CurrentINFORMATIONALIETF stream

RFC 8243: Alternatives for Multilevel Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL)

In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC

Although TRILL is based on IS-IS, which supports multilevel unicast routing, extending TRILL to multiple levels has challenges that are not addressed by the already-existing capabilities of IS-IS. One issue is with the handling of multi-destination packet distribution trees. Other issues are with TRILL switch nicknames. How are such nicknames allocated across a multilevel TRILL network? Do nicknames need to be unique across an entire multilevel TRILL network? Or can they merely be unique within each multilevel area? This informational document enumerates and examines alternatives based on a number of factors including backward compatibility, simplicity, and scalability; it makes recommendations in some cases.

Document record

Document ID
RFC8243
Published
September 2017
Authors
R. Perlman; D. Eastlake 3rd; M. Zhang; A. Ghanwani; H. Zhai
Status
INFORMATIONAL
Stream
IETF
Area
rtg
Pages
29
Also known as

Topics

Related documents

Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.

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?

canonical URL: /rfc/8243-alternatives-for-multilevel-transparent-interconnection-of-lots-of-links-trill