A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-10
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 | 2021-08-06 (Latest revision 2021-07-15) | ||
Replaces | draft-aguado-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm | ||
RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
Formats | |||
Reviews |
OPSDIR Last Call review
by Qin Wu
Has nits
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-03)
by Radek Krejčí
Ready w/issues
|
||
Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
Document shepherd | Adrian Farrel | ||
Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2021-05-03 | ||
IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9182 (Proposed Standard) | |
Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | Robert Wilton | ||
Send notices to | adrian@olddog.co.uk | ||
IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - Actions Needed | |
IANA expert review state | Expert Reviews OK |
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-10
OPSAWG S. Barguil Internet-Draft O. Gonzalez de Dios, Ed. Intended status: Standards Track Telefonica Expires: January 14, 2022 M. Boucadair, Ed. Orange L. Munoz Vodafone A. Aguado Nokia July 13, 2021 A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-10 Abstract This document defines an 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 Please update "RFC UUUU" to the RFC number to be assigned to I- D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common. 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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 1] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2022. 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7.4. VPN Instance Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.5. VPN Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7.6. VPN Network Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7.6.1. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 7.6.2. IP Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 7.6.3. CE-PE Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 2] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 7.6.4. OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 7.6.5. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 7.6.6. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 7.7. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 8. L3NM YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Appendix A. L3VPN Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 A.1. 4G VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 A.2. Loopback Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 A.3. Multicast VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Appendix B. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 B.1. Nokia Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 B.2. Huawei Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 B.3. Infinera Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 B.4. Ribbon-ECI Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 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 a model focuses 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 and the network controller/orchestrator by allowing for more network-centric information to be included. It enables further capabilities such as resource management or serves 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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 3] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 The L3NM YANG module was initially built with a prune and extend approach, taking as a starting points the YANG module described in [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 information captured in the L3SM can be passed by the orchestrator in the L3NM (e.g., customer) or be used to feed some L3NM attributes (e.g., actual forwarding policies). Also, some information captured in the 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 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]. The 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]. 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 4] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 an 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 an L3VPN. The service orchestrator interacts with the customer using the L3SM. The service orchestrator is responsible for 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 controllers. A network orchestrator can manage one or several network controllers. 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 in the VPN network access. A reference to the bearer is Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 5] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 maintained to allow keeping the link between L3SM and L3NM when both models are used in a given deployment. 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 Internet 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 6] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 modules that reflect network-related information. Such information is hidden to customers. The intelligence for translating customer-facing information into network-centric one (and vice versa) 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 7] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 +---------------+ | Customer | +-------+-------+ Customer Service Model | e.g., l3vpn-svc | +-------+-------+ | Service | | Orchestration | +-------+-------+ Service Delivery 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 an L3NM. The customer may use the L3SM or 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], or an IETF network slice service [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices]. Note also that both the L3SM and the L3NM may be used in the context of the Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) [RFC8453]. Figure 2 shows the Customer Network Controller (CNC), the Multi- Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 8] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 Domain Service Coordinator (MDSC), and the Provisioning Network Controller (PNC) components and the interfaces where L3SM/L3NM are used. +----------------------------------+ | 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 9] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 a 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 an 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: An L3VPN involves nodes that are part of a topology managed by the service provider network. Such topology can be represented using the network topology module in [RFC8345]. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 10] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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, but some manual intervention will still be required. A common function that is supported by VPNs is the addition or removal of customer sites. Workflows can use the L3NM in these scenarios to add or prune nodes from the network data model as required. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 11] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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) requires some network resources to be synchronized between systems. Particularly, resources must be adequately managed in each domain to avoid broken configuration. 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) [RFC6037] 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, [RFC6037] 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 is used to auto-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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 12] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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. 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: Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 13] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 '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. 'encryption-profile-identifier': An encryption profile refers to a set of policies related to the encryption schemes 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, of 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 14] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 meaningful locally (e.g., 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-common: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-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time +--rw vpn-instance-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: Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 15] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 '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. '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, but other values may be defined in the future to support specific Layer 3 VPN capabilities (e.g., [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement]). '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 may be an indication that network provision actions are needed to align the observed service status with the expected service status. 'vpn-instance-profiles': Defines reusable parameters for the same 'vpn-service'. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 16] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 17] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 7.4. VPN Instance Profiles VPN instance profiles are meant to factorize data nodes that are used at many levels of the model. Generic VPN instance profiles are defined at the VPN service level and then called at the VPN node and VPN network access levels. Each VPN instance profile is identified by 'profile-id'. This identifier is then referenced for one or multiple VPN nodes (Section 7.5) so that the controller can identify generic resources (e.g., RTs and RDs) to be configured for a given VRF. The subtree of 'vpn-instance-profile' is shown in Figure 6. +--rw l3vpn-ntw +--rw vpn-profiles | ... +--rw vpn-services +--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id] +--rw vpn-id vpn-common:vpn-id ... +--rw vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id] | +--rw profile-id string | +--rw role? identityref | +--rw local-autonomous-system? inet:as-number | | {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}? | +--rw (rd-choice)? | | +--:(directly-assigned) | | | +--rw rd? | | | rt-types:route-distinguisher | | +--:(directly-assigned-suffix) | | | +--rw rd-suffix? uint16 | | +--:(auto-assigned) | | | +--rw rd-auto | | | +--rw (auto-mode)? | | | | +--:(from-pool) | | | | | +--rw rd-pool-name? string | | | | +--:(full-auto) | | | | +--rw auto? empty | | | +--ro auto-assigned-rd? | | | rt-types:route-distinguisher | | +--:(auto-assigned-suffix) | | | +--rw rd-auto-suffix | | | +--rw (auto-mode)? | | | | +--:(from-pool) | | | | | +--rw rd-pool-name? string | | | | +--:(full-auto) | | | | +--rw auto? empty Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 18] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | | | +--ro auto-assigned-rd-suffix? uint16 | | +--:(no-rd) | | +--rw no-rd? empty | +--rw address-family* [address-family] | | +--rw address-family identityref | | +--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 maximum-routes* [protocol] | | +--rw protocol identityref | | +--rw maximum-routes? uint32 | +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? | ... Figure 6: Subtree Structure of VPN Instance Profiles The description of the listed data nodes is as follows: 'profile-id': Is used to uniquely identify a VPN instance profile. 'role': Indicates the role of the VPN instance profile in the VPN. Role values are defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] (e.g., any-to-any-role, spoke-role, hub-role). 'local-autonomous-system': Indicates the Autonomous System Number (ASN) that is configured for the VPN node. 'rd': As defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common], these RD assignment modes are supported: direct assignment, automatic assignment from a given pool, automatic assignment, and no assignment. For illustration purposes, the following modes can be used in the deployment cases: 'directly-assigned': The VPN service provider (service orchestrator) assigns explicitly RDs. This case will fit with a brownfield scenario where some existing services need to be updated by the VPN service provider. 'full-auto': The network controller auto-assigns RDs. This can apply for the deployment of new services. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 19] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'no-rd': The VPN service provider (service orchestrator) explicitly wants no RD to be assigned. This case can be used for CE testing within the network or for troubleshooting proposes. Also, the module accommodates deployments where only the Assigned Number subfield of RDs (Section 4.2 of [RFC4364]) is assigned from a pool while the Administrator subfield is set to, e.g., the Router ID that is assigned to a VPN node. The module supports these modes for managing the Assigned Number subfield: explicit assignment, auto-assignment from a pool, and full auto-assignment. 'address-family': Includes a set of per-address family data nodes: 'address-family': Identifies the address family. It can be set to IPv4, IPv6, or dual-stack. 'vpn-targets': Specifies RT import/export rules for the VPN service (Section 4.3 of [RFC4364]). 'maximum-routes': Indicates the maximum prefixes that the VPN node can accept for a given routing protocol. If 'protocol' is set to 'any', this means that the maximum value applies to each active routing protocol. 'multicast': Enables multicast traffic in the VPN service. Refer to Section 7.7. 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 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 pointing 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 vpn-common:vpn-id Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 20] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 +--rw description? string +--rw ne-id? string +--rw local-autonomous-system? inet:as-number | {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}? +--rw router-id? rt-types:router-id +--rw active-vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id] | +--rw profile-id leafref | +--rw router-id* [address-family] | | +--rw address-family identityref | | +--rw router-id? inet:ip-address | +--rw local-autonomous-system? inet:as-number | | {vpn-common:rtg-bgp}? | +--rw (rd-choice)? | | .... | +--rw address-family* [address-family] | | +--rw address-family identityref | | | ... | | +--rw vpn-targets | | | ... | | +--rw maximum-routes* [protocol] | | ... | +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? | ... +--rw msdp {msdp}? | +--rw peer? inet:ipv4-address | +--rw local-address? inet:ipv4-address | +--rw status | +--rw admin-status | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time +--rw groups | +--rw group* [group-id] | +--rw group-id string +--rw status | +--rw admin-status | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time +--rw vpn-network-accesses ... Figure 7: VPN Node Subtree Structure Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 21] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 enables a VPN network access. 'description': Provides a textual description of the VPN node. 'ne-id': Includes a unique identifier of the network element where the VPN node is deployed. 'local-autonomous-system': Indicates the ASN that is configured for the VPN node. 'router-id': Indicates a 32-bit number that is used to uniquely identify a router within an Autonomous System. 'active-vpn-instance-profiles': Lists the set of active VPN instance profiles for this VPN node. Concretely, one or more VPN instance profiles that are defined at the VPN service level can be enabled at the VPN node level; each of these profiles is uniquely identified by means of 'profile-id'. The structure of 'active- vpn-instance-profiles' is the same as the one discussed in Section 7.4 except 'router-id'. Indeed, Router IDs can be configured per address family. This capability can be used, for example, to configure an IPv6 address as a Router ID when such capability is supported by involved routers. Values defined in 'active-vpn-instance-profiles' overrides the ones defined in the VPN service level. 'msdp': For redundancy purposes, Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP) [RFC3618] may be enabled and used to share the state about sources between multiple rendez-vous points (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. '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. '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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 22] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'vpn-network-accesses': Represents the point to which sites are connected. Note that, unlike in the 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. 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). Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 23] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--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 interface-id? string +--rw description? string +--rw vpn-network-access-type? identityref +--rw vpn-instance-profile? leafref +--rw status | +--rw admin-status | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? 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. 'interface-id': Indicates the physical or logical interface on which the VPN network access is bound. 'description': Includes a textual description of the VPN network access. 'vpn-network-access-type': Is used to select the type of network interface to be deployed in the devices. The available defined values are: Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 24] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'point-to-point': Represents a direct connection between the endpoints. 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 multipoint connection between the customer site and the PEs. The controller must keep the association between a logical or physical interface on the device with the 'id' of the 'vpn-network-access'. 'irb': Represents a connection coming from an L2VPN service. An identifier of such service ('l2vpn-id') may be included in the 'connection' container as depicted in Figure 9. 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 a loopback interface can be used in the L3NM is provided in Appendix A.2. 'vpn-instance-profile': Provides a pointer to an active VPN instance profile at the VPN node level. Referencing an active VPN instance profile implies that all associated data nodes will be inherited by the VPN network access. However, some inherited data nodes (e.g., multicast) can be refined at the VPN network access level. In such case, refined values take precedence over inherited ones. '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 Layer 3 connectivity information of a VPN network access (e.g., IP addressing). See Section 7.6.2. 'routing-protocols': Includes the CE-PE routing configuration information. See Section 7.6.3. 'oam': Specifies the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms used for a VPN network access. 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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 25] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'service': Specifies the service parameters (e.g., QoS, multicast) to apply for a given VPN network access. See Section 7.6.6. 7.6.1. Connection The 'connection' container represents the layer 2 connectivity to the L3VPN for a particular VPN network access. As shown in the tree depicted in Figure 9, the 'connection' container defines protocols and parameters to enable such connectivity at layer 2. The traffic can enter the VPN with or without encapsulation (e.g., VLAN, QinQ). The 'encapsulation' container specifies the layer 2 encapsulation to use (if any) and allows to configure the relevant tags. The interface that is attached to the L3VPN is identified by the 'interface-id' at the 'vpn-network-access' level. From a network model perspective, it is expected that the 'interface-id' is sufficient to identify the interface. However, specific layer 2 sub- interfaces may be required to be configured in some implementations/ deployments. Such a layer 2 specific interface can be included in 'l2-termination-point'. If a layer 2 tunnel is needed to terminate the service in the CE-PE connection, the 'l2-tunnel-service' container is used to specify the required parameters to set such tunneling service (e.g., VPLS, VXLAN). An identity, called 'l2-tunnel-type', is defined for layer 2 tunnel selection. The container can also identify the pseudowire (Section 5.2 of [RFC4447]). As discussed in Section 7.6, 'l2vpn-id' is used to identify the L2VPN service that is associated with an IRB interface. To accommodate implementations that require internal bridging, a local bridge reference can be specified in 'local-bridge-reference'. Such a reference may be a local bridge domain. 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 association between a service request (e.g., L3SM) and L3NM. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 26] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw connection | +--rw encapsulation | | +--rw type? identityref | | +--rw dot1q {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 (l2-service)? | | +--:(l2-tunnel-service) | | | +--rw l2-tunnel-service | | | +--rw type? identityref | | | +--rw pseudowire | | | | +--rw vcid? uint32 | | | | +--rw far-end? union | | | +--rw vpls | | | | +--rw vcid? uint32 | | | | +--rw far-end* union | | | +--rw vxlan {vpn-common:vxlan}? | | | +--rw vni-id uint32 | | | +--rw peer-mode? identityref | | | +--rw peer-ip-address* inet:ip-address | | +--:(l2vpn) | | +--rw l2vpn-id? vpn-common:vpn-id | +--rw l2-termination-point? string | +--rw local-bridge-reference? string | +--rw bearer-reference? string {vpn-common:bearer-reference}? ... Figure 9: Connection Subtree Structure 7.6.2. IP Connection This container is used to group Layer 3 connectivity information, particularly the IP addressing information, of a VPN network access. The allocated address represents the PE interface address configuration. Note that a distinct layer 3 interface other than the one indicated under the 'connection' container may be needed to terminate the layer 3 service. The identifier of such interface is included in 'l3-termination-point'. For example, this data node can be used to carry the identifier of a bridge domain interface. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 27] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 As shown in Figure 10, the 'ip-connection' container can include IPv4, IPv6, or both if dual-stack is enabled. ... +--rw vpn-network-accesses +--rw vpn-network-access* [id] ... +--rw ip-connection | +--rw l3-termination-point? string | +--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. Note that for the IPv6 case, SLAAC [RFC4862] can be used. For both IPv4 and IPv6, 'address-allocation-type' is used to indicate the IP address allocation mode to activate for a given VPN network access. When 'address-allocation-type' is set to 'provider-dhcp', DHCP assignments can be made locally or by an external DHCP server. Such as behavior is controlled by setting 'dhcp-service-type'. Figure 11 shows the structure of the dynamic IPv4 address assignment (i.e., by means of DHCP). Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 28] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw ip-connection | +--rw l3-termination-point? string | +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}? | | +--rw local-address? inet:ipv4-address | | +--rw prefix-length? uint8 | | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref | | +--rw (allocation-type)? | | +--:(provider-dhcp) | | | +--rw dhcp-service-type? enumeration | | | +--rw (service-type)? | | | +--:(relay) | | | | +--rw server-ip-address* | | | | inet:ipv4-address | | | +--:(server) | | | +--rw (address-assign)? | | | +--:(number) | | | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? | | | | uint16 | | | +--:(explicit) | | | +--rw customer-addresses | | | +--rw address-pool* [pool-id] | | | +--rw pool-id string | | | +--rw start-address? | | | | inet:ipv4-address | | | +--rw end-address? | | | inet:ipv4-address | | +--:(dhcp-relay) | | | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers | | | +--rw server-ip-address* inet:ipv4-address | | +--:(static-addresses) | | ... ... Figure 11: IP Connection Subtree Structure (IPv4) Figure 12 shows the structure of the dynamic IPv6 address assignment (i.e., DHCPv6 and/or SLAAC). Note that if 'address-allocation-type' is set to 'slaac', the Prefix Information option of Router Advertisements that will be issued for SLAAC purposes, will carry the IPv6 prefix that is determined by 'local-address' and 'prefix- length'. For example, if 'local-address' is set to '2001:db8:0:1::1' and 'prefix-length' is set to '64', the IPv6 prefix that will be used is '2001:db8:0:1::/64'. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 29] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw ip-connection | +--rw l3-termination-point? string | +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}? | | ... | +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}? | +--rw local-address? inet:ipv6-address | +--rw prefix-length? uint8 | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref | +--rw (allocation-type)? | | +--rw provider-dhcp | | +--rw dhcp-service-type? enumeration | | +--rw (service-type)? | | +--:(provider-dhcp-servers) | | | +--rw server-ip-address* | | | inet:ipv6-address | | +--:(server) | | +--rw (address-assign)? | | +--:(number) | | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? | | | uint16 | | +--:(explicit) | | +--rw customer-addresses | | +--rw address-pool* [pool-id] | | +--rw pool-id string | | +--rw start-address? | | | inet:ipv6-address | | +--rw end-address? | | inet:ipv6-address | +--:(dhcp-relay) | | +--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 January 14, 2022 [Page 30] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw ip-connection | +--rw l3-termination-point? string | +--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/address-id | +--rw address* [address-id] | +--rw address-id string | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv6-address ... 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 protocols are 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 31] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 routing instance is indicated in 'type'. The values of these 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 32] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 o A combination thereof. Routing configuration does not include low-level policies. Such policies are handled at the device configuration level. Local policies of a service provider (e.g., filtering) are implemented as part of the device configuration; these are not captured in the L3NM, but the model allows local profiles to be associated 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 33] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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-change? yang:date-and-time | | | +--ro oper-status | | | +--ro status? identityref | | | +--ro last-change? 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-change? yang:date-and-time | | +--ro oper-status | | +--ro status? identityref | | +--ro last-change? 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 the configuration of 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 34] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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': Indicates a local AS Number (ASN) if a distinct ASN is required, other than the one configured at the VPN node level. '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. 'local-address': Specifies an address or a reference to an interface to use when establishing the BGP transport session. '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. 'allow-own-as': Is used in some topologies (e.g., hub-and-spoke) to allow the provider's ASN to be included in the AS_PATH BGP attribute received from a CE. Loops are prevented by setting 'allow-own-as' to a maximum number of provider's ASN occurrences. This parameter is set by default to '0' (that is, reject any AS_PATH attribute that includes the provider's ASN). 'prepend-global-as': When distinct ASNs are configured in the VPN node and network access levels, this parameter controls whether the ASN provided at the VPN node level is prepended to the AS_PATH attribute. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 35] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'default-route': Controls whether default routes 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. 'redistribute-connected': Controls whether the PE-CE link is advertised to other PEs. 'bgp-max-prefix': Controls the behavior when a prefix maximum is reached. 'max-prefix': Indicates the maximum number of BGP prefixes allowed in the BGP session. If the limit is reached, the action indicated in 'action-violate' will be followed. 'warning-threshold': 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) 'keepalive' which is the time interval for the KeepAlive timer between a PE and a BGP peer (Section 4.4 of [RFC4271]). 'authentication': The module adheres to the recommendations in Section 13.2 of [RFC4364] as it allows enabling TCP-AO [RFC5925] and accommodates the installed base that makes use of MD5. In addition, the module includes a provision for the use of IPsec. 'status': Indicates the status of the BGP routing instance. ... +--rw routing-protocols Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 36] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | +--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 local-address? union | | +--rw neighbor* inet:ip-address | | +--rw multihop? uint8 | | +--rw as-override? boolean | | +--rw allow-own-as? uint8 | | +--rw prepend-global-as? boolean | | +--rw default-route? boolean | | +--rw site-of-origin? rt-types:route-origin | | +--rw ipv6-site-of-origin? rt-types:ipv6-route-origin | | +--rw redistribute-connected* [address-family] | | | +--rw address-family identityref | | | +--rw enable? boolean | | +--rw bgp-max-prefix | | | +--rw max-prefix? uint32 | | | +--rw warning-threshold? decimal64 | | | +--rw violate-action? enumeration | | | +--rw restart-interval? uint16 | | +--rw bgp-timers | | | +--rw keepalive? uint16 | | | +--rw hold-time? uint16 | | +--rw authentication | | | +--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-change? yang:date-and-time | | +--ro oper-status | | +--ro status? identityref Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 37] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time ... Figure 16: BGP Routing Subtree Structure OSPF: OSPF can be configured to run as a routing protocol on the 'vpn-network-access'. 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 [RFC4577] or OSPFv3 [RFC6565] 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] and Section 5 of [RFC6565]). 'max-lsa': Sets the maximum number of LSAs that the OSPF instance will accept. 'authentication': 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 38] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 authentication | | | +--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-change? yang:date-and-time | | +--ro oper-status | | +--ro status? identityref | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time ... Figure 17: OPSF Routing Subtree Structure IS-IS: The model (Figure 18) allows the user to configure IS-IS [ISO10589][RFC1195][RFC5308] 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, Level 2, or both. 'metric': Associates a metric with IS-IS routes. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 39] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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). 'authentication': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled for the IS-IS instance. Both the specification of a key-chain [RFC8177] and the direct specification of key and authentication algorithm are supported. '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 area-address | | +--rw level? identityref | | +--rw metric? uint16 | | +--rw mode? enumeration | | +--rw authentication | | | +--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-change? yang:date-and-time | | +--ro oper-status | | +--ro status? identityref | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time ... Figure 18: IS-IS Routing Subtree Structure RIP: The model allows the user to configure RIP to run on the 'vpn- network-access' interface. As shown in Figure 19, the following RIP data nodes are supported: Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 40] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address families are to be activated. This parameter is used to determine whether RIPv2 [RFC2453] and/or RIPng are to be enabled [RFC2080]. 'timers': Indicates the following timers: 'update-interval': Is the interval at which RIP updates are sent. 'invalid-interval': Is the interval before a RIP route is declared invalid. 'holddown-interval': Is the interval before better RIP routes are released. 'flush-interval': Is the interval before a route is removed from the routing table. 'default-metric': Sets the default RIP metric. 'authentication': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled for the RIP instance. 'status': Indicates the status of the RIP routing instance. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 41] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw routing-protocols | +--rw routing-protocol* [id] | ... | +--rw rip {vpn-common:rtg-rip}? | | +--rw address-family? identityref | | +--rw timers | | | +--rw update-interval? uint16 | | | +--rw invalid-interval? uint16 | | | +--rw holddown-interval? uint16 | | | +--rw flush-interval? uint16 | | +--rw neighbor* inet:ip-address | | +--rw default-metric? uint8 | | +--rw authentication | | | +--rw enable? boolean | | | +--rw keying-material | | | +--rw (option)? | | | +--:(auth-key-chain) | | | | +--rw key-chain? | | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref | | | +--:(auth-key-explicit) | | | +--rw key? string | | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref | | +--rw status | | +--rw admin-status | | | +--rw status? identityref | | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | | +--ro oper-status | | +--ro status? identityref | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time ... Figure 19: RIP Subtree Structure VRRP: The model (Figure 20) allows enabling 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. 'virtual-ip-address': Includes virtual IP addresses for a single VRRP group. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 42] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 '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 authentication data node is included for VRRP as there isn't currently any type of VRRP authentication (see Section 9 of [RFC5798]). ... +--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 virtual-ip-address* inet:ip-address | +--rw priority? uint8 | +--rw ping-reply? boolean | +--rw status | +--rw admin-status | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? 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: 'desired-min-tx-interval': Is the minimum interval, in microseconds, that a PE would like to use when transmitting BFD Control packets less any jitter applied. 'required-min-rx-interval': Is the minimum interval, in microseconds, between received BFD Control packets that a PE is capable of supporting, less any jitter applied by the sender. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 43] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'detection-multiplier': The negotiated transmit interval, multiplied by this value, provides the detection time for the PE. 'holdtime': Is used to indicate the expected BFD holddown time. The value can be set by the customer or selected from a profile. 'authentication': 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. ... +--rw oam | +--rw bfd {vpn-common:bfd}? | +--rw desired-min-tx-interval? uint32 | +--rw required-min-rx-interval? uint32 | +--rw detection-multiplier? uint8 | +--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-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 44] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 'service' container specifies the service parameters to apply for a given VPN network access (Figure 23). Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 45] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw vpn-network-accesses +--rw vpn-network-access* [id] ... +--rw service +--rw inbound-bandwidth? uint64 {vpn-common:inbound-bw}? +--rw outbound-bandwidth? uint64 {vpn-common:outbound-bw}? +--rw mtu? uint16 +--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}? | ... +--rw carriers-carrier | {vpn-common:carriers-carrier}? | +--rw signaling-type? enumeration +--rw ntp | +--rw broadcast? enumeration | +--rw auth-profile | | +--rw profile-id? string | +--rw status | +--rw admin-status | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? ... Figure 23: Services Subtree Structure The following data nodes are defined: 'inbound-bandwidth': Indicates the inbound bandwidth of the connection (i.e., download bandwidth from the service provider to the site). 'outbound-bandwidth': Indicates the outbound bandwidth of the connection (i.e., upload bandwidth from the site to the service provider). 'mtu': Indicates the MTU at the service level. '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 January 14, 2022 [Page 46] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 25, classification can be based on any IP header field or a combination thereof. Both IPv4 and IPv6 are supported. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 47] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 48] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 Layer 4: As discussed in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common], any layer 4 protocol can be indicated in the 'protocol' data node under 'l3' (Figure 25), but only TCP and UDP specific match criteria are elaborated in this version as these protocols are widely used in the context of VPN services. Augmentations can be considered in the future to add other Layer 4 specific data nodes, if needed. TCP or UDP-related match criteria can be specified in the L3NM as shown in Figure 26. +--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) Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 49] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | | | | | | +--rw lower-port | | | | | | | inet:port-number | | | | | | +--rw upper-port | | | | | | inet:port-number | | | | | +--:(operator) | | | | | +--rw operator? operator | | | | | +--rw port | | | | | inet:port-number | | | | +--:(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 Carriers' Carriers (CsC) is enabled such the use of BGP for signaling purposes [RFC8277]. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 50] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 'ntp': Time synchronization may be needed in some VPNs such as infrastructure and management VPNs. This container is used to enable the NTP service [RFC5905]. '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 various levels: VPN service, VPN node level, or VPN network access. ... +--rw vpn-services +--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id] ... +--rw vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id] | .... | +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? | ... +--rw vpn-nodes +--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id] ... +--rw active-vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-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 instance profile level has the structure that is shown in Figure 30. ... +--rw vpn-services +--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id] ... Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 51] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 +--rw vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id] | .... | +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? | +--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 | | | +--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 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 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 52] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | +--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}? | +--rw hello-interval? rt-types:timer-value-seconds16 | +--rw dr-priority? uint32 ... Figure 28: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Instance Profile 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. 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. The same structure as the one depicted in Figure 30 is used when configuring multicast-related parameters at the VPN node level. When defined at the VPN node level (Figure 29), Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) [RFC1112][RFC2236][RFC3376], Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) [RFC2710][RFC3810], and Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) [RFC7761] parameters are applicable to all VPN network accesses of that VPN node unless corresponding nodes are refined at the VPN network access level. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 53] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 ... +--rw vpn-nodes +--rw vpn-node* [vpn-node-id] ... +--rw active-vpn-instance-profiles | +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id] | ... | +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}? | +--rw tree-flavor* identityref | +--rw rp | | ... | +--rw igmp {vpn-common:igmp and vpn-common:ipv4}? | | ... | +--rw mld {vpn-common:mld and vpn-common:ipv6}? | | ... | +--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}? | ... Figure 29: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Node Level) Multicast-related data nodes at the VPN network access level are shown in Figure 30. The values configured at the VPN network access level override the values configured for the corresponding data nodes in other levels. ... +--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 | +--rw admin-status Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 54] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 | | +--rw status? identityref | | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? 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-change? yang:date-and-time | +--ro oper-status | +--ro status? identityref | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time +--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}? +--rw hello-interval? rt-types:timer-value-seconds16 +--rw dr-priority? uint32 +--rw status +--rw admin-status | +--rw status? identityref | +--rw last-change? yang:date-and-time +--ro oper-status +--ro status? identityref +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time Figure 30: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Network Access Level) 8. L3NM YANG Module This module uses types defined in [RFC6991] and [RFC8343]. It also uses groupings defined in [RFC8519], [RFC8177], and [RFC8294]. <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-l3vpn-ntw@2021-07-12.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; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 55] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 reference "RFC UUUU: A Layer 2/3 VPN Common YANG Model"; } import ietf-inet-types { prefix inet; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types, Section 4"; } import ietf-yang-types { prefix yang; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types, Section 3"; } import ietf-key-chain { prefix key-chain; reference "RFC 8177: YANG Key Chain."; } import ietf-routing-types { prefix rt-types; reference "RFC 8294: Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area"; } import ietf-interfaces { prefix if; reference "RFC 8343: A YANG Data Model for Interface Management"; } organization "IETF OPSAWG (Operations and Management Area Working Group)"; contact "WG Web: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/> WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> Author: 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. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 56] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; revision 2021-07-12 { description "Initial revision."; reference "RFC XXXX: A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model"; } /* 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 57] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 customer."; } identity provider-dhcp-slaac { if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6"; 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 4862: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration"; } identity static-address { base address-allocation-type; description "The Provider's network provides static IP addressing to the customer."; } identity slaac { if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6"; base address-allocation-type; description "The Provider's network uses IPv6 SLAAC to provide addressing to the customer."; reference "RFC 4862: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration"; } identity local-defined-next-hop { description "Base identity 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."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 58] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } identity l2-tunnel-type { description "Base identity for layer-2 tunnel selection under the VPN network access."; } identity pseudowire { base l2-tunnel-type; description "Pseudowire tunnel termination in the VPN network access."; } identity vpls { base l2-tunnel-type; description "Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) tunnel termination in the VPN network access."; } identity vxlan { base l2-tunnel-type; description "Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN) tunnel termination in the VPN network access."; } /* Typedefs */ typedef predefined-next-hop { type identityref { base local-defined-next-hop; } description "Pre-defined next-hop designation for locally generated routes."; } 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."; } /* Groupings */ Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 59] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 grouping vpn-instance-profile { description "Grouping for data nodes that may be factorized among many levels of the model. The grouping can be used to define generic profiles at the VPN service level and then called at the VPN node and VPN network access levels."; leaf local-autonomous-system { if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-bgp"; type inet:as-number; description "Provider's Autonomous System (AS) number. Used if the customer requests BGP routing."; } uses vpn-common:route-distinguisher; list address-family { key "address-family"; description "Set of per-address family parameters."; leaf address-family { type identityref { base vpn-common:address-family; } description "Indicates the address family (IPv4 and/or IPv6)."; } container vpn-targets { description "Set of route targets to match for import and export routes to/from VRF."; uses vpn-common:vpn-route-targets; } list maximum-routes { key "protocol"; description "Defines the maximum number of routes for the VRF."; 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 each active routing protocol."; } leaf maximum-routes { type uint32; description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 60] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Indicates the maximum number of prefixes that the VRF can accept for this address family and protocol."; } } } container multicast { if-feature "vpn-common:multicast"; description "Global multicast parameters."; leaf-list tree-flavor { type identityref { base vpn-common:multicast-tree-type; } description "Type of tree to be used."; } container rp { description "Rendezvous Point (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 set to true, it indicates that a redundancy mechanism for the RP is required."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 61] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } leaf optimal-traffic-delivery { type boolean; default "false"; description "If set to true, the service provider (SP) must ensure that the 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 both RP redundancy and and delivery through optimal path are activated."; } description "PIM Anycast-RP parameters."; leaf local-address { type inet:ip-address; description "IP local address for PIM RP. Usually, it corresponds to the Router ID or the primary address."; } leaf-list rp-set-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Specifies the IP address of 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 { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 62] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "Multicast groups associated with the RP."; 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; } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 63] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 default "vpn-common:static-rp"; description "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 the customer Bootstrap Router (BSR) candidate's addresses."; leaf-list bsr-candidate-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Specifies the address of candidate BSR."; } } } } 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 { 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; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 64] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "Indicates the maximum IGMP entries."; } leaf version { type identityref { base vpn-common:igmp-version; } default "vpn-common:igmpv2"; description "Indicates the IGMP version."; reference "RFC 1112: Host Extensions for IP Multicasting RFC 2236: Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2 RFC 3376: Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3"; } } 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 with 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 number of groups."; } leaf max-entries { type uint32; description "Indicates the maximum number of MLD entries."; } leaf version { type identityref { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 65] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 base vpn-common:mld-version; } default "vpn-common:mldv2"; description "Indicates the MLD protocol version."; reference "RFC 2710: Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 RFC 3810: Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6"; } } container pim { if-feature "vpn-common:pim"; description "Only applies when protocol type is PIM."; leaf hello-interval { type rt-types:timer-value-seconds16; default "30"; description "PIM hello-messages interval. If set to 'infinity' or 'not-set', no periodic Hello messages are sent."; reference "RFC 7761: Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised), Section 4.11"; } leaf dr-priority { type uint32; default "1"; description "Indicates the preference in the Designated Router (DR) election process. Numerically larger DR priority allows a node to be elected as a DR."; reference "RFC 7761: Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised), Section 4.3.2"; } } } } /* Main Blocks */ /* Main l3vpn-ntw */ container l3vpn-ntw { description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 66] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "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 "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 be an L3SM, a slice request, a VPN+ service, etc."; } leaf vpn-type { type identityref { base vpn-common:service-type; } description "Indicates the service type."; } 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 vpn-instance-profiles { description "Container for a list of VPN instance profiles."; list vpn-instance-profile { key "profile-id"; description "List of VPN instance profiles."; leaf profile-id { type string; description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 67] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "VPN instance profile identifier."; } leaf role { type identityref { base vpn-common:role; } default "vpn-common:any-to-any-role"; description "Role of the VPN node in the VPN."; } uses vpn-instance-profile; } } 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."; } } } } container vpn-nodes { description "Container for VPN nodes."; list vpn-node { key "vpn-node-id"; description "Includes a list of VPN nodes."; leaf vpn-node-id { type vpn-common:vpn-id; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 68] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "An identifier of the VPN node."; } 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 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 router-id { type rt-types:router-id; description "A 32-bit number in the dotted-quad format that is used to uniquely identify a node within an autonomous system. This identifier is used for both IPv4 and IPv6."; } container active-vpn-instance-profiles { description "Container for active VPN instance profiles."; list vpn-instance-profile { key "profile-id"; description "Includes a list of active VPN instance profiles."; leaf profile-id { type leafref { path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-services/vpn-service" + "/vpn-instance-profiles/vpn-instance-profile" + "/profile-id"; } description "Node's active VPN instance profile."; } list router-id { key "address-family"; description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 69] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Router-id per address family."; leaf address-family { type identityref { base vpn-common:address-family; } description "Indicates the address family for which the Router-ID applies."; } leaf router-id { type inet:ip-address; description "The router-id information can be an IPv4 or IPv6 address. This can be used, for example, to configure an IPv6 address as a router-id when such capability is supported by underlay routers. In such case, the configured value overrides the generic one defined at the VPN node level."; } } uses vpn-instance-profile; } } container msdp { if-feature "msdp"; description "Includes MSDP-related parameters."; leaf peer { type inet:ipv4-address; description "Indicates the IPv4 address of the MSDP peer."; } leaf local-address { type inet:ipv4-address; description "Indicates the IPv4 address of the local end. This local address must be configured on the node."; } uses vpn-common:service-status; } uses vpn-common:vpn-components-group; uses vpn-common:service-status; container vpn-network-accesses { description "List of network accesses."; list vpn-network-access { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 70] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 key "id"; description "List of network accesses."; leaf id { type vpn-common:vpn-id; description "Identifier for the network access."; } leaf interface-id { type string; description "Identifier for the physical or logical interface. The identification of the sub-interface is provided at the connection and/or IP connection levels."; } 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."; } leaf vpn-instance-profile { type leafref { path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-services/vpn-service/vpn-nodes" + "/vpn-node/active-vpn-instance-profiles" + "/vpn-instance-profile/profile-id"; } description "An identifier of an active VPN instance profile."; } uses vpn-common:service-status; container connection { description "Defines layer 2 protocols and parameters that are required to enable connectivity between the PE and the CE."; container encapsulation { description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 71] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Container for layer 2 encapsulation."; 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 { 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 { range "1..4094"; } 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."; leaf tag-type { type identityref { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 72] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 "Includes QinQ parameters."; leaf tag-type { type identityref { base vpn-common:tag-type; } default "vpn-common:s-c-vlan"; description "Tag type. By default, the tag type is 'c-s-vlan'."; } leaf svlan-id { type uint16; mandatory true; description "S-VLAN identifier."; } leaf cvlan-id { type uint16; mandatory true; description "C-VLAN identifier."; } } } choice l2-service { description "The layer 2 connectivity service can be provided by indicating a pointer to an L2VPN or by specifying a layer 2 tunnel service."; container l2-tunnel-service { description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 73] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Defines a layer 2 tunnel termination. It is only applicable when a tunnel is required. The supported values are: pseudowire, VPLS and, VXLAN. Other values may defined, if needed."; leaf type { type identityref { base l2-tunnel-type; } description "Selects the tunnel termiantion option for each vpn-network-access."; } container pseudowire { description "Includes 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 "Neighbor reference."; reference "RFC 4447: Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP), Section 5.2"; } } container vpls { description "VPLS termination parameters."; leaf vcid { type uint32; description "VC Identifier."; } leaf-list far-end { type union { type uint32; type inet:ip-address; } description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 74] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Neighbor reference."; } } container vxlan { if-feature "vpn-common:vxlan"; description "VXLAN termination parameters."; 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'."; } leaf-list peer-ip-address { type inet:ip-address; description "List of peer's IP addresses."; } } } case l2vpn { leaf l2vpn-id { type vpn-common:vpn-id; description "Indicates the L2VPN service associated with an Integrated Routing and Bridging (IRB) interface."; } } } leaf l2-termination-point { type string; description "Specifies a reference to a local layer 2 termination point such as a layer 2 sub-interface."; } leaf local-bridge-reference { type string; description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 75] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Specifies a local bridge reference to accommodate, for example, implementations that require internal bridging. A reference may be a local bridge domain."; } leaf bearer-reference { if-feature "vpn-common:bearer-reference"; type string; description "This is an internal reference for the service provider to identify the bearer associated with this VPN."; } } container ip-connection { description "Defines IP connection parameters."; leaf l3-termination-point { type string; description "Specifies a reference to a local layer 3 termination point such as a bridge domain interface."; } container ipv4 { if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4"; description "IPv4-specific parameters."; leaf local-address { type inet:ipv4-address; description "The IP address used at the provider's interface."; } leaf prefix-length { type uint8 { range "0..32"; } description "Subnet prefix length expressed in bits. It is applied to both local and customer addresses."; } leaf address-allocation-type { type identityref { base address-allocation-type; } must "not(derived-from-or-self(current(), " + "'slaac') or derived-from-or-self(current()," Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 76] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 + " '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 addressing is not enabled."; } choice allocation-type { description "Choice of the IPv4 address allocation."; case provider-dhcp { description "DHCP allocated addresses related parameters. IP addresses are allocated by DHCP that is operated by the provider"; leaf dhcp-service-type { type enumeration { enum server { description "Local DHCP server."; } enum relay { description "Local DHCP relay. DHCP requests are relayed to a provider's server."; } } description "Indicates the type of DHCP service to be enabled on this access."; } choice service-type { description "Choice based on the DHCP service type."; case relay { description "Container for list of provider's DHCP servers (i.e., dhcp-service-type is set to relay)."; leaf-list server-ip-address { type inet:ipv4-address; description "IPv4 addresses of the provider's DHCP server to use by the local DHCP Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 77] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 relay."; } } case server { description "A choice about how addresses are assigned when a local DHCP server is enabled."; 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-pool { key "pool-id"; description "Describes IP addresses to be allocated by DHCP. When only start-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."; leaf pool-id { type string; description "A pool identifier for the address range from start- address to end-address."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 78] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } leaf start-address { type inet:ipv4-address; mandatory true; description "Indicates the first address in the pool."; } leaf end-address { type inet:ipv4-address; description "Indicates the last address in the pool."; } } } } } } } } case dhcp-relay { description "DHCP relay is provided by the operator."; container customer-dhcp-servers { description "Container for a list of customer's DHCP servers."; leaf-list server-ip-address { type inet:ipv4-address; description "IPv4 addresses of the customer's DHCP server."; } } } case static-addresses { description "Lists the IPv4 addresses that are used."; leaf primary-address { type leafref { path "../address/address-id"; } description "Primary address of the connection."; } list address { key "address-id"; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 79] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "Lists the IPv4 addresses that are used."; leaf address-id { type string; description "An identifier of the 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-address; description "IPv6 address of the provider side."; } leaf prefix-length { type uint8 { range "0..128"; } description "Subnet prefix length expressed in bits. It is applied to both local and customer addresses."; } leaf address-allocation-type { type identityref { base address-allocation-type; } description "Defines how addresses are allocated. If there is no value for the address allocation type, then IPv6 addressing is disabled."; } choice allocation-type { description "A choice based on the IPv6 allocation type."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 80] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 container 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 provided by the operator."; } description "DHCPv6 allocated addresses related parameters."; leaf dhcp-service-type { type enumeration { enum server { description "Local DHCPv6 server."; } enum relay { description "DHCPv6 relay."; } } description "Indicates the type of the DHCPv6 service to be enabled on this access."; } choice service-type { description "Choice based on the DHCPv6 service type."; case provider-dhcp-servers { leaf-list server-ip-address { type inet:ipv6-address; description "IPv6 addresses of the provider's DHCPv6 server."; } } case server { choice address-assign { default "number"; description "Choice about how IPv6 prefixes are assigned by the DHCPv6 server."; case number { leaf number-of-dynamic-address { type uint16; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 81] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 default "1"; description "Describes the number of IPv6 prefixes that are allocated to the customer on this access."; } } case explicit { container customer-addresses { description "Container for customer IPv6 addresses allocated by DHCPv6."; list address-pool { key "pool-id"; description "Describes IPv6 addresses allocated by DHCPv6. When only start-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."; leaf pool-id { type string; description "Pool identifier for the address range from identified by start- address and end-address."; } leaf start-address { type inet:ipv6-address; mandatory true; description "Indicates the first address."; } leaf end-address { type inet:ipv6-address; description "Indicates the last address."; } } } } } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 82] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } } } case dhcp-relay { description "DHCPv6 relay provided by the operator."; container customer-dhcp-servers { description "Container for a list of customer DHCP servers."; leaf-list server-ip-address { type inet:ipv6-address; description "Contains the IP addresses of the customer DHCPv6 server."; } } } case static-addresses { description "IPv6-specific parameters for static allocation."; leaf primary-address { type leafref { path "../address/address-id"; } description "Principal address of the connection"; } list address { key "address-id"; description "Describes IPv6 addresses that are used."; leaf address-id { type string; description "An identifier of an IPv6 address."; } leaf customer-address { type inet:ipv6-address; description "An IPv6 address of the customer side."; } } } } } } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 83] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 { base vpn-common:ie-type; } description "Import, export, or both."; } } container static { when "derived-from-or-self(../type, " + "'vpn-common:static-routing')" { description "Only applies when protocol is static."; } description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 84] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "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 or a pre-defined next-hop type (e.g., discard or local-link)."; } leaf bfd-enable { if-feature "vpn-common:bfd"; type boolean; 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 85] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 or a pre-defined next-hop type (e.g., discard or local-link)."; } leaf bfd-enable { if-feature "vpn-common:bfd"; type boolean; 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."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 86] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } uses vpn-common:service-status; } } } container bgp { when "derived-from-or-self(../type, " + "'vpn-common:bgp-routing')" { 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. This 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 "Indicates a local AS Number (ASN) if a distinct ASN than the one configured at the VPN node level is needed."; } leaf peer-autonomous-system { type inet:as-number; mandatory true; description "Indicates the customer's ASN when 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 local-address { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 87] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 type union { type inet:ip-address; type if:interface-ref; } description "Set the local IP address to use for the BGP transport session. This may be expressed as either an IP address or a reference to an interface."; } 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 ASN override is enabled, i.e., replace the ASN of the customer specified in the AS_Path attribute with the local ASN."; } leaf allow-own-as { type uint8; default "0"; description "Specifies the number of occurrences of the provider's ASN that can occur within the AS_PATH before it is rejected."; } leaf prepend-global-as { type boolean; default "false"; description "In some situations, the ASN that is provided at the VPN node level may be Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 88] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 distinct from the one configured at the VPN network access level. When such ASNs are provided, they are both prepended to the BGP route updates for this access. To disable that behavior, the prepend-global-as must be set to 'false'. In such a case, the ASN that is provided at the VPN node level is not prepended to the BGP route updates for this access."; } leaf default-route { type boolean; default "false"; description "Defines whether default routes can be advertised to its peer. If set, the default routes are advertised to its peer."; } leaf site-of-origin { when "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv4' or " + "'vpn-common:dual-stack'" { 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 "RFC 4364: BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 89] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 Origin for VRF information."; reference "RFC 5701: IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended Community Attribute"; } list redistribute-connected { key "address-family"; description "Indicates the per-AF policy to follow for connected routes."; leaf address-family { type identityref { base vpn-common:address-family; } description "Indicates the address family."; } leaf enable { type boolean; description "Enables to redistribute connected routes."; } } 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 control of how many prefixes can be received from a neighbor. If the limit is exceeded, the action indicated in violate-action will be followed."; reference "RFC 4271: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), Section 8.2.2"; } leaf warning-threshold { type decimal64 { fraction-digits 5; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 90] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 "The BGP session restarts after a time interval."; } } description "BGP neighbor 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."; leaf keepalive { type uint16 { range "0..21845"; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 91] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } 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 KEEPALIVE messages would be one third of the Hold Time interval."; reference "RFC 4271: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), Section 4.4"; } 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 "RFC 4271: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), Section 4.2"; } } container authentication { description "Container for BGP authentication parameters between a PE and a CE."; leaf enable { type boolean; default "false"; description "Enables or disables authentication."; } container keying-material { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 92] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 "RFC 4364: BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), Section 13.2"; 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 93] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } leaf key { type string; description "BGP 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-routing')" { 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 { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 94] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 type yang:dotted-quad; mandatory true; description "Area ID."; reference "RFC 4577: OSPF as the Provider/Customer Edge Protocol for BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), Section 4.2.3 RFC 6565: OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge (PE-CE) Routing Protocol, Section 4.2"; } leaf metric { type uint16; default "1"; description "Metric of the PE-CE link. It is used in the routing state calculation and path selection."; } container sham-links { if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-ospf-sham-link"; description "List of sham links."; reference "RFC 4577: OSPF as the Provider/Customer Edge Protocol for BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), Section 4.2.7 RFC 6565: OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge (PE-CE) Routing Protocol, Section 5"; list sham-link { key "target-site"; description "Creates a sham link with another site."; leaf target-site { type string; 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 95] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 the routing state calculation and path selection. The default value is set to 1."; reference "RFC 4577: OSPF as the Provider/Customer Edge Protocol for BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), Section 4.2.7.3 RFC 6565: OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge (PE-CE) Routing Protocol, Section 5.2"; } } } leaf max-lsa { type uint32 { range "1..4294967294"; } description "Maximum number of allowed LSAs OSPF."; } container authentication { 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 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 { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 96] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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."; reference "RFC 4552: Authentication /Confidentiality for OSPFv3"; } } } } } uses vpn-common:service-status; } container isis { when "derived-from-or-self(../type, " + "'vpn-common:isis-routing')" { 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 97] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both are to be activated."; } leaf area-address { type area-address; mandatory true; description "Area address."; } leaf level { type identityref { base vpn-common:isis-level; } description "Can be level-1, level-2, or level-1-2."; } 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 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 authentication { description "Authentication configuration."; leaf enable { type boolean; default "false"; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 98] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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."; } 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-routing')" { description Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 99] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "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."; } container timers { description "Indicates the RIP timers."; reference "RFC 2453: RIP Version 2"; leaf update-interval { type uint16 { range "1..32767"; } units "seconds"; default "30"; description "Indicates the RIP update time. That is, the amount of time for which routing updates are sent."; } leaf invalid-interval { type uint16 { range "1..32767"; } units "seconds"; default "180"; description "Is the interval before a route is declared invalid after no updates are received. This value is at least three times the value for the update-interval argument."; } leaf holddown-interval { type uint16 { range "1..32767"; } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 100] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 units "seconds"; default "180"; description "Specifies the interval before better routes are released."; } leaf flush-interval { type uint16 { range "1..32767"; } units "seconds"; default "180"; description "Indicates the RIP flush timer. That is, the amount of time that must elapse before a route is removed from the routing table."; } } leaf default-metric { type uint8 { range "0..16"; } default "1"; description "Sets the default metric."; } container authentication { 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 a RIP session is to be secured between a CE and a PE."; choice option { description "Specifies the authentication scheme."; case auth-key-chain { leaf key-chain { type key-chain:key-chain-ref; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 101] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "key-chain name."; } } case auth-key-explicit { leaf key { type string; description "RIP authentication key."; } 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 vrrp { when "derived-from-or-self(../type, " + "'vpn-common:vrrp-routing')" { description "Only applies when protocol is VRRP."; } if-feature "vpn-common:rtg-vrrp"; description "Configuration specific to VRRP."; reference "RFC 5798: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6"; leaf address-family { type identityref { base vpn-common:address-family; } description "Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address families are to be enabled."; } leaf vrrp-group { type uint8 { range "1..255"; } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 102] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 description "Includes the VRRP group identifier."; } leaf backup-peer { type inet:ip-address; description "Indicates the IP address of the peer."; } leaf-list virtual-ip-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Virtual IP addresses for a single VRRP group. "; reference "RFC 5798: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6, Sections 1.2 and 1.3"; } 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 103] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 leaf desired-min-tx-interval { type uint32; units "microseconds"; default "1000000"; description "The minimum interval between transmission of BFD control packets that the operator desires."; reference "RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Section 6.8.7"; } leaf required-min-rx-interval { type uint32; units "microseconds"; description "The minimum interval between received BFD control packets that the PE should support."; reference "RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Section 6.8.7"; } leaf detection-multiplier { type uint8 { range "1..max"; } description "The detection interval for the BFD session is calculated by multiplying the value of the negotiated transmission interval by the detection multiplier value."; reference "RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Section 6.8.7"; } 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 of Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 104] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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."; } leaf meticulous { type boolean; description "Enables meticulous mode."; reference "RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Section 6.7"; } } uses vpn-common:service-status; } } container security { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 105] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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. Otherwise, it is disabled."; } 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 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 106] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "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 of the attachment."; leaf inbound-bandwidth { if-feature "vpn-common:inbound-bw"; type uint64; units "bps"; description "From the customer site's perspective, the service inbound bandwidth of the connection or download bandwidth from the SP to the site. Note that the L3SM uses 'input- -bandwidth' to refer to the same concept."; } leaf outbound-bandwidth { if-feature "vpn-common:outbound-bw"; type uint64; units "bps"; description "From the customer site's perspective, the service oubtound bandwidth of the connection or upload bandwidth from the site to the SP. Note that the L3SM uses 'output-bandwidth' to refer to the same concept."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 107] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } leaf mtu { type uint16; units "bytes"; description "MTU at service level. If the service is IP, it refers to the IP MTU. If Carriers' Carriers (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 administration."; } leaf inbound-rate-limit { type decimal64 { fraction-digits 5; range "0..100"; } units "percent"; description "Specifies whether/how to rate-limit the Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 108] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 { base vpn-common:qos-profile-direction; } default "vpn-common:both"; description "The direction to which the QoS profile is applied."; } } } } Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 109] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 container carriers-carrier { if-feature "vpn-common:carriers-carrier"; 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 MPLS service using an IP VPN to carry its traffic)."; leaf signaling-type { type enumeration { enum ldp { description "Use LDP as the signaling protocol between the PE and the CE. In this case, an IGP routing protocol must also be configured."; } enum bgp { description "Use BGP as the signaling 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 signaling type."; } } container ntp { description "Time synchronization may be needed in some VPNs such as infrastructure and Management VPNs. This container includes parameters to enable NTP service."; reference "RFC 5905: Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Specification"; leaf broadcast { type enumeration { enum client { description "The VPN node will listen to NTP broadcast Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 110] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 messages on this VPN network access."; } enum server { description "The VPN node will behave as a broadcast server."; } } description "Indicates NTP broadcast mode to use for the VPN network access."; } container auth-profile { description "Pointer to a local profile."; leaf profile-id { type string; description "A pointer to a local authentication profile on the VPN node is provided."; } } uses vpn-common:service-status; } container multicast { if-feature "vpn-common:multicast"; description "Multicast parameters for the network access."; 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."; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 111] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 } 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. 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 " Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 112] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 + "../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."; } 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 " Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 113] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 + "../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."; } 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'"; Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 114] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 if-feature "vpn-common:pim"; description "Only applies when protocol type is PIM."; leaf hello-interval { type rt-types:timer-value-seconds16; default "30"; description "PIM hello-messages interval. If set to 'infinity' or 'not-set', no periodic Hello messages are sent."; reference "RFC 7761: Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised), Section 4.11"; } leaf dr-priority { type uint32; default "1"; description "Indicates the preference in the DR election process. Numerically larger DR priority allows a node to be elected as a DR."; reference "RFC 7761: Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised), Section 4.3.2"; } uses vpn-common:service-status; } } } } } } } } } } } <CODE ENDS> 9. 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 115] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 [RFC8446]. 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. There are a number of data nodes defined in this YANG module that are writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is the 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 an L3VPN service or adding a new network access. In addition to using NACM to prevent authorized access, such activity can be detected by adequately monitoring and tracking network configuration changes. Some readable data nodes in this YANG 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. Several data nodes defined in the L3NM rely upon [RFC8177] for authentication purposes. Therefore, this module inherits the security considerations discussed in Section 5 of [RFC8177]. The following summarizes the foreseen risks of using the "ietf-l3vpn- ntw" module can be classified into: Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 116] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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. 10. 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 11. References 11.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common] Barguil, S., Dios, O. G. D., Boucadair, M., and Q. Wu, "A Layer 2/3 VPN Common YANG Model", draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn- common-07 (work in progress), April 2021. [ISO10589] ISO, "Intermediate System to Intermediate System intra- domain routeing information exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol for providing the connectionless-mode network service (ISO 8473)", 2002, <International Standard 10589:2002, Second Edition>. [RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP multicasting", STD 5, RFC 1112, DOI 10.17487/RFC1112, August 1989, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1112>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 117] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195, December 1990, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1195>. [RFC2080] Malkin, G. and R. Minnear, "RIPng for IPv6", RFC 2080, DOI 10.17487/RFC2080, January 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2080>. [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>. [RFC2236] Fenner, W., "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2", RFC 2236, DOI 10.17487/RFC2236, November 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2236>. [RFC2453] Malkin, G., "RIP Version 2", STD 56, RFC 2453, DOI 10.17487/RFC2453, November 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2453>. [RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, DOI 10.17487/RFC2710, October 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2710>. [RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A. Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3", RFC 3376, DOI 10.17487/RFC3376, October 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3376>. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. [RFC3810] Vida, R., Ed. and L. Costa, Ed., "Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, DOI 10.17487/RFC3810, June 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3810>. [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>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 118] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. [RFC5308] Hopps, C., "Routing IPv6 with IS-IS", RFC 5308, DOI 10.17487/RFC5308, October 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5308>. [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>. [RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>. [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>. [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>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 119] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. [RFC7761] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., Kouvelas, I., Parekh, R., Zhang, Z., and L. Zheng, "Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised)", STD 83, RFC 7761, DOI 10.17487/RFC7761, March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7761>. [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 January 14, 2022 [Page 120] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. [RFC8343] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8343>. [RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>. [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>. 11.2. Informative References [I-D.evenwu-opsawg-yang-composed-vpn] Even, R., Wu, B., Wu, Q., and YingCheng, "YANG Data Model for Composed VPN Service Delivery", draft-evenwu-opsawg- yang-composed-vpn-03 (work in progress), March 2019. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 121] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement] Rabadan, J., Henderickx, W., Drake, J. E., Lin, W., and A. Sajassi, "IP Prefix Advertisement in EVPN", draft-ietf- bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-11 (work in progress), May 2018. [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-03 (work in progress), February 2021. [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn] Dong, J., Bryant, S., Li, Z., Miyasaka, T., and Y. Lee, "A Framework for Enhanced Virtual Private Network (VPN+) Services", draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-07 (work in progress), February 2021. [I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices] Farrel, A., Gray, E., Drake, J., Rokui, R., Homma, S., Makhijani, K., Contreras, L. M., and J. Tantsura, "Framework for IETF Network Slices", draft-ietf-teas-ietf- network-slices-00 (work in progress), April 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>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 122] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. [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>. [RFC4447] Martini, L., Ed., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and G. Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, DOI 10.17487/RFC4447, April 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4447>. [RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, DOI 10.17487/RFC4862, September 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>. [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>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 123] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. [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>. Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 124] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 [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>. 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 31, 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 | | | | 198.51.100.1 | | eNodeB |>--------/------->|........... | | | vlan 1 | | | | |>--------/------->|...... | | | | vlan 2 | | | | | | Direct | +-------------+ | +-------------+ Routing | | vpn-node-id | | | | 44 | | | +-------------+ | | | +------------------+ Figure 31: Mobile Backhaul Example To create an L3VPN service using the L3NM, the following steps can be followed. First: Create the 4G VPN service (Figure 32). Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 125] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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", "vpn-instance-profiles": { "vpn-instance-profile": [ { "profile-id": "simple-profile", "local-autonomous-system": 65550, "rd": "0:65550:1", "address-family": [ { "address-family": "vpn-common:dual-stack", "vpn-targets": { "vpn-target": [ { "id": "1", "route-targets": [ "0:65550:1" ], "route-target-type": "both" } ] } } ] } ] } } ] } } Figure 32: Create VPN Service Second: Create a VPN node as depicted in Figure 33. 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 January 14, 2022 [Page 126] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 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", "active-vpn-instance-profiles": { "vpn-instance-profile": [ { "profile-id": "simple-profile" } ] } } ] } } Figure 33: Create VPN Node Finally, two VPN network accesses are created using the same physical port ('interface-id'=1/1/1). Each 'vpn-network-access' has a particular VLAN (1,2) to differentiate the traffic between: Sync and data (Figure 34). 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": [ { "id": "1/1/1.1", "interface-id": "1/1/1", "description": "Interface SYNC to eNODE-B", "vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:point-to-point", "vpn-instance-profile": "simple-profile", "status": { "admin-status": { "status": "vpn-common:admin-state-up" } }, Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 127] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "connection": { "encapsulation": { "type": "dot1q", "dot1q": { "cvlan-id": 1 } } }, "ip-connection": { "ipv4": { "local-address": "192.0.2.1", "prefix-length": 30, "address-allocation-type": "static-address", "static-addresses": { "primary-address": "1", "address": [ { "address-id": "1", "customer-address": "192.0.2.2" } ] } }, "ipv6": { "local-address": "2001:db8::1", "prefix-length": 64, "address-allocation-type": "static-address", "primary-address": "1", "address": [ { "address-id": "1", "customer-address": "2001:db8::2" } ] } }, "routing-protocols": { "routing-protocol": [ { "id": "1", "type": "vpn-common:direct" } ] } }, { "id": "1/1/1.2", "interface-id": "1/1/1", Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 128] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "description": "Interface DATA to eNODE-B", "vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:point-to-point", "vpn-instance-profile": "simple-profile", "status": { "admin-status": { "status": "vpn-common:admin-state-up" } }, "connection": { "encapsulation": { "type": "dot1q", "dot1q": { "cvlan-id": 2 } } }, "ip-connection": { "ipv4": { "local-address": "192.0.2.1", "prefix-length": 30, "address-allocation-type": "static-address", "static-addresses": { "primary-address": "1", "address": [ { "address-id": "1", "customer-address": "192.0.2.2" } ] } }, "ipv6": { "local-address": "2001:db8::1", "prefix-length": 64, "address-allocation-type": "static-address", "primary-address": "1", "address": [ { "address-id": "1", "customer-address": "2001:db8::2" } ] } }, "routing-protocols": { "routing-protocol": [ { "id": "1", Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 129] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "type": "vpn-common:direct" } ] } } ] } } Figure 34: Create VPN Network Access A.2. Loopback Interface An example of loopback interface is depicted in Figure 35. { "ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-network-accesses": { "vpn-network-access": [ { "id": "vpn-access-loopback", "interface-id": "Loopback1", "description": "An example of loopback interface.", "vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:loopback", "status": { "admin-status": { "status": "vpn-common:admin-state-up" } }, "ip-connection": { "ipv6": { "local-address": "2001:db8::4", "prefix-length": 128 } } } ] } } Figure 35: VPN Network Access with a Loopback Interface (Message Body) A.3. 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 130] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 An example is provided below to illustrate how to configure a multicast L3VPN service using the L3NM. First, the multicast service is created together with a generic VPN instance profile (see the excerpt of the request message body shown in Figure 37) Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 131] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 { "ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-services": { "vpn-service": [ { "vpn-id": "Multicast-IPTV", "vpn-description": "Multicast IPTV VPN service", "customer-name": "a-name", "vpn-service-topology": "vpn-common:hub-spoke", "vpn-instance-profiles": { "vpn-instance-profile": [ { "profile-id": "multicast", "role": "ietf-vpn-common:hub-role", "local-autonomous-system": 65536, "multicast": { "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 37: Create Multicast VPN Service (Excerpt of the Message Request Body) Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 132] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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. { "ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-node": [ { "vpn-node-id": "500003105", "description": "VRF-IPTV-MULTICAST", "ne-id": "198.51.100.10", "router-id": "198.51.100.10", "active-vpn-instance-profiles": { "vpn-instance-profile": [ { "profile-id": "multicast", "rd": "65536:31050202" } ] } } ] } 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). { "ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-network-access": { "id": "1/1/1", "description": "Connected-to-source", "vpn-network-access-type": "vpn-common:point-to-point", "vpn-instance-profile": "multicast", "status": { "admin-status": { "status": "vpn-common:admin-state-up" }, "ip-connection": { "ipv4": { "local-address": "203.0.113.1", "prefix-length": 30, "address-allocation-type": "static-address", "static-addresses": { "primary-address": "1", "address": [ { Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 133] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 "address-id": "1", "customer-address": "203.0.113.2" } ] } } }, "routing-protocols": { "routing-protocol": [ { "id": "1", "type": "vpn-common:bgp-routing", "bgp": { "description": "Connected to CE", "peer-autonomous-system": "65537", "address-family": "vpn-common:ipv4", "neighbor": "203.0.113.2" } } ] }, "service": { "inbound-bandwidth": "100000000", "outbound-bandwidth": "100000000", "mtu": 1500, "multicast": { "access-type": "source-only", "address-family": "vpn-common:ipv4", "protocol-type": "router", "pim": { "hello-interval": 30, "status": { "admin-status": { "status": "vpn-common:admin-state-up" } } } } } } } } Figure 39: Create VPN Network Access (Excerpt of the Message Request Body) Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 134] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 document 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 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 Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 135] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 Acknowledgements During the discussions of this work, helpful comments, suggestions, and reviews were received from (listed alphabetically): Raul Arco, Miguel Cros Cecilia, Joe Clarke, Dhruv Dhody, Adrian Farrel, Roque Gagliano, Christian Jacquenet, Kireeti Kompella, Julian Lucek, and Tom Petch. Many thanks to them. Thanks to Philip Eardly for the review of an early version of the document. Daniel King, Daniel Voyer, Luay Jalil, and Stephane Litkowski contributed to early version of the individual submission. Many thanks to Robert Wilton for the AD review. This work was supported in part by the European Commission funded H2020-ICT-2016-2 METRO-HAUL project (G.A. 761727) and Horizon 2020 Secured autonomic traffic management for a Tera of SDN flows (Teraflow) project (G.A. 101015857). 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> Paul Sherratt Gamma Telecom Email: paul.sherratt@gamma.co.uk Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 136] Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model July 2021 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 Alejandro Aguado Nokia Madrid ES Email: alejandro.aguado_martin@nokia.com Barguil, et al. Expires January 14, 2022 [Page 137]