< draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-05.txt		draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-06.txt >
	skipping to change at page 1, line 16 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 16 ¶
	Expires: August 01, 2014 Juniper Networks		Expires: August 01, 2014 Juniper Networks
	S. Amante		S. Amante
	Apple Inc.		Apple Inc.
	A. Malis		A. Malis
	Huawei		Huawei
	C. Pignataro		C. Pignataro
	Cisco		Cisco
	January 28, 2014		January 28, 2014
	MPLS Forwarding Compliance and Performance Requirements		MPLS Forwarding Compliance and Performance Requirements
	draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-05		draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-06
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document provides guidelines for implementers regarding MPLS		This document provides guidelines for implementers regarding MPLS
	forwarding and a basis for evaluations of forwarding implementations.		forwarding and a basis for evaluations of forwarding implementations.
	Guidelines cover many aspects of MPLS forwarding. Topics are		Guidelines cover many aspects of MPLS forwarding. Topics are
	highlighted where implementers might otherwise overlook practical		highlighted where implementers might otherwise overlook practical
	requirements which are unstated or under emphasized or are optional		requirements which are unstated or under emphasized or are optional
	for conformance to RFCs but are often considered mandatory by		for conformance to RFCs but are often considered mandatory by
	providers.		providers.
	skipping to change at page 11, line 48 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 48 ¶
	generally impact only RSVP-TE signaling. Forwarding is modified by		generally impact only RSVP-TE signaling. Forwarding is modified by
	major extension built upon RFC3209.		major extension built upon RFC3209.
	RFCs which impact forwarding are discussed in the following		RFCs which impact forwarding are discussed in the following
	subsections.		subsections.
	2.1.1. MPLS Special Purpose Labels		2.1.1. MPLS Special Purpose Labels
	[RFC3032] specifies that label values 0-15 are special purpose labels		[RFC3032] specifies that label values 0-15 are special purpose labels
	with special meanings. [I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels]		with special meanings. [I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels]
	renamed these from the term "reserved labels" used in [RFC3032]		renamed these from the term "reserved labels" used in [RFC3032] to
	"special purpose labels". Three values of NULL label are defined		"special purpose labels". Three values of NULL label are defined
	(two of which are later updated by [RFC4182]) and a router-alert		(two of which are later updated by [RFC4182]) and a router-alert
	label is defined. The original intent was that special purpose		label is defined. The original intent was that special purpose
	labels, except the NULL labels, could be sent to the routing engine		labels, except the NULL labels, could be sent to the routing engine
	CPU rather than be processed in forwarding hardware. Hardware		CPU rather than be processed in forwarding hardware. Hardware
	support is required by new RFCs such as those defining entropy label		support is required by new RFCs such as those defining entropy label
	and OAM processed as a result of receiving a GAL. For new special		and OAM processed as a result of receiving a GAL. For new special
	purpose labels, some accommodation is needed for LSR that will send		purpose labels, some accommodation is needed for LSR that will send
	the labels to a general purpose CPU or other highly programmable		the labels to a general purpose CPU or other highly programmable
	hardware. For example, ELI will only be sent to LSR which have		hardware. For example, ELI will only be sent to LSR which have
	signaled support for [RFC6790] and high OAM packet rate must be		signaled support for [RFC6790] and high OAM packet rate must be
	negotiated among endpoints.		negotiated among endpoints.
	[RFC3429] reserves a label for ITU-T Y.1711, however Y.1711 does not		[RFC3429] reserves a label for ITU-T Y.1711, however Y.1711 does not
	work with multipath and its use is strongly discouraged.		work with multipath and its use is strongly discouraged.
	The current list of special purpose labels can be found on the		The current list of special purpose labels can be found on the
	"Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture (MPLS) Label Values"		"Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture (MPLS) Label Values"
	registry reachable at IANA's pages at [1].		registry reachable at IANA's pages at http://www.iana.org.
	[I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels] introduces an IANA "Extended		[I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels] introduces an IANA "Extended
	Special Purpose MPLS Label Values" registry and makes use of the		Special Purpose MPLS Label Values" registry and makes use of the
	"extension" label, label 15, to indicate that the next label is an		"extension" label, label 15, to indicate that the next label is an
	extended special purpose label and requires special handling. The		extended special purpose label and requires special handling. The
	range of only 16 values for special purpose labels allows a table to		range of only 16 values for special purpose labels allows a table to
	be used. The range of extended special purpose labels with 20 bits		be used. The range of extended special purpose labels with 20 bits
	available for use may have to be handled in some other way in the		available for use may have to be handled in some other way in the
	unlikely event that in the future the range of currently reserved		unlikely event that in the future the range of currently reserved
	values 256-1048575 are used. If only the standards action range,		values 256-1048575 are used. If only the standards action range,
	skipping to change at page 47, line 7 ¶		skipping to change at page 47, line 7 ¶
	protection. The extreme data and packet rates make this type of		protection. The extreme data and packet rates make this type of
	denial of service unlikely and make undetectable denial of service of		denial of service unlikely and make undetectable denial of service of
	this type impossible.		this type impossible.
	8. References		8. References
	8.1. Normative References		8.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-mpls-psc-updates]		[I-D.ietf-mpls-psc-updates]
	Osborne, E., "Updates to PSC", draft-ietf-mpls-psc-		Osborne, E., "Updates to PSC", draft-ietf-mpls-psc-
	updates-01 (work in progress), October 2013.		updates-01 (work in progress), January 2014.
	[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, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	[RFC3032] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y.,		[RFC3032] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y.,
	Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack		Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack
	Encoding", RFC 3032, January 2001.		Encoding", RFC 3032, January 2001.
	[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,		[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
	and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP		and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
	skipping to change at page 49, line 29 ¶		skipping to change at page 49, line 29 ¶
	[ACK-compression]		[ACK-compression]
	, , , "Observations and Dynamics of a Congestion Control		, , , "Observations and Dynamics of a Congestion Control
	Algorithm: The Effects of Two-Way Traffic", Proc. ACM		Algorithm: The Effects of Two-Way Traffic", Proc. ACM
	SIGCOMM, ACM Computer Communications Review (CCR) Vol 21,		SIGCOMM, ACM Computer Communications Review (CCR) Vol 21,
	No 4, 1991, pp.133-147., 1991.		No 4, 1991, pp.133-147., 1991.
	[I-D.ietf-mpls-in-udp]		[I-D.ietf-mpls-in-udp]
	Building, K., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Pignataro, C., and F.		Building, K., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Pignataro, C., and F.
	Yongbing, "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", draft-ietf-mpls-in-		Yongbing, "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", draft-ietf-mpls-in-
	udp-05 (work in progress), December 2013.		udp-05 (work in progress), January 2014.
	[I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels]		[I-D.ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels]
	Kompella, K., Andersson, L., and A. Farrel, "Allocating		Kompella, K., Andersson, L., and A. Farrel, "Allocating
	and Retiring Special Purpose MPLS Labels", draft-ietf-		and Retiring Special Purpose MPLS Labels", draft-ietf-
	mpls-special-purpose-labels-03 (work in progress), July		mpls-special-purpose-labels-03 (work in progress), July
	2013.		2013.
	[I-D.ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls]		[I-D.ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls]
	Davari, S., Oren, A., Bhatia, M., Roberts, P., and L.		Davari, S., Oren, A., Bhatia, M., Roberts, P., and L.
	Montini, "Transporting Timing messages over MPLS		Montini, "Transporting Timing messages over MPLS
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	5 lines changed or deleted		5 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/