summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt171
1 files changed, 171 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e50b24
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc8093.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Snijders
+Request for Comments: 8093 NTT
+Category: Standards Track February 2017
+ISSN: 2070-1721
+
+
+ Deprecation of BGP Path Attribute
+ Values 30, 31, 129, 241, 242, and 243
+
+Abstract
+
+ This document requests IANA to mark BGP path attribute values 30, 31,
+ 129, 241, 242, and 243 as "Deprecated".
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+ This is an Internet Standards Track document.
+
+ 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). Further information on
+ Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
+
+ 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/rfc8093.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (c) 2017 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.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Snijders Standards Track [Page 1]
+
+RFC 8093 Deprecation of Squatted BGP Path Attributes February 2017
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+ 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
+ 2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
+ 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
+ 4. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+
+1. Introduction
+
+ It has been discovered that certain BGP Path Attribute values have
+ been used in BGP implementations that have been deployed in the wild
+ while not being assigned by IANA for such usage. Unregistered usage
+ of BGP Path Attribute values can lead to deployment problems for new
+ technologies.
+
+ The use of these unregistered values was noticed when the BGP Large
+ Communities attribute [RFC8092] was initially assigned value 30 by
+ IANA. It was subsequently discovered that a widely deployed BGP-4
+ [RFC4271] implementation had released code that used path attribute
+ 30 and that applied a "Treat-as-withdraw" [RFC7606] strategy to
+ routes containing a valid Large Community attribute, since it was
+ expecting a different data structure. Because these routes were
+ dropped, early adopters of Large Communities were unreachable from
+ parts of the Internet. As a workaround, a new Early IANA Allocation
+ was requested.
+
+ The squatting of values 30, 31, 129, 241, 242, and 243 has been
+ confirmed by the involved vendors or through source code review.
+
+2. IANA Considerations
+
+ IANA has marked values 30, 31, 129, 241, 242, and 243 as "Deprecated"
+ in the "BGP Path Attributes" subregistry under the "Border Gateway
+ Protocol (BGP) Parameters" registry. The marking "Deprecated" means
+ "use is not recommended" ([IANA-GUIDELINES]).
+
+3. Security Considerations
+
+ There are no meaningful security consequences arising from this
+ registry update.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Snijders Standards Track [Page 2]
+
+RFC 8093 Deprecation of Squatted BGP Path Attributes February 2017
+
+
+4. Informative References
+
+ [IANA-GUIDELINES]
+ Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
+ Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", Work in
+ Progress, draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-18, September
+ 2016.
+
+ [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
+ Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
+ DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
+ <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
+
+ [RFC7606] Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K.
+ Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages",
+ RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015,
+ <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7606>.
+
+ [RFC8092] Heitz, J., Ed., Snijders, J., Ed., Patel, K., Bagdonas,
+ I., and N. Hilliard, "BGP Large Communities Attribute",
+ RFC 8092, DOI 10.17487/RFC8092, February 2017,
+ <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8092>.
+
+Acknowledgements
+
+ The author would like to gratefully acknowledge Marlien Vijfhuizen
+ who helped discover the squatting of value 30, and Nick Hilliard for
+ editorial feedback.
+
+Author's Address
+
+ Job Snijders
+ NTT Communications
+ Theodorus Majofskistraat 100
+ Amsterdam 1065 SZ
+ The Netherlands
+
+ Email: job@ntt.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Snijders Standards Track [Page 3]
+