wdiff rfc7537.original rfc7537.txt

Network Working Group
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Decraene
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 7537 Orange
Updates: 4379, 6424 (if approved) N. Akiya
Intended status:
Category: Standards Track C. Pignataro
Expires: September 7, 2015
ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco Systems
L. Andersson
S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies
March 6,
May 2015

IANA registries Registries for LSP ping Ping Code Points
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-03

Abstract

RFC

RFCs 4379 and RFC 6424 created name spaces for Multiprotocol Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFCs
did not create the corresponding IANA registries for the Downstream
Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Type, Types, Pad TLV TLVs, and
Interface and Label Stack Address Types.

There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. This document updates RFC RFCs 4379 and RFC 6424 in that it
creates the IANA registries for that purpose.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents an Internet Standards Track document.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for a maximum publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

Information about the current status of six months this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2015.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Multipath Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Pad Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1. Introduction

[RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping.
However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries
for DS Flags, Multipath Type, Types, Pad TLV TLVs, and Interface and Label
Stack Address Types.

There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. In particular [I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] particular, [ENTROPY-LSP-PING] and
[I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath] are requesting allocation for [LSP-PING-LAG]
request new DS Flags and Multipath Type. Type allocations.

This document serves to update updates [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it creates the IANA
registries for that purpose.

Note that "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type" are fields included in two
TLVs defined in the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream
Mapping TLV (DEPRECATED) (value 2) and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV (value
20). Modification to their either registry will affect both TLVs.

2. IANA Considerations

This document requests

Per this document, IANA to create has created new registries within the "Multi-
Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping
Parameters" [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] protocol registry to maintain "DS Flags", "Multipath
Type", "Pad TLV" DS Flags,
Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and "Address Types" Label Stack Address
Types fields. Name of registries The registry names and initial values are described in
the immediate sub-sections to subsections that follow.

2.1. DS Flags

[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping (DSMAP) TLV, which has the Type
2 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.

[RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, which
has the Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.

DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share a field: "DS
Flags".

The DS
Flags.

IANA is requested to create has created and maintain now maintains a registry entitled "DS
Flags" with Flags".

The registration policy for this registry is Standards Action
[RFC5226].

IANA has made the following registration procedure: initial assignments:

Registry Name: DS Flags. Flags

Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC4379 RFC 4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC4379 RFC 4379
5-0 Unassigned

Assignments of DS Flags are via Standards Action [RFC5226].

2.2. Multipath Type

The Types

IANA is requested to create has created and maintain now maintains a registry entitled "Multipath Type".
Types".

The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are: are as follows:

0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action

IANA is requested to make has made the following initial assignments:

Registry Name: Multipath Type. Types

Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC4379 RFC 4379
1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC4379 RFC 4379
3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC4379 RFC 4379
5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC4379 RFC 4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC4379 RFC 4379
10-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document

2.3. Pad Type

The

IANA is requested to create has created and now maintain a registry entitled "Pad
Type". Types".

The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:

0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action

IANA is requested to make has made the following initial assignments:

Registry Name: Pad Type. Types

Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC4379 RFC 4379
2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC4379 RFC 4379
3-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document

2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type

The

IANA is requested to create has created and maintain now maintains a registry entitled "Interface and
Label Stack Address Type". Types".

The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:

0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards Action

IANA is requested to make has made the following initial assignments:

Registry Name: Interface and Label Stack Address Type. Types

Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 IPv4 Numbered RFC4379 RFC 4379
2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC4379 RFC 4379
3 IPv6 Numbered RFC4379 RFC 4379
4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC4379 RFC 4379
5-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document

3. Security Considerations

This document simply creates IANA registries for code point points defined
in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424]. Thus, there are no new security
concerns.

4. References

4.1. Normative References

[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.

[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for
Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS
Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011. 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6424>.

4.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping]
[ENTROPY-LSP-PING]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S.
Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW)
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.

[I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath]

[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/
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",
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00 (work Work
in
progress), Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00,
January 2015.

[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>.

[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008. 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.

Authors' Addresses

Bruno Decraene
Orange

Email:

EMail: bruno.decraene@orange.com

Nobo Akiya
Cisco Systems

Email:

EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com

Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems

Email:

EMail: cpignata@cisco.com

Loa Andersson
Huawei Technologies

Email:

EMail: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Sam Aldrin
Huawei Technologies

Email:

EMail: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com