| rfc9972.original | rfc9972.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GROW M. Srivastava, Ed. | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Srivastava, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft Hewlett Packard Enterprise | Request for Comments: 9972 Hewlett Packard Enterprise | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Y. Liu | Category: Standards Track Y. Liu | |||
| Expires: 6 June 2026 China Mobile | ISSN: 2070-1721 China Mobile | |||
| C. Lin, Ed. | C. Lin, Ed. | |||
| New H3C Technologies | New H3C Technologies | |||
| J. Li | J. Li | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| 3 December 2025 | May 2026 | |||
| Advanced BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) Statistics Types | Advanced BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) Statistics Types | |||
| draft-ietf-grow-bmp-bgp-rib-stats-17 | ||||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| RFC 7854 defines different BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) statistics | The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) described in RFC 7854 defines | |||
| message types to observe events that occur on a monitored router. | statistics message types to observe events that occur on a monitored | |||
| This document defines new statistics type to monitor BMP Adj-RIB-In | router. This document defines new statistics types to monitor BMP | |||
| and Adj-RIB-Out Routing Information Bases (RIBs). | Adj-RIB-In and Adj-RIB-Out Routing Information Bases (RIBs). | |||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This is an Internet Standards Track document. | |||
| 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 | This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | received public review and has been approved for publication by the | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on | |||
| Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. | ||||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on 6 June 2026. | Information about the current status of this document, any errata, | |||
| and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at | ||||
| https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9972. | ||||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the | |||
| provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. | Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described | |||
| in the Revised BSD License. | ||||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Requirements Language | |||
| 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Terminology | |||
| 3. RIB Monitoring Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 3. RIB Monitoring Statistics | |||
| 3.1. Statistics Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 3.1. Statistics Format | |||
| 3.2. Adj-RIB-In RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition . . . . . 5 | 3.2. Adj-RIB-In RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | |||
| 3.3. Adj-RIB-Out RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition . . . . 7 | 3.3. Adj-RIB-Out RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | |||
| 4. Application Scope of Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 4. Application Scope of Statistics | |||
| 5. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 5. Implementation Considerations | |||
| 6. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 6. Operational Considerations | |||
| 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 7. Security Considerations | |||
| 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 8. IANA Considerations | |||
| 9. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 9. References | |||
| 9.1. Juniper Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 9.1. Normative References | |||
| 9.2. New H3C Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | Acknowledgements | |||
| 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | Authors' Addresses | |||
| 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | ||||
| 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | ||||
| 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | ||||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Section 4.8 of [RFC7854] defines a number of different BGP Monitoring | Section 4.8 of [RFC7854] defines a number of different BGP Monitoring | |||
| Protocol (BMP) statistics types to observe major events that occur on | Protocol (BMP) statistics types to observe major events that occur on | |||
| a monitored router. Stats are either counters or gauges. | a monitored router. Statistics are either counters or gauges. | |||
| Section 6.2 of [RFC8671] also defines several BMP statistics types | Section 6.2 of [RFC8671] also defines several BMP statistics types | |||
| for Adj-RIB-Out of a monitored router. | for Adj-RIB-Out of a monitored router. | |||
| New BMP statistics types are needed to enable more refined BGP route | New BMP statistics types are needed to enable more-refined BGP route | |||
| monitoring and analysis, improving operational maintenance and | monitoring and analysis to improve operational maintenance and | |||
| troubleshooting capabilities. | troubleshooting capabilities. | |||
| This document defines gauges for new BMP statistics. The | This document defines gauges for new BMP statistics. The | |||
| applicability scope of these new gauges (Adj-RIB-In, Adj-RIB-Out, | applicability scope of these new gauges (Adj-RIB-In, Adj-RIB-Out, | |||
| Loc-RIB) is provided in Section 4. The format of the BMP statistics | Loc-RIB) is provided in Section 4. The format of the BMP statistics | |||
| message remains same as defined in [RFC7854]. | message remains the same as defined in [RFC7854]. | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Language | 1.1. Requirements Language | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | |||
| "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP | "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | |||
| 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | |||
| capitals, as shown here. The BCP14 is used to stress importance for | capitals, as shown here. | |||
| operators but are not required as formal implementation requirement. | ||||
| | Note that the key words are used to stress importance for | ||||
| | operations; they are not required as a formal implementation | ||||
| | requirement. | ||||
| 2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
| This document makes use of the following terms: | This document makes use of the following terms: | |||
| * Adj-RIB-In: As defined in [RFC4271], "The Adj-RIBs-In contains | Adj-RIB-In: As defined in [RFC4271]: | |||
| unprocessed routing information that has been advertised to the | ||||
| local BGP speaker by its peers." | ||||
| * Pre-policy Adj-RIB-In: The result before applying the inbound | | The Adj-RIBs-In contains unprocessed routing information that | |||
| policy to an Adj-RIB-In. Note that this is an explicit definition | | has been advertised to the local BGP speaker by its peers. | |||
| that aligns with the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In concept specified in | ||||
| Pre-policy Adj-RIB-In: The result before applying the inbound policy | ||||
| to an Adj-RIB-In. Note that this is an explicit definition that | ||||
| aligns with the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In concept specified in | ||||
| Section 2 of [RFC7854]. | Section 2 of [RFC7854]. | |||
| * Post-policy Adj-RIB-In: As defined in Section 2 of [RFC7854]. | Post-policy Adj-RIB-In: As defined in Section 2 of [RFC7854]. | |||
| * Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in [RFC4271], "The Adj-RIBs-Out contains | Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in [RFC4271]: | |||
| the routes for advertisement to specific peers by means of the | ||||
| local speaker's UPDATE messages." | ||||
| * Pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in Section 3 of [RFC8671]. | | The Adj-RIBs-Out contains the routes for advertisement to | |||
| | specific peers by means of the local speaker's UPDATE messages. | ||||
| * Post-policy Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in Section 3 of [RFC8671]. | Pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in Section 3 of [RFC8671]. | |||
| * Loc-RIB: As defined in Section 1.1 of [RFC4271], "The Loc-RIB | Post-policy Adj-RIB-Out: As defined in Section 3 of [RFC8671]. | |||
| contains the routes that have been selected by the local BGP | ||||
| speaker's Decision Process." Note that the Loc-RIB state as | ||||
| monitored through BMP might also contain routes imported from | ||||
| other routing protocols such as an IGP or local static routes. | ||||
| * Route: As defined in Section 1.1 of [RFC4271]. | Loc-RIB: As defined in Section 1.1 of [RFC4271]: | |||
| The terms "Producer" and "Collector" are equivalent to "Monitored | | The Loc-RIB contains the routes that have been selected by the | |||
| Router" and "Monitoring Station", respectively. Also, | | local BGP speaker's Decision Process." Note that the Loc-RIB | |||
| "implementation" is used following the same usage in [RFC7854]. | | state as monitored through BMP might also contain routes | |||
| | imported from other routing protocols such as an IGP or local | ||||
| | static routes. | ||||
| Route: As defined in Section 1.1 of [RFC4271]. | ||||
| The terms "producer" and "collector" are equivalent to "monitored | ||||
| router" and "monitoring station", respectively. Also, | ||||
| "implementation" follows the same usage as in [RFC7854]. | ||||
| 3. RIB Monitoring Statistics | 3. RIB Monitoring Statistics | |||
| This section defines different statistics type for Adj-RIB-In and | This section defines different statistics types for Adj-RIB-In and | |||
| Adj-RIB-Out monitoring type. Some of these statistics are also | Adj-RIB-Out monitoring types. Some of these statistics are also | |||
| applicable to Loc-RIB; refer to Section 4 for more details. | applicable to Loc-RIB; refer to Section 4 for more details. | |||
| 3.1. Statistics Format | 3.1. Statistics Format | |||
| The BMP Statistics Report Message carries statistic information in | The BMP Statistics Report Message carries statistic information in | |||
| Type-Length-Value (TLV) formats. Each Statistic is encoded as a TLV | Type-Length-Value (TLV) formats. Each Statistic is encoded as a TLV | |||
| (Stat Type, Stat Len, Stat Data) (Section 4.8 of [RFC7854]). "Stat | (Stat Type, Stat Len, Stat Data) (see Section 4.8 of [RFC7854]). | |||
| Data" is being referred as "value" when defining various RIB | "Stat Data" is being referred to as "value" when defining various RIB | |||
| Monitoring Statistics. | Monitoring Statistics. | |||
| Statistics defined in this document can be categorized into two | Statistics defined in this document can be categorized into two | |||
| granularities: Global Statistics and Per-Address Family Identifier | granularities: Global Statistics and Per-Address Family Identifier | |||
| (AFI)/Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) [RFC4760] | (AFI) / Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) Statistics (see | |||
| Statistics. Statistics defined with Per-AFI/SAFI descriptions belong | [RFC4760]). Statistics defined with Per-AFI/SAFI descriptions belong | |||
| to Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics, while other statistics belong to Global | to Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics, while other statistics belong to Global | |||
| Statistics. Both a Global Statistic and its corresponding Per-AFI/ | Statistics. Both a Global Statistic and its corresponding Per-AFI/ | |||
| SAFI Statistics can be reported simultaneously. | SAFI Statistics can be reported simultaneously. | |||
| The Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics apply only to the AFI/SAFIs that a BGP | The Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics apply only to the AFI/SAFIs that a BGP | |||
| speaker supports and negotiates with its peer. The authoritative | speaker supports and negotiates with its peer. The authoritative | |||
| registries for AFI/SAFI values are maintained by IANA [IANA-AFI] | registries for AFI/SAFI values are maintained by IANA (see [IANA-AFI] | |||
| [IANA-SAFI]. | and [IANA-SAFI]). | |||
| For Global Statistics, the "Stat Data" (value) field is a single | For Global Statistics, the "Stat Data" (value) field is a single | |||
| 64-bit unsigned integer gauge with "Stat Len" MUST be set to 8. Each | 64-bit unsigned integer gauge where the "Stat Len" field MUST be set | |||
| global statistic MUST appear only once in a BMP Statistics Report | to 8. Each global statistic MUST appear only once in a BMP | |||
| Message. | Statistics Report Message. | |||
| For Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics, the "Stat Data" (value) field is a | For Per-AFI/SAFI Statistics, the "Stat Data" (value) field is a | |||
| 11-byte structured value formatted as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, and | 11-byte structured value formatted as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, and a | |||
| 64-bit Gauge. The "Stat Len" MUST be set to 11. For any given per- | 64-bit Gauge. The "Stat Len" MUST be set to 11. For any given per- | |||
| AFI/SAFI Statistic, duplicate (AFI, SAFI) pairs MUST NOT appear | AFI/SAFI Statistic, duplicate (AFI, SAFI) pairs MUST NOT appear | |||
| within the same BMP Statistics Report Message. Per-AFI/SAFI | within the same BMP Statistics Report Message. Per-AFI/SAFI | |||
| statistics MUST NOT be included in the BMP Statistics Report Message | statistics MUST NOT be included in the BMP Statistics Report Message | |||
| if there is no data to report for that AFI/SAFI. | if there is no data to report for that AFI/SAFI. | |||
| If statistics apply to the Loc-RIB, the "Peer Type" field in the Per- | If statistics apply to the Loc-RIB, the "Peer Type" field in the Per- | |||
| Peer Header of the corresponding BMP Statistics Report Message MUST | Peer Header of the corresponding BMP Statistics Report Message MUST | |||
| be set to 3 (Loc-RIB Instance Peer) [RFC9069]. Otherwise, the "Peer | be set to 3 (Loc-RIB Instance Peer) [RFC9069]. Otherwise, the "Peer | |||
| Type" MUST be set as defined in Section 4.2 of of [RFC7854]. | Type" field MUST be set as defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC7854]. | |||
| A BMP implementation MUST ignore unrecognized stat types upon | A BMP implementation MUST ignore unrecognized stat types upon | |||
| receipt. | receipt. | |||
| 3.2. Adj-RIB-In RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | 3.2. Adj-RIB-In RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | |||
| * Type = 18: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in pre-policy | Type = 18: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| Adj-RIB-In. This gauge is similar to stats type 7 defined in | Current number of routes in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. This gauge | |||
| [RFC7854] and makes it explicitly for the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. | is similar to stats type 7 defined in [RFC7854] and makes it | |||
| explicitly for the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. | ||||
| * Type = 19: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 19: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. This gauge is similar to stats type 9 | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| defined in Section 4.8 of [RFC7854] and makes it explicitly for | In. This gauge is similar to stats type 9 defined in Section 4.8 | |||
| the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. The value is structured as: 2-byte | of [RFC7854] and makes it explicitly for the pre-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | In. | |||
| * Type = 20: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in post-policy | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| Adj-RIB-In. | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| * Type = 21: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 20: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, | Current number of routes in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In. | |||
| 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 22: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 21: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| pre-policy Adj-RIB-In rejected by inbound policy. This gauge is | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| different from stats type 0 defined in Section 4.8 of [RFC7854]. | In. | |||
| The stats type 0 is a 32-counter which is a monotonically | ||||
| increasing number, while the stats type 22 is a 64-bit gauge which | ||||
| represents the current number of routes rejected by an inbound | ||||
| policy due to ongoing policy configuration changes. The value is | ||||
| structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit | ||||
| Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 23: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In accepted by inbound policy. The value is | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit | ||||
| Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 26: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 22: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB suppressed by configured route | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy Adj-RIB-In | |||
| damping policy. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte | rejected by an inbound policy. This gauge is different from stats | |||
| SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. 'Suppressed' refers to a route | type 0 defined in Section 4.8 of [RFC7854]. Stats type 0 is a | |||
| which has been declared suppressed by the BGP Route Flap Damping | 32-counter that is a monotonically increasing number; the stats | |||
| mechanism as described in Section 2.2 of [RFC2439]. | type 22 is a 64-bit gauge that represents the current number of | |||
| routes rejected by an inbound policy due to ongoing policy | ||||
| configuration changes. | ||||
| * Type = 27: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by Graceful | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| Restart (GR) events. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, | ||||
| 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. 'Stale' refers to a | ||||
| route which has been declared stale by the BGP GR mechanism as | ||||
| described in Section 4.1 of [RFC4724]. | ||||
| * Type = 28: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 23: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by Long-Lived | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| Graceful Restart (LLGR). The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, | In accepted by an inbound policy. | |||
| 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. 'Stale' refers to a | ||||
| route which has been declared stale by the BGP LLGR mechanism as | ||||
| described in Section 4.3 of [RFC9494]. | ||||
| * Type = 29: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in post-policy | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| Adj-RIB-In left before exceeding the received route threshold as | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| defined in Section 6.7 of [RFC4271]. | ||||
| * Type = 30: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes per-AFI/SAFI in | Type = 26: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In left before exceeding the received route | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| threshold which corresponds to the upper bound of per-AFI/SAFI | In or Loc-RIB suppressed by a configured route-damping policy. | |||
| accepted routes following the model defined in Section 6.7 of | ||||
| [RFC4271]. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, | ||||
| followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 31: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in post-policy | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license-customized | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| route threshold. If no such license is configured, or if the | ||||
| license does not impose a hard limit, this value MUST NOT be | ||||
| reported. | ||||
| * Type = 32: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | 'Suppressed' refers to a route that has been declared suppressed | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license- | by the BGP Route Flap Damping mechanism as described in | |||
| customized route threshold. If no such license is configured, or | Section 2.2 of [RFC2439]. | |||
| if the license does not impose a hard limit, this value MUST NOT | ||||
| be reported. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, | ||||
| followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 33: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in pre-policy | Type = 27: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| Adj-RIB-In rejected by exceeding the maximum AS_PATH length | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by Graceful Restart (GR) events. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| 'Stale' refers to a route that has been declared stale by the BGP | ||||
| GR mechanism as described in Section 4.1 of [RFC4724]. | ||||
| Type = 28: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by Long-Lived Graceful Restart | ||||
| (LLGR). | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| 'Stale' refers to a route that has been declared stale by the BGP | ||||
| LLGR mechanism as described in Section 4.3 of [RFC9494]. | ||||
| Type = 29: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In left before | ||||
| exceeding the received-route threshold as defined in Section 6.7 | ||||
| of [RFC4271]. | ||||
| Type = 30: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI in post-policy Adj- | ||||
| RIB-In left before exceeding the received-route threshold that | ||||
| corresponds to the upper bound of per-AFI/SAFI accepted routes | ||||
| following the model defined in Section 6.7 of [RFC4271]. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| Type = 31: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB | ||||
| left before exceeding a license-customized route threshold. If no | ||||
| such license is configured, or if the license does not impose a | ||||
| hard limit, this value MUST NOT be reported. | ||||
| Type = 32: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| In or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license-customized route | ||||
| threshold. If no such license is configured, or if the license | ||||
| does not impose a hard limit, this value MUST NOT be reported. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| Type = 33: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In rejected due | ||||
| to exceeding the maximum AS_PATH length supported by the local | ||||
| configuration. | ||||
| Type = 34: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI in pre-policy Adj- | ||||
| RIB-In rejected due to exceeding the maximum AS_PATH length | ||||
| supported by the local configuration. | supported by the local configuration. | |||
| * Type = 34: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| in pre-policy Adj-RIB-In rejected by exceeding the maximum AS_PATH | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| length supported by the local configuration. The value is | ||||
| structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit | ||||
| Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 35: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 35: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In invalidated through the Route Origin | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| Authorization (ROA) of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) | In invalidated through the Route Origin Authorization (ROA) of | |||
| [RFC6811]. This is total number of routes invalidated due to | Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) [RFC6811]. This is the | |||
| origin Autonomous System (AS) number mismatch and prefix length | total number of routes invalidated due to a mismatch of origin | |||
| mismatch. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, | Autonomous System (AS) numbers and a mismatch of prefix length. | |||
| followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 36: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In validated by verifying route origin AS | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| number through the ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. The value is structured | ||||
| as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | Type = 36: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| In validated by verifying the route origin AS number through the | ||||
| ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| Type = 37: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| In whose RPKI route origin validation state is NotFound due to the | ||||
| absence of a matching ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. | ||||
| * Type = 37: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | ||||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-In whose RPKI route origin validation state is | ||||
| NotFound due to the absence of a matching ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| 64-bit Gauge. | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| 3.3. Adj-RIB-Out RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | 3.3. Adj-RIB-Out RIB Monitoring Statistics Definition | |||
| * Type = 38: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 38: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out rejected by outbound policy. These routes | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| are active routes which otherwise would have been advertised in | Out rejected by an outbound policy. These routes are active | |||
| absence of outbound policy which rejected them. The value is | routes that otherwise would have been advertised in the absence of | |||
| structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit | an outbound policy that rejected them. | |||
| Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 39: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in pre-policy | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| Adj-RIB-Out filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| Type = 39: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out filtered | ||||
| due to the AS_PATH length exceeding the locally configured | ||||
| maximum. | ||||
| Type = 40: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| Out filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally | ||||
| configured maximum. | configured maximum. | |||
| * Type = 40: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| the locally configured maximum. The value is structured as: | ||||
| 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 41: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 41: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-Out invalidated through the ROA of RPKI | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| [RFC6811]. This is total number of routes invalidated due to | Out invalidated through the ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. This is the | |||
| origin AS number mismatch and prefix length mismatch. The value | total number of routes invalidated due to a mismatch of origin AS | |||
| is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit | numbers and a mismatch of prefix lengths. | |||
| Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 42: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-Out validated by verifying route origin AS | 64-bit Gauge. | |||
| number through the ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. The value is structured | ||||
| as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| * Type = 43: (64-bit Gauge) Current number of routes in per-AFI/SAFI | Type = 42: (64-bit Gauge) | |||
| post-policy Adj-RIB-Out whose RPKI route origin validation state | Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | |||
| is NotFound due to the absence of a matching ROA of RPKI | Out validated by verifying the route origin AS number through the | |||
| [RFC6811]. The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, | ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. | |||
| followed by a 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| Type = 43: (64-bit Gauge) | ||||
| Current number of routes in the per-AFI/SAFI post-policy Adj-RIB- | ||||
| Out whose RPKI route origin validation state is NotFound due to | ||||
| the absence of a matching ROA of RPKI [RFC6811]. | ||||
| The value is structured as: 2-byte AFI, 1-byte SAFI, followed by a | ||||
| 64-bit Gauge. | ||||
| 4. Application Scope of Statistics | 4. Application Scope of Statistics | |||
| This section briefly lists the statistics defined in this document | This section briefly lists the statistics defined in this document | |||
| and outlines their scope of application, as shown in Table 1. | and outlines their scope of application. | |||
| +====+==========+=============+=======+=============+=============+ | +====+==========+=============+=======+=============+=============+ | |||
| |Type|Pre-policy| Post-policy |Loc-RIB| Pre-policy | Post-policy | | |Type|Pre-policy| Post-policy |Loc-RIB| Pre-policy | Post-policy | | |||
| | |Adj-RIB-In| Adj-RIB-In | | Adj-RIB-Out | Adj-RIB-Out | | | |Adj-RIB-In| Adj-RIB-In | | Adj-RIB-Out | Adj-RIB-Out | | |||
| +====+==========+=============+=======+=============+=============+ | +====+==========+=============+=======+=============+=============+ | |||
| | 18 | Y | N | N | N | N | | | 18 | Y | N | N | N | N | | |||
| +----+----------+-------------+-------+-------------+-------------+ | +----+----------+-------------+-------+-------------+-------------+ | |||
| | 19 | Y | N | N | N | N | | | 19 | Y | N | N | N | N | | |||
| +----+----------+-------------+-------+-------------+-------------+ | +----+----------+-------------+-------+-------------+-------------+ | |||
| | 20 | N | Y | N | N | N | | | 20 | N | Y | N | N | N | | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 25 ¶ | skipping to change at line 448 ¶ | |||
| 5. Implementation Considerations | 5. Implementation Considerations | |||
| This document specifies gauges for new BMP statistics. The format of | This document specifies gauges for new BMP statistics. The format of | |||
| BMP statistics messages remains unchanged from [RFC7854]. This | BMP statistics messages remains unchanged from [RFC7854]. This | |||
| section outlines the implementation considerations for new BMP | section outlines the implementation considerations for new BMP | |||
| statistics. | statistics. | |||
| For backward compatibility, and absent policy otherwise, it is | For backward compatibility, and absent policy otherwise, it is | |||
| RECOMMENDED that BMP producers capable of generating both (Types 7 | RECOMMENDED that BMP producers capable of generating both (Types 7 | |||
| and 18) or (Types 9 and 19) BMP statistics SHOULD transmit both | and 18) and (Types 9 and 19) BMP statistics SHOULD transmit both | |||
| corresponding types simultaneously. This allows BMP collectors to | corresponding types simultaneously. This allows BMP collectors to | |||
| process either format according to their needs without disrupting | process either format according to their needs without disrupting | |||
| existing implementations that rely on Type 7 or Type 9. The | existing implementations that rely on Type 7 or Type 9. The | |||
| selection of which statistic types to generate within each pair | selection of which statistic types to generate within each pair | |||
| SHOULD be treated as an implementation decision rather than a | SHOULD be treated as an implementation decision rather than a | |||
| protocol requirement, with the BMP collector behavior for handling | protocol requirement, with the BMP collector behavior for handling | |||
| these statistic types remaining implementation-specific. | these statistic types remaining implementation specific. | |||
| Some statistics are dependent on feature configurations, such as GR, | Some statistics are dependent on feature configurations, such as GR, | |||
| LLGR, and RPKI, so the corresponding statistics SHOULD only be | LLGR, and RPKI; therefore, the corresponding statistics SHOULD only | |||
| generated and sent when these features are enabled on the BMP | be generated and sent when these features are enabled on the BMP | |||
| producer. These statistics include Types 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, | producer. These statistics include the following Types: 26, 27, 28, | |||
| 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, and 43. | 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, and 43. | |||
| Some statistics are also relevant for the Loc-RIB view [RFC9069], so | Some statistics are also relevant for the Loc-RIB view [RFC9069]; | |||
| they may apply to the Loc-RIB view after best-path selection is | therefore, they may apply to the Loc-RIB view after best-path | |||
| completed. These statistics include Types 26, 27, 28, 31, and 32. | selection is completed. These statistics include Types 26, 27, 28, | |||
| When these statistics apply to the Loc-RIB view, the Peer Type in the | 31, and 32. When these statistics apply to the Loc-RIB view, the | |||
| Per-Peer Header of the corresponding BMP Statistics Report Message | "Peer Type" field in the Per-Peer Header of the corresponding BMP | |||
| MUST set to 3. | Statistics Report Message MUST set to 3. | |||
| Certain statistics may have logical relationships (e.g., per-AFI/SAFI | Certain statistics may have logical relationships (e.g., per-AFI/SAFI | |||
| counts summing to global totals). BMP statistics producers and | counts summing to global totals). BMP statistics producers and | |||
| collectors MAY perform consistency checks but MUST NOT assume strict | collectors MAY perform consistency checks but MUST NOT assume strict | |||
| dependencies (due to potential race conditions or partial failures). | dependencies (due to potential race conditions or partial failures). | |||
| Discrepancies (e.g., sum(per-AFI/SAFI) != global count) SHOULD be | Discrepancies (e.g., sum(per-AFI/SAFI) != global count) SHOULD be | |||
| logged as warnings but MUST NOT disrupt protocol operation. | logged as warnings but MUST NOT disrupt protocol operation. | |||
| The generation and transmission of type 27 and 28 during an active | The generation and transmission of type 27 and 28 during an active | |||
| GR/LLGR event consumes additional control plane resources (e.g., | GR/LLGR event consumes additional control plane resources (e.g., | |||
| CPU). BMP statistics producers SHOULD prioritize the core GR/LLGR | CPU). BMP statistics producers SHOULD prioritize the core GR/LLGR | |||
| convergence procedures. To avoid adversely impacting the restart | convergence procedures. To avoid adversely impacting the restart | |||
| process, a BMP statistics producer MAY choose to sample this value at | process, a BMP statistics producer MAY choose to sample this value at | |||
| a lower frequency, buffer updates, or temporarily suspend reporting | a lower frequency, buffer updates, or temporarily suspend reporting | |||
| for this type during the most critical phases of a switchover. | for this type during the most critical phases of a switchover. | |||
| These gauges may reset due to manual clearance, or overflow. BMP | These gauges may reset due to manual clearance or overflow. BMP | |||
| statistics producers and collectors MUST track discontinuities and | statistics producers and collectors MUST track discontinuities and | |||
| log this anomaly. | log this anomaly. | |||
| 6. Operational Considerations | 6. Operational Considerations | |||
| This section outlines some operational considerations of new BMP | This section outlines some operational considerations of new BMP | |||
| statistics for BMP operators. | statistics for BMP operators. | |||
| Transmission scheduling and triggering mechanisms for new gauges are | Transmission scheduling and triggering mechanisms for new gauges are | |||
| implementation-dependent. BMP operators SHOULD determine appropriate | implementation dependent. BMP operators SHOULD determine appropriate | |||
| report generation and delivery strategies, including configurable | report generation and delivery strategies, including configurable | |||
| timing intervals and threshold values. The mechanism for controlling | timing intervals and threshold values. The mechanism for controlling | |||
| the reporting of new gauges SHOULD be consistent with that of | the reporting of new gauges SHOULD be consistent with that of | |||
| existing types. | existing types. | |||
| BMP operators SHOULD rate-limit statistic updates to minimize | BMP operators SHOULD rate-limit statistics updates to minimize | |||
| performance impact on control-plane processes. BMP operators SHOULD | performance impact on control plane processes. BMP operators SHOULD | |||
| only enable necessary statistics to reduce memory and CPU overhead. | only enable necessary statistics to reduce memory and CPU overhead. | |||
| Implementations SHOULD also support per-router configuration of | Implementations SHOULD also support per-router configuration of | |||
| statistic subsets for collection and reporting. | statistic subsets for collection and reporting. | |||
| Some BMP statistics producers, or configurations in BMP statistics | Some BMP statistics producers, or configurations in BMP statistics | |||
| producers, MAY discard routes that do not match policy and thus the | producers, MAY discard routes that do not match policy; thus, the | |||
| accepted count (Type 23) and the Adj-RIB-In counts (Type 21) will be | accepted count (Type 23) and the Adj-RIB-In counts (Type 21) will be | |||
| identical in such cases. BMP operators SHOULD be aware of this | identical in such cases. BMP operators SHOULD be aware of this | |||
| behavior when interpreting these gauges. BMP operators SHOULD be | behavior when interpreting these gauges. BMP operators SHOULD be | |||
| aware that BMP statistics producers and collectors MAY log | aware that BMP statistics producers and collectors MAY log | |||
| inconsistencies between statistics as warnings. | inconsistencies between statistics as warnings. | |||
| 7. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
| Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not | Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not | |||
| affect the BMP security model. All security and authentication | affect the BMP security model. All security and authentication | |||
| mechanisms required by Section 11 of [RFC7854], Section 8 of | mechanisms required by Section 11 of [RFC7854], Section 8 of | |||
| [RFC8671], and Section 7 of [RFC9069] are also applicable to the | [RFC8671], and Section 7 of [RFC9069] are also applicable to the | |||
| gauges defined in this document. This document does not add any | gauges defined in this document. This document does not add any | |||
| additional security considerations. | additional security considerations. | |||
| Monitored devices SHOULD be configured to implement rate-limited | Monitored devices SHOULD be configured to implement rate-limited | |||
| reporting of new gauges. | reporting of new gauges. | |||
| 8. IANA Considerations | 8. IANA Considerations | |||
| IANA has assigned the following new parameters in the BMP Statistics | IANA has assigned the following new parameters in the "BMP Statistics | |||
| Types registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/bmp-parameters/bmp- | Types" registry, part of the "BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) | |||
| parameters.xhtml#statistics-types), part of the BMP parameters | Parameters" registry group <https://www.iana.org/assignments/bmp- | |||
| registry group (https://www.iana.org/assignments/bmp-parameters/bmp- | parameters/>. | |||
| parameters.xhtml). | ||||
| This document requests IANA to update these entries as follows. | IANA has listed these entries as follows. This document serves as a | |||
| Also, the document requests IANA to update the reference cited for | reference for each entry. | |||
| the entries with the RFC number to be assigned to this document. | ||||
| * Type = 18: Number of routes currently in pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. | Type = 18: Number of routes currently in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In. | |||
| * Type = 19: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | Type = 19: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | |||
| Adj-RIB-In. | Adj-RIB-In. | |||
| * Type = 20: Number of routes currently in post-policy Adj-RIB-In. | Type = 20: Number of routes currently in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In. | |||
| * Type = 21: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 21: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In. | policy Adj-RIB-In. | |||
| * Type = 22: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | Type = 22: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | |||
| Adj-RIB-In rejected by inbound policy. | Adj-RIB-In rejected by an inbound policy. | |||
| * Type = 23: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 23: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In accepted by inbound policy. | policy Adj-RIB-In accepted by an inbound policy. | |||
| * Type = 26: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 26: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB suppressed by configured route damping | policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB suppressed by a configured route- | |||
| policy. | damping policy. | |||
| * Type = 27: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 27: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by GR events. | policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by GR events. | |||
| * Type = 28: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 28: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by LLGR. | policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB marked as stale by LLGR. | |||
| * Type = 29: Number of routes currently in post-policy Adj-RIB-In | Type = 29: Number of routes currently in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In | |||
| left before exceeding the received route threshold. | left before exceeding the received-route threshold. | |||
| * Type = 30: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 30: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In left before exceeding the received route threshold. | policy Adj-RIB-In left before exceeding the received-route | |||
| threshold. | ||||
| * Type = 31: Number of routes currently in post-policy Adj-RIB-In or | Type = 31: Number of routes currently in the post-policy Adj-RIB-In | |||
| Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license-customized route | or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license-customized route | |||
| threshold. | threshold. | |||
| * Type = 32: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 32: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license-customized | policy Adj-RIB-In or Loc-RIB left before exceeding a license- | |||
| route threshold. | customized route threshold. | |||
| * Type = 33: Number of routes currently in pre-policy Adj-RIB-In | Type = 33: Number of routes currently in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-In | |||
| rejected due to exceeding the locally configured maximum AS_PATH | rejected due to exceeding the locally configured maximum AS_PATH | |||
| length. | length. | |||
| * Type = 34: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | Type = 34: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | |||
| Adj-RIB-In rejected due to exceeding the locally configured | Adj-RIB-In rejected due to exceeding the locally configured | |||
| maximum AS_PATH length. | maximum AS_PATH length. | |||
| * Type = 35: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 35: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In invalidated after verifying route origin AS number | policy Adj-RIB-In invalidated after verifying the route origin AS | |||
| through the ROA of RPKI. | number through the ROA of RPKI. | |||
| * Type = 36: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 36: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In validated after verifying route origin AS number | policy Adj-RIB-In validated after verifying the route origin AS | |||
| through the ROA of RPKI. | number through the ROA of RPKI. | |||
| * Type = 37: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 37: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-In whose RPKI route origin validation state is NotFound. | policy Adj-RIB-In whose RPKI route origin validation state is | |||
| NotFound. | ||||
| * Type = 38: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | Type = 38: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | |||
| Adj-RIB-Out rejected by outbound policy. | Adj-RIB-Out rejected by an outbound policy. | |||
| * Type = 39: Number of routes currently in pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out | Type = 39: Number of routes currently in the pre-policy Adj-RIB-Out | |||
| filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally configured | filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally configured | |||
| maximum. | maximum. | |||
| * Type = 40: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | Type = 40: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI pre-policy | |||
| Adj-RIB-Out filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally | Adj-RIB-Out filtered due to AS_PATH length exceeding the locally | |||
| configured maximum. | configured maximum. | |||
| * Type = 41: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | Type = 41: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| Adj-RIB-Out invalidated after verifying route origin AS number | policy Adj-RIB-Out invalidated after verifying the route origin AS | |||
| through the ROA of RPKI. | number through the ROA of RPKI. | |||
| * Type = 42: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | ||||
| Adj-RIB-Out validated after verifying route origin AS number | ||||
| through the ROA of RPKI. | ||||
| * Type = 43: Number of routes currently in per-AFI/SAFI post-policy | ||||
| Adj-RIB-Out whose RPKI route origin validation state is NotFound. | ||||
| 9. Implementation Status | ||||
| Note to the RFC Editor - remove this section before publication, as | ||||
| well as remove the reference to [RFC7942]. | ||||
| This section records the status of known implementations of the | ||||
| protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this | ||||
| Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942]. | ||||
| The description of implementations in this section is intended to | ||||
| assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to | ||||
| RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation | ||||
| here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort | ||||
| has been spent to verify the information presented here that was | ||||
| supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not | ||||
| be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their | ||||
| features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may | ||||
| exist. | ||||
| According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups | ||||
| to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of | ||||
| running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation | ||||
| and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. | ||||
| It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as | ||||
| they see fit". | ||||
| 9.1. Juniper Networks | ||||
| * Organization: Juniper Networks. | ||||
| * Implementation: | ||||
| * Description: Below RIB-IN statistics are implemented. | ||||
| - Type = 18. | ||||
| - Type = 19. | ||||
| - Type = 20. | ||||
| - Type = 21. | ||||
| - Type = 22. | ||||
| - Type = 23. | ||||
| - Type = 26. | ||||
| - Type = 27. | ||||
| - Type = 28. | ||||
| - Type = 35. | ||||
| - Type = 36. | ||||
| - Type = 37. | ||||
| * Maturity Level: Demo | ||||
| * Coverage: | ||||
| * Version: Draft-05 | ||||
| * Licensing: N/A | ||||
| * Implementation experience: Nothing specific. | ||||
| * Contact: msri@juniper.net | ||||
| * Last updated: January 20, 2025 | ||||
| 9.2. New H3C Technologies | ||||
| * Organization: New H3C Technologies. | ||||
| * Implementation: H3C CR16000, CR19000 series routers implementation | ||||
| of New BMP Statistics Type. | ||||
| * Description: Below New types have been implemented in above- | ||||
| mentioned New H3C Products (running Version 7.1.086 and above). | ||||
| - Type = 18. | ||||
| - Type = 19. | ||||
| - Type = 20. | ||||
| - Type = 21. | ||||
| - Type = 22. | ||||
| - Type = 23. | ||||
| - Type = 29. | ||||
| - Type = 30. | ||||
| - Type = 31. | ||||
| - Type = 32. | ||||
| - Type = 33. | ||||
| - Type = 34. | ||||
| - Type = 35. | ||||
| - Type = 36. | ||||
| - Type = 37. | ||||
| - Type = 38. | ||||
| - Type = 39. | ||||
| - Type = 40. | ||||
| * Maturity Level: Demo | ||||
| * Coverage: | ||||
| * Version: Draft-05 | ||||
| * Licensing: N/A | ||||
| * Implementation experience: Nothing specific. | ||||
| * Contact: linchangwang.04414@h3c.com | ||||
| * Last updated: January 20, 2025 | ||||
| 10. Acknowledgements | ||||
| The author would like to thank Jeff Haas, Mohamed Boucadair, Thomas | ||||
| Graf, and Prasad S. Narasimha for their valuable input. | ||||
| Thanks to Giuseppe Fioccola for the OPSDIR, Jouni Korhonen for the | Type = 42: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| GENART, and Bruno Decraene for the RTGDIR review. | policy Adj-RIB-Out validated after verifying the route origin AS | |||
| number through the ROA of RPKI. | ||||
| Thanks to Gunter van de Velde, Eric Vyncke, and Ketan Talaulikar for | Type = 43: Number of routes currently in the per-AFI/SAFI post- | |||
| the IESG review. | policy Adj-RIB-Out whose RPKI route origin validation state is | |||
| NotFound. | ||||
| 11. References | 9. References | |||
| 11.1. Normative References | 9.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| [RFC2439] Villamizar, C., Chandra, R., and R. Govindan, "BGP Route | [RFC2439] Villamizar, C., Chandra, R., and R. Govindan, "BGP Route | |||
| Flap Damping", RFC 2439, DOI 10.17487/RFC2439, November | Flap Damping", RFC 2439, DOI 10.17487/RFC2439, November | |||
| 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2439>. | 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2439>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at line 686 ¶ | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9494>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9494>. | |||
| [IANA-AFI] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", | [IANA-AFI] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", | |||
| <https://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers>. | <https://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers>. | |||
| [IANA-SAFI] | [IANA-SAFI] | |||
| IANA, "Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFI) | IANA, "Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFI) | |||
| Parameters", | Parameters", | |||
| <https://www.iana.org/assignments/safi-namespace>. | <https://www.iana.org/assignments/safi-namespace>. | |||
| 11.2. Informative References | Acknowledgements | |||
| [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running | The authors would like to thank Jeff Haas, Mohamed Boucadair, Thomas | |||
| Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205, | Graf, and Prasad S. Narasimha for their valuable input. | |||
| RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>. | Thanks to Giuseppe Fioccola for the OPSDIR, Jouni Korhonen for the | |||
| GENART, and Bruno Decraene for the RTGDIR review. | ||||
| Thanks to Gunter van de Velde, Éric Vyncke, and Ketan Talaulikar for | ||||
| the IESG review. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Mukul Srivastava (editor) | Mukul Srivastava (editor) | |||
| Hewlett Packard Enterprise | Hewlett Packard Enterprise | |||
| 10 Technology Park Dr | 10 Technology Park Dr | |||
| Westford, MA 01886 | Westford, MA 01886 | |||
| United States of America | United States of America | |||
| Email: mukul.srivastava@hpe.com | Email: mukul.srivastava@hpe.com | |||
| Yisong Liu | Yisong Liu | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| 32 Xuanwumen West Street | 32 Xuanwumen West Street | |||
| Beijing | Beijing | |||
| Xicheng District, 100053 | Xicheng District, 100053 | |||
| China | China | |||
| Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | |||
| Changwang Lin (editor) | Changwang Lin (editor) | |||
| New H3C Technologies | New H3C Technologies | |||
| End of changes. 94 change blocks. | ||||
| 426 lines changed or deleted | 340 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. | ||||