Making Route Servers Aware of Data Link Failures at IXPs
draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-06

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (idr WG)
Last updated 2018-10-04 (latest revision 2018-10-01)
Replaces draft-ymbk-idr-rs-bfd
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up
Document shepherd Susan Hares
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Network Working Group                                            R. Bush
Internet-Draft                                 Internet Initiative Japan
Intended status: Standards Track                                 J. Haas
Expires: April 4, 2019                                        J. Scudder
                                                  Juniper Networks, Inc.
                                                               A. Nipper
                                                              C. Dietzel
                                                                  DE-CIX
                                                         October 1, 2018

        Making Route Servers Aware of Data Link Failures at IXPs
                        draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-06

Abstract

   When BGP route servers are used, the data plane is not congruent with
   the control plane.  Therefore, peers at an Internet exchange can lose
   data connectivity without the control plane being aware of it, and
   packets are lost.  This document proposes the use of a newly defined
   BGP Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) both to allow the
   route server to request its clients use BFD to track data plane
   connectivity to their peers' addresses, and for the clients to signal
   that connectivity state back to the route server.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" are to
   be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] only when they appear in all
   upper case.  They may also appear in lower or mixed case as English
   words, without normative meaning.

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."

Bush, et al.              Expires April 4, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Making RSes aware of IXP Data Link Failures  October 2018

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 4, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Next Hop Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  ReachAsk  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  LocReach  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.3.  ReachTell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.4.  NHIB  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Advertising NH-Reach state in BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Client Procedures for NH-Reach Changes  . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Recommendations for Using BFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Other Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Acknolwedgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Appendix A.  Summary of Document Changes  . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Appendix B.  Other Forms of Connectity Checks . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

1.  Introduction

   In configurations (typically Internet Exchange Points (IXPs)) where
   EBGP routing information is exchanged between client routers through
   the agency of a route server (RS) [RFC7947], but traffic is exchanged
Show full document text