RFC 7392: Explicit Path Routing for Dynamic Multi-Segment Pseudowires
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
When set up through an explicit path, dynamic Multi-Segment Pseudowires (MS-PWs) may be required to provide a simple solution for 1:1 protection with diverse primary and backup MS-PWs for a service, or to enable controlled signaling (strict or loose) for special MS-PWs. This document specifies the extensions and procedures required to enable dynamic MS-PWs to be established along explicit paths.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC7392
- Published
- December 2014
- Authors
- P. Dutta; M. Bocci; L. Martini
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 10
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5254Requirements for Multi-Segment Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3)Current
October 2008
- RFC 7026Retiring TLVs from the Associated Channel Header of the MPLS Generic Associated ChannelCurrent
September 2013
- RFC 7893Pseudowire Congestion ConsiderationsCurrent
June 2016
- RFC 8104Pseudowire (PW) Endpoint Fast Failure ProtectionCurrent
March 2017
- RFC 8159Keyed IPv6 TunnelCurrent
May 2017
- RFC 8469Recommendation to Use the Ethernet Control WordCurrent
November 2018
- RFC 6310Pseudowire (PW) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Message MappingCurrent
July 2011
- RFC 5885Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)Updated
June 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?