| Networking Working Group | Q. Wu |
| Internet-Draft | Huawei |
| Intended status: Standards Track | M. Boucadair |
| Expires: December 26, 2018 | Orange |
| Y. Lee | |
| Huawei | |
| June 24, 2018 |
An Architecture for Data Model Driven Network Management: the Network Virtualization Case
draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-01
Data Model driven network management can be used at various phases of service and network management life cycle such as service instantiation, service provision, optimization, monitoring, and diagnostic. Also, it can be designed to provide closed-loop control for the sake of agile service creation, delivery and maintenance.
This document describes an architecture for data model driven network management with a sample applicability case: network virtualization environments.
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 December 26, 2018.
Copyright (c) 2018 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
As observed in [I-D.arkko-arch-virtualization], many IETF discussions earlier in the summer of 2017 started from a top-down view of new virtualization technologies, but they were often unable to explain the necessary delta to the wealth of existing IETF technologies in this space. Therefore, [I-D.arkko-arch-virtualization] considered a bottom-up approach to provide an overview of existing technologies which is aiming at identifying areas for further development.
For years, the IETF has been driving the industry transition from an overloaded Software Defined Networking (SDN) buzzword to focus on specific areas such as data modeling-driven management. [RFC7149] provides a first tentative to rationalize that space by identifying concrete technical domains that need to be considered:
Models are key for each of these technical items.
In the later development, , as described in [RFC8199], YANG module developers have taken both top-down and bottom-up approaches to develop modules and establish mapping between network technology and customer requirements on the top or abstracting common construct from various network technologies. At the time of writing this document (2018), we see the large number of data models including configuration models and service models developed or under development in IETF covering much of networking protocols and techniques. In addition, how these models work together to fully configure a device, or manage a set of devices involved in a service aren't developed yet in IETF.
This document takes both bottom up approach and top down approach to provide a framework that discusses the architecture for data model driven network management, with a focus on network virtualization environment.
This document also describes specific YANG modules needed to realize connectivity services and investigates how top down built model (e.g., customer-facing data models) interact with bottom up built model (network resource-facing data models) in the context of service delivery and assurance.
As described in [RFC8199], layering of modules allows for better reusability of lower-layer modules by higher-level modules while limiting duplication of features across layers.
The IETF has developed large number of network level and device level modules and service level module. Different service level modules may rely on the same set of network level or device level modules. Service level modules follow top down approach and are mostly customer-facing models providing a common model construct for higher level network services, which can be further mapped to network technology-specific models at lower layer.
Network level modules mostly follow bottom up approach and are mostly network resource-facing model and describe various aspects of a network infrastructure, including devices and their subsystems, and relevant protocols operating at the link and network layers across multiple devices (e.g., Network topology and TE Tunnel modules).
Device level modules follow bottom up approach and are mostly technology-specific modules used to realize a service.
Service level model defines a service ordered by a customer from an operator. The service can be built from a combination of network elements and protocols configuration which also include various aspects of the underlying network infrastructure, including functions/devices and their subsystems, and relevant protocols operating at the link and network layers across multiple device.
To provide service agility (including network management automation), lower level technology-specific models need to be assembled together to provision each involved network function/device and operate the network based on service requirements described in the service level model.
IETF RTGWG working group has already been tasked to define service elements configuration model composition mechanism and develop several composition model such as network instance model, logical network element model and device model.
These models can be used to setup and administrate both virtualized system and physical system.
The idea of a catalog is similar to service catalogs in traditional IT environments. Service catalogs serve as a software-based registries of available services with information needed to discover and invoke available services.
The IETF has already tasked to develop a YANG catalog which can be used to manage not only IETF defined modules, but also non-IETF defined ones [I-D.clacla-netmod-model-catalog].
The YANG catalog allows to align IETF work with other SDOs work and prevent duplicated building blocks being developed. It also encourages reusability of common building blocks.
The YANG catalog allows both YANG developers and operators to discover the more mature YANG modules that may be used to automate services operations .
<<Network Service and Network Resource Models>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | +-------------+ +-------------+| | |DOTS Data | | I2NSF || | |and Signaling| | Customer || | << Network Service Models>> | Models | | Facing Model|| | +-------------+ +-------------+| | +----------------+ +----------------+ +-------------+ | | | L3SM | | L2SM | | ACTN VN | | | | Service Model | | Service Model | |Service Model| | | +----------------+ +----------------+ +-------------+ | |------------------------------------------------------------------- | | << Network Resource Models >> | | +------------+ +-------+ +----------------+ +------------+ | | |Network Topo| | Tunnel| |Path Computation| |OAM,PM,Alarm| | | | Models | | Models| | API Models | | Models | | | +------------+ +-------+ +----------------+ +------------+ | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ -------------------------------------------------------------------- <Network Element Models>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | <<Composition Models>> | | +-------------+ +---------------+ +----------------+ | | |Device Model | |Logical Network| |Network Instance| | | | | |Element Model | | Model | | | +-------------+ +---------------+ +----------------+ | |---------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | << Component Models>> | | +------------+ | | +-----+ +------+ +---++----+ +----+ |OAM,PM,Alarm| | | | BGP | | MPLS | |ACL||QoS | |NAT | | Models | ..... | | +-----+ +------+ +---++----+ +----+ +------------+ | | | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Service and Network Resource Exposure modules define what the "service"/"resource" is. These modules can be classified into two categories:
As described in [RFC8309], the service is some form of connectivity between customer sites and the Internet or between customer sites across the network operator's network and across the Internet.
For example,
The IETF is currently defining three other customer-facing modules: ietf-dots-signal-channel [I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel] and ietf-dots-data-channel [I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel] and I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface YANG module [I-D.jeong-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm]. The first two modules are meant to be used by clients to signal DDoS attacks or to request installing filters for the sake of DDoS mitigation. Those modules do not intervene directly in the configuration of underlying network devices. The third module is required for enabling different users of a given I2NSF system to define, manage, and monitor security policies for specific flows within an administrative domain.
Figure 1 shows a set of resource-facing network YANG modules:
| |
Topo YANG Models | Tunnel YANG Models |Resource NM Tool
------------------------------------------------|-- ------------
+------------+ | |
|Network Top | | +-----------+ | +-------+
| Model | | | TE Tunnel | | | LIME |
+----+-------+ | +------+----+ | | Model |
| +--------+ | | | |/PM/OAM|
|---+TE Topo | | +--------+-+--------+ | Model|
| +--------+ | +----+---+ +---+----+ +-+-----+ +-------+
| +--------+ | |MPLS-TE | |RSVP-TE | |SR TE | +--------+
+---+L3 Topo | | Tunnel | | Tunnel | |Tunnel | | Alarm |
+----|---+ +--------+ +--------+ +-------+ | Model |
+---------+---------+ +--------+
| | | +-----------+
+---|---+ +--|---+ +---|-+ |Path |
|SR Topo| |SR TE | |L3 TE| |Computation|
| Model | | Topo | |Topo | |API Model |
+-------+ +------+ +-----+ +-----------+
Figure 1: Sample Resource Facing Network Models
Topology YANG Models:
Tunnel YANG Models:
Resource NM Tool Models:
+----------------+
--|Device Model |
| +----------------+
| +------------------+
+---------------+ | |Logical Network |
| | --| Element Mode |
| Architecture | | +------------------+
| | | +----------------------+
+-------+-------+ --|Network Instance Mode |
| | +----------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| --|Routing Type Model |
| +-------------------+
+-------+----------+----+------+------------+-----------+-------+
| | | | | | |
+-+-+ +---+---+ +--+-+ +-+-+ +-----+---+ +---+-+ |
|ACL| |Routing| |MPLS| |OAM| |Multicast| | PM | Others
+---+ |-------+ +----+ +---+ +---------+ +-----+
| +-------+ +----------+ +-------+ +-----+ +-----+
--|Core | |MPLS Basic| |BFD | |IGMP | |TWAMP|
| |Routing| +----------+ +-------+ |/MLD | +-----+
| +-------+ |MPLS LDP | |LSP Ping +-----+ |OWAMP|
--|BGP | +----------+ +-------+ |PIM | +-----+
| +-------+ |MPLS Static |MPLS-TP| +-----+ |LMAP |
--|ISIS | +----------+ +-------+ |MVPN | +-----+
| +-------+ +-----+
--|OSPF |
| +-------+
--|RIP |
| +-------+
--|VRRP |
| +-------+
--|ISIS-SR|
| +-------+
--|OSPF-SR|
| +-------+
Network Element models are used to describe how a service can be implemented by activating and tweaking a set of functions (enabled in one or multiple devices) that are involved in the service delivery.
Modularity and extensibility were among the leading design principles of the YANG data modeling language. As a result, the same YANG module can be combined with various sets of other modules and thus form a data model that is tailored to meet the requirements of a specific use case. [I-D.ietf-netmod-schema-mount] defines a mechanism, denoted schema mount, that allows for mounting one data model consisting of any number of YANG modules at a specified location of another (parent) schema.
That capability does not cover design time.
The architectural considerations and conclusions described in the previous section lead to the architecture described in this section and illustrated in Figure 2.
The interfaces and interactions shown in the figure and labeled (a) through (j) are further described in Section 5.1.
+-----------------+
-->|Service Requester|
| +-----------------+
+--|------- --|---------------------------------------------------+
| | +--------V---------+ +------------+ |
| | | Service Exposure |------------------------ IP Service | |
| | +-------(b)--------+ +---->| Mapping | |
| | | | +--(c)-|-----+ |
| | +--------V---------+ | | |
| | | IP Service to TE | | | |
| | | Mapping | | | |
| | +-------(f)--------+ | +------|-----+ |
| | | | | IP Service | |
| | +--------V---------+ | | Composition| |
| | | TE Path | | +--(d)-|-----+ |
| | | Management <---------+ | | |
| | +-------(e)--------+ | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | +--------V---------+ | | +------|------+ |
| | | Alarm/PM | | | | IP Service | |
| | +-------(g)--------+ | | | Provision | |
| | | | | +-(e)---------+ |
| | | | | |
| | +--------V---------+ +-|-------|--+ |
| +-| TE Resource | | Resource | |
| | Exposure | | Collection | |
| | | |&Abstraction| |
| +-------(h)--_-----+ +----(a)-----+ |
| |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 2: Data Model Driven Management
Network Resource such as links, nodes, or terminate-point resources can be collected from the network and aggregated or abstracted to the management system. Periodic fetching of data is not an adequate solution for applications requiring frequent or prompt updates of network resource. Applying polling-based solutions to retrieve network resource also imposes a load on networks, devices, and applications.These limitations can be addressed by including generic object subscription mechanisms within network elements.
These resources can be modelled using network topology model, L3 topology model, L2 topology model, TE topology model, L3 TE topology model, SR TE topology models at different layers.
In some cases, there may have multiple overlay topologies built on top of the same underlay topology, and the underlay topology can be also built from one or more lower layer underlay topology.
In some cases, there may have multiple overlay topologies built on top of the same underlay topology, and the underlay topology can be also built from one or more lower layer underlay topology. The network resources and management objects in these multi-layer topologies are not recommended to be exposed to customers who (will) order the service from the management system, instead it will be exposed to the management system for IP service mapping and TE path Management.
The abstract view is likely to be technology-agnostic.
Service exposure & abstraction is used to capture services offered to customers.
Service abstraction can be used by a customer to request a service (ordering and order handling). One typical example is that a customer can use L3SM service model to request L3VPN service by providing the abstract technical characterization of the intended service. Such L3VPN service describes various aspects of network infrastructure, including devices and their subsystems, and relevant protocols operating at the link and network layers across multiple device. The L3SM service model can be used to interact with the network infrastructure, e.g., configure sites, decide QoS parameters to be applied to each network access within a site, select PEs, CEs, etc.
Service catalogs can be created to expose the various services and the information needed to invoke/order a given service.
YANG modules can be grouped into various service bundles; each service bundle is corresponding to a set of YANG modules that have been released or published. Then, a mapping can be established between service abstraction and service bundles at higher layer and between service bundle and a set of YANG modules at lower layer.
Service abstraction starts with high-level abstractions exposing the business capabilities or capturing customer requirements. Then, it needs to maps them to resource abstraction and specific network technologies.
Therefore, the interaction between service abstraction and resource abstraction or between overlay and underlay is required. For example, in the L3SM service model, we describe VPN service topology including sites relationship, e.g., hub and spoke and any to any, single homed, dual-homed, multi-homed relation between PEs and CEs, but we don't know how this service topology can be mapped into underlying network topology. For detailed interaction, please refer to Section 4.1.7
In addition, there is a need to decide on a mapping between service abstraction and underlying specific network technologies. Take L3SM service model as an example, to realize L3VPN service, we need to map L3SM service view defined in Service model into detailed configuration view defined by specific configuration models for network elements, these configuration models include:
These detailed configuration models are further assembled together into service bundle using, e.g., device model, logical network element model or network instance model defined in [I.D-ietf-rtgwg-device-model] [I.D-ietf-rtgwg-lne-model] [I.D-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model] provide the association between an interface and its associated LNE and NI and populate into appropriate devices(e.g., PE and CE).
IP Service Provision is used to provision service or network infrastructure using various configuration models, e.g., use service element models such as BGP, ACL, QoS, Interface model, Network instance models to configure PE and CE device within the site. BGP Policy model is used to establish VPN membership between sites and VPN Service Topology. Traditionally, "push" service element configuration model one by one to the network device and provide association between an interface and each service element configuration model is not efficient.
To automate configuration of the service elements, we first assemble all related service elements models into logical network element model defined in [I.D-ietf-rtgwg-lne-model] and then establish association with an interface and a set of service elements.
In addition, IP Service Provision can be used to setup tunnels between sites and setup tunnels between PE and CE within the site when tunnels related configuration parameters can be generated from service abstraction.However when tunnels related configuration parameters can not be generated from service abstraction, IP Service to TE Mapping procedure is required.
In L3SM Service Model, the management system will have to determine where to connect each site-network-access of a particular site to the provider network (e.g., PE, aggregation switch). L3SM Service model proposes parameters and constraints that can influence the meshing of the site-network-access.
Nodes used to connect a site may be captured in relevant clauses of a service exposure model (e.g., Customer Nodes Map [RFC7297]).
When Site location is determined, PE and CE device location will be selected. Then we can replace parameters and constraints that can influence the meshing of the site-network-access with specified PE and CE device information associated with site- network-access and generate resource facing VN Overlay Resource model.One example of resource facing VN Overlay Resource model is ACTN VN Service Model.
This VN Overlay Resource model can be used to calculate node and link resource to Meet service requirements based on Network Topology models collected at step (a).
Path Management includes Path computation and Path setup. For example, we can translate L3SM service model into resource facing VN Overlay Resource Model, with selected PE and CE in each site, we can calculate point to point or multipoint end to end path between sites based on VPN Overlay Resource Model.
After identifying node and link resources required to meet service requirements, the mapping between overlay topology and underlay topology can be set, e.g., establish an association between VPN service topology defined in customer facing model and underlying network topology defined in I2RS network topology model (e.g., one overlay node is supported by multiple underlay nodes, one overlay link is supported by multiple underlay nodes)and generate end to end VN topology model.
Once the mapping between overlay and underlay has been setup, PM and Warning information per link based on end to end VN topology can be collected and report to the management system.
Performance metrics can be collected before instantiating a service, too.
When tunnels related configuration parameters can not be generated from service abstraction, IP Service to TE Mapping procedure can be used to generate TE Resource Exposure view, this TE reource Exposure view can be modeled as resource facing VN model which is translated and instantiated from L3SM model and manage TE resource based on path management information and PM and alarm telemetry information.
Operators may use this dedicated TE resource Exposure view to dynamically capture the overall network status and topology to:
|(2)
|
V
+-------------------+
| Management System | (3)(4)(5)
+-------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------+
/ _[CE2] _[CE3] /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ / : \ / : \ /
/[CE1]_________________[PE1] [PE2]_________________[CE4] /
+---------:--------------:------------:--------------:---+
"Service"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
+---------------------+ +---------------------+"Resource"
/ [Y5]... / / [Z5]______[Z3] /
/ / \ : / / : \_ / : /
/ / \ : / / : \_ / : /
/ / \ : / / : \ / : /
/ [Y4]____[Y1] : / / : [Z2] : /
+------:-------:---:--+ +---:---------:-----:-+ ^
vNet1 : : : : : : vNet2 |
: : : : : : |(1)
: +-------:---:-----:------------:-----:-----+ |
: / [X1]__:___:___________[X2] : / |
:/ / \_ : : _____/ / : / |
: / \_ : _____/ / : /
/: / \: / / : /
/ : / [X5] / : /
/ : / __/ \__ / : /
/ : / ___/ \__ / : /
/ : / ___/ \ / : /
/ [X4]__________________[X3]..: /
+------------------------------------------+
L3 Topology
The following steps are performed to deliver the service within model driven management architecture proposed in this document:
|(2)
|
V
+-------------------+
| Management System | (3)(4)(5)
+-------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------+
/ _[CE2] _[CE3] /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ _/ : \_ _/ : \_ /
/ / : \ / : \ /
/[CE1]_________________[PE1] [PE2]_________________[CE4] /
+---------:--------------:------------:--------------:---+
"Service"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Resource" ^
: |
: : : |(1)
: +-------:---:-----:------------:-----:-----+ |
: / [X1]__:___ __________[X2] / |
:/ / \_ : _____/ / / |
: / \_ : _____/ / /
/: / \: / / /
/ : / [X5] / /
/ : / __/ \__ / /
/ : / ___/ \__ / /
/ : / ___/ \ / /
/ [X4]__________________[X3]. /
+------------------------------------------+
L3 Topology
The following steps are performed to deliver the service within model driven management architecture proposed in this document:
Security considerations specific to each of the technologies and protocols listed in the document are discussed in the specification documents of each of these techniques.
(Potential) security considerations specific to this document are listed below:
There are no IANA requests or assignments included in this document.
| [I-D.arkko-arch-virtualization] | Arkko, J., Tantsura, J., Halpern, J. and B. Varga, "Considerations on Network Virtualization and Slicing", Internet-Draft draft-arkko-arch-virtualization-01, March 2018. |
| [I-D.asechoud-netmod-diffserv-model] | Choudhary, A., Shah, S., Jethanandani, M., Liu, B. and N. Strahle, "YANG Model for Diffserv", Internet-Draft draft-asechoud-netmod-diffserv-model-03, June 2015. |
| [I-D.chen-opsawg-composite-vpn-dm] | Chen, R., Zhang, L., Hui, D., 67, 4. and C. Xie, "YANG Data Model for Composite VPN Service Delivery", Internet-Draft draft-chen-opsawg-composite-vpn-dm-00, October 2016. |
| [I-D.clacla-netmod-model-catalog] | Clarke, J. and B. Claise, "YANG module for yangcatalog.org", Internet-Draft draft-clacla-netmod-model-catalog-03, April 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang] | Brissette, P., Shah, H., Hussain, I., Tiruveedhula, K. and J. Rabadan, "Yang Data Model for EVPN", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-05, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang] | Shah, H., Brissette, P., Chen, I., Hussain, I., Wen, B. and K. Tiruveedhula, "YANG Data Model for MPLS-based L2VPN", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang-08, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang] | Jain, D., Patel, K., Brissette, P., Li, Z., Zhuang, S., Liu, X., Haas, J., Esale, S. and B. Wen, "Yang Data Model for BGP/MPLS L3 VPNs", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang-03, April 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-bfd-yang] | Rahman, R., Zheng, L., Jethanandani, M., Networks, J. and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bfd-yang-16, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-alarm-module] | Vallin, S. and M. Bjorklund, "YANG Alarm Module", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-alarm-module-01, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-media-channel-yang] | Madrid, U., Perdices, D., Lopezalvarez, V., Dios, O., King, D., Lee, Y. and G. Galimberti, "YANG data model for Flexi-Grid media-channels", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-media-channel-yang-00, May 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-yang] | Madrid, U., Perdices, D., Lopezalvarez, V., Dios, O., King, D., Lee, Y. and G. Galimberti, "YANG data model for Flexi-Grid Optical Networks", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-yang-00, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang] | Fioccola, G., Lee, K., Lee, Y., Dhody, D. and D. Ceccarelli, "A Yang Data Model for L1 Connectivity Service Model (L1CSM)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang-04, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] | Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., Spreafico, D. and M. Vaupotic, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Radio Link", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-mw-yang-06, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang] | zhenghaomian@huawei.com, z., Guo, A., Busi, I., Sharma, A., Liu, X., Belotti, S., Xu, Y., Wang, L. and O. Dios, "A YANG Data Model for Optical Transport Network Topology", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-03, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model] | zhenghaomian@huawei.com, z., Guo, A., Busi, I., Sharma, A., Rao, R., Belotti, S., Lopezalvarez, V., Li, Y. and Y. Xu, "OTN Tunnel YANG Model", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-02, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-ccamp-wson-tunnel-model] | Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Lopezalvarez, V., King, D., Yoon, B. and R. Vilata, "A Yang Data Model for WSON Tunnel", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-tunnel-model-00, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel] | Reddy, T., Boucadair, M., Nishizuka, K., Xia, L., Patil, P., Mortensen, A. and N. Teague, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel Specification", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-16, May 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel] | Reddy, T., Boucadair, M., Patil, P., Mortensen, A. and N. Teague, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel Specification", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-dots-signal-channel-20, May 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology] | Clemm, A., Medved, J., Varga, R., Liu, X., Ananthakrishnan, H. and N. Bahadur, "A YANG Data Model for Layer 3 Topologies", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-16, December 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo] | Clemm, A., Medved, J., Varga, R., Bahadur, N., Ananthakrishnan, H. and X. Liu, "A Data Model for Network Topologies", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo-20, December 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model] | Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Xie, C. and L. Jalil, "A YANG Data Model for L2VPN Service Delivery", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model-10, April 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-lime-yang-connection-oriented-oam-model] | Kumar, D., Wu, Q. and Z. Wang, "Generic YANG Data Model for Connection Oriented Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-lime-yang-connection-oriented-oam-model-07, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam] | Kumar, D., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Rahman, R. and S. Raghavan, "Generic YANG Data Model for the Management of Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Protocols that use Connectionless Communications", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-18, November 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods] | Kumar, D., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Rahman, R. and S. Raghavan, "Retrieval Methods YANG Data Model for the Management of Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Protocols that use Connectionless Communications", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-13, November 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-mpls-base-yang] | Saad, T., Raza, K., Gandhi, R., Liu, X. and V. Beeram, "A YANG Data Model for MPLS Base", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang-06, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-netmod-acl-model] | Jethanandani, M., Huang, L., Agarwal, S. and D. Blair, "Network Access Control List (ACL) YANG Data Model", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19, April 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-netmod-schema-mount] | Bjorklund, M. and L. Lhotka, "YANG Schema Mount", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10, April 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-opsawg-nat-yang] | Boucadair, M., Sivakumar, S., Jacquenet, C., Vinapamula, S. and Q. Wu, "A YANG Module for Network Address Translation (NAT) and Network Prefix Translation (NPT)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-14, March 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang] | Liu, X., Guo, F., Sivakumar, M., McAllister, P. and A. Peter, "A YANG data model for Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) and Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-yang-06, October 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-pim-yang] | Liu, X., McAllister, P., Peter, A., Sivakumar, M., Liu, Y. and f. hu, "A YANG Data Model for Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pim-yang-17, May 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-device-model] | Lindem, A., Berger, L., Bogdanovic, D. and C. Hopps, "Network Device YANG Logical Organization", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rtgwg-device-model-02, March 2017. |
| [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model] | Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D. and X. Liu, "YANG Model for Logical Network Elements", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rtgwg-lne-model-10, March 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-ni-model] | Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D. and X. Liu, "YANG Model for Network Instances", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model-12, March 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-policy-model] | Qu, Y., Tantsura, J., Lindem, A., Liu, X. and A. Shaikh, "A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy Management", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model-02, March 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang] | Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., Bryskin, I., Yoon, B., Wu, Q. and P. Park, "A Yang Data Model for ACTN VN Operation", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang-01, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-sf-aware-topo-model] | Bryskin, I. and X. Liu, "SF Aware TE Topology YANG Model", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-sf-aware-topo-model-00, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-path-computation] | Busi, I., Belotti, S., Lopezalvarez, V., Dios, O., Sharma, A., Shi, Y., Vilata, R., Sethuraman, K., Scharf, M. and D. Ceccarelli, "Yang model for requesting Path Computation", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-01, March 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-te] | Beeram, V., Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Bryskin, I. and H. Shah, "A YANG Data Model for RSVP-TE", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-te-03, February 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te] | Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V., Shah, H. and I. Bryskin, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering Tunnels and Interfaces", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15, June 2018. |
| [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo] | Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H. and O. Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE) Topologies", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-17, June 2018. |
| [I-D.jeong-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm] | Jeong, J., Kim, E., Ahn, T., Kumar, R. and S. Hares, "I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface YANG Data Model", Internet-Draft draft-jeong-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm-05, November 2017. |
| [I-D.lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang] | Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., Tantsura, J., Fioccola, G. and Q. Wu, "Traffic Engineering and Service Mapping Yang Model", Internet-Draft draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-08, June 2018. |
| [I-D.liu-teas-yang-l3-te-topo] | Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H. and O. Dios, "YANG Data Model for Layer 3 TE Topologies", Internet-Draft draft-liu-teas-yang-l3-te-topo-05, October 2017. |
| [I-D.liu-teas-yang-sr-te-topo] | Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H. and S. Litkowski, "YANG Data Model for SR and SR TE Topologies", Internet-Draft draft-liu-teas-yang-sr-te-topo-04, October 2017. |
| [I-D.mks-idr-bgp-yang-model] | Patel, K., Jethanandani, M. and S. Hares, "BGP YANG Model", Internet-Draft draft-mks-idr-bgp-yang-model-01, November 2017. |
| [RFC7149] | Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider Environment", RFC 7149, DOI 10.17487/RFC7149, March 2014. |
| [RFC7297] | Boucadair, M., Jacquenet, C. and N. Wang, "IP Connectivity Provisioning Profile (CPP)", RFC 7297, DOI 10.17487/RFC7297, July 2014. |
| [RFC8199] | Bogdanovic, D., Claise, B. and C. Moberg, "YANG Module Classification", RFC 8199, DOI 10.17487/RFC8199, July 2017. |
| [RFC8299] | Wu, Q., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L. and K. Ogaki, "YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299, DOI 10.17487/RFC8299, January 2018. |
| [RFC8309] | Wu, Q., Liu, W. and A. Farrel, "Service Models Explained", RFC 8309, DOI 10.17487/RFC8309, January 2018. |
| [RFC8328] | Liu, W., Xie, C., Strassner, J., Karagiannis, G., Klyus, M., Bi, J., Cheng, Y. and D. Zhang, "Policy-Based Management Framework for the Simplified Use of Policy Abstractions (SUPA)", RFC 8328, DOI 10.17487/RFC8328, March 2018. |