| |
|
| |
| | Extensions to RT-Constrain in Hierarchical Route Reflection Scenarios |
| |
|
The Route Target (RT) Constrain mechanism specified in RFC 4684 is used to build a route distribution graph in order to restrict the propagation of Virtual Private Network (VPN) routes. In network scenarios where hierarchical route reflection (RR) is used, the existing RT-Constrain mechanism cannot guarantee a correct route distribution graph. This document describes the problem scenario and proposes a solution to address the RT-Constrain issue in hierarchical RR scenarios. |
| | BGP Dissemination of L2 Flow Specification Rules |
| |
|
This document defines a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Flow Specification (flowspec) extension to disseminate Ethernet Layer 2 (L2) and Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) traffic filtering rules either by themselves or in conjunction with L3 flowspecs. AFI/ SAFI 6/133 and 25/134 are used for these purposes. New component types and two extended communities are also defined. |
| | BGP Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for Tunneled Traffic |
| |
|
This draft specifies a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI) encoding format for flow specifications (RFC 8955) that can match on a variety of tunneled traffic. In addition, flow specification components are specified for certain tunneling header fields. |
| | BGP-LS Extension for Inter-AS Topology Retrieval |
| |
|
This document describes the process to build Border Gateway Protocol- Link State (BGP-LS) key parameters in inter-domain scenario, defines one new BGP-LS Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI) type (Stub Link NLRI) and some new Type-Length-Values (TLVs) for BGP-LS to let Software Definition Network (SDN) controller retrieve the network topology automatically under various inter-AS environments. Such extension and process can enable the network operator to collect the interconnect information between different domains and then calculate the overall network topology automatically based on the information provided by BGP-LS protocol. |
| | Deprecation of AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET in BGP |
| |
|
BCP 172 (i.e., RFC 6472) recommends not using AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET AS_PATH segment types in the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). This document advances that recommendation to a standards requirement in BGP; it proscribes the use of the AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET path segment types in the AS_PATH. This is done to simplify the design and implementation of BGP and to make the semantics of the originator of a BGP route clearer. This will also simplify the design, implementation, and deployment of various BGP security mechanisms. This document updates RFC 4271 and RFC 5065, and obsoletes RFC 6472. |
| | BGP BFD Strict-Mode |
| |
|
This document specifies extensions to RFC4271 BGP-4 that enable a BGP speaker to negotiate additional Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) extensions using a BGP capability. This BFD Strict-Mode Capability enables a BGP speaker to prevent a BGP session from being established until a BFD session is established. It is referred to as BGP BFD "strict-mode". BGP BFD strict-mode will be supported when both the local speaker and its remote peer are BFD strict-mode capable. |
| | SR Policy Extensions for Path Segment and Bidirectional Path |
| |
|
A Segment Routing (SR) policy is a set of candidate SR paths consisting of one or more segment lists with necessary path attributes. For each SR path, it may also have its own path attributes, and Path Segment is one of them. A Path Segment is defined to identify an SR path, which can be used for performance measurement, path correlation, and end-2-end path protection. Path Segment can be also used to correlate two unidirectional SR paths into a bidirectional SR path which is required in some scenarios, for example, mobile backhaul transport network. This document defines extensions to BGP to distribute SR policies carrying Path Segment and bidirectional path information. |
| | BGP Extensions for Routing Policy Distribution (RPD) |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-rpd-19.txt |
| | Date: |
28/03/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Zhenbin Li, Liang Ou, Yujia Luo, Gyan Mishra, Huaimo Chen, Haibo Wang |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
It is hard to adjust traffic in a traditional IP network from time to time through manual configurations. It is desirable to have a mechanism for setting up routing policies, which adjusts traffic automatically. This document describes BGP Extensions for Routing Policy Distribution (BGP RPD) to support this with a controller. |
| | SR Policies Extensions for Path Segment and Bidirectional Path in BGP-LS |
| |
|
This document specifies the way of collecting configuration and states of SR policies carrying Path Segment and bidirectional path information by using BPG-LS. Such information can be used by external conponents for many use cases such as performance measurement, path re-optimization and end-to-end protection. |
| | Signaling Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) using BGP-LS |
| |
|
BGP Link State (BGP-LS) describes a mechanism by which link-state and TE information can be collected from networks and shared with external components using the BGP routing protocol. The centralized controller (PCE/SDN) completes the service path calculation based on the information transmitted by the BGP-LS and delivers the result to the Path Computation Client (PCC) through the PCEP or BGP protocol. Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm, which can be directly applied to the MPLS architecture with no change on the forwarding plane and applied to the IPv6 architecture, with a new type of routing header, called SRH. The SR uses the IGP protocol as the control protocol. Compared to the MPLS tunneling technology, the SR does not require additional signaling. Therefore, the SR does not support the negotiation of the Path MTU. Since multiple labels or SRv6 SIDs are pushed in the packets, it is more likely that the packet size exceeds the path mtu of SR tunnel. This document specifies the extensions to BGP Link State (BGP-LS) to carry maximum transmission unit (MTU) messages of link. The PCE/SDN calculates the Path MTU while completing the service path calculation based on the information transmitted by the BGP-LS. |
| | BGP SR Policy Extensions to Enable IFIT |
| |
|
Segment Routing (SR) policy is a set of candidate SR paths consisting of one or more segment lists and necessary path attributes. It enables instantiation of an ordered list of segments with a specific intent for traffic steering. In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) refers to network OAM data plane on-path telemetry techniques, in particular the most popular are In-situ OAM (IOAM) and Alternate Marking. This document defines extensions to BGP to distribute SR policies carrying IFIT information. So that IFIT methods can be enabled automatically when the SR policy is applied. |
| | BGP Flow Specification for SRv6 |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-srv6-05.txt |
| | Date: |
29/03/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Zhenbin Li, Lei Li, Huaimo Chen, Christoph Loibl, Gyan Mishra, Yanhe Fan, Yongqing Zhu, Lei Liu, Xufeng Liu |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
This document proposes extensions to BGP Flow Specification for SRv6 for filtering packets with a SRv6 SID that matches a sequence of conditions. |
| | BGP Flow Specification Version 2 |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-v2-03.txt |
| | Date: |
23/10/2023 |
| | Authors: |
Susan Hares, Donald Eastlake, Chaitanya Yadlapalli, Sven Maduschke |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
BGP flow specification version 1 (FSv1), defined in RFC 8955, RFC 8956, and RFC 9117 describes the distribution of traffic filter policy (traffic filters and actions) distributed via BGP. Multiple applications have used BGP FSv1 to distribute traffic filter policy. These applications include the following: mitigation of denial of service (DoS), enabling traffic filtering in BGP/MPLS VPNs, centralized traffic control of router firewall functions, and SFC traffic insertion. During the deployment of BGP FSv1 a number of issues were detected due to lack of consistent TLV encoding for rules for flow specifications, lack of user ordering of filter rules and/or actions, and lack of clear definition of interaction with BGP peers not supporting FSv1. Version 2 of the BGP flow specification (FSv2) protocol addresses these features. In order to provide a clear demarcation between FSv1 and FSv2, a different NLRI encapsulates FSv2. |
| | BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS Flood Reflection |
| |
|
IS-IS Flood Reflection is a mechanism that allows flat, single-area IS-IS topologies to scale beyond their traditional limitations. This document defines new BGP-LS (BGP Link-State) TLVs in order to carry IS-IS Flood Reflection information. |
| | BGP for BIER-TE Path |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-bier-te-path-04.txt |
| | Date: |
29/03/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Huaimo Chen, Mike McBride, Ran Chen, Gyan Mishra, Aijun Wang, Yisong Liu, Yanhe Fan, Boris Khasanov, Lei Liu, Xufeng Liu |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
This document describes extensions to Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) for distributing a Bit Index Explicit Replication Traffic/Tree Engineering (BIER-TE) path. A new Tunnel Type for BIER-TE path is defined to encode the information about a BIER-TE path. |
| | Advertising In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) Capabilities in BGP |
| |
|
In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) refers to network OAM data plane on-path telemetry techniques, in particular In-situ OAM (IOAM) and Alternate Marking. This document defines a new BGP Router Capability Code to advertise the In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) capabilities. Within an IFIT domain, IFIT-capability advertisement from the tail node to the head node assists the head node to determine whether a particular IFIT Option type can be encapsulated in data packets. Such advertisement helps mitigating the leakage threat and facilitating the deployment of IFIT measurements on a per-service and on-demand basis. |
| | BGP Color-Aware Routing (CAR) |
| |
|
This document describes a BGP based routing solution to establish end-to-end intent-aware paths across a multi-domain transport network. The transport network can span multiple service provider and customer network domains. The BGP intent-aware paths can be used to steer traffic flows for service routes that need a specific intent. This solution is called BGP Color-Aware Routing (BGP CAR). This document describes the routing framework and the BGP extensions to enable intent-aware routing. The solution defines two new BGP SAFIs (BGP CAR SAFI and BGP VPN CAR SAFI) for IPv4 and IPv6. It also defines an extensible NLRI model for both SAFIs that allow multiple NLRI types to be defined for different use cases. Each type of NLRI contains key and TLV based non-key fields for efficient encoding of different per-prefix information. This specification defines two NLRI types, Color-Aware Route NLRI and IP Prefix NLRI. It defines non-key TLV types for MPLS label stack, Label Index and SRv6 SIDs. This solution also defines a new Local Color Mapping (LCM) Extended Community. |
| | BGP Classful Transport Planes |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-31.txt |
| | Date: |
11/04/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Kaliraj Vairavakkalai, Natrajan Venkataraman |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
This document specifies a mechanism referred to as "Intent Driven Service Mapping". The mechanism uses BGP to express intent based association of overlay routes with underlay routes having specific Traffic Engineering (TE) characteristics satisfying a certain Service Level Agreement (SLA). This is achieved by defining new constructs to group underlay routes with sufficiently similar TE characteristics into identifiable classes (called "Transport Classes"), that overlay routes use as an ordered set to resolve reachability (Resolution Schemes) towards service endpoints. These constructs can be used, for example, to realize the "IETF Network Slice" defined in TEAS Network Slices framework. Additionally, this document specifies protocol procedures for BGP that enable dissemination of service mapping information in a network that may span multiple cooperating administrative domains. These domains may be administered either by the same provider or by closely coordinating providers. A new BGP address family that leverages RFC 4364 procedures and follows RFC 8277 NLRI encoding is defined to advertise underlay routes with its identified class. This new address family is called "BGP Classful Transport", a.k.a., BGP CT. |
| | Traffic Steering using BGP FlowSpec with SR Policy |
| |
|
BGP Flow Specification (FlowSpec) [RFC8955] and [RFC8956] has been proposed to distribute BGP [RFC4271] FlowSpec NLRI to FlowSpec clients to mitigate (distributed) denial-of-service attacks, and to provide traffic filtering in the context of a BGP/MPLS VPN service. Recently, traffic steering applications in the context of SR-MPLS and SRv6 using FlowSpec also attract attention. This document introduces the usage of BGP FlowSpec to steer packets into an SR Policy. |
| | BGP Next Hop Dependent Capabilities Attribute |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-entropy-label-14.txt |
| | Date: |
01/03/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Bruno Decraene, John Scudder, Wim Henderickx, Kireeti Kompella, MOHANTY Satya, Jim Uttaro, Bin Wen |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
RFC 5492 allows a BGP speaker to advertise its capabilities to its peer. When a route is propagated beyond the immediate peer, it is useful to allow certain capabilities, or other properties, to be conveyed further. In particular, it is useful to advertise forwarding plane features. This specification defines a BGP transitive attribute to carry such capability information, the "Next Hop Dependent Capabilities Attribute," or NHC. Unlike the capabilities defined by RFC 5492, those conveyed in the NHC apply solely to the routes advertised by the BGP UPDATE that contains the particular NHC. This specification also defines an NHC capability that can be used to advertise the ability to process the MPLS Entropy Label as an egress LSR for all NLRI advertised in the BGP UPDATE. It updates RFC 6790 and RFC 7447 concerning this BGP signaling. |
| | BGP Extension for 5G Edge Service Metadata |
| |
|
This draft describes a new Metadata Path Attribute and some Sub-TLVs for egress routers to advertise the Metadata about the attached edge services (ES). The edge service Metadata can be used by the ingress routers in the 5G Local Data Network to make path selections not only based on the routing cost but also the running environment of the edge services. The goal is to improve latency and performance for 5G edge services. The extension enables an edge service at one specific location to be more preferred than the others with the same IP address (ANYCAST) to receive data flow from a specific source, like a specific User Equipment (UE). |
| | BGP Extended Community for Identifying the Target Nodes |
| |
|
BGP has been used to distribute different types of routing and policy information. In some cases, the information distributed may be only intended for one or a particular group of BGP nodes in the network. Currently BGP does not have a generic mechanism of designating the target nodes of the routing information. This document defines a new type of BGP Extended Community called "Node Target" for this purpose. |
| | VPN Prefix Outbound Route Filter (VPN Prefix ORF) for BGP-4 |
| |
|
This draft defines a new Outbound Route Filter (ORF) type, called the VPN Prefix ORF. The described VPN Prefix ORF mechanism is applicable when the VPN routes from different VRFs are exchanged via one shared BGP session (e.g., routers in a single-domain connect via Route Reflector). |
| | BGP Flowspec for IETF Network Slice Traffic Steering |
| |
|
BGP Flow Specification (Flowspec) provides a mechanism to distribute traffic flow specifications and the forwarding actions to be performed to the specific traffic flows. A set of Flowspec components are defined to specify the matching criteria that can be applied to the packet, and a set of BGP extended communities are defined to encode the actions a routing system can take on a packet which matches the flow specification. An IETF Network Slice enables connectivity between a set of Service Demarcation Points (SDPs) with specific Service Level Objectives (SLOs) and Service Level Expectations (SLEs) over a common underlay network. To meet the connectivity and performance requirements of network slice services, network slice service traffic may need to be mapped to a corresponding Network Resource Partition (NRP). The edge nodes of the NRP needs to identify the traffic flows of specific connectivity constructs of network slices, and steer the matched traffic into the corresponding NRP, or a specific path within the corresponding NRP. BGP Flowspec can be used to distribute the matching criteria and the forwarding actions to be preformed on network slice service traffic. The existing Flowspec components can be reused for the matching of network slice services flows at the edge of an NRP. New components and traffic action may need to be defined for steering network slice service flows into the corresponding NRP. This document defines the extensions to BGP Flowspec for IETF network slice traffic steering (NS-TS). |
| | Extended Communities Derived from Route Targets |
| |
|
This document specifies a way to derive an Extended Community from a Route Target and describes some example use cases. |
| | Advertisement of Segment Routing Policies using BGP Link-State |
| |
|
This document describes a mechanism to collect the Segment Routing Policy information that is locally available in a node and advertise it into BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) updates. Such information can be used by external components for path computation, re-optimization, service placement, network visualization, etc. |
| | Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) Send Hold Timer |
| |
|
This document defines the SendHoldtimer, along with the SendHoldTimer_Expires event, for the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Finite State Machine (FSM). Implementation of the SendHoldTimer helps overcome situations where a BGP session is not terminated after the local system detects that the remote system is not processing BGP messages. This document specifies that the local system should close the BGP connection and not solely rely on the remote system for session closure when the SendHoldTimer expires. This document updates RFC4271. |
| | BGP Extension for SR-MPLS Entropy Label Position |
| |
|
This document proposes extensions for BGP to indicate the entropy label position in the SR-MPLS label stack when delivering SR Policy via BGP. |
| | Segment Routing Segment Types Extensions for BGP SR Policy |
| |
|
This document specifies the signaling of additional Segment Routing Segment Types for BGP SR Policy SAFI. |
| | BGP CT - Adaptation to SRv6 dataplane |
| |
|
This document specifies how the mechanisms for "Intent Driven Service Mapping" defined in [BGP-CT] are applied to SRv6 dataplane. The extensions needed for SRv6 dataplane operations are specified. Base procedures of BGP CT are followed unaltered. Illustration of how BGP CT procedures work in SRv6 dataplane is provided in this document. |
| | BGP SR Policy Extensions for Network Resource Partition |
| |
|
Segment Routing (SR) Policy is a set of candidate paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists and the associated information. The header of a packet steered in an SR Policy is augmented with an ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy. A Network Resource Partition (NRP) is a subset of network resources allocated in the underlay network which can be used to support one or a group of RFC XXXX network slice services. In networks where there are multiple NRPs, an SR Policy may be associated with a particular NRP. The association between SR Policy and NRP needs to be specified, so that for service traffic which is steered into the SR Policy, the header of the packets can be augmented with the information associated with the NRP. An SR Policy candidate path can be distributed using BGP SR Policy. This document defines the extensions to BGP SR policy to specify the NRP which the SR Policy candidate path is associated with. |
| | BGP SR Policy Extensions for Segment List Identifier |
| |
|
Segment Routing is a source routing paradigm that explicitly indicates the forwarding path for packets at the ingress node. An SR Policy is a set of candidate paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists. This document defines extensions to BGP SR Policy to specify the identifier of segment list. |
| | BGP Colored Prefix Routing (CPR) for SRv6 based Services |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-cpr-00.txt |
| | Date: |
18/12/2023 |
| | Authors: |
Haibo Wang, Jie Dong, Ketan Talaulikar, hantao, Ran Chen |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
This document describes a mechanism to advertise IPv6 prefixes in BGP which are associated with Color Extended Communities to establish end-to-end intent-aware paths for SRv6 services. Such IPv6 prefixes are called "Colored Prefixes", and this mechanism is called Colored Prefix Routing (CPR). In SRv6 networks, the Colored prefixes are the SRv6 locators associated with different intent. SRv6 services (e.g. SRv6 VPN services) with specific intent could be assigned with SRv6 SIDs under the corresponding SRv6 locators, which are advertised as Colored prefixes. This allows the SRv6 service traffic to be steered into end-to-end intent-aware paths simply based on the longest prefix matching of SRv6 Service SIDs to the Colored prefixes. In data plane, dedicated transport label or SID for the inter-domain path is not needed, thus the encapsulation efficiency could be optimized. The existing IPv6 Address Family could be used for the advertisement of IPv6 Colored prefixes, thus this mechanism is easy to interoperate and can be deployed incrementally in multi-domain networks. |
| | BGP SR Policy Extensions for metric |
| |
|
SR Policy candidate paths can be represented in BGP UPDATE messages. BGP can then be used to propagate the SR Policy candidate paths to the headend nodes in the network. After SR Policy is installed on the ingress node, the packets can be steered into SR Policy through route selection. Therefore, route selection may be performed on the ingress node of the SR Policy. If there are multiple routes to the same destination, the route selection node can select routes based on the local policy. The local policy may use the IGP metric of the selected path, which is the IGP Metric of the SR Policy. Thus the BGP UPDATE message needs to carry the metric of each segment list of the SR Policy Candidate Path, which can be used in path selection of routing. |
| | Advertising Segment Routing Policies in BGP |
| |
| | draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi-02.txt |
| | Date: |
16/03/2024 |
| | Authors: |
Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Ketan Talaulikar, Paul Mattes, Dhanendra Jain |
| | Working Group: |
Inter-Domain Routing (idr) |
|
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. An SR Policy consists of one or more candidate paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists. A headend may be provisioned with candidate paths for an SR Policy via several different mechanisms, e.g., CLI, NETCONF, PCEP, or BGP. This document specifies how BGP may be used to distribute SR Policy candidate paths. It introduces a BGP SAFI to advertise a candidate path of a Segment Routing (SR) Policy and defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute for signaling information about these candidate paths. This documents updates RFC9012 with extensions to the Color Extended Community to support additional steering modes over SR Policy. |
| | BGP Route Reflector with Next Hop Self |
| |
|
The procedures in BGP Route Reflection (RR) spec RFC4456 primarily deal with scenarios where the RR is reflecting BGP routes with next hop unchanged. In some deployments like Inter-AS Option C (Section 10, RFC4364), the ABRs may perform RR functionality with nexthop set to self. If adequate precautions are not taken, the RFC4456 procedures can result in traffic forwarding loop in such deployments. This document illustrates one such looping scenario, and specifies approaches to minimize possiblity of traffic forwarding loop in such deployments. An example with Inter-AS Option C (Section 10, RFC4364) deployment is used, where RR with next hop self is used at redundant ABRs when they re-advertise BGP transport family routes between multiple IGP domains. |
| | MP-BGP Extension and the Procedures for IPv4/IPv6 Mapping Advertisement |
| |
|
This document defines MP-BGP extension and the procedures for IPv4 service delivery in multi-domain IPv6-only underlay networks. It defines a new TLV in the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation attribute to be used in conjunction with the specific AFI/SAFI for IPv4 and IPv6. The behaviors of each type of network (IPv4 and IPv6) are also illustrated. In addition, this document provides the deployment and operation considerations when the extension is deployed. |
| | BGP MultiNexthop Attribute |
| |
|
Today, a BGP speaker can advertise one nexthop for a set of NLRIs in an Update. This nexthop can be encoded in either the top-level BGP- Nexthop attribute (code 3), or inside the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute (code 14). This document defines a new optional non-transitive BGP attribute called "MultiNexthop (MNH)" with IANA BGP attribute type code TBD, that can be used to carry an ordered set of one or more Nexthops in the same route, with forwaring information scoped on a per nexthop basis. |