idnits 2.17.1 draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document date (November 22, 2015) is 3076 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IEEE.754.1985' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5575 (Obsoleted by RFC 8955) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force W. Eddy 3 Internet-Draft J. Dailey 4 Intended status: Standards Track G. Clark 5 Expires: May 25, 2016 MTI Systems 6 November 22, 2015 8 BGP Flow Specification Packet-Rate Action 9 draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate-00 11 Abstract 13 This document defines a new type of traffic filtering action for the 14 BGP flow specification. The new packet-rate action allows specifying 15 a rate-limit in number of packets per second. 17 Status of This Memo 19 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 20 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 24 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 25 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 28 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 29 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 30 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on May 25, 2016. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 44 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 45 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 46 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 47 described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 Table of Contents 51 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 52 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 53 2. Packet Rate Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 3. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 57 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 58 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 1. Introduction 62 The existing BGP flow specification [RFC5575] standard supports 63 traffic-rate limits conveyed in bytes per second. In some cases, it 64 may be easier, faster, or more relevant to perform accounting and 65 decision-making based on quantities of packets per second. It is 66 desirable to specify rate limits in terms of the number of packets 67 per second, and not just the number of bytes per second. 69 1.1. Requirements Language 71 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 72 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 73 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 75 2. Packet Rate Action 77 The traffic filtering actions pertaining to a matched flow 78 specification are indicated using BGP extended communities [RFC7153]. 79 Particular extended community values are defined in RFC 5575 for a 80 number of possible actions. New types of actions can be defined 81 using additional extended community values. The value 0x8006 has 82 been defined as the "traffic-rate" action, and specifies a rate-limit 83 in a quantity of bytes per second. The new packet-rate extended 84 community described in this draft is similar, except the quantity is 85 interpreted as packets per second. 87 +------+--------------------+--------------------------+ 88 | type | extended community | encoding | 89 +------+--------------------+--------------------------+ 90 | TBD | packet-rate | 2-byte as#, 4-byte float | 91 +------+--------------------+--------------------------+ 93 Table 1 95 Packet-rate: The packet-rate extended community is a transitive 96 extended community across the autonomous-system boundary and uses 97 following extended community encoding: 99 The first two octets carry the 2-octet id, which can be 100 assigned from a 2-byte AS number. When a 4-byte AS number is 101 locally present, the 2 least significant bytes of such an AS 102 number can be used. This value is purely informational and 103 should not be interpreted by the implementation. 105 The remaining 4 octets carry the rate information in IEEE 106 floating point [IEEE.754.1985] format, units being packets per 107 second. A packet-rate of 0 should result on all traffic for 108 the particular flow to be discarded. 110 Note that this is a transitive community type, as explained in RFC 111 7153 and not a non-transitive type as mentioned narratively in the 112 RFC 5575 description of the traffic-rate action. 114 3. Discussion 116 Although a floating-point value for packets per second may seem odd 117 or unnatural compared to an integer value, the motivations for this 118 are: 120 The maximum value that a 32-bit unsigned integer could hold would 121 limit to specifying under 2.15 Gpps (2.15 billion packets per 122 second). For large or high-performance networks especially in the 123 future, this may not be sufficient. The maximum floating point 124 value is much higher (on the order of 10^38) and should be future- 125 proof. 127 The reduced precision of the floating-point limit that can be 128 specified compared to an integer encoding does not seem to be a 129 major concern. 131 This maintains consistency with the present syntax for bytes per 132 second rate limits. 134 4. IANA Considerations 136 If accepted for publication, IANA will need to allocate a BGP 137 extended community value for the "packet-rate" action from the 138 "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Sub-Types" 139 registry. 141 5. Security Considerations 143 No security considerations are raised by this document. 145 6. Normative References 147 [IEEE.754.1985] 148 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 149 "Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", IEEE 150 Standard 754, August 1985. 152 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 153 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 154 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 155 . 157 [RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., 158 and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification 159 Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009, 160 . 162 [RFC7153] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "IANA Registries for BGP 163 Extended Communities", RFC 7153, DOI 10.17487/RFC7153, 164 March 2014, . 166 Authors' Addresses 168 Wesley Eddy 169 MTI Systems 171 Email: wes@mti-systems.com 173 Justin Dailey 174 MTI Systems 176 Email: justin@mti-systems.com 178 Gilbert Clark 179 MTI Systems 181 Email: gclark@mti-systems.com