<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd"[]>
<?rfc toc="yes" ?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="no"?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc iprnotified="Yes" ?>
<?rfc strict="no" ?>
<rfc ipr="trust200902" category="std" docName="draft-chen-pce-label-x-domains-19">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="Label Cross Domains">Extensions to PCEP for Distributing Label Cross Domains</title>
    <author initials="H" surname="Chen" fullname="Huaimo Chen">
      <organization>Futurewei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>
          <city>Boston, MA</city>
          <region></region>
          <code></code>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>hchen.ietf@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

 <author initials="A" fullname="Autumn Liu" 
            surname="Liu">
      <organization>Ciena</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>

          <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

          <city></city>

          <region>CA</region>

          <code></code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>hliu@ciena.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

<!--
 <author initials="F" fullname="Fengman Xu" 
            surname="Xu">
      <organization>Verizon</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>2400 N. Glenville Dr</street>

          <city>Richardson</city>

          <region>TX</region>

          <code>75082</code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>fengman.xu@verizon.com</email>

      </address>
 </author>
-->
 <author initials="M" fullname="Mehmet Toy" 
            surname="Toy">
      <organization>Verizon</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street> </street>

          <city></city>

          <region></region>

          <code></code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>mehmet.toy@verizon.com</email>

      </address>
 </author>


 <author initials="V" fullname="Vic Liu" 
            surname="Liu">
      <organization> </organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street> </street>

          <city></city>

          <region></region>

          <code></code>

          <country></country>
        </postal>

        <email>liu.cmri@gmail.com</email>

      </address>
 </author>
   <date year="2024" />
    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>PCE Working Group</workgroup>

<abstract>
<t>     
This document specifies extensions to PCEP for distributing labels crossing domains
for an inter-domain Point-to-Point (P2P) or Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) 
Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Path (LSP). 
</t> 
</abstract>



</front>
<middle>
  
  


<section title="Introduction">


 
<t>
After a path crossing multiple domains is computed, 
an inter-domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Path (LSP)
tunnel may be set up along the path by 
a number of tunnel central controllers (TCCs).  
Each of the domains through which the path goes may be controlled 
by a tunnel central controller (TCC), 
which sets up the segment of the TE LSP tunnel in the domain. 
When the TCC sets up the segment of the TE LSP tunnel in its domain 
that is not a domain containing the tail end of the tunnel, 
it needs a label and an interface from a downstream domain, 
which is next to it along the path. 
</t>

<t>     
This document specifies extensions to PCEP  
for distributing a label and an interface from a domain to its upstream domain 
along the path for the TE LSP tunnel crossing multiple domains.
</t> 

</section>


  
<section title="Terminology">

<t>
   ABR: Area Border Router.  Routers used to connect two IGP areas
   (areas in OSPF or levels in IS-IS).
</t>

<t>
   ASBR: Autonomous System Border Router.  Routers used to connect
   together ASes via inter-AS links.
</t>

<t>
   Boundary Node (BN): a boundary node is either an ABR in the context
   of inter-area Traffic Engineering or an ASBR in the context of
   inter-AS Traffic Engineering.
</t>

<t>
   Entry BN of domain(n): a BN connecting domain(n-1) to domain(n) along
   a determined sequence of domains.
</t>

<t>
   Exit BN of domain(n): a BN connecting domain(n) to domain(n+1) along
   a determined sequence of domains.
</t>

<t>
   Inter-area TE LSP: A TE LSP that crosses an IGP area boundary.
</t>

<t>
   Inter-AS TE LSP: A TE LSP that crosses an AS boundary.
</t>

<t>
   LSP: Label Switched Path.
</t>

<t>
   LSR: Label Switching Router.
</t>

<t>
   PCC: Path Computation Client.  Any client application requesting a
   path computation to be performed by a Path Computation Element.
</t>

<t>
   PCE: Path Computation Element.  An entity (component, application, or
   network node) that is capable of computing a network path or route
   based on a network graph and applying computational constraints.
</t>

<t>
   PCE(i) is a PCE with the scope of domain(i).
</t>

<t>
   TED: Traffic Engineering Database.
</t>

<t>
This document uses terminologies defined in RFC5440.
</t>
</section>


<section title="Conventions Used in This Document">
<t>
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119.
</t>
</section>  
                                


<section title="Label Distribution">

<t>
The Label Distribution may be provided by the PCE-based path computation. 
A PCE responsible for a domain computes a path segment for the domain,
which is from an entry boundary to an exit boundary (or an egress) 
node of the domain.
The PCE gets an label from the entry boundary node and adds an label object
containing the label and an interface as the incoming interface of the label
in the reply message to be sent to the requesting PCC (or another PCE).
</t>

<t>
When a PCE or PCC receives a reply message containing an label object,
it removes the object from the message. 
The PCE may store the information in the label object or 
send the information to another component such as 
a Tunnel Central Controller (TCC).
</t>


<section title="An Exmaple">

<t>
Figure 1 below illustrates a simple two-AS topology. 
There is a PCE responsible for the path computation in each AS. 

A path computation is requested from the Tunnel Central Controller (TCC),
acting as the PCC, which sends the path computation request to PCE-1.
</t>

<t>
PCE-1 is unable to compute an end-to-end path and invokes
PCE-2 (possibly using the techniques described in [RFC5441]). PCE-2
computes a path segment from entry boundary node 
ASBR-2 of the right domain to the egress as {ASBR-2, C, D,
Egress}. 
</t>

<t>
In addition to placing this path segment in the reply message to PCE-1,
PCE-2 gets an label from the entry boundary node ASBR-2 and 
adds an label object containing the label with the interface 
between ASBR-1 and ASBR-2 into the reply message. 
</t>

<t>
<figure title="Example of Label Distribution" suppress-title="false" align="left" alt="" width="" height="" anchor="fig1">
<artwork xml:space="preserve" name="" type="" align="left" alt="" width="" height=""><![CDATA[
 -------------------------------    ------------------------------
|             -------           |  |    -------                   |
|        +-->| PCE-1 |<---------+--+-->| PCE-2 |                  |
|        |    -------           |  |    -------                   |
|        v                      |  |    ^                         |
|      -----                    |  |    |                         |
|     | TCC |                   |  |    |                         |
|     | PCC |                   |  |    |                         |
|      -----                    |  |    v                         |
|  -------    -    -    ------  |  |  ------    -    -    ------  |
| |Ingress|--|A|--|B|--|ASBR-1|-+--+-|ASBR-2|--|C|--|D|--|Egress| |
|  -------    -    -    ------  |  |  ------    -    -    ------  |
|                               |  |                              |
 -------------------------------  ------------------------------
]]></artwork>
</figure>
</t>

<t>
When PCE-1 receives the reply message containing the label object from PCE-2,
it removes the object from the message. 
PCE-1 may store the information in the label object or 
send the information to another component such as 
a Tunnel Central Controller (TCC).
TCC may set up the segment of the LSP tunnel from Ingress to ASBR-2
using the label with the interface in the label object from ASBR-2.
</t>
</section>



</section>  



<section title="Extensions to PCEP">
<t>
This section describes the extensions to PCEP for 
distributing labels crossing domains
for an inter-domain Point-to-Point (P2P) or Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) 
Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Path (LSP).
The extensions include the definition of a new flag in the RP object, 
tunnel information and label in a PCReq/PCRep message.
</t>


<section title="RP Object Extension">

<t> 
The following flags are added into the RP Object:
 
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
    o L (Label distribution bit - 1 bit):
        0: This indicates that this is not a PCReq/PCRep message
           for distributing labels crossing domains.
        1: This indicates that this is a PCReq or PCRep message 
           for distributing labels crossing domains.
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>
<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
    o C (LSP tunnel Creation bit - 1 bit):
        0: This indicates that this is not a PCReq/PCRep message for
           creating the segment of the LSP tunnel.
        1: This indicates that this is a PCReq/PCRep message for
           creating the segment of the LSP tunnel in the domain 
           and distributing labels to its previous domain.
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

<t>
An L bit is added in the flag bits field of the RP object to tell
a receiver of a PCReq/PCRep message that the message is for 
distributing labels crossing domains for an inter-domain LSP.

The IANA request is referenced in Section below (Request Parameter Bit
Flags) of this document.
</t>


<t>
The C bit is added in the flag bits field of the RP object to tell
the receiver of a PCReq/PCRep message that the message is for 
creating the segment of the LSP tunnel in a domain
and distributing labels from this domain to its previous domain.

The IANA request is referenced in Section below (Request Parameter Bit
Flags) of this document.
</t>


<t>
This L bit with the N bit defined in RFC6006 can indicate whether
the PCReq/PCRep message is for distributing labels for 
an MPLS TE P2P LSP or an MPLS TE P2MP LSP.
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
    o L = 1 and N = 0: This indicates that this is a PCReq/PCRep message
                       for distributing labels for a P2P LSP.
    o L = 1 and N = 1: This indicates that this is a PCReq/PCRep message
                       for distributing labels for a P2MP LSP.
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>


</section>



<section title="Label Object">

<t>
The format of a label object body (Object-Type=2) is illustrated below, 
which comprises a label and an optional node sub object. 
The node sub object contains a boundary node IP address,
from which the label is allocated and distributed.
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                              Label                            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |               Node IPv4/IPv6 sub object (optional)            | 
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>


<t>
The format of the node IPv4 address sub object (Type=1) is
as follows:
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |L|   Type(1)   |   Length (8)  |     Node IPv4 address         |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Node IPv4 address (cont)    |        Reserved               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

<t>
The format of the node IPv6 address sub object (Type=2) is illustrated 
below:
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |L|   Type(2)   |  Length (20)  |     Node IPv6 address         |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                                                               |
  |                  Node IPv6 address (cont)                     |
  |                                                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Node IPv6 address (cont)    |        Reserved               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

</section>


<section title="LSP Tunnel Object">

<t>
The LSP tunnel object contains the information that may be used to 
identify an LSP tunnel. 
An LSP tunnel may be a P2P or P2MP LSP tunnel. 
It may be an IPv4 or IPv6 LPS tunnel. 
Thus there are four types of LSP tunnels:
1) P2P LSP IPv4 tunnel, 
2) P2P LSP IPv6 tunnel, 
3) P2MP LSP IPv4 tunnel, and 
4) P2MP LSP IPv6 tunnel. 
</t>

<t>
The format of the P2P LSP IPv4/6 tunnel object body is as follows:
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |       P2P LSP Tunnel Egress IPv4/6 Address (4/16 bytes)       |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |         Reserved              |            Tunnel ID          |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |               Extended Tunnel ID (4/16 bytes)                 |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |         Reserved              |              LSP ID           |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                    Controller ID (4/16 bytes)                 |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
  o P2P LSP Tunnel Egress IPv4/6 Address:  
      IPv4/6 address of the egress of the tunnel.
  o Tunnel ID:  
      A 16-bit identifier that is constant over the life of the tunnel.
  o Extended Tunnel ID: 
      A 4/16-byte identifier that is constant over the life of the tunnel.
  o LSP ID:  
      A 16-bit identifier to allow resources sharing.
  o Controller ID:  
      A 4/16-byte identifier for the controller responsible for the head 
      segment of the tunnel.
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>


<t>
The format of the P2MP LSP IPv4/6 tunnel object body is as follows:
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           P2MP ID                             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Reserved              |            Tunnel ID          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               Extended Tunnel ID (4/16 bytes)                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Reserved              |              LSP ID           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Controller ID (4/16 bytes)                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
  o P2MP ID: 
      A 32-bit number unique within the ingress of LSP tunnel.
  o Tunnel ID:  
      A 16-bit identifier that is constant over the life of the tunnel.
  o Extended Tunnel ID: 
      A 4/16-byte identifier that is constant over the life of the tunnel.
  o LSP ID:  
      A 16-bit identifier to allow resources sharing.
  o Controller ID:  
      A 16-byte identifier for the controller responsible for the head 
      segment of the tunnel.
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>

</section>




<section title="Request Message Extension">

<t>
Figure below illustrates the format of a request message with 
a optional LSP tunnel object:
</t>
<!--
<figure anchor="ReqMsgFormat" title="Format for Request Message">
-->
<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[
        <PCReq Message>::= <Common Header>
                           [<svec-list>]
                           <request-list>
        <request-list>::=<request>[<request-list>]
        <request>::= <RP> <END-POINTS> [<OF>] [<LSPA>] [<BANDWIDTH>]
                     [<metric-list>] [<RRO>[<BANDWIDTH>]] [<IRO>]
                     [<LOAD-BALANCING>]
                     [<LSP-tunnel>]
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>
<!--
</figure>
-->


</section>



<section title="Reply Message Extension">

<t>
Below is the format of a reply message with an optional Label object:
</t>
<!--
<figure anchor="RepMsgFormat" title="Format for Reply Message">
-->
<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[
        <PCReq Message>::= <Common Header>
                           <response-list>
        <response-list>::=<response>[<response-list>]
        <response>::= <RP>
                      [<NO-PATH>]
                      [<attribute-list>]
                      [<path-list>]
        <path-list>::=<path>[<path-list>]
        <path>::= <ERO><attribute-list>[<LSP-tunnel>][<Label>]                   
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>
<!--
</figure>
-->

<t>
</t>

</section>

</section>



<!--
<section title="Procedures">

<t>
Ther may be a number of procedures for distributing labels crossing domains. 
</t>

<section title="Distributing Label in Ordered Setup">
<t>
Suppose that a path for an MPLS TE LSP tunnel crossing multiple domains 
is computed by PCEs and a sequence of domains (D1, D2, ..., Dn) 
through which the path goes are controlled by a sequence of 
Tunnel Central Controllers TCCs (TCC1, TCC2, ..., TCCn) respectively. 
The method or procedure for distributing a label in ordered setup 
may comprise the following steps:
</t>

<list style="hanging">
  <t hangText=" Step 1: ">
TCCi (i = 1, ..., n-1) sends TCCj (j = i + 1) a request 
for establishing the TE LSP tunnel.
</t>



  <t hangText=" Step 2: ">
TCCn (e.g., TCC3) allocates a label from the enter border node 
(e.g., border node R) of domain Dn (e.g., D3) and sends TCCn-1 (e.g., TCC2) 
a reply containing the label after establishing the TE LSP tunnel segment 
(e.g., from node R to U) in domain Dn (e.g., D3).
</t>

  <t hangText=" Step 3: ">
TCCj (j = n-1, ..., 2) receives a reply containing a first label 
from TCCj+1, allocates a second label from the enter border 
node of domain Dj, establishes the TE LSP tunnel segment in Dj and 
sends TCCi (i = j - 1) a reply containing the label.
</t>

  <t hangText=" Step 4: ">
TCC1 receives a reply containing a label from TCC2 and establishes 
the TE LSP tunnel segment in D1. At this point, 
the TE LSP tunnel crossing multiple domains is established.
</t>
</list> 


</section>


<section title="Distributing Label in Path Computation">
<t>
Suppose that a path for an MPLS TE LSP tunnel crossing multiple domains 
is computed by PCEs and a sequence of domains (D1, D2, ..., Dn) 
through which the path goes are controlled by a sequence of 
PCEs (PCE1, PCE2, ..., PCEn) as TCCs respectively. 
The method or procedure for distributing a label in path computation 
may comprise the following steps:
</t>

<list style="hanging">
  <t hangText=" Step 1: ">
After PCEn (e.g., PCE3) receives a path request for computing the path 
and determines that the path segment of the path in domain Dn (e.g., D3) 
is on the best path, it allocates a label from the enter border node 
(e.g., R) of domain Dn (e.g., D3) on the path, 
establishes the TE LSP tunnel segment in domain Dn and sends PCEn-1 
(e.g., PCE2) a path reply containing the label.
</t>


  <t hangText=" Step 2: ">
When PCEj (j = n-1, ..., 2) receives a path reply containing a first label 
from PCEj+1 and determines that the path segment of the path in domain Dj 
(e.g., D2) is on the best path, it allocates a second label from the 
enter border node of domain Dj, establishes the TE LSP tunnel segment in Dj 
and sends PCEi (i = j - 1) a path reply containing the second label.
</t>


  <t hangText=" Step 3: ">
After PCE1 receives a path reply containing a label from PCE2 and 
determines the path segment in domain D1, 
it establishes the TE LSP tunnel segment in D1. 
At this point, the TE LSP tunnel crossing multiple domains is established.
</t>
</list> 

</section>

</section>
-->


<section title="Security  Considerations">
<t>
The mechanism described in this document does not raise any new 
security issues for the PCEP protocols.
</t>
</section>




<section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
<t>
This section specifies requests for IANA allocation.
</t>


<section anchor="IANA-RP-BITS" title="Request Parameter Bit Flags">
<t>
A new RP Object Flag has been defined in this document. 
IANA is requested to make the following allocation
from the "PCEP RP Object Flag Field" Sub-Registry:
</t>
<t>
<figure>
  <artwork> <![CDATA[  
      Bit       Description                         Reference
       18       Label Distribution  (L-bit)         This I-D
       19       LSP tunnel Creation (C-bit)         This I-D
  ]]>
  </artwork>
</figure>
</t>
</section>


</section>

<section title="Acknowledgement">
<t>
  The author would like to thank people
  for their valuable comments on this draft.
</t> 
</section>


</middle>
  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->
<back>



    <!-- References split into informative and normative -->

    <!-- Thre are 2 ways to insert reference entries from the citation libraries:
     1. define an ENTITY at the top, and use "ampersand character"RFC2629; here (as shown)
     2. simply use a PI "less than character"?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119.xml"?> here
        (for I-Ds: include="reference.I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis.xml")

     Both are cited textually in the same manner: by using xref elements.
     If you use the PI option, xml2rfc will, by default, try to find included files in the same
     directory as the including file. You can also define the XML_LIBRARY environment variable
     with a value containing a set of directories to search.  These can be either in the local
     filing system or remote ones accessed by http (http://domain/dir/... ).-->


<references title="Normative References">
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119" ?>

   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.3209" ?> 
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5440" ?> 
  
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6006" ?> 

</references>

<references title="Informative References">
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4655" ?>

   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5862" ?>

</references>
 
    <!-- Change Log

  -->
</back>


</rfc>
<?Pub *0000024293?>
