<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>

<rfc category="std" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-xzc-lsr-mpls-flc-frld-04" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF">

<front>
<title abbrev="Signaling FLC and FRLD"> Signaling Flow-ID Label Capability and Flow-ID Readable Label Depth </title>

  <author fullname="Xiao Min" initials="X" surname="Min">
      <organization>ZTE Corp.</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street/>

         <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

         <city>Nanjing</city>

         <region/>

         <code/>

         <country>China</country>
       </postal>

       <phone>+86 18061680168</phone>

       <email>xiao.min2@zte.com.cn</email>

       <!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
     </address>
    </author>
	
  <author fullname="Zheng(Sandy) Zhang" initials="Z" surname="Zhang">
      <organization>ZTE Corp.</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street/>

         <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

         <city>Nanjing</city>

         <region/>

         <code/>

         <country>China</country>
       </postal>

       <phone/>

       <email>zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn</email>

       <!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
     </address>
    </author>

  <author fullname="Weiqiang Cheng" initials="W" surname="Cheng">
      <organization>China Mobile</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street></street>

         <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

         <city>Beijing</city>

         <region></region>

         <code></code>

         <country>China</country>
       </postal>

       <phone></phone>

       <email>chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com</email>

       <!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
     </address>
    </author>

	
    <date year="2024"/>
  
    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>LSR Working Group</workgroup>

    <keyword>Request for Comments</keyword>
    <keyword>RFC</keyword>
    <keyword>Internet Draft</keyword>
    <keyword>I-D</keyword>

    <abstract>
  <t> Flow-ID Label (FL) is used for MPLS flow identification and flow-based performance measurement with alternate 
  marking method. The ability to process Flow-ID labels is called Flow-ID Label Capability (FLC), and the capability 
  of reading the maximum label stack depth and performing FL-based performance measurement is called Flow-ID Readable 
  Label Depth (FRLD). This document defines a mechanism to signal the FLC and the FRLD using IGP and BGP-LS. </t>
    </abstract>
    
</front>
  
<middle>

  <section title="Introduction">

  <t> As specified in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation"/>, Flow-ID Label (FL) is used for MPLS 
  flow identification and flow-based performance measurement with alternate marking method. </t>
  
  <t> Flow-ID Label may appear multiple times in a label stack with variable depth, so both the Flow-ID Label 
  Capability (FLC) and the Flow-ID Readable Label Depth (FRLD) are defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation"/>. </t>
  
  <t> Analogous to <xref target="RFC9088"/> and <xref target="RFC9089"/>, this document defines a mechanism to signal 
  the FLC and the FRLD using IGP and BGP-LS. Specifically, IGP includes IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. </t>
  
  <section title="Terminology">

    <t> This memo makes use of the terms defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation"/> and <xref target="RFC8491"/>. </t>
  
	<t> 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 
	<xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
	
  </section>
  </section>
  
  <section title="Advertising FLC Using IGP">

  <t> FLC is a property of the node, so FLC is advertised with a node in this document.</t>
  
  <t> If a router has multiple interfaces, the router MUST NOT announce FLC unless all of its interfaces are capable 
  of processing FL.</t>

  <section title="Advertising FLC Using IS-IS">
  
  <t> <xref target="RFC8667"/> defines an SR-Capabilities sub-TLV of the IS-IS Router Capability TLV as defined in <xref target="RFC7981"/>. 
  Bit 2 in the Flags field of the SR-Capabilities sub-TLV is used as the FLC Flag (F-Flag), as shown in Figure 1. </t>
  
  <figure anchor="Figure_1" title="Flags field of the SR-Capabilities sub-TLV">
  <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|I|V|F|         |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>
  </figure>
  
     <t> F-Flag:
		   <list>
		   <t> FLC Flag (Bit 2) - Set for the originating node if it supports FLC on all interfaces.</t>
		   </list>
	 </t>
  
  </section>
  
  <section title="Advertising FLC Using OSPF">
	
  <t> <xref target="RFC8665"/> defines some SR Capabilities TLVs as top-level TLVs of the Router Information Opaque 
  LSA as defined in <xref target="RFC7770"/>. The SR Capabilities TLVs are applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 (see 
  also <xref target="RFC8666"/>). Within the SR Capabilities TLVs, the SID/Label Range TLV has a 1-octet Reserved field. 
  Bit 0 in the Reserved field of the SID/Label Range TLV is used as the FLC Flag (F-Flag), as shown in Figure 2. </t>
  
  <figure anchor="Figure_2" title="Reserved field of the SID/Label Range TLV">
  <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|F|             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>
  </figure>
  
     <t> F-Flag:
		   <list>
		   <t> FLC Flag (Bit 0) - Set for the originating node if it supports FLC on all interfaces.</t>
		   </list>
	 </t>
  
  </section>
  
  </section>
  
  <section title="Advertising FRLD Using IGP">

  <t> As requested by <xref target="RFC8491"/>, IANA has created an IANA-managed registry titled "IGP MSD-Types" to 
  identify MSD-Types. A new MSD-Type, called FRLD-MSD, is defined to advertise the FRLD of a given router. The MSD-Type 
  code 3 is requested to be assigned by IANA for FRLD-MSD. The MSD-Value field is set to the FRLD in the range between 
  0 to 255. </t>
  
  <t> If a router has multiple interfaces with different capabilities of reading the maximum label stack depth, the router 
  MUST advertise the smallest value found across all of its interfaces.</t>
  
  <t> For IS-IS, the FRLD is advertised in a Node MSD Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC8491"/> using the FRLD-MSD type. </t>
  
  <t> For OSPF including both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3, the FRLD is advertised in a Node MSD TLV <xref target="RFC8476"/> using 
  the FRLD-MSD type. </t>
  
  <t> The absence of FRLD-MSD advertisements indicates only that the advertising node does not support advertisement 
  of this capability. </t>

  </section>
    
  <section title="Signaling FLC and FRLD in BGP-LS">
	
  <t> The IGP extensions defined in this document can be advertised via BGP-LS (Distribution of Link-State and Traffic 
  Engineering Information Using BGP) <xref target="RFC9552"/> using existing BGP-LS TLVs. </t>
  
  <t> The FLC is advertised using the SR Capabilities TLV as defined in <xref target="RFC9085"/>. </t>
  
  <t> The FRLD-MSD is advertised using the Node MSD TLV as defined in <xref target="RFC8814"/>. </t>
  
  </section>
  
  <section title="Security Considerations">
  
  <t> This document specifies the ability to advertise additional node capabilities using IS-IS, OSPF and BGP-LS. As such, 
  the security considerations as described in the referenced specifications are applicable to this document.</t>
  
  <t> Incorrectly setting the F-Flag during origination, propagation, or redistribution may lead to poor or no performance 
  measurement of the MPLS traffic or to the MPLS traffic being discarded on the egress node.</t>
   
  <t> Incorrectly setting the FRLD value may lead to poor or no performance measurement of the MPLS traffic.</t>
   
  </section>
  
  <section title="IANA Considerations"> 
  <t> This document requests the following allocation from IANA:
     <list style="symbols">	 
	 <t> Type 3 in the IGP MSD-Types registry is requested to be assigned to the FRLD-MSD.</t>	 
	 </list>
  </t>
  </section>

  <section title="Acknowledgements">
  <t> The authors would like to acknowledge Acee Lindem and Les Ginsberg for their very helpful comments.</t>
  </section>  
  
</middle>
  
<back>

    <references title="Normative References">
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8667"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7981"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8665"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7770"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8666"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8476"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8491"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8814"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9085"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9552"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation"?>
    </references>
	
    <references title="Informative References">
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9088"?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9089"?>
    </references>
	
</back>
</rfc>
