Technical Summary
This document defines extensions to the data-plane failure-detection
protocol for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched
Paths (LSPs) known as "LSP Ping". These extensions allow selection
of the LSP to use for the echo reply return path. Enforcing a
specific return path can be used to verify bidirectional connectivity
and also increase LSP ping robustness.
Working Group Summary
There has not been anything in the working group process that
needs to be mentioned, other than we had a strong support to
accept it as a working group draft, after that the discussion
on the mailing were low for almost a year, but has pick up lately
and we have had a good discussion, where all comments been
focused on improving the and no indication that the draft is not
needed.
The document has support in the working group, and operators has
participated in writing it, and has been well reviewed.
After improving the IANA section (mostly off-line) the document
shepherd now believes we have a stable document ready to be
published.
A further two months' discussion focused on a discussion of the IANA
section of this document. We have earlier made "early allocations"
of code points for this document, after discussion we have
decided not use them, but reuse (identical) sub-TLVs allocated
by RFC4379. A spin-off of the IANA discussion for this
document is that we are discussing/thiking of writing an update
to the IANA allocation of RFC4379.
The AD review raised still further issues with the IANA section and
this delayed the document by many months while the working group
grappled with an understanding of how the registries were supposed
to work. Agreement has finally been reached leading to the latest
revision and a new draft in the working group to clarify the registries
for future generations.
Document Quality
This is a very minor update to the LSP-Ping that does not have
any affect on the operations of existing LSP Ping implementations
and deployments, even if nodes with the new functionality are
introduced.
The working group mailing list has been polled for existing
implementations and intentions to implement this specification.
We know of vendors that intend to implement and at least one
operator that plans to deploy this functionality.
Personnel
Loa Andersson (loa@pi.nu) is the document shepherd.
Adrian Farrel (adrian@olddog.co.uk) is the responsible AD.
RFC Editor Note
Section 3.2.
OLD
The A bit and B bit set MUST NOT both be set
NEW
The A flag and B flag MUST NOT both be set
Section 6.4
OLD
The range of 0x0008-0xfffb is not allocated and reserved for future
extensions and is allocated via Standard Action, the range of 0xfffc-
0xffff is for Experimental Use.
NEW
The range of 0x0006-0xfffb is not allocated and reserved for future
extensions and is allocated via Standard Action, the range of 0xfffc-
0xffff is for Experimental Use.
END
===
IANA Note
IANA, please see the text in the RFC Editor Note