RFC 6974: Applicability of MPLS Transport Profile for Ring Topologies
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document presents an applicability of existing MPLS protection mechanisms, both local and end-to-end, to the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) in ring topologies. This document does not propose any new mechanisms or protocols. Requirements for MPLS-TP protection especially for protection in ring topologies are discussed in "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile" (RFC 5654) and "MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Survivability Framework" (RFC 6372). This document discusses how most of the requirements are met by applying linear protection as defined in RFC 6378 in a ring topology.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6974
- Published
- July 2013
- Authors
- Y. Weingarten; S. Bryant; D. Ceccarelli; D. Caviglia; F. Fondelli; M. Corsi; B. Wu; X. Dai
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 30
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6976Framework for Loop-Free Convergence Using the Ordered Forwarding Information Base (oFIB) ApproachCurrent
July 2013
- RFC 6969OSPFv3 Instance ID Registry UpdateCurrent
July 2013
- RFC 6981A Framework for IP and MPLS Fast Reroute Using Not-Via AddressesCurrent
August 2013
- RFC 6965MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Applicability: Use Cases and DesignCurrent
August 2013
- RFC 6984Interoperability Report for Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES)Current
August 2013
- RFC 6987OSPF Stub Router AdvertisementUpdated
September 2013
- RFC 6956Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Logical Function Block (LFB) LibraryCurrent
June 2013
- RFC 6992Routing for IPv4-Embedded IPv6 PacketsCurrent
July 2013
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?