BMP Extension for Path Status TLV
draft-cppy-grow-bmp-path-marking-tlv-06
Network Working Group C. Cardona
Internet-Draft P. Lucente
Intended status: Standards Track NTT
Expires: March 27, 2021 P. Francois
INSA-Lyon
Y. Gu
Huawei
T. Graf
Swisscom
September 23, 2020
BMP Extension for Path Status TLV
draft-cppy-grow-bmp-path-marking-tlv-06
Abstract
The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) provides an interface for obtaining
BGP Path information. BGP Path Information is conveyed within BMP
Route Monitoring (RM) messages. This document proposes an extension
to BMP to convey the status of a BGP path before and after being
processed by the BGP best-path selection algorithm. This extension
makes use of the TLV mechanims described in draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv
[I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv] and draft-lucente-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit
[I-D.lucente-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit].
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] RFC 8174 [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."
Cardona, et al. Expires March 27, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BMP path status tlv September 2020
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 27, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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. Path Status TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. IANA-registered Path Status TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Enterprise-specific Path Status TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
For a given prefix, multiple paths with different path status, e.g.,
the "best-path", "back-up path" and so on, may co-exist in the BGP
RIB after being processed by the local policy and the BGP decision
process. The path status information is currently not carried in the
BGP Update Message RFC4271 [RFC4271] or in the BMP Update Message
RFC7854 [RFC7854].
External systems can use the path status for various applications.
The path status is commonly checked by operators when performing
troubleshooting. Having such status stored in a centralized system
can enable the development of tools that facilitate this process.
Optimisation systems can include the path status in their process,
and also use the status as a validation source (since it can compare
the calculated state to the actual outcome of the network, such as
primary and backup path). As a final example, path status
information can complement other centralized sources of data, for
example, flow collectors.
Show full document text