4,M3,H1>>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The state-report for POL1, CP2 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=200>
    <BIDIRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION = A2>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=1 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=3>>
    <ERO <H1,M5,N6,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=2 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=0>>
    <ERO <H1,M7,M8,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=3 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=1>>
    <ERO <E1,M6,M5,H1>>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The state-report for POL2, CP1 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=100>
    <BIDIRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION = A1>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=1 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=3>>
    <ERO <E1,M2,M1,H1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=2 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=4>>
    <ERO <E1,M4,M3,H1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=3 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=1>>
    <ERO <H1,M1,M2,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=4 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=2>>
    <ERO <H1,M3,M4,E1>>
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The state-report for POL2, CP2 can be encoded as:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
<state-report> =
    <LSP PLSP_ID=200>
    <BIDIRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION = A2>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=1 R-flag=0
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=3>>
    <ERO <E1,M6,M5,H1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=2 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=0>>
    <ERO <H1,M7,M8,E1>>
    <PATH-ATTRIB PathID=3 R-flag=1
        <OPPDIR-PATH-TLV OppositePathID=1>>
    <ERO <H1,M5,N6,E1>>
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="implementation-status" title="Implementation Status">
<t>Note to the RFC Editor - remove this section before publication, as
well as remove the reference to <xref target="RFC7942"/>.</t>

<t>This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in <xref target="RFC7942"/>.
The description of implementations in this section
is intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing
drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual
implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore,
no effort has been spent to verify the information presented here that
was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.</t>

<t>According to <xref target="RFC7942"/>, “this will allow reviewers and
working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the
benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable
experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols
more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this
information as they see fit”.</t>

<section anchor="cisco-systems" title="Cisco Systems">

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
Organization: Cisco Systems
Implementation: IOS-XR PCC and PCE
Description: Circuit-Style SR Policies
Maturity Level: Supported feature
Coverage: Multiple Segment-Lists and reverse paths in SR Policy
Contact: mkoldych@cisco.com
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="ciena-corp" title="Ciena Corp">

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
Organization: Ciena Corp
Implementation: Head-end and controller
Maturity Level: Proof of concept
Coverage: Full
Contact: byadav@ciena.com
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="huawei-technologies" title="Huawei Technologies">

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
Organization: Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd.
Implementation: Huawei's Router and Controller
Maturity Level: Proof of concept
Coverage: Partial
Contact: tanren@huawei.com 
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="juniper-networks" title="Juniper Networks">

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
Organization: Juniper Networks
Implementation: PCC
Description: Everything in -06 except Multipath Backup TLV and Multipath Opposite Direction Path TLV.
Maturity Level: Production
Coverage: Partial
Contact: vbeeram@juniper.net
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="iana-considerations" title="IANA Considerations">

<section anchor="pcep-object" title="PCEP Object">
<t>IANA is requested to make the assignment of a new value for the
   existing “PCEP Objects” registry as follows:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +--------------+-------------+-------------------+-----------------+
 | Object-Class | Name        | Object-Type       | Reference       |
 | Value        |             | Value             |                 |
 +--------------+-------------+-------------------+-----------------+
 | 45           | PATH-ATTRIB | 1                 | This document   |
 +--------------+-------------+-------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="pcep-tlv" title="PCEP TLV">
<t>IANA is requested to make the assignment of a new value for the
   existing “PCEP TLV Type Indicators” registry as follows:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | TLV Type   | TLV Name                          | Reference       |
 | Value      |                                   |                 |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 60         | MULTIPATH-CAP                     | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 61         | MULTIPATH-WEIGHT                  | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 62         | MULTIPATH-BACKUP                  | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 63         | MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH             | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | TBD1       | MULTIPATH-FORWARD-CLASS           | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="pcep-error-object" title="PCEP-Error Object">
<t>IANA is requested to make the assignment of a new value for the
   existing “PCEP-ERROR Object Error Types and Values” sub-registry of the
   PCEP Numbers registry for the following errors:</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | Error-Type | Error-Value                       | Reference       |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 10         | 38 - Conflicting Path ID          | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 19         | 20 - Not supported path backup    | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 19         | 21 - Non-empty path               | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="flags-in-the-multipath-capability-tlv" title="Flags in the Multipath Capability TLV">

<t>IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry to manage the Flag
field of the MULTIPATH-CAP TLV, called “Flags in MULTIPATH-CAP
TLV”.
New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xref target="RFC8126"/></t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | Bit        | Description                       | Reference       |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 0-12       | Unassigned                        | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 13         | 0-flag: support for processing    | This document   |
 |            | MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV         |                 |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 14         | B-flag: support for processing    | This document   |
 |            | MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV              |                 |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 15         | W-flag: support for processing    | This document   |
 |            | MULTIPATH-WEIGHT TLV              |                 |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="flags-in-the-path-attribute-object" title="Flags in the Path Attribute Object">

<t>IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry to manage the Flag
field of the PATH-ATTRIBUTE object,
called “Flags in PATH-ATTRIBUTE Object”.
New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xref target="RFC8126"/></t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | Bit        | Description                       | Reference       |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 0-12       | Unassigned                        | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 13-15      | O-flag: Operational state         | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="flags-in-the-multipath-backup-tlv" title="Flags in the Multipath Backup TLV">

<t>IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry to manage the Flag
field of the MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV,
called “Flags in MULTIPATH-BACKUP TLV”.
New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xref target="RFC8126"/></t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | Bit        | Description                       | Reference       |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 0-14       | Unassigned                        | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 15         | B-flag: Pure backup               | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
<section anchor="flags-in-the-multipath-opposite-direction-path-tlv" title="Flags in the Multipath Opposite Direction Path TLV">

<t>IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry to manage the flag
fields of the MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV,
called “Flags in the MULTIPATH-OPPDIR-PATH TLV”.
New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xref target="RFC8126"/></t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | Bit        | Description                       | Reference       |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 0-12       | Unassigned                        | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 14         | L-flag: Link co-routed            | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
 | 15         | N-flag: Node co-routed            | This document   |
 +------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------+
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
</section>
<section anchor="security-considerations" title="Security Considerations">

<t>None at this time.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="acknowledgement" title="Acknowledgement">

<t>Thanks to Dhruv Dhody for ideas and discussion.
   Thanks to Yuan Yaping for review comments.</t>

</section>
<section anchor="contributors" title="Contributors">

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
   Andrew Stone
   Nokia
   Email: andrew.stone@nokia.com

   Chen Ran
   ZTE
   Email: chen.ran@zte.com.cn
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>


  </middle>

  <back>

    <references title='Normative References'>



<reference anchor='RFC2119' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119'>
  <front>
    <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
    <author fullname='S. Bradner' initials='S.' surname='Bradner'/>
    <date month='March' year='1997'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='BCP' value='14'/>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='2119'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC2119'/>
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC9256' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9256'>
  <front>
    <title>Segment Routing Policy Architecture</title>
    <author fullname='C. Filsfils' initials='C.' surname='Filsfils'/>
    <author fullname='K. Talaulikar' initials='K.' role='editor' surname='Talaulikar'/>
    <author fullname='D. Voyer' initials='D.' surname='Voyer'/>
    <author fullname='A. Bogdanov' initials='A.' surname='Bogdanov'/>
    <author fullname='P. Mattes' initials='P.' surname='Mattes'/>
    <date month='July' year='2022'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>Segment Routing (SR) allows a node to steer a packet flow along any path. Intermediate per-path states are eliminated thanks to source routing. SR Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated called a headend node. The packets steered into an SR Policy carry an ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy.</t>
      <t>This document updates RFC 8402 as it details the concepts of SR Policy and steering into an SR Policy.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='9256'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC9256'/>
</reference>


<reference anchor='I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp' target='https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12'>
   <front>
      <title>PCEP extension to support Segment Routing Policy Candidate Paths</title>
      <author fullname='Mike Koldychev' initials='M.' surname='Koldychev'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Siva Sivabalan' initials='S.' surname='Sivabalan'>
         <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Colby Barth' initials='C.' surname='Barth'>
         <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Shuping Peng' initials='S.' surname='Peng'>
         <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Hooman Bidgoli' initials='H.' surname='Bidgoli'>
         <organization>Nokia</organization>
      </author>
      <date day='24' month='July' year='2023'/>
      <abstract>
	 <t>   A Segment Routing (SR) Policy [RFC9256] is a non-empty set of SR
   Candidate Paths, that share the same &lt;headend, color, endpoint&gt;
   tuple.  This document extends [RFC8664] to fully support the SR
   Policy construct.  SR Policy is modeled in PCEP as an Association of
   one or more SR Candidate Paths.  PCEP extensions are defined to
   signal additional attributes of an SR Policy, which are not covered
   by [RFC8664].  The mechanism is applicable to all data planes of SR
   (MPLS, SRv6, etc.).


	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12'/>
   
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC8174' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174'>
  <front>
    <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
    <author fullname='B. Leiba' initials='B.' surname='Leiba'/>
    <date month='May' year='2017'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='BCP' value='14'/>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8174'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8174'/>
</reference>


<reference anchor='I-D.schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy' target='https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy-02'>
   <front>
      <title>Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies</title>
      <author fullname='Christian Schmutzer' initials='C.' surname='Schmutzer'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Clarence Filsfils' initials='C.' surname='Filsfils'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Zafar Ali' initials='Z.' surname='Ali'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Francois Clad' initials='F.' surname='Clad'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Praveen Maheshwari' initials='P.' surname='Maheshwari'>
         <organization>Airtel India</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Reza Rokui' initials='R.' surname='Rokui'>
         <organization>Ciena</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Andrew Stone' initials='A.' surname='Stone'>
         <organization>Nokia</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Luay Jalil' initials='L.' surname='Jalil'>
         <organization>Verizon</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Shuping Peng' initials='S.' surname='Peng'>
         <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Tarek Saad' initials='T.' surname='Saad'>
         <organization>Juniper Networks</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Daniel Voyer' initials='D.' surname='Voyer'>
         <organization>Bell Canada</organization>
      </author>
      <date day='5' month='May' year='2022'/>
      <abstract>
	 <t>   This document describes how Segment Routing (SR) policies can be used
   to satisfy the requirements for strict bandwidth guarantees, end-to-
   end recovery and persistent paths within a segment routing network.
   SR policies satisfying these requirements are called &quot;circuit-style&quot;
   SR policies (CS-SR policies).

	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy-02'/>
   
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC8231' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231'>
  <front>
    <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE</title>
    <author fullname='E. Crabbe' initials='E.' surname='Crabbe'/>
    <author fullname='I. Minei' initials='I.' surname='Minei'/>
    <author fullname='J. Medved' initials='J.' surname='Medved'/>
    <author fullname='R. Varga' initials='R.' surname='Varga'/>
    <date month='September' year='2017'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Client (PCC) requests.</t>
      <t>Although PCEP explicitly makes no assumptions regarding the information available to the PCE, it also makes no provisions for PCE control of timing and sequence of path computations within and across PCEP sessions. This document describes a set of extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via PCEP.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8231'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8231'/>
</reference>


<reference anchor='I-D.draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color' target='https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-02'>
   <front>
      <title>Path Computation Element Protocol(PCEP) Extension for Color</title>
      <author fullname='Balaji Rajagopalan' initials='B.' surname='Rajagopalan'>
         <organization>Juniper Networks</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Vishnu Pavan Beeram' initials='V. P.' surname='Beeram'>
         <organization>Juniper Networks</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Shaofu Peng' initials='S.' surname='Peng'>
         <organization>ZTE Corporation</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Mike Koldychev' initials='M.' surname='Koldychev'>
         <organization>Cisco Systems Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <author fullname='Gyan Mishra' initials='G. S.' surname='Mishra'>
         <organization>Verizon Communications Inc.</organization>
      </author>
      <date day='1' month='September' year='2023'/>
      <abstract>
	 <t>   Color is a 32-bit numerical attribute that is used to associate a
   Traffic Engineering (TE) tunnel or policy with an intent or objective
   (e.g. low latency).  This document specifies an extension to Path
   Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) to carry the color attribute.


	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-02'/>
   
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC7942' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942'>
  <front>
    <title>Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section</title>
    <author fullname='Y. Sheffer' initials='Y.' surname='Sheffer'/>
    <author fullname='A. Farrel' initials='A.' surname='Farrel'/>
    <date month='July' year='2016'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>This document describes a simple process that allows authors of Internet-Drafts to record the status of known implementations by including an Implementation Status section. This will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.</t>
      <t>This process is not mandatory. Authors of Internet-Drafts are encouraged to consider using the process for their documents, and working groups are invited to think about applying the process to all of their protocol specifications. This document obsoletes RFC 6982, advancing it to a Best Current Practice.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='BCP' value='205'/>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='7942'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC7942'/>
</reference>




    </references>

    <references title='Informative References'>



<reference anchor='RFC8745' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8745'>
  <front>
    <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Associating Working and Protection Label Switched Paths (LSPs) with Stateful PCE</title>
    <author fullname='H. Ananthakrishnan' initials='H.' surname='Ananthakrishnan'/>
    <author fullname='S. Sivabalan' initials='S.' surname='Sivabalan'/>
    <author fullname='C. Barth' initials='C.' surname='Barth'/>
    <author fullname='I. Minei' initials='I.' surname='Minei'/>
    <author fullname='M. Negi' initials='M.' surname='Negi'/>
    <date month='March' year='2020'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>An active stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) is capable of computing as well as controlling via Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). Furthermore, it is also possible for an active stateful PCE to create, maintain, and delete LSPs. This document defines the PCEP extension to associate two or more LSPs to provide end-to-end path protection.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8745'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8745'/>
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC9059' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9059'>
  <front>
    <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Associated Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)</title>
    <author fullname='R. Gandhi' initials='R.' role='editor' surname='Gandhi'/>
    <author fullname='C. Barth' initials='C.' surname='Barth'/>
    <author fullname='B. Wen' initials='B.' surname='Wen'/>
    <date month='June' year='2021'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>This document defines Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) extensions for grouping two unidirectional MPLS-TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs), one in each direction in the network, into an associated bidirectional LSP. These PCEP extensions can be applied either using a stateful PCE for both PCE-initiated and PCC-initiated LSPs or using a stateless PCE. The PCEP procedures defined are applicable to the LSPs using RSVP-TE for signaling.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='9059'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC9059'/>
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC8126' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126'>
  <front>
    <title>Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs</title>
    <author fullname='M. Cotton' initials='M.' surname='Cotton'/>
    <author fullname='B. Leiba' initials='B.' surname='Leiba'/>
    <author fullname='T. Narten' initials='T.' surname='Narten'/>
    <date month='June' year='2017'/>
    <abstract>
      <t>Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to identify various protocol parameters. To ensure that the values in these fields do not have conflicting uses and to promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by a central record keeper. For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).</t>
      <t>To make assignments in a given registry prudently, guidance describing the conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and how modifications to existing values can be made, is needed. This document defines a framework for the documentation of these guidelines by specification authors, in order to assure that the provided guidance for the IANA Considerations is clear and addresses the various issues that are likely in the operation of a registry.</t>
      <t>This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name='BCP' value='26'/>
  <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8126'/>
  <seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8126'/>
</reference>




    </references>



  </back>

<!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>

