[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-config) 00 01 draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-oam-config

PWE3 Working Group                                              F. Zhang
Internet-Draft                                                    Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track                                   B. Wu
Expires: December 29, 2014                               ZTE Corporation
                                                           E. Bellagamba
                                                                Ericsson
                                                                 M. Chen
                                                                  Huawei
                                                           June 27, 2014


    Label Distribution Protocol Extensions for Proactive Operations,
 Administration and Maintenance Configuration of Dynamic MPLS Transport
                           Profile PseudoWire
                 draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-oam-config-01

Abstract

   This document specifies extensions to the Label Distribution Protocol
   (LDP) to configure and control proactive Operations, Administration
   and Maintenance (OAM) functions, which are suitable for dynamic
   Single-Segment PseudoWire (SS-PW) and Multi-Segment PseudoWire (MS-
   PW).

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 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
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents 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 December 29, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   (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.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Acronyms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration Overview . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  OAM Configuration for MS-PW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.1.1.  Establishment of OAM Entities and Functions . . . . .   5
       3.1.2.  Adjustment of OAM Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.1.3.  Deleting OAM Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.2.  OAM Configuration for SS-PW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   4.  LDP Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       4.1.1.  Backward Compatibility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.2.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.3.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       4.3.1.  BFD Configuration sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
         4.3.1.1.  Local Discriminator sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . .  13
         4.3.1.2.  Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV  . . . . . .  13
         4.3.1.3.  BFD Authentication sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       4.3.2.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . .  15
         4.3.2.1.  MPLS-TP PW PM Loss TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
         4.3.2.2.  MPLS-TP PW PM Delay TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
       4.3.3.  MPLS-TP PW FMS TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     5.1.  TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       5.1.1.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration Sub-TLV  . . . . . . . .  20
     5.2.   OAM Configuration Error Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   7.  Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     8.1.  Normative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22

1.  Introduction

   MultiProtocol Label Switching (MPLS) Pseudowire (PW) is defined in
   [RFC3985] and [RFC5659], which provides emulated services over an
   MPLS Packet Switched Network (PSN).  MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP)



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   describes a profile of MPLS that enables operational models typical
   in transport networks, while providing additional Operations,
   Administration and Maintenance (OAM), survivability and other
   maintenance functions not previously supported by IP/MPLS.  The
   corresponding requirements are defined in [RFC5860].

   The MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms are described in [RFC6371], which can be
   categorized into proactive and on-demand OAM.  Proactive OAM refers
   to OAM operations that are either configured to be carried out
   periodically and continuously or preconfigured to act on certain
   events such as alarm signals.  In contrast, on-demand OAM is
   initiated manually and for a limited amount of time, usually for
   operations such as diagnostics to investigate into a defect
   condition.

   Normally, the Network Management System (NMS) is used to configure
   these OAM functionalities when a control plane is not instantiated.
   If the control plane is used, it MUST support the configuration and
   modification of OAM maintenance points as well as the activation/
   deactivation of OAM when the transport path or transport service is
   established or modified (Requirement 51)[RFC5654].

   This document defines extensions to the LDP protocol to negotiate PW
   OAM capabilities, configure and bootstrap proactive PW OAM functions,
   which are suitable for Point to Point (P2P) SS-PW and MS-PW.  The
   extensions to Point to Multi-Point (P2MP) PW will be studied in the
   future.

2.  Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

2.1.  Acronyms

      AC: Attachment Circuit

      AIS: Alarm indication signal

      BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection

      CC: Continuity Check

      CV: Connectivity Verification

      DM: Delay Measurement




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


      FEC: Forwarding Equivalence Class

      FMS: Fault Management Signal

      ICMP: Internet Control Message Protocol

      G-ACh: Generic Associated Channel

      LDI: Link Down Indication

      LDP: Label Distribution Protocol

      LKR: Lock Reporting

      LM: Loss Measurement

      LSP: Label Switched Path

      ME: Maintenance Entity

      MEG: Maintenance Entity Group

      MEP: Maintenance Entity Group End Point

      MIP: Maintenance Entity Group Intermediate Point

      MPLS-TP: MPLS Transport Profile

      MS-PW: Multi-Segment PseudoWire

      NMS: Network Management System

      OAM: Operations, Administration and Maintenance

      P2MP: Point to Multi-Point

      PE: Provider Edge

      PHB: Per-Hop Behavior

      PM: Performance Monitoring

      PSN: Packet Switched Network

      PW: Pseudowire

      S-PE: Switching Provider Edge




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


      SPME: Sub-Path Maintenance Entity

      SS-PW: Single-Segment Pseudo Wire

      T-PE: Terminating Provider Edge

      TLV: Type Length Value

      VCCV: Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification

3.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration Overview

   When OAM functions are required for PWs, before starting to configure
   and enable the OAM functions, the PEs SHOULD negotiate the OAM
   capability when the PWs are first set up, hence to know what OAM
   functions the PEs can support.  To achieve this, a new LDP TLV,
   MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV is defined (Section 4.1), it is included
   in the LDP Initialization message and used to carry the MPLS-TP PW OAM
   capabilities that a PE support.  So, if a PE does not receive any
   MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV from the remote PE, it SHOULD NOT send
   the MPLS-TP PW OAM configuration information to the PE and try to
   configure and enable related OAM functions.

   Section 3.1 describes the general OAM configuration procedures.  For
   SS-PW and MS-PW, the OAM configuration procedures are mostly
   identical.  One exception is that SS-PW does not need to configure
   the MIP function.  Section 3.2 highlights the differences between the
   two.

3.1.  OAM Configuration for MS-PW

3.1.1.  Establishment of OAM Entities and Functions

   Assuming there is one PW that needs to be setup between T-PE1 and
   T-PE2, across S-PE1 and S-PE2.  OAM functions must be setup and
   enabled in the appropriate order so that spurious alarms can be
   avoided.

       +-------+        +-------+        +-------+        +-------+
       |       |        |       |        |       |        |       |
       |      A|--------|B     C|--------|D     E|--------|F      |
       |       |        |       |        |       |        |       |
       +-------+        +-------+        +-------+        +-------+
         T-PE1            S-PE1            S-PE2            T-PE2


                 Figure 1: MS-PW OAM Configuration Scheme




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Fist of all, T-PE1 MUST setup the OAM sink function to be prepared to
   receive OAM messages but MUST suppress any OAM alarms (e.g., due to
   missing or unidentified OAM messages).  The Mapping message MUST be
   sent with the "OAM Alarms Enabled" cleared and "OAM MIP Entities
   desired" set in the MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV.

   When the Mapping message arrives at the downstream S-PEs, such as
   S-PE1 and S-PE2, they MUST establish and configure MIP entities
   according to the set "I"flag in the MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration
   TLV.  If failure, a Notification message SHOULD be sent, with a
   Status Code set to "MIP Configuration Failure".  If OAM entities are
   established successfully, the middle points (S-PE1 and S-PE2) MUST
   forward the Mapping message downstream, the endpoint (T-PE2) MUST set
   the OAM Source function and MUST be prepared to Send OAM messages.

   The same rules are applied to the reverse direction (from T-PE2 to
   T-PE1), that is to say, T-PE2 needs to setup the OAM sink function to
   be prepared to receive OAM messages but MUST suppress any OAM alarms
   (e.g., due to missing or unidentified OAM messages).  The Mapping
   message MUST be sent with the "OAM Alarms Enabled" cleared, "OAM MIP
   Entities desired" set in the MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV.  When
   T-PE1 receives the Mapping message, it completes any pending OAM
   configuration and enables the OAM source function to send OAM
   messages.

   After this, OAM entities are established and configured for the PW
   and OAM messages MAY already be exchanged, and OAM alarms can now be
   enabled.  The T-PE nodes (T-PE1 and T-PE2), while still keeping OAM
   alarms disabled send a Notification message with "OAM Alarms Enabled"
   PW status flag set, and enable the OAM alarms after processing the
   Notification message.  At this point, data-plane OAM is fully
   functional, and the MPLS-TP OAM PW configuration TLV MAY be omitted
   in subsequent Notification messages

   The PW MAY be setup with OAM entities right away with the first
   signalling, as described above, but a PW MAY be signalled and
   established without OAM configuration first, and OAM entities may be
   added later.  This can be done by sending a Notification message with
   the related configuration parameters subsequently.

3.1.2.  Adjustment of OAM Parameters

   There may be a need to change the parameters of an already
   established and configured OAM function during the lifetime of the
   PW.  To do so the T-PE nodes need to send a Notification message with
   the updated parameters.  OAM parameters that influence the content
   and timing of OAM messages and identify the way OAM defects and
   alarms are derived and generated.  Hence, to avoid spurious alarms,



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   it is important that both sides, OAM sink and source, are updated in
   a synchronized way.  Firstly, the alarms of the OAM sink function
   should be suppressed and only then should expected OAM parameters be
   adjusted.  Subsequently, the parameters of the OAM source function
   can be updated.  Finally, the alarms of the OAM sink side can be
   enabled again.

   In accordance with the above operation, T-PE1 MUST send a
   Notification message with "OAM Alarms Enabled" cleared and including
   the updated MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV corresponding to the new
   parameter settings.  The initiator (T-PE1) MUST keep its OAM sink and
   source functions running unmodified, but it MUST suppress OAM alarms
   after the updated Notification message is sent.  The receiver (T-PE2)
   MUST firstly disable all OAM alarms, then update the OAM parameters
   according to the information in the Notification message and reply
   with a Notification message acknowledging the changes by including
   the MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV.  Note that the receiving side
   has the possibility to adjust the requested OAM configuration
   parameters and reply with and updated MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration
   TLV in the Notification message, reflecting the actually configured
   values.  However, in order to avoid an extensive negotiation phase,
   in the case of adjusting already configured OAM functions, the
   receiving side SHOULD NOT update the parameters requested in the
   Notification message to an extent that would provide lower
   performance than what has been configured previously.

   The initiator (T-PE1) MUST only update its OAM sink and source
   functions when it has received the Notification message from the
   peer.  After the OAM parameters are updated and OAM is running
   according the new parameter settings, OAM alarms are still disabled,
   so a subsequent Notification messages exchanges with "OAM Alarms
   Enabled" flag set are needed to enable OAM alarms again.

3.1.3.  Deleting OAM Entities

   In some cases it may be useful to remove some or all OAM entities and
   functions from one PW without actually tearing down the connection.
   To avoid any spurious alarm, the following procedure should be
   followed:

   The T-PE nodes disable OAM alarms and SHOULD send Notification
   message to each other with "OAM Alarms Enabled" cleared but unchanged
   OAM configuration and without the MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV.
   After that, T-PE1 (T-PE2) SHOULD delete OAM source functions, then
   send a Notification message with "OAM MIP Entities desired" cleared.
   While T-PE2 (T-PE1) deletes OAM sink function, S-PE1 and S-PE2 delete
   MIP configuration when they receive the Notification message with
   "OAM MIP Entities desired" cleared.



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Alternatively, if only some OAM functions need to be removed, the
   T-PE node sends the Notification message with the updated OAM
   Configuration TLV.  Changes between the contents of the previously
   signalled OAM Configuration TLV and the currently received TLV
   represent which functions SHOULD be removed/added.

3.2.  OAM Configuration for SS-PW

   Assuming there is one PW that needs to be setup between T-PE1 and
   T-PE2.

   If the receiving PE (T-PE2) have initiated the MPLS-TP PW OAM
   configuration request to the other PE (T-PE1), it MUST compare its
   AII against T-PE1's.  If it is numerically lower, will reply a
   Notification message with the updated "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration
   TLV", and the Status Code set to "Wrong MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration
   TLV".

   On the other hand, if the T-PE2's AII is numerically higher than
   T-PE1's, it MUST reply a Notification message with Status Code set to
   "Rejected MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV".

4.  LDP Extensions

   Below, LDP extensions to configure proactive MPLS-TP PW OAM functions
   are defined.

4.1.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV

   A new Capability Parameter TLV called the MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability
   TLV is defined, and the format is as follows:

     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |1|0|              Type (TBD)   |     Length (= 4)              |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |S| Reserved    |               Capability Data       |F|D|L|V|C|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV

   The value of the U-bit for the MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV MUST be
   set to 1 so that a receiver MUST silently ignore this TLV if unknown
   to it, and continue processing the rest of the message[RFC5036].
   Currently defined specific OAM Capability Flags in the "Capability
   Data" field from right to left are:




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   One bit "C" (31, IANA to assign)             CC mode supported
   One bit "V" (30, IANA to assign)             CV mode supported
   One bit "L" (29, IANA to assign)             PM Loss supported
   One bit "D" (28, IANA to assign)             PM Delay supported
   One bit "F" (27, IANA to assign)             FMS supported
   Bits 8-26: This field MUST be set to zero
   on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.


   The above bits can be set individually to indicate more than one kind
   of OAM capabilities at once, and the other reserved bits MUST be set
   to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.  Moreover, if
   CV flag is set, the CC flag MUST be set at the same time.

   The MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV MAY be included by a PE in an
   Initialization message to signal its peer that it supports the MPLS-
   TP PW OAM Capability.  If the remote peer does not support the MPLS-
   TP PW OAM Capability TLV or the Initialization message sent by the
   remote peer does not include the MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV, the
   resulting negotiation does not support MPLS-TP PW OAM capability.  If
   instead the negotiation supports the MPLS-TP PW OAM capability, then
   the subsequent LDP Mapping message will carry the information of the
   MPLS-TP PW OAM configuration.

4.1.1.  Backward Compatibility

   If both the two T-PEs can recognize the MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability
   TLV,and CC or CV mode is supported, the BFD configuration procedure
   described in this document is adopted.  Otherwise, if at least one of
   the two T-PEs do not support the CC or CV mode, the old VCCV BFD
   [RFC5885] will be performed.  In this situation, the procedure
   described in [RFC5885] MUST be followed: the C and V flags of MPLS-TP
   PW OAM Configuration TLV MUST NOT be set and the BFD Configuration
   sub-TLV MUST NOT be carried as a sub-TLV of MPLS-TP PW OAM
   Configuration TLV also.

   The described behavior ensures full compatibility with the existing
   implementations.

4.2.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV

   The format of the MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV is as follows:









Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


         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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |0|0|          Type (TBD)     |            Length               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |I|A|           Reserved                                        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                     MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV

   One bit "I" (0, IANA to assign): "OAM MIP Entities Desired" is
   allocated.  If the "OAM MIP entities desired" bit is set, it is
   indicating that the establishment of OAM MIP entities is required at
   every transit node of the signalled PW.  If the establishment of a
   MIP is not supported, a Notification message MUST be sent with Status
   Code set to "MIP Configuration Failure".

   One bit "A" (1, IANA to assign): "OAM Alarms Enabled" is allocated.
   If the "OAM Alarms Enabled" bit is set, it is indicating that the
   T-PE needs to enable OAM alarms.

   Reserved (2-31 bits): This field MUST be set to zero on transmission
   and MUST be ignored on receipt.

4.3.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV

   The "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV" is depicted in the following
   figure.  It may be carried in the Mapping and Notification messages,
   just following the PW Status TLV.

     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |0|0|       Type (TBD)          |           Length              |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |C|V|L|D|F|             OAM Function Flags                      |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                     MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV

   The "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV" contains a number of flags
   indicating which OAM functions should be activated as well as OAM
   function specific sub-TLVs with configuration parameters for the
   particular functions.



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Type: indicates a new type: the MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV
   (IANA to assign).

   Length: the length of the OAM Function Flags field including the
   total length of the sub-TLVs in octets.

   OAM Function Flags: a bitmap numbered from left to right as shown in
   the figure.

   These flags are defined in this document:

      OAM Function Flag bit#             Description
      ---------------------      ---------------------------
               0 (C)             Continuity Check (CC)
               1 (V)             Connectivity Verification (CV)
               2 (L)             Performance Monitoring/Loss (PM/Loss)
               3 (D)             Performance Monitoring/Delay (PM/Delay)
               4 (F)             Fault Management Signals (FMS)
               5-31              Reserved (set all to 0s)

   Sub-TLVs corresponding to the different flags are as follows.

   o  "BFD Configuration sub-TLV", which MUST be included if the CC and/
      or the CV OAM Function flag is set.  Furthermore, if the CV flag
      is set, the CC flag MUST be set at the same time.

   o  "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV", which MUST be included if the
      PM/Loss OAM Function flag is set.

   o  "MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV", which MAY be included if the FMS OAM
      Function flag is set.  If the "MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV" is not
      included, default configuration values are used.

4.3.1.  BFD Configuration sub-TLV

   The "BFD Configuration sub-TLV is defined for BFD specific
   configuration parameters, which accommodates generic BFD OAM
   information and carries sub-TLVs.













Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  BFD Conf. Type (1) (IANA)    |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Vers.| PHB |N|S|I|G|U|A|   Reserved (set to all 0s)            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      ~                           sub TLVs                            ~
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                         BFD Configuration sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" (IANA to
   define, suggested value 1).

   Length: indicates the length of the TLV including sub-TLVs but
   excluding the Type and Length field, in octets.

   Version: identifies the BFD protocol version.  If a node does not
   support a specific BFD version, a Notification message MUST be
   generated with Status Code set to "Unsupported OAM Version".

   PHB: Identifies the Per-Hop Behavior (PHB) to be used for periodic
   continuity monitoring messages.

   BFD Negotiation (N): If set timer negotiation/re-negotiation via BFD
   Control Messages is enabled, when cleared it is disabled.

   Symmetric session (S): If set the BFD session MUST use symmetric
   timing values.

   Integrity (I): If set BFD Authentication MUST be enabled.  If the
   "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" does not include a "BFD Authentication
   sub-TLV" the authentication MUST use Keyed SHA1 with an empty pre-
   shared key (all 0s).

   Encapsulation Capability (G): if set, it shows the capability of
   encapsulating BFD messages into G-ACh channel without IP/UDP headers.
   If both the G bit and U bit are set, configuration gives precedence
   to the G bit.

   Encapsulation Capability (U): if set, it shows the capability of
   encapsulating BFD messages into G-ACh channel with IP/UDP headers.
   If both the G bit and U bit are set, configuration gives precedence
   to the G bit.




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Operation mode (A): if set, it configures BFD in the associated mode.
   If it is not set it configures BFD in independent mode.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0.

   The "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" MUST include the following sub-TLVs
   in the Mapping message:

   o  "Local Discriminator sub-TLV".

   o  "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" if the N flag is cleared.

4.3.1.1.  Local Discriminator sub-TLV

   The "Local Discriminator sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of the "BFD
   Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.

       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Lcl. Discr. Type (1) (IANA)  |         Length (4)            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Local Discriminator                     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        Local Discriminator sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "Local Discriminator sub-TLV" (IANA
   to define, suggested value 1).

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets (4).

   Local Discriminator: A unique, nonzero discriminator value generated
   by the transmitting system and referring to itself, used to
   demultiplex multiple BFD sessions between the same pair of systems.

4.3.1.2.  Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV

   The "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of
   the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.











Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Timer Neg.  Type (2) (IANA)  |          Length (16)          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |               Required Echo TX Interval                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                   Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-
   TLV" (IANA to define, suggested value 2).

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets (16).

   Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval: in case of S (symmetric)
   flag set in the "BFD Configuration" TLV, it expresses the desired
   time interval (in microseconds) at which the T-PE initiating the
   signalling intends to both transmit and receive BFD periodic control
   packets.  If the receiving T-PE can not support such value, it is
   allowed to reply back with an interval greater than the one proposed.

   In case of S (symmetric) flag cleared in the "BFD Configuration sub-
   TLV", this field expresses the desired time interval (in
   microseconds) at which T-PE intends to transmit BFD periodic control
   packets in its transmitting direction.

   Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval: in case of S (symmetric)
   flag set in the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV", this field MUST be equal
   to "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval" and has no additional
   meaning respect to the one described for "Acceptable Min.Asynchronous
   TX interval".

   In case of S (symmetric) flag cleared in the "BFD Configuration sub-
   TLV", it expresses the minimum time interval (in microseconds) at
   which T-PE can receive BFD periodic control packets.  In case this
   value is greater than the "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval"
   received from the other T-PE, such T-PE MUST adopt the interval
   expressed in this "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval".

   Required Echo TX Interval: the minimum interval (in microseconds)
   between received BFD Echo packets that this system is capable of
   supporting, less any jitter applied by the sender as described in
   [RFC5880] sect. 6.8.9.  This value is also an indication for the



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   receiving system of the minimum interval between transmitted BFD Echo
   packets.  If this value is zero, the transmitting system does not
   support the receipt of BFD Echo packets.  If the receiving system can
   not support this value a Notification MUST be generated with Status
   Code set to "Unsupported BFD TX Echo rate interval".  By default the
   value is set to 0.

4.3.1.3.  BFD Authentication sub-TLV

   The "BFD Authentication sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of the "BFD
   Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.

       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    BFD Auth. Type (3) (IANA)  |          Length = 8           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Auth Type   |  Auth Key ID  |         Reserved (0s)         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        BFD Authentication sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "BFD Authentication sub-TLV" (IANA to
   define, suggested value 3).

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets (8).

   Auth Type: indicates which type of authentication to use.  The same
   values as are defined in section 4.1 of [RFC5880] are used.

   Auth Key ID: indicates which authentication key or password
   (depending on Auth Type) should be used.  How the key exchange is
   performed is out of scope of this document.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0.

4.3.2.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV

   If the "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV" has either the L (Loss), D
   (Delay) flag set, the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" MUST be
   present.

   In case the values need to be different than the default ones the
   "MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV, "MPLS-TP PW PM Delay sub-TLV" MAY be
   included:

   o  "MPLS-PW PM Loss sub-TLV" if the L flag is set in the "MPLS-TP PW
      OAM Configuration TLV";



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   o  "MPLS-PW PM Delay sub-TLV" if the D flag is set in the "MPLS-TP PW
      OAM Configuration TLV ".

   The "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a
   sub-TLV of the "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV"

      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Perf Monitoring Type (IANA)|          Length               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |D|L|J|Y|K|C|            Reserved (set to all 0s)               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Performance Monitoring sub-TLV

   o  D: Delay inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT)

   o  L: Loss inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT)

   o  J: Delay variation/jitter (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE)

   o  Y: Dyadic (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE)

   o  K: Loopback (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE)

   o  C: Combined (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE)

4.3.2.1.  MPLS-TP PW PM Loss TLV

   The "MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-
   TLV of the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV".















Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  PM Loss Type (1) (IANA)      |          Length               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | OTF |T|B|                    RESERVED                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                    Measurement Interval                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Test Interval                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Loss Threshold                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV" (IANA to
   define, suggested value 1).

   Length: indicates the length of the parameters in octets.

   OTF: Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field described
   in [RFC6374].  By default it is set to IEEE 1588 version 1.

   Configuration Flags, please refer to [RFC6374] for further details:

   o  T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator.  Set to 1 when
      the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
      traffic class (DSCP value), and 0 otherwise.  When set to 1, the
      DS field of the message indicates the measured traffic class.  By
      default it is set to 1.

   o  B: Octet (byte) count.  When set to 1, indicates that the Counter
      1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0, indicates that
      the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts.  By default it is
      set to 0.

   Measurement Interval: the time interval (in microseconds) at which LM
   query messages MUST be sent on both directions.  If the T-PE
   receiving the Mapping message can not support such value, it can
   reply back with a higher interval.  By default it is set to (TBD).

   Test Interval: test messages interval as described in [RFC6374].  By
   default it is set to (TBD).

   Loss Threshold: the threshold value of lost packets over which
   protections MUST be triggered.  By default it is set to (TBD).




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


4.3.2.2.  MPLS-TP PW PM Delay TLV

   The "MPLS-TP PW PM Delay sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-
   TLV of the "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV"

      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  PM Delay Type (2) (IANA)      |          Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | OTF |T|B|                    RESERVED                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                    Measurement Interval                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Test Interval                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Delay Threshold                          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        MPLS-TP PW PM Delay sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "MPLS-TP PW PM Delay sub-TLV" (IANA
   to define, suggested value 2).

   Length: indicates the length of the parameters in octets.

   OTF: Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field described
   in [RFC6374].  By default it is set to IEEE 1588 version 1.

   Configuration Flags, please refer to [RFC6374] for further details:

   o  T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator.  Set to 1 when
      the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
      traffic class (DSCP value), and 0 otherwise.  When set to 1, the
      DS field of the message indicates the measured traffic class.  By
      default it is set to 1.

   o  B: Octet (byte) count.  When set to 1, indicates that the Counter
      1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0, indicates that
      the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts.  By default it is
      set to 0.

   Measurement Interval: the time interval (in microseconds) at which LM
   query messages MUST be sent on both directions.  If the T-PE
   receiving the Mapping message can not support such value, it can
   reply back with a higher interval.  By default it is set to (TBD).





Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 18]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Test Interval: test messages interval as described in [RFC6374].  By
   default it is set to (TBD).

   Delay Threshold: the threshold value of packet delay time over which
   protections MUST be triggered.  By default it is set to (TBD).

4.3.3.  MPLS-TP PW FMS TLV

   The "MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-TLV
   of the "MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV".

       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Fault mgmt Type (4) (IANA)    |        Length (8)             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |A|D|L|                  Reserved (set to all 0s)       |E| PHB |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Refresh Timer                            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                          MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV

   Type: indicates a new type, the "MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV" (IANA to
   define, suggested value 4).

   Length: indicates the length of the parameters in octets (8).

   Signal Flags: are used to enable the following signals:

   o  A: Alarm Indication Signal (AIS) as described in [RFC6427]

   o  D: Link Down Indication (LDI) as described in [RFC6427]

   o  L: Locked Report (LKR) as described in [RFC6427]

   o  Remaining bits: Reserved for future specification and set to 0.

   Configuration Flags:

   o  E: used to enable/disable explicitly clearing faults

   o  PHB: identifies the per-hop behavior of packets with fault
      management information

   Refresh Timer: indicates the refresh timer (in microseconds) of fault
   indication messages.  If the T-PE receiving the Path message can not
   support such value, it can reply back with a higher interval.



Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 19]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


5.  IANA Considerations

5.1.  TLV

   IANA is requested to assign three new TLV types from the registry
   "TLV Type Name Space" in the "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
   Parameters" registry.

      Value     TLV                                       References
      -----     --------                                  ----------
       TBD1     MPLS-TP PW OAM Capability TLV             this document
       TBD2     MPLS-TP PW OAM Administration TLV         this document
       TBD3     MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV          this document

5.1.1.  MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration Sub-TLV

   IANA is requested to create a registry of "MPLS-TP Pseudowire OAM
   Configuration Sub-TLV types".  These are 16 bit values.  Sub-TLV
   types 1 through 8 are specified in this document.  Sub-TLV types 0
   and 65535 are reserved.  Sub-TLV 9 through 65534 are to be assigned
   by IANA, using the "Expert Review" policy defined in RFC2434.

      Value     Sub-TLV                                   References
      -----     --------                                  ----------
          1     BFD Configuration sub-TLV                 this document
          2     Performance Monitoring sub-TLV            this document
          3     MPLS-TP PW FMS sub-TLV                    this document
          4     Local Discriminator sub-TLV               this document
          5     Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV      this document
          6     BFD Authentication sub-TLV                this document
          7     MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV                this document
          8     MPLS-TP PW PM Loss sub-TLV                this document

5.2.  OAM Configuration Error Code

   IANA is requested to assign the following LDP status codes from the
   registry "STATUS CODE NAME SPACE" in the "Label Distribution Protocol
   (LDP) Parameters" registry.

   Range/Value   E    Description
         TBD4    0    "MIP Configuration Failure"
         TBD5    0    "Rejected MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV"
         TBD6    0    "Wrong MPLS-TP PW OAM Configuration TLV"
         TBD7    0    "Unsupported OAM Version"
         TBD8    0    "Unsupported BFD TX Echo rate interval"






Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 20]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


6.  Security Considerations

   Security considerations relating to LDP are described in section 5 of
   [RFC5036] and section 11 of [RFC5561].  Security considerations
   relating to use of LDP in setting up PWs is described in section 8 of
   [RFC4447].

   This document defines new TLV/sub-TLV types, and OAM configuration
   procedures intended for use with MPLS-TP, which do not raise any
   additional security issues.

7.  Acknowledgement

   The authors would like to thank Andrew Malis, Greg Mirsky, Luca
   Martini, Matthew Bocci, Thomas Nadeau for their valuable comments and
   discussions, especially would like to thank Eric Gray for his review
   of this document.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative references

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC4447]  Martini, L., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and G.
              Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label
              Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006.

   [RFC5036]  Andersson, L., Minei, I., and B. Thomas, "LDP
              Specification", RFC 5036, October 2007.

   [RFC5561]  Thomas, B., Raza, K., Aggarwal, S., Aggarwal, R., and JL.
              Le Roux, "LDP Capabilities", RFC 5561, July 2009.

   [RFC6073]  Martini, L., Metz, C., Nadeau, T., Bocci, M., and M.
              Aissaoui, "Segmented Pseudowire", RFC 6073, January 2011.

8.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2434]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
              October 1998.

   [RFC3985]  Bryant, S. and P. Pate, "Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to-
              Edge (PWE3) Architecture", RFC 3985, March 2005.





Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 21]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   [RFC5654]  Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N.,
              and S. Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile",
              RFC 5654, September 2009.

   [RFC5659]  Bocci, M. and S. Bryant, "An Architecture for Multi-
              Segment Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge", RFC 5659,
              October 2009.

   [RFC5860]  Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, "Requirements for
              Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS
              Transport Networks", RFC 5860, May 2010.

   [RFC5880]  Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
              (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010.

   [RFC5885]  Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit
              Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", RFC 5885, June 2010.

   [RFC6371]  Busi, I. and D. Allan, "Operations, Administration, and
              Maintenance Framework for MPLS-Based Transport Networks",
              RFC 6371, September 2011.

   [RFC6374]  Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay
              Measurement for MPLS Networks", RFC 6374, September 2011.

   [RFC6427]  Swallow, G., Fulignoli, A., Vigoureux, M., Boutros, S.,
              and D. Ward, "MPLS Fault Management Operations,
              Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)", RFC 6427, November
              2011.

   [RFC6478]  Martini, L., Swallow, G., Heron, G., and M. Bocci,
              "Pseudowire Status for Static Pseudowires", RFC 6478, May
              2012.

Authors' Addresses

   Fei Zhang
   Huawei

   Email: zhangfei7@huawei.com


   Bo Wu
   ZTE Corporation

   Email: wu.bo@zte.com.cn




Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 22]


Internet-Draft        LDP Extensions for TP PW OAM             June 2014


   Elisa Bellagamba
   Ericsson
   Farogatan 6
   Kista, 164 40
   Sweden

   Phone: +46 761440785
   Email: elisa.bellagamba@ericsson.com


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com


   Attila Takacs
   Ericsson
   Laborc u. 1.
   Budapest, 1037
   Hungary

   Email: attila.takacs@ericsson.com


   Xuehui Dai
   ZTE Corporation

   Email: dai.xuehui@zte.com.cn


   Min Xiao
   ZTE Corporation

   Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn






































Zhang, et al.           Expires December 29, 2014              [Page 23]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.123, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/