RFC 5772: A Set of Possible Requirements for a Future Routing Architecture
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The requirements for routing architectures described in this document were produced by two sub-groups under the IRTF Routing Research Group (RRG) in 2001, with some editorial updates up to 2006. The two sub- groups worked independently, and the resulting requirements represent two separate views of the problem and of what is required to fix the problem. This document may usefully serve as part of the recommended reading for anyone who works on routing architecture designs for the Internet in the future. The document is published with the support of the IRTF RRG as a record of the work completed at that time, but with the understanding that it does not necessarily represent either the latest technical understanding or the technical consensus of the research group at the date of publication. This document defines a Historic Document for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5772
- Published
- February 2010
- Authors
- A. Doria; E. Davies; F. Kastenholz
- Status
- HISTORIC
- Stream
- IRTF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 68
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5773Analysis of Inter-Domain Routing Requirements and HistoryCurrent
February 2010
- RFC 5575Dissemination of Flow Specification RulesObsoleted
August 2009
- RFC 5492Capabilities Advertisement with BGP-4Updated
February 2009
- RFC 7705Autonomous System Migration Mechanisms and Their Effects on the BGP AS_PATH AttributeCurrent
November 2015
- RFC 7854BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)Updated
June 2016
- RFC 7947Internet Exchange BGP Route ServerCurrent
September 2016
- RFC 3345Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Persistent Route Oscillation ConditionCurrent
August 2002
- RFC 8538Notification Message Support for BGP Graceful RestartCurrent
March 2019
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?