Signaling MPLS in IP or MPLS in GRE Encapsulation
Capability
draft-raggarwa-ppvpn-mpls-ip-gre-sig-00
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Rahul Aggarwal , Robert Raszuk | ||
Last updated | 2002-12-02 | ||
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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
This document proposes a lightweight mechanism for signaling a PE router's capability to encapsulate MPLS using dynamic GRE and/or IP. This is applicable when a MPLS packet is tunnelled using a dynamic GRE and/or IP encapsulation [MPLS-IP-GRE] between PE routers. For instance the MPLS packet may be a 2547 based MPLS VPN packet [2547bis] or a layer 2 packet transported using MPLS [MARTINI]. Adding such a mechanism has several benefits. It helps in blackhole avoidance and eases transitioning from MPLS tunneling based Layer 3/Layer 2 VPNs to GRE/IP tunneling based Layer 3/Layer 2 VPNs (and vice versa). Such a mechanism is needed where a network may be using MPLS and GRE (or IP) for tunneling, at the same time, in 2547 based or Layer 2 VPNs. It can help in encapsulation selection when multiple tunneling technologies are supported. It can also be used to enhance the security of the network backbone.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)