Skip to main content

Remote-LFA Node Protection and Manageability
draft-psarkar-rtgwg-rlfa-node-protection-05

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (candidate for rtgwg WG)
Authors Hannes Gredler , Shraddha Hegde , Chris Bowers , Stephane Litkowski , Harish Raghuveer
Last updated 2014-06-24
Replaced by RFC 8102
Stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
Stream WG state Call For Adoption By WG Issued
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-rtgwg-rlfa-node-protection
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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

The loop-free alternates computed following the current Remote-LFA [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-remote-lfa] specification gaurantees only link- protection. The resulting Remote-LFA nexthops (also called PQ- nodes), may not gaurantee node-protection for all destinations being protected by it. This document describes procedures for determining if a given PQ-node provides node-protection for a specific destination or not. The document also shows how the same procedure can be utilised for collection of complete characteristics for alternate paths. Knowledge about the characteristics of all alternate path is precursory to apply operator defined policy for eliminating paths not fitting constraints.

Authors

Hannes Gredler
Shraddha Hegde
Chris Bowers
Stephane Litkowski
Harish Raghuveer

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