draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-01.txt   draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-02.txt 
Inter-Domain Routing Z. Li Inter-Domain Routing Z. Li
Internet-Draft S. Zhuang Internet-Draft S. Zhuang
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: May 4, 2020 K. Talaulikar Expires: November 7, 2020 K. Talaulikar
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Google, Inc Google, Inc
J. Tantsura J. Tantsura
Apstra Apstra
G. Mirsky G. Mirsky
ZTE Corp. ZTE Corp.
November 1, 2019 May 6, 2020
BGP Link-State Extensions for Seamless BFD BGP Link-State Extensions for Seamless BFD
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-01 draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-02
Abstract Abstract
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) defines a Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) defines a
simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
with large portions of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing with large portions of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing
benefits such as quick provisioning as well as improved control and benefits such as quick provisioning as well as improved control and
flexibility to network nodes initiating the path monitoring. The flexibility to network nodes initiating the path monitoring. The
link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF) have been extended to link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF) have been extended to
advertise the Seamless BFD (S-BFD) Discriminators. advertise the Seamless BFD (S-BFD) Discriminators.
This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family to This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family to
carry the S-BFD Discriminators information via BGP. carry the S-BFD Discriminators information via BGP.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 7, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Problem and Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Problem and Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. BGP-LS Extensions for S-BFD Discriminator . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. BGP-LS Extensions for S-BFD Discriminator . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
skipping to change at page 3, line 26 skipping to change at page 3, line 19
BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) [RFC7752] enables the collection and BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) [RFC7752] enables the collection and
distribution of IGP link-state topology information via BGP sessions distribution of IGP link-state topology information via BGP sessions
across IGP areas/levels and domains. The S-BFD discriminator(s) of a across IGP areas/levels and domains. The S-BFD discriminator(s) of a
node can thus be distributed along with the topology information via node can thus be distributed along with the topology information via
BGP-LS across IGP domains and even across multiple Autonomous Systems BGP-LS across IGP domains and even across multiple Autonomous Systems
(AS) within an administrative domain. (AS) within an administrative domain.
This draft defines extensions to BGP-LS for carrying the S-BFD This draft defines extensions to BGP-LS for carrying the S-BFD
Discriminators information. Discriminators information.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7880]. This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7880].
3. Problem and Requirement 3. Problem and Requirement
Seamless MPLS [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] extends the core domain Seamless MPLS [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] extends the core domain
and integrates aggregation and access domains into a single MPLS and integrates aggregation and access domains into a single MPLS
domain. In a large network, the core and aggregation networks can be domain. In a large network, the core and aggregation networks can be
organized as different ASes. Although the core and aggregation organized as different ASes. Although the core and aggregation
skipping to change at page 5, line 25 skipping to change at page 5, line 25
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Discriminator n (Optional) | | Discriminator n (Optional) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: S-BFD Discriminators TLV Figure 1: S-BFD Discriminators TLV
where: where:
o Type: 1032 o Type: 1032
o Length: variable. Minimum of 8 octets and increments of 4 octets o Length: variable. Minimum of 4 octets and increments of 4 octets
there on for each additional discriminator there on for each additional discriminator
o Discriminators : multiples of 4 octets, each carrying a S-BFD o Discriminators : multiples of 4 octets, each carrying a S-BFD
local discriminator value of the node. At least one discriminator local discriminator value of the node. At least one discriminator
MUST be included in the TLV. MUST be included in the TLV.
The S-BFD Discriminators TLV can only be added to the BGP-LS The S-BFD Discriminators TLV can only be added to the BGP-LS
Attribute associated with the Node NLRI that originates the Attribute associated with the Node NLRI that originates the
corresponding underlying IGP TLV/sub-TLV as described below. This corresponding underlying IGP TLV/sub-TLV as described below. This
information is derived from the protocol specific advertisements as information is derived from the protocol specific advertisements as
skipping to change at page 7, line 13 skipping to change at page 7, line 13
administrative domain. administrative domain.
Advertising the S-BFD Discriminators via BGP-LS makes it possible for Advertising the S-BFD Discriminators via BGP-LS makes it possible for
attackers to initiate S-BFD sessions using the advertised attackers to initiate S-BFD sessions using the advertised
information. The vulnerabilities this poses and how to mitigate them information. The vulnerabilities this poses and how to mitigate them
are discussed in [RFC7752]. are discussed in [RFC7752].
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Nan Wu for his contributions to this The authors would like to thank Nan Wu for his contributions to this
work. work and Gunter Van De Velde for his review.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
skipping to change at page 8, line 15 skipping to change at page 8, line 15
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls]
Leymann, N., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Konstantynowicz, Leymann, N., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Konstantynowicz,
M., and D. Steinberg, "Seamless MPLS Architecture", draft- M., and D. Steinberg, "Seamless MPLS Architecture", draft-
ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2014. ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2014.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and
P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft- P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft-
ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-03 (work in progress), ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-06 (work in progress),
May 2019. December 2019.
[RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and [RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and
Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions", Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions",
RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009, RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>.
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
17 lines changed or deleted 18 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/