RFC 4973: OSPF-xTE: Experimental Extension to OSPF for Traffic Engineering
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines OSPF-xTE, an experimental traffic engineering (TE) extension to the link-state routing protocol OSPF. OSPF-xTE defines new TE Link State Advertisements (LSAs) to disseminate TE metrics within an autonomous System (AS), which may consist of multiple areas. When an AS consists of TE and non-TE nodes, OSPF-xTE ensures that non-TE nodes in the AS are unaffected by the TE LSAs. OSPF-xTE generates a stand-alone TE Link State Database (TE-LSDB), distinct from the native OSPF LSDB, for computation of TE circuit paths. OSPF-xTE is versatile and extendible to non-packet networks such as Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) / Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) and optical networks. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4973
- Published
- July 2007
- Authors
- P. Srisuresh; P. Joseph
- Status
- EXPERIMENTAL
- Stream
- INDEPENDENT
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 50
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4970Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router CapabilitiesObsoleted
July 2007
- RFC 4222Prioritized Treatment of Specific OSPF Version 2 Packets and Congestion AvoidanceUpdated
October 2005
- RFC 4136OSPF Refresh and Flooding Reduction in Stable TopologiesCurrent
July 2005
- RFC 7770Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router CapabilitiesCurrent
February 2016
- RFC 5250The OSPF Opaque LSA OptionCurrent
July 2008
- RFC 5392OSPF Extensions in Support of Inter-Autonomous System (AS) MPLS and GMPLS Traffic EngineeringCurrent
January 2009
- RFC 2370The OSPF Opaque LSA OptionObsoleted
July 1998
- RFC 7684OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute AdvertisementCurrent
November 2015
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?