draft-ietf-idr-cease-subcode-07.txt   rfc4486.txt 
Network Working Group Enke Chen Network Working Group E. Chen
Internet Draft Cisco Systems Request for Comments: 4486 Cisco Systems
Expiration Date: July 2006 Vincent Gillet Category: Standards Track V. Gillet
France Telecom France Telecom
April 2006
Subcodes for BGP Cease Notification Message Subcodes for BGP Cease Notification Message
draft-ietf-idr-cease-subcode-07.txt Status of This Memo
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at Copyright Notice
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract Abstract
This document defines several subcodes for the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION This document defines several subcodes for the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION
message that would provide more information to aid network operators message that would provide more information to aid network operators
in correlating network events and diagnosing BGP peering issues. in correlating network events and diagnosing BGP peering issues.
1. Specification of Requirements 1. Introduction
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC-2119].
2. Introduction
This document defines several subcodes for the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION This document defines several subcodes for the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION
message that would provide more information to aid network operators message that would provide more information to aid network operators
in correlating network events and diagnosing BGP peering issues. It in correlating network events and diagnosing BGP peering issues. It
also recommends that a BGP speaker implement a backoff mechanism in also recommends that a BGP speaker implement a backoff mechanism in
re-trying a BGP connection after the speaker receives a NOTIFICATION re-trying a BGP connection after the speaker receives a NOTIFICATION
message with certain CEASE subcode. message with certain CEASE subcode.
2. Specification of Requirements
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC-2119].
3. Subcode Definition 3. Subcode Definition
The following subcodes are defined for the Cease NOTIFICATION The following subcodes are defined for the Cease NOTIFICATION
message: message:
Subcode Symbolic Name Subcode Symbolic Name
1 Maximum Number of Prefixes Reached 1 Maximum Number of Prefixes Reached
2 Administrative Shutdown 2 Administrative Shutdown
3 Peer De-configured 3 Peer De-configured
skipping to change at page 2, line 42 skipping to change at page 2, line 27
6 Other Configuration Change 6 Other Configuration Change
7 Connection Collision Resolution 7 Connection Collision Resolution
8 Out of Resources 8 Out of Resources
4. Subcode Usage 4. Subcode Usage
If a BGP speaker decides to terminate its peering with a neighbor If a BGP speaker decides to terminate its peering with a neighbor
because the number of address prefixes received from the neighbor because the number of address prefixes received from the neighbor
exceeds a locally configured upper bound (as described in [BGP-4]), exceeds a locally configured upper bound (as described in [BGP-4]),
then the speaker MUST send to the neighbor a NOTIFICATION message then the speaker MUST send to the neighbor a NOTIFICATION message
with the Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Maximum Number of with the Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Maximum Number of
Prefixes Reached". The message MAY optionally include the Address Prefixes Reached". The message MAY optionally include the Address
Family information [BGP-MP] and the upper bound in the "Data" field Family information [BGP-MP] and the upper bound in the "Data" field,
as shown in Figure 1 where the meaning and use of the <AFI, SAFI> as shown in Figure 1, where the meaning and use of the <AFI, SAFI>
tuple is the same as defined in [BGP-MP, sect. 7]. tuple is the same as defined in [BGP-MP], Section 7.
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| AFI (2 octets) | | AFI (2 octets) |
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| SAFI (1 octet) | | SAFI (1 octet) |
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| Prefix upper bound (4 octets) | | Prefix upper bound (4 octets) |
+-------------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
Figure 1 Optional Data Field Figure 1: Optional Data Field
If a BGP speaker decides to administratively shut down its peering If a BGP speaker decides to administratively shut down its peering
with a neighbor, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with a neighbor, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message
with the Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Administrative with the Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Administrative
Shutdown". Shutdown".
If a BGP speaker decides to de-configure a peer, then the speaker If a BGP speaker decides to de-configure a peer, then the speaker
SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with the Error Code Cease, and the SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with the Error Code Cease and the
Error Subcode "Peer De-configured". Error Subcode "Peer De-configured".
If a BGP speaker decides to administratively reset the peering with a If a BGP speaker decides to administratively reset the peering with a
neighbor, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with neighbor, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with
the Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Administrative Reset". the Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Administrative Reset".
If a BGP speaker decides to dis-allow a BGP connection (e.g., the If a BGP speaker decides to disallow a BGP connection (e.g., the peer
peer is not configured locally) after the speaker accepts a transport is not configured locally) after the speaker accepts a transport
protocol connection, then the BGP speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION protocol connection, then the BGP speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION
message with the Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Connection message with the Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Connection
Rejected". Rejected".
If a BGP speaker decides to administratively reset the peering with a If a BGP speaker decides to administratively reset the peering with a
neighbor due to a configuration change other than the ones described neighbor due to a configuration change other than the ones described
above, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with the above, then the speaker SHOULD send a NOTIFICATION message with the
Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Other Configuration Change". Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Other Configuration Change".
If a BGP speaker decides to send a NOTIFICATION message with the If a BGP speaker decides to send a NOTIFICATION message with the
Error Code Cease as a result of the collision resolution procedure Error Code Cease as a result of the collision resolution procedure
(as described in [BGP-4]), then the subcode SHOULD be set to (as described in [BGP-4]), then the subcode SHOULD be set to
"Connection Collision Resolution". "Connection Collision Resolution".
If a BGP speaker runs out of resources (e.g., memory) and decides to If a BGP speaker runs out of resources (e.g., memory) and decides to
reset a session, then the speaker MAY send a NOTIFICATION message reset a session, then the speaker MAY send a NOTIFICATION message
with the Error Code Cease, and the Error Subcode "Out of Resources". with the Error Code Cease and the Error Subcode "Out of Resources".
It is RECOMMENDED that a BGP speaker behave as though the It is RECOMMENDED that a BGP speaker behave as though the
DampPeerOscillations attribute [BGP-4] was true for this peer when DampPeerOscillations attribute [BGP-4] were true for this peer when
re-trying a BGP connection after the speaker receives a Cease re-trying a BGP connection after the speaker receives a Cease
NOTIFICATION message with subcode of "Administrative Shutdown", or NOTIFICATION message with a subcode of "Administrative Shutdown",
"Peer De-configured", or "Connection Rejected", or "Out of "Peer De-configured", "Connection Rejected", or "Out of Resources".
Resources". An implementation SHOULD impose an upper bound on the An implementation SHOULD impose an upper bound on the number of
number of consecutive automatic retries. Once this bound is reached, consecutive automatic retries. Once this bound is reached, the
the implementation would stop re-trying any BGP connections until implementation would stop re-trying any BGP connections until some
some administrative intervention, i.e., set the AllowAutomaticStart administrative intervention, i.e., set the AllowAutomaticStart
attribute [BGP-4] to FALSE. attribute [BGP-4] to FALSE.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document defines the subcodes 1 - 8 for the BGP Cease This document defines the subcodes 1 - 8 for the BGP Cease
NOTIFICATION message. Future assignments are to be made using either NOTIFICATION message. Future assignments are to be made using either
the Standards Action process defined in [RFC-2434], or the Early IANA the Standards Action process defined in [RFC-2434], or the Early IANA
Allocation process defined in [RFC-4020]. Assignments consist of a Allocation process defined in [RFC-4020]. Assignments consist of a
name and the value. name and the value.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security issues This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security issues
inherent in the existing BGP. inherent in the existing BGP.
7. Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter, Pedro Marques, Andrew The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter, Pedro Marques, Andrew
Lange and Don Goodspeed for their review and suggestions. Lange, and Don Goodspeed for their review and suggestions.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[BGP-4] Y. Rekhter, T. Li and S. Hares, Eds., "A Border Gateway [BGP-4] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006. Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
[BGP-MP] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D. and Y. Rekhter, [BGP-MP] Bates, T., Rekhter, Y., Chandra, R., and D. Katz,
"Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 2858, June 2000. "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 2858, June 2000.
[RFC-2434] Narten, T., Alvestrand, H., "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC-2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 2434, October 1998. IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[RFC-2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC-2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[RFC-4020] Kompella, K. and A. Zinin, "Early IANA Allocation of [RFC-4020] Kompella, K. and A. Zinin, "Early IANA Allocation of
Standards Track Code Points", BCP 100, RFC 4020, February 2005. Standards Track Code Points", BCP 100, RFC 4020, February
2005.
9. Author Information Authors' Addresses
Enke Chen Enke Chen
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 W. Tasman Dr. 170 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
USA USA
Email: enkechen@cisco.com EMail: enkechen@cisco.com
Vincent Gillet Vincent Gillet
France Telecom Longues Distances France Telecom Longues Distances
61, rue des Archives 61, rue des Archives
75003 Paris FRANCE 75003 Paris FRANCE
Email: vgi@opentransit.net EMail: vgi@opentransit.net
10. Intellectual Property Considerations Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ipr@ietf.org. ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
11. Full Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions Acknowledgement
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
 End of changes. 33 change blocks. 
71 lines changed or deleted 71 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.29, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/