|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 3270 (2002)
|
|
Title:
|
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) support of Differentiated Services.
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Approved by IESG (Internet Engineering Steering Group).
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
G.8121 refers to the terminology defined in RFC 3270.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=3270
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
The status of RFC 3270 is "Standards Track".
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
The status of RFC 3270 is "Standards Track".
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
References within the referenced RFC are listed under item (8).
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] ANSI/IEEE Std 802.1D, 1993 Edition, incorporating IEEE supplements P802.1p, 802.1j-1996, 802.6k-1992, 802.11c-1998, and P802.12e)./
[2] ATM Forum, "Traffic Management Specification Version 4.1", March 1999./
[3] Jamoussi, B., Editor, Andersson, L., Callon, R. and R. Dantu, "Constraint-Based LSP Setup using LDP", RFC 3212, January 2002./
[4] Bernet, Y., "Format of the RSVP DCLASS Object", RFC 2996, November 2000./
[5] Heinanen, J., Baker, F., Weiss, W. and J. Wroclawski, "Assured Forwarding PHB Group", RFC 2597, June 1999./
[6] Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z. and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated Services", RFC 2475, December 1998./
[7] Davie, B., Charny, A., Baker, F., Bennet, J., Benson, K., Boudec, J., Chiu, A., Courtney, W., Davari, S., Firoiu, V., Kalmanek, C., Ramakrishnam, K. and D. Stiliadis, "An Expedited Forwarding PHB (Per-Hop Behavior)", RFC 3246, March 2002./
[8] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F. and D. Black,"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS/
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474, December 1998./
[9] Grossman, D., "New Terminology and Clarifications for Diffserv", RFC 3260, April 2002./
[10] Black, D., "Differentiated Services and Tunnels", RFC 2983, October 2000./
[11] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S. and D. Black, "The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", RFC 3168, September 2001./
[12] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998./
[13] ISO/IEC 15802-3: 1998 ANSI/IEEE Std 802.1D, 1998 Edition (Revision and redesignation of ISO/IEC 10038:98./
[14] Andersson, L., Doolan, D., Feldman, N., Fredette, A. and B. Thomas, "LDP Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001./
[15] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A. and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001./
[16] Davie, B., Lawrence, J., McCloghrie, K., Rosen, E.,Swallow, G., Rekhter, Y. and P. Doolan, "MPLS using LDP and ATM VC Switching", RFC 3035, January 2001./
[17] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y., Farinacci, D., Li, T. and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack Encoding", RFC 3032, January 2001./
[18] Conta, A., Doolan, P. and A. Malis, "Use of Label Switching on Frame Relay Networks Specification", RFC 3034, January 2001./
[19] Rosen, E., "BGP/MPLS VPNs", Work in Progress./
[20] Bernet, Y., Smith, A. and B. Davie, "Specification of the Null Service Type", RFC 2997, November 2000./
[21] Black, D., Brim, S., Carpenter, B. and F. LeFaucheur, "Per Hop Behavior Identification Codes" RFC 3140, June 2001./
[22] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S. and S. Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) - Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997./
[23] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V. and G. Swallow, "Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
All RFCs are available on line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
