GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc1965

Network Working Group P. Traina Request for Comments: 1965 cisco Systems Category: Experimental June 1996

              Autonomous System Confederations for BGP

Status of this Memo

 This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
 community.  This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any
 kind.  Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
 Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

 Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing
 protocol designed for TCP/IP networks.
 This document describes an extension to BGP which may be used to
 create a confederation of autonomous systems which is represented as
 one single autonomous system to BGP peers external to the
 confederation.
 The intention of this extension is to aid in policy administration
 and reduce the management complexity of maintaining a large
 autonomous system.
 The extension this document describes is widely deployed in the
 Internet today.

Introduction

 It may be useful to subdivide autonomous systems with a very large
 number of BGP speakers into smaller domains for purposes of
 controlling routing policy via information contained in the BGP
 AS_PATH attribute.  For example, one may chose to consider all BGP
 speakers in a geographic region as a single entity.
 In addition to improvements in routing policy control, current
 techniques for deploying BGP among speakers in the same autonomous
 system establish a full mesh of TCP connections among all speakers
 for the purpose of exchanging exterior routing information.  In
 autonomous systems the number of intra-domain connections that need
 to be maintained by each border router can become significant.
 Subdividing a large autonomous system allows a significant reduction
 in the total number of intra-domain BGP connections, as the

Traina Experimental [Page 1] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

 connectivity requirements simplify to the model used for inter-domain
 connections.
 Unfortunately subdividing an autonomous system may increase the
 complexity of policy routing based on AS_PATH information for all
 members of the Internet.  Additionally, this division increases the
 maintenance overhead of coordinating external peering when the
 internal topology of this collection of autonomous systems is
 modified.
 Finally, dividing a large AS may unnecessarily increase the length of
 the sequence portions of the AS_PATH attribute.  Several common BGP
 implementations can use the number of "hops" required to reach a
 given destination as part of the path selection criteria.  While this
 is not an optimal method of determining route preference, given the
 lack of other in-band information, it provides a reasonable default
 behavior which is widely used across the Internet.  Therefore,
 division of an autonomous system into separate systems may adversely
 affect optimal routing of packets through the Internet.
 However, there is usually no need to expose the internal topology of
 this divided autonomous system,  which means it is possible to regard
 a collection of autonomous systems under a common administration as a
 single entity or autonomous system when viewed from outside the
 confines of the confederation of autonomous systems itself.

Terms and Definitions

 AS Confederation
    A collection of autonomous systems advertised as a single AS
    number to BGP speakers that are not members of the confederation.
 AS Confederation Identifier
    An externally visible autonomous system number that identifies the
    confederation as a whole.
 Member-AS
    An autonomous system that is contained in a given AS
    confederation.

Overview

 IDRP[2] has the concept of a routing domain confederation.  An IDRP
 routing domain confederation appears to IDRP speakers external to the
 confederation as a single administrative entity.  This extension is
 based upon that work.

Traina Experimental [Page 2] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

 In IDRP, routing domain confederations may be nested within each
 other or disjoint portions of still larger confederations.  The
 algorithm BGP defines for additions to the AS_PATH attribute imposes
 an additional restriction that AS confederations must be strictly
 hierarchical in nature.

AS_CONFED segment type extension

 Currently, BGP specifies that the AS_PATH attribute is a well-known
 mandatory attribute that is composed of a sequence of AS path
 segments.  Each AS path segment is represented by a type/length/value
 triple.
 In [1], the path segment type is a 1-octet long field with the two
 following values defined:
           Value     Segment Type
           1         AS_SET: unordered set of ASs a route in the
                            UPDATE message has traversed
           2         AS_SEQUENCE: ordered set of ASs a route in
                            the UPDATE message has traversed
 This document reserves two additional segment types:
           3         AS_CONFED_SET: unordered set of ASs in the local
                            confederation that the UPDATE message
                            has traversed
           4         AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE: ordered set of ASs in the
                            local confederation that the UPDATE
                            message has traversed

Operation

 A member of a BGP confederation will use its confederation identifier
 in all transactions with peers that are not members of its
 confederation.  This confederation identifier is considered to be the
 "externally visible" AS number and this number is used in OPEN
 messages and advertised in the AS_PATH attribute.
 A member of a BGP confederation will use its routing domain
 identifier (the internally visible AS number) in all transactions
 with peers that are members of the same confederation as the given
 router.

Traina Experimental [Page 3] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

 A BGP speaker receiving an AS_PATH attribute containing a
 confederation ID matching its own confederation shall treat the path
 in the same fashion as if it had received a path containing its own
 AS number.

AS_PATH modification rules

 Section 5.1.2 of [1] is replaced with the following text.
 When a BGP speaker propagates a route which it has learned from
 another BGP speaker's UPDATE message, it shall modify the route's
 AS_PATH attribute based on the location of the BGP speaker to which
 the route will be sent:
    a) When a given BGP speaker advertises the route to another BGP
    speaker located in its own autonomous system, the advertising
    speaker shall not modify the AS_PATH attribute associated with
    the route.
    b) When a given BGP speaker advertises the route to a BGP
    speaker located in a neighboring autonomous system that is a
    member of the local autonomous system confederation, then the
    advertising speaker shall update the AS_PATH attribute as
    follows:
       1) if the first path segment of the AS_PATH is of type
       AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE, the local system shall prepend its own AS
       number as the last element of the sequence (put it in the
       leftmost position).
       2) if the first path segment of the AS_PATH is not of type
       AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE the local system shall prepend a new path
       segment of type AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE to the AS_PATH, including
       its own confederation identifier in that segment.
    c) When a given BGP speaker advertises the route to a BGP
    speaker located in a neighboring autonomous system that is not a
    member of the current routing domain confederation, then the
    advertising speaker shall update the AS_PATH attribute as
    follows:
       1) if the first path segment of the AS_PATH is of type
       AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE, that segment and any immediately
       following segments of the type AS_CONFED_SET are removed from
       the AS_PATH attribute, leaving the sanitized AS_PATH
       attribute to be operated on by steps 2, or 3.

Traina Experimental [Page 4] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

       2) if the first path segment of the remaining AS_PATH is of
       type AS_SEQUENCE, the local system shall prepend its own
       confederation identifier as the last element of the sequence
       (put it in the leftmost position).
       3) if there are no path segments following the removal of the
       first AS_CONFED_SET/AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE segments, or if the
       first path segment of the remaining AS_PATH is of type AS_SET
       the local system shall prepend a new path segment of type
       AS_SEQUENCE to the AS_PATH, including its own confederation
       identifier in that segment.
 When a BGP speaker originates a route:
    a) the originating speaker shall include an empty AS_PATH
    attribute in all UPDATE messages sent to BGP speakers located in
    its own autonomous system. (An empty AS_PATH attribute is one
    whose length field contains the value zero).
    b) the originating speaker shall include its own AS number in an
    AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE segment of the AS_PATH attribute of all
    UPDATE messages sent to BGP speakers located in neighboring
    autonomous systems that are members of the local confederation.
    (In this case, the AS number of the originating speaker's member
    autonomous system number will be the only entry in the AS_PATH
    attribute).
    c) the originating speaker shall include its own confederation
    identifier in a AS_SEQUENCE segment of the AS_PATH attribute of
    all UPDATE messages sent to BGP speakers located in neighboring
    autonomous systems that are not members of the local
    confederation. (In this case, the confederation identifier of
    the originating speaker's member confederation will be the only
    entry in the AS_PATH attribute).

Common Administration Issues

 It is reasonable for member ASs of a confederation to share a common
 administration and IGP information for the entire confederation.
 It shall be legal for a BGP speaker to advertise an unchanged
 NEXT_HOP and MULTI_EXIT_DISCRIMINATOR attribute to peers in a
 neighboring AS within the same confederation.  In addition, the
 restriction against sending the LOCAL_PREFERENCE attribute to peers
 in a neighboring AS within the same confederation is removed.  Path
 selection criteria for information received from members inside a
 confederation may follow the same rules used for information received
 from members inside the same autonomous system.

Traina Experimental [Page 5] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

Compatibility

 All BGP speakers participating in a confederation must recognize the
 AS_CONFED_SET and AS_CONFED_SEQUENCE segment type extensions to the
 AS_PATH attribute.
 Any BGP speaker not supporting these extensions will generate a
 notification message specifying an "UPDATE Message Error" and a sub-
 code of "Malformed AS_PATH".
 This compatibility issue implies that all BGP speakers participating
 in a confederation must support BGP confederations,  however BGP
 speakers outside the confederation need not support these extensions.

Compatibility Discussion

 We considered the use of a distinct, optional, transitive attribute
 to carry AS confederation information as opposed to specifying new
 types in the existing AS path attribute.  This would relax the
 requirement that all BGP speakers participating in a confederation to
 allow the use of legacy units provided they have no external (i.e.
 neither inter-AS nor intra-confederation) connectivity.
 At the time of this writing, an implementation of this extension as
 documented is widely deployed throughout the Internet,  therefore the
 value of any change that is incompatible with this document must be
 weighed against the benefit gained from a relaxation of this
 restriction.

References

 [1] Rekhter, Y., and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)",
     RFC 1771, March 1995.
 [2] Kunzinger, C. Editor, "Inter-Domain Routing Protocol", ISO/IEC
     10747, October 1993.

Security Considerations

 Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

Acknowledgments

 Ravi Chandra and Yakov Rekhter reviewed this document and provided
 constructive and valuable comments.

Traina Experimental [Page 6] RFC 1965 AS Confederations for BGP June 1996

Author's Address

 Paul Traina
 cisco Systems, Inc.
 170 W. Tasman Dr.
 San Jose, CA 95134
 EMail: pst@cisco.com

Traina Experimental [Page 7]

/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc1965.txt · Last modified: 1996/06/10 22:21 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki