Flowspec Indirection-id Redirect
draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-08
IDR Working Group G. Van de Velde, Ed.
Internet-Draft Nokia
Intended status: Standards Track K. Patel
Expires: December 20, 2019 Arrcus
Z. Li
Huawei Technologies
June 18, 2019
Flowspec Indirection-id Redirect
draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect-08
Abstract
This document defines a new extended community known as "FlowSpec
Redirect to indirection-id Extended Community". This extended
community triggers advanced redirection capabilities to flowspec
clients. When activated, this flowspec extended community is used by
a flowspec client to retrieve the corresponding next-hop and encoding
information within a localised indirection-id mapping table.
The functionality detailed in this document allows a network
controller to decouple the BGP flowspec redirection instruction from
the operation of the available paths.
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 [1].
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 December 20, 2019.
Van de Velde, et al. Expires December 20, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Flowspec Indirection-id Redirect June 2019
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
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. indirection-id and indirection-id table . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use Case Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Redirection shortest Path tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Redirection to path-engineered tunnels . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Redirection to complex dynamically constructed tunnels . 5
4. Redirect to indirection-id Community . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Redirect using localised indirection-id mapping table . . . . 8
6. Validation Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Contributor Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
Flowspec is an extension to BGP that allows for the dissemination of
traffic flow specification rules. This has many possible
applications but the primary one for many network operators is the
distribution of traffic filtering actions for DDoS mitigation. The
flowspec standard RFC5575 [2] defines a redirect-to-VRF action for
policy-based forwarding, but this mechanism is not always sufficient,
particularly if the redirected traffic needs to be steered onto an
explicit path.
Every flowspec policy route is effectively a rule, consisting of two
parts. The first part, encoded in the NLRI field, provides
Van de Velde, et al. Expires December 20, 2019 [Page 2]
Show full document text