draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-01.txt | draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-02.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Network Working Group P. Mohapatra | Network Working Group P. Mohapatra | |||
Internet-Draft R. Fernando | Internet-Draft R. Fernando | |||
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | |||
Expires: August 28, 2010 February 24, 2010 | Expires: September 10, 2011 March 9, 2011 | |||
BGP Link Bandwidth Extended Community | BGP Link Bandwidth Extended Community | |||
draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-01.txt | draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-02.txt | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This document describes an application of BGP extended communities | This document describes an application of BGP extended communities | |||
that allows a router to perform unequal cost load balancing. | that allows a router to perform unequal cost load balancing. | |||
Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
Drafts. | Drafts is at http://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." | |||
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | This Internet-Draft will expire on September 10, 2011. | |||
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | ||||
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | ||||
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | ||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 28, 2010. | ||||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2011 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 | |||
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://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 | |||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
described in the BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF | This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF | |||
Contributions published or made publicly available before November | Contributions published or made publicly available before November | |||
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this | 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this | |||
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow | material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow | |||
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. | modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. | |||
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling | Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling | |||
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified | the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified | |||
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may | outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may | |||
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format | not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format | |||
skipping to change at page 2, line 30 | skipping to change at page 2, line 24 | |||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
2. Link Bandwidth Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Link Bandwidth Extended Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 3. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
4. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 4. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
When a BGP speaker receives multiple paths from its internal peers, | When a BGP speaker receives multiple paths from its internal peers, | |||
it could select more than one path to send traffic to. In doing so, | it could select more than one path to send traffic to. In doing so, | |||
it might be useful to provide the speaker with information that would | it might be useful to provide the speaker with information that would | |||
help it distribute the traffic unequally based on the cost of the | help it distribute the traffic unequally based on the bandwidth of | |||
external (DMZ) link. This document suggests that the external link | the external (DMZ) link. This document suggests that the external | |||
bandwidth be carried in the network using a new extended community | link bandwidth be carried in the network using a new extended | |||
[RFC4360] - the link bandwidth extended community. | community [RFC4360] - the link bandwidth extended community. | |||
1.1. Requirements Language | 1.1. Requirements Language | |||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. | document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. | |||
2. Link Bandwidth Extended Community | 2. Link Bandwidth Extended Community | |||
When a BGP speaker receives a route from a directly connected | When a BGP speaker receives a route from an external neighbor and | |||
external neighbor (the external neighbor that is one IP hop away) and | ||||
advertises this route (via IBGP) to internal neighbors, as part of | advertises this route (via IBGP) to internal neighbors, as part of | |||
this advertisement the router may carry the bandwidth of the link | this advertisement the router may carry the cost to reach the | |||
that connects the router with the external neighbor. The bandwidth | neighbor. The cost can be either configured per neighbor or derived | |||
of such a link is carried in the Link Bandwidth Community. The | from the bandwidth of the link that connects the router to a directly | |||
community is optional non-transitive. A border router MUST strip the | connected external neighbor. This value is carried in the Link | |||
link bandwidth community from a route when it advertises the route to | Bandwidth Extended Community. No more than one link bandwidth | |||
an external neighbor. The value of the high-order octet of the | extended community SHALL be attached to a route. Additionally, if a | |||
extended Type Field is 0x40. The value of the low-order octet of the | route is received with link bandwidth extended community and the BGP | |||
extended type field for this community is 0x04. The value of the | speaker sets itself as next-hop while announcing that route to other | |||
Global Administrator subfield in the Value Field SHOULD represent the | peers, the link bandwidth extended community should be removed. | |||
Autonomous System of the router that attaches the Link Bandwidth | ||||
Community. If four octet AS numbering scheme is used [RFC4893], | The extended community is optional non-transitive. The value of the | |||
AS_TRANS should be used in the Global Administrator subfield. The | high-order octet of the extended Type Field is 0x40. The value of | |||
bandwidth of the link is expressed as 4 octets in IEEE floating point | the low-order octet of the extended type field for this community is | |||
format, units being bytes per second. It is carried in the Local | 0x04. The value of the Global Administrator subfield in the Value | |||
Administrator subfield of the Value Field. | Field SHOULD represent the Autonomous System of the router that | |||
attaches the Link Bandwidth Community. If four octet AS numbering | ||||
scheme is used [RFC4893], AS_TRANS should be used in the Global | ||||
Administrator subfield. The bandwidth of the link is expressed as 4 | ||||
octets in IEEE floating point format, units being bytes (not bits!) | ||||
per second. It is carried in the Local Administrator subfield of the | ||||
Value Field. | ||||
3. Deployment Considerations | 3. Deployment Considerations | |||
The usage of this community is restricted to the cases where BGP | The usage of this community is restricted to the cases where BGP | |||
multipath can be safely deployed. In other words, the IGP distance | multipath can be safely deployed. In other words, the IGP distance | |||
between the load balancing router and the exit points should be the | between the load balancing router and the exit points should be the | |||
same. Alternatively, the path between the load sharing router and | same. Alternatively, the path between the load sharing router and | |||
the exit points could be label switched. If there are multiple paths | the exit points could be tunneled. If there are multiple paths to | |||
to reach a destination and if only some of them have link bandwidth | reach a destination and if only some of them have link bandwidth | |||
community, the receiver should not perform unequal cost load | community, the receiver should not perform unequal cost load | |||
balancing based on link bandwidths. | balancing based on link bandwidths. | |||
4. Acknowledgments | 4. Acknowledgments | |||
The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter, Srihari Sangli and Dan | The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter, Srihari Sangli and Dan | |||
Tappan for proposing unequal cost load balancing as one possible | Tappan for proposing unequal cost load balancing as one possible | |||
application of the extended community attribute. | application of the extended community attribute. | |||
The authors would like to thank Bruno Decraene, Robert Raszuk, Joel | ||||
Halpern, and Aleksi Suhonen for their useful comments and | ||||
discussions. | ||||
5. IANA Considerations | 5. IANA Considerations | |||
This document defines a specific application of the two-octet AS | This document defines a specific application of the two-octet AS | |||
specific extended community. IANA is requested to assign a sub- type | specific extended community. IANA is requested to assign a sub- type | |||
value of 0x04 for the link bandwidth extended community. | value of 0x04 for the link bandwidth extended community. | |||
Name Value | Name Value | |||
---- ----- | ---- ----- | |||
non-transitive Link Bandwidth Ext. Community 0x4004 | non-transitive Link Bandwidth Ext. Community 0x4004 | |||
End of changes. 13 change blocks. | ||||
39 lines changed or deleted | 42 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |