Skip to main content

Simplified Local Internet Number Resource Management (SLURM) with RPKI Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA)
draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-slurm-01

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (sidrops WG)
Authors Job Snijders , Ben Cartwright-Cox
Last updated 2024-05-21
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-slurm-01
SIDROPS                                                      J. Snijders
Internet-Draft                                                    Fastly
Updates: 8416 (if approved)                            B. Cartwright-Cox
Intended status: Standards Track                            Port 179 Ltd
Expires: 22 November 2024                                    21 May 2024

 Simplified Local Internet Number Resource Management (SLURM) with RPKI
            Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA)
                    draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-slurm-01

Abstract

   ISPs may want to establish a local view of exceptions to the Resource
   Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) data in the form of local filters or
   additional attestations.  This document defines an addendum to RFC
   8416 by specifying a format for local filters and local assertions
   for Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA) for use with the
   RPKI.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

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 22 November 2024.

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  SLURM v2 File Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Validation Output Filters for ASPA  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Validated ASPA Filters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Locally Added ASPA Assertions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Example of a SLURM file with ASPA Filters and Assertions  . .   5
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Appendix A.  Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE
           PUBLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   ISPs may want to establish a local view of exceptions to the Resource
   Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) data in the form of local filters or
   additional attestations.  This document defines an addendum to RFC
   8416 by specifying a format for local filters and local assertions
   for Autonomous System Provider Authorizations (ASPA) for use with the
   RPKI.

   See [RFC8416] for an overview of the SLURM mechanism, specifically
   Section 3 and Section 4.

2.  SLURM v2 File Overview

   A SLURM file consists of a single JSON [RFC8259] object containing
   the following members:

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

   *  A "slurmVersion" member that MUST be set to 2, encoded as a number

   *  A "validationOutputFilters" member whose value is an object.  The
      object MUST contain exactly three members:

      -  A "prefixFilters" member, see Section 3.3.1 [RFC8416]

      -  A "bgpsecFilters" member, see section 3.3.2 [RFC8416]

      -  A "aspaFilters" member, see Section 3.1

   *  A "locallyAddedAssertions" member whose value is an object.  The
      object MUST contain exactly three members:

      -  A "prefixAssertions" member, see Section 3.4.1 [RFC8416]

      -  A "bgpsecAssertions" member, see Section 3.4.2 [RFC8416]

      -  A "aspaAssertions" member, see Section 3.2

   The following JSON structure with JSON members represents a SLURM
   file that has no filters or assertions:

   {
     "slurmVersion": 2,
     "validationOutputFilters": {
       "aspaFilters": [],
       "bgpsecFilters": [],
       "prefixFilters": []
     },
     "locallyAddedAssertions": {
       "aspaAssertions": [],
       "bgpsecAssertions": [],
       "prefixAssertions": []
     }
   }

3.  Validation Output Filters for ASPA

3.1.  Validated ASPA Filters

   The RP can configure zero or more Validated ASPA Filters ("ASPA
   Filters" for short).  Each ASPA Filter contains a single
   'customerAsid' and optionally a single 'comment'.

   *  The 'customerAsid' member has as value a number.

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

   *  It is RECOMMENDED that an explanatory comment is included with
      each ASPA Filter so that it can be shown to users of the RP
      software.

   Any Validated ASPA Payload (VAP) [I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile] that
   matches any configured ASPA Filter MUST be removed from the RP's
   output.

   A VAP is considered to match with an ASPA Filter if the following
   condition applies:

   1.  The VAP is considered to match if the VAP Customer ASID is equal
       to the ASPA Filter Customer ASID.

   The following example JSON structure represents a "aspaFilters"
   member with one object as described above:

"aspaFilter": [
  {
    "customerAsid": 64496,
    "comment": "Filter out ASPA Payloads which specify AS 64496 as the Customer ASID"
  }
]

3.2.  Locally Added ASPA Assertions

   Each RP is locally configured with a (possibly empty) array of ASPA
   Assertions.  Each ASPA Assertion MUST contain a 'customerAsid' member
   containing the Customer ASID and a 'providerSet' array of numbers,
   reflecting the set of Provider ASNs.  It is RECOMMENDED that an
   explanatory comment is also included so that it can be shown to users
   of the RP software.

   The above is expressed as a value of the "aspaAssertions" member, as
   an array of zero or more objects.  Each object MUST contain one each
   of all of the following members:

   *  An "customerAsid" member whose value is a number.

   *  A "providerSet" member whose value is an array of numbers.

   *  An optional "comment" member whose value is a string.

   The following example JSON structure represents a "aspaAssertions"
   member with one object as described above:

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

  "aspaAssertions": [
    {
      "customerAsid": 64496,
      "providerSet": [64497, 64498],
      "comment": "Locally assert 64497 are 64498 are providers to 64496"
    }
  ]

   Note that an "aspaAssertions" member matches the syntax of the ASPA
   PDU described in Section 5.12 of [I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis].  Relying
   Parties MUST add any "aspaAssertions" member thus found to the set of
   ASPA PDUs, excluding duplicates, when using version 2 of the RPKI-
   Router protocol [I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis].  An "aspaAssertions" does
   not act as an implicit filter.

4.  Example of a SLURM file with ASPA Filters and Assertions

{
  "slurmVersion": 2,
  "validationOutputFilters": {
    "prefixFilters": [
      {
        "prefix": "192.0.2.0/24",
        "comment": "All VRPs encompassed by prefix"
      },
      {
        "asn": 64496,
        "comment": "All VRPs matching ASN"
      },
      {
        "prefix": "198.51.100.0/24",
        "asn": 64497,
        "comment": "All VRPs encompassed by prefix, matching ASN"
      }
    ],
    "bgpsecFilters": [
      {
        "asn": 64496,
        "comment": "All keys for ASN"
      },
      {
        "SKI": "voibVdC3Nzl9dcSfSFuFj6mK0R8",
        "comment": "Key matching Router SKI"
      },
      {
        "asn": 64497,
        "SKI": "UQ9IXSminbe1FfnEePjtPLeqfSM",

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

        "comment": "Key for ASN 64497 matching Router SKI"
      }
    ],
    "aspaFilters": [
      {
        "customerAsid": 64496,
        "comment": "ASPAs matching Customer ASID 64496"
      }
    ]
  },
  "locallyAddedAssertions": {
    "prefixAssertions": [
      {
        "asn": 64496,
        "prefix": "198.51.100.0/24",
        "comment": "My other important route"
      },
      {
        "asn": 64496,
        "prefix": "2001:db8::/32",
        "maxPrefixLength": 48,
        "comment": "My other important de-aggregated routes"
      }
    ],
    "bgpsecAssertions": [
      {
        "asn": 64496,
        "comment" : "My known key for my important ASN",
        "SKI": "XUJQ4tgdREjYop786R0p/wdeyeI",
        "routerPublicKey": "MFkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDQgAEgFcjQ/g//LAQerAH2Mpp+GucoDAGBbhIqD33wNPsXxnAGb+mtZ7XQrVO9DQ6UlAShtig5+QfEKpTtFgiqfiAFQ"
      }
    ],
    "aspaAssertions": [
      {
        "customerAsid": 64496,
        "providerSet": [64497, 64498],
        "comment": "Locally assert 64497 and 64498 are providers for 64496"
      }
    ]
  }
}

5.  Security Considerations

   For Security Considerations see Section 6 of [RFC8416].

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

7.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Tim Bruijnzeels for their helpful
   review of this document.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-sidrops-8210bis]
              Bush, R. and R. Austein, "The Resource Public Key
              Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol, Version 2", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-
              12, 4 March 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-12>.

   [I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile]
              Azimov, A., Uskov, E., Bush, R., Snijders, J., Housley,
              R., and B. Maddison, "A Profile for Autonomous System
              Provider Authorization", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-sidrops-aspa-profile-17, 7 November 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-
              aspa-profile-17>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8259]  Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
              Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.

   [RFC8416]  Ma, D., Mandelberg, D., and T. Bruijnzeels, "Simplified
              Local Internet Number Resource Management with the RPKI
              (SLURM)", RFC 8416, DOI 10.17487/RFC8416, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8416>.

8.2.  Informative References

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft             SLURM for RPKI ASPA                  May 2024

   [stayrtr]  Cartwright-Cox, B., "StayRTR", 2023,
              <https://github.com/bgp/stayrtr>.

Appendix A.  Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE
             PUBLICATION

   This section records the status of known implementations of the
   protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
   Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942.
   The description of implementations in this section is intended to
   assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
   RFCs.  Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
   here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.  Furthermore, no effort
   has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
   supplied by IETF contributors.  This is not intended as, and must not
   be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
   features.  Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
   exist.

   According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups
   to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
   running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
   and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
   It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
   they see fit".

   *  StayRTR [stayrtr]

Authors' Addresses

   Job Snijders
   Fastly
   Amsterdam
   Netherlands
   Email: job@fastly.com

   Ben Cartwright-Cox
   Port 179 Ltd
   London
   United Kingdom
   Email: ben@benjojo.co.uk

Snijders & Cartwright-CoExpires 22 November 2024                [Page 8]