Policy Guided Prefixes with Routing In Fat Trees
draft-atlas-rift-pgp-00
|
Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (individual)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2018-10-22
|
|
Stream |
|
(None)
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
(None)
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
pdf
html
bibtex
|
Stream |
Stream state |
|
(No stream defined) |
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
RFC Editor Note |
|
(None)
|
IESG |
IESG state |
|
I-D Exists
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
(None)
|
|
Send notices to |
|
(None)
|
RIFT A. Atlas
Internet-Draft Individual
Intended status: Standards Track Z. Zhang
Expires: April 25, 2019 Juniper Networks
October 22, 2018
Policy Guided Prefixes with Routing In Fat Trees
draft-atlas-rift-pgp-00
Abstract
In a fat tree, it can be sometimes desirable to guide traffic to
particular destinations or keep specific flows to certain paths. In
RIFT, this traffic steering/engineering is done by using policy-
guided prefixes with their associated communities. Routes based on
policy-guided prefixes are preferred over regular routes. Any node
can originate a policy-guided prefix and advertise it in both north
and south directions, and the calculation in both directions are
distance vector based.
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.
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 April 25, 2019.
Atlas & Zhang Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft rift-pgp October 2018
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
(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
2. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Ingress Filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Applying Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Store Policy-Guided Prefix for Route Computation and
Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. Re-origination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.5. Reachability Computation with PGP Consideration . . . . . 6
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
In a fat tree, it can be sometimes desirable to guide traffic to
particular destinations or keep specific flows to certain paths. In
RIFT, this is done by using policy-guided prefixes with their
associated communities. Each community is an abstract value whose
meaning is determined by configuration. It is assumed that the
fabric is under a single administrative control so that the meaning
and intent of the communities is understood by all the nodes in the
fabric. Any node can originate a policy-guided prefix.
Since RIFT uses distance vector concepts in a southbound direction,
it is straightforward to add a policy-guided prefix to an S-TIE. For
easier troubleshooting, the approach taken in RIFT is that a node's
southbound policy-guided prefixes are sent in its S-TIE and the
receiver does inbound filtering based on the associated communities
(an egress policy is imaginable but would lead to different S-TIEs
per adjacency possibly which is not considered in RIFT protocol
Atlas & Zhang Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft rift-pgp October 2018
procedures). A southbound policy-guided prefix can only use links in
the south direction. If an PGP S-TIE is received on an East-West or
Show full document text