<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!-- edited with XMLSPY v5 rel. 3 U (http://www.xmlspy.com)
     by Daniel M Kohn (private) -->
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
]>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-inter-as-topology-ext-43"
     ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="BGP-LS-Inter-AS-Ext">BGP-LS Extensions for Inter-AS
    Topology Retrieval</title>

    <author fullname="Aijun Wang" initials="A" surname="Wang">
      <organization>China Telecom</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Beiqijia Town, Changping District</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region>Beijing</region>

          <code>102209</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Huaimo Chen" initials="H" surname="Chen">
      <organization>Individual</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Boston</city>

          <region>MA</region>

          <code/>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>hchen.ietf@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Ketan Talaulikar" initials="K" surname="Talaulikar">
      <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city/>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>India</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>ketant.ietf@gmail.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Shunwan Zhuang" initials="S" surname="Zhuang">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Huawei Building, No.156 Beiqing Rd.</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region/>

          <code>100095</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>zhuangshunwan@huawei.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Changwang Lin" initials="C" surname="Lin">
      <organization>New H3C Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>8 Yongjia North Road</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region/>

          <code>100094</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>linchangwang.04414@h3c.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="4" month="September" year="2026"/>

    <area>RTG Area</area>

    <workgroup>IDR Working Group</workgroup>

    <keyword>RFC</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document specifies the procedures for distributing Border
      Gateway Protocol-Link State (BGP-LS) key parameters for inter-domain
      links between two Autonomous Systems (ASes). It defines a new type
      within the BGP-LS Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI) for an
      Inter-AS Link, along with three new Type-Length-Values (TLVs)
      descriptors for the BGP-LS Inter-AS Link.</t>

      <t>These extensions and procedures allow network operators to collect
      inter-domain interconnect information and automatically compute the
      inter-AS topology using information provided by the BGP-LS protocol.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
      <t>BGP-LS <xref target="RFC9552"/> describes the use of the BGP protocol
      for advertising Link-State topology information. It enables applications
      such as Software-Defined Network Controller<xref target="RFC7426">s
      </xref> to collect the underlay network topology. <xref
      target="RFC9552"/> covers the advertisement of topology information from
      within an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) domain. If the network has
      more than one IGP domain, and these domains interconnect with each other
      via Inter-AS links, there is no mechanism within <xref
      target="RFC9552"/> to advertise the interconnect topology
      information.</t>

      <t>This document defines the Inter-AS Link NLRI and some new TLVs for
      BGP-LS to cover scenarios where a network controller needs to get the
      interconnection topology information between different AS domains when
      such information is sourced from IGPs. These additions may also be used
      as an alternative to <xref target="RFC9086"/> for a BGP-LS topology
      scenario defined in <xref target="secOtherAlternativeScenario"/>.</t>

      <t>Automatically building the inter-AS view is possible when the sender
      and receiver of BGP-LS are upgraded to support the extensions. The
      correlation depends on the accuracy of the information that is available
      to a BGP-LS receiver/consumer.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Requirements Language">
      <t>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
      <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when,
      they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Terminology">
      <t>The following terms are defined in this document:</t>

      <t><list style="symbols">
          <t>DC: Data Center</t>

          <t>SDN: Software-Defined Network</t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="s-Inter-AS-Scenario" title="Inter-AS Domain Scenarios">
      <t>Figure 1 illustrates the multi-domain scenarios discussed in this
      document. Typically, an SDN controller can retrieve the topology of IGP
      A and IGP B individually via BGP-LS, but it cannot obtain topology
      connection information between these two IGP domains, as IGP protocols
      do generally not run over the Inter-AS links.</t>

      <t>In Figure 1, S2 (in IGP domain A) and T1 (in IGP domain B) are
      connected to the SDN controller via BGP-LS, but they can only report the
      topology information within the IGP A and IGP B, respectively. They
      cannot report the Inter-AS topology information between them because
      there is no IGP protocol runs over the Inter-AS links. The border
      routers SB1/SB3 (in IGP A) and TB2/TB4 (in IGP B) are aware of the
      Inter-AS links connecting them, and can advertise such information via
      underlying OSPF <xref target="RFC5392"/> or IS-IS <xref
      target="RFC9346"/>; however, <xref target="RFC9552"/> currently lacks an
      encoding to convey this information in BGP-LS.</t>

      <t><figure>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[                        +-----------------+
                 +------+ SDN Controller  +-----+
                 |      +-----------------+     |
                 |                              |
                 |BGP-LS                        |BGP-LS
                 |                              |
 +---------------+-------+               +------+--------------+
 | +--+         +|-+   +-+-+           +-+-+   +|-+        +--+|
 | |S1+---------+S2+---+SB1+-----------+TB2+---+T1+--------+T2||
 | +-++         +--+   +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +-++|
 |   |                   |               |                   | |
 |   |                   |               |                   | |
 | +-++        +--+    +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +-++|
 | |S4+--------+S3+----+SB3+-----------+TB4+---+T3+--------+T4||
 | +--+        +--+    +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +--+|
 |                       |               |                     |
 |                       |               |                     |
 |       IGP A           |               |      IGP B          |
 +-----------------------+               +---------------------+

             Figure 1: Inter-AS Domain Scenario
]]></artwork>
        </figure></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="s-Stub-Link-NLRI" title="Inter-AS Link NLRI">
      <t><xref target="RFC9552"/> defines four NLRI types (Node, Link, IPv4
      Topology Prefix, and IPv6 Topology Prefix) to carry the topology and
      prefix information. For an Inter-AS link, since the two ends of the link
      belong to different IGP domains and the link does not run an IGP
      protocol, it is not appropriate to advertise its information using the
      existing NLRI types listed above.</t>

      <t>This document defines a new NLRI type 7 (see <xref target="s-IANA"/>)
      within the BGP-LS NLRI, referred to as the Inter-AS Link NLRI. The
      Inter-AS Link NLRI is encoded in the format shown in Figure 2:</t>

      <t><figure>
          <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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Protocol-ID  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                           Identifier                          |
     |                           (8 octets)                          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     //              Local Node Descriptors (variable)              //
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     //           Inter-AS Link Descriptors (variable)              //
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

            Figure 2: Inter-AS Link NLRI Format]]></artwork>
        </figure></t>

      <t>This section describes the encoding of the Inter-AS Link NLRI while
      the more detailed procedures for sourcing of this information from the
      underlying IGP are described in <xref target="secAdvertisement"/>.</t>

      <t>The "Protocol-ID" field is set to the value indicating the source
      protocol of the Inter-AS Link information, as specified in Section 5.2
      of <xref target="RFC9552"/>.</t>

      <t>The semantics of the "Identifier" field are the same as defined in
      <xref target="RFC9552"/> and MUST be set to the BGP-LS Instance
      Identifier to identify the IGP domain into which the information
      associated with the Inter-AS link is advertised. Therefore, the
      "Identifier" values for the two half-links (refer to Section 5.2.2 of
      <xref target="RFC9552"/>) of the Inter-AS link SHOULD be different
      depending on the configuration of Identifiers for the two IGP domains.
      The consumer of the Inter-AS Link NLRI MUST use (ASN, BGP-LS ID) tuple
      to distinguish the IGP domains in different ASes. This behavior takes
      precedence over the requirement in Section 5.2 of <xref
      target="RFC9552"/> to assign unique BGP-LS Instance-IDs to routing
      protocol instances operating in different IGP domains.</t>

      <t>The "Local Node Descriptors" field is encoded using the TLV 256, as
      defined in Section 5.2.1.2 of <xref target="RFC9552"/> ,to identify the
      ASBR associated with the specific half-link of the Inter-AS link. The
      following Sub-TLVs are included as the Local Node Descriptors:</t>

      <t>- Autonomous System (TLV 512) <xref target="RFC9552">(Section 5.2.1.4
      of</xref>) MUST be included.</t>

      <t>- OSPF Area-ID (TLV 514) <xref target="RFC9552">(Section 5.2.1.4
      of</xref>) MUST be included only in the case of OSPF when the Inter-AS
      TE LSA from which information is sourced is being flooded with an area
      scope. It MUST NOT be included when the LSA is flooded with AS
      scope.</t>

      <t>- IGP Router ID (TLV 515) MUST be included, encoded for either OSPF
      or IS-IS, depending on the source protocol, as specified in Section
      5.2.1.4 of <xref target="RFC9552"/>.</t>

      <t>- One or both of the IPv4 and IPv6 Router-IDs of the ASBR using TLV
      1028 and/or TLV 1029 <xref target="RFC9552"/>, depending on whether the
      ASBR is configured with one or both of the IPv4 and IPv6 TE Router-IDs.
      If both are known, then both MUST be present. (Note: while <xref
      target="RFC9552"/> introduced these TLVs for use in the BGP-LS
      attribute, this document also leverages them for use in the NLRI.)</t>

      <t/>

      <t>The Inter-AS Link Descriptors are encoded as TLVs that identify the
      specific half-link of the Inter-AS link. Section 6 of this document
      introduces the TLVs that MUST be included as the Inter-AS Link
      Descriptors:</t>

      <t>- Remote AS Number (TLV 270), and</t>

      <t>- One or both of IPv4 and IPv6 Remote ASBR ID using TLV 271 and/or
      TLV 272, depending on whether the Remote ASBR is configured with one or
      both of the IPv4 and IPv6 TE Router-IDs.</t>

      <t>Additionally, the following TLVs MUST be included as Inter-AS Link
      Descriptors if they are being advertised in the underlying IGP
      advertisement of the Inter-AS link, as they help identify individual
      links when there is more than one Inter-AS link between two ASBRs.</t>

      <t>- Link Local/Remote Identifiers (TLV 258), S<xref
      target="RFC9552">ection 5.2.2 of </xref></t>

      <t>- IPv4 Interface Address (TLV 259), S<xref target="RFC9552">ection
      5.2.2 of </xref></t>

      <t>- IPv4 Neighbor Address (TLV 260), <xref target="RFC9552">Section
      5.2.2 of </xref></t>

      <t>- IPv6 Interface Address (TLV 261), <xref target="RFC9552">Section
      5.2.2 of </xref></t>

      <t>- IPv6 Neighbor Address (TLV 262), S<xref target="RFC9552">ection
      5.2.2 of </xref></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="secStubLinkTLV" title="Inter-AS Link Descriptor TLVs">
      <t>This document introduces three TLVs for inclusion as Inter-AS Link
      Descriptors within the Inter-AS Link NLRI for the advertisement of
      Inter-AS link information via BGP-LS.</t>

      <t><figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[+-----------+---------------------+--------------+----------------+
|  TLV Code | Description         |IS-IS/OSPF TLV| Reference      |
|   Point   |                     |   /Sub-TLV   | (RFC/Section)  |
+-----------+---------------------+--------------+----------------+
|    270    |Remote AS Number     |   24/21      | [RFC9346]/3.4.1|
|           |                     |              | [RFC5392]/3.3.1|
|    271    |IPv4 Remote ASBR ID  |   25/22      | [RFC9346]/3.4.2|
|           |                     |              | [RFC5392]/3.3.2| 
|    272    |IPv6 Remote ASBR ID  |   26/24      | [RFC9346]/3.4.3|
|           |                     |              | [RFC5392]/3.3.3|
+-----------+---------------------+--------------+----------------+
             Figure 3: Inter-AS Link Descriptor TLVs]]></artwork>
        </figure></t>

      <t>The encoding of these TLVs is aligned with the corresponding
      advertisements in <xref target="RFC9346"/> and <xref target="RFC5392"/>,
      which keeps the BGP-LS protocol agnostic to the underlying protocol.</t>

      <section anchor="secRemoteAS" title="Remote AS Number TLV">
        <t>The Remote AS Number TLV specifies the AS number of the neighboring
        AS to which the advertised link connects.</t>

        <t>The Remote AS Number TLV is TLV Type 270. Its format is as
        follows:</t>

        <t><figure>
            <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            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote AS Number                        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           Figure 4: Remote AS Number TLV Format    ]]></artwork>
          </figure>The Remote AS Number field has 4 octets in length. When
        only 2 octets are used for the AS number, the left (high-order) 2
        octets MUST be set to 0. If not, the receiver will mistreat it as the
        4 octets AS number and then can not retrieval the Inter-AS topology
        correctly.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="secIPv4RemoteASBR" title="IPv4 Remote ASBR ID">
        <t>The IPv4 Remote ASBR ID TLV specifies the IPv4 identifier of the
        remote ASBR to which the advertised Inter-AS link connects. This can
        be any stable, routable IPv4 address of the remote ASBR. For OSPF,
        refer to the IPv4 Remote ASBR ID Sub-TLV in <xref target="RFC5392"/>;
        for IS-IS, refer to the IPv4 Remote ASBR Identifier Sub-TLV in <xref
        target="RFC9346"/>.</t>

        <t>The IPv4 Remote ASBR ID TLV is TLV Type 271 and is 4 octets in
        length. Its format is as follows:</t>

        <t><figure>
            <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            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote ASBR ID                          |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
            Figure 5:  IPv4 Remote ASBR ID TLV Format ]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="secIPv6RemoteASBR" title="IPv6 Remote ASBR ID">
        <t>The IPv6 Remote ASBR ID TLV specifies the IPv6 identifier of the
        remote ASBR to which the advertised Inter-AS link connects. This can
        be any stable, routable IPv6 address of the remote ASBR. For OSPF,
        refer to the IPv6 Remote ASBR ID Sub-TLV in <xref target="RFC5392"/>;
        for IS-IS, refer to IPv6 Remote ASBR Identifier Sub-TLV in <xref
        target="RFC9346"/>.</t>

        <t>The IPv6 Remote ASBR ID TLV is TLV Type 272 and is 16 octets in
        length. Its format is as follows:</t>

        <t><figure>
            <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            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote ASBR ID                          |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote ASBR ID (continued)              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote ASBR ID (continued)              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Remote ASBR ID (continued)              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           Figure 6:  IPv6 Remote ASBR ID TLV Format]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>

        <t>The IPv6 Remote ASBR ID TLV MUST be included if the neighboring
        ASBR has an IPv6 address.</t>

        <t>If the neighboring ASBR does not have an IPv6 address, the IPv4
        Remote ASBR ID TLV MUST be included instead. If both are known, then
        both MUST be present.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="secAdvertisement"
             title="Advertisement of IGP Information for Inter-AS Links">
      <t>Advertisement of Inter-AS Links along with their TE information is
      done in IGPs as follows:</t>

      <t>- In OSPFv2 via the Inter-AS-TE-v2 LSA <xref target="RFC5392"/></t>

      <t>- In OSPFv3 via the Inter-AS-TE-v3 LSA<xref target="RFC5392">
      </xref></t>

      <t>- In IS-IS via the Inter-AS Reachability Information TLV (TLV 141)
      <xref target="RFC9346"/></t>

      <t>As indicated in <xref target="s-Stub-Link-NLRI"/> and <xref
      target="secStubLinkTLV"/>, the routers that connect to an SDN controller
      via the BGP-LS protocol within each domain will advertise the
      information from the above IGPs for the Inter-AS link. The consumer of
      such information can then retrieve the Inter-AS topology from it.</t>

      <t>When advertising these Inter-AS Links from the IGPs into BGP-LS as
      Inter-AS Links, with the exception of the Inter-AS Link Descriptors, the
      sourcing of information for the Inter-AS Link NLRI follows the same
      procedures as specified in <xref target="RFC9552"/>. The information
      about the Remote AS Number and the IPv4/IPv6 Remote ASBR IDs specified
      in <xref target="secStubLinkTLV"/> is derived from the Remote AS Number
      and IPv4/IPv6 Remote ASBR ID TLVs specified for OSPF/IS-IS in <xref
      target="RFC5392"/> and <xref target="RFC9346"/> respectively. The rest
      of the Inter-AS Link Descriptor TLVs of the Inter-AS Link NLRI are
      sourced from the base OSPF/ISIS TE TLVs that were originally introduced
      for normal IGP links and which are also encoded for the Inter-AS TE
      links as specified in <xref target="RFC5392"/> and <xref
      target="RFC9346"/>; their procedures are therefore the same as in <xref
      target="RFC9552"/>.</t>

      <t>The OSPF/IS-IS Inter-AS Link advertisements also include various link
      properties (e.g., TE metric, Admin Groups, SRLGs, etc.) which are
      encoded using the same TLVs as for normal IGP links. These link
      properties are advertised using their corresponding BGP-LS TLVs as
      specified in <xref target="RFC9552"/> and other BGP-LS extensions in the
      BGP-LS Attribute associated with the Inter-AS Link NLRI of that specific
      link.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="secOtherAlternativeScenario"
             title="Solutions for other Alternative Scenarios">
      <t>In some scenario, a router running BGP-LS may also act as an ASBR.
      Take the topology in following figure as the example:</t>

      <t>In this alternative topology, it is SB1, which is also an ASBR in IGP
      A, runs the BGP-LS protocol with an SDN controller. All other
      information is kept the same as that in Figure 1.</t>

      <t><figure>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[                        +-----------------+
                 +------+  SDN Controller +-----+
                 |      +-----------------+     |
                 |                              |
                 +-------+BGP-LS                |BGP-LS
                         |                      |
 +-----------------------+               +------+--------------+
 | +--+         +--+   +-+-+           +-+-+   ++-+        +--+|
 | |S1+---------+S2+---+SB1+-----------+TB2+---+T1+--------+T2||
 | +-++         +--+   +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +-++|
 |   |                   |               |                   | |
 |   |                   |               |                   | |
 | +-++        +--+    +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +-++|
 | |S4+--------+S3+----+SB3+-----------+TB4+---+T3+--------+T4||
 | +--+        +--+    +-+-+           +-+-+   +--+        +--+|
 |                       |               |                     |
 |                       |               |                     |
 |       IGP A           |               |      IGP B          |
 +-----------------------+               +---------------------+

             Figure 7: Alternative Inter-AS Domain Scenario
]]></artwork>
        </figure>To retrieve the Inter-AS topology among IGP A and IGP B in
      alternative scenario in Figure 7, one possible solution is to utilize
      the BGP EPE <xref target="RFC9086"/> solution on SB1 (reports the local
      information via the Link NLRI with Protocol-ID set to 'BGP'), plus the
      solution proposed in <xref target="s-Stub-Link-NLRI"/> of this document
      that pass the BGP-LS Inter-AS NLRI on another ASBR (e.g., SB3 in Figure
      7) with Protocol-ID' set to 'OSPF' or 'IS-IS').</t>

      <t>Another solution for the use case shown in Figure 7 allows SBI to
      directly put into BGP-LS an Inter-AS Link NLRI indicating the source is
      a local route (directly connected interface or static route) that the
      ASBR uses to get to the Inter-AS link. Given this topology, SB1 sends
      the BGP-LS with the Inter-AS NLRI with the following settings:</t>

      <t>&bull; Protocol-ID &ndash; set to 'Direct' or 'Static configuration'
      per definition in <xref target="RFC9552">Section 5.2 of </xref>,</t>

      <t>&bull; Local Node Descriptors include:</t>

      <t>o Autonomous System (TLV 512) (<xref target="RFC9552">Section 5.2 of
      </xref>),</t>

      <t>o IGP Router-ID (TLV 515) (Section 5.2 of <xref target="RFC9552"/>),
      and</t>

      <t>o Inter-AS Link Descriptors (per <xref
      target="secStubLinkTLV"/>).</t>

      <t>The above information on SB1 is configured locally, and the same
      information on SB3 is from OSPF/IS-IS.</t>

      <t>Alignment between the two sides of the Inter-AS link (e.g. SB1
      &ndash; TB2) that uses the source of &ldquo;static&rdquo; or
      &ldquo;direct&rdquo; is made by a controller mapping the AS-number and
      IP Address supported by the Inter-AS Link information (<xref
      target="s-Stub-Link-NLRI"/> and <xref target="secStubLinkTLV"/>).</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="inter-as-topology-use-case"
             title="Inter-AS Topology Use Case">
      <t><xref target="RFC8735">Section 3.3 of </xref> (Traffic Engineering
      for Multi-domain) describes a scenario in which a service provider needs
      to perform end-to-end traffic engineering across multiple domains. To
      program the end-to-end path, and let the traffic pass the non-congested
      links, especially the links that interconnect to the different domains,
      an SDN controller that covers all these domains which belong to the
      service provider needs to know the Inter-AS topology information from
      the Inter-AS Link NLRI via the BGP-LS. It binds the half-link
      information from each domain together, calculates the end-to-end path
      for the assured service traffic and uses the final path information to
      control the transmission of the assured traffic.</t>

      <t>The use case can also be explained via the scenario described in
      Figure 1.</t>

      <t>If S1 wants to send traffic to T2 with assured performance, it should
      know the end-to-end path from the SDN controller, especially the
      connection topology among the four border routers (SB1, SB3, TB2 and
      TB4).</t>

      <t>Such connection topology information is sent by S2 and T1
      respectively via the BGP-LS protocol, to the SDN controller. The SDN
      controller can then stitch the two IGP domain topologies together,
      calculate the end-to-end path that spans two IGP domains and their
      interconnection links, guide the traffic from S1 (in IGP A) to T2 (in
      IGP B) to traverse the desired nodes and links.</t>

      <t>If there are no interconnection links from the Inter-AS NLRI that is
      defined in this document, an SDN controller cannot stitch the two IGP
      domains together and is unable to calculate the end-to-end path for the
      communication nodes located in different domains.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Operational Considerations">
      <t>The extensions defined in this document are intended primarily for
      deployments in which a controller collects topology information from
      multiple ASes under a common administrative control. A typical
      deployment consists of one or more BGP-LS speakers in each AS
      advertising the intra-AS topology together with the Inter-AS Link NLRIs
      to a centralized or logically centralized controller. The controller
      correlates the information advertised from the two ends of an Inter-AS
      link and constructs an inter-AS topology as described in <xref
      target="inter-as-topology-use-case"/>.</t>

      <t>The Inter-AS Link NLRI introduces additional topology state into
      BGP-LS. The amount of additional state is generally proportional to the
      number of Inter-AS links advertised to the controller. In networks
      containing a large number of ASes or Inter-AS links, operators should
      consider the resulting increase in BGP-LS state, update processing, and
      controller processing. Changes to an Inter-AS link or its associated
      attributes may result in BGP-LS updates in addition to the updates
      associated with the intra-AS topology. Operators should therefore apply
      the same scaling, filtering, and session-engineering practices used for
      other BGP-LS topology information, and should advertise only the
      Inter-AS topology information required by the consuming
      applications.</t>

      <t>Deployment of the extensions does not require all routers in an AS to
      support the Inter-AS Link NLRI. Only the routers that originate the
      relevant Inter-AS information into the IGP, the BGP-LS speakers that
      export this information, and the BGP-LS consumers that process the new
      NLRI need to support the corresponding functions. This allows the
      extensions to be introduced incrementally. A BGP-LS consumer that does
      not support the Inter-AS Link NLRI cannot use the information defined in
      this document to construct the corresponding Inter-AS links.</t>

      <t>An Inter-AS link is normally represented by information learned from
      each side of the link. The controller correlates these advertisements
      using the local and remote AS information and the ASBR identifiers
      carried in the Inter-AS Link NLRI. If the two advertisements cannot be
      correlated, the controller may observe an unpaired or incomplete
      Inter-AS link rather than a complete link between the two ASes.</t>

      <t>When troubleshooting such a condition, an operator should first
      verify that the Inter-AS link information is correctly originated on
      both ASBRs and is present in the corresponding OSPF or IS-IS
      advertisements described in <xref target="secAdvertisement"/>. The
      operator should then verify that the BGP-LS speakers have received the
      information and advertised the corresponding Inter-AS Link NLRIs to the
      controller. Either the IPv6 Remote ASBR ID or IPv4 Remote ASBR ID MUST
      be presented in the Inter-AS Link Descriptors. In particular, the Remote
      AS Number and the IPv4 and/or IPv6 Remote ASBR ID should be checked for
      consistency with the Inter-AS Link Descriptors advertised from the
      opposite side of the link. Operators should also check BGP-LS
      import/export policies and filtering along the path to the controller,
      since filtering one of the advertisements may leave the controller with
      only one half of the Inter-AS link.</t>

      <t>Implementations are encouraged to provide operational visibility into
      Inter-AS Link NLRIs, including their source protocol, local and remote
      AS numbers, local and remote ASBR identifiers, and whether the
      controller was able to correlate the advertisements from the two ends of
      a link. Such information can help distinguish an error in the underlying
      IGP advertisement from filtering or propagation problems in BGP-LS and
      from a correlation failure at the controller.</t>

      <t>The topology information described in this document can reveal
      information about interconnections between ASes. Operators should
      therefore control the scope of its distribution using existing BGP
      policy mechanisms. In particular, advertisements should be limited to
      the BGP-LS consumers that require the information.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>BGP-LS security is specified in <xref target="RFC9552"/>. This
      extension to BGP-LS focuses on scenarios where a single-entity-operated
      network includes multiple IGP domains composed of its backbone network,
      several Metropolitan-Area Networks (MANs), and Data Centers (DCs). The
      configuration of these networks, operated by a single administrative
      entity, creates a "walled garden". Within this single administrative
      domain, the network operator needs to monitor and engineer traffic flows
      traversing a network that spans multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes). The
      network operator can obtain this Inter-AS topology information via the
      procedure described in this document.</t>

      <t>A single administrative domain consisting of two ASes that passes
      information about Inter-AS Link characteristics does not cause issues
      within a controlled administrative domain. However, the Inter-AS Link
      NLRI and its characteristics (Link/Local Identifier, IPv4 Interface
      Address, IPv4 Neighbor Address, IPv6 Interface Address, IPv6 Neighbor
      Address, Multi-Topology Identifier, Remote-AS Number, IPv4 Remote ASBR
      ID, and IPv6 Remote ASBR ID) constitute critical network information. As
      such, operators SHOULD handle this critical information in a manner that
      restricts it to the controlled administrative domain or filters it
      before it leaves the controlled administrative domain.</t>

      <t/>
    </section>

    <section anchor="s-IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>This document requests IANA to maintain the allocated codepoints
      under the "Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Parameters"
      registry group as follows:</t>

      <section title="New BGP-LS NLRI type">
        <t>IANA has allocated (via Early Allocation) a codepoint for the
        Inter-AS Link NLRI type from the "BGP-LS NLRI Types" registry under
        the "Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Parameters"
        group:</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    Type       |   NLRI Type       |        Reference          |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|       7       | Inter-AS Link NLRI|      This document        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           Figure 8:  Inter-AS Link NLRI Codepoint]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>

      <section title="New Inter-AS Link Descriptors">
        <t>IANA has allocated (via Early Allocation) codepoints for the
        following TLVs from "BGP-LS NLRI and Attribute TLVs" registry under
        the "Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Parameters" group.
        They are used as Inter-AS Link Descriptor TLVs:</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   TLV Code Point  |   Description         |      Reference        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      270          | Remote AS Number      |     This document     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      271          |  IPv4 Remote ASBR ID  |     This document     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|      272          |  IPv6 Remote ASBR ID  |     This document     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           Figure 9:  BGP-LS Inter-AS Link Descriptors TLV]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>The authors would like to thank Susan Hares, Mohamed Boucadair,
      Mahesh Jethanandani, &Eacute;ric Vyncke, Acee Lindem, Jie Dong, Shaowen
      Ma, Jeff Tantsura and Dhruv Dhody for their valuable comments and
      suggestions.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5392"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9346"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9552"?>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7426"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8735"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9086"?>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
