RFC 5946: Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Extensions for Path-Triggered RSVP Receiver Proxy
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) signaling can be used to make end-to-end resource reservations in an IP network in order to guarantee the Quality of Service (QoS) required by certain flows. With conventional RSVP, both the data sender and receiver of a given flow take part in RSVP signaling. Yet, there are many use cases where resource reservation is required, but the receiver, the sender, or both, is not RSVP-capable. Where the receiver is not RSVP- capable, an RSVP router may behave as an RSVP Receiver Proxy, thereby performing RSVP signaling on behalf of the receiver. This allows resource reservations to be established on the segment of the end-to- end path from the sender to the RSVP Receiver Proxy. However, as discussed in the companion document "RSVP Proxy Approaches", RSVP extensions are needed to facilitate operations with an RSVP Receiver Proxy whose signaling is triggered by receipt of RSVP Path messages from the sender. This document specifies these extensions. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5946
- Published
- October 2010
- Authors
- F. Le Faucheur; J. Manner; A. Narayanan; A. Guillou; H. Malik
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- wit
- Pages
- 35
- Also known as
- —
- Updates:
- RFC 2205
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5945Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Proxy ApproachesCurrent
October 2010
- RFC 5961Improving TCP's Robustness to Blind In-Window AttacksUpdated
August 2010
- RFC 5927ICMP Attacks against TCPCurrent
July 2010
- RFC 5926Cryptographic Algorithms for the TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO)Current
June 2010
- RFC 5925The TCP Authentication OptionCurrent
June 2010
- RFC 6016Support for the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) in Layer 3 VPNsCurrent
October 2010
- RFC 5865A Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) for Capacity-Admitted TrafficCurrent
May 2010
- RFC 6040Tunnelling of Explicit Congestion NotificationUpdated
November 2010
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?