idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (September 24, 2020) is 1304 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '1' on line 621 -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '2' on line 639 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-LSP-PING' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-MT' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-RC' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-RM' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-1-16-21' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-11' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-20' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-23' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-27' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-Sub-6' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-TLV-reg' Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 14 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 MPLS Working Group L. Andersson 3 Internet-Draft Bronze Dragon Consulting 4 Updates: 8029, 8611 (if approved) M. Chen 5 Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Techologies 6 Expires: March 28, 2021 C. Pignataro 7 Cisco Systems 8 T. Saad 9 Juniper Networks 10 September 24, 2020 12 Updating the IANA MPLS LSP Ping Parameters 13 draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04 15 Abstract 17 This document updates RFC 8029 and RFC 8611 that both define IANA 18 registries for MPLS LSP Ping. It also updates the description of the 19 procedures for the responses sent when an unknown or erroneous code 20 point is found. The updates are to clarify and align this name space 21 with recent developments. 23 Status of This Memo 25 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 26 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 28 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 29 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 31 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 33 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 34 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 35 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 36 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 38 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 28, 2021. 40 Copyright Notice 42 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 43 document authors. All rights reserved. 45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 47 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 48 publication of this document. Please review these documents 49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 53 described in the Simplified BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 1.1. Requirement Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 1.2. Terminology Used in this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 2. Updating the Message Types, Reply Mode and Return Codes 61 Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 3. Updating the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 3.1. General Principles for the LSP Ping TLV and Sub-TLV 64 registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 3.1.1. Unrecognized Experimental Use TLVs and Sub-TLVs . . . 6 66 3.2. Common Registration Procedures for TLVs and sub-TLVs . . 6 67 3.3. Changes to the LSP Ping Registries . . . . . . . . . . . 7 68 3.3.1. Common Changes to the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries . . 7 69 4. Updates to Related RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 4.1. Updates to RFC 8029 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 71 4.2. Updates to RFC 8611 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 72 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 73 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 74 6.1. Updates to the Message Type, Reply Mode and Return Codes 75 Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 76 6.1.1. Updates to the Mesage Type registry . . . . . . . . . 11 77 6.1.2. Updates to the Reply Modes registry . . . . . . . . . 12 78 6.1.3. Updates to the Return Codes registry . . . . . . . . 13 79 6.2. Updates to the TLV and sub-TLV registries . . . . . . . . 16 80 6.2.1. Updates to the TLVs registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 81 6.2.2. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLVs 1, 16 82 and 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 83 6.2.3. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 6 . . . . 20 84 6.2.4. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 11 . . . 22 85 6.2.5. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 20 . . . 24 86 6.2.6. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 23 . . . 26 87 6.2.7. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 27 . . . 28 88 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 89 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 90 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 91 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 92 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 94 1. Introduction 96 When RFC 8029 [RFC8029] was published it contained updates to the 97 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 98 Ping Parameters" IANA name space [IANA-LSP-PING]. 100 RFC 8611 [RFC8611] updated the LSP Ping IANA registries to match RFC 101 8029. This document further clarifies the entries in those 102 registries and makes the definitions more precise. 104 This document updates RFC 8029 [[RFC8029] and RFC 8611 [RFC8611] by 105 updating two groups of registries as follows: 107 First the registries for Message Types [IANA-MT], Reply Modes 108 [IANA-RM] and Return Codes [IANA-RC] are updated. The changes to 109 these registries are minor. 111 Second, this document updates the TLV and sub-TLV registries. 113 o TLVs [IANA-TLV-reg]. 115 o Sub-TLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21]. 117 o Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 [IANA-Sub-6]. 119 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 11 [IANA-Sub-11]. 121 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 [IANA-Sub-20]. 123 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 23 [IANA-Sub-23]. 125 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 [IANA-Sub-27]. 127 The registry for sub-TLVs for TLV 9 [IANA-Sub-9] is not updated. 129 Third, some code points (TLVs and sub-TLVs) are "mandatory" or 130 "optional". Contrary to how other RFCs use these words, indicating 131 that it is mandatory or optional to include the code points in a 132 message, RFC 8029 uses these words to indicate that an action might 133 or might not be necessary. This document updates RFC 8029 to drop 134 the words "mandatory" and "optional", and the text is changed to 135 focus on what should be done. 137 1.1. Requirement Language 139 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 140 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 141 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 142 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 143 capitals, as shown here. 145 1.2. Terminology Used in this Document 147 This docuemtment uses some terms that relates to IANA registries in 148 this way: 150 IANA Name Space, 151 a name space is a top level registry. An exasmple could be 152 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 153 Ping Parameters" [IANA-LSP-PING]. A name space is most often a 154 contaimer for regiistries that hold code points that share some 155 affinity. 157 IANA Registry, 158 an IANA registry holds code points, and lists the registration 159 procedures and allocation of code points these code points. One 160 example would be the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg]. 162 IANA Sub-registry, 163 a sub-registry is used when a code point allocated in a registry 164 need code points scoped by that or a set of code points. An 165 example of a sunregistry thast holds code points for more than one 166 TLV is "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 168 2. Updating the Message Types, Reply Mode and Return Codes Registries 170 The following changes are made to the Message Types, Reply Modes and 171 Return Codes [IANA-MT] registries. 173 o In the listing of assiged code points the term "Vendor Private 174 Use" is changed to "Private Use". 176 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 177 "RFC Required" and the note "Experimental RFC needed" is removed. 179 o A small set of code points (4 code points) for Experimental Use is 180 added by reducing the range for "RFC Required" range. 182 o The registration procedures "Private Use" and "Experimental Use" 183 are added to the table of registration procedures. 185 o A note "Not to be assigned" is added for the registration 186 procedures "Private Use" and "Experimental Use". 188 o In the lists that capture the assignment status, the fields that 189 are reserved, i.e. 0 (zero), Private Use and Experimental Use are 190 clearly marked as such. 192 * Note that in the Return Codes registry [IANA-RC] registry the 193 code point "0" has already been assigned. This assignment is 194 not changed and in this registry the code point "0" continues 195 to be assigned as "No Return Code". 197 The new Registration Procedures, the registry layouts and the new 198 assignments for these registries are found in Section 6.1. 200 3. Updating the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries 202 3.1. General Principles for the LSP Ping TLV and Sub-TLV registries 204 The following principles apply to the processing of any TLV from any 205 of the LSP Ping TLV and sub-TLV IANA registries. 207 o All TLVs and sub-TLVs with a type in the range 0-32767 require a 208 response if they are not recognized. 210 o All TLVs and sub-TLVs in the range 32768-65535 may be silently 211 dropped, stepped over or an error message sennt if they are not 212 recognized. 214 The range of each TLV and sub-TLV registry is divided into two 215 blocks, one with a range from 0 to 32767 for TLVs and sub-TLVs that 216 require a response if not recognized. The other block has the range 217 from 32768 to 65535 for TLVs and sub-TLVs that may be silently 218 dropped, stepped over or an error message sent, if not recognized. 220 Each of the blocks has code point spaces with the following 221 registration procedures: 223 o Standards Action. 225 o RFC Required. 227 o Experimental Use. 229 o First come, first served (FCFS). 231 The exact defintions of these procedures are found in [RFC8126]. 233 3.1.1. Unrecognized Experimental Use TLVs and Sub-TLVs 235 Unrecognized TLVs and sub-TLVs in the Experimetal Use, and FCFS 236 ranges are handled as any other unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV. 238 o If the unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV is from the Experimental Use 239 range (37140-37143) or from the FCFS range (31744-32767) a the 240 Return Code of 2 ("One or more of the TLVs was not understood") 241 will be sent in the echo response. 243 o If the unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV is from the Experimental Use 244 range (64508-64511). or from the FCFS range (64512-65535) the 245 TLVs may be silently ignored, stepped over or an error message 246 sent. 248 The IETF does not prescribe how recognized or unrecognized 249 Experimental Use and Private Use TLVs and sub-TLVs are handled in 250 experimental or private networks, that is up to the agency running 251 the experiment or the private network. The statement above describes 252 how standards compliant implementations will treat the unrecognized 253 TLVs and sub- TLVs from these ranges. 255 3.2. Common Registration Procedures for TLVs and sub-TLVs 257 This section describes the new registration procedures for the TLV 258 and sub-TLV registries. 260 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 261 | Range | Registration | Note | 262 | | Procedures | | 263 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 264 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 265 | | | TLVs that require an error | 266 | | | message if not recognized. | 267 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs an sub- | 268 | | | TLVs that require an error | 269 | | | message if not recognized. | 270 | 37140-37143 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 271 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs anf sub- | 272 | | | TLVs that require an error | 273 | | | message if not recognized. | 274 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 275 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 276 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 277 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 278 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 279 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 280 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 281 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 282 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 283 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 284 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 286 TLV and sub-TLV Registration Procedures 288 3.3. Changes to the LSP Ping Registries 290 This section lists the changes to each MPLS LSP Ping TLV and sub-TLV 291 Registry, see section 6.2.1 to 6.2.7 describe how the new versions of 292 the IANA registries should look, together with the registration 293 procedures for each registry. 295 The new Registration Procedures description and the new assignments 296 for these registries are used to model the changed MPLS LSP Ping 297 registries, see Section 6 . 299 3.3.1. Common Changes to the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries 301 The following changes are made to the TLV and sub-TLV registries. 303 o The registration procedures "First Come Frst Served (FCFS)" and 304 "Experimental Use" are added to the table of registration 305 procedures. 307 o Two small sets of code points (4 code points each) for 308 Experiemental Use, are created. The first set are for the range 309 that requires a response if the TLV or sub-TLV is not recognised; 310 the second set are for the range there the TLV or sub-TLV that may 311 be silently dropped if not recognized. The code points for 312 experimental use are actually taken from the two ranges now called 313 "RFC Required". 315 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 316 "RFC Required" and the note "Experimental RFC needed" is removed. 318 o In the listing of assignments the term "Vendor Private Use" is 319 changed to "First Come First Served (FCFS)". 321 o In the listing of assignments the range for "Experimental Use" is 322 added. 324 o A note saying "Not to be assigned" is added for the registration 325 procedures "Experimental Use". 327 o In the list that captures assignment status, the fields that are 328 reserved, i.e. 0 (zero) and Experimental Use are clearly marked. 330 4. Updates to Related RFCs 332 Some referenced RFCs use the concept "mandatory TLVs" and "mandatory 333 sub-TLVs" to indicate that, if a TLV or sub-TLV of the range 0-16383 334 or 16384-31743 in a message is not understood, an error message needs 335 to be sent in response. 337 The same RFCs use "optional TLVs" and "optional sub-TLVs" to mean 338 TLVs or sub-TLVs that can be silently ignored if not recognized. 340 Since other RFCs use "mandatory TLVs" and "mandatory sub-TLVs" to 341 indicate TLVs and sub-TLVs that must be present in a message, we want 342 to discontinue the use of "mandatory" to indicate TLVs and sub-TLVs 343 that requires an error message in response if not understood. The 344 changes to the RFCs below align with this practice. 346 4.1. Updates to RFC 8029 348 Mandatory and optional are used to indicate whether a response is 349 needed if a TLV or sub-TLV is not understood on pages 14 and 15 in 350 Section 3 of RFC 8029. 352 The text in those two paragraphs are now updated to the following: 354 TLV and sub-TLV Types less than 32768 (i.e., with the high-order 355 bit equal to 0) are TLVs and sub-TLVs that MUST either be 356 supported by an implementation or result in the Return Code of 2 357 ("One or more of the TLVs was not understood") being sent in the 358 echo response. 360 An implementation that does not understand or support a received 361 TLV or sub-TLV with Type greater than or equal to 32768 (i.e., 362 with the high-order bit equal to 1) SHOULD ignore and step over 363 the TLV or sub-TLV, however an implementation MAY send an echo 364 response with Return Code 2 ("One or more of the TLVs was not 365 understood") as it would have done if the high order bit had been 366 clear. 368 In Section 3.8 of RFC 8029 "mandatory" is used in the same way. The 369 first two paragraphs of this section are now updated to read as 370 follows: 372 The following TLV is a TLV that MAY be included in an echo reply 373 to inform the sender of an echo request that includes TLVs or sub- 374 TLVs Types less than 32768 (i.e., with the high-order bit equal to 375 0) are either not supported by the implementation or parsed and 376 found to be in error. 378 The Value field contains the TLVs, including sub-TLVs, that were 379 not understood, encoded as sub-TLVs. 381 4.2. Updates to RFC 8611 383 Section 13.4.1 of "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute 384 Multipath Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces 385 [RFC8611]" defines "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6]. 387 The "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" registry is now updated to align with 388 changes defined in this document. 390 Section 13.4.1 of RFC 8611 is now updated as follows: 392 Section 13.4.1 Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 394 IANA has created a new sub-registry "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" 395 [IANA-Sub-6] under the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] of the 396 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 397 Ping Parameters" name space [lsp-ping-NameSpace]. 399 The "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" sub-registry is now updated to align 400 with changes defined in this document. 402 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 403 | Range | Registration | Note | 404 | | Procedures | | 405 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 406 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 407 | | | require an error message if not | 408 | | | recognized. | 409 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 410 | | | require an error message if not | 411 | | | recognized. | 412 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved not to be assigned | 413 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 414 | | | require an error message if not | 415 | | | recognized. | 416 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 417 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 418 | | | recognized. | 419 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 420 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 421 | | | recognized. | 422 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved not to be assigned | 423 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 424 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 425 | | | recognized. | 426 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 428 Table 1: Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 Registration Procedures 430 5. Security Considerations 432 This document updates IANA registries. It also updates terminology 433 used to define, and clarifies the terminology related to, the code 434 points in the registries. The document does not change how the code- 435 points in the registries are used. This should not create any new 436 threats. 438 However, the updated terminology and the clarifications improve 439 security because it makes it more likely that implementations will be 440 consistent and harder to attack. 442 6. IANA Considerations 444 IANA is requested to update the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 445 Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" name space 446 [IANA-LSP-PING] as described in this document. 448 See Section 1.2 "Terminology Used in this Document" to see how "name 449 space", "registry" and "sub-registry" are used in this document. 451 In other parts of this document the communality of the changes to the 452 LSP Ping registries has been the focus. For the IANA considerations 453 each changed registry has been described in its own right. 455 The following registries and sub-registries are changed: 457 "Message Types", [IANA-MT], 458 "Reply Modes", [IANA-RM] 459 "Return Codes" [IANA-RC] 460 "TLVs" [IANA-TLV-reg] 461 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 462 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6] 463 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" [IANA-Sub-11] 464 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" [IANA-Sub-20] 465 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" [IANA-Sub-23] 466 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" [IANA-Sub-27] 468 6.1. Updates to the Message Type, Reply Mode and Return Codes 469 Registries 471 This section details the updated registration procedures and 472 allocations for "Message Type", "Reply Mode" and "Return Codes" 473 registries. 475 6.1.1. Updates to the Mesage Type registry 477 This is the changes to the "Message Type" registry specified in this 478 document: 480 o Code Point 0 (zero) is marked Resereved. 482 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 483 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 484 removed. 486 o Four code point has been taken from what was earlier 487 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 488 "Experimental Use." 490 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Message Type" 491 registry are shown in the table below: 493 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 494 | Range | Registration | Note | 495 | | Procedures | | 496 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 497 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 498 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 499 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 500 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 501 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 503 Table 2: Message Type registration procedures 505 The updated assignments for the "Message Types" registry will look 506 like this: 508 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 509 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 510 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 511 | 0 | Reserved | This document | 512 | 1 | MPLS Echo Request | [RFC8029] | 513 | 2 | MPLS Echo Reply | [RFC8029] | 514 | 3 | MPLS Proxy Ping Request | [RFC7555] | 515 | 4 | MPLS Proxy Ping Reply | [RFC7555] | 516 | 5 | MPLS Relayed Echo Reply | [RFC7743] | 517 | 6-247 | Unassigned | | 518 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 519 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 520 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 522 Table 3: Assignments for the Message Types registry 524 6.1.2. Updates to the Reply Modes registry 526 This is the changes to the "Reply Modes" registry specified in this 527 document: 529 o Code Point 0 (zero) is marked Resereved. 531 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 532 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 533 removed. 535 o Four code point has been taken from what was earlier 536 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 537 "Experimental Use". 539 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Reply Modes" 540 registry are show in the table below: 542 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 543 | Range | Registration | Note | 544 | | Procedures | | 545 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 546 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 547 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 548 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 549 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 550 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 552 Table 4: Reply Modes registration procedures 554 The updated assignments for the "Reply Modes" registry will look like 555 this: 557 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 558 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 559 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 560 | 0 | Reserved | This document | 561 | 1 | Do not reply | [RFC8029] | 562 | 2 | Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP | [RFC8029] | 563 | | packet | | 564 | 3 | Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP | [RFC8029] | 565 | | packet with Router Alert | | 566 | 4 | Reply via application-level | [RFC8029] | 567 | | control channel | | 568 | 5 | Reply via Specified Path | [RFC7110] | 569 | 6-247 | Unassigned | | 570 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 571 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 572 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 574 Table 5: Assignments for the Reply Modes registry 576 6.1.3. Updates to the Return Codes registry 578 This is the changes to the "Return Codes" registry specified in this 579 document: 581 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 582 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 583 removed. 585 o Four code point has been taken from what was earlier 586 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 587 "Experimental Use". 589 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Return Codes" 590 registry are show in the table below: 592 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 593 | Range | Registration | Note | 594 | | Procedures | | 595 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 596 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 597 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 598 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 599 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 600 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 602 Table 6: Return Codes registration procedures 604 The updated assignments for the "Return Codes" registry will look 605 like this: 607 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 608 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 609 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 610 | 0 | No Return Code | This document | 611 | 1 | Malformed echo request received | [RFC8029] | 612 | 2 | One or more of the TLVs was not | [RFC8029] | 613 | | understood | | 614 | 3 | Replying router is an egress for | [RFC8029] | 615 | | the FEC at stack-depth (RSC) | | 616 | 4 | Replying router has no mapping | [RFC8029] | 617 | | for the FEC at stack-depth (RSC) | | 618 | 5 | Downstream Mapping Mismatch (See | [RFC8029] | 619 | | [1]) | | 620 | 6 | Upstream Interface Index Unknown | [RFC8029] | 621 | | (See [1]) | | 622 | 7 | Reserved | [RFC8029] | 623 | 8 | Label switched at stack-depth | [RFC8029] | 624 | | (RSC) | | 625 | 9 | Label switched but no MPLS | [RFC8029] | 626 | | forwarding at stack-depth (RSC) | | 627 | 10 | Mapping for this FEC is not the | [RFC8029] | 628 | | given label at stack-depth (RSC) | | 629 | 11 | No label entry at stack-depth | [RFC8029] | 630 | | (RSC) | | 631 | 12 | Protocol not associated with | [RFC8029] | 632 | | interface at FEC stack-depth | | 633 | | (RSC) | | 634 | 13 | Premature termination of ping | [RFC8029] | 635 | | due to label stack shrinking to | | 636 | | a single label | | 637 | 14 | See DDMAP TLV for meaning of | [RFC8029] | 638 | | Return Code and Return Subcode | | 639 | | (See [2]) | | 640 | 15 | Label switched with FEC change | [RFC8029] | 641 | 16 | Proxy Ping not authorized | [RFC7555] | 642 | 17 | Proxy Ping parameters need to be | [RFC7555] | 643 | | modified | | 644 | 18 | MPLS Echo Request could not be | [RFC7555] | 645 | | sent | | 646 | 19 | Replying router has FEC mapping | [RFC7555] | 647 | | for topmost FEC | | 648 | 20 | One or more TLVs not returned | [RFC7743] | 649 | | due to MTU size | | 650 | 21 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 651 | | Version | | 652 | 22 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 653 | | Encapsulation format | | 654 | 23 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 655 | | Authentication Type | | 656 | 24 | OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD | [RFC7759] | 657 | | Authentication Key ID | | 658 | 25 | OAM Problem/Unsupported | [RFC7759] | 659 | | Timestamp Format | | 660 | 26 | OAM Problem/Unsupported Delay | [RFC7759] | 661 | | Mode | | 662 | 27 | OAM Problem/Unsupported Loss | [RFC7759] | 663 | | Mode | | 664 | 28 | AM Problem/Delay variation | [RFC7759] | 665 | | unsupported | | 666 | 29 | OAM Problem/Dyadic mode | [RFC7759] | 667 | | unsupported | | 668 | 30 | OAM Problem/Loopback mode | [RFC7759] | 669 | | unsupported | | 670 | 31 | OAM Problem/Combined mode | [RFC7759] | 671 | | unsupported | | 672 | 32 | OAM Problem/Fault management | [RFC7759] | 673 | | signaling unsupported | | 674 | 33 | OAM Problem/Unable to create | [RFC7759] | 675 | | fault management association | | 676 | 34 | OAM Problem/PM Configuration | [RFC7759] | 677 | | Error | | 678 | 35 | Mapping for this FEC is not | [RFC8287] sec 7.4 | 679 | | associated with the incoming | | 680 | | interface | | 681 | 36-247 | Unassigned | [RFC7759] | 682 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 683 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 684 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 685 Table 7: Assignments for the Return Codes registry 687 6.2. Updates to the TLV and sub-TLV registries 689 The updates to the TLV and the sub-TLV registries are mostly the 690 same, however the Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 9 [IANA-Sub-9] has not been 691 updated. 693 Note that when a field in an assigment table sayds "EQ", it means 694 that the field should not be changed as compared to the corresponding 695 field in the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched 696 Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" name space [IANA-LSP-PING] 698 6.2.1. Updates to the TLVs registry 700 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 701 assignments for the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] based on the new 702 registration procedures. 704 The registration procedures has been changed the following way for 705 the "TLVs" registry. 707 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 708 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 709 has been removed. 711 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 712 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 713 points. 715 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 716 Experimental Use. 718 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 720 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 721 procedures. 723 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 724 to reflect when a response is required or not if a TLV is not 725 recognized. 727 The registration procedures for the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] 728 will now look like this: 730 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 731 | Range | Registration | Note | 732 | | Procedures | | 733 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 734 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that | 735 | | | require an error message if not | 736 | | | recognized. | 737 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that | 738 | | | require an error message if not | 739 | | | recognized. | 740 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 741 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that | 742 | | | require an error message if not | 743 | | | recognized. | 744 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that can | 745 | | | be silently dropped if not | 746 | | | recognized. | 747 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that can | 748 | | | be silently dropped if not | 749 | | | recognized. | 750 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 751 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that can | 752 | | | be silently dropped if not | 753 | | | recognized. | 754 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 756 Table 8: TLV Registration Procedures 758 The TLV Assignments will now look like this. 760 Note that when a field in this table does say "EQ", it means that if 761 should be the same as the registry being updtated. 763 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 764 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Sub-TLV Registry | 765 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 766 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 767 | 1-7 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 768 | 8 | Unassigned | | | 769 | 9-16 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 770 | 17-19 | unassigned | | | 771 | 20-27 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 772 | 28-31739 | Unassigned | | | 773 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 774 | | Use | | be assigned | 775 | 31744-32767 | Unassigned | | | 776 | 32768-32770 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 777 | 32771-64507 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 778 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 779 | | Use | | be assigned | 780 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 781 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 783 Table 9: TLV Assignments 785 6.2.2. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 787 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 788 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" 789 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] sub-registry based on the new registration 790 procedures. 792 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 793 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 794 has been removed. 796 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 797 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 798 points. 800 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 801 Experimental Use. 803 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 805 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 806 procedures. 808 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 809 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 810 recognized or not. 812 The registration procedures for the 813 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] sub- 814 registry will now look like this: 816 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 817 | Range | Registration | Note | 818 | | Procedures | | 819 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 820 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that | 821 | | | require an error message if not | 822 | | | recognized. | 823 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that | 824 | | | require an error message if not | 825 | | | recognized. | 826 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 827 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that | 828 | | | require an error message if not | 829 | | | recognized. | 830 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that can | 831 | | | be silently dropped if not | 832 | | | recognized. | 833 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that can | 834 | | | be silently dropped if not | 835 | | | recognized. | 836 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 837 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that can | 838 | | | be silently dropped if not | 839 | | | recognized. | 840 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 842 Table 10: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 843 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 844 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 845 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 846 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 847 | 1-4 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 848 | 5 | Unassigned | | | 849 | 6-8 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 850 | 9 | EQ | EQ | DEPRECATED | 851 | 9-20 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 852 | 21 | unassigned | | | 853 | 22-37 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 854 | 38-31739 | Unassigned | | | 855 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 856 | | Use | | be assigned | 857 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 858 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 859 | | Use | | be assigned | 860 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 861 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 863 Table 11: Sub-TLV for TLV 1, 16 and 21 Assignments 865 6.2.3. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 6 867 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 868 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6] sub- 869 registry based on the new registration procedures. 871 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 872 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 873 has been removed. 875 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 876 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 877 points. 879 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 880 Experimental Use. 882 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 884 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 885 procedures. 887 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 888 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 889 recognized or not. 891 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" 892 [IANA-Sub-6] sub-registry will now look like this: 894 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 895 | Range | Registration | Note | 896 | | Procedures | | 897 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 898 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 899 | | | require an error message if not | 900 | | | recognized. | 901 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 902 | | | require an error message if not | 903 | | | recognized. | 904 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 905 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 906 | | | require an error message if not | 907 | | | recognized. | 908 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 909 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 910 | | | recognized. | 911 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 912 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 913 | | | recognized. | 914 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 915 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 916 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 917 | | | recognized. | 918 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 920 Table 12: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 6 922 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 923 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 924 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 925 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 926 | 1-2 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 927 | 3-31739 | Unassigned | | | 928 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 929 | | Use | | be assigned | 930 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 931 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 932 | | Use | | be assigned | 933 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 934 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 936 Table 13: Sub-TLVs for TLV 6 Assignments 938 6.2.4. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 11 940 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 941 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" [IANA-Sub-11] sub- 942 registry based on the new registration procedures. 944 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 945 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 946 has been removed. 948 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 949 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 950 points. 952 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 953 Experimental Use. 955 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 957 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 958 procedures. 960 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 961 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 962 recognized or not. 964 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" 965 [IANA-Sub-11] sub-registry will now look like this: 967 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 968 | Range | Registration | Note | 969 | | Procedures | | 970 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 971 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 972 | | | require an error message if not | 973 | | | recognized. | 974 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 975 | | | require an error message if not | 976 | | | recognized. | 977 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 978 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 979 | | | require an error message if not | 980 | | | recognized. | 981 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 982 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 983 | | | recognized. | 984 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 985 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 986 | | | recognized. | 987 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 988 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 989 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 990 | | | recognized. | 991 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 993 Table 14: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 11 995 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 996 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 997 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 998 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 999 | 1-4 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1000 | 5-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1001 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1002 | | Use | | be assigned | 1003 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1004 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 1005 | | Use | | be assigned | 1006 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1007 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1009 Table 15: Sub-TLVs for TLV 11 Assignments 1011 6.2.5. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 20 1013 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1014 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" [IANA-Sub-20] sub- 1015 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1017 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1018 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1019 has been removed. 1021 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1022 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1023 points. 1025 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 1026 Experimental Use. 1028 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1030 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1031 procedures. 1033 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1034 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1035 recognized or not. 1037 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" 1038 [IANA-Sub-20] sub-registry will now look like this: 1040 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1041 | Range | Registration | Note | 1042 | | Procedures | | 1043 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1044 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1045 | | | require an error message if not | 1046 | | | recognized. | 1047 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1048 | | | require an error message if not | 1049 | | | recognized. | 1050 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1051 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1052 | | | require an error message if not | 1053 | | | recognized. | 1054 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1055 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1056 | | | recognized. | 1057 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1058 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1059 | | | recognized. | 1060 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1061 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1062 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1063 | | | recognized. | 1064 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1066 Table 16: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 20 1068 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1069 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1070 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1071 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 1072 | 1-5 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1073 | 6-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1074 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1075 | | Use | | be assigned | 1076 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1077 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 1078 | | Use | | be assigned | 1079 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1080 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1082 Table 17: Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 Assignments 1084 6.2.6. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 23 1086 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1087 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" [IANA-Sub-23] sub- 1088 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1090 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1091 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1092 has been removed. 1094 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1095 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1096 points. 1098 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 1099 Experimental Use. 1101 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1103 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1104 procedures. 1106 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1107 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1108 recognized or not. 1110 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" 1111 [IANA-Sub-23] sub-registry will now look like this: 1113 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1114 | Range | Registration | Note | 1115 | | Procedures | | 1116 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1117 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1118 | | | require an error message if not | 1119 | | | recognized. | 1120 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1121 | | | require an error message if not | 1122 | | | recognized. | 1123 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1124 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1125 | | | require an error message if not | 1126 | | | recognized. | 1127 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1128 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1129 | | | recognized. | 1130 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1131 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1132 | | | recognized. | 1133 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1134 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1135 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1136 | | | recognized. | 1137 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1139 Table 18: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 23 1141 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1142 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1143 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1144 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7555] | | 1145 | 1 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1146 | 2-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1147 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1148 | | Use | | be assigned | 1149 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1150 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 1151 | | Use | | be assigned | 1152 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1153 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1155 Table 19: Sub-TLVs for TLV 23 Assignments 1157 6.2.7. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 27 1159 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1160 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" [IANA-Sub-27] sub- 1161 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1163 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1164 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1165 has been removed. 1167 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1168 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1169 points. 1171 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, has been created for 1172 Experimental Use. 1174 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1176 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1177 procedures. 1179 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1180 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1181 recognized or not. 1183 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" 1184 [IANA-Sub-27] sub-registry will now look like this: 1186 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1187 | Range | Registration | Note | 1188 | | Procedures | | 1189 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1190 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1191 | | | require an error message if not | 1192 | | | recognized. | 1193 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1194 | | | require an error message if not | 1195 | | | recognized. | 1196 | 37140-37144 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1197 | 31748-32767 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1198 | | | require an error message if not | 1199 | | | recognized. | 1200 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1201 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1202 | | | recognized. | 1203 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1204 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1205 | | | recognized. | 1206 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1207 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for Sub-TLVs that | 1208 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1209 | | | recognized. | 1210 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1212 Table 20: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 1214 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1215 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1216 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1217 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7555] | | 1218 | 1 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1219 | 2-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1220 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1221 | | Use | | be assigned | 1222 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1223 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Resereved, not to | 1224 | | Use | | be assigned | 1225 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1226 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1228 Table 21: Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 Assignments 1230 7. Acknowledgements 1232 The authors wish to thank Adrian Farrel, who both made very useful 1233 comments and agreed to serve as the document shepherd. 1235 The authors also wish to thank Micelle Cotton who very patiently 1236 worked with us to determine how our registries could and should be 1237 updated. 1239 The authors thanks Donald Eastlake for a careful and detailed review. 1241 8. References 1243 8.1. Normative References 1245 [IANA-LSP-PING] 1246 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths 1247 (LSPs) Ping Parameters", 1248 . 1251 [IANA-MT] "Message Types", . 1255 [IANA-RC] "Return Codes", . 1258 [IANA-RM] "Reply Modes", . 1261 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 1262 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21", 1263 . 1267 [IANA-Sub-11] 1268 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11", 1269 . 1273 [IANA-Sub-20] 1274 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20", 1275 . 1279 [IANA-Sub-23] 1280 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23", 1281 . 1285 [IANA-Sub-27] 1286 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27", 1287 . 1291 [IANA-Sub-6] 1292 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6", 1293 . 1297 [IANA-TLV-reg] 1298 "TLVs", . 1301 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1302 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 1303 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 1304 . 1306 [RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N., 1307 Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label 1308 Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029, 1309 DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017, 1310 . 1312 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 1313 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 1314 May 2017, . 1316 [RFC8287] Kumar, N., Ed., Pignataro, C., Ed., Swallow, G., Akiya, 1317 N., Kini, S., and M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) 1318 Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and 1319 IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data 1320 Planes", RFC 8287, DOI 10.17487/RFC8287, December 2017, 1321 . 1323 [RFC8611] Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., 1324 Drake, J., and M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping 1325 and Traceroute Multipath Support for Link Aggregation 1326 Group (LAG) Interfaces", RFC 8611, DOI 10.17487/RFC8611, 1327 June 2019, . 1329 8.2. Informative References 1331 [IANA-Sub-9] 1332 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 9", 1333 . 1337 [lsp-ping-NameSpace] 1338 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths 1339 (LSPs) Ping Parameters", 1340 . 1343 [RFC7110] Chen, M., Cao, W., Ning, S., Jounay, F., and S. Delord, 1344 "Return Path Specified Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping", 1345 RFC 7110, DOI 10.17487/RFC7110, January 2014, 1346 . 1348 [RFC7555] Swallow, G., Lim, V., and S. Aldrin, "Proxy MPLS Echo 1349 Request", RFC 7555, DOI 10.17487/RFC7555, June 2015, 1350 . 1352 [RFC7743] Luo, J., Ed., Jin, L., Ed., Nadeau, T., Ed., and G. 1353 Swallow, Ed., "Relayed Echo Reply Mechanism for Label 1354 Switched Path (LSP) Ping", RFC 7743, DOI 10.17487/RFC7743, 1355 January 2016, . 1357 [RFC7759] Bellagamba, E., Mirsky, G., Andersson, L., Skoldstrom, P., 1358 Ward, D., and J. Drake, "Configuration of Proactive 1359 Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) 1360 Functions for MPLS-Based Transport Networks Using Label 1361 Switched Path (LSP) Ping", RFC 7759, DOI 10.17487/RFC7759, 1362 February 2016, . 1364 [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for 1365 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, 1366 RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, 1367 . 1369 Authors' Addresses 1371 Loa Andersson 1372 Bronze Dragon Consulting 1374 Email: loa@pi.nu 1376 Mach Chen 1377 Huawei Techologies 1379 Email: mach.chen@huawei.com 1381 Carlos Pignataro 1382 Cisco Systems 1384 Email: cpignata@cisco.com 1386 Tarek Saad 1387 Juniper Networks 1389 Email: tsaad@juniper.net