< draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-03.txt   draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-04.txt >
Network Working Group F. Templin, Ed. Network Working Group F. Templin, Ed.
Internet-Draft G. Saccone Internet-Draft G. Saccone
Intended status: Informational Boeing Research & Technology Intended status: Informational Boeing Research & Technology
Expires: May 25, 2020 G. Dawra Expires: June 7, 2020 G. Dawra
LinkedIn LinkedIn
A. Lindem A. Lindem
V. Moreno V. Moreno
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
November 22, 2019 December 05, 2019
A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the Aeronautical A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the Aeronautical
Telecommunications Network Telecommunications Network
draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-03.txt draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-04
Abstract Abstract
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is investigating The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is investigating
mobile routing solutions for a worldwide Aeronautical mobile routing solutions for a worldwide Aeronautical
Telecommunications Network with Internet Protocol Services (ATN/IPS). Telecommunications Network with Internet Protocol Services (ATN/IPS).
The ATN/IPS will eventually replace existing communication services The ATN/IPS will eventually replace existing communication services
with an IPv6-based service supporting pervasive Air Traffic with an IPv6-based service supporting pervasive Air Traffic
Management (ATM) for Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), Airline Management (ATM) for Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), Airline
Operations Controllers (AOC), and all commercial aircraft worldwide. Operations Controllers (AOC), and all commercial aircraft worldwide.
skipping to change at page 1, line 45 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
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 May 25, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 7, 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 29 skipping to change at page 2, line 29
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. ATN/IPS Routing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. ATN/IPS Routing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. ATN/IPS (Radio) Access Network (ANET) Model . . . . . . . . . 10 4. ATN/IPS (Radio) Access Network (ANET) Model . . . . . . . . . 10
5. ATN/IPS Route Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. ATN/IPS Route Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. BGP Protocol Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. BGP Protocol Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix A. BGP Convergence Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendix A. BGP Convergence Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
skipping to change at page 15, line 20 skipping to change at page 15, line 20
size of 100 bytes (800bits), the total amount of BGP control message size of 100 bytes (800bits), the total amount of BGP control message
traffic to a single c-ASBR will be less than 2.5Mbps which is a traffic to a single c-ASBR will be less than 2.5Mbps which is a
nominal rate for modern data links. nominal rate for modern data links.
Industry standard BGP routers provide configurable parameters with Industry standard BGP routers provide configurable parameters with
conservative default values. For example, the default hold time is conservative default values. For example, the default hold time is
90 seconds, the default keepalive time is 1/3 of the hold time, and 90 seconds, the default keepalive time is 1/3 of the hold time, and
the default MinRouteAdvertisementinterval is 30 seconds for eBGP the default MinRouteAdvertisementinterval is 30 seconds for eBGP
peers and 5 seconds for iBGP peers (see Section 10 of [RFC4271]). peers and 5 seconds for iBGP peers (see Section 10 of [RFC4271]).
For the simple mobile routing system described herein, these For the simple mobile routing system described herein, these
parameters can and should be set to more aggressive values to support parameters can be set to more aggressive values to support faster
faster neighbor/link failure detection and faster routing protocol neighbor/link failure detection and faster routing protocol
convergence times. For example, a hold time of 3 seconds and a convergence times. For example, a hold time of 3 seconds and a
MinRouteAdvertisementinterval of 0 seconds for both iBGP and eBGP. MinRouteAdvertisementinterval of 0 seconds for both iBGP and eBGP.
Instead of adjusting BGP default time values, BGP routers can use the
Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) protocol [RFC5880] to
quickly detect link failures that don't result in interface state
changes, BGP peer failures, and administrative state changes. BFD is
important in environments where rapid response to failures is
required for routing reconvergence and, hence, communications
continuity.
Each c-ASBR will be using eBGP both in the ATN/IPS and the INET with Each c-ASBR will be using eBGP both in the ATN/IPS and the INET with
the ATN/IPS unicast IPv6 routes resolving over INET routes. the ATN/IPS unicast IPv6 routes resolving over INET routes.
Consequently, c-ASBRs and potentially s-ASBRs will need to support Consequently, c-ASBRs and potentially s-ASBRs will need to support
separate local ASes for the two BGP routing domains and routing separate local ASes for the two BGP routing domains and routing
policy or assure routes are not propagated between the two BGP policy or assure routes are not propagated between the two BGP
routing domains. From a conceptual and operational standpoint, the routing domains. From a conceptual and operational standpoint, the
implementation should provide isolation between the two BGP routing implementation should provide isolation between the two BGP routing
domains (e.g., separate BGP instances). domains (e.g., separate BGP instances).
7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services
skipping to change at page 16, line 46 skipping to change at page 17, line 6
This work is aligned with the FAA as per the SE2025 contract number This work is aligned with the FAA as per the SE2025 contract number
DTFAWA-15-D-00030. DTFAWA-15-D-00030.
This work is aligned with the NASA Safe Autonomous Systems Operation This work is aligned with the NASA Safe Autonomous Systems Operation
(SASO) program under NASA contract number NNA16BD84C. (SASO) program under NASA contract number NNA16BD84C.
This work is aligned with the Boeing Information Technology (BIT) This work is aligned with the Boeing Information Technology (BIT)
MobileNet program. MobileNet program.
The following individuals contributed insights that have improved the The following individuals contributed insights that have improved the
document: Erik Kline, Hubert Kuenig, Tony Li, Alexandre Petrescu, document: Ahmad Amin, Erik Kline, Hubert Kuenig, Tony Li, Alexandre
Pascal Thubert, Tony Whyman. Petrescu, Pascal Thubert, Tony Whyman.
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative References 12.1. Normative References
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
skipping to change at page 17, line 25 skipping to change at page 17, line 29
Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet
Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89, Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89,
RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006, RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>.
[RFC4456] Bates, T., Chen, E., and R. Chandra, "BGP Route [RFC4456] Bates, T., Chen, E., and R. Chandra, "BGP Route
Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP
(IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006, (IBGP)", RFC 4456, DOI 10.17487/RFC4456, April 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4456>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4456>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
12.2. Informative References 12.2. Informative References
[BGP] Huston, G., "BGP in 2015, http://potaroo.net", January [BGP] Huston, G., "BGP in 2015, http://potaroo.net", January
2016. 2016.
skipping to change at page 17, line 46 skipping to change at page 18, line 8
http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html", http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html",
May 2017. May 2017.
[CBB] Dul, A., "Global IP Network Mobility using Border Gateway [CBB] Dul, A., "Global IP Network Mobility using Border Gateway
Protocol (BGP), http://www.quark.net/docs/ Protocol (BGP), http://www.quark.net/docs/
Global_IP_Network_Mobility_using_BGP.pdf", March 2006. Global_IP_Network_Mobility_using_BGP.pdf", March 2006.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]
Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A.
Cabellos-Aparicio, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol Cabellos-Aparicio, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 (work in progress), (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-28 (work in progress),
June 2019. November 2019.
[I-D.templin-atn-aero-interface] [I-D.templin-atn-aero-interface]
Templin, F., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Templin, F., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over
Aeronautical ("aero") Interfaces", draft-templin-atn-aero- Aeronautical ("aero") Interfaces", draft-templin-atn-aero-
interface-07 (work in progress), September 2019. interface-07 (work in progress), September 2019.
[I-D.templin-intarea-6706bis] [I-D.templin-intarea-6706bis]
Templin, F., "Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization Templin, F., "Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization
(AERO)", draft-templin-intarea-6706bis-17 (work in (AERO)", draft-templin-intarea-6706bis-17 (work in
progress), August 2019. progress), August 2019.
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
11 lines changed or deleted 23 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/