Network Working Group                                          S. Sangli
Request for Comments: 4724                                       E. Chen
Category: Standards Track                                  Cisco Systems
                                                            R. Fernando
                                                             J. Scudder
                                                             Y. Rekhter
                                                       Juniper Networks
                                                           January 2007


                  Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP

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 IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

  This document describes a mechanism for BGP that would help minimize
  the negative effects on routing caused by BGP restart.  An End-of-RIB
  marker is specified and can be used to convey routing convergence
  information.  A new BGP capability, termed "Graceful Restart
  Capability", is defined that would allow a BGP speaker to express its
  ability to preserve forwarding state during BGP restart.  Finally,
  procedures are outlined for temporarily retaining routing information
  across a TCP session termination/re-establishment.

  The mechanisms described in this document are applicable to all
  routers, both those with the ability to preserve forwarding state
  during BGP restart and those without (although the latter need to
  implement only a subset of the mechanisms described in this
  document).











Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


Table of Contents

  1. Introduction ....................................................2
     1.1. Specification of Requirements ..............................2
  2. Marker for End-of-RIB ...........................................3
  3. Graceful Restart Capability .....................................3
  4. Operation .......................................................6
     4.1. Procedures for the Restarting Speaker ......................6
     4.2. Procedures for the Receiving Speaker .......................7
  5. Changes to BGP Finite State Machine .............................9
  6. Deployment Considerations ......................................11
  7. Security Considerations ........................................12
  8. Acknowledgments ................................................13
  9. IANA Considerations ............................................13
  10. References ....................................................13
     10.1. Normative References .....................................13
     10.2. Informative References ...................................13

1.  Introduction

  Usually, when BGP on a router restarts, all the BGP peers detect that
  the session went down and then came up.  This "down/up" transition
  results in a "routing flap" and causes BGP route re-computation,
  generation of BGP routing updates, and unnecessary churn to the
  forwarding tables.  It could spread across multiple routing domains.
  Such routing flaps may create transient forwarding blackholes and/or
  transient forwarding loops.  They also consume resources on the
  control plane of the routers affected by the flap.  As such, they are
  detrimental to the overall network performance.

  This document describes a mechanism for BGP that would help minimize
  the negative effects on routing caused by BGP restart.  An End-of-RIB
  marker is specified and can be used to convey routing convergence
  information.  A new BGP capability, termed "Graceful Restart
  Capability", is defined that would allow a BGP speaker to express its
  ability to preserve forwarding state during BGP restart.  Finally,
  procedures are outlined for temporarily retaining routing information
  across a TCP session termination/re-establishment.

1.1  Specification of Requirements

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].







Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


2.  Marker for End-of-RIB

  An UPDATE message with no reachable Network Layer Reachability
  Information (NLRI) and empty withdrawn NLRI is specified as the End-
  of-RIB marker that can be used by a BGP speaker to indicate to its
  peer the completion of the initial routing update after the session
  is established.  For the IPv4 unicast address family, the End-of-RIB
  marker is an UPDATE message with the minimum length [BGP-4].  For any
  other address family, it is an UPDATE message that contains only the
  MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute [BGP-MP] with no withdrawn routes for that
  <AFI, SAFI>.

  Although the End-of-RIB marker is specified for the purpose of BGP
  graceful restart, it is noted that the generation of such a marker
  upon completion of the initial update would be useful for routing
  convergence in general, and thus the practice is recommended.

  In addition, it would be beneficial for routing convergence if a BGP
  speaker can indicate to its peer up-front that it will generate the
  End-of-RIB marker, regardless of its ability to preserve its
  forwarding state during BGP restart.  This can be accomplished using
  the Graceful Restart Capability described in the next section.

3.  Graceful Restart Capability

  The Graceful Restart Capability is a new BGP capability [BGP-CAP]
  that can be used by a BGP speaker to indicate its ability to preserve
  its forwarding state during BGP restart.  It can also be used to
  convey to its peer its intention of generating the End-of-RIB marker
  upon the completion of its initial routing updates.

  This capability is defined as follows:

     Capability code: 64

     Capability length: variable

     Capability value: Consists of the "Restart Flags" field, "Restart
     Time" field, and 0 to 63 of the tuples <AFI, SAFI, Flags for
     address family> as follows:











Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Restart Flags (4 bits)                           |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Restart Time in seconds (12 bits)                |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Address Family Identifier (16 bits)              |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Subsequent Address Family Identifier (8 bits)    |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Flags for Address Family (8 bits)                |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | ...                                              |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Address Family Identifier (16 bits)              |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Subsequent Address Family Identifier (8 bits)    |
        +--------------------------------------------------+
        | Flags for Address Family (8 bits)                |
        +--------------------------------------------------+

  The use and meaning of the fields are as follows:

     Restart Flags:

        This field contains bit flags related to restart.

            0 1 2 3
           +-+-+-+-+
           |R|Resv.|
           +-+-+-+-+

        The most significant bit is defined as the Restart State (R)
        bit, which can be used to avoid possible deadlock caused by
        waiting for the End-of-RIB marker when multiple BGP speakers
        peering with each other restart.  When set (value 1), this bit
        indicates that the BGP speaker has restarted, and its peer MUST
        NOT wait for the End-of-RIB marker from the speaker before
        advertising routing information to the speaker.

        The remaining bits are reserved and MUST be set to zero by the
        sender and ignored by the receiver.

     Restart Time:

        This is the estimated time (in seconds) it will take for the
        BGP session to be re-established after a restart.  This can be
        used to speed up routing convergence by its peer in case that
        the BGP speaker does not come back after a restart.



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


     Address Family Identifier (AFI), Subsequent Address Family
        Identifier (SAFI):

        The AFI and SAFI, taken in combination, indicate that Graceful
        Restart is supported for routes that are advertised with the
        same AFI and SAFI.  Routes may be explicitly associated with a
        particular AFI and SAFI using the encoding of [BGP-MP] or
        implicitly associated with <AFI=IPv4, SAFI=Unicast> if using
        the encoding of [BGP-4].

     Flags for Address Family:

        This field contains bit flags relating to routes that were
        advertised with the given AFI and SAFI.

            0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |F|   Reserved  |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

        The most significant bit is defined as the Forwarding State (F)
        bit, which can be used to indicate whether the forwarding state
        for routes that were advertised with the given AFI and SAFI has
        indeed been preserved during the previous BGP restart.  When
        set (value 1), the bit indicates that the forwarding state has
        been preserved.

        The remaining bits are reserved and MUST be set to zero by the
        sender and ignored by the receiver.

  When a sender of this capability does not include any <AFI, SAFI> in
  the capability, it means that the sender is not capable of preserving
  its forwarding state during BGP restart, but supports procedures for
  the Receiving Speaker (as defined in Section 4.2 of this document).
  In that case, the value of the "Restart Time" field advertised by the
  sender is irrelevant.

  A BGP speaker MUST NOT include more than one instance of the Graceful
  Restart Capability in the capability advertisement [BGP-CAP].  If
  more than one instance of the Graceful Restart Capability is carried
  in the capability advertisement, the receiver of the advertisement
  MUST ignore all but the last instance of the Graceful Restart
  Capability.

  Including <AFI=IPv4, SAFI=unicast> in the Graceful Restart Capability
  does not imply that the IPv4 unicast routing information should be
  carried by using the BGP multiprotocol extensions [BGP-MP] -- it
  could be carried in the NLRI field of the BGP UPDATE message.



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


4.  Operation

  A BGP speaker MAY advertise the Graceful Restart Capability for an
  address family to its peer if it has the ability to preserve its
  forwarding state for the address family when BGP restarts.  In
  addition, even if the speaker does not have the ability to preserve
  its forwarding state for any address family during BGP restart, it is
  still recommended that the speaker advertise the Graceful Restart
  Capability to its peer (as mentioned before this is done by not
  including any <AFI, SAFI> in the advertised capability).  There are
  two reasons for doing this.  The first is to indicate its intention
  of generating the End-of-RIB marker upon the completion of its
  initial routing updates, as doing this would be useful for routing
  convergence in general.  The second is to indicate its support for a
  peer which wishes to perform a graceful restart.

  The End-of-RIB marker MUST be sent by a BGP speaker to its peer once
  it completes the initial routing update (including the case when
  there is no update to send) for an address family after the BGP
  session is established.

  It is noted that the normal BGP procedures MUST be followed when the
  TCP session terminates due to the sending or receiving of a BGP
  NOTIFICATION message.

  A suggested default for the Restart Time is a value less than or
  equal to the HOLDTIME carried in the OPEN.

  In the following sections, "Restarting Speaker" refers to a router
  whose BGP has restarted, and "Receiving Speaker" refers to a router
  that peers with the restarting speaker.

  Consider that the Graceful Restart Capability for an address family
  is advertised by the Restarting Speaker, and is understood by the
  Receiving Speaker, and a BGP session between them is established.
  The following sections detail the procedures that MUST be followed by
  the Restarting Speaker as well as the Receiving Speaker once the
  Restarting Speaker restarts.

4.1.  Procedures for the Restarting Speaker

  When the Restarting Speaker restarts, it MUST retain, if possible,
  the forwarding state for the BGP routes in the Loc-RIB and MUST mark
  them as stale.  It MUST NOT differentiate between stale and other
  information during forwarding.

  To re-establish the session with its peer, the Restarting Speaker
  MUST set the "Restart State" bit in the Graceful Restart Capability



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


  of the OPEN message.  Unless allowed via configuration, the
  "Forwarding State" bit for an address family in the capability can be
  set only if the forwarding state has indeed been preserved for that
  address family during the restart.

  Once the session between the Restarting Speaker and the Receiving
  Speaker is re-established, the Restarting Speaker will receive and
  process BGP messages from its peers.  However, it MUST defer route
  selection for an address family until it either (a) receives the
  End-of-RIB marker from all its peers (excluding the ones with the
  "Restart State" bit set in the received capability and excluding the
  ones that do not advertise the graceful restart capability) or (b)
  the Selection_Deferral_Timer referred to below has expired.  It is
  noted that prior to route selection, the speaker has no routes to
  advertise to its peers and no routes to update the forwarding state.

  In situations where both Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) and BGP have
  restarted, it might be advantageous to wait for IGP to converge
  before the BGP speaker performs route selection.

  After the BGP speaker performs route selection, the forwarding state
  of the speaker MUST be updated and any previously marked stale
  information MUST be removed.  The Adj-RIB-Out can then be advertised
  to its peers.  Once the initial update is complete for an address
  family (including the case that there is no routing update to send),
  the End-of-RIB marker MUST be sent.

  To put an upper bound on the amount of time a router defers its route
  selection, an implementation MUST support a (configurable) timer that
  imposes this upper bound.  This timer is referred to as the
  "Selection_Deferral_Timer".  The value of this timer should be large
  enough, so as to provide all the peers of the Restarting Speaker with
  enough time to send all the routes to the Restarting Speaker.

  If one wants to apply graceful restart only when the restart is
  planned (as opposed to both planned and unplanned restart), then one
  way to accomplish this would be to set the Forwarding State bit to 1
  after a planned restart, and to 0 in all other cases.  Other
  approaches to accomplish this are outside the scope of this document.

4.2.  Procedures for the Receiving Speaker

  When the Restarting Speaker restarts, the Receiving Speaker may or
  may not detect the termination of the TCP session with the Restarting
  Speaker, depending on the underlying TCP implementation, whether or
  not [BGP-AUTH] is in use, and the specific circumstances of the
  restart.  In case it does not detect the termination of the old TCP
  session and still considers the BGP session as being established, it



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


  MUST treat the subsequent open connection from the peer as an
  indication of the termination of the old TCP session and act
  accordingly (when the Graceful Restart Capability has been received
  from the peer).  See Section 8 for a description of this behavior in
  terms of the BGP finite state machine.

  "Acting accordingly" in this context means that the previous TCP
  session MUST be closed, and the new one retained.  Note that this
  behavior differs from the default behavior, as specified in [BGP-4],
  Section 6.8.  Since the previous connection is considered to be
  terminated, no NOTIFICATION message should be sent -- the previous
  TCP session is simply closed.

  When the Receiving Speaker detects termination of the TCP session for
  a BGP session with a peer that has advertised the Graceful Restart
  Capability, it MUST retain the routes received from the peer for all
  the address families that were previously received in the Graceful
  Restart Capability and MUST mark them as stale routing information.
  To deal with possible consecutive restarts, a route (from the peer)
  previously marked as stale MUST be deleted.  The router MUST NOT
  differentiate between stale and other routing information during
  forwarding.

  In re-establishing the session, the "Restart State" bit in the
  Graceful Restart Capability of the OPEN message sent by the Receiving
  Speaker MUST NOT be set unless the Receiving Speaker has restarted.
  The presence and the setting of the "Forwarding State" bit for an
  address family depend upon the actual forwarding state and
  configuration.

  If the session does not get re-established within the "Restart Time"
  that the peer advertised previously, the Receiving Speaker MUST
  delete all the stale routes from the peer that it is retaining.

  A BGP speaker could have some way of determining whether its peer's
  forwarding state is still viable, for example through Bidirectional
  Forwarding Detection [BFD] or through monitoring layer two
  information.  Specifics of such mechanisms are beyond the scope of
  this document.  In the event that it determines that its peer's
  forwarding state is not viable prior to the re-establishment of the
  session, the speaker MAY delete all the stale routes from the peer
  that it is retaining.

  Once the session is re-established, if the "Forwarding State" bit for
  a specific address family is not set in the newly received Graceful
  Restart Capability, or if a specific address family is not included
  in the newly received Graceful Restart Capability, or if the Graceful
  Restart Capability is not received in the re-established session at



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


  all, then the Receiving Speaker MUST immediately remove all the stale
  routes from the peer that it is retaining for that address family.

  The Receiving Speaker MUST send the End-of-RIB marker once it
  completes the initial update for an address family (including the
  case that it has no routes to send) to the peer.

  The Receiving Speaker MUST replace the stale routes by the routing
  updates received from the peer.  Once the End-of-RIB marker for an
  address family is received from the peer, it MUST immediately remove
  any routes from the peer that are still marked as stale for that
  address family.

  To put an upper bound on the amount of time a router retains the
  stale routes, an implementation MAY support a (configurable) timer
  that imposes this upper bound.

5.  Changes to BGP Finite State Machine

  As mentioned under "Procedures for the Receiving Speaker" above, this
  specification modifies the BGP finite state machine.

  The specific state machine modifications to [BGP-4], Section 8.2.2,
  are as follows.

  In the Idle state, make the following changes.

  Replace this text:

     - initializes all BGP resources for the peer connection,

  with

     - initializes all BGP resources for the peer connection, other
       than those resources required in order to retain routes
       according to section "Procedures for the Receiving Speaker" of
       this (Graceful Restart) specification,

  In the Established state, make the following changes.

  Replace this text:

       In response to an indication that the TCP connection is
       successfully established (Event 16 or Event 17), the second
       connection SHALL be tracked until it sends an OPEN message.

  with




Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


       If the Graceful Restart Capability with one or more AFIs/SAFIs
       has not been received for the session, then in response to an
       indication that a TCP connection is successfully established
       (Event 16 or Event 17), the second connection SHALL be tracked
       until it sends an OPEN message.

       However, if the Graceful Restart Capability with one or more
       AFIs/SAFIs has been received for the session, then in response
       to Event 16 or Event 17 the local system:

        - retains all routes associated with this connection according
          to section "Procedures for the Receiving Speaker" of this
          (Graceful Restart) specification,

        - releases all other BGP resources,

        - drops the TCP connection associated with the ESTABLISHED
          session,

        - initializes all BGP resources for the peer connection, other
          than those required in order to retain routes according to
          section "Procedures for the Receiving Speaker" of this
          specification,

        - sets ConnectRetryCounter to zero,

        - starts the ConnectRetryTimer with the initial value, and

        - changes its state to Connect.

  Replace this text:

     If the local system receives a NOTIFICATION message (Event 24 or
     Event 25), or a TcpConnectionFails (Event 18) from the underlying
     TCP, the local system:

        - sets the ConnectRetryTimer to zero,

        - deletes all routes associated with this connection,

        - releases all the BGP resources,

        - drops the TCP connection,

        - increments the ConnectRetryCounter by 1,

        - changes its state to Idle.




Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


  with

     If the local system receives a NOTIFICATION message (Event 24 or
     Event 25), or if the local system receives a TcpConnectionFails
     (Event 18) from the underlying TCP and the Graceful Restart
     capability with one or more AFIs/SAFIs has not been received for
     the session, the local system:

        - sets the ConnectRetryTimer to zero,

        - deletes all routes associated with this connection,

        - releases all the BGP resources,

        - drops the TCP connection,

        - increments the ConnectRetryCounter by 1, and

        - changes its state to Idle.

     However, if the local system receives a TcpConnectionFails (Event
     18) from the underlying TCP, and the Graceful Restart Capability
     with one or more AFIs/SAFIs has been received for the session, the
     local system:

        - sets the ConnectRetryTimer to zero,

        - retains all routes associated with this connection according
          to section "Procedures for the Receiving Speaker" of this
          (Graceful Restart) specification,

        - releases all other BGP resources,

        - drops the TCP connection,

        - increments the ConnectRetryCounter by 1, and

        - changes its state to Idle.

6.  Deployment Considerations

  Although the procedures described in this document would help
  minimize the effect of routing flaps, it is noted that when a BGP
  Graceful Restart-capable router restarts, or if it restarts without
  preserving its forwarding state (e.g., due to a power failure), there
  is a potential for transient routing loops or blackholes in the
  network if routing information changes before the involved routers
  complete routing updates and convergence.  Also, depending on the



Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 11]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


  network topology, if not all IBGP speakers are Graceful Restart
  capable, there could be an increased exposure to transient routing
  loops or blackholes when the Graceful Restart procedures are
  exercised.

  The Restart Time, the upper bound for retaining routes, and the upper
  bound for deferring route selection may need to be tuned as more
  deployment experience is gained.

  Finally, it is noted that the benefits of deploying BGP Graceful
  Restart in an Autonomous System (AS) whose IGPs and BGP are tightly
  coupled (i.e., BGP and IGPs would both restart) and IGPs have no
  similar Graceful Restart Capability are reduced relative to the
  scenario where IGPs do have similar Graceful Restart Capability.

7.  Security Considerations

  Since with this proposal a new connection can cause an old one to be
  terminated, it might seem to open the door to denial of service
  attacks.  However, it is noted that unauthenticated BGP is already
  known to be vulnerable to denials of service through attacks on the
  TCP transport.  The TCP transport is commonly protected through use
  of [BGP-AUTH].  Such authentication will equally protect against
  denials of service through spurious new connections.

  If an attacker is able to successfully open a TCP connection
  impersonating a legitimate peer, the attacker's connection will
  replace the legitimate one, potentially enabling the attacker to
  advertise bogus routes.  We note, however, that the window for such a
  route insertion attack is small since through normal operation of the
  protocol the legitimate peer would open a new connection, in turn
  causing the attacker's connection to be terminated.  Thus, this
  attack devolves to a form of denial of service.

  It is thus concluded that this proposal does not change the
  underlying security model (and issues) of BGP-4.

  We also note that implementations may allow use of graceful restart
  to be controlled by configuration.  If graceful restart is not
  enabled, naturally the underlying security model of BGP-4 is
  unchanged.










Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 12]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


8.  Acknowledgments

  The authors would like to thank Bruce Cole, Lars Eggert, Bill Fenner,
  Eric Gray, Jeffrey Haas, Sam Hartman, Alvaro Retana, Pekka Savola
  Naiming Shen, Satinder Singh, Mark Townsley, David Ward, Shane
  Wright, and Alex Zinin for their review and comments.

9.  IANA Considerations

  This document defines a new BGP capability - Graceful Restart
  Capability.  The Capability Code for Graceful Restart Capability is
  64.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

  [BGP-4]     Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
              Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.

  [BGP-MP]    Bates, T., Rekhter, Y., Chandra, R., and D. Katz,
              "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 2858, June
              2000.

  [BGP-CAP]   Chandra, R. and J. Scudder, "Capabilities Advertisement
              with BGP-4", RFC 3392, November 2002.

  [BGP-AUTH]  Heffernan, A., "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP
              MD5 Signature Option", RFC 2385, August 1998.

  [RFC2119]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [IANA-AFI]  http://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers

  [IANA-SAFI] http://www.iana.org/assignments/safi-namespace

10.2.  Informative References

  [BFD]       Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection", Work in Progress.










Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 13]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


Authors' Addresses

  Srihari R.  Sangli
  Cisco Systems, Inc.

  EMail: [email protected]


  Yakov Rekhter
  Juniper Networks, Inc.

  EMail: [email protected]


  Rex Fernando
  Juniper Networks, Inc.

  EMail: [email protected]


  John G.  Scudder
  Juniper Networks, Inc.

  EMail: [email protected]


  Enke Chen
  Cisco Systems, Inc.

  EMail:  [email protected]





















Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 14]

RFC 4724           Graceful Restart Mechanism for BGP       January 2007


Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

  This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
  contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
  retain all their rights.

  This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
  OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
  THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
  OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
  THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
  WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

  The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
  Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
  pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
  this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
  might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
  made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
  on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
  found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

  Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
  assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
  attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
  such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
  specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
  http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

  The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
  copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
  rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
  this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
  [email protected].

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
  Internet Society.







Sangli, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 15]