draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-00.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-01.txt 
Network Working Group B. Decraene Network Working Group B. Decraene
Internet-Draft Orange Internet-Draft Orange
Updates: 4379, 6424 (if approved) N. Akiya Updates: 4379, 6424 (if approved) N. Akiya
Intended status: Standards Track C. Pignataro Intended status: Standards Track C. Pignataro
Expires: May 13, 2015 Cisco Systems Expires: August 7, 2015 Cisco Systems
L. Andersson L. Andersson
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
November 9, 2014 February 3, 2015
IANA registries for LSP ping Code Points IANA registries for LSP ping Code Points
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-00 draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-01
Abstract Abstract
RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 created name spaces for Multiprotocol Label RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 created name spaces for Multiprotocol Label
Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFC Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFCs
did not create the corresponding IANA registries for DS Flags, did not create the corresponding IANA registries for the Downstream
Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address Types. Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address
Types.
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. This document updates RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 in that it name spaces. This document updates RFC 4379 and RFC 6424 in that it
creates the IANA registries for that purpose. creates the IANA registries for that purpose.
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 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 May 13, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping. [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping.
However, those RFC did not create the corresponding IANA registries However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries
for DS Flags, Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address Types. for DS Flags, Multipath Type, Pad TLV and Address Types.
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these
name spaces. In particular [I-D.akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] and name spaces. In particular [I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] and
[I-D.akiya-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath] are requesting allocation [I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath] are requesting allocation for
for DS Flags and Multipath Type. DS Flags and Multipath Type.
This document serves to update [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it This document serves to update [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it
creates the IANA registries for that purpose. creates the IANA registries for that purpose.
2. IANA Considerations 2. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to create new registries within This document requests IANA to create new registries within
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] protocol to maintain "DS Flags", "Multipath [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] protocol to maintain "DS Flags", "Multipath
Type", "Pad TLV" and "Address Types" fields. Name of registries and Type", "Pad TLV" and "Address Types" fields. Name of registries and
initial values are described in immediate sub-sections to follow. initial values are described in immediate sub-sections to follow.
skipping to change at page 2, line 46 skipping to change at page 2, line 46
2.1. DS Flags 2.1. DS Flags
[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping TLV, which has the Type 2 [RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping TLV, which has the Type 2
assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
[RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV, which has the [RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV, which has the
Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs shares a field: "DS DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share a field: "DS
Flags". Flags".
The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled "DS The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled "DS
Flags" with the following registration procedure: Flags" with the following registration procedure:
Registry Name: DS flags. Registry Name: DS Flags.
Bit number Name Reference Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC4379 7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC4379 6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC4379
5-0 Unassigned 5-0 Unassigned
Assignments of DS Flags are via Standards Action [RFC5226]. Assignments of DS Flags are via Standards Action [RFC5226].
Note that "DS Flags" is a field included in two TLVs defined in Note that "DS Flags" is a field included in two TLVs defined in
skipping to change at page 5, line 23 skipping to change at page 5, line 23
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006.
[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for [RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for
Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS
Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011. Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011.
5.2. Informative References 5.2. Informative References
[I-D.akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping] [I-D.ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S. Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S.
Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW) Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW)
Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)", Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)",
draft-akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-03 (work in progress), draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-00 (work in progress),
October 2014. December 2014.
[I-D.akiya-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath] [I-D.ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and
J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath
Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces", Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces",
draft-akiya-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-02 (work in draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00 (work in
progress), October 2014. progress), January 2015.
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters", Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/ <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>. mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008. May 2008.
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 21 lines changed or added

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