Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation
"Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com> Wed, 10 March 2021 02:10 UTC
Return-Path: <jheitz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B3CF3A1664 for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 18:10:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=EYSUH/Y2; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=sQVkeZZD
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id km8BMw3epUpe for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 18:10:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E95BF3A1666 for <grow@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 18:10:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4816; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1615342230; x=1616551830; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=rUnfbDkFUwzUMSnfziKyKtPI7jR5HjiJ9xeoFDK3qrc=; b=EYSUH/Y2LqFW+dqgZQyAv7xoUajlGe3jGq86b5xtJWcYvB5kD0j0p/oV mHUEbMLR2GAxe2QYVW7Ddn+TRY5iA9xaufTezbmjuDM+5h44Ir0doLqhp 2Eaghi70EWhDhwtLVLvr3Ri7vW+fYh7hKD9NkIktoBXvJJY03UXJ7zDLu M=;
X-IPAS-Result: A0BXAwBFKEhgmJxdJa1agQmDIlF9WjYxiAkDhTmIWQOBBpgVgUKBEQNUCwEBAQ0BAR0LCgIEAQGBEwGDOQKBfgIlOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBBQBAQEBAQEBAYY2DYZEAQEBBAEBOAYBASwMCwQCAQgRBAEBHgEQJwsdCAIEARIIDAeCVQGCVQMvAQ6iPAKKHnSBNIMEAQEGhRoYghMDBoE5gnaKTSYcgUlCgRABQ4IjNT6CXAEBgSUgHCSDJIIrgVg/FBkIPCoISy8sIB0qCAEBHAEZAw4CkT6OG5ppCoMAkReLOKQAkhyCT6JEAgQCBAUCDgEBBoFrIYFZcBU7gmlQFwINjjgdgzmFFIVFczgCBgoBAQMJfIwDAQE
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:vNriEhDhDuygM0ZJAi/IUyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9pssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qw30A3FWIzB4LRFhvbY9af6Vj9I7ZWAtSUEd5pBH18AhN4NlgMtSMiCFQXgLfHsYiB7eaYKVFJs83yhd0QAHsH4ag7ep3So5ngTFwnxcw1vKbe9Fovblc/i0ee09tXaaBlJgzzoZ7R0IV22oAzdu9NQj5FlL/M6ywDCpT1DfOEFyA==
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,236,1610409600"; d="scan'208";a="658537061"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 10 Mar 2021 02:10:28 +0000
Received: from mail.cisco.com (xbe-rcd-007.cisco.com [173.37.102.22]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 12A2ASrh000498 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:10:28 GMT
Received: from xfe-rcd-005.cisco.com (173.37.227.253) by xbe-rcd-007.cisco.com (173.37.102.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.3; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 20:10:26 -0600
Received: from xfe-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.123) by xfe-rcd-005.cisco.com (173.37.227.253) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.3; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 20:10:26 -0600
Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xfe-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.123) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 20:10:25 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Weaq3mZLfAl62rbjcyWTpGVH6i0OL81eI3+Ouhn0CARd2Z3nL0DzXLdB+oZYCASIdiMdhu+oTeCV1KVLosGk4IrYfLm98+mgNV4iFKg6SXJX0NVLo6/fqc7Fq6WPFJa0HDLdA4xOt06G30x9qrZxE1ID+VSC22+43DhUO+MGa43ahTg0SEa8Se+CTgxxJjWzGg0bXeTW5d8EaP5PgVr1htRnrB39eiAbPZ+ciyFFs2mHFKFicRQvZniDwaGBufIex9rWIs94hDOJdXqE08L0bB7h2RyXx9ni+JDR7pht4RXqSuVpH/S5aKPhcMIwCQRHRrbRQMT95ybqtBuWL/APog==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KnchJCAcPDld6x4eAbd1iSE5uf0wFESRjNrDKS5xixI=; b=WKjvUelmVDQnCSoTwYk9wO1fdQKFN+P7TVE8y2a98RlBpHE5ecHRKtDueLXUdcr2oE9deyNQ7pg0xyKwRiwUfjzrhi77RfRPkzYnIrr8QsrpLej1hSjc9Q8z3qmI6w9RGd8ot45zvGL9AqWBoBsZpOVaGjSK73HwnTxBFnEUKnAMASBDBIae7nAFcN7vvrRUOAA6FotjcymiyCJaDK01gZWHnns+UHlQlPEwBvZCkT43KjdhIoPL/9e+dOLkl7YVHW5qkf0qs7nq3xT6xePPUkl8vlRQAGBNw58Lp+8ZvGVaEcEwwZgrPQ3eUFqye7M2HL9ff/T+/OzpVanJTQZ8BA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KnchJCAcPDld6x4eAbd1iSE5uf0wFESRjNrDKS5xixI=; b=sQVkeZZD0X23Bin0E6YvSXOFfY3RbvTRQwaRdtYzn5MXPgX5pA5gWXON1zdorvMvkPfWvBECTUp5GOS/vw8UAJ1VqMyvrmvIrQOUASSPaUAOwOjFLIYDlaJOFscIb1OxEE7BQUu0KMrC3nvmhTxsK7nHFbEM4B3BXl9qnpCUSIY=
Received: from BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:7c::14) by BYAPR11MB3285.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:7b::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3912.17; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:10:24 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e084:727e:9608:11c7]) by BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e084:727e:9608:11c7%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3912.027; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:10:24 +0000
From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
To: Job Snijders <job=40fastly.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "grow@ietf.org" <grow@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation
Thread-Index: AQHXFR7c2pHzW1JblEKn9bEfWDsEUap8eQow
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:10:24 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB3207C48AB9F27BC7E015CCC6C0919@BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <YEfTnMNU+taoqzal@snel>
In-Reply-To: <YEfTnMNU+taoqzal@snel>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: dmarc.ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc.ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2601:647:5701:46e0:5951:d330:73f9:48a]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 933f4ee0-728b-42e7-a09a-08d8e369aaae
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB3285:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB3285CC240718E1C0D4BF58B2C0919@BYAPR11MB3285.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(376002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(346002)(39860400002)(5660300002)(2906002)(76116006)(33656002)(966005)(83380400001)(8676002)(71200400001)(7696005)(53546011)(478600001)(9686003)(186003)(8936002)(110136005)(55016002)(316002)(52536014)(66946007)(64756008)(66556008)(66446008)(6506007)(66476007)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 933f4ee0-728b-42e7-a09a-08d8e369aaae
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Mar 2021 02:10:24.6977 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: DMYp7zMuQYaXX73FsdrlDILNCXfPml2NJCzaNkLaDEma6cml4vatcM7SSUKcM1ERfx84Hs2GGONbXVTfYCnvgQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB3285
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.22, xbe-rcd-007.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-5.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/grow/-E__V9jY81VyOYZGRbTFj19ULtw>
Subject: Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation
X-BeenThere: grow@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Grow Working Group Mailing List <grow.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/grow/>
List-Post: <mailto:grow@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:10:33 -0000
Job, your suggestion kicks a different goal than draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation does. draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation tries to determine if your neighbor leaked the route to you. To do that, you need to know how your neighbor received the route before he sent it to you. That's what the ASN in the LC is for. Regards, Jakob. -----Original Message----- From: GROW <grow-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Job Snijders Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 11:59 AM To: grow@ietf.org Subject: Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation Dear GROW, (Removed sidrops@ from CC) *Wearing a Working Group participant hat* I reviewed draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation-04 and it appears to me there is a shortcut possible in the mitigation algorithm. This shortcut in turn negates the need to specify any ASN in the "DO Community". Only requiring a single community opens up the path to use existing well-known RFC 1997 community as signal between BGP nodes. The section 4.1 leak mitigation algorithm could be revised such that if a route path present in the Loc-RIB is considered the best path and eligible for export to EBGP neighbors, an additional verification step is performed. The sender could check whether a 'DO community' is present on the route in the Loc-RIB, and if the to-be-exported-to EBGP neigbhor is configured as a 'lateral Peer' or as 'Provider', the route is rejected in the PIB (Policy Information Base) and thus will not be present in Adj-RIB-Out - thus blocking a leak from happening. This places the route leak mitigation solution one step earlier in the BGP 'supply chain' process. There is an existing well-known BGP Community known as 'NOPEER Community for BGP Route Scope Control', described in RFC 3765. Similar to how the mitigation does not truly differentiate between 'Providers' and 'Lateral Peers' (if one considers routing policy puzzles often can be solved through multiple different combinations of policy in either of EBGP-IN, IBGP-OUT, IBGP-IN, EBGP-OUT. The recommendation then simplifies to the following three steps: 1/ Recommend network operators to never strip the RFC 3765 Community upon receiving a BGP route from either an IBGP or EBGP neighbor. 2/ Recommend network operators to manually configure (or have BGP OPENv2 speakers automatically) *add* the NOPEER Community (if it wasn't already present) to route paths received from a Lateral Peer or Provider. Then proceed with whatever Import Policy applies. 3/ Recommend network operators (or have BGP OPENv2 speakers automatically) block routes which contain the NOPEER Community from propagating towards EBGP neighbor marked as 'Lateral Peer' or 'Provider'. The procedure stops. 4/ If the EBGP neighbor is *not* a 'Lateral Peer' or 'Provider', the route MAY be added to the Adj-RIB-Out specific to that EBGP neighbor. The NOPEER community is not removed (see step 1). As Nick Hilliard pointed out earlier in this thread, there might be business requirements which require the operator to override the autnomous system's default policy, but as the NOPEER Community happens to be 'just a BGP community', operators can do as they wish with the received routing information. A case can be made that operators - by default - would benefit from accepting the NOPEER community and based on its presence prevent routes from propagating further towards EBGP neighbors in the Peer/Provider class. The above proposal is slightly different than the implementation requirements stemming from honoring GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN (where the intention is for the inter-domain signal to be honored on EBGP-IN), the NOPEER community essentially is best honored in EBGP-OUT policies. Promoting inter-domain use of the NOPEER community by outlining how correctly adding & scoping based on this community one can help mitigate BGP route leaks. The NOPEER community being readily available in most deployed BGP speakers for any operator wishing to use the mitigation mechanism, this might make for a compelling argument. In short 'Down Only' is equivalent to 'Not towards Peers & Providers: - in EBGP-IN set NOPEER on routes received from Peers/Providers - in EBGP-OUT block NOPEER routes from being announced to Peers/Providers The above appears incrementally deployable, and compliant with the specification of NOPEER, and can be promoted through Network Operator Groups by converting draft-ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation to target Best Current Practise (BCP). Kind regards, Job _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
- [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-route… Job Snijders
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Brian Dickson
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Randy Bush
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Alexander Azimov
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Brian Dickson
- Re: [GROW] call for feedback on draft-ietf-grow-r… Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)
- [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-grow… Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-… Brian Dickson
- Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-… Job Snijders
- Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-… Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
- Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-… Job Snijders
- Re: [GROW] An alternative approach to draft-ietf-… Jakob Heitz (jheitz)