Internet-Draft BGP-SPF SR October 2024
Zhang & Dong Expires 24 April 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
IDR
Internet-Draft:
draft-li-lsvr-bgp-spf-sr-00
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
L. Zhang
Huawei Technologies
J. Dong
Huawei Technologies

Applying BGP-LS Segment Routing Extensions to BGP-LS SPF

Abstract

For network scenarios such as Massively Scaled Data Centers (MSDCs), BGP is extended for Link-State (LS) distribution and the Shortest Path First (SPF) algorithm based calculation. BGP-LS SPF leverages the mechanisms of both BGP protocol and BGP-LS protocol extensions. Segment Routing (SR) provides a source routing mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR domain. In some networks, it may be useful to enable SR based source routing mechanism together with BGP-LS SPF. This document proposes to introduce the BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) extensions for segment routing to the BGP-LS SPF SAFI.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

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."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 24 April 2025.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

For network scenarios such as Massively Scaled Data Centers (MSDCs), BGP is extended for Link-State (LS) distribution and the Shortest Path First (SPF) algorithm based calculation. BGP-LS-SPF leverages the mechanisms of both BGP protocol [RFC4271] and BGP-LS protocol extensions [RFC9552], with the extensions to BGP-LS attribute and new NLRI selection rules defined in [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf].

Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called "segments". SR provides a mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR domain. SR can be applied to the MPLS architecture (SR-MPLS) as defined in [RFC8660], and can also be applied to the IPv6 architecture (SRv6) as defined in [RFC8754] and [RFC8986].

In networks where BGP-LS-SPF is used as the underlay routing protocol, it may be useful to enable SR based source routing mechanism for traffic engineering and optimization. This document proposes to introduce the BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) extensions for segment routing to the BGP-LS-SPF SAFI. Both the extensions for SR-MPLS and SRv6 are specified.

In general, most of the BGP-LS extensions for SR can be applied to BGP-LS SPF SAFI, only a few extensions are not applicable to BGP-LS SPF. For accuracy and documentation, the following subsections list the BGP-LS SR extensions which are introduced to BGP-LS SPF.

1.1. Requirements Language

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2. SR-MPLS TLVs applicable to BGP-LS SPF

When SR-MPLS is enabled in BGP-LS SPF, The following TLVs SHOULD be supported.

2.1. SR-MPLS Node Attribute TLVs

Table 1: Node Attribute TLVs for SR-MPLS with BGP-LS SPF
Type Description Reference
1161 SID/Label RFC 9085
1034 SR Capabilities RFC 9085
1035 SR Algorithm RFC 9085
1036 SR Local Block RFC 9085
1037 SRMS Preference RFC 9085

2.3. SR-MPLS Prefix Attribute TLVs

Table 3: Prefix Attribute TLVs for SR-MPLS with BGP-LS SPF
Type Description Reference
1158 Prefix-SID RFC 9085
1159 Range RFC 9085
1170 Prefix Attribute Flags RFC 9085
1171 Source Router Identifier RFC 9085
1174 Source OSPF Router-ID RFC 9085

3. SRv6 Extensions Applicable to BGP-LS SPF

When SRv6 is enabled with BGP-LS SPF, The following extensions SHOULD be supported.

3.1. SRv6 Node Attribute TLVs

The following Node Attribute TLVs SHOULD be supported for SRv6:

Table 4: Node Attribute TLVs for SRv6 with BGP-LS SPF
Type Description Reference
1138 SRv6 Capabilities TLV RFC 9514
266 Node MSD TLV RFC 8814

3.3. SRv6 Prefix Attribute TLVs

The following Prefix Attribute TLVs SHOULD be supported for SRv6:

Table 6: Prefix Attribute TLVs for SRv6 with BGP-LS SPF
Type Description Reference
1162 SRv6 Locator TLV RFC 9514

3.4. SRv6 SID NLRI

When SRv6 SIDs need to be advertised in BGP-SPF, the NLRI type for SRv6 SID SHOULD be supported in BGP-LS SPF SAFI:

Table 7: SRv6 SID NLRI with BGP-LS SPF
Type NLRI Type Reference
6 SRv6 SID NLRI RFC 9514

3.4.1. SRv6 SID Information NLRI

The SRv6 SID Information TLV SHOULD be carried in the SRv6 SID NLRI.

Table 8: SRv6 SID Information TLV with BGP-LS SPF
Type NLRI Type Reference
518 SRv6 SID Information TLV RFC 9514

3.4.2. SRv6 SID Attribute TLVs

The following TLVs MAY be carried in the BGP-LS Attribute associated with the SRv6 SID NLRI:

Table 9: SRv6 SID Attribute TLVs with BGP-LS SPF
Type NLRI Type Reference
1250 SRv6 Endpoint Behavior TLV RFC 9514
1251 SRv6 PeerNode SID TLV RFC 9514
1252 SRv6 SID Structure TLV RFC 9514

4. Operational Considerations

TBD

5. Security Considerations

This document introduces no additional security vulnerabilities in addition to the ones as described in [RFC9552].

6. IANA Considerations

7. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank XXX for the review and discussion of this document.

8. Normative References

[RFC4271]
Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC9552]
Talaulikar, K., Ed., "Distribution of Link-State and Traffic Engineering Information Using BGP", RFC 9552, DOI 10.17487/RFC9552, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9552>.
[I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf]
Patel, K., Lindem, A., Zandi, S., and W. Henderickx, "BGP Link-State Shortest Path First (SPF) Routing", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-38, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-38>.
[RFC8660]
Bashandy, A., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing with the MPLS Data Plane", RFC 8660, DOI 10.17487/RFC8660, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8660>.
[RFC8754]
Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>.
[RFC8986]
Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer, D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986, DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

Authors' Addresses

Li Zhang
Huawei Technologies
No. 156 Beiqing Road
Beijing
China
Jie Dong
Huawei Technologies
No. 156 Beiqing Road
Beijing
China