Skip to main content

Intra-domain Source Address Validation (SAVNET) Architecture
draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (savnet WG)
Authors Dan Li , Jianping Wu , Lancheng Qin , Nan Geng , Li Chen
Last updated 2024-04-12
Replaces draft-li-savnet-intra-domain-architecture
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture-00
SAVNET                                                             D. Li
Internet-Draft                                                     J. Wu
Intended status: Informational                                    L. Qin
Expires: 14 October 2024                             Tsinghua University
                                                                 N. Geng
                                                                  Huawei
                                                                 L. Chen
                                                 Zhongguancun Laboratory
                                                           12 April 2024

      Intra-domain Source Address Validation (SAVNET) Architecture
             draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture-00

Abstract

   This document proposes the intra-domain SAVNET architecture, which
   achieves accurate source address validation (SAV) in an intra-domain
   network by an automatic way.  Compared with uRPF-like SAV mechanisms
   that only depend on routers' local routing information, SAVNET
   routers generate SAV rules by using both local routing information
   and SAV-specific information exchanged among routers, resulting in
   more accurate SAV validation in asymmetric routing scenarios.
   Compared with ACL rules that require manual efforts to accommodate to
   network dynamics, SAVNET routers learn the SAV rules automatically in
   a distributed way.

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 14 October 2024.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Roles of SAVNET Routers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.2.1.  Source Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.2.2.  Validation Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.2.3.  SAV-specific Information Communication Mechanism  . .   8
     3.3.  SAV-related Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       3.3.1.  SAV-specific Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       3.3.2.  Routing Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.4.  SAV Rule Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.5.  Data-plane Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   4.  Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.1.  Use Case 1: SAV at Host-facing or Customer-facing
           Routers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.2.  Use Case 2: SAV at AS Border Routers  . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  Meeting the Design Requirements of Intra-domain SAVNET  . . .  14
     5.1.  Accurate Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.2.  Automatic Update  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.3.  Incremental/Partial Deployment  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.4.  Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     5.5.  Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   6.  Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   7.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   9.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

1.  Introduction

   Source address validation (SAV) is important for mitigating source
   address spoofing and thus contributes to the Internet security.  In
   the Source Address Validation Architecture (SAVA) [RFC5210], SAV is
   divided into three checking levels, i.e., access-network SAV, intra-
   domain SAV, and inter-domain SAV.  When an access network does not
   deploy SAV (such as SAVI [RFC7039][RFC7513], Cable Source Verify
   [cable-verify], and IP Source Guard [IPSG]), intra-domain SAV helps
   block spoofed packets from an access network as close to the source
   as possible [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement].

   The main purpose of the intra-domain SAV mechanism for an AS A, is to
   protect the outgoing packets of a subnet of AS A from forging their
   source addresses as other subnets' addresses or other ASes'
   addresses, as well as protect the incoming packets to AS A from
   forging their source addresses as AS A's addresses.  The main task of
   the intra-domain SAV mechanism is to generate the correct mapping
   relationship between a source address (prefix) and the valid incoming
   interface(s), called SAV rules.  The core challenge of the intra-
   domain SAV mechanism is how to efficiently and accurately learn the
   mapping relationship.  Although many existing intra-domain SAV
   mechanisms (such as ACL-based filtering [RFC2827], strict uRPF
   [RFC3704], and loose uRPF [RFC3704]) have been proposed, they suffer
   from either inaccurate mapping in asymmetric routing scenraios, or
   high operational overhead in dynamic networks.  The key cause is that
   exsiting mechanisms generate the SAV rules by a router's local
   routing information or by manual inputs.  In
   [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement], five requirements
   for a new intra-domain SAVNET architecture are proposed.

   This document introduces the intra-domain SAVNET architecture to meet
   the five requirements.  The key idea of intra-domain SAVNET is to
   generate SAV rules in routers based on SAV-specific information
   exchanged among routers, instead of depending on local routing
   information like in existing mechanisms.  It achieves accurate SAV
   validation, because SAV-specific information is specialized for SAV
   and thus helps generate more accurate SAV rules than solely using
   local routing information.  It achieves automatic SAV rule update,
   because SAV-specific information exchange is triggered when there is
   topology change or prefix change.  In the incremental/partial
   deployment scenario where only part of intra-domain routers support
   the intra-domain SAVNET, it provides incremental benefits by using
   SAV-specific information provided by routers that support the intra-
   domain SAVNET, and/or local routing information to generate SAV
   rules.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   The reader is encouraged to be familiar with
   [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement] and
   [huang-savnet-sav-table].

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  Terminology

   Local Routing Information: The information in a router's local RIB or
   FIB that can be used to infer SAV rules.

   SAV-specific Information: The information specialized for SAV rule
   generation, which is exchanged among routers.

   SAV-related Information: The information used by a router to make SAV
   decisions.  For intra-domain SAV, SAV-related information includes
   both local routing information and SAV-specific information.

   SAV-specific Information Communication Mechanism: The mechanism for
   exchanging SAV-specific information between routers.  It can be
   either a new protocol or an extension to an existing protocol.

   SAV Information Base: A table or data structure in a router which
   stores SAV-specific information and local routing information.

   SAV Rule: The rule in a router that describes the mapping
   relationship between a source address (prefix) and the valid incoming
   interface(s).  It is used by a router to make SAV decisions and is
   inferred from the SAV Information Base.

   SAVNET Router: An intra-domain router which runs intra-domain SAVNET.

   SAVNET Agent: The agent in a SAVNET router that is responsible for
   communicating SAV-specific information, processing SAV-related
   information, and generating SAV rules.

   Host-facing Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is
   connected to a host network (i.e., a layer-2 network).

   Customer-facing Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is
   connected to an intra-domain customer network running the routing
   protocol (i.e., a layer-3 network).

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   AS Border Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is connected
   to other ASes.

   Improper Block: The validation results that the packets with
   legitimate source addresses are blocked improperly due to inaccurate
   SAV rules.

   Improper Permit: The validation results that the packets with spoofed
   source addresses are permitted improperly due to inaccurate SAV
   rules.

3.  Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture

3.1.  Overview

   Figure 1 illustrates intra-domain SAVNET architecture in an intra-
   domain network.  In the intra-domain network, host-facing routers,
   customer-facing routers, and AS border routers are required to
   perform SAV filtering on specific interfaces (i.e., interfaces '#' in
   Figure 1):

   *  Host-facing routers (e.g., Router C) generate SAV rules on
      interfaces facing a layer-2 host network and block data packets
      with source addresses not belonging to the host network receiving
      from that interface.

   *  Customer-facing routers (e.g., Routers A and B) generate SAV rules
      on interfaces facing a layer-3 customer network and block data
      packets with source addresses not belonging to the customer
      network receiving from that interface.

   *  AS border routers (e.g., Routers D or E) generate SAV rules on
      interfaces facing another AS and block data packets with source
      addresses belonging to the local AS receiving from that interface.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

                   +----------------------------------+
                   |            Other ASes            |
                   +----------------------------------+
                      |                            |
   +------------------|----------------------------|--------------+
   |    Intra-domain  |        SAV-specific        |              |
   |                  |        message from        |              |
   |                  |        Router A            |              |
   |            +----+#+---+ --------------> +----+#+---+         |
   |            | Router D |                 | Router E |         |
   |            +-----/\---+ <-------------- +-----/\---+         |
   |     SAV-specific |        SAV-specific        | SAV-specific |
   |     message from |        message from        | message from |
   |     Router A     |        Router C            | Router C     |
   |            +----------------------------------------+        |
   |            |      Other intra-domain routers        |        |
   |            +-/\-------------------------------/\----+        |
   | SAV-specific /       \  SAV-specific          | SAV-specific |
   | message from/         \ message from          | message from |
   | Router A   /           \Router A              | Router C     |
   |     +----------+  +----\/----+          +----------+         |
   |     | Router A |  | Router B |          | Router C |         |
   |     +---+#+----+  +------+#+-+          +----+#+---+         |
   |           \              /                    |              |
   +------------\------------/---------------------|--------------+
                 \          /                      |
               +--------------+            +--------------+
               |   Customer   |            |    Host      |
               |   Network    |            |   Network    |
               +--------------+            +--------------+

           Figure 1: Overview of intra-domain SAVNET architecture

   To generate more accurate SAV rules, intra-domain SAVNET requires
   routers to automatically exchange SAV-specific information.  For
   example, a host-facing (or customer-facing) router can contain its
   locally-known prefixes of the host network (or customer network) in
   its SAV-specific information.  The router can choose to only provide
   this information to specific routers or provide this information to
   all routers in the intra-domain network.  The arrows in Figure 1
   indicate the direction of SAV-specific information flows originated
   from Router A and Router C.  SAV-specific information flows
   originated from other routers are omitted for brevity.

   After receiving SAV-specific information provided by other routers,
   routers can generate more accurate SAV rules by using SAV-specific
   information provided by other routers, its own SAV-specific
   information, and/or routing information in the local FIB/RIB.  For

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   example, in Figure 1, Router B can identify all prefixes in the
   customer network by using its own SAV-specific information and SAV
   specific information provided by Router A, even if there is an
   asymmetric routing between Router B and the customer network.
   Routers F and G can identify all prefixes in the local AS by using
   SAV-specific inforamtion provided by Routers A, B, and C.

3.2.  Roles of SAVNET Routers

   A SAVNET router can be a host-facing router, a customer-facing
   router, an AS border router, or other routers.  Every SAVNET router
   has a SAVNET Agent that is responsible for actions related to SAV.
   As shown in Figure 2, a SAVNET router can act as one or two roles in
   the intra-domain SAVNET architecture, namely, source entity to
   provide its SAV-specific information to other SAVNET routers, or/and
   validation entity to receive SAV-specific information from other
   SAVNET routers.

3.2.1.  Source Entity

   When a SAVNET router acts as source entity, the information provider
   of its SAVNET Agent provides its SAV-specific information to other
   SAVNET routers that act as validation entity.  For example, a host-
   facing router acting as source entity can obtain its SAV-specific
   information related to the host network to which it is connected and
   selectively provide this information to other SAVNET routers.

3.2.2.  Validation Entity

   When a SAVNET router acts as validation entity, the information
   receiver of its SAVNET Agent receives SAV-specific information from
   other SAVNET routers that act as source entity.  Then, its SAVNET
   Agent processes SAV-specific information provided by other SAVNET
   routers, its own SAV-specific information, and/or its local routing
   information to generate SAV rules on corresponding interfaces.  As
   mentioned above, host-facing routers perform SAV filtering on
   interfaces facing the host network, customer-facing routers perform
   SAV filtering on interfaces facing the customer network, and AS
   border routers perform SAV filtering on interfaces facing another AS.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   +---------------------+              +---------------------+
   |    Source Entity    |              |  Validation Entity  |
   |     (Router A)      |              |     (Router B)      |
   |                     |              |                     |
   | +-----------------+ |              | +-----------------+ |
   | |   SAVNET Agent  | | SAV-specific | |   SAVNET Agent  | |
   | | +-------------+ | | Information  | | +-------------+ | |
   | | | Information +----------------------> Information | | |
   | | | Provider    | | |              | | | Receiver    | | |
   | | +-------------+ | |              | | +-------------+ | |
   | +-----------------+ |              | +-----------------+ |
   |                     |              |                     |
   +---------------------+              +---------------------+

                     Figure 2: Roles of SAVNET routers

3.2.3.  SAV-specific Information Communication Mechanism

   New intra-domain SAV solutions should design a SAV-specific
   communication mechanism to propagate SAV-specific information from
   source entity to validation entity.  It can be a new protocol or an
   extension to an existing protocol.  This document does not present
   the details of the protocol design or protocol extensions, but lists
   necessary features of SAV-specific communication mechanism in the
   following.

   The SAV-specific Information communication mechanism SHOULD define
   the data structure or format of SAV-specific information, and the
   operations of communication (such as communication establishment and
   communication termination).  In addition, the mechanism SHOULD
   require source entity to inform validation entity of the updates of
   SAV-specific information in a timely manner, so that validation
   entity can update SAV rules based on the latest information.

   In order to ensure the convergence and security of the communication,
   the session of the SAV-specific communication mechanism SHOULD meet
   the following requirements:

   *  The session can be a long-time session or a temporary one, but it
      SHOULD provide sufficient assurance of transmission reliability
      and timeliness, so that validation entity can update its SAV rules
      in time.

   *  Authentication can be conducted before session establishment.
      Authentication is optional but the ability of authentication
      SHOULD be available.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

3.3.  SAV-related Information

   For intra-domain SAV, both SAV-specific information and local routing
   information can be used for SAV decisions.

3.3.1.  SAV-specific Information

   SAV-specific information is specialized for SAV and thus helps
   generate more accurate SAV rules.  A SAVNET router can obtain its own
   SAV-specific information based on local routing information, local
   interface configurations, and/or other local configuration
   information.  In addition, SAVNET routers acting as validation entity
   can obtain SAV-specific information of other SAVNET routers that act
   as source entity.  By using SAV-specific information provided by
   other SAVNET routers, the SAVNET router acting as validation entity
   can generate more accurate SAV rules than solely using its local
   routing information.

   For example, customer-facing routers connected to the same multi-
   homed customer network can exchange locally-known source prefixes of
   the customer network through SAV-specific information communication.
   By processing both SAV-specific information of itself and SAV-
   specific information of the other customer-facing routers, each of
   them can identify all prefixes in the customer network and thus avoid
   improper block in case there is an asymmetric routing.  Section 4.1
   elaborates on this example.

3.3.2.  Routing Information

   Routing information is used for computing packet forwarding rules,
   which is stored in the router's RIB/FIB.  Although it is not
   specialized for SAV, it is widely used to infer SAV rules in existing
   uRPF-based SAV mechanisms, such as strict uRPF and loose uRPF
   [RFC3704].  A SAVNET router acting as validation entity can obtain
   routing information from its local RIB/FIB to generate SAV rules for
   some prefixes, when the corresponding SAV-specific information is
   missing.

3.4.  SAV Rule Generation

   Figure 3 shows the SAV rule generation process of the SAVNET router
   acting as validation entity.  The SAV Information Manager of SAVNET
   Agent consolidates SAV-specific information provided by other
   routers, SAV-specific information of the router itself, and local
   routing information into the SAV Information Base.  Then, it sends
   the consolidated information to the SAV Rule Generator.  The SAV Rule
   Generator should preferentially use SAV-specific information to
   generate SAV rules for specific source prefixes.  Local routing

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   information is only recommended when some SAV-specific information is
   missing.

   SAV Information Manager also provides the support of diagnosis.
   Operators can look up the information in SAV Information Base for
   monitoring or troubleshooting purpose.

   +--------------------------------------------------------+
   |                      SAVNET Agent                      |
   |                                                        |
   |     SAV-specific     SAV-specific     Routing          |
   |     information      information      information      |
   |     provided by      of the router    in local         |
   |     other routers    itself           FIB/RIB          |
   |         +                  +               +           |
   |         |                  |               |           |
   |       +-v------------------v---------------v-+         |
   |       |      SAV Information Manager         |         |
   |       |      +------------------------+      |         |
   |       |      | SAV Information Base   |      |         |
   |       |      +------------------------+      |         |
   |       +--------------------------------------+         |
   |                          |                             |
   |                          | SAV-related information     |
   |                          |                             |
   |       +------------------v--------------------+        |
   |       |      SAV Rule Generator               |        |
   |       |      +------------------------+       |        |
   |       |      |        SAV Rules       |       |        |
   |       |      +------------------------+       |        |
   |       +---------------------------------------+        |
   +--------------------------------------------------------+

                 Figure 3: Workflow of SAV rule generation

   The basic workflow of different kinds of SAVNET routers is summarized
   below:

   *  For a host-facing router (or a customer-facing router), it
      processes SAV-related information to identify prefixes in the host
      network (or customer network) it connected to, and then generate
      SAV rules on the interface facing to the host network (or customer
      network).  Data packets coming from that interface will be
      considered invalid and should be blocked if they use source
      addresses not belonging to the host network (or customer network).
      In the incremental/partial deployment scenario when some routers
      do not deploy SAV-specific information communication mechanism,
      the host-facing router (or customer-facing router) may not be able

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

      to identify all prefixes in the host network (or customer network)
      through SAV-specific information.  To avoid improper block in this
      case, the router is recommended to use less strict SAV rules.  For
      example, it can choose to only block packets with non-global or
      non-routable source addresses by using its local routing
      information.

   *  For an AS border router, it processes SAV-related information to
      identify prefixes in the local AS, and then generate SAV rules on
      the interface facing to another AS.  Data packets coming from that
      interface will be considered invalid and should be blocked if they
      use source addresses belonging to the local AS.  In the
      incremental/partial deployment scenario, the AS border router may
      only identify partial prefixes in the local AS through SAV-
      specific information.  In this case, the AS border router can
      still block data packets with source addresses in learned
      prefixes.

   In addition, if the AS border router also implements inter-domain
   SAVNET, its intra-domain SAVNET Agent SHOULD send the intra-domain
   SAV-specific information to its inter-domain SAVNET Agent, helping
   the inter-domain SAVNET Agent generate inter-domain SAV rules or
   inter-domain SAV-specific information.

3.5.  Data-plane Considerations

   This document mainly focuses on SAV rule generation process on
   control plane, including exchanging SAV-specific information,
   consolidating SAV-related information, and generating SAV rules.  As
   for data-plane SAV filtering, SAVNET routers check source addresses
   of incoming data packets against local SAV rules and drop those that
   are identified as using spoofing source addresses.  Therefore, the
   accuracy of data-plane SAV filtering depends entirely on the accuracy
   of generated SAV rules.  More data-plane considerations can be found
   in [huang-savnet-sav-table].

4.  Use Cases

   This section uses two use cases to illustrate that intra-domain
   SAVNET can achieve more accurate and efficient SAV than existing
   intra-domain SAV mechanisms.  The two use cases have already been
   described in [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement] to show
   that existing intra-domain SAV mechanisms have problems of improper
   block or high operational overhead.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

4.1.  Use Case 1: SAV at Host-facing or Customer-facing Routers

   Figure 4 shows an asymmetric routing in a multi-homed host/customer
   network scenario.  Router 1 and Router 2 adopt intra-domain SAV to
   block spoofing data packets with source addresses not belonging to
   Network 1 (e.g., a host network or a customer network) receiving from
   interface '#'.

   Network 1 has prefix 10.0.0.0/15 and is connected to two routers
   (i.e., Router 1 and Router 2) in the intra-domain network.  Due to
   the inbound load balance strategy of Network 1, Router 1 only learns
   the route to sub prefix 10.1.0.0/16 from Network 1, while Router 2
   only learns the route to the other sub prefix 10.0.0.0/16 from
   Network 1.  After that, Router 1 or Router 2 learns the route to the
   other sub prefix through the intra-domain routing protocol.  The FIBs
   of Router 1 and Router 2 are shown in the figure.  Assume Network 1
   may send outbound packets with source addresses in sub prefix
   10.0.0.0/16 to Router 1 for outbound load balance.  The arrows in
   Figure 4 indicate the direction of traffic.

    +-------------------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                      AS     |
    |                        +----------+                         |
    |                        | Router 3 |                         |
    | FIB on Router 1        +----------+  FIB on Router 2        |
    | Dest         Next_hop   /\      \    Dest         Next_hop  |
    | 10.1.0.0/16  Network 1  /        \   10.0.0.0/16  Network 1 |
    | 10.0.0.0/16  Router 3  /         \/  10.1.0.0/16  Router 3  |
    |                +----------+     +----------+                |
    |                | Router 1 |     | Router 2 |                |
    |                +-----+#+--+     +-+#+------+                |
    |                        /\         /                         |
    |   Outbound traffic with \        / Inbound traffic with     |
    |   source IP addresses    \      /  destination IP addresses |
    |   of 10.0.0.0/16          \    \/  of 10.0.0.0/16           |
    |                     +---------------+                       |
    |                     | Host/Customer |                       |
    |                     |   Network 1   |                       |
    |                     | (10.0.0.0/15) |                       |
    |                     +---------------+                       |
    |                                                             |
    +-------------------------------------------------------------+

                    Figure 4: A use case of outbound SAV

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 12]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   In this case, strict uRPF at Router 1 will improperly block
   legitimate packets with source addresses in prefix 10.0.0.0/16 from
   Network 1 on interface '#', because it only accepts data packets with
   source addresses in prefix 10.1.0.0/16 from Router 1's interface '#'
   according to its local routing information.

   If intra-domain SAVNET is implemented in the intra-domain network,
   Router 2 can inform Router 1 that prefix 10.0.0.0/16 also belongs to
   Network 1 by providing its SAV-specific information to Router 1.
   Then, by combining both its own SAV-specific information and SAV-
   specific information provided by Router 2, Router 1 learns that
   Network 1 have both prefix 10.1.0.0/16 and prefix 10.0.0.0/16.
   Therefore, Router 1 will accept data packets with source addresses in
   prefix 10.1.0.0/16 and prefix 10.0.0.0/16 on interface '#', so
   improper block can be avoided.

4.2.  Use Case 2: SAV at AS Border Routers

   Figure 5 shows a scenario of inbound SAV at AS border routers.
   Router 3 and Router 4 adopt intra-domain SAV to block spoofing data
   packets with internal source addresses receiving from interface '#'.
   The arrows in Figure 5 indicate the direction of spoofing traffic.

    Packets with +              Packets with +
    spoofed P1/P2|              spoofed P1/P2|
   +-------------|---------------------------|---------+
   |   AS        \/                          \/        |
   |         +--+#+-----+               +---+#+----+   |
   |         | Router 3 +---------------+ Router 4 |   |
   |         +----------+               +----+-----+   |
   |          /        \                     |         |
   |         /          \                    |         |
   |        /            \                   |         |
   | +----------+     +----------+      +----+-----+   |
   | | Router 1 |     | Router 2 |      | Router 5 |   |
   | +----------+     +----------+      +----+-----+   |
   |        \             /                  |         |
   |         \           /                   |         |
   |          \         /                    |         |
   |       +---------------+         +-------+-------+ |
   |       |     Host      |         |   Customer    | |
   |       |   Network     |         |   Network     | |
   |       |     (P1)      |         |     (P2)      | |
   |       +---------------+         +---------------+ |
   |                                                   |
   +---------------------------------------------------+

                    Figure 5: A use case of inbound SAV

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 13]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   If Router 3 and Router 4 deploy ACL-based ingress filtering, the
   operator needs to manually generate and update ACL rules at Router 3
   and Router 4 when internal source prefixes change.  The operational
   overhead of manually maintaining and updating ACL rules will be
   extremely high, especially when there are multiple inbound validation
   interfaces '#'.

   If intra-domain SAVNET is implemented in the intra-domain network,
   Router 1, Router 2, and Router 5 will automatically inform Router 3
   and Router 4 of prefixes in the host network and customer network by
   providing SAV-specific information.  After receiving SAV-specific
   information from other routers, Router 3 and Router 4 can identify
   all internal source prefixes.  The SAV-specific information
   communication will be triggered if topology or prefix related to the
   host network or customer network changes.  For example, if the
   customer network has a new source prefix P3, Router 5 will inform
   Router 3 and Router 4 of the new source prefix immediately through
   SAV-specific information communication mechanism.  In this way,
   Router 3 and Router 4 can automatically generate and update SAV rules
   on interface '#'.

5.  Meeting the Design Requirements of Intra-domain SAVNET

   Intra-domain SAVNET architecture is proposed to meet the five design
   requirements defined in
   [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement].

5.1.  Accurate Validation

   In the asymmetric routing scenario shown in Figure 4, the host-facing
   router (or customer-facing router) cannot identify all prefixes in
   its host network (or customer network) solely using its local routing
   information.  As a result, existing intra-domain SAV mechanisms
   (e.g., strict uRPF) solely using local routing information to
   generate SAV rules will have improper block problems in the case of
   asymmetric routing.

   Intra-domain SAVNET requires routers to exchange SAV-specific
   information among each other.  The SAVNET router can use SAV-specific
   information provided by other routers as well as its own SAV-specific
   information to generate more accurate SAV rules.  The use case in
   Figure 4 has shown that intra-domain SAVNET can achieve more accurate
   SAV filtering compared with strict uRPF in asymmetric routing
   scenarios.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 14]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

5.2.  Automatic Update

   In real intra-domain networks, the topology or prefixes of networks
   may change dynamically.  The SAV mechanism MUST automatically update
   SAV rules as the network changes.  However, ACL-based SAV mechanism
   requires manual efforts to accommodate to network dynamics, resulting
   in high operational overhead.

   Intra-domain SAVNET allows SAVNET routers to exchange the changes of
   SAV-specific information among each other automatically.  After
   receiving updated SAV-specific information from source entity, SAVNET
   routers acting as validation entity can generate and update their SAV
   rules accordingly.  The use case in Section 4.2 has shown that intra-
   domain SAVNET can achieve automatic update.

5.3.  Incremental/Partial Deployment

   Although an intra-domain network mostly has one administration,
   incremental/partial deployment may still exist due to phased
   deployment or multi-vendor supplement.  In phased deployment
   scenarios, SAV-specific information of non-deploying routers is not
   available.

   As described in Section 3.4, intra-domain SAVNET can adapt to
   incremental/partial deployment.  To mitigate the impact of phased
   deployment, it is RECOMMENDED that routers connected to the same
   host/customer network can simultaneously adopt intra-domain SAVNET so
   that all prefixes in the host/customer network can be identified.
   For example, in Figure 4, Router 1 and Router 2 are recommended to be
   upgraded to SAVNET routers together so that the two routers can
   identify all prefixes in Network 1 and generate accurate SAV rules on
   interfaces '#'.

   In addition, SAVNET routers acting as validation entity are
   RECOMMENDED to support flexible validation modes and perform SAV
   filtering gradually to smooth the transition from partial to full
   deployment:

   *  SAVNET routers acting as validation entity are RECOMMENDED to
      support flexible validation modes such as interface-based prefix
      allowlist, interface-based prefix blocklist, and prefix-based
      interface allowlist (see [huang-savnet-sav-table]).  The first two
      modes are interface-scale, and the last one is device-scale.
      Under incremental/partial deployment, SAVNET routers SHOULD take
      on the proper validation mode according to acquired SAV-specific
      information.  For example, if a customer-facing router can
      identify all prefixes in its customer network by processing
      acquired SAV-specific information, an interface-based prefix

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 15]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

      allowlist containing these prefixes can be used on that customer-
      facing interface.  Otherwise, it should use interface-based prefix
      blocklist or prefix-based interface allowlist to avoid improper
      block.

   *  Validation entity is RECOMMENDED to performed SAV-invalid
      filtering gradually.  The router can first take conservative
      actions on the validated data packets.  That is to say, the router
      will not discard packets with invalid results in the beginning of
      deployment.  It can conduct sampling action for measurement
      analysis at first, and then conducts rate-limiting action or
      redirecting action for packets with invalid results.  These
      conservative actions will not result in serious consequences if
      some legitimate packets are mistakenly considered invalid, while
      still providing protection for the network.  Finally, filtering
      action is enabled only after confirming that there are no improper
      block problems.

5.4.  Convergence

   When SAV-related information changes, the SAVNET Agent MUST be able
   to detect the changes in time and update SAV rules with the latest
   information.  Otherwise, outdated SAV rules may cause legitimate data
   packets to be blocked or spoofing data packets to be accepted.

   Intra-domain SAVNET requires routers to update SAV-specific
   information and update SAV rules in a timely manner.  Since SAV-
   specific information is originated from source entity, it requires
   that source entity MUST timely send the updated SAV-specific
   information to validation entity.  Therefore, the propagation speed
   of SAV-specific information is a key factor affecting the
   convergence.  Consider that routing information and SAV-specific
   information can be originated and advertised through a similar way,
   SAV-specific information SHOULD at least have a similar propagation
   speed as routing information.

5.5.  Security

   Typically, routers in an intra-domain network can trust each other
   because they would not compromise intra-domain control-plane
   architectures and protocols.

   However, in some unlikely cases, some routers may do harm to other
   routers within the same domain.  Operators SHOULD be aware of
   potential threats involved in deploying the architecture.  Some
   potential threats and solutions are as follows:

   *  Entity impersonation.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 16]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

      -  Potential solution: Mutual authentication SHOULD be conducted
         before session establishment between two entities.

      -  Gaps: Impersonation may still exist due to credential theft,
         implementation flaws, or entity being compromised.  Some other
         security mechanisms can be taken to make such kind of
         impersonation difficult.  Besides, the entities SHOULD be
         monitored so that misbehaved entities can be detected.

   *  Message blocking.

      -  Potential solution: Acknowledgement mechanisms MUST be provided
         in the session between a sender and a receiver, so that message
         losses can be detected.

      -  Gaps: Message blocking may be a result of DoS/DDoS attack, man-
         in-the-middle (MITM) attack, or congestion induced by traffic
         burst.  Acknowledgement mechanisms can detect message losses
         but cannot avoid message losses.  MITM attacks cannot be
         effectively detected by acknowledgement mechanisms.

   *  Message alteration.

      -  Potential solution: An authentication field can be carried by
         each message so as to ensure message integrity.

      -  Gaps: More overhead of control plane and data plane will be
         induced.

   *  Message replay.

      -  Potential solution: Authentication value can be computed by
         adding a sequence number or timestamp as input.

      -  Gaps: More overhead of control plane and data plane will be
         induced.

   To meet the security requirement, the above security threats SHOULD
   be considered when designing the new intra-domain SAV mechanism.

6.  Manageability Considerations

   The architecture provides a general framework for communicating SAV-
   specific information between routers and generating SAV rules based
   on SAV-specific information and local routing information.  Protocol-
   independent mechanisms SHOULD be provided for operating and managing
   SAV-related configurations.  For example, a YANG data model for SAV
   configuration and operation is necessary for the ease of management.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 17]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   SAV may affect the normal forwarding of data packets.  The diagnosis
   approach and necessary logging information SHOULD be provided.  SAV
   Information Base SHOULD store some information that may not be useful
   for SAV rule generation but is helpful for management.  The SAV-
   specific information communication mechanism SHOULD have monitoring
   and troubleshooting functions, which are necessary for efficiently
   operating the architecture.

7.  Privacy Considerations

   An intra-domain network is mostly operated by a single organization
   or company, and the advertised SAV-specific information is used
   within the network.  Therefore, the architecture will not import
   critical privacy issues in usual cases.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA requirements.

9.  Contributors

   Mingqing Huang

   Email: huangmq@vip.sina.com

   Fang Gao

   Email: fredagao520@sina.com

10.  Acknowledgements

   Many thanks to the valuable comments from: Igor Lubashev, Alvaro
   Retana, Aijun Wang, Joel Halpern, Jared Mauch, Kotikalapudi Sriram,
   RĂ¼diger Volk, Jeffrey Haas, Xiangqing Chang, Changwang Lin, Xueyan
   Song, etc.

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement]
              Li, D., Wu, J., Qin, L., Huang, M., and N. Geng, "Source
              Address Validation in Intra-domain Networks Gap Analysis,
              Problem Statement, and Requirements", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-
              statement-03, 13 February 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-savnet-
              intra-domain-problem-statement-03>.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 18]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   [RFC2827]  Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
              Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source
              Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, DOI 10.17487/RFC2827,
              May 2000, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2827>.

   [RFC3704]  Baker, F. and P. Savola, "Ingress Filtering for Multihomed
              Networks", BCP 84, RFC 3704, DOI 10.17487/RFC3704, March
              2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3704>.

   [huang-savnet-sav-table]
              "General Source Address Validation Capabilities", 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huang-savnet-sav-
              table/>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

11.2.  Informative References

   [RFC5210]  Wu, J., Bi, J., Li, X., Ren, G., Xu, K., and M. Williams,
              "A Source Address Validation Architecture (SAVA) Testbed
              and Deployment Experience", RFC 5210,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5210, June 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5210>.

   [RFC7039]  Wu, J., Bi, J., Bagnulo, M., Baker, F., and C. Vogt, Ed.,
              "Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) Framework",
              RFC 7039, DOI 10.17487/RFC7039, October 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7039>.

   [RFC7513]  Bi, J., Wu, J., Yao, G., and F. Baker, "Source Address
              Validation Improvement (SAVI) Solution for DHCP",
              RFC 7513, DOI 10.17487/RFC7513, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7513>.

   [IPSG]     "Configuring DHCP Features and IP Source Guard", January
              2016, <https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/
              catalyst2960/software/release/12-
              2_53_se/configuration/guide/2960scg/swdhcp82.html>.

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 19]
Internet-Draft      Intra-domain SAVNET Architecture          April 2024

   [cable-verify]
              "Cable Source-Verify and IP Address Security", January
              2021, <https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/
              broadband-cable/cable-security/20691-source-verify.html>.

Authors' Addresses

   Dan Li
   Tsinghua University
   Beijing
   China
   Email: tolidan@tsinghua.edu.cn

   Jianping Wu
   Tsinghua University
   Beijing
   China
   Email: jianping@cernet.edu.cn

   Lancheng Qin
   Tsinghua University
   Beijing
   China
   Email: qlc19@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn

   Nan Geng
   Huawei
   Beijing
   China
   Email: gengnan@huawei.com

   Li Chen
   Zhongguancun Laboratory
   Beijing
   China
   Email: lichen@zgclab.edu.cn

Li, et al.               Expires 14 October 2024               [Page 20]