Network Working Group                                           K. Patel
Internet-Draft                                                 A. Lindem
Intended status: Standards Track                           Cisco Systems
Expires: January 9, 2017                                        L. Jalil
                                                                 Verizon
                                                            July 8, 2016


          Selective Advertisement of Multiple Paths within BGP
           draft-keyupate-idr-bgp-selective-add-paths-01.txt

Abstract

   [draft-ietf-idr-add-paths] defines a BGP extension that allows the
   advertisement of multiple paths for the same address prefix without
   the new paths implicitly replacing any previous ones.  The essence of
   the extension is that each path is identified by a path identifier in
   addition to the address prefix.  This draft augments functionality
   defined in [draft-ietf-idr-add-paths] to facilitate advertisement of
   multiple paths for a subset of prefixes in a given address family.
   Prefixes are selected through specification of a well-known BGP
   extended community.

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 January 9, 2017.

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



Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 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.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Selective Add-Path Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Selective Add-Path Community  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Selective Add-Path Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.1.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     7.2.  Information References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths] defines a BGP extension that allows the
   advertisement of multiple paths for the same address prefix without
   the new paths implicitly replacing any previous ones.  The essence of
   the extension is that each path is identified by a path identifier in
   addition to the address prefix.  This document augments functionality
   defined in defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths] to facilitate
   advertisement of multiple paths for a subset of prefixes in a given
   address family.  Prefixes are selected through specification of a
   reserved BGP extended community.

   This draft defines a capability to limit the scope of BGP multiple
   path advertisement to a subset prefixes in a given address family.



Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 2016


   Prefixes are selected through specification of a reserved BGP
   extended community [RFC4360].


                ------
          P1--> | R1 |
          P2--> ------ \   ------    ------
                        -- | RR | -- | R3 |
                ------ /   ------    ------
          P1--> | R2 |
          P2--> ------



   As an example, suppose that RR is a route reflector that doesn't
   change nexthops of the prefixes it reflects, with clients R1, R2 and
   R3.  Suppose R1 sends RR an UPDATE: <NLRI=P1, NH=R1> and <NLRI=P2,
   NH=R1>.  Suppose R2 sends RR an UPDATE: <NLRI=P1,NH=R2> and
   <NLRI=P2,NH=R2>.  R1, R2, and R3 would like selective ADDPATHs for
   Prefix P1 and not for Prefix P2.  R1, R2, and R3 exchange selective
   the ADDPATH capability with RR.  R1, R2, R3 are configured with the
   reserved selective ADDPATHs community that they attach to prefixes
   that need selective ADDPATHs.  RR now has two paths to P1 and P2.  RR
   announces P2 with bestpath to all its clients while RR announces P1
   with additional paths.  The number of additional paths with its best
   path and its additional paths is a matter of local policy configured
   on RR.

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.  Selective Add-Path Capability

   The ADD-PATH Capability is a new BGP capability [RFC5492].  The
   Capability Code for this capability is allocated by IANA as specified
   in the Section 5.  The Capability Length field of this capability is
   variable.  The Capability Value field consists of one or more of the
   following tuples:










Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 2016


                +------------------------------------------------+
                | Address Family Identifier (2 octets)           |
                +------------------------------------------------+
                | Subsequent Address Family Identifier (1 octet) |
                +------------------------------------------------+


      The meaning and use of the fields are as follows:

      Address Family Identifier (AFI):

         This field is the same as the one used in [RFC4760].

      Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI):

         This field is the same as the one used in [RFC4760].


   A BGP Speaker that wishes to announce or receive multiple paths MUST
   exchange the add-path capability defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths].
   A BGP Speaker that wishes to announce or receive multiple paths for
   selected prefixes MUST exchange the selective add-path capability
   defined in this draft.  A BGP speaker wanting to advertise selective
   add-path capability MUST also advertise the add-path capability
   defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths].

   In processing a received selective add-path capability from a peer, a
   BGP speaker MUST ensure that it also received the add-path capability
   defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths].  Otherwise, the BGP speaker
   should ignore the received selective add-path capability and follow
   the error handling rules for unsupported add-path capabilites in
   [RFC5492].

3.  Selective Add-Path Community

   Upon successful Selective Add-Path capability negotiation, a BGP
   speaker MUST NOT announce multiple paths for any AFI/SAFI prefix
   unless it has received at least one UPDATE for that prefix that
   includes the Selective Add-Path well-known community in its
   attributes.  The community is a Transitive Opaque Extended Community
   with the sub-type value IANA-TBD.

   If Selective Add-Path capability negotiation for a given AFI/SAFI has
   not taken place and the Selective Add-Path Community is included with
   a prefix advertised for the same AFI/SAFI, the Selective Add-Path
   Community will be ignored.  However, the occurance of the unexpected
   community SHOULD be logged.




Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 2016


4.  Selective Add-Path Use Case

   A use case is a BGP deployment where underlay and overlay routes are
   associated with the same AFI/SAFI and, due to scaling, only multiple
   paths are only advertised and installed for underlay routes.  For
   direct BGP sessions, the ingress routers would only advertise
   multiple paths for the underlay routes.  However, if the topology
   includes BGP Router Reflectors [RFC4456], it is likely that multiple
   ingress routers will advertise the same overlay routes.  In this
   case, the mechanism describe herein would be useful in limiting
   multi-path best-path computation and advertisement to the underlay
   routes.

   As a second usecase, many times a service provider will carry both
   customer traffic and internal services (e.g., VOIP) on the same
   backbone network using routes in the same BGP address families.  In
   this situation, the number of customer routes and paths greatly
   exceed the number of routes and paths for internal services.
   However, the service provider desires the faster failover and
   convergence provided by BGP Add-Paths [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths].  In
   this scenario, the Selective Add-Path functionality described herein
   can be leveraged for routes corresponding to internal services
   without the overhead incurred if multiple paths were advertised for
   the customer routes.

5.  IANA Considerations

   This document defines a new capability for BGP.  We request IANA to
   assign BGP capability number from BGP Capabilities Registry.

   This document also defines a new extended community for BGP.  We
   request IANA to assign a BGP well-known extended community from the
   Transitive Opaque Extended Community Sub-Types Registry.

6.  Security Considerations

   This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security issues
   inherent in the existing [RFC4724] and [RFC4271].

6.1.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank .... for the review and comments.

7.  References







Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 2016


7.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-idr-add-paths]
              Walton, D., Retana, A., Chen, E., and J. Scudder,
              "Advertisement of Multiple Paths in BGP", draft-ietf-idr-
              add-paths-13 (work in progress), December 2015.

   [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>.

   [RFC4360]  Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
              Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360,
              February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4360>.

   [RFC5492]  Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement
              with BGP-4", RFC 5492, DOI 10.17487/RFC5492, February
              2009, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5492>.

7.2.  Information References

   [RFC4456]  Bates, T., Chen, E., and R. Chandra, "BGP Route
              Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP
              (IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4456>.

   [RFC4724]  Sangli, S., Chen, E., Fernando, R., Scudder, J., and Y.
              Rekhter, "Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP", RFC 4724,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4724, January 2007,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4724>.

Authors' Addresses

   Keyur Patel
   Cisco Systems
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: keyupate@cisco.com





Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft    BGP Add-Path Selective Advertisement         July 2016


   Acee Lindem
   Cisco Systems
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: acee@cisco.com


   Luay Jalil
   Verizon
   400 International Parkway
   Richardson, Tx  75081
   USA

   Email: luay.jalil@verizon.com



































Patel, et al.            Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 7]