Extension for BMP Peer Interface

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶

This Internet-Draft will expire on 2 October 2026.¶

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

When BGP establishes a peer relationship using a Link-Local address or unnumbered address, the local outgoing interface must be specified for the relationship to be established successfully. In other words, BGP Link-Local or unnumbered peers may only be distinguished by interface information.¶

However, the per-peer information in a BMP message does not include interface information, making it impossible to distinguish which BGP Link-Local peer or unnumbered peer the reported BMP message originated from.¶

This document introduces a new BMPv4 [I-D.ietf-grow-bmp-tlv] TLV that enables BMP messages with the per-peer header to carry interface information for the established peer session.¶

2. Terminology

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶

3. New BMPv4 TLV

This section defines a new BMPv4 TLV for reporting the BMP messages that need to be distinguished through peer interface intormation. This BMPv4 TLV is designed to convey peer interface information and is therefore named the "Peer-Interface TLV".¶

The TLV structure is illustrated in Figure 1.¶

 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 (2 octets)        |       Length (2 octets)       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    Subtype    |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~             Peer Interface Infomation (variable)              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                          Figure 1: Peer-Interface TLV

The "Peer-Interface TLV" TLV type is TBD1. The value of the TLV is the "Subtype" code (1 octet) followed by the interface information used to establish the related peer session. The length field is one (for the "Subtype" field) plus the length of the "Peer Interface Infomation" field.¶

The subtype is defined, as shown below:¶

• Subtype = 1: Interface Index. The "Peer Interface Infomation" is a 32-bit interface index.¶
• Subtype = 2: Interface Name. The "Peer Interface Infomation" is a variable interface name, encoded in UTF-8.¶

The subtype MUST use type 1 or 2 defined in this document.¶

4. Operational Considerations

When a BMP monitoring station needs to distinguish between parallel BGP sessions established over different interfaces (e.g., using link-local or unnumbered addresses), the "Peer-Interface TLV" SHOULD be included in the relevant BMP messages.¶

When a BMP sender generates a BMP message that requires distinguishing peers by interface, it SHOULD include this TLV in the BMP message. The BMP receiver needs to be able to resolve this TLV to correctly associate the BMP message with the BGP peer on a specific interface.¶

BMP receivers with older versions that do not support this TLV MAY ignore unknown TLVs, but this MAY prevent them from correctly identifying parallel interface-based peers.¶

5. Security Considerations

TBD¶

6. IANA Considerations

TBD¶

Authors' Addresses