Current issues with existing RBNF notation for PCEP messages and extensions
draft-cmfg-pce-pcep-grammar-02
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Ramon Casellas , Cyril Margaria , Adrian Farrel , Oscar Gonzalez de Dios , Dhruv Dhody , Xian Zhang | ||
Last updated | 2014-07-21 (Latest revision 2014-01-10) | ||
RFC stream | (None) | ||
Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
Formats | |||
Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | (None) | ||
Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The PCEP protocol has been defined in [RFC5440] and later extended in several RFCs. This document aims at documenting inconsistencies when implementing a set of extensions and at providing a reference, complete and formal RBNF grammar for PCEP messages, including object ordering and precedence rules.
Authors
Ramon Casellas
Cyril Margaria
Adrian Farrel
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
Dhruv Dhody
Xian Zhang
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)