statement_id stringlengths 26 83 | source stringclasses 6
values | subject_id stringlengths 3 70 | subject_label stringlengths 0 250 | subject_description stringlengths 0 250 | subject_instance_of_ids stringlengths 0 139 | subject_instance_of_labels stringlengths 0 310 | property_id stringlengths 2 6 | property_label stringlengths 0 80 | value_id stringlengths 1 1.9k | value_label stringlengths 0 1.9k | value_type stringclasses 8
values | qualifier_property_id stringclasses 948
values | qualifier_property_label stringclasses 947
values | qualifier_value_id stringlengths 0 686 | qualifier_value_label stringlengths 0 205 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
STD:IETF:RFC9351$bcc76d6f611e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9351 | Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Flexible Algorithm Advertisement | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | P. Psenak | P. Psenak | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9351$fa46841c8fcb | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9351 | Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for Flexible Algorithm Advertisement | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | Flexible Algorithm is a solution that allows some routing protocols (e.g., OSPF and IS-IS) to compute paths over a network based on user-defined (and hence, flexible) constraints and metrics. The computation is performed by routers participating in the specific network in a distributed manner using a Flexible Algorithm... | Flexible Algorithm is a solution that allows some routing protocols (e.g., OSPF and IS-IS) to compute paths over a network based on user-defined (and hence, flexible) constraints and metrics. The computation is performed by routers participating in the specific network in a distributed manner using a Flexible Algorithm... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$07b2ba7a81fc | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | The Segment Routing (SR) architecture allows a flexible definition of the end-to-end path by encoding it as a sequence of topological elements called "segments". It can be implemented over the MPLS or the IPv6 data plane. This document describes the IS-IS extensions required to support SR over the IPv6 data plane. Thi... | The Segment Routing (SR) architecture allows a flexible definition of the end-to-end path by encoding it as a sequence of topological elements called "segments". It can be implemented over the MPLS or the IPv6 data plane. This document describes the IS-IS extensions required to support SR over the IPv6 data plane. Thi... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$08c658410bbd | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$0d4c2b39180d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$0d4c2b39180d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$2e9d08ecca76 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | P. Psenak | P. Psenak | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$54f42dc356ff | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | B. Decraene | B. Decraene | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$5c54508a3ed9 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | A. Bashandy | A. Bashandy | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$66ea9883c023 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | C. Filsfils | C. Filsfils | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$b10e4d516dce | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$bbe52b2edf7d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Z. Hu | Z. Hu | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$ce59a57e6c69 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9352 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9352 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$e0717a791ed7 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9352$f4d7e862b9f7 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9352 | IS-IS Extensions to Support Segment Routing over the IPv6 Data Plane | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$0f44c67450a5 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | When a Path Computation Element (PCE) is a Label Switching Router (LSR) or a server participating in the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), its presence and path computation capabilities can be advertised using IGP flooding. The IGP extensions for PCE Discovery (PCED) (RFCs 5088 and 5089) define a method to advertise pat... | When a Path Computation Element (PCE) is a Label Switching Router (LSR) or a server participating in the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), its presence and path computation capabilities can be advertised using IGP flooding. The IGP extensions for PCE Discovery (PCED) (RFCs 5088 and 5089) define a method to advertise pat... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$1bb85663900c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$2d17957dfdc3 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$598608566c1e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Q. Ma | Q. Ma | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$5de28cc8bf9d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | D. Lopez | D. Lopez | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$747838d066e0 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Q. Wu | Q. Wu | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$93a4613a1f19 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$97ee6cae7df8 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9353 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9353 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$b1f1221f9a58 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$d82a731418df | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | D. King | D. King | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$eb8d20617338 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$eb8d20617338 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9353$eebb17daa424 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9353 | IGP Extension for Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Security Capability Support in PCE Discovery (PCED) | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | D. Dhody | D. Dhody | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$0f1f96611856 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | J. Hou | J. Hou | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$113b2adb0e13 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$22879b7e68dc | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$24fd61bcc128 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | B. Liu | B. Liu | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$6b7d5f960456 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | X. Tang | X. Tang | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$6cbad23579ca | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$80a88d4db7cc | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Y-G. Hong | Y-G. Hong | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$9c5321438a6c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$9c5321438a6c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$b0d9dbb8ecbe | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | Power Line Communication (PLC), namely using electric power lines for indoor and outdoor communications, has been widely applied to support Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), especially smart meters for electricity. The existing electricity infrastructure facilitates the expansion of PLC deployments due to its po... | Power Line Communication (PLC), namely using electric power lines for indoor and outdoor communications, has been widely applied to support Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), especially smart meters for electricity. The existing electricity infrastructure facilitates the expansion of PLC deployments due to its po... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$d80b1e90b6a8 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$d978b9912e82 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | C. Perkins | C. Perkins | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9354$e038f9987a18 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9354 | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line Communication (PLC) Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9354 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9354 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$050595461f26 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9355 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9355 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$319659c0db10 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$319659c0db10 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$453a1afef637 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | P. Psenak | P. Psenak | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$560770a02c02 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$616d1e991f1c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | A. Fu | A. Fu | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$7bf1cbbdc224 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$8bb64a2aa54a | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$c61df26094ce | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | M. Rajesh | M. Rajesh | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$c7e9653039db | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | This document specifies the extensions to OSPF that enable an OSPF
router to signal the requirement for a Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection (BFD) session prior to adjacency formation. Link-Local
Signaling (LLS) is used to advertise the requirement for strict-mode
BFD session establishment for an OSPF adjacency. If bot... | This document specifies the extensions to OSPF that enable an OSPF
router to signal the requirement for a Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection (BFD) session prior to adjacency formation. Link-Local
Signaling (LLS) is used to advertise the requirement for strict-mode
BFD session establishment for an OSPF adjacency. If bot... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$e1ebe9d2e34d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9355$e824f4b4c375 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9355 | OSPF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Strict-Mode | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | K. Talaulikar | K. Talaulikar | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$26ca1d007bc6 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$350d57132ff0 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9356 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9356 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$73eba34a0f61 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | P. Psenak | P. Psenak | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$9b0ffe36efa5 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$af8af91e898c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$ca52d33b12b4 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | K. Talaulikar | K. Talaulikar | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$d56ead6acbad | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$db5ce343fe45 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | There are deployments where the Layer 3 (L3) interface on which OSPF operates is a Layer 2 (L2) interface bundle. Existing OSPF advertisements only support advertising link attributes of the L3 interface. If entities external to OSPF wish to control traffic flows on the individual physical links that comprise the L2 in... | There are deployments where the Layer 3 (L3) interface on which OSPF operates is a Layer 2 (L2) interface bundle. Existing OSPF advertisements only support advertising link attributes of the L3 interface. If entities external to OSPF wish to control traffic flows on the individual physical links that comprise the L2 in... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$f723160b0a5e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9356$f723160b0a5e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9356 | Advertising Layer 2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in OSPF | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$0c15e8ab1323 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$4c36fa2f4880 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Q. Xiong | Q. Xiong | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$4f29e871da8a | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$4f29e871da8a | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$564a9cedbd37 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$71e4373de5d3 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | RFC 8231 describes a set of extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via PCEP. One of the extensions is the LSP object, which includes a Flag field with a length of 12 bits. However, all bits of the Flag field ha... | RFC 8231 describes a set of extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via PCEP. One of the extensions is the LSP object, which includes a Flag field with a length of 12 bits. However, all bits of the Flag field ha... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$792ad8338a57 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$7d6d502af285 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9357 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9357 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9357$fe66f79148e0 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9357 | Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$0f93a9efb51f | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$1df239d9975e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$2bd6bd5ab09c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | D. Ceccarelli | D. Ceccarelli | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$31187483a053 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$3930e557ca19 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | Y. Lee | Y. Lee | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$4268b1136c30 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | H. Zheng | H. Zheng | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$60e3e1237e22 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9358 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9358 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$6ee8e57bbf5d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$df24643c9b5d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$df24643c9b5d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9358$fec1f774cf74 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9358 | Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths and Virtual Networks | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | This document describes how to extend the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) association mechanism introduced by RFC 8697 to further associate sets of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) with a higher-level structure such as a Virtual Network (VN) requested by a customer or application. This extended assoc... | This document describes how to extend the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) association mechanism introduced by RFC 8697 to further associate sets of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) with a higher-level structure such as a Virtual Network (VN) requested by a customer or application. This extended assoc... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$61a0fe65ec7f | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | G. Mirsky | G. Mirsky | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$6cffbf6d40aa | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$720ec4ccb607 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$81353d9d714d | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P953 | full work available at URL | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9359 | https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9359 | url | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$9e5aad5dc912 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$9e5aad5dc912 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$b05a3ffc9008 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | X. Min | X. Min | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$c17bec8fe56b | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P407 | language of work or name | en | English | wikibase-item | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$cb05c2599ddb | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1683 | quotation (abstract) | This document describes a generic format for use in echo request/reply mechanisms, which can be used within an IOAM-Domain, allowing the IOAM encapsulating node to discover the enabled IOAM capabilities of each IOAM transit and IOAM decapsulating node. The generic format is intended to be used with a variety of data p... | This document describes a generic format for use in echo request/reply mechanisms, which can be used within an IOAM-Domain, allowing the IOAM encapsulating node to discover the enabled IOAM capabilities of each IOAM transit and IOAM decapsulating node. The generic format is intended to be used with a variety of data p... | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$cce9b0cc8874 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | L. Bo | L. Bo | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9359$ddc1c07f053e | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9359 | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | Echo Request/Reply for Enabled In Situ OAM (IOAM) Capabilities | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$01c6b1030d8c | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P1476 | title | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | monolingualtext | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$173294718783 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P50 | author | J. Schaad | J. Schaad | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$3b2eccbe90f7 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$3b2eccbe90f7 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P5008 | on focus list of Wikimedia project (status) | PROPOSED STANDARD | PROPOSED STANDARD | string | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$8b73bef07d42 | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P577 | publication date | 2023-01 | 2023-01 | time | ||||
STD:IETF:RFC9360$8d489313bcca | IETF | STD:IETF:RFC9360 | CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header Parameters for Carrying and Referencing X.509 Certificates | PROPOSED STANDARD | Q212971 | Request for Comments | P31 | instance of | Q212971 | Request for Comments | wikibase-item |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.