draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-09.txt   draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-10.txt 
IDR Working Group G. Van de Velde, Ed. IDR Working Group G. Van de Velde, Ed.
Internet-Draft Nokia Internet-Draft Nokia
Intended status: Standards Track K. Patel Intended status: Standards Track K. Patel
Expires: February 20, 2020 Arrcus Expires: May 1, 2020 Arrcus
Z. Li Z. Li
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
August 19, 2019 October 29, 2019
Flowspec Indirection-id Redirect Flowspec Indirection-id Redirect
draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-09 draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-10
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a new extended community known as "FlowSpec This document defines a new extended community known as "FlowSpec
Redirect to indirection-id Extended Community". This extended Redirect to indirection-id Extended Community". This extended
community triggers advanced redirection capabilities to flowspec community triggers advanced redirection capabilities to flowspec
clients. When activated, this flowspec extended community is used by clients. When activated, this flowspec extended community is used by
a flowspec client to retrieve the corresponding next-hop and encoding a flowspec client to retrieve the corresponding next-hop and encoding
information within a localised indirection-id mapping table. information within a localised indirection-id mapping table.
skipping to change at page 1, line 48 skipping to change at page 1, line 48
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 February 20, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 1, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 33 skipping to change at page 2, line 33
2. indirection-id and indirection-id table . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. indirection-id and indirection-id table . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use Case Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Use Case Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Redirection shortest Path tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Redirection shortest Path tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Redirection to path-engineered tunnels . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Redirection to path-engineered tunnels . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Redirection to complex dynamically constructed tunnels . 5 3.3. Redirection to complex dynamically constructed tunnels . 5
4. Redirect to indirection-id Community . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Redirect to indirection-id Community . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Redirect using localised indirection-id mapping table . . . . 8 5. Redirect using localised indirection-id mapping table . . . . 8
6. Validation Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Validation Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Contributor Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Flowspec is an extension to BGP that allows for the dissemination of Flowspec is an extension to BGP that allows for the dissemination of
traffic flow specification rules. This has many possible traffic flow specification rules. This has many possible
skipping to change at page 8, line 38 skipping to change at page 8, line 38
When a BGP flowspec client receives a flowspec policy route with a When a BGP flowspec client receives a flowspec policy route with a
"Redirect to indirection-id" extended community attached, and the "Redirect to indirection-id" extended community attached, and the
route represents the best BGP path, it will install a flowspec route represents the best BGP path, it will install a flowspec
policy-based forwarding rule matching the tupples described by the policy-based forwarding rule matching the tupples described by the
flowpsec NLRI field and consequently redirects the flow (C=0) or flowpsec NLRI field and consequently redirects the flow (C=0) or
copies the flow (C=1) using the information identified by the copies the flow (C=1) using the information identified by the
"Redirect to indirection-id" community. "Redirect to indirection-id" community.
6. Validation Procedures 6. Validation Procedures
The validation check described in rfc5575bis [3] and revised in [2] The validation check described in rfc5575bis [3] SHOULD be applied by
SHOULD be applied by default by a flowspec client, for received default by a flowspec client, for received flowspec policy routes
flowspec policy routes containing a "Redirect to indirection-id" containing a "Redirect to indirection-id" extended community. This
extended community. This results that a flowspec route with a results that a flowspec route with a destination prefix subcomponent
destination prefix subcomponent SHOULD NOT be accepted from an EBGP SHOULD NOT be accepted from an EBGP peer unless that peer also
peer unless that peer also advertised the best path for the matching advertised the best path for the matching unicast route.
unicast route.
While it MUST NOT happen, and is seen as invalid combination, it is While it MUST NOT happen, and is seen as invalid combination, it is
possible from a semantics perspective to have multiple clashing possible from a semantics perspective to have multiple clashing
redirect actions defined within a single flowspec rule. For best and redirect actions defined within a single flowspec rule. For best and
consistant compatibility with legacy implementations, the redirect consistant compatibility with legacy implementations, the redirect
functionality as documented by rfc5575bis MUST NOT be broken, and functionality as documented by rfc5575bis MUST NOT be broken, and
hence when a clash occurs, then rfc5575bis based redirect MUST take hence when a clash occurs, then rfc5575bis based redirect MUST take
priority. Additionally, if the "Redirect to indirection-id" does not priority. Additionally, if the "Redirect to indirection-id" does not
result in a valid redirection, then the flowspec rule MUST be result in a valid redirection, then the flowspec rule MUST be
processed as if the "Redirect to indirection-id" community was not processed as if the "Redirect to indirection-id" community was not
skipping to change at page 9, line 23 skipping to change at page 9, line 22
A system using "Redirect to indirection-id" extended community can A system using "Redirect to indirection-id" extended community can
cause during the redirect mitigation of a DDoS attack overflow of cause during the redirect mitigation of a DDoS attack overflow of
traffic received by the mitigation infrastructure. traffic received by the mitigation infrastructure.
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
This document received valuable comments and input from IDR working This document received valuable comments and input from IDR working
group including Adam Simpson, Mustapha Aissaoui, Jan Mertens, Robert group including Adam Simpson, Mustapha Aissaoui, Jan Mertens, Robert
Raszuk, Jeff Haas, Susan Hares and Lucy Yong. Raszuk, Jeff Haas, Susan Hares and Lucy Yong.
9. Contributor Addresses 9. Contributors
Below is a list of other contributing authors in alphabetical order: The following people contributed to the content of this document and
should be considered as co-authors:
Arjun Sreekantiah Arjun Sreekantiah
Cisco Systems
170 W. Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA USA
Email: asreekan@cisco.com Email: arjunhrs@gmail.com
Nan Wu Nan Wu
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Huawei Bld., No. 156 Beiquing Rd Huawei Bld., No. 156 Beiquing Rd
Beijing 100095 Beijing 100095
China China
Email: eric.wu@huawei.com Email: eric.wu@huawei.com
Shunwan Zhuang Shunwan Zhuang
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 15 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/