RFC 9696: Routing in Fat Trees (RIFT) Applicability and Operational Considerations
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document discusses the properties, applicability, and operational considerations of Routing in Fat Trees (RIFT) in different network scenarios with the intention of providing a rough guide on how RIFT can be deployed to simplify routing operations in Clos topologies and their variations.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9696
- Published
- April 2025
- Authors
- Y. Wei; Z. Zhang; D. Afanasiev; P. Thubert; T. Przygienda
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 33
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9692RIFT: Routing in Fat TreesCurrent
April 2025
- RFC 9702YANG Data Model for Maximum Segment Identifier (SID) Depth (MSD) Types and MPLS MSDCurrent
January 2025
- RFC 9689Use Cases for a PCE as a Central Controller (PCECC)Current
December 2024
- RFC 9703Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) Egress Peer Engineering (EPE) Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data PlaneCurrent
December 2024
- RFC 9687Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) Send Hold TimerCurrent
November 2024
- RFC 9705Refresh-Interval Independent RSVP Fast Reroute Facility ProtectionCurrent
March 2025
- RFC 9681IS-IS Fast FloodingCurrent
November 2024
- RFC 9714Encapsulation for MPLS Performance Measurement with the Alternate-Marking MethodCurrent
February 2025
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?