<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.39 (Ruby 3.2.3) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-geng-grow-bmp-rel-enhancement-01" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.33.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="bmp-rel-enhancement">Log More Routing Events in the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-geng-grow-bmp-rel-enhancement-01"/>
    <author initials="N." surname="Geng" fullname="Nan Geng">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>gengnan@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="Y." surname="Gao" fullname="Yujia Gao">
      <organization>Zhongguancun Laboratory</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>gaoyj@zgclab.edu.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="S." surname="Zhuang" fullname="Shunwan Zhuang">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>zhuangshunwan@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="H." surname="Wang" fullname="Haibo Wang">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>rainsword.wang@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2026" month="June" day="03"/>
    <area>OPS</area>
    <workgroup>GROW</workgroup>
    <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 62?>

<t>The Route Event Logging (REL) message is defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel"/>, which enables monitored routers to report event-driven operational data to BMP collectors.</t>
      <t>This document defines additional event code points for BGP FlowSpec <xref target="RFC8956">RFC8955</xref> and BGP SR Policies <xref target="I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi"/>. These extensions enhance monitoring visibility for policy execution failures and improve network operation and troubleshooting capabilities.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 68?>

<section anchor="sec-intro">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>BGP Adj-RIB-In, Loc-RIB, and Adj-RIB-Out are generated through BGP route exchange and routing policy processing. The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) provides comprehensive monitoring for BGP Adj-RIB-In <xref target="RFC7854"/>, BGP Loc-RIB <xref target="RFC9069"/>, and BGP Adj-RIB-Out <xref target="RFC8671"/>.</t>
      <t>The Route Event Logging (REL) message defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel"/> is designed to deliver event-driven fault logs and runtime status information from network devices to BMP monitoring servers.</t>
      <t>In modern networks, BGP FlowSpec and BGP SR Policy are widely deployed for traffic filtering, redirection and segment routing traffic engineering. However, existing BMP REL mechanisms lack dedicated event logging for common failure scenarios of these advanced BGP features.</t>
      <t>This document supplements new REL event types to cover typical abnormal failures of BGP FlowSpec and BGP SR Policy, filling the monitoring gap for policy control and forwarding execution anomalies.</t>
      <section anchor="requirements-language">
        <name>Requirements Language</name>
        <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
        <?line -18?>

</section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="bgp-flowspec-routing-event-extensions">
      <name>BGP FlowSpec Routing Event Extensions</name>
      <!-- Log Action TLV is defined in {{I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel}}, the first byte defines the nature of the logging, depending on the code point additional data may follow. the following code points are defined for BGP Flowspec in this document:

* TBD1 = Redirect-to-VRF-Fail. The BGP flowspec redirect to VRF action is defined in [RFC8955]. It is used to redirect the specified traffic into a Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRF) instance that matched the flow specification's Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI). The VRF instance may fail due to various reasons. As a result, the BGP FlowSpec will fails to redirect the matched traffic to the specific VRF instance. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made.

* TBD2 = Redirect-to-Nexthop-Fail. The BGP flowspec redirect to IP action is defined in {{I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip}}. It is used to redirect the specified traffic to a target IPv4 address or a target IPv6 address that matched the flow specification's Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI). The destination IPv4 address or destination IPv6 address may fail for a variety of reasons. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made.

* TBD3 = Redirect-to-SR-Policy-Fail. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made.

* TBD4 = Flowspec Validation Fail. The BGP Flowspec Validation Procedure is defined in [RFC8955]. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made. -->

<t>The Log Action TLV is defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel"/>. The first byte defines the nature of the logging event, and additional data may follow depending on the code point. The following code points are defined for BGP FlowSpec in this document:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>TBD1 = Redirect-to-VRF-Fail. The BGP FlowSpec redirect-to-VRF action is defined in <xref target="RFC8955"/>. This event indicates that a received FlowSpec redirect-to-VRF action cannot be resolved, installed, or executed on the monitored device for the target Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRF) instance. For example, the target VRF instance may be unavailable or the corresponding redirect action may fail during local processing. Data contains a UTF-8 diagnostic string.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>TBD2 = Redirect-to-Nexthop-Fail. The BGP FlowSpec redirect-to-IP action is defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip"/>. This event indicates that a received FlowSpec redirect-to-IP action cannot be resolved, installed, or executed on the monitored device for the target IPv4 or IPv6 next hop. Data contains a UTF-8 diagnostic string.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>TBD3 = Redirect-to-SR-Policy-Fail. This event indicates that a received FlowSpec action that redirects traffic to an SR Policy cannot be resolved, installed, or executed on the monitored device. For example, the referenced SR Policy may be unavailable or may not provide a usable forwarding behavior when the FlowSpec action is processed. Data contains a UTF-8 diagnostic string.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>TBD4 = FlowSpec-Validation-Fail. The BGP FlowSpec validation procedure is defined in <xref target="RFC8955"/>. This event indicates that a received FlowSpec route fails the FlowSpec validation procedure on the monitored device. This event is distinct from failures that occur while locally resolving, installing, or executing a FlowSpec traffic action. Data contains a UTF-8 diagnostic string.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>The UTF-8 diagnostic string is intended to provide additional implementation-specific information for troubleshooting. Its format is not specified by this document. When available, the diagnostic string <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> describe the local reason that caused the event to be generated. The Log Action code point defines the common semantics of the reported event.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="bgp-sr-policy-routing-event-extensions">
      <name>BGP SR Policy Routing Event Extensions</name>
      <t>Log Action TLV is defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel"/>, the first byte defines the nature of the logging, depending on the code point additional data may follow. The following code points are defined for BGP SR Policies in this document:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>TBD5 = Invalid-Candidate-Path. This event indicates that a candidate path is considered invalid. The validity of a candidate path is described in Section 5 of <xref target="RFC9256"/>. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>TBD6 = Invalid-Segment-List. This event indicates that a segment list of a candidate path is considered invalid. The validity of a segment list is described in Section 5 of <xref target="RFC9256"/>. Data contains a UTF-8 string whose value can be organized freely by an implementation and is meant to give additional information about why the log was made.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>TBD7 = Exceeded-Spec-Limit. Data contains a UTF-8 string to indicate violations including exceeding the maximum number of SR Policies or Segment Lists.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>The UTF-8 diagnostic string is intended to provide additional implementation-specific information for troubleshooting. Its format is not specified by this document. When available, the diagnostic string <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> describe the local reason that caused the event to be generated. The Log Action code point defines the common semantics of the reported event.</t>
      <!-- RFC9830 -->

</section>
    <section anchor="operational-considerations">
      <name>Operational Considerations</name>
      <!-- Network devices (e.g., routers and switches) receive FlowSpec routes and SR Policy routes distributed by controllers, route reflectors or adjacent BGP peers.

When the local device detects control plane validation errors or forwarding plane execution faults for FlowSpec redirection actions or SR Policy candidate path processing, it will actively encapsulate the corresponding fault type and diagnostic information into a BMP REL message and report to the configured BMP server.

BMP monitoring collectors SHOULD record and analyze these extended routing events for real-time alarm and offline fault diagnosis.  -->

<t>A monitored device may receive FlowSpec routes and SR Policy routes from controllers, route reflectors, or adjacent BGP peers. When the device detects a failure while validating or locally processing those routes or their associated actions, it reports the corresponding event and diagnostic information to the configured BMP monitoring collector using a BMP REL message.</t>
      <t>BMP monitoring collectors <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> record, analyze, and correlate these extended routing events with the relevant BMP route or policy context when available. These events can be used for real-time alarming and offline fault diagnosis.</t>
      <t>The failure events defined in this document do not define a corresponding recovery indication. Operators should use these events together with other BMP information and local operational state to determine whether the reported condition is still present.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-security">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>This document inherits all security requirements and considerations documented in Section 11 of <xref target="RFC7854"/>. BMP control sessions <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> only be established between authenticated and trusted monitoring devices to prevent unauthorized access to network internal routing information.</t>
      <t>The UTF-8 diagnostic strings carried in extended REL events may contain sensitive data such as VRF names, policy identifiers and network address prefixes. Operators are recommended to properly isolate BMP monitoring data and restrict access permissions.</t>
      <t>No new protocol interactions or message modes are introduced in this extension. Therefore, no additional security risks are introduced beyond the baseline BMP protocol.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-iana">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>This document requests IANA to assign seven new code points in the BMP Log Action TLV Registry established by <xref target="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel"/>.</t>
      <t>The requested code point assignments are as follows:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>Redirect-to-VRF-Fail (TBD1)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Redirect-to-Nexthop-Fail (TBD2)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Redirect-to-SR-Policy-Fail (TBD3)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>FlowSpec-Validation-Fail (TBD4)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Invalid-Candidate-Path (TBD5)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Invalid-Segment-List (TBD6)</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Exceeded-Spec-Limit (TBD7)</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>After permanent code points are allocated, all TBD markers will be replaced in subsequent document revisions.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="acknowledgements">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>Many thanks to the comments from Jeffrey Haas.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
      <name>Normative References</name>
      <reference anchor="RFC7854" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7854" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7854.xml">
        <front>
          <title>BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
          <author fullname="J. Scudder" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Scudder"/>
          <author fullname="R. Fernando" initials="R." surname="Fernando"/>
          <author fullname="S. Stuart" initials="S." surname="Stuart"/>
          <date month="June" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP), which can be used to monitor BGP sessions. BMP is intended to provide a convenient interface for obtaining route views. Prior to the introduction of BMP, screen scraping was the most commonly used approach to obtaining such views. The design goals are to keep BMP simple, useful, easily implemented, and minimally service affecting. BMP is not suitable for use as a routing protocol.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7854"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7854"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8671" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8671" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8671.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Support for Adj-RIB-Out in the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
          <author fullname="T. Evens" initials="T." surname="Evens"/>
          <author fullname="S. Bayraktar" initials="S." surname="Bayraktar"/>
          <author fullname="P. Lucente" initials="P." surname="Lucente"/>
          <author fullname="P. Mi" initials="P." surname="Mi"/>
          <author fullname="S. Zhuang" initials="S." surname="Zhuang"/>
          <date month="November" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) only defines access to the Adj-RIB-In Routing Information Bases (RIBs). This document updates BMP (RFC 7854) by adding access to the Adj-RIB-Out RIBs. It also adds a new flag to the peer header to distinguish between Adj-RIB-In and Adj-RIB-Out.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8671"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8671"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8955" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8955" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8955.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules</title>
          <author fullname="C. Loibl" initials="C." surname="Loibl"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hares" initials="S." surname="Hares"/>
          <author fullname="R. Raszuk" initials="R." surname="Raszuk"/>
          <author fullname="D. McPherson" initials="D." surname="McPherson"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bacher" initials="M." surname="Bacher"/>
          <date month="December" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a Border Gateway Protocol Network Layer Reachability Information (BGP NLRI) encoding format that can be used to distribute (intra-domain and inter-domain) traffic Flow Specifications for IPv4 unicast and IPv4 BGP/MPLS VPN services. This allows the routing system to propagate information regarding more specific components of the traffic aggregate defined by an IP destination prefix.</t>
            <t>It also specifies BGP Extended Community encoding formats, which can be used to propagate Traffic Filtering Actions along with the Flow Specification NLRI. Those Traffic Filtering Actions encode actions a routing system can take if the packet matches the Flow Specification.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes both RFC 5575 and RFC 7674.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8955"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8955"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8956" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8956" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8956.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for IPv6</title>
          <author fullname="C. Loibl" initials="C." role="editor" surname="Loibl"/>
          <author fullname="R. Raszuk" initials="R." role="editor" surname="Raszuk"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hares" initials="S." role="editor" surname="Hares"/>
          <date month="December" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>"Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules" (RFC 8955) provides a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) extension for the propagation of traffic flow information for the purpose of rate limiting or filtering IPv4 protocol data packets.</t>
            <t>This document extends RFC 8955 with IPv6 functionality. It also updates RFC 8955 by changing the IANA Flow Spec Component Types registry.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8956"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8956"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9069" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9069" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9069.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Support for Local RIB in the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
          <author fullname="T. Evens" initials="T." surname="Evens"/>
          <author fullname="S. Bayraktar" initials="S." surname="Bayraktar"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bhardwaj" initials="M." surname="Bhardwaj"/>
          <author fullname="P. Lucente" initials="P." surname="Lucente"/>
          <date month="February" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) defines access to local Routing Information Bases (RIBs). This document updates BMP (RFC 7854) by adding access to the Local Routing Information Base (Loc-RIB), as defined in RFC 4271. The Loc-RIB contains the routes that have been selected by the local BGP speaker's Decision Process.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9069"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9069"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
          <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
          <date month="March" year="1997"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
          <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
          <date month="May" year="2017"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9256" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9256" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9256.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Segment Routing Policy Architecture</title>
          <author fullname="C. Filsfils" initials="C." surname="Filsfils"/>
          <author fullname="K. Talaulikar" initials="K." role="editor" surname="Talaulikar"/>
          <author fullname="D. Voyer" initials="D." surname="Voyer"/>
          <author fullname="A. Bogdanov" initials="A." surname="Bogdanov"/>
          <author fullname="P. Mattes" initials="P." surname="Mattes"/>
          <date month="July" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Segment Routing (SR) allows a node to steer a packet flow along any path. Intermediate per-path states are eliminated thanks to source routing. SR Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated called a headend node. The packets steered into an SR Policy carry an ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy.</t>
            <t>This document updates RFC 8402 as it details the concepts of SR Policy and steering into an SR Policy.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9256"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9256"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-rel-05" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-rel.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Logging of routing events in BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
          <author fullname="Paolo Lucente" initials="P." surname="Lucente">
            <organization>NTT</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Camilo Cardona" initials="C." surname="Cardona">
            <organization>NTT</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="2" month="March" year="2026"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) does provide for BGP session event logging (Peer Up, Peer Down), state synchronization (Route Monitoring), debugging (Route Mirroring) and Statistics messages, among others. This document defines a new Route Event Logging (REL) message type for BMP with the aim of covering use cases with affinity to alerting, reporting and on-change analysis.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-grow-bmp-rel-05"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi-13" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Advertising Segment Routing Policies in BGP</title>
          <author fullname="Stefano Previdi" initials="S." surname="Previdi">
            <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Clarence Filsfils" initials="C." surname="Filsfils">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Ketan Talaulikar" initials="K." surname="Talaulikar">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Paul Mattes" initials="P." surname="Mattes">
            <organization>Microsoft</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Dhanendra Jain" initials="D." surname="Jain">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="6" month="February" year="2025"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>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, each comprising one or more segment lists. A headend can be provisioned with these candidate paths using various mechanisms, such as CLI, NETCONF, PCEP, or BGP. This document specifies how BGP can be used to distribute SR Policy candidate paths. It introduces a BGP SAFI for advertising a candidate path of an SR Policy and defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute to signal information related to these candidate paths. Furthermore, this document updates RFC9012 by extending the Color Extended Community to support additional steering modes over SR Policy.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi-13"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-16" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip.xml">
        <front>
          <title>BGP Flow-Spec Redirect-to-IP Action</title>
          <author fullname="Jeff Haas" initials="J." surname="Haas">
            <organization>HPE</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Wim Henderickx" initials="W." surname="Henderickx">
            <organization>Nokia</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Adam Simpson" initials="A." surname="Simpson">
            <organization>Nokia</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="21" month="May" year="2026"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Flow-spec is an extension to BGP that allows for the dissemination of traffic flow specification rules. This has many possible applications, but the primary one for many network operators is the distribution of traffic filtering actions for distributed denial of service (DDoS) mitigation. The flow-spec standard, RFC 8955, defines a redirect-to-VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) action for policy- based forwarding. This mechanism can be difficult to use, particularly in networks without Layer 3 VPN infrastructure. This document defines a new redirect-to-IP flow-spec action that provides a simpler method of policy-based forwarding. The details of the action, including the IPv4 or IPv6 target address, are encoded in newly defined BGP extended communities [RFC4360].</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-16"/>
      </reference>
    </references>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
