RFC 9017: Special-Purpose Label Terminology
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document discusses and recommends terminology that may be used when MPLS Special-Purpose Labels (SPLs) are specified and documented. This document applies that terminology change to the relevant IANA registry and also clarifies the use of the Entropy Label Indicator (7) when immediately preceded by the Extension Label (15). This document updates RFCs 3032 and 7274.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9017
- Published
- April 2021
- Authors
- L. Andersson; K. Kompella; A. Farrel
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 8
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9020YANG Data Model for Segment RoutingCurrent
May 2021
- RFC 9070YANG Data Model for MPLS LDPCurrent
March 2022
- RFC 8964Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Data Plane: MPLSCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 8957Synonymous Flow Label FrameworkCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 9085Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Segment RoutingUpdated
August 2021
- RFC 9214OSPFv3 Code Point for MPLS LSP PingCurrent
April 2022
- RFC 8690Clarification of Segment ID Sub-TLV Length for RFC 8287Current
December 2019
- RFC 8687OSPF Routing with Cross-Address Family Traffic Engineering TunnelsCurrent
November 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?