BMP Loc-RIB: Peer address
draft-francois-grow-bmp-loc-peer-00

Network Working Group                                        P. Francois
Internet-Draft                                                 M. Younsi
Intended status: Standards Track                               INSA-Lyon
Expires: 14 September 2023                                    P. Lucente
                                                                     NTT
                                                           13 March 2023

                       BMP Loc-RIB: Peer address
                  draft-francois-grow-bmp-loc-peer-00

Abstract

   BMP Loc-RIB lets a BMP publisher set the Peer Address value of a path
   information to zero.  This document introduces the option to
   communicate the actual peer from which a path was received when
   advertising that path with BMP Loc-RIB.

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 14 September 2023.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Francois, et al.        Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                bmp-loc-peer                    March 2023

   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.  BMPv3 Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  BMPv4 TLV Based Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4

1.  Introduction

   Using BMP Loc-RIB [RFC9069], the Peer Address field of a Per-Peer
   header is Zero-filled.  This prevents a collector from knowing from
   which peer a path selected as best was received.  The nexthop
   attribute of a path is indeed not an identifier of the peer from
   which the path was received.

   This document introduces the option to actually set this field to the
   IP Address of the peer from which the installed path was received.
   For BMPv4, it introduces a TLV describing the Peer Address.

2.  BMPv3 Behavior

   A BMPv3 Loc-RIB enabled node following this specification sets the
   Peer Address field in the Per-Peer header to the address of the Peer
   from which this path was received.  The V flag is applicable, so that
   if the peer address is an IPv6 address, the V flag MUST be set to 1.
   If the peer address is an IPv4 address, the V flag MUST be set to 0.

   This behavior SHOULD be disabled by default and enabled through
   configuration, so that a defensive BMP receiver would not terminate a
   BMP session over which it receives a BMP Loc-RIB messages with a non-
   zero Peer Address field.  This behavior can be enabled when the
   operator knows that the receiver can receive BMP Loc-RIB messages
   following this specification.

Francois, et al.        Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                bmp-loc-peer                    March 2023

3.  BMPv4 TLV Based Behavior

   In BMP v4 [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv], TLV's can be used to provide
   optional information along with monitored paths.  Peer Address
   information can be included using one such TLV.

   A TLV type "Peer-Address TLV" needs to be reserved from the BMP Route
   Monitoring TLVs registry.  The length field is 4 when the peer is
   IPv4 and 16 when the peer is IPv6, as the index field of the TLV is
   not included in the length field.  The value is the IP address the
   peer from which the monitored path was received.

4.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce new security considerations.

5.  Acknowledgements

   These are the acks.

6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv]
              Lucente, P. and Y. Gu, "TLV support for BMP Route
              Monitoring and Peer Down Messages", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-10, 8 November
              2022, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              grow-bmp-tlv-10>.

   [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>.

   [RFC9069]  Evens, T., Bayraktar, S., Bhardwaj, M., and P. Lucente,
              "Support for Local RIB in the BGP Monitoring Protocol
              (BMP)", RFC 9069, DOI 10.17487/RFC9069, February 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9069>.

6.2.  Informative References

Francois, et al.        Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                bmp-loc-peer                    March 2023

Authors' Addresses

   Pierre Francois
   INSA-Lyon
   Villeurbanne
   France
   Email: pierre.francois@insa-lyon.fr

   Maxence Younsi
   INSA-Lyon
   Villeurbanne
   France
   Email: maxence.younsi@insa-lyon.fr

   Paolo Lucente
   NTT
   Siriusdreef 70-72
   Hoofddorp, WT 2132
   Netherlands
   Email: paolo@ntt.net

Francois, et al.        Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 4]