RFC 9792: Prefix Flag Extension for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Each OSPF prefix can be advertised with an 8-bit field to indicate specific properties of that prefix. However, all the OSPFv3 Prefix Options bits have already been assigned, and only a few bits remain unassigned in the Flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV. This document solves this problem by defining a variable-length Prefix Extended Flags sub-TLV for OSPF. This sub-TLV is applicable to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9792
- Published
- June 2025
- Authors
- R. Chen; D. Zhao; P. Psenak; K. Talaulikar; L. Gong
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rtg
- Pages
- 7
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9843IGP Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics, and ConstraintsUpdated
September 2025
- RFC 9692RIFT: Routing in Fat TreesCurrent
April 2025
- RFC 9667Dynamic Flooding on Dense GraphsCurrent
October 2024
- RFC 9666Area Proxy for IS-ISCurrent
October 2024
- RFC 9355OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-ModeCurrent
February 2023
- RFC 9339OSPF Reverse MetricCurrent
December 2022
- RFC 8966The Babel Routing ProtocolCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 8965Applicability of the Babel Routing ProtocolCurrent
January 2021
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?