- Home
- RFC 10038
RFC 10038: Distributing the Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Locator Using DHCPv6
- W. Cheng, Ed.,
- R. Han,
- C. Lin, Ed.,
- D. Voyer,
- G. Zhang
Abstract
In an SRv6 network, each SRv6 Segment Endpoint Node must be assigned an SRv6 Locator, and segment identifiers (SIDs) are generated within the address space of this SRv6 Locator. This document describes a method for assigning SRv6 Locators to SRv6 Segment Endpoint Nodes through the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6).¶
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 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://
1. Introduction
The Segment Routing (SR) architecture [RFC8402] specifies how a node can steer a packet using an ordered list of instructions called "segments". These segments are identified using segment identifiers (SIDs).¶
SR can be instantiated on the IPv6 data plane using either the Segment Routing Header (SRH) defined in [RFC8754] or compressed segment lists defined in [RFC9800]. SR instantiation on the IPv6 data plane is referred to as SRv6.¶
[RFC8986] introduces the SRv6 Network Programming concept and specifies the base set of SRv6 behaviors.¶
In an SRv6 network, each SRv6 Segment Endpoint Node must be assigned an SRv6 Locator, and SIDs are generated within the address space of this SRv6 Locator. This document describes a method for assigning SRv6 Locators to SRv6 Segment Endpoint Nodes through the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6).¶
1.1. Requirements Language
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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
2. Terminology
This document leverages the terms defined in [RFC9915] and [RFC8986]. The reader is assumed to be familiar with this terminology.¶
3. Motivation
As shown in Figure 1, in the IP backbone network, access network devices are deployed for access users in different regions. This deployment assumes that all of the relevant components in Figure 1 are part of a single trusted SR domain. The Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) must be managed by the operator providing services or by a trusted partner. If the CPE is located within the customer premises, it must ensure that the device itself and its ports are under the same operator's administrative domain; otherwise, security risks may arise.¶
CPEs for access users are connected to the local metropolitan area network (MAN) in various ways. CPEs are responsible for assigning addresses to access users by requesting DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation (PD) from a DHCPv6 server, as specified in Section 6.3 of [RFC9915]. [RFC7084] and [RFC7368] describe such use in detail. The DHCPv6 server is usually enabled on or relayed by the Broadband Remote Access Server (BRAS).¶
After the DHCPv6 server allocates any delegated prefix, the BRAS will add a network route corresponding to the delegated prefix to a local routing table and distribute the network route to the upstream routers.¶
Metropolitan Area Network
+---------------------------+
| |
+------+ +------+ | +-----+ +-------+ |
|Host1 +-----+ CPE1 +----+--+BRAS1+--------+Router1| |
+------+ +------+ | +-----+ +---+---+ |
| | |
+---------------------+-----+
|
+--------+-------------+
| |
| Backbone Network |
| |
+--------+-------------+
|
+---------------------+-----+
| | |
+------+ +------+ | +-----+ +--+----+|
|Host2 +-----+ CPE2 +----+--+BRAS2+---------+Router2||
+------+ +------+ | +-----+ +-------+|
+---------------------------+In this network, operators hope to achieve interconnection between access users through CPE-to-CPE SRv6 tunnels. Taking the service traffic from Host1 to Host2 as an example, CPE1 is the SRv6 ingress node and CPE2 is the SRv6 egress node. The SRv6 Locator should be configured on the CPEs. Other devices within the operator's network learn the SRv6 Locator routes of the CPEs.¶
At the same time, SRv6 policies need to be configured on CPEs to steer the service traffic between CPEs to the specified SRv6 forwarding path. The SRv6 policy can be manually configured statically (via command-line interface (CLI), the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), YANG, APIs, etc.).¶
This document proposes a method for allocating SRv6 Locators to CPE via DHCPv6 and distributing SRv6 Locator routes using the DHCPv6 workflow. This approach simplifies network operation and maintains consistency with existing IPv6 address allocation mechanisms already deployed in such networks.¶
4. DHCPv6 Extensions
4.1. Identity Association for SRv6 Locator Option
The Identity Association for SRv6 Locator
The IA_
- The format of the IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR option 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OPTION_IA_SRV6_LOCATOR | Option-Len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IAID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| T1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| T2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
. .
. IA_SRV6_LOCATOR-Options .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+Where:¶
- Option-Code:
- OPTION_
IA_ SRV6_ LOCATOR (149), the option code for the Identity Association for SRv6 Locator option.¶ - Option-Len:
- 12 + the length of the IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR -Options field in octets.¶ - IAID:
- The unique identifier for this IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR . The IAID MUST be unique among the identifiers for all of this client's IA_ SRV6_ LOCATORs . The number space for IA_ SRV6_ LOCATOR IAIDs is separate from the number space for other IA option types. A 4-octet field containing an unsigned integer.¶ - T1:
- The time interval after which the client should contact the
server from which the SRv6 Locators in the IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR were obtained to extend the lifetimes of the SRv6 Locators to the IA_ SRV6_ LOCATOR . T1 is a time duration relative to the message reception time expressed in units of seconds. A 4-octet field containing an unsigned integer.¶ - T2:
- The time interval after which the client should contact any
available server to extend the lifetimes of the SRv6 Locators assigned to
the IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR . T2 is a time duration relative to the message reception time expressed in units of seconds. A 4-octet field containing an unsigned integer.¶ - IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR -Options : - Options associated with this
IA_
SRV6_ LOCATOR . A variable-length field (12 octets less than the value in the Option-Len field).¶
The IA_
An IA_
The status of any operations involving this IA_
Note that an IA_
In a message sent by a client to a server, the T1 and T2 fields SHOULD be set to 0. The server MUST ignore any values in these fields in messages received from a client.¶
In a message sent by a server to a client, the client MUST use the values in the T1 and T2 fields for the T1 and T2 timers, unless values in those fields are 0. The values in the T1 and T2 fields are the number of seconds until T1 and T2.¶
The server selects the T1 and T2 times to allow the client to extend
the lifetimes of any SRv6 Locators in the IA_
If a client receives an IA_
4.2. IA Locator Option
The IA Locator option is used to specify an SRv6 Locator associated
with an IA_
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | OPTION_IALOCATOR | Option-Len | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Preferred-lifetime | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Valid-lifetime | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Algorithm | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| | LB-Len | LN-Len | Fun-Len | Arg-Len | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| . SRv6-Locator . . (up to 16 octets) . . . +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ . . . IALocator-Options . . . +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:¶
- Option-Code:
- OPTION_
IALOCATOR (150), the option code for the IA Locator option.¶ - Option-Len:
- 16 + the length of SRv6-Locator + the length of
the IALocator
-Options field in octets.¶ - Preferred
-lifetime : - The preferred lifetime for the SRv6 Locator in the option, expressed in units of seconds. A value of 0xffffffff represents "infinity" (see Section 7.7 of [RFC9915]). A 4-octet field containing an unsigned integer.¶
- Valid-lifetime:
- The valid lifetime for the SRv6 Locator in the option, expressed in units of seconds. A value of 0xffffffff represents "infinity". A 4-octet field containing an unsigned integer.¶
- Algorithm:
- A 1-octet unsigned integer. The algorithm associated with the SRv6 Locator from which the SID is allocated. Algorithm values are defined in the "IGP Algorithm Types" registry [RFC8665]. See also [RFC9350].¶
- Reserved:
- A 3-octet unsigned integer. MUST be set to zero and ignored when received.¶
- LB-Len:
- SRv6 SID Locator Block (LB) length in bits. A 1-octet unsigned integer.¶
- LN-Len:
- SRv6 SID Locator Node (LN) length in bits. A 1-octet unsigned integer.¶
- Fun-Len:
- SRv6 SID function (FUNCT) length in bits. A 1-octet unsigned integer.¶
- Arg-Len:
- SRv6 SID arguments (ARG) length in bits. A 1-octet unsigned integer.¶
- SRv6-Locator:
- 0-16 octets. This field encodes the SRv6 Locator. The SRv6 Locator is encoded in the minimal number of octets for the SRv6 SID Locator length that is LB-Len plus LN-Len. Trailing bits MUST be set to zero and ignored when received.¶
- IALocator
-Options : - Options associated with this SRv6 Locator. A
variable-length field (determined by subtracting the length of
SRv6-Locator from Option-Len minus 12). The status code
No
SRv6Locator Avail indicates the server has no locators available to assign to the IA_ SRV6_ LOCATOR (s ).¶
The SRv6 SID Locator length (LOC-Len) is LB-Len plus LN-Len.¶
The sum of LB-Len, LN-Len, Fun-Len, and Arg-Len MUST NOT exceed 128 bits.
The sum of LB-Len and LN-Len MUST NOT be zero. If either of these conditions are violated,
the IA_
The values in the Preferred
An IA Locator option may appear only in an IA_
The status of any operations involving this IA_
5. Process of Assigning the SRv6 Locator
5.1. Procedure of the SRv6 Locator
Consistent with the PD mechanism [RFC9915], the DHCPv6 client obtains an SRv6 Locator via DHCPv6. The key message exchanges involved are Solicit, Request, Advertise, and Reply. Once the DHCPv6 server assigns an SRv6 Locator to the DHCPv6 client, it automatically adds the associated SRv6 Locator routes.¶
Figure 4 illustrates the process of SRv6 Locator allocation through DHCPv6.¶
DHCPv6 Client DHCPv6 Server
v v
| |
| |
____________ |\ |
____________ | +-----------+ |
| Solicit \|
| EmptyIALocator|
| |
| /|
| +----------+ |
| / Advertise |
|/ IALocator |
| |
|\ |
| +-----------+ |
| Request \|
| IALocator |
| /|
| +----------+ |
| / Reply |
|/ IALocator |
End of | |
4-message | |
exchange | | Issue Locator route locally
Use Locator to | | Distribute Locator route
alloc SRv6 SID | |
As specified in Section 18.2.1 of [RFC9915], the DHCPv6
client sends a Solicit message containing an IA_
The DHCPv6 server processes the Solicit message, assigns a locator to the
client, and returns the allocated locator in an Advertise message
with the IA_
As specified in Section 18.2.2 of [RFC9915], upon
receiving the Advertise message, the client accepts the assigned locator
and sends a Request message with the IA_
The server processes the Request message, confirms the locator
assignment, and responds with a Reply message containing the
IA_
As described in Section 18.2.4 of [RFC9915], the client
periodically sends a Renew message with the IA_
As described in Section 18.2.5 of [RFC9915], if the
client does not receive a Reply message before the T2 timer expires,
it sends a Rebind message with the IA_
If the server responds with a Reply message, the client retains its allocated locator.¶
If no response is received, the client considers the lease expired and restarts the process by sending a new Solicit message.¶
As described in Section 18.2.7 of [RFC9915], if the
client is about to go offline, it sends a Release message with the
IA_
Upon receiving a valid Release message, and when the SRv6 Locator in the message is valid, the server MUST remove the lease and free the locator, making it available for allocation to other clients. For detailed processing procedures, refer to Section 18.3.7 of [RFC9915].¶
5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior
A client uses the Solicit message to discover DHCPv6 servers configured to assign leases or return other configuration parameters on the link to which the client is attached.¶
A client uses Request, Renew, Rebind, Release, and Decline messages during the normal lifecycle of SRv6 Locator assignment.¶
In a message sent by a client to a server, the Preferred
The client MUST NOT send an IA_
The client MUST discard any SRv6 Locators for which the preferred lifetime is greater than the valid lifetime.¶
The process of requesting an SRv6 Locator is the same as that of
requesting prefixes. When requesting an SRv6 Locator, the DHCPv6
client sends a Request message carrying the IA_
Upon the receipt of a valid Reply message with the IA_
DHCP allows a client to obtain multiple addresses as specified in Section 6.5 of [RFC9915]. The same principle applies to SRv6 Locator assignment. In scenarios requiring multiple allocations (e.g., when multiple SRv6 Locators are needed for distinct services, such as best-effort and low-latency traffic, each with a different algorithm), the allocation policy between the DHCPv6 client and DHCPv6 server MUST remain consistent. After obtaining the SRv6 Locator assigned by the DHCPv6 server, how to assign local SRv6 SIDs based on this SRv6 Locator, how to use multiple assigned SRv6 Locators, and how to advertise these SRv6 SIDs to the rest of the network are not within the scope of this document. However, and consistent with the guidance in Section 16 of [RFC7227], the client MUST NOT make any assumption about the ordering of locators or infer any service logic from these locators.¶
The client uses the SRv6 Locators and associated information from
any IAs that do not contain a Status Code option with the
No
To extend the preferred and valid lifetimes for the assigned SRv6
Locators or obtain new assigned SRv6 Locators, the client sends a
Renew/Rebind message to the server with the IA_
If the client no longer uses the SRv6 Locator, the client can
actively send a Release message to notify the server to reclaim the SRv6
Locator and delete the corresponding SRv6 Locator. The client MUST
include options containing the IAs for the SRv6 Locators it is
releasing in the IA_
A client can explicitly request multiple SRv6 Locator prefixes by
sending multiple IA_
DHCP allows a client to request new SRv6 Locators to be assigned by
sending additional new IA_
5.3. DHCPv6 Server Behavior
When the server receives a valid Request message or a valid Solicit message with a Rapid Commit option, the server creates the bindings for that client according to the server's policy and configuration information and records the IAs and other information requested by the client.¶
The DHCPv6 server treats the SRv6 Locator as the prefix of the prefix
pool. Upon the receipt of the IA_
If there is an assignable SRv6 Locator, the server creates the SRv6
Locator binding entry for that client according to the server's
policy and configuration information and constructs a Reply message
that includes an IA_
The IA_
Upon receiving a Release message from the client or when the SRv6 Locator lease expires, the server reclaims the SRv6 Locator prefix resource and deletes the corresponding binding entry.¶
For any IA_
After receiving a DHCP message with multiple IA_
5.4. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior
The allocation of SRv6 Locators to clients that reside on a different
link from the server requires a DHCPv6 relay agent. A DHCPv6 relay agent
forwards messages containing IA_
+-------------+ +------------+ +-------------+
+DHCPv6 Client+-------+DHCPv6 Relay+-------+DHCPv6 Server|
+-------------+ +------+-----+ +-------------+
|
|
+------+-----+
| Backbone |
| Network |
+------------+5.5. Advertisement of the SRv6 Locator Route
This section describes the processing of SRv6 Locator routes.¶
As shown in Figure 5, when a DHCPv6 Relay or DHCPv6 server receives an SRv6 Locator allocation request from a client, it MAY assign an SRv6 Locator to the client and install a corresponding SRv6 Locator route locally. The next hop of this route SHOULD point to the requesting client. Through this route, the DHCPv6 Relay or DHCPv6 server can access the Host under the DHCPv6 client, while the DHCPv6 Relay or DHCPv6 server MAY then advertise this route via traditional routing protocols (e.g., an IGP) to allow other routers to learn it.¶
SRv6 Locators with an Algorithm value of zero can be advertised as normal IP prefix reachability information. Conversely, SRv6 Locators with a non-zero Algorithm value MUST be advertised using the Locators TLV as defined in [RFC9352] and [RFC9513].¶
Upon receiving an SRv6 Locator release request from the client, the DHCPv6 Relay or DHCPv6 server MUST release the allocated SRv6 Locator, remove the local SRv6 Locator route, and withdraw the previously advertised SRv6 Locator route via traditional routing protocols.¶
DHCPv6 Client-------(DHCPv6 Relay/DHCPv6 Server)-------------Router
Alloc Locator --> Add SRv6 Locator route
Advertise SRv6 Locator route -->
Release Locator--> Del SRv6 Locator route
Withdraw SRv6 Locator route -->6. Operational Considerations
This section outlines some operational considerations for assigning SRv6 Locators through DHCPv6.¶
The SRv6 Locator can be used to allocate SIDs with SR Endpoint Behaviors as defined in [RFC8986] and also to allocate SIDs with the NEXT and REPLACE flavors defined in [RFC9800]. Operators can allocate corresponding SIDs based on the LB and LN lengths of the SRv6 Locator, as well as local policies.¶
When processing the SRv6 Locator defined in this document, if an error occurs in packet processing, SRv6 Locator allocation fails, or lease aging is handled, the DHCPv6 client and DHCPv6 server SHOULD log or record these SRv6 Locators as required by local policy.¶
Section 4.4 of [RFC8987] provides necessary functional requirements for operating DHCPv6 relays with PD. These requirements also apply to the allocation of SRv6 Locators in DHCPv6 Relay scenarios.¶
Routing Stability is an additional operational consideration. Network operators may advertise an aggregated route rather than individual prefixes in certain deployments to optimize Routing Information Base (RIB) performance. The withdrawal of specific routes triggered by address releases may lead to a reduction in advertised routes. An alternative approach is to implement a policy that governs this behavior. In such cases, delegating routers will discard packets destined for specific prefixes that are not "delegated" on the customer-facing interface.¶
7. IANA Considerations
IANA has assigned the following DHCPv6 option codes in the
"Option Codes" registry at
<https://
| Value | Description | Client ORO | Singleton Option | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 149 | OPTION_ |
No | No | RFC 10038 |
| 150 | OPTION_ |
No | No | RFC 10038 |
IANA has also assigned the following DHCPv6
status code in the "Status Codes" registry at <http://
| Code | Name | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| 23 | No |
RFC 10038 |
8. Security Considerations
See Section 22 of [RFC9915] and Section 23 of [RFC7227] for the DHCP security considerations. See [RFC8200] for the IPv6 security considerations.¶
As discussed in Section 22 of [RFC9915], "DHCP lacks end-to-end encryption between clients and servers; thus, hijacking, tampering, and eavesdropping attacks are all possible as a result."¶
In some network environments, it is possible to secure the communication between clients and servers, as discussed in Section 22 of [RFC9915].¶
If not all parties use this mechanism to obtain an SRv6 Locator from the DHCPv6 server, there is the possibility of the same SRv6 Locator being used by more than one device. Note that this issue could exist on these networks even if DHCP were not used to obtain the SRv6 Locator. A potential mitigation is to partition the available address prefixes, ensuring that different allocation mechanisms draw from non-overlapping pools.¶
Server implementations SHOULD consider configuration options to limit the maximum number of SRv6 Locators to allocate (both in a single request and in total) to a client. However, note that this does not prevent a bad client actor from pretending to be many different clients and consuming all available SRv6 Locators.¶
The SR domain is a trusted domain, as defined in Sections 2 and 8.2 of [RFC8402]. Having such a well-defined trust boundary is necessary in order to operate SRv6-based services for internal traffic while preventing any external traffic from accessing or exploiting the SRv6-based services. Care and rigor in IPv6 address allocation for use for SRv6 SID allocations and network infrastructure addresses, as distinct from IPv6 addresses allocated for end users and systems (as illustrated in Section 5.1 of [RFC8754]), can provide the clear distinction between internal and external address space that is required to maintain the integrity and security of the SRv6 domain.¶
When assigning SRv6 Locators to SRv6 Segment Endpoint Nodes using DHCPv6 as specified in this document, DHCPv6 clients and DHCPv6 servers MUST operate within a single trusted SR domain. As a border node device, a DHCPv6 client may reside in customer premises, while the DHCPv6 server is located within the provider network. Although they belong to the same trusted SR domain, the DHCPv6 client MUST implement appropriate traffic filtering capabilities on both its internal and external interfaces, as required by Section 5.1 of [RFC8754].¶
9. References
9.1. Normative References
- [RFC2119]
-
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2119 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2119 - [RFC7227]
-
Hankins, D., Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Jiang, S., and S. Krishnan, "Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options", BCP 187, RFC 7227, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7227 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7227 - [RFC8168]
-
Li, T., Liu, C., and Y. Cui, "DHCPv6 Prefix-Length Hint Issues", RFC 8168, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8168 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8168 - [RFC8174]
-
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8174 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8174 - [RFC8200]
-
Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8200 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8200 - [RFC8402]
-
Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8402 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8402 - [RFC8665]
-
Psenak, P., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8665, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8665 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8665 - [RFC8754]
-
Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8754 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8754 - [RFC8986]
-
Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer, D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8986 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8986 - [RFC8987]
-
Farrer, I., Kottapalli, N., Hunek, M., and R. Patterson, "DHCPv6 Prefix Delegating Relay Requirements", RFC 8987, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8987 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8987 - [RFC9350]
-
Psenak, P., Ed., Hegde, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., and A. Gulko, "IGP Flexible Algorithm", RFC 9350, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9350 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9350 - [RFC9352]
-
Psenak, P., Ed., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., and Z. Hu, "IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane", RFC 9352, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9352 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9352 - [RFC9513]
-
Li, Z., Hu, Z., Talaulikar, K., Ed., and P. Psenak, "OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6)", RFC 9513, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9513 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9513 - [RFC9800]
-
Cheng, W., Ed., Filsfils, C., Li, Z., Decraene, B., and F. Clad, Ed., "Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding", RFC 9800, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9800 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9800 - [RFC9915]
-
Mrugalski, T., Volz, B., Richardson, M., Jiang, S., and T. Winters, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", STD 102, RFC 9915, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9915 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9915
9.2. Informative References
- [RFC7084]
-
Singh, H., Beebee, W., Donley, C., and B. Stark, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers", RFC 7084, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7084 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7084 - [RFC7368]
-
Chown, T., Ed., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. Weil, "IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", RFC 7368, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7368 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7368
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Gunter Van de Velde, Ketan Talaulikar, Mohamed Boucadair, Chongfeng Xie, Joel Halpern, Robert Raszuk, Aihua Liu, Cheng Li, Xuewei Wang, Hao Li, Junjie Wang, Mengxiao Chen, Fang Gao, Aijun Wang, Xinxin Yi, Shenchao Xu, Yisong Liu, Xueshun Wang, Min Xiao, Liyan Gong, Linda Dunbar, Quan Xiong, Adrian Farrel, and Bernie Volz for their comments on this document.¶