Advertising LSPs with Segment Routing
draft-bowers-spring-advertising-lsps-with-sr-02
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Chris Bowers , Hannes Gredler , Uma Chunduri | ||
Last updated | 2016-05-21 (Latest revision 2015-11-18) | ||
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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
Segment routing uses globally-known labels to accomplish forwarding along shortest paths, and label stacks to accomplish explicit routing along arbitrary paths. These labels are advertised using an IGP. This draft describes how label bindings corresponding to RSVP, LDP, BGP labeled-unicast, and static LSPs are advertised in segment routing and how these labels can be combined with other segment routing labels to create forwarding paths. This draft also describes how context labels for egress node protection are advertised in using segment routing IGP extensions.
Authors
Chris Bowers
Hannes Gredler
Uma Chunduri
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)