Juniper Networks

1194 N. Mathilda Ave Sunnyvale CA 94089 United States of America jgs@juniper.net

NTT

Veemweg 23 Barneveld 3771 MT Netherlands paolo@ntt.net

OPS grow IDR GROW BGP BMP RFC 7854, the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP), uses different message types for different purposes. Most of these are structured as Type, Length, Value (TLV). One message type, the Peer Up message, lacks a set of TLVs defined for its use, instead sharing a namespace with the Initiation message. Experience has shown that this namespace sharing was a mistake, as it hampers the extension of the protocol. This document updates RFC 7854 by creating an independent namespace for the Peer Up message. It also updates RFCs 8671 and 9069 by moving defined codepoints into the newly introduced registry. Compliant implementations of RFCs 7854, 8671, and 9069 also comply with this specification.

Status of This Memo This is an Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at .

Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2025 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 () 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

• .  Introduction
  • .  Requirements Language
• .  String Definition
• .  Changes to Existing RFCs
  • .  Revision to the Information TLV
  • .  Revision to the Peer Up Notification
  • .  Definition of Peer Up Information TLV
• .  IANA Considerations
• .  Security Considerations
• .  Normative References
• Acknowledgements
• Authors' Addresses

Introduction defines a number of different BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) message types. With the exception of the Route Monitoring message type, these messages are TLV-structured. Most message types have distinct namespaces and IANA registries. However, the namespace of the Peer Up message overlaps that of the Initiation message. As BMP has been extended, this overlap has become problematic. In this document, we create distinct namespaces for the Peer Up and Initiation messages to eliminate the overlap. Compliant implementations of , , and also comply with this specification.

Requirements Language 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 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

String Definition A string TLV is a free-form sequence of UTF-8 characters whose length in bytes is given by the TLV's Length field. There is no requirement to terminate the string with a null (or any other particular) character -- the Length field gives its termination.

Changes to Existing RFCs is updated as detailed in the following subsections.

Revision to the Information TLV The Information TLV defined in is renamed "Initiation Information TLV". It is used only by the Initiation message, not by the Peer Up message. The definition of Type = 0 is revised as shown below. Type = 1 and Type = 2 are unchanged; they are provided for completeness.

• Type = 0: String. The Information field contains a string. The value is administratively assigned. If multiple string TLVs are included, their ordering MUST be preserved when they are reported.
• Type = 1: sysDescr. The Information field contains an ASCII string whose value MUST be set to be equal to the value of the sysDescr MIB-II object.
• Type = 2: sysName. The Information field contains an ASCII string whose value MUST be set to be equal to the value of the sysName MIB-II object.

Revision to the Peer Up Notification The final paragraph of references the Information TLV (which is revised above). That paragraph is replaced by the following:

• Information: Information about the peer, using the Peer Up Information TLV format defined in of RFC 9736. The String type may be repeated. Inclusion of the Information field is OPTIONAL. Its presence or absence can be inferred by inspection of the Message Length in the common header.

Definition of Peer Up Information TLV The Peer Up Information TLV is used by the Peer Up message. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Information Type | Information Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Information (variable) | ~ ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

• Information Type (2 bytes): types are as defined in the "BMP Peer Up Message TLVs" registry:
  • Type = 0: String. The Information field contains a string. The value is administratively assigned. If multiple strings are included, their ordering MUST be preserved when they are reported.
  • Type = 3: VRF/Table Name. The Information field contains a UTF-8 string whose value MUST be equal to the value of the VRF or table name (e.g., RD instance name) being conveyed. The string size MUST be within the range of 1 to 255 bytes.
  • Type = 4: Admin Label. The Information field contains a free-form UTF-8 string whose byte length is given by the Information Length field. The value is administratively assigned. There is no requirement to terminate the string a with null or any other character.
• Information Length (2 bytes): The length of the following Information field, in bytes.
• Information (variable): Information about the monitored router, according to the type.

IANA Considerations IANA has created the "BMP Peer Up Message TLVs" within the "BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) Parameters" registry group and listed this document as the reference. Registration procedures for this registry are:

Range	Registration Procedures
0, 3-32767	Standards Action
32768-65530	First Come First Served
65531-65534	Experimental
1-2, 65535	Reserved

The initial values for this registry are:

Type	Description	Reference
0	String	RFC 9736
1	Reserved	RFC 9736
2	Reserved	RFC 9736
3	VRF/Table Name	RFC 9736
4	Admin Label	RFC 9736
65535	Reserved	RFC 9736

IANA has also renamed the "BMP Initiation and Peer Up Information TLVs" registry to "BMP Initiation Information TLVs" and populated it with the following values:

Type	Description	Reference
0	String	RFC 9736
1	sysDescr	RFC 9736
2	sysName	RFC 9736
3	Reserved	RFC 9736
4	Reserved	RFC 9736
65535	Reserved	RFC 9736

Security Considerations This document does not alter the security considerations of that continue to apply.

Normative References This memo defines the second version of the Management Information Base (MIB-II) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. [STANDARDS-TRACK] In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. This document defines the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP), which can be used to monitor BGP sessions. BMP is intended to provide a convenient interface for obtaining route views. Prior to the introduction of BMP, screen scraping was the most commonly used approach to obtaining such views. The design goals are to keep BMP simple, useful, easily implemented, and minimally service affecting. BMP is not suitable for use as a routing protocol. RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings. The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) only defines access to the Adj-RIB-In Routing Information Bases (RIBs). This document updates BMP (RFC 7854) by adding access to the Adj-RIB-Out RIBs. It also adds a new flag to the peer header to distinguish between Adj-RIB-In and Adj-RIB-Out. The BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) defines access to local Routing Information Bases (RIBs). This document updates BMP (RFC 7854) by adding access to the Local Routing Information Base (Loc-RIB), as defined in RFC 4271. The Loc-RIB contains the routes that have been selected by the local BGP speaker's Decision Process.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank for his review.

Authors' Addresses Juniper Networks

1194 N. Mathilda Ave Sunnyvale CA 94089 United States of America jgs@juniper.net

NTT

Veemweg 23 Barneveld 3771 MT Netherlands paolo@ntt.net