draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-09.txt   rfc8810.txt 
Network Working Group J. Scudder Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Scudder
Internet-Draft Juniper Networks Request for Comments: 8810 Juniper Networks
Updates: 5492 (if approved) May 8, 2020 Updates: 5492 August 2020
Intended status: Standards Track Category: Standards Track
Expires: November 9, 2020 ISSN: 2070-1721
Revision to Capability Codes Registration Procedures Revision to Capability Codes Registration Procedures
draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-09
Abstract Abstract
This document updates RFC 5492 by making a change to the registration This document updates RFC 5492 by making a change to the registration
procedures for BGP Capability Codes. Specifically, the range procedures for BGP Capability Codes. Specifically, the range
formerly designated "Reserved for Private Use" is divided into three formerly designated "Private Use" is divided into three new ranges:
new ranges, respectively designated as "First Come First Served", "First Come First Served", "Experimental Use", and "Reserved".
"Experimental Use" and "Reserved".
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 9, 2020. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8810.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Discussion
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IANA Considerations
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Security Considerations
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. References
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5.1. Normative References
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.2. Informative References
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Acknowledgements
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Author's Address
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Border Gateway Protocol uses a mechanism called "Capability The Border Gateway Protocol uses a mechanism called "Capability
Advertisement" [RFC5492] to enable BGP peers to tell one another Advertisement" [RFC5492] to enable BGP peers to tell one another
about their optional protocol extensions. These so-called about their optional protocol extensions. These so-called
"Capabilities" are signaled using code points called "Capability "Capabilities" are signaled using code points called "Capability
Codes". Codes".
[RFC5492] designates the range of Capability Codes 128-255 as [RFC5492] designates the range of Capability Codes 128-255 as
"Reserved for Private Use". Subsequent experience has shown this to "Private Use". Subsequent experience has shown this to be not only
be not only useless, but actively confusing to implementors. useless, but actively confusing to implementors.
Accordingly, this document revises the registration procedures for Accordingly, this document revises the registration procedures for
the range 128-255, as follows, using the terminology defined in the range 128-255, as follows, using the terminology defined in
[RFC8126]: [RFC8126]:
o 128-238: First Come First Served 128-238: First Come First Served
o 239-254: Experimental Use 239-254: Experimental Use
o 255: Reserved 255: Reserved
The procedures for the ranges 1-63 and 64-127 are unchanged, The procedures for the ranges 1-63 and 64-127 are unchanged,
remaining "IETF Review" and "First Come First Served" respectively. remaining "IETF Review" and "First Come First Served", respectively.
The full range for "First Come First Served" is now 64-238.
2. Discussion 2. Discussion
The reason for providing an Experimental Use range is to preserve a The reason for providing an "Experimental Use" range is to preserve a
range for use during early development. Although there are few range for use during early development. Although there are few
practical differences between Experimental and Private Use, the practical differences between "Experimental Use" and "Private Use",
change both makes it clear that code points from this space should the change both makes it clear that code points from this space
not be used long-term or in shipping products, and reduces the should not be used long term or in shipping products and reduces the
consumption of the scarce Capability Code space expended for this consumption of the scarce Capability Codes space expended for this
purpose. Once classified as Experimental, it should be considered purpose. Once classified as "Experimental Use", it should be
difficult to reclassify the space for some other purpose in the considered difficult to reclassify the space for some other purpose
future. in the future.
The reason for reserving the maximum value is that it may be useful The reason for reserving the maximum value is that it may be useful
in the future if extension of the number space is needed. in the future if extension of the number space is needed.
Since the range 128-255 was formerly designated Private Use, Since the range 128-255 was formerly designated "Private Use",
implementors may have chosen to use code points within that range implementors may have chosen to use code points within that range
prior to publication of this document. For this reason, a survey was prior to publication of this document. For this reason, a survey was
conducted beginning August 14, 2015 (version 01 of the individual conducted beginning August 14, 2015 (version 01 of the individual
draft) to find any such uses. A number were contributed and were draft [SCUDDER]) to find any such uses. A number were contributed
used to seed Table 2. Of course there can be no guarantee that all and were used to seed Table 2. Of course, there can be no guarantee
uses were discovered, however the likelihood seems high that that all uses were discovered; however, the likelihood seems high
remaining uses, if any, genuinely do fall under the intended use of that remaining uses, if any, genuinely do fall under the intended use
"Private Use" and are restricted to some special deployment, and are of "Private Use" and are restricted to some special deployment and
not in wide use. Furthermore, any remaining uses would be no worse are not in wide use. Furthermore, any remaining uses would be no
than any other code point collision, such as occasionally occurs with worse than any other code point collision, such as occasionally
code point "squatting", and could be dealt with in the same manner. occurs with code point "squatting", and could be dealt with in the
same manner.
3. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to revise the "Capability Codes" registry in the IANA has revised the "Capability Codes" registry as follows.
"Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group as follows.
Reference: [RFC5492] and this document. Reference: [RFC5492] and this document.
Note: The IETF will be the Change Controller for all future
registrations.
Registration procedures: Registration procedures:
+---------+-------------------------+ +=========+=========================+
| Range | Registration Procedures | | Range | Registration Procedures |
+---------+-------------------------+ +=========+=========================+
| 1-63 | IETF Review | | 1-63 | IETF Review |
+---------+-------------------------+
| 64-238 | First Come First Served | | 64-238 | First Come First Served |
| 239-254 | Experimental | +---------+-------------------------+
| 239-254 | Experimental Use |
+---------+-------------------------+ +---------+-------------------------+
Table 1 Table 1
IANA is requested to perform the following new allocations within the IANA has made the following new allocations within the "Capability
"Capability Codes" registry: Codes" registry:
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +=======+============================+===========+============+
| Value | Description | Reference | Change | | Value | Description | Reference | Change |
| | | | Controller | | | | | Controller |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +=======+============================+===========+============+
| 128 | Prestandard Route Refresh | (this | IETF | | 128 | Prestandard Route Refresh | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | (deprecated) | document) | | | | (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 129 | Prestandard Outbound Route | (this | IETF | | 129 | Prestandard Outbound Route | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | Filtering (deprecated), | document) | | | | Filtering (deprecated), | | |
| | prestandard Routing Policy | | | | | prestandard Routing Policy | | |
| | Distribution (deprecated) | | | | | Distribution (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 130 | Prestandard Outbound Route | (this | IETF | | 130 | Prestandard Outbound Route | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | Filtering (deprecated) | document) | | | | Filtering (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 131 | Prestandard Multisession | (this | IETF | | 131 | Prestandard Multisession | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | (deprecated) | document) | | | | (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 184 | Prestandard FQDN (deprecated) | (this | IETF | | 184 | Prestandard FQDN | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | | document) | | | | (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 185 | Prestandard OPERATIONAL message | (this | IETF | | 185 | Prestandard OPERATIONAL | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | (deprecated) | document) | | | | message (deprecated) | | |
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+ +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
| 255 | Reserved | (this | IETF | | 255 | Reserved | RFC 8810 | IETF |
| | | document) | | +-------+----------------------------+-----------+------------+
+-------+----------------------------------+-----------+------------+
Table 2 Table 2
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This revision to registration procedures does not change the This revision to registration procedures does not change the
underlying security issues inherent in the existing [RFC5492] and underlying security issues inherent in the existing [RFC5492] and
[RFC4271]. [RFC4271].
5. Acknowledgements 5. References
Thanks to Alia Atlas, Bruno Decraene, Martin Djernaes, Jie Dong, Jeff
Haas, Sue Hares, Acee Lindem, Thomas Mangin, and Tom Petch for review
and comments.
6. References 5.1. Normative References
6.1. Normative References
[RFC5492] Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement [RFC5492] Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement
with BGP-4", RFC 5492, DOI 10.17487/RFC5492, February with BGP-4", RFC 5492, DOI 10.17487/RFC5492, February
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5492>. 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5492>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
6.2. Informative References 5.2. Informative References
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[SCUDDER] Scudder, J., "Revision to Capability Codes Registration
Procedures", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
scudder-idr-capabilities-registry-change-01, 14 August
2015, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-scudder-idr-
capabilities-registry-change-01>.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Alia Atlas, Bruno Decraene, Martin Djernaes, Jie Dong, Jeff
Haas, Sue Hares, Acee Lindem, Thomas Mangin, and Tom Petch for their
reviews and comments.
Author's Address Author's Address
John Scudder John Scudder
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
1194 N. Mathilda Ave 1194 N. Mathilda Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Sunnyvale, CA 94089
USA United States of America
Email: jgs@juniper.net Email: jgs@juniper.net
 End of changes. 27 change blocks. 
97 lines changed or deleted 104 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/