diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc7128.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc7128.txt | 619 | 
1 files changed, 619 insertions, 0 deletions
| diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc7128.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc7128.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..46f1089 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc7128.txt @@ -0,0 +1,619 @@ + + + + + + +Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                           R. Bush +Request for Comments: 7128                     Internet Initiative Japan +Category: Informational                                       R. Austein +ISSN: 2070-1721                                     Dragon Research Labs +                                                                K. Patel +                                                           Cisco Systems +                                                              H. Gredler +                                                  Juniper Networks, Inc. +                                                            M. Waehlisch +                                                               FU Berlin +                                                           February 2014 + + + Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Router Implementation Report + +Abstract + +   This document is an implementation report for the Resource Public Key +   Infrastructure (RPKI) Router protocol as defined in RFC 6810.  The +   authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by +   respondents.  The respondents are experts with the implementations +   they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative +   for the implementations for which their responses represent.  The +   respondents were asked to only use the "YES" answer if the feature +   had at least been tested in the lab. + +Status of This Memo + +   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is +   published for informational purposes. + +   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force +   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has +   received public review and has been approved for publication by the +   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents +   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet +   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. + +   Information about the current status of this document, any errata, +   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at +   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7128. + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 1] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +Copyright Notice + +   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the +   document authors.  All rights reserved. + +   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal +   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents +   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of +   publication of this document.  Please review these documents +   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect +   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must +   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of +   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as +   described in the Simplified BSD License. + +Table of Contents + +   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2 +   2.  Implementation Forms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3 +   3.  Protocol Data Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4 +   4.  Protocol Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6 +   5.  Protocol Transport  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7 +   6.  Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7 +   7.  Incremental Updates Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8 +   8.  Session ID Support  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8 +   9.  Incremental Session Startup Support . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8 +   10. Interoperable Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.1.  Cisco Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.2.  Juniper Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.3.  rpki.net Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.4.  RIPE NCC Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.5.  RTRlib Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +     10.6.  BBN RPSTIR Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 +   12. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10 +   13. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 2] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +1.  Introduction + +   In order to formally validate the origin Autonomous Systems (ASes) of +   BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to +   receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) [RFC6810] prefix +   origin data from a trusted cache.  The RPKI Router protocol defined +   in [RFC6810] provides a mechanism to deliver validated prefix origin +   data to routers. + +   This document provides an implementation report for the RPKI Router +   protocol as defined in RFC 6810 [RFC6810]. + +   The authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided +   by respondents or by any alternative means.  The respondents are +   experts with the implementations they reported on, and their +   responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for +   which their responses represent.  Respondents were asked to only use +   the "YES" answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab. + +2.  Implementation Forms + +   Contact and implementation information for person filling out this +   form: + +   IOS +      Name: Keyur Patel +      Email: keyupate@cisco.com +      Vendor: Cisco Systems, Inc. +      Release: IOS +      Protocol Role: Client + +   XR +      Name: Forhad Ahmed +      Email:foahmed@cisco.com +      Vendor: Cisco Systems, Inc. +      Release: IOS-XR +      Protocol Role: Client + +   JUNOS +      Name: Hannes Gredler +      Email: hannes@juniper.net +      Vendor: Juniper Networks, Inc. +      Release: JUNOS +      Protocol Role: Client + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 3] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +   rpki.net +      Name: Rob Austein +      Email: sra@hactrn.net +      Vendor: rpki.net project +      Release: <http://subvert-rpki.hactrn.net/trunk/> +      Protocol Role: Client, Server + +   NCC +      Name: Tim Bruijnzeels +      Email: tim@ripe.net +      Vendor: RIPE NCC +      Release: RIPE NCC validator-app 2.0.0 <https://github.com/RIPE-NCC +      /rpki-validator> +      Protocol Role: Server + +   RTRlib +      Name: Fabian Holler, Matthias Waehlisch +      Email: waehlisch@ieee.org +      Vendor: HAW Hamburg, FU Berlin, RTRlib project +      Release: RTRlib 0.2 <http://rpki.realmv6.org/> +      Protocol Role: Client + +   BBN +      Name: David Mandelberg, Andrew Chi +      Email: dmandelb@bbn.com +      Vendor: Raytheon/BBN Technologies +      Release: RPSTIR 0.2 <http://sourceforge.net/projects/rpstir/> +      Protocol Role: Server + +3.  Protocol Data Units + +   Does the implementation support Protocol Data Units (PDUs) as +   described in Section 5 of [RFC6810]? + +   P0:  Serial Notify + +   P1:  Serial Query + +   P2:  Reset Query + +   P3:  Cache Response + +   P4:  IPv4 Prefix + +   P6:  IPv6 Prefix + +   P7:  End of Data + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 4] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +   P8:  Cache Reset + +   P10:  Error Report + +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+-----+------+-----+ +   |         | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki  |   rpki  | NCC | RTR- | BBN | +   |         |     |     |       |  .net  |   .net  |     | lib  |     | +   |         |     |     |       |  clnt  |   srvr  |     |      |     | +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+-----+------+-----+ +   | Rcv.P0  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P0  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P1  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Snd.P1  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Rcv.P2  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Snd.P2  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Rcv.P3  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P3  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P4  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P4  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P6  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P6  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P7  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P7  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P8  | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   ---   | --- | YES  | --- | +   | Snd.P8  | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---   |   YES   | YES | ---  | YES | +   | Rcv.P10 | YES | YES |  NO~1 |  YES   |   YES   | YES | YES  | YES | +   | Snd.P10 | YES |  NO |   NO  |  YES   |   YES   | YES | YES  | YES | +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+-----+------+-----+ + +   Note 1:  No, Error PDU gets silently ignored. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 5] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +4.  Protocol Sequence + +   Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation follow the four protocol +   sequences as outlined in Section 6 of [RFC6810]? + +   S1:  Start or Restart + +   S2:  Typical Exchange + +   S3:  No Incremental Update Available + +   S4:  Cache Has No Data Available + +   +----+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+------+--------+-------+ +   |    | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki  |   rpki  | NCC  | RTRlib |  BBN  | +   |    |     |     |       |  .net  |   .net  |      |        |       | +   |    |     |     |       |  clnt  |   srvr  |      |        |       | +   +----+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+------+--------+-------+ +   | S1 | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   YES   | YES  |  YES   |  YES  | +   | S2 | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   YES   | NO~1 |  YES   |  YES  | +   | S3 | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   YES   | YES  |  YES   |  YES  | +   | S4 | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES   |   YES   | YES  |  YES   | YES~2 | +   +----+-----+-----+-------+--------+---------+------+--------+-------+ + +   Note 1:  Does not implement Serial Query, thus Incremental Update is +            never available, so responds to Serial Query with Cache +            Reset as described in Section 6.3 of [RFC6810] + +   Note 2:  Sends Cache Reset in response to Serial Query when no data; +            sends Error Report PDU in response to Reset Query when no +            data. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 6] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +5.  Protocol Transport + +   Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation support the different +   protocol transport mechanisms outlined in Section 7 of [RFC6810]? + +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-----+--------+-----+ +   |         | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki |  rpki  | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | +   |         |     |     |       |  .net |  .net  |     |        |     | +   |         |     |     |       |  clnt |  srvr  |     |        |     | +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-----+--------+-----+ +   | SSH     |  NO | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  NO |  YES   | YES | +   | TLS     |  NO |  NO |   NO  |   NO  |   NO   |  NO |   NO   |  NO | +   | TCP     | YES | YES |  YES  |  YES  |  YES   | YES |  YES   | YES | +   | TCP-MD5 |  NO |  NO |   NO  |   NO  |   NO   |  NO |   NO   |  NO | +   | TCP-AO  |  NO |  NO |   NO  |   NO  |   NO   |  NO |   NO   |  NO | +   | IPsec   |  NO |  NO |   NO  |   NO  |   NO   |  NO |   NO   |  NO | +   +---------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-----+--------+-----+ + +6.  Error Codes + +   Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation support the different +   protocol error codes outlined in Section 10 of [RFC6810]? + +   +-------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+--------+-----+ +   |       | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki |  rpki  |  NCC  | RTRlib | BBN | +   |       |     |     |       |  .net |  .net  |       |        |     | +   |       |     |     |       |  clnt |  srvr  |       |        |     | +   +-------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+--------+-----+ +   | Rcv.0 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Snd.0 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Rcv.1 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Snd.1 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Rcv.2 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  ---   |  ---  |  YES   | --- | +   | Snd.2 | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---  |  YES   |  YES  |  ---   | YES | +   | Rcv.3 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  ---   |  ---  |  YES   | --- | +   | Snd.3 | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---  |  YES   |  YES  |  ---   | YES | +   | Rcv.4 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Snd.4 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Rcv.5 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Snd.5 | YES | YES |   NO  |  YES  |  YES   |  YES  |  YES   | YES | +   | Rcv.6 | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---  |  YES   | YES~1 |  ---   | YES | +   | Snd.6 | YES | YES |   NO  |   NO  |  ---   |  ---  |  YES   | --- | +   | Rcv.7 | --- | --- |  ---  |  ---  |  YES   | YES~1 |  ---   | YES | +   | Snd.7 | YES | YES |   NO  |   NO  |  ---   |  ---  |  YES   | --- | +   +-------+-----+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+--------+-----+ + +   Note 1:  YES, but... fatal, so connection is dropped, but cache does +            not conclude it's inconsistent. + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 7] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +7.  Incremental Updates Support + +   Does the RPKI Router implementation support Incremental Updates as +   defined in Section 4 of [RFC6810]? + +   +-----+----+-------+-------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ +   | IOS | XR | JUNOS |   rpki.net  |   rpki.net  | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | +   |     |    |       |     clnt    |     srvr    |     |        |     | +   +-----+----+-------+-------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ +   |  NO | NO |  YES  |     YES     |     YES     |  NO |  YES   | YES | +   +-----+----+-------+-------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ + +8.  Session ID Support + +   Session ID is used to indicate that the cache server may have +   restarted and that the incremental restart may not be possible. + +   Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation support the Session ID +   procedures outlined in Section 5.1 of [RFC6810]? + +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ +   | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki.net  |  rpki.net  | NCC  | RTRlib | BBN | +   |     |     |       |    clnt    |    srvr    |      |        |     | +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ +   | YES | YES |  YES  |    YES     |    YES     | NO~1 |  YES   | YES | +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+------------+------+--------+-----+ + +   Note 1:  NO, using random, but will FIX + +9.  Incremental Session Startup Support + +   Does the RPKI Router protocol implementation support Incremental +   session startups with Serial Number and Session ID as defined in +   Section 5.3 of [RFC6810]? + +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ +   | IOS |  XR | JUNOS |  rpki.net  |   rpki.net  | NCC | RTRlib | BBN | +   |     |     |       |    clnt    |     srvr    |     |        |     | +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ +   | YES | YES |  YES  |    YES     |     YES     |  NO |  YES   | YES | +   +-----+-----+-------+------------+-------------+-----+--------+-----+ + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 8] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +10.  Interoperable Implementations + +   List other implementations with which you have tested the +   interoperability of the RPKI Router implementation. + +10.1.  Cisco Implementation + +   Cisco: The Cisco IOS and IOS-XR implementation should be +   interoperable with other vendor RPKI Router Protocol implementations. +   In particular, we have tested our interoperability with rpki.net's +   RPKI Router implementation. + +10.2.  Juniper Implementation + +   Juniper: The Juniper Networks, Inc. JUNOS implementation should be +   interoperable with other vendor RPKI Router Protocol implementations. +   In particular, we have tested our interoperability with rpki.net's +   and NCC's RPKI Router Cache implementation. + +10.3.  rpki.net Implementation + +   rpki.net: The rpki.net implementation should operate with other rpki- +   rtr implementations.  In particular, we have tested our rpki-rtr +   server's interoperability with Cisco IOS, Cisco IOS-XR, and Juniper. + +10.4.  RIPE NCC Implementation + +   RIPE NCC: The RIPE NCC validator has been tested by us with other +   rpki-rtr implementations.  In particular, we have tested with RTRlib +   and CISCO IOS.  We received positive feedback from close contacts who +   tested our validator with JUNOS and Quagga. + +10.5.  RTRlib Implementation + +   RTRlib: The RTRlib has been tested by us with other rpki-rtr +   implementations.  In particular, we have tested with rtr-origin from +   rpki.net and RIPE NCC Validator. + +10.6.  BBN RPSTIR Implementation + +   BBN RPSTIR: We have not yet tested with any other implementations. + +11.  Security Considerations + +   No new security issues are introduced to the RPKI Router protocol +   defined in [RFC6810]. + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 9] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +12.  Acknowledgements + +   The authors would like to thank Andrew Chi, David Mandelberg, Fabian +   Holler, Forhad Ahmed, and Tim Bruijnzeels for their contributions to +   this document. + +13.  Normative References + +   [RFC6810]  Bush, R. and R. Austein, "The Resource Public Key +              Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol", RFC 6810, +              January 2013. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 10] + +RFC 7128            RPKI Router Implementation Report      February 2014 + + +Authors' Addresses + +   Randy Bush +   Internet Initiative Japan +   5147 Crystal Springs +   Bainbridge Island, Washington  98110 +   US + +   EMail: randy@psg.com + + +   Rob Austein +   Dragon Research Labs + +   EMail: sra@hactrn.net + + +   Keyur Patel +   Cisco Systems +   170 West Tasman Drive +   San Jose, California  95134 +   US + +   EMail: keyupate@cisco.com + + +   Hannes Gredler +   Juniper Networks, Inc. +   1194 N. Mathilda Ave. +   Sunnyvale, California  94089 +   US + +   EMail: hannes@juniper.net + + +   Matthias Waehlisch +   FU Berlin +   Takustr. 9 +   Berlin  14195 +   Germany + +   EMail: waehlisch@ieee.org +   URI:   http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl + + + + + + + + +Bush, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 11] + |