| < draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-16.txt | draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-17.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group F. L. Templin, Ed. | Network Working Group F. L. Templin, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft G. Saccone | Internet-Draft G. Saccone | |||
| Intended status: Informational Boeing Research & Technology | Intended status: Informational Boeing Research & Technology | |||
| Expires: 9 October 2022 G. Dawra | Expires: 21 October 2022 G. Dawra | |||
| A. Lindem | A. Lindem | |||
| V. Moreno | V. Moreno | |||
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| 7 April 2022 | 19 April 2022 | |||
| 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-16 | draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-17 | |||
| 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 IP-based service supporting pervasive Air Traffic Management | with an IP-based service supporting pervasive Air Traffic Management | |||
| (ATM) for Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), Airline Operations | (ATM) for Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), Airline Operations | |||
| Controllers (AOC), and all commercial aircraft worldwide. This | Controllers (AOC), and all commercial aircraft worldwide. This | |||
| 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 9 October 2022. | This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 October 2022. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | |||
| license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 37 ¶ | |||
| 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 8. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 8. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 10.1. Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Considerations . . . . . 22 | 10.1. Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Considerations . . . . . 22 | |||
| 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| Appendix A. BGP Convergence Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | Appendix A. BGP Convergence Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| The worldwide Air Traffic Management (ATM) system today uses a | The worldwide Air Traffic Management (ATM) system today uses a | |||
| service known as Aeronautical Telecommunications Network based on | service known as Aeronautical Telecommunications Network based on | |||
| Open Systems Interconnection (ATN/OSI). The service is used to | Open Systems Interconnection (ATN/OSI). The service is used to | |||
| augment controller to pilot voice communications with rudimentary | augment controller to pilot voice communications with rudimentary | |||
| short text command and control messages. The service has seen | short text command and control messages. The service has seen | |||
| successful deployment in a limited set of worldwide ATM domains. | successful deployment in a limited set of worldwide ATM domains. | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 30 ¶ | |||
| more-specific prefixes instead of a smaller number of aggregated | more-specific prefixes instead of a smaller number of aggregated | |||
| prefixes. | prefixes. | |||
| In addition, BGP routing service infrastructure nodes configure | In addition, BGP routing service infrastructure nodes configure | |||
| administratively-assigned ULAs ("ADM-ULA") that are statically- | administratively-assigned ULAs ("ADM-ULA") that are statically- | |||
| assigned and derived from a shorter ADM-ULA prefix assigned to their | assigned and derived from a shorter ADM-ULA prefix assigned to their | |||
| BGP network partitions. Unlike MNP-ULAs, the ADM-ULAs are | BGP network partitions. Unlike MNP-ULAs, the ADM-ULAs are | |||
| persistently present and unchanging in the routing system. The BGP | persistently present and unchanging in the routing system. The BGP | |||
| routing services therefore establish forwarding table entries based | routing services therefore establish forwarding table entries based | |||
| on these MNP-ULAs and ADM-ULAs instead of based on the GUA MNPs | on these MNP-ULAs and ADM-ULAs instead of based on the GUA MNPs | |||
| themselves. However, the {ADM,MNP}-ULA 16-bit Subnet ID is always | themselves. However, nodes set the 40-bit Global ID and 16-bit | |||
| set to 0 (i.e., the "wildcard" subnet} when the ULA is advertised in | Subnet ID to 0 when they advertise MNP-ULAs in BGP routing exchanges | |||
| BGP routing exchanges and/or installed in forwarding tables. | and/or install MNP-ULAs in forwarding tables. | |||
| Both ADM-ULAs and MNP-ULAs are used by the OAL for nested | Both ADM-ULAs and MNP-ULAs are used by the OAL for nested | |||
| encapsulation where the inner IPv6 packet is encapsulated in an IPv6 | encapsulation where the inner IPv6 packet is encapsulated in an IPv6 | |||
| adaptation layer header with ULA source and destination addresses, | adaptation layer header with ULA source and destination addresses, | |||
| which is then encapsulated in an IP header specific to the underlying | which is then encapsulated in an IP header specific to the underlying | |||
| Internetwork that will carry the actual packet transmission. A high | Internetwork that will carry the actual packet transmission. A high | |||
| level ATN/IPS network diagram is shown in Figure 1: | level ATN/IPS network diagram is shown in Figure 1: | |||
| +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | |||
| | Aircraft 1 | | Aircraft 2 | .... | Aircraft N | | | Aircraft 1 | | Aircraft 2 | .... | Aircraft N | | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 51 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 51 ¶ | |||
| routing domains. From a conceptual, operational and correctness | routing domains. From a conceptual, operational and correctness | |||
| standpoint, the implementation should provide isolation between the | standpoint, the implementation should provide isolation between the | |||
| two BGP routing domains (e.g., separate BGP instances). | two BGP routing domains (e.g., separate BGP instances). | |||
| ADM-ULAs and MNP-ULAs begin with fd00::/8 followed by a pseudo-random | ADM-ULAs and MNP-ULAs begin with fd00::/8 followed by a pseudo-random | |||
| 40-bit global ID to form the prefix [ULA]::/48, along with a 16-bit | 40-bit global ID to form the prefix [ULA]::/48, along with a 16-bit | |||
| Subnet ID '*' to form the prefix [ULA*]::/64. Each individual | Subnet ID '*' to form the prefix [ULA*]::/64. Each individual | |||
| address taken from [ULA*]::/64 includes additional routing | address taken from [ULA*]::/64 includes additional routing | |||
| information in the interface identifier. For example, for the MNP | information in the interface identifier. For example, for the MNP | |||
| 2001:db8:1:0::/56, the resulting MNP-ULA is [ULA*]:2001:db8:1:0/120, | 2001:db8:1:0::/56, the resulting MNP-ULA is [ULA*]:2001:db8:1:0/120, | |||
| and for the administrative address 1001:2002/16 the ADM-ULA is | and for the administrative address 1001:2002 the ADM-ULA is | |||
| [ULA*]::1001:2002/112 (see: [I-D.templin-6man-omni] for further | [ULA*]::1001:2002/64 (see: [I-D.templin-6man-omni] for further | |||
| details). However, ULA prefixes installed in the BGP routing system | details). However, MNP-ULA prefixes installed in the BGP routing | |||
| always set the Subnet ID to 0 (i.e., the "wildcard" subnet) since | system always set the Global ID and Subnet ID to 0 (i.e., the | |||
| OMNI link forwarding decisions are based on the interface identifier | "wildcard" subnet) since OMNI link forwarding decisions are based | |||
| information independently of the Subnet ID. | solely on the MNP found in the interface identifier independently of | |||
| the Global/Subnet IDs. | ||||
| This gives rise to a BGP routing system that must accommodate large | This gives rise to a BGP routing system that must accommodate large | |||
| numbers of long and non-aggregable MNP-ULA prefixes as well as | numbers of long and non-aggregable MNP-ULA prefixes as well as | |||
| moderate numbers of long and semi-aggregable ADM-ULA prefixes. The | moderate numbers of long and semi-aggregable ADM-ULA prefixes. The | |||
| system is kept stable and scalable through the s-ASBR / c-ASBR hub- | system is kept stable and scalable through the s-ASBR / c-ASBR hub- | |||
| and-spokes topology which ensures that mobility-related churn is not | and-spokes topology which ensures that mobility-related churn is not | |||
| exposed to the core. The forwarding table entries populated through | exposed to the core. | |||
| routing updates always set the {ADM,MNP}-ULA Subnet ID to 0, since | ||||
| forwarding is supported across subnet (i.e., OMNI link segment) | ||||
| boundaries. | ||||
| 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services | 7. Stub AS Mobile Routing Services | |||
| Stub ASes maintain intradomain routing information for mobile node | Stub ASes maintain intradomain routing information for mobile node | |||
| clients, and are responsible for all localized mobility signaling | clients, and are responsible for all localized mobility signaling | |||
| without disturbing the BGP routing system. Clients can enlist the | without disturbing the BGP routing system. Clients can enlist the | |||
| services of a candidate mobility service such as Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) | services of a candidate mobility service such as Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) | |||
| [RFC6275], LISP [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] or AERO | [RFC6275], LISP [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] or AERO | |||
| [I-D.templin-6man-aero] according to the service offered by the stub | [I-D.templin-6man-aero] according to the service offered by the stub | |||
| AS. Further details of mobile routing services are out of scope for | AS. Further details of mobile routing services are out of scope for | |||
| skipping to change at page 25, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 25, line 16 ¶ | |||
| Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. | Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. | |||
| Cabellos, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", | Cabellos, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", | |||
| Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lisp- | Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lisp- | |||
| rfc6830bis-36, 18 November 2020, | rfc6830bis-36, 18 November 2020, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lisp- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lisp- | |||
| rfc6830bis-36.txt>. | rfc6830bis-36.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.templin-6man-aero] | [I-D.templin-6man-aero] | |||
| Templin, F. L., "Automatic Extended Route Optimization | Templin, F. L., "Automatic Extended Route Optimization | |||
| (AERO)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-templin- | (AERO)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-templin- | |||
| 6man-aero-41, 29 March 2022, | 6man-aero-42, 9 April 2022, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-templin-6man-aero- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-templin-6man-aero- | |||
| 41.txt>. | 42.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.templin-6man-omni] | [I-D.templin-6man-omni] | |||
| Templin, F. L., "Transmission of IP Packets over Overlay | Templin, F. L., "Transmission of IP Packets over Overlay | |||
| Multilink Network (OMNI) Interfaces", Work in Progress, | Multilink Network (OMNI) Interfaces", Work in Progress, | |||
| Internet-Draft, draft-templin-6man-omni-56, 29 March 2022, | Internet-Draft, draft-templin-6man-omni-57, 9 April 2022, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-templin-6man-omni- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-templin-6man-omni- | |||
| 56.txt>. | 57.txt>. | |||
| [RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. | [RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. | |||
| Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784, | Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2784, March 2000, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2784, March 2000, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2784>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2784>. | |||
| [RFC4251] Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH) | [RFC4251] Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH) | |||
| Protocol Architecture", RFC 4251, DOI 10.17487/RFC4251, | Protocol Architecture", RFC 4251, DOI 10.17487/RFC4251, | |||
| January 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4251>. | January 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4251>. | |||
| End of changes. 12 change blocks. | ||||
| 22 lines changed or deleted | 20 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/ | ||||