RFC 9436: PIM Message Type Space Extension and Reserved Bits
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The PIM version 2 messages share a common message header format. The common header definition contains eight reserved bits. This document specifies how these bits may be used by individual message types and extends the PIM type space. This document updates RFCs 7761 and 3973 by defining the use of the Reserved field in the PIM common header. This document further updates RFCs 7761 and 3973, along with RFCs 5015, 5059, 6754, and 8364, by specifying the use of the bits for each PIM message. This document obsoletes RFC 8736.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9436
- Published
- August 2023
- Authors
- S. Venaas; A. Retana
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 7
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 8736
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 3 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
- RFC 6166 (2011)
- RFC 8736 (2020)
- RFC 9436 (2023)
Read the full history of PIM Message Type Space Extension and Reserved Bits →
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9437Publish/Subscribe Functionality for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)Current
August 2023
- RFC 9450Reliable and Available Wireless (RAW) Use CasesCurrent
August 2023
- RFC 9451Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Packet and Behavior in the Network Service Header (NSH)Current
August 2023
- RFC 9452Network Service Header (NSH) Encapsulation for In Situ OAM (IOAM) DataCurrent
August 2023
- RFC 9454Update to OSPF TerminologyCurrent
August 2023
- RFC 9465PIM Null-Register PackingCurrent
September 2023
- RFC 9466PIM Assert Message PackingCurrent
October 2023
- RFC 9467Relaxed Packet Counter Verification for Babel MAC AuthenticationCurrent
January 2024
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?