GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc5943

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Haberman, Ed. Request for Comments: 5943 JHU APL Category: Standards Track August 2010 ISSN: 2070-1721

A Dedicated Routing Policy Specification Language Interface Identifier

                      for Operational Testing

Abstract

 The deployment of new IP connectivity typically results in
 intermittent reachability for numerous reasons that are outside the
 scope of this document.  In order to aid in the debugging of these
 persistent problems, this document proposes the creation of a new
 Routing Policy Specification Language attribute that allows a network
 to advertise an IP address that is reachable and can be used as a
 target for diagnostic tests (e.g., pings).

Status of This Memo

 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
 Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5943.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2010 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
 described in the Simplified BSD License.

Haberman Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 5943 RPSL Pingable Attribute August 2010

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 2.  RPSL Extension for Diagnostic Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 3.  Using the RPSL Pingable Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
 4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
 5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
 6.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1. Introduction

 The deployment of new IP connectivity typically results in
 intermittent reachability for numerous reasons that are outside the
 scope of this document.  In order to aid in the debugging of these
 persistent problems, this document proposes the creation of a new
 Routing Policy Specification Language attribute [RFC4012] that allows
 a network to advertise an IP address that is reachable and can be
 used as a target for diagnostic tests (e.g., pings).
 The goal of this diagnostic address is to provide operators a means
 to advertise selected hosts that can be targets of tests for such
 common issues as reachability and Path MTU discovery.
 The capitalized key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL",
 "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
 [RFC2119].

2. RPSL Extension for Diagnostic Address

 Network operators wishing to provide a diagnostic address for their
 peers, customers, etc., MAY advertise its existence via the Routing
 Policy Specification Language [RFC4012] [RFC2622].  The pingable
 attribute is a member of the route and route6 objects in the RPSL.
 The definition of the pingable attribute is shown in Figure 1.
 +-----------+-------------------+--------------+
 | Attribute |       Value       |    Type      |
 +-----------+-------------------+--------------+
 |  pingable | <ipv6-address> or |  optional,   |
 |           | <ipv4-address>    | multi-valued |
 +-----------+-------------------+--------------+
 |  ping-hdl |   <nic-handle>    |  optional,   |
 |           |                   | multi-valued |
 +-----------+-------------------+--------------+
              Figure 1: Pingable Attribute Specification

Haberman Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 5943 RPSL Pingable Attribute August 2010

 The exact definitions of <ipv4-address> and <nic-handle> can be found
 in [RFC2622], while the definition of <ipv6-address> is in [RFC4012].
 The pingable attribute allows a network operator to advertise an IP
 address of a node that should be reachable from outside networks.
 This node can be used as a destination address for diagnostic tests.
 The address specified MUST fall within the IP address range
 advertised in the route/route6 object containing the pingable
 attribute.  The ping-hdl provides a link to contact information for
 an entity capable of responding to queries concerning the specified
 IP address.  An example of using the pingable attribute is shown in
 Figure 2.
 route6: 2001:DB8::/32
 origin: AS64500
 pingable: 2001:DB8::DEAD:BEEF
 ping-hdl: OPS4-RIPE
                 Figure 2: Pingable Attribute Example

3. Using the RPSL Pingable Attribute

 The presence of one or more pingable attributes signals to network
 operators that the operator of the target network is providing the
 address(es) for external diagnostic testing.  Tests involving the
 advertised address(es) SHOULD be rate limited to no more than ten
 probes in a five-minute window unless prior arrangements are made
 with the maintainer of the attribute.

4. Security Considerations

 The use of routing registries based on RPSL requires a significant
 level of security.  In-depth discussion of the authentication and
 authorization capabilities and weaknesses within RPSL is in
 [RFC2725].  The application of authentication in RPSL is key
 considering the vulnerabilities that may arise from the abuse of the
 pingable attribute by nefarious actors.  Additional RPSL security
 issues are discussed in the Security Considerations sections of
 [RFC2622] and [RFC4012].
 The publication of this attribute only explicitly signals the
 availability of an ICMP Echo Request/Echo Response service on the
 specified IP address.  The operator, at his/her discretion, MAY
 deploy other services at the same IP address.  These services may be
 impacted by the ping service, given its publicity via the RPSL.

Haberman Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 5943 RPSL Pingable Attribute August 2010

 While this document specifies that external users of the pingable
 attribute rate limit their probes, there is no guarantee that they
 will do so.  Operators publicizing a pingable attribute are
 encouraged to deploy their own rate limiting for the advertised IP
 address in order to reduce the risk of a denial-of-service attack.
 Services, protocols, and ports on the advertised IP address should be
 filtered if they are not intended for external users.

5. Acknowledgements

 Randy Bush and David Farmer provided the original concept for the
 pingable attribute and useful comments on preliminary versions of
 this document.  Joe Abley provided comments that justified moving the
 attribute to the route/route6 object and the inclusion of a point of
 contact.  Larry Blunk, Tony Tauber, David Harrington, Nicolas
 Williams, Sean Turner, and Peter Saint-Andre provided useful comments
 to improve the document.

6. Normative References

 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC2622]  Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D.,
            Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra,
            "Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL)", RFC 2622,
            June 1999.
 [RFC2725]  Villamizar, C., Alaettinoglu, C., Meyer, D., and S.
            Murphy, "Routing Policy System Security", RFC 2725,
            December 1999.
 [RFC4012]  Blunk, L., Damas, J., Parent, F., and A. Robachevsky,
            "Routing Policy Specification Language next generation
            (RPSLng)", RFC 4012, March 2005.

Author's Address

 Brian Haberman (editor)
 Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab
 11100 Johns Hopkins Road
 Laurel, MD  20723-6099
 US
 Phone: +1 443 778 1319
 EMail: brian@innovationslab.net

Haberman Standards Track [Page 4]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc5943.txt · Last modified: 2010/08/13 16:35 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki