Internet DRAFT - draft-retana-sidr-origin-validation-cost-community
draft-retana-sidr-origin-validation-cost-community
Network Working Group A. Retana
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track A. Weher
Expires: April 27, 2015 TelVGG
October 24, 2014
Use of the Cost Community to Propagate BGP Origin Validation State
draft-retana-sidr-origin-validation-cost-community-00
Abstract
This document explains the use of the Cost Community to provide
flexibility in the application of routing policy related to the
origin validation state of a route.
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 April 27, 2015.
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.
Retana & Weher Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Cost Community for BGP Origin Validation October 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Use of the Cost Community to Propagate BGP Origin Validation
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction
The BGP Origin Validation mechanism [RFC6811] defines the route
validation states as "Valid", "NotFound" and "Invalid". The Origin
Validation State Extended Community
[I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling] has been defined so that
this state can be considered prior to any of the steps defined in the
BGP decision process [RFC4271].
It has been suggested that the LOCAL_PREF attribute [RFC4271] may
also be used to indicate the degree of preference of a route
according to its origin validation state. [RFC7115] also suggests
the need to consider the origin validation state at other steps in
the selection process, for example after considering the AS_PATH
length.
The Cost Community [I-D.ietf-idr-custom-decision] can provide a
flexible mechanism to propagate the origin validation state, without
overloading existing attributes that may already be used to set other
types of local policy (such as the LOCAL_PREF).
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].
3. Use of the Cost Community to Propagate BGP Origin Validation State
It is RECOMMENDED that the values defined in
[I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling] also be used to assign
the Cost:
Retana & Weher Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Cost Community for BGP Origin Validation October 2014
+------+------------------+
| Cost | Validation State |
+------+------------------+
| 0 | Valid |
| 1 | NotFound |
| 2 | Invalid |
+------+------------------+
Cost vs Validation State
The Point of Insertion (POI) can be set to any of the values defined
in [I-D.ietf-idr-custom-decision]. Note that the use of the
ABSOLUTE_VALUE POI is equivalent to using the Origin Validation State
Extended Community.
If the Cost Community is used to propagate the origin validation
state, then the Origin Validation State Extended Community SHOULD NOT
be used. If used, then it will always take precendence over the Cost
Community, regardless of the POI used.
4. Operational Considerations
The use of the origin validation state as part of the BGP decision
process is a matter of local policy.
The policy mechanism chosen to propagate the origin validation state
SHOULD be implemented uniformly across the local autonomous system to
guarantee a consistent decision process and reduce the risk of
routing loops.
5. Security Considerations
This document explains the use of the Cost Community to provide
flexibility in the application of routing policy related to the
origin validation state of a route. As such, it does not introduce
new security risks beyond the ones considered in
[I-D.ietf-idr-custom-decision] or [RFC6811].
6. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Keyur Patel.
Retana & Weher Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Cost Community for BGP Origin Validation October 2014
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-custom-decision]
Retana, A. and R. White, "BGP Custom Decision Process",
draft-ietf-idr-custom-decision-05 (work in progress),
October 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC6811] Mohapatra, P., Scudder, J., Ward, D., Bush, R., and R.
Austein, "BGP Prefix Origin Validation", RFC 6811, January
2013.
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling]
Mohapatra, P., Patel, K., Scudder, J., Ward, D., and R.
Bush, "BGP Prefix Origin Validation State Extended
Community", draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling-04
(work in progress), February 2014.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
[RFC7115] Bush, R., "Origin Validation Operation Based on the
Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)", BCP 185, RFC
7115, January 2014.
Authors' Addresses
Alvaro Retana
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
USA
Email: aretana@cisco.com
Retana & Weher Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Cost Community for BGP Origin Validation October 2014
Ariel Weher
Cooperativa Telefonica de Villa Gdor. Galvez Ltda.
Av. Mitre 1028
Villa Gdor. Galvez, Santa Fe S2124HEB
Argentina
Email: ariel@weher.net
Retana & Weher Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 5]
