metasystema.org
CurrentINFORMATIONALIETF stream

RFC 8426: Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Path (LSP) Coexistence

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

Operators are looking to introduce services over Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in networks running Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) LSPs. In some instances, operators are also migrating existing services from RSVP-TE to SR LSPs. For example, there might be certain services that are well suited for SR and need to coexist with RSVP-TE in the same network. Such introduction or migration of traffic to SR might require coexistence with RSVP-TE in the same network for an extended period of time, depending on the operator's intent. The following document provides solution options for keeping the traffic engineering database consistent across the network, accounting for the different bandwidth utilization between SR and RSVP-TE.

Document record

Document ID
RFC8426
Published
July 2018
Authors
H. Sitaraman; V. Beeram; I. Minei; S. Sivabalan
Status
INFORMATIONAL
Stream
IETF
Area
rtg
Pages
12
Also known as
—

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/8426-recommendations-for-rsvp-te-and-segment-routing-sr-label-switched-path-lsp-coexi