draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-02.txt		draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-03.txt
	Internet Engineering Task Force N. Akiya		Internet Engineering Task Force N. Akiya
	Internet-Draft Big Switch Networks		Internet-Draft Big Switch Networks
	Updates: 8029 (if approved) G. Swallow		Updates: 8029 (if approved) G. Swallow
	Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems		Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
	Expires: November 20, 2017 S. Litkowski		Expires: June 3, 2018 S. Litkowski
	B. Decraene		B. Decraene
	Orange		Orange
	J. Drake		J. Drake
	Juniper Networks		Juniper Networks
	M. Chen		M. Chen
	Huawei		Huawei
	May 19, 2017		November 30, 2017
	Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath Support for		Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath Support for
	Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces		Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces
	draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-02		draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-03
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines an extension to the MPLS Label Switched Path		This document defines an extension to the MPLS Label Switched Path
	(LSP) Ping and Traceroute as specified in RFC 8029. The extension		(LSP) Ping and Traceroute as specified in RFC 8029. The extension
	allows the MPLS LSP Ping and Traceroute to discover and exercise		allows the MPLS LSP Ping and Traceroute to discover and exercise
	specific paths of Layer 2 (L2) Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) over Link		specific paths of Layer 2 (L2) Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) over Link
	Aggregation Group (LAG) interfaces.		Aggregation Group (LAG) interfaces.
	This document updates RFC8029.		This document updates RFC8029.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶
	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
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 https://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 November 20, 2017.		This Internet-Draft will expire on June 3, 2018.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2017 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		(https://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		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	skipping to change at page 25, line 21 ¶		skipping to change at page 25, line 21 ¶
	suggestion by Yimin Shen to create two separate validation procedures		suggestion by Yimin Shen to create two separate validation procedures
	had a big impact to the contents of this document.		had a big impact to the contents of this document.
	14. References		14. References
	14.1. Normative References		14.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC7537] Decraene, B., Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., Andersson, L., and		[RFC7537] Decraene, B., Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., Andersson, L., and
	S. Aldrin, "IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points",		S. Aldrin, "IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points",
	RFC 7537, DOI 10.17487/RFC7537, May 2015,		RFC 7537, DOI 10.17487/RFC7537, May 2015,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537>.
	[RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N.,		[RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N.,
	Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label		Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label
	Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029,		Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8029>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8029>.
	14.2. Informative References		14.2. Informative References
	[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/
	mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>.		mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>.
	[IEEE802.1AX]		[IEEE802.1AX]
	IEEE Std. 802.1AX, "IEEE Standard for Local and		IEEE Std. 802.1AX, "IEEE Standard for Local and
	metropolitan area networks - Link Aggregation", November		metropolitan area networks - Link Aggregation", November
	2008.		2008.
	[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", RFC 5226,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
	[RFC7439] George, W., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Gap Analysis for		[RFC7439] George, W., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Gap Analysis for
	Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks", RFC 7439,		Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks", RFC 7439,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC7439, January 2015,		DOI 10.17487/RFC7439, January 2015,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7439>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7439>.
	Appendix A. LAG with L2 Switch Issues		Appendix A. LAG with L2 Switch Issues
	Several flavors of "LAG with L2 switch" provisioning models are		Several flavors of "LAG with L2 switch" provisioning models are
	described in this section, with MPLS data plane ECMP traversal		described in this section, with MPLS data plane ECMP traversal
	validation issues with each.		validation issues with each.
	A.1. Equal Numbers of LAG Members		A.1. Equal Numbers of LAG Members
	R1 ==== S1 ==== R2		R1 ==== S1 ==== R2
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	12 lines changed or deleted		12 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/