Internet DRAFT - draft-mi-grow-monitoring-outgoing-bgp-routes
draft-mi-grow-monitoring-outgoing-bgp-routes
Network Working Group P. Mi
Internet-Draft Tencent
Intended status: Standards Track S. Zhuang
Expires: September 14, 2017 J. Dong
Huawei
March 13, 2017
Monitoring Outgoing Routes Using BMP
draft-mi-grow-monitoring-outgoing-bgp-routes-00
Abstract
The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) [RFC7854] is designed to monitor
BGP [RFC4271] running status, such as BGP peer relationship
establishment and termination and route updates. At present, the BMP
only monitors the incoming bgp routes (Adj-RIB-In), does not monitor
the outgoing bgp routes (Adj-RIB-Out).
This draft extends the applicability of BMP [RFC7854] to monitor the
outgoing bgp routes.
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].
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 September 14, 2017.
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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.
Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Option 1: Extending BMP Peer Flags . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Option 2: Introducing Advertise Route Monitoring Message 5
3.3. Optons Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Terminology
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7854].
Adj-RIB-Out: The Adj-RIBs-Out contains the routes for advertisement
to specific peers by means of the local speaker's UPDATE messages.
BMP: BGP Monitoring Protocol
BMS: BGP Monitoring Station
2. Introduction
The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) introduces the availability of
monitoring BGP running status, such as BGP peer relationship
establishment and termination and route updates. Without BMP, manual
query is required if you want to know about BGP running status. With
BMP, a router can be connected to a monitoring station and configured
to report BGP running statistics to the station for monitoring, which
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
improves the network monitoring efficiency. BMP facilitates the
monitoring of BGP running status and reports security threats in real
time so that preventive measures can be taken promptly.
The BMP can be used to obtain route view instead of screen scraping.
The BMP provides access to unprocessed routing information (Adj-RIB-
In) and processed routes (applied inbound policy) of monitored
router's peer. Route Monitoring (RM) message defined in [RFC7854] is
used to provide an initial dump of all routes received from a peer,
as well as an ongoing mechanism that sends the incremental routes
advertised and withdrawn by a peer to the monitoring station.
At present, the BMP only monitors the incoming bgp routes (Adj-RIB-
In), does not monitor the outgoing bgp routes (Adj-RIB-Out).
Consider the following scenario:
The Station of ISP A is attached to router A, and the route to the
Station is advertised to the Users via multiple exit routers (Such as
routers C and E).
The BMS (BGP Monitoring Station) is used to monitor the bgp running
status of routers C and E.
Now the operator of ISP A would like to know the status of the routes
being advertised out of the ISP A:
1) Outgoing to which peers;
2) Whether the route was rejected by the export policy;
3) The modification of BGP route attributes;
4) To be added later.
These status will provide valuable information for network operators,
can be used in subsequent optimization procedures.
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
*********************************
* +---+ *
* AS A |BMS| *
*+------+ +---+ *
*|Station| \ * AS X
*+------+ +---+ \ +---+ * +-----------+
* | /| B |-------+-| C |-+----| Transit X |---+
* | / +---+\ +---+ | * +-----------+ |
* | / | \\ // | | * AS Y |
*+---+/ | \\// | | * +-----------+ | +------+
*| A | | //\ | +----| Transit Y |---+---...| Users|
*+---+\ | // \\ | | * +-----------+ | +------+
* \ | / \ | | * AS Z |
* \ +---+ +---+ | * +-----------+ |
* \| D |---------| E |-+----| Transit Z |---+
* +---+ +---+ * +-----------+
* *
* ISP A *
* *
*********************************
Figure 1: Monitoring Outgoing Routes Using BMP
From the above description of the scenario, it can be seen that it is
necessary to monitor BGP outgoing routes. This draft extends the
applicability of BMP [RFC7854] to monitor the outgoing bgp routes.
3. Protocol Extensions
In order to support BMP to monitoring outgoing BGP routes, this
document proposes some protocol extensions to BMP.
3.1. Option 1: Extending BMP Peer Flags
[RFC7854] defines three bit flags in the Peer Flags field of the per-
peer header. The bits are numbered from 0 (the high-order, or
leftmost, bit) to 7 (the low-order, or rightmost, bit):
o Flag 0: V flag
o Flag 1: L flag
o Flag 2: A flag
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|V|L|A|O| Res. |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Peer Flags
This document defines an additional Flag that will be used to monitor
the outgoing bgp routes:
o Flag TBD: O flag
The O flag, if set to 0, indicates that Adj-RIBs-In are synchronized
to BMP Station. If set to 1, indicates that Adj-RIBs-Out are
synchronized to BMP Station.
This flag has no significance when used with other messages but Route
Monitoring message.
3.2. Option 2: Introducing Advertise Route Monitoring Message
[RFC7854] defines seven message types for transferring BGP messages
between cooperating systems:
o Type 0: Route Monitoring
o Type 1: Statistics Report
o Type 2: Peer Down Notification
o Type 3: Peer Up Notification
o Type 4: Initiation
o Type 5: Termination
o Type 6: Route Mirroring
This document defines an additional message type that will be used to
monitor the outgoing bgp routes:
o Type TBD: Advertise Route Monitoring
The format of Advertise Route Monitoring message will reuse Route
Monitoring message, the only difference is the message type value.
The support for this new route type is OPTIONAL.
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
3.3. Optons Comparison
Option 1: Reusing the Type 0 information, only introduces an
additional flag into the BMP Peer Flags. If the BMP Station does not
support the new flag, there is a risk that the BMP Station will
wrongly handle the receiving Adj-RIBs-Out information as Adj-RIBs-In
information.
Option 2: Introduces an additional message type, if the BMP Station
does not support it, the receiving new type message will be ignored
by the BMP Station Quietly.
4. Acknowledgements
TBD.
5. IANA Considerations
TBD.
6. Security Considerations
TBD.
7. 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,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[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,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC7854] Scudder, J., Ed., Fernando, R., and S. Stuart, "BGP
Monitoring Protocol (BMP)", RFC 7854,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7854, June 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7854>.
Authors' Addresses
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Monitoring Outgoing BGP Routes March 2017
Penghui Mi
Tencent
Tengyun Building,Tower A ,No. 397 Tianlin Road
Shanghai 200233
China
Email: kevinmi@tencent.com
Shunwan Zhuang
Huawei
Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing 100095
China
Email: zhuangshunwan@huawei.com
Jie Dong
Huawei
Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing 100095
China
Email: jie.dong@huawei.com
Mi, et al. Expires September 14, 2017 [Page 7]
