Revised Validation Procedure for BGP Flow Specifications
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-flowspec-oid-12
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (idr WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Jim Uttaro , Juan Alcaide , Clarence Filsfils , David Smith , Prodosh Mohapatra | ||
| Last updated | 2021-01-27 (latest revision 2020-07-08) | ||
| Replaces | draft-djsmith-bgp-flowspec-oid | ||
| Stream | Internent Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | plain text xml pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex | ||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Susan Hares | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2020-07-08) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | AD Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | Alvaro Retana | ||
| Send notices to | Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com | ||
Network Working Group J. Uttaro
Internet-Draft AT&T
Updates: 5575bis (if approved) J. Alcaide
Intended status: Standards Track C. Filsfils
Expires: January 9, 2021 D. Smith
Cisco
P. Mohapatra
Sproute Networks
July 8, 2020
Revised Validation Procedure for BGP Flow Specifications
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-flowspec-oid-12
Abstract
This document describes a modification to the validation procedure
defined for the dissemination of BGP Flow Specifications. The
dissemination of BGP Flow Specifications requires that the originator
of the Flow Specification matches the originator of the best-match
unicast route for the destination prefix embedded in the Flow
Specification. This allows only BGP speakers within the data
forwarding path (such as autonomous system border routers) to
originate BGP Flow Specifications. Though it is possible to
disseminate such Flow Specifications directly from border routers, it
may be operationally cumbersome in an autonomous system with a large
number of border routers having complex BGP policies. The
modification proposed herein enables Flow Specifications to be
originated from a centralized BGP route controller.
This document updates RFC5575bis.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2021.
Uttaro, et al. Expires January 9, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Revised Flowspec Validation Procedure July 2020
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
(https://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.
Table of Contents
1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Revised Validation Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Revision of Route Feasibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Revision of AS_PATH Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Other RFC5575bis Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Topology Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Introduction
[I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis] defined a new BGP [RFC4271] capability that
can be used to distribute traffic Flow Specifications amongst BGP
speakers in support of traffic filtering. The primary intention of
[I-D.ietf-idr-rfc5575bis] is to enable downstream autonomous systems
to signal traffic filtering policies to upstream autonomous systems.
In this way, traffic is filtered closer to the source and the
upstream autonomous system(s) avoid carrying the traffic to the
downstream autonomous system only to be discarded. [I-D.ietf-idr-
Show full document text