Extended OAM to Carry In-situ OAM Capabilities
draft-xiao-ippm-ioam-conf-state-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-12-18
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
IPPM Working Group                                                X. Min
Internet-Draft                                                 G. Mirsky
Intended status: Standards Track                                     ZTE
Expires: June 21, 2019                                             L. Bo
                                                           China Telecom
                                                       December 18, 2018

             Extended OAM to Carry In-situ OAM Capabilities
                   draft-xiao-ippm-ioam-conf-state-02

Abstract

   This document describes an extension for OAM packets including MPLS
   LSP Ping/Traceroute [RFC8029], ICMP Ping/Traceroute for SRv6
   [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam] and SFC Ping/Traceroute
   [I-D.ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam], which can be used within an IOAM
   domain, allowing the IOAM encapsulating node to acquire IOAM
   capabilities of each IOAM transit node and/or IOAM decapsulating node
   easily and dynamically.

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 June 21, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  IOAM Capabilities Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  IOAM Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.1.1.  IOAM Tracing Capabilities sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.2.  IOAM Proof of Transit Capabilities sub-TLV  . . . . .   6
       2.1.3.  IOAM Edge-to-Edge Capabilities sub-TLV  . . . . . . .   7
       2.1.4.  IOAM End-of-Domain sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   3.  Operational Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   The Data Fields for In-situ OAM (IOAM) [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
   defines data fields for IOAM which records OAM information within the
   packet while the packet traverses a particular network domain, which
   is called an IOAM domain.  IOAM can be used to complement OAM
   mechanisms based on, e.g., ICMP or other types of probe packets, and
   IOAM mechanisms can be leveraged where mechanisms using, e.g., ICMP
   do not apply or do not offer the desired results.

   As specified in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data], within the IOAM-domain,
   the IOAM data may be updated by network nodes that the packet
   traverses.  The device which adds an IOAM data container to the
   packet to capture IOAM data is called the "IOAM encapsulating node",
   whereas the device which removes the IOAM data container is referred
   to as the "IOAM decapsulating node".  Nodes within the domain which
   are aware of IOAM data and read and/or write or process the IOAM data
   are called "IOAM transit nodes".  Both the IOAM encapsulating node
   and the decapsulating node are referred to as domain edge devices,
   which can be hosts or network devices.

   In order to add accurate IOAM data container to the packet, the IOAM
   encapsulating node needs to know IOAM capabilities at the IOAM
   transit nodes and/or the IOAM decapsulating node in a whole, e.g.,

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   how many IOAM transit nodes will add tracing data and what kinds of
   data fields will be added.  This document describes an extension for
   OAM packets including MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute [RFC8029], ICMP Ping/
   Traceroute for SRv6 [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam] and SFC Ping/Traceroute
   [I-D.ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam], which can be used within an IOAM
   domain, allowing the IOAM encapsulating node to acquire IOAM
   capabilities of each IOAM transit node and/or IOAM decapsulating node
   easily and dynamically.

1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document

1.1.1.  Terminology

   E2E: Edge to Edge

   ICMP: Internet Control Message Protocol

   IOAM: In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance

   LSP: Label Switched Path

   MPLS: Multi-Protocol Label Switching

   MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit

   NTP: Network Time Protocol

   OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance

   POSIX: Portable Operating System Interface

   POT: Proof of Transit

   PTP: Precision Time Protocol

   SFC: Service Function Chain

   SRv6: Segment Routing with IPv6 Data plane

   TTL: Time to Live

1.1.2.  Requirements Language

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

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

2.  IOAM Capabilities Formats

2.1.  IOAM Capabilities TLV

   IOAM Capabilities uses TLV (Type-Length-Value tuple) which have the
   following format:

    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 = IOAM Capabilities   |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |      Namespace-IDs Length     |        Sub-TLVs Length        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                                                               .
   .                    List of Namespace-IDs                      .
   .                                                               .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                                                               .
   .                      List of Sub-TLVs                         .
   .                                                               .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Figure 1: IOAM Capabilities TLV

   When this TLV is present in the echo request sent by an IOAM
   encapsulating node, it means that the IOAM encapsulating node
   requests the receiving node to reply with its IOAM capabilities.  If
   there is no IOAM capabilities to be reported by the receiving node,
   then this TLV SHOULD be ignored by the receiving node.  List of
   Namespace-IDs MAY be included in this TLV of echo request, it means
   that the IOAM encapsulating node requests only the IOAM capabilities
   which matchs one of the Namespace-IDs.  The Namespace-ID has the same
   definition as what's specified in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

   When this TLV is present in the echo reply sent by an IOAM transit
   node and/or an IOAM decapsulating node, it means that IOAM function
   is enabled at this node and this TLV contains IOAM capabilities of
   the sender.  List of Namespace-IDs MAY be included in this TLV of
   echo reply.  It means that the IOAM capabilities included in this TLV
   match one of the Namespace-IDs.  If a List of Namespace-IDs is
   present in the TLV of echo request, then the List of Namespace-IDs in
   the TLV of echo reply MUST be a subset of that one.  List of Sub-TLVs
   which contain the IOAM capabilities SHOULD be included in this TLV of
   the echo reply.  Note that the IOAM encapsulating node or the IOAM
   decapsulating node can also be an IOAM transit node.

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   Type is set to the value which indicates that it's an IOAM
   Capabilities TLV.

   Length is the length of the TLV's Value field in octets, Namespace-
   IDs Length is the Length of the List of Namespace-IDs field in
   octets, Sub-TLVs Length is the length of the List of Sub-TLVs field
   in octets.

   Value field of this TLV or any Sub-TLV is zero padded to align to a
   4-octet boundary.  Based on the data fields for IOAM specified in
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data], four kinds of Sub-TLVs are defined in this
   document, and in an IOAM Capabilities TLV the same kind of Sub-TLV
   can appear more times than one with different Namespace-ID.

2.1.1.  IOAM Tracing Capabilities sub-TLV

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Sub-type = Tracing Conf Data  |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |               IOAM-Trace-Type                 |F|   Reserved  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Namespace-ID          |         Egress_if_MTU         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Egress_if_id (short or wide format)         ......           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                Figure 2: IOAM Tracing Capabilities Sub-TLV

   When this sub-TLV is present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV, it means
   that the sending node is an IOAM transit node and IOAM tracing
   function is enabled at this IOAM transit node.

   Sub-type is set to the value which indicates that it's an IOAM
   Tracing Capabilities sub-TLV.

   Length is the length of the sub-TLV's Value field in octets, if
   Egress_if_id is in the short format which is 16 bits long, it MUST be
   set to 10, and if Egress_if_id is in the wide format which is 32 bits
   long, it MUST be set to 12.

   IOAM-Trace-Type field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.2 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   F bit is specified to indicate whether the pre-allocated trace or
   incremental trace is enabled.  F bit is set to 1 when pre-allocated
   trace is enabled and set to 0 when the incremental trace is enabled.
   The meaning and difference of pre-allocated trace and incremental
   trace are described in section 4.1 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].  If
   the IOAM encapsulating node receives different F bit value from
   different IOAM transit node, then the IOAM encapsulating node will
   reserve data space in the IOAM header for the IOAM transit node that
   set F bit to 1, and the IOAM encapsulating node won't reserve data
   space in the IOAM header for the IOAM transit node that set F bit to
   0.

   Reserved field is reserved for future use and MUST be set to zero.

   Namespace-ID field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.2 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

   Egress_if_MTU field has 16 bits and specifies the MTU of the egress
   interface out of which the sending node would forward the received
   echo request.

   Egress_if_id field has 16 bits (in short format) or 32 bits (in wide
   format) and specifies the identifier of the egress interface out of
   which the sending node would forward the received echo request.

2.1.2.  IOAM Proof of Transit Capabilities sub-TLV

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Sub-type = POT Conf Data    |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Namespace-ID           | IOAM-POT-Type |P|SoR|Reserved |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 3: IOAM Proof of Transit Capabilities Sub-TLV

   When this sub-TLV is present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV, it means
   that the sending node is an IOAM transit node and IOAM proof of
   transit function is enabled at this IOAM transit node.

   Sub-type is set to the value which indicates that it's an IOAM Proof
   of Transit Capabilities sub-TLV.

   Length is the length of the sub-TLV's Value field in octets, and MUST
   be set to 4.

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   Namespace-ID field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.3 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

   IOAM-POT-Type field and P bit have the same definition as what's
   specified in section 4.3 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].  If the IOAM
   encapsulating node receives IOAM-POT-Type and/or P bit values from an
   IOAM transit node that are different from its own, then the IOAM
   encapsulating node MAY choose to abandon the proof of transit
   function or to select one kind of IOAM-POT-Type and P bit, it's based
   on the policy applied to the IOAM encapsulating node.

   SoR field has two bits which means the size of "Random" and
   "Cumulative" data, which are specified in section 4.3 of
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].  This document defines SoR as follow:

      0b00 means 64-bit "Random" and 64-bit "Cumulative" data.

      0b01~0b11: Reserved for future standardization

   Reserved field is reserved for future use and MUST be set to zero.

2.1.3.  IOAM Edge-to-Edge Capabilities sub-TLV

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Sub-type = E2E Conf Data    |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Namespace-ID           |         IOAM-E2E-Type         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |TSF|TSL|       Reserved        |          Must Be Zero         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Figure 4: IOAM Edge-to-Edge Capabilities Sub-TLV

   When this sub-TLV is present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV, it means
   that the sending node is an IOAM decapsulating node and IOAM edge-to-
   edge function is enabled at this IOAM decapsulating node.  That is to
   say, if the IOAM encapsulating node receives this sub-TLV, the IOAM
   encapsulating node can determine that the node which sends this sub-
   TLV is an IOAM decapsulating node.

   Sub-type is set to the value which indicates that it's an IOAM Edge-
   to-Edge Capabilities sub-TLV.

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   Length is the length of the sub-TLV's Value field in octets, and MUST
   be set to 8.

   Namespace-ID field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.4 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

   IOAM-E2E-Type field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.4 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

   TSF field specifies the timestamp format used by the sending node.
   This document defines TSF as follow:

      0b00: PTP timestamp format

      0b01: NTP timestamp format

      0b10: POSIX timestamp format

      0b11: Reserved for future standardization

   TSL field specifies the timestamp length used by the sending node.
   This document defines TSL as follow:

      When TSF field is set to 0b00 which indicates PTP timestamp
      format:

      0b00: 64-bit PTPv1 timestamp as defined in IEEE1588-2008
      [IEEE1588v2]

      0b01: 80-bit PTPv2 timestamp as defined in IEEE1588-2008
      [IEEE1588v2]

      0b10~0b11: Reserved for future standardization

      When TSF field is set to 0b01 which indicates NTP timestamp
      format:

      0b00: 32-bit NTP timestamp as defined in NTPv4 [RFC5905]

      0b01: 64-bit NTP timestamp as defined in NTPv4 [RFC5905]

      0b10: 128-bit NTP timestamp as defined in NTPv4 [RFC5905]

      0b11: Reserved for future standardization

      When TSF field is set to 0b10 or 0b11, the TSL field would be
      ignored.

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   Reserved field is reserved for future use and MUST be set to zero.

2.1.4.  IOAM End-of-Domain sub-TLV

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Sub-type = End of Domain    |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Namespace-ID           |         Must Be Zero          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                   Figure 5: IOAM End of Domain Sub-TLV

   When this sub-TLV is present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV, it means
   that the sending node is an IOAM decapsulating node.  That is to say,
   if the IOAM encapsulating node receives this sub-TLV, the IOAM
   encapsulating node can determine that the node which sends this sub-
   TLV is an IOAM decapsulating node.  When the IOAM Edge-to-Edge
   Capabilities sub-TLV is present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV sent by
   the IOAM decapsulating node, the IOAM End-of-Domain sub-TLV doesn't
   need to be present in the same IOAM Capabilities TLV, otherwise the
   End-of-Domain sub-TLV MUST be present in the IOAM Capabilities TLV
   sent by the IOAM decapsulating node.  Since both the IOAM Edge-to-
   Edge Capabilities sub-TLV and the IOAM End-of-Domain sub-TLV can be
   used to indicate that the sending node is an IOAM decapsulating node,
   it's recommended to include only the IOAM Edge-to-Edge Capabilities
   sub-TLV if IOAM edge-to-edge function is enabled at this IOAM
   decapsulating node.

   Length is the length of the sub-TLV's Value field in octets, and MUST
   be set to 4.

   Namespace-ID field has the same definition as what's specified in
   section 4.4 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].

3.  Operational Guide

   Once the IOAM encapsulating node is triggered to acquire IOAM
   capabilities of each IOAM transit node and/or IOAM decapsulating
   node, the IOAM encapsulating node will send a batch of echo requests
   that include the IOAM Capabilities TLV, first with TTL equal to 1 to
   reach the nearest node which may be an IOAM transit node or not, then
   with TTL equal to 2 to reach the second nearest node which also may
   be an IOAM transit node or not, on the analogy of this to increase 1
   to TTL every time the IOAM encapsulating node sends a new echo

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   request, until the IOAM encapsulating node receives echo reply sent
   by the IOAM decapsulating node, which must contain the IOAM
   Capabilities TLV including the IOAM Edge-to-Edge Capabilities sub-TLV
   or the IOAM End-of-Domain sub-TLV.

   The IOAM encapsulating node may be triggered by the device
   administrator, the network management, the network controller, or
   even the live user traffic, and the specific triggering mechanisms
   are outside the scope of this document.

   Each IOAM transit node and/or IOAM decapsulating node that receives
   an echo request containing the IOAM Capabilities TLV will send an
   echo reply to the IOAM encapsulating node, and within the echo reply,
   there must be an IOAM Capabilities TLV containing one or more sub-
   TLVs.  The IOAM Capabilities TLV contained in the echo request would
   be ignored by the receiving node that is unaware of IOAM.

4.  Security Considerations

   Knowledge of the state of the IOAM domain may be considered
   confidential.  Implementations SHOULD provide a means of filtering
   the addresses to which echo reply messages, MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute,
   ICMP Ping/Traceroute for SRv6 or SFC Ping/Traceroute, may be sent.

5.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

6.  Acknowledgements

   The authors appreciate the f2f discussion with Frank Brockners on
   this document.

7.  Normative References

   [I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam]
              Ali, Z., Filsfils, C., Kumar, N., Pignataro, C.,
              faiqbal@cisco.com, f., Gandhi, R., Leddy, J., Matsushima,
              S., Raszuk, R., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Dawra, G.,
              Peirens, B., Chen, M., and G. Naik, "Operations,
              Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in Segment Routing
              Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)", draft-ali-spring-
              srv6-oam-02 (work in progress), October 2018.

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
              Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H.,
              Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Mozes, D., Lapukhov,
              P., Chang, R., daniel.bernier@bell.ca, d., and J. Lemon,
              "Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-
              data-04 (work in progress), October 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam]
              Mirsky, G., Meng, W., Khasnabish, B., and C. Wang, "Active
              OAM for Service Function Chains in Networks", draft-ietf-
              sfc-multi-layer-oam-00 (work in progress), November 2018.

   [IEEE1588v2]
              Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "IEEE
              Std 1588-2008 - IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock
              Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and
              Control Systems",  IEEE Std 1588-2008, 2008,
              <http://standards.ieee.org/findstds/
              standard/1588-2008.html>.

   [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>.

   [RFC5905]  Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
              "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
              Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>.

   [RFC8029]  Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N.,
              Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label
              Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8029>.

   [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>.

Authors' Addresses

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft       Extended OAM to Carry IOAM Capa       December 2018

   Xiao Min
   ZTE
   Nanjing
   China

   Phone: +86 25 88016574
   Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn

   Greg Mirsky
   ZTE
   USA

   Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com

   Lei Bo
   China Telecom
   Beijing
   China

   Phone: +86 10 50902903
   Email: leibo.bri@chinatelecom.cn

Min, et al.               Expires June 21, 2019                [Page 12]