A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-16
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 | 2021-09-29 | ||
| Replaces | draft-aguado-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
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 2021-09-23 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9182 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date |
(None)
Needs a YES. Needs 4 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass. |
||
| Responsible AD | Robert Wilton | ||
| Send notices to | adrian@olddog.co.uk | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
| IANA expert review state | Expert Reviews OK |
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-16
OPSAWG S. Barguil
Internet-Draft O. Gonzalez de Dios, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Telefonica
Expires: 3 April 2022 M. Boucadair, Ed.
Orange
L. Munoz
Vodafone
A. Aguado
Nokia
30 September 2021
A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-16
Abstract
As a complement to the Layer 3 Virtual Private Network Service YANG
data Model (L3SM), used for communication between customers and
service providers, 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:
* "This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX;"
* "RFC XXXX: Layer 3 VPN Network Model";
* 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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 April 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. L3NM Reference Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Relation with other YANG Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Sample Uses of the L3NM Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Enterprise Layer 3 VPN Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2. Multi-Domain Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.3. Management of Multicast Services . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Description of the L3NM YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. Overall Structure of the Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.2. VPN Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.3. VPN Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.4. VPN Instance Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.5. VPN Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
7.6. VPN Network Accesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.6.1. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.6.2. IP Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.6.3. CE-PE Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.6.3.1. Static Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.6.3.2. BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.6.3.3. OSPF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.6.3.4. IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.6.3.5. RIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.6.3.6. VRRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.6.4. OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.6.5. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.6.6. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.6.6.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.6.6.2. QoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.7. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
8. L3NM YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Appendix A. L3VPN Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
A.1. 4G VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
A.2. Loopback Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
A.3. Overriding VPN Instance Profile Parameters . . . . . . . 138
A.4. Multicast VPN Provisioning Example . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Appendix B. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
B.1. Nokia Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
B.2. Huawei Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
B.3. Infinera Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
B.4. Ribbon-ECI Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
B.5. Juniper Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
1. Introduction
[RFC8299] defines a Layer 3 Virtual Private Network Service YANG data
Model (L3SM) that can be used for communication between customers and
service providers. 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]).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.
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 correlation
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].
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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].
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
CsC Carriers' Carriers
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 Rendezvous Point
RT Route Target
SA Security Association
SSM Source-Specific Multicast
VPN Virtual Private Network
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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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".
+---------------+
| 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) that characterizes the
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
requested service [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) Framework
[RFC8453]. Figure 2 shows the Customer Network Controller (CNC), the
Multi-Domain Service Coordinator (MDSC), and the Provisioning Network
Controller (PNC) components and the interfaces where L3SM/L3NM are
used.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
+----------------------------------+
| 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 3 April 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
topology managed by the service provider network. The topology
can be represented using the network topology YANG module defined
in [RFC8345] or its extension such as a User-Network Interface
(UNI) topology module (e.g., [I-D.ogondio-opsawg-uni-topology]).
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 VPN nodes. Workflows can use the L3NM in these scenarios
to add or prune nodes from the network data model as required.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 network 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 3 April 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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
Some of the data nodes are keyed by the address-family. For the sake
of data representation compactness, It is RECOMMENDED to use the
dual-stack address-family for data nodes that have the same value for
both IPv4 and IPv6. If, for some reasons, a data node is present for
both dual-stack and IPv4 (or IPv6), the value that is indicated under
dual-stack takes precedence over the one that is indicated under IPv4
(or IPv6).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.
+--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
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 facilitate identifying and binding local
policies when building a VPN service. As shown in Figure 4, the
following identifiers can be included:
'external-connectivity-identifier': This identifier refers to a
profile that defines the external connectivity provided to a VPN
service (or a subset of VPN sites). An external connectivity may
be an access to the Internet or a restricted connectivity such as
access to a public/private cloud.
'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 a set of policies such as classification, marking, and actions
(e.g., [RFC3644]).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
'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.
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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
+--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:
'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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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'.
More details are provided in Section 7.4.
'underlay-transport': Describes the preference for the transport
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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 even 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 3 April 2022 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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-as? 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 3 April 2022 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 uint8
| | | | +--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-as': Indicates the Autonomous System Number (ASN) that is
configured for the VPN node.
'rd': As defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common], the following 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 3 April 2022 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 number of 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]
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
+--rw vpn-node-id vpn-common:vpn-id
+--rw description? string
+--rw ne-id? string
+--rw local-as? 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-as? 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
...
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Figure 7: VPN Node Subtree Structure
In reference to the subtree shown in Figure 7, the description of VPN
node data nodes is as follows:
'vpn-node-id': Is an identifier that uniquely identifies a node that
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'. The value of 'router-id'
indicated under 'active-vpn-instance-profiles' takes precedence
over the 'router-id' under the 'vpn-node' for the indicated
address family. For example, 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. An example is shown in
Appendix A.3.
'msdp': For redundancy purposes, Multicast Source Discovery Protocol
(MSDP) [RFC3618] may be enabled and used to share the state about
sources between multiple Rendezvous 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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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.
'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 Accesses
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 3 April 2022 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 overridden at the VPN network access
level. In such case, adjusted 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 3 April 2022 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 6.1 of [RFC8077]).
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 connection 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 3 April 2022 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
The L3NM can be used to create a LAG interface for a given L3VPN
service ('lag-interface') [IEEE802.1AX]. Such a LAG interface can be
referenced under 'interface-id' (Section 7.6).
...
+--rw connection
| +--rw encapsulation
| | +--rw type? identityref
| | +--rw dot1q
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw cvlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw priority-tagged
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | +--rw 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
| | | +--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}?
| +--rw lag-interface {vpn-common:lag-interface}?
| +--rw lag-interface-id? string
| +--rw member-link-list
| +--rw member-link* [name]
| +--rw name string
...
Figure 9: Connection Subtree Structure
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.
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 3 April 2022 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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)?
| +--:(provider-dhcp)
| | +--rw provider-dhcp
| | +--rw dhcp-service-type?
| | | enumeration
| | +--rw (service-type)?
| | +--:(relay)
| | | +--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 3 April 2022 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw 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 (typically,
network orchestration shown in Figure 1) 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:
* Multiple BGP processes with a single neighbor running in each
process.
* A single BGP process with multiple neighbors running.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
* 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'). Note that these routing profiles can
be scoped to capture parameters that are globally applied to all
L3VPN services within a service provider network, while customized
L3VPN parameters are captured by means of the L3NM. The provisioning
of an L3VPN service will, thus, rely upon the instantiation of these
global routing profiles and the customized L3NM.
7.6.3.1. Static Routing
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].
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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
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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
'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 can also be used to control the (de)activation of
individual static route entries.
7.6.3.2. 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. The 'bgp' container does not aim
to include every BGP parameter; a comprehensive set of parameters
belongs more to the BGP device model.
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw bgp
| | +--rw description? string
| | +--rw local-as? inet:as-number
| | +--rw peer-as 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 send-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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
| | | +--rw max-prefix? uint32
| | | +--rw warning-threshold? decimal64
| | | +--rw violate-action? enumeration
| | | +--rw restart-timer? uint32
| | +--rw bgp-timers
| | | +--rw keepalive? uint16
| | | +--rw hold-time? uint16
| | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(ao)
| | | | +--rw enable-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
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
...
Figure 16: BGP Routing Subtree Structure
The following data nodes are captured in Figure 16. It is up to the
implementation (e.g., network orchestrator) to derive the
corresponding BGP device configuration:
'description': Includes a description of the BGP session.
'local-as': Indicates a local AS Number (ASN) if a distinct ASN is
required, other than the one configured at the VPN node level.
'peer-as': Conveys the customer's ASN.
'address-family': Indicates the address-family of the peer. It can
be set to IPv4, IPv6, or dual-stack.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
This address family will be used together with the 'vpn-type' to
derive the appropriate Address Family Identifiers
(AFIs)/Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFIs) that will be
part of the derived device configurations (e.g., Unicast IPv4 MPLS
L3VPN (AFI,SAFI = 1,128) defined in Section 4.3.4 of [RFC4364]).
'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-as'
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.
'send-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
Community 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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
'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 'violate-action' 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.
This version of the L3NM assumes that TCP-AO specific parameters
are preconfigured as part of the key-chain that is referenced in
the L3NM. No assumption is made about how such a key-chain is
pre-configured. However, the structure of the key-chain should
cover data nodes beyond those in [RFC8177], mainly SendID and
RecvID (Section 3.1 of [RFC5925]).
'status': Indicates the status of the BGP routing instance.
7.6.3.3. OSPF
OSPF can be configured to run as a routing protocol on the 'vpn-
network-access'.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw 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)?
| | | +--:(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
| | | +--:(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
The following data nodes are captured in Figure 17:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
When the IPv4 or dual-stack address-family is requested, it is up
to the implementation (e.g., network orchestrator) to decide
whether OSPFv2 [RFC4577] or OSPFv3 [RFC6565] is used to announce
IPv4 routes. Such decision will be typically reflected in the
device configurations that will be derived to implement the L3VPN.
'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.
7.6.3.4. IS-IS
The model (Figure 18) allows the user to configure IS-IS
[ISO10589][RFC1195][RFC5308] to run on the 'vpn-network-access'
interface.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw 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
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.
'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).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
'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.
7.6.3.5. RIP
The model (Figure 19) allows the user to configure RIP to run on the
'vpn-network-access' interface.
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw 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
As shown in Figure 19, the following RIP data nodes are supported:
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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.
7.6.3.6. VRRP
The model (Figure 20) allows enabling VRRP on the 'vpn-network-
access' interface.
...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| ...
| +--rw 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
...
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Figure 20: VRRP Subtree Structure
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.
'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]).
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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
...
+--rw oam
| +--rw bfd {vpn-common:bfd}?
| +--rw session-type? identityref
| +--rw desired-min-tx-interval? uint32
| +--rw required-min-rx-interval? uint32
| +--rw local-multiplier? uint8
| +--rw holdtime? uint32
| +--rw profile? 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)
The following OAM data nodes can be specified:
'session-type': Indicates which BFD flavor is used to set up the
session (e.g., classic BFD [RFC5880], Seamless BFD [RFC7880]). By
default, the BFD session is assumed to follow the behavior
specified in [RFC5880].
'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.
'local-multiplier': The negotiated transmit interval, multiplied by
this value, provides the detection time for the peer.
'holdtime': Is used to indicate the expected BFD holddown time.
This value may be inherited from the service request (see
Section 6.3.2.2.2 of [RFC8299]).
'profile': Refers to a BFD profile (Section 7.2). Such a profile
can be set by the provider or inherited from the service request
(see Section 6.3.2.2.2 of [RFC8299]).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
'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.
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.
...
+--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
7.6.6.1. Overview
The 'service' container specifies the service parameters to apply for
a given VPN network access (Figure 23).
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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? uint32
+--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 (refer to Section 7.6.6.2 for more details).
'carriers-carrier': 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 3 April 2022 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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.
7.6.6.2. QoS
'qos' container 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.
...
+--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
...
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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 3 April 2022 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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)
Layer 4: As discussed in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common], any layer 4
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.
As discussed in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common], some transport
protocols use existing protocols (e.g., TCP or UDP) as substrate.
The match criteria for such protocols may rely upon the 'protocol'
under 'l3', TCP/UDP match criteria shown in Figure 26, part of the
TCP/UDP payload, or a combination thereof. This version of the
module does not support such advanced match criteria. Future
revisions of the VPN common module or augmentations to the L3NM
may consider adding match criteria based on the transport protocol
payload (e.g., by means of a bitmask match).
+--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)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
| | | | | | +--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
| | | | +--:(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)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Application match: Relies upon application-specific classification.
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]
...
+--rw vpn-instance-profiles
| +--rw vpn-instance-profile* [profile-id]
| ....
| +--rw multicast {vpn-common:multicast}?
| +--rw tree-flavor? identityref
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
| +--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
| +--rw pim {vpn-common:pim}?
| +--rw hello-interval? rt-types:timer-value-seconds16
| +--rw dr-priority? uint32
...
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Figure 28: Multicast Subtree Structure (VPN Instance Profile Level)
The model supports a single type of tree per VPN access ('tree-
flavor'): Any-Source Multicast (ASM), Source-Specific Multicast
(SSM), or bidirectional.
When ASM is used, the model supports the configuration of Rendezvous
Points (RPs). RP discovery may be 'static', 'bsr-rp', or 'auto-rp'.
When set to 'static', RP to multicast grouping mappings 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.
The model supports RP redundancy through the 'rp-redundancy' leaf.
How the redundancy is achieved is out of scope.
When a particular VPN using ASM requires a more optimal traffic
delivery (e.g., requested using [RFC8299]), '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
overridden at the VPN network access level.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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@2021-09-28.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 3 April 2022 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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: <https://datatracker.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 3 April 2022 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 2021-09-28 {
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 3 April 2022 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 referenced at the VPN node and VPN
network access levels.";
leaf local-as {
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 3 April 2022 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 tree-flavor {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:multicast-tree-type;
}
description
"Type of the multicast 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 3 April 2022 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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
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 3 April 2022 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 address.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv4 address.";
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum number of groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
description
"Indicates the maximum number of 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 address.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv6 address.";
}
}
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 3 April 2022 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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. A larger value has a higher
priority over a smaller value.";
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 3 April 2022 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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-as {
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 3 April 2022 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"Container for layer 2 encapsulation.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:encapsulation-type;
}
default "vpn-common:priority-tagged";
description
"Encapsulation 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'.";
}
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 {
base vpn-common:tag-type;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
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.";
}
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
"Defines a layer 2 tunnel termination.
It is only applicable when a tunnel is
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
required. The supported values are:
pseudowire, VPLS, and VXLAN. Other
values may be defined, if needed.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base l2-tunnel-type;
}
description
"Selects the tunnel termiantion option for
each vpn-network-access.";
}
container pseudowire {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'pseudowire')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the layer 2
service type is 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 8077: Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance
Using the Label Distribution
Protocol (LDP), Section 6.1";
}
}
container vpls {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpls')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the layer 2
service type is VPLS.";
}
description
"VPLS termination parameters.";
leaf vcid {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
type uint32;
description
"VC Identifier.";
}
leaf-list far-end {
type union {
type uint32;
type inet:ip-address;
}
description
"Neighbor reference.";
}
}
container vxlan {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vxlan')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the layer 2
service type is 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;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
"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 lag-interface {
if-feature "vpn-common:lag-interface";
description
"Container of LAG interface attributes
configuration.";
leaf lag-interface-id {
type string;
description
"LAG interface identifier.";
}
container member-link-list {
description
"Container of Member link list.";
list member-link {
key "name";
description
"Member link.";
leaf name {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
type string;
description
"Member link name.";
}
}
}
}
}
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(),"
+ " 'provider-dhcp-slaac'))" {
error-message
"SLAAC is only applicable to IPv6.";
}
description
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"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
relay.";
}
}
case server {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
}
leaf start-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
mandatory true;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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";
description
"Lists the IPv4 addresses that are used.";
leaf address-id {
type string;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
container provider-dhcp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../address-allo"
+ "cation-type, 'provider-dhcp') "
+ "or derived-from-or-self(../address-allo"
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
+ "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 relay {
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;
default "1";
description
"Describes the number of IPv6
prefixes that are allocated to
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
case dhcp-relay {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
container routing-protocols {
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
list routing-protocol {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
"Configuration specific to static routing.";
container cascaded-lan-prefixes {
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
routes.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
container bgp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:bgp-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when protocol is 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-as {
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-as {
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 {
type union {
type inet:ip-address;
type if:interface-ref;
}
description
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"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
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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 send-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
Origin for VRF information.";
reference
"RFC 5701: IPv6 Address Specific BGP Extended
Community Attribute";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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;
range "0..100";
}
units "percent";
default "75";
description
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"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-timer {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"Time interval 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";
}
units "seconds";
default "30";
description
"This timer indicates the KEEPALIVE
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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 {
when "../enable = 'true'";
description
"Container for describing how a BGP routing
session is to be secured between a PE and
a CE.";
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
choice option {
description
"Choice of authentication options.";
case ao {
description
"Uses TCP-Authentication Option
(TCP-AO).";
reference
"RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication
Option.";
leaf enable-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.";
}
leaf key {
type string;
description
"BGP authentication key.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
This model only supports the subset
of keys that are representable as
ASCII strings.";
}
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 administrator-assigned
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.";
}
description
"OSPF-specific configuration.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or
both are to be activated.";
}
leaf area-id {
type yang:dotted-quad;
mandatory true;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
identifier.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
default "1";
description
"Metric of the sham link. It is used in
the routing state calculation and path
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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 {
type uint32;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
description
"Key identifier.";
}
leaf key {
type string;
description
"OSPF authentication key.
This model only supports the subset
of keys that are representable as
ASCII strings.";
}
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 administrator-assigned
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.";
}
description
"IS-IS specific configuration.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
description
"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 {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Enables or disables authentication.";
}
container keying-material {
when "../enable = 'true'";
description
"Container for describing how an IS-IS
session is to be secured between a CE
and a PE.";
choice option {
description
"Options for IS-IS authentication.";
case auth-key-chain {
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"key-chain name.";
}
}
case auth-key-explicit {
leaf key-id {
type uint32;
description
"Key Identifier.";
}
leaf key {
type string;
description
"IS-IS authentication key.
This model only supports the subset
of keys that are representable as
ASCII strings.";
}
leaf crypto-algorithm {
type identityref {
base key-chain:crypto-algorithm;
}
description
"Indicates the cryptographic algorithm
associated with the key.";
}
}
}
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
container rip {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:rip-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is RIP.
For IPv4, the model assumes that RIP
version 2 is used.";
}
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
RIP 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.";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
leaf holddown-interval {
type uint16 {
range "1..32767";
}
units "seconds";
default "180";
description
"Specifies the interval before better routes
are released.";
}
leaf flush-interval {
type uint16 {
range "1..32767";
}
units "seconds";
default "240";
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"Specifies the authentication scheme.";
case auth-key-chain {
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"key-chain name.";
}
}
case auth-key-explicit {
leaf key {
type string;
description
"RIP authentication key.
This model only supports the subset
of keys that are representable as
ASCII strings.";
}
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.";
}
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
address families are to be enabled.";
}
leaf vrrp-group {
type uint8 {
range "1..255";
}
description
"Includes the VRRP group identifier.";
}
leaf backup-peer {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Indicates the IP address of the peer.";
}
leaf-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;
default "false";
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.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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.";
leaf session-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:bfd-session-type;
}
default "vpn-common:classic-bfd";
description
"Specifies the BFD session type.";
}
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 local-multiplier {
type uint8 {
range "1..255";
}
default "3";
description
"Specifies the detection multiplier that is
transmitted to a BFD peer.
The detection interval for the receiving
BFD peer is calculated by multiplying the value
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
of the negotiated transmission interval by
the received detection multiplier value.";
reference
"RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD), Section 6.8.7";
}
leaf holdtime {
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
this function.
If the provider doesn't allow the
customer to use this function,
the fixed-value will not be set.";
reference
"RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD), Section 6.8.18";
}
leaf profile {
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 {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
type boolean;
description
"Enables meticulous mode.";
reference
"RFC 5880: Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection (BFD), Section 6.7";
}
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
}
container security {
description
"Site-specific security parameters.";
container encryption {
if-feature "vpn-common:encryption";
description
"Container for CE-PE security encryption.";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"If true, traffic encryption on the
connection is required. Otherwise, it
is disabled.";
}
leaf layer {
when "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
"It is included only when enryption
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.";
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 111]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
}
container encryption-profile {
when "../encryption/enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Indicates the layer on which encryption
is enabled.";
}
description
"Container for encryption profile.";
choice profile {
description
"Choice for the encryption profile.";
case provider-profile {
leaf profile-name {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-ntw/vpn-profiles"
+ "/valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/encryption-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"Name of the service provider's profile
to be applied.";
}
}
case customer-profile {
leaf customer-key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Customer-supplied key chain.";
}
}
}
}
}
container service {
description
"Service parameters 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.";
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 112]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
leaf outbound-bandwidth {
if-feature "vpn-common:outbound-bw";
type uint64;
units "bps";
description
"From the customer site's perspective,
the service outbound 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.";
}
leaf mtu {
type uint32;
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 maximum labeled packet
size 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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 113]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"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
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.";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 114]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
leaf direction {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:qos-profile-direction;
}
default "vpn-common:both";
description
"The direction to which the QoS profile
is applied.";
}
}
}
}
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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 115]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
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 {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 116]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
description
"The peer site only has sources.";
}
enum source-receiver {
description
"The peer site has both sources and
receivers.";
}
}
default "source-receiver";
description
"Type of multicast site.";
}
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates the address family.";
}
leaf protocol-type {
type enumeration {
enum host {
description
"Hosts are directly connected to the
provider network.
Host protocols such as IGMP or MLD are
required.";
}
enum router {
description
"Hosts are behind a customer router.
PIM will be implemented.";
}
enum both {
description
"Some hosts are behind a customer router,
and some others are directly connected
to the provider network. Both host and
routing protocols must be used.
Typically, IGMP and PIM will be
implemented.";
}
}
default "both";
description
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 117]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
"Multicast protocol type to be used with
the customer site.";
}
leaf remote-source {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"A remote multicast source is a source that is
not on the same subnet as the
vpn-network-access. When set to 'true', the
multicast traffic from a remote source is
accepted.";
}
container igmp {
when "../protocol-type = 'host' and "
+ "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv4' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'";
if-feature "vpn-common:igmp";
description
"Includes IGMP-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to
IGMP session";
leaf group-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv4 address.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv4-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv4 address.";
}
}
leaf max-groups {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum number of groups.";
}
leaf max-entries {
type uint32;
description
"Indicates the maximum number of IGMP
entries.";
}
leaf max-group-sources {
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 118]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
type uint32;
description
"The maximum number of group sources.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:igmp-version;
}
default "vpn-common:igmpv2";
description
"Version of the IGMP.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container mld {
when "../protocol-type = 'host' and "
+ "../address-family = 'vpn-common:ipv6' or "
+ "'vpn-common:dual-stack'";
if-feature "vpn-common:mld";
description
"Includes MLD-related parameters.";
list static-group {
key "group-addr";
description
"Multicast static source/group associated to
the MLD session";
leaf group-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-group-address;
description
"Multicast group IPv6 address.";
}
leaf source-addr {
type rt-types:ipv6-multicast-source-address;
description
"Multicast source IPv6 address.";
}
}
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.";
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 119]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
leaf max-group-sources {
type uint32;
description
"The maximum number of group sources.";
}
leaf version {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:mld-version;
}
default "vpn-common:mldv2";
description
"Version of the MLD protocol.";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
container pim {
when "../protocol-type = 'router'";
if-feature "vpn-common:pim";
description
"Only applies when protocol type is PIM.";
leaf 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. A larger value has a higher
priority over a smaller value.";
reference
"RFC 7761: Protocol Independent Multicast -
Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol
Specification (Revised),
Section 4.3.2";
}
uses vpn-common:service-status;
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 120]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
<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
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:
* 'vpn-profiles': This container includes a set of sensitive data
that influence how the L3VPN service is delivered. For example,
an attacker who has access to these data nodes may be able to
manipulate routing policies, QoS policies, or encryption
properties. These data nodes are defined with "nacm:default-deny-
write" tagging [I-D.ietf-opsawg-vpn-common].
* 'vpn-services': 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, keying material), leading to
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 121]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
malfunctioning of the service and therefore to SLA violations. In
addition, an attacker could attempt to create an L3VPN service or
add 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:
* '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.
* 'keying-material': An attacker can retrieve the cryptographic keys
protecting the underlying VPN service (CE-PE routing, in
particular). These keys could be used to inject spoofed routing
advertisements.
Several data nodes ('bgp', 'ospf', 'isis', 'rip', and 'bfd') rely
upon [RFC8177] for authentication purposes. Therefore, this module
inherits the security considerations discussed in Section 5 of
[RFC8177]. Also, these data nodes support supplying explicit keys as
strings in ASCII format. The use of keys in hexadecimal string
format would afford greater key entropy with the same number of key-
string octets. However, such format is not included in this version
of the L3NM because it is not supported by the underlying device
modules (e.g., [RFC8695]).
As discussed in Section 7.6.3, the module supports MD5 to basically
accommodate the installed BGP base. MD5 suffers from the security
weaknesses discussed in Section 2 of [RFC6151] or Section 2.1 of
[RFC6952].
[RFC8633] describes best current practices to be considered in VPNs
making use of NTP. Moreover, a mechanism to provide cryptographic
security for NTP is specified in [RFC8915].
10. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to register the following URI in the "ns"
subregistry within the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688]:
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 122]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-common-11, 23
September 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-
ietf-opsawg-vpn-common-11.txt>.
[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>.
[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>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 123]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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>.
[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>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 124]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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>.
[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>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 125]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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>.
[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>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 126]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-evenwu-opsawg-yang-composed-vpn-03,
8 March 2019, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-
evenwu-opsawg-yang-composed-vpn-03.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement]
Rabadan, J., Henderickx, W., Drake, J. E., Lin, W., and A.
Sajassi, "IP Prefix Advertisement in EVPN", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-
advertisement-11, 18 May 2018,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-
prefix-advertisement-11.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., Hares, S., and J. Haas, "BGP
YANG Model for Service Provider Networks", Work in
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 127]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-11, 11
July 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-
idr-bgp-model-11.txt>.
[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)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-pim-yang-17, 19 May 2018,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pim-yang-
17.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-qos-model]
Choudhary, A., Jethanandani, M., Strahle, N., Aries, E.,
and I. Chen, "A YANG Data Model for Quality of Service
(QoS)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
rtgwg-qos-model-04, 12 July 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rtgwg-qos-
model-04.txt>.
[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", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
teas-enhanced-vpn-08, 12 July 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-
vpn-08.txt>.
[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", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices-04, 23
August 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-
teas-ietf-network-slices-04.txt>.
[I-D.ogondio-opsawg-uni-topology]
Dios, O. G. D., Barguil, S., Wu, Q., and M. Boucadair, "A
YANG Model for User-Network Interface (UNI) Topologies",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ogondio-opsawg-
uni-topology-01, 2 April 2020,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ogondio-opsawg-uni-
topology-01.txt>.
[IEEE802.1AX]
"Link Aggregation", IEEE Std 802.1AX-2020, 2020.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 128]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[PYANG] "pyang", November 2020,
<https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang>.
[RFC3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3618, October 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3618>.
[RFC3644] Snir, Y., Ramberg, Y., Strassner, J., Cohen, R., and B.
Moore, "Policy Quality of Service (QoS) Information
Model", RFC 3644, DOI 10.17487/RFC3644, November 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3644>.
[RFC4026] Andersson, L. and T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual
Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4026, March 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4026>.
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC6151] Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations
for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms",
RFC 6151, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 129]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.
[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>.
[RFC7880] Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Akiya, N., Bhatia, M., and S.
Pallagatti, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(S-BFD)", RFC 7880, DOI 10.17487/RFC7880, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7880>.
[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>.
[RFC8077] Martini, L., Ed. and G. Heron, Ed., "Pseudowire Setup and
Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)",
STD 84, RFC 8077, DOI 10.17487/RFC8077, February 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8077>.
[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>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 130]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
[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>.
[RFC8633] Reilly, D., Stenn, H., and D. Sibold, "Network Time
Protocol Best Current Practices", BCP 223, RFC 8633,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8633, July 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8633>.
[RFC8695] Liu, X., Sarda, P., and V. Choudhary, "A YANG Data Model
for the Routing Information Protocol (RIP)", RFC 8695,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8695, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8695>.
[RFC8915] Franke, D., Sibold, D., Teichel, K., Dansarie, M., and R.
Sundblad, "Network Time Security for the Network Time
Protocol", RFC 8915, DOI 10.17487/RFC8915, September 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8915>.
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 131]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 132]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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-as": 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 3 April 2022 [Page 133]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 134]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 135]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 136]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 137]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
A.3. Overriding VPN Instance Profile Parameters
Figure 36 shows a simplified example to illustrate how some
information that is provided at the VPN service level (particularly
as part of the 'vpn-instance-profiles') can be overridden by the one
configured at the VPN node level. In this example, PE3 and PE4
inherit the 'vpn-instance-profiles' parameters that are specified at
the VPN service level, but PE1 and PE2 are provided with "maximum-
routes" values at the VPN node level that override the ones that are
specified at the VPN service level.
{
"ietf-l3vpn-ntw:vpn-services": {
"vpn-service": [
{
"vpn-id": "override-example",
"vpn-service-topology": "vpn-common:hub-spoke",
"vpn-instance-profiles": {
"vpn-instance-profile": [
{
"profile-id": "HUB",
"role": "vpn-common:hub-role",
"local-as": 64510,
"rd-suffix": 1001,
"address-family": [
{
"address-family": "vpn-common:dual-stack",
"maximum-routes": [
{
"protocol": "vpn-common:any",
"maximum-routes": 100
}
]
}
]
},
{
"profile-id": "SPOKE",
"role": "vpn-common:spoke-role",
"local-as": 64510,
"address-family": [
{
"address-family": "vpn-common:dual-stack",
"maximum-routes": [
{
"protocol": "vpn-common:any",
"maximum-routes": 1000
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 138]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
]
}
]
}
]
},
"vpn-nodes": {
"vpn-node": [
{
"vpn-node-id": "PE1",
"ne-id": "pe1",
"router-id": "198.51.100.1",
"active-vpn-instance-profiles": {
"vpn-instance-profile": [
{
"profile-id": "HUB",
"rd": "1:198.51.100.1:1001",
"address-family": [
{
"address-family": "vpn-common:dual-stack",
"maximum-routes": [
{
"protocol": "vpn-common:any",
"maximum-routes": 10
}
]
}
]
}
]
}
},
{
"vpn-node-id": "PE2",
"ne-id": "pe2",
"router-id": "198.51.100.2",
"active-vpn-instance-profiles": {
"vpn-instance-profile": [
{
"profile-id": "SPOKE",
"address-family": [
{
"address-family": "vpn-common:dual-stack",
"maximum-routes": [
{
"protocol": "vpn-common:any",
"maximum-routes": 100
}
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 139]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
]
}
]
}
]
}
},
{
"vpn-node-id": "PE3",
"ne-id": "pe3",
"router-id": "198.51.100.3",
"active-vpn-instance-profiles": {
"vpn-instance-profile": [
{
"profile-id": "SPOKE"
}
]
}
},
{
"vpn-node-id": "PE4",
"ne-id": "pe4",
"router-id": "198.51.100.4",
"active-vpn-instance-profiles": {
"vpn-instance-profile": [
{
"profile-id": "SPOKE"
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 36: VPN Instance Profile Example (Message Body)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 140]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
A.4. Multicast VPN Provisioning Example
IPTV is mainly distributed through multicast over the LANs. In the
following example, PIM-SM is enabled and functional between the PE
and the CE. The PE receives multicast traffic from a CE that is
directly connected to the multicast source. The signaling between PE
and CE is achieved using BGP. Also, RP is statically configured for
a multicast group.
+-----------+ +------+ +------+ +-----------+
| Multicast |---| CE |--/--| PE |----| Backbone |
| source | +------+ +------+ | IP/MPLS |
+-----------+ +-----------+
Figure 37: 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 38)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 141]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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-as": 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 38: Create Multicast VPN Service (Excerpt of the Message
Request Body)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 142]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Then, the VPN nodes are created (see the excerpt of the request
message body shown in Figure 39). 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 39: 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 40).
{
"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 3 April 2022 [Page 143]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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-as": "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 40: Create VPN Network Access (Excerpt of the Message
Request Body)
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 144]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 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 3 April 2022 [Page 145]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
B.5. Juniper Implementation
https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/lxnm/blob/master/Implementattion/
Juniper
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, Greg
Mirsky, 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. Thanks to Andrew Malis
for the routing directorate review, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef for the
security directorate review, Qin Wu for the opsdir review, and Pete
Resnick for the genart directorate review. Thanks to Michael Scharf
for the discussion on TCP-AO. Thanks to Martin Duke, Lars Eagert,
Zaheduzzaman Sarker, Roman Danyliw, Erik Kline, and Benjamin Kaduk
for the IESG 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
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 146]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
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
Authors' Addresses
Samier Barguil
Telefonica
Madrid
Spain
Email: samier.barguilgiraldo.ext@telefonica.com
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios (editor)
Telefonica
Madrid
Spain
Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
Mohamed Boucadair (editor)
Orange
Rennes 35000
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 147]
Internet-Draft L3NM YANG Model September 2021
Luis Angel Munoz
Vodafone
Spain
Email: luis-angel.munoz@vodafone.com
Alejandro Aguado
Nokia
Madrid
Spain
Email: alejandro.aguado_martin@nokia.com
Barguil, et al. Expires 3 April 2022 [Page 148]