rfc2280.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档！」· 文本 代码 · 共 1,619 行 · 第 1/5 页
TXT
1,619 行
Network Working Group C. Alaettinoglu
Request for Comments: 2280 USC/Information Sciences Institute
Category: Standards Track T. Bates
Cisco Systems
E. Gerich
At Home Network
D. Karrenberg
RIPE
D. Meyer
University of Oregon
M. Terpstra
Bay Networks
C. Villamizar
ANS
January 1998
Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL)
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction 2
2 RPSL Names, Reserved Words, and Representation 3
3 Contact Information 6
3.1 mntner Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2 person Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3 role Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4 route Class 10
5 Set Classes 12
5.1 route-set Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.2 as-set Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.3 Predefined Set Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.4 Hierarchical Set Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6 aut-num Class 16
6.1 import Attribute: Import Policy Specification . . . . . . 16
6.1.1 Peering Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.1.2 Action Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Alaettinoglu, et. al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 2280 RPSL January 1998
6.1.3 Filter Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.1.4 Example Policy Expressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.2 export Attribute: Export Policy Specification . . . . . . 24
6.3 Other Routing Protocols, Multi-Protocol Routing
Protocols, and Injecting Routes Between Protocols . . . . . 25
6.4 Ambiguity Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.5 default Attribute: Default Policy Specification . . . . . 28
6.6 Structured Policy Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7 dictionary Class 33
7.1 Initial RPSL Dictionary and Example Policy Actions
and Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8 Advanced route Class 41
8.1 Specifying Aggregate Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8.1.1 Interaction with policies in aut-num class . . . . . . 45
8.1.2 Ambiguity resolution with overlapping aggregates . . . 46
8.2 Specifying Static Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
9 inet-rtr Class 48
10 Security Considerations 49
11 Acknowledgements 50
A Routing Registry Sites 51
B Authors' Addresses 52
C Full Copyright Statement 53
1 Introduction
This memo is the reference document for the Routing Policy
Specification Language (RPSL). RPSL allows a network operator to be
able to specify routing policies at various levels in the Internet
hierarchy; for example at the Autonomous System (AS) level. At the
same time, policies can be specified with sufficient detail in RPSL
so that low level router configurations can be generated from them.
RPSL is extensible; new routing protocols and new protocol features
can be introduced at any time.
RPSL is a replacement for the current Internet policy specification
language known as RIPE-181 [4] or RFC-1786 [5]. RIPE-81 [6] was the
first language deployed in the Internet for specifying routing
policies. It was later replaced by RIPE-181 [4]. Through
operational use of RIPE-181 it has become apparent that certain
policies cannot be specified and a need for an enhanced and more
generalized language is needed. RPSL addresses RIPE-181's
limitations.
Alaettinoglu, et. al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 2280 RPSL January 1998
RPSL was designed so that a view of the global routing policy can be
contained in a single cooperatively maintained distributed database
to improve the integrity of Internet's routing. RPSL is not designed
to be a router configuration language. RPSL is designed so that
router configurations can be generated from the description of the
policy for one autonomous system (aut-num class) combined with the
description of a router (inet-rtr class), mainly providing router ID,
autonomous system number of the router, interfaces and peers of the
router, and combined with a global database mappings from AS sets to
ASes (as-set class), and from origin ASes and route sets to route
prefixes (route and route-set classes). The accurate population of
the RPSL database can help contribute toward such goals as router
configurations that protect against accidental (or malicious)
distribution of inaccurate routing information, verification of
Internet's routing, and aggregation boundaries beyond a single AS.
RPSL is object oriented; that is, objects contain pieces of policy
and administrative information. These objects are registered in the
Internet Routing Registry (IRR) by the authorized organizations. The
registration process is beyond the scope of this document. Please
refer to [1, 15, 2] for more details on the IRR.
In the following sections, we present the classes that are used to
define various policy and administrative objects. The "mntner" class
defines entities authorized to add, delete and modify a set of
objects. The "person" and "role" classes describes technical and
administrative contact personnel. Autonomous systems (ASes) are
specified using the "aut-num" class. Routes are specified using the
"route" class. Sets of ASes and routes can be defined using the
"as-set" and "route-set" classes. The "dictionary" class provides
the extensibility to the language. The "inet-rtr" class is used to
specify routers. Many of these classes were originally defined in
earlier documents [4, 11, 14, 10, 3] and have all been enhanced.
This document is self-contained. However, the reader is encouraged
to read RIPE-181 [5] and the associated documents [11, 14, 10, 3] as
they provide significant background as to the motivation and
underlying principles behind RIPE-181 and consequently, RPSL. For a
tutorial on RPSL, the reader should read the RPSL applications
document [2].
2 RPSL Names, Reserved Words, and Representation
Each class has a set of attributes which store a piece of information
about the objects of the class. Attributes can be mandatory or
optional: A mandatory attribute has to be defined for all objects of
Alaettinoglu, et. al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 2280 RPSL January 1998
the class; optional attributes can be skipped. Attributes can also
be single or multiple valued. Each object is uniquely identified by
a set of attributes, referred to as the class "key".
The value of an attribute has a type. The following types are most
widely used. Note that RPSL is case insensitive and only the
characters from the ASCII character set can be used.
<object-name>Many objects in RPSL have a name. An <object-name>
is made up of letters, digits, the character underscore "_", and
the character hyphen "-"; the first character of a name must be a
letter, and the last character of a name must be a letter or a
digit. The following words are reserved by RPSL, and they can
not be used as names:
any as-any rs-any peeras
and or not
atomic from to at action accept announce except refine
networks into inbound outbound
Names starting with certain prefixes are reserved for certain
object types. Names starting with "as-" are reserved for as set
names. Names starting with "rs-" are reserved for route set
names.
<as-number>An AS number x is represented as the string "ASx". That
is, the AS 226 is represented as AS226.
<ipv4-address>An IPv4 address is represented as a sequence of four
integers in the range from 0 to 255 separated by the character
dot ".". For example, 128.9.128.5 represents a valid IPv4
address. In the rest of this document, we may refer to IPv4
addresses as IP addresses.
<address-prefix>An address prefix is represented as an IPv4
address followed by the character slash "/" followed by an
integer in the range from 0 to 32. The following are valid
address prefixes: 128.9.128.5/32, 128.9.0.0/16, 0.0.0.0/0; and
the following address prefixes are invalid: 0/0, 128.9/16 since 0
or 128.9 are not strings containing four integers.
<address-prefix-range>An address prefix range is an address
prefix followed by one of the following range operators:
Alaettinoglu, et. al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 2280 RPSL January 1998
^- is the exclusive more specifics operator; it stands
for the more specifics of the address prefix excluding the
address prefix itself. For example, 128.9.0.0/16^- contains
all the more specifics of 128.9.0.0/16 excluding
128.9.0.0/16.
^+ is the inclusive more specifics operator; it stands
for the more specifics of the address prefix including the
address prefix itself. For example, 5.0.0.0/8^+ contains all
the more specifics of 5.0.0.0/8 including 5.0.0.0/8.
^n where n is an integer, stands for all the length n specifics
of the address prefix. For example, 30.0.0.0/8^16 contains
all the more specifics of 30.0.0.0/8 which are of length 16
such as 30.9.0.0/16.
^n-m where n and m are integers, stands for all the length n to
length m specifics of the address prefix. For example,
30.0.0.0/8^24-32 contains all the more specifics of
30.0.0.0/8 which are of length 24 to 32 such as 30.9.9.96/28.
Range operators can also be applied to address prefix sets. In
this case, they distribute over the members of the set. For
example, for a route-set (defined later) rs-foo, rs-foo^+
contains all the inclusive more specifics of all the prefixes in
rs-foo.
<date>A date is represented as an eight digit integer of the
form YYYYMMDD where YYYY represents the year, MM represents the
month of the year (01 through 12), and DD represents the day of
the month (01 through 31). For example, June 24, 1996 is
represented as 19960624.
<email-address>is as described in RFC-822[8].
<dns-name>is as described in RFC-1034[16].
<nic-handle>is a uniquely assigned identifier[13] used by routing,
address allocation, and other registries to unambiguously refer
to contact information. person and role classes map NIC handles
to actual person names, and contact information.
<free-form>is a sequence of ASCII characters.
<X-name>is a name of an object of type X. That is <mntner-name>
is a name of a mntner object.
Alaettinoglu, et. al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 2280 RPSL January 1998
<registry-name>is a name of an IRR registry. The routing
registries are listed in Appendix A.
A value of an attribute may also be a list of one of these types. A
list is represented by separating the list members by commas ",".
For example, "AS1, AS2, AS3, AS4" is a list of AS numbers. Note that
being list valued and being multiple valued are orthogonal. A
multiple valued attribute has more than one value, each of which may
or may not be a list. On the other hand a single valued attribute
may have a list value.
An RPSL object is textually represented as a list of attribute-value
pairs. Each attribute-value pair is written on a separate line. The
attribute name starts at column 0, followed by character ":" and
followed by the value of the attribute. The object's representation
ends when a blank line is encountered. An attribute's value can be
split over multiple lines, by starting the continuation lines with a
white-space (" " or tab) character. The order of attribute-value
pairs is significant.
An object's description may contain comments. A comment can be
anywhere in an object's definition, it starts at the first "#"
character on a line and ends at the first end-of-line character.
White space characters can be used to improve readability.
3 Contact Information
The mntner, person and role classes, admin-c, tech-c, mnt-by,
changed, and source attributes of all classes describe contact
information. The mntner class also specifies what entities can
create, delete and update other objects. These classes do not
specify routing policies and each registry may have different or
additional requirements on them. Here we present the common
denominator for completeness which is the RIPE database
implementation[15]. Please consult your routing registry for the
latest specification of these classes and attributes.
3.1 mntner Class
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?