--- 1/draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-00.txt	2021-10-20 11:13:10.308872794 -0700
+++ 2/draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-01.txt	2021-10-20 11:13:10.332873391 -0700
@@ -1,23 +1,23 @@
 
 Routing area                                               D. Rathi, Ed.
 Internet-Draft                                                  K. Arora
 Intended status: Standards Track                                S. Hegde
-Expires: March 25, 2022                            Juniper Networks Inc.
+Expires: April 23, 2022                            Juniper Networks Inc.
                                                                   Z. Ali
                                                                N. Nainar
                                                      Cisco Systems, Inc.
-                                                      September 21, 2021
+                                                        October 20, 2021
 
    Egress TLV for Nil FEC in Label Switched Path Ping and Traceroute
                                Mechanisms
-               draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-00
+               draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-01
 
 Abstract
 
    MPLS ping and traceroute mechanism as described in RFC 8029 and
    related extensions for SR as defined in RFC 8287 is very useful to
    precisely validate the control plane and data plane synchronization.
    There is a possibility that all intermediate or transit nodes may not
    have been upgraded to support these validation procedures.  A simple
    mpls ping and traceroute mechanism comprises of ability to traverse
    any path without having to validate the control plane state.  RFC
@@ -46,21 +46,21 @@
    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 https://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 March 25, 2022.
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 23, 2022.
 
 Copyright Notice
 
    Copyright (c) 2021 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
    (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
@@ -279,23 +279,23 @@
    Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth is Nil FEC, set Best-return-code to
    8 ("Label switched at stack-depth") and Best-return-subcode to Label-
    stack-depth to report transit switching in MPLS Echo Reply message.
 
    2.  If the Label-stack-depth is 0 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at
    FEC-stack-depth is Nil FEC then do the look up for an exact match of
    the EGRESS TLV prefix to any of locally configured interfaces or
    loopback addresses.
 
    2a.  If EGRESS TLV prefix look up succeeds, set Best-return-code to
-   TBD2 ("Replying router is an egress for EGRESS TLV") (Section 7.2)and
-   Best-return-subcode to 1 to report egress ok in MPLS Echo Reply
-   message.
+   TBD2 ("Replying router is an egress for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV")
+   (Section 7.2) and Best-return-subcode to 1 to report egress ok in
+   MPLS Echo Reply message.
 
    2b.  If EGRESS TLV prefix look up fails, set the Best-return-code to
    10, "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth" and
    Best-return-subcode to 1.
 
 5.  Backward Compatibility
 
    The extension proposed in this document is backward compatible with
    procedures described in [RFC8029].  Router that does not support
    EGRESS-TLV, will ignore it and use current NIL-FEC procedures
@@ -328,29 +328,30 @@
              | Value          | Description | Reference     |
              +----------------+-------------+---------------+
              | TBD1           |  EGRESS TLV | Section 3     |
              | (suggested 28) |             | This document |
              +----------------+-------------+---------------+
 
                         Table 1: TLVs Sub-Registry
 
 7.2.  New Return code
 
-   IANA need to assign new value for EGRESS TLV in the "Multi-Protocol
-   Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters"
-   in "Return Codes" sub-registry.  [IANA].
+   IANA need to assign new Return Code for "Replying router is an egress
+   for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV" in the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching
+   (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" in "Return Codes"
+   sub-registry.  [IANA].
 
      +----------------+------------------------------+---------------+
      | Value          |         Description          | Reference     |
      +----------------+------------------------------+---------------+
      | TBD2           | Replying router is an egress | Section 4.2   |
-     | (suggested 36) |      for the EGRESS-TLV      | This document |
+     | (suggested 36) | for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV | This document |
      +----------------+------------------------------+---------------+
 
                      Table 2: Return code Sub-Registry
 
 8.  Acknowledgements
 
    TBD.
 
 9.  References