draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-05.txt		draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-06.txt
	Network Working Group B. Decraene		Network Working Group B. Decraene
	Internet-Draft France Telecom - Orange		Internet-Draft Orange
	Intended status: Standards Track P. Francois		Intended status: Standards Track P. Francois
	Expires: November 22, 2013 IMDEA Networks		Expires: June 5, 2014 IMDEA Networks
	May 21, 2013		December 2, 2013
	Assigned BGP extended communities		Assigned BGP extended communities
	draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-05		draft-ietf-idr-reserved-extended-communities-06
	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
	skipping to change at page 1, line 45		skipping to change at page 1, line 45
	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 November 22, 2013.		This Internet-Draft will expire on June 5, 2014.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2013 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
	skipping to change at page 4, line 5		skipping to change at page 4, line 5
	As per [RFC6793], 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 transitive extended
	community registry and transitive communities are still to be		community registry. Transitive communities are to be assigned as per
	assigned as per [RFC1997].		[RFC1997].
	4. IANA Considerations		4. IANA Considerations
	The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled		The IANA is requested to create and maintain a registry entitled
	"Assigned non-transitive extended communities" with the following		"Assigned non-transitive extended communities" with the following
	registration procedure:		registration procedure:
	Registry Name: Assigned non-transitive extended communities		Registry Name: Assigned non-transitive extended communities
	with Global Significance		with Global Significance
	skipping to change at page 4, line 44		skipping to change at page 4, line 44
	the security of the BGP protocol.		the security of the BGP protocol.
	It allows the allocation of non-transitive global communities which		It allows the allocation of non-transitive global communities which
	are not propagated across Autonomous System boundaries. Compared to		are not propagated across Autonomous System boundaries. Compared to
	a transitive well-known community, a non-transitive community can		a transitive well-known community, a non-transitive community can
	provide some security benefit both for the sender and the receiver of		provide some security benefit both for the sender and the receiver of
	the community.		the community.
	6. Acknowledgements		6. Acknowledgements
	We would like to acknowledge John Scudder and Jeffrey Haas for their		We would like to acknowledge John Scudder, Jeffrey Haas and Yakov
	contribution to this document.		Rekhter for their 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", draft-		BGP Four-octet AS specific extended community", draft-
	ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06 (work in		ietf-idr-as4octet-extcomm-generic-subtype-06 (work 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
	skipping to change at page 5, line 26		skipping to change at page 5, line 26
	Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, February 2006.		Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, February 2006.
	[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.
	[RFC6793] Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-Octet		[RFC6793] Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-Octet
	Autonomous System (AS) Number Space", RFC 6793, December		Autonomous System (AS) Number Space", RFC 6793, December
	2012.		2012.
	Appendix A. Appendix A. Changes / Author Notes		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'
	skipping to change at page 6, line 5		skipping to change at page 5, line 51
	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).		Changes -05: minor editorial change (RFC 4893 obsoleted by 6793).
			Changes -06: typo fixed, minor editorial change.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Bruno Decraene		Bruno Decraene
	France Telecom - Orange		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
	Pierre Francois		Pierre Francois
	IMDEA Networks		IMDEA Networks
	Avda. del Mar Mediterraneo, 22		Avda. del Mar Mediterraneo, 22
	Leganese 28918		Leganese 28918
End of changes. 9 change blocks.
	12 lines changed or deleted		14 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/