LDP IGP Synchronization
draft-ietf-mpls-igp-sync-01

 
Document
Type Replaced Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
Last updated 2008-03-24 (latest revision 2008-02-25)
Replaced by draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-igp-sync
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
plain text pdf html
Stream
WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG
IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-igp-sync
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

Email authors IPR References Referenced by Nits Search lists

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
//www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mpls-igp-sync-01.txt

Abstract

In certain networks there is a dependency on edge-to-edge LSPs setup by LDP, e.g. networks that are used for MPLS VPN applications. For such applications it is not possible to rely on IP forwarding if the MPLS LSP is not operating appropriately. Blackholing of labeled traffic can occur in situations where the IGP is operational on a link but LDP is not operational on that link. While the link could still be used for IP forwarding, it is not useful for traffic with packets carrying a label stack of more than one label or when the IP address carried in the packet is out of the RFC1918 space. This document describes a mechanism to avoid traffic loss due to this condition without introducing any protocol changes.

Authors

Markus Jork (jork@kar.dec.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)