Methods for Detection and Mitigation of BGP Route Leaks
draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation-01
IDR and SIDR K. Sriram, Ed.
Internet-Draft USA NIST
Intended status: Standards Track A. Azimov, Ed.
Expires: January 26, 2020 Yandex
July 25, 2019
Methods for Detection and Mitigation of BGP Route Leaks
draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation-01
Abstract
Problem definition for route leaks and enumeration of types of route
leaks are provided in [RFC7908]. This document describes a new well-
known Large Community that provides a way for route leak prevention,
detection, and mitigation. The configuration process for this
Community can be automated with the methodology for setting BGP roles
that is described in ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy draft.
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 January 26, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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
Sriram & Azimov Expires January 26, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Route Leak Detection and Mitigation July 2019
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Peering Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Community vs Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Down Only Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Route Leak Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Only Marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
[RFC7908] provides a definition of the route leak problem and
enumerates several types of route leaks. For this document, the
definition that is applied is that a route leak occurs when a route
received from a transit provider or a lateral peer is forwarded
(against commonly used policy) to another transit provider or a
lateral peer. The commonly used policy is that a route received from
a transit provider or a lateral peer MAY be forwarded only to
customers.
This document describes a solution for prevention, detection and
mitigation route leaks which is based on conveying route-leak
detection information in a well-known BGP Large Community. The
configuration process for the Large Community MUST be defined
according to peering relations between ISPs. This process can be
automated with the methodology for setting BGP roles that is
described in [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy].
The techniques described in this document can be incrementally
deployed. If a group of big ISPs and/or Internet Exchanges (IXes)
deploy the proposed techniques, then they would be helping each other
by blocking route leaks that can happen between them.
2. Peering Relationships
As described in [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy] there are several
common peering relations between eBGP neighbors:
Sriram & Azimov Expires January 26, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Route Leak Detection and Mitigation July 2019
o Provider - sender is a transit provider of the neighbor;
Show full document text