This document updates several BGP Extended Community registries in order to replace the "Experimental Use" registration procedure in some entries, since their use is clearly not experimental and is thus misleading. This document updates RFCs 7153 and 8955.

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 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9184.

Copyright (c) 2022 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.

The IANA registries for the type values and sub-type values of the BGP Extended Communities attribute were reorganized by [RFC 7153]. As a result, IANA maintains a registry entitled "BGP Transitive Extended Community Types", which includes a range of type values (0x80-0x8F) reserved for Experimental Use [RFC 8126]. Out of this experimental range, types 0x80, 0x81, and 0x82 have been used in [RFC 5575] and [RFC 7674] (both documents were rendered obsolete by [RFC 8955]). The primary use for those types and the sub-type registries is non-experimental. Section 2 describes updates to the registry to reflect the actual use of those code points by changing the registration procedure from "Experimental Use" to "First Come First Served" [RFC 8126] for the types 0x80-0x82 (and removing "Experimental Use" from the sub-type registry names), thereby updating [RFC 7153] and [RFC 8955].

IANA maintains a registry entitled "BGP Transitive Extended Community Types". IANA has added RFC 9184 to the reference of this registry. They have also updated the name of the type values according to Table 1 and added RFC 9184 as a reference for the existing entries. Table 1: Registry: BGP Transitive Extended Community Types Furthermore, IANA has changed the registration procedures of this registry for type values 0x80 through 0x82 to First Come First Served [RFC 8126]. The resulting registration procedures should read as in Table 2. Table 2: Registration Procedures: BGP Transitive Extended Community Types

IANA maintains a registry entitled "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Sub-Types". IANA has added RFC 9184 to the reference of this registry and updated the registry title to:

• "Generic Transitive Extended Community Sub-Types"

IANA maintains a registry entitled "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types". IANA has added RFC 9184 to the reference of this registry and updated the registry title to:

• "Generic Transitive Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types"

IANA maintains a registry entitled "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 3 Sub-Types". IANA has added RFC 9184 to the reference of this registry and updated the registry title to:

• "Generic Transitive Extended Community Part 3 Sub-Types"

There are no direct security considerations arising from this document.

[RFC7153]

E. Rosen, and Y. Rekhter, "IANA Registries for BGP Extended Communities", RFC 7153, DOI 10.17487/RFC7153, March 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7153>.

[RFC8126]

M. Cotton, B. Leiba, and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

[RFC3692]

T. Narten, "Assigning Experimental and Testing Numbers Considered Useful", BCP 82, RFC 3692, DOI 10.17487/RFC3692, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3692>.

[RFC5575]

P. Marques, N. Sheth, R. Raszuk, B. Greene, J. Mauch, and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5575>.

[RFC7674]

J. Haas, "Clarification of the Flowspec Redirect Extended Community", RFC 7674, DOI 10.17487/RFC7674, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7674>.

[RFC8955]

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

The author wants to thank Alvaro Retana, who pointed out that the IANA registry contains misleading entries in this context.

Christoph Loibl