<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>

<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-opsawg-tsvwg-udp-ipfix-14" number="9870" category="std" updates="" obsoletes="" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3" xml:lang="en">

  <front>
    <title abbrev="IPFIX IE for UDP Options">Export of UDP Options Information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)</title>
    <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9870"/>
    <author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair" surname="Boucadair" initials="M.">
      <organization>Orange</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Rennes</city>
          <code>35000</code>
          <country>France</country>
        </postal>
        <email>mohamed.boucadair@orange.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Tirumaleswar Reddy.K" surname="Reddy.K" initials="T.">
      <organization>Nokia</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <country>India</country>
        </postal>
        <email>kondtir@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2025" month="October"/>
    <area>OPS</area>
    <workgroup>opsawg</workgroup>
    <keyword>surplus area</keyword>
    <keyword>UDP options</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>This document specifies new IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Information Elements for UDP Options.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) <xref target="RFC7011"/> is a protocol that is widely deployed in networks for traffic management purposes (<xref section="2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC6632"/>). The protocol specifies the encoding of a set of basic data types and how the various Information Elements (IEs) are transmitted. In order to support the export of new Flow-related measurement data, new IEs can be defined and registered in a dedicated IANA registry <xref target="IANA-IPFIX"/> for interoperability.</t>
      <t>This document specifies new IPFIX Information Elements for UDP Options (<xref target="sec-IE"/>). A brief overview of UDP Options is provided in <xref target="uo"/>.</t>
      <t>The IE specified in <xref target="udpOptions"/> uses the new abstract data type ("unsigned256") defined in <xref target="RFC9740"/>.</t>
      <t>Transport (including MTU) considerations are discussed in <xref section="10" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/>.</t>
      <t>Examples to illustrate the use of the new IPFIX Information Elements are provided in <xref target="sec-ex"/>.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="conventions-and-definitions">
      <name>Conventions and Definitions</name>
        <t>
    The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
    NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
    "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
    described in BCP&nbsp;14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> 
    when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
        </t>


<t>This document uses the IPFIX-specific terminology (e.g., Flow) defined in <xref section="2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/>.
As in the base IPFIX specification <xref target="RFC7011"/>, these IPFIX-specific terms have the first letter of a word capitalized.</t>
      <t>The document adheres to the naming conventions for Information Elements per <xref section="2.3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7012"/>.</t>
      <t>Also, this document uses the terms defined in <xref section="3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9868"/>, especially "datagram" and "surplus area".</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="uo">
      <name>UDP Options at a Glance</name>
      <t>UDP <xref target="RFC0768"/> does not support an extension mechanism similar to the options supported by other transport protocols, such as TCP <xref target="RFC9293"/>, Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) <xref target="RFC9260"/>, or Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP) <xref target="RFC4340"/>. Such a mechanism can be useful for various applications, e.g., to discover a path MTU or share timestamps. To fill that void, <xref target="RFC9868"/> extends UDP with a mechanism to insert extensions in datagrams. To do so, and unlike the conventional approach that relies upon transport headers, <xref target="RFC9868"/> uses trailers. Concretely, UDP Options are placed in the surplus area (that is, the area of an IP payload that follows a UDP packet). See <xref target="spa"/>. An example of the use of UDP Options for Datagram Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery (DPLPMTUD) is described in <xref target="RFC9869"/>.</t>
      <figure anchor="spa">
        <name>Surplus Area</name>
        <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
                       IP transport payload
          <------------------------------------------------->
+--------+---------+----------------------+------------------+
| IP Hdr | UDP Hdr |     UDP user data    |   surplus area   |
+--------+---------+----------------------+------------------+
          <------------------------------>
                     UDP Length]]></artwork>
      </figure>
      <t>Sections <xref format="counter" target="udpOptions"/> and <xref format="counter" target="udpUnsafeOptions"/> introduce new IEs to export the observed UDP Options.</t>
      <t>UDP Options are unambiguously identified by means of a 1-byte field, called "Kind".</t>
      <t>Options indicated by Kind values in the range 0-191 are called SAFE Options. Such options can be silently ignored by legacy receivers because they do not alter the UDP user data (<xref section="11" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9868"/>). SAFE Options are exported using the IE defined in <xref target="udpOptions"/>.</t>
      <t>Options indicated by Kind values in the range 192-255 are called UNSAFE Options. Such options are not safe for legacy receivers to ignore because they alter the UDP user data (<xref section="12" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9868"/>). UNSAFE Options are exported using the IE defined in <xref target="udpUnsafeOptions"/>.</t>
      <t>UDP Options occur per-packet within a Flow and can be inserted at any time in the Flow.</t>
      <t><xref target="RFC9868"/> reserves two options for experiments: the Experimental (EXP, Kind=127) Option for SAFE Options and the UNSAFE Experimental (UEXP, Kind=254) Option. For both options, Experiment Identifiers (ExIDs) are used to differentiate concurrent use of these options. Known ExIDs are expected to be registered within IANA. <xref target="udpExID"/> specifies a new IPFIX IE to export observed ExIDs in the EXP Options. Also, <xref target="udpUExID"/> specifies a new IPFIX IE to export observed ExIDs in the UEXP Options. Only 16-bit ExIDs are supported in <xref target="RFC9868"/>.</t>
      <t>This document does not intend to elaborate operational guidance/implications of UDP Options. The document focuses exclusively on exporting observed UDP Options in datagrams.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-IE">
      <name>New UDP IPFIX Information Elements</name>
      <t>Given the Kind structure of SAFE and UNSAFE UDP Options, using one
   single IE that would multiplex both types of options will limit the
   benefits of reduced-size encoding in the presence of UNSAFE Options.
   For example, at least 24 octets would be needed to report mandatory SAFE
   Options that are observed in a Flow.
   In order to use less bits to report observed UDP Options, distinct
   IEs are thus defined to report SAFE (<xref target="udpOptions"/>) and UNSAFE
   (<xref target="udpUnsafeOptions"/>) UDP Options. As further detailed in <xref target="sec-ex-rs"/>, only
   one octet is needed to report mandatory SAFE Options.</t>
      <section anchor="udpOptions">
        <name>udpSafeOptions</name>
        <dl>
          <dt>Name:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>udpSafeOptions</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>ElementID:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>525</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Description:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Observed SAFE UDP Options in a Flow. The information is encoded in a set of bit fields.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>Options are mapped to bits according to their option numbers. UDP
Option Kind 0 corresponds to the least significant bit in the
udpSafeOptions IE, while Kind 191 corresponds to the 65th most significant bit of the IE. The bit is set to 1 if the corresponding SAFE UDP Option is observed at least once in the Flow. The bit is set to 0 if the option is never observed in the Flow. The 64 most significant bits <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 0.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>The reduced-size encoding per <xref section="6.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/> is followed whenever fewer octets are needed to report observed SAFE UDP Options. For example, if only option Kinds &lt;= 31 are observed, then the value of the udpSafeOptions IE can be encoded as unsigned32, or if only option Kinds &lt;= 63 are observed, then the value of the udpSafeOptions IE can be encoded as unsigned64.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>The presence of udpSafeExIDList is an indication that the SAFE Experimental Option is observed in a Flow. The presence of udpSafeExIDList takes precedence over setting the corresponding bit in the udpSafeOptions IE for the same Flow. In order to optimize the use of the reduced-size encoding in the presence of udpSafeExIDList IE, the Exporter <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> set the EXP flag of the udpSafeOptions IE that is reported for the same Flow to 1.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Abstract Data Type:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>unsigned256</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Data Type Semantics:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>flags</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Additional Information:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>See the "UDP Option Kind Numbers" registry at <xref target="UDP_OPTIONS"/>.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>See <xref target="RFC9868"/> for more details about UDP Options.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Reference:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>RFC 9870</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="udpUnsafeOptions">
        <name>udpUnsafeOptions</name>
        <dl>
          <dt>Name:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>udpUnsafeOptions</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>ElementID:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>526</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Description:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Observed UNSAFE UDP Options in a Flow. The information is encoded in a set of bit fields.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>Options are mapped to bits according to their option numbers. UDP
Option Kind 192 corresponds to the least significant bit in the
udpUnsafeOptions IE, while Kind 255 corresponds to the most significant bit of the IE. The bit is set to 1 if the corresponding UNSAFE UDP Option is observed at least once in the Flow. The bit is set to 0 if the option is never observed in the Flow.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>The reduced-size encoding per <xref section="6.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/> is followed whenever fewer octets are needed to report observed UNSAFE UDP Options.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>The presence of udpUnsafeExIDList is an indication that the UNSAFE Experimental Option is observed in a Flow. The presence of udpUnsafeExIDList takes precedence over setting the corresponding bit in the udpUnsafeOptions IE for the same Flow. In order to optimize the use of the reduced-size encoding in the presence of udpUnsafeExIDList IE, the Exporter <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> set the UEXP flag of the udpUnsafeOptions IE that is reported for the same Flow to 1.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Abstract Data Type:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>unsigned64</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Data Type Semantics:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>flags</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Additional Information:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>See the "UDP Option Kind Numbers" registry at <xref target="UDP_OPTIONS"/>.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>See <xref target="RFC9868"/> for more details about UDP Options.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Reference:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>RFC 9870</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="udpBasicExID">
        <name>udpExID</name>
        <dl>
          <dt>Name:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>udpExID</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>ElementID:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>527</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Description:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Observed ExID in an Experimental (EXP, Kind=127) Option or an UNSAFE Experimental (UEXP, Kind=254) Option.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>A basicList of udpExID is used to report udpSafeExIDList and udpUnsafeExIDList values.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Abstract Data Type:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>unsigned16</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Data Type Semantics:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>identifier</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Additional Information:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>See the "TCP/UDP Experimental Option Experiment Identifiers (TCP/UDP ExIDs)" registry at <xref target="UDP_ExIDs"/>.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>See <xref target="RFC9868"/> for more details about ExIDs.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Reference:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>RFC 9870</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="udpExID">
        <name>udpSafeExIDList</name>
        <dl>
          <dt>Name:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>udpSafeExIDList</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>ElementID:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>528</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Description:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Observed ExIDs in the Experimental (EXP, Kind=127) Option.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>A basicList of udpExID Information Elements in which each udpExID Information Element carries the ExID observed in an EXP Option.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Abstract Data Type:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>basicList</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Data Type Semantics:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>list</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Additional Information:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>See the "TCP/UDP Experimental Option Experiment Identifiers (TCP/UDP ExIDs)" registry at <xref target="UDP_ExIDs"/>.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>See <xref target="RFC9868"/> for more details about ExIDs.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Reference:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>RFC 9870</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="udpUExID">
        <name>udpUnsafeExIDList</name>
        <dl>
          <dt>Name:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>udpUnsafeExIDList</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>ElementID:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>529</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Description:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Observed ExIDs in the UNSAFE Experimental (UEXP, Kind=254) Option.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>A basicList of udpExID Information Elements in which each udpExID Information Element carries the ExID observed in an UEXP Option.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Abstract Data Type:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>basicList</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Data Type Semantics:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>list</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Additional Information:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>See the "TCP/UDP Experimental Option Experiment Identifiers (TCP/UDP ExIDs)" registry at <xref target="UDP_ExIDs"/>.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>See <xref target="RFC9868"/> for more details about ExIDs.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Reference:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>RFC 9870</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-ex">
      <name>Examples</name>
      <section anchor="sec-ex-rs">
        <name>Reduced-Size Encoding</name>
        <t>Given the UDP Kind allocation in <xref section="10" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9868"/> and the option mapping defined in <xref target="udpOptions"/> of this document, fewer octets are likely to be used for Flows with mandatory UDP Options.</t>
        <t><xref target="ex-udp"/> shows an example of the Kind/bit mappings in the udpSafeOptions IE for a Flow in which End of Options List (EOL, Kind=0) and Additional Payload Checksum (APC, Kind=2) Options are observed. Only the bits that corresponds to EOL and APC Options are set to 1.</t>
        <figure anchor="ex-udp">
          <name>An Example of udpSafeOptions IE with EOL and APC Options</name>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
MSB                                                       LSB
                     1                          25
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|   |0|0|0|0|0|1|0|1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-++-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork>
        </figure>
        <t>One octet is sufficient to report these observed options because the leading zeros are dropped per the reduced-size encoding guidance. Concretely, the reported udpSafeOptions IE will be set to 0x05 (<xref target="ex-udp-wire"/>).</t>
        <figure anchor="ex-udp-wire">
          <name>An Example of the Wire udpSafeOptions IE Value with EOL and APC Options</name>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
MSB           LSB
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0|0|0|0|0|1|0|1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>
      <section anchor="safe-experimental-option">
        <name>SAFE Experimental Option</name>
        <t>Let us now consider a UDP Flow in which SAFE Experimental Options are observed. If a udpSafeOptions IE is exported for this Flow, then that IE will have the EXP bit set to 1 (<xref target="ex-udp-shared"/>). This example does not make any assumption about the presence of other UDP Options ("X" can be set to 0 or 1).</t>
        <figure anchor="ex-udp-shared">
          <name>An Example of udpSafeOptions with EXP Option</name>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
MSB                                                     LSB
                  12                          25
 0 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|X|X|X|X|   |X|X|X|X|X|X|X|X|X|X|X|1|X|X|   |X|X|X|X|X|X|X|
+-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-++-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>
      <section anchor="exids-and-reduced-size-encoding">
        <name>ExIDs and Reduced-Size Encoding</name>
        <t>Now assume that EOL, APC, EXP, and UEXP Options are observed in a Flow. Let us also consider that the observed SAFE Experimental Options have ExIDs set to 0x9858 and 0xE2D4 and UNSAFE Experimental Options have ExIDs set to 0xC3D9 and 0x1234. <xref target="ex-sho"/> shows an excerpt of the Data Set encoding with a focus on SAFE Experimental Options that have ExIDs. The fields are defined in <xref target="RFC6313"/>.</t>
        <figure anchor="ex-sho">
          <name>Example of UDP Experimental Option ExID IEs</name>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
 MSB                                                          LSB
 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
:                           ...                                 :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      255      |        List Length = 9        |semantic=allof |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           udpExID = 527       |         Field Length = 2      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SAFE ExID =  0x9858           | SAFE ExID = 0xE2D4            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      255      |        List Length = 9        |semantic=allof |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           udpExID = 527       |         Field Length = 2      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| UNSAFE ExID =  0xC3D9         | UNSAFE ExID =  0x1234         |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
:                           ...                                 :]]></artwork>
        </figure>
        <t>Following the guidance in <xref target="udpOptions"/>, the reported udpSafeOptions IE will be set to 0x05 even in the presence of EXP Options.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>This document does not introduce new security considerations other than those already discussed in <xref section="11" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/> and <xref section="8" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7012"/>.</t>
      <t>The reader may refer to <xref section="24" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9868"/> for the security considerations related to UDP Options.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="IANA">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <section anchor="ipfix-information-elements">
        <name>IPFIX Information Elements</name>
        <t>IANA has added the following new IEs to the "IPFIX Information Elements" registry under the "IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities" registry group <xref target="IANA-IPFIX"/>:</t>
        <table>
          <name>New IPFIX Information Elements</name>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="left">ElementID</th>
              <th align="left">Name</th>
              <th align="left">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">525</td>
              <td align="left">udpSafeOptions</td>
              <td align="left">
                <xref target="udpOptions"/> of RFC 9870</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">526</td>
              <td align="left">udpUnsafeOptions</td>
              <td align="left">
                <xref target="udpUnsafeOptions"/> of RFC 9870</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">527</td>
              <td align="left">udpExID</td>
              <td align="left">
                <xref target="udpBasicExID"/> of RFC 9870</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">528</td>
              <td align="left">udpSafeExIDList</td>
              <td align="left">
                <xref target="udpExID"/> of RFC 9870</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">529</td>
              <td align="left">udpUnsafeExIDList</td>
              <td align="left">
                <xref target="udpUExID"/> of RFC 9870</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>

            <t>udpSafeOptions uses the abstract data type ("unsigned256")
            defined in <xref target="RFC9740"/>.</t>

      </section>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-combined-references">
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7011.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9740.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7012.xml"/>

<reference anchor="RFC9868" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9868">
  <front>
      <title>Transport Options for UDP</title>
      <author initials="J." surname="Touch" fullname="Dr. Joseph D. Touch">
         <organization>Independent Consultant</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="C." surname="Heard" fullname="C. M. Heard" role="editor">
         <organization>Unaffiliated</organization>
      </author>
      <date month="October" year="2025" />
  </front>
  <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9868"/>
  <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9868"/>
</reference>

        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.0768.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6313.xml"/>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="IANA-IPFIX" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix">
          <front>
            <title>IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities</title>
            <author>
              <organization>IANA</organization>
            </author>
          </front>
        </reference>

        <reference anchor="UDP_OPTIONS" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/udp">
          <front>
            <title>UDP Option Kind Numbers</title>
            <author>
              <organization>IANA</organization>
            </author>
          </front>
        </reference>

        <reference anchor="UDP_ExIDs" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/udp">
          <front>
            <title>TCP/UDP Experimental Option Experiment Identifiers (TCP/UDP ExIDs)</title>
            <author>
              <organization>IANA</organization>
            </author>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6632.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9293.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9260.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4340.xml"/>

<reference anchor="RFC9869" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9869">
<front>
<title>Datagram Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery (DPLPMTUD) for UDP Options</title>
<author fullname="Gorry Fairhurst" initials="G." surname="Fairhurst">
<organization>University of Aberdeen</organization>
</author>
<author fullname="Tom Jones" initials="T." surname="Jones">
<organization>University of Aberdeen</organization>
</author>
<date month="October" year="2025"/>
</front>
  <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9869"/>
  <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9869"/>
</reference>

      </references>
    </references>

<section numbered="false" anchor="acknowledgments">
      <name>Acknowledgments</name>
      <t>Thanks to <contact fullname="Benoît Claise"/> for the discussion on
      the ordering of IPFIX IEs. Thanks to <contact fullname="Paul Aitken"/>
      for the review and comments.</t>
      <t>Thanks to <contact fullname="Tommy Pauly"/> for the TSVART review,
      <contact fullname="Joe Touch"/> for the INTDIR review, <contact
      fullname="Robert Sparks"/> for the GENART review, <contact
      fullname="Watson Ladd"/> for the SECDIR review, and <contact
      fullname="Jouni Korhonen"/> for the OPSDIR review.</t>
      <t>Thanks to <contact fullname="Thomas Graf"/> for the shepherd review.</t>
      <t>Thanks to <contact fullname="Mahesh Jethanandani"/> for the AD review.</t>
      <t>Thanks to <contact fullname="Éric Vyncke"/>, <contact fullname="Roman
      Danyliw"/>, and <contact fullname="Zahed Sarker"/> for the IESG
      review.</t>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
