draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-04.txt		draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-05.txt
	Network Working Group B. Decraene		Network Working Group B. Decraene
	Internet-Draft France Telecom - Orange		Internet-Draft France Telecom - Orange
	Intended status: Standards Track P. Francois		Intended status: Standards Track P. Francois
	Expires: May 23, 2013 IMDEA Networks		Expires: November 22, 2013 IMDEA Networks
	November 19, 2012		May 21, 2013
	Assigned BGP extended communities		Assigned BGP extended communities
	draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-04		draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-05
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines an IANA registry in order to assign non-		This document defines an IANA registry in order to assign non-
	transitive extended communities from. These are similar to the		transitive extended communities from. These are similar to the
	existing well-known BGP communities defined in RFC 1997 but provide a		existing well-known BGP communities defined in RFC 1997 but provide a
	control over inter-AS community advertisement as, per RFC RFC 4360,		control over inter-AS community advertisement as, per RFC RFC 4360,
	they are not transitive across Autonomous System boundaries.		they are not transitive across Autonomous System boundaries.
	For that purpose, this document defines the use of the reserved		For that purpose, this document defines the use of the reserved
	Autonomous System number 0.65535 in the non-transitive generic four-		Autonomous System number 0.65535 in the non-transitive generic four-
	octet AS specific extended community type.		octet AS specific extended community type.
	Requirements Language		Requirements Language
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
	Status of this Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://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 May 23, 2013.		This Internet-Draft will expire on November 22, 2013.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
			Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	Copyright (c) 2012 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
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://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
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	skipping to change at page 3, line 42		skipping to change at page 3, line 42
	significance. The lists of those communities are maintained by the		significance. The lists of those communities are maintained by the
	IANA in the registry "Assigned non-transitive extended communities".		IANA in the registry "Assigned non-transitive extended communities".
	Note that this use of the reserved AS number 0.65535 in the AS field		Note that this use of the reserved AS number 0.65535 in the AS field
	of the communities is similar to the one defined by [RFC1997] for the		of the communities is similar to the one defined by [RFC1997] for the
	BGP Well-Known communities. In particular, [RFC1997] also uses the		BGP Well-Known communities. In particular, [RFC1997] also uses the
	reserved AS number 65535.		reserved AS number 65535.
	3. Assigned transitive extended communities		3. Assigned transitive extended communities
	As per [RFC4893], a 2-octet Autonomous System number can be converted		As per [RFC6793], a 2-octet Autonomous System number can be converted
	into a 4-octet Autonomous System number by setting the two high-order		into a 4-octet Autonomous System number by setting the two high-order
	octets of the 4-octet field to zero. This applies to the reserved		octets of the 4-octet field to zero. This applies to the reserved
	2-octet Autonous System number 65535 which could use either a		2-octet Autonous System number 65535 which could use either a
	standard community or the 4-octet AS specific generic extended		standard community or the 4-octet AS specific generic extended
	community. As noted in		community. As noted in
	[I-D.ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype], this is undesirable		[I-D.ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype], this is undesirable
	as they would be treated as different communities, even if they had		as they would be treated as different communities, even if they had
	the same values.		the same values.
	Therefore, this document does not define a non-transitive extended		Therefore, this document does not define a non-transitive extended
	skipping to change at page 5, line 14		skipping to change at page 5, line 5
	6. Acknowledgements		6. Acknowledgements
	We would like to acknowledge John Scudder and Jeffrey Haas for their		We would like to acknowledge John Scudder and Jeffrey Haas for their
	contribution to this document.		contribution to this document.
	7. Normative References		7. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype]		[I-D.ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype]
	Rao, D., Mohapatra, P., and J. Haas, "Generic Subtype for		Rao, D., Mohapatra, P., and J. Haas, "Generic Subtype for
	BGP Four-octet AS specific extended community",		BGP Four-octet AS specific extended community", draft-
	draft-ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06 (work		ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06 (work in
	in progress), October 2012.		progress), October 2012.
	[RFC1997] Chandrasekeran, R., Traina, P., and T. Li, "BGP		[RFC1997] Chandrasekeran, R., Traina, P., and T. Li, "BGP
	Communities Attribute", RFC 1997, August 1996.		Communities Attribute", RFC 1997, August 1996.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	[RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended		[RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
	Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, February 2006.		Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, February 2006.
	[RFC4893] Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-octet AS
	Number Space", RFC 4893, May 2007.
	[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an		[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
	IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,		IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
	May 2008.		May 2008.
	Appendix A. Appendix A. Changes / Author Notes		[RFC6793] Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-Octet
			Autonomous System (AS) Number Space", RFC 6793, December
			2012.
			Appendix A. Appendix A. Changes / Author Notes
	[RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication ]		[RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication ]
	Changes -01		Changes -01:
	o Name changed from 'Reserved BGP extended communities' to 'Assigned		o Name changed from 'Reserved BGP extended communities' to 'Assigned
	BGP extended communities'		BGP extended communities'
	o Addition of section 'Assigned extended communities'		o Addition of section 'Assigned extended communities'
	Changes -02: no change, refresh only.		Changes -02: no change, refresh only.
	Changes -03		Changes -03:
	o Use of AS number 0.65535 (0x0000FFFF) instead of AS 0. This is		o Use of AS number 0.65535 (0x0000FFFF) instead of AS 0. This is
	better aligned with RFC 1997 which also uses AS 65535.		better aligned with RFC 1997 which also uses AS 65535.
	o Remove the transitive flavor of assigned extended communities.		o Remove the transitive flavor of assigned extended communities.
	RFC 1997 well-known standard communities to be used instead.		RFC 1997 well-known standard communities to be used instead.
	Changes -04: no change, refresh only.		Changes -04: no change, refresh only.
			Changes -05: minor editorial change (RFC 4893 obsoleted by 6793).
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Bruno Decraene		Bruno Decraene
	France Telecom - Orange		France Telecom - Orange
	38 rue du General Leclerc		38 rue du General Leclerc
	Issy Moulineaux cedex 9 92794		Issy Moulineaux cedex 9 92794
	France		France
	Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com		Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	17 lines changed or deleted		19 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/