Multilevel configuration
draft-bogdanovic-multilevel-configuration-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Dean Bogdanović  , Xufeng Liu  , Luis Contreras 
Last updated 2020-11-02
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Management Rearch Group                            D. Bogdanovic
Internet-Draft                                                    X. Liu
Intended status: Informational                            Volta Networks
Expires: 4 May 2021                                       L.M. Contreras
                                                              Telefonica
                                                         31 October 2020

                        Multilevel configuration
              draft-bogdanovic-multilevel-configuration-00

Abstract

   This document describes issues caused by residual configurations in
   network devices and how multi-level configuration could potentially
   offer a solution.

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 4 May 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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.

Bogdanovic, et al.         Expires 4 May 2021                   [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             multilevel configs               October 2020

Table of Contents

   1.  Definitions and Acronyms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Service assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Network migrations and mergings . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  Network slicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.4.  Zero touch provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove]  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Definitions and Acronyms

   TCAM: Ternary Content Addressable Memory

2.  Introduction

   As network operators experience traffic and customer growth, the
   network device configurations are getting larger.  All the config
   information, both network operator and customers, on the device is
   multiplexed into single file and the configuration differentiation
   belonging to different owners becomes harder.  This leads to the
   operators not knowing why certain parts of the config are in the
   file.  Another issue contributing to config growth are debugging
   sessions.  Network operator enters the device and starts editing
   configuration.  After the debug session is finnished, it is not
   unusual for debug configuration entries to stay in the config file
   indefinitely.

   In order to solve this problem, some operators created central
   database with all the network configuration files that act as systems
   of record.  If anything is to persist on the device in the network,
   it has to be in the central database.  Still, this solution has not
   remedided the problem.

   Both, vendors and operators, contribute to the problem:

   *  Vendors by keeping the configuration file structures as currently
      designed;

   *  Operators by allowing human operator to directly edit config file
      on the device.

Bogdanovic, et al.         Expires 4 May 2021                   [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             multilevel configs               October 2020

   Until the above two issues are solved, the residual configuration
   problem will persist and continue to waste expensive data plane
   resources (TCAM).

   This draft authors are motivated to propose a solution from both
   sides, operator and vendor.  Our initial idea is to keep the
Show full document text