Network Working Group R. Bush Internet-Draft Internet Initiative Japan Intended status: Informational R. Austein Expires: April 18, 2014 Dragon Research Labs K. Patel Cisco Systems H. Gredler Juniper Networks, Inc. M. Waehlisch FU Berlin October 15, 2013 RPKI Router Implementation Report draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-impl-04 Abstract This document is an implementation report for the RPKI Router protocol as defined in [RFC6810]. The editor did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. Respondents were asked to only use the YES answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab. 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 http://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 April 18, 2014. Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 1] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 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 (http://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 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Implementation Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Protocol Data Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Protocol Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Protocol Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Incremental Updates Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Session ID Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. Incremental Session Startup Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 10. Interoperable Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.1. Cisco Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.2. Juniper Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.3. rpki.net Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.4. RIPE NCC Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.5. RTRlib Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10.6. BBN RPSTIR Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 12. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 14. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1. Introduction In order to formally validate the origin Autonomous Systems (ASs) of BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) [RFC6810] prefix origin data from a trusted cache. The RPKI Router protocol defined in [RFC6810] provides a mechanism to deliver validated prefix origin data to routers. Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 2] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 This document provides an implementation report for the RPKI Router protocol as defined in RFC 6810 [RFC6810]. The editor did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents or by any alternative means. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. Respondents were asked to only use the YES answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab. 2. Implementation Forms Contact and implementation information for person filling out this form: IOS Name: Keyur Patel Email: keyupate@cisco.com Vendor: Cisco Systems, Inc. Release: IOS XR Name: Forhad Ahmed Email:foahmed@cisco.com Vendor: Cisco Systems, Inc. Release: IOS-XR JUNOS Name: Hannes Gredler Email: hannes@juniper.net Vendor: Juniper Networks, Inc. Release: JUNOS rpki.net Name: Rob Austein Email: sra@hactrn.net Vendor: rpki.net project Release: http://subvert-rpki.hactrn.net/trunk/ NCC Name: Tim Bruijnzeels Email: tim@ripe.net Vendor: RIPE NCC Release: RIPE NCC validator-app 2.0.0 https://github.com/RIPE-NCC/ rpki-validator RTRlib Name: Fabian Holler, Matthias Waehlisch Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 3] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 Email: waehlisch@ieee.org Vendor: HAW Hamburg, FU Berlin, RTRlib project Release: RTRlib 0.2 http://rpki.realmv6.org/ BBN Name: David Mandelberg, Andrew Chi Email: dmandelb@bbn.com Vendor: Raytheon/BBN Technologies Release: RPSTIR 0.2 http://sourceforge.net/projects/rpstir/ Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 4] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 3. Protocol Data Units Does the implementation support Protocol Data Units (PDUs) as described in Section 5 of [RFC6810]? P0: Serial Notify P1: Serial Query P2: Reset Query P3: Cache Response P4: IPv4 Prefix P6: IPv6 Prefix P7: End of Data P8: Cache Reset P10: Error Report +---------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+-----+------+-----+ | | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki | rpki | NCC | RTR- | BBN | | | | | | .net | .net | | lib | | | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +---------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+-----+------+-----+ | Rcv.P0 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P1 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Snd.P1 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Rcv.P2 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Snd.P2 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Rcv.P3 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P3 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P4 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P4 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P6 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P6 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P7 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P7 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P8 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.P8 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.P10 | YES | YES | NO~1 | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Snd.P10 | YES | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | +---------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+-----+------+-----+ Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 5] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 1) No, Error PDU gets silently ignored 4. Protocol Sequence Does RPKI Router protocol implementation follow the four protocol sequences as outlined in Section 6 of [RFC6810]? S1: Start or Restart S2: Typical Exchange S3: Generation of Incremental Updates Sequence S4: Receipt of Incremental Updates Sequence S5: Generation of Cache has No data Sequence +------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+------+--------+-----+ | | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki | rpki | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | | .net | .net | | | | | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+------+--------+-----+ | S1 | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | S2 | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | NO~1 | YES | YES | | S3 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | NO | --- | YES | | S4 | YES | YES | YES | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | S5 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | +------+------+-----+-------+--------+--------+------+--------+-----+ 1) NO, we always respond as described in 6.3 of [RFC6810] 5. Protocol Transport Does RPKI Router protocol implementation support different protocol transport mechanism outlined in Section 7 of [RFC6810]? Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 6] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 +---------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+ | | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki | rpki | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | | .net | .net | | | | | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +---------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+ | SSH | NO | YES | NO | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | | TLS | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | | TCP | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | TCP-MD5 | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | | TCP-AO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | +---------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+ 6. Error Codes Does RPKI Router protocol implementation support different protocol error codes outlined in Section 10 of [RFC6810]? +-------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+ | | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki | rpki | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | | .net | .net | | | | | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +-------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+ | Rcv.0 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Snd.0 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Rcv.1 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Snd.1 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Rcv.2 | YES | YES | NO | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.2 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.3 | YES | YES | NO | YES | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Snd.3 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES | --- | YES | | Rcv.4 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Snd.4 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Rcv.5 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Snd.5 | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | | Rcv.6 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES~1 | --- | YES | | Snd.6 | YES | YES | NO | NO | --- | --- | YES | --- | | Rcv.7 | --- | --- | --- | --- | YES | YES~1 | --- | YES | | Snd.7 | YES | YES | NO | NO | --- | --- | YES | --- | +-------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+ 1) YES, but... fatal, so connection is dropped, but cache does not conclude it's inconsistent. 7. Incremental Updates Support Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 7] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 Does the RPKI Router implementation support Incremental Updates as defined in Section 4 of [RFC6810]? +-----+------+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki.net | rpki.net | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +-----+------+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | +-----+------+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ 8. Session ID Support Session ID is used to indicate that the cache server may have restarted and that the incremental restart may not be possible. Does RPKI Router protocol implementation support Session ID procedures outlined in Section 5.1 of [RFC6810]? +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki.net | rpki.net | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | NO~1 | YES | YES | +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ 1) NO, using random, but will FIX 9. Incremental Session Startup Support Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation support Incremental session startups with Serial Number and Session ID as defined in section 5.3 of [RFC6810]? +------+-----+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ | IOS | XR | JUNOS | rpki.net | rpki.net | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | | | | | clnt | srvr | | | | +------+-----+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES | +------+-----+-------+------------+------------+-----+--------+-----+ Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 8] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 10. Interoperable Implementations List other implementations that you have tested interoperability of RPKI Router Implementation. 10.1. Cisco Implementation Cisco: The Cisco IOS and IOS-XR implementation should be interoperable with other vendor RPKI Router Protocol implementations. In particular we have tested our interoperability with rpki.net's RPKI Router implementation. 10.2. Juniper Implementation Juniper: The Juniper Networks, Inc. JUNOS implementation should be interoperable with other vendor RPKI Router Protocol implementations. In particular we have tested our interoperability with rpki.net's and NCCs RPKI Router Cache implementation. 10.3. rpki.net Implementation rpki.net: The rpki.net implementation should operate with other rpki- rtr implementations. In particular, we have tested our rpki-rtr server's interoperability with Cisco IOS, Cisco IOS-XR, and Juniper. 10.4. RIPE NCC Implementation RIPE NCC: The RIPE NCC validator has been tested by us with other rpki-rtr implementations. In particular we have tested with RTRLib and CISCO IOS. We received positive feedback from close contacts testing our validator with JUNOS and Quagga. 10.5. RTRlib Implementation RTRlib: The RTRlib has been tested by us with other rpki-rtr implementations. In particular, we have tested with rtr-origin from rpki.net and RIPE NCC Validator. 10.6. BBN RPSTIR Implementation BBN RPSTIR: We have not yet tested with any other implementations. 11. IANA Considerations This document makes no request of IANA. Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an RFC. Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 9] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 12. Security considerations No new security issues are introduced to the RPKI Router protocol defined in [RFC6810]. 13. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Andrew Chi, David Mandelberg, Fabian Holler, Forhad Ahmed, and Tim Bruijnzeels for their contributions to this document. 14. Normative References [RFC6810] Bush, R. and R. Austein, "The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol", RFC 6810, January 2013. Authors' Addresses Randy Bush Internet Initiative Japan 5147 Crystal Springs Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110 US Email: randy@psg.com Rob Austein Dragon Research Labs Email: sra@hactrn.net Keyur Patel Cisco Systems 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 US Email: keyupate@cisco.com Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 10] Internet-Draft RPKI Router Implementation Report October 2013 Hannes Gredler Juniper Networks, Inc. 1194 N. Mathilda Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94089 US Email: hannes@juniper.net Matthias Waehlisch FU Berlin Takustr. 9 Berlin 14195 Germany Email: waehlisch@ieee.org URI: http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl Bush, et al. Expires April 18, 2014 [Page 11]