<?xmlversion="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?> <?rfc toc="yes" ?> <?rfc symrefs="yes" ?> <?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?> <?rfc compact="yes" ?> <?rfc subcompact="no" ?>version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <!DOCTYPE rfc [ <!ENTITY nbsp " "> <!ENTITY zwsp "​"> <!ENTITY nbhy "‑"> <!ENTITY wj "⁠"> ]> <rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" category="std" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-path-sid-13" number="9884" updates="" obsoletes="" consensus="true"submissionType="IETF">submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" symRefs="true" sortRefs="true" version="3" xml:lang="en"> <front> <title abbrev="LSP Ping for SRPSID"> LabelPSID">Label Switched Path Ping for Segment Routing Path Segment Identifier with MPLS DataPlane </title>Plane</title> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9884"/> <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="Shaofu Peng" initials="S" surname="Peng"> <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>peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn</email><!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added --></address> </author> <author fullname="Liyan Gong" initials="L" surname="Gong"> <organization>China Mobile</organization> <address> <postal><street/> <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently --><city>Beijing</city><region/> <code/><country>China</country> </postal><phone/><email>gongliyan@chinamobile.com</email><!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added --></address> </author> <author fullname="Rakesh Gandhi" initials="R" surname="Gandhi"> <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization> <address> <postal><street/> <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently --> <city></city> <region/> <code/><country>Canada</country> </postal><phone/><email>rgandhi@cisco.com</email><!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added --></address> </author> <author fullname="Carlos Pignataro" initials="C" surname="Pignataro"> <organization>Blue Fern Consulting</organization> <address> <postal><street/> <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently --> <city></city> <region/> <code/><country>United States of America</country> </postal><phone/><email>carlos@bluefern.consulting</email> <email>cpignata@gmail.com</email><!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added --></address> </author> <dateyear="2025"/> <area>Routing</area> <workgroup>MPLS Working Group</workgroup> <keyword>Request for Comments</keyword> <keyword>RFC</keyword> <keyword>Internet Draft</keyword> <keyword>I-D</keyword>year="2025" month="October"/> <area>RTG</area> <workgroup>mpls</workgroup> <abstract> <t> Segment Routing (SR) leverages source routing to steer packets through an ordered list ofinstructions,instructions calledsegments."segments". SR can be instantiated over the MPLS data plane. Path Segment Identifiers (PSIDs) are used to identify and correlate bidirectional or end-to-end paths inSegment RoutingSR networks. This document defines procedures(i.e.(i.e., six new TargetforwardingForwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Stack sub-TLVs) for the use of LSP Ping to support connectivity verification and fault isolation for SR paths that includePath Segment Identifiers.PSIDs. The mechanisms described enable the validation and tracing of SR paths with Path SIDs in MPLS networks, complementing existing SR-MPLSOAMOperations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) capabilities. </t> </abstract> </front> <middle><section title="Introduction"><section> <name>Introduction</name> <t> A Path Segment is a local segment <xref target="RFC9545"/> that uniquely identifies an SR path on the egress node. A Path Segment Identifier (PSID) is a single label that is assigned from theSegment RoutingSR Local Block (SRLB) <xref target="RFC8402"/> of the egress node of an SR path. </t> <t> As specified in <xref target="RFC9545"/>, PSID is a single label inserted by the ingress node of the SRpath,path and then processed by the egress node of the SR path. The PSID is placed within the MPLS label stack as a label immediately following the last label of the SR path. The egress node pops the PSID. </t><t> Procedure<t>The procedure for LSP Ping <xref target="RFC8029"/> as defined inSection 7.4 of<xreftarget="RFC8287"/>target="RFC8287" section="7.4"/> is also applicable toPSID, andPSID; this document appends the existing step 4a with a new step 4b specific to PSID. Concretely, LSP Ping can be used to check the correct operation of a PSID and verify the PSID against the control plane. Checking correct operation means that an initiator can use LSP Ping to check whether a PSID reached the intended node and got processed by that node correctly. Moreover, verifying a PSID against the control plane means that the initiator can use LSP Ping to verify the SR Path context (segment-list, candidate path, or SR policy) associated with the PSID as signaled or provisioned at the egress node. To that end, this document specifies six new Target Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Stack sub-TLVs for such PSID checks. </t> <t> LSP Traceroute <xref target="RFC8287"/> is left out of this document because transit nodes are not involved in PSID processing. </t> </section><section title="Conventions"> <section title="Requirements Language"><section> <name>Conventions</name> <section> <name>Requirements Language</name> <t> The key words"MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY","<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and"OPTIONAL""<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as described inBCP 14BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shownhere.</t>here. </t> </section> <sectiontitle="Terminology">anchor="sect-2.2"> <name>Terminology</name> <t> This document uses the terminology defined in <xref target="RFC3031"/>, <xref target="RFC8402"/>, <xref target="RFC8029"/>, and <xreftarget="RFC9545"/>,target="RFC9545"/>; readers are expected to be familiar with the terms in thoseterms.documents. </t><t>Segment-List-ID <list> <t> The<t>This document introduces the following additional term:</t> <dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Segment-List-ID</dt> <dd>The Segment-List-ID field is a 4-octet identifier that uniquely identifies a segment list within the context of the candidate path of an SR Policy. Although not defined in <xref target="RFC9256"/>, the Segment-List-ID is the same identifier as the one that can besignalledsignaled through control planeprocotolsprotocols includingBGP (Section 2.1 of <xrefBorder Gateway Protocol (BGP) (<xref section="2.1" target="I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id"/>,PCEP (Section 5.2 of <xrefPath Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) (<xref section="4.2" target="I-D.ietf-pce-multipath"/>), andBGP-LS (Section 5.7.4 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy"/>). </t> </list> </t>Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) (<xref section="5.7.4" target="RFC9857"/>).</dd> </dl> </section> </section><section title="Path<section> <name>Path Segment IDSub-TLVs">Sub-TLVs</name> <t> Analogous to what's defined inSection 5 of<xreftarget="RFC8287"/>target="RFC8287" section="5"/> andSection 4 of<xreftarget="RFC9703"/>,target="RFC9703" section="4"/>, six new sub-TLVs are defined for the Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 1), the Reverse-Path Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 16), and the Reply Path TLV (Type 21). Note that the structures of the six new sub-TLVs follow the TLV's structure defined inSection 3 of<xreftarget="RFC8029"/>.target="RFC8029" section="3"/>. </t><texttable title="Sub-TLVs<table> <name>Sub-TLVs for PSIDChecks"> <ttcol align='left'>Sub-Type</ttcol> <ttcol align='left'>Sub-TLV Name</ttcol> <c>TBD1</c><c>SRChecks</name> <thead> <tr> <th align="left">Sub-Type</th> <th align="left">Sub-TLV Name</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left">49</td> <td align="left">SR Policy Associated PSID -IPv4</c> <c>TBD2</c><c>SRIPv4</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">50</td> <td align="left">SR Candidate Path Associated PSID -IPv4</c> <c>TBD3</c><c>SRIPv4</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">51</td> <td align="left">SR Segment List Associated PSID -IPv4</c> <c>TBD4</c><c>SRIPv4</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">52</td> <td align="left">SR Policy Associated PSID -IPv6</c> <c>TBD5</c><c>SRIPv6</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">53</td> <td align="left">SR Candidate Path Associated PSID -IPv6</c> <c>TBD6</c><c>SRIPv6</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">54</td> <td align="left">SR Segment List Associated PSID -IPv6</c> </texttable>IPv6</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <t> As specified inSection 2 of<xreftarget="RFC9545"/>,target="RFC9545" section="2"/>, a PSID is used to identify a segmentlist,list and/or some or all segment lists in a Candidate path or an SR policy, so six different Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs need to be defined for PSID. The ordered list of selection rules for the six Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs are defined as follows:<list style="symbols"></t> <ul spacing="normal"> <li> <t> When a PSID is used to identify all segment lists in an SR Policy, the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV of the type "SR Policy Associated PSID" (for IPv4 or IPv6)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used for PSID checks. </t> </li> <li> <t> When a PSID is used to identify all segment lists in an SR Candidate Path, the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV of the type "SR Candidate Path Associated PSID" (for IPv4 or IPv6)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used for PSID checks. </t> </li> <li> <t> When a PSID is used to identify a Segment List, the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV of the type "SR Segment List Associated PSID" (for IPv4 or IPv6)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used for PSID checks. </t> </li> <li> <t> When a PSID is used to identify some segment lists in a Candidate path or an SR policy, the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV of the type "SR Segment List Associated PSID" (for IPv4 or IPv6)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used for PSID checks. In this case, multiple LSP Ping messagesMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be sent, and one Target FEC Stack sub-TLV of the type "SR Segment List Associated PSID" (for IPv4 or IPv6)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be carried in each LSP Ping message. </t></list> </t></li> </ul> <t> These six new Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs are not expected to be present in the same message. If more than one of these sub-TLVs are present in a message, only the first sub-TLV will beprocessedprocessed, per the validation rules inSection 4.</t><xref target="sect-4"/>.</t> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.1"> <name>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV is defined as follows: </t> <figureanchor="Figure_1" title="SRanchor="Figure_1"> <name>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD149 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Headend (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Endpoint (4 octets) |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4Sub-TLV.sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD1) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length49.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 12.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv4 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the color (i.e., policy identifier) of the SR Policy and is encoded as defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field encodes the endpoint IPv4 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t>target="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.2"> <name>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV is defined as follows: </t> <figureanchor="Figure_2" title="SRanchor="Figure_2"> <name>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD250 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Headend (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Endpoint (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Protocol-Origin| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | | | Originator (20 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Discriminator (4 octets) |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD2) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length50.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 40.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv4 address of the SR Candidate Path. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the policy color and is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field encodes the endpoint IPv4 address of the SR Candidate Path. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Protocol-Origintarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Protocol-Origin (length: 1octet) <list> <t>octet)</dt> <dd> The Protocol-Origin field indicates the protocol that originated the SR Candidate Path. It is defined inSection 2.3 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>target="RFC9256" section="2.3"/> and takes values from the IANA registry <xref target="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN"/>. If an unsupported value is used, validation at the responderMUST fail. </t> </list> </t> <t>Reserved<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fail.</dd> <dt>Reserved (length: 3octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Reserved field is reserved for future use. ItMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to zero when sent andMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ignored upon receipt.</t> </list> </t> <t>Originator</dd> <dt>Originator (length: 20octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Originator field identifies the originator of the SR Candidate Path and is encoded as defined inSection 2.4 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Discriminatortarget="RFC9256" section="2.4"/>. </dd> <dt>Discriminator (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Discriminator field uniquely identifies the SR Candidate Path within the context of the Headend, Color, andEndpoint.Endpoint fields. This field is defined inSection 2.5 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t>target="RFC9256" section="2.5"/>. </dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.3"> <name>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV is used to identify a specific segment list within the context of a candidate path of an SR Policy. The format of this sub-TLV is shown inFigure 3.<xref target="Figure_3"/>. </t> <figureanchor="Figure_3" title="SRanchor="Figure_3"> <name>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD351 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Headend (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Endpoint (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Protocol-Origin| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | | | Originator (20 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Discriminator (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Segment-List-ID (4 octets) |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD3) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length51.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 44.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv4 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the color of the SR Policy and is encoded as specified inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field specifies the endpoint IPv4 address of the SR Policy, as defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Protocol-Origintarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Protocol-Origin (length: 1octet) <list> <t>octet)</dt> <dd> The Protocol-Origin field indicates the protocol that originated the SR Candidate Path. It is defined inSection 2.3 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>target="RFC9256" section="2.3"/> and takes values from the IANA registry <xref target="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN"/>. If an unsupported value is used, validation at the responderMUST fail. </t> </list> </t> <t>Reserved<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fail.</dd> <dt>Reserved (length: 3octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Reserved field is reserved for future use. ItMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to zero when transmitted andMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ignored upon receipt.</t> </list> </t> <t>Originator</dd> <dt>Originator (length: 20octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Originator field identifies the originator of the SR Candidate Path and is defined inSection 2.4 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Discriminatortarget="RFC9256" section="2.4"/>. </dd> <dt>Discriminator (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Discriminator field uniquely identifies the SR Candidate Path within the context of the Headend, Color, andEndpoint.Endpoint fields. This field is defined inSection 2.5 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Segment-List-IDtarget="RFC9256" section="2.5"/>. </dd> <dt>Segment-List-ID (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Segment-List-ID field is a 4-octet identifier that uniquely identifies a segment list within the context of the candidate path of an SR Policy. This field is defined interminology of Section 2.2. </t> </list> </t><xref target="sect-2.2"/>.</dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.4"> <name>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV is defined as follows: </t> <figureanchor="Figure_4" title="SRanchor="Figure_4"> <name>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD452 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Headend (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Endpoint (16 octets) | | | | |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6Sub-TLV.sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD4) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length52.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 36.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv6 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the color (i.e., policy identifier) of the SR Policy and is encoded as defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field encodes the endpoint IPv6 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t>target="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.5"> <name>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV is defined as follows: </t> <figureanchor="Figure_5" title="SRanchor="Figure_5"> <name>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD553 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Headend (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Endpoint (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Protocol-Origin| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | | | Originator (20 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Discriminator (4 octets) |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD5) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length53.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 64.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv6 address of the SR Candidate Path. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the policy color and is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field encodes the endpoint IPv6 address of the SR Candidate Path. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Protocol-Origintarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Protocol-Origin (length: 1octet) <list> <t>octet)</dt> <dd> The Protocol-Origin field indicates the protocol that originated the SR Candidate Path. It is defined inSection 2.3 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>target="RFC9256" section="2.3"/> and takes values from the IANA registry <xref target="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN"/>. If an unsupported value is used, validation at the responderMUST fail. </t> </list> </t> <t>Reserved<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fail.</dd> <dt>Reserved (length: 3octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Reserved field is reserved for future use. ItMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to zero when sent andMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ignored upon receipt.</t> </list> </t> <t>Originator</dd> <dt>Originator (length: 20octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Originator field identifies the originator of the SR Candidate Path and is encoded as defined inSection 2.4 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Discriminatortarget="RFC9256" section="2.4"/>. </dd> <dt>Discriminator (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Discriminator field uniquely identifies the SR Candidate Path within the context of the Headend, Color, andEndpoint.Endpoint fields. This field is defined inSection 2.5 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t>target="RFC9256" section="2.5"/>. </dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="SRanchor="sect-3.6"> <name>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6Sub-TLV">Sub-TLV</name> <t> The SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV is used to identify a specific segment list within the context of a candidate path of an SR Policy. The format of this sub-TLV is shown inFigure 6.<xref target="Figure_6"/>. </t> <figureanchor="Figure_6" title="SRanchor="Figure_6"> <name>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV Format">Sub-TLV Format</name> <artworkalign="left"> <![CDATA[align="left"><![CDATA[ 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type =TBD654 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Headend (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Color (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | Endpoint (16 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Protocol-Origin| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | | | Originator (20 octets) | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Discriminator (4 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Segment-List-ID (4 octets) |+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ]]> </artwork>+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork> </figure><t>Type<dl spacing="normal" newline="true"> <dt>Type (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Type field identifies the sub-TLV as an SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV. The value is set to(TBD6) and is to be assigned by IANA. </t> </list> </t> <t>Length54.</dd> <dt>Length (length: 2octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Length field indicates the length of the sub-TLV in octets, excluding the first 4 octets (Type and Length fields). The valueMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 68.</t> </list> </t> <t>Headend</dd> <dt>Headend (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Headend field encodes the headend IPv6 address of the SR Policy. This field is defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Colortarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Color (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Color field identifies the color of the SR Policy and is encoded as specified inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Endpointtarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Endpoint (length: 16octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Endpoint field specifies the endpoint IPv6 address of the SR Policy, as defined inSection 2.1 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Protocol-Origintarget="RFC9256" section="2.1"/>. </dd> <dt>Protocol-Origin (length: 1octet) <list> <t>octet)</dt> <dd> The Protocol-Origin field indicates the protocol that originated the SR Candidate Path. It is defined inSection 2.3 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>target="RFC9256" section="2.3"/> and takes values from the IANA registry <xref target="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN"/>. If an unsupported value is used, validation at the responderMUST fail. </t> </list> </t> <t>Reserved<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fail.</dd> <dt>Reserved (length: 3octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Reserved field is reserved for future use. ItMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to zero when transmitted andMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ignored upon receipt.</t> </list> </t> <t>Originator</dd> <dt>Originator (length: 20octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Originator field identifies the originator of the SR Candidate Path and is defined inSection 2.4 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Discriminatortarget="RFC9256" section="2.4"/>. </dd> <dt>Discriminator (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Discriminator field uniquely identifies the SR Candidate Path within the context of the Headend, Color, andEndpoint.Endpoint fields. This field is defined inSection 2.5 of<xreftarget="RFC9256"/>. </t> </list> </t> <t>Segment-List-IDtarget="RFC9256" section="2.5"/>. </dd> <dt>Segment-List-ID (length: 4octets) <list> <t>octets)</dt> <dd> The Segment-List-ID field is a 4-octet identifier that uniquely identifies a segment list within the context of the candidate path of an SR Policy. This field is defined interminology of Section 2.2. </t> </list> </t><xref target="sect-2.2"/>.</dd> </dl> </section> </section> <sectiontitle="PSIDanchor="sect-4"> <name>PSID FECValidation">Validation</name> <t> The MPLS LSP Ping procedures may be initiated by the headend of theSegment RoutingSR path or a centralized topology-aware data plane monitoring system as described in <xref target="RFC8403"/>. For the PSID, the responder nodes that receive an echo request and send an echo replyMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the endpoint of the SR path. </t> <t> When an endpoint receives the LSP echo request packet with the top FEC being the PSID, itMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> perform validity checks on the content of the PSID Target FEC Stack sub-TLV.</t> <t> If a malformed Target FEC Stack sub-TLV is received, then a return code of 1, "Malformed echo request received" as defined in <xref target="RFC8029"/>MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be sent. The section below is appended to step 4a ofSection 7.4 of<xreftarget="RFC8287"/>.target="RFC8287" section="7.4"/>. </t><section title="PSID<section> <name>PSID FEC ValidationRules"> <t>4b.Rules</name> <sourcecode type="pseudocode"><![CDATA[ 4b. Segment Routing PSID Validation:</t> <t>IfIf the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD149 (SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail (the notation<RSC><RSC> refers to the Return Subcode):<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Policy {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, andendpoint,endpoint for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV.</t> </list>}</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to 3 "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list>}</t> <t>Else,Else, if the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD250 (SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail:<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Candidate Path {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, endpoint, originator, anddiscriminator,discriminator for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV.</t> </list>}</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to 3 "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list>}</t> <t>Else,Else, if the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD351 (SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail:<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Segment List {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, endpoint, originator, discriminator, andsegment-list-id,segment-list-id for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4 sub-TLV.</t> </list>}</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to33, "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list>}</t> <t>Else,Else, if the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD452 (SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail(the notation <RSC> refers to the Return Subcode): <list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Policy {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, andendpoint,endpoint for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV. </t> </list>sub- TLV. }</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to 3 "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list>}</t> <t>Else,Else, if the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD553 (SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail:<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Candidate Path {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, endpoint, originator, anddiscriminator,discriminator for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV.</t> </list>}</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to 3 "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list>}</t> <t>Else,Else, if the Label-stack-depth is 1 and the Target FEC Stack sub-TLV at FEC-stack-depth isTBD654 (SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV), {<list> <t>SetSet the Best-return-code to10,10 "Mapping for this FEC is not the given label at stack-depth<RSC>"<RSC>" if any below conditions fail:<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate- Validate that the PSID is signaled or provisioned for the SR Segment List {<list style="symbols"> <t>Validate* Validate that the signaled or provisioned headend, color, endpoint, originator, discriminator, andsegment-list-id,segment-list-id for thePSID, matchesPSID match with the corresponding fields in the received SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV.</t> </list>}</t> </list>}</t> <t>IfIf all the above validations have passed, set the return code to 3 "Replying router is an egress for the FEC at stack-depth<RSC>". </t> <t>Set<RSC>". Set the FEC-Status to 1 and return.</t> </list> } </t>}]]></sourcecode> <t> When any of the following is carried in a Reverse-Path Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 16) or Reply Path TLV (Type 21), it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be sent by anSRendpoint in an echo reply.</t> <ul> <li>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV, or an SRsub-TLV,</li> <li>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV, or an SRsub-TLV,</li> <li>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv4sub-TLV, or an SRsub-TLV,</li> <li>SR Policy Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV, or an SRsub-TLV,</li> <li>SR Candidate Path Associated PSID - IPv6 sub-TLV,or an SRor</li> <li>SR Segment List Associated PSID - IPv6sub-TLV is carried in Reverse-Path Target FEC Stack TLV (Type 16) or Reply Path TLV (Type 21), it MUST be sent by an endpoint in an echo reply. Thesub-TLV</li></ul> <t>The headendMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> perform validity checks as described above without setting the return code. If any of the validations fail, then the headendMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> drop the echo reply andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> log and/or report an error.</t> </section> </section><section title="Security Considerations"><section> <name>Security Considerations</name> <t> This document defines additional MPLS LSP Ping sub-TLVs and follows the mechanisms defined in <xref target="RFC8029"/>. All the security considerations defined inSection 5 of<xreftarget="RFC8029"/>target="RFC8029" section="5"/> apply to this document. The MPLS LSP Ping sub-TLVs defined in this document do not impose any additional security challenges to be considered.</t> </section><section title="IANA Considerations"><section> <name>IANA Considerations</name> <t> IANAis requested to assignhas assigned sixnewTarget FEC Stack sub-TLVs from the "Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21" registry <xref target="MPLS-LSP-PING"/> within the "TLVs" registry of the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry group. The Standards Action <xref target="RFC8126"/> range that requires an error message to be returned if the sub-TLV is not recognized (range 0-16383) should be used.</t><texttable title="Sub-TLVs<table> <name>Sub-TLVs for TLV Types 1, 16, and 21Registry"> <ttcol align='left'>Sub-Type</ttcol> <ttcol align='left'>Sub-TLV Name</ttcol> <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol> <c>TBD1</c><c>SRRegistry</name> <thead> <tr> <th align="left">Sub-Type</th> <th align="left">Sub-TLV Name</th> <th align="left">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left">49</td> <td align="left">SR Policy Associated PSID -IPv4</c><c>Section 3.1 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> <c>TBD2</c><c>SRIPv4</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.1"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">50</td> <td align="left">SR Candidate Path Associated PSID -IPv4</c><c>Section 3.2 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> <c>TBD3</c><c>SRIPv4</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.2"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">51</td> <td align="left">SR Segment List Associated PSID -IPv4</c><c>Section 3.3 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> <c>TBD4</c><c>SRIPv4</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.3"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">52</td> <td align="left">SR Policy Associated PSID -IPv6</c><c>Section 3.4 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> <c>TBD5</c><c>SRIPv6</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.4"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">53</td> <td align="left">SR Candidate Path Associated PSID -IPv6</c><c>Section 3.5 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> <c>TBD6</c><c>SRIPv6</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.5"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left">54</td> <td align="left">SR Segment List Associated PSID -IPv6</c><c>Section 3.6 of THIS_DOCUMENT</c> </texttable>IPv6</td> <td align="left"><xref target="sect-3.6"/> of RFC 9884</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> </middle> <back> <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id" to="SR-SEGLIST-ID"/> <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-pce-multipath" to="PCE-MULTIPATH"/> <references> <name>References</name> <references> <name>Normative References</name> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9545.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8287.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8029.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9256.xml"/> <reference anchor="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing"> <front> <title>SR Policy Protocol Origin</title> <author> <organization>IANA</organization> </author> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="MPLS-LSP-PING" target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters"> <front> <title>Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters</title> <author> <organization>IANA</organization> </author> </front> </reference> </references> <references> <name>Informative References</name> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3031.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8126.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8402.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8403.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9703.xml"/> <!-- [I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id] draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-04 IESG State: I-D Exists as of 10/20/25 --> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id.xml"/> <!-- [I-D.ietf-pce-multipath] draft-ietf-pce-multipath-13 IESG State: I-D Exists as of 10/20/25 --> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-pce-multipath.xml"/> <!-- [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy] draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-17 In RFC Ed Queue (AUTH48) as RFC 9857 as of 10/20/25; authors prefer reversion to the I-D format if it does not beat this document to PUB. --> <reference anchor="RFC9857" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9857"> <front> <title>Advertisement of Segment Routing Policies Using BGP Link State</title> <author initials="S." surname="Previdi" fullname="Stefano Previdi"> <organization>Individual</organization> </author> <author initials="K." surname="Talaulikar" fullname="Ketan Talaulikar" role="editor"> <organization>Cisco Systems</organization> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Dong" fullname="Jie Dong"> <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization> </author> <author initials="H." surname="Gredler" fullname="Hannes Gredler"> <organization>RtBrick Inc.</organization> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Tantsura" fullname="Jeff Tantsura"> <organization>Nvidia</organization> </author> <date month="October" year="2025" /> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9857"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9857"/> </reference> </references> </references> <sectiontitle="Acknowledgements">numbered="false"> <name>Acknowledgements</name> <t> The authors would like to acknowledgeLoa Andersson, Detao Zhao, Ben Niven-Jenkins, Greg Mirsky, Ketan Talaulikar, James Guichard, Jon Geater, Gorry Fairhurst, Bing Liu, Mohamed Boucadair, Eric Vyncke, Gunter<contact fullname="Loa Andersson"/>, <contact fullname="Detao Zhao"/>, <contact fullname="Ben Niven-Jenkins"/>, <contact fullname="Greg Mirsky"/>, <contact fullname="Ketan Talaulikar"/>, <contact fullname="James Guichard"/>, <contact fullname="Jon Geater"/>, <contact fullname="Gorry Fairhurst"/>, <contact fullname="Bing Liu"/>, <contact fullname="Mohamed Boucadair"/>, <contact fullname="Éric Vyncke"/>, <contact fullname="Gunter Van deVelde, Mahesh Jethanandani, and Andy SmithVelde"/>, <contact fullname="Mahesh Jethanandani"/>, and <contact fullname="Andy Smith"/> for their thorough review and very helpful comments. </t> <t> The authors would like to acknowledgeYao Liu and Quan Xiong<contact fullname="Yao Liu"/> and <contact fullname="Quan Xiong"/> for the very helpful face to face discussion.</t> </section></middle> <back> <references title="Normative References"> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9545"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8287"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8029"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9256"?> <reference anchor="PROTOCOL-ORIGIN" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml#sr-policy-protocol-origin"> <front> <title>SR Policy Protocol Origin</title> <author></author> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="MPLS-LSP-PING" target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters"> <front> <title>Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters</title> <author></author> </front> </reference> </references> <references title="Informative References"> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.3031"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8402"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8403"?> <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9703"?> <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id"?> <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-pce-multipath"?> <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy"?> </references></back> </rfc>