Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Path (LSP) Coexistence, July 2018
- File formats:
- H. Sitaraman, Ed.
- teas (rtg)
Cite this RFC: TXT | XML | BibTeX
Discuss this RFC: Send questions or comments to the mailing list email@example.com
Other actions: Submit Errata | Find IPR Disclosures from the IETF | View History of RFC 8426
Operators are looking to introduce services over Segment Routing (SR) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in networks running Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) LSPs. In some instances, operators are also migrating existing services from RSVP-TE to SR LSPs. For example, there might be certain services that are well suited for SR and need to coexist with RSVP-TE in the same network. Such introduction or migration of traffic to SR might require coexistence with RSVP-TE in the same network for an extended period of time, depending on the operator's intent. The following document provides solution options for keeping the traffic engineering database consistent across the network, accounting for the different bandwidth utilization between SR and RSVP-TE.
For the definition of Status, see RFC 2026.
For the definition of Stream, see RFC 8729.