<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.15 (Ruby 3.0.2) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-li-lsr-igp-based-intra-domain-savnet-01" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.21.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="IGP-SAVNET">IGP-based Source Address Validation in Intra-domain Networks (Intra-domain SAVNET)</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-li-lsr-igp-based-intra-domain-savnet-01"/>
    <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="Dan Li">
      <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>tolidan@tsinghua.edu.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="L." surname="Qin" fullname="Lancheng Qin">
      <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>qlc19@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="X." surname="Song" fullname="Xueyan Song">
      <organization>ZTE Corporation</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Nanjing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>song.xueyan2@zte.com.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="C." surname="Lin" fullname="Changwang Lin">
      <organization>New H3C Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>linchangwang.04414@h3c.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="S." surname="Yue" fullname="Shengnan Yue">
      <organization>China Mobile</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>yueshengnan@chinamobile.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2024" month="June" day="17"/>
    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>lsr</workgroup>
    <keyword>SAV</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 67?>

<t>This document proposes a new IGP-based intra-domain source address validation (SAV) solution, called IGP-SAVNET, which improves the accuracy upon current intra-domain SAV solutions. It allows intra-domain routers to communicate SAV-specific information using the intra-domain routing protocol or an extension to the intra-domain routing protocol. By using SAV-specific information, intra-domain routers can generate and update accurate SAV rules in an automatic way.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 71?>

<section anchor="sec-intro">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>The purpose of intra-domain SAV is to prevent outgoing data packets from an intra-domain subnet (e.g., a host network or a customer network) from forging source addresses of other intra-domain subnets or other ASes, and to prevent incoming data packets from external ASes from forging source addresses of the local AS. To this end, intra-domain SAV should focus on SAV on host-facing routers, customer-facing routers, and AS border routers (see <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture"/>). Specifically, host-facing routers or customer-facing routers should block data packets from the connected host network or customer network with a spoofed source IP address not belonging to that network. AS border routers should block data packets from other ASes with a spoofed source IP address belonging to the local AS.</t>
      <t>However, existing intra-domain SAV solutions (e.g., BCP38 <xref target="RFC2827"/> and BCP84 <xref target="RFC3704"/>) have problems of high operational overhead or inaccurate validation (see <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement"/>). ACL-based ingress filtering requires manual operations to configure and update the SAV rules, while uRPF-based solutions may improperly block legitimate data packets in the scenario of routing asymmetry. To address these problems and guide the design of new intra-domain SAV solutions, <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture"/> proposes the architecture of intra-domain SAVNET and introduces the use of SAV-specific information in intra-domain networks.</t>
      <t>Following the intra-domain SAVNET architecture, this document proposes a new IGP-based intra-domain SAV solution, called IGP-SAVNET, which improves the accuracy upon current intra-domain SAV solutions. It allows host-facing routers, customer-facing routers, and AS border routers to communicate SAV-specific information using the intra-domain routing protocol or an extension to the intra-domain routing protocol. By using SAV-specific information, these routers can generate and update accurate SAV rules in an automatic way.</t>
      <t>The reader is encouraged to be familiar with <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement"/> and <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture"/>.</t>
      <section anchor="requirements-language">
        <name>Requirements Language</name>
        <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
        <?line -18?>

</section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="terminology">
      <name>Terminology</name>
      <t>SAV Rule: The rule in a router that describes the mapping relationship between a source address (prefix) and the valid incoming interface(s). It is used by a router to make SAV decisions and is inferred from the SAV Information Base.</t>
      <t>Host-facing Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is connected to an intra-domain host network (i.e., a layer-2 network).</t>
      <t>Customer-facing Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is connected to an intra-domain customer network running the routing protocol (i.e., a layer-3 network).</t>
      <t>AS Border Router: An intra-domain router of an AS which is connected to other ASes.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-goal">
      <name>Goals of Intra-domain SAV</name>
      <t>Goal 1: The host-facing router or customer-facing router should identify source prefixes belonging to its host network or customer network and block data packets from its host network or customer network using source addresses not belonging to the network. For example, in <xref target="fig-goal"/>, Routers A and B should generate SAV rules at the interface '#' and block data packets from Network 1 using source addresses not belonging to Network 1. Router C should generate SAV rules at interfaces '#' and block data packets from Network 2 using source addresses not belonging to Network 2.</t>
      <t>Goal 2: The AS border router should identify source prefixes belonging to the local AS and block data packets from other ASes using source addresses belonging to the local AS. For example, in <xref target="fig-goal"/>, Routers D and E should generate SAV rules at interface '#' and block data packets from other ASes using source addresses belonging to the local AS.</t>
      <figure anchor="fig-goal">
        <name>Goals of Intra-domain SAV</name>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
             +----------------------------------+
             |            Other ASes            |
             +----------------------------------+
                |                            |
+---------------|----------------------------|--------------+
| Intra-domain  |                            |              |
|               |                            |              |
|         +-----#----+                 +-----#----+         |
|         | Router D |                 | Router E |         |
|         +----------+                 +----------+         |
|               |                            |              |
|               |                            |              |
|        +----------------------------------------+         |
|        |      Other intra-domain routers        |         |
|        +----------------------------------------+         |
|          /         \                       |              |
|         /           \                      |              |
|  +----------+  +----------+          +----------+         |
|  | Router A |  | Router B |          | Router C |         |
|  +----#-----+  +-------#--+          +-----#----+         |
|        \              /                    |              |
+--------+\------------/---------------------|--------------+
           \          /                      |
       +------------------+        +------------------+
       | Customer or Host |        | Customer or Host |
       |     Network 1    |        |     Network 2    |
       +------------------+        +------------------+
]]></artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-spi">
      <name>Description of the Method</name>
      <t>To achieve the above two goals, IGP-SAVNET allows host-facing routers, customer-facing routers, and AS border routers to communicate SAV-specific information between each other through IGP. These routers will not communicate SAV-specific information with routers/devices in host networks, customer networks, and other ASes. In the following, this document describes how IGP-SAVNET works to meet the goals.</t>
      <section anchor="sav-procedure-on-customer-facing-or-host-facing-routers">
        <name>SAV procedure on customer-facing or host-facing routers</name>
        <t>SAV on a customer-facing (or host-facing) router aims to identify source prefixes belonging to the customer (or host) network. After that, the customer-facing (or host-facing) router can perform accurate SAV filtering by only accepting data packets from its customer (or host) network with source addresses belonging to that network.</t>
        <t>If the customer (or host) network is single-homed, the customer-facing (or host-facing) router can directly identify source prefixes through its local routes to that network.</t>
        <t>If the customer (or host) network is multi-homed, the customer-facing (or host-facing) router may fail to identify all source prefixes of that network through its local routes to that network in the scenario of routing asymmetry (see <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement"/>). For example, in <xref target="fig-example"/>, due to traffic engineering, Router A only learns the route to sub prefix 10.1.0.0/16 from Network N, while Router B only learns the route to the other sub prefix 10.0.0.0/16 from Network N. In this case, as described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement"/>, strict uRPF on Router A will block data packets from the customer (or host) network with legitimate source addresses in prefix 10.0.0.0/16, and strict uRPF on Router B will block data packets from the customer (or host) network with legitimate source addresses in prefix 10.1.0.0/16. To achieve accurate SAV on routers facing the multi-homed customer (or host) network, IGP-SAVNET allows routers facing the same customer (or host) network to identify source prefixes of the network through SAV-specific information communication.</t>
        <figure anchor="fig-example">
          <name>SAV-specific information communication between Routers A and B</name>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
+-----------------------------------------------------+
|  AS                                                 |
|                 [10.1.0.0/16]+[tag n]               |
|  +----------+ +---------------------> +----------+  |
|  | Router A |    SAV-specific info    | Router B |  |
|  +-------#--+ <---------------------+ +--#-------+  |
|          |      [10.0.0.0/16]+[tag n]    |          |
|          |                               |          |
|          |                               |          |
|          |    +--------------------+     |          |
|          |    |  Customer or Host  |     |          |
|          +----|     Network N      |-----+          |
|               +--------------------+                |
|                   (10.0.0.0/15 )                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------+
]]></artwork>
        </figure>
        <t>A detailed description of SAV procedure is as follows:</t>
        <ol spacing="normal" type="1"><li>
            <t>Tag Assignment: Each single-homed or multi-homed customer (or host) network is assigned a unique tag value. For example, in <xref target="fig-example"/>, Network N is assigned tag n. The tag value for can be configured and updated manually.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>SAV-specific Information Communication: Each customer-facing (or host-facing) router provides its SAV-specific information of its customer (or host) networks to other intra-domain routers. The SAV-specific information of a customer (or host) network contains the prefixes learned through the router's local routes to the network and the tag value of the network. For example, Router A can provide its SAV-specific information, which contains prefix 10.1.0.0/16 and tag n, to other intra-domain routers. This procedure can be implemented by using IGP or extensions to IGP, which will be elaborated in <xref target="sec-igp"/>.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>SAV-specific Information Processing: When a router receives SAV-specific information containing the same tag value as its customer (or host) network, it considers that the prefixes contained in the SAV-specific information also belong to its customer (or host) network. For example, Router B will identify prefix 10.1.0.0/16 as a source prefix of Network N after receiving the SAV-specific information provided by Router A.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Source Prefix Identification: By integrating prefixes learned through SAV-specific information provided by other routers with prefixes learned through its local routes, the customer-facing (or host-facing) router can identify complete source prefixes of its customer (or host) network. For example, Router B will identify that both prefix 10.1.0.0/16 and prefix 10.0.0.0/16 belong to Network N after processing SAV-specific information provided by Router A. Similarly, Router A will also identify complete source prefixes of Network N after processing SAV-specific information provided by Router B.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>SAV Rule Generation: Each customer-facing (or host-facing) router generates an allowlist containing source prefixes of its customer (or host) network at the interface facing that network. Only data packets using source addresses covered in the allowlist will be accepted at this interface.</t>
          </li>
        </ol>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sav-procedure-on-as-border-routers">
        <name>SAV procedure on AS border routers</name>
        <t>SAV on an AS border router aims to identify source prefixes belonging to the local AS. After receiving SAV-specific information or routing information originating from host-facing and customer-facing routers through IGP, AS border routers can identify source prefixes of the local AS accordingly and generate a blocklist containing these source prefixes. After that, data packets arriving from other ASes with source addresses belonging to the local AS will be blocked on the AS border router.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-igp">
      <name>SAV-specific Information Communication Using IGP</name>
      <t>The key idea is to add the tag value into the prefix information when the customer-facing (or host-facing) router distributes the prefix information of its customer (or host) network. As shown in <xref target="fig-overview"/>, the SAVNET Agent of a Sender Router provides its SAV-specific information to other SAVNET routers via IGP. After receiving SAV-specific information from other SAVNET routers, the SAVNET Agent of the Receiver Router generates SAV rules by using SAV-specific information from other SAVNET routers and/or its own SAV-specific information. The Sender Router can be a customer-facing router or a host-facing router. The Receiver Router can be a customer-facing router, a host-facing router, or an AS border router.</t>
      <figure anchor="fig-overview">
        <name>Overview of SAV-specific information communication</name>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
+---------------------+                +---------------------+
|   Sender Router     |  SAV-specific  |   Receiver Router   |
|   +------------+    |  Information   |    +------------+   |
|   |  IGP LSDB  +------------------------->+  IGP LSDB  |   |
|   +-----^------+    |                |    +-----+------+   |
|         |           |                |          |          |
| +-------+---------+ |                | +--------v--------+ |
| |   SAVNET Agent  | |                | |   SAVNET Agent  | |
| | +-------------+ | |                | | +-------------+ | |
| | | Information | | |                | | | Information | | |
| | | Provider    | | |                | | | Receiver    | | |
| | +-------------+ | |                | | +-------------+ | |
| +-----------------+ |                | +-----------------+ |
|                     |                |                     |
+---------------------+                +---------------------+
]]></artwork>
      </figure>
      <t>The overall procedure of SAV-specific information communication is as follows:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>At the Sender Router: Carry its SAV-specific information (e.g., the tag information of the customer or host network) through the Link State Database (LSDB) of IGP. The IGP will synchronize the LSDB, including node information, link information, prefix information, and tag information.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>At the Receiver Router: After receiving SAV-specific information carried in the LSDB, its SAVNET Agent extracts SAV-specific information from the LSDB of IGP and then generates SAV rules as described in <xref target="sec-spi"/>.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>In the following, this document presents two approaches to implement SAV-specific information communication among intra-domain routers.</t>
      <section anchor="approach-1-using-the-existing-administrative-tag-sub-tlv">
        <name>Approach #1: Using the existing Administrative Tag Sub-TLV</name>
        <t>When a router distributes IP prefix information of the customer or host network, it can carry the tag of that network in the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV.</t>
        <t>When a router receives IP prefix information, it checks if there is a locally configured interface with the same tag as the Administrative Tag information carried in the prefix. If such an interface exists, SAVNET rules will be added, with the prefix being the received prefix and the interface being the locally configured interface with this tag.</t>
        <t>As shown in <xref target="fig-example"/>, assume Network N is assigned tag n. In the prefix information of 10.1.0.0/16 published by Router A, tag n is carried via the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV. Similarly, in the prefix information of 10.0.0.0/16 published by Router B, tag n is carried via the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV. When Router A receives the prefix information of 10.0.0.0/16, it checks that the carried tag n matches the tag of Network N, and thus determines that prefix 10.0.0.0/16 also belongs to Network N. Similarly, Router B determines that prefix 10.1.0.0/16 also belongs to Network N using the same process.</t>
        <section anchor="administrative-tag-sub-tlv-of-is-is">
          <name>Administrative Tag Sub-TLV of IS-IS</name>
          <t>For routers running IS-IS, they can carry the tag in the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV (defined in <xref target="RFC5130"/>), which can be included in: Extended IP Reachability TLV (135), Multi-Topology Reachable IPv4 Prefixes TLV (235), IPv6 Reachability TLV (236), Multi-Topology Reachable IPv6 Prefixes TLV (237).</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="administrative-tag-sub-tlv-of-ospf">
          <name>Administrative Tag Sub-TLV of OSPF</name>
          <t>For routers running OSPF, they can carry the tag in the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV <xref target="I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags"/> within the OSPF Extended Prefix TLV Sub-TLV <xref target="RFC7684"/>.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="administrative-tag-sub-tlv-of-ospfv3">
          <name>Administrative Tag Sub-TLV of OSPFv3</name>
          <t>For routers running OSPFv3, they can include the tag in the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV <xref target="I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags"/>  within the OSPFv3 Intra-Area-Prefix TLV, Inter-Area-Prefix TLV, and External-Prefix TLV <xref target="RFC8362"/>.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="considerations-of-using-administrative-tag-sub-tlv">
          <name>Considerations of using Administrative Tag Sub-TLV</name>
          <t>In practice, intra-domain routers may also use the Administrative Tag Sub-TLV for other purposes (e.g., route filtering), and multiple Administrative Tag Sub-TLVs may be carried in the IP prefix information simultaneously. Therefore, using the existing Administrative Tag Sub-TLV for SAV-specific information communication may conflict with other routing policies that also use Administrative Tags as filtering criteria. To address this issue, this document proposes Approach #2 in the following.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="approach-2-defining-a-new-savnet-tag-sub-tlv">
        <name>Approach #2: Defining a new SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV</name>
        <t>To avoid possible conflicts and facilitate operation and management, it is more recommended to define and use a dedicated SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV to tranmit SAV-specific information.</t>
        <section anchor="savnet-tag-sub-tlv-of-is-is">
          <name>SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of IS-IS</name>
          <t><xref target="fig-isis-prefix"/> shows the structure of SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of IS-IS. It can be included in the following TLVs: Extended IP Reachability TLV (135), Multi-Topology Reachable IPv4 Prefixes TLV (235), IPv6 Reachability TLV (236), Multi-Topology Reachable IPv6 Prefixes TLV (237).</t>
          <figure anchor="fig-isis-prefix">
            <name>SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of IS-IS</name>
            <artwork><![CDATA[
      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     Type      |      Length     |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                      SAVNET Tag                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Type:       A 8-bit field set to TBD.
     Length:     4 octets.
     SAVNET Tag: The tag of the customer or host network.

]]></artwork>
          </figure>
        </section>
        <section anchor="savnet-tag-sub-tlv-of-ospf-and-ospfv3">
          <name>SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of OSPF and OSPFv3</name>
          <t><xref target="fig-ospf-prefix"/> shows the structure of SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of OSPF and OSPFv3.</t>
          <t>The SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of OSPF specified herein will be valid as a sub-TLV of the following TLVs specified in <xref target="RFC7684"/>:</t>
          <ol spacing="normal" type="1"><li>
              <t>Extended Prefix TLV advertised in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix LSA</t>
            </li>
          </ol>
          <t>The SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of OSPFv3 specified herein will be valid as a sub-TLV of the following TLVs specified in <xref target="RFC8362"/>:</t>
          <ol spacing="normal" type="1"><li>
              <t>Inter-Area-Prefix TLV advertised in the E-Inter-Area-Prefix-LSA.</t>
            </li>
            <li>
              <t>Intra-Area-Prefix TLV advertised in the E-Intra-Area-Prefix-LSA.</t>
            </li>
            <li>
              <t>External-Prefix TLV advertised in the E-AS-External-LSA and the E-NSSA-LSA.</t>
            </li>
          </ol>
          <figure anchor="fig-ospf-prefix">
            <name>SAVNET Tag Sub-TLV of OSPF and OSPFv3</name>
            <artwork><![CDATA[
      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |            Type               |        Sub-TLV Length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                        SAVNET Tag                             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Type:       A 16-bit field set to TBD.
     Length:     4 octets.
     SAVNET Tag: The tag of the customer or host network.

]]></artwork>
          </figure>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-security">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>The security considerations described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement"/> and <xref target="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture"/> also applies to this document.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>TBD.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references>
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement-03" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Source Address Validation in Intra-domain Networks Gap Analysis, Problem Statement, and Requirements</title>
            <author fullname="Dan Li" initials="D." surname="Li">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Jianping Wu" initials="J." surname="Wu">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Lancheng Qin" initials="L." surname="Qin">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Mingqing(Michael) Huang" initials="M." surname="Huang">
              <organization>Huawei</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Nan Geng" initials="N." surname="Geng">
              <organization>Huawei</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="13" month="February" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document provides the gap analysis of existing intra-domain source address validation mechanisms, describes the fundamental problems, and defines the requirements for technical improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-problem-statement-03"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture-00" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Intra-domain Source Address Validation (SAVNET) Architecture</title>
            <author fullname="Dan Li" initials="D." surname="Li">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Jianping Wu" initials="J." surname="Wu">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Lancheng Qin" initials="L." surname="Qin">
              <organization>Tsinghua University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Nan Geng" initials="N." surname="Geng">
              <organization>Huawei</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Li Chen" initials="L." surname="Chen">
              <organization>Zhongguancun Laboratory</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="12" month="April" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document proposes the intra-domain SAVNET architecture, which achieves accurate source address validation (SAV) in an intra-domain network by an automatic way. Compared with uRPF-like SAV mechanisms that only depend on routers' local routing information, SAVNET routers generate SAV rules by using both local routing information and SAV-specific information exchanged among routers, resulting in more accurate SAV validation in asymmetric routing scenarios. Compared with ACL rules that require manual efforts to accommodate to network dynamics, SAVNET routers learn the SAV rules automatically in a distributed way.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-savnet-intra-domain-architecture-00"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags-19" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Prefix Administrative Tags</title>
            <author fullname="Acee Lindem" initials="A." surname="Lindem">
              <organization>LabN Consulting, L.L.C.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Peter Psenak" initials="P." surname="Psenak">
              <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Yingzhen Qu" initials="Y." surname="Qu">
              <organization>Futurewei Technologies</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="3" month="June" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>It is useful for routers in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 routing domains to be able to associate tags with prefixes. Previously, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 were relegated to a single tag and only for AS External and Not-So- Stubby-Area (NSSA) prefixes. With the flexible encodings provided by OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Advertisement and OSPFv3 Extended LSAs, multiple administrative tags may be advertised for all types of prefixes. These administrative tags can be used for many applications including route redistribution policy, selective prefix prioritization, selective IP Fast-ReRoute (IPFRR) prefix protection, and many others. The ISIS protocol supports a similar mechanism that is described in RFC 5130.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags-19"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5130" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5130" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5130.xml">
          <front>
            <title>A Policy Control Mechanism in IS-IS Using Administrative Tags</title>
            <author fullname="S. Previdi" initials="S." surname="Previdi"/>
            <author fullname="M. Shand" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Shand"/>
            <author fullname="C. Martin" initials="C." surname="Martin"/>
            <date month="February" year="2008"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes an extension to the IS-IS protocol to add operational capabilities that allow for ease of management and control over IP prefix distribution within an IS-IS domain. This document enhances the IS-IS protocol by extending the information that an Intermediate System (IS) router can place in Link State Protocol (LSP) Data Units for policy use. This extension will provide operators with a mechanism to control IP prefix distribution throughout multi-level IS-IS domains. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5130"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5130"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7684" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7684.xml">
          <front>
            <title>OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Advertisement</title>
            <author fullname="P. Psenak" initials="P." surname="Psenak"/>
            <author fullname="H. Gredler" initials="H." surname="Gredler"/>
            <author fullname="R. Shakir" initials="R." surname="Shakir"/>
            <author fullname="W. Henderickx" initials="W." surname="Henderickx"/>
            <author fullname="J. Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura"/>
            <author fullname="A. Lindem" initials="A." surname="Lindem"/>
            <date month="November" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>OSPFv2 requires functional extension beyond what can readily be done with the fixed-format Link State Advertisements (LSAs) as described in RFC 2328. This document defines OSPFv2 Opaque LSAs based on Type-Length-Value (TLV) tuples that can be used to associate additional attributes with prefixes or links. Depending on the application, these prefixes and links may or may not be advertised in the fixed-format LSAs. The OSPFv2 Opaque LSAs are optional and fully backward compatible.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7684"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7684"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8362" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8362.xml">
          <front>
            <title>OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA) Extensibility</title>
            <author fullname="A. Lindem" initials="A." surname="Lindem"/>
            <author fullname="A. Roy" initials="A." surname="Roy"/>
            <author fullname="D. Goethals" initials="D." surname="Goethals"/>
            <author fullname="V. Reddy Vallem" initials="V." surname="Reddy Vallem"/>
            <author fullname="F. Baker" initials="F." surname="Baker"/>
            <date month="April" year="2018"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>OSPFv3 requires functional extension beyond what can readily be done with the fixed-format Link State Advertisement (LSA) as described in RFC 5340. Without LSA extension, attributes associated with OSPFv3 links and advertised IPv6 prefixes must be advertised in separate LSAs and correlated to the fixed-format LSAs. This document extends the LSA format by encoding the existing OSPFv3 LSA information in Type-Length-Value (TLV) tuples and allowing advertisement of additional information with additional TLVs. Backward-compatibility mechanisms are also described.</t>
              <t>This document updates RFC 5340, "OSPF for IPv6", and RFC 5838, "Support of Address Families in OSPFv3", by providing TLV-based encodings for the base OSPFv3 unicast support and OSPFv3 address family support.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8362"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8362"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC2827" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2827" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2827.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing</title>
            <author fullname="P. Ferguson" initials="P." surname="Ferguson"/>
            <author fullname="D. Senie" initials="D." surname="Senie"/>
            <date month="May" year="2000"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This paper discusses a simple, effective, and straightforward method for using ingress traffic filtering to prohibit DoS (Denial of Service) attacks which use forged IP addresses to be propagated from 'behind' an Internet Service Provider's (ISP) aggregation point. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="38"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2827"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2827"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3704" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3704" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3704.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Ingress Filtering for Multihomed Networks</title>
            <author fullname="F. Baker" initials="F." surname="Baker"/>
            <author fullname="P. Savola" initials="P." surname="Savola"/>
            <date month="March" year="2004"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>BCP 38, RFC 2827, is designed to limit the impact of distributed denial of service attacks, by denying traffic with spoofed addresses access to the network, and to help ensure that traffic is traceable to its correct source network. As a side effect of protecting the Internet against such attacks, the network implementing the solution also protects itself from this and other attacks, such as spoofed management access to networking equipment. There are cases when this may create problems, e.g., with multihoming. This document describes the current ingress filtering operational mechanisms, examines generic issues related to ingress filtering, and delves into the effects on multihoming in particular. This memo updates RFC 2827. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="84"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3704"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3704"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
    <?line 323?>



  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
