Allocating and Retiring MPLS Reserved Labels
draft-kompella-mpls-reserved-labels-01
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Kireeti Kompella | ||
| Last updated | 2012-10-25 (Latest revision 2012-09-28) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-kompella-mpls-special-purpose-labels | ||
| 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-kompella-mpls-special-purpose-labels | |
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
There are a limited number of reserved labels defined for Multi- Protocol Label Switching. Thus one must be cautious in the allocation of new reserved labels, yet at the same time allow forward progress when a new reserved label is called for. This memo suggests some procedures to follow in the allocation and retirement of reserved labels.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)