diff --git a/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/README.md b/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..1ada4e5a431
--- /dev/null
+++ b/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,761 @@
+# KEP-5425: Automatic Swap Node Labels
+
+<!-- toc -->
+- [Release Signoff Checklist](#release-signoff-checklist)
+- [Summary](#summary)
+- [Motivation](#motivation)
+  - [Goals](#goals)
+  - [Non-Goals](#non-goals)
+- [Background](#background)
+  - [NodeFeatureDiscovery Limitations](#nodefeaturediscovery-limitations)
+- [Proposal](#proposal)
+  - [User Stories](#user-stories)
+- [Design Details](#design-details)
+  - [Test Plan](#test-plan)
+      - [Prerequisite testing updates](#prerequisite-testing-updates)
+      - [Unit tests](#unit-tests)
+      - [Integration tests](#integration-tests)
+      - [e2e tests](#e2e-tests)
+  - [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria)
+  - [Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy](#upgrade--downgrade-strategy)
+  - [Version Skew Strategy](#version-skew-strategy)
+- [Production Readiness Review Questionnaire](#production-readiness-review-questionnaire)
+  - [Feature Enablement and Rollback](#feature-enablement-and-rollback)
+  - [Rollout, Upgrade and Rollback Planning](#rollout-upgrade-and-rollback-planning)
+  - [Monitoring Requirements](#monitoring-requirements)
+  - [Dependencies](#dependencies)
+  - [Scalability](#scalability)
+  - [Troubleshooting](#troubleshooting)
+- [Implementation History](#implementation-history)
+- [Drawbacks](#drawbacks)
+- [Alternatives](#alternatives)
+- [Infrastructure Needed (Optional)](#infrastructure-needed-optional)
+<!-- /toc -->
+
+## Release Signoff Checklist
+
+Items marked with (R) are required *prior to targeting to a milestone / release*.
+
+- [ ] (R) Enhancement issue in release milestone, which links to KEP dir in [kubernetes/enhancements] (not the initial KEP PR)
+- [ ] (R) KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable`
+- [ ] (R) Design details are appropriately documented
+- [ ] (R) Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input (including test refactors)
+  - [ ] e2e Tests for all Beta API Operations (endpoints)
+  - [ ] (R) Ensure GA e2e tests meet requirements for [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) 
+  - [ ] (R) Minimum Two Week Window for GA e2e tests to prove flake free
+- [ ] (R) Graduation criteria is in place
+  - [ ] (R) [all GA Endpoints](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1806) must be hit by [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) 
+- [ ] (R) Production readiness review completed
+- [ ] (R) Production readiness review approved
+- [ ] "Implementation History" section is up-to-date for milestone
+- [ ] User-facing documentation has been created in [kubernetes/website], for publication to [kubernetes.io]
+- [ ] Supporting documentation—e.g., additional design documents, links to mailing list discussions/SIG meetings, relevant PRs/issues, release notes
+
+<!--
+**Note:** This checklist is iterative and should be reviewed and updated every time this enhancement is being considered for a milestone.
+-->
+
+[kubernetes.io]: https://kubernetes.io/
+[kubernetes/enhancements]: https://git.k8s.io/enhancements
+[kubernetes/kubernetes]: https://git.k8s.io/kubernetes
+[kubernetes/website]: https://git.k8s.io/website
+
+## Summary
+
+This KEP proposes that kubelet automatically set well-known node labels based on swap configuration to enable workload isolation and scheduling decisions for swap-enabled nodes.
+
+## Motivation
+
+### Goals
+
+- Enable workload isolation between swap-enabled and swap-disabled nodes.
+- Support nodeSelector and nodeAffinity based node selection for swap use-cases without requiring external tools.
+
+### Non-Goals
+
+- Implementing API-based swap limits (separate KEP).
+- Modifying existing Swap modes or functionality at node.
+- Providing swap capacity information for quantitative scheduling.
+
+## Background
+
+Currently, Kubernetes supports swap through node-level configuration (`NoSwap`, `LimitedSwap`), but workloads have no way to discover or request specific swap behavior from nodes. This KEP proposes Kubelet adding a new node-label for swap-enabled nodes during bootstrap.
+
+This will help with below scenarios:
+
+1. Enable targeted scheduling for swap demanding pods to swap enabled nodes.
+2. Guard workloads that will have concerns about performance inference from accidentally placed on a swap enabled node.
+2. Users missing to manually label nodes for swap-based scheduling.
+3. Avoid external tooling dependency (NodeFeatureDiscovery) for swap feature discovery.
+
+### NodeFeatureDiscovery Limitations
+
+While NFD can detect swap devices on nodes, it has some limitations:
+- NFD labels reflect hardware state (swap device presence), not Kubernetes configuration state 
+- It cannot distinguish between `NoSwap`, `LimitedSwap`, or future swap modes
+- NFD is not an in-tree solution, requiring additional deployments for working with swap.
+
+## Proposal
+
+### API Changes
+
+Kubelet will automatically set the following well-known node labels based on swap configuration:
+
+```yaml
+metadata:
+  labels:
+    # Indicates the kubelet swap behavior mode  
+    node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior: "NoSwap" | "LimitedSwap"
+```
+
+### Label Semantics
+
+#### `node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior` 
+- **`"NoSwap"`**: Workloads will not use swap (disabled by configuration).
+- **`"LimitedSwap"`**: Node-level swap with implicit calculation
+
+#### Integration Point
+
+There is precedent in Kubernetes for auto-labeling of nodes based on hardware / os features / cloud-topology.
+
+eg: below labels are set by Kubelet
+```bash
+kubernetes.io/arch - CPU architecture
+kubernetes.io/hostname - Node hostname
+kubernetes.io/os - Operating system
+node.kubernetes.io/instance-type - Instance type from cloud provider
+topology.kubernetes.io/region - Cloud region
+topology.kubernetes.io/zone - Cloud availability zone
+```
+
+Swap labels will also be set during initial node status update, following the same pattern as existing kubelet-managed labels.
+
+### Implementation
+
+#### Kubelet Changes
+
+```go
+// api/core/v1/well_known_labels.go
+const LabelLinuxSwapBehavior = "node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior"
+
+// pkg/kubelet/kubelet_node_status_others.go
+func (kl *Kubelet) getNodeSwapLabels(node *v1.Node) (map[string]string, error) {
+    swapBehavior := kl.kubeletConfiguration.MemorySwap.SwapBehavior
+    
+    // Set node label based on swap-presence and configuration
+    found, err := swapDetected()
+    if err != nil {
+      return nil, err
+    }
+
+    if swapBehavior == "NoSwap" {
+        if found {
+          klog.Warning("Swap is detected at node, but swap disabled for workloads because configuration is NoSwap.")
+        }
+    } else {
+        if !found {
+          klog.Warningf("Swap configured(%v) but swap device not detected at node.", swapBehavior)
+        }
+    }
+
+    return map[string]string{v1.LabelLinuxSwapBehavior: string(swapBehavior)}, nil
+}
+```
+
+### User Stories
+
+#### Story 1: Workload Isolation
+As a cluster administrator, I want to isolate swap-sensitive workloads from swap-enabled nodes to prevent performance degradation.
+
+```yaml
+# Non-swap workload
+spec:
+  nodeSelector:
+    node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior: "NoSwap"
+```
+
+#### Story 2: Swap-Required Workloads  
+As a developer, I want my memory-intensive batch jobs to run only on swap-enabled nodes for better resource utilization.
+
+```yaml
+# workload desiring swap
+spec:
+  affinity:
+    nodeAffinity:
+      requiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution:
+        nodeSelectorTerms:
+        - matchExpressions:
+          - key: node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior
+            operator: NotIn
+            values: ["NoSwap"]
+```
+
+#### Story 3: Migration Planning
+As a cluster operator, I want to identify which nodes have which swap configuration during cluster migration.
+
+```bash
+kubectl get nodes -l node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior=LimitedSwap
+```
+
+## Design Details
+
+### Label Lifecycle
+
+- Labels are set during kubelet startup and initial node registration / reconciliation.
+- Labels are updated when kubelet configuration changes
+- Labels persist through node restarts
+
+### Backwards Compatibility
+
+- New labels are additive. There will be no breaking changes
+- Existing swap functionality is unchanged with the new label proposed
+- Nodes without explicit swap configuration will get a new `node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior: "NoSwap"` label on kubelet / node restart
+
+### Validation
+
+- Kubelet validates that swap configuration matches detected system state. This will raise kubelet warning logs if swap behavior is `LimitedSwap` but no swap is detected.
+
+### Test Plan
+
+[X] I/we understand the owners of the involved components may require updates to
+existing tests to make this code solid enough prior to committing the changes necessary
+to implement this enhancement.
+
+##### Prerequisite testing updates
+
+<!--
+Based on reviewers feedback describe what additional tests need to be added prior
+implementing this enhancement to ensure the enhancements have also solid foundations.
+-->
+
+##### Unit tests
+
+- kubelet
+
+  - Test `getNodeSwapLabels()` function with different swap configurations
+  - Test label updates when swap configuration changes
+  - Test feature gate enabled/disabled scenarios
+
+##### Integration tests
+
+- `TestKubeletSwapLabels` - kubelet startup with swap configuration
+  - Test kubelet sets correct labels on node registration
+  - Test label updates when kubelet configuration is updated
+- `TestSwapLabelsPersistence` - Validate label persistence across kubelet restarts
+- `TestSwapLabelsValidation` - Test validation of swap configuration vs system state
+
+##### e2e tests
+
+- E2E test to validate workload scheduling based on swap labels
+- In a cluster with swap-enabled nodes, node-query with labels should filter the right set of nodes.
+
+### Graduation Criteria
+
+<!--
+**Note:** *Not required until targeted at a release.*
+
+Define graduation milestones.
+
+These may be defined in terms of API maturity, [feature gate] graduations, or as
+something else. The KEP should keep this high-level with a focus on what
+signals will be looked at to determine graduation.
+
+Consider the following in developing the graduation criteria for this enhancement:
+- [Maturity levels (`alpha`, `beta`, `stable`)][maturity-levels]
+- [Feature gate][feature gate] lifecycle
+- [Deprecation policy][deprecation-policy]
+
+Clearly define what graduation means by either linking to the [API doc
+definition](https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/kubernetes-api/#api-versioning)
+or by redefining what graduation means.
+
+In general we try to use the same stages (alpha, beta, GA), regardless of how the
+functionality is accessed.
+
+[feature gate]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/feature-gates.md
+[maturity-levels]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/api_changes.md#alpha-beta-and-stable-versions
+[deprecation-policy]: https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-policy/
+
+Below are some examples to consider, in addition to the aforementioned [maturity levels][maturity-levels].
+
+#### Alpha
+
+- Feature implemented behind a feature flag
+- Initial e2e tests completed and enabled
+
+#### Beta
+
+- Gather feedback from developers and surveys
+- Complete features A, B, C
+- Additional tests are in Testgrid and linked in KEP
+- More rigorous forms of testing—e.g., downgrade tests and scalability tests
+- All functionality completed
+- All security enforcement completed
+- All monitoring requirements completed
+- All testing requirements completed
+- All known pre-release issues and gaps resolved 
+
+**Note:** Beta criteria must include all functional, security, monitoring, and testing requirements along with resolving all issues and gaps identified
+
+#### GA
+
+- N examples of real-world usage
+- N installs
+- Allowing time for feedback
+- All issues and gaps identified as feedback during beta are resolved
+
+**Note:** GA criteria must not include any functional, security, monitoring, or testing requirements.  Those must be beta requirements.
+
+**Note:** Generally we also wait at least two releases between beta and
+GA/stable, because there's no opportunity for user feedback, or even bug reports,
+in back-to-back releases.
+
+**For non-optional features moving to GA, the graduation criteria must include
+[conformance tests].**
+
+[conformance tests]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md
+
+#### Deprecation
+
+<!--
+- Announce deprecation and support policy of the existing flag
+- Two versions passed since introducing the functionality that deprecates the flag (to address version skew)
+- Address feedback on usage/changed behavior, provided on GitHub issues
+- Deprecate the flag
+-->
+
+**Alpha**
+
+- Feature is implemented behind the feature gate `AutomaticSwapNodeLabels`
+- Basic unit tests are implemented and passing
+- Initial integration tests are completed
+- Swap Documentation is updated with automatic node-label enhancement details.
+- Manual verification of swap node labels for different swap configurations is completed.
+
+**Beta**
+- Feature gate is enabled by default
+- Added comprehensive test coverage (unit, integration, e2e)
+
+### Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy
+
+<!--
+If applicable, how will the component be upgraded and downgraded? Make sure
+this is in the test plan.
+
+Consider the following in developing an upgrade/downgrade strategy for this
+enhancement:
+- What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing
+  cluster required to make on upgrade, in order to maintain previous behavior?
+- What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing
+  cluster required to make on upgrade, in order to make use of the enhancement?
+-->
+
+**Upgrade**
+
+Users can enable the `AutomaticSwapNodeLables` feature gate on Kubelet after upgrading to a Kubernetes version that supports it. On Kubelet startup, new swap labels will be automatically added to nodes 
+
+**Downgrade**
+
+Downgrading kubelet to a version without `AutomaticSwapNodeLabels` feature will not remove the pre-created labels; this is also desirable to ensure scheduling decisions will continue to respect the node-isolation. For a clean downgrade, users will have to manually delete the labels if they are no longer desired after downgrade as below:
+
+```bash
+kubectl label nodes --all node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior-
+```
+
+### Version Skew Strategy
+
+<!--
+If applicable, how will the component handle version skew with other
+components? What are the guarantees? Make sure this is in the test plan.
+
+Consider the following in developing a version skew strategy for this
+enhancement:
+- Does this enhancement involve coordinating behavior in the control plane and nodes?
+- How does an n-3 kubelet or kube-proxy without this feature available behave when this feature is used?
+- How does an n-1 kube-controller-manager or kube-scheduler without this feature available behave when this feature is used?
+- Will any other components on the node change? For example, changes to CSI,
+  CRI or CNI may require updating that component before the kubelet.
+-->
+
+Nodes with older kubelets won't have swap labels, but functionality is not impacted. Node selection with swap behavior labels will only include swap-enabled nodes in newer versions. This would have implication that workloads using swap labels may not find suitable nodes during mixed-version periods.
+
+## Production Readiness Review Questionnaire
+
+<!--
+
+Production readiness reviews are intended to ensure that features merging into
+Kubernetes are observable, scalable and supportable; can be safely operated in
+production environments, and can be disabled or rolled back in the event they
+cause increased failures in production. See more in the PRR KEP at
+https://git.k8s.io/enhancements/keps/sig-architecture/1194-prod-readiness.
+
+The production readiness review questionnaire must be completed and approved
+for the KEP to move to `implementable` status and be included in the release.
+
+In some cases, the questions below should also have answers in `kep.yaml`. This
+is to enable automation to verify the presence of the review, and to reduce review
+burden and latency.
+
+The KEP must have a approver from the
+[`prod-readiness-approvers`](http://git.k8s.io/enhancements/OWNERS_ALIASES)
+team. Please reach out on the
+[#prod-readiness](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CPNHUMN74) channel if
+you need any help or guidance.
+-->
+
+### Feature Enablement and Rollback
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting alpha to a release.
+-->
+
+###### How can this feature be enabled / disabled in a live cluster?
+
+<!--
+Pick one of these and delete the rest.
+
+Documentation is available on [feature gate lifecycle] and expectations, as
+well as the [existing list] of feature gates.
+
+[feature gate lifecycle]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/feature-gates.md
+[existing list]: https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/
+-->
+
+- [X] Feature gate (also fill in values in `kep.yaml`)
+  - Feature gate name: `AutomaticSwapNodeLabels`
+  - Components depending on the feature gate: `kubelet`
+- [X] Other
+  - Describe the mechanism: Kubelet add preset labels for swap detection and mode on startup.
+  - Will enabling / disabling the feature require downtime of the control
+    plane? No
+  - Will enabling / disabling the feature require downtime or reprovisioning
+    of a node? No
+
+###### Does enabling the feature change any default behavior?
+
+<!--
+Any change of default behavior may be surprising to users or break existing
+automations, so be extremely careful here.
+-->
+
+Yes, but minimally. New swap relevant node-labels will appear on the node objects / `kubectl describe node` output after upgrade. No functional behavior changes to existing workloads or scheduling.
+
+###### Can the feature be disabled once it has been enabled (i.e. can we roll back the enablement)?
+
+<!--
+Describe the consequences on existing workloads (e.g., if this is a runtime
+feature, can it break the existing applications?).
+
+Feature gates are typically disabled by setting the flag to `false` and
+restarting the component. No other changes should be necessary to disable the
+feature.
+
+NOTE: Also set `disable-supported` to `true` or `false` in `kep.yaml`.
+-->
+
+Yes. Users could set feature gate `AutomaticSwapNodeLabels=false`. During rollback, the nodes with the feature disabled would stop reporting the node label `node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior`. Manual action will be required if user intended to remove the labels. If swap configuration at the node is changed, labels that were not cleaned-up will reflect stale configuration.  If labels were removed, workloads using the label-based node-swap filtering  will no longer follow the swap-node-isolation.
+
+###### What happens if we reenable the feature if it was previously rolled back?
+
+If the feature is re-enabled, swap-behavior labels will be re-added based on current swap configuration.
+
+###### Are there any tests for feature enablement/disablement?
+
+Yes, feature enablement/disablement tests will be added along with alpha implementation.
+
+### Rollout, Upgrade and Rollback Planning
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+-->
+
+###### How can a rollout or rollback fail? Can it impact already running workloads?
+
+<!--
+Try to be as paranoid as possible - e.g., what if some components will restart
+mid-rollout?
+
+Be sure to consider highly-available clusters, where, for example,
+feature flags will be enabled on some API servers and not others during the
+rollout. Similarly, consider large clusters and how enablement/disablement
+will rollout across nodes.
+-->
+
+###### What specific metrics should inform a rollback?
+
+<!--
+What signals should users be paying attention to when the feature is young
+that might indicate a serious problem?
+-->
+
+###### Were upgrade and rollback tested? Was the upgrade->downgrade->upgrade path tested?
+
+<!--
+Describe manual testing that was done and the outcomes.
+Longer term, we may want to require automated upgrade/rollback tests, but we
+are missing a bunch of machinery and tooling and can't do that now.
+-->
+
+###### Is the rollout accompanied by any deprecations and/or removals of features, APIs, fields of API types, flags, etc.?
+
+<!--
+Even if applying deprecation policies, they may still surprise some users.
+-->
+
+### Monitoring Requirements
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+-->
+
+###### How can an operator determine if the feature is in use by workloads?
+
+<!--
+Ideally, this should be a metric. Operations against the Kubernetes API (e.g.,
+checking if there are objects with field X set) may be a last resort. Avoid
+logs or events for this purpose.
+-->
+
+###### How can someone using this feature know that it is working for their instance?
+
+<!--
+For instance, if this is a pod-related feature, it should be possible to determine if the feature is functioning properly
+for each individual pod.
+Pick one more of these and delete the rest.
+Please describe all items visible to end users below with sufficient detail so that they can verify correct enablement
+and operation of this feature.
+Recall that end users cannot usually observe component logs or access metrics.
+-->
+
+- [ ] Events
+  - Event Reason: 
+- [ ] API .status
+  - Condition name: 
+  - Other field: 
+- [ ] Other (treat as last resort)
+  - Details:
+
+###### What are the reasonable SLOs (Service Level Objectives) for the enhancement?
+
+<!--
+This is your opportunity to define what "normal" quality of service looks like
+for a feature.
+
+It's impossible to provide comprehensive guidance, but at the very
+high level (needs more precise definitions) those may be things like:
+  - per-day percentage of API calls finishing with 5XX errors <= 1%
+  - 99% percentile over day of absolute value from (job creation time minus expected
+    job creation time) for cron job <= 10%
+  - 99.9% of /health requests per day finish with 200 code
+
+These goals will help you determine what you need to measure (SLIs) in the next
+question.
+-->
+
+###### What are the SLIs (Service Level Indicators) an operator can use to determine the health of the service?
+
+<!--
+Pick one more of these and delete the rest.
+-->
+
+- [ ] Metrics
+  - Metric name:
+  - [Optional] Aggregation method:
+  - Components exposing the metric:
+- [ ] Other (treat as last resort)
+  - Details:
+
+###### Are there any missing metrics that would be useful to have to improve observability of this feature?
+
+<!--
+Describe the metrics themselves and the reasons why they weren't added (e.g., cost,
+implementation difficulties, etc.).
+-->
+
+### Dependencies
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+-->
+
+###### Does this feature depend on any specific services running in the cluster?
+
+<!--
+Think about both cluster-level services (e.g. metrics-server) as well
+as node-level agents (e.g. specific version of CRI). Focus on external or
+optional services that are needed. For example, if this feature depends on
+a cloud provider API, or upon an external software-defined storage or network
+control plane.
+
+For each of these, fill in the following—thinking about running existing user workloads
+and creating new ones, as well as about cluster-level services (e.g. DNS):
+  - [Dependency name]
+    - Usage description:
+      - Impact of its outage on the feature:
+      - Impact of its degraded performance or high-error rates on the feature:
+-->
+
+### Scalability
+
+<!--
+For alpha, this section is encouraged: reviewers should consider these questions
+and attempt to answer them.
+
+For beta, this section is required: reviewers must answer these questions.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in any new API calls?
+
+<!--
+Describe them, providing:
+  - API call type (e.g. PATCH pods)
+  - estimated throughput
+  - originating component(s) (e.g. Kubelet, Feature-X-controller)
+Focusing mostly on:
+  - components listing and/or watching resources they didn't before
+  - API calls that may be triggered by changes of some Kubernetes resources
+    (e.g. update of object X triggers new updates of object Y)
+  - periodic API calls to reconcile state (e.g. periodic fetching state,
+    heartbeats, leader election, etc.)
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in introducing new API types?
+
+<!--
+Describe them, providing:
+  - API type
+  - Supported number of objects per cluster
+  - Supported number of objects per namespace (for namespace-scoped objects)
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in any new calls to the cloud provider?
+
+<!--
+Describe them, providing:
+  - Which API(s):
+  - Estimated increase:
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in increasing size or count of the existing API objects?
+
+<!--
+Describe them, providing:
+  - API type(s):
+  - Estimated increase in size: (e.g., new annotation of size 32B)
+  - Estimated amount of new objects: (e.g., new Object X for every existing Pod)
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in increasing time taken by any operations covered by existing SLIs/SLOs?
+
+<!--
+Look at the [existing SLIs/SLOs].
+
+Think about adding additional work or introducing new steps in between
+(e.g. need to do X to start a container), etc. Please describe the details.
+
+[existing SLIs/SLOs]: https://git.k8s.io/community/sig-scalability/slos/slos.md#kubernetes-slisslos
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in non-negligible increase of resource usage (CPU, RAM, disk, IO, ...) in any components?
+
+<!--
+Things to keep in mind include: additional in-memory state, additional
+non-trivial computations, excessive access to disks (including increased log
+volume), significant amount of data sent and/or received over network, etc.
+This through this both in small and large cases, again with respect to the
+[supported limits].
+
+[supported limits]: https://git.k8s.io/community//sig-scalability/configs-and-limits/thresholds.md
+-->
+
+###### Can enabling / using this feature result in resource exhaustion of some node resources (PIDs, sockets, inodes, etc.)?
+
+<!--
+Focus not just on happy cases, but primarily on more pathological cases
+(e.g. probes taking a minute instead of milliseconds, failed pods consuming resources, etc.).
+If any of the resources can be exhausted, how this is mitigated with the existing limits
+(e.g. pods per node) or new limits added by this KEP?
+
+Are there any tests that were run/should be run to understand performance characteristics better
+and validate the declared limits?
+-->
+
+### Troubleshooting
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+
+The Troubleshooting section currently serves the `Playbook` role. We may consider
+splitting it into a dedicated `Playbook` document (potentially with some monitoring
+details). For now, we leave it here.
+-->
+
+###### How does this feature react if the API server and/or etcd is unavailable?
+
+###### What are other known failure modes?
+
+<!--
+For each of them, fill in the following information by copying the below template:
+  - [Failure mode brief description]
+    - Detection: How can it be detected via metrics? Stated another way:
+      how can an operator troubleshoot without logging into a master or worker node?
+    - Mitigations: What can be done to stop the bleeding, especially for already
+      running user workloads?
+    - Diagnostics: What are the useful log messages and their required logging
+      levels that could help debug the issue?
+      Not required until feature graduated to beta.
+    - Testing: Are there any tests for failure mode? If not, describe why.
+-->
+
+###### What steps should be taken if SLOs are not being met to determine the problem?
+
+## Implementation History
+
+* 2025-06-19: [Proposal](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/132416) and discussion.
+
+## Drawbacks
+
+<!--
+Why should this KEP _not_ be implemented?
+-->
+
+## Alternatives
+
+### Manual Labeling Only
+**Not Preferred**: Requires manual cluster management and doesn't scale. Since swap is considered a high-risk configuratio, it is preferrable to include this node metadata as a built-in solution. 
+
+### Use NodeFeatureDiscovery
+**Not Preferred**: 
+- NFD detects swap presence in the machine, not kubelet configuration
+- External dependency for core functionality
+- Cannot distinguish between swap modes
+
+### Automatic Swap Taints
+**Not Preferred**: Taints are more disruptive for swap enabled nodes to be added at bootstrap. This will require admins add tolerations to node-management pods and other critical daemon-sets for swap nodes, requiring to manage a second set of yamls which is undesirable. Auto-Labels will help users intend to manage swap with taints with selection queries such as:
+
+`kubectl taint nodes -l node.kubernetes.io/swap-behavior=LimitedSwap swap-enabled=true:NoSchedule`
+
+### Extending NodeCapabilities API for swap
+**Early In Design**: Labels provide better integration with existing node-selection mechanisms (nodeSelector, affinity, etc.), and applicable for more use-cases such as monitoring. NodeCapabilities API (as proposed) in early design stages and is considered only for Kubelet feature-discovery currently. NodeCapabilities for swap could help with complex swap-aware scheduling needs, if integrated in the future. If swap-capability is exported by node in the future, it can co-exist with labels which are generic node metadata that can help with other filtering needs.
+
+### Include Swap Capacity Information
+**Not Preffered**: 
+- Conflicts with API / adds complexity without clear use case
+- Capacity can change dynamically, making labels stale
+
+## Infrastructure Needed (Optional)
+
+<!--
+Use this section if you need things from the project/SIG. Examples include a
+new subproject, repos requested, or GitHub details. Listing these here allows a
+SIG to get the process for these resources started right away.
+-->
diff --git a/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/kep.yaml b/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/kep.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..71bdfcf6672
--- /dev/null
+++ b/keps/sig-node/5425-automatic-swap-node-labels/kep.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+ititle: AutomaticSwapLabels
+kep-number: 5425
+authors:
+  - "@ajaysundark"
+owning-sig: sig-node
+participating-sigs:
+  - sig-node
+creation-date: "2025-06-19"
+reviewers: 
+  - '@tallclair'
+  - '@SergeyKanzhelev'
+  - TBD
+approvers:
+- TBD
+
+status: provisional
+stage: alpha
+latest-milestone: "v1.34"
+milestone:
+  alpha: "v1.34"
+
+feature-gates:
+  - name: AutomaticSwapLabels
+    components:
+      - kubelet
+disable-supported: true
+
+metrics: []