



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]
