--- 1/draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-06.txt 2020-04-15 12:13:08.066512885 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-07.txt 2020-04-15 12:13:08.078513059 -0700 @@ -1,82 +1,77 @@ Network Working Group J. Scudder Internet-Draft Juniper Networks -Updates: 5492 (if approved) October 15, 2019 +Updates: 5492 (if approved) April 15, 2020 Intended status: Standards Track -Expires: April 17, 2020 +Expires: October 17, 2020 Revision to Capability Codes Registration Procedures - draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-06 + draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-07 Abstract This document updates RFC 5492 by making a change to the registration procedures for BGP Capability Codes. Specifically, the range formerly designated "Reserved for Private Use" is divided into three new ranges, respectively designated as "First Come First Served", - "Experimental" and "Reserved". + "Experimental Use" and "Reserved". 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 April 17, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on October 17, 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 2. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1. Introduction [RFC5492] designates the range of Capability Codes 128-255 as "Reserved for Private Use". Subsequent experience has shown this to - be not only useless, but actively confusing to implementors. BGP - Capability Codes do not meet the criteria for "Private Use" described - in [RFC8126] section 4.1. An example of a legitimate "private use" - code point might be a BGP community [RFC1997] value assigned for use - within a given Autonomous System, but no analogous use of - Capabilities exists. + be not only useless, but actively confusing to implementors. Accordingly, this document revises the registration procedures for the range 128-255, as follows, using the terminology defined in [RFC8126]: o 128-238: First Come First Served o 239-254: Experimental Use o 255: Reserved The procedures for the ranges 1-63 and 64-127 are unchanged, @@ -90,73 +85,77 @@ change both makes it clear that code points from this space should not be used long-term or in shipping products, and reduces the consumption of the scarce Capability Code space expended for this purpose. Once classified as Experimental, it should be considered difficult to reclassify the space for some other purpose in the future. The reason for reserving the maximum value is that it may be useful in the future if extension of the number space is needed. - The reason for designating "IESG" as the change controller for all - registrations is that while it should be easy to obtain a Capability - Code, once registered it's not a trivial matter to safely and - interoperably change the use of that code, and thus working group - consensus should be sought before changes are made to existing - registrations. - - Finally, we invite implementors who have used values in the range - 128-255 to contribute to this draft, so that the values can be - included in the registry. Values that have been reported, are - included. - 3. IANA Considerations IANA is requested to revise the "Capability Codes" registry in the "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group as follows. Reference: [RFC5492] and this document. - Registry Owner/Change Controller: IESG - Registration procedures: +---------+-------------------------+ | Range | Registration Procedures | +---------+-------------------------+ | 1-63 | IETF Review | | 64-238 | First Come First Served | | 239-254 | Experimental | +---------+-------------------------+ + Table 1 + Note: a separate "owner" column is not provided because the owner of all registrations, once made, is "IESG". IANA is requested to perform the following new allocations within the "Capability Codes" registry: - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ - | Value | Description | Reference | - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ - | 128 | Prestandard Route Refresh (deprecated) | (this | - | | | document) | - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ - | 129 | Prestandard Outbound Route Filtering | (this | - | | (deprecated), prestandard draft-li-idr- | document) | - | | flowspec-rpd-04 (deprecated) | | - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ - | 130 | Prestandard Outbound Route Filtering | (this | - | | (deprecated) | document) | - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ - | 255 | Reserved | (this | - | | | document) | - +-------+-----------------------------------------------+-----------+ + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | Valu | Description | Reference / Change Controller | + | e | | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 128 | Prestandard Route | (this document) | + | | Refresh (deprecated) | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 129 | Prestandard Outbound | (this document) | + | | Route Filtering | | + | | (deprecated), | | + | | prestandard draft-li- | | + | | idr-flowspec-rpd-04 | | + | | (deprecated) | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 130 | Prestandard Outbound | (this document) | + | | Route Filtering | | + | | (deprecated) | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 131 | Prestandard | (this document) | + | | Multisession | | + | | (deprecated) | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 184 | Prestandard FQDN | (this document) | + | | (deprecated) | | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 185 | OPERATIONAL message | (this document, draft-ietf-idr- | + | | (deprecated) | operational-message-00) | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | 255 | Reserved | (this document) | + +------+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + + Table 2 4. Security Considerations This revision to registration procedures does not change the underlying security issues inherent in the existing [RFC5492] and [RFC4271]. 5. Acknowledgements Thanks to Alia Atlas, Bruno Decraene, Martin Djernaes, Jie Dong, Jeff