Distribution of diverse BGP paths.
draft-ietf-grow-diverse-bgp-path-dist-07

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (grow WG)
Last updated 2012-07-19 (latest revision 2012-05-03)
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd None
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Needs a YES.
Responsible AD Ron Bonica
IESG note Peter Schoenmaker (pds@lugs.com) is the document shepherd.
Send notices to grow-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-grow-diverse-bgp-path-dist@tools.ietf.org
GROW Working Group                                        R. Raszuk, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                   NTT MCL
Intended status: Informational                               R. Fernando
Expires: November 4, 2012                                       K. Patel
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                            D. McPherson
                                                                Verisign
                                                               K. Kumaki
                                                        KDDI Corporation
                                                             May 3, 2012

                   Distribution of diverse BGP paths.
                draft-ietf-grow-diverse-bgp-path-dist-07

Abstract

   The BGP4 protocol specifies the selection and propagation of a single
   best path for each prefix.  As defined and widely deployed today BGP
   has no mechanisms to distribute alternate paths which are not
   considered best path between its speakers.  This behaviour results in
   number of disadvantages for new applications and services.

   This document presents an alternative mechanism for solving the
   problem based on the concept of parallel route reflector planes.
   Such planes can be built in parallel or they can co-exist on the
   current route reflection platforms.  Document also compares existing
   solutions and proposed ideas that enable distribution of more paths
   than just the best path.

   This proposal does not specify any changes to the BGP protocol
   definition.  It does not require upgrades to provider edge or core
   routers nor does it need network wide upgrades.

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."

Raszuk, et al.          Expires November 4, 2012                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            diverse-bgp-path-dist                 May 2012

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 4, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 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
   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.

Raszuk, et al.          Expires November 4, 2012                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            diverse-bgp-path-dist                 May 2012

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  History  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.1.  BGP Add-Paths Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Goals  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.  Multi plane route reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.1.  Co-located best and backup path RRs  . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.2.  Randomly located best and backup path RRs  . . . . . . . . 11
     4.3.  Multi plane route servers for Internet Exchanges . . . . . 13
   5.  Discussion on current models of IBGP route distribution  . . . 14
     5.1.  Full Mesh  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     5.2.  Confederations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     5.3.  Route reflectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   6.  Deployment considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   7.  Summary of benefits  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   8.  Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   9.  Security considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   10. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   12. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Show full document text