--- 1/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-01.txt 2020-05-06 08:13:47.763616462 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-02.txt 2020-05-06 08:13:47.783616744 -0700 @@ -1,83 +1,76 @@ Inter-Domain Routing Z. Li Internet-Draft S. Zhuang Intended status: Standards Track Huawei -Expires: May 4, 2020 K. Talaulikar +Expires: November 7, 2020 K. Talaulikar Cisco Systems S. Aldrin Google, Inc J. Tantsura Apstra G. Mirsky ZTE Corp. - November 1, 2019 + May 6, 2020 BGP Link-State Extensions for Seamless BFD - draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-01 + draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-02 Abstract Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) defines a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) with large portions of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating the path monitoring. The link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF) have been extended to advertise the Seamless BFD (S-BFD) Discriminators. This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family to carry the S-BFD Discriminators information via BGP. -Requirements Language - - The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", - "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and - "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP - 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all - capitals, as shown here. - 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 https://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 May 4, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on November 7, 2020. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2020 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 (https://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 + 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Problem and Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. BGP-LS Extensions for S-BFD Discriminator . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 @@ -108,20 +101,28 @@ BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) [RFC7752] enables the collection and distribution of IGP link-state topology information via BGP sessions across IGP areas/levels and domains. The S-BFD discriminator(s) of a node can thus be distributed along with the topology information via BGP-LS across IGP domains and even across multiple Autonomous Systems (AS) within an administrative domain. This draft defines extensions to BGP-LS for carrying the S-BFD Discriminators information. +1.1. Requirements Language + + The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and + "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP + 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all + capitals, as shown here. + 2. Terminology This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7880]. 3. Problem and Requirement Seamless MPLS [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] extends the core domain and integrates aggregation and access domains into a single MPLS domain. In a large network, the core and aggregation networks can be organized as different ASes. Although the core and aggregation @@ -188,21 +189,21 @@ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Discriminator n (Optional) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: S-BFD Discriminators TLV where: o Type: 1032 - o Length: variable. Minimum of 8 octets and increments of 4 octets + o Length: variable. Minimum of 4 octets and increments of 4 octets there on for each additional discriminator o Discriminators : multiples of 4 octets, each carrying a S-BFD local discriminator value of the node. At least one discriminator MUST be included in the TLV. The S-BFD Discriminators TLV can only be added to the BGP-LS Attribute associated with the Node NLRI that originates the corresponding underlying IGP TLV/sub-TLV as described below. This information is derived from the protocol specific advertisements as @@ -266,21 +267,21 @@ administrative domain. Advertising the S-BFD Discriminators via BGP-LS makes it possible for attackers to initiate S-BFD sessions using the advertised information. The vulnerabilities this poses and how to mitigate them are discussed in [RFC7752]. 8. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Nan Wu for his contributions to this - work. + work and Gunter Van De Velde for his review. 9. References 9.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . @@ -313,22 +314,22 @@ 9.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] Leymann, N., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Konstantynowicz, M., and D. Steinberg, "Seamless MPLS Architecture", draft- ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2014. [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft- - ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-03 (work in progress), - May 2019. + ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-06 (work in progress), + December 2019. [RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions", RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009, . [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, .