TEAS Working Group Daniele Ceccarelli (Ed)
Internet Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Informational Young Lee (Ed)
Expires: November 2015 Huawei
June 15, 2015
Framework for Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks
draft-ceccarelli-teas-actn-framework-00.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 15, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
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.
Abstract
Transport networks have a variety of mechanisms to facilitate the
separation of the data plane and control plane. They also have a
range of management and provisioning protocols to configure and
activate network resources. These mechanisms represent key
technologies for enabling flexible and dynamic networking.
Abstraction of network resources is a technique that can be applied
to a single network domain or across multiple domains to create a
single virtualized network that is under the control of a network
operator that may be the customer of the operator that actually owns
the network resources.
This draft provides a framework for Abstraction and Control of
Transport Networks (ACTN).
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................2
2. Business Model of ACTN.........................................5
2.1. Customers.................................................5
2.2. Service Providers.........................................7
2.3. Network Providers.........................................9
3. ACTN architecture..............................................9
3.1. Customer Network Controller..............................12
3.2. Multi Domain Service Coordinator.........................13
3.3. Physical Network Controller..............................14
3.4. ACTN interfaces..........................................15
4. References....................................................17
4.1. Informative References...................................17
5. Contributors..................................................20
Authors' Addresses...............................................20
1. Introduction
Transport networks have a variety of mechanisms to facilitate
separation of data plane and control plane including distributed
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
signaling for path setup and protection, centralized path
computation for planning and traffic engineering, and a range of
management and provisioning protocols to configure and activate
network resources. These mechanisms represent key technologies for
enabling flexible and dynamic networking.
The term Transport Network in this draft refers to any connection-
oriented network that has the ability of dynamic provisioning and
traffic engineering such that resource guarantees can be provided to
the network's clients. Some examples of networks that are in scope
of this definition are optical networks, MPLS Transport Profile
(MPLS-TP), MPLS Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE), and other emerging
technologies with connection-oriented behavior.
One of the main drivers for Software Defined Networking (SDN) is a
decoupling of the network control plane from the data plane. This
separation of the control plane from the data plane has been already
achieved with the development of MPLS/GMPLS [GMPLS] and PCE [PCE]
for TE-based transport networks. One of the advantages of SDN is its
logically centralized control regime that allows a global view of
the underlying network under its control. Centralized control in SDN
helps improve network resources utilization compared with
distributed network control. For TE-based transport network control,
PCE is essentially equivalent to a logically centralized control for
path computation function.
Two key aspects that need to be solved by SDN are:
. Network and service abstraction
. Coordination of resources across multiple domains to provide
end-to-end services regardless of whether the domains use SDN
or not.
As transport networks evolve, the need to provide network and
service abstraction has emerged as a key requirement for operators;
this implies in effect the virtualization of network resources so
that the network is "sliced" for different tenants shown as a
dedicated portion of the network resources
Particular attention needs to be paid to the multi-domain case,
where Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks (ACTN) can
facilitate virtual network operation via the creation of a single
virtualized network or a seamless service. This supports operators
in viewing and controlling different domains (at any dimension:
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
applied technology, administrative zones, or vendor-specific
technology islands) as a single virtualized network.
Network virtualization refers to allowing the customers of network
operators (see Section 2.1) to utilize a certain amount of network
resources as if they own them and thus control their allocated
resources with higher layer or application processes that enables
the resources to be used in the most optimal way. This empowerment
of customer control facilitates introduction of new services and
applications as the customers are permitted to create, modify, and
delete their virtual network services. More flexible, dynamic
customer control capabilities are added to the traditional VPN along
with a customer specific virtual network view. Customers control a
view of virtual network resources, specifically allocated to each
one of them. This view is called an abstracted network topology.
Such a view may be specific to a specific service, the set of
consumed resources or to a particular customer. Customer controller
of the virtual network is envisioned to support a plethora of
distinct applications. This means that there may be a further level
of virtualization that provides a view of resources in the
customer's virtual network for use by an individual application.
The framework described in this draft is named Abstraction and
Control of Transport Network (ACTN) and facilitates:
- Abstraction of the underlying network resources to higher-layer
applications and users (customers); abstraction for a specific
application or customer is referred to as virtualization in the
Optical Networking Foundation (ONF) SDN architecture. [ONF-
ARCH]
- Slicing infrastructure to connect multiple customers to meet
specific customer's service requirements;
- Creation of a virtualized environment allowing operators to
view and control multi-subnet multi-technology networks into a
single virtualized network;
- Possibility of providing a customer with abstracted network or
abstracted services (totally hiding the network).
- A virtualization/mapping network function that adapts customer
requests to the virtual resources (allocated to them) to the
supporting physical network control and performs the necessary
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
mapping, translation, isolation and security/policy
enforcement, etc.; This function is often referred to as
orchestration.
- The multi-domain coordination of the underlying transport
domains, presenting it as an abstracted topology to the
customers via open and programmable interfaces. This allows for
the recursion of controllers in a customer-provider
relationship.
A further discussion of the term "abstraction" can be found in
[TE-INFO].
2. Business Model of ACTN
The Virtual Private Network (VPN) [RFC4026] and Overlay Network (ON)
models [RFC4208] are built on the premise that one single network
provider provides all virtual private or overlay networks to its
customers. These models are simple to operate but have some
disadvantages in accommodating the increasing need for flexible and
dynamic network virtualization capabilities.
The ACTN model is built upon entities that reflect the current
landscape of network virtualization environments. There are three
key entities in the ACTN model [ACTN-PS]:
- Customers
- Service Providers
- Network Providers
2.1. Customers
Within the ACTN framework, different types of customers may be taken
into account depending on the type of their resource needs, on their
number and type of access. As example, it is possible to group them
into two main categories:
Basic Customer: Basic customers include fixed residential users,
mobile users and small enterprises. Usually the number of basic
customers is high; they require small amounts of resources and are
characterized by steady requests (relatively time invariant). A
typical request for a basic customer is for a bundle of voice
services and internet access. Moreover basic customers do not modify
their services themselves; if a service change is needed, it is
performed by the provider as proxy and they generally have very few
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
dedicated resources (subscriber drop), with everything else shared
on the basis of some SLA, which is usually best-efforts.
Advanced Customer: Advanced customers typically include enterprises,
governments and utilities. Such customers can ask for both point to
point and multipoint connectivity with high resource demand
significantly varying in time and from customer to customer. This is
one of the reasons why a bundled service offering is not enough and
it is desirable to provide each of them with a customized virtual
network service.
Advanced customers may own dedicated virtual resources, or share
resources. They may also have the ability to modify their service
parameters within the scope of their virtualized environments.
As customers are geographically spread over multiple network
provider domains, they have to interface multiple providers and may
have to support multiple virtual network services with different
underlying objectives set by the network providers. To enable these
customers to support flexible and dynamic applications they need to
control their allocated virtual network resources in a dynamic
fashion, and that means that they need an abstracted view of the
topology that spans all of the network providers.
ACTN's primary focus is Advanced Customers.
Customers of a given service provider can in turn offer a service to
other customers in a recursive way. An example of recursiveness with
2 service providers is shown below.
- Customer (of service B)
- Customer (of service A) & Service Provider (of service B)
- Service Provider (of service A)
- Network Provider
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
+------------------------------------------------------------+ ---
| | ^
| Customer (of service B)| .
| +--------------------------------------------------------+ | B
| | | |--- .
| |Customer (of service A) & Service Provider(of service B)| | ^ .
| | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | . .
| | | | | | . .
| | | Service Provider (of service A)| | | A .
| | |+------------------------------------------+ | | | . .
| | || | | | | . .
| | || Network provider| | | | v v
| | |+------------------------------------------+ | | |------
| | +---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| +--------------------------------------------------------+ |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 1: Network Recursiveness.
2.2. Service Providers
Service providers are the providers of virtual network services to
their customers. Service providers may or may not own physical
network resources. When a service provider is the same as the
network provider, this is similar to traditional VPN models. This
model works well when the customer maintains a single interface with
a single provider. When customer location spans across multiple
independent network provider domains, then it becomes hard to
facilitate the creation of end-to-end virtual network services with
this model.
A more interesting case arises when network providers only provide
infrastructure while service providers directly interface their
customers. In this case, service providers themselves are customers
of the network infrastructure providers. One service provider may
need to keep multiple independent network providers as its end-users
span geographically across multiple network provider domains as
shown in Figure 2 where Service Provider A uses resources from
Network Provider A and Network Provider B to offer a virtualized
network to its customer.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
Customer X -----------------------------------X
Service Provider A X -----------------------------------X
Network Provider B X-----------------X
Network Provider A X------------------X
Figure 2: A service Provider as Customer of Two Network Providers.
The ACTN network model is predicated upon this three tier model and
is summarized in Figure 3:
+----------------------+
| customer |
+----------------------+
|
| /\ Service/Customer specific
| || Abstract Topology
| ||
+----------------------+ E2E abstract
| Service Provider | topology creation
+----------------------+
/ | \
/ | \ Network Topology
/ | \ (raw or abstract)
/ | \
+------------------+ +------------------+ +------------------+
|Network Provider 1| |Network Provider 2| |Network Provider 3|
+------------------+ +------------------+ +------------------+
Figure 3: Three tier model.
There can be multiple types of service providers.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
. Data Center providers: can be viewed as a service provider type
as they own and operate data center resources to various WAN
clients, they can lease physical network resources from network
providers.
. Internet Service Providers (ISP): can be a service provider of
internet services to their customers while leasing physical
network resources from network providers.
. Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNO): provide mobile
services to their end-users without owning the physical network
infrastructure.
The network provider space is the one where recursiveness occurs. A
customer-provider relationship between multiple service providers
can be established leading to a hierarchical architecture of
controllers within service provider network.
2.3. Network Providers
Network Providers are the infrastructure providers that own the
physical network resources and provide network resources to their
customers. The layered model proposed by this draft separates the
concerns of network providers and customers, with service providers
acting as aggregators of customer requests.
3. ACTN architecture
This section provides a high-level control and interface model of
ACTN.
The ACTN architecture, while being aligned with the ONF SDN
architecture [ONF-ARCH], is presenting a 3-tiers reference model. It
allows for hierarchy and recursiveness not only of SDN controllers
but also of traditionally controlled domains. It defines three types
of controllers depending on the functionalities they implement. The
main functionalities that are identified are:
. Multi domain coordination function: With the definition of
domain being "everything that is under the control of the same
controller",it is needed to have a control entity that oversees
the specific aspects of the different domains and to build a
single abstracted end-to-end network topology in order to
coordinate end-to-end path computation and path/service
provisioning.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
. Virtualization/Abstraction function: To provide an abstracted
view of the underlying network resources towards customer,
being it the client or a higher level controller entity. It
includes computation of customer resource requests into virtual
network paths based on the global network-wide abstracted
topology and the creation of an abstracted view of network
slices allocated to each customer, according to customer-
specific virtual network objective functions, and to the
customer traffic profile.
. Customer mapping function: In charge of mapping customer VN
setup commands into network provisioning requests to the
Physical Network Controller (PNC) according to business OSS/NMS
provisioned static or dynamic policy. Moreover it provides
mapping and translation of customer virtual network slices into
physical network resources
. Virtual service coordination: Virtual service coordination
function in ACTN incorporates customer service-related
knowledge into the virtual network operations in order to
seamlessly operate virtual networks while meeting customer's
service requirements.
The virtual services that are coordinated under ACTN can be split
into two categories:
. Service-aware Connectivity Services: This category includes all
the network service operations used to provide connectivity
between customer end-points while meeting policies and service
related constraints. The data model for this category would
include topology entities such as virtual nodes, virtual links,
adaptation and termination points and service-related entities
such as policies and service related constraints. (See Section
4.2.2)
. Network Function Virtualization Services: These kinds of
services are usually setup between customers' premises and
service provider premises and are provided mostly by cloud
providers or content delivery providers. The context may
include, but not limited to a security function like firewall,
a traffic optimizer, the provisioning of storage or computation
capacity where the customer does not care whether the service
is implemented in a given data center or another. These
services may be hosted virtually by the provider or physically
part of the network. This allows the service provider to hide
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
his own resources (both network and data centers) and divert
customer requests where most suitable. This is also known as
"end points mobility" case and introduces new concepts of
traffic and service provisioning and resiliency. (e.g. Virtual
Machine mobility)." (See Section 4.2.3)
About the Customer service-related knowledge it includes:
- VN Service Requirements: The end customer would have
specific service requirements for the VN including the
customer endpoints access profile as well as the E2E
customer service objectives. The ACTN framework
architectural "entities" would monitor the E2E service
during the lifetime of VN by focusing on both the
connectivity provided by the network as well as the customer
service objectives. These E2E service requirements go beyond
the VN service requirements and include customer
infrastructure as well.
- Application Service Policy: Apart for network connectivity,
the customer may also require some policies for application
specific features or services. The ACTN framework would take
these application service policies and requirements into
consideration while coordinating the virtual network
operations, which require end customer connectivity for
these advanced services.
While the "types" of controller defined are shown in Figure 4 below
and are the following:
. CNC - Customer Network Controller
. MDSC - Multi Domain Service Coordinator
. PNC - Physical Network Controller
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
VPN customer NW Mobile Customer ISP NW service Customer
| | |
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| CNC-A | | CNC-B | | CNC-C |
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
\___________ | _____________/
---------- | ------------
\ | /
+-----------------------+
| MDSC |
+-----------------------+
__________/ | \_________
---------- | ------------____
/ | \
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| PNC | | PNC | | PNC |
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| GMPLS / | / \
| trigger / | / \
-------- __---- +-----+ __ +-----+ \
( ) ( )_ | PNC |__ | PCE | \
- - ( Phys ) +-----+ +-----+ -----
( GMPLS ) (Netw) | / ( )
( Physical ) ---- | / ( Phys. )
( Network ) ----- ----- ( Net )
- - ( ) ( ) -----
( ) ( Phys. ) ( Phys )
-------- ( Net ) ( Net )
----- -----
Figure 4: ACTN Control Hierarchy
3.1. Customer Network Controller
A Virtual Network Service is instantiated by the Customer Network
Controller via the CMI (CNC-MDSC Interface). As the Customer Network
Controller directly interfaces the application stratum, it
understands multiple application requirements and their service
needs. It is assumed that the Customer Network Controller and the
MDSC have a common knowledge on the end-point interfaces based on
their business negotiation prior to service instantiation. End-point
interfaces refer to customer-network physical interfaces that
connect customer premise equipment to network provider equipment.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
In addition to abstract networks, ACTN allows to provide the CNC
with services. Example of services include connectivity between one
of the customer's end points with a given set of resources in a data
center from the service provider.
3.2. Multi Domain Service Coordinator
The MDSC (Multi Domain Service Coordinator) sits between the CNC
(the one issuing connectivity requests) and the PNCs (Physical
Network Controllersr - the ones managing the physical network
resources). The MDSC can be collocated with the PNC, especially in
those cases where the service provider and the network provider are
the same entity.
The internal system architecture and building blocks of the MDSC are
out of the scope of ACTN. Some examples can be found in the
Application Based Network Operations (ABNO) architecture [ABNO] and
the ONF SDN architecture [ONF-ARCH].
The MDSC is the only building block of the architecture that is able
to implement all the four ACTN main functionalities, i.e. multi
domain coordination function, virtualization/abstraction function,
customer mapping function and virtual service coordination.
A hierarchy of MDSCs can be foreseen for scalability and
administrative choices. In order to allow for a hierarchy of MDSC,
the interface between the parent MDSC and a child MDSC must be the
same as the interface between the MDSC and the PNC. This does not
introduce any complexity as it is transparent from the perspective
of the CNCs and the PNCs and it makes use of the same interface
model and its primitives as the CMI and MPI.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
| CNC-A | | CNC-B | | CNC-C |
+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
\___________ | ___________/
---------- | ----------
\ | /
+-----------------------+
| MDSC |
+-----------------------+
__________/ | \_________
---------- | -----------____
/ | \
+----------+ +----------+ +--------+
| MDSC | | MDSC | | MDSC |
+----------+ +----------+ +--------+
| / | / \
| / | / \
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| PNC | | PNC | | PNC | | PNC | | PNC |
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
Figure 5: Controller recursiveness
A key requirement for allowing recursion of MDSCs is that a single
interface needs to be defined both for the north and the south
bounds.
In order to allow for multi-domain coordination a 1:N relationship
must be allowed between MDSCs and between MDSCs and PNCs (i.e. 1
parent MDSC and N child MDSC or 1 MDSC and N PNCs). In addition to
that it could be possible to have also a M:1 relationship between
MDSC and PNC to allow for network resource partitioning/sharing
among different customers not necessarily connected to the same MDSC
(e.g. different service providers).
3.3. Physical Network Controller
The Physical Network Controller is the one in charge of configuring
the network elements, monitoring the physical topology of the
network and passing it, either raw or abstracted, to the MDSC.
The internal architecture of the PNC, his building blocks and the
way it controls its domain, are out of the scope of ACTN. Some
examples can be found in the Application Based Network Operations
(ABNO) architecture [ABNO] and the ONF SDN architecture [ONF-ARCH]
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
The PNC, in addition to being in charge of controlling the physical
network, is able to implement two of the four ACTN main
functionalities: multi domain coordination function and
virtualization/abstraction function
A hierarchy of PNCs can be foreseen for scalability and
administrative choices.
3.4. ACTN interfaces
To allow virtualization and multi domain coordination, the network
has to provide open, programmable interfaces, in which customer
applications can create, replace and modify virtual network
resources and services in an interactive, flexible and dynamic
fashion while having no impact on other customers. Direct customer
control of transport network elements and virtualized services is
not perceived as a viable proposition for transport network
providers due to security and policy concerns among other reasons.
In addition, as discussed in the previous section, the network
control plane for transport networks has been separated from data
plane and as such it is not viable for the customer to directly
interface with transport network elements.
While the current network control plane is well suited for control
of physical network resources via dynamic provisioning, path
computation, etc., a multi service domain controller needs to be
built on top of physical network controller to support network
virtualization.
Figure 5 depicts a high-level control and interface architecture for
ACTN. A number of key ACTN interfaces exist for deployment and
operation of ACTN-based networks. These are highlighted in Figure 5
(ACTN Interfaces) below:
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
.--------------
------------- |
| Application |--
-------------
^
| I/F A --------
v ( )
-------------- - -
| Customer | ( Customer )
| Network |--------->( Network )
| Controller | ( )
-------------- - -
^ ( )
| I/F B --------
v ^ ^
-------------- : :
| MultiDomain | : .
| Service | : .
| Coordinator| -------- . I/F E
-------------- ( ) .
^ - - .
| I/F C ( Physical ) .
v ( Network ) .
--------------- ( ) --------
| |<----> - - ( )
-------------- | ( ) - -
| Physical |-- -------- ( Physical )
| Network |<---------------------->( Network )
| Controller | I/F D ( )
-------------- - -
( )
--------
Figure 5: ACTN Interfaces
The interfaces and functions are described below:
. Interface A: A north-bound interface (NBI) that will
communicate the service request or application demand. A
request will include specific service properties, including:
services, topology, bandwidth and constraint information.
. Interface B: The CNC-MDSC Interface (CMI) is an interface
between a Customer Network Controller and a Multi Service
Domain Controller. It requests the creation of the network
resources, topology or services for the applications. The
Virtual Network Controller may also report potential network
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
topology availability if queried for current capability from
the Customer Network Controller.
. Interface C: The MDSC-PNC Interface (MPI) is an interface
between a Multi Domain Service Coordinator and a Physical
Network Controller. It communicates the creation request, if
required, of new connectivity of bandwidth changes in the
physical network, via the PNC. In multi-domain environments,
the MDSC needs to establish multiple MPIs, one for each PNC, as
there are multiple PNCs responsible for its domain control.
. Interface D: The provisioning interface for creating forwarding
state in the physical network, requested via the Physical
Network Controller.
. Interface E: A mapping of physical resources to overlay
resources.
The interfaces within the ACTN scope are B and C.
4. Manageability
TBD
5. Security
TBD
6. References
6.1. Informative References
[PCE] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.-P., and J. Ash, "A Path
Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", IETF RFC
4655, August 2006.
[RFC4026] L. Andersson, T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual
Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026, March 2005.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
[RFC4208] G. Swallow, J. Drake, H.Ishimatsu, Y. Rekhter,
"Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) User-
Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation Protocol-
Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the Overlay
Model", RFC 4208, October 2005.
[PCE-S] Crabbe, E, et. al., "PCEP extension for stateful
PCE",draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce, work in progress.
[GMPLS] Manning, E., et al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004.
[NFV-AF] "Network Functions Virtualization (NFV); Architectural
Framework", ETSI GS NFV 002 v1.1.1, October 2013.
[ACTN-PS] Y. Lee, D. King, M. Boucadair, R. Jing, L. Contreras
Murillo, "Problem Statement for Abstraction and Control of
Transport Networks", draft-leeking-actn-problem-statement,
work in progress.
[ONF] Open Networking Foundation, "OpenFlow Switch Specification
Version 1.4.0 (Wire Protocol 0x05)", October 2013.
[TE-INFO] A. Farrel, Editor, "Problem Statement and Architecture for
Information Exchange Between Interconnected Traffic
Engineered Networks", draft-ietf-teas-interconnected-te-
info-exchange, work in progress.
[ABNO] King, D., and Farrel, A., "A PCE-based Architecture for
Application-based Network Operations", draft-farrkingel-
pce-abno-architecture, work in progress.
[ACTN-Info] Y. Lee, S. Belotti, D. Dhody, "Information Model for
Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks", draft-
leebelotti-teas-actn-info, work in progress.
[Cheng] W. Cheng, et. al., "ACTN Use-cases for Packet Transport
Networks in Mobile Backhaul Networks", draft-cheng-actn-
ptn-requirements, work in progress.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
[Dhody] D. Dhody, et. al., "Packet Optical Integration (POI) Use
Cases for Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks
(ACTN)", draft-dhody-actn-poi-use-case, work in progress.
[Fang] L. Fang, "ACTN Use Case for Multi-domain Data Center
Interconnect", draft-fang-actn-multidomain-dci, work in
progress.
[Klee] K. Lee, H. Lee, R. Vilata, V. Lopez, "ACTN Use-case for On-
demand E2E Connectivity Services in Multiple Vendor Domain
Transport Networks", draft-klee-actn-connectivity-multi-
vendor-domains, work in progress.
[Kumaki] K. Kumaki, T. Miyasaka, "ACTN : Use case for Multi Tenant
VNO ", draft-kumaki-actn-multitenant-vno, work in
progress.
[Lopez] D. Lopez (Ed), "ACTN Use-case for Virtual Network Operation
for Multiple Domains in a Single Operator Network", draft-
lopez-actn-vno-multidomains, work in progress.
[Shin] J. Shin, R. Hwang, J. Lee, "ACTN Use-case for Mobile Virtual
Network Operation for Multiple Domains in a Single
Operator Network", draft-shin-actn-mvno-multi-domain, work
in progress.
[Xu] Y. Xu, et. al., "Use Cases and Requirements of Dynamic Service
Control based on Performance Monitoring in ACTN
Architecture", draft-xu-actn-perf-dynamic-service-control,
work in progress.
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft ACTN Framework March 2015
7. Contributors
Authors' Addresses
Daniele Ceccarelli (Editor)
Ericsson
Torshamnsgatan,48
Stockholm, Sweden
Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com
Young Lee (Editor)
Huawei Technologies
5340 Legacy Drive
Plano, TX 75023, USA
Phone: (469)277-5838
Email: leeyoung@huawei.com
Luyuan Fang
Email: luyuanf@gmail.com
Diego Lopez
Telefonica I+D
Don Ramon de la Cruz, 82
28006 Madrid, Spain
Email: diego@tid.es
Sergio Belotti
Alcatel Lucent
Via Trento, 30
Vimercate, Italy
Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.com
Daniel King
Lancaster University
Email: d.king@lancaster.ac.uk
Dhruv Dhoddy
Huawei Technologies
dhruv.ietf@gmail.com
Ceccarelli, et al. Expires December 15, 2015 [Page 20]