Routed VPLS using BGP
draft-sajassi-l2vpn-rvpls-bgp-01
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Ali Sajassi , Keyur Patel , Prodosh Mohapatra , Clarence Filsfils , Sami Boutros | ||
| Last updated | 2010-07-09 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
VPLS, as currently defined, has challenges pertaining to the areas of redundancy and multicast optimization. In particular, multi- homing with all-active forwarding cannot be supported and there's no known solution to date for leveraging MP2MP MDTs for optimizing the delivery of multi-destination frames. This document defines an evolution of the current VPLS solution, referred to as Routed VPLS (R-VPLS), to address these shortcomings. In addition, this solution offers several benefits over current VPLS such as: ease of provisioning, per-flow load-balancing of traffic from/to multi-homed sites, optimum traffic forwarding to PEs with both single-homed and multi-homed sites, support for flexible multi-homing groups and fast convergence upon failures. Conventions The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119
Authors
Ali Sajassi
Keyur Patel
Prodosh Mohapatra
Clarence Filsfils
Sami Boutros
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)