Internet DRAFT - draft-scudder-grow-bmp-peer-up
draft-scudder-grow-bmp-peer-up
GROW J. Scudder
Internet-Draft Juniper Networks
Updates: 7854 (if approved) December 14, 2018
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: June 17, 2019
BMP Peer Up Message Namespace
draft-scudder-grow-bmp-peer-up-00.txt
Abstract
RFC 7854, BMP, uses different message types for different purposes.
Most of these are Type, Length, Value (TLV) structured. One message
type, the Peer Up message, lacks a set of TLVs defined for its use,
instead sharing a namespace with the Initiation message. Subsequent
experience has shown that this namespace sharing was a mistake, as it
hampers the extension of the protocol.
This document updates RFC 7854 by creating an independent namespace
for the Peer Up message. The changes in this document are formal
only, compliant implementations of RFC 7854 also comply with this
specification.
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 June 17, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
Scudder Expires June 17, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BMP Peer Up Namespace December 2018
(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. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. String Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Changes to RFC 7854 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Revision to Information TLV, Renamed as Initiation
Information TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Revision to Peer Up Notification . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.3. Definition of Peer Up Information TLV . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
[RFC7854] defines a number of different BMP message types. With the
exception of the Route Monitoring message type, these messages are
TLV-structured. Most message types have distinct namespaces and IANA
registries. However, the namespace of the Peer Up message overlaps
that of the Initiation message. As the BMP protocol has been
extended, this oversight has become problematic. In this document,
we create a distinct namespace for the Peer Up message to eliminate
this overlap, and create the corresponding missing registry.
The changes in this document are formal only, compliant
implementations of [RFC7854] also comply with this specification.
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.
Scudder Expires June 17, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BMP Peer Up Namespace December 2018
2. String Definition
A string TLV is a free-form sequence of UTF-8 characters whose length
is given by the TLV's Length field. There is no requirement to
terminate the string with a null (or any other particular) character
-- the Length field gives its termination.
3. Changes to RFC 7854
We update [RFC7854] as follows:
o The "Information TLV" of section 4.4, that was shared between the
Initiation and Peer Up message types, is renamed as the
"Initiation Information TLV", and is only relevant to the
Initiation message type.
o A "Peer Up Information TLV" is defined, and is relevant to the
Peer Up message type.
o A "Peer Up TLVs" registry is created, seeded with the Peer Up
Information TLV.
Other than as summarized above, and detailed below, there are no
other changes.
3.1. Revision to Information TLV, Renamed as Initiation Information TLV
The Information TLV defined in section 4.4 of [RFC7854] is renamed
"Initiation Information TLV". It is used only by the Initiation
message, not by the Peer Up message.
The definition of Type = 0 is revised to be:
o Type = 0: String. The Information field contains a string
(Section 2). The value is administratively assigned. If multiple
strings are included, their ordering MUST be preserved when they
are reported.
3.2. Revision to Peer Up Notification
The final paragraph of section 4.10 of [RFC7854] references the
Information TLV (which is revised above (Section 3.1)). That
paragraph is replaced by the following:
o Information: Information about the peer, using the Peer Up
Information TLV format defined below (Section 3.3). The String
type may be repeated. Inclusion of the Information field is
Scudder Expires June 17, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BMP Peer Up Namespace December 2018
OPTIONAL. Its presence or absence can be inferred by inspection
of the Message Length in the common header.
3.3. Definition of Peer Up Information TLV
The Peer Up Information TLV is used by the Peer Up message.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Information Type | Information Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Information (variable) |
~ ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Information Type (2 bytes): Type of information provided. Defined
types are:
* Type = 0: String. The Information field contains a string
(Section 2). The value is administratively assigned. If
multiple strings are included, their ordering MUST be preserved
when they are reported.
o Information Length (2 bytes): The length of the following
Information field, in bytes.
o Information (variable): Information about the monitored router,
according to the type.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to create a registry within the BMP group, named
"BMP Peer Up Message TLVs", reference this document.
Registration procedures for this registry are:
+-------------+--------------------------+
| Range | Registration Procedures |
+-------------+--------------------------+
| 0-32767 | Standards Action |
| 32768-65530 | First Come, First Served |
| 65531-65534 | Experimental |
| 65535 | Reserved |
+-------------+--------------------------+
Initial values for this registry are:
Scudder Expires June 17, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BMP Peer Up Namespace December 2018
+-------+-------------+---------------+
| Type | Description | Reference |
+-------+-------------+---------------+
| 0 | String | this document |
| 65535 | Reserved | this document |
+-------+-------------+---------------+
5. Security Considerations
This rearrangement of deck chairs does not change the underlying
security issues inherent in the existing [RFC7854].
6. Acknowledgements
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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC7854] Scudder, J., Ed., Fernando, R., and S. Stuart, "BGP
Monitoring Protocol (BMP)", RFC 7854,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7854, June 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7854>.
[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>.
Author's Address
John Scudder
Juniper Networks
1194 N. Mathilda Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
USA
Email: jgs@juniper.net
Scudder Expires June 17, 2019 [Page 5]
