<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lfa-manageability" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-11">
   <front>
      <title>Operational Management of Loop-Free Alternates</title>
      <author initials="P." surname="Sarkar" fullname="Pushpasis Sarkar">
         <organization>Individual Contributor</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="S." surname="Litkowski" fullname="Stephane Litkowski">
         <organization>Orange</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="B." surname="Decraene" fullname="Bruno Decraene">
         <organization>Orange</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="C." surname="Filsfils" fullname="Clarence Filsfils">
         <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="S. K." surname="Raza" fullname="Syed Kamran Raza">
         <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
      </author>
      <author initials="M." surname="Horneffer" fullname="Martin Horneffer">
         <organization>Deutsche Telekom</organization>
      </author>
      <date month="June" day="25" year="2015" />
      <abstract>
	 <t>Loop-Free Alternates (LFAs), as defined in RFC 5286, constitute an IP Fast Reroute (IP FRR) mechanism enabling traffic protection for IP traffic (and, by extension, MPLS LDP traffic). Following early deployment experiences, this document provides operational feedback on LFAs, highlights some limitations, and proposes a set of refinements to address those limitations. It also proposes required management specifications.

 This proposal is also applicable to remote-LFA solutions.
	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-11" />
   
</reference>
