draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-00.txt   draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-01.txt 
Global Routing Operations P. Lucente Global Routing Operations P. Lucente
Internet-Draft NTT Internet-Draft NTT
Updates: 7854 (if approved) Y. Gu Updates: 7854 (if approved) Y. Gu
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: March 6, 2020 H. Smit Expires: April 17, 2020 H. Smit
Independent Independent
September 3, 2019 October 15, 2019
TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages TLV support for BMP Route Monitoring and Peer Down Messages
draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-00 draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-01
Abstract Abstract
Most of the message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol Most of the message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol
(BMP) do provision for optional trailing data; however Route (BMP) do provision for optional trailing data; however Route
Monitoring message (to provide a snapshot of the monitored Routing Monitoring message (to provide a snapshot of the monitored Routing
Information Base) and Peer Down message (to indicate that a peering Information Base) and Peer Down message (to indicate that a peering
session was terminated) do not. Supporting optional data in TLV session was terminated) do not. Supporting optional data in TLV
format across all BMP message types allows for an homogeneous and format across all BMP message types allows for an homogeneous and
extensible surface that would be useful for the most different use- extensible surface that would be useful for the most different use-
skipping to change at page 1, line 43 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 6, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 17, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. TLV encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. TLV encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. BMP Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. BMP Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Common Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Common Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. TLV data in Route Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.2. TLV data in Route Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3. TLV data in Peer Down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.3. TLV data in Peer Down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.4. TLV data in other BMP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.4. TLV data in other BMP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is defined in RFC 7854 [RFC7854]. The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is defined in RFC 7854 [RFC7854].
The Route Monitoring message consists of: The Route Monitoring message consists of:
skipping to change at page 4, line 39 skipping to change at page 4, line 39
o Type = TBD2: the BGP Update PDU is encoded with ADD-PATH o Type = TBD2: the BGP Update PDU is encoded with ADD-PATH
capability RFC 7911 [RFC7911], value MUST be boolean. capability RFC 7911 [RFC7911], value MUST be boolean.
o Type = TBD3: the BGP Update PDU is encoded with Multiple Labels o Type = TBD3: the BGP Update PDU is encoded with Multiple Labels
capability RFC 8277 [RFC8277], value MUST be boolean. capability RFC 8277 [RFC8277], value MUST be boolean.
4.3. TLV data in Peer Down 4.3. TLV data in Peer Down
The Peer Down Notification message type is defined in Section 4.9 of The Peer Down Notification message type is defined in Section 4.9 of
[RFC7854]. TLV data MAY now follow any Reason code. [RFC7854]. In case of Reason code 1 and 3, a BGP Notification PDU
follows; the PDU MAY be followed by TLV data. In case of Reason code
2, a 2-byte field to give additional FSM info follows; this field MAY
be followed by TLV data. For all other Reason codes, TLV data MAY
follow the Reason field.
4.4. TLV data in other BMP messages 4.4. TLV data in other BMP messages
All other message types defined in RFC7854 [RFC7854] do already All other message types defined in RFC7854 [RFC7854] do already
provision for TLV data. It is RECOMMENDED that all future BMP provision for TLV data. It is RECOMMENDED that all future BMP
message types will provision for trailing TLV data. message types will provision for trailing TLV data.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
It is not believed that this document adds any additional security It is not believed that this document adds any additional security
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
6 lines changed or deleted 10 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/