One document matched: draft-walton-bgp-route-oscillation-stop-00.txt
Network Working Group Daniel Walton
Internet Draft David Cook
Expiration Date: November 2002 Alvaro Retana
File name: draft-walton-bgp-route-oscillation-stop-00.txt John Scudder
Cisco Systems
May 2002
BGP Persistent Route Oscillation Solution
draft-walton-bgp-route-oscillation-stop-00.txt
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
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. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by
other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet
Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a "working
draft" or "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.
Abstract
This document presents an application of the use of the advertisement
of multiple paths [1] to solve the well known BGP persistent route
oscillation [2,3] problem.
Walton, et al [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT BGP Persistent Oscillation Solution May 2002
1. Specification of Requirements
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 [5].
2. Advertisement of Multiple Paths to eliminate BGP route oscillation
Both types of route oscillation [2,3] are caused by the combination
of two factors:
1 As a result of the reduction of the IBGP full mesh through the
use of Route Reflectors [4] and Confederations [5], BGP speakers
in an AS may only have a partial view of the available exit
points into a neighboring AS.
2 Only comparing the MULTI_EXIT_DISC between routes learned from
the same neighboring AS [6,7].
In order to prevent the oscillation, we must eliminate one of these
two factors. The latter is easy to eliminate by always comparing the
MULTI_EXIT_DISC regardless of the Neighbor AS. This is not accept-
able for many BGP users because it will change the use of MED as
defined by BGP [6,7].
To solve the former, a BGP speaker which is a route reflector [4] or
a sub-AS border router in a BGP confederation [5] MUST advertise the
following to its IBGP or confederation peers:
o The best path for a prefix as defined by [6,7]; and
o One "neighbor AS best path" per neighbor AS. A "neighbor AS
best path" is the path that is considered best among all paths
from the same neighbor AS, and is advertised using the mechanism
described in [1]. Only "neighbor AS best paths" for which the
tie breaker (when comparing the path to the best path) occurs
after the MED is compared need to be propagated.
The result is that for every n neighbor ASes which a route reflector
or sub-AS border router has learned, it will advertise at most n-1
"neighbor AS best paths" to its non-EBGP peers.
Notwithstanding the above, the BGP speaker MUST continue to follow
the UPDATE propagation rules defined in the corresponding specifica-
tions [4,5,6,7].
The "neighbor AS best paths" MUST be withdrawn if the actual best
Walton, et al [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT BGP Persistent Oscillation Solution May 2002
path is withdrawn and not replaced. I.e., a "neighbor AS best path"
may only be announced as a supplement to an actual best path.
Note that the BGP speaker MUST NOT advertise the normal best path as
a "Neighbor AS best path"; i.e. the best path MUST only be advertised
once and no additional paths SHOULD be advertised for the Neighbor AS
from which the best path was selected.
3. Security Considerations
This document introduces no new security concerns to BGP or other
specifications referenced in this document.
4. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Bruce Cole, Chaitanya Kodeboyina, Dave Meyer,
Srihari Ramachandra, Mark Turner and Blaine Christian for their com-
ments and suggestions.
5. References
[1] Walton, D., Cook, D., Retana, A., Scudder, J., "Advertisement of
Multiple Paths in BGP", Work in Progress (draft-walton-bgp-add-
paths-00), May 2002.
[2] Cisco Systems, Inc., "Endless BGP Convergence Problem in Cisco IOS
Software Releases" , FN, October 10, 2000.
[3] McPherson, D., Gill, V., Walton, D., Retana, A., "BGP Persistent
Route Oscillation Condition", Work in Progress (draft-ietf-idr-
route-oscillation-01), February 2002.
[4] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Chen, E., "BGP Route Reflection - An
Alternative to Full Mesh IBGP", RFC 2796, April 2000.
[5] Traina, P., McPherson, D., Scudder, J.. "Autonomous System Con-
federations for BGP", RFC 3065, February 2001.
[6] Rekhter, Y., and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC
1771, March 1995.
[7] Rekhter, Y., and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)",
Work in Progress (draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-17), January 2002.
Walton, et al [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT BGP Persistent Oscillation Solution May 2002
6. Authors' addresses
Daniel Walton
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Email: dwalton@cisco.com
Alvaro Retana
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Email: aretana@cisco.com
David Cook
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Email: dacook@cisco.com
John G. Scudder
Cisco Systems, Inc.
100 S. Main Suite 200
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Email: jgs@cisco.com
Walton, et al [Page 4]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 16:00:44 |