RFC 8537: Updates to the Fast Reroute Procedures for Co-routed Associated Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) association signaling can be used to bind two unidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs) into an associated bidirectional LSP. When an associated bidirectional LSP is co-routed, the reverse LSP follows the same path as its forward LSP. This document updates the fast reroute procedures defined in RFC 4090 to support both single-sided and double-sided provisioned associated bidirectional LSPs. This document also updates the procedure for associating two reverse LSPs defined in RFC 7551 to support co-routed bidirectional LSPs. The fast reroute procedures can ensure that, for the co-routed LSPs, traffic flows on co-routed paths in the forward and reverse directions after a failure event.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8537
- Published
- February 2019
- Authors
- R. Gandhi; H. Shah; J. Whittaker
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 16
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9059Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Associated Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)Updated
June 2021
- RFC 8538Notification Message Support for BGP Graceful RestartCurrent
March 2019
- RFC 8534Explicit Tracking with Wildcard Routes in Multicast VPNCurrent
February 2019
- RFC 8541Impact of Shortest Path First (SPF) Trigger and Delay Strategies on IGP Micro-loopsCurrent
March 2019
- RFC 8542A YANG Data Model for Fabric Topology in Data-Center NetworksCurrent
March 2019
- RFC 8530YANG Model for Logical Network ElementsCurrent
March 2019
- RFC 8529YANG Data Model for Network InstancesCurrent
March 2019
- RFC 8518Selection of Loop-Free Alternates for Multi-Homed PrefixesCurrent
March 2019
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?