%% You should probably cite rfc8955 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-26, number = {draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-26}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis/26/}, author = {Christoph Loibl and Susan Hares and Robert Raszuk and Danny R. McPherson and Martin Bacher}, title = {{Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules}}, pagetotal = 39, year = 2020, month = aug, day = 12, abstract = {This document defines a Border Gateway Protocol Network Layer Reachability Information (BGP NLRI) encoding format that can be used to distribute traffic Flow Specifications. This allows the routing system to propagate information regarding more specific components of the traffic aggregate defined by an IP destination prefix. It also specifies BGP Extended Community encoding formats, that 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. Additionally, it defines two applications of that encoding format: one that can be used to automate inter-domain coordination of traffic filtering, such as what is required in order to mitigate (distributed) denial-of-service attacks, and a second application to provide traffic filtering in the context of a BGP/MPLS VPN service. Other applications (e.g. centralized control of traffic in a SDN or NFV context) are also possible. Other documents may specify Flow Specification extensions. The information is carried via BGP, thereby reusing protocol algorithms, operational experience, and administrative processes such as inter-provider peering agreements. This document obsoletes both RFC5575 and RFC7674.}, }