RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document describes protocol-specific procedures and extensions for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling to support end-to-end Label Switched Path (LSP) recovery that denotes protection and restoration. A generic functional description of GMPLS recovery can be found in a companion document, RFC 4426. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4872
- Published
- May 2007
- Authors
- J.P. Lang; Y. Rekhter; D. Papadimitriou
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 47
- Also known as
- —
- Updates:
- RFC 3471
Topics
Referenced by
3 later RFCs formally update or obsolete part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4090Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP TunnelsUpdated
May 2005
- RFC 3480Signalling Unnumbered Links in CR-LDP (Constraint-Routing Label Distribution Protocol)Current
February 2003
- RFC 3477Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)Updated
February 2003
- RFC 3473Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) ExtensionsUpdated
February 2003
- RFC 4875Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Updated
May 2007
- RFC 4655A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based ArchitectureCurrent
August 2006
- RFC 4558Node-ID Based Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Hello: A Clarification StatementCurrent
June 2006
- RFC 5440Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)Updated
March 2009
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?