Route Target Constrained Distribution of Routes with no Route Targets
draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (idr WG)
Last updated 2015-10-14 (latest revision 2015-06-29)
Replaces draft-rosen-idr-rtc-no-rt
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state In WG Last Call
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                                          E. Rosen, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                    Juniper Networks, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track                                K. Patel
Expires: December 31, 2015                           Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                                 J. Haas
                                                  Juniper Networks, Inc.
                                                               R. Raszuk
                                                           Mirantis Inc.
                                                           June 29, 2015

 Route Target Constrained Distribution of Routes with no Route Targets
                    draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-01.txt

Abstract

   BGP routes sometimes carry an "Extended Communities" path attribute.
   An Extended Communities path attribute can contain one or more "Route
   Targets" (RTs).  By means of a procedure known as "RT Constrained
   Distribution" (RTC), a BGP speaker can send BGP UPDATE messages that
   express its interest in a particular set of RTs.  Generally, RTC has
   been applied only to address families whose routes always carry RTs.
   When RTC is applied to such an address family, a BGP speaker
   expressing its interest in a particular set of RTs is indicating that
   it wants to receive all and only the routes of that address family
   that have at least one of the RTs of interest.  However, there are
   scenarios in which the originator of a route chooses not to include
   any RTs at all, assuming that the distribution of a route with no RTs
   at all will be unaffected by RTC.  This has led to interoperability
   problems in the field, where the originator of a route assumes that
   RTC will not affect the distribution of the route, but intermediate
   BGP speakers refuse to distribute that route because it does not
   carry any RT of interest.  The purpose of this document is to clarify
   the effect of the RTC mechanism on routes that do not have any RTs.

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

Rosen, et al.           Expires December 31, 2015               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            RTC Behavior w/o RTs                 June 2015

   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 31, 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.  Some Deployment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Default Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   A BGP route can carry a particular type of BGP path attribute known
   as an "Extended Communities Attribute" [RFC4360].  Each such
   attribute can contain a variable number of typed communities.
   Certain typed communities are known as "Route Targets" (RTs)
   ([RFC4360], [RFC4364]).

   [RFC4684] defines a procedure, known as "RT Constrained Distribution"
   (RTC) that allows a BGP speaker to advertise its interest in a
   particular set of RTs.  It does so by advertising "RT membership
   information".  (See [RFC4684] for details.)  It may advertise RT
   membership for any number of RTs.  By advertising membership for a
   particular RT, a BGP speaker declares that it is interested in
Show full document text