Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Decraene
Request for Comments: 7537 Orange
Updates: 4379, 6424 N. Akiya
Category: Standards Track C. Pignataro
ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco Systems
L. Andersson
S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies
May 2015
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Decraene
Request for Comments: 7537 Orange
Updates: 4379, 6424 N. Akiya
Category: Standards Track C. Pignataro
ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco Systems
L. Andersson
S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies
May 2015
IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points
LSP Ping代码点的IANA注册表
Abstract
摘要
RFCs 4379 and 6424 created name spaces for Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping. However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries for Downstream Mapping object Flags (DS Flags), Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types.
RFCs 4379和6424为多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）Ping创建了名称空间。但是，这些RFC没有为下游映射对象标志（DS标志）、多路径类型、Pad TLV以及接口和标签堆栈地址类型创建相应的IANA注册表。
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these name spaces. This document updates RFCs 4379 and 6424 in that it creates IANA registries for that purpose.
现在需要从这些名称空间进一步分配代码点。本文档更新了RFCs 4379和6424，因为它为此目的创建了IANA注册中心。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
这是一份互联网标准跟踪文件。
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关互联网标准的更多信息，请参见RFC 5741第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7537.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2015 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
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.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Multipath Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Pad Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Multipath Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Pad Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Interface and Label Stack Address Type . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
[RFC4379] and [RFC6424] created name spaces for MPLS LSP Ping. However, those RFCs did not create the corresponding IANA registries for DS Flags, Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types.
[RFC4379]和[RFC6424]为MPLS LSP Ping创建了名称空间。但是，这些RFC没有为DS标志、多路径类型、Pad TLV以及接口和标签堆栈地址类型创建相应的IANA注册表。
There is now a need to make further code point allocations from these name spaces. In particular, [ENTROPY-LSP-PING] and [LSP-PING-LAG] request new DS Flags and Multipath Type allocations.
现在需要从这些名称空间进一步分配代码点。特别是，[ENTROPY-LSP-PING]和[LSP-PING-LAG]请求新的DS标志和多路径类型分配。
This document updates [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] in that it creates IANA registries for that purpose.
本文档更新了[RFC4379]和[RFC6424]，因为它为此目的创建了IANA注册表。
Note that "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type" are fields included in two TLVs defined in the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream Mapping (DEPRECATED) (value 2) and Downstream Detailed Mapping (value 20). Modification to either registry will affect both TLVs.
请注意，“DS标志”和“多路径类型”是“多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）Ping参数-TLV”注册表中定义的两个TLV中包含的字段：下游映射（不推荐）（值2）和下游详细映射（值20）。对任一注册表的修改都会影响两个TLV。
Per this document, IANA has created new registries within the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] registry to maintain DS Flags, Multipath Types, Pad TLVs, and Interface and Label Stack Address Types fields. The registry names and initial values are described in the immediate subsections that follow.
根据本文档，IANA在“多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）Ping参数”[IANA-MPLS-LSP-Ping]注册表中创建了新的注册表，以维护DS标志、多路径类型、Pad TLV以及接口和标签堆栈地址类型字段。注册表名和初始值在后面的直接小节中进行了描述。
[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping (DSMAP) TLV, which has Type 2 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
[RFC4379]定义下游映射（DSMAP）TLV，该TLV具有从“多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）Ping参数-TLV”注册表分配的类型2。
[RFC6424] defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, which has Type 20 assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry.
[RFC6424]定义下游详细映射（DDMAP）TLV，该TLV具有从“多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）Ping参数-TLV”注册表分配的类型20。
DSMAP has been deprecated by DDMAP, but both TLVs share a field: DS Flags.
DDMAP不推荐使用DSMAP，但两个TLV共享一个字段：DS标志。
IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "DS Flags".
IANA已经创建并维护了一个名为“DS标志”的注册表。
The registration policy for this registry is Standards Action [RFC5226].
此注册表的注册策略为标准操作[RFC5226]。
IANA has made the following initial assignments:
IANA已完成以下初步任务：
Registry Name: DS Flags
注册表名：DS标志
Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC 4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC 4379
5-0 Unassigned
Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC 4379
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC 4379
5-0 Unassigned
IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Multipath Types".
IANA已经创建并维护了一个名为“多路径类型”的注册表。
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are as follows:
此注册表的注册策略[RFC5226]如下所示：
0-250 Standards Action 251-254 Experimental Use 255 Standards Action
0-250标准行动251-254实验性使用255标准行动
IANA has made the following initial assignments:
IANA已完成以下初步任务：
Registry Name: Multipath Types
注册表名称：多路径类型
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC 4379
1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC 4379
3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC 4379
5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC 4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC 4379
10-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC 4379
1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC 4379
3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC 4379
5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC 4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC 4379
10-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Pad Types".
IANA已经创建并维护了一个名为“焊盘类型”的注册表。
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
此注册表的注册策略[RFC5226]为：
0-250 Standards Action 251-254 Experimental Use 255 Standards Action
0-250标准行动251-254实验性使用255标准行动
IANA has made the following initial assignments:
IANA已完成以下初步任务：
Registry Name: Pad Types
注册表名称：焊盘类型
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC 4379
2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC 4379
3-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 Drop Pad TLV from reply RFC 4379
2 Copy Pad TLV to reply RFC 4379
3-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
IANA has created and now maintains a registry entitled "Interface and Label Stack Address Types".
IANA已经创建并维护了一个名为“接口和标签堆栈地址类型”的注册表。
The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:
此注册表的注册策略[RFC5226]为：
0-250 Standards Action 251-254 Experimental Use 255 Standards Action
0-250标准行动251-254实验性使用255标准行动
IANA has made the following initial assignments:
IANA已完成以下初步任务：
Registry Name: Interface and Label Stack Address Types
注册表名称：接口和标签堆栈地址类型
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 IPv4 Numbered RFC 4379
2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC 4379
3 IPv6 Numbered RFC 4379
4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC 4379
5-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 Reserved This document
1 IPv4 Numbered RFC 4379
2 IPv4 Unnumbered RFC 4379
3 IPv6 Numbered RFC 4379
4 IPv6 Unnumbered RFC 4379
5-250 Unassigned
251-254 Experimental Use This document
255 Reserved This document
This document simply creates IANA registries for code points defined in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424]. Thus, there are no new security concerns.
本文档仅为[RFC4379]和[RFC6424]中定义的代码点创建IANA注册表。因此，没有新的安全问题。
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.
[RFC4379]Kompella，K.和G.Swallow，“检测多协议标签交换（MPLS）数据平面故障”，RFC 4379，2006年2月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.
[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6424>.
[RFC6424]Bahadur，N.，Kompella，K.，和G.Swallow，“在MPLS隧道上执行标签交换路径Ping（LSP Ping）的机制”，RFC 64242011年11月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6424>.
[ENTROPY-LSP-PING] Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Malis, A., and S. Aldrin, "Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW) Ping/Trace over MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-00, December 2014.
[熵-LSP-PING]Akiya，N.，Swallow，G.，Pignataro，C.，Malis，A.，和S.Aldrin，“使用熵标签（EL）在MPLS网络上标记交换路径（LSP）和伪线（PW）PING/跟踪”，正在进行的工作，草案-ietf-MPLS-熵-LSP-PING-00，2014年12月。
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters", <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ mpls-lsp-ping-parameters>.
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]IANA，“多协议标签交换（MPLS）标签交换路径（LSP）PING参数”<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ mpls lsp ping参数>。
[LSP-PING-LAG] Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and J. Drake, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace Multipath Support for Link Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-00, January 2015.
[LSP-PING-LAG]Akiya，N.，Swallow，G.，Litkowski，S.，DeClaene，B.，和J.Drake，“链路聚合组（LAG）接口的标签交换路径（LSP）PING/跟踪多路径支持”，正在进行的工作，草案-ietf-mpls-LSP-PING-LAG-Multipath-00，2015年1月。
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[RFC5226]Narten，T.和H.Alvestrand，“在RFCs中编写IANA注意事项部分的指南”，BCP 26，RFC 5226，2008年5月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Bruno Decraene Orange
布鲁诺橙
EMail: bruno.decraene@orange.com
EMail: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Nobo Akiya Cisco Systems
Nobo Akiya思科系统公司
EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com
EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com
Carlos Pignataro Cisco Systems
卡洛斯·皮格纳塔罗思科系统公司
EMail: cpignata@cisco.com
EMail: cpignata@cisco.com
Loa Andersson Huawei Technologies
安达信华为技术有限公司
EMail: loa@mail01.huawei.com
EMail: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Sam Aldrin Huawei Technologies
山姆·奥尔德林华为技术有限公司
EMail: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com
EMail: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com