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 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.”
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 18, 2009.
This document revises the specification of the BGP MRAI timer, by deprecating the previously recommended values and by allowing for withdrawals to be exempted from the MRAI.
4. IANA Considerations
5. Security Considerations
6. Normative References
§ Author's Address
§ Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements
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 [RFC2119] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” February 2001.).
The Minimum Route Advertisement Interval (MRAI) timer is specified in RFC4271 (Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, “A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4),” January 2006.) [BGP]. This timer acts to rate-limit updates, on a per-destination basis. [BGP] (Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, “A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4),” January 2006.) suggests values of 30s and 5s for this interval for eBGP and iBGP respectively. The MRAI must also be applied to withdrawals according to RFC4271, a change from the earlier RFC1771.
The MRAI timer has a significant effect on the convergence of BGP, in terms of convergence time, the number of messages, amongst other metrics. The optimum value for this timer is hard to estimate, never mind calculate and will differ between networks, and probably even different subsets of the same network.
The suggested default values for the MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer given in RFC4271 (Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, “A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4),” January 2006.) [BGP] are deprecated. Implementations SHOULD provide a means to allow operators to choose values appropriate to their requirements, on a per-peer and per-AFI/SAFI basis. Implementations MAY exempt withdrawals from the MRAI timer.
There are no requests made to IANA in this document.
This document raises no new security considerations.
|[BGP]||Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, “A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4),” RFC 4271, January 2006.|
|[RFC2119]||Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” RFC 2119, BCP 14, February 2001.|
|Linlithgow, West Lothian EH49 7LR|
|Phone:||+44 1506 673150|
Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).
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, THE IETF TRUST 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.
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 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 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 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 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at email@example.com.