RFC 7537
IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) 🌸
Request for Comments: 7537 Title: IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points ✨ Authors: B. Decraene (Orange), N. Akiya, C. Pignataro (Cisco Systems), L. Andersson, S. Aldrin (Huawei Technologies) Category: Standards Track 👑 ISSN: 2070-1721 Date: May 2015 Updates: RFCs 4379 and 6424 (it doesn't obsolete anything 💅)
Abstract 🦋
okay so RFCs 4379 and 6424 created name spaces for Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping, which is giving main character energy 💖. But they never made the matching IANA registries for Downstream Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types. 😭
Now people need to allocate more code points from those name spaces, so this document updates RFCs 4379 and 6424 by creating IANA registries for exactly that purpose. iconic 🔥
Status of This Memo 🎀
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
It's a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and represents the consensus of the IETF community. It got public review and was approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). More info on Internet Standards is in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
You can find the current status, any errata, and how to send feedback at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537. 🧚
Copyright Notice 🌈
Copyright (c) 2015 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication. Please read these carefully, because they spell out your rights and restrictions for this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions, and they come without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 💜
Table of Contents 🍓
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Multipath Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Pad Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71. Introduction 💖
[RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping, but those RFCs never created the matching IANA registries for DS Flags, Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types. Not cute. 🙈
More code points are needed from these name spaces. In particular, [ENTROPY-LSP-PING] and [LSP-PING-LAG] request new DS Flags and Multipath Type allocations. ✨
This document updates [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] by creating IANA registries for that purpose. 🫶
Quick heads up: "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type" are fields inside two TLVs from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream Mapping (DEPRECATED) (value 2) and Downstream Detailed Mapping (value 20). Changing either registry affects both TLVs, so be careful, bestie. 🚨
2. IANA Considerations 👑
Per this document, IANA has created new registries inside the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] registry to keep track of DS Flags, Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types fields. The registry names and initial values are in the subsections right below. 🎀
2.1. DS Flags 🦋
[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping (DSMAP) TLV, which gets Type 2 from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
[RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, which gets Type 20 from that same registry.
DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share one field: DS Flags. 💅
IANA has created and now maintains a registry called "DS Flags".
The registration policy for this registry is Standards Action [RFC5226].
IANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: DS Flags
Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC 4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC 4379
5-0 Unassigned2.2. Multipath Types 🌸
IANA has created and now maintains a registry called "Multipath Types".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are as follows:
0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards ActionIANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Multipath Types
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC 4379
1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC 4379
3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC 4379
5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC 4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC 4379
10-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document2.3. Pad Type 🧚
IANA has created and now maintains a registry called "Pad Types".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards ActionIANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Pad Types
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC 4379
2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC 4379
3-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type 🍓
IANA has created and now maintains a registry called "Interface and Label Stack Address Types".
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
0-250 Standards Action
251-254 Experimental Use
255 Standards ActionIANA has made the following initial assignments:
Registry Name: Interface and Label Stack Address Types
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 IPv4 Numbered RFC 4379
2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC 4379
3 IPv6 Numbered RFC 4379
4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC 4379
5-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document3. Security Considerations 🔥
This document only creates IANA registries for code points defined in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424]. Honestly? That means there are no new security concerns here. Phew 😮💨💜
4. References 📚
4.1. Normative References 💜
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.
[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for
Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS
Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6424>.4.2. Informative References 🌈
[ENTROPY-LSP-PING]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S.
Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW)
Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)",
Work in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-00,
December 2014.
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters>.
[LSP-PING-LAG]
Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and
J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath
Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces", Work
in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00,
January 2015.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.Authors' Addresses 🫶
Bruno Decraene
Orange
EMail: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Nobo Akiya
Cisco Systems
EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com
Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems
EMail: cpignata@cisco.com
Loa Andersson
Huawei Technologies
EMail: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Sam Aldrin
Huawei Technologies
EMail: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc7537 2015-05
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms