Re: [mpls] Question on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt

"Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <> Mon, 28 November 2016 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247AE129607 for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:31:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.018
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VvyNhjItYZ_d for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E08331295FF for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:31:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=23886; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1480347063; x=1481556663; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=rpTsNvLpCfcTZYNru9gXsJLvmV1JWRf7BqmHb18zPDQ=; b=KlwVAMYtSVwPGyH85mivKZ8RB6327M6ZWUo9aol3EjGfMXoFzaUlqv7K z3l0TjECLvEAaw32gJzZUODoaThtHV8Z4Eu54yg/26Pkiligg3ll4MeAl U1ttpgSO5RkfofLBj89w12J/SX9zcDdwjCrHWX164R/imRSFXlKd3K8Ca k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,564,1473120000"; d="scan'208,217";a="180220873"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 28 Nov 2016 15:31:03 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uASFV2jU005149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:31:02 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:31:01 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:31:01 -0500
From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <>
To: "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA)" <>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Question on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt
Thread-Index: AdJGnV7er03UlZ6JRUi/8+DkE/AdkADC2LQAAAi2+rD//9VvgA==
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:31:01 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_187B9620D1ED428AAC275788A125DB21ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Question on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:31:06 -0000

Hi, Mustapha,

On Nov 28, 2016, at 9:55 AM, Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA) <<>> wrote:

Hi Carlos,
You meant: {Section 5.1, Section 5.2, Section 5.*3*} .

Yes, sorry for the typo.

Also, you need to reference draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt instead of RFC 4379 throughout the document and replace DSMAP TLV with DDMAP TLV (RFC 6424).

Indeed. We were waiting for 4379bis to be approved, now is the right time.

We are planning on making all these changes and submit a new rev.

I have a few more comments on draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-01 which I will be sending in a separate message.

Look forward.


— Carlos.


From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) []
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:54 AM
To: Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA) <<>>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Question on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt

Thank you Mustapha for catching these, and Tom and Mach for the follow-ups.

There are three changes needed to draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping based based on this discussion:

  1.  In Section 10.1, update the references to {Section 4.1, Section 4.2, Section 4.1} -> {Section 5.1, Section 5.2, Section 5.1}
  2.  Create a Section 10.2, create a registry for the “Protocol field of the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV”, registering values 0-4, and asking for TBD5 and TBD6. If this happens in this draft instead of 4379bis, I believe it is OK.
  3.  Create a Section 10.3, requesting error code TBD.


Carlos Pignataro,<>

“Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis."

On Nov 24, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA) <<>> wrote:

Dear all,
Can someone point me to where are held the IANA allocation for the values in the ‘protocol’ field of the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV?

There is draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-01 which is adding IS-IS and OSPF as new values into this field but I fail to find where these are maintained.

mpls mailing list<>