GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc7313

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Patel Request for Comments: 7313 E. Chen Updates: 2918 Cisco Systems Category: Standards Track B. Venkatachalapathy ISSN: 2070-1721 July 2014

            Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4

Abstract

 In this document, we enhance the existing BGP route refresh
 mechanisms to provide for the demarcation of the beginning and the
 ending of a route refresh.  The enhancement can be used to facilitate
 correction of BGP Routing Information Base (RIB) inconsistencies in a
 non-disruptive manner.  This document updates RFC 2918.

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/rfc7313.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2014 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.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
 2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
 3.  Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.1.  Enhanced Route Refresh Capability . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.2.  Subtypes for ROUTE-REFRESH Message  . . . . . . . . . . .   3
 4.  Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
 5.  Error Handling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
 6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
 7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
 8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
 9.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1. Introduction

 It is sometimes necessary to perform routing consistency validations
 such as checking for possible missing route withdrawals between BGP
 speakers [RFC4271].  Currently, such validations typically involve
 offline, manual operations that can be tedious and time-consuming.
 In this document, we enhance the existing BGP route refresh
 mechanisms [RFC2918] to provide for the demarcation of the beginning
 and the ending of a route refresh (which refers to the complete
 re-advertisement of the Adj-RIB-Out to a peer, subject to routing
 policies).  The enhancement can be used to facilitate online, non-
 disruptive consistency validation of BGP routing updates.
 This document updates [RFC2918] by redefining a field in the ROUTE-
 REFRESH message that was previously designated as Reserved.

2. Requirements Language

 The 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] only when
 they appear in all upper case.  They may also appear in lower or
 mixed case as English words, without any normative meaning.

3. Protocol Extensions

 The BGP protocol extensions introduced in this document include the
 definition of a new BGP capability, named "Enhanced Route Refresh
 Capability", and the specification of the message subtypes for the
 ROUTE-REFRESH message.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

3.1. Enhanced Route Refresh Capability

 The "Enhanced Route Refresh Capability" is a new BGP capability
 [RFC5492].  IANA has assigned a Capability Code of 70 for this
 capability.  The Capability Length field of this capability is zero.
 By advertising this capability to a peer, a BGP speaker conveys to
 the peer that the speaker supports the message subtypes for the
 ROUTE-REFRESH message and the related procedures described in this
 document.

3.2. Subtypes for ROUTE-REFRESH Message

 The "Reserved" field of the ROUTE-REFRESH message specified in
 [RFC2918] is redefined as the "Message Subtype" with the following
 values:
           0 - Normal route refresh request [RFC2918]
               with/without Outbound Route Filtering (ORF) [RFC5291]
           1 - Demarcation of the beginning of a route refresh
               (BoRR) operation
           2 - Demarcation of the ending of a route refresh
               (EoRR) operation
         255 - Reserved
 The remaining values of the message subtypes are reserved for future
 use; see Section 6 ("IANA Considerations").  The use of the new
 message subtypes is described in Section 4 ("Operation").

4. Operation

 A BGP speaker that supports the message subtypes for the ROUTE-
 REFRESH message and the related procedures SHOULD advertise the
 "Enhanced Route Refresh Capability".
 The following procedures are applicable only if a BGP speaker has
 received the "Enhanced Route Refresh Capability" from a peer.
 Before the speaker starts a route refresh that is either initiated
 locally, or in response to a "normal route refresh request" from the
 peer, the speaker MUST send a BoRR message.  After the speaker
 completes the re-advertisement of the entire Adj-RIB-Out to the peer,
 it MUST send an EoRR message.
 Conceptually, the "entire Adj-RIB-Out" for a peer in this section
 refers to all the route entries in the "Adj-RIB-Out" for the peer at
 the start of the route refresh operation.  These route entries
 comprise both the reachability as well as unreachability information.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

 When a route entry in the "Adj-RIB-Out" changes, only the modified
 route entry needs to be advertised.
 In processing a ROUTE-REFRESH message from a peer, the BGP speaker
 MUST examine the "message subtype" field of the message and take the
 appropriate actions.  The message processing rules for ROUTE-REFRESH
 message with subtype of 0 are described in [RFC2918] and [RFC5291].
 A BGP speaker can receive a BoRR message from a peer at any time,
 either as a result of a peer responding to a ROUTE-REFRESH message,
 or as a result of a peer unilaterally initiating a route refresh.
 When a BGP speaker receives a BoRR message from a peer, it MUST mark
 all the routes with the given Address Family Identifier and
 Subsequent Address Family Identifier, <AFI, SAFI> [RFC2918], from
 that peer as stale.  As it receives routes from its peer's subsequent
 Adj-RIB-Out re-advertisement, these replace any corresponding stale
 routes.  When a BGP speaker receives an EoRR message from a peer, it
 MUST immediately remove any routes from the peer that are still
 marked as stale for that <AFI, SAFI>.  Such purged routes MAY be
 logged for future analysis.  A BGP speaker MAY ignore any EoRR
 message received without a prior receipt of an associated BoRR
 message.  Such messages MAY be logged for future analysis.
 An implementation MAY impose a locally configurable upper bound on
 how long it would retain any stale routes.  Once the upper bound is
 reached, the implementation MAY remove any routes from the peer that
 are still marked as stale for that <AFI, SAFI> without waiting for an
 EoRR message.
 The following procedures are specified in order to simplify the
 interaction with the BGP Graceful Restart [RFC4724].  In particular,
 these procedures ensure that End-of-RIB (EoR) defined in Graceful
 Restart and EoRR as defined in this specification are kept separate,
 thereby avoiding any premature cleanup of stale routes.  For a BGP
 speaker that supports the BGP Graceful Restart, it MUST NOT send a
 BoRR for an <AFI, SAFI> to a neighbor before it sends the EoR for the
 <AFI, SAFI> to the neighbor.  A BGP speaker that has received the
 Graceful Restart Capability from its neighbor MUST ignore any BoRRs
 for an <AFI, SAFI> from the neighbor before the speaker receives the
 EoR for the given <AFI, SAFI> from the neighbor.  The BGP speaker
 SHOULD log an error of the condition for further analysis.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

5. Error Handling

 This document defines a new NOTIFICATION error code:
        Error Code   Name
            7        ROUTE-REFRESH Message Error
 The following error subcode is defined as well:
        Subcode      Name
           1         Invalid Message Length
 The error handling specified in this section is applicable only when
 a BGP speaker has received the "Enhanced Route Refresh Capability"
 from a peer.
 If the length, excluding the fixed-size message header, of the
 received ROUTE-REFRESH message with Message Subtype 1 and 2 is not 4,
 then the BGP speaker MUST send a NOTIFICATION message with the Error
 Code of "ROUTE-REFRESH Message Error" and the subcode of "Invalid
 Message Length".  The Data field of the NOTIFICATION message MUST
 contain the complete ROUTE-REFRESH message.
 When the BGP speaker receives a ROUTE-REFRESH message with a "Message
 Subtype" field other than 0, 1, or 2, it MUST ignore the received
 ROUTE-REFRESH message.  It SHOULD log an error for further analysis.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

6. IANA Considerations

 This document defines the Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP.
 In the "Capability Codes" registry, IANA has assigned it value 70,
 referencing this document.
 This document also defines two new subcodes for the Route Refresh
 message.  They have been registered with the IANA in a new registry
 as follows:
         Under "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters":
         Registry: "BGP Route Refresh Subcodes"
         Reference: [RFC7313]
         Registration Procedure(s): Values 0-127 Standards Action,
           values 128-254 First Come First Served
         Value   Code                Reference
         0       Route-Refresh       [RFC2918], [RFC5291]
         1       BoRR                [RFC7313]
         2       EoRR                [RFC7313]
         3-254   Unassigned
         255     Reserved            [RFC7313]
 In addition, this document defines a NOTIFICATION error code and an
 error subcode related to the ROUTE-REFRESH message.  IANA has changed
 the name of the "BGP Error Codes" to "BGP Error (Notification) Codes"
 and added this document as a reference.  IANA has allocated a new
 error code from that registry with the name "ROUTE-REFRESH Message
 Error", referencing this document.
 IANA has created a new registry for the error subcodes as follows:
         Under "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters",
         under "BGP Error Subcodes":
         Registry: "BGP ROUTE-REFRESH Message Error subcodes"
         Reference: [RFC7313]
         Registration Procedure(s): Values 0-127 Standards Action,
           values 128-255 First Come First Served
         Value   Name                     Reference
         0       Reserved                 [RFC7313]
         1       Invalid Message Length   [RFC7313]
         2-255   Unassigned

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

7. Security Considerations

 Security considerations are given in [RFC4272] , but they do not
 cover Route-Refresh and many other BGP extensions.  This document
 does not significantly change the underlying security issues
 regarding Route-Refresh, although improved error handling may aid
 operational security.

8. Acknowledgements

 The authors would like to thank Pedro Marques, Pradosh Mohapatra,
 Robert Raszuk, Pranav Mehta, Shyam Sethuram, Bruno Decraene, Martin
 Djernaes, Jeff Haas, Ilya Varlashkin, Rob Shakir, Paul Jakma, Jie
 Dong, Qing Zeng, Albert Tian, Jakob Heitz, and Chris Hall for their
 review and comments.  The authors would like to thank John Scudder
 for the review and contribution to this document.

9. Normative References

 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC2918]  Chen, E., "Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4", RFC 2918,
            September 2000.
 [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
            Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
 [RFC4272]  Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis", RFC
            4272, January 2006.
 [RFC4724]  Sangli, S., Chen, E., Fernando, R., Scudder, J., and Y.
            Rekhter, "Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP", RFC 4724,
            January 2007.
 [RFC5291]  Chen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "Outbound Route Filtering
            Capability for BGP-4", RFC 5291, August 2008.
 [RFC5492]  Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement
            with BGP-4", RFC 5492, February 2009.

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 7313 Enhanced Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4 July 2014

Authors' Addresses

 Keyur Patel
 Cisco Systems
 170 W. Tasman Drive
 San Jose, CA  95134
 USA
 EMail: keyupate@cisco.com
 Enke Chen
 Cisco Systems
 170 W. Tasman Drive
 San Jose, CA  95134
 USA
 EMail: enkechen@cisco.com
 Balaji Venkatachalapathy
 EMail: balaji_pv@hotmail.com

Patel, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc7313.txt · Last modified: 2014/07/22 18:41 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki