[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00

Global Routing Operations                                     P. Lucente
Internet-Draft                                                       NTT
Updates: 7854 (if approved)                                        Y. Gu
Intended status: Standards Track                                  Huawei
Expires: May 3, 2020                                    October 31, 2019


  Support for Enterprise-specific TLVs in the BGP Monitoring Protocol
                   draft-lucente-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit-00

Abstract

   Message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) do
   provision for optional trailing data in TLV - Type, Length, Value -
   format; however the space for Type value is unique and governed by
   IANA.  To allow the usage of vendor-specific TLVs, a mechanism to
   define per-vendor Type values is required.  With this document we
   want to introduce an Enterprise Bit, or E-bit, for such purpose.

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 https://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 May 3, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   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



Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                BMP TLV EBIT                  October 2019


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  TLV encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  IANA-registered TLV encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Enterprise-specific TLV encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  TLV encoding remarks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is defined in RFC 7854 [RFC7854].
   Support for trailing TLV data is extended by TLV support for BMP
   Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv].

   Vendors need the ability to define proprietary Information Elements,
   because, for example, they are delivering a pre-standards product, or
   the Information Element is in some way commercially sensitive.

   This document re-defines the format of IANA-registered TLVs in a
   backward compatible manner with respect to previous documents and
   existing IANA allocations; it also defines the format for newly
   introduced enterprise-specific TLVs.

   The concept of an E-bit, or Enterprise bit, is not new.  For example
   such mechanism is defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC7011] for a very
   similar purpose.

2.  Terminology

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] RFC 8174 [RFC8174] when, and only when, they
   appear in all capitals, as shown here.






Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                BMP TLV EBIT                  October 2019


3.  TLV encoding

3.1.  IANA-registered TLV encoding

   Existing TLV encoding defined in Section 4.4 of [RFC7854] is reviewed
   as follows:

   o  1 bit to flag an enterprise-specific TLV set to zero.  The TLV
      Type value must have been defined in IANA-BMP [IANA-BMP]

   o  15 bits of TLV Type,

   o  2 octets of TLV Length,

   o  0 or more octets of TLV Value.


      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |E|             Type            |     Length (2 octets)         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Value (variable)                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                                 Figure 1

3.2.  Enterprise-specific TLV encoding

   Enterprise-specific TLV encoding is defined as follows:

   o  1 bit to flag an enterprise-specific TLV set to one

   o  15 bits of TLV Type,

   o  2 octets of TLV Length,

   o  4 octets of IANA enterprise number IANA-PEN [IANA-PEN]

   o  0 or more octets of TLV Value.











Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                BMP TLV EBIT                  October 2019


      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |E|             Type            |     Length (2 octets)         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Enterprise number                      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Value (variable)                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                                 Figure 2

3.3.  TLV encoding remarks

   The encoding specified in this document applies to all existing BMP
   Message Types and their namespaces defined in RFC 7854 [RFC7854], TLV
   support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages
   [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv] and BMP Peer Up Message Namespace
   [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up].  While the proposed encoding is not per-
   se backward compatible, there is no existing IANA-allocated Type
   value that makes use of the most significant bit (which is being used
   in this document to define the E-bit).

   Future BMP Message Types MUST make use of the TLV encoding defined in
   this document.

   TLVs SHOULD be sorted by their code point.  Multiple TLVs of the same
   type can be repeated as part of the same message and it is left to
   the specific use-cases whether all, any, the first or the last TLV
   should be considered.

4.  Security Considerations

   It is not believed that this document adds any additional security
   considerations.

5.  IANA Considerations

   The TLV Type values used by BMP are managed by IANA as are the
   Private Enterprise Numbers used by enterprise-specific Type values
   IANA-PEN [IANA-PEN].  This document makes no changes to these
   registries.

6.  References







Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                BMP TLV EBIT                  October 2019


6.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up]
              Scudder, J., "BMP Peer Up Message Namespace", draft-ietf-
              grow-bmp-peer-up-00 (work in progress), July 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv]
              Lucente, P., Gu, Y., and H. Smit, "TLV support for BMP
              Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages", draft-ietf-grow-
              bmp-tlv-01 (work in progress), October 2019.

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

   [RFC7854]  Scudder, J., Ed., Fernando, R., and S. Stuart, "BGP
              Monitoring Protocol (BMP)", RFC 7854,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7854, June 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7854>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

6.2.  Informative References

   [IANA-BMP]
              IANA, "BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) Parameters", 2016,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/bmp-parameters/
              bmp-parameters.xhtml>.

   [IANA-PEN]
              IANA, "Private Enterprise Numbers", 1982,
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers/>.

   [RFC7011]  Claise, B., Ed., Trammell, B., Ed., and P. Aitken,
              "Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
              Protocol for the Exchange of Flow Information", STD 77,
              RFC 7011, DOI 10.17487/RFC7011, September 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7011>.

Acknowledgements

   TBD






Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                BMP TLV EBIT                  October 2019


Authors' Addresses

   Paolo Lucente
   NTT
   Siriusdreef 70-72
   Hoofddorp, WT  2132
   NL

   Email: paolo@ntt.net


   Yunan Gu
   Huawei
   Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: guyunan@huawei.com

































Lucente & Gu               Expires May 3, 2020                  [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/