RFC 7579: General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS-Controlled Networks
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) can be used to control a wide variety of technologies. In some of these technologies, network elements and links may impose additional routing constraints such as asymmetric switch connectivity, non-local label assignment, and label range limitations on links. This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for general information elements representing connectivity and label constraints as well as label availability. It is intended that protocol-specific documents will reference this memo to describe how information is carried for specific uses.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC7579
- Published
- June 2015
- Authors
- G. Bernstein; Y. Lee; D. Li; W. Imajuku; J. Han
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 28
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7580OSPF-TE Extensions for General Network Element ConstraintsCurrent
June 2015
- RFC 7709Requirements for Very Fast Setup of GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Current
November 2015
- RFC 7446Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical NetworksCurrent
February 2015
- RFC 7581Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for Wavelength Switched Optical NetworksCurrent
June 2015
- RFC 7582Multicast Virtual Private Network (MVPN): Using Bidirectional P-TunnelsUpdated
July 2015
- RFC 7571GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions for Lock Instruct and LoopbackCurrent
July 2015
- RFC 7570Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in the Explicit Route Object (ERO)Current
July 2015
- RFC 7602IS-IS Extended Sequence Number TLVCurrent
July 2015
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?