



IDR Working Group                                                H. Wang
Internet-Draft                                                    Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track                                 A. Wang
Expires: 1 September 2026                                  China Telecom
                                                               S. Zhuang
                                                                  T. Qin
                                                                  Huawei
                                                        28 February 2026


       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter for BGP Flow Specification
            draft-wang-idr-flowspec-dip-origin-as-filter-12

Abstract

   This document defines an extension to the Border Gateway Protocol
   (BGP) Flow Specification (FlowSpec) to enable filtering based on the
   Origin Autonomous System (AS) of the destination IP address.  This
   extension is particularly useful in mitigating Distributed Denial of
   Service (DDoS) attacks where the target IP addresses are dynamic but
   belong to a specific destination AS.


Requirements Language

   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 BCP 14 [RFC2119]
   [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown
   here.

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 1 September 2026.




Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Definitions and Acronyms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  The Flow Specification Encoding for Destination-IP-Origin-AS
           Filter  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Operational Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  IANA  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1.  Introduction

   BGP Flow Specification (FlowSpec), defined in [RFC8955] and
   [RFC8956], allows for the dissemination of traffic filtering rules.
   Current FlowSpec components support filtering by destination prefix,
   source prefix, and various Layer 4 parameters.

   In certain DDoS mitigation scenarios, an operator may need to apply
   rate-limiting or filtering to all traffic destined for a particular
   network (Autonomous System), even when the specific target IP
   prefixes within that AS are numerous or rapidly changing.  Manually
   updating hundreds of prefix-based FlowSpec rules is inefficient.
   This document introduces a new FlowSpec component that allows
   operators to use the Destination Origin AS as a matching criterion.








Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


2.  Definitions and Acronyms

   *  FS: Flow Specification

   *  Destination-IP-Origin-AS: The origin AS number of the destination
      IP address

3.  The Flow Specification Encoding for Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter

   This document proposes a new flow specification component type that
   is encoded in the BGP Flowspec NLRI.  The following new component
   type is defined.

   *  Destination-IP-Origin-AS

   Type TBD1 - Destination-IP-Origin-AS

   Encoding: <type (1 octet), [op, value]+>

   Contains a set of {operator, value} pairs that are used to match the
   Destination-IP-Origin-AS (i.e. the origin AS number of the
   destination IP address).

   The operator byte is encoded as:

       0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7
     +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
     | e | a |  len  | 0 |lt |gt |eq |
     +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

                  Figure 1: Numeric Operator (numeric_op)


   Where:

   e - end-of-list bit.  Set in the last {op, value} pair in the list.

   a - AND bit.  If unset, the previous term is logically ORed with the
   current one.  If set, the operation is a logical AND.  It MUST be
   unset in the Destination-IP-Origin-AS filter.

   len - The length of the value field for this operator given as (1 <<
   len).  This encodes 1 (len=00), 2 (len=01), 4 (len=10), and 8
   (len=11) octets.

   lt - less than comparison between data and value.

   gt - greater than comparison between data and value.



Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


   eq - equality between data and value.

   The bits lt, gt, and eq can be combined to produce match the
   Destination-IP-Origin-AS filter or a range of Destination-IP-Origin-
   AS filter(e.g. less than AS1 and greater than AS2).

   The value field is encoded as:

      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
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
     ~       Destination-IP-Origin-AS  (4 octets)                    ~
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+

                     Figure 2: Destination-IP-Origin-AS


   Per section 10 of [RFC8955] , If a receiving BGP speaker cannot
   support this new Flow Specification component type, it MUST discard
   the NLRI value field that contains such unknown components.  Since
   the NLRI field encoding (Section 4 of [RFC8955]) is defined in the
   form of a 2-tuple <length, NLRI value>, message decoding can skip
   over the unknown NLRI value and continue with subsequent remaining
   NLRI.

   In cases of multi-homed prefixes with multiple Origin ASes, the match
   succeeds if any of the valid Origin ASes match the filter.

3.1.  Operational Procedures

   When a BGP speaker receives a FlowSpec update containing the
   Destination Origin AS component:

   It MUST determine the Origin AS of the destination IP of the transit
   packet by performing a lookup in its local BGP RIB.

   If the packet's destination IP matches a prefix whose BGP path has an
   AS_PATH where the rightmost AS (the origin) matches the value in the
   FlowSpec rule, the action (e.g., rate-limit, discard) MUST be
   applied.


4.  Use Cases

   This section describes how to use this function in a simple scenario.
   Considering the topology shown in Figure 3.  In AS64597's R1, if the
   ISP AS64597 wants to redirect all packets originating from IP Prefix
   61 to AS64598:



Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


   "first go to R3, then forward them to AS64598", the ISP AS64597 can
   use the traditional method or the method defining in this draft.

                            +---------+
                            | BGP FS  |
                            | Server  |
                            +----|----+
                                 |
                                 |
                                 /
                                /
                   ************/************  IP Prefix 81
                   *          /            *  IP Prefix 82
     IP Prefix 61  *         / AS64597     *  IP Prefix 83
                   *        /              *  IP Prefix 84
      +-------+    *  +---+/        +---+  *   +-------+
      +AS64596+-------+ R1+---------+ R2|------+AS64598+
      +-------+    *  +-+-+\        +---+  */  +-------+
                   *        \         |\   /
                   *         \        | \ /*  IP Prefix 91
                   *          \       |  /\*  IP Prefix 92
                   *           \      | /  \  IP Prefix 93
                   *            \     |/   *\ IP Prefix 94
                   *             \  +-+-+  * \ +-------+
                   *              \-+ R3+------+AS64599+
                   *                +---+  *   +-------+
                   *                       *
                   *************************

               Figure 3: Redirect the traffic using Flowspec

   Using the traditional method, the ISP AS64597 needs to setup multiple
   "Destination Prefix + Source Prefix" rules in Router R1 as following:

       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       | Destination  | Source Prefix| Redirect to IP Nexthop  |
       | Prefix       |              |                         |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       | IP Prefix 81 | IP Prefix 61 |       R3                |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       | IP Prefix 82 | IP Prefix 61 |       R3                |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       | IP Prefix 83 | IP Prefix 61 |       R3                |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       | IP Prefix 84 | IP Prefix 61 |       R3                |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
       |                  More ...                             |
       +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+



Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


       Figure 4: Using the traditional method to redirect the traffic

   Using the method defining in this draft, the ISP AS64597 needs to
   setup only one "Destination Origin AS + Source Prefix" rule in Router
   R1 as following:

     +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
     | Destination  | Source Prefix| Redirect to IP Nexthop  |
     | IP Origin AS |              |                         |
     +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+
     |  64598       | IP Prefix 61 |       R3                |
     +--------------+--------------+-------------------------+

   Figure 5: Using the AS-level filtering method to redirect the traffic

   Obviously, the new method defining in this draft saves a lot of entry
   spaces on the control plane and forwarding plane, and it would
   greatly simplify the operation of the control plane, and the more
   destination prefixes an AS has, the more obvious the benefit.


5.  Security Considerations

   In addition to the security considerations in [RFC8955], operators
   must be aware of:

   *  Routing Inconsistency: If different routers in the network have
      different views of the BGP table, the "Origin AS" for a given IP
      may differ, leading to inconsistent filter application.

   *  AS_PATH Manipulation: An attacker could potentially spoof or
      prepend ASes to bypass filters if the local BGP table is
      compromised.

   *  Validation: Implementations SHOULD ensure that FlowSpec rules are
      validated against the originating peer to prevent unauthorized AS-
      based filtering across administrative boundaries.

6.  IANA

   IANA is requested to a new entry in "Flow Spec component types
   registry" with the following values:

      +---------+--------------+---------------------------------+
      |   Type  | RFC or Draft |    Description                  |
      +---------+--------------+---------------------------------+
      |   TBD1  |  This Draft  |    Destination-IP-Origin-AS     |
      +---------+--------------+---------------------------------+



Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


7.  Contributors

   TBD

8.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to acknowledge the review and inputs from Gang
   Yan, Robert Raszuk, Jeffray Haas, Linda Dunbar, Zhenbin Li, Rainbow
   Wu, Jie Dong and Ziqing Cao.


9.  References

   [I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-l2vpn]
              Weiguo, H., Eastlake, D. E., Litkowski, S., and S. Zhuang,
              "BGP Dissemination of L2 Flow Specification Rules", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-
              l2vpn-26, 23 September 2025,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-
              flowspec-l2vpn-26>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
              Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8955]  Loibl, C., Hares, S., Raszuk, R., McPherson, D., and M.
              Bacher, "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules",
              RFC 8955, DOI 10.17487/RFC8955, December 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8955>.

   [RFC8956]  Loibl, C., Ed., Raszuk, R., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed.,
              "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for IPv6",
              RFC 8956, DOI 10.17487/RFC8956, December 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8956>.

Authors' Addresses





Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft       Destination-IP-Origin-AS Filter       February 2026


   Haibo Wang
   Huawei
   156 Beiqing Road
   Beijing
   100095
   P.R. China
   Email: rainsword.wang@huawei.com


   Aijun Wang
   China Telecom
   Beiqijia Town, Changping District
   Beijing
   102209
   P.R. China
   Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn


   Shunwan Zhuang
   Huawei
   156 Beiqing Road
   Beijing
   100095
   P.R. China
   Email: zhuangshunwan@huawei.com


   Tao Qin
   Huawei
   156 Beiqing Road
   Beijing
   100095
   P.R. China
   Email: qintao11@huawei.com

















Wang, et al.            Expires 1 September 2026                [Page 8]
