RSVP Extensions for Path Key Support
draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-01
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Richard Bradford , JP Vasseur | ||
| Last updated | 2009-04-28 (Latest revision 2008-02-24) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-ccamp-path-key-ero | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Replaced by draft-ietf-ccamp-path-key-ero | |
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) may be computed by Path Computation Elements (PCEs). Where the TE LSP crosses multiple domains, such as Autonomous Systems (ASes), the path may be computed by multiple PCEs that cooperate, with each responsible for computing a segment of the path. To preserve confidentiality of topology with each AS, the PCE supports a mechanism to hide the contents of a segment of a path, called the Confidential Path Segment (CPS), by encoding the contents as a Path Key Subobject (PKS). This document describes the addition of this information to Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) signaling by inclusion in the Explicit Route Object (ERO) and Record Route Object (RRO).
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)