idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-06.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 (November 25, 2020) is 1248 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 719 -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '2' on line 719 -- 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: May 29, 2021 C. Pignataro 7 Cisco Systems 8 T. Saad 9 Juniper Networks 10 November 25, 2020 12 Updating the IANA MPLS LSP Ping Parameters 13 draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-06 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 May 29, 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 1.2. Terminology Used in this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 2. Updating the Message Types, Reply Mode and Return Codes 61 Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 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 . . 8 69 4. Updates to Related RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 4.1. Updates to RFC 8029 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 71 4.2. Updates to RFC 8611 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 72 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 73 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 74 6.1. Updates to the Message Type, Reply Mode and Return Codes 75 Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 76 6.1.1. Updates to the Message Type registry . . . . . . . . 11 77 6.1.2. Updates to the Reply Modes registry . . . . . . . . . 12 78 6.1.3. Updates to the Return Codes registry . . . . . . . . 14 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 83 6.2.3. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 6 . . . . 21 84 6.2.4. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 11 . . . 23 85 6.2.5. Updates to the registry for Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 . . . 25 86 6.2.6. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 23 . . . 27 87 6.2.7. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 27 . . . 29 88 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 89 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 90 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 91 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 92 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 94 1. Introduction 96 There were a few reasons to start the work that have led to this 97 document, e.g.: 99 o When the LSP Ping registry was created it was incorrectly assumed 100 that code points allocated by Experimental RFCs would be 101 'experimental' code points; a code point made available in a 102 public IANA registry is not limited by the type of RDFC that made 103 the allocation but is available for any document. 105 o The number of 'experimental' code points was also too large, as 106 compared to what we normally allocated for "Experimental Use". 108 o RFC 8029 uses the words "mandatory" and "optional" differently 109 from what others RFC does. RFC 8029 for example talks about 110 mandatory TLVs to indicate that it is mandatory to take a certain 111 action if the TLV is found in a message but not recognized, other 112 RFCs uses "mandatory TLV" to indicate a TLV that must be present 113 in a message. 115 Over time there has been attempts administratively update some of the 116 registries, but it was soon decided the an RFC was needed. We also 117 found other, often minor, potential updates, e.g. reserving the value 118 0 (zero) in registries there that is possible. 120 When RFC 8029 [RFC8029] was published it contained updates to the 121 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 122 Ping Parameters" IANA name space [IANA-LSP-PING]. 124 RFC 8611 [RFC8611] updated the LSP Ping IANA registries to match RFC 125 8029. This document further clarifies the entries in those 126 registries and makes the definitions more precise. 128 This document updates RFC 8029 [[RFC8029] and RFC 8611 [RFC8611] by 129 updating two groups of registries as follows: 131 First the registries for Message Types [IANA-MT], Reply Modes 132 [IANA-RM] and Return Codes [IANA-RC] are updated. The changes to 133 these registries are minor. 135 Second, this document updates the TLV and sub-TLV registries. 137 o TLVs [IANA-TLV-reg]. 139 o Sub-TLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21]. 141 o Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 [IANA-Sub-6]. 143 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 11 [IANA-Sub-11]. 145 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 [IANA-Sub-20]. 147 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 23 [IANA-Sub-23]. 149 o Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 [IANA-Sub-27]. 151 The registry for sub-TLVs for TLV 9 [IANA-Sub-9] is not updated. 153 Third, some code points (TLVs and sub-TLVs) are "mandatory" or 154 "optional". Contrary to how other RFCs use these words, indicating 155 that it is mandatory or optional to include the code points in a 156 message, RFC 8029 uses these words to indicate that an action might 157 or might not be necessary. This document updates RFC 8029 to drop 158 the words "mandatory" and "optional", and the text is changed to 159 focus on what should be done. 161 1.1. Requirement Language 163 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 164 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 165 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 166 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 167 capitals, as shown here. 169 1.2. Terminology Used in this Document 171 This document uses some terms that relates to IANA registries in this 172 way: 174 IANA Name Space, 175 a name space is a top level registry. An example could be 176 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 177 Ping Parameters" [IANA-LSP-PING]. A name space is most often a 178 container for registries that hold code points that share some 179 affinity. 181 IANA Registry, 182 an IANA registry holds code points, and lists the registration 183 procedures and allocation of code points these code points. One 184 example would be the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg]. 186 IANA Sub-registry, 187 a sub-registry is used when a code point, or a set of code points 188 allocated in a single registry, needs "sub-code points" scoped by 189 the code point or the set of code points. An example of a sub- 190 registry that holds code points for more than one TLV is 191 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 193 2. Updating the Message Types, Reply Mode and Return Codes Registries 195 The following changes are made to the Message Types, Reply Modes and 196 Return Codes [IANA-MT] registries. 198 o In the listing of assigned code points the term "Vendor Private 199 Use" is changed to "Private Use". 201 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 202 "RFC Required" and the note "Experimental RFC needed" is removed. 204 o A small set of code points (4 code points) for Experimental Use is 205 added by reducing the "RFC Required" range. 207 o The registration procedures "Private Use" and "Experimental Use" 208 are added to the table of registration procedures. 210 o A note "Not to be assigned" is added for the registration 211 procedures "Private Use" and "Experimental Use". 213 o In the lists that capture the assignment status, the fields that 214 are reserved, i.e., 0 (zero), Private Use and Experimental Use are 215 clearly marked as such. 217 * Note that in the Return Codes registry [IANA-RC] the code point 218 "0" has already been assigned. This assignment is not changed 219 and in this registry the code point "0" continues to be 220 assigned as "No Return Code". 222 The new Registration Procedures, the registry layouts and the new 223 assignments for these registries are found in Section 6.1. 225 3. Updating the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries 227 3.1. General Principles for the LSP Ping TLV and Sub-TLV registries 229 The following principles apply to the processing of any TLV from any 230 of the LSP Ping TLV and sub-TLV IANA registries. 232 o All TLVs and sub-TLVs with a type in the range 0-32767 require a 233 response if they are not recognized. 235 o All TLVs and sub-TLVs in the range 32768-65535 may be silently 236 dropped, stepped over or an error message sent if they are not 237 recognized. 239 Each of the blocks has code point spaces with the following 240 registration procedures: 242 o Standards Action. 244 o RFC Required. 246 o Experimental Use. 248 o First Come First Served (FCFS). 250 The exact definitions of these procedures are found in [RFC8126]. 252 3.1.1. Unrecognized Experimental Use TLVs and Sub-TLVs 254 Unrecognized TLVs and sub-TLVs in the Experimental Use, and FCFS 255 ranges are handled as any other unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV. 257 o If the unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV is from the Experimental Use 258 range (31740-31743) or from the FCFS range (31744-32767) a Return 259 Code of 2 ("One or more of the TLVs was not understood") will be 260 sent in the echo response. 262 o If the unrecognized TLV or sub-TLV is from the Experimental Use 263 range (64508-64511)or from the FCFS range (64512-65535) the TLVs 264 may be silently ignored, stepped over or an error message sent. 266 The IETF does not prescribe how recognized or unrecognized 267 Experimental Use and Private Use TLVs and sub-TLVs are handled in 268 experimental or private networks, that is up to the agency running 269 the experiment or the private network. The statement above describes 270 how standards compliant implementations will treat the unrecognized 271 TLVs and sub-TLVs from these ranges. 273 3.2. Common Registration Procedures for TLVs and sub-TLVs 275 This section describes the new registration procedures for the TLV 276 and sub-TLV registries. 278 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 279 | Range | Registration | Note | 280 | | Procedures | | 281 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 282 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 283 | | | TLVs that require an error | 284 | | | message if not recognized. | 285 | | | [This document, section 3.1] | 286 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 287 | | | TLVs that require an error | 288 | | | message if not recognized. | 289 | | | [This document, section 3.1] | 290 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 291 | | | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 292 | | | TLVs that require an error | 293 | | | message if not recognized. | 294 | | | [This document, section 3.1] | 295 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 296 | | | TLVs that require an error | 297 | | | message if not recognized. | 298 | | | [This document, section 3.1] | 299 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 300 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 301 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 302 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 303 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 304 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 305 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 306 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs and sub- | 307 | | | TLVs that can be silently | 308 | | | dropped if not recognized. | 309 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 311 Table 1: TLV and sub-TLV Registration Procedures 313 3.3. Changes to the LSP Ping Registries 315 This section lists the changes to each MPLS LSP Ping TLV and sub-TLV 316 Registry, see section 6.2.1 to 6.2.7 describe how the new versions of 317 the IANA registries should look, together with the registration 318 procedures for each registry. 320 The new Registration Procedures description and the new assignments 321 for these registries are used to model the changed MPLS LSP Ping 322 registries, see Section 6 . 324 3.3.1. Common Changes to the TLV and Sub-TLV Registries 326 The following changes are made to the TLV and sub-TLV registries. 328 o The registration procedures "First Come First Served (FCFS)" and 329 "Experimental Use" are added to the table of registration 330 procedures. 332 o Two small sets of code points (4 code points each) for 333 Experimental Use, are created. The first set is for the range 334 that requires a response if the TLV or sub-TLV is not recognized; 335 the second set is for the range there the TLV or sub-TLV that may 336 be silently dropped if not recognized. The code points for 337 experimental use are actually taken from the two ranges now called 338 "RFC Required". 340 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 341 "RFC Required" and the note "Experimental RFC needed" is removed. 343 o In the listing of assignments the term "Vendor Private Use" is 344 changed to "First Come First Served (FCFS)". 346 o In the listing of assignments the range for "Experimental Use" is 347 added. 349 o A note saying "Not to be assigned" is added for the registration 350 procedures "Experimental Use". 352 o In the list that captures assignment status, the fields that are 353 reserved, i.e., 0 (zero) and Experimental Use are clearly marked. 355 4. Updates to Related RFCs 357 Some referenced RFCs use the concept "mandatory TLVs" and "mandatory 358 sub-TLVs" to indicate that, if a TLV or sub-TLV of the range 0-32767 359 in a message is not understood, an error message needs to be sent in 360 response. 362 The same RFCs use "optional TLVs" and "optional sub-TLVs" to mean 363 TLVs or sub-TLVs that can be silently ignored if not recognized. 365 Since other RFCs use "mandatory TLVs" and "mandatory sub-TLVs" to 366 indicate TLVs and sub-TLVs that must be present in a message, we want 367 to discontinue the use of "mandatory" to indicate TLVs and sub-TLVs 368 that requires an error message in response if not understood. The 369 changes to the RFCs below align with this practice. 371 4.1. Updates to RFC 8029 373 Mandatory and optional are used to indicate whether a response is 374 needed if a TLV or sub-TLV is not understood on pages 14 and 15 in 375 Section 3 of RFC 8029. 377 The text in those two paragraphs is now updated to the following: 379 TLV and sub-TLV Types less than 32768 (i.e., with the high-order 380 bit equal to 0) are TLVs and sub-TLVs that MUST either be 381 supported by an implementation or result in the Return Code of 2 382 ("One or more of the TLVs was not understood") being sent in the 383 echo response. 385 An implementation that does not understand or support a received 386 TLV or sub-TLV with Type greater than or equal to 32768 (i.e., 387 with the high-order bit equal to 1) SHOULD ignore and step over 388 the TLV or sub-TLV, however an implementation MAY send an echo 389 response with Return Code 2 ("One or more of the TLVs was not 390 understood") as it would have done if the high order bit had been 391 clear. 393 In Section 3.8 of RFC 8029 "mandatory" is used in the same way. The 394 first two paragraphs of this section are now updated to read as 395 follows: 397 The following TLV is a TLV that MAY be included in an echo reply 398 to inform the sender of an echo request that includes TLVs or sub- 399 TLVs Types less than 32768 (i.e., with the high-order bit equal to 400 0) are either not supported by the implementation or parsed and 401 found to be in error. 403 The Value field contains the TLVs, including sub-TLVs, that were 404 not understood, encoded as sub-TLVs. 406 4.2. Updates to RFC 8611 408 Section 13.4.1 of "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute 409 Multipath Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces 410 [RFC8611]" defines "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6]. 412 The "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" registry is now updated to align with 413 changes defined in this document. 415 Section 13.4.1 of RFC 8611 is now updated as follows: 417 Section 13.4.1 Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 418 IANA has created a new sub-registry "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" 419 [IANA-Sub-6] under the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] of the 420 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 421 Ping Parameters" name space [lsp-ping-NameSpace]. 423 The "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" sub-registry is now updated to align 424 with changes defined in this document. 426 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 427 | Range | Registration | Note | 428 | | Procedures | | 429 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 430 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 431 | | | require an error message if not | 432 | | | recognized. [This document, | 433 | | | section 3.1] | 434 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 435 | | | require an error message if not | 436 | | | recognized. [This document, | 437 | | | section 3.1] | 438 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved not to be assigned. | 439 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 440 | | | require an error message if not | 441 | | | recognized. [This document, | 442 | | | section 3.1] | 443 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 444 | | | require an error message if not | 445 | | | recognized. [This document, | 446 | | | section 3.1] | 447 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 448 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 449 | | | recognized. | 450 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 451 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 452 | | | recognized. | 453 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved not to be assigned | 454 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 455 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 456 | | | recognized. | 457 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 459 Table 2: Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6 Registration Procedures 461 5. Security Considerations 463 This document updates IANA registries. It also updates terminology 464 used to define, and clarifies the terminology related to, the code 465 points in the registries. The document does not change how the code- 466 points in the registries are used. This should not create any new 467 threats. 469 However, the updated terminology and the clarifications improve 470 security because it makes it more likely that implementations will be 471 consistent and harder to attack. 473 6. IANA Considerations 475 IANA is requested to update the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 476 Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" name space 477 [IANA-LSP-PING] as described in this document. 479 See Section 1.2 "Terminology Used in this Document" to see how "name 480 space", "registry" and "sub-registry" are used in this document. 482 In other parts of this document the communality of the changes to the 483 LSP Ping registries has been the focus. For the IANA considerations 484 each changed registry has been described in its own right. 486 The following registries and sub-registries are changed: 488 "Message Types", [IANA-MT], 489 "Reply Modes", [IANA-RM] 490 "Return Codes" [IANA-RC] 491 "TLVs" [IANA-TLV-reg] 492 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 493 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6] 494 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" [IANA-Sub-11] 495 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" [IANA-Sub-20] 496 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" [IANA-Sub-23] 497 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" [IANA-Sub-27] 499 6.1. Updates to the Message Type, Reply Mode and Return Codes 500 Registries 502 This section details the updated registration procedures and 503 allocations for "Message Type", "Reply Mode" and "Return Codes" 504 registries. 506 6.1.1. Updates to the Message Type registry 508 This is the changes to the "Message Type" registry specified in this 509 document: 511 o Code Point 0 (zero) is marked Reserved. 513 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 514 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 515 removed. 517 o Four code point have been taken from what was earlier 518 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 519 "Experimental Use." 521 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Message Type" 522 registry are shown in the table below: 524 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 525 | Range | Registration | Note | 526 | | Procedures | | 527 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 528 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 529 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 530 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 531 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 532 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 534 Table 3: Message Type registration procedures 536 The updated assignments for the "Message Types" registry will look 537 like this: 539 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 540 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 541 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 542 | 0 | Reserved | This document | 543 | 1 | MPLS Echo Request | [RFC8029] | 544 | 2 | MPLS Echo Reply | [RFC8029] | 545 | 3 | MPLS Proxy Ping Request | [RFC7555] | 546 | 4 | MPLS Proxy Ping Reply | [RFC7555] | 547 | 5 | MPLS Relayed Echo Reply | [RFC7743] | 548 | 6-247 | Unassigned | | 549 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 550 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 551 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 553 Table 4: Assignments for the Message Types registry 555 6.1.2. Updates to the Reply Modes registry 557 This is the changes to the "Reply Modes" registry specified in this 558 document: 560 o Code Point 0 (zero) is marked Reserved. 562 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 563 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 564 removed. 566 o Four code point have been taken from what was earlier 567 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 568 "Experimental Use". 570 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Reply Modes" 571 registry are show in the table below: 573 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 574 | Range | Registration | Note | 575 | | Procedures | | 576 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 577 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 578 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 579 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 580 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 581 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 583 Table 5: Reply Modes registration procedures 585 The updated assignments for the "Reply Modes" registry will look like 586 this: 588 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 589 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 590 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 591 | 0 | Reserved | This document | 592 | 1 | Do not reply | [RFC8029] | 593 | 2 | Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP | [RFC8029] | 594 | | packet | | 595 | 3 | Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP | [RFC8029] | 596 | | packet with Router Alert | | 597 | 4 | Reply via application-level | [RFC8029] | 598 | | control channel | | 599 | 5 | Reply via Specified Path | [RFC7110] | 600 | 6-247 | Unassigned | | 601 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 602 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 603 +---------+---------------------------------+-----------------------+ 605 Table 6: Assignments for the Reply Modes registry 607 6.1.3. Updates to the Return Codes registry 609 This is the changes to the "Return Codes" registry specified in this 610 document: 612 o The registration procedure "Specification Required" is changed to 613 "RFC Required" and the comment "Experimental RFC needed" is 614 removed. 616 o Four code point have been taken from what was earlier 617 "Specification Required" to form a set of code points for 618 "Experimental Use". 620 The registration procedures after the changes for the "Return Codes" 621 registry are show in the table below: 623 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 624 | Range | Registration | Note | 625 | | Procedures | | 626 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 627 | 0-191 | Standards Action | | 628 | 192-247 | RFC Required | | 629 | 248-251 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 630 | 252-255 | Private Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 631 +---------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ 633 Table 7: Return Codes registration procedures 635 The updated assignments for the "Return Codes" registry will look 636 like this: 638 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 639 | Value | Meaning | Reference | 640 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 641 | 0 | No Return Code | This document | 642 | 1 | Malformed echo request received | [RFC8029] | 643 | 2 | One or more of the TLVs was not | [RFC8029] | 644 | | understood | | 645 | 3 | Replying router is an egress for | [RFC8029] | 646 | | the FEC at stack-depth (RSC) | | 647 | 4 | Replying router has no mapping | [RFC8029] | 648 | | for the FEC at stack-depth (RSC) | | 649 | 5 | Downstream Mapping Mismatch (See | [RFC8029] | 650 | | [1]) | | 651 | 6 | Upstream Interface Index Unknown | [RFC8029] | 652 | | (See [1]) | | 653 | 7 | Reserved | [RFC8029] | 654 | 8 | Label switched at stack-depth | [RFC8029] | 655 | | (RSC) | | 656 | 9 | Label switched but no MPLS | [RFC8029] | 657 | | forwarding at stack-depth (RSC) | | 658 | 10 | Mapping for this FEC is not the | [RFC8029] | 659 | | given label at stack-depth (RSC) | | 660 | 11 | No label entry at stack-depth | [RFC8029] | 661 | | (RSC) | | 662 | 12 | Protocol not associated with | [RFC8029] | 663 | | interface at FEC stack-depth | | 664 | | (RSC) | | 665 | 13 | Premature termination of ping | [RFC8029] | 666 | | due to label stack shrinking to | | 667 | | a single label | | 668 | 14 | See DDMAP TLV for meaning of | [RFC8029] | 669 | | Return Code and Return Subcode | | 670 | | (See [2]) | | 671 | 15 | Label switched with FEC change | [RFC8029] | 672 | 16 | Proxy Ping not authorized | [RFC7555] | 673 | 17 | Proxy Ping parameters need to be | [RFC7555] | 674 | | modified | | 675 | 18 | MPLS Echo Request could not be | [RFC7555] | 676 | | sent | | 677 | 19 | Replying router has FEC mapping | [RFC7555] | 678 | | for topmost FEC | | 679 | 20 | One or more TLVs not returned | [RFC7743] | 680 | | due to MTU size | | 681 | 21 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 682 | | Version | | 683 | 22 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 684 | | Encapsulation format | | 685 | 23 | OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD | [RFC7759] | 686 | | Authentication Type | | 687 | 24 | OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD | [RFC7759] | 688 | | Authentication Key ID | | 689 | 25 | OAM Problem/Unsupported | [RFC7759] | 690 | | Timestamp Format | | 691 | 26 | OAM Problem/Unsupported Delay | [RFC7759] | 692 | | Mode | | 693 | 27 | OAM Problem/Unsupported Loss | [RFC7759] | 694 | | Mode | | 695 | 28 | AM Problem/Delay variation | [RFC7759] | 696 | | unsupported | | 697 | 29 | OAM Problem/Dyadic mode | [RFC7759] | 698 | | unsupported | | 699 | 30 | OAM Problem/Loopback mode | [RFC7759] | 700 | | unsupported | | 701 | 31 | OAM Problem/Combined mode | [RFC7759] | 702 | | unsupported | | 703 | 32 | OAM Problem/Fault management | [RFC7759] | 704 | | signaling unsupported | | 705 | 33 | OAM Problem/Unable to create | [RFC7759] | 706 | | fault management association | | 707 | 34 | OAM Problem/PM Configuration | [RFC7759] | 708 | | Error | | 709 | 35 | Mapping for this FEC is not | [RFC8287] sec 7.4 | 710 | | associated with the incoming | | 711 | | interface | | 712 | 36-247 | Unassigned | [RFC7759] | 713 | 248-251 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document | 714 | 252-255 | Reserved for Private Use | [RFC8029] | 715 +---------+----------------------------------+----------------------+ 717 Table 8: Assignments for the Return Codes registry 719 Notes [1] and [2] for code point 5,6 and 14 points to footnotes in 720 the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) 721 Ping Parameters" name space. The footnoes are not changed by this 722 document. 724 6.2. Updates to the TLV and Sub-TLV registries 726 The updates to the TLV and the sub-TLV registries are mostly the 727 same, however the Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 9 [IANA-Sub-9] has not been 728 updated. 730 Note that when a field in an assignment table says "EQ", it means 731 that the field should not be changed as compared to the corresponding 732 field in the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched 733 Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" name space [IANA-LSP-PING] 735 6.2.1. Updates to the TLVs registry 737 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 738 assignments for the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] based on the new 739 registration procedures. 741 The registration procedures has been changed the following way for 742 the "TLVs" registry. 744 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 745 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 746 has been removed. 748 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 749 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 750 points. 752 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 753 Experimental Use. 755 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 757 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 758 procedures. 760 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 761 to reflect when a response is required or not if a TLV is not 762 recognized. 764 The registration procedures for the "TLVs" registry [IANA-TLV-reg] 765 will now look like this: 767 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 768 | Range | Registration | Note | 769 | | Procedures | | 770 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 771 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that | 772 | | | require an error message if not | 773 | | | recognized. [This document, | 774 | | | section 3.1] | 775 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that | 776 | | | require an error message if not | 777 | | | recognized. [This document, | 778 | | | section 3.1] | 779 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 780 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 781 | | | require an error message if not | 782 | | | recognized. [This document, | 783 | | | section 3.1] | 784 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that | 785 | | | require an error message if not | 786 | | | recognized. [This document, | 787 | | | section 3.1] | 788 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for TLVs that can | 789 | | | be silently dropped if not | 790 | | | recognized. | 791 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for TLVs that can | 792 | | | be silently dropped if not | 793 | | | recognized. | 794 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 795 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for TLVs that can | 796 | | | be silently dropped if not | 797 | | | recognized. | 798 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 800 Table 9: TLV Registration Procedures 802 The TLV Assignments will now look like this. 804 Note that when a field in this table does say "EQ", it means that it 805 should be the same as the registry being updated. 807 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 808 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Sub-TLV Registry | 809 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 810 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 811 | 1-7 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 812 | 8 | Unassigned | | | 813 | 9-16 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 814 | 17-19 | unassigned | | | 815 | 20-27 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 816 | 28-31739 | Unassigned | | | 817 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 818 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 819 | | | | range is for sub- | 820 | | | | TLVs that require | 821 | | | | an error message | 822 | | | | if not | 823 | | | | recognized. [This | 824 | | | | document, section | 825 | | | | 3.1] | 826 | 31744-32767 | Unassigned | | | 827 | 32768-32770 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 828 | 32771-64507 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 829 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 830 | | Use | | be assigned | 831 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 832 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 834 Table 10: TLV Assignments 836 6.2.2. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 838 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 839 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" 840 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] sub-registry based on the new registration 841 procedures. 843 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 844 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 845 has been removed. 847 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 848 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 849 points. 851 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 852 Experimental Use. 854 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 856 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 857 procedures. 859 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 860 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 861 recognized or not. 863 The registration procedures for the 864 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] sub- 865 registry will now look like this: 867 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 868 | Range | Registration | Note | 869 | | Procedures | | 870 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 871 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 872 | | | require an error message if not | 873 | | | recognized. [This document, | 874 | | | section 3.1] | 875 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 876 | | | require an error message if not | 877 | | | recognized. [This document, | 878 | | | section 3.1] | 879 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 880 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 881 | | | require an error message if not | 882 | | | recognized. [This document, | 883 | | | section 3.1] | 884 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 885 | | | require an error message if not | 886 | | | recognized. [This document, | 887 | | | section 3.1] | 888 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 889 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 890 | | | recognized. | 891 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 892 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 893 | | | recognized. | 894 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 895 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 896 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 897 | | | recognized. | 898 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 900 Table 11: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 1, 16 and 21 901 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 902 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 903 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 904 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 905 | 1-4 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 906 | 5 | Unassigned | | | 907 | 6-8 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 908 | 9 | EQ | EQ | DEPRECATED | 909 | 10-20 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 910 | 21 | unassigned | | | 911 | 22-37 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 912 | 38-31739 | Unassigned | | | 913 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 914 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 915 | | | | range is for sub- | 916 | | | | TLVs that require | 917 | | | | an error message | 918 | | | | if not | 919 | | | | recognized. [This | 920 | | | | document, section | 921 | | | | 3.1] | 922 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 923 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 924 | | Use | | be assigned | 925 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 926 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 928 Table 12: Sub-TLV for TLV 1, 16 and 21 Assignments 930 6.2.3. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 6 932 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 933 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" [IANA-Sub-6] sub- 934 registry based on the new registration procedures. 936 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 937 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 938 has been removed. 940 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 941 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 942 points. 944 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 945 Experimental Use. 947 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 949 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 950 procedures. 952 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 953 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 954 recognized or not. 956 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6" 957 [IANA-Sub-6] sub-registry will now look like this: 959 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 960 | Range | Registration | Note | 961 | | Procedures | | 962 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 963 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 964 | | | require an error message if not | 965 | | | recognized. [This document, | 966 | | | section 3.1] | 967 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 968 | | | require an error message if not | 969 | | | recognized. [This document, | 970 | | | section 3.1] | 971 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 972 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 973 | | | require an error message if not | 974 | | | recognized. [This document, | 975 | | | section 3.1] | 976 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 977 | | | require an error message if not | 978 | | | recognized. [This document, | 979 | | | section 3.1] | 980 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 981 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 982 | | | recognized. | 983 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 984 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 985 | | | recognized. | 986 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 987 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 988 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 989 | | | recognized. | 990 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 992 Table 13: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 6 994 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 995 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 996 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 997 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 998 | 1-2 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 999 | 3-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1000 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1001 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 1002 | | | | range is for sub- | 1003 | | | | TLVs that require | 1004 | | | | an error message | 1005 | | | | if not | 1006 | | | | recognized. [This | 1007 | | | | document, section | 1008 | | | | 3.1] | 1009 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1010 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 1011 | | Use | | be assigned | 1012 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1013 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1015 Table 14: Sub-TLVs for TLV 6 Assignments 1017 6.2.4. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 11 1019 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1020 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" [IANA-Sub-11] sub- 1021 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1023 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1024 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1025 has been removed. 1027 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1028 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1029 points. 1031 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 1032 Experimental Use. 1034 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1036 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1037 procedures. 1039 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1040 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1041 recognized or not. 1043 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11" 1044 [IANA-Sub-11] sub-registry will now look like this: 1046 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1047 | Range | Registration | Note | 1048 | | Procedures | | 1049 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1050 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1051 | | | require an error message if not | 1052 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1053 | | | section 3.1] | 1054 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1055 | | | require an error message if not | 1056 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1057 | | | section 3.1] | 1058 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 1059 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 1060 | | | require an error message if not | 1061 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1062 | | | section 3.1] | 1063 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1064 | | | require an error message if not | 1065 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1066 | | | section 3.1] | 1067 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1068 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1069 | | | recognized. | 1070 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1071 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1072 | | | recognized. | 1073 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1074 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1075 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1076 | | | recognized. | 1077 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1079 Table 15: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 11 1081 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1082 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1083 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1084 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 1085 | 1-4 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1086 | 5-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1087 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1088 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 1089 | | | | range is for sub- | 1090 | | | | TLVs that require | 1091 | | | | an error message | 1092 | | | | if not | 1093 | | | | recognized. [This | 1094 | | | | document, section | 1095 | | | | 3.1] | 1096 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1097 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 1098 | | Use | | be assigned | 1099 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1100 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1102 Table 16: Sub-TLVs for TLV 11 Assignments 1104 6.2.5. Updates to the registry for Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 1106 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1107 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" [IANA-Sub-20] sub- 1108 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1110 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1111 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1112 has been removed. 1114 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1115 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1116 points. 1118 o Two small sets, 4 code ve been created for Experimental Use. 1120 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1122 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1123 procedures. 1125 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1126 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1127 recognized or not. 1129 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20" 1130 [IANA-Sub-20] sub-registry will now look like this: 1132 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1133 | Range | Registration | Note | 1134 | | Procedures | | 1135 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1136 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1137 | | | require an error message if not | 1138 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1139 | | | section 3.1] | 1140 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1141 | | | require an error message if not | 1142 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1143 | | | section 3.1] | 1144 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 1145 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 1146 | | | require an error message if not | 1147 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1148 | | | section 3.1] | 1149 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1150 | | | require an error message if not | 1151 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1152 | | | section 3.1] | 1153 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1154 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1155 | | | recognized. | 1156 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1157 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1158 | | | recognized. | 1159 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1160 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1161 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1162 | | | recognized. | 1163 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1165 Table 17: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 20 1167 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1168 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1169 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1170 | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 1171 | 1-5 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1172 | 6-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1173 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1174 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 1175 | | | | range is for sub- | 1176 | | | | TLVs that require | 1177 | | | | an error message | 1178 | | | | if not | 1179 | | | | recognized. [This | 1180 | | | | document, section | 1181 | | | | 3.1] | 1182 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1183 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 1184 | | Use | | be assigned | 1185 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1186 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1188 Table 18: Sub-TLVs for TLV 20 Assignments 1190 6.2.6. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 23 1192 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1193 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" [IANA-Sub-23] sub- 1194 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1196 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1197 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1198 has been removed. 1200 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1201 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1202 points. 1204 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 1205 Experimental Use. 1207 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1209 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1210 procedures. 1212 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1213 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1214 recognized or not. 1216 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23" 1217 [IANA-Sub-23] sub-registry will now look like this: 1219 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1220 | Range | Registration | Note | 1221 | | Procedures | | 1222 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1223 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1224 | | | require an error message if not | 1225 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1226 | | | section 3.1] | 1227 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1228 | | | require an error message if not | 1229 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1230 | | | section 3.1] | 1231 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 1232 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 1233 | | | require an error message if not | 1234 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1235 | | | section 3.1] | 1236 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1237 | | | require an error message if not | 1238 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1239 | | | section 3.1] | 1240 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1241 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1242 | | | recognized. | 1243 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1244 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1245 | | | recognized. | 1246 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1247 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1248 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1249 | | | recognized. | 1250 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1252 Table 19: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLVs 23 1254 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1255 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1256 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1257 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7555] | | 1258 | 1 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1259 | 2-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1260 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1261 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 1262 | | | | range is for sub- | 1263 | | | | TLVs that require | 1264 | | | | an error message | 1265 | | | | if not | 1266 | | | | recognized. [This | 1267 | | | | document, section | 1268 | | | | 3.1] | 1269 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1270 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 1271 | | Use | | be assigned | 1272 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1273 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1275 Table 20: Sub-TLVs for TLV 23 Assignments 1277 6.2.7. Updates to the registry for SubTLVs for TLV 27 1279 This section describes the new registration procedures and the 1280 assignments for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" [IANA-Sub-27] sub- 1281 registry based on the new registration procedures. 1283 o The "Specification Required" registration procedure has been 1284 changed to "RFC Required", the comment "Experimental RFC Required" 1285 has been removed. 1287 o The code points registration procedure "Vendor Private Use" has 1288 been removed and replaced with "First Come, First Served" code 1289 points. 1291 o Two small sets, 4 code points each, have been created for 1292 Experimental Use. 1294 o Code points that are reserved are clearly marked as such. 1296 o The assignments have been updated to match the new registration 1297 procedures. 1299 o The notes related to the registration procedures have been changed 1300 to reflect when a response is required if a sub-TLV is not 1301 recognized or not. 1303 The registration procedures for the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27" 1304 [IANA-Sub-27] sub-registry will now look like this: 1306 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1307 | Range | Registration | Note | 1308 | | Procedures | | 1309 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1310 | 0-16383 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1311 | | | require an error message if not | 1312 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1313 | | | section 3.1] | 1314 | 16384-31739 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1315 | | | require an error message if not | 1316 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1317 | | | section 3.1] | 1318 | 31740-31743 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned. | 1319 | | | This range is for sub-TLVs that | 1320 | | | require an error message if not | 1321 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1322 | | | section 3.1] | 1323 | 31744-32767 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1324 | | | require an error message if not | 1325 | | | recognized. [This document, | 1326 | | | section 3.1] | 1327 | 32768-49161 | Standards Action | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1328 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1329 | | | recognized. | 1330 | 49162-64507 | RFC Required | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1331 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1332 | | | recognized. | 1333 | 64508-64511 | Experimental Use | Reserved, not to be assigned | 1334 | 64512-65535 | FCFS | This range is for sun-TLVs that | 1335 | | | can be silently dropped if not | 1336 | | | recognized. | 1337 +-------------+-------------------+---------------------------------+ 1339 Table 21: Registration Procedures for Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 1341 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1342 | Type | TLV Name | Reference | Comment | 1343 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1344 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7555] | | 1345 | 1 | EQ | EQ | EQ | 1346 | 2-31739 | Unassigned | | | 1347 | 31740-31743 | Experimental | This Document | Reserved, not to | 1348 | | Use | | be assigned. This | 1349 | | | | range is for sub- | 1350 | | | | TLVs that require | 1351 | | | | an error message | 1352 | | | | if not | 1353 | | | | recognized. [This | 1354 | | | | document, section | 1355 | | | | 3.1] | 1356 | 31744-64507 | Unassigned | | | 1357 | 64508-64511 | Experimental | This document | Reserved, not to | 1358 | | Use | | be assigned | 1359 | 64512-65535 | Unassigned | | | 1360 +-------------+---------------+-----------------+-------------------+ 1362 Table 22: Sub-TLVs for TLV 27 Assignments 1364 7. Acknowledgements 1366 The authors wish to thank Adrian Farrel, who both made very useful 1367 comments and agreed to serve as the document shepherd. 1369 The authors also wish to thank Michelle Cotton who very patiently 1370 worked with us to determine how our registries could and should be 1371 updated. 1373 The authors thanks Donald Eastlake and Tom Petch for careful and 1374 detailed reviews. 1376 8. References 1378 8.1. Normative References 1380 [IANA-LSP-PING] 1381 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths 1382 (LSPs) Ping Parameters", 1383 . 1386 [IANA-MT] "Message Types", . 1390 [IANA-RC] "Return Codes", . 1393 [IANA-RM] "Reply Modes", . 1396 [IANA-Sub-1-16-21] 1397 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21", 1398 . 1402 [IANA-Sub-11] 1403 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 11", 1404 . 1408 [IANA-Sub-20] 1409 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 20", 1410 . 1414 [IANA-Sub-23] 1415 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 23", 1416 . 1420 [IANA-Sub-27] 1421 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 27", 1422 . 1426 [IANA-Sub-6] 1427 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 6", 1428 . 1432 [IANA-TLV-reg] 1433 "TLVs", . 1436 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1437 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 1438 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 1439 . 1441 [RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N., 1442 Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label 1443 Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029, 1444 DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017, 1445 . 1447 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 1448 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 1449 May 2017, . 1451 [RFC8287] Kumar, N., Ed., Pignataro, C., Ed., Swallow, G., Akiya, 1452 N., Kini, S., and M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) 1453 Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and 1454 IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data 1455 Planes", RFC 8287, DOI 10.17487/RFC8287, December 2017, 1456 . 1458 [RFC8611] Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., 1459 Drake, J., and M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping 1460 and Traceroute Multipath Support for Link Aggregation 1461 Group (LAG) Interfaces", RFC 8611, DOI 10.17487/RFC8611, 1462 June 2019, . 1464 8.2. Informative References 1466 [IANA-Sub-9] 1467 "Sub-TLVs for TLV Type 9", 1468 . 1472 [lsp-ping-NameSpace] 1473 "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths 1474 (LSPs) Ping Parameters", 1475 . 1478 [RFC7110] Chen, M., Cao, W., Ning, S., Jounay, F., and S. Delord, 1479 "Return Path Specified Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping", 1480 RFC 7110, DOI 10.17487/RFC7110, January 2014, 1481 . 1483 [RFC7555] Swallow, G., Lim, V., and S. Aldrin, "Proxy MPLS Echo 1484 Request", RFC 7555, DOI 10.17487/RFC7555, June 2015, 1485 . 1487 [RFC7743] Luo, J., Ed., Jin, L., Ed., Nadeau, T., Ed., and G. 1488 Swallow, Ed., "Relayed Echo Reply Mechanism for Label 1489 Switched Path (LSP) Ping", RFC 7743, DOI 10.17487/RFC7743, 1490 January 2016, . 1492 [RFC7759] Bellagamba, E., Mirsky, G., Andersson, L., Skoldstrom, P., 1493 Ward, D., and J. Drake, "Configuration of Proactive 1494 Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) 1495 Functions for MPLS-Based Transport Networks Using Label 1496 Switched Path (LSP) Ping", RFC 7759, DOI 10.17487/RFC7759, 1497 February 2016, . 1499 [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for 1500 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, 1501 RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, 1502 . 1504 Authors' Addresses 1506 Loa Andersson 1507 Bronze Dragon Consulting 1509 Email: loa@pi.nu 1511 Mach Chen 1512 Huawei Techologies 1514 Email: mach.chen@huawei.com 1516 Carlos Pignataro 1517 Cisco Systems 1519 Email: cpignata@cisco.com 1521 Tarek Saad 1522 Juniper Networks 1524 Email: tsaad@juniper.net