[Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-00.txt
internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon, 05 January 2015 17:24 UTC
Return-Path: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898EF1A710C; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:24:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 4jx9YNyE7yI5; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:23:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 970731A854D; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:23:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.10.0.p1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20150105172358.13425.66144.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 09:23:58 -0800
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/xvinBV1zxNoRDAmG4RcuLs5OmJY
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-00.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 17:24:01 -0000
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing Working Group of the IETF. Title : Route Target Constrained Distribution of Routes with no Route Targets Authors : Eric C. Rosen Keyur Patel Jeffrey Haas Robert Raszuk Filename : draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-00.txt Pages : 6 Date : 2015-01-05 Abstract: BGP routes sometimes carry an "Extended Communities" path attribute. An Extended Communities path attribute can contain one or more "Route Targets" (RTs). By means of a procedure known as "RT Constrained Distribution" (RTC), a BGP speaker can send BGP UPDATE messages that express its interest in a particular set of RTs. Generally, RTC has been applied only to address families whose routes always carry RTs. When RTC is applied to such an address family, a BGP speaker expressing its interest in a particular set of RTs is indicating that it wants to receive all and only the routes of that address family that have at least one of the RTs of interest. However, there are scenarios in which the originator of a route chooses not to include any RTs at all, assuming that the distribution of a route with no RTs at all will be unaffected by RTC. This has led to interoperability problems in the field, where the originator of a route assumes that RTC will not affect the distribution of the route, but intermediate BGP speakers refuse to distribute that route because it does not carry any RT of interest. The purpose of this document is to clarify the effect of the RTC mechanism on routes that do not have any RTs. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
- [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rtc-no-rt-00.txt internet-drafts