draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-04.txt 
Network Working Group M. Chen Network Working Group M. Chen
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Updates: 4379 (if approved) P. Pan Updates: 4379 (if approved) P. Pan
Intended status: Standards Track Infinera Intended status: Standards Track Infinera
Expires: April 27, 2013 C. Pignataro Expires: May 30, 2013 C. Pignataro
R. Asati R. Asati
Cisco Cisco
October 24, 2012 November 26, 2012
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Pseudowire FECs Advertised over IPv6
draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03 draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-04
Abstract Abstract
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping
and traceroute mechanisms are commonly used to detect and isolate and traceroute mechanisms are commonly used to detect and isolate
data plane failures in all MPLS LSPs including Pseudowire (PW) LSPs. data plane failures in all MPLS LSPs including LSPs used for each
The PW LSP Ping and traceroute elements, however, are not specified direction of an MPLS Pseudowire (PW). The LSP Ping and traceroute
for IPv6 address usage. elements used for PWs, however, are not specified for IPv6 address
usage.
This document extends the PW LSP Ping and traceroute mechanisms so This document extends the PW LSP Ping and traceroute mechanisms so
they can be used with IPv6 PWs, and updates RFC 4379. they can be used with PWs that are setup and maintained using IPv6
LDP sessions, and updates RFC 4379.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 47 skipping to change at page 1, line 49
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 27, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 30, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 23
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 Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. IPv4 Pseudowire Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Pseudowire IPv4 Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IPv6 Pseudowire Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Pseudowire IPv6 Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. FEC 128 Pseudowire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2. FEC 129 Pseudowire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Summary of Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Summary of Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
skipping to change at page 3, line 20 skipping to change at page 3, line 20
(LSPs) including Pseudowires (PWs). The PW LSP Ping and traceroute (LSPs) including Pseudowires (PWs). The PW LSP Ping and traceroute
elements, however, are not specified for IPv6 address usage. elements, however, are not specified for IPv6 address usage.
Specifically, the PW FEC sub-TLVs for the Target FEC Stack in the LSP Specifically, the PW FEC sub-TLVs for the Target FEC Stack in the LSP
Ping and traceroute mechanism are defined only for IPv4 Provider Edge Ping and traceroute mechanism are defined only for IPv4 Provider Edge
(PEs) routers, and are not applicable for the case where PEs use IPv6 (PEs) routers, and are not applicable for the case where PEs use IPv6
addresses. Three PW related Target Forwarding Equivalence Class addresses. Three PW related Target Forwarding Equivalence Class
(FEC) sub-TLVs are currently defined (FEC 128 Pseudowire-Deprecated, (FEC) sub-TLVs are currently defined (FEC 128 Pseudowire-Deprecated,
FEC 128 Pseudowire-Current, and FEC 129 Pseudowire, see Sections FEC 128 Pseudowire-Current, and FEC 129 Pseudowire, see Sections
3.2.8 through 3.2.10 of [RFC4379]). These sub-TLVs contain the 3.2.8 through 3.2.10 of [RFC4379]). These sub-TLVs contain the
source and destination addresses of the target LDP session, and source and destination addresses of the LDP session, and currently
currently only IPv4 target LDP session is covered. Despite the fact only an IPv4 LDP session is covered. Despite the fact that the PE IP
that the PE IP address family is not explicit in the sub-TLV address family is not explicit in the sub-TLV definition, this can be
definition, this can be inferred indirectly by examining the lengths inferred indirectly by examining the lengths of the Sender's/Remote
of the Sender's/Remote PE Address fields, or calculating the Length PE Address fields, or calculating the Length of the sub-TLVs (see
of the sub-TLVs (see Section 3.2 of [RFC4379]). When an IPv6 target Section 3.2 of [RFC4379]). When an IPv6 LDP session is used,
LDP session is used, therefore these existing sub-TLVs can not be therefore these existing sub-TLVs can not be used since the addresses
used since the addresses will not fit. Additionally, all other sub- will not fit. Additionally, all other sub-TLVs are defined in pairs,
TLVs are defined in pairs, one for IPv4 and another for IPv6, but not one for IPv4 and another for IPv6, but not the PW sub-TLVs.
the PW sub-TLVs.
This document updates [RFC4379] to explicitly constrain the existing This document updates [RFC4379] to explicitly constrain the existing
PW FEC sub-TLVs for IPv4 LDP sessions, and extends the PW LSP Ping to PW FEC sub-TLVs for IPv4 LDP sessions, and extends the PW LSP Ping to
IPv6 LDP sessions (i.e., when IPv6 LDP sessions are used to signal IPv6 LDP sessions (i.e., when IPv6 LDP sessions are used to signal
the PW, the Sender's and Receiver's IP addresses are IPv6 addresses). the PW, the Sender's and Receiver's IP addresses are IPv6 addresses).
This is done by renaming the existing PW sub-TLVs to say "IPv4", and This is done by renaming the existing PW sub-TLVs to say "IPv4", and
also by defining two new Target FEC sub-TLVs (IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire also by defining two new Target FEC sub-TLVs (FEC 128 Pseudowire IPv6
sub-TLV and IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire sub-TLV) to extend the sub-TLV and FEC 129 Pseudowire IPv6 sub-TLV) to extend the
application of PW LSP Ping and traceroute to the IPv6 usage when an application of PW LSP Ping and traceroute to the IPv6 usage when an
IPv6 LDP session [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6] is used to signal the IPv6 LDP session [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6] is used to signal the
Pseudowire. Note that FEC 128 Pseudowire (Deprecated) is not defined Pseudowire. Note that FEC 128 Pseudowire (Deprecated) is not defined
for IPv6 in this document. for IPv6 in this document.
2. IPv4 Pseudowire Sub-TLVs 2. Pseudowire IPv4 Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs
This document updates Section 3.2 and Sections 3.2.8 through 3.2.10 This document updates Section 3.2 and Sections 3.2.8 through 3.2.10
of [RFC4379] as follows and as indicated in Section 4 and Section 6. of [RFC4379] as follows and as indicated in Section 4 and Section 6.
This is done to avoid any potential ambiguity and confusion, and to This is done to avoid any potential ambiguity and confusion, and to
clarify that these TLVs carry only IPv4 addresses. Note that the clarify that these TLVs carry only IPv4 addresses. Note that the
changes are limited to the names of fields; there are no semantic changes are limited to the names of fields; there are no semantic
changes. changes.
Sections 3.2.8 through 3.2.10 of [RFC4379] list the PW sub-TLVs and Sections 3.2.8 through 3.2.10 of [RFC4379] list the PW sub-TLVs and
state: state:
"FEC 128" Pseudowire (Deprecated) "FEC 128" Pseudowire (Deprecated)
"FEC 128" Pseudowire "FEC 128" Pseudowire
"FEC 129" Pseudowire "FEC 129" Pseudowire
These names and titles are now changed to: These names and titles are now changed to:
IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire (Deprecated) "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4 (Deprecated)
IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4
IPv4 "FEC 129" Pseudowire "FEC 129" Pseudowire - IPv4
Additionally, when referring to the PE addresses, these three Additionally, when referring to the PE addresses, these three
sections state: sections state:
Sender's PE Address Sender's PE Address
Remote PE Address Remote PE Address
These are now updated to say: These are now updated to say:
Sender's PE IPv4 Address Sender's PE IPv4 Address
Remote PE IPv4 Address Remote PE IPv4 Address
3. IPv6 Pseudowire Sub-TLVs 3. Pseudowire IPv6 Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs
3.1. IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire Sub-TLV 3.1. FEC 128 Pseudowire
IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire sub-TLV has the consistent structure with FEC FEC 128 Pseudowire IPv6 sub-TLV has the consistent structure with FEC
128 Pseudowire sub-TLV as described in Section 3.2.9 of [RFC4379]. 128 Pseudowire sub-TLV as described in Section 3.2.9 of [RFC4379].
The encoding of IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire sub-TLV is as follows: The encoding of FEC 128 Pseudowire IPv6 sub-TLV is as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 FEC 128 PW Type | Length | | FEC 128 PW IPv6 Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Sender's PE IPv6 Address ~ ~ Sender's PE IPv6 Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Remote PE IPv6 Address ~ ~ Remote PE IPv6 Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW ID | | PW ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW Type | Must Be Zero | | PW Type | Must Be Zero |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire Figure 1: FEC 128 Pseudowire - IPv6
IPv6 FEC 128 PW Type: TBD1. 2 octets. FEC 128 PW IPv6 Type: TBD1. 2 octets.
Length: Defines the length in octets of the value field of the sub- Length: Defines the length in octets of the value field of the sub-
TLV and its value is 38. 2 octets. TLV and its value is 38. 2 octets.
Sender's PE IPv6 Address: The source IP address of the target IPv6 Sender's PE IPv6 Address: The source IP address of the target IPv6
LDP session. 16 octets. LDP session. 16 octets.
Remote PE IPv6 Address: The destination IP address of the target IPv6 Remote PE IPv6 Address: The destination IP address of the target IPv6
LDP session. 16 octets. LDP session. 16 octets.
PW ID: Same as IPv4 FEC 128 Pseudowire [RFC4379]. PW ID: Same as FEC 128 Pseudowire IPv4 [RFC4379].
PW Type: Same as IPv4 FEC 128 Pseudowire [RFC4379].
IPv6 FEC 128 Pseudowire sub-TLV is applicable to be a sub-TLV for PW Type: Same as FEC 128 Pseudowire IPv4 [RFC4379].
inclusion in the Reply Path TLV
[I-D.ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping] for expressing a
specific return path.
3.2. IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire Sub-TLV 3.2. FEC 129 Pseudowire
IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire sub-TLV has the consistent structure with FEC FEC 129 Pseudowire IPv6 sub-TLV has the consistent structure with FEC
129 Pseudowire sub-TLV as described in Section 3.2.10 of [RFC4379]. 129 Pseudowire sub-TLV as described in Section 3.2.10 of [RFC4379].
The encoding of IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire is as follows: The encoding of FEC 129 Pseudowire IPv6 is as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 FEC 129 PW Type | Length | | FEC 129 PW IPv6 Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Sender's PE IPv6 Address ~ ~ Sender's PE IPv6 Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Remote PE IPv6 Address ~ ~ Remote PE IPv6 Address ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW Type | AGI Type | AGI Length | | PW Type | AGI Type | AGI Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ AGI Value ~ ~ AGI Value ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AII Type | SAII Length | SAII Value | | AII Type | SAII Length | SAII Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ SAII Value (continued) ~ ~ SAII Value (continued) ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AII Type | TAII Length | TAII Value | | AII Type | TAII Length | TAII Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ TAII Value (continued) ~ ~ TAII Value (continued) ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TAII (cont.) | 0-3 octets of zero padding | | TAII (cont.) | 0-3 octets of zero padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire Figure 2: FEC 129 Pseudowire - IPv6
IPv6 FEC 129 PW Type: TBD2. 2 octets. FEC 129 PW IPv6 Type: TBD2. 2 octets.
Length: Defines the length in octets of the value field of the sub- Length: Defines the length in octets of the value field of the sub-
TLV. 2 octets TLV. 2 octets
The length of this TLV is 40 + AGI length + SAII length + TAII The length of this TLV is 40 + AGI length + SAII length + TAII
length. Padding is used to make the total length a multiple of 4; length. Padding is used to make the total length a multiple of 4;
the length of the padding is not included in the Length field. the length of the padding is not included in the Length field.
Sender's PE IPv6 Address: The source IP address of the target IPv6 Sender's PE IPv6 Address: The source IP address of the target IPv6
LDP session. 16 octets. LDP session. 16 octets.
Remote PE IPv6 Address: The destination IP address of the target IPv6 Remote PE IPv6 Address: The destination IP address of the target IPv6
LDP session. 16 octets. LDP session. 16 octets.
The other fields are same as IPv4 FEC 129 Pseudowire [RFC4379]. The other fields are same as FEC 129 Pseudowire IPv4 [RFC4379].
IPv6 FEC 129 Pseudowire sub-TLV is applicable to be a sub-TLV for
inclusion in the Reply Path TLV
[I-D.ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping] for expressing a
specific return path.
4. Summary of Changes 4. Summary of Changes
Section 3.2 of [RFC4379] tabulates all the sub-TLVs for the Target Section 3.2 of [RFC4379] tabulates all the sub-TLVs for the Target
FEC Stack. Per the change described in Section 2 and Section 3, the FEC Stack. Per the change described in Section 2 and Section 3, the
table would show the following: table would show the following:
Sub-Type Length Value Field Sub-Type Length Value Field
-------- ------ ----------- -------- ------ -----------
... ...
9 10 IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire (deprecated) 9 10 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4 (deprecated)
10 14 IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire 10 14 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4
11 16+ IPv4 "FEC 129" Pseudowire 11 16+ "FEC 129" Pseudowire - IPv4
... ...
TBD1 38 IPv6 "FEC 128" Pseudowire TBD1 38 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv6
TBD2 40+ IPv6 "FEC 129" Pseudowire TBD2 40+ "FEC 129" Pseudowire - IPv6
5. Operation 5. Operation
This document does not define any new procedures. The process This document does not define any new procedures. The process
described in [RFC4379] MUST be used. described in [RFC4379] MUST be used.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to perform the following assignments in the "Multi- IANA is requested to perform the following assignments in the "Multi-
Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping
Parameters" registry, "TLVs and sub-TLVs" sub-registry. Parameters" registry, "TLVs and sub-TLVs" sub-registry.
[RFC Editor: To be REMOVED prior to publication. This registration [RFC Editor: To be REMOVED prior to publication. This registration
should take place at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ should take place at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/ mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xml#mpls-lsp-ping-parameters-7>] mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xml#mpls-lsp-ping-parameters-7>]
The following Sub-TLV changes, which comprise three updates and two The following Sub-TLV changes, which comprise three updates and two
additions, are made for two TLV Types in the aforementioned sub- additions, are made for the TLV Type 1 "Target FEC Stack" in the
registry: TLV Type 1 for "Target FEC Stack", and TLV Type 21 for aforementioned sub-registry.
"Reply Path".
Update the names of the Value fields of these three Sub-TLVs, adding Update the names of the Value fields of these three Sub-TLVs, adding
the "IPv4" qualifier (see Section 2), and update the Reference to the "IPv4" qualifier (see Section 2), and update the Reference to
also point to this document: also point to this document:
Type Sub-Type Value Field Type Sub-Type Value Field
---- -------- ----------- ---- -------- -----------
1 9 IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire (Deprecated) 1 9 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4 (Deprecated)
1 10 IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire 1 10 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4
1 11 IPv4 "FEC 129" Pseudowire 1 11 "FEC 129" Pseudowire - IPv4
Create two new entries for the Sub-Type field of Target FEC TLV (see Create two new entries for the Sub-Type field of Target FEC TLV (see
Section 3): Section 3):
Type Sub-Type Value Field Type Sub-Type Value Field
---- -------- ----------- ---- -------- -----------
1 TBD1 IPv6 "FEC 128" Pseudowire 1 TBD1 "FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv6
1 TBD2 IPv6 "FEC 129" Pseudowire 1 TBD2 "FEC 129" Pseudowire - IPv6
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
This draft does not introduce any new security issues, the security This draft does not introduce any new security issues, the security
mechanisms defined in [RFC4379] apply here. mechanisms defined in [RFC4379] apply here.
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge review and comments of Vanson Lim, The authors gratefully acknowledge review and comments of Vanson Lim,
Tom Petch, Spike Curtis, Loa Andersson, and Kireeti Kompella. Tom Petch, Spike Curtis, Loa Andersson, and Kireeti Kompella.
skipping to change at page 8, line 41 skipping to change at page 8, line 38
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6] [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6]
Asati, R., Manral, V., Papneja, R., and C. Pignataro, Asati, R., Manral, V., Papneja, R., and C. Pignataro,
"Updates to LDP for IPv6", draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-07 "Updates to LDP for IPv6", draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-07
(work in progress), June 2012. (work in progress), June 2012.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping]
Chen, M., Cao, W., Ning, S., JOUNAY, F., and S. DeLord,
"Return Path Specified LSP Ping",
draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-11 (work in
progress), October 2012.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Mach(Guoyi) Chen Mach(Guoyi) Chen
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
No. 3 Xinxi Road, Shang-di, Hai-dian District No. 3 Xinxi Road, Shang-di, Hai-dian District
Beijing 100085 Beijing 100085
China China
Email: mach@huawei.com Email: mach@huawei.com
Ping Pan Ping Pan
Infinera Infinera
US US
Email: ppan@infinera.com Email: ppan@infinera.com
Carlos Pignataro Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
7200-12 Kit Creek Road 7200-12 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
 End of changes. 37 change blocks. 
76 lines changed or deleted 60 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/