Skip to main content

Digital Map: Concept, Requirements, and Use Cases
draft-ietf-nmop-digital-map-concept-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (nmop WG)
Authors Olga Havel , Benoît Claise , Oscar Gonzalez de Dios , Thomas Graf
Last updated 2024-10-21
Replaces draft-havel-nmop-digital-map-concept
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats
Additional resources GitHub Repository
Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd Mohamed Boucadair
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
draft-ietf-nmop-digital-map-concept-02
Network Management Operations                                   O. Havel
Internet-Draft                                                 B. Claise
Intended status: Informational                                    Huawei
Expires: 24 April 2025                                     O. G. D. Dios
                                                              Telefonica
                                                                 T. Graf
                                                                Swisscom
                                                         21 October 2024

           Digital Map: Concept, Requirements, and Use Cases
                 draft-ietf-nmop-digital-map-concept-02

Abstract

   This document defines the concept of Digital Map, and identifies a
   set of Digital Map requirements and use cases.

   The document intends to be used as a reference for the assessment
   effort of the various topology modules to meet Digital Map
   requirements.

Discussion Venues

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the Network Management
   Operations Working Group mailing list (nmop@ietf.org), which is
   archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nmop/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/ietf-wg-nmop/draft-ietf-nmop-digital-map-concept.

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."

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 24 April 2025.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Sample Digital Map Use Cases  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Generic inventory queries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Service placement feasibility checks  . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  Service-> subservice -> resource  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Resource -> subservice -> service . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.5.  Intent/service assurance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.6.  Service E2E and per-link KPIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.7.  Capacity planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.8.  Network design  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.9.  Simulation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.10. Closed Loop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.11. Digital Twin  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  Digital Map Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Core Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.3.  Architectural Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Appendix A.  Related IETF Activities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     A.1.  Network Topology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     A.2.  Core Digital Map Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     A.3.  Additional Digital Map Components . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

1.  Introduction

   Digital Map is a data model that provides a view of the operator's
   networks and services, including how it is connected to other models/
   data (e.g. inventory, observability sources, and operational
   knowledge).  It specifically provides an approach to model multi-
   layered topology and appropriate mechanism to navigate amongs layers
   and correlate between them.  This includes layers from physical
   topology to service topology.  This model is applicable to multiple
   domains (access, core, data centers, etc.) and technologies (Optical,
   IP, etc.).

   The Digital Map modelling defines the core topological entities
   (network, node, link, and interface) at each layer, their role in the
   network topology, core topological properties, and topological
   relationships both inside each layer and between the layers.  It also
   defines how to access other external models from the topology.

   The Digital Map model is a topological model that is linked to the
   other functional models and connects them all: configuration,
   maintenance, assurance (KPIs, status, health, and symptoms), Traffic-
   Engineering (TE), different behaviors and actions, simulation,
   emulation, mathematical abstractions, AI algorithms, etc.  These
   other models exist outside of the digital map and are not defined
   during digital map modelling.

   The Digital Map data consists of virtual instances of network and
   service topologies at different layers.  The Digital Map provides
   access to this data via standard APIs for both read and write
   operations (write operations for offline simulations), with query
   capabilities and links to other YANG modules (e.g., Service Assurance
   for Intent-based Networking (SAIN) [RFC9417], Service Attachement
   Points (SAPs) [RFC9408], Inventory
   [I-D.ietf-ivy-network-inventory-yang], and non-YANG models.

2.  Terminology

   The document makes use of the following terms:

   Topology:  Topology in this document refers to the network and
      service topology.  Network topology defines how physical or
      logical nodes, links and interfaces are related and arranged.
      Service topology defines how service components (e.g., VPN
      instances, customer interfaces, and customer links) between
      customer sites are interrelated and arranged.  There are at least
      8 types of topologies: point to point, bus, ring, star, tree,
      mesh, hybrid and daisy chain.  Topologies may be unidirectional or
      bidirectional (bus, some rings).

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   Multi-layered topology:  A multi-layered topology models
      relationships between different layers of topology, where each
      layer represents a connectivity aspect of the network and services
      that needs to be configured, controlled and monitored.  Each layer
      of topology has a separate lifecycle.

   Topology layer:  Represents topology at a single layer in the multi-
      layered topology.

      The topology layer can also represent what needs to be managed by
      a specific user, for example IGP layer can be of interest to the
      operator troubleshooting or optimizating the routing, while the
      optical layer may be of interest to the user managing the optical
      network.

      Some topology layers may relate closely to OSI layers, like L1
      topology for physical topology, Layer 2 for link topology and
      Layer 3 for IPv4 and IPv6 topologies.

      Some topology layers represent the control aspects of Layer 3,
      like OSPF, IS-IS, or BGP.

      The service layer represents the service view of the connectivity,
      that can differ for different types of services and for different
      providers/solutions.

      The top layer represents the application/flow view of service
      connectivity.

   The document defines the following terms:

   Digital Map:  Digital Map is a data model that provides a view of the
      operator's networks and services, including how it is connected to
      other models/data (e.g. inventory, observability sources, and
      operational knowledge).  It specifically provides an approach to
      model multi-layered topology and appropriate mechanism to navigate
      amongs layers and correlate between them.  This model is
      applicable to multiple domains (access, core, data centers, etc.)
      and technologies (Optical, IP, etc.).

   Digital Map modelling:  The set of principles, guidelines, and
      conventions to model the Digital Map using the IETF [RFC8345]
      approach.  They cover the network types (layers and sublayers),
      entity types, entity roles (network, node, termination point or
      link), entity properties, relationship types between entities and
      relationships to other entities.

   Digital Map model:  Defines the core topological entities, their role

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

      in the network, core topological properties and relationships both
      inside each layer and between the layers.

      It is the basic topological model with the links to other models
      and connects them all: configuration, maintenance, assurance
      (KPIs, status, health, symptoms, etc.), traffic engineering,
      different behaviors, simulation, emulation, mathematical
      abstractions, AI algorithms, etc.

   Digital Map data:  Consists of instances of network and service
      topologies at different layers.  This includes instances of
      networks, nodes, links and termination points, topological
      relationships between nodes, links and termination points inside a
      network, relationships between instances belonging to different
      networks, links to functional data for the instances, including
      configuration, health, symptoms.

      The data can be historical, real-time, or future data for 'what-
      if' scenarios.

3.  Sample Digital Map Use Cases

   The following are sample use cases that require Digital Map:

   *  Generic inventory queries

   *  Service placement feasibility checks

   *  Service-> subservice -> resource

   *  Resource -> subservice -> service

   *  Intent/service assurance

   *  Service E2E and per-link KPIs on the Digital Map (connectivity
      status, high-availability, delay, jitter, and loss)

   *  Capacity planning

   *  Network design

   *  Simulation

   *  Closed loop

   *  Digital Twin

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   Overall, the Digital Map is needed to provide the mechanism to
   connect data islands from the core multi-layered topology.  It is a
   solution feasible and useful in the short-term for the existing
   operations use cases, but it is also a requirement for the Digital
   Twin.

   The following sections shows some example use case descriptions to
   initiate the discussion what type of info is needed to describe the
   use cases in the context of Digital Map. The next version of the
   draft will include more info on these use cases, from the perspective
   of what is the value of the digital map for each use case and how the
   Digital Map API can be used.  This will also clarify if only read and
   if/when write interface is needed per use case.

3.1.  Generic inventory queries

   The application will be able to retrieve physical topology from the
   controller via Digital Map API and from the response it will be able
   to retrieve physical inventory of individual devices and cables.

   The application may request either one or multiple layers of topology
   via the Digital Map API and and from the response it will be able to
   retrieve both physical and logical inventory.

3.2.  Service placement feasibility checks

3.3.  Service-> subservice -> resource

   The application will be able to retrieve all services from the
   Digital Map API for selected network type.  The application will be
   able to retrieve the topology for selected services via Digital Map
   API and from the response it will be able to navigate via the
   supporting relationship top-down to the lower layers.  That way, it
   will be able to determine what logical resources are used by the
   service.  The supporting relations to the lowest layer will help
   application to determine what physical resources are used by the
   service.

3.4.  Resource -> subservice -> service

   The application will be able to navigate from the Physical, L2 or L3
   topology to the services that use specific resources.  For example,
   the application will be able to select the resouce and by navigation
   the supporting relationship bottom-up come to the service and its
   nodes, tps and links.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

3.5.  Intent/service assurance

   The application will be able to retrieve topology layer and any
   network/node/tp/link instances from the controller via Digital Map
   API and from the response it will be able to determine the health of
   each instance by navigating to the SAIN subservices and its symptoms.

3.6.  Service E2E and per-link KPIs

   The application will be able to retieve the topology at any layer
   from the controller via Digital Map API and from the response it will
   be able to navigate any retrieve any KPIs for selected topology
   entity.

3.7.  Capacity planning

3.8.  Network design

3.9.  Simulation

3.10.  Closed Loop

3.11.  Digital Twin

4.  Digital Map Requirements

4.1.  Core Requirements

   The following are the core requirements for the Digital Map (note
   that some of them are supported by default by [RFC8345]):

   REQ-BASIC-MODEL-SUPPORT:  Basic model with network, node, link, and
      interface entity types.

      This means that users of the Digital Map model must be able to
      understand topology model at any layer via these core concepts
      only, without having to go to the details of the specific
      augmentations to understand the topology.

   REQ-LAYERED-MODEL:  Layered Digital Map, from physical network
      (ideally optical, layer 2, layer 3) up to service and intent
      views.

   REQ-PROG-OPEN-MODEL:  Open and programmable Digital Map.

      This includes "read" operations to retrieve the view of the
      network, typically as application-facing interface of Software
      Defined Networking (SDN) controllers or orchestrators.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

      It also includes "write" operations, not for the ability to
      directly change the Digital Map data (e.g., changing the network
      or service parameters), but for offline simulations, also known as
      what-if scenarios.

      Running a "what-if" analysis requires the ability to take
      snapshots and to switch easily between them.

      Note that there is a need to distinguish between a change on the
      Digital Map for future simulation and a change that reflects the
      current reality of the network.

   REQ-STD-API-BASED:  Standard based Digital Map Models and APIs, for
      multi-vendor support.

      Digital Map must provide the standard YANG APIs that provide for
      read/write and queries.  These APIs must also provide the
      capability to retrieve the links to external data/models.

   REQ-COMMON-APP:  Digital Map models and APIs must be common over
      different network domains (campus, core, data center, etc.).

      This means that clients of the Digital Map API must be able to
      understand the topology model of layers of any domain without
      having to understand the details of any technologies and domains.

   REQ-SEMANTIC:  Digital Map must provide semantics for layered network
      topologies and for linking external models/data.

   REQ-LAYER-NAVIGATE:  Digital Map must provide intra-layer and inter-
      layer relationships.

   REQ-EXTENSIBLE:  Digital Map must be extensible with metadata.

   REQ-PLUGG:  Digital Map must be pluggable.  That is,

      *  Must connect to other YANG modules for inventory,
         configuration, assurance, etc.

      *  Given that no all involved components can be available using
         YANG, there is a need to connect Digital Map YANG model with
         other modelling mechanisms.

   REQ-GRAPH-TRAVERSAL:  Digital Map must be optimized for graph
      traversal for paths.  This means that only providing link nodes
      and source and sink relationships to termination-points may not be
      sufficient, we may need to have the direct relationship between
      the termination points or nodes.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

4.2.  Design Requirements

   The following are design requirements for modelling the Digital Map.
   Theey are derived from the core requerements collected from the
   operators and although there is some duplication, these are focused
   on summarizing the requirements for the design of the model and API:

   REQ-TOPO-ONLY:  Digital Map should contain only topological
      information.

      Digital Map is not required to contain all models and data
      required for all the management and use cases.  However, it should
      be designed to support adequate pointers to other functional data
      and models to ease navigating in the overall system.  For example:

   *  ACLs and Route Policies are not required to be supported in the
      Digital Map, they would be linked to Digital Map

   *  Dynamic paths may either be outside of the Digital Map or part of
      traffic engineering data/models

   REQ-PROPERTIES:  Digital Map entities should mainly contain
      properties used to identify topological entities at different
      layers, identify their roles, and topological relationships
      between them.

   REQ-RELATIONSHIPS:  Digital Map should contain all topological
      relationships inside each layer or between the layers (underlay/
      overlay)

      Digital Map should contain links to other models/data to enable
      generic navigation to other YANG models in generic way.

   REQ-CONDITIONAL:  Provide capability for conditional retrieval of
      parts of Digital Map.

   REQ-TEMPO-HISTO:  Must support geo-spatial, temporal, and historical
      data.  The temporal and historical can also be supported external
      to the Digital Map.

4.3.  Architectural Requirements

   The following are the architectural requirements for the controller
   that provides Digital Map API:

   REQ-DM-SCALES:  Scale, performance, ease of integration.

   REQ-DM-DISCOVERY:  Initial discovery and dynamic (change only) synch

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

      with the physical network.

5.  Security Considerations

   As this document covers the Digital Map concepts, requirements, and
   use cases, there is no specific security considerations.  However,
   the RFC 8345 Security Considerations aspects will be useful when
   designing the solution.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no actions for IANA.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC8345]  Clemm, A., Medved, J., Varga, R., Bahadur, N.,
              Ananthakrishnan, H., and X. Liu, "A YANG Data Model for
              Network Topologies", RFC 8345, DOI 10.17487/RFC8345, March
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8345>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang]
              Yu, C., Belotti, S., Bouquier, J., Peruzzini, F., and P.
              Bedard, "A YANG Data Model for Network Hardware
              Inventory", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
              ccamp-network-inventory-yang-02, 9 July 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-
              network-inventory-yang-02>.

   [I-D.ietf-ivy-network-inventory-topology]
              Wu, B., Zhou, C., Wu, Q., and M. Boucadair, "A Network
              Inventory Topology Model", Work in Progress, Internet-
              Draft, draft-ietf-ivy-network-inventory-topology-00, 7
              August 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
              ietf-ivy-network-inventory-topology-00>.

   [I-D.ietf-ivy-network-inventory-yang]
              Yu, C., Belotti, S., Bouquier, J., Peruzzini, F., and P.
              Bedard, "A YANG Data Model for Network Inventory", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ivy-network-
              inventory-yang-03, 7 July 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ivy-
              network-inventory-yang-03>.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   [I-D.ietf-nmop-network-incident-yang]
              Hu, T., Contreras, L. M., Wu, Q., Davis, N., and C. Feng,
              "A YANG Data Model for Network Incident Management", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-nmop-network-
              incident-yang-02, 10 October 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-nmop-
              network-incident-yang-02>.

   [I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit]
              Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S.,
              and B. Wu, "A Network YANG Data Model for Attachment
              Circuits", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
              opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit-13, 5 September 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-
              ntw-attachment-circuit-13>.

   [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit]
              Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S.,
              and B. Wu, "YANG Data Models for Bearers and 'Attachment
              Circuits'-as-a-Service (ACaaS)", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-
              17, 10 October 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-
              teas-attachment-circuit-17>.

   [I-D.ogondio-nmop-isis-topology]
              de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S., Lopez, V., Ceccarelli, D.,
              and B. Claise, "A YANG Data Model for Intermediate System
              to intermediate System (IS-IS) Topology", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ogondio-nmop-isis-
              topology-00, 4 March 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ogondio-nmop-
              isis-topology-00>.

   [I-D.ogondio-opsawg-ospf-topology]
              de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S., and V. Lopez, "A YANG Data
              Model for Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Topology", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ogondio-opsawg-ospf-
              topology-01, 23 October 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ogondio-
              opsawg-ospf-topology-01>.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   [I-D.wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management]
              Wu, B., Zhou, C., Wu, Q., and M. Boucadair, "A YANG
              Network Data Model of Network Inventory", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-
              inventory-management-04, 19 October 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wzwb-opsawg-
              network-inventory-management-04>.

   [RFC8299]  Wu, Q., Ed., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki,
              "YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8299, January 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8299>.

   [RFC8466]  Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Ed., Xie, C., and L. Jalil, "A YANG
              Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN)
              Service Delivery", RFC 8466, DOI 10.17487/RFC8466, October
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8466>.

   [RFC8795]  Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H., and
              O. Gonzalez de Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic
              Engineering (TE) Topologies", RFC 8795,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8795, August 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8795>.

   [RFC8944]  Dong, J., Wei, X., Wu, Q., Boucadair, M., and A. Liu, "A
              YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Network Topologies", RFC 8944,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8944, November 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8944>.

   [RFC9179]  Hopps, C., "A YANG Grouping for Geographic Locations",
              RFC 9179, DOI 10.17487/RFC9179, February 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9179>.

   [RFC9182]  Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M.,
              Ed., Munoz, L., and A. Aguado, "A YANG Network Data Model
              for Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9182, DOI 10.17487/RFC9182,
              February 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9182>.

   [RFC9291]  Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Barguil,
              S., and L. Munoz, "A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 2
              VPNs", RFC 9291, DOI 10.17487/RFC9291, September 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9291>.

   [RFC9408]  Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil, S., Wu,
              Q., and V. Lopez, "A YANG Network Data Model for Service
              Attachment Points (SAPs)", RFC 9408, DOI 10.17487/RFC9408,
              June 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9408>.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 12]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   [RFC9417]  Claise, B., Quilbeuf, J., Lopez, D., Voyer, D., and T.
              Arumugam, "Service Assurance for Intent-Based Networking
              Architecture", RFC 9417, DOI 10.17487/RFC9417, July 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9417>.

   [RFC9418]  Claise, B., Quilbeuf, J., Lucente, P., Fasano, P., and T.
              Arumugam, "A YANG Data Model for Service Assurance",
              RFC 9418, DOI 10.17487/RFC9418, July 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9418>.

   [RFC9522]  Farrel, A., Ed., "Overview and Principles of Internet
              Traffic Engineering", RFC 9522, DOI 10.17487/RFC9522,
              January 2024, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9522>.

Appendix A.  Related IETF Activities

A.1.  Network Topology

   Interestingly, we could not find any network topology definition in
   IETF RFCs (not even in [RFC8345]) or Internet-Drafts.  However, it is
   mentioned in multiple documents.  As an example, in Overview and
   Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering [RFC9522], which mentions:

   |  To conduct performance studies and to support planning of existing
   |  and future networks, a routing analysis may be performed to
   |  determine the paths the routing protocols will choose for various
   |  traffic demands, and to ascertain the utilization of network
   |  resources as traffic is routed through the network.  Routing
   |  analysis captures the selection of paths through the network, the
   |  assignment of traffic across multiple feasible routes, and the
   |  multiplexing of IP traffic over traffic trunks (if such constructs
   |  exist) and over the underlying network infrastructure.  A model of
   |  network topology is necessary to perform routing analysis.  A
   |  network topology model may be extracted from:
   |  
   |  *  Network architecture documents
   |  
   |  *  Network designs
   |  
   |  *  Information contained in router configuration files
   |  
   |  *  Routing databases such as the link state database of an
   |     interior gateway protocol (IGP)
   |  
   |  *  Routing tables
   |  
   |  *  Automated tools that discover and collate network topology
   |     information.

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 13]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   |  
   |  Topology information may also be derived from servers that monitor
   |  network state, and from servers that perform provisioning
   |  functions.

A.2.  Core Digital Map Components

   The following specifications are core for the Digital Map:

   *  IETF network model and network topology model [RFC8345]

   *  A YANG grouping for geographic location [RFC9179]

   *  IETF modules that augment [RFC8345] for different technologies:

      -  A YANG data model for Traffic Engineering (TE) Topologies
         [RFC8795]

      -  A YANG data model for Layer 2 network topologies [RFC8944]

      -  A YANG data model for OSFP topology
         [I-D.ogondio-opsawg-ospf-topology]

      -  A YANG data model for IS-IS topology
         [I-D.ogondio-nmop-isis-topology]

A.3.  Additional Digital Map Components

   The Digital Map may need to link to the following models, some are
   already augmenting [RFC8345]:

   *  Service Attachment Point (SAP) [RFC9408], augments 'ietf-network'
      data model [RFC8345] by adding the SAP.

   *  SAIN [RFC9417] [RFC9418]

   *  Network Inventory Model [I-D.ietf-ivy-network-inventory-yang]
      focuses on physical and virtual inventory.  Logical inventory is
      currently outside of the scope.  It does not augment RFC8345 like
      the two Internet-Drafts that it evolved from
      [I-D.ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang] and
      [I-D.wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management].
      [I-D.ietf-ivy-network-inventory-topology] correlates the network
      inventory with the general topology via RFC8345 augmentations that
      reference inventory.

   *  KPIs: delay, jitter, loss

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 14]
Internet-Draft         Digital Map Concept & Needs          October 2024

   *  Attachment Circuits (ACs) [I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit]
      and [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit]

   *  Configuration: L2SM [RFC8466], L3SM [RFC8299], L2NM [RFC9291], and
      L3NM [RFC9182]

   *  Incident Management for Network Services
      [I-D.ietf-nmop-network-incident-yang]

Acknowledgments

   Many thanks to Mohamed Boucadair (mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
   (mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com)) for his valuable
   contributions, reviews, and comments.

   Many thanks to Nigel Davis ndavis@ciena.com (mailto:ndavis@ciena.com)
   for the valuable discussions and his confirmation of the modelling
   requirements.

Contributors

   Ahmed Elhassany
   Swisscom
   Email: Ahmed.Elhassany@swisscom.com

Authors' Addresses

   Olga Havel
   Huawei
   Email: olga.havel@huawei.com

   Benoit Claise
   Huawei
   Email: benoit.claise@huawei.com

   Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
   Telefonica
   Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com

   Thomas Graf
   Swisscom
   Email: thomas.graf@swisscom.com

Havel, et al.             Expires 24 April 2025                [Page 15]