<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>

<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>

<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes" ?>

<rfc number="7487"
     submissionType="IETF"
     category="std"
     consensus="yes"
     ipr="trust200902">

  <front>
    <title abbrev="Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Configuration">Configuration of Proactive 
    Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for MPLS-Based Transport Networks Using
    RSVP-TE</title>

    <author fullname="Elisa Bellagamba" initials="E." 
            surname="Bellagamba">
      <organization>Ericsson</organization>
      <address>
        <email>elisa.bellagamba@ericsson.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Attila Takacs" initials="A."  surname="Takacs">
      <organization>Ericsson</organization>

      <address>
        <phone></phone>

        <email>attila.takacs@ericsson.com</email>

      </address>
    </author>

      <author fullname="Gregory Mirsky" initials="G."
            surname="Mirsky">
      <organization>Ericsson</organization>
      <address>
        <email>Gregory.Mirsky@ericsson.com</email>

      </address>
    </author>
    
    <author fullname="Loa Andersson" initials="L."
            surname="Andersson">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <phone></phone>
        <email>loa@mail01.huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Pontus Skoldstrom" initials="P."
            surname="Skoldstrom">
      <organization>Acreo AB</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Electrum 236</street>
          <city>Kista</city>
          <region></region>
          <code>164 40</code>
          <country>Sweden</country>
        </postal>
        <phone>+46 70 7957731</phone>
        <email>pontus.skoldstrom@acreo.se</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Dave Ward" initials="D." surname="Ward">
      <organization>Cisco</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>
          <city></city>
          <region></region>
          <code></code>
	  <country></country>
        </postal>
        <phone></phone>
        <email>dward@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>


    <date month="March" year="2015" />
    <area>Signaling</area>
    <workgroup>CCAMP Working Group</workgroup>
    <keyword>RSVP-TE</keyword>
    <keyword>GMPLS</keyword>
    <keyword>MPLS</keyword>
    <keyword>MPLS-TP</keyword>
    <keyword>OAM</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This specification describes the configuration of proactive MPLS
      Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) functions for a given
      Label Switched Path (LSP) using a set of TLVs that are carried by the
      GMPLS RSVP-TE protocol based on the OAM Configuration Framework for GMPLS RSVP-TE.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      
      <t>This document describes the configuration of proactive MPLS-TP OAM functions for a given
      LSP using TLVs that use GMPLS RSVP-TE <xref target="RFC3473"/>. <xref target="RFC7260"/>
      defines use of GMPLS RSVP-TE for the configuration of OAM
      functions in a technology-agnostic way. This document specifies
      the additional mechanisms necessary to establish MPLS-TP
      OAM entities at the maintenance points for monitoring and performing
      measurements on an LSP, as well as defining information elements and
      procedures to configure proactive MPLS-TP OAM functions running between
      Label Edge Routers (LERs).  Initialization and control of on-demand MPLS-TP OAM functions are
      expected to be carried out by directly accessing network nodes via a
      management interface; hence, configuration and control of on-demand OAM
      functions are out of scope for this document.</t>

      <t>MPLS-TP, the Transport Profile of MPLS, must, by definition <xref target="RFC5654"/>, be
      capable of operating without a control plane. Therefore, there are 
      several options for configuring MPLS-TP OAM without a control plane 
      by using either a Network Management System (NMS), an LSP Ping, or 
       signaling protocols such as RSVP-TE in the control plane.
      </t>

      <t>MPLS-TP describes a profile of MPLS that
      enables operational models typical in transport networks while providing
      additional OAM survivability and other maintenance functions not
      currently supported by MPLS.  <xref target="RFC5860"/> defines the requirements for the
      OAM functionality of MPLS-TP.</t>

      <t>Proactive MPLS-TP OAM is performed by three different protocols:
      Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) <xref target="RFC6428"/> for Continuity
      Check / Connectivity Verification, the Delay Measurement (DM) protocol
      <xref target="RFC6374"/> for delay and delay variation (jitter) measurements, and the
      Loss Measurement (LM) protocol <xref target="RFC6374"/> for packet loss and throughput
      measurements. Additionally, there are a number of Fault Management signals
      that can be configured <xref target="RFC6427"/>.
      </t>
     
      <t>BFD is a protocol that provides low-overhead, fast detection of
      failures in the path between two forwarding engines, including the
      interfaces, data link(s), and (to the extent possible) the forwarding
      engines themselves. BFD can be used to track the liveliness and to detect
      the data plane failures of MPLS-TP point to point and might also be
      extended to support point-to-multipoint connections.
      </t>
      
      <t>The delay and loss measurement protocols <xref target="RFC6374"/> use a simple
      query/response model for performing bidirectional measurements that allows
      the originating node to measure packet loss and delay in both
      directions. By timestamping and/or writing current packet counters to the
      measurement packets four times (Tx and Rx in both directions), current
      delays and packet losses can be calculated. By performing successive delay
      measurements, the delay variation (jitter) can be calculated. Current
      throughput can be calculated from the packet loss measurements by dividing
      the number of packets sent/received with the time it took to perform the
      measurement, given by the timestamp in LM header. Combined with a packet
      generator, the throughput measurement can be used to measure the maximum
      capacity of a particular LSP. It should be noted that here we are not
      configuring on-demand throughput estimates based on saturating the
      connection as defined in <xref target="RFC6371"/>. Rather, we only enable the estimation
      of the current throughput based on loss measurements.
      </t>
 
     <section title="Conventions Used in This Document">
         <section title="Terminology">
<t>AIS - Alarm Indication Signal</t>
<t>BFD - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection</t>
<t>CC - Continuity Check</t>
<t>CV - Connectivity Verification</t>
<t>DM - Delay Measurement</t>
<t>FMS - Fault Management Signal </t>
<t>G-ACh - Generic Associated Channel</t>
<t>GMPLS - Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching</t>
<t>LDI - Link Down Indication</t>
<t>LER - Label Edge Router</t>
<t>LKR - Lock Report</t>
<t>LM - Loss Measurement</t>
<t>LOC - Loss Of Continuity</t>
<t>LSP - Label Switched Path</t>
<t>LSR - Label Switching Router</t>
<t>MEP - Maintenance Entity Group End Point</t>
<t>MIP - Maintenance Entity Group Intermediate Point</t>
<t>MPLS - Multi-Protocol Label Switching</t>
<t>MPLS-TP - MPLS Transport Profile</t>
<t>NMS - Network Management System</t>
<t>PM - Performance Measurement</t>
<t>RSVP-TE - Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering</t>
<t>TC - Traffic Class</t>

         </section>
         
               <section title ="Requirements Language">
	<t>
	  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	  document are to be interpreted as described
	  in <xref target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.
	</t>
      </section>
    </section>
</section>

    <section title="Overview of MPLS OAM for Transport Applications">


      <t><xref target="RFC6371"/> describes how MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms are operated to
      meet transport requirements outlined in <xref target="RFC5860"/>.</t>
      
      <t><xref target="RFC6428"/> specifies two BFD operation modes: 1) "CC mode", which uses
      periodic BFD message exchanges with symmetric timer settings supporting
      Continuity Check, and 2) "CV/CC mode", which sends unique maintenance entity
      identifiers in the periodic BFD messages supporting CV as well as CC.</t>
      
      <t><xref target="RFC6374"/> specifies mechanisms for Performance Monitoring of LSPs, in
      particular it specifies loss and delay measurement OAM functions.</t>

      <t><xref target="RFC6427"/> specifies fault management signals with which a server LSP
      can notify client LSPs about various fault conditions to suppress alarms
      or to be used as triggers for actions in the client LSPs.  The following
      signals are defined: Alarm Indication Signal (AIS), Link Down Indication
      (LDI), and Lock Report (LKR). </t>

      <t><xref target="RFC6371"/> describes the mapping of fault conditions to
      consequent actions. Some of these mappings may be configured by the
      operator depending on the application of the LSP. The following defects
      are identified: Loss Of Continuity (LOC), Misconnectivity, MEP
      Misconfiguration, and Period Misconfiguration. Out of these defect
      conditions, the following consequent actions may be configurable: 1)
      whether or not the LOC defect should result in blocking the outgoing data
      traffic; 2) whether or not the "Period Misconfiguration defect" should
      result in a signal fail condition.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Theory of Operations">
      <section title="MPLS-TP OAM Configuration Operation Overview">

	<t>GMPLS RSVP-TE, or alternatively LSP Ping <xref target="LSP-PING-CONF"/>, can be used to
	simply enable the different OAM functions by setting the corresponding
	flags in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC7260"/>.
	For a more detailed configuration, one
	may include sub-TLVs for the different OAM functions in order to specify
	various parameters in detail.</t>

	<t>Typically, intermediate nodes SHOULD NOT process or modify any of
	the OAM Configuration TLVs but simply
	forward them to the end node.  There is one exception to this and that
	is if the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV is
	present. This sub-TLV MUST be examined even by intermediate nodes that support these extensions
	but only acted upon by nodes capable of
	transmitting FMS signals into the LSP being established. 
	The sub-TLV MAY be present when the FMS flag is
	set in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV. If this sub-TLV is present,
	then the "OAM MIP entities desired" and "OAM MEP
	entities desired" flags (described in <xref target="RFC7260"/>) in the 
	LSP Attribute Flags TLV MUST be set and the
	entire OAM Configuration TLV placed either in the
	LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES object or in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES
	object in order to ensure that capable intermediate nodes process the
	configuration. If placed in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object, nodes that are not
	able to process the OAM Configuration TLV will forward the message without generating an error.
	If the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV has been placed in the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES object, a node that
	supports RFC 7260 but does not support the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV
	MUST generate a PathErr message with "OAM Problem/Configuration Error"
	<xref target="RFC7260"/>. Otherwise, if the node doesn't support
	RFC 7260, it will not raise any errors as described in the Section 4.1
	of <xref target="RFC7260"/>.</t>
	
	<t> Finally, if the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV is not included, only the "OAM MEP
	entities desired" flag is set and the OAM Configuration TLV may be
	placed in either LSP_ATTRIBUTES or LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES. </t>

	<section title="Configuration of BFD Sessions">

	  <t> For this specification, BFD MUST be run in either one of the two modes:</t>
	  <t>
	    <list style="symbols">
	      <t>Asynchronous mode, where both sides should be in active mode;
	      or</t>
	      <t>Unidirectional mode.</t>
	    </list>
	  </t>

	  <t>In the simplest scenario, RSVP-TE (or alternatively LSP Ping
	  <xref target="LSP-PING-CONF"/>), 
	  is used only to bootstrap a BFD session for an LSP without any timer negotiation.</t>

	  <t>Timer negotiation can be performed either in subsequent BFD Control 
	  messages (in this case the operation is similar to LSP-Ping-based bootstrapping 
	  described in <xref target="RFC5884"/>) or directly in the RSVP-TE signaling messages.</t>

	  <t>When BFD Control packets are transported in the G-ACh, they are not
	  protected by any end-to-end checksum; only lower layers are providing
	  error detection/correction. A single bit error, e.g., a flipped bit in
	  the BFD State field, could cause the receiving end to wrongly conclude
	  that the link is down and, in turn, trigger protection switching. To
	  prevent this from happening, the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV has an
	  Integrity flag that, when set, enables BFD Authentication using Keyed
	  SHA1 with an empty key (all 0s) <xref target="RFC5880"/>. This would ensure that
	  every BFD Control packet carries a SHA1 hash of itself that can be used
	  to detect errors.</t>

	  <t>If BFD Authentication using a pre-shared key / password is desired
	  (i.e., authentication and not only error detection), the BFD
	  Authentication Sub-TLV MUST be included in the BFD Configuration
	  Sub-TLV. The BFD Authentication Sub-TLV is used to specify which
	  authentication method should be used and which pre-shared key /
	  password should be used for this particular session. How the key
	  exchange is performed is out of scope of this document. </t>
	</section>

	<section title="Configuration of Performance Monitoring">
	  <t>It is possible to configure Performance Monitoring functionalities such as Loss, 
	  Delay, Delay variation (jitter), and Throughput, as described in
	  <xref target="RFC6374"/>.</t>

	  <t>When configuring Performance Monitoring functionalities, it is
	  possible to choose either the default configuration (by only setting the
	  respective flags in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV) or a customized
	  configuration. To customize the configuration, one would set the
	  respective flags and include the respective Loss and/or Delay
	  sub-TLVs. </t>
	  
	  <t>By setting the PM/Loss flag in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV and
	  by including the MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV, one can configure the
	  measurement interval and loss threshold values for triggering
	  protection.</t>
	  
	  <t>Delay measurements are configured by setting the PM/Delay flag in the
	  OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV; by including the MPLS OAM PM Loss
	  Sub-TLV, one can configure the measurement interval and the delay
	  threshold values for triggering protection.</t>
	</section>
	
	<section title="Configuration of Fault Management Signals">

	  <t>To configure Fault Management signals and their refresh time, the
	  FMS flag in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV MUST be set and the MPLS
	  OAM FMS Sub-TLV included. When configuring Fault Management signals, 
	  an implementation can enable the default configuration by setting the 
	  FMS flag in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV. In order to modify the
	  default configuration, the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV MUST be included. </t>

	  <t>If an intermediate point is intended to originate fault management
	  signal messages, this means that such an intermediate point is
	  associated with a server MEP through a co-located MPLS-TP client/server
	  adaptation function, and the "Fault Management subscription" flag in the
	  MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV has been set as an indication of the request to create
	  the association at each intermediate node of the client LSP.  The corresponding
	  server MEP needs to be configured by its own RSVP-TE session (or, alternatively, via an NMS or
	  LSP Ping).</t>

	</section>
      </section>

      <section anchor="mpls-oam-conf-tlv" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV">
    <t>The OAM Configuration TLV, defined in <xref target="RFC7260"/>,
    specifies the OAM functions that are used for the
	LSP. This document extends the OAM Configuration TLV by defining a new OAM Type: "MPLS OAM" (3). The
	MPLS OAM type is set to request the establishment of OAM functions for
	MPLS-TP LSPs.  The specific OAM functions are specified in the OAM Function
	Flags Sub-TLV as depicted in <xref target="RFC7260"/>. </t>

	<t>When an egress LSR receives an OAM Configuration TLV indicating the
	MPLS OAM type, the LSR will first process any present OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV,
	and then it MUST process technology-specific configuration TLVs.  This
	document defines a sub-TLV, the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV, which
	is carried in the OAM Configuration TLV. </t>
	<t>
          <figure anchor="MPLSOAMConfig" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Format">
            <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MPLS OAM Conf. Sub-TLV (33)   |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                  
]]></artwork>                                             
	  </figure>                                                                                                  
	</t>

	<t>Type: 33, the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>Length: Indicates the total length in octets, including sub-TLVs as well as the Type and Length fields.</t>

	<t>The following MPLS-OAM-specific sub-TLVs MAY be included in the
	MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV:</t>
	
	<t>
	  <list style="symbols">
	    <t>BFD Configuration Sub-TLV MUST be included if either the CC, 
	    the CV, or both OAM Function flags are being set in the 
	    OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC7260"/>. This sub-TLV carries additional
	    sub-TLVs; failure to include the correct sub-TLVs MUST result in an
	    error being generated: "OAM Problem/Configuration Error". The sub-TLVs
	    are:
	    <list>
	      <t>BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV MUST always be included.</t>
	      <t>Timer Negotiation Parameters Sub-TLV MUST be included if the N flag is not set.</t>
	      <t>BFD Authentication Sub-TLV MAY be included if the I flag is set.</t>
	    </list> 
	    </t>
	    <t>Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV, which MUST be included if any
	    of the PM/Delay, PM/Loss, or PM/Throughput flags are set in the OAM
	    Function Flag Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC7260"/>. This sub-TLV MAY carry additional sub-TLVs: 
	    <list>
	      <t>MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV MAY be included if the PM/Loss OAM
	      Function flag is set. If the MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV is not
	      included, default configuration values are used. The same sub-TLV MAY
	      also be included in case the PM/Throughput OAM Function flag is set
	      and there is the need to specify measurement intervals different from
	      the default ones. Since throughput measurements use the same tool as
	      loss measurements, the same TLV is used.
	      </t>

	      <t>MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV MAY be included if the PM/Delay OAM
	      Function flag is set. If the MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV is not
	      included, default configuration values are used.
	      </t>
	    </list>
	    </t>
	    <t>MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV MAY be included if the FMS OAM Function
	    flag is set. If the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV is not included, default
	    configuration values are used.
	    </t>
	  </list>
	</t>
	
	<t>The following are some additional rules of processing the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV:</t>
              <t>
                   <list style="symbols">
                   <t>The MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV MAY be empty, i.e.,
		   have no Value. If so, then its Length MUST be 8.
                   Then, all OAM functions that have their corresponding flags
		   set in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV
                   MUST be assigned their default values or left disabled.</t>
                   <t>A sub-TLV that doesn't have a corresponding flag set MUST be silently ignored.</t>
                   <t>If multiple copies of a sub-TLV are present, then only the first sub-TLV
                   MUST be used and the remaining sub-TLVs MUST be silently ignored.</t>
                   </list>
               </t>

	<t>However, not all the values can be derived from the standard RSVP-TE
	objects, in particular the locally assigned Tunnel ID at the egress
	cannot be derived by the ingress node. Therefore, the full LSP MEP-ID used
	by the ingress has to be carried in the BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV in the
	Path message and the egress LSP MEP-ID in the same way in the
	Resv message.</t>
	
       <section anchor="cv-flag-use" title="CV Flag Rules of Use">

	<t>If the CV flag is set in the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC7260"/>,
	then the CC flag MUST be set as well
	because performing Connectivity Verification implies performing Continuity Check as well.
	The format of an MPLS-TP CV/CC message is shown in <xref target="RFC6428"/>. In order to
	perform Connectivity Verification, the CV/CC message MUST contain the "LSP MEP-ID"
	in addition to the BFD Control packet information. The "LSP MEP-ID" contains four identifiers: </t>
	<t>
	  <list>
	    <t>MPLS-TP Global_ID</t>
	    <t>MPLS-TP Node Identifier</t>
	    <t>Tunnel_Num</t>
	    <t>LSP_Num</t>
	  </list>
	</t>
	
	<t>These values need to be correctly set by both ingress and egress when
	transmitting a CV packet, and both ingress and egress need to know what
	to expect when receiving a CV packet. Most of these values can be derived
	from the Path and Resv messages <xref target="RFC3473"/>, which use a 5-tuple to
	uniquely identify an LSP within an operator's network. This tuple is
	composed of a Tunnel Sender Address, Tunnel Endpoint Address, Tunnel_ID,
	Extended Tunnel ID, and (GMPLS) LSP_ID.</t> 


       </section> 
         
   </section>

      <section anchor="bfd-config-tlv" title="BFD Configuration Sub-TLV">
      
	<t>The BFD Configuration Sub-TLV (depicted below) is defined for
	BFD-OAM-specific configuration parameters.  The BFD Configuration Sub-TLV is
	carried as a sub-TLV of the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>This TLV accommodates generic BFD OAM information and carries
	sub-TLVs.</t>

	<t>
          <figure anchor="BFDConfig" title="BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Format">
            <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      BFD Conf. Type (1)       |           Length              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Vers.|N|S|I|G|U|B|       Reserved (set to all 0s)              |      
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                 
   ]]></artwork>                                             
	  </figure>                                                                                                  
	</t>

	<t>Type: 1, the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>Length: Indicates the total length in octets, including sub-TLVs as well as the Type and Length fields.</t>

	<t>Version: Identifies the BFD protocol version. If the egress LSR does not
	support the version, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD
	Version".</t>

	<t>BFD Negotiation (N): If set timer negotiation/re-negotiation via
	BFD Control messages is enabled, when cleared it is disabled.</t>

	<t>Symmetric Session (S): If set, the BFD session MUST use symmetric
	timing values. </t>

	<t>Integrity (I): If set, BFD Authentication MUST be enabled. If the BFD
	Configuration Sub-TLV does not include a BFD Authentication Sub-TLV, the
	authentication MUST use Keyed SHA1 with an empty pre-shared key (all
	0s). If the egress LSR does not support BFD Authentication, an error MUST
	be generated: "OAM Problem/BFD Authentication unsupported".</t>

	<t>Encapsulation Capability (G): If set, it shows the capability of
	encapsulating BFD messages into The G-Ach channel. If both the G bit and
	U bit are set, configuration gives precedence to the G bit. If the
	egress LSR does not support any of the ingress LSR Encapsulation
	Capabilities, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported
	BFD Encapsulation format". </t>

	<t>Encapsulation Capability (U): If set, it shows the capability of
	encapsulating BFD messages into UDP packets.  If both the G bit and U
	bit are set, configuration gives precedence to the G bit.  If the
	egress LSR does not support any of the ingress LSR Encapsulation
	Capabilities, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported
	BFD Encapsulation Format".</t>

	<t>Bidirectional (B): If set, it configures BFD in the Bidirectional mode. 
	If it is not set, it configures BFD in unidirectional mode. In the second case, 
	the source node does not expect any Discriminator values back from the destination node.</t> 
	
	<t>Reserved: Reserved for future specifications; set to 0 on transmission and ignored when received.</t>

	<t>The BFD Configuration Sub-TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs in
	the Path message:</t>

	<t><list style="symbols">
	  <t>BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV; and</t>

	  <t>Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV if the N flag is
	  cleared.</t>
	</list></t>

	<t>The BFD Configuration Sub-TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs in
	the Resv message:</t>

	<t><list style="symbols">
	  <t>BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV; and</t>

	  <t>Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV if:
	  <list>
	    <t>the N and S flags are cleared; or if </t>
	    <t>the N flag is cleared and the S flag is set and the
	    Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV received by
	    the egress contains unsupported values.  In this case, an updated
	    Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV
	    containing values supported by the egress LSR MUST be returned to the ingress.</t>
	  </list>
	  </t>
	</list></t>
	<section title="BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV">

	  <t>The BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the
	  BFD Configuration Sub-TLV and is depicted below.</t>
	  <t>
	    <figure anchor="BFDID" title="BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV Format">
	      <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   BFD Identfiers Type (1)     |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                     Local Discriminator                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       MPLS-TP Global_ID                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                    MPLS-TP Node Identifier                    |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           Tunnel_Num          |            LSP_Num            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

 ]]></artwork>
	    </figure>                                                                                                  
	  </t>

	  <t>Type: 1, the BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV.</t>

	  <t>Length: Indicates the TLV total length in octets, including the Type and Length fields (20).</t>

	  <t>Local Discriminator: A unique, non-zero discriminator value
	  generated by the transmitting system and referring to itself; it is used to
	  de-multiplex multiple BFD sessions between the same pair of
	  systems as defined in <xref target="RFC5880"/>.</t>
          
	  <t>MPLS-TP Global_ID, Node Identifier, Tunnel_Num,
	  and LSP_Num: All set as defined in <xref target="RFC6370"/>.</t>
	</section>

	<section title="Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV">
	  <t>The Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV is carried as a sub-TLV
	  of the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV and is depicted below.</t>

	  <t>
            <figure anchor="NegTime" title="Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV Format">
              <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    Nego. Timer Type (2)       |             Length            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|         Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|               Required Echo TX Interval                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    ]]></artwork>                                             
	    </figure>
	  </t>

	  <t>Type: 2, the Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV.</t>

	  <t>Length: Indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and Length fields (16).</t>

	  <t>Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval: If the S flag
	  is set in the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV, it expresses the desired
	  time interval (in microseconds) at which the ingress LER intends to
	  both transmit and receive BFD periodic control packets. If the egress
	  LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported
	  interval.</t>

	  <t>If the S flag is cleared in the BFD Configuration
	  Sub-TLV, this field expresses the desired time interval (in
	  microseconds) at which the ingress LSR intends to transmit BFD periodic
	  control packets.</t>

	  <t>Acceptable Min. Asynchronous RX interval: If the S
	  flag is set in the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV, this field MUST be set equal to
	  "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval" on transmit and MUST be ignored
	  on receipt since it has no additional
	  meaning with respect to the one described for "Acceptable Min. Asynchronous
	  TX interval".</t>


	  <t>If the S flag is cleared in the BFD Configuration
	  Sub-TLV, it expresses the minimum time interval (in microseconds) at
	  which the ingress/egress LSRs can receive periodic BFD Control
	  packets. If this value is greater than the "Acceptable
	  Min. Asynchronous TX interval" received from the ingress/egress LSR,
	  the receiving LSR MUST adopt the interval expressed in the "Acceptable
	  Min. Asynchronous RX interval".</t>

	  <t>Required Echo TX Interval: The minimum interval (in microseconds)
	  between received BFD Echo packets that this system is capable of
	  supporting, less any jitter applied by the sender as described in
	  Section 6.8.9 of <xref target="RFC5880"/>.  This value is also an indication for the
	  receiving system of the minimum interval between transmitted BFD Echo
	  packets.  If this value is zero, the transmitting system does not
	  support the receipt of BFD Echo packets.  If the LSR node cannot
	  support this value, it SHOULD reply with a supported value (which may
	  be zero if Echo is not supported).</t>
	</section>

	<section title="BFD Authentication Sub-TLV">
	  <t>The BFD Authentication Sub-TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the
	  BFD Configuration Sub-TLV and is depicted below.</t>
	  <t>
            <figure anchor="BFDAuth" title="BFD Authentication Sub-TLV Format">
              <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      BFD Auth. Type (3)       |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Auth Type   |  Auth Key ID  |         Reserved (0s)         |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  ]]></artwork>                                             
	    </figure>
	  </t>
	  <t>Type: 3, the BFD Authentication Sub-TLV.</t>
	  <t>Length: Indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and Length fields (8).</t>
	  <t>Auth Type: Indicates which type of authentication to use. The same
	  values are used as are defined in Section 4.1 of <xref target="RFC5880"/>. If the
	  egress LSR does not support this type, an "OAM Problem/Unsupported
	  BFD Authentication Type" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>Auth Key ID: Indicates which authentication key or password
	  (depending on Auth Type) should be used. How the key exchange is
	  performed is out of scope of this document. If the egress LSR does
	  not support this Auth Key ID, an "OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD
	  Authentication Key ID" error MUST be generated. </t>
	  <t>Reserved: Reserved for future specifications; set to 0 on
	  transmission and ignored when received.</t>
	</section>
	<section anchor="traffic-class-sub-tlv" title="Traffic Class Sub-TLV">

	  <t>The Traffic Class Sub-TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the
	    BFD Configuration Sub-TLV or Fault Management Signal Sub-TLV (<xref target="fms-sub-tlv"/>)
	    and is depicted in <xref target="traffic-class-sub-tlv-figure"/>.</t>
	  <t>

	    <figure align="left" anchor="traffic-class-sub-tlv-figure"
                title="Traffic Class Sub-TLV Format">
	      <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|  Traffic Class Sub-Type (4)   |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|  TC |                 Reserved (set to all 0s)                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>
</figure>                                                                                                  
	  </t>


	  <t>Type: 4, the Traffic Class Sub-TLV.</t>

	  <t>Length: Indicates the length of the Value field in octets (4).</t>

	<t>Traffic Class (TC): Identifies the TC <xref target="RFC5462"/> for periodic
	continuity monitoring messages or packets with fault
	management information.</t>
	
	<t>If the Traffic Class Sub-TLV is present, then the value of the TC field MUST be used
	as the value of the TC field  of an MPLS label stack entry. If the
	Traffic Class Sub-TLV is absent
	from BFD Configuration Sub-TLV or Fault Management Signal Sub-TLV, then selection of
	the TC value is a local decision.
	</t>
	  
	</section>

      </section>
      
      <section title="Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV">

	<t>If the OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV has either the PM/Loss, PM/Delay,
	or PM/Throughput flag set, the Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV MUST be
	present in the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV. Failure to include the
	correct sub-TLVs MUST result in an "OAM Problem/Configuration Error" message
	being generated.</t>

	<t>The Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV provides the configuration information mentioned in Section 7 of
	<xref target="RFC6374"/>. It includes support for the configuration of
	quality thresholds and, as described in <xref target="RFC6374"/>, "the
	crossing of which will trigger warnings or alarms, and result reporting and exception notification will be
	integrated into the system-wide network management and reporting framework."</t>

	<t>In case the values need to be different than the default ones, the
	Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV includes the following sub-TLVs:
	<list style="symbols">
	  <t>MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV if the PM/Loss and/or PM/Throughput flag is set in the OAM
	  Function Flags Sub-TLV; and</t>
	  <t>MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV if the PM/Delay flag is set in the
	  OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV.</t>
	</list>
	</t>

	<t>The Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV depicted below is carried as a
	sub-TLV of the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>
	  <figure anchor="PerfMon" title="Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV Format">
 	    <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    Perf. Monitoring Type (2)  |          Length               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|D|L|J|Y|K|C|            Reserved (set to all 0s)               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
~                           sub-TLVs                            ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>                                             
	  </figure>  
	</t>  
	
	<t>Type: 2, the Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>Length: Indicates the TLV total length in octets, including sub-TLVs as well as Type and Length fields. </t>

	<t>Configuration Flags (for the specific function description please refer to <xref target="RFC6374"/>):
	<list style="symbols">
	  <t>D: Delay inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT). If the egress LSR does
	  not support the specified mode, an "OAM Problem/Unsupported Delay Mode" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>L: Loss inferred/direct (0=INFERRED, 1=DIRECT). If the egress LSR does
	  not support the specified mode, an "OAM Problem/Unsupported Loss Mode" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>J: Delay variation/jitter (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE). If the egress LSR does
	  not support Delay variation measurements and the J flag is set, an
	  "OAM Problem/Delay variation unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>Y: Dyadic (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE). If the egress LSR does
	  not support Dyadic mode and the Y flag is set, an
	  "OAM Problem/Dyadic mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>K: Loopback (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE). If the egress LSR does
	  not support Loopback mode and the K flag is set, an
	  "OAM Problem/Loopback mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>
	  <t>C: Combined (1=ACTIVE, 0=NOT ACTIVE). If the egress LSR does
	  not support Combined mode and the C flag is set, an
	  "OAM Problem/Combined mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>
	</list>
	</t>
	<t>Reserved: Reserved for future specifications; set to 0 on transmission and ignored when received.</t>
	
	<section title="MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV">
	  <t>The MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV depicted below is carried as a
	  sub-TLV of the Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV.</t>
	  
	  <t>
	    <figure anchor="MPLSOAMPMLoss" title="MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV Format">
	      <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|       PM Loss Type (1)        |          Length               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OTF |T|B|              Reserved (set to all 0s)               |    
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                    Measurement Interval                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Test Interval                           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                      Loss Threshold                           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     ]]></artwork>                                             
	    </figure>                                                                                                  
	  </t>
	  
	  <t>Type: 1, the MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV.</t>
	  
	  <t>Length: Indicates the length of the parameters in octets, including Type and Length fields (20).</t>

	  <t>Origin Timestamp Format (OTF): Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field
	  described in <xref target="RFC6374"/>.  By default, it is set to IEEE 1588 version
	  1. If the egress LSR cannot support this value, an "OAM
	  Problem/Unsupported Timestamp Format" error MUST be generated.  </t>

	  <t>Configuration Flags (please refer to <xref target="RFC6374"/> for further details):
	  <list style="symbols">
	    <t>T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator. Set to 1 when
	    the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
	    traffic class (Differentiated Service Code Point (DSCP) value) and zero otherwise.  When set to 1, the
	    Differentiated Services (DS) field of the message indicates the measured traffic class. 
	    By default, it is set to 1.</t>
	    <t>B: Octet (byte) count. When set to 1, it indicates that the Counter
	    1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0, it indicates that 
	    the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts. 
	    By default, it is set to 0.</t>
	  </list>
	  </t>
	  <t>Reserved: Reserved for future specifications; set to 0 on transmission and ignored when received.</t>
	  <t>Measurement Interval: The time interval (in milliseconds) at
	  which Loss Measurement query messages MUST be
	  sent in both directions. If the egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported
	  interval. By default, it is set to 100 milliseconds as per <xref target="RFC6375"/>.</t>

	  <t>Test Interval: Test messages interval (in milliseconds) as
	  described in <xref target="RFC6374"/>.
	  By default, it is set to 10 milliseconds as per <xref target="RFC6375"/>. If
	  the egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a
	  supported interval.</t>

	  <t>Loss Threshold: The threshold value of measured lost packets per measurement over which action(s)
	  SHOULD be triggered. </t>

	</section>	

	<section title="MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV">
	  <t>The MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV depicted below is carried as a
	  sub-TLV of the Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV.</t>

	  <t>
	    <figure anchor="MPLSOAMPMDelay" title="MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV Format">
	      <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      PM Delay Type (2)        |          Length               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OTF |T|B|             Reserved (set to all 0s)                |    
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                    Measurement Interval                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Test Interval                           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                      Delay Threshold                          |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    ]]></artwork>                                             
    </figure>                                                                                                  
	  </t>

	  <t>Type: 2, the MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV.</t>
	  
	  <t>Length: Indicates the length of the parameters in octets, including Type and Length fields (20).</t>

	  <t>OTF: Origin Timestamp Format of the Origin Timestamp field
	  described in <xref target="RFC6374"/>. 
	  By default, it is set to IEEE 1588 version 1. If the egress LSR
	  cannot support this value, an "OAM Problem/Unsupported Timestamp Format" error
	  MUST be generated. </t>	
	  <t>Configuration Flags (please refer to <xref target="RFC6374"/> for further details):
	  <list style="symbols">
	    <t>T: Traffic-class-specific measurement indicator. Set to 1 when
	    the measurement operation is scoped to packets of a particular
	    traffic class (Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) value) and zero otherwise.  When set to 1, the
	    Differentiated Service (DS) field of the message indicates the measured traffic class. 
	    By default, it is set to 1.</t>
	    <t>B: Octet (byte) count. When set to 1, it indicates that the Counter
	    1-4 fields represent octet counts.  When set to 0, it indicates that 
	    the Counter 1-4 fields represent packet counts. 
	    By default, it is set to 0.</t>
	  </list>
	  </t>
	  <t>Reserved: Reserved for future specifications; set to 0 on transmission and ignored when received.</t>

	  <t>Measurement Interval: The time interval (in milliseconds) at
	  which Delay Measurement query messages MUST be
	  sent on both directions. If the egress LSR cannot support the value,
	  it SHOULD reply with a supported interval. By
	  default, it is set to 1000 milliseconds as per <xref target="RFC6375"/>.</t>

	  <t>Test Interval: Test messages interval (in milliseconds) as
	  described in <xref target="RFC6374"/>.
	  By default, it is set to 10 milliseconds as per <xref target="RFC6375"/>. If
	  the egress LSR cannot support the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported interval.</t>

	  <t>Delay Threshold: The threshold value of measured two-way delay (in milliseconds) over which action(s)
	  SHOULD be triggered. </t>
	</section>
   </section>
   


    <section anchor="fms-sub-tlv" title="MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV">
	<t>The MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV depicted below is carried as a sub-TLV of
	the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV. When both working and protection paths
	are signaled, both LSPs SHOULD be signaled with identical settings of
	the E flag, T flag, and the refresh timer.</t>
	<t>
          <figure anchor="MPLSOAMFMS" title="MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV Format">
            <artwork><![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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|     MPLS OAM FMS Type (3)     |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|E|S|T|           Reserved            |      Refresh Timer      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
~                           Sub-TLVs                            ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   ]]></artwork>                                             
  </figure>                                                                                                  
	</t>

	<t>Type: 3, the MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV.</t>

	<t>Length: Indicates the TLV total length in octets, including Type and Length fields (8).</t>


	<t>FMS Signal Flags are used to enable the FMS signals at MEPs and
	the server MEPs of the links over which the LSP is forwarded. In this
	document, only the S flag pertains to server MEPs. </t>
	
	<t>The following flags are defined:
	
	<list style="symbol">
	  <t>E: Enable Alarm Indication Signal (AIS) and Lock Report (LKR) signaling 
	  as described in <xref target="RFC6427"/>. The default value is 1
	  (enabled). If the egress MEP does not support FMS signal
	  generation, an "OAM Problem/Fault management signaling unsupported" error MUST be generated. </t>
	  
	  <t>S: Indicate to a server MEP that it should transmit AIS and LKR signals on 
	  client LSPs.  The default value is 0 (disabled). If a server MEP, which is capable of
	  generating FMS messages, is for some
	  reason unable to do so for the LSP being signaled an "OAM Problem/Unable to
	  create fault management association" error MUST be generated.  </t>

	  <t>T: Set timer value, enabled by the configuration of a specific timer value. 
	  The Default value is 0 (disabled).</t>
	  
	  <t>Remaining bits: Reserved for a future specification and set to 0.</t>
	</list>
	</t>
	<t>Refresh Timer: Indicates (in seconds) the refresh timer of fault indication messages. The value MUST be
	between 1 to 20 seconds as specified for the Refresh Timer field in
	<xref target="RFC6427"/>. If the egress LSR cannot support
	the value, it SHOULD reply with a supported timer value. </t>
	
	<t>The Fault Management Signals Sub-TLV MAY include the Traffic Class Sub-TLV (<xref
	target="traffic-class-sub-tlv"/>.) If the Traffic Class Sub-TLV is present,
	the value of the TC field MUST be used as the value of the TC field of an MPLS label stack entry
	for FMS messages. If the Traffic Class Sub-TLV is absent, then
	selection of the TC value is local decision.</t>

      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="ErrorSummary" title="Summary of MPLS OAM Configuration Errors">

      <t>In addition to error values specified in <xref target="RFC7260"/>, this document
      defines the following values for the "OAM Problem" error code: </t>

	<t><list style="symbols">
	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD version, an
	  error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD Version".</t>
	  
	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD Encapsulation
	  format, an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD Encapsulation format".</t>
	  
	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support BFD Authentication and it is requested, 
	  an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/BFD Authentication unsupported".</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified BFD Authentication Type,
	  an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD Authentication Type".</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR is not able to use the specified Authentication Key ID, an
	  error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Mismatch of BFD Authentication Key ID".</t>
	  
	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified Timestamp Format,
	  an error MUST be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported Timestamp
	  Format".</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified Delay mode, an "OAM
	  Problem/Unsupported Delay Mode" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support the specified Loss mode, an "OAM
	  Problem/Unsupported Loss Mode" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support Delay variation measurements and it
	  is requested, an "OAM Problem/Delay variation unsupported" error MUST
	  be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support Dyadic mode and it is requested, an
	  "OAM Problem/Dyadic mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support Loopback mode and it is requested, an
	  "OAM Problem/Loopback mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support Combined mode and it is requested, an
	  "OAM Problem/Combined mode unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an egress LSR does not support Fault Monitoring signals and it is requested, an
	  "OAM Problem/Fault management signaling unsupported" error MUST be generated.</t>

	  <t>If an intermediate server MEP supports Fault Monitoring signals
	  but is unable to create an association
	  when requested to do so, an "OAM Problem/Unable to create fault
	  management association" error MUST be generated.</t>
	</list>
	</t>

    </section>
    
    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
 
       <section anchor="iana-mpls-oam" title="MPLS OAM Type">
<t>This document specifies the new MPLS OAM type.
      IANA has allocated a new type (3) from the
      "OAM Types" space of the "RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry". 
      </t>
   <texttable anchor="oam-mpls-type-tbl" title="MPLS OAM Type">
    <ttcol align='center'>Type</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='center'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>3</c>
    <c>MPLS OAM</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    </texttable>
      </section>     

     <section anchor="iana-mpls-oam-conf-tbl" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV">
       <t>This document specifies the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV. IANA has
      allocated a new type (33) from the OAM Sub-TLV space of the
      "RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry". 
      </t>
 
   <texttable anchor="mpls-oam-conf-tbl" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Type">
    <ttcol align='center'>Type</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='center'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>33</c>
    <c>MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    </texttable>   
      </section>

          <section anchor="iana-mpls-oam-tlv" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Types">
	<t>IANA has created an "MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Types" sub-registry in the
	"RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-TLVs carried in
	the MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV. Values from this new
	sub-registry are to be
	allocated through IETF Review except for the "Reserved for Experimental Use" range.
	This document defines the
 following types:</t>

   <texttable anchor="mpls-oam-sub-tlv-tbl" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Sub-TLV Types">
    <ttcol align='center'>Type</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='center'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>0</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>1</c>
    <c>BFD Configuration Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>2</c>
    <c>Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>3</c>
    <c>MPLS OAM FMS Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>4-65532</c>
    <c>Unassigned</c>
    <c></c>
    <c>65533-65534</c>
    <c>Reserved for Experimental Use</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>65535</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
     </texttable>   

          </section>	

          <section anchor="iana-bfd-confsub-tlv-types" title="BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Types">      
       	<t>IANA has created a "BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Types" sub-registry in the
	"RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-TLV types carried in
	the BFD Configuration Sub-TLV.  Values from this new sub-registry
	are to be
	allocated through IETF Review except for the "Reserved for Experimental Use" range.
	This document defines the following
 types:</t>

   <texttable anchor="bfd-conf-sub-tlv-tbl" title="BFD Configuration Sub-TLV Types">
    <ttcol align='center'>Type</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='center'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>0</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>1</c>
    <c>BFD Identifiers Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>2</c>
    <c>Negotiation Timer Parameters Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>3</c>
    <c>BFD Authentication Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>4</c>
    <c>Traffic Class Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>5-65532</c>
    <c>Unassigned</c>
    <c></c>
    <c>65533-65534</c>
    <c>Reserved for Experimental Use</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>65535</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
     </texttable>   

    </section>
    
     <section anchor="iana-perf-mon-tlv" title="Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV Types">
	<t>IANA has created a "Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV Type" sub-registry in the
	"RSVP-TE OAM Configuration Registry" for the sub-TLV types carried in
	the Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV.   Values from this new
	sub-registry are to be
	allocated through IETF Review except for the "Reserved for Experimental Use" range.
	This document defines the following
 types:</t>

   <texttable anchor="perf-mon-sub-tlv-tbl" title="Performance Monitoring Sub-TLV Types">
    <ttcol align='center'>Type</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='center'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>0</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>1</c>
    <c>MPLS OAM PM Loss Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>2</c>
    <c>MPLS OAM PM Delay Sub-TLV</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>3-65532</c>
    <c>Unassigned</c>
    <c></c>
    <c>65533-65534</c>
    <c>Reserved for Experimental Use</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>65535</c>
    <c>Reserved</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
     </texttable>   

   </section>

  <section anchor="iana-new-error-codes" title="New RSVP-TE Error Codes">
   <t>The following values have been assigned under the "OAM Problem" error
   code <xref target="RFC7260"/> by IETF Review process:</t>
   
    <texttable anchor="iana-new-error-codes-tbl" title="MPLS OAM Configuration Error Codes">
<?rfc subcompact="yes"?>
    <ttcol align='left'>Error Value Sub-Codes</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Description</ttcol>
    <ttcol align='left'>Reference</ttcol>
    <c>13</c>
    <c>Unsupported BFD Version</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>14</c>
    <c>Unsupported BFD Encapsulation format</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>15</c>
    <c>Unsupported BFD Authentication Type</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>16</c>
    <c>Mismatch of BFD Authentication Key ID</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>17</c>
    <c>Unsupported Timestamp Format</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>18</c>
    <c>Unsupported Delay Mode</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>19</c>
    <c>Unsupported Loss Mode</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>20</c>
    <c>Delay variation unsupported</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>21</c>
    <c>Dyadic mode unsupported</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>22</c>
    <c>Loopback mode unsupported</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>23</c>
    <c>Combined mode unsupported</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>24</c>
    <c>Fault management signaling unsupported</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
    <c>25</c>
    <c>Unable to create fault management association</c>
    <c>[RFC7487]</c>
     </texttable>   
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>

    <t>

    The "Sub-Codes - 40 OAM Problem" sub-registry is located in the "Error Codes and Globally-Defined Error Value Sub-Codes" registry.

    </t>
    </section>
    </section>
    
    <section anchor="Security" title="Security Considerations">
      <t>The signaling of OAM-related parameters and the automatic establishment
      of OAM entities introduces additional security considerations to those
      discussed in <xref target="RFC3473"/>.  In particular, a network element could be
      overloaded if an attacker were to request high frequency liveliness
      monitoring of a large number of LSPs, targeting a single network element
      as discussed in <xref target="RFC7260"/> and <xref target="RFC6060"/>.</t>
      <t>Additional discussion of security for MPLS and GMPLS protocols can be found in <xref target="RFC5920"/>.
      </t>
    </section>

  </middle>

  <back>

    <references title="Normative References">

    <reference  anchor='RFC2119' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119'>
    <front>
    <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
    <author initials='S.' surname='Bradner' fullname='S. Bradner'><organization /></author>
    <date year='1997' month='March' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='BCP' value='14'/>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='2119'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='4723'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC3473' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3473'>
    <front>
    <title>Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions</title>
    <author initials='L.' surname='Berger' fullname='L. Berger' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2003' month='January' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='3473'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='91808'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC5654' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5654'>
    <front>
    <title>Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile</title>
    <author initials='B.' surname='Niven-Jenkins' fullname='B. Niven-Jenkins' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Brungard' fullname='D. Brungard' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='M.' surname='Betts' fullname='M. Betts' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='N.' surname='Sprecher' fullname='N. Sprecher'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='S.' surname='Ueno' fullname='S. Ueno'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2009' month='September' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5654'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='69999'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC5860' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5860'>
    <front>
    <title>Requirements for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS Transport Networks</title>
    <author initials='M.' surname='Vigoureux' fullname='M. Vigoureux' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Ward' fullname='D. Ward' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='M.' surname='Betts' fullname='M. Betts' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2010' month='May' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5860'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='36951'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC5880' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880'>
    <front>
    <title>Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)</title>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Katz' fullname='D. Katz'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Ward' fullname='D. Ward'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2010' month='June' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5880'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='110279'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC5884' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5884'>
    <front>
    <title>Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)</title>
    <author initials='R.' surname='Aggarwal' fullname='R. Aggarwal'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='K.' surname='Kompella' fullname='K. Kompella'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='T.' surname='Nadeau' fullname='T. Nadeau'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='G.' surname='Swallow' fullname='G. Swallow'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2010' month='June' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5884'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='27734'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6370' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6370'>
    <front>
    <title>MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers</title>
    <author initials='M.' surname='Bocci' fullname='M. Bocci'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='G.' surname='Swallow' fullname='G. Swallow'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='E.' surname='Gray' fullname='E. Gray'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='September' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6370'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='35294'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6374' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6374'>
    <front>
    <title>Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks</title>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Frost' fullname='D. Frost'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='S.' surname='Bryant' fullname='S. Bryant'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='September' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6374'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='123462'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6427' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6427'>
    <front>
    <title>MPLS Fault Management Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)</title>
    <author initials='G.' surname='Swallow' fullname='G. Swallow' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='A.' surname='Fulignoli' fullname='A. Fulignoli' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='M.' surname='Vigoureux' fullname='M. Vigoureux' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='S.' surname='Boutros' fullname='S. Boutros'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Ward' fullname='D. Ward'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='November' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6427'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='34069'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6428' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6428'>
    <front>
    <title>Proactive Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check, and Remote Defect Indication for the MPLS Transport Profile</title>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Allan' fullname='D. Allan' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='G.' surname='Swallow Ed.' fullname='G. Swallow Ed.'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='J.' surname='Drake Ed.' fullname='J. Drake Ed.'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='November' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6428'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='44293'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6060' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6060'>
    <front>
    <title>Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Control of Ethernet Provider Backbone Traffic Engineering (PBB-TE)</title>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Fedyk' fullname='D. Fedyk'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='H.' surname='Shah' fullname='H. Shah'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='N.' surname='Bitar' fullname='N. Bitar'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='A.' surname='Takacs' fullname='A. Takacs'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='March' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6060'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='45600'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC7260' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7260'>
    <front>
    <title>GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Configuration</title>
    <author initials='A.' surname='Takacs' fullname='A. Takacs'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Fedyk' fullname='D. Fedyk'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='J.' surname='He' fullname='J. He'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2014' month='June' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='7260'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='58030'/>
    </reference>
     
  </references>

    <references title="Informative References">

    <reference  anchor='RFC6371' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6371'>
    <front>
    <title>Operations, Administration, and Maintenance Framework for MPLS-Based Transport Networks</title>
    <author initials='I.' surname='Busi' fullname='I. Busi' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Allan' fullname='D. Allan' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='September' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6371'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='142857'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC6375' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6375'>
    <front>
    <title>A Packet Loss and Delay Measurement Profile for MPLS-Based Transport Networks</title>
    <author initials='D.' surname='Frost' fullname='D. Frost' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='S.' surname='Bryant' fullname='S. Bryant' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2011' month='September' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6375'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='10026'/>
    </reference>

    <reference  anchor='RFC5920' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5920'>
    <front>
    <title>Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks</title>
    <author initials='L.' surname='Fang' fullname='L. Fang' role='editor'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2010' month='July' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5920'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='152830'/>
    </reference> 

    <reference  anchor='RFC5462' target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5462'>
    <front>
    <title>Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: &quot;EXP&quot; Field Renamed to &quot;Traffic Class&quot; Field</title>
    <author initials='L.' surname='Andersson' fullname='L. Andersson'><organization /></author>
    <author initials='R.' surname='Asati' fullname='R. Asati'><organization /></author>
    <date year='2009' month='February' />
    </front>
    <seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5462'/>
    <format type='ASCII' octets='19372'/>
    </reference>     


<!-- draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf: I-D Exists -->
      <reference anchor="LSP-PING-CONF">
        <front>
          <title>Configuration of Proactive Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
    (OAM) Functions for MPLS-based Transport Networks using LSP Ping</title>

          <author initials="E" surname="Bellagamba">
            <organization>Ericsson</organization>
          </author>

          <author initials="G" surname="Mirsky">
            <organization>Ericsson</organization>
          </author>

          <author initials="L" surname="Andersson">
            <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
          </author>

          <author initials="P" surname="Skoldstrom">
            <organization>Acreo</organization>
          </author>

          <author initials="D" surname="Ward">
            <organization>Cisco</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="J" surname="Drake">
            <organization>Juniper</organization>
          </author>


          <date month="January" year="2015" />
        </front>
	<seriesInfo name="Work in Progress,"
		    value="draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-09" />

      </reference>
    </references>

<section title="Acknowledgements" numbered="no">
<t>The authors would like to thank David Allan, Lou Berger, Annamaria
   Fulignoli, Eric Gray, Andras Kern, David Jocha, and David Sinicrope
   for their useful comments.</t>
</section>


<section title="Contributors" numbered="no">
<t>This document is the result of a large team of authors and
   contributors.  The following is a list of the contributors:</t>

   <t>John Drake</t>

   <t>Benoit Tremblay</t>
</section>
  </back>
</rfc>
