1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
|
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) E. Chen
Request for Comments: 9072 Palo Alto Networks
Updates: 4271 J. Scudder
Category: Standards Track Juniper Networks
ISSN: 2070-1721 July 2021
Extended Optional Parameters Length for BGP OPEN Message
Abstract
The Optional Parameters in the BGP OPEN message as defined in the
base BGP specification are limited to 255 octets due to a one-octet
length field. BGP capabilities are carried in this field and may
foreseeably exceed 255 octets in the future, leading to concerns
about this limitation.
This document updates RFC 4271 by extending, in a backward-compatible
manner, the length of the Optional Parameters in a BGP OPEN message.
The Parameter Length field of individual Optional Parameters is also
extended.
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
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9072.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include 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
1.1. Requirements Language
2. Update to RFC 4271
3. Backward Compatibility
4. IANA Considerations
5. Security Considerations
6. References
6.1. Normative References
6.2. Informative References
Acknowledgements
Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction
The Optional Parameters Length field in the BGP OPEN message is
defined in the base BGP specification [RFC4271] as one octet, thus
limiting the Optional Parameters field in the OPEN message to 255
octets. Since BGP capabilities [RFC5492] are carried in the Optional
Parameters field, and new BGP capabilities continue to be introduced,
the limitation is a concern for BGP development.
This document updates [RFC4271] by extending the length of the
Optional Parameters in BGP OPEN in a backward-compatible manner.
This is done by using Optional Parameter type code 255 as a
distinguished value, which indicates an extended Optional Parameters
Length field follows and that the parsing of the BGP OPEN should be
modified according to these procedures. In this case, the Parameter
Length field of the individual Optional Parameters in the BGP OPEN
message is also extended.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Update to RFC 4271
This document reserves Optional Parameter type code 255 as the
"Extended Length".
In the event that the length of the Optional Parameters in the BGP
OPEN message does not exceed 255, the encodings of the base BGP
specification [RFC4271] SHOULD be used without alteration.
Configuration MAY override this to force the extended format to be
used in all cases; this might be used, for example, to test that a
peer supports this specification. (In any case, an implementation
MUST accept an OPEN message that uses the encoding of this
specification even if the length of the Optional Parameters is 255 or
less.)
However, if the length of the Optional Parameters in the BGP OPEN
message does exceed 255, the OPEN message MUST be encoded according
to the procedure below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| My Autonomous System |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Hold Time |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BGP Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Non-Ext OP Len.|Non-Ext OP Type| Extended Opt. Parm. Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| Optional Parameters (variable) |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Extended Encoding OPEN Format
The Non-Extended Optional Parameters Length field (Non-Ext OP Len.)
SHOULD be set to 255 on transmission and, in any event, MUST NOT be
set to 0; it MUST be ignored on receipt once the use of the extended
format is determined positively by inspection of the Non-Extended
Optional Parameters Type (Non-Ext OP Type) field.
The subsequent one-octet field (which would be the first Optional
Parameter Type field in the non-extended format and is called "Non-
Ext OP Type" in the figure above) MUST be set to 255 on transmission.
On receipt, a value of 255 for this field is the indication that the
extended format is in use.
In this extended encoding, the subsequent two-octet field, termed the
"Extended Optional Parameters Length field", is an unsigned integer
indicating the total length of the Optional Parameters field in
octets. If the value of this field is zero, no Optional Parameters
are present.
Likewise, in that situation, the Optional Parameters encoding is
modified to be the following:
0 1 2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Parm. Type | Parameter Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Parameter Value (variable) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Extended Parameters Format
The rules for encoding Optional Parameters are unchanged with respect
to those given in [RFC4271], except that the Parameter Length field
is extended to be a two-octet unsigned integer.
In parsing an OPEN message, if the one-octet Optional Parameters
Length field (labeled "Non-Ext OP Len." in Figure 1) is non-zero, a
BGP speaker MUST use the value of the octet following the one-octet
Optional Parameters Length field (labeled "Non-Ext OP Type" in
Figure 1) to determine both the encoding of the Optional Parameters
length and the size of the Parameter Length field of individual
Optional Parameters. If the value of the "Non-Ext OP Type" field is
255, then the encoding described above is used for the Optional
Parameters length. Otherwise, the encoding defined in [RFC4271] is
used.
3. Backward Compatibility
If a BGP speaker supporting this specification (a "new speaker") is
peering with one that does not (an "old speaker"), no
interoperability issues arise unless the new speaker needs to encode
Optional Parameters whose length exceeds 255. In that case, it will
transmit an OPEN message that the old speaker will interpret as
containing an Optional Parameter with type code 255. Since the old
speaker will not recognize that type code by definition, the old
speaker is expected to close the connection with a NOTIFICATION with
an error code of "OPEN Message Error" and an error subcode of
"Unsupported Optional Parameters", according to Section 6.2 of
[RFC4271].
Although the Optional Parameter type code 255 is used in this
specification as the indication that the extended encoding is in use,
it is not a bona fide Optional Parameter type code in the usual sense
and MUST NOT be used other than as described above. If encountered
other than as the Non-Ext OP Type, it MUST be treated as an
unrecognized Optional Parameter and handled according to [RFC4271],
Section 6.2.
It is not considered an error to receive an OPEN message whose
Extended Optional Parameters Length value is less than or equal to
255. It is not considered a fatal error to receive an OPEN message
whose (non-extended) Optional Parameters Length value is not 255 and
whose first Optional Parameter type code is 255 -- in this case, the
encoding of this specification MUST be used for decoding the message.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA has assigned value 255 as the Extended Length type code in the
"BGP OPEN Optional Parameter Types" registry.
5. Security Considerations
This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security or
confidentiality issues inherent in the existing BGP [RFC4272].
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
6.2. Informative References
[RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.
[RFC5492] Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement
with BGP-4", RFC 5492, DOI 10.17487/RFC5492, February
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5492>.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter and Srihari Sangli for
discussing various options to enlarge the Optional Parameters field.
We would also like to thank Matthew Bocci, Bruno Decraene, John
Heasley, Jakob Heitz, Christer Holmberg, Pradosh Mohapatra, Keyur
Patel, and Hannes Gredler for their valuable comments.
Authors' Addresses
Enke Chen
Palo Alto Networks
Email: enchen@paloaltonetworks.com
John Scudder
Juniper Networks
Email: jgs@juniper.net
|
