BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS Flood Reflection
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-isis-flood-reflection-00

Inter-Domain Routing                                        J. Head, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             T. Przygienda
Intended status: Experimental                           Juniper Networks
Expires: 6 January 2023                                      5 July 2022

              BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS Flood Reflection
             draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-isis-flood-reflection-00

Abstract

   This document defines new BGP-LS (BGP Link-State) TLVs in order to
   carry IS-IS Flood Reflection information.

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 6 January 2023.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2022 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 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.

Head & Przygienda        Expires 6 January 2023                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS FR            July 2022

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS Flood Reflection  . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  BGP-LS TLVs for IS-IS Flood Reflection  . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.1.  Requested TLV Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   BGP Link-State RFC7752 [RFC7752] defines mechanisms to advertise
   information about the underlying IGP in BGP NLRI to an external
   entity (e.g. a controller).  New BGP-LS TLVs are required in order to
   faciliate IS-IS Flood Reflection [IS-IS-FR] extensions.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

2.  BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS Flood Reflection

   Controllers may need to compute traffic engineered paths across Flood
   Reflection clusters.  This requires that they be aware of Flood
   Reflection specific details, such as Cluster ID, C-bit (which
   indicates Flood Reflector or Flood Reflector Client), or any sub-
   TLVs.

   This document defines the following BGP-LS TLV code point value in
   accordance with RFC7752 rules:

   +================+======================+=======================+
   | TLV Code Point | Description          | IS-IS TLV             |
   +================+======================+=======================+
   | TBD1           | Flood Reflection TLV | TBD1 (161) [IS-IS-FR] |
   +----------------+----------------------+-----------------------+

            Table 1: BGP-LS Flood Reflection TLV Code Points

   TLV formats are described in detail in subsequent subsections.

Head & Przygienda        Expires 6 January 2023                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft       BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS FR            July 2022

3.  BGP-LS TLVs for IS-IS Flood Reflection

   This TLV advertises Flood Reflection details.  The semantics of any
   fields within the TLV/sub-TLVs is described in [IS-IS-FR].

      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |             Type              |             Length            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |C|  RESERVED   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                  Flood Reflection Cluster ID                  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                          Sub-TLVs ...                         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Figure 1: Flood Reflection TLVs

   where:

      *Type:*  TBD1

      *Length:*  variable

4.  IANA Considerations

   This section requests the following (suggested) values from the "BGP-
   LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute
   TLVs" registry for the following TLVs:

4.1.  Requested TLV Entries

   +================+=============+===================+===========+
   | TLV Code Point | Description | IS-IS TLV/Sub-TLV | Reference |
   +================+=============+===================+===========+
   | TBD1 (161)     | IS-IS Flood | 161               | This      |
   |                | Reflection  |                   | document. |
   +----------------+-------------+-------------------+-----------+

                    Table 2: Requested TLV Entries

Head & Przygienda        Expires 6 January 2023                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft       BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS FR            July 2022

5.  Security Considerations

   Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
   affect the BGP security model.  See the "Security Considerations"
   section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP security.  Also, refer
   to [RFC4272] and [RFC6952] for analyses of BGP security issues.
   Security considerations for acquiring and distributing BGP-LS
   information are discussed in [RFC7752].

   The TLVs introduced in this document are used to propagate IS-IS
   Flood Reflection TLVs defined in [IS-IS-FR].  These TLVs represent
   IS-IS Flood Reflection state and are therefore assumed to support
   any/all of the required security and authentication mechanisms as
   described in [IS-IS-FR] to prevent any security issues when
   propagating the TLVs into BGP-LS.

6.  Acknowledgements

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [IS-IS-FR] Przygienda, T., Bowers, C., Lee, Y., Sharma, A., and R.
              White, "IS-IS Flood Reflection", October 2021,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-
              isis-flood-reflection>.

   [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>.

   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
              Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", January 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.

   [RFC4272]  Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
              January 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.

   [RFC6952]  Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
              BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
              and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
              Guide", May 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.

Head & Przygienda        Expires 6 January 2023                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft       BGP-LS Extensions for IS-IS FR            July 2022

   [RFC7752]  Gredler, H., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S.
              Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and Traffic
              Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", March 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.

   [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
              Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", June
              2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

Authors' Addresses

   Jordan Head (editor)
   Juniper Networks
   1137 Innovation Way
   Sunnyvale, CA
   United States of America
   Email: jhead@juniper.net

   Tony Przygienda
   Juniper Networks
   1137 Innovation Way
   Sunnyvale, CA
   United States of America
   Email: prz@juniper.net

Head & Przygienda        Expires 6 January 2023                 [Page 5]