Network Working Group Pierre Francois
Internet-Draft Universite catholique de Louvain
Intended status: Informational Bruno Decraene
Expires: September 7, 2009 France Telecom
Cristel Pelsser
NTT Corporation
Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems
March 6, 2009
Graceful BGP session shutdown
draft-francois-bgp-gshut-01
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material
from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly
available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the
copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF
Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the
IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from
the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this
document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and
derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards
Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to
translate it into languages other than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2009.
Copyright Notice
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
This draft describes operational procedures aimed at reducing the
amount of traffic lost during planned maintenances of routers,
involving the shutdown of BGP peering sessions.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Packet loss upon manual eBGP session shutdown . . . . . . . . 5
4. Practices to avoid packet losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Improving availability of alternate paths . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Graceful shutdown procedures for eBGP sessions . . . . . . 6
4.2.1. Outbound traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2.2. Inbound traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. Graceful shutdown procedures for iBGP sessions . . . . . . 9
5. Forwarding modes and forwarding loops . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Dealing with Internet policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Effect of the g-shut procedure on the convergence . . . . . . 10
7.1. Maintenance of an eBGP session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1.1. Propagation on the other eBGP sessions of the
g-shut initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1.2. Propagation on the other iBGP sessions of the
g-shut initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.1.3. Propagation of updates in an iBGP full-mesh . . . . . 11
7.1.4. Propagation of updates from iBGP to iBGP in a RR
hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. Maintenance of an iBGP session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.3. Applicability of the g-shut procedure . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.4. Summary of operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.4.1. Pre-configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.4.2. Operations at maintenance time . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Link Up cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. Unreachability local to the ASBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.2. iBGP convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Alternative techniques with limited applicability . . . . . . 15
9.1. In-filter reconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9.2. Multi Exit Discriminator tweaking . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.3. IGP distance Poisoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
1. Introduction
Routing changes in BGP can be caused by planned, manual, maintenance
operations. This document discusses operational procedures to be
applied in order to reduce or eliminate losses of packets during the
maintenance. These losses come from the transient lack of
reachability during the BGP convergence following the shutdown of an
eBGP peering session between two Autonomous System Border Routers
(ASBR).
This document presents procedures for the cases where the forwarding
plane is impacted by the maintenance, hence when the use of Graceful
Restart does not apply.
The procedures described in this document can be applied to reduce or
avoid packet loss for outbound and inbound traffic flows initially
forwarded along the peering link to be shut down. These procedures
allow routers to keep using old paths until alternate ones are
learned, ensuring that routers always have a valid route available
during the convergence process.
The goal of the document is to meet the requirements described in
[REQS] at best, without changing the BGP protocol or BGP
implementations.
Still, it explains why reserving a community value for the purpose of
BGP session graceful shutdown would reduce the management overhead
bound with the solution. It would also allow vendors to provide an
automatic graceful shutdown mechanism that does not require any
configuration at maintenance time.
2. Terminology
g-shut initiator : a router on which the session shutdown is
performed for the maintenance.
g-shut neighbor : a router that peers with the g-shut initiator via
(one of) the session(s) to be shut down.
Note that for the link-up case, we will refer to these nodes as g-no-
shut initiator, and g-no-shut neighbor.
Initiator AS : the Autonomous System of the g-shut initiator.
Neighbor AS : the Autonomous System of the g-shut neighbor.
Affected path / Nominal / pre-convergence path : a BGP path via the
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
peering link(s) undergoing the maintenance. This path will no longer
exist after the shutdown.
Affected prefix : a prefix initially reached via an affected path.
Affected router : a router having an affected prefix.
Backup / alternate / post-convergence path : a path toward an
affected prefix that will be selected as the best path by an affected
router, when the link is shut down and the BGP convergence is
completed.
Transient alternate path : a path towards an affected prefix that may
be transiently selected as best by an affected router during the
convergence process but that is not a post-convergence path.
Loss of Connectivity (LoC) : the state when a router has no path
towards an affected prefix.
3. Packet loss upon manual eBGP session shutdown
Packets can be lost during a manual shutdown of an eBGP session for
two reasons.
First, routers involved in the convergence process can transiently
lack of paths towards an affected prefix, and drop traffic destined
to this prefix. This is because alternate paths can be hidden by
nodes of an AS. This happens when the paths are not selected as best
by the ASBR that receive them on an eBGP session, or by Route
Reflectors that do not propagate them further in the iBGP topology
because they do not select them as best.
Second, within the AS, routers' FIB can be transiently inconsistent
during the BGP convergence and packets towards affected prefixes can
loop and be dropped. Note that these loops only happen when ASBR-to-
ASBR encapsulation is not used within the AS.
This document only addresses the first reason.
4. Practices to avoid packet losses
This section describes means for an ISP to reduce the transient loss
of packets upon a manual shutdown of a BGP session.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
4.1. Improving availability of alternate paths
All solutions that increase the availability of alternate BGP paths
in routers performing packet lookups in BGP tables [BestExternal]
[AddPath] help in reducing the LoC bound with manual shutdown of eBGP
sessions.
One solution increasing diversity in such a way that, at any single
step of the convergence process following the eBGP session shutdown,
a BGP router does not receive a message withdrawing the only path it
currently knows for a given NLRI, allows for a simplified g-shut
procedure. This simplified procedure would only tackle potential LoC
for the inbound traffic.
Using advertise-best-external [BestExternal] on ASBRs and RRs helps
in avoiding lack of alternate paths in route reflectors upon a
convergence. Hence it reduces the LoC duration for the outbound
traffic of the ISP upon an eBGP Session shutdown by reducing the iBGP
path hunting.
Still it does not ensure that BGP routers will always have at least
one path towards affected prefixes during the convergence following
the event. This property may be verified in future revisions of
[BestExternal], notably of its Section 4, hence the current proposal
will be updated accordingly.
Increasing diversity with [AddPath] might lead to the respect of this
property, depending on the path propagation decision process that
add-path compliant routers would use.
Note that the LoC for the inbound traffic of the maintained router,
induced by a lack of alternate path propagation within the iBGP
topology of a neighboring AS is not under the control of the operator
performing the maintenance, hence the procedure described in
Section 4.2.2 should be applied upon the maintenance, even if not
required for the outbound traffic.
4.2. Graceful shutdown procedures for eBGP sessions
This section aims at describing a procedure to be applied to reduce
the LoC with readily available BGP features, and without assuming a
particular iBGP design in the Initiator and Neighbor ASes.
4.2.1. Outbound traffic
This section discusses a mean to render the affected paths less
desirable by the BGP decision process of affected routers, still
allowing these to be used during the convergence while alternate
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
paths are propagated to the affected routers.
A decrease of the local-pref value of the affected paths can be
issued in order to render the affected paths less preferable, at the
highest possible level of the BGP Decision Process.
This operation can be performed by reconfiguring the out-filters
associated with the iBGP sessions established by the g-shut
initiator.
The modification of the filters MUST supplant any other rule
affecting the local-pref value of the old paths.
Compared to using an in-filter of the eBGP session to be shut down,
the modification of the out-filters will not let the g-shut initiator
switch to another path, as the input to the BGP decision process of
that router does not change. As a consequence, the g-shut initiator
will not send a withdraw message over its iBGP sessions when it
receives an alternate path over an iBGP session. It will however
modify the local-pref of the affected paths so that upstream routers
will switch to alternate ones.
When the actual shutdown of the session is performed, the g-shut
initiator will itself switch to the alternate paths.
4.2.2. Inbound traffic
The solution described for the outbound traffic can be applied at the
neighbor AS. This can be done either "manually" or by using a
community value dedicated to this task.
4.2.2.1. Phone call
The operator performing the maintenance of the eBGP session can
contact the operator at the other side of the peering link, and let
him apply the procedure described above for its own outbound traffic.
4.2.2.2. Community tagging
A community value (referred to as GSHUT community in this document)
can be agreed upon by neighboring ASes. A path tagged with this
community must be considered as soon to be affected by a maintenance
operation.
4.2.2.2.1. Pre-Configuration
A g-shut neighbor is pre-configured to set a low local-pref value for
the paths received over eBGP sessions which are tagged with the GSHUT
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
community.
This rule must supplant any other rule affecting the local-pref value
of the paths.
This local-pref reconfiguration SHOULD be performed at the out-
filters of the iBGP sessions of the g-shut neighbor. That is, the
g-shut neighbor does not take into account this low local-pref in its
own BGP best path selection. As described in Section 4.2.1 this
avoids sending the withdraw messages that can lead to LoC.
4.2.2.2.2. Operational action upon maintenance
Upon the manual shutdown, the output filter associated with the
maintained eBGP session will be modified on the g-shut initiator so
as to tag all the paths advertised over the session with the GSHUT
community.
4.2.2.2.3. Transitivity of the community
If the GSHUT community is an extended community, it SHOULD be set non
transitive.
If a normal community is used, this community SHOULD be removed from
the path by the ASBR of the peer receiving it. If not, the GSHUT
community MAY be removed from the path by all the ASBRs of the
neighboring AS, before propagating the path to other peers.
Not propagating the community further in the Internet reduces the
amount of BGP churn and avoids rerouting in distant ASes that would
also recognize this community value. In other words, it helps
concealing the convergence at the maintenance location.
There are cases where an interdomain exploration is to be performed
to recover the reachability, e.g., in the case of a shutdown in
confederations where the alternate paths will be found in another AS
of the confederation. In such scenarios, the community value SHOULD
be allowed to transit through the confederation but MAY be removed
from the paths advertised outside of the confederation.
When the local-pref value of a path is conserved upon its propagation
from one AS of the confederation to the other, there is no need to
have the GSHUT community be propagated throughout that confederation.
4.2.2.2.4. Easing the configuration for G-SHUT
From a configuration burden viewpoint, it would be much easier to
reserve a value for the GSHUT community.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
First, on the g-shut initiator, an operator would have a single
configuration rule to be applied at the maintenance time, which would
not depend on the identity of its peer. This would make the
maintenance operations less error prone.
Second, on the g-shut neighbor, a simple filter related to g-shut can
be applied to all iBGP sessions. Additionnaly, this filter doesn't
need to be updated each time neighboring ASes are added or removed.
4.3. Graceful shutdown procedures for iBGP sessions
If the iBGP topology is viable after the maintenance of the session,
i.e, if all BGP speakers of the AS have an iBGP signaling path for
all prefixes advertised on this g-shut iBGP session, then the
shutdown of an iBGP session does not lead to transient
unreachability.
However, in the case of a shutdown of a router, a reconfiguration of
the out-filters of the g-shut initiator should be performed to set a
low local-pref value for the paths originated by the g-shut initiator
(e.g, BGP aggregates redistributed from other protocols, including
static routes).
This behavior is equivalent to the recommended behavior for paths
"redistributed" from eBGP sessions to iBGP sessions in the case of
the shutdown of an ASBR.
5. Forwarding modes and forwarding loops
If the AS applying the solution does not rely on encapsulation to
forward packets from the Ingress Border Router to the Egress Border
Router, then transient forwarding loops and consequent packet losses
can occur during the convergence process, even if the procedure
described above is applied. Hence if zero LoC is required,
encapsulation is required between ASBRs of the AS.
Using the out-filter reconfiguration avoids the forwarding loops
between the g-shut initiator and its directly connected upstream
neighbors. Indeed, when this reconfiguration is applied, the g-shut
initiator keeps using its own external path and lets the upstream
routers converge to the alternate ones. During this phase, no
forwarding loops can occur between the g-shut initiator and its
upstream neighbors as the g-shut initiator keeps using the affected
paths via its eBGP peering links. When all the upstream routers have
switched to alternate paths, the transition performed by the g-shut
initiator when the session is actually shut down, will be loopfree.
Transient forwarding loops between other routers will not be avoided
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
with this procedure.
6. Dealing with Internet policies
A side gain of the maintenance solution is that it can also reduce
the churn implied by a shutdown of an eBGP session.
For this, it is recommended to apply the filters modifying the local-
pref value of the paths to values strictly lower but as close as
possible to the local-pref values of the post-convergence paths.
For example, if an eBGP link is shut down between a provider and one
of its customers, and another link with this customer remains active,
then the value of the local-pref of the old paths SHOULD be decreased
to the smallest possible value of the 'customer' local_pref range,
minus 1. Thus, routers will not transiently switch to paths received
from shared-cost peers or providers, which could lead to the
propagation of withdraw messages over eBGP sessions with shared-cost
peers and providers.
Proceeding like this reduces both BGP churn and traffic shifting as
routers will less likely switch to transient paths.
In the above example, it also prevents transient unreachabilities in
the neighboring AS that are due to the sending of "abrupt" withdraw
messages to shared-cost peers and providers.
7. Effect of the g-shut procedure on the convergence
This section describes the effect of applying the solution.
7.1. Maintenance of an eBGP session
This section describes the effect of applying the solution for the
shutdown of an eBGP session.
7.1.1. Propagation on the other eBGP sessions of the g-shut initiator
Nothing is propagated on the other eBGP sessions when the out-filters
reconfiguration step is applied. The reconfiguration is indeed only
defined for its iBGP sessions.
The reconfiguration of the iBGP out-filters will trigger the
reception of alternate paths at the g-shut initiator. As the eBGP
in-filters have not been modified at that step, the old paths are
still preferred by the g-shut initiator.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
7.1.2. Propagation on the other iBGP sessions of the g-shut initiator
During the out-filter reconfiguration, path updates are propagated
with a reduced local-pref value for the affected paths. As a
consequence, Route Reflectors and distant ASBRs select and propagate
alternate paths through the iBGP topology as they no longer select
the old paths as best.
When the shut-down is performed, for each affected prefix, the g-shut
initiator propagates on its iBGP sessions:
. The alternate path, if the best path was received over an eBGP
sessions.
. A withdraw, if the best path was received over an iBGP sessions.
7.1.3. Propagation of updates in an iBGP full-mesh
No transient LoC can occur if a reconfiguration of the iBGP out-
filters on the g-shut initiator is performed.
7.1.4. Propagation of updates from iBGP to iBGP in a RR hierarchy
Upon the reception of the update of a primary path with a lower
local-pref value from a client, a Route Reflector RR1 will either
propagate the update, or select an alternate path, depending on the
fact that the updated primary path is still the best one w.r.t. the
state of the Adj-Rib-In of RR1.
If the updated primary path is still the best, then the RR will
propagate an update for this path to the iBGP neighbors to which it
previously advertised the path. Hence it cannot cause transient lack
of path in the Adj-Rib-In of its iBGP neighbors.
If an alternate path is picked, and this path was also originated by
a client of RR1, an update will also be propagated to the same
neighbors as the one to which the primary path was initially
propagated. Hence it cannot cause transient lack of path in the Adj-
Rib-In of its iBGP neighbors.
If an alternate path is picked, and this path was received from a
member of its Route-Reflector iBGP full-mesh, then a withdraw message
is sent. As the alternate path has been sent over each session of
the iBGP full-mesh, the propagation of a withdraw for the primary
path of RR1 is done to routers that are expected to know the
alternate path picked by RR1.
The following example describes a situation where some corner case
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
timings could lead to transient unreachability from some members of
the iBGP full-mesh.
1. A Route Reflector RR1 only knew about the primary path upon
the shutdown.
2. A member of its RR full-mesh, RR2, propagates an update of
the old path with a lower local-pref.
3. Another member of its RR full-mesh, RR3 processes the
update, selects an alternate path, and propagates an update in
the mesh.
4. RR2 receives the alternate path, selects it as best, and
hence withdraws the updated old path on the iBGP sessions of the
mesh.
5. If for any reason, RR1 receives and processes the withdraw
generated in step 4 before processing the update generated in
step 3, RR1 transiently suffers from unreachability for the
affected prefix.
In such corner cases, the solution improves the iBGP convergence
behavior/LoC but does not ensure 0 packet loss, as we cannot define a
simple solution relying only on a reconfiguration of the filters of
the g-shut initiator. Improving the availability of alternate paths
in Route Reflectors, using [BestExternal], or [AddPath], seems to be
the most pragmatic solution to these corner cases.
The use of [BestExternal] in the iBGP full-mesh between RRs can solve
these corner cases by ensuring that within an AS, the advertisement
of a new path is not translated into the withdraw of a former path.
Indeed, "best-external" ensures that an ASBR does not withdraw a
previously advertised (eBGP) path when it receives an additional,
preferred path over an iBGP session. Also, "best-intra-cluster"
ensures that a RR does not withdraw a previously advertised (iBGP)
path to its non clients (e.g. other RRs in a mesh of RR) when it
receives a new, preferred path over an iBGP session.
7.2. Maintenance of an iBGP session
If the shutdown does not temper with the viability of the iBGP
topology, the described procedure is sufficient to avoid LoC.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
7.3. Applicability of the g-shut procedure
The applicability of the procedure described in this draft to the
cases presented in [REQS] can be shown by combining the effects
described in this section. A complete case by case analysis will be
provided in the next versions of the draft.
7.4. Summary of operations
This section summarizes the configurations and actions to be
performed to support the g-shut procedure for eBGP peering links.
7.4.1. Pre-configuration
On each ASBR supporting the g-shut procedure, set-up an out-filter
applied on all iBGP sessions of the ASBR, that :
. sets the local-pref of the paths tagged with the g-shut community
to a low value
. removes the g-shut community from the path.
7.4.2. Operations at maintenance time
On the g-shut initiator :
. Apply an in-filter on the maintained BGP session to tag the paths
received over the session with the g-shut community.
. Apply an out-filter on the maintained BGP session to tag the paths
propagated over the session with the g-shut community.
. Wait for convergence to happen.
. Perform a BGP session shutdown.
8. Link Up cases
We identify two potential causes for transient packet losses upon an
eBGP link up event. The first one is local to the g-shut initiator,
the second one is due to the BGP convergence following the injection
of new best paths within the iBGP topology.
8.1. Unreachability local to the ASBR
An ASBR that selects as best a path received over a newly brought up
eBGP session may transiently drop traffic. This can typically happen
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
when the nexthop attribute differs from the IP address of the eBGP
peer, and the receiving ASBR has not yet resolved the MAC address
associated with the IP address of that "third party" nexthop.
A BGP speaker implementation could avoid such losses by ensuring that
"third party" nexthops are resolved before installing paths using
these in the RIB.
If the link up event corresponds to an eBGP session that is being
manually brought up, over an already up multi-access link, then the
operator can ping third party nexthops that are expected to be used
before actually bringing the session up, or ping directed broadcast
the subnet IP address of the link. By proceeding like this, the MAC
addresses associated with these third party nexthops will be resolved
by the g-no-shut initiator.
8.2. iBGP convergence
Similar corner cases as described in Section 7.1.4 for the link down
case, can occur during an eBGP link up event.
A typical example for such transient unreachability for a given
prefix is the following :
1. A Route Reflector, RR1, is initially advertising the current
best path to the members of its iBGP RR full-mesh. It
propagated that path within its RR full-mesh. Another route
reflector of the full-mesh, RR2, knows only that path towards
the prefix.
2. A third Route Reflector of the RR full-mesh, RR3 receives a
new best path orginated by the "g-no-shut" initiator, being one
of its RR clients. RR3 selects it as best, and propagates an
UPDATE within its RR full-mesh, i.e., to RR1 and RR2.
3. RR1 receives that path, reruns its decision process, and
picks this new path as best. As a result, RR1 withdraws its
previously announced best-path on the iBGP sessions of its RR
full-mesh.
4. If, for any reason, RR3 processes the withdraw generated in
step 3, before processing the update generated in step 2, RR3
transiently suffers from unreachability for the affected prefix.
The use of [BestExternal] among the RR of the iBGP full-mesh can
solve these corner cases by ensuring that within an AS, the
advertisement of a new route is not translated into the withdraw of a
former route.
Indeed, "best-external" ensures that an ASBR does not withdraw a
previously advertised (eBGP) path when it receives an additional,
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
preferred path over an iBGP session. Also, "best-intra-cluster"
ensures that a RR does not withdraw a previously advertised (iBGP)
path to its non clients (e.g. other RRs in a mesh of RR) when it
receives a new, preferred path over an iBGP session.
9. Alternative techniques with limited applicability
A few alternative techniques have been considered to provide g-shut
capabilities but have been rejected due to their limited
applicability. This section describe them for possible reference.
9.1. In-filter reconfiguration
An In-filter reconfiguration on the eBGP session undergoing the
maintenance could be performed instead of out-filter reconfigurations
on the iBGP sessions of the g-shut initiator.
Upon the application of the maintenance procedure, if the g-shut
initiator has an alternate path in its Adj-Rib-In, it will switch to
it directly.
If this new path was advertised by an eBGP neighbor of the g-shut
initiator, the g-shut initiator will send a BGP Path Update message
advertising the new path over its iBGP and eBGP sessions.
If this new path was received over an iBGP session, the g-shut
initiator will select that path and withdraw the previously
advertised path over its non-client iBGP sessions. There can be iBGP
topologies where the iBGP peers of the g-shut initiator do not know
an alternate path, and hence may drop traffic.
Also, applying an In-filter reconfiguration on the eBGP session
undergoing the maintenance may lead to transient LoC, in full-mesh
iBGP topologies if
a. An ASBR of the initiator AS, ASBR1 did not initially select
its own external path as best, and
b. An ASBR of the initiator AS, ASBR2 advertises a new path
along its iBGP sessions upon the reception of ASBR1's update
following the in-filter reconfiguration on the g-shut initiator,
and
c. ASBR1 receives the update message, runs its Decision Process
and hence withdraws its external path after having selected
ASBR2's path as best, and
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
d. An impacted router of the AS processes the withdraw of ASBR1
before processing the update from ASBR2.
Applying a reconfiguration of the out-filters prevents such transient
unreachabilities.
Indeed, when the g-shut initiator propagates an update of the old
path first, the withdraw from ASBR2 does not trigger unreachability
in other nodes, as the old path is still available. Indeed, even
though it receives alternate paths, the g-shut initiator keeps using
its old path as best as the in-filter of the maintained eBGP session
has not been modified yet.
Applying the out-filter reconfiguration also prevents packet loops
between the g-shut initiator and its direct neighbors when
encapsulation is not used between the ASBRs of the AS.
9.2. Multi Exit Discriminator tweaking
The MED attribute of the paths to be avoided can be increased so as
to force the routers in the neighboring AS to select other paths.
The solution only works if the alternate paths are as good as the
initial ones with respect to the Local-Pref value and the AS Path
Length value. In the other cases, increasing the MED value will not
have an impact on the decision process of the routers in the
neighboring AS.
9.3. IGP distance Poisoning
The distance to the BGP nexthop corresponding to the maintained
session can be increased in the IGP so that the old paths will be
less preferred during the application of the IGP distance tie-break
rule. However, this solution only works for the paths whose
alternates are as good as the old paths with respect to their Local-
Pref value, their AS Path length, and their MED value.
Also, this poisoning cannot be applied when nexthop self is used as
there is no nexthop specific to the maintained session to poison in
the IGP.
10. IANA considerations
Applying the g-shut procedure is rendered much easier with a reserved
g-shut community value. Hence this draft suggests to reserve a
community value, e.g., 0xFFFF0000, for this purpose.
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
11. Security Considerations
By providing the g-shut service to a neighboring AS, an ISP provides
means to this neighbor to lower the local-pref value assigned to the
paths received from this neighbor.
The neighbor could abuse the technique and do inbound traffic
engineering by declaring some prefixes as undergoing a maintenance so
as to switch traffic to another peering link.
If this behavior is not tolerated by the ISP, it SHOULD monitor the
use of the g-shut community by this neighbor.
12. Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Olivier Bonaventure and Pradosh Mohapatra
for their useful comments on this work.
13. References
[AddPath] D. Walton, A. Retana, and E. Chen, "Advertisement of
Multiple Paths in BGP", draft-walton-bgp-add-paths-06.txt
(work in progress).
[BestExternal]
Marques, P., Fernando, R., Chen, E., and P. Mohapatra,
"Advertisement of the best-external route to IBGP",
draft-marques-idr-best-external-00.txt, July 2008.
[REQS] Decraene, B., Francois, P., Pelsser, C., and Z. Ahmad,
"Requirements for the graceful shutdown of BGP sessions",
draft-decraene-bgp-graceful-shutdown-requirements-00.txt
, December 2007.
Authors' Addresses
Pierre Francois
Universite catholique de Louvain
Place Ste Barbe, 2
Louvain-la-Neuve 1348
BE
Email: pierre.francois@uclouvain.be
URI: http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be/pfr
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Graceful BGP session shutdown March 2009
Bruno Decraene
France Telecom
38-40 rue du General Leclerc
92794 Issi Moulineaux cedex 9
FR
Email: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com
Cristel Pelsser
NTT Corporation
9-11, Midori-Cho 3 Chrome
Musashino-Shi, Tokyo 180-8585
JP
Email: pelsser.cristel@lab.ntt.co.jp
Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems
De kleetlaan 6a
Diegem 1831
BE
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Pierre Francois, et al. Expires September 7, 2009 [Page 18]