draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-03.txt   rfc7537.txt 
Network Working Group B. Decraene Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Decraene
Internet-Draft Orange Request for Comments: 7537 Orange
Updates: 4379, 6424 (if approved) N. Akiya Updates: 4379, 6424 N. Akiya
Intended status: Standards Track C. Pignataro Category: Standards Track C. Pignataro
Expires: September 7, 2015 Cisco Systems ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco Systems
L. Andersson L. Andersson
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
March 6, 2015 May 2015
IANA registries for LSP ping Code Points IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-03
Abstract Abstract
RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 created name spaces for Multiprotocol Label RFCs 4379 and 6424 created name spaces for Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFCs Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFCs
did not create the corresponding IANA registries for the Downstream did not create the corresponding IANA registries for Downstream
Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and
Types. Interface and Label Stack Address Types.
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. This document updates RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 in that it name spaces. This document updates RFCs 4379 and 6424 in that it
creates the IANA registries for that purpose. creates IANA registries for that purpose.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2015. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Multipath Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Pad Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping. [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping.
However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries
for DS Flags, Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address Types. for DS Flags, Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label
Stack Address Types.
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. In particular [I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] and name spaces. In particular, [ENTROPY-LSP-PING] and [LSP-PING-LAG]
[I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath] are requesting allocation for request new DS Flags and Multipath Type allocations.
DS Flags and Multipath Type.
This document serves to update [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it This document updates [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it creates IANA
creates the IANA registries for that purpose. registries for that purpose.
Note that "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type" are fields included in two Note that "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type" are fields included in two
TLVs defined in "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched TLVs defined in the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream Mapping TLV Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream
(value 2) and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV (value 20). Mapping (DEPRECATED) (value 2) and Downstream Detailed Mapping (value
Modification to their registry will affect both TLVs. 20). Modification to either registry will affect both TLVs.
2. IANA Considerations 2. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to create new registries within Per this document, IANA has created new registries within the "Multi-
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] protocol to maintain "DS Flags", "Multipath Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping
Type", "Pad TLV" and "Address Types" fields. Name of registries and Parameters" [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] registry to maintain DS Flags,
initial values are described in immediate sub-sections to follow. Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address
Types fields. The registry names and initial values are described in
the immediate subsections that follow.
2.1. DS Flags 2.1. DS Flags
[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping (DSMAP) TLV, which has the [RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping (DSMAP) TLV, which has Type
Type 2 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label 2 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
[RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, which [RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, which
has the Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching has Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
(MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share a field: "DS DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share a field: DS
Flags". Flags.
The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled "DS IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "DS Flags".
Flags" with the following registration procedure:
Registry Name: DS Flags. The registration policy for this registry is Standards Action
[RFC5226].
Bit number Name Reference IANA has made the following initial assignments:
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC4379
5-0 Unassigned
Assignments of DS Flags are via Standards Action [RFC5226]. Registry Name: DS Flags
2.2. Multipath Type Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC 4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC 4379
5-0 Unassigned
The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled 2.2. Multipath Types
"Multipath Type".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are: IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Multipath
Types".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are as follows:
0-250 Standards Action 0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use 251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action 255 Standards Action
IANA is requested to make the following initial assignments: IANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Multipath Type. Registry Name: Multipath Types
Value Meaning Reference Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC4379 0 no multipath RFC 4379
1 Unassigned 1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC4379 2 IP address RFC 4379
3 Unassigned 3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC4379 4 IP address range RFC 4379
5-7 Unassigned 5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC4379 8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC 4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC4379 9 Bit-masked label set RFC 4379
10-250 Unassigned 10-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental This document 251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document 255 Reserved This document
2.3. Pad Type 2.3. Pad Type
The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled "Pad IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Pad Types".
Type".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are: The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
0-250 Standards Action 0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use 251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action 255 Standards Action
IANA is requested to make the following initial assignments: IANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Pad Type. Registry Name: Pad Types
Value Meaning Reference Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document 0 Reserved This document
1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC4379 1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC 4379
2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC4379 2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC 4379
3-250 Unassigned 3-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental This document 251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document 255 Reserved This document
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type 2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type
The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Interface and
"Interface and Label Stack Address Type". Label Stack Address Types".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are: The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
0-250 Standards Action 0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use 251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action 255 Standards Action
IANA is requested to make the following initial assignments: IANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Interface and Label Stack Address Type. Registry Name: Interface and Label Stack Address Types
Value Meaning Reference Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document 0 Reserved This document
1 IPv4 Numbered RFC4379 1 IPv4 Numbered RFC 4379
2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC4379 2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC 4379
3 IPv6 Numbered RFC4379 3 IPv6 Numbered RFC 4379
4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC4379 4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC 4379
5-250 Unassigned 5-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental This document 251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document 255 Reserved This document
3. Security Considerations 3. Security Considerations
This document simply creates IANA registries for code point defined This document simply creates IANA registries for code points defined
in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424]. Thus, there are no new security in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424]. Thus, there are no new security
concerns. concerns.
4. References 4. References
4.1. Normative References 4.1. Normative References
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.
[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for [RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for
Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS
Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011. Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6424>.
4.2. Informative References 4.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] [ENTROPY-LSP-PING]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S. Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S.
Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW) Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW)
Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)", Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)",
draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-00 (work in progress), Work in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-00,
December 2014. December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and
J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath
Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces",
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00 (work in
progress), January 2015.
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters", Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/ <http://www.iana.org/assignments/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>. mpls-lsp-ping-parameters>.
[LSP-PING-LAG]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and
J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath
Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces", Work
in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00,
January 2015.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008. May 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Bruno Decraene Bruno Decraene
Orange Orange
Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com EMail: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Nobo Akiya Nobo Akiya
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com
Carlos Pignataro Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: cpignata@cisco.com EMail: cpignata@cisco.com
Loa Andersson Loa Andersson
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Email: loa@mail01.huawei.com EMail: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Sam Aldrin Sam Aldrin
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Email: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com EMail: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com
 End of changes. 55 change blocks. 
102 lines changed or deleted 116 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/