BGP Custom Decision Process
draft-ietf-idr-custom-decision-07

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (idr WG)
Last updated 2015-11-01
Replaces draft-retana-bgp-custom-decision
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WG
Document shepherd Susan Hares
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Inter-Domain Routing                                           A. Retana
Internet-Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track                                R. White
Expires: May 4, 2016                                            Ericsson
                                                        November 1, 2015

                      BGP Custom Decision Process
                   draft-ietf-idr-custom-decision-07

Abstract

   The BGP specification describes a Decision Process for selecting the
   best route.  This process uses a series of steps, made up of path
   attributes and other values, to first determine the Degree of
   Preference of a route and later as tie breakers.  While existing
   mechanisms may achieve some of the same results described in this
   document, they can only do so through extensive configuration such as
   matching communities to explicit policy and/or route preference
   configurations present on each BGP speaker within their
   administrative domain (autonomous system).  Implementing some
   specific fine grained policies through such mechanisms is cumbersome,
   if even possible.

   This document defines a new Extended Community, called the Cost
   Community, which may be used as part of the Decision Process.  The
   end result is a local Custom Decision Process.

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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, 2016.

Retana & White             Expires May 4, 2016                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         BGP Custom Decision Process         November 2015

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  The BGP Cost Community  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.1.  Cost Community Point of Insertion Registry  . . . . . . .   7
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     A.1.  Changes between the -00 and -01 versions. . . . . . . . .   9
     A.2.  Changes between the -01 and -02 versions. . . . . . . . .  10
     A.3.  Changes between the -02 and -03 versions. . . . . . . . .  10
     A.4.  Changes between the -03 and -04 versions. . . . . . . . .  10
     A.5.  Changes between the -04 and -05 versions. . . . . . . . .  10
     A.6.  Changes between the -05 and -06 versions. . . . . . . . .  10
     A.7.  Changes between the -06 and -07 versions  . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   The BGP specification defines a Decision Process [RFC4271] for
   selecting the best route.  This process uses a series of steps, made
   up of path attributes and other values, to first determine the Degree
   of Preference of a route and later as tie breakers.  While existing
   mechanisms may achieve some of the same results described in this
Show full document text