rfc9214.original   rfc9214.txt 
Network Work group N. Nainar Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) N. Nainar
Internet-Draft C. Pignataro Request for Comments: 9214 C. Pignataro
Updates: 8287 (if approved) Cisco Systems, Inc. Updates: 8287 Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track M. Aissaoui Category: Standards Track M. Aissaoui
Expires: May 22, 2022 Nokia ISSN: 2070-1721 Nokia
November 18, 2021 March 2022
OSPFv3 CodePoint for MPLS LSP Ping OSPFv3 Code Point for MPLS LSP Ping
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint-06
Abstract Abstract
IANA has created "Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV" and "Protocol IANA has created "Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV" and "Protocol
in the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV" in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV" registries
registries under the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label under the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry. RFC8287 defines the (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry. RFC 8287 defines the code points
code points for Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) and Intermediate for Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) and Intermediate System to
System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) protocols. Intermediate System (IS-IS) protocols.
This document specifies the code point to be used in the Segment ID This document specifies the code point to be used in the Segment ID
sub-TLV and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV when the Interior Gateway sub-TLV and Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV when the Interior
Protocol (IGP) is OSPFv3. This document also updates RFC8287 by Gateway Protocol (IGP) is OSPFv3. This document also updates
clarifying that the existing "OSPF" code point is to be used only to RFC 8287 by clarifying that the existing "OSPF" code point is to be
indicate OSPFv2, and by defining the behavior when the Segment ID used only to indicate OSPFv2 and by defining the behavior when the
sub-TLV indicates the use of IPv6. Segment ID sub-TLV indicates the use of IPv6.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 22, 2022. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9214.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2022 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
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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
described in the Simplified BSD License. in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Requirements Notation
3. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Terminology
4. OSPFv3 protocol in Segment ID sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. OSPFv3 Protocol in Segment ID Sub-TLVs
5. OSPFv3 protocol in Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV . . . . . 4 5. OSPFv3 Protocol in Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV
6. Update to RFC8287 - OSPFv2 Protocol in Segment ID and DDMAP 6. Update to RFC 8287 - OSPFv2 Protocol in Segment ID and DDMAP
sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Sub-TLVs
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7. IANA Considerations
7.1. Protocol in the Segment ID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7.1. Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV
7.2. Protocol in Label Stack sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed 7.2. Protocol in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed
Mapping TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Mapping TLV
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. Security Considerations
9. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9. Normative References
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Acknowledgements
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
IANA has created the "Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV" registry IANA has created the "Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV" registry
and "Protocol in the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed and "Protocol in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping
Mapping TLV" registries under the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching TLV" registries under the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
(MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING].
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]. [RFC8287] defines the code points for OSPF and [RFC8287] defines the code points for OSPF and IS-IS.
IS-IS.
"OSPF for IPv6" [RFC5340] describes OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) to "OSPF for IPv6" [RFC5340] describes OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) to
support IPv6. "Support of Address Families in OSPFv3" [RFC5838] support IPv6. "Support of Address Families in OSPFv3" [RFC5838]
describes the mechanism to support multiple address families (AFs) in describes the mechanism to support multiple address families (AFs) in
OSPFv3. Accordingly, OSPFv3 may be used to advertise IPv6 and IPv4 OSPFv3. Accordingly, OSPFv3 may be used to advertise IPv6 and IPv4
prefixes. prefixes.
This document specifies the code point to be used in the Segment ID This document specifies the code point to be used in the Segment ID
sub-TLV (Type 34, 35 and 36) and in the Downstream Detailed Mapping sub-TLV (Types 34, 35, and 36) and in the Downstream Detailed Mapping
(DDMAP) TLV when the IGP is OSPFv3. (DDMAP) TLV when the IGP is OSPFv3.
This document also updates "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute This document also updates "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute
for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment
Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes" [RFC8287] by clarifying Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes" [RFC8287] by clarifying
that the existing "OSPF" code point is to be used only to indicate that the existing "OSPF" code point is to be used only to indicate
OSPFv2, and by defining the behavior when the Segment ID sub-TLV OSPFv2 and by defining the behavior when the Segment ID sub-TLV
indicates the use of IPv6. indicates the use of IPv6.
2. Terminology 2. Requirements Notation
This document uses the terminology defined in "Segment Routing
Architecture" [RFC8402], "Detecting Multiprotocol Label Switched
(MPLS) Data-Plane Failures" [RFC8029], [RFC8287] and so the readers
are expected to be familiar with the same.
3. Requirements Notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
4. OSPFv3 protocol in Segment ID sub-TLVs 3. Terminology
This document uses the terminology defined in "Segment Routing
Architecture" [RFC8402], "Detecting Multiprotocol Label Switched
(MPLS) Data-Plane Failures" [RFC8029], and "Label Switched Path (LSP)
Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency
Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes" [RFC8287], and so
the readers are expected to be familiar with the same.
4. OSPFv3 Protocol in Segment ID Sub-TLVs
When the protocol field of the Segment ID sub-TLV of Type 34 (IPv4 When the protocol field of the Segment ID sub-TLV of Type 34 (IPv4
IGP-Prefix Segment ID), Type 35 (IPv6 IGP-Prefix Segment ID) and Type IGP-Prefix Segment ID), Type 35 (IPv6 IGP-Prefix Segment ID), and
36 (IGP-Adjacency Segment ID) is set to 3, the responder MUST perform Type 36 (IGP-Adjacency Segment ID) is set to 3, the responder MUST
the Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) validation using OSPFv3 as the perform the Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) validation using
IGP. OSPFv3 as the IGP.
The initiator MUST NOT set the protocol field of the Segment ID sub- The initiator MUST NOT set the protocol field of the Segment ID sub-
TLV Type 35 and Type 36 as OSPF (value 1) as OSPFv2 is not compatible TLV Type 35 and Type 36 as OSPF (value 1) as OSPFv2 is not compatible
with the use of IPv6 addresses indicated by this sub-TLV. with the use of IPv6 addresses indicated by this sub-TLV.
When the protocol field in the received Segment ID sub-TLV Type 35 When the protocol field in the received Segment ID sub-TLV Type 35
and Type 36 is OSPF (value 1), the responder MAY treat the protocol and Type 36 is OSPF (value 1), the responder MAY treat the protocol
value as "Any IGP Protocol" (value 0) according to step 4a of value as "Any IGP Protocol" (value 0) according to step 4a of
Section 7.4 of [RFC8287]. This allows the responder to support Section 7.4 of [RFC8287]. This allows the responder to support
legacy implementations that use value 1 to indicate OSPFv3. legacy implementations that use value 1 to indicate OSPFv3.
5. OSPFv3 protocol in Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV 5. OSPFv3 Protocol in Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV
The protocol field of the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV in The protocol field of the DDMAP TLV in an echo reply is set to 7 when
an echo reply is set to 7 when OSPFv3 is used to distribute the label OSPFv3 is used to distribute the label carried in the Downstream
carried in the Downstream Label field. Label field.
6. Update to RFC8287 - OSPFv2 Protocol in Segment ID and DDMAP sub-TLVs 6. Update to RFC 8287 - OSPFv2 Protocol in Segment ID and DDMAP Sub-
TLVs
Section 5 of [RFC8287] defines the code point for OSPF to be used in Section 5 of [RFC8287] defines the code point for OSPF to be used in
the Protocol field of the Segment ID sub-TLV. Section 6 of [RFC8287] the Protocol field of the Segment ID sub-TLV. Section 6 of [RFC8287]
defines the code point for OSPF to be used in the Protocol field of defines the code point for OSPF to be used in the Protocol field of
the DDMAP TLV. the DDMAP TLV.
This document updates [RFC8287], by specifying that the "OSPF" code This document updates [RFC8287] by specifying that the "OSPF" code
points SHOULD be used only for OSPFv2. points SHOULD be used only for OSPFv2.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
7.1. Protocol in the Segment ID sub-TLV 7.1. Protocol in the Segment ID Sub-TLV
IANA is requested to assign a new code point from the "Protocol in IANA has assigned a new code point from the "Protocol in the Segment
the Segment ID sub-TLV" registry under the "Multi-Protocol Label ID Sub-TLV" registry under the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry as follows:
registry as follows:
Value Meaning Reference +=======+=========+===========+
---------- ------- ------------ | Value | Meaning | Reference |
3 OSPFv3 This document +=======+=========+===========+
| 3 | OSPFv3 | RFC 9214 |
+-------+---------+-----------+
IANA is also requested to add a note for the existing entry for code Table 1
point 1 (OSPF) to read: - "To be used for OSPFv2 only".
7.2. Protocol in Label Stack sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV IANA has added a note for the existing entry for code point 1 (OSPF):
"To be used for OSPFv2 only".
IANA is requested to assign a new code point for OSPFv3 from 7.2. Protocol in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV
"Protocol in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV"
registry under the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry as follows:
Value Meaning Reference IANA has assigned a new code point for OSPFv3 from "Protocol in Label
---------- --------- ------------ Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV" registry under the
7 OSPFv3 This document "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
Ping Parameters" registry as follows:
IANA is also requested to add a note for the existing codepoint 5 +=======+=========+===========+
(OSPF) to read - "To be used for OSPFv2 only". | Value | Meaning | Reference |
+=======+=========+===========+
| 7 | OSPFv3 | RFC 9214 |
+-------+---------+-----------+
Table 2
IANA has added a note for the existing codepoint 5 (OSPF): "To be
used for OSPFv2 only".
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This document updates [RFC8287] and does not introduce any additional This document updates [RFC8287] and does not introduce any additional
security considerations. See [RFC8029] to see generic security security considerations. See [RFC8029] to see generic security
considerations about the MPLS LSP Ping. considerations about the MPLS LSP Ping.
9. Acknowledgement 9. Normative References
The authors would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Zafar Ali, Loa
Andersson, Andrew Molotchko, Deborah Brungard, Acee Lindem and Adrian
Farrel for their review and suggestions.
The authors also would like to thank Christer Holmberg, Tero Kivinen,
Matthew Bocci, Tom Petch and Martin Vigoureux for their review
comments.
10. Normative References
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label IANA, "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters", Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/ <https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>. parameters>.
[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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF [RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008, for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
skipping to change at page 6, line 17 skipping to change at line 238
Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and
IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data
Planes", RFC 8287, DOI 10.17487/RFC8287, December 2017, Planes", RFC 8287, DOI 10.17487/RFC8287, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8287>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8287>.
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Les Ginsberg, Zafar Ali, Loa
Andersson, Andrew Molotchko, Deborah Brungard, Acee Lindem, and
Adrian Farrel for their review and suggestions.
The authors also would like to thank Christer Holmberg, Tero Kivinen,
Matthew Bocci, Tom Petch, and Martin Vigoureux for their review
comments.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Nagendra Kumar Nainar Nagendra Kumar Nainar
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
7200-12 Kit Creek Road 7200-12 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
US United States of America
Email: naikumar@cisco.com Email: naikumar@cisco.com
Carlos Pignataro Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
7200-11 Kit Creek Road 7200-11 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
US United States of America
Email: cpignata@cisco.com Email: cpignata@cisco.com
Mustapha Aissaoui Mustapha Aissaoui
Nokia Nokia
Canada Canada
Email: mustapha.aissaoui@nokia.com Email: mustapha.aissaoui@nokia.com
 End of changes. 35 change blocks. 
119 lines changed or deleted 121 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/