[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-pmohapat-sidr-origin-validation-signaling) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 RFC 8097

SIDR                                                        P. Mohapatra
Internet-Draft                                          Sproute Networks
Intended status: Standards Track                                K. Patel
Expires: July 14, 2017                                             Cisco
                                                              J. Scudder
                                                        Juniper Networks
                                                                 D. Ward
                                                                   Cisco
                                                                 R. Bush
                                         Internet Initiative Japan, Inc.
                                                        January 10, 2017


         BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended Community
             draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-11

Abstract

   This document defines a new BGP opaque extended community to carry
   the origination AS validation state inside an autonomous system.
   IBGP speakers that receive this validation state can configure local
   policies allowing it to influence their decision process.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 14, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of



Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft  Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm.   January 2017


   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Origin Validation State Extended Community  . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   This document defines a new BGP opaque extended community to carry
   the origination AS validation state inside an autonomous system.
   IBGP speakers that receive this validation state can configure local
   policies allowing it to influence their decision process.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   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 [RFC2119].

2.  Origin Validation State Extended Community

   The origin validation state extended community is an opaque extended
   community [RFC4360]  with the following encoding:

        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |       0x43    |      0x00     |             Reserved          |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                    Reserved                   |validationstate|
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+





Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft  Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm.   January 2017


   The value of the high-order octet of the extended Type Field is 0x43,
   which indicates it is non-transitive.  The value of the low-order
   octet of the extended type field as assigned by IANA is 0x00.  The
   Reserved field MUST be set to 0 and ignored upon the receipt of this
   community.  The last octet of the extended community is an unsigned
   integer that gives the route's validation state [RFC6811].  It can
   assume the following values:

                     +-------+-----------------------------+
                     | Value | Meaning                     |
                     +-------+-----------------------------+
                     |   0   | Lookup result = "valid"     |
                     |   1   | Lookup result = "not found" |
                     |   2   | Lookup result = "invalid"   |
                     +-------+-----------------------------+

   If the router is configured to support the extensions defined in this
   draft, it SHOULD attach the origin validation state extended
   community to BGP UPDATE messages sent to IBGP peers by mapping the
   computed validation state in the last octet of the extended
   community.  Similarly on the receiving IBGP speakers, the validation
   state of an IBGP route SHOULD be derived directly from the last octet
   of the extended community, if present.

   An implementation SHOULD NOT send more than one instance of the
   origin validation state extended community.  However, if more than
   one instance is received, an implementation MUST disregard all
   instances other than the one with the numerically-greatest validation
   state value.  If the value received is greater than the largest
   specified value (2), the implementation MUST apply a strategy similar
   to attribute discard [RFC7606] by discarding the erroneous community
   and logging the error for further analysis.

   By default, implementations MUST drop the origin validation state
   extended community if received from an EBGP peer, without further
   processing it.  Similarly, by default an implementation SHOULD NOT
   send the community to EBGP peers.  However it SHOULD be possible to
   configure an implementation to send or accept the community when
   warranted.  An example of a case where the community would reasonably
   be received from, or sent to, an EBGP peer is when two adjacent ASes
   are under control of the same administration.  A second example is
   documented in [I-D.ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light].

3.  Deployment Considerations

   In deployment scenarios where not all the speakers in an autonomous
   system are upgraded to support the extensions defined in this
   document, it is necessary to define policies that match on the origin



Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft  Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm.   January 2017


   validation extended community and set another BGP attribute [RFC6811]
   that influences the best path selection the same way as what would
   have been enabled by an implementation of this extension.

4.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable review and
   suggestions from Wesley George, Roque Gagliano and Bruno Decraene on
   this document.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA has assigned the value 0x00 from the "Non-Transitive Opaque
   Extended Community Sub-Types" registry.  The value is called "BGP
   Origin Validation State Extended Community".

6.  Security Considerations

   Security considerations such as those described in [RFC4272] continue
   to apply.  Since this document introduces an extended community that
   will generally be used to affect route selection, the analysis in
   Section 4.5 ("Falsification") of [RFC4593] is relevant.  These issues
   are neither new, nor unique to the origin validation extended
   community.

   The security considerations provided in [RFC6811] apply equally to
   this application of origin validation.  In addition, this document
   describes a scheme where router A outsources validation to some
   router B.  If this scheme is used, the participating routers should
   have the appropriate trust relationship -- B should trust A either
   because they are under the same administrative control or for some
   other reason (for example, consider
   [I-D.ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light]).  The security properties of
   the propagation path between the two routers should also be
   considered.  See [RFC7454] Section 5.1 for advice regarding
   protection of the propagation path.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.






Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft  Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm.   January 2017


   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
              Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.

   [RFC4360]  Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
              Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360,
              February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4360>.

   [RFC6811]  Mohapatra, P., Scudder, J., Ward, D., Bush, R., and R.
              Austein, "BGP Prefix Origin Validation", RFC 6811,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6811, January 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6811>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light]
              King, T., Kopp, D., Lambrianidis, A., and A. Fenioux,
              "Signaling Prefix Origin Validation Results from a Route-
              Server to Peers", draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-
              light-01 (work in progress), December 2016.

   [RFC4272]  Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
              RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.

   [RFC4593]  Barbir, A., Murphy, S., and Y. Yang, "Generic Threats to
              Routing Protocols", RFC 4593, DOI 10.17487/RFC4593,
              October 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4593>.

   [RFC7454]  Durand, J., Pepelnjak, I., and G. Doering, "BGP Operations
              and Security", BCP 194, RFC 7454, DOI 10.17487/RFC7454,
              February 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7454>.

   [RFC7606]  Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K.
              Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages",
              RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7606>.

Authors' Addresses

   Pradosh Mohapatra
   Sproute Networks

   Email: mpradosh@yahoo.com






Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft  Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm.   January 2017


   Keyur Patel
   Cisco
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95124

   Email: keyupate@cisco.com


   John Scudder
   Juniper Networks
   1194 N. Mathilda Ave
   Sunnyvale, CA  94089

   Email: jgs@juniper.net


   Dave Ward
   Cisco
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95124

   Email: dward@cisco.com


   Randy Bush
   Internet Initiative Japan, Inc.
   5147 Crystal Springs
   Bainbridge Island, Washington  98110

   Email: randy@psg.com





















Mohapatra, et al.         Expires July 14, 2017                 [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.122, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/