A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-07
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 9182.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Samier Barguil , Oscar Gonzalez de Dios , Mohamed Boucadair , Luis Angel Munoz , Alejandro Aguado | ||
| Last updated | 2021-04-08 (Latest revision 2021-03-10) | ||
| Replaces | draft-aguado-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
YANGDOCTORS Last Call review
by Radek Krejčí
Ready w/nits
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-03)
by Radek Krejčí
Ready w/issues
OPSDIR
will not review this version
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up | |
| Document shepherd | Adrian Farrel | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2021-04-07 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9182 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | adrian@olddog.co.uk |
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-07
OPSAWG S. Barguil
Internet-Draft O. Gonzalez de Dios, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Telefonica
Expires: September 11, 2021 M. Boucadair, Ed.
Orange
L. Munoz
Vodafone
A. Aguado
Nokia
March 10, 2021
A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-07
Abstract
This document defines a L3VPN Network YANG Model (L3NM) that can be
used for the provisioning of Layer 3 Virtual Private Network (VPN)
services within a service provider network. The model provides a
network-centric view of L3VPN services.
L3NM is meant to be used by a network controller to derive the
configuration information that will be sent to relevant network
devices. The model can also facilitate the communication between a
service orchestrator and a network controller/orchestrator.
Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)
Please update these statements within the document with the RFC
number to be assigned to this document:
o "This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX;"
o "RFC XXXX: Layer 3 VPN Network Model";
o reference: RFC XXXX
Also, please update the "revision" date of the YANG module.
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
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
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 September 11, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. L3NM Reference Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Relation with other YANG Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Sample Uses of the L3NM Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1. Enterprise Layer 3 VPN Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.2. Multi-Domain Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.3. Management of Multicast Services . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Description of the L3NM YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.1. Overall Structure of the Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2. VPN Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.3. VPN Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.4. Import/Export Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.5. VPN Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7.6. VPN Network Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7.6.1. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.6.2. IP Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.6.3. CE-PE Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.6.4. OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.6.5. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
7.6.6. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.7. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8. L3NM YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
12. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Appendix A. L3VPN Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
A.1. 4G VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
A.2. Multicast VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Appendix B. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
B.1. Nokia Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
B.2. Huawei Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
B.3. Infinera Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
B.4. Ribbon-ECI Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
1. Introduction
[RFC8299] defines a Layer 3 Virtual Private Network Service YANG data
Model (L3SM) that can be used for communication between customers and
network operators. Such model is focused on describing the customer
view of the Virtual Private Network (VPN) services and provides an
abstracted view of the customer's requested services. That approach
limits the usage of the L3SM to the role of a Customer Service Model
(as per [RFC8309]).
This document defines a YANG module called L3VPN Network Model
(L3NM). The L3NM is aimed at providing a network-centric view of
Layer 3 (L3) VPN services. This data model can be used to facilitate
communication between the service orchestrator (or a network
operator) and the network controller/orchestrator by allowing for
more network-centric information to be included. It enables further
capabilities, such as resource management or to serve as a multi-
domain orchestration interface, where logical resources (such as
route targets or route distinguishers) must be coordinated.
This document uses the common VPN YANG module defined in
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common].
This document does not obsolete [RFC8299]. These two modules are
used for similar objectives but with different scopes and views.
The L3NM YANG module is initially built with a prune and extend
approach, taking as a starting points the YANG module described in
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[RFC8299]. Nevertheless, the L3NM is not defined as an augment to
L3SM because a specific structure is required to meet network-
oriented L3 needs.
Some of the information captured in the L3SM can be passed by the
Orchestrator in the L3NM (e.g., customer) or be used to fed some of
the L3NM attributes (e.g., actual forwarding policies). Some of the
information captured in L3SM may be maintained locally within the
Orchestrator; which is in charge of maintaining the correspondence
between a customer view and its network instantiation. Likewise,
some of the information captured and exposed using the L3NM can feed
the service layer (e.g., capabilities) to drive VPN service order
handling, and thus the L3SM.
Section 5.1 of [RFC8969] illustrates how the L3NM can be used within
the network management automation architecture.
The L3NM does not attempt to address all deployment cases especially
those where the L3VPN connectivity is supported through the
coordination of different VPNs in different underlying networks.
More complex deployment scenarios involving the coordination of
different VPN instances and different technologies to provide an end-
to-end VPN connectivity are addressed by complementary YANG modules,
e.g., [I-D.evenwu-opsawg-yang-composed-vpn].
L3NM focuses on BGP Provider Edge (PE) based Layer 3 VPNs as
described in [RFC4026][RFC4110][RFC4364] and Multicast VPNs as
described in [RFC6037][RFC6513][RFC7988].
The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in [RFC8342].
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "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.
This document assumes that the reader is familiar with the contents
of [RFC6241], [RFC7950], [RFC8299], [RFC8309], and [RFC8453] and uses
the terminology defined in those documents.
This document uses the term "network model" defined in Section 2.1 of
[RFC8969].
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
The meaning of the symbols in the tree diagrams is defined in
[RFC8340].
This document makes use of the following terms:
Layer 3 VPN Customer Service Model (L3SM): A YANG module that
describes the service requirements of a L3VPN that interconnects a
set of sites from the point of view of the customer. The customer
service model does not provide details on the service provider
network. The L3VPN Customer Service model is defined in
[RFC8299].
Layer 3 VPN Service Network Model (L3NM): A YANG module that
describes a VPN service in the service provider network. It
contains information of the service provider network and might
include allocated resources. It can be used by network
controllers to manage and control the VPN service configuration in
the service provider network. The YANG module can be consumed by
a service orchestrator to request a VPN service to a Network
Controller.
Service orchestrator: A functional entity that interacts with the
customer of a L3VPN. The service orchestrator interacts with the
customer using the L3SM. The service orchestrator is responsible
of the Customer Edge (CE) - Provider Edge (PE) attachment
circuits, the PE selection, and requesting the VPN service to the
Network Controller.
Network orchestrator: A functional entity that is hierarchically
intermediate between a service orchestrator and network
nontrollers. A network orchestrator can manage one or several
network nontrollers.
Network controller: A functional entity responsible for the control
and management of the service provider network.
VPN node: An abstraction that represents a set of policies applied
on a PE and that belong to a single VPN service. A VPN service
involves one or more VPN nodes. As it is an abstraction, the
network controller will take on how to implement a VPN node. For
example, typically, in a BGP-based VPN, a VPN node could be mapped
into a Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRF).
VPN network access: An abstraction that represents the network
interfaces that are associated to a given VPN node. Traffic
coming from the VPN network access belongs to the VPN. The
attachment circuits (bearers) between CEs and PEs are terminated
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
in the VPN network access. A reference to the bearer is
maintained to allow keeping the link between L3SM and L3NM.
VPN site: A VPN customer's location that is connected to the
service provider network via a CE-PE link, which can access at
least one VPN [RFC4176].
VPN service provider: A service provider that offers VPN-related
services [RFC4176].
Service provider network: A network that is able to provide VPN-
related services.
The document is aimed at modeling BGP PE-based VPNs in a service
provider network, so the terms defined in [RFC4026] and [RFC4176] are
used.
3. Acronyms
The following acronyms are used in the document:
ACL Access Control List
AS Autonomous System
ASM Any-Source Multicast
ASN AS Number
BSR Bootstrap Router
BFD Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
BGP Border Gateway Protocol
CE Customer Edge
IGMP nternet Group Management Protocol
L3VPN Layer 3 Virtual Private Network
L3SM L3VPN Service Model
L3NM L3VPN Network Model
MLD Multicast Listener Discovery
MSDP Multicast Source Discovery Protocol
MVPN Multicast VPN
NAT Network Address Translation
OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
OSPF Open Shortest Path First
PE Provider Edge
PIM Protocol Independent Multicast
QoS Quality of Service
RD Route Distinguisher
RP Rendez-vous Point
RT Route Target
SA Security Association
SSM Source-Specific Multicast
VPN Virtual Private Network
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
VRF Virtual Routing and Forwarding
4. L3NM Reference Architecture
Figure 1 depicts the reference architecture for the L3NM. The figure
is an expansion of the architecture presented in Section 5 of
[RFC8299]; it decomposes the box marked "orchestration" in that
section into three separate functional components: Service
Orchestration, Network Orchestration, and Domain Orchestration.
Although some deployments may choose to construct a monolithic
orchestration component (covering both service and network matters),
this document advocates for a clear separation between service and
network orchestration components for the sake of better flexibility.
Such design adheres to the L3VPN reference architecture defined in
Section 1.3 of [RFC4176]. This separation relies upon a dedicated
communication interface between these components and appropriate YANG
module that reflect network-related information (that is hidden to
customers).
The intelligence for translating customer-facing information into
network-centric one is implementation specific.
The terminology from [RFC8309] is introduced to show the distinction
between the customer service model, the service delivery model, the
network configuration model, and the device configuration model. In
that context, the "Domain Orchestration" and "Config Manager" roles
may be performed by "Controllers".
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
+---------------+
| Customer |
+---------------+
Customer Service Model |
e.g., l3vpn-svc |
+---------------+
| Service |
| Orchestration |
+---------------+
Network Model |
l3vpn-ntw |
+---------------+
| Network |
| Orchestration |
+---------------+
Network Configuration Model |
+-----------+-----------+
| |
+---------------+ +---------------+
| Domain | | Domain |
| Orchestration | | Orchestration |
+---------------+ +---------------+
Device | | |
Configuration | | |
Model | | |
+---------+ | |
| Config | | |
| Manager | | |
+---------+ | |
| | |
| NETCONF/CLI..................
| | |
+------------------------------------------------+
Network
Figure 1: L3NM Reference Architecture
The customer may use a variety of means to request a service that may
trigger the instantiation of a L3NM. The customer may use the L3SM
or may rely upon more abstract models to request a service that
relies upon an L3VPN service. For example, the customer may supply
an IP Connectivity Provisioning Profile (CPP) [RFC7297], an enhanced
VPN (VPN+) service [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn], an IETF network
slice [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition], or Abstraction
and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) [RFC8453].
Note also that both the L3SM and the L3NM may be used in the context
of the ACTN architecture. Figure 2 shows the Customer Network
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Controller (CNC), the Multi-Domain Service Coordinator (MDSC), and
the Provisioning Network Controller (PNC).
+----------------------------------+
| Customer |
| +-----------------------------+ |
| | CNC | |
| +-----------------------------+ |
+----:-----------------------:-----+
: :
: L3SM : L3SM
: :
+---------:---------+ +-------------------+
| MDSC : | | MDSC |
| +---------------+ | | (parent) |
| | Service | | +-------------------+
| | Orchestration | | :
| +---------------+ | : L3NM
| : | :
| : L3NM | +-------------------+
| : | | MDSC |
| +---------------+ | | (child) |
| | Network | | +-------------------+
| | Orchestration | | :
| +---------------+ | :
+---------:---------+ :
: :
: Network Configuration :
: :
+------------:-------+ +---------:------------+
| Domain : | | : Domain |
| Controller : | | : Controller |
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
| | PNC | | | | PNC | |
| +---------+ | | +---------+ |
+------------:-------+ +---------:------------+
: :
: Device Configuration :
: :
+--------+ +--------+
| Device | | Device |
+--------+ +--------+
Figure 2: L3SM and L3NM in the Context of ACTN
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
5. Relation with other YANG Models
The "ietf-vpn-common" module [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] includes a
set of identities, types, and groupings that are meant to be reused
by VPN-related YANG modules independently of the layer (e.g., Layer
2, Layer 3) and the type of the module (e.g., network model, service
model) including future revisions of existing models (e.g., [RFC8299]
or [RFC8466]). The L3NM reuses these common types and groupings.
In order to avoid data duplication and to ease passing data between
layers when required (service layer to network layer and vice versa),
early versions of the L3NM reused many of the data nodes that are
defined in [RFC8299]. Nevertheless, that approach was abandoned in
favor of the "ietf-vpn-common" module because that initial design was
interpreted as if the deployment of L3NM depends on L3SM, while this
is not the case. For example, a service provider may decide to use
the L3NM to build its L3VPN services without exposing the L3SM.
As discussed in Section 4, the L3NM is meant to manage L3VPN services
within a service provider network. The module provides a network
view of the service. Such view is only visible within the service
provider and is not exposed outside (to customers, for example). The
following discusses how L3NM interfaces with other YANG modules:
L3SM: L3NM is not a customer service model.
The internal view of the service (i.e., L3NM) may be mapped to an
external view which is visible to customers: L3VPN Service YANG
data Model (L3SM) [RFC8299].
The L3NM can be fed with inputs that are requested by customers,
typically, relying upon a L3SM template. Concretely, some parts
of the L3SM module can be directly mapped into L3NM while other
parts are generated as a function of the requested service and
local guidelines. Some other parts are local to the service
provider and do not map directly to L3SM.
Note that the use of L3NM within a service provider does not
assume nor preclude exposing the VPN service via the L3SM. This
is deployment-specific. Nevertheless, the design of L3NM tries to
align as much as possible with the features supported by the L3SM
to ease grafting both L3NM and L3SM for the sake of highly
automated VPN service provisioning and delivery.
Network Topology Modules: A L3VPN involves nodes that are part of a
topology managed by the service provider network. Such topology
can be represented as using the network topology module in
[RFC8345].
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Device Modules: L3NM is not a device model.
Once a global VPN service is captured by means of L3NM, the actual
activation and provisioning of the VPN service will involve a
variety of device modules to tweak the required functions for the
delivery of the service. These functions are supported by the VPN
nodes and can be managed using device YANG modules. A non-
comprehensive list of such device YANG modules is provided below:
* Routing management [RFC8349].
* BGP [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model].
* PIM [I-D.ietf-pim-yang].
* NAT management [RFC8512].
* QoS management [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-qos-model].
* ACLs [RFC8519].
How L3NM is used to derive device-specific actions is
implementation-specific.
6. Sample Uses of the L3NM Data Model
This section provides a non-exhaustive list of examples to illustrate
contexts where the L3NM can be used.
6.1. Enterprise Layer 3 VPN Services
Enterprise L3VPNs are one of the most demanded services for carriers,
and therefore, L3NM can be useful to automate the provisioning and
maintenance of these VPNs. Templates and batch processes can be
built, and as a result many parameters are needed for the creation
from scratch of a VPN that can be abstracted to the upper Software-
Defined Networking (SDN) [RFC7149][RFC7426] layer and little manual
intervention will be still required.
Also common addition and/or removal of sites of an existing customer
VPN can benefit of using L3NM by creation of workflows that either
prune or add nodes as required from the network data mode.
6.2. Multi-Domain Resource Management
The implementation of L3VPN services which span across
administratively separated domains (i.e., that are under the
administration of different management systems or controllers)
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
requires some network resources to be synchronized between systems.
Particularly, there are two resources that must be orchestrated and
manage to avoid asymmetric (non-functional) configuration, or the
usage of unavailable resources.
For example, route targets (RTs) shall be synchronized between PEs.
When all PEs are controlled by the same management system, RT
allocation can be performed by that management system. In cases
where the service spans across multiple management systems, the task
of allocating RTs has to be aligned across the domains, therefore,
the service model must provide a way to specify RTs. In addition,
route distinguishers (RDs) must also be synchronized to avoid
collisions in RD allocation between separate management systems. An
incorrect allocation might lead to the same RD and IP prefixes being
exported by different PEs.
6.3. Management of Multicast Services
Multicast services over L3VPN can be implemented using dual PIM MVPNs
(also known as, Draft Rosen model) [RFC4364] or Multiprotocol BGP
(MP-BGP)-based MVPNs [RFC6513][RFC6514]. Both methods are supported
and equally effective, but the main difference is that MBGP-based
MVPN does not require multicast configuration on the service provider
network. MBGP MVPNs employ the intra-autonomous system BGP control
plane and PIM sparse mode as the data plane. The PIM state
information is maintained between PEs using the same architecture
that is used for unicast VPNs.
On the other hand, [RFC4364] has limitations such as reduced options
for transport, control plane scalability, availability, operational
inconsistency, and the need of maintaining state in the backbone.
Because of these limitations, MBGP MVPN is the architectural model
that has been taken as the base for implementing multicast service in
L3VPNs. In this scenario, BGP auto discovery is used to discover
MVPN PE members and the customer PIM signaling is sent across the
provider's core through MP-BGP. The multicast traffic is transported
on MPLS P2MP LSPs.
7. Description of the L3NM YANG Module
The L3NM ('ietf-l3vpn-ntw') is defined to manage L3VPNs in a service
provider network. In particular, the 'ietf-l3vpn-ntw' module can be
used to create, modify, and retrieve L3VPN services of a network.
The full tree diagram of the module can be generated using the
"pyang" tool [PYANG]. That tree is not included here because it is
too long (Section 3.3 of [RFC8340]). Instead, subtrees are provided
for the reader's convenience.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
7.1. Overall Structure of the Module
The 'ietf-l3vpn-ntw' module uses two main containers: 'vpn-services'
and 'vpn-profiles' (see Figure 3).
The 'vpn-profiles' container is used by the provider to maintain a
set of common VPN profiles that apply to one or several VPN services
(Section 7.2).
The 'vpn-services' container maintains the set of VPN services
managed within the service provider network. 'vpn-service' is the
data structure that abstracts a VPN service (Section 7.3).
module: ietf-l3vpn-ntw
+--rw l3vpn-ntw
+--rw vpn-profiles
| ...
+--rw vpn-services
+--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
Figure 3: Overall L3NM Tree Structure
7.2. VPN Profiles
The 'vpn-profiles' container (Figure 4) allows the VPN service
provider to define and maintain a set of VPN profiles
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] that apply to one or several VPN
services.
This document does not make any assumption about the exact definition
of these profiles. The exact definition of the profiles is local to
each VPN service provider. The model only includes an identifier to
these profiles in order to ease identifying and binding local
policies when building a VPN service. As shown in Figure 4, the
following identifiers can be included:
'external-connectivity-identifier': This identifier refers to a
profile that defines the external connectivity provided to a VPN
service (or a subset of VPN sites). An external connectivity may
be an access to the Internet or a restricted connectivity such as
access to a public/private cloud.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'encryption-profile-identifier': An encryption profile refers to a
set of policies related to the encryption scheme(s) and setup that
can be applied when building and offering a VPN service.
'qos-profile-identifier': A Quality of Service (QoS) profile refers
to as set of policies such as classification, marking, and actions
(e.g., [RFC3644]).
'bfd-profile-identifier': A Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
profile refers to a set of BFD [RFC5880] policies that can be
invoked when building a VPN service.
'forwarding-profile-identifier': A forwarding profile refers to the
policies that apply to the forwarding of packets conveyed within a
VPN. Such policies may consist, for example, at applying Access
Control Lists (ACLs).
'routing-profile-identifier': A routing profile refers to a set of
routing policies that will be invoked (e.g., BGP policies) when
delivering the VPN service.
+--rw l3vpn-ntw
+--rw vpn-profiles
| +--rw valid-provider-identifiers
| +--rw external-connectivity-identifier* [id]
| | {external-connectivity}?
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw encryption-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw qos-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw bfd-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw forwarding-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw routing-profile-identifier* [id]
| +--rw id string
+--rw vpn-services
...
Figure 4: VPN Profiles Subtree Structure
7.3. VPN Services
The 'vpn-service' is the data structure that abstracts a VPN service
in the service provider network. Each 'vpn-service' is uniquely
identified by an identifier: 'vpn-id'. Such 'vpn-id' is only
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
meaningful locally within the network controller. The subtree of the
'vpn-services' is shown in Figure 5.
+--rw l3vpn-ntw
+--rw vpn-profiles
| ...
+--rw vpn-services
+--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
+--rw vpn-id vpn-id
+--rw vpn-name? string
+--rw vpn-description? string
+--rw customer-name? string
+--rw parent-service-id? vpn-common:vpn-id
+--rw vpn-type? identityref
+--rw vpn-service-topology? identityref
+--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--rw ie-profiles
| ...
+--rw underlay-transport
| +-- (type)?
| +--:(abstract)
| | +-- transport-instance-id? string
| +--:(protocol)
| +-- protocol* identityref
+--rw external-connectivity
| {external-connectivity}
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(profile)
| +--rw profile-name? leafref
+--rw vpn-nodes
...
Figure 5: VPN Services Subtree Structure
The description of the VPN service data nodes that are depicted in
Figure 5 are as follows:
'vpn-id': Is an identifier that is used to uniquely identify the
L3VPN service within L3NM scope.
'vpn-name': Associates a name with the service in order to
facilitate the identification of the service.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'vpn-description': Includes a textual description of the service.
The internal structure of a VPN description is local to each VPN
service provider.
'customer-name': Indicates the name of the customer who ordered the
service.
'parent-service-id': Refers to an identifier of the parent service
(e.g, L3SM, IETF network slice, VPN+) that triggered the creation
of the VPN service. This identifier is used to easily correlate
the (network) service as built in the network with a service
order. A controller can use that correlation to enrich or
populate some fields (e.g., description fields) as a function of
local deployments.
'vpn-type': Indicates the VPN type. The values are taken from
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common]. For the L3NM, this is typically set
to BGP/MPLS L3VPN.
'vpn-service-topology': Indicates the network topology for the
service: hub-spoke, any-to-any, or custom. The network
implementation of this attribute is defined by the correct usage
of import and export profiles (Section 4.3.5 of [RFC4364]).
'status': Is used to track the service status of a given VPN
service. Both operational and administrative status are
maintained together with a timestamp. For example, a service can
be created, but not put into effect.
Administrative and operational status can be used as a trigger to
detect service anomalies. For example, a service that is declared
at the service layer as being active but still inactive at the
network layer is an indication that network provision actions are
needed to align the observed service status with the expected
service status.
'ie-profiles': Defines reusable import/export policies for the same
'vpn-service'.
More details are provided in Section 7.4.
'underlay-transport': Describes the preference for the transport
technology to carry the traffic of the VPN service. This
preference is especially useful in networks with multiple domains
and Network-to-Network Interface (NNI) types. The underlay
transport can be expressed as an abstract transport instance
(e.g., an identifier of a VPN+ instance, a virtual network
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
identifier, or a network slice name) or as an ordered list of the
actual protocols to be enabled in the network.
A rich set of protocol identifiers that can be used to refer to an
underlay transport are defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common].
'external-connectivity': Indicates whether/how external connectivity
is provided to the VPN service. For example, a service provider
may provide an external connectivity to a VPN customer (e.g., to a
public cloud). Such service may involve tweaking both filtering
and NAT rules (e.g., bind a Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRF)
interface with a NAT instance as discussed in Section 2.10 of
[RFC8512]). These added value features may be bound to all or a
subset of network accesses. Some of these added value features
may be implemented in a PE or in other nodes than PEs (e.g., a P
node or event a dedicated node that hosts the NAT function).
Only a pointer to a local profile that defines the external
connectivity feature is supported in this document.
'vpn-node': Is an abstraction that represents a set of policies
applied to a network node and that belong to a single 'vpn-
service'. A VPN service is typically built by adding instances of
'vpn-node' to the 'vpn-nodes' container.
A 'vpn-node' contains 'vpn-network-accesses', which are the
interfaces attached to the VPN by which the customer traffic is
received. Therefore, the customer sites are connected to the
'vpn-network-accesses'.
Note that, as this is a network data model, the information about
customers sites is not required in the model. Such information is
rather relevant in the L3SM. Whether that information is included
in the L3NM, e.g., to populate the various 'description' data node
is implementation specific.
More details are provided in Section 7.5.
7.4. Import/Export Profiles
The import and export profiles construct contains a list with
information related with route targets and distinguishers (RTs and
RDs), grouped and identified by 'ie-profile-id'. The identifier is
then referenced in one or multiple 'vpn-nodes' (Section 7.5) so that
the controller can identify RTs and RDs to be configured for a given
VRF. The subtree of 'ie-profiles' is shown in Figure 6.
The following modes are supported in:
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'full-autoasigned': The network controller auto-assigns logical
resources (RTs, RDs). This can apply for the deployment of new
services.
'rd-from-pool': A variant of the previous one is to indicate a pool
from where the RD values can be auto-assigned.
'directly-assigned': The VPN service provider (service orchestrator)
assigns explicitly the RTs and RDs. This case will fit with a
brownfield scenario where some existing services need to be
updated by the VPN service provider.
'no-rd': The (service orchestrator) explicitly wants no RT/RD to be
assigned. This case can be used for CE testing within the network
or for troubleshooting proposes.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
+--rw l3vpn-ntw
+--rw vpn-profiles
| ...
+--rw vpn-services
+--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
+--rw vpn-id vpn-common:vpn-id
+ ...
+--rw ie-profiles
| +--rw ie-profile* [ie-profile-id]
| +--rw ie-profile-id string
| +--rw (rd-choice)?
| | +--:(directly-assigned)
| | | +--rw rd?
| | | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| | +--:(pool-assigned)
| | | +--rw rd-pool-name? string
| | | +--ro rd-from-pool?
| | | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| | +--:(full-autoasigned)
| | | +--rw auto? empty
| | | +--ro rd-auto?
| | | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| | +--:(no-rd)
| | +--rw no-rd? empty
| +--rw vpn-targets
| +--rw vpn-target* [id]
| | +--rw id int8
| | +--rw route-targets* [route-target]
| | | +--rw route-target rt-types:route-target
| | +--rw route-target-type
| | rt-types:route-target-type
| +--rw vpn-policies
| +--rw import-policy? string
| +--rw export-policy? string
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [ne-id]
+--rw ne-id string
...
+--rw node-ie-profile? leafref
...
Figure 6: Subtree Structure of Import/Export Profiles
7.5. VPN Nodes
The 'vpn-node' is an abstraction that represents a set of common
policies applied on a given network node (typically, a PE) and belong
to one L3VPN service. The 'vpn-node' includes a parameter to
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
indicate the network node on which it is applied. In the case that
the 'ne-id' points to a specific PE, the 'vpn-node' will likely be
mapped into a VRF in the node. However, the model also allows to
point to an abstract node. In this case, the network controller will
decide how to split the 'vpn-node' into VRFs.
+--rw l3vpn-ntw
+--rw vpn-profiles
| ...
+--rw vpn-services
+--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
+--rw vpn-node-id union
+--rw description? string
+--rw ne-id? string
+--rw node-role? identityref
+--rw local-autonomous-system? inet:as-number
| {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}?
+--rw address-family? identityref
+--rw router-id? inet:ip-address
+--rw (rd-choice)?
| +--:(directly-assigned)
| | +--rw rd?
| | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| +--:(pool-assigned)
| | +--rw rd-pool-name? string
| | +--ro rd-from-pool?
| | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| +--:(full-autoasigned)
| | +--rw auto? empty
| | +--ro rd-auto?
| | rt-types:route-distinguisher
| +--:(no-rd)
| +--rw no-rd? empty
+--rw vpn-targets
| +--rw vpn-target* [id]
| | +--rw id int8
| | +--rw route-targets* [route-target]
| | | +--rw route-target
| | | rt-types:route-target
| | +--rw route-target-type
| | rt-types:route-target-type
| +--rw vpn-policies
| +--rw import-policy? string
| +--rw export-policy? string
+--rw node-ie-profile? leafref
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
+--rw maximum-routes
| +--rw selector* [address-family protocol]
| +--rw address-family identityref
| +--rw protocol identityref
| +--rw maximum-routes? uint32
+--rw groups
| +--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
| ...
+--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
...
Figure 7: VPN Node Subtree Structure
In reference to the subtree shown in Figure 7, the description of VPN
node data nodes is as follows:
'vpn-node-id': Is an identifier that uniquely identifies a node that
enable a VPN network access.
'description': Providers a textual description of the VPN node.
'ne-id': Includes a unique identifier of the network element where
the VPN node is deployed.
'node-role': Indicates the role of the VPN node in the VPN. Roles
values are defines defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] (e.g.,
any-to-any-role, spoke-role, hub-role).
'local-autonomous-system': Indicates the BGP Autonomous System
Number (ASN) that is configured for the VPN node.
'address-family': Is used to identify the address family used for
the Router ID. It can be set to IPv4 or IPv6.
'router-id': Indicates a unique Router ID information. It can be an
IPv4 or IPv6 address as a function of the enclosed address-family.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'rd': If the logical resources are managed outside the network
controller, the model allows to explicitly indicate the logical
resources such as RTs and RDs.
As defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] and recalled in
Section 7.4, RDs can be explicitly configured or automatically
assigned. RD auto- assignment can also constrained by indicating
an RD pool name ('rd- pool-name').
'vpn-targets': Specifies RT import/export rules for the VPN service.
'node-ie-profile': Refer to Section 7.4.
'maximum-routes': Indicates the maximum prefixes that the VPN node
can accept for a given address family and routing protocol. If
'protocol' is set to 'any', this means that the maximum value
applies to any active routing protocol.
'groups': Lists the groups to which a VPN node belongs to
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common]. The 'group-id' is used to
associate, e.g., redundancy or protection constraints with VPN
nodes.
'multicast': Enables multicast traffic in the VPN. Refer to
Section 7.7.
'status': Tracks the status of a node involved in a VPN service.
Both operational and administrative status are maintained. A
mismatch between the administrative status vs. the operational
status can be used as a trigger to detect anomalies.
'vpn-network-accesses': Represents the point to which sites are
connected.
Note that, unlike in L3SM, the L3NM does not need to model the
customer site, only the points where the traffic from the site are
received (i.e., the PE side of PE-CE connections). Hence, the VPN
network access contains the connectivity information between the
provider's network and the customer premises. The VPN profiles
('vpn-profiles') have a set of routing policies that can be
applied during the service creation.
See Section 7.6 for more details.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
7.6. VPN Network Access
The 'vpn-network-access' includes a set of data nodes that describe
the access information for the traffic that belongs to a particular
L3VPN (Figure 8).
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
+--rw id vpn-common:vpn-id
+--rw port-id? vpn-common:vpn-id
+--rw description? string
+--rw vpn-network-access-type? identityref
+--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--rw connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 8: VPN Network Access Subtree Structure
In reference to the subtree depicted in Figure 8, a 'vpn-network-
access' includes the following data nodes:
'id': Is an identifier of the VPN network access.
'port-id': Indicates the physical port on which the VPN network
access is bound.
'description': Includes a textual description of the VPN network
access.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'vpn-network-access-type': Is used to select the type of network
interface to be deployed in the devices. The available options
are:
Point-to-Point: Represents a direct connection between the end-
points. It implies that the controller must keep the
association between a logical or physical interface on the
device with the 'id' of the 'vpn-network-access'.
Multipoint: Represents a broadcast connection between the end-
points. It implies that the controller must keep the
association between a logical or physical interface on the
device with the 'id' of the 'vpn-network-access'.
Pseudowire: Represents a connection coming from an L2VPN service.
It implies that the controller must keep the relationship
between the logical tunnels or bridges on the devices with the
'id' of the' vpn-network-access'.
Loopback: Represents the creation of a logical interface on a
device. An example to illustrate how loopback interfaces can
be created is provided in Figure 35.
'status': Indicates both operational and administrative status of a
VPN network access.
'connection': Represents and groups the set of Layer 2 connectivity
from where the traffic of the L3VPN in a particular VPN Network
access is coming. See Section 7.6.1.
'ip-connection': Contains the IP addressing information of a VPN
network access. See Section 7.6.2.
'routing-protocols': Represents and groups the set of Layer 2
connectivity from where the traffic of the L3VPN in a particular
VPN Network access is coming. See Section 7.6.3.
'oam': Specifies the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
(OAM) mechanisms used for a VPN network accesss. See
Section 7.6.4.
'security': Specifies the authentication and the encryption to be
applied for a given VPN network access. See Section 7.6.5.
'service': Specifies the service parameters (e.g., QoS, multicast)
to apply for a given VPN network access. See Section 7.6.6.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
7.6.1. Connection
The definition of a L3VPN is commonly specified not only at the IP
layer, but also requires to provide parameters at the Ethernet layer,
such as specifying an encapsulation type (e.g., VLAN, QinQ, QinAny,
VxLAN, etc.). The L3NM uses the 'connection' container to specify
such parameters.
A site, as per [RFC4176] represents a VPN customer's location that is
connected to the service provider network via a CE-PE link, which can
access at least one VPN. The connection from the site to the service
provider network is the bearer. Every site is associated with a list
of bearers. A bearer is the layer two connections with the site. In
the L3NM, it is assumed that the bearer has been allocated by the
service provider at the service orchestration stage. The bearer is
associated to a network element and a port. Hence, a bearer is just
a bearer-reference to allow the translation between a service request
(e.g., L3SM) and L3NM.
As shown in Figure 9, the 'connection' container defines protocols
and parameters to enable connectivity at Layer 2.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw connection
| +--rw encapsulation-type? identityref
| +--rw logical-interface
| | +--rw peer-reference? uint32
| +--rw tagged-interface
| | +--rw type? identityref
| | +--rw dot1q-vlan-tagged {vpn-common:dot1q}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw cvlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw priority-tagged
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | +--rw qinq {vpn-common:qinq}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw svlan-id uint16
| | | +--rw cvlan-id uint16
| | +--rw qinany {vpn-common:qinany}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw svlan-id uint16
| | +--rw vxlan {vpn-common:vxlan}?
| | +--rw vni-id uint32
| | +--rw peer-mode? identityref
| | +--rw peer-list* [peer-ip]
| | +--rw peer-ip inet:ip-address
| +--rw bearer
| +--rw bearer-reference? string
| | {vpn-common:bearer-reference}?
| +--rw pseudowire
| | +--rw vcid? uint32
| | +--rw far-end? union
| +--rw vpls
| +--rw vcid? union
| +--rw far-end? union
...
Figure 9: Connection Subtree Structure
7.6.2. IP Connections
This container is used to group the IP addressing information of a
VPN network access. The allocated address represents the PE
interface address configuration. As shown in Figure 10, this
container can include IPv4, IPv6, or both information if dual-stack
is enabled.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | ...
| +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| ...
...
Figure 10: IP Connection Subtree Structure
For both IPv4 and IPv6, the IP connection supports three IP address
assignment modes for customer addresses: provider DHCP, DHCP relay,
and static addressing. Only one mode is enabled for a given service.
Note that for the IPv6 cases, SLAAC [RFC7527] can be used.
Figure 11 shows the structure of the dynamic IPv4 address assignment.
...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | +--rw local-address? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| | +--rw (allocation-type)?
| | +--:(provider-dhcp)
| | | +--rw dhcp-server-enable? boolean
| | | +--rw (address-assign)?
| | | +--:(number)
| | | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint16
| | | +--:(explicit)
| | | +--rw customer-addresses
| | | +--rw address-group* [group-id]
| | | +--rw group-id string
| | | +--rw start-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | | +--rw end-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | +--:(dhcp-relay)
| | | +--rw dhcp-relay-enable? boolean
| | | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | | +--rw server-ip-address* inet:ipv4-address
| | +--:(static-addresses)
| | ...
...
Figure 11: IP Connection Subtree Structure (IPv4)
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Figure 12 shows the structure of the dynamic IPv6 address assignment.
...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | ...
| +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| +--rw local-address? inet:ipv6-prefix
| +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| +--rw (allocation-type)?
| +--:(provider-dhcp)
| | +--rw dhcp-server-enable? boolean
| | +--rw (address-assign)?
| | +--:(number)
| | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint16
| | +--:(explicit)
| | +--rw customer-addresses
| | +--rw address-group* [group-id]
| | +--rw group-id string
| | +--rw start-address? inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw end-address? inet:ipv6-address
| +--:(dhcp-relay)
| | +--rw dhcp-relay-enable? boolean
| | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | +--rw server-ip-address* inet:ipv6-address
| +--:(static-addresses)
| ...
...
Figure 12: IP Connection Subtree Structure (IPv6)
In the case of the static addressing (Figure 13), the model supports
the assignment of several IP addresses in the same 'vpn-network-
access'. To identify which of the addresses is the primary address
of a connection ,the 'primary-address' reference MUST be set with the
corresponding 'address-id'.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| | +--rw (allocation-type)?
| | ...
| | +--:(static-addresses)
| | +--rw primary-address? -> ../address/address-id
| | +--rw address* [address-id]
| | +--rw address-id string
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv4-address
| +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| +--rw (allocation-type)?
| ...
| +--:(static-addresses)
| +--rw primary-address? -> ../address/prefix-id
| +--rw address* [address-id]
| +--rw prefix-id string
| +--rw customer-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
...
Figure 13: IP Connection Subtree Structure (Static Mode)
7.6.3. CE-PE Routing Protocols
A VPN service provider can configure one or more routing protocols
associated with a particular 'vpn-network-access'. Such routing
protocol is enabled between the PE and the CE. Each instance is
uniquely identified to accommodate scenarios where multiple instances
of the same routing protocol have to be configured on the same link.
The subtree of the 'routing-protocols' is shown in Figure 14.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id leafref
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}?
| | ...
| +--rw ospf {vpn-common:rtg-ospf}?
| | ...
| +--rw isis {vpn-common:rtg-isis}?
| | ...
| +--rw rip {vpn-common:rtg-rip}?
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp {vpn-common:rtg-vrrp}?
| ...
+--rw security
...
Figure 14: Routing Subtree Structure
Multiple routing instances can be defined; each uniquely identified
by an 'id'. The type of a routing instance is indicated in 'type'.
The values of this attributes are those defined in
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] ('routing-protocol-type' identity).
Configuring multiple instances of the same routing protocol does not
automatically imply that, from a device configuration perspective,
there will be parallel instances (e.g., multiple processes) running
on the PE-CE link. It is up to each implementation to decide about
the appropriate configuration as a function of underlying
capabilities and service provider operational guidelines. As an
example, when multiple BGP peers need to be implemented, multiple
instances of BGP must be configured as part of this model. However,
from a device configuration point of view, this could be implemented
as:
o Multiple BGP processes with a single neighbor running in each
process.
o A single BGP process with multiple neighbors running.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
o A combination thereof.
Routing configuration does not include low-level policies. Such
policies are handed at the device configuration level. Local
policies of a service provider (e.g., filtering) will be implemented
as part of the device configuration; these are not captured in the
L3NM, but the model allows to associate local profiles with routing
instances ('routing-profiles').
The L3NM supports the configuration of one or more IPv4/IPv6 static
routes. Since the same structure is used for both IPv4 and IPv6, it
was considered to have one single container to group both static
entries independently of their address family, but that design was
abandoned to ease the mapping with the structure in [RFC8299]. As
depicted in Figure 15, the following data nodes can be defined for a
given IP prefix:
'lan-tag': Indicates a local tag (e.g., "myfavourite-lan") that is
used to enforce local policies.
'next-hop': Indicates the next-hop to be used for the static route.
It can be identified by an IP address, an interface, etc.
'bfd-enable': Indicates whether BFD is enabled or disabled for this
static route entry.
'metric': Indicates the metric associated with the static route
entry.
'preference': Indicates the preference associated with the static
route entry. This preference is used to selecting a preferred
route among routes to the same destination prefix.
'status': Used to convey the status of a static route entry. This
data node is used to control the (de)activation of individual
static route entries.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes*
| | | [lan next-hop]
| | | {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop union
| | | +--rw bfd-enable? boolean
| | | +--rw metric? uint32
| | | +--rw preference? uint32
| | | +--rw status
| | | +--rw admin-status
| | | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | | +--ro oper-status
| | | +--ro status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes*
| | [lan next-hop]
| | {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | +--rw next-hop union
| | +--rw bfd-enable? boolean
| | +--rw metric? uint32
| | +--rw preference? uint32
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 15: Static Routing Subtree Structure
In addition, the L3NM supports the following CE-PE routing protocols:
BGP: The L3NM allows to configure a BGP neighbor, including a set
for parameters that are pertinent to be tweaked at the network
level for service customization purposes.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
This container does not aim to include every BGP parameter; a
comprehensive set of parameters belongs more to the BGP device
model.
The following data nodes are captured in Figure 16. It is up to
the implementation to derive the corresponding BGP device
configuration:
'description': Includes a description of the BGP session.
'local-autonomous-system': Is set to the AS Number (ASN) to
override a customer ASN if such feature is requested by the
customer.
'peer-autonomous-system': Conveys the customer's ASN.
'address-family': Indicates the address-family of the peer. It
can be set to IPv4, IPv6, or dual-stack.
'neighbor': Can indicate two neighbors (each for a given address-
family) or one neighbor (if 'address-family' attribute is set
to dual-stack). A list of IP address(es) of the BGP neighbors
can be then conveyed in this data node.
'multihop': Indicates the number of allowed IP hops between a PE
and its BGP peer.
'as-override': If set, this parameter indicates whether ASN
override is enabled, i.e., replace the ASN of the customer
specified in the AS_PATH BGP attribute with the ASN identified
in the 'local-autonomous-system' attribute.
'default-route': Controls whether default route(s) can be
advertised to the peer.
'site-of-origin': Is meant to uniquely identify the set of routes
learned from a site via a particular CE/PE connection and is
used to prevent routing loops (Section 7 of [RFC4364]). The
Site of Origin attribute is encoded as a Route Origin Extended
Community.
'ipv6-site-of-origin': Carries an IPv6 Address Specific BGP
Extended that is used to indicate the Site of Origin for VRF
information [RFC5701]. It is used to prevent routing loops.
'bgp-max-prefix': Controls the behavior when a prefix maximum is
reached.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'max-prefix': Indicates the maximum number of BGP prefixes
allowed in the BGP session. If such limit is reached, the
action indicated in 'action-violate' will be followed.
'warning-threshold':a warning
notification will be triggered'
A warning notification is triggered when this limit is reached.
'violate-action': Indicates which action to execute when the maximum
number of BGP prefixes is reached. Examples of such actions are:
send a warning message, discard extra paths from the peer, or
restart the session.
'bgp-timers': Two timers can be captured in this container: (1)
'hold-time' which is the time interval that will be used for
the HoldTimer (Section 4.2 of [RFC4271]) when establishing a
BGP session. (2) 'keep-alive' which is the time interval for
the KeepAlive timer between a PE and a BGP peer (Section 4.4 of
[RFC4271]).
'security': The module adheres to the recommendations in
Section 13.2 of [RFC4364] as it allows to enable TCP-AO
[RFC5925] and accommodates the installed base that make use of
MD5. In addition, the module includes a provision for the use
of IPsec.
'status': Indicates the status of the BGP routing instance.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw bgp {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}?
| | +--rw description? string
| | +--rw local-autonomous-system? inet:as-number
| | +--rw peer-autonomous-system inet:as-number
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw neighbor* inet:ip-address
| | +--rw multihop? uint8
| | +--rw as-override? boolean
| | +--rw default-route? boolean
| | +--rw site-of-origin? rt-types:route-origin
| | +--rw ipv6-site-of-origin? rt-types:ipv6-route-origin
| | +--rw bgp-max-prefix
| | | +--rw max-prefix? uint32
| | | +--rw warning-threshold? decimal64
| | | +--rw violate-action? enumeration
| | | +--rw restart-interval? uint16
| | +--rw bgp-timers
| | | +--rw keep-alive? uint16
| | | +--rw hold-time? uint16
| | +--rw security
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(tcp-ao)
| | | | +--rw enable-tcp-ao? boolean
| | | | +--rw ao-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(md5)
| | | | +--rw md5-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(explicit)
| | | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | | +--rw key? string
| | | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | | +--:(ipsec)
| | | +--rw sa? string
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 16: BGP Routing Subtree Structure
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
OSPF: OSPF can be configured to run as a routing protocol on the
'vpn-network-access' [RFC4577][RFC6565]. The following data nodes
are captured in Figure 17:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated.
When only the IPv4 address-family is requested, it will be up
to the implementation to decide whether OSPFv2 [RFC2328] or
OSPFv3 [RFC5340] is used.
'area-id': Indicates the OSPF Area ID.
'metric': Associates a metric with OSPF routes.
'sham-links': Is used to create OSPF sham links between two VPN
network accesses sharing the same area and having a backdoor
link (Section 4.2.7 of [RFC4577]).
'max-lsa': Sets the maximum number of LSAs that the OSPF instance
will accept.
'security': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled for
the OSPF instance. The following options are supported: IPsec
for OSPFv3 authentication [RFC4552], authentication trailer for
OSPFv2 [RFC5709] [RFC7474] and OSPFv3 [RFC7166].
'status': Indicates the status of the OSPF routing instance.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw ospf {vpn-common:rtg-ospf}?
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw area-id yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw sham-links {vpn-common:rtg-ospf-sham-link}?
| | | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | | +--rw target-site
| | | | vpn-common:vpn-id
| | | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw max-lsa? uint32
| | +--rw security
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(md5)
| | | | +--rw md5-keychain?
| | | | kc:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(ipsec)
| | | +--rw sa? string
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 17: OPSF Routing Subtree Structure
IS-IS: The model (Figure 18) allows the user to configure IS-IS to
run on the 'vpn-network-access' interface. The following IS-IS
data nodes are supported:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated.
'area-address': Indicates the IS-IS area address.
'level': Indicates the IS-IS level: Level 1, Level2, or both.
'metric': Associates a metric with IS-IS routes.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
'mode': Indicates the IS-IS interface mode type. It can be set
to 'active' (that is, send or receive IS-IS protocol control
packets) or 'passive' (that is, suppress the sending of IS-IS
updates through the interface).
'security': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled for
the IS-IS instance.
'status': Indicates the status of the OSPF routing instance.
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw isis {vpn-common:rtg-isis}?
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw area-address yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw level? identityref
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw mode? enumeration
| | +--rw security
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | | | +--rw key-chain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(auth-key-explicit)
| | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 18: IS-IS Routing Subtree Structure
RIP: The module covers only a list of address-family and status as
shown in Figure 19. The meaning of these data nodes is similar to
the other routing protocols.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw rip {vpn-common:rtg-rip}?
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 19: RIP Subtree Structure
VRRP: The model (Figure 20) allows to enable VRRP on the 'vpn-
network-access' interface. The following data nodes are
supported:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated. Note that VRRP version 3
[RFC5798] supports both IPv4 and IPv6.
'vrrp-group': Is used to identify the VRRP group.
'backup-peer': Carries the IP address of the peer
'priority': Assigns the VRRP election priority for the backup
virtual router.
'ping-reply': Controls whether ping requests can be replied to.
'status': Indicates the status of the VRRP instance.
Note that no security data node is included for VRRP as there
isn't currently any type of VRRP authentication (see Section 9 of
[RFC5798]).
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw vrrp {vpn-common:rtg-vrrp}?
| +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw vrrp-group? uint8
| +--rw backup-peer? inet:ip-address
| +--rw priority? uint8
| +--rw ping-reply? boolean
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 20: VRRP Subtree Structure
7.6.4. OAM
This container (Figure 21) defines the Operations, Administration,
and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms used for a VPN network access. In
the current version of the L3NM, only BFD is supported. The current
data nodes can be specified:
holdtime': Is used to indicate the expected BFD holddown time. The
value can be set by the customer or selected from a profile.
'security': Includes the required information to enable the BFD
authentication modes discussed in Section 6.7 of [RFC5880]. In
particular 'meticulous' controls the activation of the meticulous
mode discussed in Sections 6.7.3 and 6.7.4 of [RFC5880].
'status': Indicates the status of BFD.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw oam
| +--rw bfd {vpn-common:bfd}?
| +--rw (holdtime)?
| | +--:(fixed)
| | | +--rw fixed-value? uint32
| | +--:(profile)
| | | +--rw profile-name? leafref
| +--rw authentication!
| | +--rw key-chain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | +--rw meticulous? boolean
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 21: IP Connection Subtree Structure (OAM)
7.6.5. Security
The 'security' container specifies the authentication and the
encryption to be applied for a given VPN network access traffic. As
depicted in the subtree shown in Figure 22, the L3NM can be used to
directly control the encryption to put in place (e.g., Layer 2 or
Layer 3 encryption) or invoke a local encryption profile.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw vpn-services
+--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw security
| +--rw encryption {vpn-common:encryption}?
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw layer? enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | +--rw profile-name? leafref
| +--:(customer-profile)
| +--rw customer-key-chain?
| kc:key-chain-ref
+--rw service
...
Figure 22: Security Subtree Structure
7.6.6. Services
The 'services' container specifies the service parameters to apply
for a given VPN network access (Figure 23).
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw service
+--rw input-bandwidth uint64
+--rw output-bandwidth uint64
+--rw mtu uint16
+--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}?
| ...
+--rw carrierscarrier
| {vpn-common:carrierscarrier}?
| +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
...
Figure 23: Services Subtree Structure
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
The following data nodes are defined:
'input-bandwidth': Indicates the inbound bandwidth of the connection
(i.e., download bandwidth from the SP to the site).
'output-bandwidth': Indicates the outbound bandwidth of the
connection (i.e., upload bandwidth from the site to the SP).
'mtu': Indicates the MTU at service level. It can be the IP MTU or
MPLS MTU, for example.
'qos': Is used to define a set of QoS policies to apply on a given
connection (Figure 24). A QoS policy may be a classification or
an action policy. For example, a QoS action can be defined to
rate limit inbound/outbound traffic of a given class of service.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}?
| +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | +--rw rule* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | +--rw (l3)?
| | | | | +--:(ipv4)
| | | | | | ...
| | | | | +--:(ipv6)
| | | | | ...
| | | | +--rw (l4)?
| | | | +--:(tcp)
| | | | | ...
| | | | +--:(udp)
| | | | ...
| | | +--:(match-application)
| | | +--rw match-application?
| | | identityref
| | +--rw target-class-id?
| | string
| +--rw qos-action
| | +--rw rule* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw inbound-rate-limit? decimal64
| | +--rw outbound-rate-limit? decimal64
| +--rw qos-profile
| +--rw qos-profile* [profile]
| +--rw profile leafref
| +--rw direction? identityref
...
Figure 24: Services Subtree Structure
QoS classification can be based on many criteria such as:
Layer 3: As shown in Figure 26, classification can be based on
any IP header field or a combination thereof. Both IPv4 and
IPv6 are supported.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
+--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}?
| +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | +--rw rule* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | +--rw (l3)?
| | | | | +--:(ipv4)
| | | | | | +--rw ipv4
| | | | | | +--rw dscp? inet:dscp
| | | | | | +--rw ecn? uint8
| | | | | | +--rw length? uint16
| | | | | | +--rw ttl? uint8
| | | | | | +--rw protocol? uint8
| | | | | | +--rw ihl? uint8
| | | | | | +--rw flags? bits
| | | | | | +--rw offset? uint16
| | | | | | +--rw identification? uint16
| | | | | | +--rw (destination-network)?
| | | | | | | +--:(destination-ipv4-network)
| | | | | | | +--rw destination-ipv4-network?
| | | | | | | inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | | +--rw (source-network)?
| | | | | | +--:(source-ipv4-network)
| | | | | | +--rw source-ipv4-network?
| | | | | | inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | +--:(ipv6)
| | | | | +--rw ipv6
| | | | | +--rw dscp? inet:dscp
| | | | | +--rw ecn? uint8
| | | | | +--rw length? uint16
| | | | | +--rw ttl? uint8
| | | | | +--rw protocol? uint8
| | | | | +--rw (destination-network)?
| | | | | | +--:(destination-ipv6-network)
| | | | | | +--rw destination-ipv6-network?
| | | | | | inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw (source-network)?
| | | | | | +--:(source-ipv6-network)
| | | | | | +--rw source-ipv6-network?
| | | | | | inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw flow-label?
| | | | | inet:ipv6-flow-label
...
Figure 25: QoS Subtree Structure (L3)
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Layer 4: As shown in Figure 26, TCP or UDP-related match crietria
can be specified in the L3NM.
+--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}?
| +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | +--rw rule* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | +--rw (l3)?
| | | | | ...
| | | | +--rw (l4)?
| | | | +--:(tcp)
| | | | | +--rw tcp
| | | | | +--rw sequence-number? uint32
| | | | | +--rw acknowledgement-number? uint32
| | | | | +--rw data-offset? uint8
| | | | | +--rw reserved? uint8
| | | | | +--rw flags? bits
| | | | | +--rw window-size? uint16
| | | | | +--rw urgent-pointer? uint16
| | | | | +--rw options? binary
| | | | | +--rw (source-port)?
| | | | | | +--:(source-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | | | +--rw source-port-range-or-operator
| | | | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
| | | | | | +--:(range)
| | | | | | | +--rw lower-port
| | | | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | | | +--rw upper-port
| | | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | | +--:(operator)
| | | | | | +--rw operator? operator
| | | | | | +--rw port
| | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw (destination-port)?
| | | | +--:(destination-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | | +--rw destination-port-range-or-operator
| | | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
| | | | | +--:(range)
| | | | | | +--rw lower-port
| | | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | | +--rw upper-port
| | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | +--:(operator)
| | | | | +--rw operator? operator
| | | | | +--rw port
| | | | | inet:port-number
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
| | | | +--:(udp)
| | | | +--rw udp
| | | | +--rw length? uint16
| | | | +--rw (source-port)?
| | | | | +--:(source-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | | +--rw source-port-range-or-operator
| | | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
| | | | | +--:(range)
| | | | | | +--rw lower-port
| | | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | | +--rw upper-port
| | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | +--:(operator)
| | | | | +--rw operator? operator
| | | | | +--rw port
| | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | +--rw (destination-port)?
| | | | +--:(destination-port-range-or-operator)
| | | | +--rw destination-port-range-or-operator
| | | | +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
| | | | +--:(range)
| | | | | +--rw lower-port
| | | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw upper-port
| | | | | inet:port-number
| | | | +--:(operator)
| | | | +--rw operator? operator
| | | | +--rw port
| | | | inet:port-number
...
Figure 26: QoS Subtree Structure (L4)
Application match: Relies upon application-specific
classification.
'carrierscarrier': Groups a set of parameters that are used when CsC
is enabled such the use of BGP for signalling purposes [RFC8277].
'multicast': Specifies the multicast mode and other data nodes such
as the address-family. Refer to Section 7.7.
7.7. Multicast
Multicast may be enabled for a particular VPN at the VPN node and VPN
network access levels (see Figure 27). Some data nodes (e.g., max-
groups) can be controlled at the VPN node level or at the VPN network
access.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
...
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
| ...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw service
...
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
...
Figure 27: Overall Multicast Subtree Structure
Multicast-related data nodes at the VPN node level are shown in
Figure 29. Disabling multicast at the VPN node level will have an
effect to disable it also at the VPN network access level. For IGMP,
MLD, and PIM, Global data nodes that are defined at the VPN node
level are applicable to all VPN network accesses whose corresponding
nodes are not provided at the VPN network access level.
...
+--rw vpn-nodes
+--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id]
...
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
| +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw tree-flavor* identityref
| +--rw rp
| | +--rw rp-group-mappings
| | | +--rw rp-group-mapping* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw provider-managed
| | | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | | +--rw rp-redundancy? boolean
| | | | +--rw optimal-traffic-delivery? boolean
| | | | +--rw anycast
| | | | +--rw local-address? inet:ip-address
| | | | +--rw rp-set-address* inet:ip-address
| | | +--rw rp-address inet:ip-address
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
| | | +--rw groups
| | | +--rw group* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw (group-format)
| | | +--:(group-prefix)
| | | | +--rw group-address? inet:ip-prefix
| | | +--:(startend)
| | | +--rw group-start? inet:ip-address
| | | +--rw group-end? inet:ip-address
| | +--rw rp-discovery
| | +--rw rp-discovery-type? identityref
| | +--rw bsr-candidates
| | +--rw bsr-candidate-address* inet:ip-address
| +--rw msdp {msdp}?
| | +--rw peer? inet:ip-address
| | +--rw local-address? inet:ip-address
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw igmp {vpn-common:igmp and vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | +--rw static-group* [group-addr]
| | | +--rw group-addr
| | | rt-types:ipv4-multicast-group-address
| | | +--rw source-addr?
| | | rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address
| | +--rw max-groups? uint32
| | +--rw max-entries? uint32
| | +--rw version? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw mld {vpn-common:mld and vpn-common:ipv6}?
| | +--rw static-group* [group-addr]
| | | +--rw group-addr
| | | rt-types:ipv6-multicast-group-address
| | | +--rw source-addr?
| | | rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address
| | +--rw max-groups? uint32
| | +--rw max-entries? uint32
| | +--rw version? identityref
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}?
| +--rw hello-interval? uint8
| +--rw dr-priority? uint16
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 28: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Node Level)
Multicast-related data nodes at the VPN network access level are
shown in Figure 29. Except the 'status' node, the value configured
at the VPN network access level overrides the value configured for
the corresponding data node at the VPN node level.
...
+--rw vpn-network-accesses
+--rw vpn-network-access* [id]
...
+--rw service
...
+--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
+--rw access-type? enumeration
+--rw address-family? identityref
+--rw protocol-type? enumeration
+--rw remote-source? boolean
+--rw igmp {vpn-common:igmp}?
| +--rw static-group* [group-addr]
| | +--rw group-addr
| | rt-types:ipv4-multicast-group-address
| | +--rw source-addr?
| | rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address
| +--rw max-groups? uint32
| +--rw max-entries? uint32
| +--rw max-group-sources? uint32
| +--rw version? identityref
| +--rw status
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--rw mld {vpn-common:mld}?
| +--rw static-group* [group-addr]
| | +--rw group-addr
| | rt-types:ipv6-multicast-group-address
| | +--rw source-addr?
| | rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address
| +--rw max-groups? uint32
| +--rw max-entries? uint32
| +--rw max-group-sources? uint32
| +--rw version? identityref
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}?
+--rw priority? uint8
+--rw hello-interval? uint8
+--rw dr-priority? uint16
+--rw status
+--rw admin-status
| +--rw status? identityref
| +--rw last-updated? yang:date-and-time
+--ro oper-status
+--ro status? identityref
+--ro last-updated? yang:date-and-time
Figure 29: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Network Access Level)
The model supports a single type of tree: Any-Source Multicast (ASM),
Source-Specific Multicast (SSM), or bidirectional.
When ASM is used, the model supports the configuration of rendez-vous
points (RPs). RP discovery may be 'static', 'bsr-rp', or 'auto-rp'.
When set to 'static', RP to multicast grouping mapping MUST be
configured as part of the 'rp-group-mappings' container. The RP MAY
be a provider node or a customer node. When the RP is a customer
node, the RP address must be configured using the 'rp-address' leaf
otherwise no RP address is needed.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
The model supports RP redundancy through the 'rp-redundancy' leaf.
How the redundancy is achieved is out of scope and is up to the
implementation.
When a particular VPN using ASM requires a more optimal traffic
delivery, 'optimal-traffic-delivery' can be set. When set to 'true',
the implementation must use any mechanism to provide a more optimal
traffic delivery for the customer. For example, anycast is one of
the mechanisms to enhance RPs redundancy, resilience against
failures, and to recover from failures quickly.
For redundancy purposes, Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)
[RFC3618] may be enabled and used to share the state about sources
between multiple RPs. The purpose of MSDP in this context is to
enhance the robustness of the multicast service. MSDP may be
configured on non-RP routers, which is useful in a domain that does
not support multicast sources, but does support multicast transit.
8. L3NM YANG Module
This module uses types defined in [RFC6991] and groupings defined in
[RFC8519], [RFC8177], and [RFC8294].
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-l3vpn-ntw@2021-02-19.yang"
module ietf-l3vpn-ntw {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-ntw";
prefix l3nm;
import ietf-vpn-common {
prefix vpn-common;
reference
"RFC UUUU: A Layer 2/3 VPN Common YANG Model";
}
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
"Section 4 of RFC 6991";
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
reference
"Section 3 of RFC 6991";
}
import ietf-key-chain {
prefix key-chain;
reference
"RFC 8177: YANG Key Chain.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
import ietf-routing-types {
prefix rt-types;
reference
"RFC 8294: Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area";
}
organization
"IETF OPSA (Operations and Management Area) Working Group ";
contact
"WG Web: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/>
WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Editor: Samier Barguil
<mailto:samier.barguilgiraldo.ext@telefonica.com>
Editor: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
<mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>
Editor: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Author: Luis Angel Munoz
<mailto:luis-angel.munoz@vodafone.com>
Author: Alejandro Aguado
<mailto:alejandro.aguado_martin@nokia.com>
";
description
"This YANG module defines a generic network-oriented model
for the configuration of Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks.
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to
the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set
forth in Section 4 of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX
(https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself
for full legal notices.";
revision 2021-02-19 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC XXXX: A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
/* Features */
feature msdp {
description
"This feature indicates that Multicast Source Discovery Protocol
(MSDP) capabilities are supported by the VPN.";
reference
"RFC 3618: Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)";
}
/* Identities */
identity address-allocation-type {
description
"Base identity for address allocation type in the
Provider Edge (PE)-Customer Edge (CE) link.";
}
identity provider-dhcp {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"The Provider's network provides a DHCP service to the customer.";
}
identity provider-dhcp-relay {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"The Provider's network provides a DHCP relay service to the
customer.";
}
identity provider-dhcp-slaac {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"The Provider's network provides a DHCP service to the customer
as well as IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC).";
reference
"RFC 7527: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration";
}
identity static-address {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"The Provider-to-customer addressing is static.";
}
identity slaac {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Use IPv6 SLAAC.";
reference
"RFC 7527: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration";
}
identity bearer-inf-type {
description
"Identity for the bearer interface type.";
}
identity port-id {
base bearer-inf-type;
description
"Identity for the priority-tagged interface.";
}
identity lag-id {
base bearer-inf-type;
description
"Identity for the lag-tagged interface.";
}
identity local-defined-next-hop {
description
"Defines a base identity type of local defined
next-hops.";
}
identity discard {
base local-defined-next-hop;
description
"Indicates an action to discard traffic for the
corresponding destination.
For example, this can be used to blackhole traffic.";
}
identity local-link {
base local-defined-next-hop;
description
"Treat traffic towards addresses within the specified next-hop
prefix as though they are connected to a local link.";
}
typedef predefined-next-hop {
type identityref {
base local-defined-next-hop;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
description
"Pre-defined next-hop designation for locally generated routes.";
}
/* Typedefs */
typedef area-address {
type string {
pattern '[0-9A-Fa-f]{2}(\.[0-9A-Fa-f]{4}){0,6}';
}
description
"This type defines the area address format.";
}
/* Main Blocks */
/* Main l3vpn-ntw */
container l3vpn-ntw {
description
"Main container for L3VPN services management.";
container vpn-profiles {
description
"Contains a set of valid VPN Profiles to reference in the VPN
service.";
uses vpn-common:vpn-profile-cfg;
}
container vpn-services {
description
"Top-level container for the VPN services.";
list vpn-service {
key "vpn-id";
description
"List of VPN services.";
uses vpn-common:vpn-description;
leaf parent-service-id {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
description
"Pointer to the parent service, if any.
A parent service can an L3SM, a slice request, a VPN+
service, etc.";
}
leaf vpn-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:service-type;
}
description
"Indicates the service type.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf vpn-service-topology {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:vpn-topology;
}
default "vpn-common:any-to-any";
description
"VPN service topology.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
container ie-profiles {
description
"Container for Import/Export profiles.";
list ie-profile {
key "ie-profile-id";
description
"List for Imort/Export profile.";
leaf ie-profile-id {
type string;
description
"IE profile id.";
}
uses vpn-common:rt-rd;
}
}
container underlay-transport {
description
"Container for underlay transport.";
uses vpn-common:underlay-transport;
}
container external-connectivity {
if-feature "vpn-common:external-connectivity";
description
"Container for external connectivity.";
choice profile {
description
"Choice for the external connectivity profile.";
case profile {
leaf profile-name {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/external-connectivity-identifier/id";
}
description
"Name of the service provider's profile to be applied
at the VPN service level.";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
}
}
container vpn-nodes {
description
"Container for VPN nodes.";
list vpn-node {
key "vpn-node-id";
description
"List for VPN node.";
leaf vpn-node-id {
type union {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
type uint32;
}
description
"Type STRING or NUMBER identifier.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Textual description of the VPN node.";
}
leaf ne-id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier of the network element where the VPN
node is deployed.";
}
leaf node-role {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:role;
}
default "vpn-common:any-to-any-role";
description
"Role of the VPN node in the IP VPN.";
}
leaf local-autonomous-system {
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-bgp";
type inet:as-number;
description
"Provider's AS number in case the customer requests BGP
routing.";
}
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"The address family used for router-id information.";
}
leaf router-id {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The router-id information can be an IPv4 or IPv6
address.";
}
uses vpn-common:rt-rd;
leaf node-ie-profile {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-services/vpn-service"
+ "/ie-profiles/ie-profile/ie-profile-id";
}
description
"Node's Import/Export profile.";
}
container maximum-routes {
description
"Defines maximum routes for the VRF.";
list selector {
key "address-family protocol";
description
"List of address families.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates the address family (IPv4 or IPv6).";
}
leaf protocol {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:routing-protocol-type;
}
description
"Indicates the routing protocol. 'any' value can
be used to identify a limit that will apply for
any active routing protocol.";
}
leaf maximum-routes {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum prefixes the VRF can accept
for this address family and protocol.";
}
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
uses vpn-common:vpn-components-group;
container multicast {
if-feature "vpn-common:multicast";
description
"Global multicast parameters.";
uses vpn-common:service-status;
leaf-list tree-flavor {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:multicast-tree-type;
}
description
"Type of tree to be used.";
}
container rp {
description
"RP parameters.";
container rp-group-mappings {
description
"RP-to-group mappings parameters.";
list rp-group-mapping {
key "id";
description
"List of RP-to-group mappings.";
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"Unique identifier for the mapping.";
}
container provider-managed {
description
"Parameters for a provider-managed RP.";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Set to true if the Rendezvous Point (RP)
must be a provider-managed node. Set to
false if it is a customer-managed node.";
}
leaf rp-redundancy {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"If true, a redundancy mechanism for the
RP is required.";
}
leaf optimal-traffic-delivery {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"If true, the SP must ensure that
traffic uses an optimal path. An SP may
use Anycast RP or RP-tree-to-SPT
switchover architectures.";
}
container anycast {
when "../rp-redundancy = 'true' and
../optimal-traffic-delivery = 'true'" {
description
"Only applicable if RP redundancy is enabled
and delivery through optimal path is
activated.";
}
description
"PIM Anycast-RP parameters.";
leaf local-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"IP local address for PIM RP. Usually, it
corresponds to router ID or primary
address";
}
leaf-list rp-set-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Address other RP routers that share the
same RP IP address.";
}
}
}
leaf rp-address {
when "../provider-managed/enabled = 'false'" {
description
"Relevant when the RP is not
provider-managed.";
}
type inet:ip-address;
mandatory true;
description
"Defines the address of the RP.
Used if the RP is customer-managed.";
}
container groups {
description
"Multicast groups associated with the RP.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
list group {
key "id";
description
"List of multicast groups.";
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"Identifier for the group.";
}
choice group-format {
mandatory true;
description
"Choice for multicast group format.";
case group-prefix {
leaf group-address {
type inet:ip-prefix;
description
"A single multicast group prefix.";
}
}
case startend {
leaf group-start {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The first multicast group address in
the multicast group address range.";
}
leaf group-end {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The last multicast group address in
the multicast group address range.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
container rp-discovery {
description
"RP discovery parameters.";
leaf rp-discovery-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:multicast-rp-discovery-type;
}
default "vpn-common:static-rp";
description
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"Type of RP discovery used.";
}
container bsr-candidates {
when "derived-from-or-self(../rp-discovery-type, "
+ "'vpn-common:bsr-rp')" {
description
"Only applicable if discovery type is BSR-RP.";
}
description
"Container for List of Customer BSR candidate's
addresses.";
leaf-list bsr-candidate-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Specifies the address of candidate Bootstrap
Router (BSR).";
}
}
}
}
container msdp {
if-feature "msdp";
description
"Includes MSDP-related parameters.";
leaf peer {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Indicates the IP address of the MSDP peer.";
}
leaf local-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Indicates the IP address of the local end.
This local address must be configured on
the node.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container igmp {
if-feature "vpn-common:igmp and vpn-common:ipv4";
description
"Includes IGMP-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to the
IGMP session";
leaf group-addr {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv4 addresss.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv4 addresss.";
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum IGMP entries.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:igmp-version;
}
default "vpn-common:igmpv2";
description
"Version of the IGMP.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container mld {
if-feature "vpn-common:mld and vpn-common:ipv6";
description
"Includes MLD-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to the
MLD session";
leaf group-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv6 addresss.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv6 addresss.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum MLD entries.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:mld-version;
}
default "vpn-common:mldv2";
description
"Version of the MLD protocol.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container pim {
if-feature "vpn-common:pim";
description
"Only applies when protocol type is PIM.";
leaf hello-interval {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
default "30";
description
"PIM hello-messages interval.";
}
leaf dr-priority {
type uint16;
description
"Value to increase or decrease the
chances of a given DR being elected.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
container vpn-network-accesses {
description
"List of network accesses.";
list vpn-network-access {
key "id";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"List of network accesses.";
leaf id {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
description
"Identifier for the network access.";
}
leaf port-id {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
description
"Identifier for the interface.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Textual description of the network access.";
}
leaf vpn-network-access-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:site-network-access-type;
}
default "vpn-common:point-to-point";
description
"Describes the type of connection, e.g.,
point-to-point or multipoint.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
container connection {
description
"Encapsulation types.";
leaf encapsulation-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:encapsulation-type;
}
default "vpn-common:untagged-int";
description
"Encapsulation type. By default, the encapsulation
type is set to 'untagged'.";
}
container logical-interface {
description
"Reference of a logical interface
type.";
leaf peer-reference {
type uint32;
description
"Specifies the associated logical peer
interface.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
}
container tagged-interface {
description
"Container for tagged interfaces.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:encapsulation-type;
}
default "vpn-common:priority-tagged";
description
"Tagged interface type. By default, the type of
the tagged interface is 'priority-tagged'.";
}
container dot1q-vlan-tagged {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:dot1q')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the
tagged interface is 'dot1q'.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:dot1q";
description
"Tagged interface.";
leaf tag-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:tag-type;
}
default "vpn-common:c-vlan";
description
"Tag type. By default, the tag type is
'c-vlan'.";
}
leaf cvlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"VLAN identifier.";
}
}
container priority-tagged {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:priority-tagged')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the
tagged interface is 'priority-tagged'.";
}
description
"Priority tagged.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
leaf tag-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:tag-type;
}
default "vpn-common:c-vlan";
description
"Tag type. By default, the tag type is
'c-vlan'.";
}
}
container qinq {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:qinq')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged
interface is 'qinq'.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:qinq";
description
"QinQ.";
leaf tag-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:tag-type;
}
default "vpn-common:c-s-vlan";
description
"Tag type. By default, the tag type is
'c-s-vlan'.";
}
leaf svlan-id {
type uint16;
mandatory true;
description
"SVLAN identifier.";
}
leaf cvlan-id {
type uint16;
mandatory true;
description
"CVLAN identifier.";
}
}
container qinany {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:qinany')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the
tagged interface is 'qinany'.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
if-feature "vpn-common:qinany";
description
"Container for QinAny.";
leaf tag-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:tag-type;
}
default "vpn-common:s-vlan";
description
"Tag type. By default, the tag type is
's-vlan'.";
}
leaf svlan-id {
type uint16;
mandatory true;
description
"Service VLAN ID.";
}
}
container vxlan {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:vxlan')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the
tagged interface is 'vxlan'.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:vxlan";
description
"QinQ.";
leaf vni-id {
type uint32;
mandatory true;
description
"VXLAN Network Identifier (VNI).";
}
leaf peer-mode {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:vxlan-peer-mode;
}
default "vpn-common:static-mode";
description
"Specifies the VXLAN access mode. By default,
the peer mode is set to 'static-mode'.";
}
list peer-list {
key "peer-ip";
description
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"List of peer IP addresses.";
leaf peer-ip {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Peer IP address.";
}
}
}
}
container bearer {
description
"Defines physical properties of a site
attachment.";
leaf bearer-reference {
if-feature "vpn-common:bearer-reference";
type string;
description
"This is an internal reference for the service
provider.";
}
container pseudowire {
description
"Pseudowire termination parameters";
leaf vcid {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates a PW or VC identifier.";
}
leaf far-end {
type union {
type uint32;
type inet:ip-address;
}
description
"SDP/Far End/LDP neighbour reference.";
}
}
container vpls {
description
"Pseudowire termination parameters";
leaf vcid {
type union {
type uint32;
type string;
}
description
"VCID identifier, IRB/RVPPLs interface
supported using string format.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf far-end {
type union {
type uint32;
type inet:ip-address;
}
description
"SDP/Far End/LDP Neighbour reference.";
}
}
}
}
container ip-connection {
description
"Defines connection parameters.";
container ipv4 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
description
"IPv4-specific parameters.";
leaf local-address {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"This address is used at provider side.";
}
leaf address-allocation-type {
type identityref {
base address-allocation-type;
}
must "not(derived-from-or-self(current(), "
+ "'slaac') or derived-from-or-self(current(),"
+ " 'provider-dhcp-slaac'))" {
error-message
"SLAAC is only applicable to IPv6.";
}
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated to the
peer site.
If there is no value for the address
allocation type, then IPv4 is not enabled.";
}
choice allocation-type {
description
"Choice of the IPv4 address allocation.";
case provider-dhcp {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-"
+ "allocation-type, 'provider-dhcp')" {
description
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"Only applies when addresses are allocated
by DHCP.";
}
description
"DHCP allocated addresses related
parameters.";
leaf dhcp-server-enable {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"Enables a DHCP service on this access.
The following information are passed to
the provider's DHCP server.";
}
choice address-assign {
default "number";
description
"Choice for how IPv4 addresses are
assigned.";
case number {
leaf number-of-dynamic-address {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Specifies the number of IP addresses
to be assigned to the customer on this
access.";
}
}
case explicit {
container customer-addresses {
description
"Container for customer addresses to be
allocated using DHCP.";
list address-group {
key "group-id";
description
"Describes IP addresses to be
allocated by DHCP.
When only start-address or only
end-address is present, it
represents a single address.
When both start-address and
end-address are specified, it
implies a range inclusive of
both addresses. If no address
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
is specified, it implies customer
addresses group is not supported.";
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id for the address range from
start-address to end-address.";
}
leaf start-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Indicates the first address in
the group.";
}
leaf end-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Indicates the last address in the
group.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
case dhcp-relay {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-allocation"
+ "-type, 'provider-dhcp-relay')" {
description
"Only applies when the provider is required
to implement DHCP relay function.";
}
description
"DHCP relay provided by operator.";
leaf dhcp-relay-enable {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"Enables the DHCP relay function for this
access.";
}
container customer-dhcp-servers {
description
"Container for list of customer
DHCP servers.";
leaf-list server-ip-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"IP address of customer DHCP server.";
}
}
}
case static-addresses {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-allocation"
+ "-type, 'static-address')" {
description
"Only applies when address allocation
type is static.";
}
description
"Describes IPv4 addresses used.";
leaf primary-address {
type leafref {
path "../address/address-id";
}
description
"Primary address of the connection.";
}
list address {
key "address-id";
description
"Describes IPv4 addresses used.";
leaf address-id {
type string;
description
"Used static IPv4 address.";
}
leaf customer-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"IPv4 address at the customer side.";
}
}
}
}
}
container ipv6 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6";
description
"IPv6-specific parameters.";
leaf local-address {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Address of the provider side.";
}
leaf address-allocation-type {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
type identityref {
base address-allocation-type;
}
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated.
If there is no value for the address
allocation type, then IPv6 is
not enabled.";
}
choice allocation-type {
description
"IPv6 allocation type.";
case provider-dhcp {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-allo"
+ "cation-type, 'provider-dhcp') "
+ "or derived-from-or-self(./address-allo"
+ "cation-type, 'provider-dhcp-slaac')" {
description
"Only applies when addresses are
allocated by DHCPv6.";
}
description
"DHCPv6 allocated addresses related
parameters.";
leaf dhcp-server-enable {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"Enables DHCPv6 service for this access.";
}
choice address-assign {
default "number";
description
"Choice for the way to assign IPv6
prefixes.";
case number {
leaf number-of-dynamic-address {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Describes the number of IPv6 prefixes
that are allocated to the customer
on this access.";
}
}
case explicit {
container customer-addresses {
description
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"Container for customer IPv6 addresses
allocated by DHCPv6.";
list address-group {
key "group-id";
description
"Describes IPv6 addresses allocated
by DHCPv6.
When only start-address or only
end-address is present, it
represents a single address.
When both start-address and
end-address are specified, it
implies a range inclusive of
both addresses.
If no address is specified, it
implies customer addresses group
is not supported.";
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id for the address range
from identified by start-address
and end-address.";
}
leaf start-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Indicates the first address.";
}
leaf end-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Indicates the last address.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
case dhcp-relay {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-allo"
+ "cation-type, 'provider-dhcp-relay')" {
description
"Only applies when the provider is required
to implement DHCP relay function.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
description
"DHCP relay provided by operator.";
leaf dhcp-relay-enable {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"Enables the DHCP relay function for this
access.";
}
container customer-dhcp-servers {
description
"Container for list of customer DHCP
servers.";
leaf-list server-ip-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"This node contains the IP address of
the customer DHCP server. If the DHCP
relay function is implemented by the
provider, this node contains the
configured value.";
}
}
}
case static-addresses {
when "derived-from-or-self(./address-allocation"
+ "-type, 'static-address')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol allocation type
is static.";
}
description
"IPv6-specific parameters for static
allocation.";
leaf primary-address {
type leafref {
path "../address/prefix-id";
}
description
"Principal address of the connection";
}
list address {
key "prefix-id";
description
"Describes IPv6 prefixes used.";
leaf prefix-id {
type string;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"An identifier of an IPv6 prefix.";
}
leaf customer-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"An IPv6 prefix of the customer side.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
container routing-protocols {
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
list routing-protocol {
key "id";
description
"List of routing protocols used on
the CE/PE link. This list can be augmented.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier for routing protocol.";
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:routing-protocol-type;
}
description
"Type of routing protocol.";
}
list routing-profiles {
key "id";
description
"Routing profiles.";
leaf id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/routing-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"Routing profile to be used.";
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
base vpn-common:ie-type;
}
description
"Import, export or both.";
}
}
container static {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:static')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is static.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to static routing.";
container cascaded-lan-prefixes {
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
list ipv4-lan-prefixes {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
key "lan next-hop";
description
"List of LAN prefixes for the site.";
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"LAN prefixes.";
}
leaf lan-tag {
type string;
description
"Internal tag to be used in VPN
policies.";
}
leaf next-hop {
type union {
type inet:ip-address;
type predefined-next-hop;
}
description
"The next-hop that is to be used
for the static route. This may be
specified as an IP address, an interface,
or a pre-defined next-hop type (e.g.,
discard or local-link).";
}
leaf bfd-enable {
if-feature "vpn-common:bfd";
type boolean;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"Enables BFD.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the metric associated with
the static route.";
}
leaf preference {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the preference of the static
routes.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
list ipv6-lan-prefixes {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6";
key "lan next-hop";
description
"List of LAN prefixes for the site.";
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"LAN prefixes.";
}
leaf lan-tag {
type string;
description
"Internal tag to be used in VPN
policies.";
}
leaf next-hop {
type union {
type inet:ip-address;
type predefined-next-hop;
}
description
"The next-hop that is to be used for the
static route. This may be specified as
an IP address, an interface, or a
pre-defined next-hop type (e.g.,
discard or local-link).";
}
leaf bfd-enable {
if-feature "vpn-common:bfd";
type boolean;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"Enables BFD.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the metric associated with
the static route.";
}
leaf preference {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the preference associated
with the static route.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
}
container bgp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:bgp')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is BGP.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-bgp";
description
"BGP-specific configuration.";
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Includes a description of the BGP session.
Such description is meant to be used for
diagnosis purposes. The semantic of the
description is local to an
implementation.";
}
leaf local-autonomous-system {
type inet:as-number;
description
"Is set to the ASN to override a peers' ASN
if such feature is requested by the
Customer.";
}
leaf peer-autonomous-system {
type inet:as-number;
mandatory true;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"Indicates the Customer's AS Number (ASN) in
case the Customer requests BGP routing.";
}
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"This node contains the address families to be
activated. Dual-stack means that both IPv4
and IPv6 will be activated.";
}
leaf-list neighbor {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"IP address(es) of the BGP neighbor. IPv4
and IPv6 neighbors may be indicated if
two sessions will be used for IPv4 and
IPv6.";
}
leaf multihop {
type uint8;
description
"Describes the number of IP hops allowed
between a given BGP neighbor and the PE.";
}
leaf as-override {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Defines whether AS override is enabled,
i.e., replace the ASN of the customer
specified in the AS Path attribute with
the local ASN.";
}
leaf default-route {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Defines whether default route(s) can be
advertised to its peer. If set, the
default route(s) is advertised to its
peer.";
}
leaf site-of-origin {
when "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv4' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'" {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
description
"Only applies if IPv4 is activated.";
}
type rt-types:route-origin;
description
"The Site of Origin attribute is encoded as
a Route Origin Extended Community. It is
meant to uniquely identify the set of routes
learned from a site via a particular CE/PE
connection and is used to prevent routing
loops.";
reference
"RFC4364, Section 7";
}
leaf ipv6-site-of-origin {
when "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv6' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'" {
description
"Only applies if IPv6 is activated.";
}
type rt-types:ipv6-route-origin;
description
"IPv6 Route Origins are IPv6 Address Specific
BGP Extended that are meant to the Site of
Origin for VRF information.";
reference
"RFC 5701: IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended
Community Attribute";
}
container bgp-max-prefix {
description
"Controls the behavior when a prefix
maximum is reached.";
leaf max-prefix {
type uint32;
default "5000";
description
"Indicates the maximum number of BGP
prefixes allowed in the BGP session.
It allows to control how many prefixes
can be received from a neighbor.
If the limit is exceeded, the action
indicated in violate-action will be
followed.";
reference
"RFC4271, Section 8.2.2.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf warning-threshold {
type decimal64 {
fraction-digits 5;
range "0..100";
}
units "percent";
default "75";
description
"When this value is reached, a warning
notification will be triggered.";
}
leaf violate-action {
type enumeration {
enum warning {
description
"Only a warning message is sent to
the peer when the limit is
exceeded.";
}
enum discard-extra-paths {
description
"Discards extra paths when the
limit is exceeded.";
}
enum restart {
description
"Restarts after a time interval.";
}
}
description
"BGP neighbour max-prefix violate
action";
}
leaf restart-interval {
type uint16;
units "minutes";
description
"Time interval (min) after which the
BGP session will be reestablished.";
}
}
container bgp-timers {
description
"Includes two BGP timers that can be
customized when building a VPN service
with BGP used as CE-PE routing
protocol.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
leaf keep-alive {
type uint16 {
range "0..21845";
}
units "seconds";
default "30";
description
"This timer indicates the KEEPALIVE
messages' frequency between a PE
and a BGP peer.
If set to '0', it indicates KEEPALIVE
messages are disabled.
It is suggested that the maximum time
between KEEPALIVEmessages would be
one third of the Hold Time interval.";
reference
"Section 4.4 of RFC 4271";
}
leaf hold-time {
type uint16 {
range "0 | 3..65535";
}
units "seconds";
default "90";
description
"It indicates the maximum number of
seconds that may elapse between the
receipt of successive KEEPALIVE
and/or UPDATE messages from the peer.
The Hold Time must be either zero or
at least three seconds.";
reference
"Section 4.2 of RFC 4271";
}
}
container security {
description
"Container for BGP security parameters
between a PE and a CE.";
leaf enable {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Enables or disables authentication.";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
container keying-material {
when "../enable = 'true'";
description
"Container for describing how a BGP routing
session is to be secured between a PE and
a CE.";
choice option {
description
"Choice of authentication options.";
case tcp-ao {
description
"Uses TCP-Authentication Option
(TCP-AO).";
reference
"RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication
Option.";
leaf enable-tcp-ao {
type boolean;
description
"Enables TCP-AO.";
}
leaf ao-keychain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Reference to the TCP-AO key chain.";
reference
"RFC 8177: YANG Key Chain.";
}
}
case md5 {
description
"Uses MD5 to secure the session.";
reference
"Section 13.2 of RFC 4364";
leaf md5-keychain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Reference to the MD5 key chain.";
reference
"RFC 8177: YANG Key Chain.";
}
}
case explicit {
leaf key-id {
type uint32;
description
"Key Identifier";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
leaf key {
type string;
description
"OSPF authentication key.";
}
leaf crypto-algorithm {
type identityref {
base key-chain:crypto-algorithm;
}
description
"Indicates the cryptographic algorithm
associated with the key.";
}
}
case ipsec {
description
"Specifies a reference to an IKE
Security Association (SA).";
leaf sa {
type string;
description
"Indicates the name of the SA.";
}
}
}
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container ospf {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:ospf')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is OSPF.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-ospf";
description
"OSPF-specific configuration.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or
both are to be activated.";
}
leaf area-id {
type yang:dotted-quad;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
mandatory true;
description
"Area ID.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Metric of the PE-CE link. It is used
in the routing state calculation and
path selection.";
}
container sham-links {
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-ospf-sham-link";
description
"List of sham links.";
list sham-link {
key "target-site";
description
"Creates a sham link with another site.";
leaf target-site {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
description
"Target site for the sham link connection.
The site is referred to by its ID.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Metric of the sham link. It is used in
the routing state calculation and path
selection. The default value is set
to 1.";
}
}
}
leaf max-lsa {
type uint32 {
range "1..4294967294";
}
description
"Maximum number of allowed LSAs OSPF.";
}
container security {
description
"Authentication configuration.";
leaf enable {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Enables or disables authentication.";
}
container keying-material {
when "../enable = 'true'";
description
"Container for describing how an OSPF
session is to be secured between a CE
and a PE.";
choice option {
description
"Options for OSPF authentication.";
case auth-key-chain {
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"key-chain name.";
}
}
case auth-key-explicit {
leaf key-id {
type uint32;
description
"Key Identifier";
}
leaf key {
type string;
description
"OSPF authentication key.";
}
leaf crypto-algorithm {
type identityref {
base key-chain:crypto-algorithm;
}
description
"Indicates the cryptographic algorithm
associated with the key.";
}
}
case ipsec {
leaf sa {
type string;
description
"Indicates the name of the SA.";
}
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container isis {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:isis')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is IS-IS.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-isis";
description
"IS-IS specific configuration.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both
are to be activated.";
}
leaf area-address {
type yang:dotted-quad;
mandatory true;
description
"Area address.";
}
leaf level {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:isis-level;
}
description
"Can be level1, level2, or level1-2.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Metric of the PE-CE link. It is used
in the routing state calculation and
path selection.";
}
leaf mode {
type enumeration {
enum active {
description
"Interface sends or receives IS-IS
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
protocol control packets.";
}
enum passive {
description
"Suppresses the sending of IS-IS
updates through the specified
interface.";
}
}
default "active";
description
"IS-IS interface mode type.";
}
container security {
description
"Authentication configuration.";
leaf enable {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Enables or disables authentication.";
}
container keying-material {
when "../enable = 'true'";
description
"Container for describing how an IS-IS
session is to be secured between a CE
and a PE.";
choice option {
description
"Options for IS-IS authentication.";
case auth-key-chain {
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"key-chain name.";
}
}
case auth-key-explicit {
leaf key-id {
type uint32;
description
"Key Identifier";
}
leaf key {
type string;
description
"IS-IS authentication key.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf crypto-algorithm {
type identityref {
base key-chain:crypto-algorithm;
}
description
"Indicates the cryptographic algorithm
associated with the key.";
}
}
}
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container rip {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:rip')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is RIP.
For IPv4, the model assumes that RIP
version 2 is used.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-rip";
description
"Configuration specific to RIP routing.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both
address families are to be activated.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container vrrp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:vrrp')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is VRRP.";
}
if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-vrrp";
description
"Configuration specific to VRRP.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both
address families are to be enabled.";
}
leaf vrrp-group {
type uint8 {
range "1..255";
}
description
"Includes the VRRP group identifier.";
}
leaf backup-peer {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Indicates the IP address of the peer.";
}
leaf priority {
type uint8 {
range "1..254";
}
default "100";
description
"Sets the local priority of the VRRP
speaker.";
}
leaf ping-reply {
type boolean;
description
"Controls whether the VRRP speaker should
answer to ping requests.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
}
container oam {
description
"Defines the Operations, Administration,
and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms used.
BFD is set as a fault detection mechanism,
but other mechanisms can be defined in the
future.";
container bfd {
if-feature "vpn-common:bfd";
description
"Container for BFD.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
choice holdtime {
default "fixed";
description
"Choice for holdtime flavor.";
case fixed {
leaf fixed-value {
type uint32;
units "msec";
description
"Expected BFD holdtime.
The customer may impose some fixed
values for the holdtime period if the
provider allows the customer use this
function.
If the provider doesn't allow the
customer to use this function,
the fixed-value will not be set.";
}
}
case profile {
description
"Well-known SP profile.";
leaf profile-name {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/bfd-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"Well-known service provider profile name.
The provider can propose some profiles
to the customer, depending on the
service level the customer wants to
achieve.";
}
}
}
container authentication {
presence "Enables BFD authentication";
description
"Parameters for BFD authentication.";
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Name of the key-chain.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf meticulous {
type boolean;
description
"Enables meticulous mode.";
reference
"Section 6.7 of RFC 5880";
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
container security {
description
"Site-specific security parameters.";
container encryption {
if-feature "vpn-common:encryption";
description
"Container for CE-PE security encryption.";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"If true, traffic encryption on the
connection is required. It is
disabled, otherwise.";
}
leaf layer {
when "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Indicates the layer on which encryption
is enabled.";
}
type enumeration {
enum layer2 {
description
"Encryption occurs at Layer 2.";
}
enum layer3 {
description
"Encryption occurs at Layer 3.
For example, IPsec may be used when
a customer requests Layer 3
encryption.";
}
}
description
"Indicates the layer on which encryption
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
is applied.";
}
}
container encryption-profile {
when "../encryption/enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Indicates the layer on which encryption
is enabled.";
}
description
"Container for encryption profile.";
choice profile {
description
"Choice for the encryption profile.";
case provider-profile {
leaf profile-name {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/encryption-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"Name of the service provider's profile
to be applied.";
}
}
case customer-profile {
leaf customer-key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Customer-supplied key chain.";
}
}
}
}
}
container service {
description
"Service parameters on the attachment.";
leaf input-bandwidth {
type uint64;
units "bps";
mandatory true;
description
"From the customer site's perspective, the
service input bandwidth of the connection
or download bandwidth from the SP to
the site.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf output-bandwidth {
type uint64;
units "bps";
mandatory true;
description
"From the customer site's perspective,
the service output bandwidth of the
connection or upload bandwidth from
the site to the SP.";
}
leaf mtu {
type uint16;
units "bytes";
mandatory true;
description
"MTU at service level. If the service is IP,
it refers to the IP MTU. If CsC is enabled,
the requested MTU will refer
to the MPLS MTU and not to the IP MTU.";
}
container qos {
if-feature "vpn-common:qos";
description
"QoS configuration.";
container qos-classification-policy {
description
"Configuration of the traffic classification
policy.";
uses vpn-common:qos-classification-policy;
}
container qos-action {
description
"List of QoS action policies.";
list rule {
key "id";
description
"List of QoS actions.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"An identifier of the QoS action rule.";
}
leaf target-class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the class of service.
This identifier is internal to the
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
administration.";
}
leaf inbound-rate-limit {
type decimal64 {
fraction-digits 5;
range "0..100";
}
units "percent";
description
"Specifies whether/how to rate-limit the
inbound traffic matching this QoS policy.
It is expressed as a percent of the value
that is indicated in 'input-bandwidth'.";
}
leaf outbound-rate-limit {
type decimal64 {
fraction-digits 5;
range "0..100";
}
units "percent";
description
"Specifies whether/how to rate-limit the
outbound traffic matching this QoS policy.
It is expressed as a percent of the value
that is indicated in 'output-bandwidth'.";
}
}
}
container qos-profile {
description
"QoS profile configuration.";
list qos-profile {
key "profile";
description
"QoS profile.
Can be standard profile or customized
profile.";
leaf profile {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/qos-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"QoS profile to be used.";
}
leaf direction {
type identityref {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
base vpn-common:qos-profile-direction;
}
default "vpn-common:both";
description
"The direction to which the QoS profile
is applied.";
}
}
}
}
container carrierscarrier {
if-feature "vpn-common:carrierscarrier";
description
"This container is used when the customer
provides MPLS-based services. This is
only used in the case of CsC (i.e., a
customer builds an MPLSservice using an
IP VPN to carry its traffic).";
leaf signalling-type {
type enumeration {
enum ldp {
description
"Use LDP as the signalling protocol
between the PE and the CE. In this
case, an IGP routing protocol must
also be activated.";
}
enum bgp {
description
"Use BGP as the signalling protocol
between the PE and the CE.
In this case, BGP must also be configured
as the routing protocol.";
reference
"RFC 8277: Using BGP to Bind MPLS Labels
to Address Prefixes";
}
}
default "bgp";
description
"MPLS signalling type.";
}
}
container multicast {
if-feature "vpn-common:multicast";
description
"Multicast parameters for the network
access.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
leaf access-type {
type enumeration {
enum receiver-only {
description
"The peer site only has receivers.";
}
enum source-only {
description
"The peer site only has sources.";
}
enum source-receiver {
description
"The peer site has both sources and
receivers.";
}
}
default "source-receiver";
description
"Type of multicast site.";
}
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates the address family.";
}
leaf protocol-type {
type enumeration {
enum host {
description
"Hosts are directly connected to the
provider network.
Host protocols such as IGMP or MLD are
required.";
}
enum router {
description
"Hosts are behind a customer router.
PIM will be implemented.";
}
enum both {
description
"Some hosts are behind a customer router,
and some others are directly connected
to the provider network. Both host and
routing protocols must be used.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Typically, IGMP and PIM will be
implemented.";
}
}
default "both";
description
"Multicast protocol type to be used with
the customer site.";
}
leaf remote-source {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"When true, there is no PIM adjacency on
the interface.";
}
container igmp {
when "../protocol-type = 'host' and "
+ "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv4' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'";
if-feature "vpn-common:igmp";
description
"Includes IGMP-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to
to IGMP session";
leaf group-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv4 addresss.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv4 addresss.";
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum IGMP entries.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf max-group-sources {
type uint32;
description
"The maximum number of group sources.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:igmp-version;
}
default "vpn-common:igmpv2";
description
"Version of the IGMP.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container mld {
when "../protocol-type = 'host' and "
+ "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv6' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'";
if-feature "vpn-common:mld";
description
"Includes MLD-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to
the MLD session";
leaf group-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv6 addresss.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv6 addresss.";
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum MLD entries.";
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
leaf max-group-sources {
type uint32;
description
"The maximum number of group sources.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:mld-version;
}
default "vpn-common:mldv2";
description
"Version of the MLD protocol.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container pim {
when "../protocol-type = 'router'";
if-feature "vpn-common:pim";
description
"Only applies when protocol type is PIM.";
leaf priority {
type uint8;
description
"PIM priority definition.";
}
leaf hello-interval {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
default "30";
description
"PIM hello-messages interval.";
}
leaf dr-priority {
type uint16;
description
"Value to increase or decrease the
chances of a given DR being elected.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
}
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
9. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to register the following URI in the "ns"
subregistry within the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688]:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-ntw
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document requests IANA to register the following YANG module in
the "YANG Module Names" subregistry [RFC6020] within the "YANG
Parameters" registry.
name: ietf-l3vpn-ntw
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-ntw
maintained by IANA: N
prefix: l3nm
reference: RFC XXXX
10. Security Considerations
The YANG module specified in this document defines schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040] . The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC8466].
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or
RESTCONF protocol operations and content.
The "ietf-l3vpn-ntw" module is used to manage Layer 3 VPNs in a
service provider backbone network. Hence, the module can be used to
request, modify, or retrieve L3VPN services. For example, the
creation of a 'vpn-service' leaf instance triggers the creation of an
L3VPN Service in a service provider network.
Due to the foreseen use of the "ietf-l3vpn-ntw" module, there are a
number of data nodes defined in the module that are
writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is the
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
default). These data nodes MAY be considered sensitive or vulnerable
in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config)
and delete operations to these data nodes without proper protection
or authentication can have a negative effect on network operations.
These are the subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/
vulnerability in the "ietf-l3vpn-ntw" module:
o 'vpn-service': An attacker who is able to access network nodes can
undertake various attacks, such as deleting a running L3VPN
Service, interrupting all the traffic of a client. In addition,
an attacker may modify the attributes of a running service (e.g.,
QoS, bandwidth, routing protocols), leading to malfunctioning of
the service and therefore to SLA violations. In addition, an
attacker could attempt to create a L3VPN Service or adding a new
network access. Such activity can be detected by adequately
monitoring and tracking network configuration changes.
Some of the readable data nodes in the "ietf-l3vpn-ntw" module may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It
is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config,
or notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and
data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
o 'customer-name' and 'ip-connection': An attacker can retrieve
privacy-related information which can be used to track a customer.
Disclosing such information may be considered as a violation of
the customer-provider trust relationship.
The following summarizes the foreseen risks of using the "ietf-l3vpn-
ntw" module can be classified into:
o Malicious clients attempting to delete or modify VPN services.
o Unauthorized clients attempting to create/modify/delete a VPN
service.
o Unauthorized clients attempting to read VPN service related
information.
11. Acknowledgements
During the discussions of this work, helpful comments, suggestions,
and reviews were received from (listed alphabetically): Raul Arco,
Miguel Cros Cecilia, Joe Clarke, Adrian Farrel, Roque Gagliano,
Christian Jacquenet, Kireeti Kompella, and Julian Lucek. Many thanks
to them. Thanks to Philip Eardly for the review of an early version
of the document.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Daniel King, Daniel Voyer, Luay Jalil, and Stephane Litkowski
contributed to early version of the individual submission.
This work was supported in part by the European Commission funded
H2020-ICT-2016-2 METRO-HAUL project (G.A. 761727).
12. Contributors
Victor Lopez
Telefonica
Email: victor.lopezalvarez@telefonica.com
Qin Wu
Huawei
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com>
Manuel Julian
Vodafone
Email: manuel-julian.lopez@vodafone.com>
Lucia Oliva Ballega
Telefonica
Email: lucia.olivaballega.ext@telefonica.com>
Erez Segev
ECI Telecom
Email: erez.segev@ecitele.com>
13. References
13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common]
barguil, s., Dios, O., Boucadair, M., and Q. WU, "A Layer
2/3 VPN Common YANG Model", draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-
common-03 (work in progress), January 2021.
[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>.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[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>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC4552] Gupta, M. and N. Melam, "Authentication/Confidentiality
for OSPFv3", RFC 4552, DOI 10.17487/RFC4552, June 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4552>.
[RFC4577] Rosen, E., Psenak, P., and P. Pillay-Esnault, "OSPF as the
Provider/Customer Edge Protocol for BGP/MPLS IP Virtual
Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4577, DOI 10.17487/RFC4577,
June 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4577>.
[RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
[RFC5701] Rekhter, Y., "IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended Community
Attribute", RFC 5701, DOI 10.17487/RFC5701, November 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5701>.
[RFC5709] Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Fanto, M., White, R., Barnes, M.,
Li, T., and R. Atkinson, "OSPFv2 HMAC-SHA Cryptographic
Authentication", RFC 5709, DOI 10.17487/RFC5709, October
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5709>.
[RFC5798] Nadas, S., Ed., "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)
Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6", RFC 5798,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5798, March 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5798>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>.
[RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP
Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925,
June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
[RFC6513] Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6513>.
[RFC6514] Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP
Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6514>.
[RFC6565] Pillay-Esnault, P., Moyer, P., Doyle, J., Ertekin, E., and
M. Lundberg, "OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge
(PE-CE) Routing Protocol", RFC 6565, DOI 10.17487/RFC6565,
June 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6565>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC7166] Bhatia, M., Manral, V., and A. Lindem, "Supporting
Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3", RFC 7166,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7166, March 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7166>.
[RFC7474] Bhatia, M., Hartman, S., Zhang, D., and A. Lindem, Ed.,
"Security Extension for OSPFv2 When Using Manual Key
Management", RFC 7474, DOI 10.17487/RFC7474, April 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7474>.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[RFC7988] Rosen, E., Ed., Subramanian, K., and Z. Zhang, "Ingress
Replication Tunnels in Multicast VPN", RFC 7988,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7988, October 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7988>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[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>.
[RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J.
Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8177>.
[RFC8294] Liu, X., Qu, Y., Lindem, A., Hopps, C., and L. Berger,
"Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area", RFC 8294,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8294, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8294>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
[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/info/rfc8466>.
[RFC8519] Jethanandani, M., Agarwal, S., Huang, L., and D. Blair,
"YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs)",
RFC 8519, DOI 10.17487/RFC8519, March 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8519>.
13.2. Informative References
[I-D.evenwu-opsawg-yang-composed-vpn]
Even, R., Bo, W., Wu, Q., and Y. Cheng, "YANG Data Model
for Composed VPN Service Delivery", draft-evenwu-opsawg-
yang-composed-vpn-03 (work in progress), March 2019.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., Hares, S., and J. Haas, "BGP
YANG Model for Service Provider Networks", draft-ietf-idr-
bgp-model-10 (work in progress), November 2020.
[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)", draft-ietf-pim-yang-17 (work in
progress), May 2018.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-qos-model]
Choudhary, A., Jethanandani, M., Strahle, N., Aries, E.,
and I. Chen, "YANG Model for QoS", draft-ietf-rtgwg-qos-
model-02 (work in progress), July 2020.
[I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn]
Dong, J., Bryant, S., Li, Z., Miyasaka, T., and Y. Lee, "A
Framework for Enhanced Virtual Private Networks (VPN+)
Service", draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-06 (work in
progress), July 2020.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition]
Rokui, R., Homma, S., Makhijani, K., Contreras, L., and J.
Tantsura, "Definition of IETF Network Slices", draft-ietf-
teas-ietf-network-slice-definition-00 (work in progress),
January 2021.
[PYANG] "pyang", November 2020,
<https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang>.
[RFC3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3618, October 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3618>.
[RFC3644] Snir, Y., Ramberg, Y., Strassner, J., Cohen, R., and B.
Moore, "Policy Quality of Service (QoS) Information
Model", RFC 3644, DOI 10.17487/RFC3644, November 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3644>.
[RFC4026] Andersson, L. and T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual
Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4026, March 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4026>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[RFC4110] Callon, R. and M. Suzuki, "A Framework for Layer 3
Provider-Provisioned Virtual Private Networks (PPVPNs)",
RFC 4110, DOI 10.17487/RFC4110, July 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4110>.
[RFC4176] El Mghazli, Y., Ed., Nadeau, T., Boucadair, M., Chan, K.,
and A. Gonguet, "Framework for Layer 3 Virtual Private
Networks (L3VPN) Operations and Management", RFC 4176,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4176, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4176>.
[RFC6037] Rosen, E., Ed., Cai, Y., Ed., and IJ. Wijnands, "Cisco
Systems' Solution for Multicast in BGP/MPLS IP VPNs",
RFC 6037, DOI 10.17487/RFC6037, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6037>.
[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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7149>.
[RFC7297] Boucadair, M., Jacquenet, C., and N. Wang, "IP
Connectivity Provisioning Profile (CPP)", RFC 7297,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7297, July 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7297>.
[RFC7426] Haleplidis, E., Ed., Pentikousis, K., Ed., Denazis, S.,
Hadi Salim, J., Meyer, D., and O. Koufopavlou, "Software-
Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture
Terminology", RFC 7426, DOI 10.17487/RFC7426, January
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7426>.
[RFC7527] Asati, R., Singh, H., Beebee, W., Pignataro, C., Dart, E.,
and W. George, "Enhanced Duplicate Address Detection",
RFC 7527, DOI 10.17487/RFC7527, April 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7527>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
[RFC8277] Rosen, E., "Using BGP to Bind MPLS Labels to Address
Prefixes", RFC 8277, DOI 10.17487/RFC8277, October 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8277>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 111]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
[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/info/rfc8299>.
[RFC8309] Wu, Q., Liu, W., and A. Farrel, "Service Models
Explained", RFC 8309, DOI 10.17487/RFC8309, January 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8309>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
[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/info/rfc8345>.
[RFC8349] Lhotka, L., Lindem, A., and Y. Qu, "A YANG Data Model for
Routing Management (NMDA Version)", RFC 8349,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8349, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8349>.
[RFC8453] Ceccarelli, D., Ed. and Y. Lee, Ed., "Framework for
Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)", RFC 8453,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8453, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8453>.
[RFC8512] Boucadair, M., Ed., Sivakumar, S., Jacquenet, C.,
Vinapamula, S., and Q. Wu, "A YANG Module for Network
Address Translation (NAT) and Network Prefix Translation
(NPT)", RFC 8512, DOI 10.17487/RFC8512, January 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8512>.
[RFC8969] Wu, Q., Ed., Boucadair, M., Ed., Lopez, D., Xie, C., and
L. Geng, "A Framework for Automating Service and Network
Management with YANG", RFC 8969, DOI 10.17487/RFC8969,
January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8969>.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 112]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Appendix A. L3VPN Examples
A.1. 4G VPN Provisioning Example
L3VPNs are widely used to deploy 3G/4G, fixed, and enterprise
services mainly because several traffic discrimination policies can
be applied within the network to deliver to the mobile customers a
service that meets the SLA requirements.
As it is shown in the Figure 30, typically, an eNodeB (CE) is
directly connected to the access routers of the mobile backhaul and
their logical interfaces (one or many according to the Service type)
are configured in a VPN that transports the packets to the mobile
core platforms. In this example, a 'vpn-node' is created with two
'vpn-network-accesses'.
+-------------+ +------------------+
| | | PE |
| | 192.0.2.2 | 198.51.100.1 |
| eNodeB |>--------/------->|........... |
| | Vlan 1 | | |
| |>--------/------->|...... | |
| | Vlan 2 | | | |
| | Direct | +-------------+ |
+-------------+ Routing | | vpn-node-id | |
| | 44 | |
| +-------------+ |
| |
+------------------+
Figure 30: Mobile Backhaul Example
To create a L3VPN service using the L3NM, the following sample steps
can be followed:
First: Create the 4G VPN service (Figure 31).
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 113]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
POST: /restconf/data/ietf-l3vpn-ntw:l3vpn-ntw/vpn-services
Host: example.com
Content-Type: application/yang-data+json
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-services": {
"vpn-service": [
{
"vpn-id": "4G",
"customer-name": "mycustomer",
"vpn-service-topology": "custom",
"description": "VPN to deploy 4G services"
}
]
}
}
Figure 31: Create VPN Service
Second: Create a VPN node as depicted in Figure 32. In this type of
service, the VPN node is equivalent to the VRF configured in the
physical device ('ne-id'=198.51.100.1).
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 114]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
POST: /restconf/data/ietf-l3vpn-ntw:l3vpn-ntw/\
vpn-services/vpn-service=4G
Host: example.com
Content-Type: application/yang-data+json
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-nodes": {
"vpn-node": [
{
"vpn-node-id": "44",
"ne-id": "198.51.100.1",
"local-autonomous-system": "65550",
"rd": "0:65550:1",
"vpn-targets": {
"vpn-target": [
{
"id": "1",
"route-targets": [
"0:65550:1"
],
"route-target-type": "both"
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 32: Create VPN Node
Finally, two VPN network accesses are created using the same physical
port ('port-id'=1/1/1). Each 'vpn-network-access' has a particular
VLAN (1,2) to differentiate the traffic between: Sync and data
(Figure 33).
POST: /restconf/data/ietf-l3vpn-ntw:l3vpn-ntw/\
vpn-services/vpn-service=4G/vpn-nodes/vpn-node=44
content-type: application/yang-data+json
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-network-accesses": {
"vpn-network-access": [
{
"vpn-network-access-id": "1/1/1.1",
"port-id": "1/1/1",
"description": "Interface SYNC to eNODE-B",
"admin-status": {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 115]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
},
"vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:point-to-point",
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1/32",
"address-allocation-type": "static-address",
"static-addresses": {
"primary-address": "1",
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"s-customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
}
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "vpn-common:direct"
}
]
}
},
{
"vpn-network-access-id": "1/1/1.2",
"port-id": "1/1/1",
"description": "Interface DATA to eNODE-B",
"admin-status": {
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1/32",
"address-allocation-type": "static-address",
"static-addresses": {
"primary-address": "1",
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
}
}
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 116]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "vpn-common:direct"
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 33: Create VPN Network Access
Similar actions can be followed when IPv6 is supported in a VPN. For
example, Figure 34 illustrates how to create a VPN node that is
identified with an 'ne-id' set to 2001:db8::1.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 117]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
POST: /restconf/data/ietf-l3vpn-ntw:l3vpn-ntw/\
vpn-services/vpn-service=4G
Host: example.com
Content-Type: application/yang-data+json
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-nodes": {
"vpn-node": [
{
"vpn-node-id": "44",
"ne-id": "2001:db8::1",
"local-autonomous-system": "65550",
"rd": "0:65550:1",
"vpn-targets": {
"vpn-target": [
{
"id": "1",
"route-targets": [
"0:65550:1"
],
"route-target-type": "both"
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 34: Create VPN Node (IPv6)
An example of creating a loopback interface is depicted in .
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 118]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-network-accesses": {
"vpn-network-access": [
{
"vpn-network-access-id": "Loopback1",
"port-id": "Loopback1",
"description": "An example of loopback interface.",
"admin-status": {
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
},
"vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:loopback",
"ip-connection": {
"ipv6": {
"local-address": "2001:db8::1/128"
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 35: Create a Loopback Interface
A.2. Multicast VPN Provisioning Example
IPTV is mainly distributed through multicast over the LANs. In the
following example, PIM-SM is enabled and functional between the PE
and the CE. The PE receives multicast traffic from a CE that is
directly connected to the multicast source. The signaling between PE
and CE is achieved using BGP. Also, RP is statically configured for
a multicast group.
+-----------+ +------+ +------+ +-----------+
| Multicast |---| CE |--/--| PE |----| Backbone |
| source | +------+ +------+ | IP/MPLS |
+-----------+ +-----------+
Figure 36: Multicast L3VPN Service Example
To configure a Multicast L3VPN service using the L3NM model the
procedure and the JSON with the data structure is the following:
First, the multicast service is created (see the excerpt of the
request message body shown in Figure 37)
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 119]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-services": {
"vpn-service": [
{
"vpn-id": "Multicast-IPTV",
"customer-name": "310",
"vpn-service-topology": "vpn-common:hub-spoke",
"description": "Multicast IPTV VPN service"
}
]
}
}
Figure 37: Create Multicast VPN Service (Excerpt of the Message
Request Body)
Then, the VPN nodes are created (see the excerpt of the request
message body shown in Figure 38). In this example, the VPN Node will
represent VRF configured in the physical device.
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 120]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-node": [
{
"vpn-node-id": "500003105",
"description": "VRF-IPTV-MULTICAST",
"ne-id": "198.51.100.10",
"node-role": "vpn-common:hub-role",
"local-autonomous-system": "3816",
"address-family": "vpn-common:ipv4",
"router-id": "198.51.100.10",
"rd": "3816:31050202",
"multicast": {
"status": {
"admin-status": {
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
}
},
"rp": {
"rp-group-mappings": {
"rp-group-mapping": [
{
"id": "1",
"rp-address": "203.0.113.17",
"groups": {
"group": [
{
"id": "1",
"group-address": "239.130.0.0/15"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"rp-discovery": {
"rp-discovery-type": "vpn-common:static-rp"
}
}
}
}
]
}
Figure 38: Create Multicast VPN Node (Excerpt of the Message Request
Body)
Finally, create the VPN Network Access with multicast enabled (see
the excerpt of the request message body shown in Figure 39).
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 121]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-network-access": {
"vpn-network-access-id": "1/1/1",
"description": "Connected_to_source",
"status": {
"admin-status": {
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
},
"vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:point-to-point",
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "203.0.113.1/32",
"address-allocation-type": "static-address",
"static-addresses": {
"primary-address": "1",
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "203.0.113.2"
}
]
}
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "vpn-common:bgp",
"bgp": {
"description": "Connected to CE"
"local-autonomous-system": "3816",
"peer-autonomous-system": "6500",
"address-family": "vpn-common:ipv4",
"neighbor": "203.0.113.2",
}
}
]
},
"service": {
"multicast": {
"multicast-site-type": "source-only",
"address-family": "vpn-common:ipv4",
"protocol-type": "router",
"pim": {
"hello-interval": 30,
"status": {
"admin-status": {
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 122]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
"status": "vpn-common:administrative-state-up"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
Figure 39: Create VPN Network Access (Excerpt of the Message Request
Body)
Appendix B. Implementation Status
This section records the status of known implementations of the Yang
module defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
The description of implementations in this section is intended to
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.
According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
Note to the RFC Editor: As per [RFC7942] guidelines, please remove
this Implementation Status apendix prior publication.
B.1. Nokia Implementation
Details can be found at: https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-
WG/l3nm/blob/master/Implementattion/Nokia.txt
B.2. Huawei Implementation
Details can be found at: https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-
WG/l3nm/blob/master/Implementattion/Huawei.txt
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 123]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
B.3. Infinera Implementation
Details can be found at: https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-
WG/l3nm/blob/master/Implementattion/Infinera.txt
B.4. Ribbon-ECI Implementation
Details can be found at: https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-
WG/l3nm/blob/master/Implementattion/Ribbon-ECI.txt
Authors' Addresses
Samier Barguil
Telefonica
Madrid
ES
Email: samier.barguilgiraldo.ext@telefonica.com
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios (editor)
Telefonica
Madrid
ES
Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
Mohamed Boucadair (editor)
Orange
Rennes 35000
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Luis Angel Munoz
Vodafone
ES
Email: luis-angel.munoz@vodafone.com
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 124]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model March 2021
Alejandro Aguado
Nokia
Madrid
ES
Email: alejandro.aguado_martin@nokia.com
Barguil, et al. Expires September 11, 2021 [Page 125]