Signaling MNA Capability Using IGP and BGP-LS
draft-chen-lsr-mpls-mna-capability-04
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Ran Chen , Detao Zhao | ||
| Last updated | 2026-01-27 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-chen-lsr-mpls-mna-capability-04
LSR Working Group R. Chen
Internet-Draft D. Zhao
Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corporation
Expires: 31 July 2026 27 January 2026
Signaling MNA Capability Using IGP and BGP-LS
draft-chen-lsr-mpls-mna-capability-04
Abstract
This document defines a mechanism to signal MNA Capability using IGP
and Border Gateway Protocol-Link State(BGP-LS).
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 31 July 2026.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft MNA Capability advertisement January 2026
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Advertising MNA Using IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Advertising MNA Using OSPF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Signaling MNA in BGP-LS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
[RFC9789] describes the architectural framework for MPLS Network
Action (MNA) technologies.MNA technologies are used to indicate
actions for Label Switched Paths (LSPs) and/or MPLS packets and to
transfer data needed for these actions.The specific encoding
mechanisms and header formats for these actions are defined in
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr].
Building upon these specifications, [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]
and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ioam] specify the mechanisms for carrying
Network Resource Partition (NRP) Selectors and In-situ OAM (IOAM)
data fields, respectively, using MPLS Network Actions.
The ingress node /Controller should obtain the network action of the
nodes within the MNA infrastructure, which ensure that the
encapsulated data packets by the ingress node can be correctly parsed
by the on-path nodes. Specifically, while intermediate nodes can
skip unsupported actions, the ingress node need to know whether the
decapsulating node is capable of parsing and removing the MNA-related
headers (e.g., NRP or IOAM data fields), thereby avoiding potential
packet drops or forwarding errors
This document defines how the ingress node knows of the network
action all the on-path nodes within the MNA infrastructure. It
defines a mechanism to signal the MPLS Network actions(MNA) using IGP
and BGP-LS.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft MNA Capability advertisement January 2026
2. Advertising MNA Using IS-IS
This section defines the MNA-Capabilities Sub-TLV that are inserted
into the IS-IS Router Capability that is defined in [RFC7981].
The format of the MNA-Capabilities Sub-TLV is:
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 | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |P|I|C|N|S|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1. MNA-Capabilities Sub-TLV
where:
Type: TBD1.
Length: 4.
Flags: 4 octet of flags. The following are defined:
* S: 13-bit NRP Selector flag. If set, then the router is capable
of processing 13-bit NRP Selector (NRPS13) (as defined in
Section 2.1 of [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]) on all
interfaces.
* N: 20-bit NRP Selector (NRPS20) flag. If set, then the router is
capable of processing 20-bit NRP Selector (NRPS13)(as defined in
Section 2.2 of [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]) on all
interfaces.
* C: 20-bit Entropy and NRP Selector (ENRPS20) flag. If set, then
the router is capable of processing 20-bit Entropy and NRP
Selector (ENRPS20) (as defined in Section 2.3 of
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]) on all interfaces.
* I: IOAM ISD flag. If set, it indicates that the router is capable
of processing the IOAM option encoded as In-Stack Data (ISD) (as
defined in Section 4.2 of [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ioam]) on all
interfaces.
* P: IOAM PSD flag. If set, it indicates that the router is capable
of processing the IOAM option carried in the PSD (as defined in
Section 4.1 of [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ioam]) on all interfaces.
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft MNA Capability advertisement January 2026
The TLVs defined in this section are applicable to both OSPFv2,
OSPFv3 and BGP-LS.
3. Advertising MNA Using OSPF
This section defines the MNA-Capabilities TLV that are inserted into
the Router Information Opaque LSA（for OSPFv2）and OSPFv3 Router
Information Opaque LSA（for OSPFv3）(defined in [RFC7770]). The format
of the MNA-Capabilities TLV is the same as section 2.
4. Signaling MNA in BGP-LS
The IGP extensions defined in this document can be advertised via
BGP-LS (distribution of Link-State and Traffic Engineering
information using BGP) [RFC7752] using existing BGP-LS TLVs.
This section defines the following Node Attribute TLV:
+============+==============================+
| Type | Description |
+============+==============================+
| TBD | the MNA-Capabilities TLV |
+------------+------------------------------+
5. Acknowledgements
TBD.
6. IANA Considerations
TBD.
7. Security Considerations
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the IS-IS, OSPFv2 , OSPFv3 and BGP security model. See
Section 5 of [RFC7981] for a discussion of IS-IS security, Section 5
of [RFC7684] for a discussion of OSPFv2 TLV-encoding considerations,
Section 7 of [RFC8362] for a discussion of OSPFv3 security and
Section 8 of [RFC7752] for a discussion of BGP-LS security.
8. Normative References
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft MNA Capability advertisement January 2026
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr]
Rajamanickam, J., Gandhi, R., Zigler, R., Song, H., and K.
Kompella, "MPLS Network Action (MNA) Sub-Stack
Specification including In-Stack Network Actions and
Data", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-hdr-18, 13 January 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-hdr-18>.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-ioam]
Gandhi, R., Mirsky, G., Li, T., Song, H., and B. Wen,
"Supporting In Situ Operations, Administration and
Maintenance Using MPLS Network Actions", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-ioam-04, 20 November
2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
mpls-mna-ioam-04>.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector]
Li, T., Beeram, V. P., Drake, J., Saad, T., and I. Meilik,
"MPLS Network Actions for Network Resource Partition
Selector", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
mpls-mna-nrp-selector-03, 23 December 2025,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-nrp-selector-03>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W.,
Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute
Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
[RFC7770] Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and
S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional
Router Capabilities", RFC 7770, DOI 10.17487/RFC7770,
February 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7770>.
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft MNA Capability advertisement January 2026
[RFC7981] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions
for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7981>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8362] Lindem, A., Roy, A., Goethals, D., Reddy Vallem, V., and
F. Baker, "OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA)
Extensibility", RFC 8362, DOI 10.17487/RFC8362, April
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362>.
[RFC9789] Andersson, L., Bryant, S., Bocci, M., and T. Li, "MPLS
Network Actions (MNAs) Framework", RFC 9789,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9789, July 2025,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9789>.
Authors' Addresses
Ran Chen
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Email: chen.ran@zte.com.cn
Detao Zhao
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Email: zhao.detao@zte.com.cn
Chen & Zhao Expires 31 July 2026 [Page 6]