Internet-Draft IOAM Using MPLS Network Actions August 2026
Gandhi, et al. Expires 27 February 2027 [Page]
Workgroup:
MPLS Working Group
Internet-Draft:
draft-ietf-mpls-mna-ioam-12
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
R. Gandhi, Ed.
Cisco Systems, Inc.
G. Mirsky, Ed.
Ciena Corporation
H. Song
Futurewei Technologies
B. Wen
Comcast
V. Kozak
Comcast

Encapsulation for In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance Data Using MPLS Network Actions

Abstract

In situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM), defined in RFC 9197, collects operational and telemetry information in the packet using IOAM-Data-Fields while the packet traverses a path between two points in the network. Several IOAM Option-Types are available, for example, Pre-allocated Trace, Proof of Transit (POT), Edge-to-Edge (E2E), and Incremental Trace, that can be used to collect information for calculating various performance metrics. RFC 9326 defines the IOAM Direct Export (IOAM-DEX) Option-Type, which is used as a trigger for IOAM data to be directly exported or locally aggregated without being pushed into in-flight data packets.

MPLS Network Actions (MNA) mechanisms indicate actions to be performed on any combination of Label Switched Paths, MPLS packets, and the node itself, and to transport data needed for these actions. This document employs the MNA mechanisms to collect and transport the operational state and telemetry information using IOAM-Data-Fields as well as IOAM-DEX.

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 https://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 27 February 2027.

▲

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

In situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) [RFC9197] collects operational and telemetry information in the packet using IOAM-Data-Fields while the packet traverses a path between two points in the network. Several IOAM Option-Types are available, for example, Pre-allocated Trace, Proof of Transit (POT), Edge-to-Edge (E2E), and Incremental Trace, that can be used to collect information for calculating various performance metrics. Such mechanisms transport the collected information from an IOAM encapsulating node to an IOAM decapsulating node (both typically located at the edge of the IOAM domain within the data path).

IOAM Direct Export (IOAM-DEX) [RFC9326] is an IOAM Option-Type used as a trigger for IOAM data to be directly exported or locally aggregated without being pushed into in-flight data packets. The exporting method and format are outside the scope of [RFC9326].

MPLS Network Actions (MNA) mechanisms [RFC9789] indicate actions to be performed on any combination of Label Switched Paths, MPLS packets, and the node itself, and allow for the transport of data needed for these actions. [RFC9994] defines mechanisms for carrying a Network Action Sub-Stack (NAS) as part of the MPLS label stack, i.e., the In-Stack MNA solution. [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] defines mechanisms for carrying MNA and Ancillary Data (AD) below the MPLS label stack, i.e., as the Post-Stack MNA solution. [RFC9791] describes various use cases that can be realized using the MNA solution, including the IOAM and IOAM-DEX.

This document employs the MNA mechanisms to collect and transport the operational state and telemetry information using IOAM Option-Types, including Pre-allocated Trace, POT, and E2E, as well as IOAM-DEX. The mechanism for exporting the collected information for the IOAM-DEX Option-Type is outside the scope of this document. Also, transporting the Incremental Trace IOAM Option-Type is outside the scope of this document.

2. Conventions Used in This Document

2.1. Abbreviations

The terminology defined in [RFC9789], [RFC9994], and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] is used in this document.

Table 1: Abbreviations
Abbreviation Meaning Reference
AD Ancillary Data [RFC9613]
Blob Binary Large Object This document
BoS Bottom of Stack [RFC3032]
HbH Hop-by-Hop [RFC9789]
I2E Ingress to Egress [RFC9789]
E2E Edge to Edge [RFC9197]
IHS I2E, HbH, or Select [RFC9994]
IOAM In situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance [RFC9197]
IOAM-DEX IOAM Direct Export [RFC9326]
IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD IOAM Direct Export as MPLS Network Action ISD This document
ISD In-Stack Data [RFC9613]
LSE Label Stack Entry [RFC3032]
MNA MPLS Network Action [RFC9789]
MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching [RFC3032]
NAI Network Action Indicator [RFC9613]
NAL Network Action Length [RFC9994]
NAS Network Action Sub-Stack [RFC9789]
NASL Network Action Sub-Stack Length [RFC9994]
OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance [RFC6291]
P bit Post-Stack Data Presence bit [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]
POT Proof of Transit [RFC9197]
RLD Readable Label Depth [RFC9789] and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]
PFN Post-Stack First Nibble [RFC9790]
PSD Post-Stack Data [RFC9613]
PSMH Post-Stack MPLS Header [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]
S bit Bottom of Stack bit [RFC3032]
TC Traffic Class [RFC5462]
TTL Time to Live [RFC3032]
U bit Unknown Network Action Handling bit [RFC9994]

2.2. Requirements Language

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

3. Applicability of IOAM and IOAM-DEX in an MPLS Network

Pre-allocated Trace, POT, and E2E IOAM Option-Types [RFC9197] use user packets to collect and transport the operational state and telemetry information. This document defines the Post-Stack MNA [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] solution for encapsulation of the Pre-allocated Trace, POT, and E2E IOAM Option-Types (see Section 4).

However, for some use cases, e.g., mobile backhaul, in which network resources are closely controlled, collecting and transporting telemetry information within a user packet may increase the complexity of network operations. In such environments, IOAM nodes can use IOAM-DEX, an IOAM Option-Type used as a trigger for IOAM data to be directly exported or locally aggregated without being pushed into in-flight data packets, as defined in [RFC9326]. IOAM-DEX collects the on-path telemetry information defined as IOAM data in [RFC9197]. In this document, encapsulations for IOAM-DEX are realized as In-Stack Data (see Section 5) and as Post-Stack Data (see Section 4).

The procedure defined in this document for carrying IOAM Option-Types using the MNA solution can be applied to user traffic packets and active measurement test packets. [I-D.gandhi-ippm-stamp-mpls-hdr] uses the mechanisms defined in this document to transport IOAM Option-Types using the MNA solution, with Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) test packets for Hop-by-Hop (HbH) and E2E measurements. [I-D.ietf-ippm-on-path-active-measurements] also describes active measurement methods where the mechanisms defined in this document can carry IOAM Option-Types for on-path telemetry in MPLS networks.

4. Realization of IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

The procedure defined utilizes the In-Stack MNA mechanisms [RFC9994] and Post-Stack MNA mechanisms [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] to transport IOAM Option-Types defined in Section 4 of [RFC9197] and IOAM-DEX Option-Type defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326]) as Post-Stack MNA in MPLS networks.

4.1. NAS for IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

The presence of the associated Post-Stack MPLS Header (PSMH) is indicated by setting the P bit to 1 in the NAS as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]. An example of a NAS with a Format B LSE and the associated PSMH carrying IOAM and IOAM-DEX Option-Types is shown 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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                MNA Label (value 4)    | TC  |S|  TTL          |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  Opcode     |  13-bit Data (Format B) |P|IHS|S|  NASL |U| NAL |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                Label                  | TC  |1|  TTL          |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~ Post-Stack MPLS Header for IOAM and IOAM-DEX per Figure 2     ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~                Optional Payload + Padding                     ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Example of NAS with Format B LSE for Carrying IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSMH

The fields in a NAS are defined as follows:

If both edge and intermediate nodes need to process the IOAM Option-Types, then the IHS scope MUST be set to "HbH, value 0x1". If only edge nodes need to process the IOAM Option-Types, then the IHS scope MUST be set to "I2E, value 0x0". The I2E scope allows skipping IOAM processing on the intermediate nodes, i.e., it avoids the need to parse all IOAM Option-Types to detect the one that requires HbH processing.

4.2. PSMH for IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

An example encoding of PSMH carrying IOAM and IOAM-DEX in Post-Stack MNA is shown in Figure 2.

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  PFN  |Reserve|  PSMH-Len     | Type = MNA Post-Stack Header  |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  MNA-PS-OP  |R|R|   PS-NAL    | Block-Number  |R|IOAM-Opt-Type|
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~       IOAM Option-Type and Data Space [RFC9197] [RFC9326]     ~
 ~       Beginning from Namespace-ID                             ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Example of Post-Stack MPLS Header Carrying IOAM and IOAM-DEX

The Post-Stack MPLS Base Header is added and contains the following fields as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].

  • PFN (4-bit): The Post-Stack First Nibble (PFN) (value 0x0) as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].
  • PSMH-Len (8-bit): The PSMH total length in units of 4 octets as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]. The value excludes the first 4-octet unit for Post-Stack MPLS Base Header. When carrying N IOAM and IOAM-DEX network actions, all with the same PS-NAL value, PSMH-Len equals (1 + PS-NAL) * N.
  • Type (16-bit): Type for MNA Post-Stack Header (value 1) as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].

The PSMH is added after the Post-Stack MPLS Base Header and contains the Post-Stack network action opcode for IOAM and IOAM-DEX, the length in 4-octet units, and the IOAM Option-Type with IOAM-Data-Fields in the Post-Stack ancillary data as shown in Figure 2 and contains the following fields:

  • MNA-PS-OP (7-bit): Set to Opcode TBA1 (network action opcode for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSD) for the IOAM Option-Type defined in [RFC9197], and the IOAM-DEX Option-Type defined in [RFC9326].

    The U bit for this network action is set as specified in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].

    The IHS scope field for this network action is set to either I2E or HBH [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].

  • R (3 x 1-bit): Three reserved bits appear in the PSMH row: two bits following MNA-PS-OP and one bit preceding IOAM-Opt-Type. All reserved bits MUST be set to 0 on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
  • IOAM-Opt-Type (7-bit): The field to carry the IOAM Option-Type, as defined in the "IOAM Option-Type Registry" in [RFC9197] and [RFC9326].
  • PS-NAL (7-bit): Unsigned integer representing the length of the IOAM-Data-Fields in 4-octet units for the MNA-PS-OP. The value excludes the first 4-octet unit.
  • IOAM Option-Type and Data Space: IOAM-Data-Fields as specified by the IOAM-Opt-Type field, beginning from the Namespace-ID field. IOAM-Data-Fields are defined according to the IOAM Option-Type (e.g., see Section 4 of [RFC9197] and Section 3.2 of [RFC9326]).

  • Block-Number (8-bit): The Block-Number is used for the alternate marking method [RFC9341] to aggregate the IOAM-Data-Fields collected in the data plane and to correlate IOAM-Data-Fields exported from different nodes along the packet path, e.g., to compute measurement metrics for each block of a data flow.

    • When the Flow ID field is present in the IOAM-Data-Fields in the PSMH, the Block-Number is scoped per data flow within the IOAM Namespace identified by the Namespace-ID field.
    • When the Flow ID field is absent, the Block-Number is scoped per IOAM Namespace (identified by the Namespace-ID field) and applies to all flows sharing that Namespace.
    • The Block-Number MUST be initialized to 0 at the start of operation and wraps from 255 back to 0 on overflow. It is incremented sequentially at every measurement interval configured at the encapsulating node. When the alternate marking method is not used, the Block-Number SHOULD be set to 0.

The following processing rules apply to the network action opcode TBA1.

  • An MPLS packet MAY carry multiple network action opcode TBA1 in the same PSMH for different Option-Types.
  • An MPLS packet MAY carry network action opcode TBA1 in more than one PSMH for different processing scopes.
  • An MPLS packet MUST NOT carry network action opcode TBA1 in a NAS. Otherwise, the packet is treated as malformed and MUST be dropped.
  • The IHS scope in a NAS MUST NOT be set to Select when the network action opcode TBA1 is carried in the associated PSMH. Otherwise, the packet is treated as malformed and MUST be dropped.

4.2.1. Example of Multiple IOAM and IOAM-DEX Option-Types as Post-Stack MNA

An example of multiple Post-Stack Network Actions with the same IHS scope carrying different IOAM and IOAM-DEX Option-Types is shown in Figure 3.

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  PFN  |Reserve|  PSMH-Len     | Type = MNA Post-Stack Header  |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  MNA-PS-OP1 |R|R|   PS-NAL1   | Block-Number  |R|IOAM-Opt-Type|
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~  IOAM Option-Type and Data Space [RFC9197] [RFC9326]          ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  MNA-PS-OP2 |R|R|   PS-NAL2   | Block-Number  |R|IOAM-Opt-Type|
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~  IOAM Option-Type and Data Space [RFC9197] [RFC9326]          ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~                 Optional Payload + Padding                    ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Example of Multiple IOAM and IOAM-DEX Option-Types as Post-Stack MNA

In this example, the PSMH carries the post-stack network action MNA-PS-OP1 with length PS-NAL1 and the post-stack network action MNA-PS-OP2 with length PS-NAL2, both for different Option-Types.

4.3. Procedure for IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

4.3.1. Ingress-to-Egress Scope IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

The network actions with I2E scope carry IOAM Option-Types that require processing on the encapsulating and egress nodes only.

The IOAM Option-Type carried can be the IOAM E2E Option-Type (value 3) defined in [RFC9197] or the IOAM-DEX Option-Type (value 4) defined in [RFC9326]. The network actions with I2E scope MUST NOT carry any IOAM Option-Type that requires IOAM processing on the intermediate nodes, as it will not be processed by them when the IHS scope is set to "I2E, value 0x0".

The IOAM and IOAM-DEX network action procedure with I2E scope is summarized as follows:

  • The encapsulating node inserts a NAS with the IHS scope set to "I2E, value 0x0", as well as one or more network actions for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in the MPLS packet.
  • The encapsulating node MUST ensure that the packet with all NASs and PSMHs added does not exceed the path MTU, as specified in Section 8 of [RFC9994] and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].
  • The egress node processes the IOAM-Data-Fields using the procedures defined in [RFC9197] and [RFC9326]. An example of IOAM processing is to export the IOAM-Data-Fields for streaming telemetry.
  • The egress node MUST remove the NAS and the associated PSMH including network actions for IOAM and IOAM-DEX and IOAM-Data-Fields from the received packet. The decapsulated packet is forwarded downstream similar to the regular data packets or terminated locally.

4.3.2. Hop-by-Hop Scope IOAM and IOAM-DEX as Post-Stack MNA

The network actions with HbH scope carry IOAM Option-Types that require processing at the intermediate and/or encapsulating and egress nodes.

The IOAM Option-Type carried can be Pre-allocated Trace (value 0), POT (value 2), or E2E (value 3) defined in [RFC9197], or the IOAM-DEX Option-Type (value 4) defined in [RFC9326].

Note that the network actions defined in this document do not support the IOAM Incremental Trace Option-Type (value 1), which requires HbH processing.

The IOAM and IOAM-DEX network action procedure with HbH scope is summarized as follows:

  • The encapsulating node inserts a NAS with the IHS scope set to "HbH, value 0x1", as well as one or more network actions for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in the MPLS packet.
  • The intermediate node that is enabled for the IOAM function processes the IOAM-Data-Fields as defined in [RFC9197] and [RFC9326] when the node recognizes the HbH scope in the NAS.
  • The intermediate node forwards the data packet downstream.
  • The processing on the egress node is the same as in the I2E case.

Both HbH and I2E scope network actions for IOAM and IOAM-DEX MAY be carried in the Post-Stack MNA in an MPLS packet. In this case, the PSMH carrying HbH-scoped network actions MUST be added after the BoS and before the PSMH carrying I2E-scoped network actions. This minimizes the Readable Label Depth (RLD) [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] required on intermediate nodes for processing IOAM and IOAM-DEX.

5. Realization of IOAM-DEX as In-Stack MNA

The procedure defined adopts the IOAM-DEX Option-Type format defined in [RFC9326] using MNA In-Stack Data (ISD) [RFC9994] to support direct export in MPLS networks.

5.1. NAS for IOAM-DEX as In-Stack MNA

To transport direct export of the operational state and telemetry information, the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD Binary Large Object (blob) is placed in a NAS according to the procedure defined in [RFC9994]. An example NAS with Format B LSE and Format D LSE to carry IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD is shown in Figure 4.

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                MNA Label (value 4)    | TC  |S|    TTL        |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |Opcode = TBA2|  13-bit Data (Format B) |P|IHS|S|  NASL |U| NAL |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~1|  IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD per Figure 5 (Format D) |S|               ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: Example of NAS with Format B LSE and Format D LSE to Carry IOAM-DEX as In-Stack MNA

Here, the fields in a NAS are defined as follows:

  • The MNA Label (value 4) is defined in [RFC9994].
  • S (1-bit): The BoS [RFC3032].
  • P (1-bit): The P bit is set as specified in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].
  • The U bit and NAL field are set as specified in [RFC9994].
  • NASL (4-bit): The number of LSEs that compose the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD blob.
  • Opcode (7-bit): Set to network action opcode TBA2 for IOAM-DEX in ISD. The opcode TBA2 can be carried in Format B or Format C LSE [RFC9994].
  • Data: MUST be set to 0 in both cases, 13-bit data in Format B LSE and 20-bit data in Format C LSE [RFC9994].
  • IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD: IOAM-DEX in MNA ISD encoding in Format D LSE [RFC9994].

By setting the IHS field [RFC9994], the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD can be configured to operate in HbH, I2E, or Select scopes [RFC9789] to collect the operational state and telemetry information.

The following processing rules apply to the network action opcode TBA2.

  • An MPLS packet MUST NOT carry multiple network action opcode TBA2 in the same NAS. Otherwise, the packet is treated as malformed and MUST be dropped.
  • An MPLS packet MAY carry network action opcode TBA2 in more than one NAS for different processing scopes.
  • An MPLS packet MUST NOT carry network action opcode TBA2 in a PSMH. Otherwise, the packet is treated as malformed and MUST be dropped.

The following processing rules apply when carrying both the network action opcode TBA1 for the IOAM-DEX Option-Type in a PSMH and the network action opcode TBA2 in a NAS in an MPLS packet:

  • The network action opcode TBA2 in a NAS and the network action opcode TBA1 for the IOAM-DEX Option-Type in the associated PSMH MUST NOT be carried, due to their same IHS scope, in an MPLS packet; otherwise, the packet MUST be treated as malformed and MUST be dropped.
  • The network action opcode TBA1 for IOAM-DEX Option-Type in a PSMH and network action opcode TBA2 in a NAS MAY be carried for different IHS scopes in an MPLS packet.
  • Each network action for the IOAM-DEX Option-Type operates independently: opcode TBA2 triggers direct export at nodes processing the In-Stack MNA, while opcode TBA1 with IOAM Option-Type triggers direct export at nodes processing the Post-Stack MNA.

5.2. IOAM-DEX Option-Type Encoding as MNA ISD

The IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD blob in a NAS uses the Format D LSE Section 4.4 of [RFC9994], that maps to the IOAM-DEX Option-Type format [RFC9326]. In addition to the requirement to preserve the S bit, the most significant bit in Format D LSE is always set to 1, avoiding a possible mix-up of the LSE with one of the Base Special Purpose Labels [RFC9994]. The format of the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD blob in a NAS is shown in Figure 5.

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |1|         Namespace-ID          | Reserved  |S|     Flags     |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |1|         IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA               |S|O|R| Ext-Flags |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |1|         Flow ID MNA (Optional)            |S|  Flow ID MNA  |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |1|         Sequence Number MNA (Optional)    |S|  Seq Num MNA  |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: IOAM-DEX Option-Type Format for MNA ISD

Here, the fields are defined as follows:

  • Namespace-ID (16-bit): Identifier of the IOAM Namespace, as defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326].
  • Reserved (6-bit): The Reserved field MUST be set to 0 on transmit and ignored on receipt.
  • Flags (8-bit): The Flags field comprises eight one-bit subfields. The subfields in the Flags field are allocated by IANA in the IOAM DEX Flags registry, as defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC9326].

  • IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA (22-bit): The IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA corresponds to the IOAM-Trace-Type field defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326].

    • The interpretation of bit positions, from bit 0 through bit 21, is as specified in [RFC9197].
    • Note that bits as specified in [RFC9197] are right-shifted one bit, so for example, bit 0 in [RFC9197] (leftmost bit for hop_Lim and node_id in short format) is mapped to bit 1 (second leftmost bit) in the MNA encoding.
    • The registry that contains the assigned code points is found in IANA's IOAM Trace-Type registry [IANA-IOAM-Trace-Type].

  • O (1-bit): This is a one-bit flag identical to the interpretation of bit 22 of the IOAM-Trace-Type field as defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326], marked as "variable-length Opaque State Snapshot" per [RFC9197]; assigned code points are found in IANA's IOAM Trace-Type registry [IANA-IOAM-Trace-Type].

  • R (1-bit): This is a one-bit flag identical to the interpretation of bit 23 of the IOAM-Trace-Type field as defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326], marked as "reserved" per [RFC9197]; assigned code points are found in IANA's IOAM Trace-Type registry [IANA-IOAM-Trace-Type].

    • Similarly to [RFC9326], the R bit is reserved to allow for future extensions of the IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA bit field, i.e., it indicates the presence of the extended IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA field in the next LSE in Format D. The format of the extended IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA field in the next LSE in Format D is outside the scope of this document.
  • The concatenation of the 22-bit IOAM-Trace-Type-MNA field with O and R flags, explained above, is identical to the 24-bit IOAM-Trace-Type field in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326], and in the interpretation of those bits as defined in [RFC9197] and assigned code points found in IANA's IOAM Trace-Type registry [IANA-IOAM-Trace-Type].

  • Ext-Flags (6-bit): The Ext-Flags field comprises six one-bit subfields. The allocation of the subfields in this field is according to the Extension-Flags field defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC9326].

    • Four flags have been assigned by IANA: two as defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC9326] indicating the presence of the optional Flow ID and Sequence Number fields, and two as defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC9630] indicating the presence of the optional Multicast Branch ID field.
    • Section 5.2.1 describes the detailed format of the Ext-Flags field.

  • In the IOAM-DEX Option-Type defined in [RFC9326], the IOAM-Trace-Type and Reserved fields together form the second 32-bit word, aligning the optional fields to 4-octet boundaries.

    • In the case of the IOAM-DEX in MNA, for optional fields such as Flow ID MNA and Sequence Number MNA, such alignment is achieved without adding a Reserved field for padding.

  • Flow ID MNA: An optional 4-octet field containing a 30-bit Flow ID (after removing leading 1 and S bits).

    • The semantics of the Flow ID MNA field are the same as those of the Flow ID field defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326], with the following two differences.

      1. The Flow ID MNA field carries a 30-bit value, compared to the 32-bit Flow ID field in [RFC9326]; therefore, the Flow ID space differs accordingly, and the 30-bit value will wrap around faster than the 32-bit value.
      2. The most significant bit MUST be set to 1. Bit 23 MUST be set according to the definition of the S bit in [RFC3032].

  • Sequence Number MNA: An optional 4-octet field containing a 30-bit sequence number (after removing leading 1 and S bits).

    • The semantics of the Sequence Number MNA field are the same as those of the Sequence Number field defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326], with the following two differences.

      1. The Sequence Number MNA field carries a 30-bit value, compared to the 32-bit Sequence Number field in [RFC9326]; therefore, the sequence number space differs accordingly, and the 30-bit value will wrap around faster than the 32-bit value.
      2. The most significant bit MUST be set to 1. Bit 23 MUST be set according to the definition of the S bit in [RFC3032].
    • In MPLS networks, when it is known that the label stack information is used for load-balancing flows, the 19-bit-long part of the Sequence Number MNA, starting from the bit 1 position of the LSE, MUST remain immutable for a particular packet flow identified by the value of the Flow ID MNA field.
    • In MPLS networks, when it is known that other load-balancing techniques are used, all bits of the Sequence Number MNA field can be varied. Mechanisms to learn about the load-balancing techniques used by the nodes in MPLS networks are outside the scope of this document.

5.2.1. Ext-Flags Definition

The length of the Ext-Flags field in the IOAM-DEX Option-Type in MNA is shorter by two one-bit fields compared to the length of the Extension-Flags field defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9326]. In the 6-bit Ext-Flags field of the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD header, four flags have been mapped to those IANA assigned flags in the IOAM-DEX Option-Type, and two flags (corresponding to unassigned bits in the [RFC9326] Extension-Flags field) remain unassigned.

                          0 1 2 3 4 5
                         +-+-+-+-+-+-+
                         |F|Q|N|I|A|A|
                         +-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: Ext-Flags Field Format

Here, the Ext-Flags field is defined as follows:

  • F (1-bit): One-bit flag. When the F flag is set to 1, it indicates the presence of the Flow ID field in the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD header.
  • Q (1-bit): One-bit flag. When the Q flag is set to 1, it indicates the presence of the Sequence Number field in the IOAM-DEX-MNA-ISD header. The designation as Q flag is used to avoid confusion with the existing S bit for Bottom-of-Stack (BoS) in the MPLS header. This flag corresponds to the Sequence Number flag (labeled "S" in [RFC9630]) in the IOAM DEX Extension-Flags registry.
  • N (1-bit): One-bit flag. When the N flag is set to 1, it indicates the presence of the Multicast Branching Node ID in the Multicast Branch ID field, as defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC9630].
  • I (1-bit): One-bit flag. When the I flag is set to 1, it indicates the presence of the Multicast Branching Interface Index in the Multicast Branch ID field, as defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC9630]. The N and I flags MUST be both set or both cleared; otherwise the header is considered malformed and the packet MUST be dropped.
  • A (1-bit): Unassigned one-bit flags. They MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored upon receipt.

6. Considerations for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in MPLS Networks

6.1. Node Capability

The following behaviors for node capability apply:

  • An MNA-capable egress node that supports the network action for IOAM and IOAM-DEX may not support the specific IOAM Option-Type or IOAM-Data-Fields carried in the packet. In that case, the egress node MUST handle the network action according to the U bit as defined in [RFC9994] and updated in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].
  • The MNA-capable intermediate node that does not support the network action for IOAM and IOAM-DEX, or the IOAM Option-Type or IOAM-Data-Fields carried in the packet, MUST handle the network action according to the U bit as defined in [RFC9994] and updated in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].
  • The intermediate node that does not support the MNA skips processing the IOAM and IOAM-DEX functions.

The encapsulating node needs to know if the intermediate and egress nodes can support the IOAM and IOAM-DEX network actions. Information about the IOAM and IOAM-DEX capabilities of the nodes may be configured, collected through management protocols, or distributed by control protocols (such as advertising by routing protocols). The encapsulating node learns about the IOAM and IOAM-DEX capabilities of nodes using mechanisms that are out of scope for this document.

The encapsulating node needs to know about the path maximum transmission unit (MTU) for the nodes on the path [RFC3032]. Information about the path MTU of the nodes may be configured, collected through management protocols, or distributed by control protocols (such as MTU signaling for Label Distribution Protocol [RFC3988] and Path MTU Discovery for IPv6 [RFC8201]). The mechanisms to learn about the path MTU of nodes in the path are out of scope for this document.

The encapsulating node needs to know about the RLD of the nodes in the path as described in Section 2.3.1 of [RFC9789] and updated in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr], so that IOAM and IOAM-DEX Option-Types can be read by nodes in the path. Information about the RLD of the nodes may be configured, collected through management protocols, or distributed by control protocols (such as advertising by routing protocols). The mechanisms to learn about the RLD of nodes in the path are out of scope for this document.

6.2. Readable Label Depth

The encapsulating node needs to ensure that the IOAM Option-Types and their IOAM-Data-Fields and IOAM-DEX data in a NAS and the associated PSMH are added within the RLD [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] of the downstream MNA-capable nodes so that they can process the IOAM-Data-Fields and IOAM-DEX data.

6.3. Nested MPLS Encapsulation

The following processing rules apply to nested MPLS encapsulation when adding a new MPLS encapsulation:

  • When a packet is received with a network action opcode TBA2 for IOAM-DEX in ISD or opcode TBA1 for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSD, and the nested MPLS encapsulating node needs to add the network action opcode TBA2 for a different scope for IOAM-DEX in ISD, the node MUST add a new NAS with network action opcode TBA2 as part of the new MPLS encapsulation.
  • When a packet is received with a network action opcode TBA2 for IOAM-DEX in ISD or opcode TBA1 for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSD, the nested MPLS encapsulating node MUST NOT add the network action opcode TBA2 for the same scope for IOAM-DEX in ISD as part of the new MPLS encapsulation.
  • When a packet is received with an MPLS header, the nested MPLS encapsulating node MUST NOT add the new network action opcode TBA1 for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSD as part of the new MPLS encapsulation. This is because inserting a PSMH in an MPLS-encapsulated packet received from the network is not supported by [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr].

7. Operational Considerations

Operational considerations discussed in [RFC9994] and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] apply to this document.

Management considerations discussed in [RFC9789], management and deployment considerations discussed in [RFC9197], and performance considerations discussed in Section 5 of [RFC9326] are also applicable here.

Further operational considerations include policies controlling the processing of the collected operational state and telemetry information, and their transport in MPLS networks. Additional considerations are described in Section 6 for deploying IOAM and IOAM-DEX in MPLS networks.

An implementation MAY collect the following counters:

Nodes MAY generate rate-limited notifications or alarms for significant operational events, such as sustained high rates of IOAM-related packet drops to alert operators to potential issues. Comprehensive logging of IOAM and IOAM-DEX network action processing details can aid in network diagnostics and post-mortem analysis.

8. Security Considerations

The security considerations discussed in [RFC9197], [RFC9326], and [RFC9378] for IOAM and IOAM-DEX apply to this document.

The security considerations discussed in [RFC9341] for alternate marking and [RFC9630] for IOAM deployment apply to this document.

The security considerations discussed in [RFC9789], [RFC9994], and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] for MNA apply to this document.

The usage of network actions defined in this document for IOAM and IOAM-DEX is intended for deployment in a single network administrative domain. As such, it assumes that the operator enabling the IOAM and IOAM-DEX operations has previously verified the integrity of the path that packets take. However, operators need to properly secure the IOAM and IOAM-DEX in the domain to avoid malicious configuration and use, which could include injecting malicious IOAM and IOAM-DEX packets into the domain.

9. IANA Considerations

9.1. Network Action Opcodes

IANA is requested to assign code points from its Network Action Opcodes registry (created in [RFC9994] and updated in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]) as specified in Table 2.

Table 2: Network Action Opcodes
Opcode Description In-Stack Only, Post-Stack Only, In-Stack and Post-Stack Reference
TBA1 Network Action for IOAM and IOAM-DEX in PSD Post-Stack Only This document
TBA2 Network Action for IOAM-DEX in ISD In-Stack Only This document

10. References

10.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]
Rajamanickam, J., Gandhi, R., Zigler, R., Dong, J., and J. Bhattacharya, "MPLS Network Action (MNA) Post-Stack Header Specification", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr-19, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr-19>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3032]
Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y., Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack Encoding", RFC 3032, DOI 10.17487/RFC3032, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3032>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC9197]
Brockners, F., Ed., Bhandari, S., Ed., and T. Mizrahi, Ed., "Data Fields for In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM)", RFC 9197, DOI 10.17487/RFC9197, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9197>.
[RFC9326]
Song, H., Gafni, B., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and T. Mizrahi, "In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) Direct Exporting", RFC 9326, DOI 10.17487/RFC9326, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9326>.
[RFC9341]
Fioccola, G., Ed., Cociglio, M., Mirsky, G., Mizrahi, T., and T. Zhou, "Alternate-Marking Method", RFC 9341, DOI 10.17487/RFC9341, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9341>.
[RFC9630]
Song, H., McBride, M., Mirsky, G., Mishra, G., Asaeda, H., and T. Zhou, "Multicast On-Path Telemetry Using In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM)", RFC 9630, DOI 10.17487/RFC9630, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9630>.
[RFC9789]
Andersson, L., Bryant, S., Bocci, M., and T. Li, "MPLS Network Actions (MNAs) Framework", RFC 9789, DOI 10.17487/RFC9789, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9789>.
[RFC9994]
Rajamanickam, J., Ed., Gandhi, R., Ed., Zigler, R., Song, H., and K. Kompella, "MPLS Network Action (MNA) Sub-Stack Specification Including In-Stack Network Actions and Data", RFC 9994, DOI 10.17487/RFC9994, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9994>.

10.2. Informative References

[I-D.gandhi-ippm-stamp-mpls-hdr]
Gandhi, R., Zhou, T., Li, Z., Ihle, F., and B. Wen, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) Extensions for Reflecting STAMP Packet MPLS Network Action Headers", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-mpls-hdr-08, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-ippm-stamp-mpls-hdr-08>.
[I-D.ietf-ippm-on-path-active-measurements]
Fioccola, G., Zhu, K., Zhou, T., Zhu, Y., and X. Min, "On-Path Telemetry for Active Performance Measurements", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ippm-on-path-active-measurements-02, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-on-path-active-measurements-02>.
[IANA-IOAM-Trace-Type]
IANA, "IOAM Trace-Type", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ioam/ioam.xhtml#trace-type>.
[RFC3988]
Black, B. and K. Kompella, "Maximum Transmission Unit Signalling Extensions for the Label Distribution Protocol", RFC 3988, DOI 10.17487/RFC3988, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3988>.
[RFC5462]
Andersson, L. and R. Asati, "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic Class" Field", RFC 5462, DOI 10.17487/RFC5462, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5462>.
[RFC6291]
Andersson, L., van Helvoort, H., Bonica, R., Romascanu, D., and S. Mansfield, "Guidelines for the Use of the "OAM" Acronym in the IETF", BCP 161, RFC 6291, DOI 10.17487/RFC6291, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6291>.
[RFC8201]
McCann, J., Deering, S., Mogul, J., and R. Hinden, Ed., "Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6", STD 87, RFC 8201, DOI 10.17487/RFC8201, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8201>.
[RFC9378]
Brockners, F., Ed., Bhandari, S., Ed., Bernier, D., and T. Mizrahi, Ed., "In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) Deployment", RFC 9378, DOI 10.17487/RFC9378, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9378>.
[RFC9613]
Bocci, M., Ed., Bryant, S., and J. Drake, "Requirements for Solutions that Support MPLS Network Actions (MNAs)", RFC 9613, DOI 10.17487/RFC9613, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9613>.
[RFC9790]
Kompella, K., Bryant, S., Bocci, M., Mirsky, G., Ed., Andersson, L., and J. Dong, "IANA Registry and Processing Recommendations for the First Nibble Following a Label Stack", RFC 9790, DOI 10.17487/RFC9790, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9790>.
[RFC9791]
Saad, T., Makhijani, K., Song, H., and G. Mirsky, "Use Cases for MPLS Network Action Indicators and Ancillary Data", RFC 9791, DOI 10.17487/RFC9791, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9791>.

Appendix A: In-Stack and Post-Stack Network Action Processing Order Example

As described in Section 5.5 of [RFC9994], the network actions in a NAS are processed in order starting from the top of the label stack. The PSMH Start Offset Network Action opcode TBA3 defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr] can be added to interleave Post-Stack Network Actions with In-Stack Network Actions to define processing order. The following example shows how to process the Post-Stack Network Action before some of the In-Stack Network Actions in a NAS.

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--
 |           MNA Label (value 4)         | TC  |0|    TTL        | |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
 | Opcode=L    |      Ancillary Data     |1|IHS|0| NASL=3|U|NAL=0| |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
 | Opcode=1    |      Flag-Based NAIs          |0| NAIs  |U|NAL=0| A
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ S
 | Opcode=TBA3 |      0                        |0|  0    |U|NAL=0| |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
 | Opcode=M    |      Ancillary Data           |1|  AD   |U|NAL=0| |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--
 | PFN   |Reserve|    PSMH-Len   | Type = MNA Post-Stack Header  | |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ P
 |Opcode = TBA1|R|R|   PS-NAL    | Block-Number  |R|IOAM-Opt-Type| S
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ M
 ~       IOAM Option-Type and Data Space [RFC9197] [RFC9326]     ~ H
 ~       Beginning from Namespace-ID                             ~ |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--
 ~                 Optional Payload + Padding                    ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--
Figure 7: Example of In-Stack and Post-Stack Network Action Processing Order

In this example, shown in Figure 7, the network actions in the NAS are processed in the following order:

Note: Opcode TBA3 will be assigned by IANA as part of [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ps-hdr]. This example will be updated by the RFC editor with the IANA assigned value for TBA3 at the time of publication. This note is to be removed once TBA3 value is updated in this example.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel and Xueyan Song for reviewing this document and providing review comments. The authors would also like to thank Patrick Khordoc, Sagar Soni, Shwetha Bhandari, Vengada Prasad Govindan, Tarek Saad, Stewart Bryant, Xiao Min, Jaganbabu Rajamanickam, Jie Dong, and Cheng Li for reviewing the early version of this document. The authors would also like to thank Mach Chen, Andrew Malis, Matthew Bocci, and Nick Delregno for the MPLS-RT expert review of the early version of this document. The authors also thank Matthew Bocci for the early Rtgdir review, Sheng Jiang for early Opsdir review, and Giuseppe Fioccola for the PerfMetrDir review, which helped improve this document.

Contributors

The following people have substantially contributed to this document:


Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: zali@cisco.com

Frank Brockners
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Germany
Email: fbrockne@cisco.com

Loa Andersson
Huawei Technologies
Email: loa@pi.nu

Authors' Addresses

Rakesh Gandhi (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Canada
Greg Mirsky (editor)
Ciena Corporation
Haoyu Song
Futurewei Technologies
United States of America
Bin Wen
Comcast
United States of America
Voitek Kozak
Comcast
United States of America