- Home
- RFCs by Subject
- routing
- segment routing
segment routing
Segment routing architecture
Within this page
segment routing RFCs (43)
RFC 10018: Multicast and Ethernet VPN with Segment Routing Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) and Ingress Replication
Proposed Standard- R. Parekh
- D. Voyer
- C. Filsfils
- H. Bidgoli
- Z. Zhang
- August 2026
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) tree in a Segment Routing (SR) domain carries traffic from a Root to a set of Leaves. This document specifies extensions to BGP encodings and procedures for P2MP trees and Ingress Replication used in BGP/MPLS IP VPNs and Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs) in an SR domain. This document updates RFCs 6514 and 7988.
Abstract
A Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) tree in a Segment Routing (SR) domain carries traffic from a Root to a set of Leaves. This document specifies extensions to BGP encodings and procedures for P2MP trees and Ingress Replication used in BGP/MPLS IP VPNs and Ethernet VPNs (EVPNs) in an SR domain. This document updates RFCs 6514 and 7988.
RFC 9947: Application of the Alternate-Marking Method to the Segment Routing Header
Experimental- G. Fioccola
- T. Zhou
- G. Mishra
- X. Wang
- G. Zhang
- M. Cociglio
- March 2026
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document describes an alternative experimental approach for the application of the Alternate-Marking Method to Segment Routing for IPv6 (SRv6). It uses an experimental TLV in the Segment Routing Header (SRH); thus, participation in this experiment should be between coordinating parties in a controlled domain. This approach has potential scaling and simplification benefits over the technique described in RFC 9343, and the scope of the experiment is to determine whether those are significant and attractive to the community.
This protocol extension has been developed outside the IETF as an alternative to the IETF's Standards Track specification RFC 9343 and it does not have IETF consensus. It is published here to guide experimental implementation and ensure interoperability among implementations to better determine the value of this approach. Researchers are invited to submit their evaluations of this work to the Independent Submissions Editor or to the IETF SPRING Working Group as Internet-Drafts.
Abstract
This document describes an alternative experimental approach for the application of the Alternate-Marking Method to Segment Routing for IPv6 (SRv6). It uses an experimental TLV in the Segment Routing Header (SRH); thus, participation in this experiment should be between coordinating parties in a controlled domain. This approach has potential scaling and simplification benefits over the technique described in RFC 9343, and the scope of the experiment is to determine whether those are significant and attractive to the community.
This protocol extension has been developed outside the IETF as an alternative to the IETF's Standards Track specification RFC 9343 and it does not have IETF consensus. It is published here to guide experimental implementation and ensure interoperability among implementations to better determine the value of this approach. Researchers are invited to submit their evaluations of this work to the Independent Submissions Editor or to the IETF SPRING Working Group as Internet-Drafts.
RFC 9902: A YANG Data Model for IS-IS Segment Routing over the MPLS Data Plane
Proposed Standard- S. Litkowski
- Y. Qu
- A. Lindem
- I. Chen
- J. Tantsura
- December 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to manage IS-IS extensions for Segment Routing (SR) over the MPLS data plane.
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to manage IS-IS extensions for Segment Routing (SR) over the MPLS data plane.
RFC 9903: A YANG Data Model for OSPF Segment Routing over the MPLS Data Plane
Proposed Standard- Y. Qu
- A. Lindem
- J. Zhang
- I. Chen
- December 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to manage OSPF extensions for Segment Routing over the MPLS data plane.
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to manage OSPF extensions for Segment Routing over the MPLS data plane.
RFC 9862: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing (SR) Policy Candidate Paths
Proposed Standard- M. Koldychev
- S. Sivabalan
- S. Sidor
- C. Barth
- S. Peng
- H. Bidgoli
- October 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of instructions called "segments" that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated. An SR Policy is made of one or more Candidate Paths.
This document specifies the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) extension to signal Candidate Paths of an SR Policy. Additionally, this document updates RFC 8231 to allow delegation and setup of an SR Label Switched Path (LSP) without using the path computation request and reply messages. This document is applicable to both Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) and Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6).
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of instructions called "segments" that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated. An SR Policy is made of one or more Candidate Paths.
This document specifies the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) extension to signal Candidate Paths of an SR Policy. Additionally, this document updates RFC 8231 to allow delegation and setup of an SR Label Switched Path (LSP) without using the path computation request and reply messages. This document is applicable to both Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) and Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6).
RFC 9884: Label Switched Path Ping for Segment Routing Path Segment Identifier with MPLS Data Plane
Proposed Standard- X. Min
- S. Peng
- L. Gong
- R. Gandhi
- C. Pignataro
- October 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing to steer packets through an ordered list of instructions called "segments". SR can be instantiated over the MPLS data plane. Path Segment Identifiers (PSIDs) are used to identify and correlate bidirectional or end-to-end paths in SR networks. This document defines procedures (i.e., six new Target Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Stack sub-TLVs) for the use of LSP Ping to support connectivity verification and fault isolation for SR paths that include PSIDs. The mechanisms described enable the validation and tracing of SR paths with Path SIDs in MPLS networks, complementing existing SR-MPLS Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) capabilities.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing to steer packets through an ordered list of instructions called "segments". SR can be instantiated over the MPLS data plane. Path Segment Identifiers (PSIDs) are used to identify and correlate bidirectional or end-to-end paths in SR networks. This document defines procedures (i.e., six new Target Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Stack sub-TLVs) for the use of LSP Ping to support connectivity verification and fault isolation for SR paths that include PSIDs. The mechanisms described enable the validation and tracing of SR paths with Path SIDs in MPLS networks, complementing existing SR-MPLS Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) capabilities.
RFC 9855: Topology Independent Fast Reroute Using Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- A. Bashandy
- S. Litkowski
- C. Filsfils
- P. Francois
- B. Decraene
- D. Voyer
- October 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document presents Topology Independent Loop-Free Alternate (TI-LFA) Fast Reroute (FRR), which is aimed at providing protection of node and Adjacency segments within the Segment Routing (SR) framework. This FRR behavior builds on proven IP FRR concepts being LFAs, Remote LFAs (RLFAs), and Directed Loop-Free Alternates (DLFAs). It extends these concepts to provide guaranteed coverage in any two-connected networks using a link-state IGP. An important aspect of TI-LFA is the FRR path selection approach establishing protection over the expected post-convergence paths from the Point of Local Repair (PLR), reducing the operational need to control the tie-breaks among various FRR options.
Abstract
This document presents Topology Independent Loop-Free Alternate (TI-LFA) Fast Reroute (FRR), which is aimed at providing protection of node and Adjacency segments within the Segment Routing (SR) framework. This FRR behavior builds on proven IP FRR concepts being LFAs, Remote LFAs (RLFAs), and Directed Loop-Free Alternates (DLFAs). It extends these concepts to provide guaranteed coverage in any two-connected networks using a link-state IGP. An important aspect of TI-LFA is the FRR path selection approach establishing protection over the expected post-convergence paths from the Point of Local Repair (PLR), reducing the operational need to control the tie-breaks among various FRR options.
RFC 9830: Advertising Segment Routing Policies in BGP
Proposed Standard- S. Previdi
- C. Filsfils
- K. Talaulikar
- P. Mattes
- D. Jain
- September 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of segments (also referred to as "instructions") that define a source-routed policy. An SR Policy consists of one or more Candidate Paths (CPs), each comprising one or more segment lists. A headend can be provisioned with these CPs using various mechanisms such as Command-Line Interface (CLI), Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP), or BGP.
This document specifies how BGP can be used to distribute SR Policy CPs. It introduces a BGP SAFI for advertising a CP of an SR Policy and defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute to signal information related to these CPs.
Furthermore, this document updates RFC 9012 by extending the Color Extended Community to support additional steering modes over SR Policy.
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of segments (also referred to as "instructions") that define a source-routed policy. An SR Policy consists of one or more Candidate Paths (CPs), each comprising one or more segment lists. A headend can be provisioned with these CPs using various mechanisms such as Command-Line Interface (CLI), Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP), or BGP.
This document specifies how BGP can be used to distribute SR Policy CPs. It introduces a BGP SAFI for advertising a CP of an SR Policy and defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute to signal information related to these CPs.
Furthermore, this document updates RFC 9012 by extending the Color Extended Community to support additional steering modes over SR Policy.
RFC 9831: Segment Type Extensions for BGP Segment Routing (SR) Policy
Experimental- K. Talaulikar
- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- P. Mattes
- D. Jain
- September 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document specifies the signaling of additional Segment Routing (SR) Segment Types for SR Policies in BGP using the SR Policy Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI).
Abstract
This document specifies the signaling of additional Segment Routing (SR) Segment Types for SR Policies in BGP using the SR Policy Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI).
RFC 9716: Mechanisms for MPLS Ping and Traceroute Procedures in Inter-Domain Segment Routing Networks
Proposed Standard- S. Hegde
- K. Arora
- M. Srivastava
- S. Ninan
- N. Kumar
- February 2025
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
The Segment Routing (SR) architecture leverages source routing and can be directly applied to the use of an MPLS data plane. A Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) network may consist of multiple IGP domains or multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes) under the control of the same organization. It is useful to have the Label Switched Path (LSP) ping and traceroute procedures when an SR end-to-end path traverses multiple ASes or IGP domains. This document outlines mechanisms to enable efficient LSP ping and traceroute procedures in inter-AS and inter-domain SR-MPLS networks. This is achieved through a straightforward extension to the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) protocol, relying solely on data plane forwarding for handling echo replies on transit nodes.
Abstract
The Segment Routing (SR) architecture leverages source routing and can be directly applied to the use of an MPLS data plane. A Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) network may consist of multiple IGP domains or multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes) under the control of the same organization. It is useful to have the Label Switched Path (LSP) ping and traceroute procedures when an SR end-to-end path traverses multiple ASes or IGP domains. This document outlines mechanisms to enable efficient LSP ping and traceroute procedures in inter-AS and inter-domain SR-MPLS networks. This is achieved through a straightforward extension to the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) protocol, relying solely on data plane forwarding for handling echo replies on transit nodes.
RFC 9717: A Routing Architecture for Satellite Networks
Informational- T. Li
- January 2025
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Satellite networks present some interesting challenges for packet networking. The entire topology is continually in motion, with links far less reliable than what is common in terrestrial networks. Some changes to link connectivity can be anticipated due to orbital dynamics.
This document proposes a scalable routing architecture for satellite networks based on existing routing protocols and mechanisms that is enhanced with scheduled link connectivity change information. This document proposes no protocol changes.
This document presents the author's view and is neither the product of the IETF nor a consensus view of the community.
Abstract
Satellite networks present some interesting challenges for packet networking. The entire topology is continually in motion, with links far less reliable than what is common in terrestrial networks. Some changes to link connectivity can be anticipated due to orbital dynamics.
This document proposes a scalable routing architecture for satellite networks based on existing routing protocols and mechanisms that is enhanced with scheduled link connectivity change information. This document proposes no protocol changes.
This document presents the author's view and is neither the product of the IETF nor a consensus view of the community.
RFC 9703: Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Plane
Proposed Standard- S. Hegde
- M. Srivastava
- K. Arora
- S. Ninan
- X. Xu
- December 2024
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) is an application of Segment Routing (SR) that solves the problem of egress peer selection. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution allows a centralized controller, e.g., a Software-Defined Network (SDN) controller, to program any egress peer. The EPE solution requires the node or the SDN controller to program 1) the PeerNode Segment Identifier (SID) describing a session between two nodes, 2) the PeerAdj SID describing the link or links that are used by the sessions between peer nodes, and 3) the PeerSet SID describing any connected interface to any peer in the related group. This document provides new sub-TLVs for EPE-SIDs that are used in the Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 1) in MPLS Ping and Traceroute procedures.
Abstract
Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) is an application of Segment Routing (SR) that solves the problem of egress peer selection. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution allows a centralized controller, e.g., a Software-Defined Network (SDN) controller, to program any egress peer. The EPE solution requires the node or the SDN controller to program 1) the PeerNode Segment Identifier (SID) describing a session between two nodes, 2) the PeerAdj SID describing the link or links that are used by the sessions between peer nodes, and 3) the PeerSet SID describing any connected interface to any peer in the related group. This document provides new sub-TLVs for EPE-SIDs that are used in the Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 1) in MPLS Ping and Traceroute procedures.
RFC 9524: Segment Routing Replication for Multipoint Service Delivery
Proposed Standard- D. Voyer
- C. Filsfils
- R. Parekh
- H. Bidgoli
- Z. Zhang
- February 2024
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes the Segment Routing Replication segment for multipoint service delivery. A Replication segment allows a packet to be replicated from a replication node to downstream nodes.
Abstract
This document describes the Segment Routing Replication segment for multipoint service delivery. A Replication segment allows a packet to be replicated from a replication node to downstream nodes.
RFC 9545: Path Segment Identifier in MPLS-Based Segment Routing Networks
Proposed Standard- W. Cheng
- H. Li
- C. Li
- R. Gandhi
- R. Zigler
- February 2024
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) path is identified by an SR segment list. A subset of segments from the segment list cannot be leveraged to distinguish one SR path from another as they may be partially congruent. SR path identification is a prerequisite for various use cases such as performance measurement and end-to-end 1+1 path protection.
In an SR over MPLS (SR-MPLS) data plane, an egress node cannot determine on which SR path a packet traversed the network from the label stack because the segment identifiers are removed from the label stack as the packet transits the network.
This document defines a Path Segment Identifier (PSID) to identify an SR path on the egress node of the path.
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) path is identified by an SR segment list. A subset of segments from the segment list cannot be leveraged to distinguish one SR path from another as they may be partially congruent. SR path identification is a prerequisite for various use cases such as performance measurement and end-to-end 1+1 path protection.
In an SR over MPLS (SR-MPLS) data plane, an egress node cannot determine on which SR path a packet traversed the network from the label stack because the segment identifiers are removed from the label stack as the packet transits the network.
This document defines a Path Segment Identifier (PSID) to identify an SR path on the egress node of the path.
RFC 9503: Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) Extensions for Segment Routing Networks
Proposed Standard- R. Gandhi
- C. Filsfils
- M. Chen
- B. Janssens
- R. Foote
- October 2023
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. SR is applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6) forwarding planes. This document specifies Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) extensions (as described in RFC 8762) for SR networks, for both the SR-MPLS and SRv6 forwarding planes, by augmenting the optional extensions defined in RFC 8972.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. SR is applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6) forwarding planes. This document specifies Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) extensions (as described in RFC 8762) for SR networks, for both the SR-MPLS and SRv6 forwarding planes, by augmenting the optional extensions defined in RFC 8972.
RFC 9488: Local Protection Enforcement in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Proposed Standard- A. Stone
- M. Aissaoui
- S. Sidor
- S. Sivabalan
- October 2023
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 5440 to clarify usage of the Local Protection Desired bit signaled in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP). This document also introduces a new flag for signaling protection enforcement in PCEP.
Abstract
This document updates RFC 5440 to clarify usage of the Local Protection Desired bit signaled in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP). This document also introduces a new flag for signaling protection enforcement in PCEP.
RFC 9351: Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Flexible Algorithm Advertisement
Proposed Standard- K. Talaulikar
- P. Psenak
- S. Zandi
- G. Dawra
- February 2023
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Flexible Algorithm is a solution that allows some routing protocols (e.g., OSPF and IS-IS) to compute paths over a network based on user-defined (and hence, flexible) constraints and metrics. The computation is performed by routers participating in the specific network in a distributed manner using a Flexible Algorithm Definition (FAD). This definition is provisioned on one or more routers and propagated through the network by OSPF and IS-IS flooding.
Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) enables the collection of various topology information from the network. This document defines extensions to the BGP-LS address family to advertise the FAD as a part of the topology information from the network.
Abstract
Flexible Algorithm is a solution that allows some routing protocols (e.g., OSPF and IS-IS) to compute paths over a network based on user-defined (and hence, flexible) constraints and metrics. The computation is performed by routers participating in the specific network in a distributed manner using a Flexible Algorithm Definition (FAD). This definition is provisioned on one or more routers and propagated through the network by OSPF and IS-IS flooding.
Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) enables the collection of various topology information from the network. This document defines extensions to the BGP-LS address family to advertise the FAD as a part of the topology information from the network.
RFC 9352: IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane
Proposed Standard- P. Psenak
- C. Filsfils
- A. Bashandy
- B. Decraene
- Z. Hu
- February 2023
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
The Segment Routing (SR) architecture allows a flexible definition of the end-to-end path by encoding it as a sequence of topological elements called "segments". It can be implemented over the MPLS or the IPv6 data plane. This document describes the IS-IS extensions required to support SR over the IPv6 data plane.
This document updates RFC 7370 by modifying an existing registry.
Abstract
The Segment Routing (SR) architecture allows a flexible definition of the end-to-end path by encoding it as a sequence of topological elements called "segments". It can be implemented over the MPLS or the IPv6 data plane. This document describes the IS-IS extensions required to support SR over the IPv6 data plane.
This document updates RFC 7370 by modifying an existing registry.
RFC 9294: Application-Specific Link Attributes Advertisement Using the Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS)
Proposed Standard- K. Talaulikar
- P. Psenak
- J. Tantsura
- August 2022
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Extensions have been defined for link-state routing protocols that enable distribution of application-specific link attributes for existing as well as newer applications such as Segment Routing (SR). This document defines extensions to the Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) to enable the advertisement of these application-specific attributes as a part of the topology information from the network.
Abstract
Extensions have been defined for link-state routing protocols that enable distribution of application-specific link attributes for existing as well as newer applications such as Segment Routing (SR). This document defines extensions to the Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) to enable the advertisement of these application-specific attributes as a part of the topology information from the network.
RFC 9160: Export of MPLS Segment Routing Label Type Information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
Informational- T. Graf
- December 2021
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document introduces new IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) code points to identify which traffic is being forwarded based on which MPLS control plane protocol is used within a Segment Routing domain. In particular, this document defines five code points for the IPFIX mplsTopLabelType Information Element for Path Computation Element (PCE), IS-IS, OSPFv2, OSPFv3, and BGP MPLS Segment Routing extensions.
Abstract
This document introduces new IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) code points to identify which traffic is being forwarded based on which MPLS control plane protocol is used within a Segment Routing domain. In particular, this document defines five code points for the IPFIX mplsTopLabelType Information Element for Path Computation Element (PCE), IS-IS, OSPFv2, OSPFv3, and BGP MPLS Segment Routing extensions.
RFC 9125: Gateway Auto-Discovery and Route Advertisement for Site Interconnection Using Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- A. Farrel
- J. Drake
- E. Rosen
- K. Patel
- L. Jalil
- August 2021
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Data centers are attached to the Internet or a backbone network by gateway routers. One data center typically has more than one gateway for commercial, load-balancing, and resiliency reasons. Other sites, such as access networks, also need to be connected across backbone networks through gateways.
This document defines a mechanism using the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation attribute to allow data center gateway routers to advertise routes to the prefixes reachable in the site, including advertising them on behalf of other gateways at the same site. This allows segment routing to be used to identify multiple paths across the Internet or backbone network between different gateways. The paths can be selected for load-balancing, resilience, and quality purposes.
Abstract
Data centers are attached to the Internet or a backbone network by gateway routers. One data center typically has more than one gateway for commercial, load-balancing, and resiliency reasons. Other sites, such as access networks, also need to be connected across backbone networks through gateways.
This document defines a mechanism using the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation attribute to allow data center gateway routers to advertise routes to the prefixes reachable in the site, including advertising them on behalf of other gateways at the same site. This allows segment routing to be used to identify multiple paths across the Internet or backbone network between different gateways. The paths can be selected for load-balancing, resilience, and quality purposes.
RFC 9086: Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Segment Routing BGP Egress Peer Engineering
Proposed Standard- S. Previdi
- K. Talaulikar
- C. Filsfils
- K. Patel
- S. Ray
- J. Dong
- August 2021
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the packet with a list of segment identifiers (SIDs). A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. SR segments allow steering a flow through any topological path and service chain while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
This document describes an extension to Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) for advertisement of BGP Peering Segments along with their BGP peering node information so that efficient BGP Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) policies and strategies can be computed based on Segment Routing.
Abstract
A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the packet with a list of segment identifiers (SIDs). A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. SR segments allow steering a flow through any topological path and service chain while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
This document describes an extension to Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) for advertisement of BGP Peering Segments along with their BGP peering node information so that efficient BGP Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) policies and strategies can be computed based on Segment Routing.
RFC 9087: Segment Routing Centralized BGP Egress Peer Engineering
Informational- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- G. Dawra
- E. Aries
- D. Afanasiev
- August 2021
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the packet with an SR header. A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. SR allows for the enforcement of a flow through any topological path while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
The Segment Routing architecture can be directly applied to the MPLS data plane with no change on the forwarding plane. It requires a minor extension to the existing link-state routing protocols.
This document illustrates the application of Segment Routing to solve the BGP Egress Peer Engineering (BGP-EPE) requirement. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution allows a centralized (Software-Defined Networking, or SDN) controller to program any egress peer policy at ingress border routers or at hosts within the domain.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing. A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the packet with an SR header. A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. SR allows for the enforcement of a flow through any topological path while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node of the SR domain.
The Segment Routing architecture can be directly applied to the MPLS data plane with no change on the forwarding plane. It requires a minor extension to the existing link-state routing protocols.
This document illustrates the application of Segment Routing to solve the BGP Egress Peer Engineering (BGP-EPE) requirement. The SR-based BGP-EPE solution allows a centralized (Software-Defined Networking, or SDN) controller to program any egress peer policy at ingress border routers or at hosts within the domain.
RFC 9085: Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- S. Previdi
- K. Talaulikar
- C. Filsfils
- H. Gredler
- M. Chen
- August 2021
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by routing protocols, e.g., by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3) within IGP topologies.
This document defines extensions to the Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) address family in order to carry SR information via BGP.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by routing protocols, e.g., by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3) within IGP topologies.
This document defines extensions to the Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) address family in order to carry SR information via BGP.
RFC 9020: YANG Data Model for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- S. Litkowski
- Y. Qu
- A. Lindem
- P. Sarkar
- J. Tantsura
- May 2021
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines three YANG data models. The first is for Segment Routing (SR) configuration and operation, which is to be augmented by different Segment Routing data planes. The next is a YANG data model that defines a collection of generic types and groupings for SR. The third module defines the configuration and operational states for the Segment Routing MPLS data plane.
Abstract
This document defines three YANG data models. The first is for Segment Routing (SR) configuration and operation, which is to be augmented by different Segment Routing data planes. The next is a YANG data model that defines a collection of generic types and groupings for SR. The third module defines the configuration and operational states for the Segment Routing MPLS data plane.
RFC 8664: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- S. Sivabalan
- C. Filsfils
- J. Tantsura
- W. Henderickx
- J. Hardwick
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) enables any head-end node to select any path without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling technique (e.g., LDP or RSVP-TE). It depends only on "segments" that are advertised by link-state Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). An SR path can be derived from a variety of mechanisms, including an IGP Shortest Path Tree (SPT), an explicit configuration, or a Path Computation Element (PCE). This document specifies extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) that allow a stateful PCE to compute and initiate Traffic-Engineering (TE) paths, as well as a Path Computation Client (PCC) to request a path subject to certain constraints and optimization criteria in SR networks.
This document updates RFC 8408.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) enables any head-end node to select any path without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling technique (e.g., LDP or RSVP-TE). It depends only on "segments" that are advertised by link-state Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). An SR path can be derived from a variety of mechanisms, including an IGP Shortest Path Tree (SPT), an explicit configuration, or a Path Computation Element (PCE). This document specifies extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) that allow a stateful PCE to compute and initiate Traffic-Engineering (TE) paths, as well as a Path Computation Client (PCC) to request a path subject to certain constraints and optimization criteria in SR networks.
This document updates RFC 8408.
RFC 8665: OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- P. Psenak
- S. Previdi
- C. Filsfils
- H. Gredler
- R. Shakir
- W. Henderickx
- J. Tantsura
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the OSPFv2 extensions required for Segment Routing.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the OSPFv2 extensions required for Segment Routing.
RFC 8666: OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- P. Psenak
- S. Previdi
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the OSPFv3 extensions required for Segment Routing with the MPLS data plane.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the OSPFv3 extensions required for Segment Routing with the MPLS data plane.
RFC 8667: IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing
Proposed Standard- S. Previdi
- L. Ginsberg
- C. Filsfils
- A. Bashandy
- H. Gredler
- B. Decraene
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the IS-IS extensions that need to be introduced for Segment Routing operating on an MPLS data plane.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).
This document describes the IS-IS extensions that need to be introduced for Segment Routing operating on an MPLS data plane.
RFC 8669: Segment Routing Prefix Segment Identifier Extensions for BGP
Proposed Standard- S. Previdi
- C. Filsfils
- A. Lindem
- A. Sreekantiah
- H. Gredler
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source-routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions called "segments". A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. The ingress node prepends an SR header to a packet containing a set of segment identifiers (SIDs). Each SID represents a topological or service-based instruction. Per-flow state is maintained only on the ingress node of the SR domain. An "SR domain" is defined as a single administrative domain for global SID assignment.
This document defines an optional, transitive BGP attribute for announcing information about BGP Prefix Segment Identifiers (BGP Prefix-SIDs) and the specification for SR-MPLS SIDs.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source-routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions called "segments". A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. The ingress node prepends an SR header to a packet containing a set of segment identifiers (SIDs). Each SID represents a topological or service-based instruction. Per-flow state is maintained only on the ingress node of the SR domain. An "SR domain" is defined as a single administrative domain for global SID assignment.
This document defines an optional, transitive BGP attribute for announcing information about BGP Prefix Segment Identifiers (BGP Prefix-SIDs) and the specification for SR-MPLS SIDs.
RFC 8670: BGP Prefix Segment in Large-Scale Data Centers
Informational- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- G. Dawra
- E. Aries
- P. Lapukhov
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes the motivation for, and benefits of, applying Segment Routing (SR) in BGP-based large-scale data centers. It describes the design to deploy SR in those data centers for both the MPLS and IPv6 data planes.
Abstract
This document describes the motivation for, and benefits of, applying Segment Routing (SR) in BGP-based large-scale data centers. It describes the design to deploy SR in those data centers for both the MPLS and IPv6 data planes.
RFC 8604: Interconnecting Millions of Endpoints with Segment Routing
Informational- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- G. Dawra
- W. Henderickx
- D. Cooper
- June 2019
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document describes an application of Segment Routing to scale the network to support hundreds of thousands of network nodes, and tens of millions of physical underlay endpoints. This use case can be applied to the interconnection of massive-scale Data Centers (DCs) and/or large aggregation networks. Forwarding tables of midpoint and leaf nodes only require a few tens of thousands of entries. This may be achieved by the inherently scaleable nature of Segment Routing and the design proposed in this document.
Abstract
This document describes an application of Segment Routing to scale the network to support hundreds of thousands of network nodes, and tens of millions of physical underlay endpoints. This use case can be applied to the interconnection of massive-scale Data Centers (DCs) and/or large aggregation networks. Forwarding tables of midpoint and leaf nodes only require a few tens of thousands of entries. This may be achieved by the inherently scaleable nature of Segment Routing and the design proposed in this document.
RFC 8426: Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Path (LSP) Coexistence
Informational- H. Sitaraman
- V. Beeram
- I. Minei
- S. Sivabalan
- July 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Operators are looking to introduce services over Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in networks running Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) LSPs. In some instances, operators are also migrating existing services from RSVP-TE to SR LSPs. For example, there might be certain services that are well suited for SR and need to coexist with RSVP-TE in the same network. Such introduction or migration of traffic to SR might require coexistence with RSVP-TE in the same network for an extended period of time, depending on the operator's intent. The following document provides solution options for keeping the traffic engineering database consistent across the network, accounting for the different bandwidth utilization between SR and RSVP-TE.
Abstract
Operators are looking to introduce services over Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in networks running Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) LSPs. In some instances, operators are also migrating existing services from RSVP-TE to SR LSPs. For example, there might be certain services that are well suited for SR and need to coexist with RSVP-TE in the same network. Such introduction or migration of traffic to SR might require coexistence with RSVP-TE in the same network for an extended period of time, depending on the operator's intent. The following document provides solution options for keeping the traffic engineering database consistent across the network, accounting for the different bandwidth utilization between SR and RSVP-TE.
RFC 8402: Segment Routing Architecture
Proposed Standard- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- L. Ginsberg
- B. Decraene
- S. Litkowski
- R. Shakir
- July 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called "segments". A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. A segment can have a semantic local to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR provides a mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR domain.
SR can be directly applied to the MPLS architecture with no change to the forwarding plane. A segment is encoded as an MPLS label. An ordered list of segments is encoded as a stack of labels. The segment to process is on the top of the stack. Upon completion of a segment, the related label is popped from the stack.
SR can be applied to the IPv6 architecture, with a new type of routing header. A segment is encoded as an IPv6 address. An ordered list of segments is encoded as an ordered list of IPv6 addresses in the routing header. The active segment is indicated by the Destination Address (DA) of the packet. The next active segment is indicated by a pointer in the new routing header.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called "segments". A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. A segment can have a semantic local to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR provides a mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR domain.
SR can be directly applied to the MPLS architecture with no change to the forwarding plane. A segment is encoded as an MPLS label. An ordered list of segments is encoded as a stack of labels. The segment to process is on the top of the stack. Upon completion of a segment, the related label is popped from the stack.
SR can be applied to the IPv6 architecture, with a new type of routing header. A segment is encoded as an IPv6 address. An ordered list of segments is encoded as an ordered list of IPv6 addresses in the routing header. The active segment is indicated by the Destination Address (DA) of the packet. The next active segment is indicated by a pointer in the new routing header.
RFC 8403: A Scalable and Topology-Aware MPLS Data-Plane Monitoring System
Informational- R. Geib
- C. Filsfils
- C. Pignataro
- N. Kumar
- July 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes features of an MPLS path monitoring system and related use cases. Segment-based routing enables a scalable and simple method to monitor data-plane liveliness of the complete set of paths belonging to a single domain. The MPLS monitoring system adds features to the traditional MPLS ping and Label Switched Path (LSP) trace, in a very complementary way. MPLS topology awareness reduces management and control-plane involvement of Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) measurements while enabling new OAM features.
Abstract
This document describes features of an MPLS path monitoring system and related use cases. Segment-based routing enables a scalable and simple method to monitor data-plane liveliness of the complete set of paths belonging to a single domain. The MPLS monitoring system adds features to the traditional MPLS ping and Label Switched Path (LSP) trace, in a very complementary way. MPLS topology awareness reduces management and control-plane involvement of Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) measurements while enabling new OAM features.
RFC 8354: Use Cases for IPv6 Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING)
Informational- J. Brzozowski
- J. Leddy
- C. Filsfils
- R. Maglione
- M. Townsley
- March 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
The Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture describes how Segment Routing can be used to steer packets through an IPv6 or MPLS network using the source routing paradigm. This document illustrates some use cases for Segment Routing in an IPv6-only environment.
Abstract
The Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture describes how Segment Routing can be used to steer packets through an IPv6 or MPLS network using the source routing paradigm. This document illustrates some use cases for Segment Routing in an IPv6-only environment.
RFC 8355: Resiliency Use Cases in Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Networks
Informational- C. Filsfils
- S. Previdi
- B. Decraene
- R. Shakir
- March 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document identifies and describes the requirements for a set of use cases related to Segment Routing network resiliency on Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) networks.
Abstract
This document identifies and describes the requirements for a set of use cases related to Segment Routing network resiliency on Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) networks.
RFC 8287: Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes
Proposed Standard- N. Kumar
- C. Pignataro
- G. Swallow
- N. Akiya
- S. Kini
- M. Chen
- December 2017
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) architecture leverages source routing and tunneling paradigms and can be directly applied to the use of a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) data plane. A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions called "segments" by prepending the packet with an SR header.
The segment assignment and forwarding semantic nature of SR raises additional considerations for connectivity verification and fault isolation for a Label Switched Path (LSP) within an SR architecture. This document illustrates the problem and defines extensions to perform LSP Ping and Traceroute for Segment Routing IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with an MPLS data plane.
Abstract
A Segment Routing (SR) architecture leverages source routing and tunneling paradigms and can be directly applied to the use of a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) data plane. A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions called "segments" by prepending the packet with an SR header.
The segment assignment and forwarding semantic nature of SR raises additional considerations for connectivity verification and fault isolation for a Label Switched Path (LSP) within an SR architecture. This document illustrates the problem and defines extensions to perform LSP Ping and Traceroute for Segment Routing IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with an MPLS data plane.
RFC 7880: Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)
Proposed Standard- C. Pignataro
- D. Ward
- N. Akiya
- M. Bhatia
- S. Pallagatti
- July 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD), a simplified mechanism for using BFD with a large proportion of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning, as well as improved control and flexibility for network nodes initiating path monitoring.
This document updates RFC 5880.
Abstract
This document defines Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD), a simplified mechanism for using BFD with a large proportion of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning, as well as improved control and flexibility for network nodes initiating path monitoring.
This document updates RFC 5880.
RFC 7881: Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) for IPv4, IPv6, and MPLS
Proposed Standard- C. Pignataro
- D. Ward
- N. Akiya
- July 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines procedures for using Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) in IPv4, IPv6, and MPLS environments.
Abstract
This document defines procedures for using Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) in IPv4, IPv6, and MPLS environments.
RFC 7882: Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Use Cases
Informational- S. Aldrin
- C. Pignataro
- G. Mirsky
- N. Kumar
- July 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes various use cases for Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) and provides requirements such that protocol mechanisms allow for simplified detection of forwarding failures.
These use cases support S-BFD, which is a simplified mechanism for using BFD with a large proportion of negotiation aspects eliminated, accelerating the establishment of a BFD session. The benefits of S-BFD include quick provisioning, as well as improved control and flexibility for network nodes initiating path monitoring.
Abstract
This document describes various use cases for Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) and provides requirements such that protocol mechanisms allow for simplified detection of forwarding failures.
These use cases support S-BFD, which is a simplified mechanism for using BFD with a large proportion of negotiation aspects eliminated, accelerating the establishment of a BFD session. The benefits of S-BFD include quick provisioning, as well as improved control and flexibility for network nodes initiating path monitoring.
RFC 7884: OSPF Extensions to Advertise Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Target Discriminators
Proposed Standard- C. Pignataro
- M. Bhatia
- S. Aldrin
- T. Ranganath
- July 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a new OSPF Router Information (RI) TLV that allows OSPF routers to flood the Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Discriminator values associated with a target network identifier. This mechanism is applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
Abstract
This document defines a new OSPF Router Information (RI) TLV that allows OSPF routers to flood the Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Discriminator values associated with a target network identifier. This mechanism is applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
RFC 7855: Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement and Requirements
Informational- S. Previdi
- C. Filsfils
- B. Decraene
- S. Litkowski
- M. Horneffer
- R. Shakir
- May 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
The ability for a node to specify a forwarding path, other than the normal shortest path, that a particular packet will traverse, benefits a number of network functions. Source-based routing mechanisms have previously been specified for network protocols but have not seen widespread adoption. In this context, the term "source" means "the point at which the explicit route is imposed"; therefore, it is not limited to the originator of the packet (i.e., the node imposing the explicit route may be the ingress node of an operator's network).
This document outlines various use cases, with their requirements, that need to be taken into account by the Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture for unicast traffic. Multicast use cases and requirements are out of scope for this document.
Abstract
The ability for a node to specify a forwarding path, other than the normal shortest path, that a particular packet will traverse, benefits a number of network functions. Source-based routing mechanisms have previously been specified for network protocols but have not seen widespread adoption. In this context, the term "source" means "the point at which the explicit route is imposed"; therefore, it is not limited to the originator of the packet (i.e., the node imposing the explicit route may be the ingress node of an operator's network).
This document outlines various use cases, with their requirements, that need to be taken into account by the Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture for unicast traffic. Multicast use cases and requirements are out of scope for this document.
Subscribe to segment routing
Get notified when:
- RFC changes to status, obsoleted by, updates, updated by, or subseries.
- New RFC added to this subject or below
- The subject was merged into another.