[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: (draft-bellagamba-ccamp-rsvp-te-mpls-tp-oam-ext) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 RFC 7487

CCAMP Working Group                                        E. Bellagamba
Internet-Draft                                                 A. Takacs
Intended status: Standards Track                               G. Mirsky
Expires: July 28, 2015                                          Ericsson
                                                            L. Andersson
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           P. Skoldstrom
                                                                Acreo AB
                                                                 D. Ward
                                                                   Cisco
                                                        January 24, 2015


Configuration of Pro-Active Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
    (OAM) Functions for MPLS-based Transport Networks using RSVP-TE
              draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-mpls-tp-oam-ext-16

Abstract

   This specification describes the configuration of proactive MPLS-TP
   (MPLS-Transport Profile) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
   (OAM) Functions for a given LSP using a set of TLVs that are carried
   by the GMPLS RSVP-TE protocol based on the OAM Configuration
   Framework for GMPLS RSVP-TE.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 28, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       1.1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       1.1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.  Overview of MPLS OAM for Transport Applications . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Theory of Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  MPLS-TP OAM Configuration Operation Overview  . . . . . .   5
       3.1.1.  Configuration of BFD sessions . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.1.2.  Configuration of Performance Monitoring . . . . . . .   7
       3.1.3.  Configuration of Fault Management Signals . . . . . .   7
     3.2.  MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       3.2.1.  CV Flag Rules of Use  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     3.3.  BFD Configuration sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       3.3.1.  BFD Identifiers sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       3.3.2.  Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV  . . . . . . . .  13
       3.3.3.  BFD Authentication sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       3.3.4.  Traffic Class sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     3.4.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       3.4.1.  MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       3.4.2.  MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     3.5.  MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   4.  Summary of MPLS OAM configuration errors  . . . . . . . . . .  21
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     5.1.  MPLS OAM Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     5.2.  MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.3.  MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Types  . . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.4.  BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
     5.5.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV Types  . . . . . . . . . .  24
     5.6.  New RSVP-TE error codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   6.  Contributing Authors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


1.  Introduction

   This document describes the configuration of proactive MPLS-TP (MPLS-
   Transport Profile) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)
   Functions for a given LSP using TLVs using GMPLS RSVP-TE [RFC3473].
   [RFC7260] defines use of GMPLS RSVP-TE for the configuration of OAM
   functions in a technology agnostic way.  This document specifies the
   additional mechanisms necessary to establish MPLS-TP OAM entities at
   the maintenance points for monitoring and performing measurements on
   an LSP, as well as defining information elements and procedures to
   configure proactive MPLS-TP OAM functions running between LERs.
   Initialization and control of on-demand MPLS-TP OAM functions are
   expected to be carried out by directly accessing network nodes via a
   management interface; hence configuration and control of on-demand
   OAM functions are out-of-scope for this document.

   MPLS-TP, the Transport Profile of MPLS, must, by definition
   [RFC5654], be capable of operating without a control plane.
   Therefore, there are several options for configuring MPLS-TP OAM,
   without a control plane by either using an NMS or LSP Ping, or with a
   control plane using signaling protocols such as RSVP-TE.

   MPLS-TP describes a profile of MPLS that enables operational models
   typical in transport networks, while providing additional OAM,
   survivability and other maintenance functions not currently supported
   by MPLS.  [RFC5860] defines the requirements for the OAM
   functionality of MPLS-TP.

   Proactive MPLS-TP OAM is performed by three different protocols, Bi-
   directional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC6428] for Continuity
   Check/Connectivity Verification, the delay measurement protocol (DM)
   [RFC6374] for delay and delay variation (jitter) measurements, and
   the loss measurement protocol (LM) [RFC6374] for packet loss and
   throughput measurements.  Additionally, there is a number of Fault
   Management Signals that can be configured [RFC6427].

   BFD is a protocol that provides low-overhead, fast detection of
   failures in the path between two forwarding engines, including the
   interfaces, data link(s), and to the extent possible the forwarding
   engines themselves.  BFD can be used to track the liveliness and
   detect data plane failures of MPLS-TP point-to-point and might also
   be extended to support point-to-multipoint connections.

   The delay and loss measurements protocols [RFC6374] use a simple
   query/response model for performing bidirectional measurements that
   allows the originating node to measure packet loss and delay in both
   directions.  By timestamping and/or writing current packet counters
   to the measurement packets at four times (Tx and Rx in both



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   directions) current delays and packet losses can be calculated.  By
   performing successive delay measurements the delay variation (jitter)
   can be calculated.  Current throughput can be calculated from the
   packet loss measurements by dividing the number of packets sent/
   received with the time it took to perform the measurement, given by
   the timestamp in LM header.  Combined with a packet generator the
   throughput measurement can be used to measure the maximum capacity of
   a particular LSP.  It should be noted that here we are not
   configuring on-demand throughput estimates based on saturating the
   connection as defined in [RFC6371].  Rather, we only enable the
   estimation of the current throughput based on loss measurements.

1.1.  Conventions used in this document

1.1.1.  Terminology

   BFD - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection

   CV - Connectivity Verification

   CC - Continuity Check

   DM - Delay Measurement

   FMS - Fault Management Signal

   G-ACh - Generic Associated Channel

   GMPLS - Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching

   LER - Label switching Edge Router

   LM - Loss Measurement

   LSP - Label Switched Path

   LSR - Label Switching Router

   MEP - Maintenance Entity Group End Point

   MPLS - Multi-Protocol Label Switching

   MPLS-TP - MPLS Transport Profile

   NMS - Network Management System

   PM - Performance Measurement




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   RSVP-TE - Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering

   TC - Traffic Class

1.1.2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

2.  Overview of MPLS OAM for Transport Applications

   [RFC6371] describes how MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms are operated to meet
   transport requirements outlined in [RFC5860].

   [RFC6428] specifies two BFD operation modes: 1) "CC mode", which uses
   periodic BFD message exchanges with symmetric timer settings,
   supporting Continuity Check, 2) "CV/CC mode" which sends unique
   maintenance entity identifiers in the periodic BFD messages
   supporting Connectivity Verification (CV) as well as Continuity Check
   (CC).

   [RFC6374] specifies mechanisms for performance monitoring of LSPs, in
   particular it specifies loss and delay measurement OAM functions.

   [RFC6427] specifies fault management signals with which a server LSP
   can notify client LSPs about various fault conditions to suppress
   alarms or to be used as triggers for actions in the client LSPs.  The
   following signals are defined: Alarm Indication Signal (AIS), Link
   Down Indication (LDI) and Lock Report (LKR).

   [RFC6371] describes the mapping of fault conditions to consequent
   actions.  Some of these mappings may be configured by the operator,
   depending on the application of the LSP.  The following defects are
   identified: Loss Of Continuity (LOC), Misconnectivity, MEP
   Misconfiguration and Period Misconfiguration.  Out of these defect
   conditions, the following consequent actions may be configurable: 1)
   whether or not the LOC defect should result in blocking the outgoing
   data traffic; 2) whether or not the "Period Misconfiguration defect"
   should result in a signal fail condition.

3.  Theory of Operations

3.1.  MPLS-TP OAM Configuration Operation Overview

   GMPLS RSVP-TE, or alternatively LSP Ping [LSP-PING-CONF], can be used
   to simply enable the different OAM functions, by setting the
   corresponding flags in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" [RFC7260].



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   For a more detailed configuration one may include sub-TLVs for the
   different OAM functions in order to specify various parameters in
   detail.

   Typically intermediate nodes SHOULD NOT process or modify any of the
   OAM configuration TLVs but simply forward them to the end-node.
   There is one exception to this and that is if the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-
   TLV" is present.  This sub-TLV MUST be examined even by intermediate
   nodes that support these extensions, but only acted upon by nodes
   capable of transmitting FMS signals into the LSP being established.
   The sub-TLV MAY be present when the FMS flag is set in the "OAM
   Function Flags sub-TLV".  If this sub-TLV is present, then the "OAM
   MIP entities desired" and "OAM MEP entities desired" flags (described
   in [RFC7260]) in the "LSP Attributes Flags TLV" MUST be set and the
   entire OAM Configuration TLV placed either in the
   LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES object or in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object in
   order to ensure that capable intermediate nodes process the
   configuration.  If placed in LSP_ATTRIBUTES object, nodes that are
   not able to process the OAM Configuration TLV will forward the
   message without generating an error.  If the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV"
   been placed in the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES object a node that
   supports the RFC 7260 but does not support the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV"
   MUST generate PathErr message with "OAM Problem/Configuration Error"
   [RFC7260].  Otherwise, if the node doesn't support the RFC 7260, it
   will not raise any errors as described in the Section 4.1 [RFC7260].

   Finally, if the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" is not included only the "OAM
   MEP entities desired" flag is set and the OAM Configuration TLV may
   be placed in either LSP_ATTRIBUTES or LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES.

3.1.1.  Configuration of BFD sessions

   For this specification, BFD MUST be run in either one of the two
   modes:

      - Asynchronous mode, where both sides should be in active mode

      - Unidirectional mode

   In the simplest scenario, RSVP-TE, or alternatively LSP Ping [LSP-
   PING-CONF], is used only to bootstrap a BFD session for an LSP,
   without any timer negotiation.

   Timer negotiation can be performed either in subsequent BFD control
   messages (in this case the operation is similar to LSP Ping based
   bootstrapping described in [RFC5884]) or directly in the RSVP-TE
   signaling messages.




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   When BFD Control packets are transported in the G-ACh they are not
   protected by any end-to-end checksum, only lower-layers are providing
   error detection/correction.  A single bit error, e.g. a flipped bit
   in the BFD State field could cause the receiving end to wrongly
   conclude that the link is down and in turn trigger protection
   switching.  To prevent this from happening the "BFD Configuration
   sub-TLV" has an Integrity flag that when set enables BFD
   Authentication using Keyed SHA1 with an empty key (all 0s) [RFC5880].
   This would ensure that every BFD Control packet carries an SHA1 hash
   of itself that can be used to detect errors.

   If BFD Authentication using a pre-shared key / password is desired
   (i.e. authentication and not only error detection), the "BFD
   Authentication sub-TLV" MUST be included in the "BFD Configuration
   sub-TLV".  The "BFD Authentication sub-TLV" is used to specify which
   authentication method should be used and which pre-shared key /
   password should be used for this particular session.  How the key
   exchange is performed is out of scope of this document.

3.1.2.  Configuration of Performance Monitoring

   It is possible to configure Performance Monitoring functionalities
   such as Loss, Delay, Delay variation (jitter), and Throughput as
   described in [RFC6374].

   When configuring Performance monitoring functionalities it is
   possible to choose either the default configuration, by only setting
   the respective flags in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV", or a
   customized configuration.  To customize the configuration, one would
   set the respective flags and including the respective Loss and/or
   Delay sub-TLVs).

   By setting the PM/Loss flag in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" and
   by including the "MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV", one can configure the
   measurement interval and loss threshold values for triggering
   protection.

   Delay measurements are configured by setting PM/Delay flag in the
   "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV", and by including the "MPLS OAM PM Loss
   sub-TLV", one can configure the measurement interval and the delay
   threshold values for triggering protection.

3.1.3.  Configuration of Fault Management Signals

   To configure Fault Management Signals and their refresh time, the FMS
   flag in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" MUST be set and the "MPLS
   OAM FMS sub-TLV" included.  When configuring Fault Management
   Signals, an implementation can enable the default configuration by



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   setting the FMS flag in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV".  In order
   to modify the default configuration the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" MUST
   be included.

   If an intermediate point is intended to originate fault management
   signal messages, this means that such an intermediate point is
   associated with a server MEP through a co-located MPLS-TP client/
   server adaptation function and the "Fault Management subscription"
   flag in the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" been set as indication of the
   request to create the association at each intermediate node of the
   client LSP.  Corresponding server MEP needs to be configured by its
   own RSVP-TE session (or, alternatively, via an NMS or LSP-ping).

3.2.  MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV

   The "OAM Configuration TLV", defined in [RFC7260], specifies the OAM
   functions that are used for the LSP.  This document extends the "OAM
   Configuration TLV" by defining a new OAM Type: "MPLS OAM" (TBA1).
   The "MPLS OAM" type is set to request the establishment of OAM
   functions for MPLS-TP LSPs.  The specific OAM functions are specified
   in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" as depicted in [RFC7260].

   When an egress LSR receives an "OAM Configuration TLV" indicating the
   MPLS OAM type, the LSR will first process any present "OAM Function
   Flags sub-TLV" and then it MUST process technology specific
   configuration TLVs.  This document defines a sub-TLV, the "MPLS OAM
   Configuration sub-TLV" which is carried in the "OAM Configuration
   TLV".

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | MPLS OAM Conf. sub-TLV (TBA2) |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: TBA2, the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the total length in octets, including sub-TLVs as
   well as the Type and Length fields.

   The following MPLS OAM specific sub-TLVs MAY be included in the "MPLS
   OAM Configuration sub-TLV":





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


      - "BFD Configuration sub-TLV", which MUST be included if either
      the CC, the CV or both OAM Function flags being set in the OAM
      Function Flags Sub-TLV [RFC7260].  This sub-TLV carries additional
      sub-TLVs, failure to include the correct sub-TLVs MUST result in
      an error being generated: "OAM Problem/Configuration Error".  The
      sub-TLVs are:

         - "BFD Identifiers sub-TLV", MUST always be included.

         - "Timer Negotiation Parameters sub-TLV", MUST be included if
         the N flag is not set.

         - "BFD Authentication sub-TLV", MAY be included if the I flag
         is set.

      - "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV", which MUST be included if any
      of the PM/Delay, PM/Loss or PM/Throughput flags are set in the
      "OAM Function Flag sub-TLV" [RFC7260].  This sub-TLV MAY carry
      additional sub-TLVs:

         - "MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV" MAY be included if the PM/Loss OAM
         Function flag is set.  If the "MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV" is not
         included, default configuration values are used.  The same sub-
         TLV MAY also be included in case the PM/Throughput OAM Function
         flag is set and there is the need to specify measurement
         interval different from the default ones.  Since throughput
         measurements use the same tool as loss measurements the same
         TLV is used.

         - "MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV" MAY be included if the PM/Delay
         OAM Function flag is set.  If the "MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV"
         is not included, default configuration values are used.

      - "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" MAY be included if the FMS OAM Function
      flag is set.  If the "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" is not included,
      default configuration values are used.

   Following are some additional rules of processing MPLS OAM
   Configuration sub-TLV:

      - MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV MAY be empty, i.e. have no Value.
      Then its Length MUST be 8.  Then all OAM functions that have their
      corresponding flags set in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" MUST
      be assigned their default values or left disabled.

      - Sub-TLV that doesn't have corresponding flag set MUST be
      silently ignored.




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


      - If multiple copies of a sub-TLV are present, then only the first
      sub-TLV MUST be used and the remaining sub-TLVs MUST be silently
      ignored.

   However, not all the values can be derived from the standard RSVP-TE
   objects, in particular the locally assigned Tunnel ID at the egress
   cannot be derived by the ingress node.  Therefore, the full LSP MEP-
   ID used by the ingress has to be carried in the "BFD Identifiers sub-
   TLV" in the Path message and the egress LSP MEP-ID in the same way in
   the Resv message.

3.2.1.  CV Flag Rules of Use

   If the CV flag is set in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV [RFC7260],
   then the CC flag MUST be set as well because performing Connectivity
   Verification implies performing Continuity Check as well.  The format
   of an MPLS-TP CV/CC message is shown in [RFC6428].  In order to
   perform Connectivity Verification the CV/CC message MUST contain the
   "LSP MEP-ID" in addition to the BFD Control packet information.  The
   "LSP MEP-ID" contains four identifiers:

      MPLS-TP Global_ID

      MPLS-TP Node Identifier

      Tunnel_Num

      LSP_Num

   These values need to be correctly set by both ingress and egress when
   transmitting a CV packet and both ingress and egress needs to know
   what to expect when receiving a CV packet.  Most of these values can
   be derived from the Path and Resv messages [RFC3473], which uses a
   5-tuple to uniquely identify an LSP within an operator's network.
   This tuple is composed of a Tunnel Sender Address, Tunnel Endpoint
   Address, Tunnel_ID, Extended Tunnel ID, and (GMPLS) LSP_ID.

3.3.  BFD Configuration sub-TLV

   The "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" (depicted below) is defined for BFD
   OAM specific configuration parameters.  The "BFD Configuration sub-
   TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".

   This TLV accommodates generic BFD OAM information and carries sub-
   TLVs.






Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |      BFD Conf. Type (1)       |           Length              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |Vers.|N|S|I|G|U|B|       Reserved (set to all 0s)              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 1, the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the total length in octets, including sub-TLVs as
   well as the Type and Length fields.

   Version: identifies the BFD protocol version.  If the egress LSR does
   not support the version an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/
   Unsupported BFD Version".

   BFD Negotiation (N): If set timer negotiation/re-negotiation via BFD
   Control Messages is enabled, when cleared it is disabled.

   Symmetric session (S): If set the BFD session MUST use symmetric
   timing values.

   Integrity (I): If set BFD Authentication MUST be enabled.  If the
   "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" does not include a "BFD Authentication
   sub-TLV" the authentication MUST use Keyed SHA1 with an empty pre-
   shared key (all 0s).  If the egress LSR does not support BFD
   Authentication an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/BFD
   Authentication unsupported".

   Encapsulation Capability (G): if set, shows the capability of
   encapsulating BFD messages into The G-Ach channel.  If both the G bit
   and U bit are set, configuration gives precedence to the G bit.  If
   the egress LSR does not support any of the ingress LSR Encapsulation
   Capabilities an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD
   Encapsulation format".

   Encapsulation Capability (U): if set, shows the capability of
   encapsulating BFD messages into UDP packets.  If both the G bit and U
   bit are set, configuration gives precedence to the G bit.  If the
   egress LSR does not support any of the ingress LSR Encapsulation
   Capabilities an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD
   Encapsulation format".




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   Bidirectional (B): if set, it configures BFD in the Bidirectional
   mode.  If it is not set it configures BFD in unidirectional mode.  In
   the second case, the source node does not expect any Discriminator
   values back from the destination node.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0 on
   transmission and ignored when received.

   The "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" MUST include the following sub-TLVs
   in the Path message:

      - "BFD Identifiers sub-TLV";

      - "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" if the N flag is cleared.

   The "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" MUST include the following sub-TLVs
   in the Resv message:

      - "BFD Identifiers sub-TLV;"

      - "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" if:

         - the N and S flags are cleared, or if:

         - the N flag is cleared and the S flag is set, and the
         "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" received by the egress
         contains unsupported values.  In this case an updated
         "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV", containing values
         supported by the egress LSR, MUST be returned to the ingress.

3.3.1.  BFD Identifiers sub-TLV

   The "BFD Identifiers sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of the "BFD
   Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.

















Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   BFD Identfiers Type (1)     |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                     Local Discriminator                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       MPLS-TP Global_ID                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    MPLS-TP Node Identifier                    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |           Tunnel_Num          |            LSP_Num            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   Type: 1, "BFD Identifiers sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets, including the Type
   and Length fields (20).

   Local Discriminator: A unique, nonzero discriminator value generated
   by the transmitting system and referring to itself, used to
   demultiplex multiple BFD sessions between the same pair of systems as
   defined in [RFC5880].

   MPLS-TP Global_ID, Node Identifier, Tunnel_Num, and LSP_Num: all set
   as defined in [RFC6370].

3.3.2.  Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV

   The "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of
   the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    Nego. Timer Type (2)       |             Length            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               Required Echo TX Interval                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 2, "Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-TLV".





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and
   Length fields (16).

   Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval: If the S (symmetric) flag
   is set in the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV", it expresses the desired
   time interval (in microseconds) at which the ingress LER intends to
   both transmit and receive BFD periodic control packets.  If the
   egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported
   interval.

   If the S (symmetric) flag is cleared in the "BFD Configuration sub-
   TLV", this field expresses the desired time interval (in
   microseconds) at which the ingress LSR intends to transmit BFD
   periodic control packets.

   Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval: If the S (symmetric) flag
   is set in the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV", this field MUST be set
   equal to "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval" on transmit and
   MUST be ignored on receipt since it has no additional meaning with
   respect to the one described for "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX
   interval".

   If the S (symmetric) flag is cleared in the "BFD Configuration sub-
   TLV", it expresses the minimum time interval (in microseconds) at
   which the ingress/egress LSRs can receive periodic BFD control
   packets.  If this value is greater than the "Acceptable Min.
   Asynchronous TX interval" received from the ingress/egress LSR, the
   receiving LSR MUST adopt the interval expressed in the "Acceptable
   Min. Asynchronous RX interval".

   Required Echo TX Interval: the minimum interval (in microseconds)
   between received BFD Echo packets that this system is capable of
   supporting, less any jitter applied by the sender as described in
   [RFC5880] sect. 6.8.9.  This value is also an indication for the
   receiving system of the minimum interval between transmitted BFD Echo
   packets.  If this value is zero, the transmitting system does not
   support the receipt of BFD Echo packets.  If the LSR node cannot
   support this value it SHOULD reply with a supported value (which may
   be zero if Echo is not supported).

3.3.3.  BFD Authentication sub-TLV

   The "BFD Authentication sub-TLV" is carried as a sub-TLV of the "BFD
   Configuration sub-TLV" and is depicted below.







Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |      BFD Auth. Type (3)       |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Auth Type   |  Auth Key ID  |         Reserved (0s)         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 3, "BFD Authentication sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and
   Length fields (8).

   Auth Type: indicates which type of authentication to use.  The same
   values as are defined in section 4.1 of [RFC5880] are used.  If the
   egress LSR does not support this type an "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD
   Authentication Type" error MUST be generated.

   Auth Key ID: indicates which authentication key or password
   (depending on Auth Type) should be used.  How the key exchange is
   performed is out of scope of this document.  If the egress LSR does
   not support this Auth Key ID an "OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD
   Authentication Key ID" error MUST be generated.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0 on
   transmission and ignored when received.

3.3.4.  Traffic Class sub-TLV

   The Traffic Class sub-TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the "BFD
   Configuration sub-TLV" or "Fault Management Signal sub-TLV"
   Section 3.5 and is depicted in Figure 1.

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Traffic Class sub-Type (4)   |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  TC |                 Reserved (set to all 0s)                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                  Figure 1: Traffic Class sub-TLV format

   Type: 3, "Traffic Class sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the length of the Value field in octets . (4)





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   TC: Identifies the Traffic Class (TC) [RFC5462] for periodic
   continuity monitoring messages or packets with fault management
   information.

   If TC sub-TLV is present, then the value of the TC field MUST be used
   as the value of the TC field of an MPLS label stack entry.  If the TC
   sub-TLV is absent from "BFD Configuration sub-TLV" or "Fault
   Management Signal sub-TLV", then selection of the TC value is local
   decision.

3.4.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV

   If the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV" has either the PM/Loss, PM/Delay
   or PM/Throughput flag set, the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" MUST
   be present in the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".  Failure to
   include the correct sub-TLVs MUST result in an "OAM Problem/
   Configuration Error" error being generated.

   The "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" provides the configuration
   information mentioned in Section 7 of [RFC6374].  It includes support
   for the configuration of quality thresholds and, as described in
   [RFC6374], "the crossing of which will trigger warnings or alarms,
   and result reporting and exception notification will be integrated
   into the system-wide network management and reporting framework."

   In case the values need to be different than the default ones the
   "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" includes the following sub-TLVs:

      - "MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV" if the PM/Loss and/or PM/Throughput
      flag is set in the "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV";

      - "MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV" if the PM/Delay flag is set in the
      "OAM Function Flags sub-TLV";

   The "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a
   sub-TLV of the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    Perf. Monitoring Type(2)   |          Length               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |D|L|J|Y|K|C|            Reserved (set to all 0s)               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   Type: 2, "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets, including sub-TLVs
   as well as Type and Length fields.

   Configuration Flags, for the specific function description please
   refer to [RFC6374]:

      - D: Delay inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT).  If the egress
      LSR does not support specified mode an "OAM Problem/Unsupported
      Delay Mode" error MUST be generated.

      - L: Loss inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT).  If the egress
      LSR does not support specified mode an "OAM Problem/Unsupported
      Loss Mode" error MUST be generated.

      - J: Delay variation/jitter (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE).  If the
      egress LSR does not support Delay variation measurements and the J
      flag is set, an "OAM Problem/Delay variation unsupported" error
      MUST be generated.

      - Y: Dyadic (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE).  If the egress LSR does not
      support Dyadic mode and the Y flag is set, an "OAM Problem/Dyadic
      mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.

      - K: Loopback (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE).  If the egress LSR does
      not support Loopback mode and the K flag is set, an "OAM Problem/
      Loopback mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.

      - C: Combined (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE).  If the egress LSR does
      not support Combined mode and the C flag is set, an "OAM Problem/
      Combined mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0 on
   transmission and ignored when received.

3.4.1.  MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV

   The "MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-TLV
   of the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV".











Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |       PM Loss Type (1)        |          Length               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | OTF |T|B|              Reserved (set to all 0s)               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Measurement Interval                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Test Interval                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Loss Threshold                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 1,"MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the length of the parameters in octets, including
   Type and Length fields (20).

   OTF: Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field described
   in [RFC6374].  By default it is set to IEEE 1588 version 1.  If the
   egress LSR cannot support this value an "OAM Problem/Unsupported
   Timestamp Format" error MUST be generated.

   Configuration Flags, please refer to [RFC6374] for further details:

      - T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator.  Set to 1 when
      the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
      traffic class (DSCP value), and 0 otherwise.  When set to 1, the
      DS field of the message indicates the measured traffic class.  By
      default it is set to 1.

      - B: Octet (byte) count.  When set to 1, indicates that the
      Counter 1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0,
      indicates that the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts.  By
      default it is set to 0.

   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0 on
   transmission and ignored when received.

   Measurement Interval: the time interval (in milliseconds) at which
   Loss Measurement query messages MUST be sent on both directions.  If
   the egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a
   supported interval.  By default it is set to (100) as per [RFC6375].

   Test Interval: test messages interval in milliseconds as described in
   [RFC6374].  By default it is set to (10) as per [RFC6375].  If the




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported
   interval.

   Loss Threshold: the threshold value of measured lost packets per
   measurement over which action(s) SHOULD be triggered.

3.4.2.  MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV

   The "MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-
   TLV of the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV".

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |      PM Delay Type (2)        |          Length               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | OTF |T|B|             Reserved (set to all 0s)                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Measurement Interval                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Test Interval                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Delay Threshold                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 2,"MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the length of the parameters in octets, including
   Type and Length fields (20).

   OTF: Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field described
   in [RFC6374].  By default it is set to IEEE 1588 version 1.  If the
   egress LSR cannot support this value an "OAM Problem/Unsupported
   Timestamp Format" error MUST be generated.

   Configuration Flags, please refer to [RFC6374] for further details:

      - T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator.  Set to 1 when
      the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
      traffic class (DSCP value), and 0 otherwise.  When set to 1, the
      DS field of the message indicates the measured traffic class.  By
      default it is set to 1.

      - B: Octet (byte) count.  When set to 1, indicates that the
      Counter 1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0,
      indicates that the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts.  By
      default it is set to 0.




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   Reserved: Reserved for future specification and set to 0 on
   transmission and ignored when received.

   Measurement Interval: the time interval (in milliseconds) at which
   Delay Measurement query messages MUST be sent on both directions.  If
   the egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a
   supported interval.  By default it is set to (1000) as per [RFC6375].

   Test Interval: test messages interval (in milliseconds) as described
   in [RFC6374].  By default it is set to (10) as per [RFC6375].  If the
   egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported
   interval.

   Delay Threshold: the threshold value of measured two-way delay (in
   milliseconds) over which action(s) SHOULD be triggered.

3.5.  MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV

   The "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV" depicted below is carried as a sub-TLV of
   the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".  When both working and
   protection paths are signaled, both LSPs SHOULD be signaled with
   identical settings of the E flag, T flag, and the refresh timer.

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     MPLS OAM FMS Type (3)     |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |E|S|T|           Reserved            |      Refresh Timer      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type: 3, "MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV".

   Length: indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and
   Length fields (8).

   FMS Signal Flags are used to enable the FMS signals at end point MEPs
   and the Server MEPs of the links over which the LSP is forwarded.  In
   this document only the S flag pertains to Server MEPs.

   The following flags are defined:

      - E: Enable Alarm Indication Signal (AIS) and Lock Report (LKR)
      signaling as described in [RFC6427].  Default value is 1



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


      (enabled).  If the egress MEP does not support FMS signal
      generation an "OAM Problem/Fault management signaling unsupported"
      error MUST be generated.

      - S: Indicate to a Server MEP that it should transmit AIS and LKR
      signals on client LSPs.  Default value is 0 (disabled).  If a
      Server MEP which is capable of generating FMS messages is for some
      reason unable to do so for the LSP being signaled an "OAM Problem/
      Unable to create fault management association" error MUST be
      generated.

      - T: Set timer value, enabled the configuration of a specific
      timer value.  Default value is 0 (disabled).

      - Remaining bits: Reserved for future specification and set to 0.

   Refresh Timer: indicates the refresh timer of fault indication
   messages, in seconds.  The value MUST be between 1 to 20 seconds as
   specified for the Refresh Timer field in [RFC6427].  If the egress
   LSR cannot support the value it SHOULD reply with a supported timer
   value.

   FMS sub-TLV MAY include Traffic Class sub-TLV Section 3.3.4.  If TC
   sub-TLV is present, the value of the TC field MUST be used as the
   value of the TC field of an MPLS label stack entry for FMS messages.
   If the TC sub-TLV is absent, then selection of the TC value is local
   decision.

4.  Summary of MPLS OAM configuration errors

   In addition to error values specified in [RFC7260] this document
   defines the following values for the "OAM Problem" Error Code:

      - If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD version, an
      error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD Version".

      - If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD
      Encapsulation format, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/
      Unsupported BFD Encapsulation format".

      - If an egress LSR does not support BFD Authentication, and it is
      requested, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/BFD
      Authentication unsupported".

      - If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD
      Authentication Type, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/
      Unsupported BFD Authentication Type".




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


      - If an egress LSR is not able to use the specified Authentication
      Key ID, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD
      Authentication Key ID".

      - If an egress LSR does not support the specified Timestamp
      Format, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported
      Timestamp Format".

      - If an egress LSR does not support specified Delay mode, an "OAM
      Problem/Unsupported Delay Mode" error MUST be generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support specified Loss mode, an "OAM
      Problem/Unsupported Loss Mode" error MUST be generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support Delay variation measurements,
      and it is requested, an "OAM Problem/Delay variation unsupported"
      error MUST be generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support Dyadic mode, and it is
      requested, an "OAM Problem/Dyadic mode unsupported" error MUST be
      generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support Loopback mode, and it is
      requested, an "OAM Problem/Loopback mode unsupported" error MUST
      be generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support Combined mode, and it is
      requested, an "OAM Problem/Combined mode unsupported" error MUST
      be generated.

      - If an egress LSR does not support Fault Monitoring Signals, and
      it is requested, an "OAM Problem/Fault management signaling
      unsupported" error MUST be generated.

      - If an intermediate server MEP supports Fault Monitoring Signals
      but is unable to create an association, when requested to do so,
      an "OAM Problem/Unable to create fault management association"
      error MUST be generated.

5.  IANA Considerations

5.1.  MPLS OAM Type

   This document specifies new the "MPLS OAM Type".  IANA is requested
   to allocate a new type (TBA1) from the OAM Type space of the RSVP-TE
   OAM Configuration Registry.





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


                  +------+-------------+---------------+
                  | Type | Description | Reference     |
                  +------+-------------+---------------+
                  | TBA1 |   MPLS OAM  | This document |
                  +------+-------------+---------------+

                          Table 1: OAM MPLS Type

5.2.  MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV

   This document specifies the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV", IANA is
   requested to allocate a new type (TBA2) from the technology-specific
   sub-TLV space of the RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry.

         +------+--------------------------------+---------------+
         | Type |          Description           | Reference     |
         +------+--------------------------------+---------------+
         | TBA2 | MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV | This document |
         +------+--------------------------------+---------------+

               Table 2: MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV Type

5.3.  MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Types

   IANA is requested to create an "MPLS OAM sub-TLV Types" sub-registry
   in the "RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-TLVs carried
   in the "MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV".  Values from this new sub-
   registry to be allocated through IETF Review except for the Reserved
   for Experimental Use range.  This document defines the following
   types:

     +-------------+--------------------------------+---------------+
     |     Type    |          Description           | Reference     |
     +-------------+--------------------------------+---------------+
     |      0      |            Reserved            | This document |
     |      1      |   BFD Configuration sub-TLV    | This document |
     |      2      | Performance Monitoring sub-TLV | This document |
     |      3      |      MPLS OAM FMS sub-TLV      | This document |
     |   4-65532   |           Unassigned           |               |
     | 65533-65534 | Reserved for Experimental Use  | This document |
     |    65535    |            Reserved            | This document |
     +-------------+--------------------------------+---------------+

               Table 3: MPLS OAM Configuration sub-TLV Types







Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


5.4.  BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Types

   IANA is requested to create a "BFD Configuration sub-TLV Types" sub-
   registry in the "RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-TLV
   types carried in the "BFD Configuration sub-TLV".  Values from this
   new sub-registry to be allocated through IETF Review except for the
   Reserved for Experimental Use range.  This document defines the
   following types:

   +-------------+-------------------------------------+---------------+
   |     Type    |             Description             | Reference     |
   +-------------+-------------------------------------+---------------+
   |      0      |               Reserved              | This document |
   |      1      |       BFD Identifiers sub-TLV       | This document |
   |      2      |  Negotiation Timer Parameters sub-  | This document |
   |             |                 TLV                 |               |
   |      3      |      BFD Authentication sub-TLV     | This document |
   |      4      |        Traffic Class sub-TLV        | This document |
   |   5-65532   |              Unassigned             |               |
   | 65533-65534 |    Reserved for Experimental Use    | This document |
   |    65535    |               Reserved              | This document |
   +-------------+-------------------------------------+---------------+

                 Table 4: BFD Configuration Sus-TLV Types

5.5.  Performance Monitoring sub-TLV Types

   IANA is requested to create a "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV Type"
   sub-registry in the "RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-
   TLV types carried in the "Performance Monitoring sub-TLV".  Values
   from this new sub-registry to be allocated through IETF Review except
   for the Reserved for Experimental Use range.  This document defines
   the following types:

      +-------------+-------------------------------+---------------+
      |     Type    |          Description          | Reference     |
      +-------------+-------------------------------+---------------+
      |      0      |            Reserved           | This document |
      |      1      |    MPLS OAM PM Loss sub-TLV   | This document |
      |      2      |   MPLS OAM PM Delay sub-TLV   | This document |
      |   3-65532   |           Unassigned          |               |
      | 65533-65534 | Reserved for Experimental Use | This document |
      |    65535    |            Reserved           | This document |
      +-------------+-------------------------------+---------------+

               Table 5: Performance Monitoring sub-TLV Types





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 24]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


5.6.  New RSVP-TE error codes

   The following values need to be assigned under the "OAM Problem"
   Error Code [RFC7260] by IETF Review process:

   +-----------------+---------------------------------+---------------+
   | Error Value     | Description                     | Reference     |
   | Sub-codes       |                                 |               |
   +-----------------+---------------------------------+---------------+
   | TBA3            | Unsupported BFD Version         | This document |
   | TBA4            | Unsupported BFD Encapsulation   | This document |
   |                 | format                          |               |
   | TBA5            | Unsupported BFD Authentication  | This document |
   |                 | Type                            |               |
   | TBA6            | Mismatch of BFD Authentication  | This document |
   |                 | Key ID                          |               |
   | TBA7            | Unsupported Timestamp Format    | This document |
   | TBA8            | Unsupported Delay Mode          | This document |
   | TBA9            | Unsupported Loss Mode           | This document |
   | TBA10           | Delay variation unsupported     | This document |
   | TBA11           | Dyadic mode unsupported         | This document |
   | TBA12           | Loopback mode unsupported       | This document |
   | TBA13           | Combined mode unsupported       | This document |
   | TBA14           | Fault management signaling      | This document |
   |                 | unsupported                     |               |
   | TBA15           | Unable to create fault          | This document |
   |                 | management association          |               |
   +-----------------+---------------------------------+---------------+

                Table 6: MPLS OAM Configuration Error Codes

   The "Sub-codes - 40, OAM Problem" sub-registry is located in the
   "Error Codes and Globally-Defined Error Value Sub-Codes" registry.

6.  Contributing Authors

   This document is the result of a large team of authors and
   contributors.  The following is a list of the co-authors:

      John Drake

      Benoit Tremblay

7.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank David Allan, Lou Berger, Annamaria
   Fulignoli, Eric Gray, Andras Kern, David Jocha and David Sinicrope
   for their useful comments.



Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 25]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


8.  Security Considerations

   The signaling of OAM related parameters and the automatic
   establishment of OAM entities introduces additional security
   considerations to those discussed in [RFC3473].  In particular, a
   network element could be overloaded if an attacker were to request
   high frequency liveliness monitoring of a large number of LSPs,
   targeting a single network element as discussed in [RFC7260] and
   [RFC6060].

   Additional discussion of security for MPLS and GMPLS protocols can be
   found in [RFC5920].

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3473]  Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
              (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
              Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003.

   [RFC5654]  Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N.,
              and S. Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile",
              RFC 5654, September 2009.

   [RFC5860]  Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, "Requirements for
              Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS
              Transport Networks", RFC 5860, May 2010.

   [RFC5880]  Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
              (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010.

   [RFC5884]  Aggarwal, R., Kompella, K., Nadeau, T., and G. Swallow,
              "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for MPLS Label
              Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 5884, June 2010.

   [RFC6060]  Fedyk, D., Shah, H., Bitar, N., and A. Takacs,
              "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Control
              of Ethernet Provider Backbone Traffic Engineering (PBB-
              TE)", RFC 6060, March 2011.

   [RFC6370]  Bocci, M., Swallow, G., and E. Gray, "MPLS Transport
              Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers", RFC 6370, September 2011.





Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 26]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   [RFC6374]  Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay
              Measurement for MPLS Networks", RFC 6374, September 2011.

   [RFC6427]  Swallow, G., Fulignoli, A., Vigoureux, M., Boutros, S.,
              and D. Ward, "MPLS Fault Management Operations,
              Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)", RFC 6427, November
              2011.

   [RFC6428]  Allan, D., Swallow Ed. , G., and J. Drake Ed. , "Proactive
              Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check, and Remote
              Defect Indication for the MPLS Transport Profile", RFC
              6428, November 2011.

   [RFC7260]  Takacs, A., Fedyk, D., and J. He, "GMPLS RSVP-TE
              Extensions for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
              (OAM) Configuration", RFC 7260, June 2014.

9.2.  Informative References

   [LSP-PING-CONF]
              Bellagamba, E., Andersson, L., Ward, D., Drake, J., and P.
              Skoldstrom, "Configuration of proactive MPLS-TP
              Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)
              Functions Using LSP Ping", 2014, <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-
              ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf>.

   [RFC5462]  Andersson, L. and R. Asati, "Multiprotocol Label Switching
              (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic
              Class" Field", RFC 5462, February 2009.

   [RFC5920]  Fang, L., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
              Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010.

   [RFC6371]  Busi, I. and D. Allan, "Operations, Administration, and
              Maintenance Framework for MPLS-Based Transport Networks",
              RFC 6371, September 2011.

   [RFC6375]  Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "A Packet Loss and Delay
              Measurement Profile for MPLS-Based Transport Networks",
              RFC 6375, September 2011.

Authors' Addresses

   Elisa Bellagamba
   Ericsson

   Email: elisa.bellagamba@ericsson.com




Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 27]


Internet-Draft       Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Conf        January 2015


   Attila Takacs
   Ericsson

   Email: attila.takacs@ericsson.com


   Gregory Mirsky
   Ericsson

   Email: Gregory.Mirsky@ericsson.com


   Loa Andersson
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: loa@mail01.huawei.com


   Pontus Skoldstrom
   Acreo AB
   Electrum 236
   Kista  164 40
   Sweden

   Phone: +46 70 7957731
   Email: pontus.skoldstrom@acreo.se


   Dave Ward
   Cisco

   Email: dward@cisco.com



















Bellagamba, et al.        Expires July 28, 2015                [Page 28]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/