Network Working Group P. Sarkar, Ed. Internet-Draft K. Patel Intended status: Informational Arrcus, Inc. Expires: December 4, 2020 S. Pallagatti VMware B. Saji Arista Networks June 2, 2020 BGP Shortest Path Routing Extension Implementation Report draft-psarkar-lsvr-bgp-spf-impl-00 Abstract This document is an implementation report for the Shortest Path Routing Extensions to BGP protocol as defined in [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]. The authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. The respondents were asked to only use the "YES" answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on December 4, 2020. Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 1] Internet-Draft BGP SPF Implementation Report June 2020 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2020 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Implementation Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. BGP-LS-SPF Peering Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Extensions to BGP-LS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Support for Simplified Decision Process . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. Introduction [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf] describes an alternative solution which leverages BGP-LS [RFC7752] and the Shortest Path First algorithm similar to Internal Gateway Protocols (IGPs) such as OSPF [RFC2328]. The solution introduces an new BGP-LS-SPF AFI-SAFI and replaces the Phase 1 and 2 decision functions of the Decision Process specifed by [RFC4271] with the Shortest Path First (SPF) algorithm also known as the Dijkstra algorithm. This solution avails the benefits of both BGP and SPF-based IGPs that include TCP based flow-control, no periodic link-state refresh, and completely incremental NLRI advertisements. These advantages can reduce the overhead in MSDCs where there is a high degree of Equal Cost Multi- Path (ECMPs) and the topology is very stable. Additionally, using an SPF-based computation can support fast convergence and the computation of Loop- Free Alternatives (LFAs) [RFC5286] in the event of link failures. Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 2] Internet-Draft BGP SPF Implementation Report June 2020 This document provides an implementation report of the Shortest Path Routing extensions to BGP protocol as specified in [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]. The authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents or by any alternative means. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. Respondents were asked to only use the "YES" answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab. 2. Implementation Forms Contact and implementation information for person filling out this form: ArcOS Name: Pushpasis Sarkar Email: pushpasis@arrcus.com Vendor: Arrcus, Inc. Release: ArcOS Protocol Role: Route Reflector and Client FRR Name: Basil Saji Email: sajibasil@gmail.com Vendor: FRR Release: Protocol Role: Route Reflector Name: Santosh P K Email: santosh.pallagatti@gmail.com Vendor: FRR Release: Protocol Role: Route Reflector Figure 1 3. BGP-LS-SPF Peering Models Does the implementation support the following BGP-LS-SPF Peering Models as specified in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]? o 2.1 -- BGP Single-Hop Peering on Network Node Connections Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 3] Internet-Draft BGP SPF Implementation Report June 2020 o 2.2 -- BGP Peering Between Directly Connected Network Nodes o 2.3 -- BGP Peering in Route-Reflector or Controller Topology +----------+-----+-----+----------------------------+ | Reelease | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 | +----------+-----+-----+----------------------------+ | ArcOS | Yes | Yes | Yes (Route Reflector only) | | FRR | Yes | Yes | Yes | +----------+-----+-----+----------------------------+ Table 1: Peering Model Support 4. Extensions to BGP-LS Does the implementation support the following BGP-LS-SPF TLVs as described in Section 4 and sub-sections of [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]?? o T1 -- Node NLRI Attribute SPF Capability TLV o T2 -- Node/Link/Prefix NLRI Attribute SPF Status TLV o T3 -- Link NLRI Attribute IPv4 Prefix-Length TLV o T4 -- Link NLRI Attribute IPv6 Prefix-Length TLV o T5 -- Attribute Sequence-Number TLV +---------+-------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ | Release | Send / Recv | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | +---------+-------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ | ArcOS | Send | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Recv | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | FRR | Send | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Recv | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | +---------+-------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Table 2: BGP-LS Extension TLVs Support 5. Support for Simplified Decision Process Does the implementation support the following Best Path Decision processes as described in Section 5 and sub-sections of [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]? o P1 -- Phase-1 BGP NLRI Selection o P2 -- Dual Stack Support Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 4] Internet-Draft BGP SPF Implementation Report June 2020 o P3 -- SPF Calculation based on BGP-LS NLRI +---------+-----+-----+-----+ | Release | P1 | P2 | P3 | +---------+-----+-----+-----+ | ArcOS | Yes | Yes | Yes | | TBA | --- | --- | --- | +---------+-----+-----+-----+ Table 3: Decision Process Support 6. Acknowledgements TBA 7. IANA Considerations N/A. - No protocol changes are proposed in this document. 8. Security Considerations This document does not introduce any change in any of the protocol specifications. 9. References 9.1. 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, . [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998, . [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, . [RFC5286] Atlas, A., Ed. and A. Zinin, Ed., "Basic Specification for IP Fast Reroute: Loop-Free Alternates", RFC 5286, DOI 10.17487/RFC5286, September 2008, . Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 5] Internet-Draft BGP SPF Implementation Report June 2020 [RFC5331] Aggarwal, R., Rekhter, Y., and E. Rosen, "MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label Space", RFC 5331, DOI 10.17487/RFC5331, August 2008, . [RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752, DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016, . 9.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf] Patel, K., Lindem, A., Zandi, S., and W. Henderickx, "Shortest Path Routing Extensions for BGP Protocol", draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-08 (work in progress), March 2020. Authors' Addresses Pushpasis Sarkar (editor) Arrcus, Inc. Bangalore, KA 562125 India Email: pushpasis.ietf@gmail.com Keyur Patel Arrcus, Inc. Email: keyur@arrcus.com Santosh VMware Email: santosh.pallagatti@gmail.com Basil Arista Networks Email: sajibasil@gmail.com Sarkar, et al. Expires December 4, 2020 [Page 6]