RFC 5073: IGP Routing Protocol Extensions for Discovery of Traffic Engineering Node Capabilities
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
It is highly desired, in several cases, to take into account Traffic Engineering (TE) node capabilities during Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineered Label Switched Path (TE-LSP) selection, such as, for instance, the capability to act as a branch Label Switching Router (LSR) of a Point-To-MultiPoint (P2MP) LSP. This requires advertising these capabilities within the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP). For that purpose, this document specifies Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) and Intermediate System-Intermediate System (IS-IS) traffic engineering extensions for the advertisement of control plane and data plane traffic engineering node capabilities. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5073
- Published
- December 2007
- Authors
- J.P. Vasseur; J.L. Le Roux
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 13
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5443LDP IGP SynchronizationUpdated
March 2009
- RFC 4561Definition of a Record Route Object (RRO) Node-Id Sub-ObjectCurrent
June 2006
- RFC 3719Recommendations for Interoperable Networks using Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS)Current
February 2004
- RFC 4124Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic EngineeringCurrent
June 2005
- RFC 3785Use of Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Metric as a second MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) MetricCurrent
May 2004
- RFC 6413Benchmarking Methodology for Link-State IGP Data-Plane Route ConvergenceCurrent
November 2011
- RFC 5065Autonomous System Confederations for BGPUpdated
August 2007
- RFC 5082The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM)Current
October 2007
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?