3. Summary of Operation
3. Summary of Operation
The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is an inter-Autonomous System routing protocol. It is built on experience gained with EGP (as defined in [RFC904]) and EGP usage in the NSFNET Backbone (as described in [RFC1092] and [RFC1093]). For more BGP-related information, see [RFC1772], [RFC1930], [RFC1997], and [RFC2858].
The primary function of a BGP speaking system is to exchange network reachability information with other BGP systems. This network reachability information includes information on the list of Autonomous Systems (ASes) that reachability information traverses. This information is sufficient for constructing a graph of AS connectivity, from which routing loops may be pruned, and, at the AS level, some policy decisions may be enforced.
In the context of this document, we assume that a BGP speaker advertises to its peers only those routes that it uses itself (in this context, a BGP speaker is said to "use" a BGP route if it is the most preferred BGP route and is used in forwarding). All other cases are outside the scope of this document.
In the context of this document, the term "IP address" refers to an IP Version 4 address [RFC791].
Routing information exchanged via BGP supports only the destination-based forwarding paradigm, which assumes that a router forwards a packet based solely on the destination address carried in the IP header of the packet. This, in turn, reflects the set of policy decisions that can (and cannot) be enforced using BGP. Note that some policies cannot be supported by the destination-based forwarding paradigm, and thus require techniques such as source routing (aka explicit routing) to be enforced. Such policies cannot be enforced using BGP either. For example, BGP does not enable one AS to send traffic to a neighboring AS for forwarding to some destination (reachable through but) beyond that neighboring AS, intending that the traffic take a different route to that taken by the traffic originating in the neighboring AS (for that same destination). On the other hand, BGP can support any policy conforming to the destination-based forwarding paradigm.
BGP-4 provides a new set of mechanisms for supporting Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) [RFC1518, RFC1519]. These mechanisms include support for advertising a set of destinations as an IP prefix and eliminating the concept of a network "class" within BGP. BGP-4 also introduces mechanisms that allow aggregation of routes, including aggregation of AS paths.
This document uses the term `Autonomous System' (AS) throughout. The classic definition of an Autonomous System is a set of routers under a single technical administration, using an interior gateway protocol (IGP) and common metrics to determine how to route packets within the AS, and using an inter-AS routing protocol to determine how to route packets to other ASes. Since this classic definition was developed, it has become common for a single AS to use several IGPs and, sometimes, several sets of metrics within an AS. The use of the term Autonomous System stresses the fact that, even when multiple IGPs and metrics are used, the administration of an AS appears to other ASes to have a single coherent interior routing plan and presents a consistent picture of the destinations that are reachable through it.
BGP uses TCP [RFC793] as its transport protocol. This eliminates the need to implement explicit update fragmentation, retransmission, acknowledgement, and sequencing. BGP listens on TCP port 179. The error notification mechanism used in BGP assumes that TCP supports a "graceful" close (i.e., that all outstanding data will be delivered before the connection is closed).
A TCP connection is formed between two systems. They exchange messages to open and confirm the connection parameters.
The initial data flow is the portion of the BGP routing table that is allowed by the export policy, called the Adj-Ribs-Out (see 3.2). Incremental updates are sent as the routing tables change. BGP does not require a periodic refresh of the routing table. To allow local policy changes to have the correct effect without resetting any BGP connections, a BGP speaker SHOULD either (a) retain the current version of the routes advertised to it by all of its peers for the duration of the connection, or (b) make use of the Route Refresh extension [RFC2918].
KEEPALIVE messages may be sent periodically to ensure that the connection is live. NOTIFICATION messages are sent in response to errors or special conditions. If a connection encounters an error condition, a NOTIFICATION message is sent and the connection is closed.
A peer in a different AS is referred to as an external peer, while a peer in the same AS is referred to as an internal peer. Internal BGP and external BGP are commonly abbreviated as IBGP and EBGP.
If a particular AS has multiple BGP speakers and is providing transit service for other ASes, then care must be taken to ensure a consistent view of routing within the AS. A consistent view of the interior routes of the AS is provided by the IGP used within the AS. For the purpose of this document, it is assumed that a consistent view of the routes exterior to the AS is provided by having all BGP speakers within the AS maintain IBGP with each other.
This document specifies the base behavior of the BGP protocol. This behavior can be, and is, modified by extension specifications. When the protocol is extended, the new behavior is fully documented in the extension specifications.