<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?Pub Inc?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-idr-sdwan-edge-discovery-30"
     ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="SD-WAN Edge Discovery">SD-WAN Edge and Underlay Tunnel Discovery Using BGP</title>

    <author fullname="Linda Dunbar" initials="L. " surname="Dunbar">
      <organization>Futurewei</organization>

      <address>
		<postal>
          <city>Dallas, TX</city>
          <country>USA</country>
		</postal>
        <email>ldunbar@futurewei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
	
    <author fullname="Susan Hares" initials="S. " surname="Hares">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>
          <city> </city>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>shares@ndzh.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    
	<author fullname="Kausik Majumdar" initials="K." surname="Majumdar">
      <organization>Upscale AI</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>California</city>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>kmajumdar@upscaleai.com </email>
      </address>
    </author>



    <author fullname="Robert Raszuk" initials="R. " surname="Raszuk">
      <organization>Arrcus</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>

          <code></code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>robert@raszuk.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Venkit Kasiviswanathan" initials="V" surname="Kasiviswanathan">
      <organization>Arista</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city></city>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>venkit@arista.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>


    <date year="2026"/>

    <abstract>
     <t>This document specifies BGP mechanisms for SD-WAN (Software-Defined Wide Area Network) edge node attribute discovery. These mechanisms comprise a new tunnel type and associated Sub-TLVs for the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, and a new Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) carrying a typed NLRI for advertising SD-WAN underlay tunnel information. 
	 </t> 
	

    </abstract>

    <note title="Requirements Language">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. </t>
    </note>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
	
     <t>This document describes the BGP [RFC4271] signaling extensions that enable SD-WAN edge nodes 
	 to advertise client route reachability, underlay tunnel properties, and security 
	 related attributes required to establish and maintain SD-WAN overlay tunnels. 
	 The SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel forms a logical overlay between edge nodes across 
	 heterogeneous underlay networks (e.g., MPLS VPNs, direct Layer 2 links, or public Internet).</t>

     <t>The mechanisms defined in this document apply to both: 
	 <list> 
	 <t>1) SD-WAN Secure L3VPN deployments, where L3VPN services are delivered over SD-WAN Hybrid tunnels,
	 and </t>
	 <t>2) SD-WAN Secure Links deployments, where encrypted logical links are formed between 
	 SD-WAN edge nodes without using L3VPN address families.</t>
	 </list>
	 </t>
	 <t>BGP [RFC4271] serves as the control plane for these SD-WAN deployments. BGP sessions used to exchange the SD-WAN information defined in this document MUST provide peer authentication, integrity protection, and confidentiality. The specific mechanism used to provide these security properties is deployment dependent. The BGP speaker can be an IBGP peer or an RR. 
	</t> 
     <t>This document defines a new SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel type and associated sub-TLVs for the 
	 BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012], as well as new NLRIs for advertising SD-WAN 
	 underlay information. These extensions enable SD-WAN edge nodes to exchange the 
	 information necessary to establish and update secure SD-WAN overlay tunnels, as described in [Net2Cloud].</t>	 
	<t>In the context of this document, BGP Route Reflector (RR) is 
	the component of the SD-WAN Controller system that receives the BGP UPDATE from SD-WAN edges 
	and in turn propagates the information to the intended peers 
	that are authorized to communicate via the SD-WAN overlay network. The mechanisms specified in this document are intended for a controlled SD-WAN environment in which the participating SD-WAN edge nodes and RRs operate under a common administrative authority and are constrained by policy to an authorized set of participants. They are not specified for use between mutually distrusting administrative domains.</t>
	<t> The deployment model specified in this document is based on a BGP Route Reflector that is part of the SD-WAN Controller. The RR provides the central point for applying authorization and policy and for propagating SD-WAN route and tunnel information to authorized peers. </t>

	  <section title="Secure L3VPN Services over SD-WAN">
	  <t> An SD-WAN network defined in [MEF70.1] and [MEF70.2] refers to a policy-driven network  
	  over multiple heterogeneous underlay networks tailored to get better WAN bandwidth  
	  management, visibility, and control. In many deployments, L3VPN services are offered over SD-WAN 
	  overlays to provide site-to-site connectivity with traffic segmentation, security, and performance 
	  guarantees. These L3VPN services leverage SD-WAN Secure Links, i.e. encrypted data plane tunnels 
	  established between SD-WAN edge nodes using mechanisms such as IPsec, to carry user traffic 
	  between endpoints.</t>

	   <t>This document describes the BGP mechanisms used to support such L3VPN deployments by enabling 
	   SD-WAN edge nodes to advertise underlay attributes, tunnel characteristics, and security association 
	   related attributes. These mechanisms enable dynamic tunnel selection, service-level steering, 
	   and secure endpoint discovery.</t>
	   
	   <t>The SD-WAN usage model, including its deployment scenarios and BGP requirements, 
	   is detailed in <xref target="SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE"></xref> and not repeated here. This document 
	   focuses solely on the signaling extensions and encapsulation mechanisms required to support 
	   those scenarios in BGP. 
      </t>
	  </section> 
	  <section title="SD-WAN Secure Links">  
      <t><xref target="RFC9012"></xref> defines a BGP mechanism 
	  that links routes to a specific tunnels using a specific encapsulation. 
	  The SD-WAN Secure Links Topology uses a single hybrid logical link on 
      a SD-WAN Peer to represent multiple underlay topology links. The SD-WAN
      peer distributes IPsec security association (IPsec SA) [RFC4301] related information 
	  regarding the hybrid link or individual underlay links. 
	  </t>
	  <t>The traffic is routed via normal IPv4/IPv6 forwarding without 
	  any VPN addition. The SD-WAN Secure Links provides some link security for some simple
      cases of the three scenarios from [SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE] that do not require L3VPN addresses
      (Route Distinguisher (RD), prefix). 	  
	  </t>
	  </section>

   <section title="Conventions used in this document">
   	<t>The following terms are used as defined in other documents:
	 <list style="hanging">
	 <t hangText="[MEF 70.1] [MEF 70.2]:"> SD-WAN (Software-Defined Wide Area Network)</t> 
	 <t hangText="[RFC4301]:"> IPsec SA (IPsec Security Association) </t>
	 <t hangText="[RFC4760]:"> MP_REACH_NLRI </t> 
	 <t hangText="[RFC9012]:"> Tunnel Enapsulation Attribute </t>
	 <t hangText="[SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE]:"> C-PE, Controller, and SD-WAN Edge </t>
	 </list>
     </t>
	 
     <t>For clarity, this document uses the following terms from [SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE]: 
	 <list style="hanging">
		 <t hangText="C-PE (Customer Premises Equipment):"> A specific type of SD-WAN Edge 
		   deployed at the customer's edge. In this document, the terms C-PE and 
		   SD-WAN Edge are used interchangeably when referring to SD-WAN nodes that handle 
		   client route advertisement and secure tunnel establishment.</t>		   
		  <t hangText="Controller:">Refers to the SD-WAN Controller as defined in [SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE]. </t>
		  <t hangText="SD-WAN Edge:">A network element that participates in the SD-WAN overlay as defined 
		  in [SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE]. </t>
	 </list> 
	 </t>
		 
     <t> The following new terms are defined for this document:  
	 <list style="hanging">	  
	 
		  <t hangText="Client Route:"> A route advertised using AFI/SAFI 1/1, 2/1, 1/128, or 2/128 that is associated with an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel.</t>
		  <t hangText="CPE-Based VPN:">Virtual Private Secure network formed among C-PEs. This is to 
		  differentiate such VPNs from most commonly used PE-based VPNs discussed in [RFC4364].</t>
		  <t hangText="CPN:">Customer Premises Network</t>
		   
		   <t hangText="SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel:">A single logical tunnel that combines several links of different 
		   encapsulation into a single tunnel. This logical tunnel MAY exist as part of a SD-WAN Secure L3VPN or 
		   simply be a SD-WAN secure link for a flat network. </t>
	       <t hangText="SD-WAN Underlay Route:"> A route advertised using AFI/SAFI 1/74 or 2/74 whose SD-WAN NLRI identifies a WAN port or ports and whose associated Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute advertises tunnel-related properties.</t>
		  <t hangText = "Secure Transport Connection:"> A transport layer security mechanism that 
		  provides authentication, integrity, and confidentiality of routing updates over untrusted networks.</t> 
		  <t hangText = "Walled Garden:"> A controlled SD-WAN deployment in which participating SD-WAN edge nodes and RRs are authorized and managed under a common administrative authority, and BGP sessions and SD-WAN tunnel advertisements are constrained by local policy to those authorized participants.</t>
	</list> 
	</t>
   </section>
   </section>

<section title="BGP SD-WAN Mechanisms">
<t> The BGP mechanisms defined in this document support two types of advertisements: 
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Advertise Client routes with SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel:"> A BGP speaker supporting SD-WAN 
re-advertises routes received from client routers with the Next_HOP address set to its own IP address
(due to the SD-WAN feature configuration) and includes a BGP attribute indicating the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel. Client routes 
MAY be advertised using the following AFI/SAFIs: Unicast IPv4/IPv6 (1/1, 2/1) and L3VPN IPv4/IPv6 
(1/128, 2/128). The SD-WAN tunnel indication can be conveyed using either the 
Encapsulation Extended Community or the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute.
</t>
<t hangText="Advertise SD-WAN Underlay Routes:">A BGP speaker advertises SD-WAN Underlay Routes using AFI/SAFI 1/74 or 2/74. The NEXT_HOP is set to a reachable address of the advertising SD-WAN edge node, typically its loopback address, and the UPDATE includes a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute containing an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV. The SD-WAN NLRI identifies the WAN port or ports, SD-WAN Color, and SD-WAN Node ID to which the advertised tunnel properties apply. The associated SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV carries the corresponding tunnel-related information, including IPsec SA properties and, optionally, NAT-related information. </t>
</list>
</t>
<t>In this document, "Client Route" refers to the first type of advertisement, and "SD-WAN Underlay Route" refers to the second. The term "SD-WAN NLRI" refers specifically to the NLRI encoding used for an SD-WAN Underlay Route. For Client Routes, the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute procedures of [RFC9012] apply. For SD-WAN Underlay Routes using SAFI 74, which is outside the applicability scope defined by [RFC9012], the use and processing of the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute are defined by this document. This document does not update [RFC9012].</t>
<t>
This section describes the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel, the SD-WAN NLRIs, 
the new sub-TLVs for SD-WAN Tunnel IPsec SA, sub-TLVs for Port attributes,  
the procedures for the client routes, the procedures for underlay routes, 
error handling, and considerations for managing SD-WAN technologies. 
</t>
<section title="SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV Encoding">
<t> 
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Name:"> SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel </t>
<t hangText="Code:"> 25 (IANA assigned)</t>
<t hangText="Description:">The SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel identifies a virtual tunnel that overlays a 
path across a set of underlay links between two BGP peers. These underlay links may use various technologies 
(e.g., MPLS, Layer 2 direct connections, or Layer 3 public Internet). The term hybrid reflects that different 
types of underlay links can be used simultaneously.</t>
<t hangText="Encoding:">Per [RFC9012], the following two BGP attributes that MAY 
encode a Tunnel Encapsulation attribute information: the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, 
and the Encapsulation Extended Community as a "barebones" tunnel identification. 
The encoding for the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel is described for both BGP attributes. 
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="SD-WAN Hybrid tunnel Encoded in Encapsulation Extended Community:"> The SD-WAN encoding uses 
the Encapsulation Extended Community defined in  <xref target="RFC9012"></xref> 
 with the tunnel type set to 25 (IANA assigned).
 The NextHop Field in the BGP update indicates the tunnel egress endpoint 
 and this field SHOULD be set to the BGP Peer Address for the SD-WAN Peer. </t>
<t hangText="SD-WAN Hybrid tunnel Encoded in Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute:"> The tunnel TLV has a type set to 25 (IANA assigned).
The valid Sub-TLVs for client routes are the Color Sub-TLV (defined in <xref target="RFC9012"></xref>),  
and the following Sub-TLVs defined in sections 2.2 and 2.3 of this document: IPSec SEC ID, IPsec SA Rekey Cnt, 
IPsec Public Key, IPsec SA Proposal, and Simplified IPsec SA. The valid Sub-TLVs for 
underlay tunnels are the Tunnel Egress End Point defined in [RFC9012] and the following Sub-TLVs 
defined in sections 2.2 and 2.3 of this document: IPSec SEC ID, IPsec SA Rekey Cnt, Extended Port Attr, Underlay Type,  
IPsec Public Key, IPsec SA Proposal, and Simplified IPsec SA. For SD-WAN Underlay Routes using SAFI 74, if a Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV is not included in the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV, it is treated as if a Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV with an Address Family value of 0 were included. For Client Routes, Tunnel Egress Endpoint processing follows [RFC9012]. Figure 1 summarizes this Sub-TLV support in a tabular format.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
 <figure anchor="Sub-TLV Support for Client and Underlay Routes"
           title="Sub-TLV Support for Client and Underlay Routes">
           <artwork><![CDATA[  
		   
Client Routes AFI/SAFI = 1/1, 2/1, 1/128, 2/128
Underlay Routes AFI/SAFI = 1/74 and 2/74 
                         
sub-TLV            Code  Client Routes  Underlay Routes      
------            ----  -------------  ---------------
Encapsulation        1   not valid     not valid  
Protocol             2   not valid     not valid  
Color                4   not valid     not valid            
Load-Balancing Block 5   not valid     not valid  
Tunnel Egress EP     6   required      required *1
DS Field             7   not valid     not valid      
UDP Dest. Port       8   not valid     not valid  
Embedded Label H.    9   not valid     not valid   
MPLS label Stack    10   not valid     not valid   
Prefix-SID          11   not valid     not valid    
Preference          12   not valid     not valid  
Binding SID         13   not valid     not valid  
ENLP                14   not valid     not valid  
Priority            15   not valid     not valid   
SPI/SI              16   not valid     not valid 
SRv6 Binding SID    20   not valid     not valid   
IPsec SA ID         64   valid         valid   
Extended Port Attr  65   not valid     valid  
IPsec SA Rekey Cnt  67   valid         valid  
IPsec Public Key    68   valid         valid  
IPsec SA Proposal   69   valid         valid   
Simplified IPsec SA 70   valid         valid   


*1 - For SD-WAN Underlay Routes, if a Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV 
     is not included, it is treated as if a Tunnel Egress Endpoint 
	 Sub-TLV with AFI 0 were included. 
	]]></artwork>
 </figure>
</t>
<t>The Color Sub-TLV defined in [RFC9012] is not used by the SD-WAN procedures defined in this document. Client Routes carry the Color Extended Community, while SD-WAN Underlay Routes carry the SD-WAN-Color field in the SAFI-74 NLRI. The receiving BGP speaker correlates these values as described in Sections 2.4.1, 2.4.3, and 3.1.</t>

<section title="Summary of Validation Procedure">
<t> The SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV and its Sub-TLVs MUST first be validated for correct encoding and applicability as specified in this section and Section 2.3. Route-specific validation procedures are specified in Section 2.4.2 for Client Routes and Section 2.5.2 for SD-WAN Underlay Routes. Error handling is specified in Section 2.6.

After the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV has been validated, the receiving BGP speaker processes it according to the applicable route procedure.  
</t>
</section>  

<section title="Processing Considerations for SD-Wan Hybrid Tunnel Encoding">
<t> When Encapsulation Extended Community with a SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type is attached to a client route, 
the detailed SD-WAN tunnel attributes are not included in the same BGP UPDATE message, 
but are advertised separately using the SD-WAN NLRI. Section 2.2 and 2.3 describe the processing.
The SD-WAN NLRI is originated by the C-PE, and the BGP Next Hop is set to a reachable address of the C-PE, typically its loopback address. The remote BGP speaker uses this loopback address to 
associate the client route with the corresponding logical SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel, 
and the SD-WAN NLRI SD-WAN Node ID and port to the underlay tunnel within the logial SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel.  
This separation allows for independent advertisement rates and avoids 
bloating BGP UPDATE messages with the large amount of data required for IPsec SA, cryptographic keys, and related parameters.
</t>
<t>When the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV is attached to the client route, 
the detailed underlay tunnel attributes, such as IPsec-related parameters, are included directly in the 
same BGP UPDATE as the client route. As a result, there is no need for a separate UPDATE message associated 
with the C-PE loopback address. However, this approach means that any changes to underlay attributes (e.g., IPsec keys or cryptographic parameters) 
necessitate re-advertising the client route with an updated Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, which can increase both the 
frequency and size of BGP UPDATE messages.    
</t> 
</section> 
</section> 
<section title="SD-WAN Underlay Route Advertisement">
 <t>An Edge BGP Peer using BGP SD-WAN discovery advertises an SD-WAN Underlay Route whose NLRI is encoded as specified in Section 2.2.1. The route carries a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute containing an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV to advertise the detailed properties associated with the public-facing WAN port or ports and their associated IPsec tunnels. The SD-WAN Underlay Route carries control-plane information describing an SD-WAN WAN port and its tunnel properties; the SD-WAN NLRI is not itself installed as a route for forwarding user traffic. The Edge BGP Peer sends this information to its designated RR via a secure transport connection. Each BGP UPDATE containing an SD-WAN Underlay Route MUST include a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV. If an SD-WAN Underlay Route is received without the required Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute and SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV, the route MUST be handled as Treat-as-withdraw as specified in Section 2.6.3. 
</t>
 <t>
 The SD-WAN Hybrid tunnel TLV within the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute can include sub-TLVs for 
 Extended Port attribute (see Section 2.3.6) or IPsec information (see Section 2.3).  
 The IPsec information sub-TLVs include: IPsec SA ID, IPsec SA Rekey Counter, IPsec Public Key, 
 IPsec SA Proposal, and Simplified IPsec SA. 
 </t>
 <t>
 </t>
<section title="NLRI for SD-WAN Underlay Route">
<t>A new NLRI SAFI (SD-WAN SAFI=74) is introduced within the MP_REACH_NLRI Path Attribute of [RFC4760] for advertising the detailed properties of SD-WAN tunnels terminated at the WAN ports of the edge nodes. The SD-WAN SAFI uses the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute and Tunnel TLV/sub-TLV encodings defined in [RFC9012]. Because SAFI 74 is outside the AFI/SAFIs for which [RFC9012] defines applicability procedures, this document defines the use of the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with SAFI 74, including the associated next-hop, propagation, and validation procedures. This is a "typed" NLRI (similar to other "typed" NLRIs as described in [RFC7606]). The format is shown in figure 2.  
</t>
<t>For AFI/SAFI 1/74, the MP_REACH_NLRI Next Hop Network Address field MUST contain a 4-octet IPv4 address. For AFI/SAFI 2/74, it MUST contain a 16-octet IPv6 address. The Next Hop MUST contain a reachable address of the advertising SD-WAN edge node, typically its loopback address or SD-WAN Node ID.</t>
<t>
 <figure  anchor="SD-WAN NLRI Encode"  
          title="SD-WAN NLRI Encoding ">
        <artwork><![CDATA[  
+------------------+
|    Route Type    | 2 octets
+------------------+  
|     Length       | 2 octets
+------------------+   
|   Type Specific  |  
~ Value (Variable) ~  
|                  |  
+------------------+
]]></artwork>
</figure>
</t>
<t>where:
	<list style="hanging">
	<t hangText="Route Type:"> A 2-octet value that defines the encoding of the reminder of the SD-WAN the NLRI.
	</t>
	<t hangText="Length:">2 octets indicating the length of the value field in octets.</t>
	</list>
</t>
<t></t>
<t>This document defines the following SD-WAN Route type:</t>
     <t>
	<list style="hanging">
	 <t hangText="Route-Type = 1 (SD-WAN Tunnel Endpoint NLRI):"> For advertising the detailed properties of the SD-WAN 
	 tunnels terminated at the edge, where the transport network port can be uniquely identified by a 
	 tuple of three values (Port-Local-ID, SD-WAN-Color, SD-WAN Node ID). 
	 The SD-WAN NLRI Route Type =1 has the following encoding:
	<figure anchor="SD-WAN NLRI Route Type 1" title="SD-WAN NLRI Route Type 1">
           <artwork><![CDATA[  
     +------------------+
     |  Route-Type = 1  | 2 octets
     +------------------+
     |     Length       | 2 octets
     +------------------+
     |   Port-Local-ID  | 4 octets
     +------------------+
     |   SD-WAN-Color   | 4 octets
     +------------------+
     |  SD-WAN Node ID  | 4 or 16 octets
     +------------------+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
	</t>
	<t hangText="Length:">The value of the Length field for Route-Type 1 MUST be either 12 octets 
	(when the SD-WAN Node ID is an IPv4 address) or 24 octets (when the SD-WAN Node ID is an IPv6 address). 
	Any other value is invalid. Error handling for an invalid Length field is specified in Section 2.6.2..</t>
	<t hangText="Port-local-ID:"> SD-WAN edge node Port identifier, which is locally significant. 
	If the SD-WAN NLRI applies to multiple WAN ports, this field is zero.</t>
	<t hangText="SD-WAN-Color:"> identifies a group of Hybrid SD-WAN tunnels that may span multiple 
	SD-WAN logical tunnels co-located at the same site. The BGP Peer supporting SD-WAN uses this SD-WAN-Color 
	value to allow local policy to correlate client routes identified by the Color Extended Community 
	to a specific group of Hybrid SD-WAN tunnels or a specific set of underlay tunnels within the Hybrid 
    SD-WAN tunnel. If the SD-WAN-Color represents all tunnels at a site, it effectively serves as a site-level identifier. 
	If no matching SD-WAN-Color is found, the client route is not be forwarded over any SD-WAN tunnels. 
	However, local configuration MAY remove this restriction. </t>
	<t hangText="SD-WAN Node ID:"> This field carries the IPv4 or IPv6 address of the SD-WAN edge node (C-PE). 
	For IPv4 SD-WAN NLRI (AFI/SAFI 1/74), this field contains a 4-octet IPv4 address representing a /32 host address. 
	For IPv6 SD-WAN NLRI (AFI/SAFI 2/74), this field contains a 16-octet IPv6 address representing a /128 host address. 
	The SD-WAN Node ID identifies the IP address (usually the loopback address) used by the SD-WAN edge node to 
	advertise its tunnel attributes of a tunnel underlay route within the logical SD-WAN Hybrid logical tunnel. </t>
	</list>
	</t>
 </section>
 <section title="Validation of SD-WAN NLRI">

 <t> Upon receiving an SD-WAN NLRI, the following validation steps are performed:
 <list style="hanging"> 
 <t hangText ="- Route Type Validation:"> The Route Type field MUST be equal to 1. An SD-WAN NLRI with an unrecognized Route Type MUST be discarded and MUST NOT be propagated, as specified for typed NLRIs in Section 5.4 of [RFC7606].</t> 
 <t hangText="- Length Field Validation:">For Route type1, the Length field MUST contain a value of either 12 or 24 octets, as defined in Section 2.2.1. 
 Any other value renders the SD-WAN NLRI malformed. Error handling is specified in Section 2.6.2.</t>
 <t hangText="- SD-WAN Node ID:">If Length = 12, the SD-WAN Node-ID field contains an IPv4 Unicast address. 
 If Length = 24, the SD-WAN Node-ID field contains an IPv6 Unicast address. The SD-WAN Node-ID MUST be a valid unicast address. Otherwise, the NLRI must be discarded.</t>
</list> 
</t> 
 </section> 
 <section title="BGP Path Attributes attached to SD-WAN NLRI">
 <t>The Path Attributes attached to the SD-WAN NLRIs apply to the WAN-facing tunnel endpoints being advertised, 
 not to client routes. These attributes describe properties of the WAN ports (e.g., encapsulation, transport role, or color) 
 that may be used in establishing SD-WAN underlay tunnels between edge nodes. Client routes, 
 which represent customer prefixes, are propagated using separate BGP NLRIs (e.g., IPv4/IPv6 unicast or L3VPN), 
 with their own associated Path Attributes. The SD-WAN NLRI and client route NLRI are independent 
 but may be correlated by the receiving BGP speaker for tunnel selection and service mapping.
</t>
 </section> 
</section> 
 <section title="IPsec SA Property Sub-TLVs">
 <t> The IPsec SA Property Sub-TLVs defined in this section specify encodings that allow BGP UPDATE messages to carry IPsec-related parameters associated with SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnels to authorized peers. BGP does not establish, negotiate, derive, or maintain IPsec SAs. BGP validation of these Sub-TLVs is limited to their encoding and syntactic validity. The creation and operation of an IPsec SA, including algorithm validation, key derivation, SA state management, rekeying, and packet protection, are performed by the IPsec implementation according to [RFC4301] and, when IKEv2 is used, [RFC7296], together with local policy. While these Sub-TLV formats could potentially 
 be reused in other applications that require IPsec SA signaling over BGP, this document defines 
 their semantics and behavior specifically within the SD-WAN Edge Discovery framework. 
</t>
<t> If any sub-TLV is malformed, error handling MUST follow the procedure in Section 13 of <xref target="RFC9012"></xref>. 
</t>  
<t>To support key rotation (e.g., updating IPsec keys or parameters), the SD-WAN NLRI 
(identified by Port-Local-ID, SD-WAN-Color, and SD-WAN Node ID) can be re-advertised 
via a BGP UPDATE message containing updated IPsec SA information. In the centrally controlled SD-WAN model described in this document, IPsec SA parameters and keying material can be distributed to authorized SD-WAN edge nodes through the RR/Controller. Therefore, peer-to-peer key negotiation between SD-WAN edge nodes is not required by this mechanism. A deployment MAY use IKEv2 or another key-management mechanism instead.</t> 
 <section title="IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV">
<t>The IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV is used to reference one or more previously established 
IPsec SAs between SD-WAN nodes. This Sub-TLV carries one or more 32-bit Security 
Parameter Index (SPI) values assigned at the receiving node (i.e., the inbound SPI). 
When combined with the SD-WAN Node-ID (which identifies the underlay tunnel endpoint address), 
each SPI uniquely identifies an existing IPsec SA, consistent with the SA identification described in [RFC4301].</t>
<t>Multiple SPIs MAY be included within the Sub-TLV to reference multiple pre-established IPsec SAs available 
for the SD-WAN overlay. This enables advertisement of SA updates, key rotations, or 
operational state changes without resending full SA parameter sets, and allowing pairwise IPsec rekeying to proceed independently for each SA.</t>

<t>
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Name:"> IPsec SA ID</t>
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Code:"> 64 (IANA assigned) </t>
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Encoding:"> 
  <figure
    anchor="IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV"
    title="IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV">
     <artwork><![CDATA[  
 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 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|IPsec SA ID Sub|   Length      |  Reserved                     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                      IPsec SA Identifier #1                   |      
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                      IPsec SA Identifier #2                   |      
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                                                               |
~                                                               ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                      IPsec SA Identifier #n                   |      
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
    where: 	
	<list style="symbols">
	<t>IPsec SA ID (8 bits): 64(IANA Assigned). </t>  
	<t>Length (8 bits): Specifies the total length in octets of
            the value field (not including the Type and Length fields). 
			For the IPsec SA ID Sub-Type, the Length field MUST be 
			equal to 2 + 4 *(number of IPsec SA Identifier fields).
	</t>
	<t>Reserved: Reserved for future use. MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.</t>
	<t>A sequence of IPsec SA Identifier fields follows the reserved field. 	
	Each IPsec SA Identifier field is 4 octets long, and identifies a 
	pre-established IP security association. </t>
	</list> 
	</t> 
  <t hangText="Sub-TLV Error Handling:">An IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV whose Length field is not equal to 2 + 4 x (number of IPsec SA Identifier fields) is malformed and is handled according to [RFC9012]. </t>
 </list> 
</t>   
  </section>
 <section title="IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV"> 
 <t> The IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV carries rekey-related information associated with a specific IPsec Security Association (SA). The SA is identified by the 32-bit Security Parameter Index (SPI) carried in this Sub-TLV. Together with the IPsec protocol and destination address associated with the advertised tunnel endpoint, the SPI identifies the inbound IPsec SA as described in <xref target="RFC4301"/>.</t> 
 
 <t> The Rekey Counter and Nonce Data defined in this Sub-TLV are SD-WAN-specific fields. They are not IKEv2 protocol fields and do not require IKEv2 signaling. BGP carries these fields as part of the SD-WAN tunnel information but does not interpret them for route selection or BGP processing. </t>
 
 <t>
 <list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Name:"> IPsec SA Rekey Counter</t>
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Code:"> 67 (IANA assigned) </t>
 <t hangText="Sub-TLV Encoding:">
	<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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |SA-RekeyCounter|   Length      |  Reserved                     |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |   Reserved2   |       Nonce Length            |I|   Flags     |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                             Rekey                             |
 |                            Counter                            |
 +---------------------------------------------------------------+
 |                  IPsec SPI                                    |
 +---------------------------------------------------------------+
 |                                                               |
 ~                          Nonce Data                           ~
 |                                                               |
 +---------------------------------------------------------------+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
	where:
	<list style ="symbol"> 
 	<t>IP SA-Rekey Counter (8 bits): IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV Type = 67 (IANA assigned).</t>  
	<t>length (8 bits): Specifies the total length, in octets, of the Sub-TLV value field, excluding the Type and Length fields. The Length MUST equal 18 + Nonce Length. 
	</t>
	<t>Reserved (16 bits): Reserved for future use. The Reserved field MUST be set to zero and MUST be
	    ignored upon receipt.</t>
	<t>Reserved2 (8 bits): Reserved for future use. The Reserved field MUST be set to zero and MUST be
	    ignored upon receipt. </t> 
	<t> Nonce Length (16 bits): Indicates the length, in octets, of the Nonce Data. The Nonce Length MUST be between 8 and 237 octets, inclusive. A Nonce Length of at least 16 octets is RECOMMENDED. The upper bound ensures that the complete Sub-TLV value fits within the 255-octet limit imposed by the one-octet Sub-TLV Length field.
	</t>
	<t> I Flag: When set to 1, the I Flag indicates that the advertised information is associated with a new SA instance. When set to 0, it indicates an update associated with an existing SA instance. 
	</t> 
	<t>Flags (7 bits): Reserved for future use. These bits 
	    MUST be set to zero and MUST be ignored upon receipt.</t> 
	<t>Rekey Counter (64 bits): Carries an unsigned counter associated with rekeying of the identified IPsec SA. The Rekey Counter is opaque to BGP and is passed unchanged to the SD-WAN/IPsec implementation. BGP does not use this value for route selection, freshness determination, or replay detection. </t>
	<t>SPI: Carries the 32-bit Security Parameter Index of the IPsec SA. Together with the IPsec protocol and destination address associated with the advertised tunnel endpoint, the SPI identifies the inbound IPsec SA as described in <xref target="RFC4301"/>.</t>
	 <t>Nonce Data: Carries an SD-WAN-specific nonce associated with the advertised IPsec SA information. The nonce can be used by the receiving SD-WAN/IPsec implementation as a freshness value when processing SA information. Generation, storage, comparison, and replay handling of the nonce are outside the scope of BGP.</t>
    </list>
	</t>
  <t hangText="Sub-TLV Error Handling:"> The Sub-TLV is malformed if the Length field is not equal to 18 + Nonce Length, or if the Nonce Length is less than 8 or greater than 237 octets.</t> 
  <t> A malformed IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV is handled according to the procedures specified in <xref target="RFC9012"/>. </t>
 </list>
 </t>
 </section>
 <section title="IPsec Public Key Sub-TLV"> 
 <t>The IPsec Public Key Sub-TLV provides the Public Key exchange information and 
 the life span for the Diffie-Hellman Key. The encoding is shown in the figure below:</t> 
 
	<figure
    anchor="IPsec SA Public Key Sub-TLV diagram"
    title="IPsec SA Public Key Sub-TLV diagram">
     <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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |IPsec-PublicKey|   Length      |  Reserved                     |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | Key Exchange Method Group Num |          Reserved             |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       ~                       Key Exchange Data                       ~
       |                                                               |
       +---------------------------------------------------------------+
       |                            Duration                           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
	<t>where: 
    <list> 
	<t>IPSec-PublicKey (8 bits): Type value for Sub-TLV is 68 (IANA assigned).  </t>  
	<t>length (8 bits): The Length field MUST equal 10 + the Key Exchange Data length. Because the fixed fields occupy 10 octets, the Key Exchange Data MUST NOT exceed 245 octets.  
	</t>
	<t> Key Exchange Method Group Num (16 bits): identifies the key exchange method used to compute the Key Exchange Data. Values are taken from the IANA IKEv2 "Transform Type 4 - Key Exchange Method Transform IDs" registry. Additional information on the key exchange groups is provided in Appendix B of IKEv2 [RFC7296], [RFC5114], and [RFC5903] for elliptic-curve groups. </t>
	<t> Key Exchange data: This field contains a copy of the sender's Diffie-Hellman public value. Because the RFC 9012 sub-TLV Length field is one octet, the total value carried in this IPsec Public Key Sub-TLV is limited to 255 octets. Therefore, the encoded public value, together with the other fields in this Sub-TLV, MUST fit within this limit. Elliptic-curve Diffie-Hellman groups are RECOMMENDED because their public values are smaller; for example, Groups 19, 20, and 21 use public values of 64, 96, and 132 octets, respectively, as defined in [RFC5903]. If the selected Diffie-Hellman public value cannot fit within this Sub-TLV, the public key MUST be distributed by another mechanism, such as the SD-WAN controller or management system.  
    </t> 	
	<t> Duration (32 bits): a 4-octet value specifying the life span of the Diffie-Hellman key in seconds.  
	</t> 
	</list> 
	</t>
<t hangText="Sub-TLV Error Handling:"> An IPsec Public Key Sub-TLV is considered malformed 
if any of its fields do not conform to the encoding rules specified above. 
Malformed Sub-TLVs are handled according to [RFC9012].  
  </t>
 </section>
  <section title="IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV"> 
   <t>The IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV is used to advertise a set of cryptographic parameters 
   that define the proposal for establishing an IPsec SA. In the centrally controlled SD-WAN model described in this document, the participating SD-WAN edge nodes operate under coordinated administrative policy, reducing the need to advertise multiple alternative proposals for negotiation. Therefore, only one IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV is processed for a given SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV. 
   </t> 
   <t>
   <list style="hanging">
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Name:"> IPsec SA Proposal - Indicates IPsec Transform Attributes</t>
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Code:"> 69 (IANA assigned) </t>
   <t hangText="Each transform includes:"> </t>
   <t hangText=" -"> A Transform Type, which identifies the function being specified (e.g., encryption, integrity).</t>
   <t hangText=" -"> A Transform ID, which specifies the algorithm for that function.</t>
   <t hangText=" -"> Optional Transform Attributes, which provide additional algorithm-specific parameters when necessary. 
   </t>
   </list>
   </t>
   <t>
    The encoding is shown below: 
  	<figure
    anchor="IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV diagram"
    title="IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV diagram">
     <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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|  SA Proposal  |   Length      |       Reserved (16 bits)      |          
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    Transform Attr Length      |Transform Type |    Reserved-2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|     Transform ID              |          Reserved-3           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
~                        Transform Attributes                   ~
|                                                               |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
    where:
	<list> 
    <t>IPsec SA Proposal Sub-Type (8 bits): 69 (IANA assigned) </t>  
	<t>length (8 bits): Total length of the value field in octets (not including Type and Length fields). 
	This equals 10 + the Transform attribute length. 
	</t>
    <t>Reserved (16 bits): reserved for future use. MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.</t> 
	<t>Transform Attr Length (16 bits): length of the Transform Attributes field in octets. 
	</t>
	<t> Transform Type (8 bits): The function being specified. Transform Type values are defined in [RFC7296] 
	and IANA IKEv2 Transform Type registry. Valid types include: ENCR (1), PRF (2), INTEG (3), DH (4), and ESN (5).
	</t>
	<t>Reserved-2 (8 bits): Reserved for future use. MUST be set to zero when transmitted and ignored upon receipt. 
	Received values MUST be propagated without change.
    </t> 
	<t>Transform ID (16 bits): Identifies the algorithm for the corresponding Transform Type, as defined in [RFC7296]. 
	</t> 
	<t>Reserved-3 (16 bits): Reserved for future use. MUST be set to zero when transmitted and ignored upon receipt.
	 	Received values MUST be propagated without change.</t>	
    <t> Transform Attributes: This is a sequence of Transform attribute TLVs. 
	  Each transform attribute TLV is encoded as defined in [RFC7296] Section 3.3.5.</t>
	</list>
	The Transform Attributes field may be omitted if no additional parameters are required for the selected algorithm.</t>

  <section title="Sub-TLV Error Handling:">
  <t>
   An IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV is considered malformed if:
    <list style="hanging">
	<t hangText=" -">The Length field value does not match the actual length (Transform Attr Length + 10).  
	</t>
	<t hangText=" -">The Transform Attr Length field does not total length of all Transform attributes parsed. </t> 	
	<t hangText=" -">Any Transform Attribute TLV whose type, length or value field falls outside its valid range as specified in [RFC7296].</t>
	</list> 
	Malformed Sub-TLVs MUST be handled according to [RFC9012]. Additional content checks for the 
	IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV are described in Section 2.4 (for client routes) and Section 2.5 (for underlay routes). 
	</t> 
  </section>
  </section> 
  <section title="Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV">
  <t> The Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV provides a compact way to signal IPsec SA parameters in a centrally controlled SD-WAN environment where the SD-WAN Controller or management system pre-configures the participating SD-WAN nodes with the required IPsec algorithms, keying methods, and other security parameters. Because these parameters are configured consistently across the SD-WAN domain, this Sub-TLV does not carry all of the information required for IPsec negotiation. It carries the parameters and keying material needed to install and operate the applicable SA instance.</t>
   <t>
   <list style="hanging">
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Name:"> Simplified IPsec SA </t>
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Code:"> 70 (IANA assigned) </t>
    <t hangText="Sub-TLV Encoding:"> </t> 
   </list>
   </t>   
  	<figure
    anchor="Simplifed IPsec SA Sub-TLV diagram"
    title="Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV diagram">
     <artwork><![CDATA[  
     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |Sub-TLV type   |    Length     |             Reserved          |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    SA-Type    | IPsec Mode    |       algorithms              |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         Rekey Counter                                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | key1 length   |         Key 1                                 ~
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    | key2 length   |         Key 2                                 ~
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | nonce-length  |         Nonce                                 ~
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |        Duration                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
  <t> where:</t>
  <list style="hanging">
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV type (8 bits):">Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV type (70)[IANA assigned] </t> 
  <t hangText="Length (8 bits):"> Specifies the total length, in octets, of the Sub-TLV value field, excluding the Type and Length fields. The Length MUST equal 18 + Key 1 Length + Key 2 Length + Nonce Length. Therefore, the combined lengths of Key 1, Key 2, and Nonce MUST NOT exceed 237 octets. </t>
  <t hangText="Reserved (16 bits):"> Reserved for future use. 
	 MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
	 </t>
  <t hangText="SA-Type(8 bits):"> 
	<list style="symbol">
		<t>SA-Type = 1 means AH,</t> 
		<t>SA-Type = 2 means ESP</t> 

	</list>
	All other SA-Type values are invalid. 
  </t>
	<t hangText="IPsec Mode (8 bits):">
	<list style="symbol">
		<t>Mode = 1 indicates that the Tunnel mode is used.</t>
		<t>Mode = 2 indicates that the Transport mode is used.</t>
	</list>
	Only Mode values 1 and 2 are valid. All other modes are invalid. 
	</t>
	<t hangText="Algorithms (16 bits):"> Identifies the cryptographic algorithm used by the advertised SA. When SA-Type = 1 (AH), the Algorithm field identifies the AH integrity algorithm using the corresponding value from the IANA Integrity Algorithm registry. When SA-Type = 2 (ESP), the Algorithm field identifies the ESP encryption algorithm using the corresponding value from the IANA Encryption Algorithm registry.</t> 	

	<t hangText="Rekey Counter (4 octet):">  Carries an unsigned counter associated with key rotation for the advertised IPsec SA. The Rekey Counter identifies the key generation associated with the advertised keying material. Interpretation of the counter and selection of the active key are performed by the SD-WAN/IPsec implementation. The Rekey Counter is opaque to BGP.</t>
	<t hangText="key1 length (8 bits):"> Specifies the length, in octets, of the Key 1 field. The required key length is determined by the selected Algorithm and the configured IPsec security profile.</t>
	<t hangText="Public Key 1:"> Carries one generation of keying material for the advertised IPsec SA. The encoding and required length of the keying material are determined by the selected Algorithm and the configured IPsec security profile.</t>
	<t hangText="key2 length (8 bits):"> Specifies the length, in octets, of the Key 2 field. The required key length is determined by the selected Algorithm and the configured IPsec security profile.</t>
	<t hangText="Public Key 2:"> Carries an alternate generation of keying material for the advertised IPsec SA. Key 1 and Key 2 allow keying material for a new generation to be distributed while the previous generation remains available during rekeying. Selection and retirement of the active key generation are performed by the SD-WAN/IPsec implementation and are outside the scope of BGP.</t>
	<t hangText="nonce-length (8 bits):"> Specifies the length, in octets, of the Nonce field. The Nonce is an SD-WAN-specific value. The Nonce Length MUST be at least 8 octets. A Nonce Length of at least 16 octets is RECOMMENDED. The combined Key 1, Key 2, and Nonce lengths MUST satisfy the Sub-TLV Length constraint specified above.</t>
	<t hangText="Nonce:"> Carries an SD-WAN-specific nonce associated with the advertised IPsec SA information. Generation and processing of the nonce are performed by the SD-WAN/IPsec implementation and are outside the scope of BGP.</t>
	<t hangText="Duration (32 bits):"> Specifies the lifetime of the advertised IPsec SA in seconds. 
	</t> 
  </list>
  <t hangText="Sub-TLV Error Handling:"> A Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV is considered MALFORMED 
   if any of its fields are not properly encoded, do not conform to the specified value ranges above, or 
   contain invalid field lengths. Any MALFORMED Sub-TLV is processed according to <xref target="RFC9012"></xref>. 
   </t>
  </section>
 <section title="Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV">
   <t> The Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV advertises NAT-related properties associated with a public 
   Internet-facing WAN port on an SD-WAN edge node. This information enables peer SD-WAN nodes to 
   establish secure tunnels even when one or both peers are behind NAT devices.  
   An SD-WAN edge node may query a STUN server (Session Traversal Utilities for NAT [RFC8489]) 
   to determine its NAT properties, including its public IP address and public port number. 
   These properties are then advertised to peer nodes using the Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV.</t> 
   
   <t>In SD-WAN deployments, NAT devices may exist at one or both ends of the tunnel path. 
      The possible deployment scenarios include:
     	<list style="symbol">
		<t>Only one SD-WAN edge node is located behind a NAT device, while its peer is directly reachable.</t>
		<t>Both SD-WAN edge nodes are behind NAT devices (symmetric or independent NATs).</t>
		<t>The external address and port assigned to an edge node may change dynamically, either due to ISP address allocation or when traversing NAT devices that use dynamic address pools.</t>
	    </list>
    </t>
    <t>Because an SD-WAN edge node may have multiple WAN ports with independent NAT characteristics, 
	the NAT properties are associated with individual WAN ports and are advertised independently for each port using this Sub-TLV. 
	This per-port advertisement allows remote peers to construct appropriate NAT traversal parameters for each potential tunnel endpoint.</t>
    <t>Unlike pairwise NAT traversal mechanisms such as IKEv2 [RFC7296], in which NAT-related information is discovered between peers during tunnel establishment, the BGP-controlled SD-WAN architecture enables an SD-WAN edge node to advertise its NAT properties through the RR to authorized SD-WAN peers before individual tunnels are established. This avoids requiring the same NAT-related information to be discovered independently during the establishment of each SD-WAN tunnel and can reduce repeated parameter exchange in deployments where an SD-WAN edge establishes tunnels with many peers.</t>
  <t>
   <list style="hanging">
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Name:"> Extended Port Attribute</t>
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Code:"> 65 (IANA assigned) </t>
   <t hangText="Sub-TLV Encoding:"> The encoding is shown in the figure below:</t>
   </list>
  </t>  
  <t>
  <figure
    anchor="Extended Port Attribute  Sub-TLV"
    title="Extended Port Attribute  Sub-TLV">
     <artwork><![CDATA[  
     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |Type (65)      | Length        |Flags          |I|O|R|R|R|R|R|R|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | NAT Type      |  Encap-Type   |Trans networkID|     RD ID     |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                  Local  IP Address                            | 
    |        32-bits for IPv4, 128-bits for Ipv6                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                  Local  Port  |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Public IP                                      | 
    |        32-bits for IPv4, 128-bits for Ipv6                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Public Port    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    |               Extended Sub-Sub-TLV                            | 
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
	</t>
	<t>where:
	<list style="symbol">
		<t>Length: Specifies the total length, in octets, of the Sub-TLV value field, excluding the Type and Length fields. The Length MUST equal: 10 + Local-IP-Length + Public-IP-Length + the total encoded length of all included Extended Sub-Sub-TLVs. The Local-IP-Length is 4 octets when the I bit is 0 and 16 octets when the I bit is 1. The Public-IP-Length is 4 octets when the O bit is 0 and 16 octets when the O bit is 1.  </t>
		<t>Flags (16 bits):
			<list style="symbol">
		    <t>Flags field starts with 8 bits which are reserved for future use. 
			MUST be set to 0, and ignored upon reception.</t> 
			<t>I bit (C-PE port address or Inner address scheme):
			    <list> 
				<t>If set to 0, the Local IP Address field contains a 4-octet IPv4 address.</t> 
				<t>If set to 1, the Local IP Address field contains a 16-octet IPv6 address. </t>
				</list>
			</t>
			<t>O bit (Outer address scheme):
			    <list>
				<t>If set to 0, the Public IP Address field contains a 4-octet IPv4 address.</t> 
				<t>If set to 1, the Public IP Address field contains a 16-octet IPv6 address. </t>
				</list>
			</t>
			<t>R bits: reserved for future use. MUST be set to 0, and ignored upon reception.</t>
			</list>
		</t>
		<t>NAT Type (8 bits): an unsigned integer indicating the NAT behavior observed for this WAN port. 
		 The values are derived from the legacy NAT classification model described in RFC 8489 Section 5. The assigned values are: 
		  <list style="symbols"> 
		  <t>1: without NAT ;  </t>
		  <t>2: 1-to-1 static NAT; </t>
	      <t>3: Full Cone; </t> 
		  <t>4: Restricted Cone; </t>
		  <t>5: Port Restricted Cone; </t>
 		  <t>6: Symmetric; or </t> 
		  <t>7: Unknown (e.g. no response from the STUN server).</t>
		  </list>
		The NAT Type value is determined by the sender using NAT discovery procedures (e.g., STUN [RFC8489] with legacy tests [RFC8489])
		or local administrative configuration. The receiver is not required to verify NAT behavior but MUST validate 
		that the received NAT Type field is within the range 1-7. Values outside this range are considered invalid 
		and result in the Sub-TLV being treated as malformed.  
		</t>
		<t>Encap-Type (8 bits): An unsigned integer indicating the encapsulation type supported for this WAN port. 
		 The Encap-Type identifies the encapsulation protocol used within the IPsec payload when 
		 IPsec SA Sub-TLVs (IPsec SA ID, IPsec SA Rekey Counter, IPsec Public Key, IPsec SA Proposal, or Simplified IPsec SA) 
		 are present in the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel. This field is distinct from the Tunnel Type field in 
		 the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012]. The encapsulation types are: 
		  <list>
		  <t>Encap-Type=1: GRE;</t>
		  <t>Encap-Type=2: VxLAN;</t> 
		  </list>
		<t> Notes:</t> 
		<list>
		 <t>This document defines Encap-Type values 1 (GRE) and 2 (VXLAN). Additional values may be assigned in the future through the IANA registry. An unrecognized Encap-Type value does not by itself make the Sub-TLV malformed; however, an implementation MUST NOT use an encapsulation type that it does not support. The Encap-Type identifies the encapsulation protocol used within the IPsec payload when IPsec SA Sub-TLVs (IPsec SA ID, IPsec SA Rekey Counter, IPsec Public Key, IPsec SA Proposal, or Simplified IPsec SA) are present in the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel.</t>
		<t>The Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV does not support NAT traversal scenarios involving IPv4/IPv6 translation (e.g., NAT64 or 6to4).
		</t> 
		</list>
		</t> 
		<t>Trans NetworkID (Transport Network ID) (8 bits): An identifier assigned by the SD-WAN Controller to indicate the 
		transport network that this WAN port belongs to. All values from 0 to 255 are valid.</t>
		<t>RD ID: The Routing Domain ID is a globally unique identifier assigned to the routing domain associated with this WAN port. 
		All values from 0 to 255 are valid. 
		<list>
		<t>Some SD-WAN deployments may define multiple levels, zones, or regions that are represented as logical routing domains or transport 
		networks. Operational policies may govern whether SD-WAN Hybrid tunnels or underlay tunnels are allowed between nodes 
		in different logical routing domains.  The definition, distribution, and enforcement of such policies are outside the scope of this document.</t>
		</list>
		</t>
		<t>Local IP: The local or private IP address of the WAN port. The address family and field length are determined by the I bit. If I = 0, this field contains a 4-octet IPv4 address. If I = 1, this field contains a 16-octet IPv6 address.</t>
		<t>Local Port: The port number associated with the local IP address of the WAN endpoint. Together with the Local IP address, it identifies the local endpoint of the NAT mapping. A value of 0 indicates that no port number is specified or applicable. Valid values: 0x00 - 0xFFFFFFFF.
		</t>
		<t>Public IP: The public IP address of the WAN port after NAT processing. The address family and field length are determined by the O bit. If O = 0, this field contains a 4-octet IPv4 address. If O = 1, this field contains a 16-octet IPv6 address. If NAT is not used, this field MUST be set to all zeros. </t>
		<t>Public Port: The port number associated with the Public IP address after NAT processing. Together with the Public IP address, it identifies the public endpoint of the NAT mapping. If NAT is not used, this field MUST be set to zero. Otherwise, the value can be 0x01 to 0xFFFFFFFF.</t>
		<t>If NAT is not used for the WAN port, both the Public IP and Public Port fields MUST be set to zero. 
		If one field is set to zero and the other is non-zero, the Sub-TLV is considered malformed.</t>
		<t>Extended Sub-Sub-TLV: Carries additional information about the underlay networks.</t> 
	</list>
	</t>
  <list style="hanging">
  <t hangText="Sub-TLV Error Handling:"> If the Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV is malformed 
  (e.g., incorrect length, invalid address format, or unrecognized NAT type), it MUST be ignored per the procedures described in [RFC9012]. 
  </t>
  <t hangText="Multiple Sub-TLVs:">Multiple Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLVs are allowed. 
  If the informsation from multiple Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLVs is the same, the first one is processed, the rest is ignored.</t>
  </list>
  <section title="Extended Port Sub-Sub-TLV">
  <t>One Extended Sub-Sub-TLVs is specified in this document: Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV. 
  </t>
   <t> The Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV is an optional Sub-Sub-TLV used to advertise additional 
   transport characteristics for the WAN port, including connection type, physical port type, and 
   port bandwidth (e.g., LTE, DSL, Ethernet, and others). This information assists remote peers or 
   controllers in selecting optimal underlay paths when multiple WAN ports are available. The 
   Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV is only valid for the Tunnel SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV within the Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV.</t>

   <t hangText="Sub-Sub-TLV Name:">Underlay Network Type.</t>
   <t hangText="Sub-Sub-TLV Code:"> 1 (IANA Assigned). </t>
 
	<t hangText="Sub-TLV Encoding:"> The encoding is shown in the figure below:</t>   
	<figure
    anchor="Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV"
    title="Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV">
     <artwork><![CDATA[  
     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | UnderlayType  |      Length   |      Reserved                 | 
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |Connection Type|   Port Type   |        Port Speed             |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
		]]></artwork>
	</figure>
    <t>Where:
    <list style="hanging">
	  <t hangText="UnderlayType:"> Underlay Network Type (1 assigned by IANA) </t>
      <t hangText="Length:"> always 6 bytes</t>
      <t hangText="Reserved:"> 2-octet of reserved bits. It SHOULD be set to zero on
       transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.</t>
	  <t hangText="Connection Type:"> An unsigned integer indicating the connection type for this WAN port. Only a single value is carried per instance. The following values are defined:
			<list style="symbol">
			<t>1 = Wired</t>
			<t>2 = WIFI</t>
			<t>3 = LTE </t>
			<t>4 = 5G </t>
			<t>Values outside the range 1-4 are invalid and render the Sub-TLV malformed.</t>
		    </list>
	  </t>
	  <t hangText="Port Type:">An unsigned integer indicating the physical port type of the WAN interface. Only a single value is carried per instance. The following values are defined: 
			<list style="symbol">
			<t>1 = Ethernet </t>
			<t>2 = Fiber Cable </t>
			<t>3 = Coax Cable </t>
			<t>4 = Cellular </t>
			<t>This document defines Connection Type values 1 through 4. Additional values may be defined by future specifications and assigned through the IANA registry. Until then, values other than those defined by this document are unsupported. An implementation receiving an unsupported Connection Type value MUST NOT use that value for tunnel selection or establishment.</t> 
			</list>
	  </t>
	 <t hangText="Port Speed:">An unsigned 16-bit integer representing the port speed in megabits per second (Mbps). For example, a value of 1000 represents a port speed of 1000 Mbps (1 Gbps). The valid range is 1-65535. A Port Speed value of 0 is invalid and renders the Sub-TLV malformed.</t>
    </list> 
  </t>
  <t hangText="Sub-Sub-TLV Error Handling:">The Underlay Network Type Sub-Sub-TLV is MALFORMED if its encoding or length is invalid. This document defines the valid Connection Type and Port Type values listed above. Additional values may be defined by future specifications and assigned through the corresponding IANA registries. Until such values are defined, other values are invalid. If a MALFORMED Sub-Sub-TLV is contained in the Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV, then the Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV is also MALFORMED. Per <xref target="RFC9012"></xref>, a MALFORMED Sub-TLV is ignored.
   </t>

 </section>  
 </section>
</section> 
<section title="Procedure for Client Route Advertisements with SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel">
<t>Client routes with NLRI of AFI/SAFI IPv4 Unicast (1/1), IPv6 (2/1), L3VPN v4 Unicast
(1/128), and IPv6 L3VPN (2/128) that use the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type can be 
advertised using one of two mechanisms:</t>

 <list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Encapsulation Extended Community with SD-WAN SAFI:">In this approach, the 
client route is advertised using Encapsulation Extended Community with the SD-WAN Hybrid tunnel type. 
The detailed tunnel properties, such as IPsec SAs, WAN port attributes, 
NAT properties, and other parameters, are advertised separately via BGP UPDATE 
messages using the SD-WAN SAFI. The SD-WAN Node ID, carried as the NextHop in 
client route advertisements and as the SD-WAN Node ID in SD-WAN SAFI underlay route advertisements, 
enables receiving BGP nodes to associate client routes with the correct underlay tunnels.</t>
<t hangText="Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute:">Alternatively, client routes UPDATEs can include all 
tunnel-related information directly in the same BGP UPDATE using the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute. 
The SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV specifies the outer tunnel through which the underlay tunnel identified 
by SD-WAN Node ID passes.  This outer tunnel is identified by the Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV. When the BGP Next Hop is used as the tunnel endpoint, the Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV is encoded with Address Family 0 as specified in [RFC9012]. </t>
</list>

<t>The Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute based approach, which includes all 
tunnel attributes within route advertisement, can simplify the processing at the receiving nodes. 
However, it may lead to significant BGP attribute overhead, particularly when 
multiple IPsec SAs are eligible to carry the same client route.
In contrast, the Encapsulation Extended Community approach 
(the "barebones" method defined in [RFC9012]) combined with SD-WAN SAFI separates 
tunnel attributes from route Updates, allows tunnel properties to be 
reused across multiple client routes.</t>
 
<t>The SD-WAN Secure Links topology is supported using unicast IPv4 and IPv6 routes. 
L3VPN topologies, on the other hand, support the formation of Secure SD-WAN L3VPNs as 
described in [SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE] and MEF specifications [MEF 70.1] and [MEF 70.2].</t>

<section title="SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type in Encapsulation Extended Community">  
<t>When client routes are advertised using the Encapsulation Extended Community 
with the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type, as specified in [RFC9012], the Encapsulation 
Extended Community identifies the tunnel type, and the NextHop field in the 
BGP UPDATE serves as the Tunnel Egress Endpoint. Validation of the Tunnel Egress 
Endpoint follows the procedures defined in Sections 13 of [RFC9012], as applied to the NextHop.</t>
<t>
The Color Extended Community is used to associate a client route with its eligible underlay tunnels. 
The Color value in the client route identifies the set of underlay tunnels, previously advertised 
with the same Color via SD-WAN SAFI, that may be used to transport the traffic. 
This enables SD-WAN ingress nodes or controllers to apply path selection policies 
based on performance, cost, or service requirements.
</t>
</section> 
<section title="SD-WAN Hybrid Type in Tunnel Attributes via Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute">
<t>When client routes are advertised using the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type, the following procedures apply for validating the BGP UPDATE message:</t>

<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="1. Check for Well-formed SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV:"> For Client Routes, the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV and its Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV are validated and handled according to [RFC9012]. MALFORMED and unrecognized Sub-TLVs are handled according to [RFC9012]. The SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV processes only the first instance of each Sub-TLV, except for the IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV. Multiple IPsec SA ID Sub-TLVs MAY be processed if their IPsec SA Identifiers are unique. If a subsequent IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV contains an identifier already advertised in an earlier instance, that Sub-TLV is ignored and not propagated.
</t>
<t hangText="2. Validate Tunnel Egress Endpoint: "> Per [RFC9012] validation procedures for a
Tunnel Egress Endpoint.  Note: The Tunnel Egress Endpoint represents the outer tunnel through which 
the underlay tunnels specified by the SD-WAN NLRI operate.  The tunnel link 
MAY be active or inactive. 
</t>
<t hangText="3. Check for Multiple SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLVs "> Multiple unique 
SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLVs MAY be included in the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, but
duplicate SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLVs should be ignored silently.  Optionally, duplicate 
SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLVs MAY be logged. 
</t>
<t hangText="4. Validate each NLRI:"> Local policy is run to validate routes.  </t>
<t hangText="5. Validate Next Hop:"> The Next Hop MUST be be reachable via the tunnel.</t>
</list>

</section> 
<section title="Client Routes Carried Over Multiple SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnels"> 
<t>When a client route is advertised with the Encapsulation Extended Community 
that identifies the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel Type, the route may also include a 
Color Extended Community (Color-EC). This combination allows the route to 
be carried over multiple underlay tunnels that were previously advertised, each with the same Color value. 
</t>
<t>The Color-EC serves as a correlation mechanism: all underlay tunnels that have been advertised 
(via SD-WAN SAFI) with the same Color value are considered eligible to carry the traffic 
for the client route. This approach supports flexible path selection and tunnel diversity while avoiding the need to enumerate each tunnel per route.</t>
<t>This model is especially useful when:</t>
	<list style="symbol">
	<t>A site has multiple available IPsec tunnels or WAN links.</t>
	<t>A centralized controller or ingress SD-WAN edge node must select the optimal tunnel for forwarding based on performance, policy, or service constraints.</t>
	</list>

<t>The tunnel attributes, including IPsec parameters, NAT traversal info, 
and WAN port properties, are conveyed separately via SD-WAN SAFI updates. 
This keeps client route updates minimal, allowing multiple routes to reference the 
same tunnel attributes by using the Color-EC.</t>
</section> 
 <section title="SD-WAN VPN ID in Control Plane">  
 <t>In a BGP-controlled SD-WAN network, the VPN ID distinguishes client VPNs and ensures route separation. It is conveyed in client route UPDATEs as follows:</t>
	<list style="symbol">
	<t>For IPv4/IPv6 Unicast (AFI/SAFI = 1/1 or 2/1), client routes received from different client-facing ports may be configured to belong to different VPNs when traversing the SD-WAN network. The Route Target Extended Community [RFC4360] SHOULD be included in the BGP advertisement to identify the VPN associated with each client route. Remote SD-WAN edge nodes use the Route Target to associate the received client route with the corresponding VPN forwarding context. If all client routes belong to a single VPN, the Route Target MAY be omitted.</t>
	<t>For VPN-IPv4/VPN-IPv6 routes (AFI/SAFI = 1/128 or 2/128), the Route Distinguisher is part of the BGP NLRI and distinguishes otherwise identical prefixes belonging to different VPNs. The Route Target controls VPN membership and route import/export policy. Overlapping prefixes belonging to different VPNs therefore use VPN-IPv4/VPN-IPv6 routes with distinct Route Distinguishers.</t>
    </list>
 
 </section>
  <section title="SD-WAN VPN ID in Data Plane">  
  <t>In the data plane, client traffic belonging to different VPNs MUST remain distinguishable while traversing the SD-WAN network. The method used to carry the VPN identifier depends on the encapsulation:
	<list style ="symbol">
	<t>For MPLS segments, an MPLS label is used to distinguish traffic belonging to different VPNs according to the applicable MPLS VPN procedures.</t>
	<t>For IPsec segments, the VPN identifier is carried within the encapsulation protected by IPsec. For GRE encapsulation, the GRE Key field is used to identify the VPN. For VXLAN encapsulation, the VNI (Virtual Network Identifier) is used to identify the VPN.</t>
	</list>
  </t>
 </section>
</section>
 <section title="Procedure for SD-WAN Underlay Routes with SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV ">
 <t>Underlay tunnel routes in a BGP-controlled SD-WAN network are advertised using the SD-WAN SAFI, 
 with the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute carrying a SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV.
The Tunnel Egress End Point Sub-TLV (assumed or sent) indicates the other 
tunnel through which these underlay tunnels operate.  
 </t>
 <t>Remote nodes use the SD-WAN information carried in the SD-WAN SAFI, together with the applicable Color and local SD-WAN policy, to associate Client Routes with the tunnel attributes advertised by the corresponding SD-WAN edge nodes. The SD-WAN Node ID identifies an individual SD-WAN edge node, while the SD-WAN-Color identifies a group of eligible SD-WAN tunnels. Tunnels associated with the same SD-WAN-Color MAY terminate on different WAN ports or different SD-WAN edge nodes. This enables multiple SD-WAN edge nodes to provide connectivity for the same Color group, subject to local policy. The BGP Next Hop identifies a reachable address of the advertising SD-WAN edge node and is not required to equal the SD-WAN Node ID.</t>
 <t>Normal BGP best-path selection applies when multiple paths for the same SD-WAN NLRI are received; the SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV and its Sub-TLVs do not participate in best-path selection. The RR reflects authorized SD-WAN Underlay Routes within the SD-WAN administrative domain according to [RFC4456].</t>
<section title ="SD-WAN Underlay Route without Encapsulation Extended Community">
<t>The SD-WAN Hybrid NLRI MUST be accompanied by the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, and MUST NOT be accompanied by an Encapsulation Extended Community.</t>
</section>
 <section title="Underlay Route with a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute">
 <t>
 The procedure for processing underlay routes follows the following steps:</t>
 <list style="hanging">
 <t hangText="1. Check for Well-Formed SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV:">
 A SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV is well-formed using only Sub-TLVs valid for association 
 with the underlay Route (see section 2.1). The IPsec SA ID
  sub-TLVs MAY have multiple instances of the sub-TLV if the IPsec SA Identifiers are 
  unique, but if the IPsec SA Identifiers are not unique the second sub-TLV is ignored
  and not propagated. If multiple Extended Port Sub-TLVs exist, the TLVs
  must be validated in step 4.  For all other valid Sub-TLVs (see section 2.1), 
  only the first instance of a Sub-TLV is processed; subsequent ones are ignored.
  </t>
 <t hangText="2. Validate Tunnel Egress Endpoint:"> The Tunnel Egress Endpoint validation 
  is done per [RFC9012] rules either on the Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV received in the UPDATE
  or an "assumed" Tunnel Egress Endpoint if no Tunnel Egress Endpoint Sub-TLV 
  exists in the TLV (see section 2.1). Practically, the outer tunnel group either 
  identifies a specific WAN interface or (in the case of the "assumed" Tunnel Egerss Endpoint)
  the remote SD-WAN edge node at which the outer SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel terminates. 
 </t>
 <t hangText="3. Validate Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV(s):"> As described in Section 2.3.6, 
 each Extended Port Attribute sub-TLV describes the properties of a single WAN port. 
 Therefore, multiple Extended Port sub-TLVs may be present when the SD-WAN edge node has multiple WAN ports.
  Each Sub-TLV MUST be validated for correct encoding and field values according to Section 2.3.6.
If an Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV is malformed, it MUST be handled according to Section 13 of [RFC9012] and Section 2.6.1 of this document. </t>
 <t hangText="4. Validate each NLRI:"> Each typed NLRI in the SD-WAN Underlay MUST be well-formed, 
 meaning it conforms to the structure defined in Section 2.2.1,  including correct field lengths and ordering. 
 A MALFORMED NLRI MUST be discarded; implementations MAY log an error.  
 </t>
 <t hangText="5. Validate Next Hop:"> The MP_REACH_NLRI Next Hop MUST satisfy the encoding requirements specified in Section 2.2.1 and identify a reachable address of the advertising SD-WAN edge node. The SD-WAN Underlay Route carries tunnel-control information and is not installed as a forwarding route for user traffic.
 </t>
 </list>
 
 </section> 
 <section title="Underlay Routes with Port-Local-ID of Zero">
 <t> As specified in Section 2.2.1, a Route Type 1 NLRI includes the tuple (Port-Local-ID, SD-WAN-Color, SD-WAN Node ID). The Port-Local-ID field MAY be set to zero to indicate that the NLRI applies to all WAN ports on the identified SD-WAN node, effectively representing tunnel attributes at the node level rather than a specific port.</t>

 <t>When Port-Local-ID = 0, the receiving BGP speaker SHOULD apply local policy to determine how to associate client routes with underlay tunnels. This local policy may prefer tunnels from specific SD-WAN nodes, or choose among SD-WAN Colors based on administrative preference, link type, path performance, or service-level objectives. The exact selection logic is implementation-specific.</t>

 <t>It is valid for multiple such node-level NLRIs to be received, each advertising different SD-WAN Colors for the same node. For example, the following three NLRIs may be received (within one or more UPDATE messages): 
<list>
<t> Port-Local-ID (0), SD-WAN-Color (10), SD-WAN Node ID (192.0.2.2),
</t> 
<t> Port-Local-ID (0), SD-WAN-Color (20), SD-WAN Node ID (192.0.2.2), and
</t>
<t> Port-Local-ID (0), SD-WAN-Color (30), SD-WAN Node ID (192.0.2.2).
</t>
</list>
These indicate that node 192.0.2.2 supports multiple tunnel groups, each classified by a different SD-WAN Color. For example, these Colors may correspond to service tiers such as gold, silver, and bronze. The SD-WAN-Color field is used to correlate underlay tunnels with client routes that carry a matching Color Extended Community. If no match is found, the client route may not be forwarded over any SD-WAN tunnel. 
</t>
 </section>
<section title="Multiple Tunnels Associated with One SD-WAN Underlay Route">
<t>An underlay tunnel passes through only one SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel.  Therefore, 
if there are more than one SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV within a single 
Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, the first is processed and the subsequent 
SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLVs are ignored.  
</t>
</section> 
 </section>
 
 <section title="Error handling">
 <t>This section specifies the error-handling procedures for validation failures identified by the procedures in Sections 2.4 and 2.5. It covers Tunnel Encapsulation signaling and SD-WAN Underlay Route errors. 
</t>
<t>Section 2.4 specifies the procedures for Client Routes, and Section 2.5 specifies the procedures for SD-WAN Underlay Routes.  
</t>
<section title="Error handling for Tunnel Encapsulation Signaling">
<t> For Client Routes, error handling for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute follows Section 13 of [RFC9012]. For SD-WAN Underlay Routes using SAFI 74, error handling for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute and its Sub-TLVs is defined by this document. Sub-TLVs that are not applicable to SAFI 74 MUST be ignored and MAY be removed when the route is propagated.</t>

<t>A malformed Sub-TLV within an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV MUST be handled according to Section 13 of [RFC9012]. Unless explicitly specified otherwise in this document, the malformed Sub-TLV is treated as an unrecognized Sub-TLV and ignored; it does not cause the entire SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV or the associated route to be withdrawn.
</t>
<t>For Client Routes carrying a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV, the IPsec Sub-TLVs (IPsec SA ID, IPsec SA Rekey Counter, IPsec Public Key, IPsec SA Proposal, and Simplified IPsec SA) MAY be included. Malformed Sub-TLVs are handled according to [RFC9012].  
</t> 
<t> If multiple instances of the IPsec Rekey Counter, IPsec Public Key, IPsec Proposal, and 
Simplified IPsec are received within a SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV , only the first is processed.  
The second instance is ignored and not propagated.  The IPsec SA ID MAY have multiple 
copies, but the IPsec SA Identifiers sent in the second sub-TLV MUST be different
than any in the first IPsec SA ID sub-TLV. 
</t>
<t>If multiple instances of the Extended Port sub-TLV are received, the local 
policy MUST determine which is to be used. 
</t>
 </section> 
 <section title="Error Handling for NLRI">
 <t>
The SD-WAN NLRI [AFI/SAFI = 1/74 or 2/74] utilizes a Route Type field to describe the format of the NLRI. This specification defines Route Type 1. An NLRI with an unsupported Route Type MUST be discarded and MUST NOT be propagated to other peers. The implementation MAY log an error upon reception of an unsupported Route Type.</t>
<t>If a recognized SD-WAN NLRI is malformed but its Length field still allows the receiver to determine where that NLRI ends and the next NLRI begins, the affected NLRI MUST be handled as Treat-as-withdraw according to [RFC7606].
Error handling for other malformed SD-WAN NLRIs follows the BGP UPDATE error-handling procedures specified in [RFC7606].</t>
<t>If the MP_REACH_NLRI Next Hop field for an SD-WAN Underlay Route has an invalid encoding or length such that the NLRI field cannot be reliably located, the error MUST be handled according to the applicable session-reset or AFI/SAFI-disable procedures specified in [RFC7606]. 
</t>
<t>Local configuration and policy MUST carefully constrain 
the SD-WAN-NLRI, tunnels, and IPsec security associations
to create a "walled garden".  
</t>

 </section> 
 <section title="SD-WAN NLRI and Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute">
 <t> The SD-WAN NLRI (AFI/SAFI=1/74 or 2/74) MUST be paired with a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute containing an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV. If the SD-WAN NLRI exists in a BGP UPDATE without a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute containing an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel TLV, the NLRI is considered malformed and the Treat-as-withdraw approach specified in [RFC7606] MUST be used.  
 </t>
 <t>TThe SD-WAN NLRI MUST NOT be paired with an Encapsulation Extended Community. If an SD-WAN NLRI is paired with an Encapsulation Extended Community rather than a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, the SD-WAN NLRI is considered malformed and the Treat-as-withdraw approach specified in [RFC7606] MUST be used.
</t>
 </section>
</section>  
 </section> 
 <section title="Operational Consistency and Tunnel Validation"> 
 <t>Unlike MPLS VPN whose PE nodes are all controlled by the network operators, 
 SD-WAN edge nodes can be installed anywhere, in shopping malls, in 3rd party Cloud DCs [Net2Cloud], etc.</t> 
 <t>It is essential to ensure that advertisements from an SD-WAN edge node are legitimate. 
 The RR, which maintains policy information about which SD-WAN nodes are authorized to 
 communicate, MUST verify that the advertising BGP speaker is permitted to originate 
 SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel information before reflecting such routes to other peers.</t>   
 <section title="Detecting Misaligned Tunnels"> 
 <t>It is critical that a SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel forwards traffic in accordance with 
 local policy, taking into account the client route attributes, tunnel ingress
 and egress endpoints, and the associated security parameters.</t>
 <t>To maintain correctness and security, both the RR and BGP speakers SHOULD validate 
 that the client routes and associated tunnel information are consistent with expected configurations. 
 This includes verifying that: 
 <list style ="symbol">
 <t>The NextHop in the client route update matches a known SD-WAN Node ID.</t>
 <t>The tunnel's egress endpoints are reachable and authorized.</t>
 <t>The advertised SD-WAN Color in the underlay NLRI matches the 
 Color Extended Community attached to the client route.</t>
 </list>
 </t>
 </section> 
 <section title="IPsec Attributes Mismatch"> 
 <t>Each SD-WAN node (e.g., a C-PE) can advertise its IPsec-related attributes 
 to remote peers using Sub-TLVs within the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, 
 in one of the following three forms, to support the establishment of IPsec SAs: 
 <list style="symbols">
<t>Identifiers of a pre-established IPsec SA, carried in IPsec SA ID Sub-TLV.  
</t>  
<t>a simplified set of security parameters for setting up a IPsec SA, such as 
Transform type, IPsec Mode, AH/ESP Algorithms, rekey counter, 
2 public keys, nonce, and duration, carried in the Simplified IPsec SA Sub-TLV.  
</t>
<t>A flexible representation of IPsec parameters, where the Nonce, Public Key, 
and SA Proposal are individually specified and carried in the 
IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV, IPsec Public Key Sub-TLV, and IPsec SA Proposal Sub-TLV, respectively.
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>For existing IPsec SAs, an SD-WAN node that receives the advertisement can simply use one of the existing SAs to forward traffic for the associated client routes. If multiple SAs are available for a given client route, local policy on the receiving SD-WAN node MAY determine which SA is selected. 
</t>
<t>When parameters carried in these Sub-TLVs are used to establish a new IPsec SA, the receiving SD-WAN node passes the advertised parameters to its IPsec function. The IPsec implementation determines whether the advertised transforms and algorithms are compatible with local configuration and performs SA establishment according to [RFC4301] and, when IKEv2 is used, [RFC7296]. These attributes, received via the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, provide the parameters associated with establishing the IPsec tunnel between local and remote WAN ports. BGP itself does not perform IPsec negotiation, compatibility checking, or SA establishment. If the IPsec implementation cannot use the advertised parameters, this does not by itself make the BGP advertisement malformed.</t>

<t>The C-PE devices do not attempt to negotiate IPsec SA parameters or transform sets with remote peers. Instead, the configurations must match as advertised. If there is a mismatch, either in the simple IPsec SA identifiers or in the detailed transform parameters, no tunnel is established. Implementations MAY discard incompatible proposals or log them for operational visibility. 
</t>

<section title="Example creation of IPsec SA over SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel">
<t>This section provides an example illustrating how an IPsec SA is established over an SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel. Assume an IPsec tunnel is to be created between port P2 (198.51.100.10) on C-PE1 and port P2 (192.0.2.1) on C-PE2.</t>
 <t>To establish this tunnel, C-PE1 must advertise the following attributes required for setting up the IPsec SA:</t>
<t> 
 <list style="symbols">
 <t>NextHop: 198.51.100.10</t>
 <t>SD-WAN Node ID: 192.0.2.1</t>
 <t>SD-WAN-Color: 1502</t> 
 <t>Tunnel Encap Attr (Type = SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel) - 
	<list style="symbols">
	<t>Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV containing
	  <list>
	   <t>Transport Sub-Sub-TLV - with information on ISP. </t>
      </list>
    </t>	
	<t>IPsec information for detailed information about the ISP</t>
	<t>IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV,</t> 
	<t>IPsec SA Public Key Sub-TLV,</t>
	<t>Proposal Sub-TLV (type = ENCR, transform ID = 1) 
	  <list>
	  <t>type: ENCR </t>
	  <t>Transform ID: 1 </t> 
	  <t>Tranform attributes = trans 1 [from RFC7296]</t>
	  </list>
    </t>
	<t>No Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV 
	   <list>
	   <t>Without a Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV, the
	      SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel processing treats this 
		  as though a Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV with 
		  an AFI of 0 has been received. Per [RFC9012]
		  this assumes a tunnel egress endpoint of 
		  the NextHop value of 198.51.100.10.
		  </t>
		</list>
		</t> 
    </list>
 </t>
 </list>
</t> 
<t>C-PE2 needs to advertise the following attributes for establishing the IPsec SA:
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Next Hop:"> 192.0.2.1</t>
<t hangText="SD-WAN Node ID:"> 192.0.2.2</t>
<t hangText="SD-WAN-Color:"> 1500 </t>
<t hangText="Tunnel Encap Attr (Type=SD-WAN)">
	<list style="symbols">
	<t>Extended Port Attribute Sub-TLV
	  <list>
	  <t>Transport Sub-Sub-TLV - with information on ISP. </t>
      </list>
	</t>
	<t>IPsec SA Rekey Counter Sub-TLV, </t>
	<t>IPsec SA Public Key Sub-TLV,</t>
	<t>IPSec Proposal Sub-TLV with 
  	  <list>
      <t> transform type: ENCR </t>  
	  <t> Transform ID = 1 </t>
	  <t> Transform attributes = trans 2 </t> 
	  </list>
	</t>
	<t>No Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV 
	   <list>
	   <t>Without a Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV, the
	      SD-WAN Hybrid Tunnel processing treats this 
		  as though a Tunnel Egress EndPoint Sub-TLV with 
		  an AFI of 0 has been received. Per [RFC9012]
		  this assumes a tunnel egress endpoint of 
		  the NextHop value of 192.0.2.1. 
		  </t>
		</list>
		</t> 	
    </list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>As there is no matching transform between the WAN ports P2 and P2 in C-PE1 and C-PE2, 
respectively, no IPsec Tunnel will be established.</t>
 </section>
 </section> 
 </section>
 
 <section title = "Manageability Considerations">
 <t>The BGP-based signaling mechanisms described in this document are primarily intended to 
 enable SD-WAN edge nodes to advertise underlay transport and tunnel parameters to their RR. 
 These parameters, once received, can be monitored and validated using existing BGP monitoring 
 tools such as BMP or route policy inspection frameworks. Operators SHOULD implement logging 
 and alerting mechanisms for cases where inconsistent or malformed Sub-TLVs are received, as specified in Section 2.6. 
 Misaligned parameters, such as mismatched IPsec SA IDs or invalid NAT indicators, 
 should trigger operational alerts to aid troubleshooting.
</t>
<t> No new MIB modules or YANG models
 are introduced in this document, but implementations are expected to expose relevant state 
 (e.g., tunnel type, advertised properties) via standard operational interfaces. 
 The secure-transport requirements for BGP sessions carrying the SD-WAN information defined in this document are specified in Section 1.</t>
 </section>
 
  <section title="Security Considerations"> 
 <t>This document defines BGP extensions for SD-WAN edge nodes to advertise their attributes for establishing IPsec SAs and underlay tunnel attributes, typically via a RR that is part of the SD-WAN Controller, which then propagates them to authorized SD-WAN peers. As described in Sections 1 and 3, the RR/Controller maintains the authorization policy for the SD-WAN domain and verifies that an advertising SD-WAN edge is authorized to originate the corresponding SD-WAN tunnel information before reflecting it to other peers. These BGP UPDATEs may contain sensitive information such as public keys, IPsec proposals, and nonces. In deployments where SD-WAN edge nodes communicate with the RR over public or untrusted networks, BGP SHOULD be run over TCP-AO secure transport that provides authentication and integrity for this data.
 </t>
 <t>Some network operators running SD-WAN edge over public or untrusted networks may require confidentiality in addition to authentication and integrity. In such deployments, a mechanism providing confidentiality, such as IPsec [RFC4301], can be used to protect the path between the SD-WAN edge and the RR.
</t>
<t>
These two sets of secure transport technologies for BGP provide different levels of
protection against tampering or interception.  These secure transport connections are 
needed to protect all fields, including cryptographic
 attributes, from tampering or interception. Without such protection, 
 the system maybe vulnerable to spoofed tunnel attributes, unauthorized 
 route injections, or replayed IPsec setup information.</t>  

<t> As specified in Section 2.3, BGP only distributes IPsec-related parameters; IPsec SA establishment and operation are performed by the IPsec implementation according to [RFC4301] and, when IKEv2 is used, [RFC7296].</t>

 <t>
 In closed or "walled garden" deployments, where SD-WAN edge nodes and the RR are within a trusted and secured environment, the risk of interception or tampering may be reduced. However, the peer-authentication and integrity requirements specified in Section 1 still apply.
 </t>
 <t>
 Regardless of the transport used, BGP policy enforcement remains critical. 
 The RR SHOULD apply strict filtering and policy controls to validate that
 only authorized SD-WAN edge nodes advertise specific Node IDs, Route Targets,
 or VPN identifiers. While route origin validation via RPKI helps, it does not
 cover SD-WAN-specific fields like Tunnel attributes or SA proposals. Local policies,
 when misconfigured, may introduce vulnerabilities; therefore, policy application 
 points SHOULD be carefully audited.
 </t>
 <t>Many of the general BGP security risks discussed here are also covered in [RFC4271], [RFC4272], and [RFC9012]. This document inherits those considerations and introduces no new cryptographic requirements beyond what is described for securing BGP transport and validating the correctness of SD-WAN tunnel attribute exchanges.</t>

<t>This specification does not define deployments across fully untrusted networks, but if such environments are used, strong transport security becomes a MUST, and additional validation mechanisms may be required to maintain SD-WAN tunnel and routing integrity. This document does not analyze the consequences of compromise or misconfiguration of the RR/Controller, the forward-secrecy properties of IPsec SAs established using parameters distributed by BGP, the control-plane impact of large-scale IPsec rekeying, or provide a general comparison with alternative mechanisms for SD-WAN discovery or IPsec SA establishment. 
 </t>
 </section>
 
  <section title="IANA Considerations"> 
   <section title="SD-WAN SAFI"> 
	<t>IANA has assigned SAFI = 74 as the SD-WAN SAFI.</t>
   </section>
    <section title="Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Tunnel Type"> 
	<t>IANA is requested to assign a type from the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Tunnel Types 
	registry in the Border Gateway Protocol Tunnel Encapsulation Group 
	as follows [RFC8126]:</t>
	     <artwork><![CDATA[  
 Value   Description    Reference
-----   ------------   ---------
 25	  SD-WAN-Hybrid   (this document)
		]]></artwork>
	</section>
	  <section title="Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLV Types"> 
	  <t>IANA has previously assigned the following Sub-TLV Types in the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLVs registry in the Border Gateway Protocol Tunnel Encapsulation Group. IANA is requested to update the descriptions and references for these existing assignments as follows:</t>
	 <artwork><![CDATA[  
   Value   Type Description            Reference     Section 
   -----   -----------------------     ------------- -------
    64	IPsec SA ID                    This document  2.3.1
    65	Extended Port Attribute        This document  2.3.6
    67	IPsec SA Rekey Counter         This document  2.3.2
    68	IPsec Public Key               This document  2.3.3 
    69	IPsec SA Proposal              This document  2.3.4
    70	Simplified IPsec               This document  2.3.5
		]]></artwork>
	 
	  <t>IANA is requested to return the existing value 66 assignment in the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLVs registry to the unassigned pool.</t>
	 </section>
    <section title="SD-WAN Edge Discovery NLRI Route Types"> 
	<t>IANA is requested to create a new registry titled
	"SD-WAN Edge Discovery NLRI Route Types" under the
	"Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group. The allocation policy 
	for this registry shall be IETF Review (as defined in RFC 8126):</t>
	     <artwork><![CDATA[  
 Value   Description                           Reference
-----   ------------                           ---------
  1	  SD-WAN Tunnel Endpoint NLRI Route Type   (this document)
  
  Values 2-65535 are Unassigned.
  
		]]></artwork>
	</section>
	
	<section title = "SD-WAN Extended Port Encapsulation Types">
	<t>IANA is requested to create a new registry titled 
	"SD-WAN Extended Port Encapsulation Types" under the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Group.</t>
	 <artwork><![CDATA[  
   Value   Type Description            Reference       
   -----   -----------------------     ------------- 
    0	   Reserved                    This document   
    1	   GRE                         This document 
    2	   VXLAN                       This document   
    3~255  Unassigned        
	]]></artwork>	
	</section>
	
	<section title = "SD-WAN Extended Port Connection Types">
	<t>IANA is requested to create a new registry titled "SD-WAN Extended Port Connection Types" 
	under the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Group.</t>
  <artwork><![CDATA[  
   Value   Type Description            Reference       
   -----   -----------------------     ------------- 
    0	   Reserved                    This document   
    1	   Wired                       This document 
    2	   WIFI                        This document
    3	   LTE                         This document
    4	   5G                          This document
    5~254  Unassigned
	255    Reserved for Experimental Use
	]]></artwork>	
	</section>
	
	<section title = "SD-WAN Extended Port Physical Port Types">
	<t>IANA is requested to create a new registry titled
	"SD-WAN Extended Port Physical Port Types" under the
	BGP Tunnel Encapsulation group.</t>
	 <artwork><![CDATA[  
   Value   Type Description            Reference       
   -----   -----------------------     ------------- 
    0	   Reserved                    This document   
    1	   Ethernet                    This document 
    2	   Fiber Cable                 This document
    3	   Coax Cable                  This document
    4	   Cellular                    This document
    5~254  Unassigned
    255    Reserved for Experimental Use
	]]></artwork>	
	</section>
	
	<section title = "SD-WAN Extended Port Sub-Sub-TLV Types">
	<t>IANA is requested to create a new registry titled "SD-WAN Extended Port Sub-Sub-TLV Types" under the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Group. The registration policy is IETF Review [RFC8126].</t>
	<artwork><![CDATA[  
   Value   Type Description            Reference       
   -----   -----------------------     ------------- 
    0	   Reserved                    This document   
    1	   Underlay Network Type       This document  
    2~255  Unassigned        
	]]></artwork>
	</section>
 </section>
 
</middle>	

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
   
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4271"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4301"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4360"?>
  	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4456"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4760"?>  
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7296"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7606"?>

	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8126"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8489"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9012"?>
	  
	 <reference anchor="MEF70.1" target="https://www.mef.net/resources/mef-70-1-sd-wan-service-attributes-and-service-framework/">
	 <front>
	    <title> SD-WAN Service Attributes and Service Framework</title>
		<author>
		 <organization>MEF</organization>
		</author>
		<date month="Nov" year="2021"/>
     </front>
	 </reference>
	 <reference anchor="MEF70.2" target="https://www.mef.net/resources/mef-70-2-sd-wan-service-attributes-and-service-framework/">
	 <front>
	    <title> SD-WAN Service Attributes and Service Framework</title>
		<author>
		 <organization>MEF</organization>
		</author>
		<date month="Oct" year="2023"/>
     </front>
	 </reference>	
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4272"?>	  
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4364"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5114"?>
	  <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5903"?>	 	  
 
	 <reference anchor="Net2Cloud" target= "https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement/">
	 <front>
	    <title> Dynamic Networks to Hybrid Cloud DCs: Problem Statement and Mitigation Practice</title>
		<author>
		 <organization>L. Dunbar, A Malis, C. Jacquenet, M. Toy and  K. Majumdar</organization>
		</author>
		<date month="Sept" year="2023"/>
     </front>
	 </reference>
	 
	 <reference anchor="SD-WAN-BGP-USAGE" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage/">
	 <front>
	    <title> BGP Usage for SD-WAN Overlay Networks</title>
		<author>
		 <organization>L. Dunbar, A Sajassi, J Drake, and B. Najem</organization>
		</author>
		<date month="June" year="2026"/>
     </front>
	 </reference>

 	  	
    </references>
	<section title="Acknowledgments">
	<t>Acknowledgements to Wang Haibo, Shunwan Zhuang, Hao Weiguo, and ShengCheng for implementation contribution. 
	Many thanks to Yoav Nir, Graham Bartlett, Jim Guichard, John Scudder, and Donald Eastlake for their 
	review and suggestions.</t>

	</section>
	<section numbered="false" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.b">
      <name slugifiedName="name-contributors">Contributors</name>
   <t>Below is a list of other contributing authors:</t>
   <t>
   <list style="symbols">
   <t>
      	<contact fullname="Gyan Mishra">
        <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Verizon</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>     
            <country>USA</country>
          </postal>
          <email>gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com</email>
        </address>
      </contact>, </t>  
	 <t>
	  <contact fullname="Shunwan Zhuang">
        <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Huawei</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>
            <city>Beijing</city>
            <country>China</country>
          </postal>
          <email>zhuangshunwan@huawei.com</email>
        </address>
      </contact>,</t> 
	  <t>
      <contact fullname="Sheng Cheng">
        <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Huawei</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>     
            <city>Beijing</city>
            <country>China</country>
          </postal>
          <email>shengcheng@huawei.com</email>
        </address>
      </contact>, and </t>
	  <t>
	  <contact fullname="Donald Eastlake">
        <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Futurewei</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>     
            <country>USA</country>
          </postal>
          <email>d3e3e3@gmail.com</email>
        </address>
      </contact>.</t> 
	  </list>
	  </t> 
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
