draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-04.txt   draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-05.txt 
opsawg Z. Li opsawg Z. Li
Internet-Draft R. Gu Internet-Draft R. Gu
Updates: 7012 (if approved) China Mobile Updates: 7012 (if approved) China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track J. Dong Intended status: Standards Track J. Dong
Expires: June 7, 2018 Huawei Technologies Expires: September 6, 2018 Huawei Technologies
December 4, 2017 March 5, 2018
Export BGP community information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Export BGP community information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-04 draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-05
Abstract Abstract
This draft updates RFC7012 IPFIX information model by introducing This draft updates RFC7012 IPFIX information model by introducing
several information elements to enable IPFIX to export the BGP several information elements (IEs) to enable IPFIX to export the BGP
community information, including BGP standard community defined in community information, including BGP standard community defined in
RFC1997, BGP extended community defined in RFC4360, and BGP large RFC1997, BGP extended community defined in RFC4360, and BGP large
community defined in RFC8092. Network traffic flow information can community defined in RFC8092. Network traffic flow information can
then be accumulated and analysed at the granularity specified by the then be accumulated and analysed at the granularity specified by the
BGP communities, which is suitable for and needed by some traffic BGP communities, which is suitable for and needed by some traffic
optimization applications located in IPFIX collector, SDN controller optimization applications located in IPFIX collector, SDN controller
or PCE (Path Computation Element). or PCE (Path Computation Element).
To clarify, no new BGP community attribute is defined in this
document and this document has no purpose to replace BGP Monitoring
Protocol BMP defined in RFC7854. The IEs introduced in this document
are used by IPFIX together with other IEs to facilitate the IPFIX
collector analyzing the traffic in BGP community granularity without
running the heavy BGP protocol.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 June 7, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. BGP Community based Traffic Collection . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. BGP Community based Traffic Collection . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IEs for BGP Standard Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. IEs for BGP Standard Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. bgpCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1. bgpCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. bgpSourceCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.2. bgpSourceCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. bgpDestinationCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.3. bgpDestinationCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. IEs for BGP Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. IEs for BGP Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. bgpExtendedCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. bgpExtendedCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. bgpSourceExtendedCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. bgpSourceExtendedCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. bgpDestinationExtendedCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.3. bgpDestinationExtendedCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. IEs for BGP Large Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. IEs for BGP Large Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. bgpLargeCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1. bgpLargeCommunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. bgpSourceLargeCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.2. bgpSourceLargeCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.3. bgpDestinationLargeCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.3. bgpDestinationLargeCommunityList . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Encoding Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Appendix A. Encoding Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A.1. Template Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 A.1. Template Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
A.2. Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 A.2. Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) [RFC7011] provides network IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) [RFC7011] provides network
administrators with traffic flow information using the information administrators with traffic flow information using the information
elements (IEs) defined in [IANA-IPFIX] registries. Based on the elements (IEs) defined in [IANA-IPFIX] registries. Based on the
traffic flow information, network administrators know the amount and traffic flow information, network administrators know the amount and
direction of the traffic in their network, then they can optimize direction of the traffic in their network, then they can optimize
their network when needed. For example, they can shift some flows their network when needed. For example, they can shift some flows
from the congested links to the low utilized links through a SDN from the congested links to the low utilized links through a SDN
skipping to change at page 3, line 15 skipping to change at page 3, line 26
[IANA-IPFIX] has already defined the following IEs for traffic flow [IANA-IPFIX] has already defined the following IEs for traffic flow
information exporting in different granularities: sourceIPv4Address, information exporting in different granularities: sourceIPv4Address,
sourceIPv4Prefix, destinationIPv4Address, destinationIPv4Prefix, sourceIPv4Prefix, destinationIPv4Address, destinationIPv4Prefix,
bgpSourceAsNumber, bgpDestinationAsNumber, bgpNextHopIPv4Address, bgpSourceAsNumber, bgpDestinationAsNumber, bgpNextHopIPv4Address,
etc. In some circumstances, however, especially when traffic etc. In some circumstances, however, especially when traffic
engineering and optimization are executed in the Tier 1 or Tier 2 engineering and optimization are executed in the Tier 1 or Tier 2
operators' backbone networks, traffic flow information based on these operators' backbone networks, traffic flow information based on these
IEs may not be suitable. Flow information based on IP address or IP IEs may not be suitable. Flow information based on IP address or IP
prefix may provide much too fine granularity for a large network. On prefix may provide much too fine granularity for a large network. On
the contrary, flow information based on AS number may be too coarse. the contrary, flow information based on AS number may be too coarse.
BGP community [RFC1997], which describes a group of routes sharing
some common properties, is preferably used for traffic engineering at BGP community is a BGP path attribute defined in IDR (Inter Domain
the proper granularity [Community-TE] [RFC4384]. There is no IE Routing) working group. The already defined BGP community attribute
defined for BGP community information in [IANA-IPFIX] yet. includes the standard community defined in [RFC1997], the extended
community defined in [RFC4360], and the large community defined in
[RFC8092]. BGP community attribute has a variety of use cases, one
common practice of which for the operators is to use BGP community
with planned specific values in their field networks to represent the
groups of customers, peers, geographical and topological regions.
Please refer to [RFC4384], [RFC8195] and Section 3 of this document
for the detailed examples. To know the traffic generated by differnt
kinds of customers, from differnt geographical or topological
regions, by differnt kinds of customers in differnt regions, we need
the corresponding community information related to the traffic flow
exported by IPFIX. Netwok traffic statistic in BGP community
granularity is useful not only for the traffic analyzing, but also
can then be used by other applications, such as the traffic
optimization applications located in IPFIX collector, SDN controller
or PCE. [Community-TE] also states analyzing network traffic
information at the granularity specified by BGP community is prefered
for inbound traffic engineering. However, there is no IE defined for
BGP community attribute in [IANA-IPFIX] yet.
Flow information based on BGP community may be collected by a Flow information based on BGP community may be collected by a
mediator defined in [RFC6183]. Mediator is responsible for the mediator defined in [RFC6183]. Mediator is responsible for the
correlation between flow information and BGP community. However no correlation between flow information and BGP community. However no
IEs are defined in [RFC6183] for exporting BGP community information IEs are defined in [RFC6183] for exporting BGP community information
in IPFIX. Furthermore, to correlate the BGP community with the flow in IPFIX. Furthermore, to correlate the BGP community with the flow
information, mediator needs to learn BGP routes and perform lookup in information, mediator needs to learn BGP routes and perform lookup in
the BGP routing table to get the matching entry for specific flow. the BGP routing table to get the matching entry for a specific flow.
Neither BGP route learning nor routing table lookup is trivial for a Neither BGP route learning nor routing table lookup is trivial for a
mediator. Mediator is mainly introduced to release the performance mediator. Mediator is mainly introduced to release the performance
requirement for the exporter [RFC5982]. In fact, to obtain the requirement for the exporter [RFC5982]. In fact, to obtain the
information for BGP related IEs that have already been defined, such information for BGP related IEs that have already been defined, such
as bgpSourceAsNumber, bgpDestinationAsNumber, and as bgpSourceAsNumber, bgpDestinationAsNumber, and
bgpNextHopIPv4Address, etc, exporter has to hold the up-to-date BGP bgpNextHopIPv4Address, etc, exporter has to hold the up-to-date BGP
routing table and perform lookup in the BGP routing table. The routing table and perform lookup in the BGP routing table. The
exporter can obtain the BGP community information in the same exporter can obtain the BGP community information in the same
procedure, thus exporting BGP community information adds no more procedure, thus exporting BGP community information adds no more
requirement for exporter. It is RECOMMENDED that the BGP community requirement for exporter. It is RECOMMENDED that the BGP community
information be exported by the exporter directly using IPFIX. information be exported by the exporter directly using IPFIX.
Through running BGP [RFC4271] or BMP [RFC7854] and performing lookup
in the BGP routing table to get the matching entry for a specific
flow (we call it correlation), IPFIX collectors and other
applications, such as SDN controller or PCE, can figure up the
network traffic at BGP community granularity. However,neither
running BGP or BMP protocol nor routing table lookup is trivial for
the IPFIX collectors and other applications. Moreover correlation
between IPFIX flow information and the BGP RIB on the exporter (such
as router) is more accurate, compared to the correlation on a
collector, since the BGP routing table may be updated when the IPFIX
collectors and other applications reveive the IPFIX flow information.
And as stated above, the exporter can obtain the BGP community
information in the same procedure when it obtains other BGP related
informaiton. So exporting the BGP community information directly by
the exporter to the collector is the efficient and accurate way. If
the IPFIX collectors and other applications only want to figure up
the network traffic at BGP community granularity, they do not need to
run the heavy BGP or BMP protocol when the BGP community information
can be obtained by IPFIX. However, we have to clarify, the BMP
protocol has its own application scenario, the mechanisum introduced
in this document has no purpose to replace it.
This draft introduces new IEs to extend the IPFIX information model This draft introduces new IEs to extend the IPFIX information model
defined in [RFC7012] to export the BGP community information, defined in [RFC7012] to export the BGP community information,
including BGP standard community defined in [RFC1997], BGP extended including BGP standard community defined in [RFC1997], BGP extended
community defined in [RFC4360], and BGP large community defined in community defined in [RFC4360], and BGP large community defined in
[RFC8092]. Flow information, including packetDeltaCount, [RFC8092]. Flow information, including packetDeltaCount,
octetDeltaCount [RFC7012] etc, can then be accumulated and analysed octetDeltaCount [RFC7012] etc, can then be accumulated and analysed
by the collector or other applications, such as SDN controller or PCE by the collector or other applications, such as SDN controller or PCE
[RFC4655], at the granularity specified by BGP community , which is [RFC4655], at the granularity specified by BGP community , which is
useful for traffic engineering or traffic optimization applications, useful for knowing the traffic generted by different kinds of
especially in the backbone network. customers, from differnt geographical or topological regions
according to the operator's BGP community plan, and can then be used
by the traffic engineering or traffic optimization applications,
especially in the backbone network. To clarify, no new BGP community
attribute is defined in this document, IDR (Inter Domain Routing)
working group is the right place to define new community attributes
for the BGP protocol.
The IEs introduced in this document are applicable for both IPv4 and The IEs introduced in this document are applicable for both IPv4 and
IPv6 traffic. Both exporter and mediator can use these IEs to export IPv6 traffic. Both exporter and mediator can use these IEs to export
BGP community information in IPFIX. BGP community information in IPFIX.
Please refer Appendix A for the encoding example and Section 3 for a Please refer Appendix A for the encoding example and Section 3 for a
detailed use case. detailed use case.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
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 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. BGP Community based Traffic Collection 3. BGP Community based Traffic Collection
[RFC4384] introduces the mechanism of using BGP standard communities [RFC4384] introduces the mechanism of using BGP standard communities
and extended communities to collect the geographical and topological and extended communities to collect the geographical and topological
related information in BGP routing system. The traffic flow related information in BGP routing system. [RFC8195] gives some
information corresponding to BGP standard communities and extended examples about the application of BGP large communities to represent
communities are also useful for service providers to analyze and the geographical regions. Since the network traffic at the BGP
optimize the network traffic between different regions in the community granularity represents the traffic generted by different
network. This section gives a use case in which network operator kinds of customers, from differnt geographical regions according to
uses the BGP community based traffic information to adjust the the network operator's BGP community plan, it is useful for the
network paths for different traffic flows. network operators to analyze and optimize the network traffic among
different customers and regions. This section gives a use case in
which the network operator uses the BGP community based traffic
information to adjust the network paths for different traffic flows.
Considering the following scenario, AS C provides transit connection Considering the following scenario, AS C provides transit connection
between AS A and B, the routes of AS A and B are categorized into between AS A and B. By tagging with different BGP communities, the
several groups respectively, which are tagged using different BGP routes of AS A and B are categorized into several groups respectively
communities, for example community A:X and A:Y are used in routes with the operator's plan. For example community A:X and A:Y are used
originated from different regions of AS A, and community B:M and B:N for the routes originated from different geographical regions in AS
are used with routes originated from different regions of AS B . By A, and community B:M and B:N are used for the routes representing the
default, all traffic originated from AS A and destinated to AS B (we different kinds of customers in AS B, such as B:M is for the mobile
call it traffic A-B) goes through path C1-C2-C3 (call it Path-1) in customers and B:N is for the fixed line customers. By default, all
AS C. When the link between C1 and C2 is congested, we cannot simply traffic originated from AS A and destinated to AS B (we call it
steer all the traffic A-B from Path-1 to Path C1-C4-C3 (call it Path- traffic A-B) goes through path C1-C2-C3 (call it Path-1) in AS C.
2), which will cause congestion in Path-2. When the link between C1 and C2 is congested, we cannot simply steer
all the traffic A-B from Path-1 to Path C1-C4-C3 (call it Path-2),
becuse it will cause the congestion in Path-2.
+----------+ +----------+
| PCE/SDN | | PCE/SDN |
+-------|Controller|-------+ +-------|Controller|-------+
| +----------+ | | +----------+ |
| | | |
| AS C | | AS C |
| | +----------+ | | | | +----------+ | |
| | +---|Router C2 |---+ | | | | +---|Router C2 |---+ | |
| | | +----------+ | | | | | | +----------+ | | |
skipping to change at page 5, line 25 skipping to change at page 6, line 25
+--------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | +--------+
|Router A|--|--|Router C1| |Router C3|--|--|Router B| |Router A|--|--|Router C1| |Router C3|--|--|Router B|
+--------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | +--------+
Community: | |100 100| | Community: Community: | |100 100| | Community:
A:X | | +----------+ | | B:M A:X | | +----------+ | | B:M
A:Y | +---|Router C4 |---+ | B:N A:Y | +---|Router C4 |---+ | B:N
+----------+ +----------+
Figure 1: BGP Community based Traffic Collection Figure 1: BGP Community based Traffic Collection
If the network operator can obtain the traffic statistics at BGP If the PCE/SDN controller in AS C can obtain the network traffic
community granularity, based on this traffic statistics information information at BGP community granularity, it can steer some traffic
and the utilization of different paths, the PCE/SDN controller can related to some BGP communities (when we consider only the source or
steer some traffic related to some BGP communities, or some BGP destination of the traffic), or some BGP community pairs (when we
community pairs from Path-1 to Path-2. The BGP community pairs are consider both the source and the destination of the traffic) from
used when both the source and destination of the traffic are taken Path-1 to Path-2 according to the utilization of different paths.
into consideration. Consider both the source and the destination of For instance, steer the traffic generated by community A:X from
the traffic from AS A to AS B, the traffic can be categorized into 4 Path-1 to Path-2 by deploying route policy at Router C1, or steer the
groups as indicated by 4 BGP community pairs, (A:X, B:M), (A:X, traffic from community A:Y to community B:M from Path-1 to Path-2.
B:N),(A:Y, B:M), (A:Y, B:N). IPFIX can be used to export the traffic Using the IEs defined in this document, IPFIX can export the BGP
information of particular BGP community, or BGP community pairs to community information related to a specific traffic flow togecher
the collector. Then the accumulated traffic information at BGP with other flow information. The traffic information can then be
community granularity can be used by the PCE/SDN controller to steer accumulated at BGP community granularity and used by the PCE/SDN
a subset of the traffic from AS A to AS B to go through Path-2. controller to steer the appropriate traffic from Path-1 to Path-2.
4. IEs for BGP Standard Community 4. IEs for BGP Standard Community
[RFC1997] defines the BGP Communities attribute, called BGP Standard [RFC1997] defines the BGP Communities attribute, called BGP Standard
Community in this document, which describes a group of routes sharing Community in this document, which describes a group of routes sharing
some common properties. BGP Standard Communities are treated as 32 some common properties. BGP Standard Communities are treated as 32
bit values as stated in[RFC1997]. bit values as stated in[RFC1997].
In order to export BGP standard community information along with In order to export BGP standard community information along with
other flow information defined by IPFIX, three new IEs are other flow information defined by IPFIX, three new IEs are
skipping to change at page 12, line 9 skipping to change at page 13, line 9
communities may be truncated due to limited message space. In this communities may be truncated due to limited message space. In this
case, it is RECOMMENDED to configure export policy of BGP communities case, it is RECOMMENDED to configure export policy of BGP communities
on the exporter to limit the BGP communities to be exported, so as to on the exporter to limit the BGP communities to be exported, so as to
only export some specific communities,or not to export some specific only export some specific communities,or not to export some specific
communities. communities.
If needed, we may consider to extend the message length of IPFIX If needed, we may consider to extend the message length of IPFIX
[RFC7011] from 16 bits to 32 bits to solve this problem completely. [RFC7011] from 16 bits to 32 bits to solve this problem completely.
The detailed mechanism is out of the scope of this document. The detailed mechanism is out of the scope of this document.
To align with the size of BGP extended community and large community,
the size of IE bgpExtendedCommunity and bgpLargeCommunity is 8 octets
and 12 octets respectively. In the event that the
bgpExtendedCommunity or bgpLargeCommunity Elements are not of their
expected sizes (8 and 12 octets, respectively), the IPFIX collector
SHOULD ignore them. This is intended to protect implementations
using BGP logic from calling their parsing routines with invalid
lengths.
For the proper processing of the exporter, when it receives the
template requesting to report the BGP community information (refer
Appendix A for an example), the exporter SHOULD obtain the
coressponding BGP community information through BGP lookup using the
corresponding source or destination IP of the specific traffic flow.
When exporting the IPFIX information to the collector, the exporter
SHOULD include the corresponding BGP communities in the IPFIX
message.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This document only defines three new IEs for IPFIX. This document This document only defines three new IEs for IPFIX. This document
itself does not directly introduce security issues. The same itself does not directly introduce security issues. The same
security considerations as for the IPFIX Protocol Specification security considerations as for the IPFIX Protocol Specification
[RFC7011] and Information Model [RFC7012] apply. [RFC7011] and Information Model [RFC7012] apply.
As the BGP community information is deducible by other means, there As the BGP community information is deducible by other means, there
are no increased privacy concerns, neither. are no increased privacy concerns, neither.
skipping to change at page 16, line 5 skipping to change at page 17, line 24
[RFC5982] Kobayashi, A., Ed. and B. Claise, Ed., "IP Flow [RFC5982] Kobayashi, A., Ed. and B. Claise, Ed., "IP Flow
Information Export (IPFIX) Mediation: Problem Statement", Information Export (IPFIX) Mediation: Problem Statement",
RFC 5982, DOI 10.17487/RFC5982, August 2010, RFC 5982, DOI 10.17487/RFC5982, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5982>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5982>.
[RFC6183] Kobayashi, A., Claise, B., Muenz, G., and K. Ishibashi, [RFC6183] Kobayashi, A., Claise, B., Muenz, G., and K. Ishibashi,
"IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Mediation: Framework", "IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Mediation: Framework",
RFC 6183, DOI 10.17487/RFC6183, April 2011, RFC 6183, DOI 10.17487/RFC6183, April 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6183>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6183>.
[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>.
[RFC8092] Heitz, J., Ed., Snijders, J., Ed., Patel, K., Bagdonas, [RFC8092] Heitz, J., Ed., Snijders, J., Ed., Patel, K., Bagdonas,
I., and N. Hilliard, "BGP Large Communities Attribute", I., and N. Hilliard, "BGP Large Communities Attribute",
RFC 8092, DOI 10.17487/RFC8092, February 2017, RFC 8092, DOI 10.17487/RFC8092, February 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8092>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8092>.
[RFC8195] Snijders, J., Heasley, J., and M. Schmidt, "Use of BGP
Large Communities", RFC 8195, DOI 10.17487/RFC8195, June
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8195>.
Appendix A. Encoding Example Appendix A. Encoding Example
In this section, we give an example to show the encoding format for In this section, we give an example to show the encoding format for
the new introduced IEs. the new introduced IEs.
Flow information including BGP communities is shown in the below Flow information including BGP communities is shown in the below
table. Suppose we want all the fields to be reported by IPFIX. table. Suppose we want all the fields to be reported by IPFIX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Source ip|Destination ip |Source BGP community| Destination BGP | |Source ip|Destination ip |Source BGP community| Destination BGP |
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
70 lines changed or deleted 155 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/