draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-02.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-03.txt 
Routing area D. Rathi, Ed. Routing area D. Rathi, Ed.
Internet-Draft K. Arora Internet-Draft K. Arora
Intended status: Standards Track S. Hegde Intended status: Standards Track S. Hegde
Expires: June 6, 2022 Juniper Networks Inc. Expires: June 9, 2022 Juniper Networks Inc.
Z. Ali Z. Ali
N. Nainar N. Nainar
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
December 3, 2021 December 6, 2021
Egress TLV for Nil FEC in Label Switched Path Ping and Traceroute Egress TLV for Nil FEC in Label Switched Path Ping and Traceroute
Mechanisms Mechanisms
draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-02 draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-03
Abstract Abstract
MPLS ping and traceroute mechanism as described in RFC 8029 and MPLS ping and traceroute mechanism as described in RFC 8029 and
related extensions for SR as defined in RFC 8287 is very useful to related extensions for SR as defined in RFC 8287 is very useful to
precisely validate the control plane and data plane synchronization. precisely validate the control plane and data plane synchronization.
There is a possibility that all intermediate or transit nodes may not There is a possibility that all intermediate or transit nodes may not
have been upgraded to support these validation procedures. A simple have been upgraded to support these validation procedures. A simple
mpls ping and traceroute mechanism comprises of ability to traverse mpls ping and traceroute mechanism comprises of ability to traverse
any path without having to validate the control plane state. RFC any path without having to validate the control plane state. RFC
skipping to change at page 2, line 12 skipping to change at page 2, line 12
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 https://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 June 6, 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 9, 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 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
(https://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
skipping to change at page 2, line 40 skipping to change at page 2, line 40
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Problem with Nil FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Problem with Nil FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Egress TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Egress TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Sending Egress TLV in MPLS Echo Request . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. Sending Egress TLV in MPLS Echo Request . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Receiving Egress TLV in MPLS Echo Request . . . . . . . . 6 4.2. Receiving Egress TLV in MPLS Echo Request . . . . . . . . 6
5. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. New TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.1. New TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. New Return code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7.2. New Return code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Segment routing supports the creation of explicit paths using Segment routing supports the creation of explicit paths using
skipping to change at page 7, line 45 skipping to change at page 7, line 45
proposed in this draft Best-return-code as 8 ("Label switched at proposed in this draft Best-return-code as 8 ("Label switched at
stack-depth") and Best-return-subcode as Label-stack-depth to report stack-depth") and Best-return-subcode as Label-stack-depth to report
transit switching will be set in MPLS Echo Reply message. transit switching will be set in MPLS Echo Reply message.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
TBD TBD
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
The code points in section Section 7.1 and Section 7.2 have been
assigned by [IANA] by early allocation on 2021-11-08.
7.1. New TLV 7.1. New TLV
IANA need to assign new value for EGRESS TLV in the "Multi-Protocol [IANA] need to assign new value for EGRESS TLV in the "Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters"
in "TLVs" sub-registry [IANA]. in "TLVs" sub-registry.
+-------+-------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------+---------------+
| Value | Description | Reference | | Value | Description | Reference |
+-------+-------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------+---------------+
| 28 | EGRESS TLV | Section 3 | | 28 | EGRESS TLV | Section 3 |
| | | This document | | | | This document |
+-------+-------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------+---------------+
Table 1: TLVs Sub-Registry Table 1: TLVs Sub-Registry
7.2. New Return code 7.2. New Return code
IANA need to assign new Return Code for "Replying router is an egress [IANA] need to assign new Return Code for "Replying router is an
for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV" in the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching egress for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV" in the "Multi-Protocol Label
(MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" in "Return Codes" Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" in
sub-registry. [IANA]. "Return Codes" sub-registry.
+-------+------------------------------+---------------+ +-------+------------------------------+---------------+
| Value | Description | Reference | | Value | Description | Reference |
+-------+------------------------------+---------------+ +-------+------------------------------+---------------+
| 36 | Replying router is an egress | Section 4.2 | | 36 | Replying router is an egress | Section 4.2 |
| | for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV | This document | | | for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV | This document |
+-------+------------------------------+---------------+ +-------+------------------------------+---------------+
Table 2: Return code Sub-Registry Table 2: Return code Sub-Registry
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
11 lines changed or deleted 14 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/