draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-04.txt | draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-05.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
INTERNET-DRAFT Enke Chen | INTERNET-DRAFT Enke Chen | |||
<draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-04.txt> Tony Bates | <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-05.txt> Tony Bates | |||
Expires in six months MCI | Expires September 1996 MCI | |||
January 1996 | March 1996 | |||
Destination Preference Attribute for BGP | Destination Preference Attribute for BGP | |||
<draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-04.txt> | <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-dpa-05.txt> | |||
Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working | This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working | |||
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, | documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, | |||
and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute | and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
working documents as Internet Drafts. | working documents as Internet Drafts. | |||
Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | |||
months. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by | months. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by | |||
skipping to change at page 2, line 32 | skipping to change at page 2, line 32 | |||
This document proposes the DPA path attribute, which is an optional | This document proposes the DPA path attribute, which is an optional | |||
transitive attribute of fixed length. The attribute is represented | transitive attribute of fixed length. The attribute is represented | |||
by a pair <AS#, DPA value>. The AS# is a two octet non-negative | by a pair <AS#, DPA value>. The AS# is a two octet non-negative | |||
integer, which denotes the AS that specifies the preference. The DPA | integer, which denotes the AS that specifies the preference. The DPA | |||
value is a four octet non-negative integer. | value is a four octet non-negative integer. | |||
The DPA attribute has Type Code 11. | The DPA attribute has Type Code 11. | |||
Route Selection Process | Route Selection Process | |||
The DPA attributes shall be used as a route selection criteria, after | A router may use DPA to influence the degree of preference [1] | |||
the "LOCAL_PREF" attribute is evaluated, and before the evaluation of | assigned to a route. | |||
the AS path length and the multi-exit-discriminator (MED) attribute. | ||||
However, if a route contains both MED and DPA attributes from the | ||||
same neighboring AS, the MED values shall be favored over DPA values | ||||
for route selection. | ||||
The higher the DPA attribute value, the more preferred the route. | ||||
A route with missing DPA attribute must be treated as having an DPA | DPA influence on the computation of degree of preference is a local | |||
attribute with value zero. | matter. In general, a route with a higher DPA indicates a higher | |||
preference by the originator of the DPA attribute. | ||||
Operation | Operation | |||
The AS that sets this attribute must include its AS number in the | The AS that sets this attribute must include its AS number in the | |||
attribute. A BGP speaker may use the "LOCAL_PREF" attribute to | attribute. A BGP speaker may use the "LOCAL_PREF" attribute to | |||
select a different path other than the one specified by the DPA | select a different path other than the one specified by the DPA | |||
attribute value. This does not preclude an AS from re-setting this | attribute value. This does not preclude an AS from re-setting this | |||
attribute. However, coordination with the upstream and/or downstream | attribute. However, coordination with the upstream and/or downstream | |||
neighbors is strongly recommended. | neighbors is strongly recommended. | |||
To make sure that the MED attribute and not the DPA attribute is used | ||||
in the selection of routes from multiple peers of the same | ||||
neighboring AS, the DPA value, if set, must be identical for all | ||||
peers with the same neighboring AS. It is an operational matter to | ||||
ensure the correct setting of the DPA value for multiple peers to the | ||||
same neighboring AS. | ||||
Aggregation | Aggregation | |||
If aggregation is done, the resultant aggregate shall be treated as a | If aggregation is done, the resultant aggregate shall be treated as a | |||
new NLRI. No DPA attribute shall be derived from more specific NLRIs | new NLRI. No DPA attribute shall be derived from more specific NLRIs | |||
which formed the aggregate. The resultant aggregate is free to have | which formed the aggregate. The resultant aggregate is free to have | |||
the DPA attribute set if so desired. | the DPA attribute set if so desired. | |||
Remarks | Remarks | |||
It is noted that this new BGP attribute is simple and requires little | It is noted that this new BGP attribute is simple and requires little | |||
skipping to change at page 4, line 9 | skipping to change at page 3, line 47 | |||
subsequent versions of BGP unless specifically noted otherwise. | subsequent versions of BGP unless specifically noted otherwise. | |||
Security Considerations | Security Considerations | |||
Security considerations are not discussed in this memo. | Security considerations are not discussed in this memo. | |||
Acknowledgments | Acknowledgments | |||
The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter of cisco for his | The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter of cisco for his | |||
insightful comments and suggestions. We also acknowledge Ramesh | insightful comments and suggestions. We also acknowledge Ramesh | |||
Govindan (ISI) and Ravi Chandra (cisco) for their helpful comments. | Govindan (ISI), Paul Traina (cisco), and Ravi Chandra (cisco) for | |||
their helpful comments. | ||||
References | References | |||
[1] Rekhter, Y., and Li, T., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", | [1] Rekhter, Y., and Li, T., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", | |||
RFC1771, March 1995. | RFC1771, March 1995. | |||
[2] Y. Rekhter, and P. Gross, "Application of the Border Gateway | [2] Y. Rekhter, and P. Gross, "Application of the Border Gateway | |||
Protocol in the Internet", RFC1772, March 1995. | Protocol in the Internet", RFC1772, March 1995. | |||
[3] Chen, E., and Bates, T., "Current Practice of Implementing | [3] Chen, E., and Bates, T., "Current Practice of Implementing | |||
End of changes. | ||||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/ |