rfc9571v2.txt | rfc9571.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
skipping to change at line 73 ¶ | skipping to change at line 73 ¶ | |||
4. RFC 6374-Based Single Packet Delay Measurement Using SFL | 4. RFC 6374-Based Single Packet Delay Measurement Using SFL | |||
5. Data Service Packet Delay Measurement | 5. Data Service Packet Delay Measurement | |||
6. Some Simplifying Rules | 6. Some Simplifying Rules | |||
7. Multiple Packet Delay Characteristics | 7. Multiple Packet Delay Characteristics | |||
7.1. Method 1: Time Buckets | 7.1. Method 1: Time Buckets | |||
7.2. Method 2: Classic Standard Deviation | 7.2. Method 2: Classic Standard Deviation | |||
7.2.1. Multi-packet Delay Measurement Message Format | 7.2.1. Multi-packet Delay Measurement Message Format | |||
7.3. Per-Packet Delay Measurement | 7.3. Per-Packet Delay Measurement | |||
7.4. Average Delay | 7.4. Average Delay | |||
8. Sampled Measurement | 8. Sampled Measurement | |||
9. Carrying RFC 6374 Packets over an LSP Using an SFL | 9. Carrying Packets over an LSP Using an SFL | |||
9.1. Extending RFC 6374 with SFL TLV | 9.1. Extending RFC 6374 with SFL TLV | |||
10. RFC 6374-Based Combined Loss/Delay Measurement Using SFL | 10. RFC 6374-Based Combined Loss/Delay Measurement Using SFL | |||
11. Privacy Considerations | 11. Privacy Considerations | |||
12. Security Considerations | 12. Security Considerations | |||
13. IANA Considerations | 13. IANA Considerations | |||
13.1. Allocation of MPLS Generalized Associated Channel (G-ACh) | 13.1. Allocation of MPLS Generalized Associated Channel (G-ACh) | |||
Types | Types | |||
13.2. Allocation of MPLS Loss/Delay TLV Object | 13.2. Allocation of MPLS Loss/Delay TLV Object | |||
14. References | 14. References | |||
14.1. Normative References | 14.1. Normative References | |||
skipping to change at line 148 ¶ | skipping to change at line 148 ¶ | |||
some source-specific information into the packet to identify packet | some source-specific information into the packet to identify packet | |||
batches from a specific source. | batches from a specific source. | |||
[RFC8957] describes a method of encoding per-flow instructions in an | [RFC8957] describes a method of encoding per-flow instructions in an | |||
MPLS label stack using a technique called Synonymous Flow Labels | MPLS label stack using a technique called Synonymous Flow Labels | |||
(SFLs), in which labels that mimic the behavior of other labels | (SFLs), in which labels that mimic the behavior of other labels | |||
provide the packet batch identifiers and enable the per-batch packet | provide the packet batch identifiers and enable the per-batch packet | |||
accounting. This memo specifies how SFLs are used to perform packet | accounting. This memo specifies how SFLs are used to perform packet | |||
loss and delay measurements as described in [RFC6374]. | loss and delay measurements as described in [RFC6374]. | |||
When the terms "Query," "packet," or "message" are used in this | When the terms "performance measurement method," "Query," "packet," | |||
document, they refer to a Query, packet, or message as specified in | or "message" are used in this document, they refer to a performance | |||
measurement method, Query, packet, or message as specified in | ||||
[RFC6374]. | [RFC6374]. | |||
2. Requirements Language | 2. Requirements Language | |||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | |||
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | |||
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | |||
capitals, as shown here. | capitals, as shown here. | |||
3. RFC 6374-Based Packet Loss Measurement Using SFL | 3. RFC 6374-Based Packet Loss Measurement Using SFL | |||
The data service packets of the flow being instrumented are grouped | The data service packets of the flow being instrumented are grouped | |||
into batches, and all the packets within a batch are marked with the | into batches, and all the packets within a batch are marked with the | |||
SFL [RFC8372] corresponding to that batch. The sender counts the | SFL [RFC8372] corresponding to that batch. The sender counts the | |||
number of packets in the batch. When the batch has completed and the | number of packets in the batch. When the batch has completed and the | |||
sender is confident that all of the packets in that batch will have | sender is confident that all of the packets in that batch will have | |||
been received, the sender issues an [RFC6374] Query message to | been received, the sender issues a Query message to determine the | |||
determine the number actually received and hence the number of | number actually received and hence the number of packets lost. The | |||
packets lost. The [RFC6374] Query message is sent using the same SFL | Query message is sent using the same SFL as the corresponding batch | |||
as the corresponding batch of data service packets. The format of | of data service packets. The format of the Query and Response | |||
the Query and Response packets is described in Section 9. | packets is described in Section 9. | |||
4. RFC 6374-Based Single Packet Delay Measurement Using SFL | 4. RFC 6374-Based Single Packet Delay Measurement Using SFL | |||
[RFC6374] describes how to measure the packet delay by measuring the | [RFC6374] describes how to measure the packet delay by measuring the | |||
transit time of an [RFC6374] packet over an LSP. Such a packet may | transit time of a packet over an LSP. Such a packet may not need to | |||
not need to be carried over an SFL since the delay over a particular | be carried over an SFL since the delay over a particular LSP should | |||
LSP should be a function of the Traffic Class (TC) bits. | be a function of the Traffic Class (TC) bits. | |||
However, where SFLs are being used to monitor packet loss or where | However, where SFLs are being used to monitor packet loss or where | |||
label-inferred scheduling is used [RFC3270], then the SFL would be | label-inferred scheduling is used [RFC3270], then the SFL would be | |||
REQUIRED to ensure that the [RFC6374] packet that was being used as a | REQUIRED to ensure that the packet that was being used as a proxy for | |||
proxy for a data service packet experienced a representative delay. | a data service packet experienced a representative delay. The format | |||
The format of an [RFC6374] packet carried over the LSP using an SFL | of a packet carried over the LSP using an SFL is shown in Section 9. | |||
is shown in Section 9. | ||||
5. Data Service Packet Delay Measurement | 5. Data Service Packet Delay Measurement | |||
Where it is desired to more thoroughly instrument a packet flow and | Where it is desired to more thoroughly instrument a packet flow and | |||
to determine the delay of a number of packets, it is undesirable to | to determine the delay of a number of packets, it is undesirable to | |||
send a large number of [RFC6374] packets acting as proxy data service | send a large number of packets acting as proxy data service packets | |||
packets (see Section 4). A method of directly measuring the delay | (see Section 4). A method of directly measuring the delay | |||
characteristics of a batch of packets is therefore needed. | characteristics of a batch of packets is therefore needed. | |||
Given the long intervals over which it is necessary to measure packet | Given the long intervals over which it is necessary to measure packet | |||
loss, it is not necessarily the case that the batch times for the two | loss, it is not necessarily the case that the batch times for the two | |||
measurement types would be identical. Thus, we use a technique that | measurement types would be identical. Thus, we use a technique that | |||
permits the two measurements to be made concurrently and yet | permits the two measurements to be made concurrently and yet | |||
relatively independently from each other. The notion that they are | relatively independently from each other. The notion that they are | |||
relatively independent arises from the potential for the two batches | relatively independent arises from the potential for the two batches | |||
to overlap in time, in which case either the delay batch time will | to overlap in time, in which case either the delay batch time will | |||
need to be cut short or the loss time will need to be extended to | need to be cut short or the loss time will need to be extended to | |||
skipping to change at line 229 ¶ | skipping to change at line 229 ¶ | |||
(Case 4) AACDCDCDAABBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBB | (Case 4) AACDCDCDAABBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBB | |||
A case of multiple delay measurements within a packet loss | A case of multiple delay measurements within a packet loss | |||
measurement | measurement | |||
where | where | |||
A and B are packets where loss is being measured. | A and B are packets where loss is being measured. | |||
C and D are packets where loss and delay are being measured. | C and D are packets where loss and delay are being measured. | |||
Figure 1: RFC 6734 Query Packet with SFL | Figure 1: Query Packet with SFL | |||
In Case 1, we show where loss measurement alone is being carried out | In Case 1, we show where loss measurement alone is being carried out | |||
on the flow under analysis. For illustrative purposes, consider that | on the flow under analysis. For illustrative purposes, consider that | |||
10 packets are used in each flow in the time interval being analyzed. | 10 packets are used in each flow in the time interval being analyzed. | |||
Now consider Case 2, where a small batch of packets need to be | Now consider Case 2, where a small batch of packets need to be | |||
analyzed for delay. These are marked with a different SFL type, | analyzed for delay. These are marked with a different SFL type, | |||
indicating that they are to be monitored for both loss and delay. | indicating that they are to be monitored for both loss and delay. | |||
The SFL=A indicates loss batch A, and SFL=D indicates a batch of | The SFL=A indicates loss batch A, and SFL=D indicates a batch of | |||
packets that are to be instrumented for delay, but SFL D is | packets that are to be instrumented for delay, but SFL D is | |||
synonymous with SFL A, which in turn is synonymous with the | synonymous with SFL A, which in turn is synonymous with the | |||
underlying Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC). Thus, a packet marked | underlying Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC). Thus, a packet marked | |||
"D" will be accumulated into the A loss batch, into the delay | "D" will be accumulated into the A loss batch, into the delay | |||
statistics, and will be forwarded as normal. Whether the packet is | statistics, and will be forwarded as normal. Whether the packet is | |||
actually counted twice (for loss and delay) or whether the two | actually counted twice (for loss and delay) or whether the two | |||
counters are reconciled during reporting is a local matter. | counters are reconciled during reporting is a local matter. | |||
Now consider Case 3, where a small batch of packets is marked for | Now consider Case 3, where a small batch of packets is marked for | |||
delay across a loss batch boundary. These packets need to be | delay across a loss batch boundary. These packets need to be | |||
considered as a part of batch A or a part of batch B, and any | considered as a part of batch A or a part of batch B, and any Query | |||
[RFC6374] Query needs to take place after all packets A or D | needs to take place after all packets A or D (whichever option is | |||
(whichever option is chosen) have arrived at the receiving Label | chosen) have arrived at the receiving Label Switching Router (LSR). | |||
Switching Router (LSR). | ||||
Now consider Case 4. Here, we have a case where it is required to | Now consider Case 4. Here, we have a case where it is required to | |||
take a number of delay measurements within a batch of packets that we | take a number of delay measurements within a batch of packets that we | |||
are measuring for loss. To do this, we need two SFLs for delay (C | are measuring for loss. To do this, we need two SFLs for delay (C | |||
and D) and alternate between them (on a delay-batch-by-delay-batch | and D) and alternate between them (on a delay-batch-by-delay-batch | |||
basis) for the purposes of measuring the delay characteristics of the | basis) for the purposes of measuring the delay characteristics of the | |||
different batches of packets. | different batches of packets. | |||
6. Some Simplifying Rules | 6. Some Simplifying Rules | |||
skipping to change at line 349 ¶ | skipping to change at line 348 ¶ | |||
| QTF | RTF | RPTF | Reserved | | | QTF | RTF | RPTF | Reserved | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Session Identifier | DS | | | Session Identifier | DS | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Number of | Reserved 1 | | | Number of | Reserved 1 | | |||
| Buckets | | | | Buckets | | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Interval (in 10 ns units) | | | Interval (in 10 ns units) | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Number of Pkts in Bucket | | | Number of Pkts in Bucket 1 | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
~ ~ | ~ ~ | |||
~ ~ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Number of Pkts in Bucket N | | ||||
| | | ||||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
~ ~ | ~ ~ | |||
~ TLV Block ~ | ~ TLV Block ~ | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
Figure 2: Time Bucket Jitter Measurement Message Format | Figure 2: Time Bucket Jitter Measurement Message Format | |||
The Version, Flags, Control Code, Message Length, Querier Timestamp | The Version, Flags, Control Code, Message Length, Querier Timestamp | |||
Format (QTF), Responder Timestamp Format (RTF), Responder's Preferred | Format (QTF), Responder Timestamp Format (RTF), Responder's Preferred | |||
Timestamp Format (RPTF), Session Identifier, Reserved, and | Timestamp Format (RPTF), Session Identifier, Reserved, and | |||
skipping to change at line 375 ¶ | skipping to change at line 376 ¶ | |||
[RFC6374]. The remaining fields, which are unsigned integers, are as | [RFC6374]. The remaining fields, which are unsigned integers, are as | |||
follows: | follows: | |||
* Number of Buckets in the measurement. | * Number of Buckets in the measurement. | |||
* Reserved 1 must be sent as zero and ignored on receipt. | * Reserved 1 must be sent as zero and ignored on receipt. | |||
* Interval (in 10 ns units) is the inter-packet interval for this | * Interval (in 10 ns units) is the inter-packet interval for this | |||
bucket. | bucket. | |||
* Number of Pkts in Bucket is the number of packets found in this | * Number of Pkts in Bucket 1 is the number of packets found in the | |||
bucket. | first bucket. | |||
* Number of Pkts in Bucket N is the number of packets found in the | ||||
Nth bucket, where N is the value in the Number of Buckets field. | ||||
There will be a number of Interval/Number pairs depending on the | There will be a number of Interval/Number pairs depending on the | |||
number of buckets being specified by the Querier. If an [RFC6374] | number of buckets being specified by the Querier. If a message is | |||
message is being used to configure the buckets (i.e., the responder | being used to configure the buckets (i.e., the responder is creating | |||
is creating or modifying the buckets according to the intervals in | or modifying the buckets according to the intervals in the Query | |||
the Query message), then the responder MUST respond with 0 packets in | message), then the responder MUST respond with 0 packets in each | |||
each bucket until it has been configured for a full measurement | bucket until it has been configured for a full measurement period. | |||
period. This indicates that it was configured at the time of the | This indicates that it was configured at the time of the last | |||
last response message, and thus, the response is valid for the whole | response message, and thus, the response is valid for the whole | |||
interval. As per the convention in [RFC6374], the Number of Pkts in | interval. As per the convention in [RFC6374], the Number of Pkts in | |||
Bucket fields are included in the Query message and set to zero. | Bucket fields are included in the Query message and set to zero. | |||
Out-of-band configuration is permitted by this mode of operation. | Out-of-band configuration is permitted by this mode of operation. | |||
Note this is a departure from the normal fixed format used in | Note this is a departure from the normal fixed format used in | |||
[RFC6374]. | [RFC6374]. | |||
The Time Bucket Jitter Measurement message is carried over an LSP in | The Time Bucket Jitter Measurement message is carried over an LSP in | |||
the way described in [RFC6374] and over an LSP with an SFL as | the way described in [RFC6374] and over an LSP with an SFL as | |||
skipping to change at line 571 ¶ | skipping to change at line 575 ¶ | |||
8. Sampled Measurement | 8. Sampled Measurement | |||
In the discussion so far, it has been assumed that we would measure | In the discussion so far, it has been assumed that we would measure | |||
the delay characteristics of every packet in a delay measurement | the delay characteristics of every packet in a delay measurement | |||
interval defined by an SFL of constant color. In [RFC9341], the | interval defined by an SFL of constant color. In [RFC9341], the | |||
concept of a sampled measurement is considered. That is, the | concept of a sampled measurement is considered. That is, the | |||
responder only measures a packet at the start of a group of packets | responder only measures a packet at the start of a group of packets | |||
being marked for delay measurement by a particular color, rather than | being marked for delay measurement by a particular color, rather than | |||
every packet in the marked batch. A measurement interval is not | every packet in the marked batch. A measurement interval is not | |||
defined by the duration of a marked batch of packets but the interval | defined by the duration of a marked batch of packets but the interval | |||
between a pair of [RFC6374] packets taking a readout of the delay | between a pair of packets taking a readout of the delay | |||
characteristic. This approach has the advantage that the measurement | characteristic. This approach has the advantage that the measurement | |||
is not impacted by ECMP effects. | is not impacted by ECMP effects. | |||
This sampled approach may be used if supported by the responder and | This sampled approach may be used if supported by the responder and | |||
configured by the operator. | configured by the operator. | |||
9. Carrying RFC 6374 Packets over an LSP Using an SFL | 9. Carrying Packets over an LSP Using an SFL | |||
We illustrate the packet format of an [RFC6374] Query message using | We illustrate the packet format of a Query message using SFLs for the | |||
SFLs for the case of an MPLS Direct Loss Measurement in Figure 5. | case of an MPLS Direct Loss Measurement in Figure 5. | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| LSP | | | LSP | | |||
| Label | | | Label | | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| Synonymous Flow | | | Synonymous Flow | | |||
| Label | | | Label | | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| GAL | | | GAL | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| ACH Type = 0xA | | | ACH Type = 0xA | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
| RFC 6374 Measurement Message | | | Measurement Message | | |||
| | | | | | |||
| +-------------------------+ | | | +-------------------------+ | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Fixed-format | | | | | Fixed-format | | | |||
| | portion of msg | | | | | portion of msg | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-------------------------+ | | | +-------------------------+ | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Optional SFL TLV | | | | | Optional SFL TLV | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-------------------------+ | | | +-------------------------+ | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Optional Return | | | | | Optional Return | | | |||
| | Information | | | | | Information | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-------------------------+ | | | +-------------------------+ | | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-------------------------------+ | +-------------------------------+ | |||
Figure 5: RFC 6734 Query Packet with SFL | Figure 5: Query Packet with SFL | |||
The MPLS label stack is exactly the same as that used for the user | The MPLS label stack is exactly the same as that used for the user | |||
data service packets being instrumented except for the inclusion of | data service packets being instrumented except for the inclusion of | |||
the Generic Associated Channel Label (GAL) [RFC5586] to allow the | the Generic Associated Channel Label (GAL) [RFC5586] to allow the | |||
receiver to distinguish between normal data packets and OAM packets. | receiver to distinguish between normal data packets and OAM packets. | |||
Since the packet loss measurements are being made on the data service | Since the packet loss measurements are being made on the data service | |||
packets, an [RFC6374] Direct Loss Measurement is being made, which is | packets, an MPLS Direct Loss Measurement is being made, which is | |||
indicated by the type field in the Associated Channel Header (ACH) | indicated by the type field in the Associated Channel Header (ACH) | |||
(Type = 0x000A). | (Type = 0x000A). | |||
The measurement message as specified in [RFC6374] consists of three | The measurement message as specified in [RFC6374] consists of up to | |||
components. The first is the [RFC6374] fixed-format portion of the | three components as follows. | |||
message, which is carried over the ACH channel. The ACH channel type | ||||
specifies the type of measurement being made (currently: loss, delay, | ||||
or loss and delay) as specified in [RFC6374]. | ||||
Two optional TLVs MAY also be carried if needed. The first is the | * The fixed-format portion of the message is carried over the ACH | |||
SFL TLV specified in Section 9.1. This is used to provide the | channel. The ACH channel type specifies the type of measurement | |||
implementation with a reminder of the SFL that was used to carry the | being made (currently: loss, delay, or loss and delay) as | |||
[RFC6374] message. This is needed because a number of MPLS | specified in [RFC6374]. | |||
implementations do not provide the MPLS label stack to the MPLS OAM | ||||
handler. This TLV is required if [RFC6374] messages are sent over | ||||
UDP [RFC7876]. This TLV MUST be included unless, by some method | ||||
outside the scope of this document, it is known that this information | ||||
is not needed by the [RFC6374] responder. | ||||
The second set of information that may be needed is the return | * (Optional) The SFL TLV specified in Section 9.1 MAY be carried if | |||
information that allows the responder send the [RFC6374] response to | needed. It is used to provide the implementation with a reminder | |||
the Querier. This is not needed if the response is requested in band | of the SFL that was used to carry the message. This is needed | |||
and the MPLS construct being measured is a point-to-point LSP, but it | because a number of MPLS implementations do not provide the MPLS | |||
otherwise MUST be carried. The Return Address TLV is defined in | label stack to the MPLS OAM handler. This TLV is required if | |||
[RFC6374], and the optional UDP Return Object is defined in | messages are sent over UDP [RFC7876]. This TLV MUST be included | |||
[RFC7876]. | unless, by some method outside the scope of this document, it is | |||
known that this information is not needed by the responder as | ||||
specified in [RFC6374]. | ||||
* (Optional) The return information MAY be carried if needed. It | ||||
allows the responder send the response (as specified in [RFC6374]) | ||||
to the Querier. This is not needed if the response is requested | ||||
in band and the MPLS construct being measured is a point-to-point | ||||
LSP, but it otherwise MUST be carried. The Return Address TLV is | ||||
defined in [RFC6374], and the optional UDP Return Object is | ||||
defined in [RFC7876]. | ||||
Where a measurement other than an MPLS Direct Loss Measurement is to | Where a measurement other than an MPLS Direct Loss Measurement is to | |||
be made, the appropriate [RFC6374] measurement message is used (for | be made, the appropriate measurement message is used (for example, | |||
example, one of the new types defined in this document), and this is | one of the new types defined in this document), and this is indicated | |||
indicated to the receiver by the use of the corresponding ACH type. | to the receiver by the use of the corresponding ACH type. | |||
9.1. Extending RFC 6374 with SFL TLV | 9.1. Extending RFC 6374 with SFL TLV | |||
The [RFC6374] SFL TLV is shown in Figure 6. This contains the SFL | The [RFC6374] SFL TLV is shown in Figure 6. This contains the SFL | |||
that was carried in the label stack, the FEC that was used to | that was carried in the label stack, the FEC that was used to | |||
allocate the SFL, and the index (into the batch of SFLs that were | allocate the SFL, and the index (into the batch of SFLs that were | |||
allocated for the FEC) that corresponds to this SFL. | allocated for the FEC) that corresponds to this SFL. | |||
0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
End of changes. 22 change blocks. | ||||
64 lines changed or deleted | 70 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. |