NextHop
A. Retana
Cisco
January 2006
BGP-4 Implementation Report
Status of This Memo
-
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
-
Copyright © The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
-
This document reports the results of the BGP-4 implementation survey. The survey had 259 questions about implementations' support of BGP-4 as specified in RFC 4271. After a brief summary of the results, each response is listed. This document contains responses from the four implementers that completed the survey (Alcatel, Cisco, Laurel, and NextHop) and brief information from three that did not (Avici, Data Connection Ltd., and Nokia).
The editors did not use exterior means to verify the accuracy of the information submitted by the respondents. The respondents are experts with the products they reported on.
Table of Contents
-
1. Introduction ....................................................3 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................4 2. Results of Survey ...............................................4 2.1. Significant Differences ....................................4 2.2. Overview of Differences ....................................5 2.3. Implementations and Interoperability .......................6 2.4. BGP Implementation Identification ..........................7 3. BGP-4 Implementation Report .....................................7 3.0. Summary of Operation / Section 3 [RFC4271] .................7 3.1. Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1 [RFC4271] ..8 3.2. Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2 [RFC4271] ..........9 3.3. Message Formats / Section 4 [RFC4271] ......................9 3.4. Message Header Format / Section 4.1 [RFC4271] .............10 3.5. OPEN Message / Section 4.2 [RFC4271] ......................11 3.6. UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3 [RFC4271] .............12 3.7. KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4 [RFC4271] ..........16 3.8. NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5 [RFC4271] .......17 3.9. Path Attributes /Section 5 [RFC4271] ......................17 3.10. ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1 [RFC4271] .........................22 3.11. AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2 [RFC4271] ........................22 3.12. NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3 [RFC4271] .......................23 3.13. MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4 [RFC4271] ................27 3.14. LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5 [RFC4271] .....................30 3.15. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6 [RFC4271] ...............31 3.16. AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7 [RFC4271] .....................32 3.17. BGP Error Handling / Section 6 [RFC4271] .................34 3.18. Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1 [RFC4271] ....34 3.19. OPEN Message Error Handling / Section 6.2 [RFC4271] ......36 3.20. UPDATE Message Error Handling / Section 6.3 [RFC4271] ....40 3.21. NOTIFICATION Message Error Handling / Section 6.4 [RFC4271] ................................................50 3.22. Hold Timer Expired Error Handling / Section 6.5 [RFC4271] ................................................51 3.23. Finite State Machine Error Handling / Section 6.6 [RFC4271] ................................................51 3.24. Cease / Section 6.7 [RFC4271] ............................51 3.25. BGP Connection Collision Detection / Section 6.8 [RFC4271] ................................................53 3.26. BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7 [RFC4271] ............54 3.27. BGP Finite State Machine (FSM) / Section 8 [RFC4271] .....55 3.28. Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2 [RFC4271] ..........55 3.29. Timer Events / Section 8.1.3 [RFC4271] ...................61 3.30. TCP Connection-Based Events / Section 8.1.4 [RFC4271] ....62 3.31. BGP Messages-Based Events / Section 8.1.5 [RFC4271] ......63 3.32. FSM Definition / Section 8.2.1 [RFC4271] .................65 3.33. FSM and Collision Detection / Section 8.2.1.2 [RFC4271] ..66 3.34. FSM Event numbers / Section 8.2.1.4 [RFC4271] ............66 3.35. Finite State Machine / Section 8.2.2 [RFC4271] ...........67 3.36. UPDATE Message Handling / Section 9 [RFC4271] ............67 3.37. Decision Process / Section 9.1 [RFC4271] .................69 3.38. Phase 1: Calculation of Degree of Preference / Section 9.1.1 ............................................70 3.39. Phase 2: Route Selection / Section 9.1.2 [RFC4271] .......71 3.40. Route Resolvability Condition / Section 9.1.2.1 [RFC4271] ................................................73 3.41. Breaking Ties (Phase 2) / Section 9.1.2.2 [RFC4271] ......74 3.42. Phase 3: Route Dissemination / Section 9.1.3 [RFC4271] ...76 3.43. Overlapping Routes / Section 9.1.4 [RFC4271] .............77 3.44. Update-Send Process / Section 9.2 [RFC4271] ..............79 3.45. Frequency of Route Advertisement / Section 9.2.1.1 [RFC4271] ........................................81 3.46. Aggregating Routing Information / Section 9.2.2.2 [RFC4271] ................................................82 3.47. Route Selection Criteria / Section 9.3 [RFC4271] .........87 3.48. Originating BGP Routes / Section 9.4 [RFC4271] ...........88 3.49. BGP Timers / Section 10 [RFC4271] ........................88 3.50. TCP Options that May Be Used with BGP / Appendix E [RFC4271] ..............................................91 3.51. Reducing Route Flapping / Appendix F.2 [RFC4271] .........92 3.52. Complex AS_PATH aggregation / Appendix F.6 [RFC4271] .....92 3.53. Security Considerations [RFC4271] ........................92 4. Additional BGP Implementations Information .....................93 4.1. Avici .....................................................93 4.2. Data Connection Ltd. ......................................94 4.3. Nokia .....................................................94 5. Security Considerations ........................................95 6. Normative References ...........................................95 7. Acknowledgements ...............................................96
1. Introduction
-
This document reports results from a survey of implementations of BGP-4 as specified in [RFC4271]. RFC 4271 is in alignment with current deployments of BGP-4 and obsoletes the BGP standard [RFC1771]. BGP is a widely deployed cornerstone of Internet technology that continues to add additional functionality as the needs of the Internet evolve. As deployed in the Internet, BGP-4 encompasses both this base specification and additional specifications such as TCP MD5 [RFC2385], BGP Route Reflectors [RFC2796], BGP Confederations [RFC3065], and BGP Route Refresh [RFC2918].
The BGP-4 implementation survey had 259 detailed questions about compliance with [RFC4271]. Four implementers (Alcatel, Cisco, Laurel, and NextHop) completed the survey. Section 3 provides a compilation of those results.
Section 2.1 highlights significant differences and Section 2.2 provides an overview of the differences between the four implementations. Section 2.3 provides interoperability information.
Due to the large number of BGP implementations and the small number of respondents, the editors took an informal survey to determine if the length of the original survey caused implementers not to submit it. Three implementers responded, and all indicated the length of the survey was the issue. Section 4 gives the results of this informal survey.
In this document, the editors have compiled the results of the implementation survey results and the informal survey.
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
-
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 [RFC2119].
2. Results of Survey
-
The respondents replied "Y" (yes) or "N" (no) to the survey's 259 questions to indicate whether their implementation supports the Functionality/Description of the [RFC2119] language in [RFC4271]. The respondents replied "O" (other) to indicate that the support is neither "Y" nor "N" (for example, an alternate behavior).
2.1. Significant Differences
-
Each question received affirmative responses from at least two implementers (i.e., two "Y" responses, or one "Y" and one "O"), except the following questions:
a) MUST - Linked Questions 212/213, regarding Section 9.1.4
-
Due to the format of the linked questions, three vendors (Cisco, Laurel, and NextHop) replied "N" to Question 213. (See Section 2.2 for details.)
b) SHALL NOT - Question 228, regarding Section 9.2.2.2
-
Three vendors (Alcatel, Cisco, and Laurel) answered "N" to SHALL NOT (meaning they did). One vendor (NextHop) indicated "O" matching the specification.
Text: Routes that have different MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute SHALL NOT be aggregated. (Section 9.2.2.2, [RFC4271])c) SHOULD - Questions 257 and 258, regarding Appendix F
-
Three vendors answered "N" and one vendor answered "Y" to Question 257. All four vendors answered "N" to Question 258. (Please note that support of Appendix F, "Implementation Recommendations", is optional.)
Text: A BGP speaker which needs to withdraw a destination and send an update about a more specific or less specific route SHOULD combine them into the same UPDATE message. (Appendix F.2, [RFC4271]) Text: The last instance (rightmost occurrence) of that AS number is kept. (Appendix F.6, [RFC4271])d) MAY - Questions 180 and 254, regarding Sections 8.1.2.4 and 10
-
Three vendors answered "N", and 1 replied "Y" to Question 180.
Text: The Event numbers (1-28) utilized in this state machine description aid in specifying the behavior of the BGP state machine. Implementations MAY use these numbers to provide network management information. The exact form of a FSM or the FSM events are specific to each implementation. (Section 8.1.2.4, [RFC4271]) Editors' note: Section 8.1.2.4 was written to allow existing implementations to transition to the new event numbering. It was expected over time (3 years) that the FSM event numbering would be updated to the new numbering.-
Three vendors answered "N" and one answered "Y" to Question 254 about configurable jitter time values.
Text: A given BGP speaker MAY apply the same jitter to each of these quantities regardless of the destinations to which the updates are being sent; that is, jitter need not be configured on a "per peer" basis. (Section 10, [RFC4271]) Question: Is the jitter range configurable? -
2.2. Overview of Differences
-
This section provides the reader with a shortcut to the points where the four implementations differ.
The following questions were not answered "Y" by all four respondents (Note that the question numbers correspond to the final digit of subsection numbers of Section 3):
MUST 97, 106, 107, 111, 122, 125, 138, 141, 213-
SHALL
233, 239SHALL NOT
228
SHOULD 42, 117, 132, 146, 152, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 164, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 202, 225, 250, 255, 256-
SHOULD NOT
226
MAY 67, 94, 121, 143, 180, 223, 247, 254-
Other
236, 238Linked Questions
212/213Three vendors answered "N" and one answered "Y" to Question 213 about the aggregation of routes. Questions 212 and 213 are grouped together.
Question 212 states: "The decision process MUST either install
both routes or..." Question 213 states: "Aggregate the two routes and install the aggregated route, provided that both routes have the same value of the NEXT_HOP attribute"-
Of the four respondents that said "Y" to Question 212, three said "N" to Question 213. Given the context of the question, answering "N" to Question 213 is appropriate.
-
2.3. Implementations and Interoperability
-
Alcatel Cisco Laurel NextHop Alcatel Y Y Cisco Y Laurel Y Y NextHop Y Y
2.4. BGP Implementation Identification
-
1.6.0 Alcatel Implementation Name/Version: Alcatel 7750 BGP Implementation Release 1.3 Date: July 2003 Contact Name: Devendra Raut Contact Email: [email protected] 1.6.1 Cisco Implementation Name/Version: Cisco BGP Implementation, 12.0(27)S Contact Name: Alvaro Retana Date: 11/26/2003 1.6.2 Laurel Implementation Name/Version: Laurel Networks 3.0 Contact Name: Manish Vora Contact Email: [email protected] Date: 2/1/2004-
1.6.3 NextHop Technologies
Implementation Name/Version: Gated NGC 2.0, 2.2
Date: January 2004
-
3. BGP-4 Implementation Report
-
For every item listed, the respondents indicated whether their implementation supports the Functionality/Description or not (Y/N) according to the [RFC2119] language indicated. Any respondent comments are included. If appropriate, the respondents indicated with "O" the fact that the support is neither Y/N (an alternate behavior, for example). Refer to the appropriate sections in [RFC4271] for additional details. Note that the last digit of the subsection number is the number of the survey question.
3.0. Summary of Operation / Section 3 [RFC4271]
-
3.0.1. Base Behavior
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the base behavior described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.0.2. Local Policy Changes
-
Functionality/Description: To allow local policy changes to have the correct effect without resetting any BGP connections, a BGP speaker SHOULD either (a) retain the current version of the routes advertised to it by all of its peers for the duration of the connection, or (b) make use of the Route Refresh extension [RFC2918]
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.1. Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.1.3. Withdraw Routes from Service
-
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the three methods described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.1.4. Path Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Added to or modified before advertising the route
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.2. Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.2.5. Routing Information Bases
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the RIB structure described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.2.6. Next Hop Resolution
-
Functionality/Description: The next hop for each route in the Loc-RIB MUST be resolvable via the local BGP speaker's Routing Table
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.3. Message Formats / Section 4 [RFC4271]
-
3.3.7. Message Size
-
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the message sizes described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.4. Message Header Format / Section 4.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.4.8. Marker
-
Functionality/Description:
MUST be set to all ones
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.4.9. Length-
Functionality/Description: MUST always be at least 19 and no greater than 4096
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.4.10. Length-
Functionality/Description: MAY be further constrained, depending on the message type
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.4.11. Message "Padding"
-
Functionality/Description: No "padding" of extra data after the message is allowed, so the Length field MUST have the smallest value required given the rest of the message
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.5. OPEN Message / Section 4.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.5.12. Hold Timer Calculation
-
Functionality/Description: Use the smaller of its configured Hold Time and the Hold Time received in the OPEN message
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.5.13. Minimum Hold Time
-
Functionality/Description: MUST be either zero or at least three seconds
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.5.14. Connection Rejection
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Based on the Hold Time
-
-
-
-
-
-
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Sends notification. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.6. UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.6.15. UPDATE
-
Functionality/Description: Simultaneously advertise a feasible route and withdraw multiple unfeasible routes from service
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have capability to process this functionality on receiving end but we don't send feasible & unfeasible simultaneously. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.16. Transitive Bit Setting
-
Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes, the Transitive bit MUST be set to 1
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.17. Partial Bit Setting
-
Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes and for optional non-transitive attributes the Partial bit MUST be set to 0
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.6.18. Attribute Flags Octet Sending Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits set to zeroMUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.6.19. Attribute Flags Octet Receiving Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits ignoredMUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.6.20. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the destinations listed in the NLRI field of the UPDATE message
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.6.21. MULTI_EXIT_DISC-
Functionality/Description: Used by a BGP speaker's decision process to discriminate among multiple entry points to a neighboring autonomous system
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.22. AGGREGATOR IP Address
-
Functionality/Description: Same address as the one used for the BGP Identifier of the speaker
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured different from BGP ID. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.23. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
-
-
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields
Functionality/Description: UPDATE messages SHOULD NOT include that information
-
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.24. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
-
-
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields
Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker MUST be able to handle them
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.6.25. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
-
-
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields
Functionality/Description: Treated as if the WITHDRAWN ROUTES doesn't contain the address prefix
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Withdrawn routes are processed before NLRI fields. Hence we get the desired behavior. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.7. KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.7.26. Maximum KEEPALIVE Frequency
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not greater than one second
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.7.27. KEEPALIVE Messages Rate
-
Functionality/Description: Adjusted as a function of the Hold Time interval
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.7.28. Negotiated Hold Time of 0
-
Functionality/Description:
No KEEPALIVEs sent
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.8. NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5 [RFC4271]
-
3.8.29. NOTIFICATION Message
-
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the NOTIFICATION Message as described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.9. Path Attributes /Section 5 [RFC4271]
-
3.9.30. Path Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the path attributes as described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.31. Well-Known Attributes
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Recognized by all BGP implementations
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.32. Mandatory Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Included in every UPDATE message that contains NLRI
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.33/34. Discretionary Attributes
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sent in a particular UPDATE message
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MAY or MAY NOT
-
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.35. Well-Known Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Passed along (after proper updating, if necessary) to other BGP peers
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.36. Optional Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: In addition to well-known attributes, each path MAY contain one or more optional attributes
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.9.37. Unrecognized Transitive Optional Attributes-
Functionality/Description:
-
Accepted
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.38. Partial Bit for Unrecognized Transitive Optional Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Set to 1 if the attribute is accepted and passed to other BGP speakers
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.9.39. Unrecognized Non-Transitive Optional Attributes-
Functionality/Description: Quietly ignored and not passed along to other BGP peers
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.9.40. New Transitive Optional Attributes-
Functionality/Description: Attached to the path by the originator or by any other BGP speaker in the path
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.41. Optional Attributes
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Updated by BGP speakers in the path
-
-
-
-
-
-
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.42. Path Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Ordered in ascending order of attribute type
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O All attributes are ordered in ascending order except Extended Community, which is type 16 but we send it out after community attribute. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y except for MBGP which is always last NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.43. Out of Order Received Path Attributes
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Receiver MUST be able to handle
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.9.44. Mandatory Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Present in all exchanges if NLRI are contained in the UPDATE message
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.10. ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.10.45. ORIGIN
-
Functionality/Description: Value SHOULD NOT be changed by any speaker, except the originator
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.11. AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.11.46. AS_PATH
-
Functionality/Description: Not modified when advertising a route to an internal peer
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.11.47. Segment Overflow
-
Functionality/Description: If the act of prepending will cause an overflow in the AS_PATH segment, i.e., more than 255 ASs, it SHOULD prepend a new segment of type AS_SEQUENCE and prepend its own AS number to this new segment
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.11.48. Prepending-
Functionality/Description: The local system MAY include/prepend more than one instance of its own AS number in the AS_PATH attribute
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.12. NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.12.49. NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the destinations listed in the UPDATE message
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.50. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: When sending a message to an internal peer, if the route is not locally originated, the BGP speaker SHOULD NOT modify the NEXT_HOP attribute, unless it has been explicitly configured to announce its own IP address as the NEXT_HOP
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.51. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: When announcing a locally originated route to an internal peer, the BGP speaker SHOULD use as the NEXT_HOP the interface address of the router through which the announced network is reachable for the speaker
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.52. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: If the route is directly connected to the speaker, or the interface address of the router through which the announced network is reachable for the speaker is the internal peer's address, then the BGP speaker SHOULD use for the NEXT_HOP attribute its own IP address (the address of the interface that is used to reach the peer)
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.53. "First Party" NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: If the external peer to which the route is being advertised shares a common subnet with one of the interfaces of the announcing BGP speaker, the speaker MAY use the IP address associated with such an interface in the NEXT_HOP attribute
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.54. Default NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: IP address of the interface that the speaker uses to establish the BGP connection to peer X
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.55. NEXT_HOP Propagation
-
Functionality/Description: The speaker MAY be configured to propagate the NEXT_HOP attribute. In this case when advertising a route that the speaker learned from one of its peers, the NEXT_HOP attribute of the advertised route is exactly the same as the NEXT_HOP attribute of the learned route (the speaker just doesn't modify the NEXT_HOP attribute)
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.56. Third Party NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST be able to support disabling it
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.57. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: A route originated by a BGP speaker SHALL NOT be advertised to a peer using an address of that peer as NEXT_HOP
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.58. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHALL NOT install a route with itself as the next hop
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.12.59. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: Used to determine the actual outbound interface and immediate next-hop address that SHOULD be used to forward transit packets to the associated destinations
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.60. Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address
-
Functionality/Description: If the entry specifies an attached subnet, but does not specify a next-hop address, then the address in the NEXT_HOP attribute SHOULD be used as the immediate next-hop address
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.12.61. Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address
-
Functionality/Description: If the entry also specifies the next-hop address, this address SHOULD be used as the immediate next-hop address for packet forwarding
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.13. MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.13.62. Preferred Metric
-
Functionality/Description:
Lowest value
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.13.63. MULTI_EXIT_DISC-
Functionality/Description: If received over EBGP, the MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY be propagated over IBGP to other BGP speakers within the same AS
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.13.64. MULTI_EXIT_DISC-
Functionality/Description: If received from a neighboring AS, it MUST NOT be propagated to other neighboring ASes
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.13.65. Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC
-
Functionality/Description: Local configuration mechanism to remove the attribute from a route
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.13.66. Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC
-
Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree of preference of the route and performing route selection
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.13.67. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration
-
Functionality/Description: An implementation MAY also (based on local configuration) alter the value of the MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute received over EBGP
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.13.68. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration
-
Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree of preference of the route and performing route selection
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.14. LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5 [RFC4271]
-
3.14.69. LOCAL_PREF
-
Functionality/Description: Included in all UPDATE messages that a given BGP speaker sends to the other internal peers
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.14.70. Degree of Preference
-
Functionality/Description: Calculated for each external route based on the locally configured policy, and included when advertising a route to its internal peers
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.14.71. LOCAL_PREF-
Functionality/Description: Higher degree of preference MUST be preferred
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.14.72. LOCAL_PREF-
Functionality/Description: Not included in UPDATE messages sent to external peers, except for the case of BGP Confederations [RFC3065]
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.14.73. LOCAL_PREF-
Functionality/Description: Ignored if received from an external peer, except for the case of BGP Confederations [RFC3065]
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.15. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6 [RFC4271]
-
3.15.74. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
-
Functionality/Description: Included if an aggregate excludes at least some of the AS numbers present in the AS_PATH of the routes that are aggregated as a result of dropping the AS_SET
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.15.75. Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
-
Functionality/Description: BGP speaker SHOULD NOT remove the attribute from the route when propagating it to other speakers
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.15.76. Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
-
Functionality/Description: BGP speaker MUST NOT make any NLRI of that route more specific (as defined in 9.1.4)
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.16. AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7 [RFC4271]
-
3.16.77. AGGREGATOR
-
Functionality/Description: Included in updates which are formed by aggregation (see Section 9.2.2.2)
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.16.78. AGGREGATOR-
Functionality/Description: Added by the BGP speaker performing route aggregation
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.16.79. AGGREGATOR-
Functionality/Description: Contain local AS number and IP address
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured different from BGP ID. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.16.80. AGGREGATOR IP Address
-
Functionality/Description: The same as the BGP Identifier of the speaker
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.17. BGP Error Handling / Section 6 [RFC4271]
-
3.17.81. Error Handling
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the error handling procedures described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.17.82. Error Subcode
Functionality/Description: Zero, if it is not specified
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.18. Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.18.83. Message Header Errors
-
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION message with Error Code Message Header Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.18.84. Synchronization Error
-
Functionality/Description: Error Subcode MUST be set to Connection Not Synchronized
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.18.85. Message Length
-
Functionality/Description: Use the Bad Message Length Error Subcode to indicate an incorrect message length
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.18.86. Bad Message Length
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the erroneous Length field
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.18.87. Type Field
-
Functionality/Description: If the Type field of the message header is not recognized, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to
Bad Message Type
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.18.88. Bad Message Type
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the erroneous Type field
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.19. OPEN Message Error Handling / Section 6.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.19.89. OPEN Message Errors
-
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION message with Error Code OPEN Message Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.90. Version Number Not Supported
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Unsupported Version Number
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.91. Unacceptable Autonomous System Field
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad Peer AS
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.92. Unacceptable Hold Time Error Subcode
-
Functionality/Description: Used if the Hold Time field of the OPEN message is unacceptable
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.93. Hold Time Rejection
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Values of one or two seconds
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.94. Hold Time Rejection
-
Functionality/Description: An implementation may reject any proposed Hold Time
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.95. Hold Time
-
Functionality/Description: If accepted, then the negotiated value MUST be used
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.96. Syntactically Incorrect BGP Identifier
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad BGP Identifier
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.97. Not Recognized Optional Parameters
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Unsupported Optional Parameters
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We may fix this. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.19.98. Recognized but Malformed Optional Parameters
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to 0 (Unspecific)
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.20. UPDATE Message Error Handling / Section 6.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.20.99. UPDATE Message Errors
-
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION message with Error Code UPDATE Message Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.100. Too Large
-
Functionality/Description: If the Withdrawn Routes Length or Total Attribute Length is too large, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed Attribute List
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.101. Conflicting Flags
-
Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has Attribute Flags that conflict with the Attribute Type Code, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Flags Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.102. Conflicting Flags
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the erroneous attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.103. Conflicting Length
-
Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has Attribute Length that conflicts with the expected length, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Length Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.104. Conflicting Length
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the erroneous attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.20.105. Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Missing Well-known Attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.20.106. Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Attribute Type Code of the missing well-known attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We plan to fix this in future. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.20.107. Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Unrecognized Well-known Attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We set error subcode to Attribute Flags Error, but we intend to correct this soon. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.20.108. Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the unrecognized attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.109. Undefined ORIGIN
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Sub-code MUST be set to Invalid Origin Attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.110. Undefined ORIGIN
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the unrecognized attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.111. Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Invalid NEXT_HOP Attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Ignores the prefix in case of martian nexthop, and in case of length not equal to IPv4 address-length, we send NOTIFICATION with error subcode Attribute Length error. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.112. Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the incorrect attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.113. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
-
Functionality/Description: NEXT_HOP is checked for semantic correctness against the criteria in this section
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.114. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
-
Functionality/Description: Not be the IP address of the receiving speaker
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.115. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
-
Functionality/Description: In the case of an EBGP where the sender and receiver are one IP hop away from each other, either the IP address in the NEXT_HOP MUST be the sender's IP address (that is used to establish the BGP connection), or the interface associated with the NEXT_HOP IP address MUST share a common subnet with the receiving BGP speaker
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.116. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description:
Error logged
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.117. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description:
Route Ignored
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.118. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description:
NOTIFICATION not sent
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.119. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description:
Connection not closed
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.120. Syntactically Incorrect AS_PATH
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed AS_PATH
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.121. First Neighbor in AS_PATH Check
-
Functionality/Description: If the UPDATE message is received from an external peer, the local system MAY check whether the leftmost AS in the AS_PATH attribute is equal to the autonomous system number of the peer that sent the message
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.122. First Neighbor in AS_PATH Check
-
Functionality/Description: If the check determines that this is not the case, the Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed AS_PATH
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.123. Optional Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Value MUST be checked if the attribute is recognized
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.124. Optional Attribute Error
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The attribute MUST be discarded
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.125. Optional Attribute Error
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Optional Attribute Error
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N What exactly is optional attribute e.g., If error is flag related, we send update flag error subcode, if it is length related, we send update length error subcode. These granular subcodes are better in terms of debugging than optional attribute error. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Only optional attribute error that doesn't have a more specific error, is the version 3 to version 4 error for the atomic aggregate. All others default to more specific error codes if implementation.3.20.126. Optional Attribute Error
-
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.127. Duplicate Attributes
-
Functionality/Description: If any attribute appears more than once in the UPDATE message, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed Attribute List
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.128. Syntactically Incorrect NLRI Field
-
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Invalid Network Field
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.129. Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
An error SHOULD be logged locally
-
-
-
-
-
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.130. Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The prefix SHOULD be ignored
-
-
-
-
-
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.20.131. UPDATE with no NLRI
-
Functionality/Description: An UPDATE message that contains correct path attributes, but no NLRI, SHALL be treated as a valid UPDATE message
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.21. NOTIFICATION Message Error Handling / Section 6.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.21.132. Error in NOTIFICATION Message
-
Functionality/Description: Noticed, logged locally, and brought to the attention of the administration of the peer
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.22. Hold Timer Expired Error Handling / Section 6.5 [RFC4271]
-
3.22.133. Hold Timer Expired
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the error handling procedures described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.23. Finite State Machine Error Handling / Section 6.6 [RFC4271]
-
3.23.134. Finite State Machine Errors
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the error handling procedures described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.24. Cease / Section 6.7 [RFC4271]
-
3.24.135. Cease NOTIFICATION
-
Functionality/Description: Used in absence of any fatal errors if a BGP peer chooses at any given time to close its BGP connection
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We close the TCP session without CEASE NOTIFICATION. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.24.136. Cease NOTIFICATION
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not used for specified fatal errors
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.24.137. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
-
-
-
is willing to accept from a neighbor
-
-
Functionality/Description: Support by local configuration
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.24.138. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
-
-
-
is willing to accept from a neighbor
-
Functionality/Description: If exceeded and the BGP speaker decides to terminate its BGP connection, the Cease NOTIFICATION MUST be used
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't send CEASE but we plan to correct that soon. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y No termination of peers is supported We are considering support with the maximum prefix document for later releases.3.24.139. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
-
-
-
is willing to accept from a neighbor
-
Functionality/Description:
-
Log locally
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.25. BGP Connection Collision Detection / Section 6.8 [RFC4271]
-
3.25.140. Connection Collision
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
One of the connections MUST be closed
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.25.141. Receipt of an OPEN Message
-
Functionality/Description: The local system MUST examine all of its connections that are in the OpenConfirm state
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We detect collision through some other implementation specific way and resolve by method specified in the document. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.25.142. Receipt of an OPEN Message
-
Functionality/Description: Examine connections in an OpenSent state if it knows the BGP Identifier of the peer by means outside of the protocol
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.26. BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7 [RFC4271]
-
3.26.143. Version Negotiation
-
Functionality/Description: Multiple attempts to open a BGP connection, starting with the highest version number each supports
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4 Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We resolve it through config. If Config is for version 3, and we get version 4, OPEN will always fail. Similarly, if configed (default) is version 4 and peers configured is 3, we don't try to negotiate version 3 unless we have configured it. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4.3.26.144. Future Versions of BGP
-
Functionality/Description: MUST retain the format of the OPEN and NOTIFICATION messages
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.27. BGP Finite State Machine (FSM) / Section 8 [RFC4271]
-
3.27.145. FSM
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the conceptual FSM described in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.28. Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.28.146. Optional Session Attribute Settings
-
Functionality/Description: Each event has an indication of what optional session attributes SHOULD be set at each stage
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Its rather vague. We have an option Of manually starting or stopping sessions but not an option for all optional session attributes that are listed in the document. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y The following optional attributes are implied in this implementation: 1) Automatic start, 2) Automatic Stop, 3)3.28.147. Event1: ManualStart
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.148. Event3: AutomaticStart
-
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.149. Event3: AutomaticStart
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment optional session attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.150. Event3: AutomaticStart
-
Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute, so it is always FALSE. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.151. Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We wait for some fixed time before initiating OPEN. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.152. Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute so it is FALSE. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation attribute with a setting of off, and hence Event 4. Future version will support Event 43.28.153. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.154. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.155. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute, so always FALSE. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation attribute with a setting of off, and hence Event 5. Future version will support Event 53.28.156. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
-
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.157. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
-
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.158. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event6. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.159. Event7: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event7 Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.160. Event7: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event7 Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.161. Event7: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
-
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event7 Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.28.162. Event8: AutomaticStop
-
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStop attribute SHOULD be TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.29. Timer Events / Section 8.1.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.29.163. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
-
Functionality/Description: DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.29.164. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
-
Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTime attribute SHOULD be supported
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.29.165. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be supported
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.29.166. Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires
-
Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event13 Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.29.167. Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires
-
Functionality/Description: IdleHoldTimer SHOULD have just expired
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations attribute and hence Event13 Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.30. TCP Connection-Based Events / Section 8.1.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.30.168. Event14: TcpConnection_Valid
-
Functionality/Description: BGP's destination port SHOULD be port 179
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.30.169. Event14: TcpConnection_Valid
-
Functionality/Description: The TrackTcpState attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for the TCP state tracking, but use of this option depends OS support. Future versions will have additional hooks.3.30.170. Event15: Tcp_CR_Invalid
-
Functionality/Description: BGP destination port number SHOULD be 179
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for the TCP state tracking, but use of this option depends OS support. Future versions will have additional hooks. -
3.31. BGP Messages-Based Events / Section 8.1.5 [RFC4271]
-
3.31.171. Event19: BGPOpen
-
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen optional attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.31.172. Event19: BGPOpen
-
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD not be running
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.31.173. Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer Running
-
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Not applicable Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.31.174. Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer Running
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be running
-
-
-
-
-
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.31.175. Event23: OpenCollisionDump
-
Functionality/Description: If the state machine is to process this event in Established state, the CollisionDetectEstablishedState optional attribute SHOULD be set to TRUE
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Collision detection event is logged. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We always detect collision before we go to established state. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 does not support Collision Detection in Established state. This option attribute is always set to FALSE. -
3.32. FSM Definition / Section 8.2.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.32.176. FSM
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Separate FSM for each configured peer
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.32.177. TCP Port 179
-
Functionality/Description: A BGP implementation MUST connect to and listen on TCP port 179 for incoming connections in addition to trying to connect to peers
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.32.178. Incoming Connections
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A state machine MUST be instantiated
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.33. FSM and Collision Detection / Section 8.2.1.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.33.179. Connection Collision
-
Functionality/Description: The corresponding FSM for the connection that is closed SHOULD be disposed of
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.34. FSM Event numbers / Section 8.2.1.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.34.180. Event Numbers
-
Functionality/Description: Used to provide network management information
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Not visible to operator. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Future Release of GateD NGC may support event numbers. -
3.35. Finite State Machine / Section 8.2.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.35.181. ConnectRetryTimer
-
Functionality/Description: Sufficiently large to allow TCP initialization
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.35.182. Second Connection Tracking
-
Functionality/Description: In response to a TCP connection succeeds [Event 16 or Event 17], the 2nd connection SHALL be tracked until it sends an OPEN message
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.36. UPDATE Message Handling / Section 9 [RFC4271]
-
3.36.183. UPDATE Message Handling
-
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation handle UPDATE messages in a manner compatible to the description in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.36.184. WITHDRAWN ROUTES
-
Functionality/Description: Any previously advertised routes whose destinations are contained in this field SHALL be removed from the Adj-RIB-In
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.36.185. WITHDRAWN ROUTES
-
Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker SHALL run its Decision Process since the previously advertised route is no longer available for use
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.36.186. Implicit Withdraw
-
Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a feasible route, and the NLRI of the new route is identical to the one of a route currently stored in the Adj-RIB-In, then the new route SHALL replace the older route
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.36.187. Other Feasible Routes
-
Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a feasible route, and the NLRI of the new route is not identical to the one of any route currently stored in the Adj-RIB-In, then the new route SHALL be placed in the Adj-RIB-In
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.36.188. Adj-RIB-In Update
-
Functionality/Description: Once a BGP speaker updates the Adj-RIB-In, it SHALL run its Decision Process
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.37. Decision Process / Section 9.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.37.189. Decision Process
-
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with the description in this section?
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.37.190. Degree of Preference
-
Functionality/Description: SHALL NOT use as its inputs any of the following: the existence of other routes, the non-existence of other routes, or the path attributes of other routes
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.38. Phase 1: Calculation of Degree of Preference / Section 9.1.1
[RFC4271]
-
3.38.191. Ineligible Degree of Preference
-
Functionality/Description: The route MAY NOT serve as an input to the next phase of route selection
MAY NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.38.192. Eligible Degree of Preference
-
Functionality/Description: Used as the LOCAL_PREF value in any IBGP re-advertisement
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.39. Phase 2: Route Selection / Section 9.1.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.39.193. Unresolvable NEXT_HOP
-
Functionality/Description: If the NEXT_HOP attribute of a BGP route depicts an address that is not resolvable, or it would become unresolvable if the route was installed in the routing table the BGP route MUST be excluded
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.39.194. Routes Installed in LOC-RIB-
Functionality/Description: The route in the Adj-RIBs-In identified as the best (see section 9.1.2) is installed in the Loc-RIB, replacing any route to the same destination that is currently being held in the Loc-RIB
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.39.195. Immediate Next-Hop Address
-
Functionality/Description: MUST be determined from the NEXT_HOP attribute of the selected route (see Section 5.1.3)
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.39.196. Phase 2: Route Selection-
Functionality/Description: Performed again if either the immediate next hop or the IGP cost to the NEXT_HOP changes
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.39.197. Immediate Next-Hop Address
Functionality/Description: Used for packet forwarding
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.39.198. Unresolvable Routes
-
Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB and the routing table
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.39.199. Unresolvable Routes
Functionality/Description: Kept in the corresponding Adj-RIBs-In
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.40. Route Resolvability Condition / Section 9.1.2.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.40.200. Unresolvable Routes
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Excluded from the Phase 2 decision
-
-
-
-
-
-
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.40.201. Multiple Matching Routes
-
Functionality/Description: Only the longest matching route SHOULD be considered
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.40.202. Mutual Recursion
-
Functionality/Description: If a route fails the resolvability check because of mutual recursion, an error message SHOULD be logged
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have checks that disallow mutual recursion, so this won't happen. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.41. Breaking Ties (Phase 2) / Section 9.1.2.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.41.203. Tie-Breaking Criteria
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Applied in the order specified
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.41.204. Algorithm Used
-
Functionality/Description: BGP implementations MAY use any algorithm which produces the same results as those described here
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.41.205. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Removal
-
Functionality/Description: If done before re-advertising a route into IBGP, then comparison based on the received EBGP MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY still be performed
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.41.206. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Removal
-
Functionality/Description: The optional comparison on MULTI_EXIT_DISC if performed at all MUST be performed only among EBGP learned routes
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.41.207. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Comparison
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Performed for IBGP learned routes
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.42. Phase 3: Route Dissemination / Section 9.1.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.42.208. Policy for processing routes from the Loc-RIB into
Adj-RIBs-Out
-
Functionality/Description: Exclude a route in the Loc-RIB from being installed in a particular Adj-RIB-Out
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.42.209. Adj-Rib-Out Route Installation
-
Functionality/Description: Not unless the destination and NEXT_HOP described by this route may be forwarded appropriately by the Routing Table
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.42.210. Withdraw Routes
-
Functionality/Description: If a route in Loc-RIB is excluded from a particular Adj-RIB-Out the previously advertised route in that Adj-RIB-Out MUST be withdrawn from service by means of an UPDATE message (see 9.2)
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43. Overlapping Routes / Section 9.1.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.43.211. Overlapping Routes
-
Functionality/Description: Consider both routes based on the configured acceptance policy
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.43.212. Accepted Overlapping Routes
-
Functionality/Description: The Decision Process MUST either install both routes or...
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.43.213. Accepted Overlapping Routes
-
Functionality/Description: Aggregate the two routes and install the aggregated route, provided that both routes have the same value of the NEXT_HOP attribute
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We install both in Local RIB. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation 3.43.214. Aggregation-
Functionality/Description: Either include all ASs used to form the aggregate in an AS_SET or add the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE attribute to the route
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.43.215. De-Aggregation Functionality/Description: Routes SHOULD NOT be de-aggregatedSHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.43.216. Route with the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE Attribute
-
Functionality/Description:
Not de-aggregated
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.44. Update-Send Process / Section 9.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.44.217. UPDATE Message Received from an Internal Peer
-
Functionality/Description: Not re-distribute the routing information to other internal peers, unless the speaker acts as a BGP Route Reflector [RFC2796]
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.218. No Replacement Route
-
Functionality/Description: All newly installed routes and all newly unfeasible routes for which there is no replacement route SHALL be advertised to its peers by means of an UPDATE message
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.219. Previously Advertised Routes
-
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHOULD NOT advertise a given feasible BGP route if it would produce an UPDATE message containing the same BGP route as was previously advertised
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.220. Unfeasible Routes
Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.221. Changes to Reachable Destinations
-
Functionality/Description: Changes to the reachable destinations within its own autonomous system SHALL also be advertised in an UPDATE message
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.222. A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message
-
Functionality/Description:
Don't advertise
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.44.223. A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message
Functionality/Description: Log an error local
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.45. Frequency of Route Advertisement / Section 9.2.1.1 [RFC4271]
-
3.45.224. MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
-
Functionality/Description: Minimum separation between two UPDATE messages sent by a BGP speaker to a peer that advertise feasible routes and/or withdrawal of unfeasible routes to some common set of destinations
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.45.225. Fast Convergence
-
Functionality/Description: MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer used for internal peers SHOULD be shorter than the MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer used for external peers, or
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Configurable on per peer basis. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N they are same for ebgp and ibgp NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Configuration option allows to set the time per peer.3.45.226. Fast Convergence
-
Functionality/Description: The procedure describes in this section SHOULD NOT apply for routes sent to internal peers
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Operator has to ensure that through configuration. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default setting is off for BGP peers. 3.45.227. MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer-
Functionality/Description: The last route selected SHALL be advertised at the end of MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.46. Aggregating Routing Information / Section 9.2.2.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.46.228. MULTI_EXIT_DISC
-
Functionality/Description: Routes that have different MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute SHALL NOT be aggregated
SHALL NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.229. AS_SET as the First Element
-
Functionality/Description: If the aggregated route has an AS_SET as the first element in its AS_PATH attribute, then the router that originates the route SHOULD NOT advertise the MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute with this route
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.46.230. NEXT_HOP-
Functionality/Description: When aggregating routes that have different NEXT_HOP attribute, the NEXT_HOP attribute of the aggregated route SHALL identify an interface on the BGP speaker that performs the aggregation
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.231. ORIGIN INCOMPLETE
-
Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value INCOMPLETE
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.232. ORIGIN EGP
-
Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value EGP
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.233. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: The aggregated AS_PATH attribute SHALL satisfy all of the following conditions: ...
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.234. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE in the aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in all of the AS_PATH in the initial set of routes to be aggregated
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.235. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SET in the aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in at least one of the AS_PATH in the initial set
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.236. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: For any tuple X of type AS_SEQUENCE in the aggregated AS_PATH which precedes tuple Y in the aggregated AS_PATH, X precedes Y in each AS_PATH in the initial set which contains Y, regardless of the type of Y
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.237. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: No tuple of type AS_SET with the same value SHALL appear more than once in the aggregated AS_PATH
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.238. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
-
Functionality/Description: Multiple tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE with the same value may appear in the aggregated AS_PATH only when adjacent to another tuple of the same type and value
N/A Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.46.239. AS_PATH Aggregation Algorithm
-
Functionality/Description: Able to perform the (minimum) algorithm described in 9.2.2.2.
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't do merging. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.46.240. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE-
Functionality/Description: The aggregated route SHALL have this attribute if at least one of the routes to be aggregated has it
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.46.241. AGGREGATOR-
Functionality/Description: Attribute from routes to be aggregated MUST NOT be included in aggregated route
MUST NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.46.242. AGGREGATOR-
Functionality/Description: Attach a new one when aggregating (see Section 5.1.7)
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.47. Route Selection Criteria / Section 9.3 [RFC4271]
-
3.47.243. Unstable Routes
-
Functionality/Description:
Avoid using them
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.47.244. Route Changes
-
Functionality/Description: SHOULD NOT make rapid spontaneous changes to the choice of route
SHOULD NOT Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.48. Originating BGP Routes / Section 9.4 [RFC4271]
-
3.48.245. Non-BGP Acquired Routes
-
Functionality/Description: Distributed to other BGP speakers within the local AS as part of the update process (see Section 9.2)
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.48.246. Non-BGP Acquired Routes
Functionality/Description: Distribution controlled via configurationSHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
3.49. BGP Timers / Section 10 [RFC4271]
-
3.49.247. Optional Timers
-
Functionality/Description: Two optional timers MAY be supported: DelayOpenTimer, IdleHoldTimer by BGP
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We support DelayOpenTimer but not IdleHoldTimer Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y support IdleHoldTimer but not the DelayOpenTimer NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.49.248. Hold Time
-
Functionality/Description:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Configurable on a per peer basis
-
-
-
-
-
-
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.49.249. Timers-
Functionality/Description: Allow the other timers to be configurable
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.49.250. Jitter-
Functionality/Description: Applied to the timers associated with MinASOriginationInterval, KeepAlive, MinRouteAdvertisementInterval, and ConnectRetry
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We only apply to ConnectRetry. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y 3.49.251. Jitter-
Functionality/Description: Apply the same jitter to each of these quantities regardless of the destinations to which the updates are being sent; that is, jitter need not be configured on a "per peer" basis
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We apply same only for connectretry. Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.49.252. Default Amount of jitter
-
Functionality/Description: Determined by multiplying the base value of the appropriate timer by a random factor which is uniformly distributed in the range from 0.75 to 1.0
SHALL Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Range is 0.9 to 1.1 Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.49.253. Default Amount of jitter
-
Functionality/Description: New random value picked each time the timer is set
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y3.49.254. Jitter Random Value Range
-
Functionality/Description:
Configurable
MAY Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N -
3.50. TCP Options that May Be Used with BGP / Appendix E [RFC4271]
-
3.50.255. TCP PUSH Function Supported
-
Functionality/Description: Each BGP message SHOULD be transmitted with PUSH flag set
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support. GateD 10, NGC can run over multiple stacks.3.50.256. Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) Field Support
-
Functionality/Description: TCP connections opened with bits 0-2 of the DSCP field set to 110 (binary)
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support. GateD 10, NGC can run over multiple stacks. -
3.51. Reducing Route Flapping / Appendix F.2 [RFC4271]
-
3.51.257. Avoid Excessive Route Flapping
-
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker which needs to withdraw a destination and send an update about a more specific or less specific route SHOULD combine them into the same UPDATE message
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N -
3.52. Complex AS_PATH aggregation / Appendix F.6 [RFC4271]
-
3.52.258. Multiple Instances in AS_PATH
-
Functionality/Description: The last instance (rightmost occurrence) of that AS number is kept
SHOULD Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N We use algorithm in 9.2.2.2 Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N -
3.53. Security Considerations [RFC4271]
-
3.53.259. Authentication Mechanism
-
Functionality/Description: A BGP implementation MUST support the authentication mechanism specified in RFC 2385 [RFC2385].
MUST Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y -
4. Additional BGP Implementations Information
-
Three implementations responded to a call (5/20/04-6/2/04) for information on those implementations that had a BGP implementation, but did not complete the full survey. The responses for the call for additional information are below.
4.1. Avici
-
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send me the answer the following questions:
- BGP product Contributor (your name):Curtis Villamizar [[email protected]] Company: Avici name of product: IPriori (TM) minor version: No interoperability problems with any version.
Current deployed versions are 5.x and 6.0.x.
Version 6.1 and beyond are tested against the
latest BGP specification [RFC4271].
-
- What other implementations you interoperate with.
Cisco: IOS 12.0(22) Juniper: JUNOS (version not given)- Do you inter-operate with:
1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - not tested tested with IOS 12.0(22); BGP is the same 3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested 4) NextHop GateD - not tested- Did the length of the survey for BGP cause you to not submit the BGP implementation report?
yes
4.2. Data Connection Ltd.
-
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send me the answer the following questions:
- BGP product Contributor (your name): Mike Dell Company: Data Connection Ltd. name of product: DC-BGP version and minor of software: v1.1 release date: April 2003
- What other implementations you interoperate with.
-
-
Cisco (12.0(26)S)
Alcatal (7770 0BX)
Agilent (Router Tester)
Ixia (1600T)
Netplane (Powercode)
Nortel (Shasta 5000 BSN)
Redback (SmartEdge 800)
Riverstone (RS8000)
Spirent (AX4000)
IP Infusion (ZebOs)
Nokia (IP400)
Juniper (M5)
-
3) Do you inter-operate with 1) Alcatel BGP (release) YES 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s Unknown, but we do inter-operate with v12.0(26)s 3) laurel BGP (specify release) Unknown 4) NextHop GateD YES- Did the length of the survey for BGP cause you to not submit the BGP implementation report?
YES
4.3. Nokia
-
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send me the answer the following questions:
- BGP product
Contributor (your name):Rahul Bahadur ([email protected]) Company: Nokia Name of product: IP Security Platforms Version and minor of software IPSO 3.8 Build031 Release date May 24, 2004- What other implementations you interoperate with.
Cisco: IOS 12.3(1) Extreme: Extremeware Version 6.1.7 (Build 9) Foundry: SW Version 07.5.05iT53 Juniper: JUNOS 5.3R1.2 Nortel: BayRS 15.4.0.1 GNU Zebra: zebra-0.92a 3) Do you inter-operate with-
1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested
2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - yes
3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested
4) NextHop GateD - not tested
- Did the length of the survey for BGP cause you to not submit the BGP implementation report?
-
-
Yes - lack of resources to help with task.
-
5. Security Considerations
-
This document does not address any security issues.
6. Normative References
-
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, Eds., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006. [RFC1771] Rekhter, Y. and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP- 4)", RFC 1771, March 1995. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC2385] Heffernan, A., "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature Option", RFC 2385, August 1998. [RFC2796] Bates, T., Chandra, R., and E. Chen, "BGP Route Reflection - An Alternative to Full Mesh IBGP", RFC 2796, April 2000. [RFC2918] Chen, E., "Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4", RFC 2918, September 2000. [RFC3065] Traina, P., McPherson, D., and J. Scudder, "Autonomous System Confederations for BGP", RFC 3065, February 2001.
7. Acknowledgements
-
Alcatel responses provided by: Contact Name: Devendra Raut Contact EMail: [email protected] Cisco Systems responses provided by: Contact Name: Himanshu Shah, Ruchi Kapoor Contact EMail: [email protected], [email protected] Laurel responses provided by: Contact Name: Manish Vora Contact EMail: [email protected] NextHop responses provided by: Contact Name: Susan Hares Contact EMail: [email protected] Additional Help: Matt Richardson, Shane Wright.
Authors' Addresses
-
Susan Hares
NextHop Technologies
825 Victors Way, Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48108Phone: 734.222.1610 EMail: [email protected]
Alvaro Retana
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709Phone: 919 392 2061 EMail: [email protected]
Full Copyright Statement
-
Copyright © The Internet Society (2006).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
-
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at [email protected].
Acknowledgement
-
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA).