Support for Long-lived BGP Graceful Restart
draft-ietf-idr-long-lived-gr-00
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Jim Uttaro , Enke Chen , Bruno Decraene , John Scudder | ||
| Last updated | 2020-03-09 (Latest revision 2019-09-05) | ||
| Replaces | draft-uttaro-idr-bgp-persistence | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
In this document we introduce a new BGP capability termed "Long-lived Graceful Restart Capability" so that stale routes can be retained for a longer time upon session failure. A well-known BGP community "LLGR_STALE" is introduced for marking stale routes retained for a longer time. A second well-known BGP community, "NO_LLGR", is introduced to mark routes for which these procedures should not be applied. We also specify that such long-lived stale routes be treated as the least-preferred, and their advertisements be limited to BGP speakers that have advertised the new capability. Use of this extension is not advisable in all cases, and we provide guidelines to help determine if it is. We update RFC 6368 by specifying that the LLGR_STALE community must be propagated into, or out of, the path attributes exchanged between PE and CE.
Authors
Jim Uttaro
Enke Chen
Bruno Decraene
John Scudder
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)