Network Working Group V. Manral, Ed. Internet-Draft IPInfusion Inc. Intended status: Standards Track Expires: October 01, 2010 March 01, 2010 LSP-Ping Target FEC Stack Extensions draft-manral-mpls-lsp-ping-fecext-00 Abstract LSP-Ping for MPLS is existing and widely deployment OAM mechanisms for MPLS LSPs. This document describes extensions to LSP Ping Target FEC stack for MPLS data tunneled over MPLS tunnels, MPLS Target FEC as well as Static Target FEC. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. 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." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 20, 2010. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2010 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 of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to 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 are provided without warranty as described in the BSD License. 1. Introduction An MPLS echo request MUST have a Target FEC Stack that describes the FEC Stack being tested. The FEC defines a group of packets forwarded in the same manner. However the LSP Ping RFC [RFC4379] does not define FEC's for Static or MPLS. 1.1. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 2. Target FEC stack Sub-Type Length Value Field -------- ------ ----------- 17 5 Static IPv4 prefix 18 17 Static IPv6 prefix 19 4 MPLS FEC stack 2.1. Static Labeled IPv4 Prefix When a Static labeled IPv4 prefix is encoded in a label stack, the following format is used. The value field consists the IPv4 prefix (with trailing 0 bits to make 32 bits in all), and the prefix length, as follows: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv4 Prefix | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Prefix Length | Must Be Zero | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2.2. Static Labeled IPv6 Prefix When a Static labeled IPv6 prefix is encoded in a label stack, the following format is used. The value consists of 16 octets of an IPv6 prefix followed by 1 octet of prefix length in bits; the format is given below. The IPv6 prefix is in network byte order; if the prefix is shorter than 128 bits, the trailing bits SHOULD be set to zero. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 prefix | | (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Prefix Length | Must Be Zero | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2.3 MPLS Target FEC MPLS top of the stack is what is encoded in the FEC. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | MPLS Label | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3. Security Considerations The draft does not introduce any new security considerations. Those discussed in [RFC4379] are also applicable to this document. 4. Acknowledgements 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. New Target FEC subtype Type A new Channel type is defined in Section 2.1. IANA is requested to assign a new value from the "PW Associated Channel Type" registry, as per IETF consensus policy. Type Value Meaning ---- ----- ------- 1 17 Static IPv4 prefix 18 Static IPv6 prefix 19 MPLS FEC stack 6. References 6.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, February 2006. [RFC4385] Bryant, S., Swallow, G., Martini, L., and D. McPherson, "Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Control Word for Use over an MPLS PSN", RFC 4385, February 2006. 6.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-bfd-mpls] Aggarwal, R., Kompella, K., Nadeau, T., and G. Swallow, "BFD For MPLS LSPs", draft-ietf-bfd-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2008. [I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv] Boutros, S., Bryant, S., Sivabalan, S., Swallow, G., and D. Ward, "Definition of ACH TLV Structure", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-01 (work in progress), February 2010. [I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-oam-requirements] Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, "Requirements for OAM in MPLS Transport Networks", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-requirements-04 (work in progress), December 2009. [I-D.ietf-pwe3-vccv-bfd] Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-bfd-07 (work in progress), July 2009. [I-D.katz-ward-bfd-multipoint] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "BFD for Multipoint Networks", draft-katz-ward-bfd-multipoint-02 (work in progress), February 2009. [I-D.swallow-mpls-tp-identifiers] Bocci, M. and G. Swallow, "MPLS-TP Identifiers", draft-swallow-mpls-tp-identifiers-02 (work in progress), October 2009. [RFC5586] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009. Authors' Addresses Vishwas Manral IP Infusion Inc. vishwas@ipinfusion.com