--- 1/draft-ietf-idr-legacy-rtc-06.txt 2016-10-03 15:15:50.960794785 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-idr-legacy-rtc-07.txt 2016-10-03 15:15:50.984795400 -0700 @@ -1,23 +1,25 @@ Network Working Group P. Mohapatra Internet-Draft Sproute Networks Intended status: Standards Track A. Sreekantiah -Expires: April 18, 2016 K. Patel +Expires: April 6, 2017 Cisco Systems + K. Patel + Arrcus Inc B. Pithawala Cisco Systems A. Lo Arista Networks - October 16, 2015 + October 3, 2016 Automatic Route Target Filtering for legacy PEs - draft-ietf-idr-legacy-rtc-06 + draft-ietf-idr-legacy-rtc-07 Abstract This document describes a simple procedure that allows "legacy" BGP speakers to exchange route target membership information in BGP without using mechanisms specified in [RFC4684]. The intention of the proposed technique is to help in partial deployment scenarios and is not meant to replace [RFC4684]. Status of This Memo @@ -28,25 +30,25 @@ 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, 2016. + This Internet-Draft will expire on April 6, 2017. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2016 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 @@ -64,33 +66,33 @@ it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Basic Idea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Detailed Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Legacy PE Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3.2. RR Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 3.2. RR Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2.1. Generating Route Target Membership NLRIs for the legacy PE clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 4. ROUTE_FILTER Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 4. ROUTE_FILTER Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 6. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 10.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 6. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 10.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1. Introduction [RFC4684] provides a powerful and general means for BGP speakers to exchange and propagate Route Target reachability information and constrain VPN route distribution to achieve high scale. However, it requires that all the BGP speakers in the network are upgraded to support this functionality. For example, in a network with route reflectors (RR), if one PE client in the cluster doesn't support constrained distribution, the cluster degenerates into storing and @@ -273,21 +276,23 @@ ROUTE_FILTER_TRANSLATED_v4 MAY be treated by an implementation as a default VPN route-filter community to build a combination VPN filter for all VPN AFs (VPNv4, VPNv6) present on the RR. This is in accordance with the procedures in [RFC4684] to build combination route-filters for VPN AFs and AF specific route-filters defined in [I-D.keyur-bgp-af-specific-rt-constrain]. If this is the case, then subsequent receipt of any "route-filter" routes with AF specific communities (ROUTE_FILTER_v6, ROUTE_FILTER_TRANSLATED_v6) will override the default filters sent with ROUTE_FILTER_v4 or ROUTE_FILTER_TRANSLATED_v4 for the VPNv6 AFI when support for the AF - specific communities exists. + specific communities exists. Suggested values for ROUTE_FILTER_v4 + and ROUTE_FILTER_TRANSLATED_v4 are 0xFFFF0002 (65535:2) and + 0xFFFF0003 (65535:3) respectively 5. Deployment Considerations When both the legacy PE and the RR support extended community based Outbound Route Filtering as in [I-D.chen-bgp-ext-community-orf] this may be used as a alternate solution for the legacy PE to signal RT membership information, in order to realize the same benefits as [RFC4684]. Also extended community ORF can be used amongst the RRs in lieu of [RFC4684] to realize similar benefits. @@ -309,27 +314,27 @@ 9. Security Considerations There are no additional security risks introduced by this design. 10. References 10.1. 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, + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, + DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A - Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, DOI - 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, + Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, + DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, . [RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360, February 2006, . [RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February 2006, . @@ -362,31 +367,28 @@ Arjun Sreekantiah Cisco Systems 170 W. Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 USA Email: asreekan@cisco.com Keyur Patel - Cisco Systems - 170 W. Tasman Drive - San Jose, CA 95134 - USA + Arrcus Inc + + Email: keyurpat@yahoo.com - Email: keyupate@cisco.com Burjiz Pithawala Cisco Systems 170 W. Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 USA Email: bpithaw@cisco.com - Alton Lo Arista Networks 5470 Great America Parkway Santa Clara, CA 95054 USA Email: altonlo@aristanetworks.com