SIDROPS J. Snijders
Internet-Draft Fastly
Updates: 8416 (if approved) B. Cartwright-Cox
Intended status: Standards Track Port 179 Ltd
Expires: 27 August 2023 23 February 2023
Simplified Local Internet Number Resource Management (SLURM) with RPKI
Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA)
draft-spaghetti-sidrops-aspa-slurm-00
Abstract
ISPs may want to establish a local view of exceptions to the Resource
Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) data in the form of local filters
and additions. This document defines an addendum to RFC 8416 by
specifying a format for local filters and local assertions for
Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA) for use with the
RPKI.
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.
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 27 August 2023.
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 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 (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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. SLURM v2 File Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Validation Output Filters for ASPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Validated ASPA Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Locally Added ASPA Assertions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Example of a SLURM file with ASPA Filters and Assertions . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE
PUBLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
ISPs may want to establish a local view of exceptions to the Resource
Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) data in the form of local filters
and additions. This document defines an addendum to RFC 8416 by
specifying a format for local filters and local assertions for
Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA) for use with the
RPKI.
See [RFC8416] for an overview of the SLURM mechanism, specifically
Section 3 and Section 4.
2. SLURM v2 File Overview
A SLURM file consists of a single JSON [RFC8259] object containing
the following members:
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
* A "slurmVersion" member that MUST be set to 2, encoded as a number
* A "validationOutputFilters" member whose value is an object. The
object MUST contain exactly three members:
- A "prefixFilters" member, see Section 3.3.1 [RFC8416]
- A "bgpsecFilters" member, see section 3.3.2 [RFC8416]
- A "aspaFilters" member, see Section 3.1
* A "locallyAddedAssertions" member whose value is an object. The
object MUST contain exactly three members:
- A "prefixAssertions" member, see Section 3.4.1 [RFC8416]
- A "bgpsecAssertions" member, see Section 3.4.2 [RFC8416]
- A "aspaAssertions" member, see Section 3.2
The following JSON structure with JSON members represents a SLURM
file that has no filters or assertions:
{
"slurmVersion": 2,
"validationOutputFilters": {
"aspaFilters": [],
"bgpsecFilters": [],
"prefixFilters": []
},
"locallyAddedAssertions": {
"aspaAssertions": [],
"bgpsecAssertions": [],
"prefixAssertions": []
}
}
3. Validation Output Filters for ASPA
3.1. Validated ASPA Filters
The RP can configure zero or more Validated ASPA Filters ("ASPA
Filters" for short. Each ASPA Filter contains a single
'customer_asid', a single 'afi', and optionally a single 'comment'.
* The 'customer_asid' member has as value a number.
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
* The 'afi' member has as value a string which is either "ipv4" or
"ipv6".
* It is RECOMMENDED that an explanatory comment is included with
each ASPA Filter so that it can be shown to users of the RP
software.
Any Validated ASPA Payload (VAP) [I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile] that
matches any configured ASPA Filter MUST be removed from the RP's
output.
A VAP is considered to match with an ASPA Filter if the following
condition applies:
1. The VAP is considered to match if the VAP Customer ASID is equal
to the ASPA Filter Customer ASID.
The following example JSON structure represents a "aspaFilters"
member with one object as described above:
"aspaFilter": [
{
"customer_asid": 64496,
"afi": "ipv6",
"comment": "Ignore ASPA(s) that have 64496 as Customer ASID"
}
]
3.2. Locally Added ASPA Assertions
Each RP is locally configured with a (possibly empty) array of ASPA
Assertions. Each ASPA Assertion MUST contain a 'customer_asid'
member containing the Customer ASID and a 'provider_set' array of
numbers, reflecting the set of Provider ASNs. It is RECOMMENDED that
an explanatory comment is also included so that it can be shown to
users of the RP software.
The above is expressed as a value of the "aspaAssertions" member, as
an array of zero or more objects. Each object MUST contain one each
of all of the following members:
* An "customer_asid" member whose value is a number.
* An "afi" member whose value is a string, whose content is either
"ipv4" or "ipv6".
* A "provider_set" member whose value is an array of numbers.
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
* An optional "comment" member whose value is a string.
The following example JSON structure represents a "aspaAssertions"
member with one object as described above:
"aspaAssertions": [
{
"customer_asid": 64496,
"afi": "ipv6",
"provider_set": [64497, 64498],
"comment": "pretend 64497 are 64498 are providers to 64496 for IPv6 routes"
}
]
Note that a "aspaAssertions" member matches the syntax of the Router
Key PDU described in Section 5.12 of [I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis].
Relying Parties MUST add any "aspaAssertions" member thus found to
the set of Router Key PDUs, excluding duplicates, when using version
2 of the RPKI-Router protocol [I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis].
4. Example of a SLURM file with ASPA Filters and Assertions
{
"slurmVersion": 2,
"validationOutputFilters": {
"prefixFilters": [
{
"prefix": "192.0.2.0/24",
"comment": "All VRPs encompassed by prefix"
},
{
"asn": 64496,
"comment": "All VRPs matching ASN"
},
{
"prefix": "198.51.100.0/24",
"asn": 64497,
"comment": "All VRPs encompassed by prefix, matching ASN"
}
],
"bgpsecFilters": [
{
"asn": 64496,
"comment": "All keys for ASN"
},
{
"SKI": "voibVdC3Nzl9dcSfSFuFj6mK0R8",
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
"comment": "Key matching Router SKI"
},
{
"asn": 64497,
"SKI": "UQ9IXSminbe1FfnEePjtPLeqfSM",
"comment": "Key for ASN 64497 matching Router SKI"
}
],
"aspaFilters": [
{
"customer_asid": 64496,
"afi": "ipv6",
"comment": "ASPAs matching Customer ASID"
}
]
},
"locallyAddedAssertions": {
"prefixAssertions": [
{
"asn": 64496,
"prefix": "198.51.100.0/24",
"comment": "My other important route"
},
{
"asn": 64496,
"prefix": "2001:db8::/32",
"maxPrefixLength": 48,
"comment": "My other important de-aggregated routes"
}
],
"bgpsecAssertions": [
{
"asn": 64496,
"comment" : "My known key for my important ASN",
"SKI": "XUJQ4tgdREjYop786R0p/wdeyeI",
"routerPublicKey": "MFkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDQgAEgFcjQ/g//LAQerAH2Mpp+GucoDAGBbhIqD33wNPsXxnAGb+mtZ7XQrVO9DQ6UlAShtig5+QfEKpTtFgiqfiAFQ"
}
],
"aspaAssertions": [
{
"customer_asid": 64496,
"afi": "ipv6",
"provider_set": [64497, 64498],
"comment": "Pretend 64497 and 64498 are upstream for 64496 in the IPv6 AFI"
}
]
}
}
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
5. Security Considerations
For Security Considerations see Section 6 of [RFC8416].
6. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank TBD for their helpful review of this
document.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis]
Bush, R. and R. Austein, "The Resource Public Key
Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol, Version 2", Work
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-
10, 16 June 2022, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-10>.
[I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile]
Azimov, A., Uskov, E., Bush, R., Snijders, J., Housley,
R., and B. Maddison, "A Profile for Autonomous System
Provider Authorization", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile-12, 29 January 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-
aspa-profile-12>.
[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>.
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
[RFC8416] Ma, D., Mandelberg, D., and T. Bruijnzeels, "Simplified
Local Internet Number Resource Management with the RPKI
(SLURM)", RFC 8416, DOI 10.17487/RFC8416, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8416>.
8.2. Informative References
[stayrtr] Cartwright-Cox, B., "StayRTR", February 2023,
<https://github.com/bgp/stayrtr>.
Appendix A. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE
PUBLICATION
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942.
The description of implementations in this section is intended to
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.
According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
* StayRTR [stayrtr]
Authors' Addresses
Job Snijders
Fastly
Amsterdam
Netherlands
Email: job@fastly.com
Ben Cartwright-Cox
Port 179 Ltd
London
United Kingdom
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SLURM for RPKI ASPA February 2023
Email: ben@benjojo.co.uk
Snijders & Cartwright-CoxExpires 27 August 2023 [Page 9]