Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Aggarwal
Request for Comments: 6515 Juniper Networks, Inc.
Updates: 6514 E. Rosen
Category: Standard Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
ISSN: 2070-1721 February 2012
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Aggarwal
Request for Comments: 6515 Juniper Networks, Inc.
Updates: 6514 E. Rosen
Category: Standard Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
ISSN: 2070-1721 February 2012
IPv4 and IPv6 Infrastructure Addresses in BGP Updates for Multicast VPN
多播VPN的BGP更新中的IPv4和IPv6基础结构地址
Abstract
摘要
To provide Multicast VPN (MVPN) service, Provider Edge routers originate BGP Update messages that carry Multicast-VPN ("MCAST-VPN") BGP routes; they also originate unicast VPN routes that carry MVPN-specific attributes. These routes encode addresses from the customer's address space, as well as addresses from the provider's address space. These two address spaces are independent, and the address family (IPv4 or IPv6) of the two spaces may or may not be the same. These routes always contain an "address family" field that specifies whether the customer addresses are IPv4 addresses or whether they are IPv6 addresses. However, there is no field that explicitly specifies the address family of the provider addresses. To ensure interoperability, this document specifies that provider IPv4 addresses are always encoded in these update messages as 4-octet addresses, and that the distinction between IPv4 and IPv6 is signaled solely by the length of the address field. Specific cases are explained in detail. This document updates RFC 6514.
为了提供多播VPN（MVPN）服务，提供商边缘路由器发起承载多播VPN（“MCAST-VPN”）BGP路由的BGP更新消息；它们还发起带有MVPN特定属性的单播VPN路由。这些路由编码来自客户地址空间的地址，以及来自提供商地址空间的地址。这两个地址空间是独立的，两个空间的地址族（IPv4或IPv6）可能相同，也可能不同。这些路由始终包含一个“地址系列”字段，用于指定客户地址是IPv4地址还是IPv6地址。但是，没有明确指定提供程序地址的地址系列的字段。为确保互操作性，本文档规定提供程序IPv4地址在这些更新消息中始终编码为4个八位组地址，并且IPv4和IPv6之间的区别仅由地址字段的长度表示。详细解释了具体案例。本文件更新了RFC 6514。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
这是一份互联网标准跟踪文件。
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关互联网标准的更多信息，请参见RFC 5741第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6515.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6515.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2012 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses in MCAST-VPN Routes ................2
1.2. Specification of Requirements ..............................4
1.3. Acronyms Used in This Document .............................4
2. PE Addresses in MCAST-VPN Routes ................................4
3. VRF Route Import Extended Community .............................5
4. PMSI Tunnel Attributes in I-PMSI A-D Routes .....................6
4.1. Relationship to AFI Value ..................................6
4.2. Relationship to Next Hop Address Family ....................6
5. IANA Considerations .............................................7
6. Security Considerations .........................................7
7. Acknowledgments .................................................7
8. Normative References ............................................7
9. Informative References ..........................................7
1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses in MCAST-VPN Routes ................2
1.2. Specification of Requirements ..............................4
1.3. Acronyms Used in This Document .............................4
2. PE Addresses in MCAST-VPN Routes ................................4
3. VRF Route Import Extended Community .............................5
4. PMSI Tunnel Attributes in I-PMSI A-D Routes .....................6
4.1. Relationship to AFI Value ..................................6
4.2. Relationship to Next Hop Address Family ....................6
5. IANA Considerations .............................................7
6. Security Considerations .........................................7
7. Acknowledgments .................................................7
8. Normative References ............................................7
9. Informative References ..........................................7
[MVPN-BGP] defines a new set of BGP route types that are used by service providers (SPs) to provide Multicast Virtual Private Network service to their customers. These routes have a newly defined BGP NLRI, the "MCAST-VPN" NLRI. The MCAST-VPN NLRI is carried in the NLRI field of the MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attributes defined in [BGP-MP]. The SAFI field of the MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute is used to identify the NLRI as being an MCAST-VPN NLRI.
[MVPN-BGP]定义了一组新的BGP路由类型，服务提供商（SP）使用这些类型向其客户提供多播虚拟专用网络服务。这些路由具有新定义的BGP NLRI，“MCAST-VPN”NLRI。MCAST-VPN NLRI携带在[BGP-MP]中定义的MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI属性的NLRI字段中。MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI属性的SAFI字段用于将NLRI标识为MCAST-VPN NLRI。
When the SAFI field of an MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute has the "MCAST-VPN" value, the AFI field has two defined values: 1 and 2. AFI 1 indicates that any customer multicast addresses occurring in the MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute are IPv4 addresses; AFI 2 indicates that such addresses are IPv6 addresses.
当MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI属性的SAFI字段具有“MCAST-VPN”值时，AFI字段具有两个定义的值：1和2。AFI 1表示在MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI属性中出现的任何客户多播地址都是IPv4地址；AFI 2表示这些地址是IPv6地址。
However, some of the MCAST-VPN routes also contain addresses of Provider Edge (PE) routers in the SP network. An SP with an IPv4 network may provide MVPN service for customers using IPv6, and an SP with an IPv6 network may provide MVPN service for customers that use IPv4. Therefore, the address family of the PE addresses MUST NOT be inferred from the AFI field of the associated MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute.
但是，某些MCAST-VPN路由还包含SP网络中提供商边缘（PE）路由器的地址。具有IPv4网络的SP可以为使用IPv6的客户提供MVPN服务，而具有IPv6网络的SP可以为使用IPv4的客户提供MVPN服务。因此，PE地址的地址族不能从关联MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI属性的AFI字段推断。
The purpose of this document is to make clear that whenever a PE address occurs in an MCAST-VPN route (whether in the NLRI or in an attribute), the IP address family of that address is determined by the length of the address (a length of 4 octets for IPv4 addresses, a length of 16 octets for IPv6 addresses), NOT by the AFI field of the route.
本文档的目的是明确，每当PE地址出现在MCAST-VPN路由中时（无论是在NLRI中还是在属性中），该地址的IP地址族由地址长度决定（IPv4地址的长度为4个八位字节，IPv6地址的长度为16个八位字节），而不是由路由的AFI字段决定。
In particular, if a SP with an IPv4 core network is providing MVPN/IPv6 service to a customer, the PE addresses in the MCAST-VPN routes will be 4-octet IPv4 routes, even though the AFI of those routes will have the value 2.
特别是，如果具有IPv4核心网络的SP向客户提供MVPN/IPv6服务，则MCAST-VPN路由中的PE地址将是4-octet IPv4路由，即使这些路由的AFI值为2。
Some previous specifications (e.g., [RFC4659] and [RFC4798]) have taken a different approach, requiring that in any routes containing IPv6 or VPN-IPv6 customer addresses, the IPv4 PE addresses be represented as IPv6-mapped IPv4 addresses [RFC4291]. This document does not use that approach. Rather, this specification uses the approach adopted in [RFC4684] and [RFC5549]. The MCAST-VPN routes contain enough information to enable the IP address family of the PE addresses to be inferred from the address lengths.
一些以前的规范（例如，[RFC4659]和[RFC4798]）采用了不同的方法，要求在包含IPv6或VPN-IPv6客户地址的任何路由中，IPv4 PE地址表示为IPv6映射的IPv4地址[RFC4291]。本文件没有使用这种方法。相反，本规范使用[RFC4684]和[RFC5549]中采用的方法。MCAST-VPN路由包含足够的信息，可以从地址长度推断PE地址的IP地址系列。
[MVPN-BGP] also defines an attribute, the "VRF Route Import Extended Community", that is attached to unicast VPN-IPv4 or VPN-IPv6 routes. This extended community contains a PE address, and this document specifies how to encode an IPv6 address in this attribute, independent of whether the attribute is attached to a VPN-IPv4 route or a VPN-IPv6 route.
[MVPN-BGP]还定义了一个属性“VRF路由导入扩展社区”，该属性连接到单播VPN-IPv4或VPN-IPv6路由。此扩展社区包含一个PE地址，本文档指定如何在此属性中编码IPv6地址，而与该属性是附加到VPN-IPv4路由还是VPN-IPv6路由无关。
This document also clarifies an issue with respect to the significance of the Address Family field of an Intra-AS I-PMSI A-D route that carries a PMSI Tunnel Attribute.
本文件还澄清了关于承载PMSI隧道属性的AS I-PMSI A-D内部路由的地址族字段的重要性的问题。
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].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“必需”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照[RFC2119]中所述进行解释。
This document uses a number of acronyms, mostly taken directly from the BGP and VPN specifications.
本文档使用了许多首字母缩写词，大部分直接取自BGP和VPN规范。
- A-D Route: Auto-Discovery Route [MVPN]
- A-D路由：自动发现路由[MVPN]
- AFI: Address Family Identifier [BGP-MP]
- AFI:地址族标识符[BGP-MP]
- AS: Autonomous System [BGP]
- AS：自治系统[BGP]
- I-PMSI: Inclusive PMSI [RFC4364]
- I-PMSI：包括PMSI[RFC4364]
- MVPN: Multicast Virtual Private Network [MVPN]
- MVPN：多播虚拟专用网[MVPN]
- MCAST-VPN routes: BGP routes of "MCAST-VPN" Subsequent Address Family, as defined in [MVPN-BGP]. The NLRI of such routes may be referred to as MCAST-VPN NLRI.
- MCAST-VPN路由：“MCAST-VPN”后续地址系列的BGP路由，定义见[MVPN-BGP]。此类路由的NLRI可称为MCAST-VPN NLRI。
- MP_REACH_NLRI: Multiprotocol Reachable NLRI [BGP-MP]
- MP_REACH_NLRI：多协议可到达NLRI[BGP-MP]
- MP_UNREACH_NLRI: Multiprotocol Unreachable NLRI [BGP-MP]
- MP_UNREACH_NLRI：多协议不可访问NLRI[BGP-MP]
- PMSI: Provider Multicast Service Interface [MVPN]
- PMSI:提供商多播服务接口[MVPN]
- NLRI: Network Layer Reachability Information [BGP]
- NLRI：网络层可达性信息[BGP]
- PE: Provider Edge [RFC4364]
- PE:提供程序边缘[RFC4364]
- S-PMSI: Selective PMSI [RFC4364]
- S-PMSI：选择性PMSI[RFC4364]
- SAFI: Subsequent Address Field Identifier [BGP-MP]
- SAFI：后续地址字段标识符[BGP-MP]
- SP: Service Provider
- SP：服务提供商
PE addresses occur in MCAST-VPN routes in the following places:
PE地址出现在以下位置的MCAST-VPN路由中：
1. "Network Address of Next Hop" field in the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute, as defined in Section 3 of [BGP-MP]. This field is preceded by a "length of next hop address" field. Hence, it is
1. [BGP-MP]第3节中定义的MP_REACH_NLRI属性中的“下一跳的网络地址”字段。此字段前面有一个“下一跳地址的长度”字段。因此，它是
always clear whether the address is an IPv4 address (length is 4) or an IPv6 address (length is 16). If the length of the next hop address is neither 4 nor 16, the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute MUST be considered to be "incorrect", and MUST be handled as specified in Section 7 of [BGP-MP].
始终清除地址是IPv4地址（长度为4）还是IPv6地址（长度为16）。如果下一跳地址的长度既不是4也不是16，则MP_REACH_NLRI属性必须被视为“不正确”，并且必须按照[BGP-MP]第7节的规定进行处理。
2. "Intra-AS I-PMSI A-D route", defined in Section 4.1 of [MVPN-BGP]. All MCAST-VPN routes begin with a 1-octet route type field, followed by a 1-octet "NLRI length" field. In the Intra-AS I-PMSI A-D route, the length is followed by an 8-octet Route Distinguisher (RD), which is then followed by the "Originating Router's IP Address" field. The length of this field (4 octets for IPv4 or 16 octets for IPv6) can thus be inferred from the NLRI length field (which will be either 12 or 24, respectively). If the inferred length of the "Originating Router's IP Address" field is neither 4 nor 16, the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute MUST be considered to be "incorrect", and MUST be handled as specified in Section 7 of [BGP-MP].
2. “内部AS I-PMSI A-D路由”，定义见[MVPN-BGP]第4.1节。所有MCAST-VPN路由都以1个八位字节的路由类型字段开头，然后是1个八位字节的“NLRI长度”字段。在帧内AS I-PMSI A-D路由中，长度后面跟着一个8-八位组路由识别器（RD），然后是“原始路由器的IP地址”字段。因此，可以从NLRI长度字段（分别为12或24）推断此字段的长度（IPv4为4个八位字节，IPv6为16个八位字节）。如果“始发路由器的IP地址”字段的推断长度既不是4也不是16，则MP_REACH_NLRI属性必须被视为“不正确”，并且必须按照[BGP-MP]第7节的规定进行处理。
3. "S-PMSI A-D Route", defined in Section 4.3 of [MVPN-BGP]. In this route, the "NLRI length" field is followed by an 8-octet RD, a variable-length "multicast source" field, a variable-length "multicast group" field, and an "Originating Router's IP Address" field. The two variable-length fields have their own length fields. From these two length fields and the NLRI length field, one can compute the length of the "Originating Router's IP Address" field, which again is either 4 for IPv4 or 16 for IPv6. If the computed length of the "Originating Router's IP Address" field is neither 4 nor 16, the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute MUST be considered to be "incorrect", and MUST be handled as specified in Section 7 of [BGP-MP].
3. “S-PMSI A-D路线”，定义见[MVPN-BGP]第4.3节。在该路由中，“NLRI长度”字段后面紧跟着一个8位字节的RD、一个可变长度的“多播源”字段、一个可变长度的“多播组”字段和一个“原始路由器的IP地址”字段。这两个可变长度字段有各自的长度字段。从这两个长度字段和NLRI长度字段中，可以计算“原始路由器的IP地址”字段的长度，对于IPv4，该字段的长度为4，对于IPv6，该字段的长度为16。如果“始发路由器IP地址”字段的计算长度既不是4也不是16，则MP_REACH_NLRI属性必须被视为“不正确”，并且必须按照[BGP-MP]第7节的规定进行处理。
4. "Leaf A-D Route", defined in Section 4.4 of [MVPN-BGP]. In this route, the "NLRI length" field is following by a variable-length "route key", which is followed by the "Originating Router's IP Address" field. The Route Key has its own length field. From the NLRI length and the route key length, one can compute the length of the "Originating Router's IP Address" field. If the computed length of the "Originating Router's IP Address" field is neither 4 nor 16, the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute MUST be considered to be "incorrect", and MUST be handled as specified in Section 7 of [BGP-MP].
4. [MVPN-BGP]第4.4节中定义的“叶A-D路线”。在该路由中，“NLRI长度”字段后面是一个可变长度的“路由密钥”，该密钥后面是“原始路由器的IP地址”字段。路由键有自己的长度字段。根据NLRI长度和路由密钥长度，可以计算“原始路由器的IP地址”字段的长度。如果“始发路由器IP地址”字段的计算长度既不是4也不是16，则MP_REACH_NLRI属性必须被视为“不正确”，并且必须按照[BGP-MP]第7节的规定进行处理。
The "VRF Route Import Extended Community", specified in [MVPN-BGP], is an attribute carried by unicast VPN-IPv4 or VPN-IPv6 routes. It is an "IPv4 Address Specific Extended Community" of type "VRF Route
[MVPN-BGP]中指定的“VRF路由导入扩展社区”是单播VPN-IPv4或VPN-IPv6路由携带的属性。它是“VRF路由”类型的“IPv4地址特定扩展社区”
Import"; hence, it can only carry an IPv4 address. To carry an IPv6 address, an "IPv6 Address Specific Extended Community" [RFC5701], of type "VRF Route Import", must be used. A code point for this type of extended community has been allocated by IANA.
导入）；因此，它只能承载IPv4地址。若要承载IPv6地址，必须使用“VRF路由导入”类型的“IPv6地址特定扩展社区”[RFC5701]。IANA已为此类型的扩展社区分配了一个代码点。
When a PMSI Tunnel Attribute occurs in an I-PMSI A-D route originated by a particular PE or Autonomous System Border Router (ASBR), it identifies a tunnel that the PE/ASBR uses by default for carrying the multicast traffic of a particular customer MVPN. The proper encoding and interpretation of the PMSI Tunnel attribute is affected by both the AFI and "Network Address of Next Hop" fields.
当PMSI隧道属性出现在由特定PE或自治系统边界路由器（ASBR）发起的I-PMSI a-D路由中时，它标识PE/ASBR默认用于承载特定客户MVPN的多播流量的隧道。PMSI隧道属性的正确编码和解释受AFI和“下一跳的网络地址”字段的影响。
When the PMSI Tunnel Attribute occurs in a BGP Update message with a MP_REACH_NLRI attribute whose AFI is 1, the meaning is that the identified tunnel is used by default to carry IPv4 MVPN traffic for a particular customer MVPN. When the PMSI Tunnel Attribute occurs in a BGP Update message with a MP_REACH_NLRI attribute whose AFI is 2, the meaning is that the identified tunnel is used by default to carry IPv6 MVPN traffic for a particular customer MVPN. To assign both IPv4 and IPv6 MVPN traffic to an I-PMSI tunnel, two I-PMSI A-D routes MUST be used -- one whose MP_REACH_NLRI has an AFI of 1 and one whose MP_REACH_NLRI has an AFI of 2. To use the same tunnel for both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic, the same value of the PMSI Tunnel attribute can be used in each route.
当PMSI隧道属性出现在具有AFI为1的MP_REACH_NLRI属性的BGP更新消息中时，这意味着默认情况下，已识别的隧道用于承载特定客户MVPN的IPv4 MVPN流量。当PMSI隧道属性出现在具有AFI为2的MP_REACH_NLRI属性的BGP更新消息中时，这意味着默认情况下，已识别的隧道用于承载特定客户MVPN的IPv6 MVPN流量。要将IPv4和IPv6 MVPN流量分配给I-PMSI隧道，必须使用两条I-PMSI A-D路由——一条其MP_REACH_NLRI的AFI为1，另一条其MP_REACH_NLRI的AFI为2。要对IPv4和IPv6流量使用相同的隧道，可以在每个路由中使用相同的PMSI隧道属性值。
If the "Network Address of Next Hop" field in the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute contains an IPv4 address, then any IP addresses appearing in the "Tunnel Identifier" field of the PMSI Tunnel Attribute MUST be IPv4 addresses.
如果MP_REACH_NLRI属性中的“下一跳的网络地址”字段包含IPv4地址，则PMSI隧道属性的“隧道标识符”字段中出现的任何IP地址都必须是IPv4地址。
If the "Network Address of Next Hop" field in the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute contains an IPv6 address, then any IP addresses appearing in the "Tunnel Identifier" field of the PMSI Tunnel Attribute MUST be IPv6 addresses.
如果MP_REACH_NLRI属性中的“下一跳的网络地址”字段包含IPv6地址，则PMSI隧道属性的“隧道标识符”字段中出现的任何IP地址都必须是IPv6地址。
If these conditions are not met, the PMSI Tunnel Attribute MUST be handled as a "malformed" PMSI Tunnel Attribute, as specified in Section 5 of [MVPN-BGP].
如果不满足这些条件，则必须按照[MVPN-BGP]第5节的规定，将PMSI隧道属性作为“格式错误”的PMSI隧道属性处理。
IANA has assigned the code point 0x000b for "VRF Route Import" in the "IPv6 Address Specific Extended Community" registry in the "transitive communities" portion of the namespace. The references are to this document and to [MVPN-BGP].
IANA已在命名空间“可传递社区”部分的“IPv6地址特定扩展社区”注册表中为“VRF路由导入”分配了代码点0x000b。参考文件包括本文件和[MVPN-BGP]。
This document does not raise any security considerations beyond those raised by [MVPN-BGP].
除[MVPN-BGP]提出的安全注意事项外，本文件未提出任何其他安全注意事项。
The authors wish to thank Dongling Duan, Keyur Patel, Yakov Rekhter, and Karthik Subramanian.
作者希望感谢段东玲、科乌尔·帕特尔、雅科夫·雷克特和卡尔蒂克·苏布拉曼尼安。
[BGP] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
[BGP]Rekhter，Y.，Ed.，Li，T.，Ed.，和S.Hares，Ed.，“边境网关协议4（BGP-4）”，RFC 42712006年1月。
[BGP-MP] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter, "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760, January 2007.
[BGP-MP]Bates，T.，Chandra，R.，Katz，D.，和Y.Rekhter，“BGP-4的多协议扩展”，RFC 4760，2007年1月。
[MVPN] Rosen, E., Ed., and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, February 2012.
[MVPN]Rosen，E.，Ed.，和R.Aggarwal，Ed.，“MPLS/BGP IP VPN中的多播”，RFC 6513，2012年2月。
[MVPN-BGP] Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6514, February 2012.
[MVPN-BGP]Aggarwal，R.，Rosen，E.，Morin，T.，和Y.Rekhter，“MPLS/BGP IP VPN中的BGP编码和多播过程”，RFC 6514，2012年2月。
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
[RFC4291]Hinden，R.和S.Deering，“IP版本6寻址体系结构”，RFC 42912006年2月。
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, February 2006.
[RFC4364]Rosen，E.和Y.Rekhter，“BGP/MPLS IP虚拟专用网络（VPN）”，RFC 4364，2006年2月。
[RFC4659] De Clercq, J., Ooms, D., Carugi, M., and F. Le Faucheur, "BGP-MPLS IP Virtual Private Network (VPN) Extension for IPv6 VPN", RFC 4659, September 2006.
[RFC4659]De Clercq，J.，Ooms，D.，Carugi，M.，和F.Le Faucheur，“用于IPv6 VPN的BGP-MPLS IP虚拟专用网络（VPN）扩展”，RFC 46592006年9月。
[RFC4798] De Clercq, J., Ooms, D., Prevost, S., and F. Le Faucheur, "Connecting IPv6 Islands over IPv4 MPLS Using IPv6 Provider Edge Routers (6PE)", RFC 4798, February 2007.
[RFC4798]De Clercq，J.，Ooms，D.，Prevost，S.，和F.Le Faucheur，“使用IPv6提供商边缘路由器（6PE）通过IPv4 MPLS连接IPv6孤岛”，RFC 4798，2007年2月。
[RFC4684] Marques, P., Bonica, R., Fang, L., Martini, L., Raszuk, R., Patel, K., and J. Guichard, "Constrained Route Distribution for Border Gateway Protocol/MultiProtocol Label Switching (BGP/MPLS) Internet Protocol (IP) Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4684, November 2006.
[RFC4684]Marques，P.，Bonica，R.，Fang，L.，Martini，L.，Raszuk，R.，Patel，K.，和J.Guichard，“边界网关协议/多协议标签交换（BGP/MPLS）互联网协议（IP）虚拟专用网络（VPN）的受限路由分布”，RFC 46842006年11月。
[RFC5549] Le Faucheur, F. and E. Rosen, "Advertising IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information with an IPv6 Next Hop", RFC 5549, May 2009.
[RFC5549]Le Faucheur，F.和E.Rosen，“通过IPv6下一跳来宣传IPv4网络层可达性信息”，RFC 5549，2009年5月。
[RFC5701] Rekhter, Y., "IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended Community Attribute", RFC 5701, November 2009.
[RFC5701]Rekhter，Y.，“特定于IPv6地址的BGP扩展社区属性”，RFC 57012009年11月。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Rahul Aggarwal Juniper Networks 1194 North Mathilda Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94089 EMail: raggarwa_1@yahoo.com
Rahul Aggarwal Juniper Networks 1194 North Mathilda Avenue Sunnyvale，CA 94089电子邮件：raggarwa_1@yahoo.com
Eric C. Rosen Cisco Systems, Inc. 1414 Massachusetts Avenue Boxborough, MA 01719 EMail: erosen@cisco.com
Eric C.Rosen Cisco Systems，Inc.马萨诸塞州伯斯堡马萨诸塞大道1414号邮编01719电子邮件：erosen@cisco.com