SIDR P. Mohapatra Internet-Draft Sproute Networks Intended status: Standards Track K. Patel Expires: December 29, 2016 Cisco J. Scudder Juniper Networks D. Ward Cisco R. Bush Internet Initiative Japan, Inc. June 27, 2016 BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended Community draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-09 Abstract This document defines a new BGP opaque extended community to carry the origination AS validation state inside an autonomous system. IBGP speakers that receive this validation state can configure local policies allowing it to influence their decision process. 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 http://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 December 29, 2016. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2016 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 Mohapatra, et al. Expires December 29, 2016 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm. June 2016 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. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Origin Validation State Extended Community . . . . . . . . . 2 3. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1. Introduction This document defines a new BGP opaque extended community to carry the origination AS validation state inside an autonomous system. IBGP speakers that receive this validation state can configure local policies allowing it to influence their decision process. 1.1. 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. Origin Validation State Extended Community The origin validation state extended community is an opaque extended community [RFC4360] with the following encoding: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 0x43 | 0x00 | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Reserved |validationstate| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Mohapatra, et al. Expires December 29, 2016 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm. June 2016 The value of the high-order octet of the extended Type Field is 0x43, which indicates it is non-transitive. The value of the low-order octet of the extended type field as assigned by IANA is 0x00. The Reserved field MUST be set to 0 and ignored upon the receipt of this community. The last octet of the extended community encodes the route's validation state [RFC6811]. It can assume the following values: +-------+-----------------------------+ | Value | Meaning | +-------+-----------------------------+ | 0 | Lookup result = "valid" | | 1 | Lookup result = "not found" | | 2 | Lookup result = "invalid" | +-------+-----------------------------+ If the router is configured to support the extensions defined in this draft, it SHOULD attach the origin validation state extended community to BGP UPDATE messages sent to IBGP peers by mapping the computed validation state in the last octet of the extended community. Similarly on the receiving IBGP speakers, the validation state of an IBGP route SHOULD be derived directly from the last octet of the extended community, if present. An implementation SHOULD NOT send more than one instance of the origin validation state extended community. However, if more than one instance is received, an implementation MUST disregard all instances other than the one with the numerically-greatest validation state value. If the value received is greater than the largest specified value (2), the implementation MUST apply a strategy similar to attribute discard [RFC7606] by discarding the erroneous community and logging the error for further analysis. By default, implementations SHOULD drop the origin validation state extended community if received from an EBGP peer, without further processing it. Similarly, by default an implementation SHOULD NOT send the community to EBGP peers. However it SHOULD be possible to configure an implementation to send or accept the community when warranted. An example of a case where the community would reasonably be received from, or sent to, an EBGP peer is when two adjacent ASes are under control of the same administration. A second example is documented in [I-D.ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light]. 3. Deployment Considerations In deployment scenarios where not all the speakers in an autonomous system are upgraded to support the extensions defined in this document, it is necessary to define policies that match on the origin Mohapatra, et al. Expires December 29, 2016 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm. June 2016 validation extended community and set another BGP attribute [RFC6811] that influences the best path selection the same way as what would have been enabled by an implementation of this extension. 4. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable review and suggestions from Wesley George, Roque Gagliano and Bruno Decraene on this document. 5. IANA Considerations IANA has assigned the value 0x00 from the "Non-Transitive Opaque Extended Community Sub-Types" registry. The value is called "BGP Origin Validation State Extended Community". 6. Security Considerations This document introduces no new security concerns beyond what is described in [RFC6811]. 7. References 7.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, . [RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360, February 2006, . [RFC6811] Mohapatra, P., Scudder, J., Ward, D., Bush, R., and R. Austein, "BGP Prefix Origin Validation", RFC 6811, DOI 10.17487/RFC6811, January 2013, . [RFC7606] Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K. Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages", RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015, . Mohapatra, et al. Expires December 29, 2016 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Prefix Origin Validation State Ext. Comm. June 2016 7.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light] King, T., Kopp, D., Lambrianidis, A., and A. Fenioux, "Signaling Prefix Origin Validation Results from a Route- Server to Peers", draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki- light-00 (work in progress), June 2016. Authors' Addresses Pradosh Mohapatra Sproute Networks Email: mpradosh@yahoo.com Keyur Patel Cisco 170 W. Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95124 Email: keyupate@cisco.com John Scudder Juniper Networks 1194 N. Mathilda Ave Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Email: jgs@juniper.net Dave Ward Cisco 170 W. Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95124 Email: dward@cisco.com Randy Bush Internet Initiative Japan, Inc. 5147 Crystal Springs Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110 Email: randy@psg.com Mohapatra, et al. Expires December 29, 2016 [Page 5]