draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-03.txt   draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-04.txt 
IDR J. Snijders IDR J. Snijders
Internet-Draft NTT Internet-Draft NTT
Updates: 4486 (if approved) J. Heitz Updates: 4486 (if approved) J. Heitz
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Intended status: Standards Track Cisco
Expires: July 23, 2017 J. Scudder Expires: August 1, 2017 J. Scudder
Juniper Juniper
January 19, 2017 January 28, 2017
BGP Administrative Shutdown Communication BGP Administrative Shutdown Communication
draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-03 draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-04
Abstract Abstract
This document enhances the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION message This document enhances the BGP Cease NOTIFICATION message
"Administrative Shutdown" subcode for operators to transmit a short "Administrative Shutdown" and "Administrative Reset" subcodes for
freeform message to describe why a BGP session was shutdown. operators to transmit a short freeform message to describe why a BGP
session was shutdown or reset.
Requirements Language 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 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 23, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 17 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
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 Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Shutdown Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Shutdown Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 4 7. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 4
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
It can be troublesome for an operator to correlate a BGP-4 [RFC4271] It can be troublesome for an operator to correlate a BGP-4 [RFC4271]
session teardown in the network with a notice that was transmitted session teardown in the network with a notice that was transmitted
via off-line methods such email or telephone calls. This document via off-line methods such email or telephone calls. This document
specifies a mechanism to transmit a short freeform UTF-8 [RFC3629] specifies a mechanism to transmit a short freeform UTF-8 [RFC3629]
message as part of a Cease NOTIFICATION message [RFC4486] to inform message as part of a Cease NOTIFICATION message [RFC4486] to inform
the peer why the BGP session is being shutdown. the peer why the BGP session is being shutdown or reset.
2. Shutdown Communication 2. Shutdown Communication
If a BGP speaker decides to terminate its session with a BGP If a BGP speaker decides to terminate its session with a BGP
neighbor, then the BGP speaker MAY send to the neighbor a neighbor, then the BGP speaker MAY send to the neighbor a
NOTIFICATION message with the Error Code "Cease" and the Error NOTIFICATION message with the Error Code "Cease" and Error Subcode
Subcode "Administrative Shutdown" followed by a length field and an "Administrative Shutdown" or "Administrative Reset" followed by a
UTF-8 encoded string. The contents of the string are at the length field and an UTF-8 encoded string. The contents of the string
operator's discretion. are at the operator's discretion.
The Cease NOTIFICATION message with an Administrative Shutdown The Cease NOTIFICATION message with a Shutdown Communication is
Communication is encoded as below: encoded as below:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Error code 6 | subcode 2 | Length | ... \ | Error code 6 | Subcode | Length | ... \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ /
\ \ \ \
/ ... Shutdown Communication ... / / ... Shutdown Communication ... /
\ \ \ \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Subcode: the Error Subcode value MUST be one of the following
values: 2 ("Administrative Shutdown") or 4 ("Administrative
Reset").
Length: this 8-bit field represents the length of the Shutdown Length: this 8-bit field represents the length of the Shutdown
Communication field in octets. The length value MUST range from 0 Communication field in octets. The length value MUST range from 0
to 128 inclusive. When the length value is zero, no Shutdown to 128 inclusive. When the length value is zero, no Shutdown
Communication field follows. Communication field follows.
Shutdown Communication: to support international characters, the Shutdown Communication: to support international characters, the
Shutdown Communication field MUST be encoded using UTF-8. A Shutdown Communication field MUST be encoded using UTF-8. A
receiving BGP speaker MUST NOT interpret invalid UTF-8 sequences. receiving BGP speaker MUST NOT interpret invalid UTF-8 sequences.
Note that when the Shutdown Communication contains multibyte Note that when the Shutdown Communication contains multibyte
characters, the number of characters will be less than the length characters, the number of characters will be less than the length
skipping to change at page 4, line 8 skipping to change at page 4, line 13
archive to find more details. archive to find more details.
4. Error Handling 4. Error Handling
Any erroneous or malformed Shutdown Communication received SHOULD be Any erroneous or malformed Shutdown Communication received SHOULD be
logged for the attention of the operator and then MAY be discarded. logged for the attention of the operator and then MAY be discarded.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
Per this document, IANA is requested to reference this document at Per this document, IANA is requested to reference this document at
subcode "Administrative Shutdown" in the "Cease NOTIFICATION message subcode "Administrative Shutdown", and at subcode "Administrative
subcodes" registry under the "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Reset" in the "Cease NOTIFICATION message subcodes" registry under
Parameters" group in addition to [RFC4486]. the "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Parameters" group in addition to
[RFC4486].
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This document uses UTF-8 encoding for the Shutdown Communication. This document uses UTF-8 encoding for the Shutdown Communication.
There are a number of security issues with UNICODE. Implementers and There are a number of security issues with UNICODE. Implementers and
operator are advised to review UNICODE TR36 [UTR36] to learn about operator are advised to review UNICODE TR36 [UTR36] to learn about
these issues. This document guards against the technical issues these issues. This document guards against the technical issues
outlined in UTR36 by REQUIRING "shortest form" encoding. However, outlined in UTR36 by REQUIRING "shortest form" encoding. However,
the visual spoofing due to character confusion still persists. This the visual spoofing due to character confusion still persists. This
specification minimizes the effects of visual spoofing by limiting specification minimizes the effects of visual spoofing by limiting
skipping to change at page 4, line 51 skipping to change at page 5, line 8
does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has
been spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied been spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied
by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be
construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist. exist.
As of today these vendors have produced an implementation of the As of today these vendors have produced an implementation of the
Shutdown Communication: Shutdown Communication:
o ExaBGP [1] o ExaBGP
o pmacct [2] o pmacct
o OpenBGPD [3] o OpenBGPD
o GoBGP o tcpdump (packet analyser)
o Wireshark [4] (packet analyser)
o tcpdump [5], (alt) [6] (packet analyser)
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5424>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5424>.
[RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP [RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP
Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925, Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925,
June 2010, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>. June 2010, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>.
[UTR36] Davis, M. and M. Suignard, "Unicode Security [UTR36] Davis, M. and M. Suignard, "Unicode Security
Considerations", Unicode Technical Report #36, August Considerations", Unicode Technical Report #36, August
2010, <http://unicode.org/reports/tr36/>. 2010, <http://unicode.org/reports/tr36/>.
8.3. URIs
[1] https://github.com/Exa-Networks/exabgp/blob/d8b7cd24e835b9dabfddc
87d74e0161921165a50/lib/exabgp/bgp/message/
notification.py#L112-L144
[2] https://github.com/pmacct/pmacct/compare/ed8df5820c9f0b8847a7b087
3ade3af8ab262113...9fd97a77d144b15bf42d4e55a4d861c499bb0cfc
[3] https://github.com/openbsd/src/
commit/0561b344da393d4a962339c507c2e78057100ae1
[4] https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits/201612/
msg00238.html
[5] https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group/tcpdump/pull/578
[6] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=148379081203084&w=2
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge Tom Scholl, David The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge Tom Scholl, David
Freedman, Jared Mauch, Jeff Haas, Peter Hessler, Bruno Decraene, John Freedman, Jared Mauch, Jeff Haas, Peter Hessler, Bruno Decraene, John
Heasley, Peter van Dijk, Arjen Zonneveld, James Bensley, Susan Hares, Heasley, Peter van Dijk, Arjen Zonneveld, James Bensley, Susan Hares,
and Saku Ytti. and Saku Ytti.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Job Snijders Job Snijders
 End of changes. 15 change blocks. 
44 lines changed or deleted 28 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/