TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-02
Global Routing Operations P. Lucente
Internet-Draft NTT
Updates: 7854 (if approved) Y. Gu
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: September 10, 2020 H. Smit
Independent
March 9, 2020
TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-02
Abstract
Most of the message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol
(BMP) do provision for optional trailing data. However, Route
Monitoring messages (to provide a snapshot of the monitored Routing
Information Base) and Peer Down messages (to indicate that a peering
session was terminated) do not. Supporting optional data in TLV
format across all BMP message types allows for an homogeneous and
extensible surface that would be useful for the most different use-
cases that need to convey additional data to a BMP station. While it
is not intended for this document to cover any specific utilization
scenario, it defines a simple way to support optional TLV data in all
message types.
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 September 10, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Lucente, et al. Expires September 10, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BMP TLV March 2020
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. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. TLV encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. BMP Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Common Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. TLV data in Route Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3. TLV data in Peer Down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.4. TLV data in other BMP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is defined in RFC 7854 [RFC7854].
The Route Monitoring message consists of:
o Common Header
o Per-Peer Header
o BGP Update PDU
The Peer Down Notification message consists of:
o Common Header
o Per-Peer Header
o Reason
o Data (only if Reason code is 1, 2 or 3)
Lucente, et al. Expires September 10, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BMP TLV March 2020
This means that both Route Monitoring and Peer Down messages have a
non-extensible format. In the Route Monitoring case, this is
limiting if transmitting characteristics of transported NLRIs is
desired (ie. to help stateless parsing) or vendor-specific data. In
the Peer Down case, this is limiting if matching TLVs sent with the
Peer Up is desired. The proposal of this document is to bump the BMP
version, for backward compatibility, and allow all message types to
provision for trailing TLV data.
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
Show full document text