RFC 7311: The Accumulated IGP Metric Attribute for BGP
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Routing protocols that have been designed to run within a single administrative domain (IGPs) generally do so by assigning a metric to each link and then choosing, as the installed path between two nodes, the path for which the total distance (sum of the metric of each link along the path) is minimized. BGP, designed to provide routing over a large number of independent administrative domains (autonomous systems), does not make its path-selection decisions through the use of a metric. It is generally recognized that any attempt to do so would incur significant scalability problems as well as inter-administration coordination problems. However, there are deployments in which a single administration runs several contiguous BGP networks. In such cases, it can be desirable, within that single administrative domain, for BGP to select paths based on a metric, just as an IGP would do. The purpose of this document is to provide a specification for doing so.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC7311
- Published
- August 2014
- Authors
- P. Mohapatra; R. Fernando; E. Rosen; J. Uttaro
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 15
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7309Redundancy Mechanism for Inter-domain VPLS ServiceCurrent
July 2014
- RFC 7313Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4Current
July 2014
- RFC 7308Extended Administrative Groups in MPLS Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE)Current
July 2014
- RFC 7307LDP Extensions for Multi-TopologyUpdated
July 2014
- RFC 7318Policy Qualifiers in Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) CertificatesCurrent
July 2014
- RFC 7300Reservation of Last Autonomous System (AS) NumbersCurrent
July 2014
- RFC 7324Updates to MPLS Transport Profile Linear ProtectionCurrent
July 2014
- RFC 7325MPLS Forwarding Compliance and Performance RequirementsCurrent
August 2014
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?