Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA01197; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 11:25:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id LAA16477; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 11:26:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA13667 for bgp-outgoing; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:21:15 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604291523.IAA10645@hubbub.cisco.com> To: jhalpern@newbridge.com Cc: bgp@ans.net Subject: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard Date: Mon, 29 Apr 96 08:21:06 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Joel, The IDR WG would like to ask the IESG to advance draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt to a Proposed Standard, and draft-ietf-idr-community-usage-00.txt to an Informational RFC. There are two independent implementations of BGP Communities, one by BayNetworks, and one by Cisco. Yakov. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id KAA19189; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:31:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id KAA01556; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:33:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA14081 for bgp-outgoing; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 14:32:17 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604261435.HAA24256@hubbub.cisco.com> To: jhalpern@newbridge.com Cc: bgp@ans.net Subject: draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt to Experimental Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 07:32:08 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Joel, The IDR WG would like to ask the IESG to advance draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt to an Experimental RFC. Yakov. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id KAA18910; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:12:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id KAA01018; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:13:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA41903 for bgp-outgoing; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 14:10:04 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: bgp@ans.net From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 09:24:00 -0400 Message-Id: <9604260924.aa12430@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net --NextPart A Revised Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP Route Reflection An alternative to full mesh IBGP Author(s) : T. Bates, R. Chandra Filename : draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt Pages : 8 Date : 04/25/1996 The Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. BGP deployments are configured such that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed so that any external routing information must be re-distributed to all other routers within that AS. This represents a serious scaling problem that has been well documented with several alternatives proposed [2,3]. This document describes the use and design of a method known as "Route Reflection" to alleviate the the need for "full mesh" IBGP. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) o Europe Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) o Pacific Rim Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) o US East Coast Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) o US West Coast Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960425132917.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-02.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960425132917.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA21936; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 11:37:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id LAA00975; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 11:38:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA41323 for bgp-outgoing; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:30:39 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604251530.LAA00752@postoffice.reston.mci.net> To: bgp@ans.net Subject: Slight update to Route Reflection paper From: Tony Bates X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 11:30:30 -0400 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Please note a new version of the draft will be announced in the next day or so. This update contains editorial feedback on comments from other implementors of route reflection. Find at bottom both the diffs and the new draft. Thanks, --Tony diffs ----- 2,6d1 < < < < < 8c3 < MCI --- > MCI 11c6 < April 1996 --- > March 1996 16c11 < --- > 60c55 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 65,70c60,65 < Currently in the Internet, BGP deployments are configured such that < that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed and any < external routing information must be re-distributed to all other < routers within that AS. This "full mesh" requirement clearly does not < scale when there are a large number of IBGP speakers as is common in < many of todays internet networks. --- > Currently in the Internet today, BGP deployments are configured such > that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed > and any external routing information must be re-distributed to all > other routers within that AS. This "full mesh" requirement clearly > does not scale when there are a large number of IBGP speakers as is > common in many of todays internet networks. 116c111 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 150c145 < need for the IBGP session between RTR-A and RTR-B as shown in Figure --- > need for the IBGP session between RTR-A and RTR-C as shown in Figure 172c167 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 204c199 < | \ / | --- > | \ / | 206c201 < | \ / | --- > | \ / | 228c223 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 245,246c240,241 < Client peers other than the originator. (Hence the < Client peers are not required to be fully meshed). --- > Client peers (Hence the Client peers are not required > to be fully meshed). 265c260 < understand the concept of Route-Reflectors (let us call them --- > understand the concept of Route-Reflectors (let us call them as 268c263 < could be either members of a Non-Client group or a Client group. This --- > could be either members of Non-Client group or Client group. This 284c279 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 308,310c303,304 < ORIGINATOR_ID attribute if one already exists. A route reflector < must never send routing information back to the router specified in < ORIGINATOR_ID. --- > ORIGINATOR_ID attribute if one already exists If routing information > comes back to the originator, it must be ignored. 337a332 > 340c335 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 353c348 < However, it must not be possible for an RR to set on reflected IBGP --- > However, this must not be possible for an RR to set on reflected IBGP 355c350 < will result in potential black holeing of traffic. --- > will result in potential black holes. 358,359c353,354 < DPA)that could change consistent route selection. This could result < in potential loops. --- > DPA)that could change consistent route selection. This could > resulting in potential loops. 396c391 < INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 --- > INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection March 1996 new draft --------- INTERNET-DRAFT Tony Bates MCI Ravi Chandra cisco Systems April 1996 BGP Route Reflection An alternative to full mesh IBGP Status of this Memo This document is an Internet Draft. 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. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a "working draft" or "work in progress". Please check the I-D abstract listing contained in each Internet Draft directory to learn the current status of this or any other Internet Draft. Abstract The Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. BGP deployments are configured such that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed so that any external routing information must be re- distributed to all other routers within that AS. This represents a serious scaling problem that has been well documented with several alternatives proposed [2,3]. This document describes the use and design of a method known as "Route Reflection" to alleviate the the need for "full mesh" IBGP. Bates & Chandra [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 1. Introduction Currently in the Internet, BGP deployments are configured such that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed and any external routing information must be re-distributed to all other routers within that AS. This "full mesh" requirement clearly does not scale when there are a large number of IBGP speakers as is common in many of todays internet networks. For n BGP speakers within an AS you must maintain n*(n-1)/2 unique IBGP sessions. With finite resources in both bandwidth and router CPU this clearly does not scale. This scaling problem has been well documented and a number of proposals have been made to alleviate this [2,3]. This document represents another alternative in alleviating the need for a "full mesh" and is known as "Route Reflection". It represents a change in the commonly understood concept of IBGP and the addition of two new optional transitive BGP attributes. 2. Design Criteria Route Reflection was designed to satisfy the following criteria. o Simplicity Any alternative must be both simple to configure as well as understand. o Easy Migration It must be possible to migrate from a full mesh configuration without the need to change either topology or AS. This is an unfortunate management overhead of the technique proposed in [3]. o Compatibility It must be possible for non compliant IBGP peers to continue be part of the original AS or domain without any loss of BGP routing information. These criteria were motivated by operational experiences of a very large and topology rich network with many external connections. Bates & Chandra [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 3. Route Reflection The basic idea of Route Reflection is very simple. Let us consider the simple example depicted in Figure 1 below. +------ + +-------+ | | IBGP | | | RTR-A |--------| RTR-B | | | | | +-------+ +-------+ \ / IBGP \ ASX / IBGP \ / +-------+ | | | RTR-C | | | +-------+ Figure 1: Full Mesh IBGP In ASX there are three IBGP speakers (routers RTR-A, RTR-B and RTR- C). With the existing BGP model, if RTR-A receives an external route and it is selected as the best path it must advertise the external route to both RTR-B and RTR-C. RTR-B and RTR-C (as IBGP speakers) will not re-advertise these IBGP learned routes to other IBGP speakers. If this rule is relaxed and RTR-C is allowed to reflect IBGP learned routes, then it could re-advertise (or reflect) the IBGP routes learned from RTR-A to RTR-B and vice versa. This would eliminate the need for the IBGP session between RTR-A and RTR-B as shown in Figure 2 below. +------ + +-------+ | | | | | RTR-A | | RTR-B | | | | | +-------+ +-------+ \ / IBGP \ ASX / IBGP \ / +-------+ | | | RTR-C | | | +-------+ Bates & Chandra [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 Figure 2: Route Reflection IBGP The Route Reflection scheme is based upon this basic principle. 4. Terminology and Concepts We use the term "Route Reflector" (RR) to represent an IBGP speaker that participates in the reflection. The internal peers of a RR are divided into two groups: 1) Client Peers 2) Non-Client Peers A RR reflects routes between these groups. A RR along with its client peers form a Cluster. The Non-Client peer must be fully meshed but the Client peers need not be fully meshed. The Client peers should not peer with internal speakers outside of their cluster. Figure 3 depicts a simple example outlining the basic RR components using the terminology noted above. / - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\ | Cluster | +-------+ +-------+ | | | | | | | RTR-A | | RTR-B | | |Client | |Client | | +-------+ +-------+ | \ / | IBGP \ / IBGP | \ / | +-------+ | | | | | RTR-C | | | RR | | +-------+ | / \ | \ - - - - -/- - -\- - - - - - / IBGP / \ IBGP +-------+ +-------+ | RTR-D | IBGP | RTR-E | | Non- |---------| Non- | |Client | |Client | +-------+ +-------+ Figure 3: RR Components Bates & Chandra [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 5. Operation When a route is received by a RR, it selects the best path based on its path selection rule. After the best path is selected, it must do the following depending on the type of the peer it is receiving the best path from: 1) A Route from a Non-Client peer Reflect to all other Clients. 2) A Route from a Client peer Reflect to all the Non-Client peers and also to the Client peers other than the originator. (Hence the Client peers are not required to be fully meshed). 3) Route from an EBGP peer Send to all the Client and Non-Client Peers. An Autonomous System could have many RRs. A RR treats other RRs just like any other internal BGP speakers. A RR could be configured to have other RRs in a Client group or Non-client group. In a simple configuration the backbone could be divided into many clusters. Each RR would be configured with other RRs as Non-Client peers (thus all the RRs will be fully meshed.). The Clients will be configured to maintain IBGP session only with the RR in their cluster. Due to route reflection, all the IBGP speakers will receive reflected routing information. It is normal in a Autonomous System to have BGP speakers that do not understand the concept of Route-Reflectors (let us call them conventional BGP speakers). The Route-Reflector Scheme allows such conventional BGP speakers to co-exist. Conventional BGP speakers could be either members of a Non-Client group or a Client group. This allows for an easy and gradual migration from the current IBGP model to the Route Reflection model. One could start creating clusters by configuring a single router as the designated RR and configuring other RRs and their clients as normal IBGP peers. Additional clusters can be created gradually. 6. Redundant RRs Usually a cluster of clients will have a single RR. In that case, the Bates & Chandra [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 cluster will be identified by the ROUTER_ID of the RR. However, this represents a single point of failure so to make it possible to have multiple RRs in the same cluster, all RRs in the same cluster must be configured with a 4-byte CLUSTER_ID so that an RR can discern routes from other RRs in the same cluster. 7. Avoiding Routing Information Loops As IBGP learned routes are reflected, it is possible through mis- configuration to form route re-distribution loops. The Route Reflection method defines the following attributes to detect and avoid routing information loops. ORIGINATOR_ID ORIGINATOR_ID is a new optional, non-transitive BGP attribute of Type code 9. This attribute is 4 bytes long and it will be created by a RR. This attribute will carry the ROUTER_ID of the originator of the route in the local AS. A BGP speaker should not create an ORIGINATOR_ID attribute if one already exists. A route reflector must never send routing information back to the router specified in ORIGINATOR_ID. CLUSTER_LIST Cluster-list is a new optional, non-transitive BGP attribute of Type code 10. It is a sequence of CLUSTER_ID values representing the reflection path that the route has passed. It is encoded as follows: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Attr. Flags |Attr. Type Code| Length | value ... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Where Length is the number of octets. When a RR reflects a route from its Clients to a Non-Client peer, it must append the local CLUSTER_ID to the CLUSTER_LIST. If the CLUSTER_LIST is empty, it must create a new one. Using this attribute an RR can identify if the routing information is looped back to the same cluster due to mis-configuration. If the local CLUSTER_ID is found in the cluster-list, the advertisement will be ignored. Bates & Chandra [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 8. Implementation and Configuration Considerations Care should be taken to make sure that none of the BGP path attributes defined above can be modified through configuration when exchanging internal routing information between RRs and Clients and Non-Clients. This could result is looping of routes. In some implementations, modification of the BGP path attribute, NEXT_HOP is possible. For example, there could be a need for a RR to modify NEXT_HOP for EBGP learned routes sent to its internal peers. However, it must not be possible for an RR to set on reflected IBGP routes as this breaks the basic principle of Route Reflection and will result in potential black holeing of traffic. An RR should not modify any AS-PATH attributes (i.e. LOCAL_PREF, MED, DPA)that could change consistent route selection. This could result in potential loops. The BGP protocol provides no way for a Client to identify itself dynamically as a Client to an RR configured BGP speaker and the simplest way to achieve this is by manual configuration. 9. Security Security considerations are not discussed in this memo. 10. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Dennis Ferguson, Enke Chen, John Scudder, Paul Traina and Tony Li for the many discussions resulting in this work. This idea was developed from an earlier discussion between Tony Li and Dimitri Haskin. 11. References [1] Rekhter, Y., and Li, T., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC1771, March 1995. [2] Haskin, D., "A BGP/IDRP Route Server alternative to a full mesh routing", RFC1863, October 1995. [3] Traina, P. "Limited Autonomous System Confederations for BGP", INTERNET-DRAFT, , April 1995. Bates & Chandra [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT BGP Route Reflection April 1996 12. Author's Addresses Tony Bates MCI 2100 Reston Parkway Reston, VA 22091 phone: +1 703 715 7521 email: Tony.Bates@mci.net Ravishanker Chandrasekeran (Ravi Chandra) cisco Systems 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 email: rchandra@cisco.com Bates & Chandra [Page 8] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id JAA14037; Tue, 23 Apr 1996 09:21:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id JAA15432; Tue, 23 Apr 1996 09:23:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA14402 for bgp-outgoing; Tue, 23 Apr 1996 13:13:13 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 21:19:10 +0800 (SST) From: "Felipe Corrales Golpe Jr." Subject: bgp mailing list To: bgp@ans.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net hi, how can i join in? thanks! \\\|/// \\ ~ ~ // Jun Golpe (/ @ @ \) Engineer -o00o-(_)-o00o-- Globe Telecom - GMCR Inc. Makati Philippines Handyphone: (0917) 819-1438 ----------0ooo.-- Telephone #: (632) 892-0223 .ooo0 ( ) Internet: jungolpe@globe.com.ph ( ) ) / ============================================= \ ( (_/ \_) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id QAA23145; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 16:15:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id QAA19375; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 16:16:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA37442 for bgp-outgoing; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:13:11 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604152012.NAA03029@hubbub.cisco.com> To: jhalpern@newbridge.com Cc: bgp@ans.net Subject: Confederations to Experimental Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 13:12:53 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Joel, The IDR WG would like to ask the IESG to advance draft-ietf-idr-bgp-confed-00.txt to an Experimental RFC. Yakov. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16360; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id LAA10244; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 11:25:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA37085 for bgp-outgoing; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:19:32 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604121519.IAA16633@hubbub.cisco.com> To: bgp@ans.net Subject: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:19:23 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Folks, At the last WG meeting we discussed BGP Communities attribute and agreed to ask the IESG to publish it as a Proposed Standard. There are two independent implementations of this attribute (BayNetworks and Cisco). This is the WG last call on this document. If there will be no objections within 2 weeks (4/26/96), I'll send a note to the IESG asking the IESG to advance the Internet Draft to a Proposed Standard. Yakov. ------- Forwarded Message Return-Path: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US Received: from beasley.cisco.com (beasley.cisco.com [171.69.2.135]) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA03071; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:17:52 -0700 Received: from IETF.cnri.reston.VA.US (ietf.cnri.reston.va.us [132.151.1.35]) by beasley.cisco.com (8.6.12/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with SMTP id GAA00896; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:17:00 -0700 Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13384; 11 Apr 96 9:11 EDT Received: from [127.0.0.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13314; 11 Apr 96 9:09 EDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: bgp@ans.net Sender: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 09:09:52 -0400 X-Orig-Sender: cclark@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Message-Id: <9604110909.aa13314@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> - --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP communities attribute Author(s) : R. Chandra, P. Traina, T. Li Filename : draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Pages : 5 Date : 04/10/1996 Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. This document describes an extension to BGP which may be used to pass additional information to both neighboring and remote BGP peers. The intention of the proposed technique is to aid in policy administration and reduce the management complexity of maintaining the Internet. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) o Europe Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) o Pacific Rim Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) o US East Coast Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) o US West Coast Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. - --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" - --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt - --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> - --OtherAccess-- - --NextPart-- ------- End of Forwarded Message - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16236; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id VAA28644; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 21:39:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA14039 for bgp-outgoing; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 01:38:35 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f From: Sean Doran To: bgp@ans.net Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard Message-Id: <96Apr12.183824pdt.5667@cesium.clock.org> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:38:10 -0700 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Is there an implementation? Sean. - -- | Can we also get the community usage paper of Enke and I as an | Informational RFC at the same time. | | Thanks, | --Tony | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16246; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id VAA28077; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 21:01:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA34079 for bgp-outgoing; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 00:59:26 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604130059.UAA02352@postoffice.reston.mci.net> To: bgp@ans.net Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:19:23 PDT. <199604121519.IAA16633@hubbub.cisco.com> From: Tony Bates X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 20:59:19 -0400 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Can we also get the community usage paper of Enke and I as an Informational RFC at the same time. Thanks, --Tony Yakov Rekhter writes: * Folks, * * At the last WG meeting we discussed BGP Communities attribute * and agreed to ask the IESG to publish it as a Proposed Standard. There * are two independent implementations of this attribute (BayNetworks and Cisc * o). * * This is the WG last call on this document. If there will be no objections * within 2 weeks (4/26/96), I'll send a note to the IESG asking the IESG * to advance the Internet Draft to a Proposed Standard. * * Yakov. * * ------- Forwarded Message * * Return-Path: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US * Received: from beasley.cisco.com (beasley.cisco.com [171.69.2.135]) by puli * .cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA03071; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:17:5 * 2 -0700 * Received: from IETF.cnri.reston.VA.US (ietf.cnri.reston.va.us [132.151.1.35 * ]) by beasley.cisco.com (8.6.12/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with SMTP id GAA00896; Thu, * 11 Apr 1996 06:17:00 -0700 * Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13384; * 11 Apr 96 9:11 EDT * Received: from [127.0.0.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13314; * 11 Apr 96 9:09 EDT * Mime-Version: 1.0 * Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" * To: IETF-Announce:; * Cc: bgp@ans.net * Sender: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US * From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US * Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US * Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt * Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 09:09:52 -0400 * X-Orig-Sender: cclark@CNRI.Reston.VA.US * Message-Id: <9604110909.aa13314@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> * * - --NextPart * * A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts * directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working * Group of the IETF. * * Title : BGP communities attribute * Author(s) : R. Chandra, P. Traina, T. Li * Filename : draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt * Pages : 5 * Date : 04/10/1996 * * Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol * designed for TCP/IP internets. * * This document describes an extension to BGP which may be used to pass * additional information to both neighboring and remote BGP peers. * * The intention of the proposed technique is to aid in policy administration * and reduce the management complexity of maintaining the Internet. * * Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username * "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, * type "cd internet-drafts" and then * "get draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". * A URL for the Internet-Draft is: * ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt * * Internet-Drafts directories are located at: * * o Africa * Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) * * o Europe * Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) * Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) * * o Pacific Rim * Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) * * o US East Coast * Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) * * o US West Coast * Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) * * Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. * * Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: * "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". * * NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in * MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this * feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" * command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or * a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers * exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with * "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split * up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on * how to manipulate these messages. * * For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. * * * Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader * implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version * of the Internet-Draft. * * - --NextPart * Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" * * - --OtherAccess * Content-Type: Message/External-body; * access-type="mail-server"; * server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" * * Content-Type: text/plain * Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> * * ENCODING mime * FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt * * - --OtherAccess * Content-Type: Message/External-body; * name="draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt"; * site="ds.internic.net"; * access-type="anon-ftp"; * directory="internet-drafts" * * Content-Type: text/plain * Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> * * - --OtherAccess-- * * - --NextPart-- * * * ------- End of Forwarded Message * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16218; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id WAA29681; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:37:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA36302 for bgp-outgoing; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 02:37:12 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:36:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Dorian Kim To: Sean Doran Cc: bgp@ans.net Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: <96Apr12.183824pdt.5667@cesium.clock.org> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Does informational RFC require an implemantation or am I missing the gist of the question? -dorian On Fri, 12 Apr 1996, Sean Doran wrote: > Is there an implementation? > > Sean. > - -- > | Can we also get the community usage paper of Enke and I as an > | Informational RFC at the same time. > | > | Thanks, > | --Tony > | > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16160; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id VAA24626; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:42:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA12283 for bgp-outgoing; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 01:37:51 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604140137.VAA17722@postoffice.reston.mci.net> To: bgp@ans.net Cc: Sean Doran Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:36:58 EDT. From: Tony Bates X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521 Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:37:43 -0400 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Ditto from me. Not sure what you are asking Sean. The usage paper is just showing a simple but useful (IMHO) application of the community attribute. It was agreed at the last idr meeting to move this to Informational when the community paper was moved along. --Tony Dorian Kim writes: * Does informational RFC require an implemantation or am I missing the gist o * f * the question? * * -dorian * * On Fri, 12 Apr 1996, Sean Doran wrote: * * > Is there an implementation? * > * > Sean. * > - -- * > | Can we also get the community usage paper of Enke and I as an * > | Informational RFC at the same time. * > | * > | Thanks, * > | --Tony * > | * > * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16153; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id NAA10675; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:35:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA12929 for bgp-outgoing; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 17:34:30 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f From: Sean Doran To: Tony.Bates@mci.net, bgp@ans.net Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard Message-Id: <96Apr14.103422pdt.5570@cesium.clock.org> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 10:34:08 -0700 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Sorry, mind failure. I thought we were talking about another draft. Sean. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id LAA16155; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id KAA07894; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 10:59:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12954 for bgp-outgoing; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:58:14 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Message-Id: <199604141458.HAA07699@hubbub.cisco.com> To: bgp@ans.net Subject: Re: BGP Communities to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Apr 96 20:59:19 EDT." <199604130059.UAA02352@postoffice.reston.mci.net> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 07:58:07 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Tony, > Can we also get the community usage paper of Enke and I as an > Informational RFC at the same time. > > Thanks, > --Tony Sorry. My omission. This is also the Last WG Call for advancing draft-ietf-idr-community-usage-00.txt to an Informational RFC. In the absence of any objections by 4/28 the WG will ask the IESG to publish this document as an Informational RFC. Yakov. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id JAA01897; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:31:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id JAA02452; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:32:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by p-o.ans.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA14555 for bgp-outgoing; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:26:12 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: p-o.ans.net: majordom set sender to bgp-owner using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: bgp@ans.net From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 09:09:52 -0400 Message-Id: <9604110909.aa13314@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP communities attribute Author(s) : R. Chandra, P. Traina, T. Li Filename : draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Pages : 5 Date : 04/10/1996 Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. This document describes an extension to BGP which may be used to pass additional information to both neighboring and remote BGP peers. The intention of the proposed technique is to aid in policy administration and reduce the management complexity of maintaining the Internet. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) o Europe Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) o Pacific Rim Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) o US East Coast Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) o US West Coast Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-communities-00.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960410143533.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id VAA20953; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:08:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id VAA00735; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:10:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA06300 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 9 Apr 1996 01:09:33 GMT Message-Id: <199604090109.SAA01211@hubbub.cisco.com> To: bgp@ans.net Cc: Tony.Bates@mci.net (Tony Bates), bmanning@isi.edu, yakov@cisco.com Subject: Re: attribute type codes In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 08 Apr 96 16:06:09 PDT." <199604082306.AA11999@zed.isi.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 96 18:09:26 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Bill, > > I presume in the actual document you'll refernce either the > > actual ID or RFC. What would be nice would be to put this out along > > with all the other documents we wanted to move forward from the last > > idr meeting so we get a pretty complete set of RFCs. > > > > For completeness for 9,10 and 11 this would be: > > > > 9 ORIGINATOR_ID > > 10 CLUSTER_LIST > > 11 DPA > > > > Note, should be announced in a day or > > so. I just submitted it yesterday folowing comments. > > > > --Tony > > i don't think that IDs are legal to reference in RFCs. That is correct. However, as you recall at the last WG meeting we agreed to move the first ID to an Experimental RFC, and the second ID to a Proposed Standard (after we'll get an implementation DPA). Once these two documents would get published as RFCs, it would be perfectly fine to reference them. Yakov. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from merit.edu by nic.merit.edu (8.7.1/nic-1.0) id TAA18676; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:20:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p-o.ans.net (p-o.ans.net [147.225.1.111]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id TAA27880; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:19:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA38862 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Mon, 8 Apr 1996 23:11:40 GMT From: bmanning@ISI.EDU Posted-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 16:06:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604082306.AA11999@zed.isi.edu> Subject: Re: attribute type codes To: Tony.Bates@mci.net (Tony Bates) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 16:06:09 -0700 (PDT) Cc: bgp@ans.net, bmanning@ISI.EDU In-Reply-To: <199604022222.RAA21767@postoffice.reston.mci.net> from "Tony Bates" at Apr 2, 96 05:22:02 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net > > Bill, > I presume in the actual document you'll refernce either the > actual ID or RFC. What would be nice would be to put this out along > with all the other documents we wanted to move forward from the last > idr meeting so we get a pretty complete set of RFCs. > > For completeness for 9,10 and 11 this would be: > > 9 ORIGINATOR_ID > 10 CLUSTER_LIST > 11 DPA > > Note, should be announced in a day or > so. I just submitted it yesterday folowing comments. > > --Tony i don't think that IDs are legal to reference in RFCs. -- --bill - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA15900 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 16:45:58 -0400 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA06197 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 20:41:24 GMT Message-Id: <199604072041.NAA27594@hubbub.cisco.com> To: bgp@ans.net Subject: BGP Route Reflector to Experimental Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 13:41:12 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O Folks, At the last WG meeting we agreed to ask the IESG to advance draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt to an Experimental RFC. In the absence of any objections on this list by April 21, I will send the IESG a note asking to advance this I-D to an Experimenal RFC. Yakov Rekhter. ------- Forwarded Message Return-Path: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US Received: from hubbub.cisco.com (hubbub.cisco.com [198.92.30.32]) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA07011; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 06:23:50 -0800 Received: from IETF.cnri.reston.VA.US (ietf.cnri.reston.va.us [132.151.1.35]) by hubbub.cisco.com (8.6.12/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with SMTP id GAA21474; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 06:21:51 -0800 Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13273; 3 Apr 96 9:17 EST Received: from [127.0.0.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13096; 3 Apr 96 9:14 EST Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: bgp@ans.net Sender: ietf-announce-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Date: Wed, 03 Apr 96 09:14:23 -0500 X-Orig-Sender: cclark@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Message-Id: <9604030914.aa13096@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> - --NextPart A Revised Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP Route Reflection An alternative to full mesh IBGP Author(s) : T. Bates, R. Chandra Filename : draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Pages : 8 Date : 04/02/1996 The Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. BGP deployments are configured such that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed so that any external routing information must be re-distributed to all other routers within that AS. This represents a serious scaling problem that has been well documented with several alternatives proposed [2,3]. This document describes the use and design of a method known as "Route Reflection" to alleviate the the need for "full mesh" IBGP. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) o Europe Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) o Pacific Rim Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) o US East Coast Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) o US West Coast Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. - --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" - --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960402093820.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt - --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960402093820.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> - --OtherAccess-- - --NextPart-- ------- End of Forwarded Message Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA18116 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Wed, 3 Apr 1996 10:14:00 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA24355 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Wed, 3 Apr 1996 15:03:47 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: bgp@ans.net From: Internet-Drafts@CNRI.Reston.VA.US Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Date: Wed, 03 Apr 96 09:14:23 -0500 Message-Id: <9604030914.aa13096@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O --NextPart A Revised Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP Route Reflection An alternative to full mesh IBGP Author(s) : T. Bates, R. Chandra Filename : draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Pages : 8 Date : 04/02/1996 The Border Gateway Protocol [1] is an inter-autonomous system routing protocol designed for TCP/IP internets. BGP deployments are configured such that that all BGP speakers within a single AS must be fully meshed so that any external routing information must be re-distributed to all other routers within that AS. This represents a serious scaling problem that has been well documented with several alternatives proposed [2,3]. This document describes the use and design of a method known as "Route Reflection" to alleviate the the need for "full mesh" IBGP. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa Address: ftp.is.co.za (196.4.160.8) o Europe Address: nic.nordu.net (192.36.148.17) Address: ftp.nis.garr.it (193.205.245.10) o Pacific Rim Address: munnari.oz.au (128.250.1.21) o US East Coast Address: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10) o US West Coast Address: ftp.isi.edu (128.9.0.32) Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. For questions, please mail to Internet-Drafts@cnri.reston.va.us. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960402093820.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-idr-route-reflect-01.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19960402093820.I-D@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA12144 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 17:43:38 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA44766 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 22:22:22 GMT Message-Id: <199604022222.RAA21767@postoffice.reston.mci.net> To: bgp@ans.net Cc: bmanning@isi.edu Subject: Re: attribute type codes In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 02 Apr 1996 13:34:03 PST. <199604022134.AA04579@zed.isi.edu> From: Tony Bates X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 17:22:02 -0500 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O Bill, I presume in the actual document you'll refernce either the actual ID or RFC. What would be nice would be to put this out along with all the other documents we wanted to move forward from the last idr meeting so we get a pretty complete set of RFCs. For completeness for 9,10 and 11 this would be: 9 ORIGINATOR_ID 10 CLUSTER_LIST 11 DPA Note, should be announced in a day or so. I just submitted it yesterday folowing comments. --Tony bmanning@ISI.EDU writes: * > * > We need to be able to register message types and error codes too. * * As part of the same ID? Can you provide page refs where * message types and error codes are defined? * * > I believe ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH is the same as the cisco's originator * > and 'cluster list' but I'm not 100% sure. I'm willing to change the * > ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH ids to lower numbers (e.g. 12 and 13) but you * > have to get back to me with the new numbers quickly since it would be * > much more difficult to change them in couple weeks. * > * > Dimitry * * * Please change the numbers as you specified: * * 7 aggregator * 8 community cisco ID * 9 originator cisco ID * 10 cluster list cisco ID * 11 destination preference MCI ID * 12 advertiser Bay ID * 13 rcid_path (cluster id) Bay ID * * ... * * * -- * --bill Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA14826 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:48:39 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA24508 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:41:00 GMT From: bmanning@ISI.EDU Posted-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:34:03 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199604022134.AA04579@zed.isi.edu> Subject: Re: attribute type codes To: bgp@ans.net Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:34:03 -0800 (PST) Cc: bmanning@ISI.EDU In-Reply-To: <9604021954.AA05028@pobox.BayNetworks.com> from "Dimitry Haskin" at Apr 2, 96 02:54:16 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 954 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O > > We need to be able to register message types and error codes too. As part of the same ID? Can you provide page refs where message types and error codes are defined? > I believe ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH is the same as the cisco's originator > and 'cluster list' but I'm not 100% sure. I'm willing to change the > ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH ids to lower numbers (e.g. 12 and 13) but you > have to get back to me with the new numbers quickly since it would be > much more difficult to change them in couple weeks. > > Dimitry Please change the numbers as you specified: 7 aggregator 8 community cisco ID 9 originator cisco ID 10 cluster list cisco ID 11 destination preference MCI ID 12 advertiser Bay ID 13 rcid_path (cluster id) Bay ID ... -- --bill Received: from p-o.ans.net ([147.225.1.111]) by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA16438 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 14:19:05 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA15459 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:06:12 GMT From: bmanning@ISI.EDU Posted-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:00:53 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199604021900.AA04443@zed.isi.edu> Subject: attribute type codes To: bgp@ans.net Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:00:53 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1945 Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O Hi, I've been promising this for a while. Comments/corrections before I send this in as an ID please. ------------------------------------------------------------------ This document describes the process for creating new BGP attribute type codes. Basic attribute type codes are described in RFC1771 pages 12 through 15. These, and new attribute type codes that are used in the internet are expected to be registered with the IANA. It is expected that new BGP attribute type codes will be registered in a similar way that DNS RR's and SNMP subtypes are registered. The actual process will involve the documentation of such attribute type codes in FYI RFCs. There is no intention of segmenting the code space into public/private or IP/OSI or any other sectioning. As each attribute type code is in the process of being developed, it will use an octect value of 255, which will be reserved for this use. At the time an attribute type code is assigned a number by the IANA, the documetnation and code base will be updated to reflect the authorized attribute type code value. IANA maintained values will be published in the periodically updated assigned numbers STD. The bgp attribute type code list or pointer to the bgp attribute type code list will be added to this STD. Requests for assignment of a new attribute type code should be sent to IANA with a subject that includes the phrase "attribute type code request". Currently in use attribute type codes are listed below: 1 origin 2 as path 3 next hop 4 multi exit disc. 5 local preference 6 atomic aggregate 7 aggregator 8 community cisco ID 9 originator cisco ID 10 cluster list cisco ID 11 destination preference MCI ID ... (Dimitry, I've misplaced the list you sent me for Bay stuff) -- --bill Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA11065 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 17:07:01 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA13098 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 22:00:29 GMT Date: Tue, 2 Apr 96 17:00:16 EST From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) Message-Id: <9604022200.AA11148@pobox.BayNetworks.com> To: bmanning@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: attribute type codes Cc: bgp@ans.net Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O > > > > > We need to be able to register message types and error codes too. > > As part of the same ID? Can you provide page refs where > message types and error codes are defined? > RFC1863: Page 8, Section 4.3.1 Page 14, Section 4.3.5 > Please change the numbers as you specified: > > 7 aggregator > 8 community cisco ID > 9 originator cisco ID > 10 cluster list cisco ID > 11 destination preference MCI ID > 12 advertiser Bay ID > 13 rcid_path (cluster id) Bay ID > Done > --bill > Dimitry Received: from p-o.ans.net by ftp.ans.net with SMTP id AA14820 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:05:45 -0500 Received: by p-o.ans.net id AA14399 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for bgp-outgoing); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:54:43 GMT Date: Tue, 2 Apr 96 14:54:16 EST From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) Message-Id: <9604021954.AA05028@pobox.BayNetworks.com> To: bmanning@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: attribute type codes Cc: bgp@ans.net Sender: bgp-owner@ans.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bgp@ans.net Status: O Bill, > > As each attribute type code is in the process of being developed, it will use > an octect value of 255, which will be reserved for this use. At the time an > attribute type code is assigned a number by the IANA, the documetnation and > code base will be updated to reflect the authorized attribute type code value. > > IANA maintained values will be published in the periodically updated assigned > numbers STD. The bgp attribute type code list or pointer to the bgp attribute > type code list will be added to this STD. Requests for assignment of a new > attribute type code should be sent to IANA with a subject that includes the > phrase "attribute type code request". > > Currently in use attribute type codes are listed below: > > > 1 origin > 2 as path > 3 next hop > 4 multi exit disc. > 5 local preference > 6 atomic aggregate > 7 aggregator > 8 community cisco ID > 9 originator cisco ID > 10 cluster list cisco ID > 11 destination preference MCI ID > ... > (Dimitry, I've misplaced the list you sent me for Bay stuff) > The following are my attributes as specified in RFC1863: 255 ADVERTISER 244 Cluster id list (RCID_PATH) RFC1863 also defines a new message type: 255 LIST And also new error types: 255 LIST Message Error Code 1 Bad Address subcode 255 Invalid ADVERTISER Attribute subcode of UPDATE error (3) We need to be able to register message types and error codes too. I believe ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH is the same as the cisco's originator and 'cluster list' but I'm not 100% sure. I'm willing to change the ADVERTISER and RCID_PATH ids to lower numbers (e.g. 12 and 13) but you have to get back to me with the new numbers quickly since it would be much more difficult to change them in couple weeks. > --bill > Dimitry