idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-05.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 (Using the creation date from RFC1930, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 1996-03-01) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (May 29, 2013) is 3947 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Best Current Practice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group J. Mitchell 3 Internet-Draft Microsoft Corporation 4 Updates: 1930 (if approved) May 29, 2013 5 Intended status: Best Current Practice 6 Expires: November 30, 2013 8 Autonomous System (AS) Reservation for Private Use 9 draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-05 11 Abstract 13 This document describes the reservation of Autonomous System numbers 14 (ASNs) that are for Private Use only and MUST NOT be advertised to 15 the Internet, known as Private Use ASNs. This document enlarges the 16 total space available for Private Use ASNs by documenting the 17 reservation of a second, larger range and updates RFC 1930 by 18 replacing Section 10. 20 Status of This Memo 22 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 23 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 25 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 26 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 27 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 28 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 30 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 31 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 32 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 33 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 35 This Internet-Draft will expire on November 30, 2013. 37 Copyright Notice 39 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 40 document authors. All rights reserved. 42 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 43 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 44 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 45 publication of this document. Please review these documents 46 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 47 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 48 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 49 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 50 described in the Simplified BSD License. 52 1. Introduction 54 The original IANA reservation of Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) for 55 Private Use was a block of 1023 ASNs. This was also documented by 56 IETF in Section 10 of [RFC1930]. Since the time when that range was 57 reserved, Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), documented in [RFC4271], has 58 seen deployment in new application domains, such as datacenter 59 networks, which require a larger Private Use AS Space. 61 Since the introduction of BGP Support for Four-octet AS Number Space 62 [RFC6793], the total size of the ASN space has increased 63 dramatically, and a larger subset of the space should be available to 64 network operators to deploy in these Private Use cases. The existing 65 range of Private Use ASNs is widely deployed and the ability to 66 renumber this resource in existing networks cannot be coordinated 67 given these ASNs by definition are not registered. Therefore this 68 documents the existing Private Use ASN reservation, while also 69 introducing a second, larger range that can also be utilized. 71 2. Requirements Language 73 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 74 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 75 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 77 3. Private Use ASNs 79 To allow the continued growth of usage of the BGP protocol in new 80 network applications that utilize Private Use ASNs, two ranges of 81 ASNs are reserved by this document in Section 6. The first, which 82 was previously defined in [RFC1930] out of the original 16-bit 83 Autonomous System range, and a second, larger range out of the higher 84 part of the Four-Octet AS Number Space [RFC6793]. 86 4. Operational Considerations 88 If Private Use ASNs are used and prefixes are originated from these 89 ASNs, Private Use ASNs MUST be removed from AS path attributes 90 (including AS4_PATH if utilizing four-octet AS number space) before 91 being advertised to the global Internet. Operators SHOULD ensure all 92 EBGP speakers support [RFC6793] and ensure any implementation 93 specific features that recognize Private Use ASNs have been updated 94 to recognize both ranges prior to making use of the newer, 95 numerically higher range of Private Use ASNs in the four-octet AS 96 number space. Some existing implementations that remove Private Use 97 ASNs from the AS_PATH are known to not remove Private Use ASNs if the 98 AS_PATH contains a mixture of Private Use and Non-Private Use ASNs. 99 If such implementations have not been updated to recognize the new 100 range of ASNs in this document and a mix of old and new range Private 101 Use ASNs exist in the AS4_PATH, these implementations will likely 102 cease to remove any Private Use ASNs from either of the AS path 103 attributes. Normal AS path filtering MAY also be used to prevent 104 prefixes originating from Private Use ASNs from being advertised to 105 the global Internet. 107 5. Acknowledgements 109 The author would like to acknowledge Christopher Morrow, Jason 110 Schiller, and John Scudder for their advice on how to pursue this 111 change. The author would also like to thank Brian Dickson, David 112 Farmer, Jeffrey Haas, Nick Hilliard, Joel Jaeggli, Warren Kumari, and 113 Jeff Wheeler for their comments and suggestions. 115 6. IANA Considerations 117 [Note to IANA, this paragraph to be removed upon publication: The 118 IANA should update the "16-bit Autonomous System Numbers" registry to 119 reference this RFC for the existing Private Use reservation. The end 120 of the "32-bit Autonomous System Numbers" range will be reserved for 121 Private Use, and a size of 94,967,295 (value to replace TBD1 below) 122 corresponding to the range of 4200000000 (value to replace TBD2 123 below) to 4294967294 (value to replace TBD3 below). Text after this 124 sentence should be published in the document.] 126 IANA has reserved, for Private Use, a contiguous block of 1023 127 Autonomous System numbers from the "16-bit Autonomous System Numbers" 128 registry, namely 64512 - 65534 inclusive. 130 IANA has also reserved, for Private Use, a contiguous block of TBD1 131 Autonomous System numbers from the "32-bit Autonomous System Numbers" 132 registry, namely TBD2 - TBD3 inclusive. 134 These reservations have been documented in the IANA Autonomous System 135 Numbers Registry [IANA.AS]. 137 7. Security Considerations 139 Private Use ASNs do not raise any unique security concerns. Loss of 140 connectivity might result from inappropriate use of them, 141 specifically outside of a single organization, since they are not 142 globally unique. This loss of connectivity is limited to the 143 organization using Private Use ASNs inappropriately or without 144 reference to Section 4. General BGP security considerations are 145 discussed in [RFC4271] and [RFC4272]. Identification of the 146 originator of a route with a Private Use ASN in the AS path would 147 have to be done by tracking the route back to the neighboring 148 globally unique AS in the path or by inspecting other attributes. 150 8. References 152 8.1. Normative References 154 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 155 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 157 [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway 158 Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006. 160 [RFC6793] Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-Octet 161 Autonomous System (AS) Number Space", RFC 6793, December 162 2012. 164 8.2. Informative References 166 [IANA.AS] IANA, "Autonomous System (AS) Numbers", May 2013, 167 . 169 [RFC1930] Hawkinson, J. and T. Bates, "Guidelines for creation, 170 selection, and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)", 171 BCP 6, RFC 1930, March 1996. 173 [RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis", RFC 174 4272, January 2006. 176 Author's Address 178 Jon Mitchell 179 Microsoft Corporation 180 One Microsoft Way 181 Redmond, WA 98052 182 USA 184 Email: Jon.Mitchell@microsoft.com