BGP Optimal Route Reflection (BGP-ORR)
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-12

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (idr WG)
Last updated 2016-07-08
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd Susan Hares
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
IDR Working Group                                         R. Raszuk, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                              Bloomberg LP
Intended status: Standards Track                               C. Cassar
Expires: January 9, 2017                                   Cisco Systems
                                                                 E. Aman
                                                             TeliaSonera
                                                             B. Decraene
                                                            S. Litkowski
                                                                  Orange
                                                                 K. Wang
                                                        Juniper Networks
                                                            July 8, 2016

                 BGP Optimal Route Reflection (BGP-ORR)
             draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-12

Abstract

   This document proposes a solution for BGP route reflectors to allow
   them to choose the best path their clients would have chosen under
   the same conditions, without requiring further state or any new
   features to be placed on the clients.  This facilitates, for example,
   best exit point policy (hot potato routing).  This solution is
   primarily applicable in deployments using centralized route
   reflectors.

   The solution relies upon all route reflectors learning all paths
   which are eligible for consideration.  Best path selection is
   performed in each route reflector based on a configured virtual
   location in the IGP.  The location can be the same for all clients or
   different per peer/update group or per peer.  Best path selection can
   also be performed based on user configured policies in each route
   reflector.

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

Raszuk, et al.           Expires January 9, 2017                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        bgp-optimal-route-reflection             July 2016

   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 9, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Definitions of Terms Used in This Memo  . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Existing/Alternative Solutions  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Proposed Solutions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Client's Perspective IGP Based Best Path Selection  . . .   6
     3.2.  Client's Perspective Policy Based Best Path Selection . .   6
     3.3.  Solution Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  CPU and Memory Scalability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Advantages and Deployment Considerations  . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Definitions of Terms Used in This Memo

   NLRI -   Network Layer Reachability Information.

   RIB -   Routing Information Base.
Show full document text