PIM Flooding Protocol over Reliable Transport
draft-venaas-pim-port-pfm-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Stig Venaas , Balaji Ganesh , Kesavan Thiruvenkatasamy , Ramakrishnan Cokkanathapuram Sundaram | ||
| Last updated | 2019-09-12 (Latest revision 2019-03-11) | ||
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
The PIM Flooding Protocol (PFM) defined in RFC8364 relies on sending periodic updates as it does not provide for any reliability. If a message is lost, the information will be provided in the next periodic update. This document extends the Reliable Transport Mechanism for PIM in RFC6559 to allow for sending PFM messages. This significantly reduces the PFM signaling by not requiring frequent periodic updates, and it provides for retransmission, allowing for quick recovery when an IP packet is dropped.
Authors
Stig Venaas
Balaji Ganesh
Kesavan Thiruvenkatasamy
Ramakrishnan Cokkanathapuram Sundaram
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)