RFC 6425: Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Recent proposals have extended the scope of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) to encompass point-to-multipoint (P2MP) LSPs. The requirement for a simple and efficient mechanism that can be used to detect data-plane failures in point-to-point (P2P) MPLS LSPs has been recognized and has led to the development of techniques for fault detection and isolation commonly referred to as "LSP ping". The scope of this document is fault detection and isolation for P2MP MPLS LSPs. This documents does not replace any of the mechanisms of LSP ping, but clarifies their applicability to MPLS P2MP LSPs, and extends the techniques and mechanisms of LSP ping to the MPLS P2MP environment. This document updates RFC 4379. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6425
- Published
- November 2011
- Authors
- S. Saxena; G. Swallow; Z. Ali; A. Farrel; S. Yasukawa; T. Nadeau
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 28
- Also known as
- —
- Updates:
- RFC 4379
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6348Requirements for Point-to-Multipoint Extensions to the Label Distribution ProtocolCurrent
September 2011
- RFC 6517Mandatory Features in a Layer 3 Multicast BGP/MPLS VPN SolutionCurrent
February 2012
- RFC 6845OSPF Hybrid Broadcast and Point-to-Multipoint Interface TypeCurrent
January 2013
- RFC 5501Requirements for Multicast Support in Virtual Private LAN ServicesCurrent
March 2009
- RFC 4875Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Updated
May 2007
- RFC 4461Signaling Requirements for Point-to-Multipoint Traffic-Engineered MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Current
April 2006
- RFC 9026Multicast VPN Fast Upstream FailoverCurrent
April 2021
- RFC 4837Managed Objects of Ethernet Passive Optical Networks (EPON)Current
July 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?