MPLS Loop Prevention Mechanism
draft-ietf-mpls-loop-prevention-03

The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC
Document Type RFC Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
Authors Yoshihiro Ohba  , Yasuhiro Katsube  , Paul Doolan  , Eric Rosen 
Last updated 2013-03-02 (latest revision 2000-04-27)
Stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state RFC 3063 (Experimental)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 3063

        Title:      MPLS Loop Prevention Mechanism
        Author(s):  Y. Ohba, Y. Katsube, E. Rosen, P. Doolan
        Status:     Experimental
        Date:       February 2001
        Mailbox:    yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp,
                    yasuhiro.katsube@toshiba.co.jp, erosen@cisco.com,
                    pdoolan@ennovatenetworks.com 
        Pages:      44
        Characters: 93523
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:    None        

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-mpls-loop-prevention-03.txt

        URL:        ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3063.txt

This paper presents a simple mechanism, based on "threads", which
can be used to prevent Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) from
setting up label switched path (LSPs) which have loops.  The
mechanism is compatible with, but does not require, VC merge.  The
mechanism can be used with either the ordered downstream-on-demand
allocation or ordered downstream allocation.  The amount of
information that must be passed in a protocol message is tightly
bounded (i.e., no path-vector is used).  When a node needs to change
its next hop, a distributed procedure is executed, but only nodes
which are downstream of the change are involved.

This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching
Working Group of the IETF.

This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Discussion and
suggestions for improvement are requested.  Distribution of this memo
is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG.  Requests to be
added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should
be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body 
help: ways_to_get_rfcs.  For example:

        To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG
        Subject: getting rfcs

        help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.echo 
Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.  Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC
Authors, for further information.