Multicast VPN Upstream Designated Forwarder Selection
draft-wang-bess-mvpn-upstream-df-selection-07
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Fanghong Duan , Siyu Chen , Yisong Liu , Heng Wang | ||
| Last updated | 2023-11-16 (Latest revision 2023-05-15) | ||
| RFC stream | (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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
This document defines Multicast Virtual Private Network (VPN) extensions and procedures of designated forwarder election performed between ingress PEs, which is different from the one described in [RFC9026] in which the upstream designated forwarder determined by using the "Standby PE Community" carried in the C-Multicast routes. Based on the DF election, the failure detection point discovery mechanism between DF and standby DF is extended in MVPN procedures to achieve fast failover by using BFD session to track the status of detection point. To realize a stable "warm root standby", this document obsolete the P-Tunnel status determining procedure for downstream PEs in regular MVPN by introducing a RPF Set Checking mechanism as an instead.
Authors
Fanghong Duan
Siyu Chen
Yisong Liu
Heng Wang
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)