Dissemination of flow specification rules implementation report
draft-raszuk-idr-flow-spec-impl-00

Status of this Memo

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

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.”

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on December 23, 2008.

Abstract

This document provides an implementation report for Dissemination of flow specification rules as defined in draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-01 The editor 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.

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 (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.) [RFC2119].

Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
2.  Implementation Forms
    2.1.  Dissemination of Information Compliance
    2.2.  Traffic filtering compliance
    2.3.  Validation procedure compliance
    2.4.  Traffic Filtering Actions compliance
    2.5.  Monitoring compliance
    2.6.  Interoperable Implementations
3.  IANA Considerations
4.  Security Considerations
5.  Acknowledgements
6.  References
    6.1.  Normative References
    6.2.  Informative References
§  Authors' Addresses
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements

1.  Introduction

Dissemination of flow specification rules BGP describes an extension to BGP which may be used to propagate information describing flows of data between BGP speakers. Such information may be needed to apply action on selected data flows through and beyond autonoumus systems. Examples of such actions are: dropping, rate limiting, redirecting, monitoring etc ...

This document provides an implementation report for Dissemination of flow specification rules as defined in draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-01

The editor 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.

2.  Implementation Forms

Contact and implementation information for person filling out this form:

Name: Craig Labovitz, Email: labovit@arbor.net , Vendor: Arbor Networks, Inc. Release: Peakflow SP

Name: Pedro Marques, Email: roque@juniper.net, Vendor: Juniper Networks Inc., Release: JUNOS 7.3

2.1.  Dissemination of Information Compliance

Does your implementation supports 0 octet length Next Hop in the MP_REACH_NLRI as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports one and two octet of NLRI length field in the MP_REACH_NLRI as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Destination Prefix component (Type 1) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Source Prefix component (Type 2) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports IP Protocol component (Type 3) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Port component (Type 4) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Destination Port component (Type 5) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Source Port component (Type 6) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports ICMP type component (Type 7) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports ICMP code component (Type 8) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports TCP flags component (Type 9) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Packet length component (Type 10) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports DSCP component (Type 11) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your Flow Specification supports Fragment component (Type 12) as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation assures strict type ordering of propagated components as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports BGP's Capability Advertisement facility to exchange the Multiprotocol Extension Capability Codeas defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports dissemination of flow specification rules for IPv4 Unicast as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES, but not completely applicable (we are not a router)

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports dissemination of flow specification rules for VPNv4 Unicast as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

2.2.  Traffic filtering compliance

Does your implementation supports ordered traffic filtering rules such that the order of two flow specifications is given by the comparison of NLRI key byte strings as defined by the memcmp() function is the ISO C standard ?

Arbor: YES, but not completely applicable

Juniper: YES

2.3.  Validation procedure compliance

Does your implementation supports flow routes validation per originator match with corresponding unicast route as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: N/A (we are not a router)

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports flow routes validation to make sure that there are no more specifics flow routes received from a different neighboring AS than the best-match unicast route as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: N/A

Juniper: YES

2.4.  Traffic Filtering Actions compliance

Does your implementation supports traffic-rate extended community filtering action as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports traffic-action extended community filtering action as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: YES

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports redirect extended community filtering action as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: NO (but upcoming version will)

Juniper: YES

2.5.  Monitoring compliance

Does your implementation supports a mechanism to log the packet header of filtered traffic as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: N/A

Juniper: YES

Does your implementation supports a mechanism to count the number of matches for a given Flow Specification rule as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: N/A

Juniper: YES

2.6.  Interoperable Implementations

List other implementations that you have tested interoperability of Dissemination of flow specification rules Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.) with:

Arbor: Juniper

Juniper: Arbor

3.  IANA Considerations

This document makes no request of IANA.

Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an RFC.

4.  Security Considerations

Does your implementation supports flow routes rules to match the corresponding unicast routing paths for the relevant prefixes as defined in Flow-Spec [I‑D.ietf‑idr‑flow‑spec] (Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., and D. McPherson, “Dissemination of flow specification rules,” May 2009.)?

Arbor: N/A

Juniper: YES

5.  Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Yakov Rekhter and Danny McPherson for their comments.

6.  References

6.1. Normative References

6.2. Informative References

Authors' Addresses

Full Copyright Statement

Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).

This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

This document and the information contained herein are provided on an “AS IS” basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.