RFC 5195: BGP-Based Auto-Discovery for Layer-1 VPNs
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The purpose of this document is to define a BGP-based auto-discovery mechanism for Layer-1 VPNs (L1VPNs). The auto-discovery mechanism for L1VPNs allows the provider network devices to dynamically discover the set of Provider Edges (PEs) having ports attached to Customer Edge (CE) members of the same VPN. That information is necessary for completing the signaling phase of L1VPN connections. One main objective of a L1VPN auto-discovery mechanism is to support the "single-end provisioning" model, where addition of a new port to a given L1VPN would involve configuration changes only on the PE that has this port and on the CE that is connected to the PE via this port. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5195
- Published
- June 2008
- Authors
- H. Ould-Brahim; D. Fedyk; Y. Rekhter
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 10
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5251Layer 1 VPN Basic ModeCurrent
July 2008
- RFC 5252OSPF-Based Layer 1 VPN Auto-DiscoveryCurrent
July 2008
- RFC 4847Framework and Requirements for Layer 1 Virtual Private NetworksCurrent
April 2007
- RFC 5187OSPFv3 Graceful RestartCurrent
June 2008
- RFC 5185OSPF Multi-Area AdjacencyCurrent
May 2008
- RFC 5212Requirements for GMPLS-Based Multi-Region and Multi-Layer Networks (MRN/MLN)Current
July 2008
- RFC 5152A Per-Domain Path Computation Method for Establishing Inter-Domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Current
February 2008
- RFC 5151Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) ExtensionsCurrent
February 2008
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?