draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02.txt   rfc4276.txt 
Interdomain Working Group
Internet Draft S. Hares
Document: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02.txt NextHop
A. Retana
Cisco
Expires: April 2005 October 2004
BGP 4 Implementation Report Network Working Group S. Hares
Request for Comments: 4276 NextHop
Status of this Memo Category: Informational A. Retana
Cisco
January 2006
By submitting this Internet-Draft, we certify that any applicable BGP-4 Implementation Report
patent or other IPR claims of which we are aware have been
disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which we become aware
will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Status of This Memo
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts memo is unlimited.
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
progress".
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at Copyright Notice
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt .
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html"
Abstract Abstract
This document provides a survey of the BGP-4 implementation draft- This document reports the results of the BGP-4 implementation survey.
ietf-idr-bgp4-24.txt. After a brief summary, each response is The survey had 259 questions about implementations' support of BGP-4
listed. The editors created the draft based on the input given by as specified in RFC 4271. After a brief summary of the results, each
those contributors responding to the survey. response is listed. This document contains responses from the four
implementers that completed the survey (Alcatel, Cisco, Laurel, and
The editors did not verify the accuracy of the information submitted NextHop) and brief information from three that did not (Avici, Data
by contributor by an exterior means. The contributors are experts Connection Ltd., and Nokia).
with the products they reported on.
Conventions used in this document
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The editors did not use exterior means to verify the accuracy of the
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this information submitted by the respondents. The respondents are
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [i]. experts with the products they reported on.
TABLE of CONTENTS Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3 1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Results of Survey..............................................4 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................4
2.1 Differences................................................5 2. Results of Survey ...............................................4
2.2 Implementations and interoperability.......................6 2.1. Significant Differences ....................................4
2.3 BGP Implementation Identification..........................7 2.2. Overview of Differences ....................................5
3. BGP4 Implementation Report.....................................7 2.3. Implementations and Interoperability .......................6
3.0 Summary of Operation / Section 3...........................7 2.4. BGP Implementation Identification ..........................7
3.1 Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1............8 3. BGP-4 Implementation Report .....................................7
3.2 Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2....................9 3.0. Summary of Operation / Section 3 [RFC4271] .................7
3.3 Message Formats / Section 4................................9 3.1. Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1 [RFC4271] ..8
3.4 Message Header Format / Section 4.1........................9 3.2. Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2 [RFC4271] ..........9
3.5 OPEN Message / Section 4.2................................11 3.3. Message Formats / Section 4 [RFC4271] ......................9
3.6 UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3.......................11 3.4. Message Header Format / Section 4.1 [RFC4271] .............10
3.7 KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4....................15 3.5. OPEN Message / Section 4.2 [RFC4271] ......................11
3.8 NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5.................15 3.6. UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3 [RFC4271] .............12
3.9 Path Attributes /Section 5................................16 3.7. KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4 [RFC4271] ..........16
3.10 ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1...................................19 3.8. NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5 [RFC4271] .......17
3.11 AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2..................................20 3.9. Path Attributes /Section 5 [RFC4271] ......................17
3.12 NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3.................................21 3.10. ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1 [RFC4271] .........................22
3.13 MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4..........................24 3.11. AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2 [RFC4271] ........................22
3.14 LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5...............................26 3.12. NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3 [RFC4271] .......................23
3.15 ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6.........................28 3.13. MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4 [RFC4271] ................27
3.16 AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7...............................29 3.14. LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5 [RFC4271] .....................30
3.17 BGP Error Handling / Section 6...........................30 3.15. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6 [RFC4271] ...............31
3.18 Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1..............30 3.16. AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7 [RFC4271] .....................32
3.19 OPEN message error handling / Section 6.2................32 3.17. BGP Error Handling / Section 6 [RFC4271] .................34
3.20 UPDATE message error handling / Section 6.3..............35 3.18. Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1 [RFC4271] ....34
3.21 NOTIFICATION message error handling / Section 6.4........44 3.19. OPEN Message Error Handling / Section 6.2 [RFC4271] ......36
3.22 Hold Timer Expired error handling / Section 6.5..........44 3.20. UPDATE Message Error Handling / Section 6.3 [RFC4271] ....40
3.23 Finite State Machine error handling / Section 6.6........45 3.21. NOTIFICATION Message Error Handling / Section 6.4
3.24 Cease / Section 6.7......................................45 [RFC4271] ................................................50
3.25 BGP connection collision detection / Section 6.8.........46 3.22. Hold Timer Expired Error Handling / Section 6.5
3.26 BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7......................47 [RFC4271] ................................................51
3.27 BGP Finite State machine (FSM) / Section 8...............48 3.23. Finite State Machine Error Handling / Section 6.6
3.28 Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2....................48 [RFC4271] ................................................51
3.29 Timer Events / Section 8.1.3.............................53 3.24. Cease / Section 6.7 [RFC4271] ............................51
3.30 TCP Connection based Events / Section 8.1.4..............55 3.25. BGP Connection Collision Detection / Section 6.8
3.31 BGP Messages based Events / Seciton 8.1.5................56 [RFC4271] ................................................53
3.32 FSM Definition / Section 8.2.1...........................57 3.26. BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7 [RFC4271] ............54
3.33 FSM and collision detection / Section 8.2.1.2............58 3.27. BGP Finite State Machine (FSM) / Section 8 [RFC4271] .....55
3.34 FSM Event numbers / Section 8.2.1.4......................58 3.28. Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2 [RFC4271] ..........55
3.35 Finite State Machine / Section 8.2.2.....................59 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
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 1. Introduction
3.36 UPDATE Message Handling / Section 9......................59 This document reports results from a survey of implementations of
3.37 Decision Process / Section 9.1...........................61 BGP-4 as specified in [RFC4271]. RFC 4271 is in alignment with
3.38 Phase 1: Calculation of Degree of Preference / Section 9.1.1 current deployments of BGP-4 and obsoletes the BGP standard
..............................................................62 [RFC1771]. BGP is a widely deployed cornerstone of Internet
3.39 Phase 2: Route Selection / Section 9.1.2.................62 technology that continues to add additional functionality as the
3.40 Route Resolvability Condition / Section 9.1.2.1..........64 needs of the Internet evolve. As deployed in the Internet, BGP-4
3.41 Breaking Ties (Phase 2) / Section 9.1.2.2................65 encompasses both this base specification and additional
3.42 Phase 3: Route Dissemination / Section 9.1.3.............66 specifications such as TCP MD5 [RFC2385], BGP Route Reflectors
3.43 Overlapping Routes / Section 9.1.4.......................67 [RFC2796], BGP Confederations [RFC3065], and BGP Route Refresh
3.44 Update-Send Process / Section 9.2........................69 [RFC2918].
3.45 Frequency of Route Advertisement / Section 9.2.1.1.......71
3.46 Aggregating Routing Information / Section 9.2.2.2........72
3.47 Route Selection Criteria / Section 9.3...................76
3.48 Originating BGP routes / Section 9.4.....................77
3.49 BGP Timers / Section 10..................................77
3.50 TCP options that may be used with BGP / Appendix E.......80
3.51 Reducing route flapping / Appendix F.2...................80
3.52 Complex AS_PATH aggregation / Appendix F.6...............81
3.53 Security Considerations..................................81
4. Additional BGP implementations Information....................81
4.1 Avici.....................................................81
4.2 Data Connection Ltd.......................................82
4.3 Nokia.....................................................83
Security Considerations..........................................8
4
Normative References.............................................84
Acknowledgments..................................................85
Authors' Addresses...............................................85
Intellectual Property Statement..................................85
Copyright Statement..............................................86
1. The BGP-4 implementation survey had 259 detailed questions about
Introduction compliance with [RFC4271]. Four implementers (Alcatel, Cisco,
Laurel, and NextHop) completed the survey. Section 3 provides a
compilation of those results.
This document surveys implementations of BGP based on [BGP4]/RFCxxx. Section 2.1 highlights significant differences and Section 2.2
RFCxxxx updates the BGP standard [RFC1771] to be in alignment with provides an overview of the differences between the four
the deployments of the BGP-4 protocols. BGP-4 as deployed in the implementations. Section 2.3 provides interoperability information.
Internet encompasses both this base specification and additional
specifications such as TCP MD5 [RFC2385], BGP Route Reflectors [RFC
2796], BGP Confederations [RFC3065], and BGP Route Refresh [RFC
2918].
BGP as a widely deployed cornerstone of Internet technology Due to the large number of BGP implementations and the small number
continues to add additional functionality as the needs within the of respondents, the editors took an informal survey to determine if
Internet requires. This survey has 259 detailed questions on the the length of the original survey caused implementers not to submit
compliance with the revised standard. 4 implementers (Alcatel, it. Three implementers responded, and all indicated the length of
Cisco, Laurel, NextHop) sent in implementation reports. Section 3 the survey was the issue. Section 4 gives the results of this
provides a compilation of those results. informal survey.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 In this document, the editors have compiled the results of the
implementation survey results and the informal survey.
Section 2.1 provides an overview of the differences of between those 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
implementations. Section 2.2 provides an inter-operability of the 4
implementations.
Due to the large number of BGP implementations and the small number The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
of responses, the editors took an informal survey to determine if "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
the length of survey was an issue. Three implementers responded, document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
and all indicated the length of the survey was the issue. Section 3
gives this informal survey results.
The editors have compiled the submitted survey results and the 2. Results of Survey
informal survey results based on the submitted information.
2. The respondents replied "Y" (yes) or "N" (no) to the survey's 259
Results of Survey 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).
Significant Differences 2.1. Significant Differences
For every item listed (259 questions), the respondents indicated Each question received affirmative responses from at least two
whether their implementation supports the Functionality/Description implementers (i.e., two "Y" responses, or one "Y" and one "O"),
or not (Y/N) indicated by the RFC2199 [RFC2119] language. Of the 259 except the following questions:
questions in the survey, had two implementations giving an
affirmative response (two "y" or "y" and "O") except the following:
a) Must - Linked questions 212/213, regarding section 9.1.4 a) MUST - Linked Questions 212/213, regarding Section 9.1.4
The linking of the questions lead to question 213 having three Due to the format of the linked questions, three vendors (Cisco,
vendors (Cisco, Laurel, and NextHop) give a "no" as the second Laurel, and NextHop) replied "N" to Question 213. (See Section
half of a question due to the format of the survey question. 2.2 for details.)
(See the next section for details).
b) SHALL NOT - Question 228, regarding section 9.2.2.2 b) SHALL NOT - Question 228, regarding Section 9.2.2.2
Three vendors (Alcatel, Cisco, Laurel), answered "N" to shall Three vendors (Alcatel, Cisco, and Laurel) answered "N" to SHALL
not (meaning they did). One vendor (NextHop) indicated "O" NOT (meaning they did). One vendor (NextHop) indicated "O"
matching the specification. matching the specification.
Text: Routes that have different MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute Text: Routes that have different MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute SHALL
SHALL NOT be aggregated. NOT be aggregated. (Section 9.2.2.2, [RFC4271])
c) SHOULD - 2 in appendix F (questions 257, 258)
Three vendors said no, one vendor said yes to question 257.
All four vendors indicated no to question 258. (Please note
that Appendix F is text section for optional support.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 c) SHOULD - Questions 257 and 258, regarding Appendix F
Text: Section F.2 - A BGP speaker which needs to withdraw a Three vendors answered "N" and one vendor answered "Y" to Question
destination and send an update about a more specific or 257. All four vendors answered "N" to Question 258. (Please note
less specific route SHOULD combine them into the same that support of Appendix F, "Implementation Recommendations", is
UPDATE message. 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: Section F.6: The last instance (rightmost occurrence) of Text: The last instance (rightmost occurrence) of that AS number
that AS number is kept. is kept. (Appendix F.6, [RFC4271])
d) MAY - 1 in section 8.1.2.4, 1 in Section 10 (question 254) d) MAY - Questions 180 and 254, regarding Sections 8.1.2.4 and 10
Section 8: 3 "No", 1 yes Three vendors answered "N", and 1 replied "Y" to Question 180.
Text: "The Event numbers (1-28) utilized in this state machine Text: The Event numbers (1-28) utilized in this state machine
description aid in specifying the behavior of the BGP description aid in specifying the behavior of the BGP state
state machine. Implementations MAY use these numbers to machine. Implementations MAY use these numbers to provide
provide network management information. The exact form of network management information. The exact form of a FSM or
a FSM or the FSM events are specific to each the FSM events are specific to each implementation.
implementation." (Section 8.1.2.4, [RFC4271])
Editors note: Section 8.1.2.4 was written to allow existing Editors' note: Section 8.1.2.4 was written to allow existing
implementations to transition to the new event implementations to transition to the new event
numbering. It was expected over time (3 years) numbering. It was expected over time (3 years)
that the FSM event numbering would be updated to that the FSM event numbering would be updated to
the new numbering. the new numbering.
Section 10: 3 "no" Three vendors answered "N" and one answered "Y" to Question 254
Three vendors answered "no" configurable jitter time values. about configurable jitter time values.
One vendor indicated a configurable jitter timer value.
Text: A given BGP speaker MAY apply the same jitter to each of Text: A given BGP speaker MAY apply the same jitter to each of
these quantities regardless of the destinations to these quantities regardless of the destinations to which
which the updates are being sent; that is, jitter need the updates are being sent; that is, jitter need not be
not be configured on a "per peer" basis. configured on a "per peer" basis. (Section 10, [RFC4271])
Question: Is the jitter range configurable? Question: Is the jitter range configurable?
2.1 2.2. Overview of Differences
Differences
The following section provides a list of sections where all answers
were not "yes". This section is provided to allow the reader a short
cut to the interesting points.
Differences are found in Subsections: This section provides the reader with a shortcut to the points where
the four implementations differ.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 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 MUST
97, 106, 107, 111, 122, 125, 138, 141, 213 97, 106, 107, 111, 122, 125, 138, 141, 213
SHALL SHALL
233, 239 233, 239
SHALL NOT SHALL NOT
228 228
SHOULD SHOULD
42, 117, 132, 146, 152, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 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, 256 164, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 202, 225, 250, 255, 256
skipping to change at page 6, line 30 skipping to change at page 6, line 24
SHOULD NOT SHOULD NOT
226 226
MAY MAY
67, 94, 121, 143, 180, 223, 247, 254 67, 94, 121, 143, 180, 223, 247, 254
Other Other
236, 238 236, 238
Linked Questions Linked Questions
212/213 212/213
Question 213 about the aggregation of routes had 3 "N" and 1 Three vendors answered "N" and one answered "Y" to Question 213
"Y". Questions 212 and 213 are grouped together. about the aggregation of routes. Questions 212 and 213 are
grouped together.
Question 212 states: Question 212 states: "The decision process MUST either install
"The decision process MUST either install both routes" or both routes or..."
Question 213:
"Aggregate the two routes and install the aggregated route,
provided that both routes have the same value of the
NEXT_HOP attribute"
The four respondents that said "Y" to question 212, said "N" to Question 213 states: "Aggregate the two routes and install the
questions 213. Given the context of the question, the "N" to aggregated route, provided that both routes have the same value
question 213 is appropriate. of the NEXT_HOP attribute"
2.2 Of the four respondents that said "Y" to Question 212, three said
Implementations and interoperability "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 Cisco Laurel NextHop
Alcatel Y Y Alcatel Y Y
Cisco Y Cisco Y
Laurel Y Y Laurel Y Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y Y NextHop Y Y
2.3 2.4. BGP Implementation Identification
BGP Implementation Identification
1.6.0 Alcatel 1.6.0 Alcatel
Implementation Name/Version: Implementation Name/Version:
Alcatel 7750 BGP Implementation Release 1.3 Alcatel 7750 BGP Implementation Release 1.3
Date: July 2003 Date: July 2003
Contact Name: Devendra Raut Contact Name: Devendra Raut
Contact Email: Devendra.raut@Alcatel.com Contact Email: Devendra.raut@Alcatel.com
1.6.1 Cisco 1.6.1 Cisco
Implementation Name/Version: Cisco BGP Implementation, 12.0(27)S Implementation Name/Version: Cisco BGP Implementation, 12.0(27)S
Contact Name: Alvaro Retana Contact Name: Alvaro Retana
Date: 11/26/2003 Date: 11/26/2003
1.6.2 Laurel 1.6.2 Laurel
Implementation Name/Version: Laurel Networks 3.0 Implementation Name/Version: Laurel Networks 3.0
Contact Name: Man Contact Name: Manish Vora
ish Vora
Contact Email: vora@laurelnetworks.com Contact Email: vora@laurelnetworks.com
Date: 2/1/2004 Date: 2/1/2004
1.6.3 NextHop Technologies 1.6.3 NextHop Technologies
Implementation Name/Version: Gated NGC 2.0, 2.2 Implementation Name/Version: Gated NGC 2.0, 2.2
Date: January 2004 Date: January 2004
3. 3. BGP-4 Implementation Report
BGP4 Implementation Report
For every item listed, the respondents indicated whether their For every item listed, the respondents indicated whether their
implementation supports the Functionality/Description or not (Y/N) implementation supports the Functionality/Description or not (Y/N)
according to the RFC2119 [ii] language indicated. Any respondent according to the [RFC2119] language indicated. Any respondent
comments are included. If appropriate, the respondents indicated comments are included. If appropriate, the respondents indicated
with O the fact that the support is neither Y/N (an alternate with "O" the fact that the support is neither Y/N (an alternate
behavior, for example). Refer to the appropriate sections in [BGP4] behavior, for example). Refer to the appropriate sections in
for additional details. [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 3.0. Summary of Operation / Section 3 [RFC4271]
3.0.1 Base Behavior 3.0.1. Base Behavior
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible with Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
the base behavior described in this section? with the base behavior described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.0.2. Local Policy Changes
3.0.2 Local Policy Changes
Functionality/Description: To allow local policy changes to have Functionality/Description: To allow local policy changes to have
the correct effect without resetting any BGP connections, a BGP the correct effect without resetting any BGP connections, a BGP
speaker SHOULD either (a) retain the current version of the speaker SHOULD either (a) retain the current version of the
routes advertised to it by all of its peers for the duration of routes advertised to it by all of its peers for the duration of
the connection, or (b) make use of the Route Refresh extension the connection, or (b) make use of the Route Refresh extension
[RFC2918] [RFC2918]
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.1 3.1. Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1 [RFC4271]
Routes: Advertisement and Storage / Section 3.1
3.1.3 Withdraw routes from service 3.1.3. Withdraw Routes from Service
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the
three methods described in this section? three methods described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.1.4 Path attributes 3.1.4. Path Attributes
Functionality/Description: Added to or modified before Functionality/Description: Added to or modified before
advertising the route advertising the route
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.2 3.2. Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2 [RFC4271]
Routing Information Bases / Section 3.2
3.2.5 Routing Information Bases 3.2.5. Routing Information Bases
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the RIB structure described in this section? with the RIB structure described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.2.6 Next Hop Resolution 3.2.6. Next Hop Resolution
Functionality/Description: The next hop for each route in the Functionality/Description: The next hop for each route in the
Loc-RIB MUST be resolvable via the local BGP speaker's Routing Loc-RIB MUST be resolvable via the local BGP speaker's Routing
Table Table
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.3 3.3. Message Formats / Section 4 [RFC4271]
Message Formats / Section 4
3.3.7 Message Size 3.3.7. Message Size
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the
message sizes described in this section? message sizes described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.4 3.4. Message Header Format / Section 4.1 [RFC4271]
Message Header Format / Section 4.1
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.4.8 Marker 3.4.8. Marker
Functionality/Description: MUST be set to all ones Functionality/Description: MUST be set to all ones
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.4.9 Length 3.4.9. Length
Functionality/Description: MUST always be at least 19 and no Functionality/Description: MUST always be at least 19 and no
greater than 4096 greater than 4096
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.4.10 Length 3.4.10. Length
Functionality/Description: MAY be further constrained, depending Functionality/Description: MAY be further constrained, depending
on the message type on the message type
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.4.11. Message "Padding"
3.4.11 Message "padding"
Functionality/Description: No "padding" of extra data after the Functionality/Description: No "padding" of extra data after the
message is allowed, so the Length field MUST have the smallest message is allowed, so the Length field MUST have the smallest
value required given the rest of the message value required given the rest of the message
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.5 3.5. OPEN Message / Section 4.2 [RFC4271]
OPEN Message / Section 4.2
3.5.12 Hold Timer Calculation 3.5.12. Hold Timer Calculation
Functionality/Description: Use the smaller of its configured Functionality/Description: Use the smaller of its configured
Hold Time and the Hold Time received in the OPEN message Hold Time and the Hold Time received in the OPEN message
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.5.13 Minimum Hold Time 3.5.13. Minimum Hold Time
Functionality/Description: MUST be either zero or at least three Functionality/Description: MUST be either zero or at least three
seconds seconds
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.5.14. Connection Rejection
3.5.14 Connection Rejection
Functionality/Description: Based on the Hold Time Functionality/Description: Based on the Hold Time
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Sends notification. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Sends notification.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6 3.6. UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3 [RFC4271]
UPDATE Message Format / Section 4.3
3.6.15 UPDATE 3.6.15. UPDATE
Functionality/Description: Simultaneously advertise a feasible Functionality/Description: Simultaneously advertise a feasible
route and withdraw multiple unfeasible routes from service route and withdraw multiple unfeasible routes from service
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have capability to process this Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have capability to process this
functionality on receiving end but functionality on receiving end but
we don't send feasible & unfeasible we don't send feasible & unfeasible
simultaneously. simultaneously.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.16 Transitive Bit Setting 3.6.16. Transitive Bit Setting
Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes, the Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes, the
Transitive bit MUST be set to 1 Transitive bit MUST be set to 1
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.17. Partial Bit Setting
3.6.17 Partial Bit Setting
Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes and for Functionality/Description: For well-known attributes and for
optional non-transitive attributes the Partial bit MUST be set optional non-transitive attributes the Partial bit MUST be set
to 0 to 0
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/C NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
omments: Y
3.6.18 Attribute Flags octet sending 3.6.18. Attribute Flags Octet Sending
Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits set to zero Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits set to zero
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.6.19. Attribute Flags Octet Receiving
3.6.19 Attribute Flags octet receiving
Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits ignored Functionality/Description: Lower-order four bits ignored
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.20. NEXT_HOP
3.6.20 NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the
destinations listed in the NLRI field of the UPDATE message destinations listed in the NLRI field of the UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.21 MULTI_EXIT_DISC 3.6.21. MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: Used by a BGP speaker's decision Functionality/Description: Used by a BGP speaker's decision
process to discriminate among multiple entry points to a process to discriminate among multiple entry points to a
neighboring autonomous system neighboring autonomous system
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.22 AGGREGATOR IP Address 3.6.22. AGGREGATOR IP Address
Functionality/Description: Same address as the one used for the Functionality/Description: Same address as the one used for the
BGP Identifier of the speaker BGP Identifier of the speaker
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
different from BGP ID. different from BGP ID.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.23. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
3.6.23 UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields fields
Functionality/Description: UPDATE messages SHOULD NOT include Functionality/Description: UPDATE messages SHOULD NOT include
that information that information
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.24 UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the 3.6.24. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information
fields
Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker MUST be able to handle Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker MUST be able to handle
them them
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.6.25 UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the 3.6.25. UPDATE messages that include the same address prefix in the
WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information fields WITHDRAWN ROUTES and Network Layer Reachability Information
fields
Functionality/Description: Treated as if the WITHDRAWN ROUTES Functionality/Description: Treated as if the WITHDRAWN ROUTES
doesn't contain the address prefix doesn't contain the address prefix
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Withdrawn routes are processed Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Withdrawn routes are processed
before NLRI fields. Hence we get the before NLRI fields. Hence we get
desired behavior. the desired behavior.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.7. KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4 [RFC4271]
3.7
KEEPALIVE Message Format / Section 4.4
3.7.26 Maximum KEEPALIVE frequency 3.7.26. Maximum KEEPALIVE Frequency
Functionality/Description: Not greater than one second Functionality/Description: Not greater than one second
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.7.27 KEEPALIVE messages rate 3.7.27. KEEPALIVE Messages Rate
Functionality/Description: Adjusted as a function of the Hold Functionality/Description: Adjusted as a function of the Hold
Time interval Time interval
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.7.28 Negotiated Hold Time of 0 3.7.28. Negotiated Hold Time of 0
Functionality/Description: No KEEPALIVEs sent Functionality/Description: No KEEPALIVEs sent
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.8 3.8. NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5 [RFC4271]
NOTIFICATION Message Format / Section 4.5
3.8.29 NOTIFICATION Message 3.8.29. NOTIFICATION Message
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the
NOTIFICATION Message as described in this section? NOTIFICATION Message as described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9 3.9. Path Attributes /Section 5 [RFC4271]
Path Attributes /Section 5
3.9.30 Path attributes 3.9.30. Path Attributes
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the Functionality/Description: Does your implementation support the
path attributes as described in this section? path attributes as described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.31 Well-known attributes 3.9.31. Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: Recognized by all BGP implementations Functionality/Description: Recognized by all BGP implementations
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.32. Mandatory Attributes
3.9.32 Mandatory Attributes
Functionality/Description: Included in every UPDATE message that Functionality/Description: Included in every UPDATE message that
contains NLRI contains NLRI
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.33/34 Discretionary Attributes 3.9.33/34. Discretionary Attributes
Functionality/Description: Sent in a particular UPDATE message Functionality/Description: Sent in a particular UPDATE message
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MAY or MAY NOT RFC2119: MAY or MAY NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.35 Well-known attributes 3.9.35. Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: Passed along (after proper updating, Functionality/Description: Passed along (after proper updating,
if necessary) to other BGP peers if necessary) to other BGP peers
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.36. Optional Attributes
3.9.36 Optional Attributes
Functionality/Description: In addition to well-known attributes, Functionality/Description: In addition to well-known attributes,
each path MAY contain one or more optional attributes each path MAY contain one or more optional attributes
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.37 Unrecognized transitive optional attributes 3.9.37. Unrecognized Transitive Optional Attributes
Functionality/Description: Accepted Functionality/Description: Accepted
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.38 Partial Bit for unrecognized transitive optional attributes 3.9.38. Partial Bit for Unrecognized Transitive Optional Attributes
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: Set to 1 if the attribute is accepted Functionality/Description: Set to 1 if the attribute is accepted
and pa and passed to other BGP speakers
ssed to other BGP speakers
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.39. Unrecognized Non-Transitive Optional Attributes
3.9.39 Unrecognized non-transitive optional attributes
Functionality/Description: Quietly ignored and not passed along Functionality/Description: Quietly ignored and not passed along
to other BGP peers to other BGP peers
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.40 New transitive optional attributes 3.9.40. New Transitive Optional Attributes
Functionality/Description: Attached to the path by the Functionality/Description: Attached to the path by the
originator or by any other BGP speaker in the path originator or by any other BGP speaker in the path
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.41 Optional Attributes 3.9.41. Optional Attributes
Functionality/Description: Updated by BGP speakers in the path Functionality/Description: Updated by BGP speakers in the path
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.42. Path Attributes
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.9.42 Path Attributes
Functionality/Description: Ordered in ascending order of Functionality/Description: Ordered in ascending order of
attribute type attribute type
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O All attributes are ordered in Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O All attributes are ordered in
ascending order except Extended ascending order except Extended
Community, which is type 16 but we Community, which is type 16 but we
send it out after community send it out after community
attribute. attribute.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y except for MBGP which is always last Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y except for MBGP which is always last
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.43 Out of order received path attributes 3.9.43. Out of Order Received Path Attributes
Functionality/Description: Receiver MUST be able to handle Functionality/Description: Receiver MUST be able to handle
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.9.44 Mandatory Attributes 3.9.44. Mandatory Attributes
Functionality/Description: Present in all exchanges if NLRI are Functionality/Description: Present in all exchanges if NLRI are
contained in the UPDATE message contained in the UPDATE message
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.10 3.10. ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1 [RFC4271]
ORIGIN / Section 5.1.1
3.10.45 ORIGIN 3.10.45. ORIGIN
Functionality/Description: Value SHOULD NOT be changed by any Functionality/Description: Value SHOULD NOT be changed by any
speaker, except the originator speaker, except the originator
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.11 3.11. AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2 [RFC4271]
AS_PATH / Section 5.1.2
3.11.46 AS_PATH 3.11.46. AS_PATH
Functionality/Description: Not modified when advertising a route Functionality/Description: Not modified when advertising a route
to an internal peer to an internal peer
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.11.47 Segment Overflow 3.11.47. Segment Overflow
Functionality/Description: If the act of prepending will cause Functionality/Description: If the act of prepending will cause
an overflow in the AS_PATH segment, i.e. more than 255 ASs, it 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 SHOULD prepend a new segment of type AS_SEQUENCE and prepend its
own AS number to this new segment own AS number to this new segment
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.11.48. Prepending
3.11.48 Prepending
Functionality/Description: The local system MAY include/prepend Functionality/Description: The local system MAY include/prepend
more than one instance of its own AS number in the AS_PATH more than one instance of its own AS number in the AS_PATH
attribute attribute
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12 3.12. NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3 [RFC4271]
NEXT_HOP / Section 5.1.3
3.12.49 NEXT_HOP 3.12.49. NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the Functionality/Description: Used as the next hop to the
destinations listed in the UPDATE message destinations listed in the UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.50 NEXT_HOP 3.12.50. NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: When sending a message to an internal Functionality/Description: When sending a message to an internal
peer, if the route is not locally originated, the BGP speaker peer, if the route is not locally originated, the BGP speaker
SHOULD NOT modify the NEXT_HOP attribute, unless it has been SHOULD NOT modify the NEXT_HOP attribute, unless it has been
explicitly configured to announce its own IP address as the explicitly configured to announce its own IP address as the
NEXT_HOP NEXT_HOP
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.51. NEXT_HOP
3.12.51 NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: When announcing a locally originated Functionality/Description: When announcing a locally originated
route to an internal peer, the BGP speaker SHOULD use as the route to an internal peer, the BGP speaker SHOULD use as the
NEXT_HOP the interface address of the router through which the NEXT_HOP the interface address of the router through which the
announced network is reachable for the speaker announced network is reachable for the speaker
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.12.52. NEXT_HOP
3.12.52 NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: If the route is directly connected to Functionality/Description: If the route is directly connected to
the speaker, or the interface address of the router through the speaker, or the interface address of the router through
which the announced network is reachable for the speaker is the which the announced network is reachable for the speaker is the
internal peer's address, then the BGP speaker SHOULD use for the internal peer's address, then the BGP speaker SHOULD use for the
NEXT_HOP attribute its own IP address (the address of the NEXT_HOP attribute its own IP address (the address of the
interface that is used to reach the peer) interface that is used to reach the peer)
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.53 "first party" NEXT_HOP 3.12.53. "First Party" NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: If the external peer to which the Functionality/Description: If the external peer to which the
route is being advertised shares a common subnet with one of the route is being advertised shares a common subnet with one of the
interfaces of the announcing BGP speaker, the speaker MAY use interfaces of the announcing BGP speaker, the speaker MAY use
the IP address associated with such an interface in the NEXT_HOP the IP address associated with such an interface in the NEXT_HOP
attribute attribute
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.54. Default NEXT_HOP
3.12.54 Default NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: IP address of the interface that the Functionality/Description: IP address of the interface that the
speaker uses to establish the BGP connection to peer X speaker uses to establish the BGP connection to peer X
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.55 NEXT_HOP Propagation 3.12.55. NEXT_HOP Propagation
Functionality/Description: The speaker MAY be configured to Functionality/Description: The speaker MAY be configured to
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
propagate the NEXT_HOP attribute. In this case when advertising propagate the NEXT_HOP attribute. In this case when advertising
a route that the speaker learned from one of its peers, the a route that the speaker learned from one of its peers, the
NEXT_HOP attribute of the advertised route is exactly th NEXT_HOP attribute of the advertised route is exactly the same
e same
as the NEXT_HOP attribute of the learned route (the speaker just as the NEXT_HOP attribute of the learned route (the speaker just
doesn't modify the NEXT_HOP attribute) doesn't modify the NEXT_HOP attribute)
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.56 Third party NEXT_HOP 3.12.56. Third Party NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: MUST be able to support disabling it Functionality/Description: MUST be able to support disabling it
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.57. NEXT_HOP
3.12.57 NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: A route originated by a BGP speaker Functionality/Description: A route originated by a BGP speaker
SHALL NOT be advertised to a peer using an address of that peer SHALL NOT be advertised to a peer using an address of that peer
as NEXT_HOP as NEXT_HOP
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.58 NEXT_HOP 3.12.58. NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHALL NOT install a Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHALL NOT install a
route with itself as the next hop route with itself as the next hop
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.59 NEXT_HOP 3.12.59. NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: Used to determine the actual outbound Functionality/Description: Used to determine the actual outbound
interface and immediate next-hop address that SHOULD be used to interface and immediate next-hop address that SHOULD be used to
forward transit packets to the associated destinations forward transit packets to the associated destinations
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.60. Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address
3.12.60 Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address
Functionality/Description: If the entry specifies an attached Functionality/Description: If the entry specifies an attached
subnet, but does not specify a next-hop address, then the subnet, but does not specify a next-hop address, then the
address in the NEXT_HOP attribute SHOULD be used as the address in the NEXT_HOP attribute SHOULD be used as the
immediate next-hop address immediate next-hop address
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.12.61 Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address 3.12.61. Resolved NEXT_HOP IP Address
Functionality/Description: If the entry also specifies the Functionality/Description: If the entry also specifies the
next-hop address, this address SHOULD be used as the immediate next-hop address, this address SHOULD be used as the immediate
next-hop address for packet forwarding next-hop address for packet forwarding
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13 3.13. MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4 [RFC4271]
MULTI_EXIT_DISC / Section 5.1.4
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.13.62 Preferred metric 3.13.62. Preferred Metric
Functionality/Description: Lowest value Functionality/Description: Lowest value
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.63. MULTI_EXIT_DISC
3.13.63 MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: If received over EBGP, the Functionality/Description: If received over EBGP, the
MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY be propagated over IBGP to other MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY be propagated over IBGP to other
BGP speakers within the same AS BGP speakers within the same AS
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.64 MULTI_EXIT_DISC 3.13.64. MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: If received from a neighboring AS, it Functionality/Description: If received from a neighboring AS, it
MUST NOT be propagated to other neighboring ASes MUST NOT be propagated to other neighboring ASes
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.65 Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC 3.13.65. Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: Local configuration mechanism to Functionality/Description: Local configuration mechanism to
remove the attribute from a route remove the attribute from a route
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.66. Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC
3.13.66 Remove MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree
of preference of the route and performing route selection of preference of the route and performing route selection
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.67 MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration 3.13.67. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration
Functionality/Description: An implementation MAY also (based on Functionality/Description: An implementation MAY also (based on
local configuration) alter the value of the MULTI_EXIT_DISC local configuration) alter the value of the MULTI_EXIT_DISC
attribute received over EBGP attribute received over EBGP
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.13.68 MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration 3.13.68. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Alteration
Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree Functionality/Description: Done prior to determining the degree
of preference of the route and performing route selection of preference of the route and performing route selection
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.14 3.14. LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5 [RFC4271]
LOCAL_PREF / Section 5.1.5
3.14.69 LOCAL_PREF 3.14.69. LOCAL_PREF
Functionality/Description: Included in all UPDATE messages that Functionality/Description: Included in all UPDATE messages that
a given BGP speaker sends to the other internal peers a given BGP speaker sends to the other internal peers
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.14.70 Degree of Preference 3.14.70. Degree of Preference
Functionality/Description: Calculated for each external route Functionality/Description: Calculated for each external route
based on the locally configured policy, and included when based on the locally configured policy, and included when
advertising a route to its internal peers advertising a route to its internal peers
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.14.71 LOCAL_PREF 3.14.71. LOCAL_PREF
Functionality/Description: Higher degree of preference MUST be Functionality/Description: Higher degree of preference MUST be
preferred preferred
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.14.72. LOCAL_PREF
3.14.72 LOCAL_PREF
Functionality/Description: Not included in UPDATE messages sent Functionality/Description: Not included in UPDATE messages sent
to external peers, except for the case of BGP Confederations to external peers, except for the case of BGP Confederations
[RFC3065] [RFC3065]
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.14.73. LOCAL_PREF
3.14.73 LOCAL_PREF
Functionality/Description: Ignored if received from an external Functionality/Description: Ignored if received from an external
peer, except for the case of BGP Confederations [RFC3065] peer, except for the case of BGP Confederations [RFC3065]
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.15 3.15. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6 [RFC4271]
ATOMIC_AGGREGATE / Section 5.1.6
3.15.74 ATOMIC_AGGREGATE 3.15.74. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
Functionality/Description: Included if an aggregate excludes at Functionality/Description: Included if an aggregate excludes at
least some of the AS numbers present in the AS_PATH of the least some of the AS numbers present in the AS_PATH of the
routes routes that are aggregated as a result of dropping the AS_SET
that are aggregated as a result of dropping the AS_SET
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.15.75. Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
3.15.75 Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
Functionality/Description: BGP speaker SHOULD NOT remove the Functionality/Description: BGP speaker SHOULD NOT remove the
attribute from the route when propagating it to other speakers attribute from the route when propagating it to other speakers
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.15.76 Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE 3.15.76. Received ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
Functionality/Description: BGP speaker MUST NOT make any NLRI of Functionality/Description: BGP speaker MUST NOT make any NLRI of
that route more specific (as defined in 9.1.4) that route more specific (as defined in 9.1.4)
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.16 3.16. AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7 [RFC4271]
AGGREGATOR / Section 5.1.7
3.16.77 AGGREGATOR 3.16.77. AGGREGATOR
Functionality/Description: Included in updates which are formed Functionality/Description: Included in updates which are formed
by aggregation (see Section 9.2.2.2) by aggregation (see Section 9.2.2.2)
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.16.78. AGGREGATOR
3.16.78 AGGREGATOR
Functionality/Description: Added by the BGP speaker performing Functionality/Description: Added by the BGP speaker performing
route aggregation route aggregation
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.16.79 AGGREGATOR 3.16.79. AGGREGATOR
Functionality/Description: Contain local AS number and IP Functionality/Description: Contain local AS number and IP
address address
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default behavior. Can be configured
different from BGP ID. different from BGP ID.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.16.80. AGGREGATOR IP Address
3.16.80 AGGREGATOR IP Address
Functionality/Description: The same as the BGP Identifier of the Functionality/Description: The same as the BGP Identifier of the
speaker speaker
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.17 3.17. BGP Error Handling / Section 6 [RFC4271]
BGP Error Handling / Section 6
3.17.81 Error Handling 3.17.81. Error Handling
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the error handling procedures described in this section? with the error handling procedures described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.17.82 Error Subcode 3.17.82. Error Subcode
Functionality/Description: Zero, if it is not specified Functionality/Description: Zero, if it is not specified
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18 3.18. Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1 [RFC4271]
Message Header Error Handling / Section 6.1
3.18.83 Message Header Errors 3.18.83. Message Header Errors
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION
message with Error Code Message Header Error message with Error Code Message Header Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18.84. Synchronization Error
3.18.84 Synchronization Error
Functionality/Description: Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: Error Subcode MUST be set to
Connection Not Synchronized Connection Not Synchronized
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18.85 Message Length 3.18.85. Message Length
Functionality/Description: Use the Bad Message Length Error Functionality/Description: Use the Bad Message Length Error
Subcode to indicate an incorrect message length Subcode to indicate an incorrect message length
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18.86 Bad Message Length 3.18.86. Bad Message Length
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
erroneous Lentgh field erroneous Length field
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18.87. Type Field
3.18.87 Type Field
Functionality/Description: If the Type field of the message Functionality/Description: If the Type field of the message
header is not recognized, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to header is not recognized, then the Error Subcode MUST be set to
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Bad Message Type Bad Message Type
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.18.88 Bad Message Type 3.18.88. Bad Message Type
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
erroneous Type field erroneous Type field
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19 3.19. OPEN Message Error Handling / Section 6.2 [RFC4271]
OPEN message error handling / Section 6.2
3.19.89 OPEN Message Errors 3.19.89. OPEN Message Errors
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the NOTIFICATION
message with Error Code OPEN Message Error message with Error Code OPEN Message Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.90. Version Number Not Supported
3.19.90 Version Number not Supported
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Unsupported Version Number Unsupported Version Number
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.19.91. Unacceptable Autonomous System Field
3.19.91 Unnacceptable Autonomous System Field
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad
Peer AS Peer AS
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.92 Unacceptable Hold Time Error Subcode 3.19.92. Unacceptable Hold Time Error Subcode
Functionality/Description: Used if the Hold Time field of the Functionality/Description: Used if the Hold Time field of the
OPEN message is unacceptable OPEN message is unacceptable
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.93. Hold Time Rejection
3.19.93 Hold Time Rejection
Functionality/Description: Values of one or two seconds Functionality/Description: Values of one or two seconds
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.94 Hold Time Rejection 3.19.94. Hold Time Rejection
Functionality/Description: An implementation may reject any Functionality/Description: An implementation may reject any
proposed Hold Time proposed Hold Time
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 O
ctober 2004
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.95 Hold Time 3.19.95. Hold Time
Functionality/Description: If accepted, then the negotiated Functionality/Description: If accepted, then the negotiated
value MUST be used value MUST be used
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.96. Syntactically Incorrect BGP Identifier
3.19.96 Syntactically Incorrect BGP Identifier
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Bad
BGP Identifier BGP Identifier
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.97 Not recognized Optional Parameters 3.19.97. Not Recognized Optional Parameters
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Unsupported Optional Parameters Unsupported Optional Parameters
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We may fix this. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We may fix this.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.19.98 Recognized but Malformed Optional Parameters 3.19.98. Recognized but Malformed Optional Parameters
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to 0 Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to 0
(Unspecific) (Unspecific)
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20 3.20. UPDATE Message Error Handling / Section 6.3 [RFC4271]
UPDATE message error handling / Section 6.3
3.20.99 UPDATE Message Errors 3.20.99. UPDATE Message Errors
Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the Functionality/Description: Indicated by sending the
NOTIFICATION message with Error Code UPDATE Message Error NOTIFICATION message with Error Code UPDATE Message Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.100 Too Large 3.20.100. Too Large
Functionality/Description: If the Withdrawn Routes Length or Functionality/Description: If the Withdrawn Routes Length or
Total Attribute Length is too large, then the Error Subcode MUST Total Attribute Length is too large, then the Error Subcode MUST
be set to Malformed Attribute List be set to Malformed Attribute List
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.101 Conflicting Flags 3.20.101. Conflicting Flags
Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has
Attribute Flags that conflict with the Attribute Type Code, then Attribute Flags that conflict with the Attribute Type Code, then
the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Flags Error the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Flags Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.102. Conflicting Flags
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.20.102 Conflicting Flags
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
erroneous attribute erroneous attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.103 Conflicting Length 3.20.103. Conflicting Length
Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has Functionality/Description: If any recognized attribute has
Attribute Length that conflicts with the expected length, then Attribute Length that conflicts with the expected length, then
the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Length Error the Error Subcode MUST be set to Attribute Length Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.104 Conflicting Length 3.20.104. Conflicting Length
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
erroneous attribute erroneous attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.105. Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
3.20.105 Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Missing Well-known Attribute Missing Well-known Attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.106 Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes 3.20.106. Missing Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
Attribute Type Code of the missing well-known attribute Attribute Type Code of the missing well-known attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We plan to fix this in future. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We plan to fix this in future.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.107 Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes 3.20.107. Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Unrecognized Well-known Attribute Unrecognized Well-known Attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We set error subcode to Attribute Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We set error subcode to Attribute
Flags Error, but we intend to Flags Error, but we intend to
correct this soon. correct this soon.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.108. Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
3.20.108 Unrecognized Mandatory Well-Known Attributes
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
unrecognized attribute unrecognized attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.109 Undefined ORIGIN 3.20.109. Undefined ORIGIN
Functionality/Description: The Error Sub-code MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Sub-code MUST be set to
Invalid Origin Attribute Invalid Origin Attribute
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.110 Undefined ORIGIN 3.20.110. Undefined ORIGIN
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
unrecognized attribute unrecognized attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.111. Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
3.20.111 Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Invalid NEXT_HOP Attribute Invalid NEXT_HOP Attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Ignores the prefix in case of Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Ignores the prefix in case of
martian nexthop, and in case of martian nexthop, and in case of
length not equal to IPv4 length not equal to IPv4
address-length, we send address-length, we send
NOTIFICATION with error subcode NOTIFICATION with error subcode
Attribute Length error. Attribute Length error.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.112 Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP 3.20.112. Syntactically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
incorrect attribute incorrect attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.113 NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness 3.20.113. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
Functionality/Description: NEXT_HOP is checked for semantic Functionality/Description: NEXT_HOP is checked for semantic
correctness against the criteria in this section correctness against the criteria in this section
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.114. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
3.20.114 NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
Functionality/Description: Not be the IP address of the Functionality/Description: Not be the IP address of the
receiving speaker receiving speaker
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.115 NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness 3.20.115. NEXT_HOP Semantic Correctness
Functionality/Description: In the case of an EBGP where the Functionality/Description: In the case of an EBGP where the
sender and receiver are one IP hop away from each other, either 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 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 (that is used to establish the BGP connection), or the interface
associated with the NEXT_HOP IP address MUST share a common associated with the NEXT_HOP IP address MUST share a common
subnet with the receiving BGP speaker subnet with the receiving BGP speaker
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.116 Semantically incorrect NEXT_HOP 3.20.116. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: Error logged Functionality/Description: Error logged
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.117. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
3.20.117 Semantically incorrect NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: Route Ignored Functionality/Description: Route Ignored
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.118 Semantically incorrect NEXT_HOP 3.20.118. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: NOTIFICATION not sent Functionality/Description: NOTIFICATION not sent
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.119 Semantically incorrect NEXT_HOP 3.20.119. Semantically Incorrect NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: Connection not closed Functionality/Description: Connection not closed
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.120 Syntactically Incorrect AS_PATH 3.20.120. Syntactically Incorrect AS_PATH
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Malformed AS_PATH Malformed AS_PATH
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.121. First Neighbor in AS_PATH Check
3.20.121 First Neighbor in AS_PATH check
Functionality/Description: If the UPDATE message is received Functionality/Description: If the UPDATE message is received
from an external peer, the local system MAY check whether the from an external peer, the local system MAY check whether the
leftmost AS in the AS_PATH attribute is equal to the autonomous leftmost AS in the AS_PATH attribute is equal to the autonomous
system number of the peer that sent the message system number of the peer that sent the message
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.122 First Neighbor in AS_PATH check 3.20.122. First Neighbor in AS_PATH Check
Functionality/Description: If the check determines that this is Functionality/Description: If the check determines that this is
not the case, the Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed AS_PATH not the case, the Error Subcode MUST be set to Malformed AS_PATH
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.123 Optional Attributes 3.20.123. Optional Attributes
Functionality/Description: Value MUST be checked if the Functionality/Description: Value MUST be checked if the
attribute is recognized attribute is recognized
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.124. Optional Attribute Error
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.20.124 Optional Attribute Error
Functionality/Description: The attribute MUST be discarded Functionality/Description: The attribute MUST be discarded
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.125 Optional Attribute Error 3.20.125. Optional Attribute Error
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Optional Attribute Error Optional Attribute Error
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N What exactly is optional attribute Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N What exactly is optional attribute
e.g If error is flag related, we send e.g., If error is flag related, we
update flag error subcode, if it is send update flag error subcode, if it
length related, we send update length is length related, we send update
error subcode. These granular length error subcode. These granular
subcodes are better in terms of subcodes are better in terms of
debugging than optional attribute debugging than optional attribute
error. error.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Only optional attribute error that NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Only optional attribute error that
doesn't have a more specific error, doesn't have a more specific error,
is the version 3 to version 4 error is the version 3 to version 4 error
for the atomic aggregate. All others for the atomic aggregate. All others
default to more specific error codes default to more specific error codes
if implementation. if implementation.
3.20.126 Optional Attribute Error 3.20.126. Optional Attribute Error
Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the Functionality/Description: The Data field MUST contain the
attribute attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.127. Duplicate Attributes
3.20.127 Duplicate Attributes
Functionality/Description: If any attribute appears more than Functionality/Description: If any attribute appears more than
once in the UPDATE message, then the Error Subcode MUST be set once in the UPDATE message, then the Error Subcode MUST be set
to Malformed Attribute List to Malformed Attribute List
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.128 Syntactically Incorrect NLRI Field 3.20.128. Syntactically Incorrect NLRI Field
Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to Functionality/Description: The Error Subcode MUST be set to
Invalid Network Field Invalid Network Field
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.129 Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field 3.20.129. Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field
Functionality/Description: An error SHOULD be logged locally Functionality/Description: An error SHOULD be logged locally
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.130. Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field
3.20.130 Semantically Incorrect NLRI Field
Functionality/Description: The prefix SHOULD be ignored Functionality/Description: The prefix SHOULD be ignored
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.20.131 UPDATE with no NLRI 3.20.131. UPDATE with no NLRI
Functionality/Description: An UPDATE message that contains Functionality/Description: An UPDATE message that contains
correct path attributes, but no NLRI, SHALL be treated as a correct path attributes, but no NLRI, SHALL be treated as a
valid UPDATE message valid UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.21 3.21. NOTIFICATION Message Error Handling / Section 6.4 [RFC4271]
NOTIFICATION message error handling / Section 6.4
3.21.132 Error in NOTIFICATION message 3.21.132. Error in NOTIFICATION Message
Functionality/Description: Noticed, logged locally, and brought Functionality/Description: Noticed, logged locally, and brought
to the attention of the administration of the peer to the attention of the administration of the peer
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.22 3.22. Hold Timer Expired Error Handling / Section 6.5 [RFC4271]
Hold Timer Expired error handling / Section 6.5
3.22.133 Hold Timer Expired 3.22.133. Hold Timer Expired
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the error handling procedures described in this section? with the error handling procedures described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.23. Finite State Machine Error Handling / Section 6.6 [RFC4271]
3.23
Finite State Machine error handling / Section 6.6
3.23.134 Finite State Machine Errors 3.23.134. Finite State Machine Errors
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the error handling procedures described in this section? with the error handling procedures described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.24 3.24. Cease / Section 6.7 [RFC4271]
Cease / Section 6.7
3.24.135 Cease NOTIFICATION 3.24.135. Cease NOTIFICATION
Functionality/Description: Used in absence of any fatal errors Functionality/Description: Used in absence of any fatal errors
if a BGP peer chooses at any given time to close its BGP if a BGP peer chooses at any given time to close its BGP
connection connection
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We close the TCP session without Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We close the TCP session without
CEASE NOTIFICATION. CEASE NOTIFICATION.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.24.136. Cease NOTIFICATION
3.24.136 Cease NOTIFICATION
Functionality/Description: Not used for specified fatal errors Functionality/Description: Not used for specified fatal errors
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.24.137 Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker is 3.24.137. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
willing to accept from a neighbor is willing to accept from a neighbor
Functionality/Description: Support by local configuration Functionality/Description: Support by local configuration
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.24.138 Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker is 3.24.138. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
willing to accept from a neighbor is willing to accept from a neighbor
Functionality/Description: If exceeded and the BGP speaker Functionality/Description: If exceeded and the BGP speaker
decides to terminate its BGP connection, the Cease NOTIFICATION decides to terminate its BGP connection, the Cease NOTIFICATION
MUST be used MUST be used
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't send CEASE but we plan to Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't send CEASE but we plan to
correct that soon. correct that soon.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y No termination of peers is supported NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y No termination of peers is supported
We are considering support with the We are considering support with the
maximum prefix draft for later maximum prefix document for later
releases. releases.
3.24.139 Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker is 3.24.139. Upper bound on the number of address prefixes the speaker
willing to accept from a neighbor is willing to accept from a neighbor
Functionality/Description: Log locally Functionality/Description: Log locally
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.25 3.25. BGP Connection Collision Detection / Section 6.8 [RFC4271]
BGP connection collision detection / Section 6.8
3.25.140 Connection Collision 3.25.140. Connection Collision
Functionality/Description: One of the connections MUST be closed Functionality/Description: One of the connections MUST be closed
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.25.141 Receipt of an OPEN message 3.25.141. Receipt of an OPEN Message
Functionality/Description: The local system MUST examine all of Functionality/Description: The local system MUST examine all of
its connections that are in the OpenConfirm state its connections that are in the OpenConfirm state
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We detect collision through some Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We detect collision through some
other implementation specific way other implementation specific way
and resolve by method specified in and resolve by method specified in
draft. the document.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.25.142. Receipt of an OPEN Message
3.25.142 Receipt of an OPEN message
Functionality/Description: Examine connections in an OpenSent Functionality/Description: Examine connections in an OpenSent
state if it knows the BGP Identifier of the peer by means state if it knows the BGP Identifier of the peer by means
outside of the protocol outside of the protocol
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.26 3.26. BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7 [RFC4271]
BGP Version Negotiation / Section 7
3.26.143 Version Negotiation 3.26.143. Version Negotiation
Functionality/Description: Multiple attempts to open a BGP Functionality/Description: Multiple attempts to open a BGP
connection, starting with the highest version number each connection, starting with the highest version number each
supports supports
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4 Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We resolve it through config. If Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We resolve it through config. If
Config is for version 3, and we get Config is for version 3, and we get
version 4, OPEN will always fail. version 4, OPEN will always fail.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Similarly, if configed (default) is Similarly, if configed (default) is
version 4 and peers configured is 3, version 4 and peers configured is 3,
we don't try to negotiate version 3 we don't try to negotiate version 3
unless we have configured it. unless we have configured it.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4. NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Supports only version 4.
3.26.144 Future versions of BGP 3.26.144. Future Versions of BGP
Functionality/Description: MUST retain the format of the OPEN Functionality/Description: MUST retain the format of the OPEN
and NOTIFICATION messages and NOTIFICATION messages
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.27 3.27. BGP Finite State Machine (FSM) / Section 8 [RFC4271]
BGP Finite State machine (FSM) / Section 8
3.27.145 FSM 3.27.145. FSM
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the conceptual FSM described in this section? with the conceptual FSM described in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28 3.28. Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2 [RFC4271]
Administrative Events / Section 8.1.2
3.28.146 Optional Session Attribute Settings 3.28.146. Optional Session Attribute Settings
Functionality/Description: Each event has an indication of what Functionality/Description: Each event has an indication of what
optional session attributes SHOULD be set at each stage optional session attributes SHOULD be set at each stage
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Its rather vague. We have an option Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Its rather vague. We have an option
Of manually starting or stopping Of manually starting or stopping
sessions but not an option for all sessions but not an option for all
draft-iet
f-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
optional session attributes that are optional session attributes that are
listed in draft. listed in the document.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y The following optional attributes NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y The following optional attributes
are implied in this implementation: are implied in this implementation:
1) Automatic start, 2) Automatic 1) Automatic start, 2) Automatic
Stop, 3) Stop, 3)
3.28.147 Event1: ManualStart 3.28.147. Event1: ManualStart
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute
SHOULD be set to FALSE SHOULD be set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.148. Event3: AutomaticStart
3.28.148 Event3: AutomaticStart
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.149 Event3: AutomaticStart 3.28.149. Event3: AutomaticStart
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment optional Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment optional
session attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE session attribute SHOULD be set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.150 Event3: AutomaticStart 3.28.150. Event3: AutomaticStart
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be set to Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be set to
FALSE FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute, so it is always FALSE. attribute, so it is always FALSE.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.151. Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
3.28.151 Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We wait for some fixed time before Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We wait for some fixed time before
initiating OPEN. initiating OPEN.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.152 Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment 3.28.152. Event4: ManualStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute
SHOULD be set to FALSE SHOULD be set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute so it is FALSE. attribute so it is FALSE.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation
attribute with a setting of off, and attribute with a setting of off, and
hence Event 4. Future version will hence Event 4. Future version will
support Event 4 support Event 4
3.28.153 Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment 3.28.153. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.154. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
3.28.154 Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.155 Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment 3.28.155. Event5: AutomaticStart_with_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations SHOULD be
set to FALSE set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute, so always FALSE. attribute, so always FALSE.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O We don't support DampPeerOscilation
attribute with a setting of off, and attribute with a setting of off, and
hence Event 5. Future version will hence Event 5. Future version will
support Event 5 support Event 5
3.28.156 Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations 3.28.156. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute. attribute.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.157. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
3.28.157 Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute. attribute.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.158 Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations 3.28.158. Event6: AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute
SHOULD be set to FALSE SHOULD be set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event6. attribute and hence Event6.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.159 Event 7: 3.28.159. Event7:
AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStart attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event7 attribute and hence Event7
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.160. Event7:
3.28.160 Event 7:
AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute Functionality/Description: The DampPeerOscillations attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event7 attribute and hence Event7
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.161 Event 7: 3.28.161. Event7:
AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment AutomaticStart_with_DampPeerOscillations_and_PassiveTcpEstablishment
Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute Functionality/Description: The PassiveTcpEstablishment attribute
SHOULD be set to TRUE SHOULD be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event7 attribute and hence Event7
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.28.162 Event8: AutomaticStop 3.28.162. Event8: AutomaticStop
Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStop attribute Functionality/Description: The AllowAutomaticStop attribute
SH SHOULD be TRUE
OULD be TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.29 3.29. Timer Events / Section 8.1.3 [RFC4271]
Timer Events / Section 8.1.3
3.29.163 Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires 3.29.163. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set to Functionality/Description: DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set to
TRUE TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.29.164 Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires 3.29.164. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTime attribute SHOULD be Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTime attribute SHOULD be
supported supported
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.29.165 Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires 3.29.165. Event12: DelayOpenTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be supported Functionality/Description: DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be supported
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.29.166. Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires
3.29.166 Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD Functionality/Description: DampPeerOscillations attribute SHOULD
be set to TRUE be set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event13 attribute and hence Event13
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.29.167 Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires 3.29.167. Event13: IdleHoldTimer_Expires
Functionality/Description: IdleHoldTimer SHOULD have just Functionality/Description: IdleHoldTimer SHOULD have just
expired expired
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O Don't support DampPeerOscillations
attribute and hence Event13 attribute and hence Event13
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.30 3.30. TCP Connection-Based Events / Section 8.1.4 [RFC4271]
TCP Connection based Events / Section 8.1.4
3.30.168 Event14: TcpConnection_Valid 3.30.168. Event14: TcpConnection_Valid
Functionality/Description: BGP's destination port SHOULD be port Functionality/Description: BGP's destination port SHOULD be port
179 179
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.30.169. Event14: TcpConnection_Valid
3.30.169 Event14: TcpConnection_Valid
Functionality/Description: The TrackTcpState attribute SHOULD be Functionality/Description: The TrackTcpState attribute SHOULD be
set to TRUE set to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for
the TCP state tracking, but use of the TCP state tracking, but use of
this option depends OS support. this option depends OS support.
Future versions will have additional Future versions will have additional
hooks. hooks.
3.30.170 Event15: Tcp_CR_Invalid 3.30.170. Event15: Tcp_CR_Invalid
Functionality/Description: BGP destination port number SHOULD be Functionality/Description: BGP destination port number SHOULD be
179 179
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 provides hooks for
the TCP state tracking, but use of the TCP state tracking, but use of
this option depends OS support. this option depends OS support.
Future versions will have additional Future versions will have additional
hooks. hooks.
3.31 3.31. BGP Messages-Based Events / Section 8.1.5 [RFC4271]
BGP Messages based Events / Seciton 8.1.5
3.31.171 Event19: BGPOpen 3.31.171. Event19: BGPOpen
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen optional attribute Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen optional attribute
SHOULD be set to FALSE SHOULD be set to FALSE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.31.172. Event19: BGPOpen
3.31.172 Event19: BGPOpen
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD not be Functionality/Description: The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD not be
running running
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.31.173 Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer running 3.31.173. Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer Running
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set Functionality/Description: The DelayOpen attribute SHOULD be set
to TRUE to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Not applicable Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Not applicable
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.31.174. Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer Running
3.31.174 Event20: BGPOpen with DelayOpenTimer running
Functionality/Description: The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be running Functionality/Description: The DelayOpenTimer SHOULD be running
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: n/a
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.31.175. Event23: OpenCollisionDump
3.31.175 Event23: OpenCollisionDump
Functionality/Description: If the state machine is to process Functionality/Description: If the state machine is to process
this event in Established state, the this event in Established state, the
CollisionDetectEstablishedState optional attribute SHOULD be set CollisionDetectEstablishedState optional attribute SHOULD be set
to TRUE to TRUE
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Collision detection event is logged. Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Collision detection event is logged.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We always detect collision before we Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We always detect collision before we
go to established state. go to established state.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 does not support NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O GateD NGC 2.0 does not support
Collision Detection in Established Collision Detection in Established
state. This option attribute is state. This option attribute is
always set to FALSE. always set to FALSE.
3.32 3.32. FSM Definition / Section 8.2.1 [RFC4271]
FSM Definition / Section 8.2.1
3.32.176 FSM 3.32.176. FSM
Functionality/Description: Separate FSM for each configured peer Functionality/Description: Separate FSM for each configured peer
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.32.177 TCP Port 179 3.32.177. TCP Port 179
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: A BGP implementation MUST connect to Functionality/Description: A BGP implementation MUST connect to
and listen on TCP port 179 for incoming connections in addition and listen on TCP port 179 for incoming connections in addition
to trying to connect to peers to trying to connect to peers
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.32.178. Incoming Connections
3.32.178 Incoming Connections
Functionality/Description: A state machine MUST be instantiated Functionality/Description: A state machine MUST be instantiated
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.33 3.33. FSM and Collision Detection / Section 8.2.1.2 [RFC4271]
FSM and collision detection / Section 8.2.1.2
3.33.179 Connection Collision 3.33.179. Connection Collision
Functionality/Description: The corresponding FSM for the Functionality/Description: The corresponding FSM for the
connection that is closed SHOULD be disposed of connection that is closed SHOULD be disposed of
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.34 3.34. FSM Event numbers / Section 8.2.1.4 [RFC4271]
FSM Event numbers / Section 8.2.1.4
3.34.180 Event Numbers 3.34.180. Event Numbers
Functionality/Description: Used to provide network management Functionality/Description: Used to provide network management
information information
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Not visible to operator. Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Not visible to operator.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Future Release of GateD NGC may NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N Future Release of GateD NGC may
support event numbers. support event numbers.
3.35 3.35. Finite State Machine / Section 8.2.2 [RFC4271]
Finite State Machine / Section 8.2.2
3.35.181 ConnectRetryTimer 3.35.181. ConnectRetryTimer
Functionality/Description: Sufficiently large to allow TCP Functionality/Description: Sufficiently large to allow TCP
initialization initialization
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.35.182 2nd connection tracking 3.35.182. Second Connection Tracking
Functionality/Description: In response to a TCP connection Functionality/Description: In response to a TCP connection
succeeds [Event 16 or Event 17], the 2nd connection SHALL be succeeds [Event 16 or Event 17], the 2nd connection SHALL be
tracked until it sends an OPEN message tracked until it sends an OPEN message
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36 3.36. UPDATE Message Handling / Section 9 [RFC4271]
UPDATE Message Handling / Section 9
3.36.183 UPDATE Message Handling 3.36.183. UPDATE Message Handling
Functionality/Description: Does your implementation handle Functionality/Description: Does your implementation handle
UPDATE messages in a manner compatible to the description in UPDATE messages in a manner compatible to the description in
this section? this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36.184. WITHDRAWN ROUTES
3.36.184 WITHDRAWN ROUTES
Functionality/Description: Any previously advertised routes Functionality/Description: Any previously advertised routes
whose destinations are contained in this field SHALL be removed whose destinations are contained in this field SHALL be removed
from the Adj-RIB-In from the Adj-RIB-In
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36.185 WITHDRAWN ROUTES 3.36.185. WITHDRAWN ROUTES
Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker SHALL run its Functionality/Description: The BGP speaker SHALL run its
Decision Process since the previously advertised route is no Decision Process since the previously advertised route is no
longer available for use longer available for use
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36.186 Implicit withdraw 3.36.186. Implicit Withdraw
Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a
feasible route, and the NLRI of the new route is identical to 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 the one of a route currently stored in the Adj-RIB-In, then the
new route SHALL replace the older route new route SHALL replace the older route
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36.187. Other Feasible Routes
3.36.187 Other feasible routes
Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a Functionality/Description: If an UPDATE message contains a
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
feasible route, and the NLRI of the new route is not identical 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 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 the new route SHALL be placed in the Adj-RIB-In
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.36.188 Adj-RIB-In Update 3.36.188. Adj-RIB-In Update
Functionality/Description: Once a BGP speaker updates the Functionality/Description: Once a BGP speaker updates the
Adj-RIB-In, it SHALL run its Decision Process Adj-RIB-In, it SHALL run its Decision Process
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.37 3.37. Decision Process / Section 9.1 [RFC4271]
Decision Process / Section 9.1
3.37.189 Decision Process 3.37.189. Decision Process
Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible Functionality/Description: Is your implementation compatible
with the description in this section? with the description in this section?
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.37.190. Degree of Preference
3.37.190 Degree of Preference
Functionality/Description: SHALL NOT use as its inputs any of Functionality/Description: SHALL NOT use as its inputs any of
the following: the existence of other routes, the non-existence the following: the existence of other routes, the non-existence
of other routes, or the path attributes of other routes of other routes, or the path attributes of other routes
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.38 3.38. Phase 1: Calculation of Degree of Preference / Section 9.1.1
Phase 1: Calculation of Degree of Preference / Section 9.1.1 [RFC4271]
3.38.191 Ineligible degree of preference 3.38.191. Ineligible Degree of Preference
Functionality/Description: The route MAY NOT serve as an input Functionality/Description: The route MAY NOT serve as an input
to the next phase of route selection to the next phase of route selection
RFC2119: MAY NOT RFC2119: MAY NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.38.192 Eligible degree of preference 3.38.192. Eligible Degree of Preference
Functionality/Description: Used as the LOCAL_PREF value in any Functionality/Description: Used as the LOCAL_PREF value in any
IBGP readvertisement IBGP re-advertisement
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39 3.39. Phase 2: Route Selection / Section 9.1.2 [RFC4271]
Phase 2: Route Selection / Section 9.1.2
3.39.193 Unresolvable NEXT_HOP 3.39.193. Unresolvable NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: If the NEXT_HOP attribute of a BGP Functionality/Description: If the NEXT_HOP attribute of a BGP
route depicts an address that is not resolvable, or it would route depicts an address that is not resolvable, or it would
become unresolvable if the route was installed in the routing become unresolvable if the route was installed in the routing
table the BGP route MUST be excluded table the BGP route MUST be excluded
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.39.194. Routes Installed in LOC-RIB
3.39.194 Routes installed in LOC-RIB
Functionality/Description: The route in the Adj-RIBs-In Functionality/Description: The route in the Adj-RIBs-In
identified as the best (see section 9.1.2) is installed in the identified as the best (see section 9.1.2) is installed in the
Loc-RIB, replacing any route to the same destination that is Loc-RIB, replacing any route to the same destination that is
currently being held in the Loc-RIB currently being held in the Loc-RIB
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39.195 Immediate next-hop address 3.39.195. Immediate Next-Hop Address
Functionality/Description: MUST be determined from the NEXT_HOP Functionality/Description: MUST be determined from the NEXT_HOP
attribute of the selected route (see Section 5.1.3) attribute of the selected route (see Section 5.1.3)
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39.196. Phase 2: Route Selection
3.39.196 Phase 2: Route Selection
Functionality/Description: Performed again if either the Functionality/Description: Performed again if either the
immediate next hop or the IGP cost to the NEXT_HOP changes immediate next hop or the IGP cost to the NEXT_HOP changes
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39.197 Immediate next-hop address 3.39.197. Immediate Next-Hop Address
Functionality/Description: Used for packet forwarding Functionality/Description: Used for packet forwarding
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39.198 Unresolvable routes 3.39.198. Unresolvable Routes
Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB and the Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB and the
routing table routing table
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.39.199. Unresolvable Routes
3.39.199 Unresolvable routes
Functionality/Description: Kept in the corresponding Adj-RIBs-In Functionality/Description: Kept in the corresponding Adj-RIBs-In
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.40 3.40. Route Resolvability Condition / Section 9.1.2.1 [RFC4271]
Route Resolvability Condition / Section 9.1.2.1
3.40.200 Unresolvable routes 3.40.200. Unresolvable Routes
Functionality/Description: Excluded from the Phase 2 decision Functionality/Description: Excluded from the Phase 2 decision
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.40.201 Multiple Matching Routes 3.40.201. Multiple Matching Routes
Functionality/Description: Only the longest matching route Functionality/Description: Only the longest matching route
SHOULD be considered SHOULD be considered
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.40.202. Mutual Recursion
3.40.202 Mutual Recursion
Functionality/Description: If a route fails the resolvability Functionality/Description: If a route fails the resolvability
check because of mutual recursion, an error message SHOULD be check because of mutual recursion, an error message SHOULD be
logged logged
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have checks that disallow mutual Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We have checks that disallow mutual
recursion, so this won't happen. recursion, so this won't happen.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.41 3.41. Breaking Ties (Phase 2) / Section 9.1.2.2 [RFC4271]
Breaking Ties (Phase 2) / Section 9.1.2.2
3.41.203 Tie-breaking criteria 3.41.203. Tie-Breaking Criteria
Functionality/Description: Applied in the order specified Functionality/Description: Applied in the order specified
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.41.204 Algorithm used 3.41.204. Algorithm Used
Functionality/Description: BGP implementations MAY use any Functionality/Description: BGP implementations MAY use any
algorithm which produces the same results asthose described here algorithm which produces the same results as those described
here
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.41.205. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Removal
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.41.205 MULTI_EXIT_DISC removal
Functionality/Description: If done before re-advertising a route Functionality/Description: If done before re-advertising a route
into IBGP, then comparison based on the received EBGP into IBGP, then comparison based on the received EBGP
MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY still be performed MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute MAY still be performed
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.41.206 MULTI_EXIT_DISC removal 3.41.206. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Removal
Functionality/Description: The optional comparison on Functionality/Description: The optional comparison on
MULTI_EXIT_DISC if performed at all MUST be performed only among MULTI_EXIT_DISC if performed at all MUST be performed only among
EBGP learned routes EBGP learned routes
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.41.207 MULTI_EXIT_DISC comparison 3.41.207. MULTI_EXIT_DISC Comparison
Functionality/Description: Performed for IBGP learned routes Functionality/Description: Performed for IBGP learned routes
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.42 3.42. Phase 3: Route Dissemination / Section 9.1.3 [RFC4271]
Phase 3: Route Dissemination / Section 9.1.3
3.42.208 Policy for processing routes from the Loc-RIB into Adj-RIBs- 3.42.208. Policy for processing routes from the Loc-RIB into
Out Adj-RIBs-Out
Functionality/Description: Exclude a route in the Loc-RIB from Functionality/Description: Exclude a route in the Loc-RIB from
being installed in a particular Adj-RIB-Out being installed in a particular Adj-RIB-Out
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.42.209 Adj-Rib-Out Route Installation 3.42.209. Adj-Rib-Out Route Installation
Functionality/Description: Not unless the destination and Functionality/Description: Not unless the destination and
NEXT_HOP described by this route may be forwarded appropriately NEXT_HOP described by this route may be forwarded appropriately
by the Routing Table by the Routing Table
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.42.210 Withdraw routes 3.42.210. Withdraw Routes
Functionality/Description: If a route in Loc-RIB is excluded Functionality/Description: If a route in Loc-RIB is excluded
from a particular Adj-RIB-Out the previously advertised route in from a particular Adj-RIB-Out the previously advertised route in
that Adj-RIB-Out MUST be withdrawn from service by means of an that Adj-RIB-Out MUST be withdrawn from service by means of an
UPDATE message (see 9.2) UPDATE message (see 9.2)
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43 3.43. Overlapping Routes / Section 9.1.4 [RFC4271]
Overlapping Routes / Section 9.1.4
3.43.211 Overlapping Routes 3.43.211. Overlapping Routes
Functionality/Description: Consider both routes based on the Functionality/Description: Consider both routes based on the
configured acceptance policy configured acceptance policy
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43.212 Accepted Overlapping Routes 3.43.212. Accepted Overlapping Routes
Functionality/Description: The Decision Process MUST either Functionality/Description: The Decision Process MUST either
install both routes or... install both routes or...
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43.213 Accepted Overlapping Routes 3.43.213. Accepted Overlapping Routes
Functionality/Description: Aggregate the two routes and install Functionality/Description: Aggregate the two routes and install
the aggregated route, provided that both routes have the same the aggregated route, provided that both routes have the same
value of the NEXT_HOP attribute value of the NEXT_HOP attribute
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We install both in Local RIB. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We install both in Local RIB.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N no automatic aggregation
3.43.214. Aggregation
3.43.214 Aggregation
Functionality/Description: Either include all ASs used to form Functionality/Description: Either include all ASs used to form
the aggreagate in an AS_SET or add the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE the aggregate in an AS_SET or add the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
attribute to the route attribute to the route
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43.215 De-aggregation 3.43.215. De-Aggregation
Functionality/Description: Routes SHOULD NOT be de-aggregated Functionality/Description: Routes SHOULD NOT be de-aggregated
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.43.216 Route with the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE attribute 3.43.216. Route with the ATOMIC_AGGREGATE Attribute
Functionality/Description: Not de-aggregated Functionality/Description: Not de-aggregated
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44 3.44. Update-Send Process / Section 9.2 [RFC4271]
Update-Send Process / Section 9.2
3.44.217 UPDATE message received from an internal peer 3.44.217. UPDATE Message Received from an Internal Peer
Functionality/Description: Not re-distribute the routing Functionality/Description: Not re-distribute the routing
information to other internal peers, unless the speaker acts as information to other internal peers, unless the speaker acts as
a BGP Route Reflector [RFC2796] a BGP Route Reflector [RFC2796]
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44.218 No replacement route 3.44.218. No Replacement Route
Functionality/Description: All newly installed routes and all Functionality/Description: All newly installed routes and all
newly unfeasible routes for which there is no replacement route newly unfeasible routes for which there is no replacement route
SHALL be advertised to its peers by means of an UPDATE message SHALL be advertised to its peers by means of an UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.44.219. Previously Advertised Routes
3.44.219 Previously Advertised Routes
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHOULD NOT advertise a Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker SHOULD NOT advertise a
given feasible BGP route if it would produce an UPDATE message given feasible BGP route if it would produce an UPDATE message
containing the same BGP route as was previously advertised containing the same BGP route as was previously advertised
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44.220. Unfeasible Routes
3.44.220 Unfeasible routes
Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB Functionality/Description: Removed from the Loc-RIB
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44.221 Changes to reachable destinations 3.44.221. Changes to Reachable Destinations
Functionality/Description: Changes to the reachable destinations Functionality/Description: Changes to the reachable destinations
within its own autonomous system SHALL also be advertised in an within its own autonomous system SHALL also be advertised in an
UPDATE message UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44.222 A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message 3.44.222. A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message
Functionality/Description: Don't advertise Functionality/Description: Don't advertise
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.44.223 A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message 3.44.223. A single route doesn't fit into the UPDATE message
Functionality/Description: Log an error local Functionality/Description: Log an error local
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.45 3.45. Frequency of Route Advertisement / Section 9.2.1.1 [RFC4271]
Frequency of Route Advertisement / Section 9.2.1.1
3.45.224 MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer 3.45.224. MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
Functionality/Description: Minimum separation between two UPDATE Functionality/Description: Minimum separation between two UPDATE
messages sent by a BGP speaker to a peer that advertise feasible messages sent by a BGP speaker to a peer that advertise feasible
routes and/or withdrawal of unfeasible routes to some common set routes and/or withdrawal of unfeasible routes to some common set
of destinations of destinations
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.45.225 Fast Convergence 3.45.225. Fast Convergence
Functionality/Description: MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer Functionality/Description: MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
used for internal peers SHOULD be shorter than the used for internal peers SHOULD be shorter than the
MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer used for external peers, or MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer used for external peers, or
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Configurable on per peer basis. Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Configurable on per peer basis.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N they are same for ebgp and ibgp Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N they are same for ebgp and ibgp
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Configuration option allows to set NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Configuration option allows to set
the time per peer. the time per peer.
3.45.226 Fast Convergence 3.45.226. Fast Convergence
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Functionality/Description: The procedure describes in this Functionality/Description: The procedure describes in this
section SHOULD NOT apply for routes sent to internal peers section SHOULD NOT apply for routes sent to internal peers
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Operator has to ensure that through Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: O Operator has to ensure that through
configuration. configuration.
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default setting is off for BGP NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y Default setting is off for BGP
peers. peers.
3.45.227 MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer 3.45.227. MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
Functionality/Description: The last route selected SHALL be Functionality/Description: The last route selected SHALL be
advertised at the end of MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer advertised at the end of MinRouteAdvertisementIntervalTimer
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46 3.46. Aggregating Routing Information / Section 9.2.2.2 [RFC4271]
Aggregating Routing Information / Section 9.2.2.2
3.46.228 MULTI_EXIT_DISC 3.46.228. MULTI_EXIT_DISC
Functionality/Description: Routes that have different Functionality/Description: Routes that have different
MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute SHALL NOT be aggregated MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute SHALL NOT be aggregated
RFC2119: SHALL NOT RFC2119: SHALL NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.229 AS_SET as the First Element 3.46.229. AS_SET as the First Element
Functionality/Description: If the aggregated route has an AS_SET Functionality/Description: If the aggregated route has an AS_SET
as the first element in its AS_PATH attribute, then the router as the first element in its AS_PATH attribute, then the router
that originates the route SHOULD NOT advertise the that originates the route SHOULD NOT advertise the
MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute with this route MULTI_EXIT_DISC attribute with this route
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.230. NEXT_HOP
3.46.230 NEXT_HOP
Functionality/Description: When aggregating routes that have Functionality/Description: When aggregating routes that have
different NEXT_HOP attribute, the NEXT_HOP attribute of the different NEXT_HOP attribute, the NEXT_HOP attribute of the
aggregated route SHALL identify an interface on the BGP speaker aggregated route SHALL identify an interface on the BGP speaker
that performs the aggregation that performs the aggregation
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.231 ORIGIN INCOMPLETE 3.46.231. ORIGIN INCOMPLETE
Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among
routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value INCOMPLETE routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value INCOMPLETE
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.232 ORIGIN EGP 3.46.232. ORIGIN EGP
Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among Functionality/Description: Used if at least one route among
routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value EGP routes that are aggregated has ORIGIN with the value EGP
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.233. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 Functionality/Description: The aggregated AS_PATH attribute
3.46.233 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: The aggregated AS_PATH attribu
te
SHALL satisfy all of the following conditions: ... SHALL satisfy all of the following conditions: ...
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.234 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes 3.46.234. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE in the Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE in the
aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in all of the AS_PATH in the aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in all of the AS_PATH in the
initial set of routes to be aggregated initial set of routes to be aggregated
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.235 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes 3.46.235. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SET in the Functionality/Description: All tuples of type AS_SET in the
aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in at least one of the AS_PATH aggregated AS_PATH SHALL appear in at least one of the AS_PATH
in the initial set in the initial set
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.236. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
3.46.236 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: For any tuple X of type AS_SEQUENCE Functionality/Description: For any tuple X of type AS_SEQUENCE
in the aggregated AS_PATH which precedes tuple Y in the in the aggregated AS_PATH which precedes tuple Y in the
aggregated AS_PATH, X precedes Y in each AS_PATH in the initial aggregated AS_PATH, X precedes Y in each AS_PATH in the initial
set which contains Y, regardless of the type of Y set which contains Y, regardless of the type of Y
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.237 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes 3.46.237. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: No tuple of type AS_SET with the same Functionality/Description: No tuple of type AS_SET with the same
value SHALL appear more than once in the aggregated AS_PATH value SHALL appear more than once in the aggregated AS_PATH
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.238 Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes 3.46.238. Routes to be aggregated have different AS_PATH attributes
Functionality/Description: Multiple tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE Functionality/Description: Multiple tuples of type AS_SEQUENCE
with the same value may appear in the aggregated AS_PATH only with the same value may appear in the aggregated AS_PATH only
when adjacent to another tuple of the same type and value when adjacent to another tuple of the same type and value
RFC2119: N/A RFC2119: N/A
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.239. AS_PATH Aggregation Algorithm
3.46.239 AS_PATH Aggregation Algorithm
Functionality/Description: Able to perform the (minimum) Functionality/Description: Able to perform the (minimum)
algorithm described in 9.2.2.2. algorithm described in 9.2.2.2.
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't do merging. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N We don't do merging.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.240 ATOMIC_AGGREGATE 3.46.240. ATOMIC_AGGREGATE
Functionality/Description: The aggregated route SHALL have this Functionality/Description: The aggregated route SHALL have this
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
attribute if at least one of the routes to be aggregated has it attribute if at least one of the routes to be aggregated has it
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.241 AGGREGATOR 3.46.241. AGGREGATOR
Functionality/Description: Attribute from routes to be Functionality/Description: Attribute from routes to be
aggregated MUST NOT be included in aggregated route aggregated MUST NOT be included in aggregated route
RFC2119: MUST NOT RFC2119: MUST NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.46.242. AGGREGATOR
3.46.242 AGGREGATOR
Functionality/Description: Attach a new one when aggregating Functionality/Description: Attach a new one when aggregating
(see Section 5.1.7) (see Section 5.1.7)
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.47 3.47. Route Selection Criteria / Section 9.3 [RFC4271]
Route Selection Criteria / Section 9.3
3.47.243 Unstable routes 3.47.243. Unstable Routes
Functionality/Description: Avoid using them Functionality/Description: Avoid using them
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.47.244. Route Changes
3.47.244 Route changes
Functionality/Description: SHOULD NOT make rapid spontaneous Functionality/Description: SHOULD NOT make rapid spontaneous
changes to the choice of route changes to the choice of route
RFC2119: SHOULD NOT RFC2119: SHOULD NOT
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.48 3.48. Originating BGP Routes / Section 9.4 [RFC4271]
Originating BGP routes / Section 9.4
3.48.245 Non-BGP acquired routes 3.48.245. Non-BGP Acquired Routes
Functionality/Description: Distributed to other BGP speakers Functionality/Description: Distributed to other BGP speakers
within the local AS as part of the update process within the local AS as part of the update process
(see Section 9.2) (see Section 9.2)
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.48.246 Non-BGP acquired routes 3.48.246. Non-BGP Acquired Routes
Functionality/Description: Distribution controlled via Functionality/Description: Distribution controlled via
configuration configuration
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49 3.49. BGP Timers / Section 10 [RFC4271]
BGP Timers / Section 10
3.49.247 Optional Timers 3.49.247. Optional Timers
Functionality/Description: Two optional timers MAY be supported: Functionality/Description: Two optional timers MAY be supported:
DelayOpenTimer, IdleHoldTimer by BGP DelayOpenTimer, IdleHoldTimer by BGP
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We support DelayOpenTimer but not Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We support DelayOpenTimer but not
IdleHoldTimer IdleHoldTimer
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y support IdleHoldTimer but not the Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y support IdleHoldTimer but not the
DelayOpenTimer DelayOpenTimer
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.248. Hold Time
3.49.248 Hold Time
Functionality/Description: Configurable on a per peer basis Functionality/Description: Configurable on a per peer basis
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.249 Timers 3.49.249. Timers
Functionality/Description: Allow the other timers to be Functionality/Description: Allow the other timers to be
configurable configurable
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.250 Jitter 3.49.250. Jitter
Functionality/Description: Applied to the timers associated with Functionality/Description: Applied to the timers associated with
MinASOriginationInterval, KeepAlive, MinASOriginationInterval, KeepAlive,
MinRouteAdvertisementInterval, and ConnectRetry MinRouteAdvertisementInterval, and ConnectRetry
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We only apply to ConnectRetry. Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: O We only apply to ConnectRetry.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.251. Jitter
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
3.49.251 Jitter
Functionality/Description: Apply the same jitter to each of Functionality/Description: Apply the same jitter to each of
these quantities regardless of the destinations to which the these quantities regardless of the destinations to which the
updates are being sent; that is, jitter need not be configured updates are being sent; that is, jitter need not be configured
on a "per peer" basis on a "per peer" basis
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We app Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y We apply same only for connectretry.
ly same only for connectretry.
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.252 Default amount of jitter 3.49.252. Default Amount of jitter
Functionality/Description: Determined by multiplying the base Functionality/Description: Determined by multiplying the base
value of the appropriate timer by a random factor which is value of the appropriate timer by a random factor which is
uniformly distributed in the range from 0.75 to 1.0 uniformly distributed in the range from 0.75 to 1.0
RFC2119: SHALL RFC2119: SHALL
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Range is 0.9 to 1.1 Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Range is 0.9 to 1.1
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.253 Default amount of jitter 3.49.253. Default Amount of jitter
Functionality/Description: New random value picked each time the Functionality/Description: New random value picked each time the
timer is set timer is set
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
3.49.254. Jitter Random Value Range
3.49.254 Jitter Random Value Range
Functionality/Description: Configurable Functionality/Description: Configurable
RFC2119: MAY RFC2119: MAY
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N
3.50 3.50. TCP Options that May Be Used with BGP / Appendix E [RFC4271]
TCP options that may be used with BGP / Appendix E
3.50.255 TCP PUSH function supported 3.50.255. TCP PUSH Function Supported
Functionality/Description: Each BGP message SHOULD be Functionality/Description: Each BGP message SHOULD be
transmitted with PUSH flag set transmitted with PUSH flag set
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support. NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support.
GateD 10, NGC can run over GateD 10, NGC can run over
multiple stacks. multiple stacks.
3.50.256 DSCP Field Support 3.50.256. Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) Field Support
Functionality/Description: TCP connections opened with bits 0-2 Functionality/Description: TCP connections opened with bits 0-2
of the DSCP field set to 110 (binary) of the DSCP field set to 110 (binary)
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support. NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: O Depends on the TCP stack support.
GateD 10, NGC can run over GateD 10, NGC can run over
multiple stacks. multiple stacks.
3.51 3.51. Reducing Route Flapping / Appendix F.2 [RFC4271]
Reducing route flapping / Appendix F.2
3.51.257 Avoid excessive route flapping 3.51.257. Avoid Excessive Route Flapping
Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker which needs to withdraw Functionality/Description: A BGP speaker which needs to withdraw
a destination and send an update about a more specific or less a destination and send an update about a more specific or less
specific route SHOULD combine them into the same UPDATE message specific route SHOULD combine them into the same UPDATE message
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 3.52. Complex AS_PATH aggregation / Appendix F.6 [RFC4271]
3.52
Complex AS_PATH aggregation / Appendix F.6
3.52.258 Multiple instances in AS_PATH 3.52.258. Multiple Instances in AS_PATH
Functionality/Description: The last instance (rightmost Functionality/Description: The last instance (rightmost
occurrence) of that AS number is kept occurrence) of that AS number is kept
RFC2119: SHOULD RFC2119: SHOULD
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N We use algorithm in 9.2.2.2 Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: N We use algorithm in 9.2.2.2
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: N
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: N
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: N
3.53 3.53. Security Considerations [RFC4271]
Security Considerations
3.53.259 Authentication Mechanism 3.53.259. Authentication Mechanism
Functionality/Description: RFC2385 Functionality/Description: A BGP implementation MUST support
the authentication mechanism specified in RFC 2385 [RFC2385].
RFC2119: MUST RFC2119: MUST
Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Alcatel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y Cisco Y/N/O/Comments: Y
Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y Laurel Y/N/O/Comments: Y
NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y NextHop Y/N/O/Comments: Y
4. 4. Additional BGP Implementations Information
Additional BGP implementations Information
Three implementations responded to a call (5/20/04-6/2/04) for Three implementations responded to a call (5/20/04-6/2/04) for
information on those implementations that had a BGP implementation, information on those implementations that had a BGP implementation,
but did not complete the full survey. The responses for the call for but did not complete the full survey. The responses for the call for
additional information are below. additional information are below.
4.1 4.1. Avici
Avici
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an
implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send
me the answer the following questions: me the answer the following questions:
1) BGP product 1) BGP product
Contributor (your name):Curtis Villamizar [curtis@fictitious.org] Contributor (your name):Curtis Villamizar [curtis@fictitious.org]
Company: Avici Company: Avici
name of product: IPriori (TM) name of product: IPriori (TM)
minor version: No interoperability problems with any version. minor version: No interoperability problems with any version.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
Current deployed versions are 5.x and 6.0.x. Current deployed versions are 5.x and 6.0.x.
Version 6.1 and beyond are tested against the Version 6.1 and beyond are tested against the
latest BGP draft soon to replace rfc1771. latest BGP specification [RFC4271].
2) What other implementations you interoperate with. 2) What other implementations you interoperate with.
Cisco: IOS 12.0(22) Cisco: IOS 12.0(22)
Juniper: JUNOS (version not given) Juniper: JUNOS (version not given)
3) Do you inter-operate with: 3) Do you inter-operate with:
1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested 1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested
2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - not tested 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - not tested
skipping to change at page 82, line 21 skipping to change at page 93, line 38
2) What other implementations you interoperate with. 2) What other implementations you interoperate with.
Cisco: IOS 12.0(22) Cisco: IOS 12.0(22)
Juniper: JUNOS (version not given) Juniper: JUNOS (version not given)
3) Do you inter-operate with: 3) Do you inter-operate with:
1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested 1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested
2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - not tested 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - not tested
tested with IOS 12.0(22); BGP is the same tested with IOS 12.0(22); BGP is the same
3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested 3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested
4) NextHop GateD- not tested 4) NextHop GateD- not tested
4) Did the length of the survey for BGP cause you to not 4) Did the length of the survey for BGP cause you to not
submit the BGP implementation report? submit the BGP implementation report?
yes yes
4.2 4.2. Data Connection Ltd.
Data Connection Ltd.
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an
implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send
me the answer the following questions: me the answer the following questions:
1) BGP product 1) BGP product
Contributor (your name): Mike Dell Contributor (your name): Mike Dell
Company: Data Connection Ltd. Company: Data Connection Ltd.
name of product: DC-BGP name of product: DC-BGP
version and minor of software: v1.1 version and minor of software: v1.1
skipping to change at page 83, line 4 skipping to change at page 94, line 29
Cisco (12.0(26)S) Cisco (12.0(26)S)
Alcatal (7770 0BX) Alcatal (7770 0BX)
Agilent (Router Tester) Agilent (Router Tester)
Ixia (1600T) Ixia (1600T)
Netplane (Powercode) Netplane (Powercode)
Nortel (Shasta 5000 BSN) Nortel (Shasta 5000 BSN)
Redback (SmartEdge 800) Redback (SmartEdge 800)
Riverstone (RS8000) Riverstone (RS8000)
Spirent (AX4000) Spirent (AX4000)
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
IP Infusion (ZebOs) IP Infusion (ZebOs)
Nokia (IP400) Nokia (IP400)
Juniper (M5) Juniper (M5)
3) Do you inter-operate with 3) Do you inter-operate with
1) Alcatel BGP (release) YES 1) Alcatel BGP (release) YES
2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s
Unknown, but we do inter-operate with v12.0(26)s Unknown, but we do inter-operate with v12.0(26)s
3) laurel BGP (specify release) Unknown 3) laurel BGP (specify release) Unknown
4) NextHop GateD YES 4) NextHop GateD YES
4) Did the length of the survey for BGP 4) Did the length of the survey for BGP
cause you to not submit the BGP cause you to not submit the BGP
implementation report? implementation report?
YES YES
4.3 4.3. Nokia
Nokia
If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an If you have an implementation of BGP and you did not send in an
implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send implementation report (answering the 259 questions), could you send
me the answer the following questions: me the answer the following questions:
1) BGP product 1) BGP product
Contributor (your name):Rahul Bahadur Contributor (your name):Rahul Bahadur
(rahul.bahadur@nokia.com) (rahul.bahadur@nokia.com)
Company: Nokia Company: Nokia
skipping to change at page 83, line 57 skipping to change at page 95, line 30
Nortel: BayRS 15.4.0.1 Nortel: BayRS 15.4.0.1
GNU Zebra: zebra-0.92a GNU Zebra: zebra-0.92a
3) Do you inter-operate with 3) Do you inter-operate with
1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested 1) Alcatel BGP (release) - not tested
2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - yes 2) cisco BGP IOS 12.0(27)s - yes
3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested 3) laurel BGP (specify release) - not tested
4) NextHop GateD- not tested 4) NextHop GateD- not tested
Hares &
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004
4) Did the length of the survey for BGP 4) Did the length of the survey for BGP
cause you to not submit the BGP implementation report? cause you to not submit the BGP implementation report?
Yes - lack of resources to help with task. Yes - lack of resources to help with task.
Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
This document does not address any security issues. This document does not address any security issues.
Normative References 6. Normative References
[BGP4] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., Hares, S., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, Eds., "A Border Gateway
(BGP-4)", draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-24.txt, June 2004 Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
[RFC1771] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 [RFC1771] Rekhter, Y. and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-
(BGP-4)", RFC1771, March 1995 4)", RFC 1771, March 1995.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, March 1997 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2385] A. Heffernan, "Protection of BGP Session via a TCP MD5 [RFC2385] Heffernan, A., "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5
Signature", RFC2385, August 1998 Signature Option", RFC 2385, August 1998.
[RFC2796] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Chen, E., "BGP Route Reflection - [RFC2796] Bates, T., Chandra, R., and E. Chen, "BGP Route Reflection
an Alternative to Full Mesh IBGP", RFC 2796, April 2000 - An Alternative to Full Mesh IBGP", RFC 2796, April 2000.
[RFC2918] Chen, E., "Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4", RFC2918, [RFC2918] Chen, E., "Route Refresh Capability for BGP-4", RFC2918,
September 2000 September 2000.
[RFC3065] Traina, P., McPherson, D., Scudder, J., "Autonomous
Confederations for BGP", RFC 3065, February 2001
[RFC3667] Bradner, S., "IETF Rights in Contributions", BCP 78,
February 2004
[RFC3668] Bradner, S. "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
Technology", BCP 79, February 2004
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 [RFC3065] Traina, P., McPherson, D., and J. Scudder, "Autonomous
System Confederations for BGP", RFC 3065, February 2001.
Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgements
Alcatel Responses provided by: Alcatel responses provided by:
Contact Name: Devendra Raut Contact Name: Devendra Raut
Contact Email: Devendra.raut@Alcatel.com Contact EMail: Devendra.raut@Alcatel.com
Cisco Systems Responses provided by: Cisco Systems responses provided by:
Contact Name: Himanshu Shah, Ruchi Kapoor Contact Name: Himanshu Shah, Ruchi Kapoor
Contact e-mail Address: hhshah@cisco.com, ruchi@cisco.com Contact EMail: hhshah@cisco.com, ruchi@cisco.com
Laurel Responses provided by: Laurel responses provided by:
Contact Name: Manish Vora Contact Name: Manish Vora
Contact e-mail Address: vora@laurelnetworks.com Contact EMail: vora@laurelnetworks.com
NextHop Responses provided by: NextHop responses provided by:
Contact Name: Susan Hares Contact Name: Susan Hares
Contact e-mail Address: skh@nexthop.com Contact EMail: skh@nexthop.com
Additional Help: Matt Richardson, Shane Wright. Additional Help: Matt Richardson, Shane Wright.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Susan Hares Susan Hares
NextHop Technologies NextHop Technologies
825 Victors Way, Suite 100 825 Victors Way, Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
Phone: 734.222.1610 Phone: 734.222.1610
Email: skh@nexthop.com EMail: skh@nexthop.com
Alvaro Retana Alvaro Retana
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd. 7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Phone: 919 392 2061 Phone: 919 392 2061
e-mail: aretana@cisco.com EMail: aretana@cisco.com
Intellectual Property Statement Full Copyright Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
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.
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-implementation-02 October 2004 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.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention Intellectual Property
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 ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity 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.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement 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
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject Acknowledgement
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
 End of changes. 473 change blocks. 
949 lines changed or deleted 617 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.28, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/