< draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-00.txt   draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-01.txt >
Network Working Group J. Dong Network Working Group J. Dong
Internet-Draft S. Zhuang Internet-Draft S. Zhuang
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Technologies Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Technologies
Expires: September 6, 2018 G. Van de Velde Expires: January 9, 2020 G. Van de Velde
Nokia Nokia
March 5, 2018 July 8, 2019
BGP Extended Community for Identifying the Target Node BGP Extended Community for Identifying the Target Node
draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-00 draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-01
Abstract Abstract
BGP has been used to distribute different types of routing and policy BGP has been used to distribute different types of routing and policy
information in the network. In some cases, the information information in the network. In some cases, the information
distributed may be only intended for one or several particular distributed may be only intended for one or several particular
receiving BGP nodes in the network. BGP does not have a general receiving BGP nodes in the network. However, BGP does not have a
mechanism for designating the receiving node of the routing general mechanism for designating the receiving node of the routing
information. This document defines a new type of BGP extended information. This document defines a new type of BGP extended
community called "Node Target". The mechanism and of using the Node community called "Node Target". The mechanism of using the Node
Target extended community to steer BGP route distribution to Target extended community to steer BGP route distribution to
particular BGP nodes is specified. particular BGP nodes is specified.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 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
2. Node Target Extended Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Node Target Extended Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. IPv4 Node Target Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. IPv4 Node Target Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. IPv6 Node Target Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. IPv6 Node Target Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
BGP [RFC4271] has been used to distribute different types of routing BGP [RFC4271] has been used to distribute different types of routing
and policy information in the network. In some cases, the and policy information in the network. In some cases, the
information distributed may be only intended for one or several information distributed may be only intended for one or several
particular receiving BGP nodes in the network. A typical use case is particular receiving BGP nodes in the network. A typical use case is
the distribution of BGP FlowSpec [RFC5575] policies to some the distribution of BGP FlowSpec [RFC5575] [I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis]
particular BGP nodes. policies to some particular BGP nodes.
BGP does not have a general mechanism for designating the receiving However, BGP does not have a general mechanism for designating the
nodes of the information to be distributed. Route Target (RT) as receiving nodes of the information to be distributed. Route Target
defined in [RFC4364] is used for the distribution of VPN routes into (RT) as defined in [RFC4364] is used for the distribution of VPN
the target VPN Routing and Forwarding tables (VRFs) on a set of PE routes into the target VPN Routing and Forwarding tables (VRFs) on a
nodes. Although it is possible to use RTs to control the set of PE nodes. Although it is possible to use RTs to control the
distribution of non VPN-specific information to a particular node, distribution of non VPN-specific information to a particular node,
such mechanism is not applicable when the information to be such mechanism is not applicable when the information to be
distributed is VPN-specific and relies on RTs to match the target distributed is VPN-specific and relies on RTs to match the target
VRF. Thus a new mechanism is needed to control the distribution of VRF. Thus a mechanism which is independent from the control of VPN
BGP information to particular BGP nodes, which is independent from route to VRF distribution is needed.
the control of VPN route distribution to VRF.
Another possible way is to configure, on each router, a community and
the corresponding policies to match the community to determine
whether to accept the received routes. Such mechanism relies on
manual configuration thus is considered error-prone. It is
preferable by operators that an automatic approach can be provided.
This document defines a new type of BGP extended community called
"Node Target". The mechanism of using the Node Target extended
community to steer BGP route distribution to particular BGP nodes is
also specified.
2. Node Target Extended Communities 2. Node Target Extended Communities
2.1. IPv4 Node Target Extended Community 2.1. IPv4 Node Target Extended Community
For IPv4 networks, this section defines a new BGP extended community For IPv4 networks, this section defines a new BGP extended community
[RFC4360] called "IPv4 Node Target Extended Community". It is a [RFC4360] called "IPv4 Node Target Extended Community". It is a
transitive extended community with type 0x01 and sub-type TBA. transitive extended community with type 0x01 and sub-type TBA.
The format of IPv4 Node Target Extended Community is shown in The format of IPv4 Node Target Extended Community is shown in
skipping to change at page 6, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 16
Target extended community" from the "Transitive IPv6-Address-Specific Target extended community" from the "Transitive IPv6-Address-Specific
Extended Community" registry of the "BGP extended communities" Extended Community" registry of the "BGP extended communities"
registry. registry.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
This document does not change the security properties of BGP. This document does not change the security properties of BGP.
6. Acknowledgements 6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Zhenbin Li for the discussion and The authors would like to thank Zhenbin Li and Ercin Torun for the
review of this document. discussion and review of this document.
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
skipping to change at page 6, line 39 skipping to change at page 6, line 48
Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP
(IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006, (IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4456>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4456>.
[RFC5701] Rekhter, Y., "IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended Community [RFC5701] Rekhter, Y., "IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended Community
Attribute", RFC 5701, DOI 10.17487/RFC5701, November 2009, Attribute", RFC 5701, DOI 10.17487/RFC5701, November 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5701>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5701>.
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis]
Loibl, C., Hares, S., Raszuk, R., McPherson, D., and M.
Bacher, "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules",
draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-17 (work in progress), June
2019.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private [RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>. 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., [RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J.,
and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification
Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009, Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5575>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5575>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
 End of changes. 15 change blocks. 
23 lines changed or deleted 39 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/