L3SM Working Group S. Litkowski
Internet-Draft Orange Business Service
Intended status: Standards Track R. Shakir
Expires: June 17, 2016 BT
L. Tomotaki
Verizon
K. D'Souza
ATT
December 15, 2015
YANG Data Model for L3VPN service delivery
draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model-02
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to deliver a
Layer 3 Provider Provisioned VPN service. The document is limited to
the BGP PE-based VPNs as described in RFC4110 and RFC4364. This
model is intended to be instantiated at management system to deliver
the overall service. This model is not a configuration model to be
used directly on network elements. This model provides an abstracted
view of the Layer 3 IPVPN service configuration components. It will
be up to a management system to take this as an input and use
specific configurations models to configure the different network
elements to deliver the service. How configuration of network
elements is done is out of scope of the document.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
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 http://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."
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 17, 2016.
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
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
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Tree diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Layer 3 IP VPN service model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Service data model usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Design of the Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1. VPN service overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.1. VPN service topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.1.1. Route Target allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.1.2. Any to any . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.1.3. Hub and Spoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.1.4. Hub and Spoke disjoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1.2. Cloud access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.1.3. Multicast service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2. Site overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2.1. Deciding where to connect the site . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.1.1. Site location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.1.2. Site diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.2.1.3. Site network access availability . . . . . . . . 24
5.2.1.4. Route Distinguisher and VRF allocation . . . . . 26
5.2.2. VPN policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.2.3. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.2.3.1. Encryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.2.4. Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.2.5. Routing protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.2.5.1. Dual stack handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2.5.2. Direct LAN connection onto SP network . . . . . . 31
5.2.5.3. Direct LAN connection onto SP network with
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.5.4. Static routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.5.5. RIP routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.5.6. OSPF routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2.5.7. BGP routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.2.6. Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.2.6.1. QoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.2.6.2. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.2.6.3. Traffic protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.2.7. Site network accesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.7.1. Bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.7.2. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.3. Enhanced VPN features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3.1. Carrier Supporting Carrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3.2. Transport constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.4. Using configuration templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6. Service model usage example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7. Interaction with Other YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
8. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
12. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Appendix A. Example: NETCONF <get> Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
1. Introduction
This document defines a YANG data model for Layer 3 IPVPN service
configuration.
1.1. Terminology
The following terms are defined in [RFC6241] and are not redefined
here:
o client
o configuration data
o server
o state data
The following terms are defined in [RFC6020] and are not redefined
here:
o augment
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
o data model
o data node
The terminology for describing YANG data models is found in
[RFC6020].
1.2. Tree diagram
A simplified graphical representation of the data model is presented
in Section 5.
The meaning of the symbols in these diagrams is as follows:
o Brackets "[" and "]" enclose list keys.
o Curly braces "{" and "}" contain names of optional features that
make the corresponding node conditional.
o Abbreviations before data node names: "rw" means configuration
(read-write), and "ro" state data (read-only).
o Symbols after data node names: "?" means an optional node and "*"
denotes a "list" or "leaf-list".
o Parentheses enclose choice and case nodes, and case nodes are also
marked with a colon (":").
o Ellipsis ("...") stands for contents of subtrees that are not
shown.
2. Definitions
Customer Edge (CE) Device: The equipment on the customer side of the
SP-customer boundary (the customer interface).
Provider Edge (PE) Device: The equipment on the SP side of the SP-
customer boundary (the customer interface).
PE-Based VPNs: The PE devices know that certain traffic is VPN
traffic. They forward the traffic (through tunnels) based on the
destination IP address of the packet, and optionally on based on
other information in the IP header of the packet. The PE devices are
themselves the tunnel endpoints. The tunnels may make use of various
encapsulations to send traffic over the SP network (such as, but not
restricted to, GRE, IP-in-IP, IPsec, or MPLS tunnels).
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
3. Layer 3 IP VPN service model
A Layer 3 IPVPN service is a collection of sites that are authorized
to exchange traffic between each other over a shared IP
infrastructure. This layer 3 VPN service model aims at providing a
common understanding on how the corresponding IP VPN service is to be
deployed over the shared infrastructure. This service model is
limited to BGP PE-Based VPNs as described in [RFC4110] and [RFC4364].
4. Service data model usage
L3VPN-SVC |
MODEL |
|
+------------------+ +-----+
| Orchestration | < --- > | OSS |
+------------------+ +-----+
| |
+----------------+ |
| Config manager | |
+----------------+ |
| |
| Netconf/CLI ...
| |
+------------------------------------------------+
Network
+++++++
+ AAA +
+++++++
+++++++ Bearer ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++
+ CEA + ------- + PE A + + PE B + ----- + CEB +
+++++++ Cnct ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++
Site A Site B
The idea of the L3 IPVPN service model is to propose an abstracted
interface to manage configuration of components of a L3VPN service.
A typical usage is to use this model as an input for an orchestration
layer who will be responsible to translate it to orchestrated
configuration of network elements who will be part of the service.
The network elements can be routers, but also servers (like AAA), and
not limited to these examples. The configuration of network elements
MAY be done by CLI, or by NetConf/RestConf coupled with specific
configuration YANG data models (BGP, VRF, BFD ...) or any other way.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
The usage of this service model is not limited to this example, it
can be used by any component of the management system but not
directly by network elements.
5. Design of the Data Model
The YANG module is divided in three main containers : vpn-svc, sites,
site-templates.
The vpn-svc defines global parameters for the VPN service for a
specific customer.
A site is composed of at least one site-network-access and may have
multiple site-network-access in case of multihoming. The site-
network-access attachment is done through a bearer with a connection
(transport protocol) on top. The bearer refers to physical
properties of the attachment while the connection refers to more
protocol oriented properties.
Authorization of traffic exchange is done through what we call a VPN
policy or VPN topology defining routing exchange rules between sites.
The site-templates may be used as configuration templates for sites.
Part of the site configuration can be inherited from templates.
The figure below describe the overall structure of the YANG module:
module: ietf-l3vpn-svc
+--rw l3vpn-svc
+--rw vpn-svc* [vpn-id]
| +--rw vpn-id svc-id
| +--rw customer-name? string
| +--rw topology? identityref
| +--rw cloud-access* [cloud-identifier]
| | +--rw cloud-identifier string
| | +--rw authorized-sites* [site-id]
| | | +--rw site-id leafref
| | +--rw denied-sites* [site-id]
| | | +--rw site-id leafref
| | +--rw nat-enabled? boolean
| | +--rw customer-nat-address? inet:ipv4-address
| +--rw multicast
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw customer-tree-flavors
| | | +--rw tree-flavor* [type]
| | | +--rw type identityref
| | +--rw rp
| | +--rw rp-group-mapping* [rp-address group]
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | | +--rw provider-managed
| | | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | | +--rw anycast-rp? boolean
| | | +--rw rp-address union
| | | +--rw group union
| | +--rw rp-discovery? identityref
| +--rw mpls? boolean
| +--rw transport-constraints
| +--rw unicast-transport-constraints
| | +--rw constraints* [constraint-id]
| | +--rw constraint-id svc-id
| | +--rw site1? svc-id
| | +--rw site2? svc-id
| | +--rw constraint-list* [constraint-type]
| | +--rw constraint-type identityref
| | +--rw constraint-opaque-value? string
| +--rw multicast-transport-constraints
| +--rw constraints* [constraint-id]
| +--rw constraint-id svc-id
| +--rw src-site? svc-id
| +--rw dst-site? svc-id
| +--rw constraint-list* [constraint-type]
| +--rw constraint-type identityref
| +--rw constraint-opaque-value? string
+--rw sites* [site-id]
| +--rw site-id svc-id
| +--rw apply-template? leafref
| +--rw requested-site-start? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw requested-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw actual-site-start? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw actual-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw location
| | +--rw address? string
| | +--rw zip-code? string
| | +--rw city? string
| | +--rw country-code? string
| +--rw site-diversity
| | +--rw type? placement-diversity
| | +--rw site-group* uint32
| +--rw management
| | +--rw type? identityref
| | +--rw management-transport? identityref
| | +--rw address? union
| +--rw vpn-policy
| | +--rw entries* [id]
| | +--rw id svc-id
| | +--rw filter
| | | +--rw lan-prefixes
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | | | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan]
| | | | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan]
| | | | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag* string
| | +--rw vpn
| | +--rw vpn leafref
| | +--rw site-role identityref
| +--rw maximum-routes
| | +--rw address-family* [af]
| | +--rw af identityref
| | +--rw maximum-routes? uint32
| +--rw security
| | +--rw authentication
| | +--rw encryption
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw layer? enumeration
| | +--rw encryption-profile
| | +--rw (profile)?
| | +--:(provider-profile)
| | | +--rw profile-name? string
| | +--:(customer-profile)
| | +--rw algorithm? string
| | +--rw (key-type)?
| | ...
| +--rw service
| | +--rw svc-input-bandwidth? uint32
| | +--rw svc-output-bandwidth? uint32
| | +--rw svc-mtu? uint16
| | +--rw qos
| | | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | | +--rw rules* [id]
| | | | +--rw id uint16
| | | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | | +--rw dscp? uint8
| | | | | +--rw tos? uint8
| | | | | +--rw ipv4-src-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv6-src-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv4-dst-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv6-dst-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw l4-src-port? uint16
| | | | | +--rw l4-dst-port? uint16
| | | | | +--rw protocol-field? union
| | | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | | +--rw std-qos-profile? string
| | | +--rw custom-qos-profile
| | | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | | +--rw class-id string
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | | +--rw rate-limit? uint8
| | | +--rw priority-level? uint8
| | | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent? uint8
| | +--rw traffic-protection
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw mpls
| | | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| | +--rw multicast
| | +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| | +--rw multicast-transport-protocol
| | | +--rw ipv4? boolean
| | | +--rw ipv6? boolean
| | +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
| +--rw routing-protocols
| | +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| | +--rw type identityref
| | +--rw ospf
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | | +--rw metric? uint16
| | | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | | +--rw target-site svc-id
| | | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw bgp
| | | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw static
| | | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv4-address
| | | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw rip
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw vrrp
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw site-network-accesses
| +--rw site-network-access* [site-network-access-id]
| +--rw site-network-access-id svc-id
| +--rw apply-template? leafref
| +--rw access-diversity
| | +--rw type? placement-diversity
| +--rw bearer
| | +--rw type? string
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | +--rw bearer-reference? string
| +--rw ip-connection
| | +--rw ipv4
| | | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| | | +--rw (subnet)?
| | | +--:(subnet-only)
| | | | ...
| | | +--:(addresses)
| | | ...
| | +--rw ipv6
| | | +--rw address-allocation-type? string
| | | +--rw (subnet)?
| | | +--:(subnet-only)
| | | | ...
| | | +--:(addresses)
| | | ...
| | +--rw oam
| | +--rw bfd
| | +--rw bfd-enabled? boolean
| | +--rw (holdtime)?
| | ...
| +--rw security
| | +--rw authentication
| | +--rw encryption
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw layer? enumeration
| | +--rw encryption-profile
| | +--rw (profile)?
| | ...
| +--rw service
| | +--rw svc-input-bandwidth? uint32
| | +--rw svc-output-bandwidth? uint32
| | +--rw svc-mtu? uint16
| | +--rw qos
| | | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | | +--rw rules* [id]
| | | | ...
| | | +--rw std-qos-profile? string
| | | +--rw custom-qos-profile
| | | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | | ...
| | +--rw traffic-protection
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw mpls
| | | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| | +--rw multicast
| | +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| | +--rw multicast-transport-protocol
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | | +--rw ipv4? boolean
| | | +--rw ipv6? boolean
| | +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
| +--rw routing-protocols
| | +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| | +--rw type identityref
| | +--rw ospf
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | | +--rw metric? uint16
| | | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | | ...
| | +--rw bgp
| | | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw static
| | | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | | ...
| | +--rw rip
| | | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw vrrp
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw availability
| +--rw access-priority? uint32
+--rw site-templates* [site-template-id]
+--rw site-template-id template-id
+--rw requested-site-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw requested-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw actual-site-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw actual-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw location
| +--rw address? string
| +--rw zip-code? string
| +--rw city? string
| +--rw country-code? string
+--rw site-diversity
| +--rw type? placement-diversity
| +--rw site-group* uint32
+--rw management
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw management-transport? identityref
| +--rw address? union
+--rw vpn-policy
| +--rw entries* [id]
| +--rw id svc-id
| +--rw filter
| | +--rw lan-prefixes
| | | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan]
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan]
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag* string
| +--rw vpn
| +--rw vpn leafref
| +--rw site-role identityref
+--rw maximum-routes
| +--rw address-family* [af]
| +--rw af identityref
| +--rw maximum-routes? uint32
+--rw security
| +--rw authentication
| +--rw encryption
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw layer? enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | +--rw profile-name? string
| +--:(customer-profile)
| +--rw algorithm? string
| +--rw (key-type)?
| ...
+--rw service
| +--rw svc-input-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-output-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-mtu? uint16
| +--rw qos
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rules* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | +--rw dscp? uint8
| | | | +--rw tos? uint8
| | | | +--rw ipv4-src-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | +--rw ipv6-src-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | +--rw ipv4-dst-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | +--rw ipv6-dst-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | +--rw l4-src-port? uint16
| | | | +--rw l4-dst-port? uint16
| | | | +--rw protocol-field? union
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw std-qos-profile? string
| | +--rw custom-qos-profile
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | +--rw class-id string
| | +--rw rate-limit? uint8
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | +--rw priority-level? uint8
| | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent? uint8
| +--rw traffic-protection
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw mpls
| | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-transport-protocol
| | +--rw ipv4? boolean
| | +--rw ipv6? boolean
| +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw ospf
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | +--rw target-site svc-id
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| +--rw bgp
| | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv6-address
| +--rw rip
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw vrrp
| +--rw address-family* identityref
+--rw site-network-access
+--rw access-diversity
| +--rw type? placement-diversity
+--rw bearer
| +--rw type? string
| +--rw bearer-reference? string
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | +--rw (subnet)?
| | +--:(subnet-only)
| | | +--rw subnet-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | +--:(addresses)
| | +--rw provider-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw mask? uint8
| +--rw ipv6
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? string
| | +--rw (subnet)?
| | +--:(subnet-only)
| | | +--rw subnet-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--:(addresses)
| | +--rw provider-address? inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw mask? uint8
| +--rw oam
| +--rw bfd
| +--rw bfd-enabled? boolean
| +--rw (holdtime)?
| +--:(profile)
| | ...
| +--:(fixed)
| ...
+--rw security
| +--rw authentication
| +--rw encryption
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw layer? enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | ...
| +--:(customer-profile)
| ...
+--rw service
| +--rw svc-input-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-output-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-mtu? uint16
| +--rw qos
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rules* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | ...
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw std-qos-profile? string
| | +--rw custom-qos-profile
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | +--rw class-id string
| | +--rw rate-limit? uint8
| | +--rw priority-level? uint8
| | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent? uint8
| +--rw traffic-protection
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw mpls
| | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-transport-protocol
| | +--rw ipv4? boolean
| | +--rw ipv6? boolean
| +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw ospf
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | +--rw target-site svc-id
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| +--rw bgp
| | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | | ...
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | +--rw address-family* identityref
| +--rw vrrp
| +--rw address-family* identityref
+--rw availability
+--rw access-priority? uint32
5.1. VPN service overview
The vpn-svc top container contains generic information about the VPN
service. The vpn-id of the vpn-svc refers to an internal reference
for this VPN service, while customer name refers to a more explicit
reference to the customer. This identifier is purely internal to the
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
organization responsible for the VPN service. The vpn-id MUST be
unique.
5.1.1. VPN service topology
The type of topology of the VPN is required for configuration.
Current proposal supports : any-to-any, hub and spoke (where hubs can
exchange traffic), and hub and spoke disjoint (where hubs cannot
exchange traffic). New topologies could be added by augmentation.
By default, any-to-any topology is used.
5.1.1.1. Route Target allocation
Layer 3 PE-based VPN is built using route-targets as described in
[RFC4364]. It is expected management system to allocate
automatically set of route-targets upon a VPN service creation
request. How management system allocates route-targets is out of
scope of the document but multiple ways could be envisaged as
described below.
Management system
<------------------------------------------------->
Request RT
+-----------------------+ Topo a2a +----------+
RestConf | | -----> | |
User ------------- | Service Orchestration | |NetworkOSS|
l3vpn-svc | | <----- | |
model +-----------------------+ Response +----------+
RT1,RT2
In the example above, a service orchestration, owning the
instantiation of this service model, request route-targets to the
network OSS. Based on the requested VPN topology, the network OSS
replies with one or multiple route-targets. The interface between
this service orchestration and network OSS is out of scope of this
document.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
+---------------------------+
RestConf | |
User ------------- | Service Orchestration |
l3vpn-svc | |
model | |
| RT pool : 10:1->10:10000 |
| RT pool : 20:50->20:5000 |
+---------------------------+
In the example above, a service orchestration, owning the
instantiation of this service model, owns one or more pools of route-
target (filled by service provider) that can be allocated. Based on
the requested VPN topology, it will allocate one or multiple route-
targets from the pool.
The mechanism displayed above are just examples and SHOULD NOT be
considered as exhaustive list of solutions.
5.1.1.2. Any to any
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| VPN1_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ VPN1_Site2 |
| |
| VPN1_Site3 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ VPN1_Site4 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Any to any VPN topology
In the any to any topology, all VPN sites can discuss between each
other without any restriction. It is expected that the management
system that owns a any to any IPVPN service request through this
model, needs to assign and then configure the VRF and route-targets
on the appropriate PEs. In case of any to any, in general a single
route-target is required and every VRF imports and exports this
route-target.
5.1.1.3. Hub and Spoke
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
| +----------------------------------+
| |
| +----------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Hub and Spoke VPN topology
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
In the hub and spoke topology, all spoke sites can discuss only with
Hub sites but not between each other. Hubs can discuss also between
each other. It is expected that the management system that owns a
any to any IPVPN service request through this model, needs to assign
and then configure the VRF and route-targets on the appropriate PEs.
In case of hub and spoke, in general a two route-targets are required
(one route-target for Hub routes, one route-target for spoke routes).
A Hub VRF, connecting Hub sites, will export Hub routes with Hub
route-target, and will import Spoke routes through Spoke route-
target. It will also import the Hub route-target to allow Hub to Hub
communication. A Spoke VRF, connecting Spoke sites, will export
Spoke routes with Spoke route-target, and will import Hub routes
through Hub route-target.
The management system MUST take into account Hub and Spoke
connections constraints. For example, if management system decides
to mesh a spoke site and a hub site on the same PE, it needs to mesh
connections in different VRFs as displayed in the figure below.
Hub_Site ------- (VRF_Hub) PE1
(VRF_Spoke)
/ |
Spoke_Site1 -------------------+ |
|
Spoke_Site2 -----------------------+
5.1.1.4. Hub and Spoke disjoint
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Hub and Spoke disjoint VPN topology
In the hub and spoke disjoint topology, all spoke sites can discuss
only with Hub sites but not between each other. Hubs cannot discuss
between each other. It is expected that the management system that
owns a any to any IPVPN service request through this model, needs to
assign and then configure the VRF and route-targets on the
appropriate PEs. In case of hub and spoke, in general a two route-
targets are required (one route-target for Hub routes, one route-
target for spoke routes). A Hub VRF, connecting Hub sites, will
export Hub routes with Hub route-target, and will import Spoke routes
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
through Spoke route-target. A Spoke VRF, connecting Spoke sites,
will export Spoke routes with Spoke route-target, and will import Hub
routes through Hub route-target.
The management system MUST take into account Hub and Spoke
connections constraints as in the previous case.
5.1.2. Cloud access
The proposed model provides cloud access configuration through the
cloud-access container. Internet access can typically be considered
as a public cloud access service. The cloud-access container
provides parameters for network address translation and authorization
rules.
A cloud identifier is used to reference the target service. This
identifier is local to each administration.
If NAT is required to access to the cloud, the nat-enabled leaf MUST
be set to true. A NAT address may be provided in customer-nat-
address, in case the customer is providing the public IP address for
the cloud access. If service provider is providing the NAT address,
customer-nat-address is not necessary as it can be picked from a
service provider pool.
By default, all sites in the IPVPN MUST be authorized to access to
the cloud. In case restrictions are required, a user MAY configure
the authorized-sites and denied-sites list. The authorization-sites
defines the list of sites authorized for cloud access. The denied-
sites defines the list of sites denied for cloud access. The model
supports both "deny all expect" and "accept all expect"
authorization.
The "deny all expect" behavior is obtained by filling only the
authorized-sites. All the sites listed will be authorized, all
others will be denied.
The "accept all expect" behavior is obtained by filling only the
denied-sites. All the sites listed will be denied, all others will
be authorized.
Defining both denied-sites and authorized-sites MUST be processed as
"deny all expect", so the denied-sites will have not effect.
How the restrictions will be configured on network elements is out of
scope of this document and will be specific to each deployment.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
IPVPN
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++
+ Site 3 + --- + Cloud1 +
+ Site 1 + +++++++++++
+ +
+ Site 2 + --- ++++++++++++
+ + + Internet +
+ Site 4 + ++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
++++++++++
+ Cloud2 +
++++++++++
In the example above, we may configure the global VPN to access
Internet by creating a cloud-access pointing to the cloud identifier
for Internet service. No authorized-sites will be configured as all
sites are required to access to Internet. NAT-enabled will be set to
true and a nat-address will be configured.
<vpn-svc>
<vpn-id>ZKITYHJ054687</vpn-id>
<customer-name>CUSTOMER_1</customer-name>
<topology>any-to-any</topology>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>51</cloud-identifier>
<nat-enabled>true</nat-enabled>
</cloud-access>
</vpn-svc>
If Site1 and Site2 requires access to Cloud1, a new cloud-access will
be created pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud1. Authorized
sites will be filled with reference to Site1 and Site2.
<vpn-svc>
<name>ZKITYHJ054687</name>
<id>12456487</id>
<customer-name>CUSTOMER_1</customer-name>
<topology>any-to-any</topology>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>1111111</cloud-identifier>
<authorized-sites>
<site-id>site1</site-id>
<site-id>site2</site-id>
</authorized-sites>
</cloud-access>
</vpn-svc>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
If all sites except Site1 requires access to Cloud2, a new cloud-
access will be created pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud2.
denied-sites will be filled with reference to Site1.
<vpn-svc>
<name>ZKITYHJ054687</name>
<id>12456487</id>
<customer-name>CUSTOMER_1</customer-name>
<topology>any-to-any</topology>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>22222222</cloud-identifier>
<denied-sites>
<site-id>site1</site-id>
</denied-sites>
</cloud-access>
</vpn-svc>
5.1.3. Multicast service
Multicast in IP VPN is described in [RFC6513].
If IPVPN supports multicast service, it is expected to provide inputs
on global multicast parameters.
The user of this model will need to fill the flavor of trees that
will be used by customer within the IPVPN (Customer tree). The
proposed model supports ASM, SSM and BiDirectional trees (and can be
augmented). Multiple flavors of tree can be supported
simultaneously.
(SSM tree)
Recv (IGMPv3) -- Site2 ------- PE2
PE1 --- Site1 --- Source1
\
-- Source2
(ASM tree)
Recv (IGMPv2) -- Site3 ------- PE3
(SSM tree)
Recv (IGMPv3) -- Site4 ------- PE4
/
Recv (IGMPv2) -- Site5 --------
(ASM tree)
In case of ASM flavor, this model requires to fill the rp and rp-
discovery parameters. Multiple RP to group mappings can be created.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
The RP service can be managed by the service provider using the leaf
provider-managed/enabled set to true. In case of provider managed
RP, anycast RP can also be activated providing redundancy as well as
more optimal forwarding.
In case of customer managed RP, the RP address must be filled in the
RP to group mappings.
The rp-discovery supports the auto-rp, static-rp, anycast-rp and bsr-
rp modes.
5.2. Site overview
The L3VPN service is really attached to the notion of sites. A site
is composed of some characteristics :
o Unique identifier (site-id) : to uniquely identify the site within
the overall network infrastructure. The identifier is a string
allowing to any encoding for the local administration of the VPN
service.
o Location (location) : site location informations to allow easy
retrieval on nearest available ressources.
o Site constraints (site-diversity) : site-diversity container allow
to define some constraints for the setup of the site, for example
: PE disjointness or PoP disjointness. A site-group identifier
allow to manage the disjointness. Two sites with the same group
and requiring PE disjointness cannot be connected on the same PE.
o Management (management) : defines the model of management of the
site, for example : comanaged, customer managed or provider
managed.
o Site network accesses (site-network-accesses) : defines the list
of network accesses associated to the sites and their properties :
especially bearer, connection and service parameters.
The site configuration is viewed as a global entity, we assume that
it is mostly the role of the management to split the parameters
between the different elements within the network. For example, in
the case of the attachment configuration, the management system needs
to split the overall parameters between PE configuration and CE
configuration.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
5.2.1. Deciding where to connect the site
The management system will have to decide where to connect the site
in the provider network (PE, aggregation switch ...). This decision
MAY be based on any constraint that are up to the service provider :
least load, distance ... The current model proposes some parameters
that will help the management system to decide where to attach the
customer site. It would be up to the service provider to define
which on those parameters are relevant for placing the site, moreover
the service provider can decide to rely also on other internal
parameters.
5.2.1.1. Site location
The location information provided in this model MAY be used by a
management system to decide the target PE to mesh the site.
PoP#1 (New York)
+---------+
| PE1 |
Site #1 ---... | PE2 |
(Atlantic City) | PE3 |
+---------+
PoP#2 (Washington)
+---------+
| PE4 |
| PE5 |
| PE6 |
+---------+
PoP#3 (Philadelphia)
+---------+
| PE7 |
Site #2 ---... | PE2 |
(Reston) | PE9 |
+---------+
In the example below, the management system may decide to mesh Site
#1 on a PE from Philadelphia PoP for distance reason. It may also
take in account resources available on PEs to decide the exact target
PE (least load). In case of shortest distance PE used, it may also
decide to mesh Site #2 on Washington PoP.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
5.2.1.2. Site diversity
The site diversity defines what is the acceptable fate sharing level
in case multiple sites for a single VPN must be provisioned in a
common location. The site diversity introduces the notion of site-
group. Sites belonging to the same site-group cannot share the same
fate. We propose to introduce two constraints :
PoP diverse : site belonging to the same site-group MUST be
provisioned on different PoPs.
PE diverse : site belonging to the same site-group MUST be
provisioned on different PE routers.
How these diversity constraints are applied is out of scope of the
document. As an example, the management system receiving the request
for diversity, MAY exchange information with some OSS components to
define the best target PEs based on location and ressource
availability.
As example, if a company has multiple small branch offices (single
homed) that requires to be connected in the same location, it is
desirable to dispatch the attachment on multiple PEs. So in case of
PE crash, only some offices will be impacted.
PoP#1
+---------+
| PE1 |
Office#1 ---... | PE2 |
Office#2 ---... | PE3 |
Office#3 ---... | PE4 |
Office#...--... +---------+
Office#100--...
In the figure above, it may be good to mesh 25 offices on each PE of
PoP#1 to prevent concentration of two many customer offices on common
network elements.
5.2.1.3. Site network access availability
A site may be multihomed, so having multiple site-network-accesses.
An implementation MAY apply placement diversity for accesses
belonging to the same site. By default, diversity for accesses
belonging to the same site is set to "PE-diverse".
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Consider a dual homed hub site, it is desirable for redundancy to
provision the two VPN access connections on two different PEs or two
different PoPs.
PoP#1
+---------+
| PE1 |
Hub_Site_primary ------ | PE2 |
| PE3 |
+---------+
PoP#2
+---------+
| PE4 |
Hub_Site_backup ------- | PE5 |
| PE6 |
+---------+
In a PoP diverse scenario, the management system may decide to mesh
Hub_Site_primary on any PE of PoP#1 and Hub_Site_backup on any PE of
PoP#2. In a PE diverse scenario, if the management system decides to
mesh Hub_Site_primary on PE1, it is require to mesh Hub_Site_backup
on any PE different from PE1.
The site-network-access/availability defines parameters for the site
redundancy. The access-priority defines a preference for a
particular access. This preference is used to model any kind of
loadbalancing or primary/backup scenario. The highest the access-
priority is, and the highest the preference will be.
The figure below describes how access-priority attribute can be used.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Hub#1 LAN (Primary/backup) Hub#2 LAN (Loadsharing)
| |
| access-priority 1 access-priority 1 |
|--- CE1 ------- PE1 PE3 --------- CE3 --- |
| |
| |
|--- CE2 ------- PE2 PE4 --------- CE4 --- |
| access-priority 2 access-priority 1 |
PE5
|
|
|
CE5
|
Spoke#1 site (Single-homed)
In the figure above, Hub#2 requires loadsharing so all the site-
network-accesses must use the same access-priority value. At the
contrary, as Hub#1 requires primary/backup, a higher access-priority
will be configured on the primary access.
More complex scenario can be modeled. Let's consider a Hub site with
5 accesses to the network (A1,A2,A3,A4,A5). The customer wants to
loadshare traffic on A1,A2 in the nominal situation. If A1 and A2
fails, he wants to loadshare traffic on A3 and A4, and finally if A1
to A4 are down, he wants to use A5. We can model it easily by
associating the following access-priorities : A1=100, A2=100, A3=50,
A4=50, A5=10.
5.2.1.4. Route Distinguisher and VRF allocation
Route distinguisher is also a critical parameter of PE-based L3VPN as
described in [RFC4364] that will allow to distinguish common
addressing plans in different VPNs. As for Route-targets, it is
expected management system to allocate a VRF on the target PE and a
route-distinguisher for this VRF.
If a VRF exists on the target PE, and the VRF fulfils the
connectivity constraints for the site, there is no need to recreate
another VRF and the site MAY be meshed within this existing VRF. How
the management system checks that an existing VRF fulfils the
connectivity constraints for a site is out of scope of this document.
If no VRF exists on the target PE, filling the site constraints, the
management system will have to initiate a new VRF creation on the
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
target PE and will have to allocate a new route distinguisher for
this new VRF.
The management system MAY apply a per-VPN or per-VRF allocation
policy for the route-distinguisher depending of the service provider
policy. In a per-VPN allocation policy, all VRFs (dispatched on
multiple PEs) within a VPN will share the same route distinguisher
value. In a per-VRF model, all VRFs will always have a unique route-
distinguisher value. Some other allocation policies are also
possible, and this document does not restrict the allocation policies
to be used.
Allocation of route-distinguisher MAY be done in the same way as the
route-targets. The example provided in Section 5.1.1.1 could be
reused.
Note that a service provider MAY decide to configure target PE for
automated allocation of route distinguisher. In this case, there
will be no need for any backend system to allocate a route-
distinguisher value.
5.2.2. VPN policy
The VPN policy defines the route exchange between multiple VPNs. A
vpn-policy configuration MUST be configured to attach a site to one
or multiple VPNs. The vpn-policy container defines relations of the
site (or specific LAN of the sites) with VPNs. When vpn-policy is
defined, the management system will built the route-target policy
configuration from a combination of both the vpn-policy and the vpn-
topology of the VPNs listed in the policy.
As a site can belong to multiple VPNs, the vpn-policy may be composed
of multiple entries. A filter can be applied to specify that only
some LANs of the site should be part of a particular VPN. Each time
a site (or LAN) is attached to a VPN, we must precise its role within
the targeted VPN topology.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| VPN1_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ VPN1_Site2 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| VPN2_Site3 ------ PE7 |
+-------------------------+ |
| |
+-------------------------+ |
| VPN2_Site1 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ VPN2_Site2 |
+----------------------------------+ |
| |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| VPN3_Site1 ------ PE5 | PE6 ------ VPN3_Site2 | |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| |
+---------------------------+
Let us consider service VPN1 with a any-to-any topology. For site#1,
we define a VPN policy that attach the site to the VPN1 and setting
the role of the site as "any-to-any-role".
<vpn-policy>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN1</vpn>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
Now let us consider service VPN2 with a hub and spoke disjoint
topology (Site1, Site3 are Hubs). For site#1, we define a VPN policy
that attach the site to the VPN2 and setting the role of the site as
"hub-role".
<vpn-policy>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN2</vpn>
<site-role>hub-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
When the vpn services are provisioned a route-target value will be
affected by the OSS of the service provider for these VPNs. Let's
call RT1 the route-target of VPN1,and RT21(spoke)/RT22(hub) the
route-target of VPN2. Now we consider a new VPN service VPN3 (any to
any) that must be provisioned, RT3 will be allocated by the OSS for
proper configuration on network elements.
Consider a site#1 in VPN3 that must communicate only in VPN3, in this
case, the vpn-policy will be similar to Site#1 of VPN1. The VRF on
PE5 for VPN3 will be so provisioned by the management system using
RT3 value as import and export value.
Consider a site#2 in VPN3 that must communicate in VPN3, and a
specific LAN LAN1 must communicate with VPN2 as a spoke (as VPN2 is
hub and Spoke disjoint). Below is a sample configuration of the VPN
policy for site#2 :
<vpn-policy>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<filter>
<lan-tag>LAN1</lan-tag>
</filter>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN2</vpn>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
<entries>
<id>2</id>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN3</vpn>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
The VRF on PE6 for VPN3 will be so provisioned by the management
system using RT3 value as import and RT3 as export value plus RT21
for LAN1 prefix.
5.2.3. Security
Security container defines customer specific security parameters for
the site. This section will more be detailed in future revision.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
5.2.3.1. Encryption
Encryption can be requested on the connection. It may be performed
at layer 2 or layer 3 by selecting the appropriate enumeration in
"layer" leaf. The encryption profile can be a service provider
defined template or customer specific.
5.2.4. Management
The model proposes three types of common management options :
o comanaged : the CE router is managed by the provider and also by
the customer.
o provider-managed : the CE router is managed only by the provider.
o customer-managed : the CE router is managed only by the customer.
Based on the management model, different security options MAY be
derived.
In case of "provider-managed" or "comanaged", the model proposes some
option to define the management transport protocol (IPv4 or IPv6) and
the associated management address.
5.2.5. Routing protocols
Routing-protocol defines which routing protocol must be activated
between the provider and the customer router. The current model
support : bgp, rip, rip-ng, ospf, static, direct, vrrp.
The routing protocol defined applies at the provider to customer
boundary. Depending of the management of the management model, it
may apply to the PE-CE boundary or CE to customer boundary. In case
of customer managed site, the routing-protocol defined will be
activated between the PE and the CE router managed by the customer.
In case of provider managed site, the routing-protocol defined will
be activated between the CE managed by the SP and the router or LAN
belonging to the customer. In this case, it is expected that the PE-
CE routing will be configured based on the service provider rules as
both are managed by the same entity.
Rtg protocol
192.0.2.0/24 ----- CE ----------------- PE1
Customer managed site
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Rtg protocol
Customer router ----- CE ----------------- PE1
Provider managed site
All the examples below will refer to a customer managed site case.
5.2.5.1. Dual stack handling
All routing protocol types support dual stack by using address-family
leaf-list.
Example of Dual stack using the same routing protocol :
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>static</type>
<static>
<address-family>ipv4-unicast</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6-unicast</address-family>
</static>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
Example of Dual stack using two different routing protocols :
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>rip</type>
<rip>
<address-family>ipv4-unicast</address-family>
</rip>
</routing-protocol>
<routing-protocol>
<type>ospf</type>
<ospf>
<address-family>ipv6-unicast</address-family>
</ospf>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
5.2.5.2. Direct LAN connection onto SP network
Routing-protocol "direct" SHOULD be used when a customer LAN is
directly connected to the provider network and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
LAN attached directly to provider network :
192.0.2.0/24 ----- PE1
5.2.5.3. Direct LAN connection onto SP network with redundancy
Routing-protocol "vrrp" SHOULD be used when a customer LAN is
directly connected to the provider network and must be advertised in
the IPVPN and LAN redundancy is expected.
LAN attached directly to provider network with LAN redundancy:
192.0.2.0/24 ------ PE1
|
+-- PE2
5.2.5.4. Static routing
Routing-protocol "static" MAY be used when a customer LAN is
connected to the provider network through a CE router and must be
advertised in the IPVPN.
Static rtg
192.0.2.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
| |
| Static route 192.0.2.0/24 nh CE
Static route 0.0.0.0/0 nh PE
5.2.5.5. RIP routing
Routing-protocol "rip" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
In case of dual stack, the management system will be responsible to
configure rip (including right version number) and rip-ng instances
on network elements.
RIP rtg
192.0.2.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
5.2.5.6. OSPF routing
Routing-protocol "ospf" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
It can be used to extend an existing OSPF network and interconnect
different areas. See [RFC4577] for more details.
+---------------------+
| |
OSPF | | OSPF
area 1 | | area 2
(OSPF | | (OSPF
area 1) --- CE ---------- PE PE ----- CE --- area 2)
| |
+---------------------+
The model also proposes an option to create an OSPF sham-link between
two sites sharing the same area and having a backdoor link. The
sham-link is created by referencing the target site sharing the same
OSPF area. The management system will be responsible to check if
there is already a shamlink configured for this VPN and area between
the same pair of PEs. If there is no existing shamlink, the
management system will provision it, this shamlink MAY be reused by
other sites.
+------------------------+
| |
| |
| PE (--shamlink--)PE |
| | | |
+----|----------------|--+
| OSPF area1 | OSPF area 1
| |
CE1 CE2
| |
(OSPF area1) (OSPF area1)
| |
+----------------+
Regarding Dual stack support, user MAY decide to fill both IPv4 and
IPv6 address families, if both protocols SHOULD be routed through
OSPF. As OSPF is using two different protocol for IPv4 and IPv6, the
management system will need to configure both ospf version 2 and
version 3 on the PE-CE link.
Example of OSPF routing parameters in service model.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>ospf</type>
<ospf>
<area-address>1.1.1.1</area-address>
<address-family>ipv4-unicast</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6-unicast</address-family>
</ospf>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
Example of PE configuration done by management system :
router ospf 10
area 0.0.0.0
interface Ethernet0/0
!
router ospfv3 10
area 0.0.0.0
interface Ethernet0/0
!
5.2.5.7. BGP routing
Routing-protocol "bgp" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
BGP rtg
10.0.0.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
The AS numbers, peerings addressing will be derived from connection
parameters or customer-specific-information as well as internal
knowledge of SP.
In case of dual stack access, user MAY request BGP routing for both
IPv4 and IPv6 by filling both address-families. It will be up to SP
and management system to decide how to decline the configuration (two
BGP sessions, single, multisession ...).
The service configuration below actives BGP on PE-CE link for both
IPv4 and IPv6.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>bgp</type>
<bgp>
<address-family>ipv4-unicast</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6-unicast</address-family>
<bgp>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
This service configuration can be derived by management system into
multiple flavors depending on SP flavor.
Example #1 of PE configuration done by management system
(single session IPv4 transport):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
neighbor 203.0.113.2 route-map SET-NH-IPV6 out
Example #2 of PE configuration done
by management system (two sessions):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
neighbor 2001::2 remote-as 65000
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 2001::2 activate
Example #3 of PE configuration done
by management system (multisession):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
neighbor 203.0.113.2 multisession per-af
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
neighbor 203.0.113.2 route-map SET-NH-IPV6 out
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
5.2.6. Service
The service defines service parameters associated with the site.
5.2.6.1. QoS
The model proposes to define QoS parameters in an abstracted way :
o qos-classification-policy : define a set of ordered rules to
classify customer traffic.
o std-qos-profile : provider standard outgoing QoS profile to be
applied. This is a reference to a well known profile in Service
provider administration.
o custom-qos-profile : defines customer specific profiles.
5.2.6.1.1. QoS classification
QoS classification rules are handled by qos-classification-policy.
The qos-classification-policy is an ordered list of rules that match
a flow and set the appropriate target class of service (target-class-
id). The match criterions provide a basic infrastructure for
defining flows : layer 3 source and destination address, layer 4
ports, layer 4 protocol.
Where the classification is done depends on the SP implementation of
the service, but classification concerns the flow coming from the
customer site and entering the network.
Provider network
+-----------------------+
192.0.2.0/24
198.51.100.0/24 ---- CE --------- PE
Traffic flow
---------->
In the figure above, the management system can decide :
o if the CE is customer managed, to implement the classification
rule in the ingress direction on the PE interface.
o if the CE is provider managed, to implement the classification
rule in the ingress direction on the CE interface connected to
customer LAN.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
The figure below describes a sample service description of qos-
classification for a site :
<service>
<qos>
<qos-classification-policy>
<rules>
<id>1</id>
<match-flow>
<ipv4-src-prefix>192.0.2.0/24</ipv4-src-prefix>
<ipv4-dst-prefix>1.1.1.1/32</ipv4-dst-prefix>
<l4-dst-port>80</l4-dst-port>
<l4-protocol>tcp</l4-protocol>
</match-flow>
<target-class-id>DATA2</target-class-id>
</rules>
<rules>
<id>2</id>
<match-flow>
<ipv4-src-prefix>192.0.2.0/24</ipv4-src-prefix>
<ipv4-dst-prefix>1.1.1.1/32</ipv4-dst-prefix>
<l4-dst-port>21</l4-dst-port>
<l4-protocol>tcp</l4-protocol>
</match-flow>
<target-class-id>DATA2</target-class-id>
</rules>
<rules>
<id>3</id>
<target-class-id>DATA1</target-class-id>
</rules>
</qos-classification-policy>
</qos>
</service>
In the example above :
o HTTP traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 LAN destinated to 1.1.1.1/32 will
be classified in DATA2.
o FTP traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 LAN destinated to 1.1.1.1/32 will be
classified in DATA2.
o All other traffic will be classified in DATA1.
The order of rules is really important. The management system
responsible for translating those rules in network element
configuration MUST keep the same processing order in element
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
configuration. The order of rule is defined by the "id" leaf. The
lowest "id" MUST be processed first.
5.2.6.1.2. QoS profile
std-qos-profile and custom-qos-profile define output QoS profiles to
be used between PE and CE.
Provider network
+-----------------------+
192.0.2.0/24
198.51.100.0/24 ---- CE --------- PE
\ /
qos-profile
std-qos-profile and custom-qos-profile cannot be used at the same
time. If both are present, the management system SHOULD keep only
the custom-qos-profile.
A custom-qos-profile is defined as a list of class of services and
associated properties. The properties are :
o rate-limit : used to rate-limit the class of service. The value
is expressed as a percentage of the global service bandwidth.
o priority-level : used to define priorities between class of
services. The value of the priority to be used is dependant of
each administration. The higher the priority-level is, the higher
the priority of the class will be. Priority-level is used to
define strict priority queueing. A priority-level 250 class will
be served before a priority-level 100 class until there is no more
packet to process or until rate-limit does not allow anymore
packets from the higher priority class.
o guaranteed-bw-percent : used to define a guaranteed amount of
bandwidth for the class of service. It is expressed as a
percentage. The guaranteed-bw-percent uses available bandwidth at
the priority-level of the class.
Example of service configuration using a standard qos profile :
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<sites>
<site-id>1245HRTFGJGJ154654</site-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>100000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>100000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<std-qos-profile>PLATINUM</std-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>555555AAAA2344</site-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>2000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>2000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<std-qos-profile>GOLD</std-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
Example of service configuration using a custom qos profile :
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<sites>
<site-id>Site1</site-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>100000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>100000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<custom-qos-profile>
<class>
<class-id>REAL_TIME</class-id>
<rate-limit>10</rate-limit>
<priority-level>10</priority-level>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA</class-id>
<priority-level>5</priority-level>
</class>
</custom-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>Site2</site-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>2000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>2000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<custom-qos-profile>
<class>
<class-id>REAL_TIME</class-id>
<rate-limit>30</rate-limit>
<priority-level>10</priority-level>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA1</class-id>
<priority-level>5</priority-level>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>80</guaranteed-bw-percent>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA2</class-id>
<priority-level>5</priority-level>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>20</guaranteed-bw-percent>
</class>
</custom-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
The custom-qos-profile for site1 defines that traffic from REAL_TIME
class will have a higher priority than traffic from DATA class. The
REAL_TIME traffic will be rate-limit to 10% of the service bandwidth
(10% of 100Mbps = 10Mbps) to let some place for DATA traffic.
The custom-qos-profile for site2 defines that traffic from REAL_TIME
class will have a higher priority than traffic from data traffic.
Data traffic will be splitted in two class of service DATA1 and DATA2
that will share bandwidth between them according to the percentage of
guaranteed-bw-percent. The maximum of percentage to be used is not
limited by this model but MUST be limited by the management system
according to the policies authorized by the service provider. The
REAL_TIME traffic will be rate-limit to 30% of the service bandwidth
(30% of 100Mbps = 30Mbps) to let some place for data traffic. In
case of congestion of the access, the REAL_TIME traffic can go up to
30Mbps (Let's assume that 20Mbps only are consumed). The DATA1 and
DATA2 will share remaining bandwidth (80Mbps) according to their
percentage. So DATA1 will be served with at least 64Mbps of
bandwidth.
5.2.6.2. Multicast
The multicast section defines the type of site in the customer
multicast topology : source, receiver, or both. These parameters
will help management system to optimize the multicast service. User
can also define the type of multicast relation with the customer :
router (requires a protocol like PIM), host (IGMP or MLD), or both.
Transport protocol (IPv4 or IPv6 or both) can also be defined.
5.2.6.3. Traffic protection
The service model supports the ability to protect traffic from or to
a site.
Site#1 Site#2
CE1 ----- PE1 -- P1 P3 -- PE3 ---- CE3
| | |
| | |
CE2 ----- PE2 -- P2 P4 -- PE4 ---- CE4
/
/
CE5 ----+
Site#3
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
In the figure above, we consider an IPVPN service with three sites
including two dual homed sites (site#1 and #2). For dual homed
sites, we consider PE1-CE1 and PE3-CE3 as primary, and
PE2-CE2,PE4-CE4 as backup for the example (even if protection also
applies to loadsharing scenarios.)
In order to protect Site#2 for a PE-CE link failure, a service
provider MAY configure link-local-protection on the primary access of
site#2 (PE3-CE3). In such case, if we consider traffic coming from a
remote site (site#1 or site#3), primary path is to use PE3 as egress
PE. PE3 has preprogrammed a backup forwarding entry pointing to
backup path (through PE4-CE4) for all prefixes going through PE3-CE3
link. How backup path is computed is out of scope of the document.
When PE3-CE3 link fails, traffic is still received by PE3 but PE3
switch automatically traffic to the backup entry, path will so be
PE1-P1-(...)-P3-PE3-PE4-CE4 until remote PEs reconverge and use PE4
as egress PE.
In order to protect Site#2 for a egress PE node failure, a service
provider may configure node-local-protection on the primary access of
site#2 (PE3-CE3). This protection flavor is so called egress PE node
protection. In such case, if we consider traffic coming from a
remote site (site#1 or site#3), primary path is to use PE3 as egress
PE. P3 has preprogrammed a backup forwarding entry pointing to
backup path. How backup path is computed is out of scope of the
document. When PE3 node fails, traffic is still received by P3 but
P3 switch automatically traffic to the backup entry, path will so be
PE1-P1-(...)-P3-P4-PE4-CE4 until remote PEs reconverge and use PE4 as
egress PE.
In order to protect Site#2 for a egress PE node failure, another
flavor of protection can be used, a service provider MAY configure
node-global-protection on all remote sites. This protection flavor
is generally called PIC Edge (Prefix Independent Convergence for
Edge). In such case, if we consider traffic coming from a remote
site (site#1 or site#3), primary path is to use PE3 as egress PE.
All remote PEs (PE1,PE2) have preprogrammed a backup forwarding entry
pointing to backup path (through PE4). How backup path is computed
is out of scope of the document. When PE3 node fails, remote PEs
detect through IGP convergence that PE3 is no more reachable and
decide to switch automatically traffic to the backup entry, path will
so be PE1-P1-(...)-P4-PE4-CE4. In this case, as BGP convergence is
involved, there is no other need of reconvergence.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
5.2.7. Site network accesses
As mentioned, a site may be multihomed. Each network access for a
site is defined in the site-network-accesses list. The site-network-
access defines how the service is connected on the network and is
splitted in two main classes of parameters :
o bearer : defines physical parameters of the attachment.
o connection : defines protocol parameters of the attachment
(transport layer and routing protocols).
Some parameters from the site can be configured also at the access
level like : routing, services, security ... Defining parameters only
at site level will provide inheritance. If a parameter is configured
at both site and access level, the access level parameter MUST
override the site level parameter.
5.2.7.1. Bearer
Bearer defines an internal reference to the bearer used for the
access. Two strings are available (type and bearer-reference) to
encode necessary informations to map the VPN access to the
appropriate network access bearer.
How the mapping is done is out of scope of the document.
5.2.7.2. Connection
The connection defines the protocol parameters of the attachment
(IPv4 and IPv6). Depending of the management mode, it refers to the
PE-CE addressing or CE to customer LAN addressing. In any case, it
describes the provider to customer responsibility boundary. For a
customer managed site, it refers to the PE-CE connection. For a
provider managed site, it refers to the CE to LAN connection.
5.2.7.2.1. IP addressing
IP subnet can be configured for either transport protocols. For a
dual stack connection, two subnets will be provided, one for each
transport layer.
The address-allocation-type will help in defining how the address
allocation MUST be done. The current model proposes three ways of IP
address allocation :
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
o provider-dhcp : the provider will provide DHCP service for
customer equipments, this is applicable to both IPv4 and IPv6
addressing.
o static-address : Addresses will be assigned manually on both
sides, this is applicable to both IPv4 and IPv6 addressing.
o slaac : enables stateless address autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]).
This is applicable only for IPv6.
5.3. Enhanced VPN features
5.3.1. Carrier Supporting Carrier
In case of Carrier Supporting Carrier (CsC), a customer MAY want to
build MPLS service using an IPVPN as transport layer.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
LAN customer1
|
|
CE1
|
| -------------
(vrf_cust1)
CE1_ISP1
| ISP1 PoP
| MPLS link
| -------------
|
(vrf ISP1)
PE1
(...) Provider backbone
PE2
(vrf ISP1)
|
| ------------
|
| MPLS link
| ISP1 PoP
CE2_ISP1
(vrf_cust1)
|-------------
|
CE2
|
Lan customer1
In the figure above, ISP1 resells IPVPN service but has no transport
infrastructure between its PoPs. ISP1 uses an IPVPN as transport
infrastructure (belonging to another provider) between its PoPs.
In order to support CsC, the VPN service must be declared MPLS
support using the "mpls" leaf set to true in vpn-svc. The link
between CE1_ISP1/PE1 and CE2_ISP1/PE2 must also run a MPLS signalling
protocol. This configuration is done at the site level.
In the proposed model, LDP or BGP can be used as MPLS signalling
protocol. In case of LDP, an IGP routing protocol MUST also be
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
activated. In case of BGP signalling, BGP MUST also be configured as
routing-protocol.
5.3.2. Transport constraints
A customer may require some constraints for transporting traffic
between particular sites. As example, a customer may require low
latencies and disjoint paths between two hub sites. The current
model proposes to define a list of constraints that can be augmented
for unicast and/or multicast traffic. For unicast traffic, the model
considers that the constraints are bidirectional (same constraint
from site1 to site2 and site2 to site1). For multicast, constraints
are unidirectional from source to receiver. The current model
supports the following constraints :
o Latency : this constraint allow to create the lowest latency path
possible or to create a path with a latency boundary. In case a
latency boundary is required, the boundary MUST be encoded in the
constraint-opaque-value using a millisecond unit.
o Bandwidth : this constraint allow to create a path that fits
specific bandwidth requirement. If no constraint-opaque-value is
provided, an implementation SHOULD use the lowest bandwidth
between the two sites as reference. If constraint-opaque-value is
used, the required bandwidth MUST be encoded in Mbps, and the
implementation MUST use this value as reference.
o Jitter : this constraint allow to create a path with a jitter
boundary. constraint-opaque-value MUST be used with jitter
constraint and MUST contain the jitter boundary expressed in
milliseconds.
o Path diversity : this constraint allow creation of disjoint paths
between two sites. This requires the sites to be multihomed.
constraint-opaque-value is not used.
o Site diversity : this constraint is similar to path diversity but
ensures that paths are not crossing the same sites. This requires
the sites to be multihomed. constraint-opaque-value MAY be used to
encode additional site location that must be avoided.
5.4. Using configuration templates
The proposed model supports the creation and application of
configuration templates for sites.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
A template can be configured by creating adding a site in the site-
template list. The "site-templates" list contains only templates.
Real sites are part of the "sites" list.
Multiple templates can be configured. Templates can be applied at
multiple levels referenced by apply-template leaf. The apply-
template references the site-id of the template to be called. The
location of the apply-template within the sites hierarchy defines
which parameters must be inherited. For example, if apply-template
is done on service container of a site, only service container
parameters (and childs) from the template will be applied.
<site-templates>
<site-id>Template-VoiceCoS-Cust1</site-id>
<service>
<qos>
<custom-qos-profile>
<class>
<class-id>REAL_TIME</class-id>
<rate-limit>30</rate-limit>
<priority-level>10</priority-level>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA1</class-id>
<priority-level>5</priority-level>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>80</guaranteed-bw-percent>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA2</class-id>
<priority-level>5</priority-level>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>20</guaranteed-bw-percent>
</class>
</custom-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
<site-templates>
<site-id>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</site-id>
<service>
<qos>
<std-qos-profile>PLATINUM</std-qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</sites>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Site-templates allow to define configuration blocks that will be
inherited by one or multiple sites in order to speed up
configuration. For example, if all the sites of an IPVPN service
have the almost same configuration (routing-protocol, qos, management
...), a template can be created and each site of the VPN will
reference the template. If a site has some particular parameters,
specific parameters within the site MUST always override parameters
derived from template.
The example above defines two site templates :
o Template-VPNsite-Customer1 that will be used to configure all the
VPN sites for customer 1.
o Template-VoiceCoS-Cust1 that will be used to configure some
special CoS policy on some specific accesses of the VPN.
In the example below, all sites of VPN1 are inheriting basic
configuration from template Template-VPNsite-Customer1. Some
specific parameters like svc-input-bandwidth are also defined for
each site. For Site 4 and 5 , specific QoS parameters are required,
a new template Template-VoiceCoS-Cust1 is applied at service level
for these two sites, overriding the service parameters from the
Template-VPNsite-Customer1 template.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<sites>
<site-id>Site1</site-id>
<apply-template>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</apply-template>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>5000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>5000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>Site2</site-id>
<apply-template>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</apply-template>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>20000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>20000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>Site3</site-id>
<apply-template>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</apply-template>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>30000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>30000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>Site4</site-id>
<apply-template>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</apply-template>
<service>
<apply-template>Template-VoiceCoS-Cust1</apply-template>
<svc-input-bandwidth>100000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>100000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
</sites>
<sites>
<site-id>Site5</site-id>
<apply-template>Template-VPNsite-Customer1</apply-template>
<service>
<apply-template>Template-VoiceCoS-Cust1</apply-template>
<svc-input-bandwidth>450000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>450000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
</sites>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
6. Service model usage example
As explained in Section 4, this service model is intended to be
instantiated at a management layer and is not intended to be used
directly on network elements. The management system serves as a
central point of configuration of the overall service.
This section provides an example on how a management system can use
this model to configure an IPVPN service on network elements.
The example wants to achieve the provisionning of a VPN service for 3
sites using hub and spoke topology. One of the site will be dual
homed and loadsharing is expected.
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
| | +----------------------------------+
| | |
| | +----------------------------------+
| Hub_Site ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
The following XML describes the overall simplified service
configuration of this VPN.
<vpn-svc>
<name>VPN1</name>
<id>12456487</id>
<customer-name>CUSTOMER1</customer-name>
<topology>hub-spoke</topology>
</vpn-svc>
When receiving the request for provisioning the VPN service, the
management system will internally (or through discussion with other
OSS component) allocates VPN route-targets. In this specific case
two RTs will be allocated (100:1 for Hub and 100:2 for Spoke). The
output below describes the configuration of Spoke1.
<sites>
<site-id>Spoke_Site1</site-id>
<site-diversity>
<type>pe-diverse</type>
<site-group>100</site-group>
</site-diversity>
<location>
<city-code>NY</city-code>
<country-code>US</country-code>
</location>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>bgp</type>
<bgp>
<autonomous-system>500</autonomous-system>
<address-family>ipv4-unicast</address-family>
</bgp>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>Spoke_Site1</site-network-access-id>
<ip-connection>
<ipv4>
<provider-address>203.0.113.254</provider-address>
<customer-address>203.0.113.2</customer-address>
<mask>24</mask>
</ipv4>
</ip-connection>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
<management>
<type>provider-managed</type>
<management-transport>ipv4-unicast</management-transport>
<address>192.0.2.1</address>
</management>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>450000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>450000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
<vpn-policy>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN1</vpn>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
</sites>
When receiving the request for provisioning Spoke1 site, the
management system MUST allocate network resources for this site. It
MUST first decide the target network elements to provision the
access, and especially the PE router (and may be an aggregation
switch). As described in Section 5.2.1, the management system SHOULD
use the location information and SHOULD use the site-diversity
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
constraint to find the appropriate PE. In this case, we consider
Spoke1 requires PE diversity with Hub and that management system
allocate PEs based on lowest distance. Based on the location
information, the management system finds the available PEs in the
nearest area of the customer and picks one that fits the site-
diversity constraint.
When the PE is chosen, management system needs to allocate interface
resources on the node, one interface is so picked from the PE
available pool. The management system can start provisioning the PE
node by using any mean (Netconf, CLI, ...). The management system
will check if a VRF is already present that fits the needs. If not,
it will provision the VRF : Route distinguisher will come from
internal allocation policy model, route-targets are coming from the
vpn-policy configuration of the site (management system allocated
some RTs for the VPN). As the site is a spoke site (site-role), the
management system knows which RT must be imported and exported. As
the site is provider managed, some management route-targets may also
be added (100:5000). Standard provider VPN policies MAY also be
added in the configuration.
Example of generated PE configuration :
ip vrf Customer1
export-map STD-CUSTOMER-EXPORT <---- Standard SP configuration
route-distinguisher 100:3123234324
route-target import 100:1
route-target import 100:5000 <---- Standard SP configuration
route-target export 100:2 for provider managed
!
When the VRF has been provisioned, the management system can start
configuring the access on the PE using the allocated interface
information. IP addressing is derived from the subnet-prefix of the
connection. One address will be picked from the subnet for the PE,
another will be used for the CE configuration. Routing protocols
will also be configured on the PE, bgp will be used as requested in
the service model. Peering addresses will be derived from subnet-
prefix. PE AS number is well known and as CE is provider managed, CE
AS number can be automatically allocated by the management system.
Some provider standard configuration templates may also be added.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Example of generated PE configuration :
interface Ethernet1/1/0.10
encapsulation dot1q 10
ip vrf forwarding Customer1
ip address 198.51.100.1 255.255.255.252 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
ip access-group STD-PROTECT-IN <---- Standard SP config
!
router bgp 100
address-family ipv4 vrf Customer1
neighbor 198.51.100.1 remote-as 65000 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 198.51.100.1 route-map STD in <---- Standard SP config
neighbor 198.51.100.1 filter-list 10 in <---- Standard SP config
!
ip route vrf Customer1 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.255 198.51.100.2
! Static route for provider administration of CE
!
As the CE router is not reachable at this stage, the management
system can produce a complete CE configuration that can be uploaded
to the node by manual operation before sending the CE to customer
premise. The CE configuration will be built as for the PE. Based on
the CE type (vendor/model) allocated to the customer and bearer
information, the management system knows which interface must be
configured on the CE. PE-CE link configuration is expected to be
handled automatically using the service provider OSS as both
resources are managed internally. CE to LAN interface parameters
like IP addressing are derived from ip-connection taking into account
how management system distributes addresses between PE and CE within
the subnet. This will allow to produce a plug'n'play configuration
for the CE.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Example of generated CE configuration :
interface Loopback10
description "Administration"
ip address 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.255
!
interface FastEthernet10
description "WAN"
ip address 198.51.100.2 255.255.255.252 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
!
interface FastEthernet11
description "LAN"
ip address 203.0.113.254 255.255.255.0 <---- Comes from
ip-connection
!
router bgp 65000
redistribute static route-map STATIC2BGP <---- Standard SP
configuration
neighbor 198.51.100.1 remote-as 100 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 500 <---- Comes from
ip-connection
!
route-map STATIC2BGP permit 10
match tag 10
!
7. Interaction with Other YANG Modules
As expressed in Section 4, this service module is intended to be
instantiated in management system and not directly on network
elements.
It will be the role of the management system to configure the network
elements. The management system MAY be modular, so the component
instantiating the service model (let's call it service component) and
the component responsible for network element configuration (let's
call it configuration component) MAY be different.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
L3VPN-SVC |
service model |
|
+----------------------+
| Service component | service datastore
+----------------------+
|
|
+----------------------+
+----| Config component |-------+
/ +----------------------+ \ Network
/ / \ \ Configuration
/ / \ \ models
/ / \ \
+++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++
+ CEA + ------- + PE A + + PE B + ----- + CEB + Config
+++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++ datastore
Site A Site B
In the previous sections, we provided some example of translation of
service provisioning request to router configuration lines as
illustration. In the NetConf/Yang ecosystem, it will be expected
NetConf/YANG to be used between configuration component and network
elements to configure the requested service on these elements.
In this framework, it is expected from standardization to also work
on specific configuration YANG modelization of service components on
network elements. There will be so a strong relation between the
abstracted view provided by this service model and the detailed
configuration view that will be provided by specific configuration
models for network elements.
Authors of this document are expecting definition of YANG models for
network elements on this non exhaustive list of items :
o VRF definition including VPN policy expression.
o Physical interface.
o IP layer (IPv4, IPv6).
o QoS : classification, profiles...
o Routing protocols : support of configuration of all protocols
listed in the document, as well as routing policies associated
with these protocols.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
o Multicast VPN.
o Network Address Translation.
o ...
Example of VPN site request at service level using this model :
<sites>
<site-id>Site A</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<ip-connection>
<ipv4>
<address-allocation-type>static-address</address-allocation-type>
<subnet-prefix>203.0.113.0/30</subnet-prefix>
</ipv4>
</ip-connection>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>static</type>
<static>
<cascaded-lan-prefixes>
<ipv4-lan-prefixes>
<lan>198.51.100.0/30</lan>
<next-hop>203.0.113.2</next-hop>
</ipv4-lan-prefixes>
</cascaded-lan-prefixes>
</static>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
<management>
<type>customer-managed>/type<
</management>
<vpn-policy>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn>VPN1</vpn>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
</sites>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
In the service example above, it is expected that the service
component requests to the configuration component of the management
system the configuration of the service elements. If we consider
that service component selected a PE (PE A) as target PE for the
site, the configuration component will need to push the configuration
to PE A. The configuration component will use several YANG data
models to define the configuration to be applied to PE A. The XML
configuration of PE-A may look like this :
<if:interfaces>
<if:interface>
<if:name>eth0</if:name>
<if:type>ianaift:ethernetCsmacd</if:type>
<if:description>
Link to CEA.
</if:description>
<ip:ipv4>
<ip:address>
<ip:ip>203.0.113.1</ip:ip>
<ip:prefix-length>30</ip:prefix-length>
</ip:address>
<ip:forwarding>true</ip:forwarding>
</ip:ipv4>
</if:interface>
</if:interfaces>
<rt:routing>
<rt:routing-instance>
<rt:name>VRF_CustA</rt:name>
<rt:type>l3vpn:vrf</rt:type>
<rt:description>VRF for CustomerA</rt:description>
<l3vpn:route-distinguisher>
100:1546542343
</l3vpn:route-distinguisher>
<l3vpn:import-rt>100:1</l3vpn:import-rt>
<l3vpn:export-rt>100:1</l3vpn:export-rt>
<rt:interfaces>
<rt:interface>
<rt:name>eth0</rt:name>
</rt:interface>
</rt:interfaces>
<rt:routing-protocols>
<rt:routing-protocol>
<rt:type>rt:static</rt:type>
<rt:name>st0</rt:name>
<rt:static-routes>
<v4ur:ipv4>
<v4ur:route>
<v4ur:destination-prefix>
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
198.51.100.0/30
</v4ur:destination-prefix>
<v4ur:next-hop>
<v4ur:next-hop-address>
203.0.113.2
</v4ur:next-hop-address>
</v4ur:next-hop>
</v4ur:route>
</v4ur:ipv4>
</rt:static-routes>
</rt:routing-protocol>
</rt:routing-protocols>
</rt:routing-instance>
</rt:routing>
8. YANG Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-l3vpn-svc@2015-12-15.yang"
module ietf-l3vpn-svc {
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-svc";
prefix l3vpn-svc;
import ietf-routing {
prefix "rt";
}
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
}
organization
"IETF L3SM Working Group";
contact
"WG List: <mailto:l3sm@ietf.org>
Editor:
";
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"The YANG module defines a generic service configuration
model for Layer 3 VPN common across all of the vendor
implementations.";
revision 2015-12-07 {
description
"
* A site is now a collection of site-accesses.
This was introduced to support M to N availability.
* Site-availability has been removed, replaced by
availability parameters under site-accesses
* Added transport-constraints within vpn-svc
";
reference "draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-yang-02";
}
revision 2015-11-03 {
description "
* Add ToS support in match-flow
* nexthop in cascaded lan as mandatory
* customer-specific-info deleted and moved to routing
protocols
* customer-lan-connection modified : need prefix and CE address
* add choice in managing PE-CE addressing
* Simplifying traffic protection
";
reference "";
}
revision 2015-09-10 {
description "
* Refine groupings for vpn-svc
* Removed name in vpn-svc
* id in vpn-svc moved to string
* Rename id in vpn-svc to vpn-id
* Changed key of vpn-svc list to vpn-id
* Add DSCP support in flow definition
";
reference "";
}
revision 2015-08-07 {
description
"
Multicast :
* Removed ACL from security
* Add FW for site and cloud access
";
reference "";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
revision 2015-08-05 {
description
"
Multicast :
* Removed anycast-rp identity as discovery mechanism
* Added rp-group mappings for multicast
* Added flag for provider managed RP.
";
reference "";
}
revision 2015-08-03 {
description
" * Creating multiple reusable groupings
* Added mpls leaf in vpn-svc for carrier's carrier case
* Modify identity single to single-site
* Modify site-type to site-role and also child identities.
* Creating OAM container under site and moved BFD in.
* Creating flow-definition grouping to be reused
in ACL, QoS ...
* Simplified VPN policy.
* Adding multicast static group to RP mappings.
* Removed native-vpn and site-role from global site
cfg, now managed within the VPN policy.
* Creating a separate list for site templates.
";
reference "draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-yang-01";
}
revision 2015-07-02 {
reference "draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-yang-00";
}
revision 2015-04-24 {
description "
* Add encryption parameters
* Adding holdtime for BFD.
* Add postal address in location
";
reference "draft-lstd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-yang-00";
}
revision 2015-02-05 {
description "Initial revision.";
reference "draft-l3vpn-service-yang-00";
}
/* Typedefs */
typedef svc-id {
type string;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
description
"Defining a type of service component
identificators.";
}
typedef template-id {
type string;
description
"Defining a type of service template
identificators.";
}
typedef placement-diversity {
type enumeration {
enum "pop-diverse" {
description
"The access must use another PoP
compared
to other accesses in the same group.";
}
enum "pe-diverse" {
description
"The access must use another PE
compared
to other accesses in the same group.";
}
}
description
"Defines a type for service placement diversity.";
}
/* Identities */
identity transport-constraint {
description
"Base identity for transport constraint.";
}
identity tc-latency {
base transport-constraint;
description
"Base identity for transport constraint
based on latency.";
}
identity tc-jitter {
base transport-constraint;
description
"Base identity for transport constraint
based on jitter.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
identity tc-bandwidth {
base transport-constraint;
description
"Base identity for transport constraint
based on bandwidth.";
}
identity tc-path-diversity {
base transport-constraint;
description
"Base identity for transport constraint
based on path diversity.";
}
identity tc-site-diversity {
base transport-constraint;
description
"Base identity for transport constraint
based on site diversity.";
}
identity management {
description
"Base identity for site management scheme.";
}
identity comanaged {
base management;
description
"Base identity for comanaged site.";
}
identity customer-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for customer managed site.";
}
identity provider-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for provider managed site.";
}
identity address-allocation-type {
description
"Base identity for address-allocation-type
for PE-CE link.";
}
identity pe-dhcp {
base address-allocation-type;
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"PE router provides DHCP service to CE.";
}
identity static-address {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"PE-CE addressing is static.";
}
identity slaac {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Use IPv6 SLAAC.";
}
/*
identity site-availability {
description
"Base identity for site availability.";
}
identity loadsharing {
base site-availability;
description
"Identity for loadsharing site.";
}
identity loadsharing-ibgp {
base loadsharing;
description
"Identity for ECMP ibgp based loadsharing site.";
}
identity loadsharing-eibgp {
base loadsharing;
description
"Identity for ECMP eibgp based loadsharing site.";
}
identity primary-backup {
base site-availability;
description
"Identity for primary-backup site.";
}
identity single-site {
base site-availability;
description
"Identity for single site.";
}
identity access-availability-type {
description
"base identity for access-availability-type";
}
identity primary-access {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
base access-availability-type;
description
"Identity for primary access type.";
}
identity backup-access {
base access-availability-type;
description
"Identity for backup access type.";
}
identity single-access {
base access-availability-type;
description
"Identity for single access type.";
}
identity loadsharing-access {
base access-availability-type;
description
"Identity for loadsharing access type.";
}
*/
identity site-role {
description
"Base identity for site type.";
}
identity any-to-any-role {
base site-role;
description
"Site in a any to any IPVPN.";
}
identity spoke-role {
base site-role;
description
"Spoke Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity hub-role {
base site-role;
description
"Hub Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity vpn-topology {
description
"Base identity for VPN topology.";
}
identity any-to-any {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for any to any VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke-disjoint {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology
where Hubs cannot talk between each other.";
}
identity multicast-tree-type {
description
"Base identity for multicast tree type.";
}
identity ssm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for SSM tree type.";
}
identity asm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for ASM tree type.";
}
identity bidir-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for BiDir tree type.";
}
identity multicast-rp-discovery-type {
description
"Base identity for rp discovery type.";
}
identity auto-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
description
"Base identity for auto-rp discovery type.";
}
identity static-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
description
"Base identity for static type.";
}
identity bsr-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
description
"Base identity for BDR discovery type.";
}
identity routing-protocol-type {
description
"Base identity for routing-protocol type.";
}
identity ospf {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for OSPF protocol type.";
}
identity bgp {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for BGP protocol type.";
}
identity static {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for static routing protocol type.";
}
identity rip {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for RIP protocol type.";
}
identity rip-ng {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for RIPng protocol type.";
}
identity vrrp {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for VRRP protocol type.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
This is to be used when LAn are directly connected
to provider Edge routers.";
}
identity direct {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for direct protocol type.
.";
}
identity protocol-type {
description
"Base identity for protocol field type.";
}
identity tcp {
base protocol-type;
description
"TCP protocol type.";
}
identity udp {
base protocol-type;
description
"UDP protocol type.";
}
identity icmp {
base protocol-type;
description
"icmp protocol type.";
}
identity icmp6 {
base protocol-type;
description
"icmp v6 protocol type.";
}
identity gre {
base protocol-type;
description
"GRE protocol type.";
}
identity ipip {
base protocol-type;
description
"IPinIP protocol type.";
}
identity hop-by-hop {
base protocol-type;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
description
"Hop by Hop IPv6 header type.";
}
identity routing {
base protocol-type;
description
"Routing IPv6 header type.";
}
identity esp {
base protocol-type;
description
"ESP header type.";
}
identity ah {
base protocol-type;
description
"AH header type.";
}
/* Groupings */
grouping vpn-service-cloud-access {
list cloud-access {
key cloud-identifier;
leaf cloud-identifier {
type string;
description
"Identification of cloud service. Local
admin meaning.";
}
list authorized-sites {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type leafref {
path "../../../../sites/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"List of authorized sites.";
}
list denied-sites {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type leafref {
path "../../../../sites/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID.";
}
description
"List of denied sites.";
}
leaf nat-enabled {
type boolean;
description
"Control if NAT is required or not.";
}
leaf customer-nat-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"NAT address to be used in case of public
or shared cloud.
This is to be used in case customer is providing
the public address.";
}
description
"Cloud access configuration.";
}
description
"grouping for vpn cloud definition";
}
grouping vpn-service-multicast {
container multicast {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enable multicast.";
}
container customer-tree-flavors {
list tree-flavor {
key type;
leaf type {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
type identityref {
base multicast-tree-type;
}
description
"Type of tree to be used.";
}
description
"List of tree flavors.";
}
description
"Type of trees used by customer.";
}
container rp {
list rp-group-mapping {
key "rp-address group";
container provider-managed {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Set to true, if the RP must be a
provider
managed node.
Set to false, if it is a customer
managed node.";
}
leaf anycast-rp {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enables anycast-RP.";
}
description
"Parameters for provider managed RP.";
}
leaf rp-address {
type union {
type inet:ipv4-address;
type inet:ipv6-address;
}
description
"Defines the address of the RendezvousPoint.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
Used if RP is customer managed.";
}
leaf group {
type union {
type inet:ipv4-address;
type inet:ipv6-address;
}
description
"Defines the address of the multicast group
handled by the RP.";
}
description
"List of RP to group mappings.";
}
leaf rp-discovery {
type identityref {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
}
description
"Type of RP discovery used.";
}
description
"RendezvousPoint parameters.";
}
description
"Multicast global parameters for the VPN service.";
}
description
"grouping for multicast vpn definition";
}
grouping vpn-service-mpls {
leaf mpls {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"The VPN is using Carrier Supporting Carrier,
and so MPLS is required.";
}
description
"grouping for mpls CsC definition";
}
grouping customer-location-info {
container location {
leaf address {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
type string;
description
"Address (number and street)
of the site.";
}
leaf zip-code {
type string;
description
"ZIP code of the site.";
}
leaf city {
type string;
description
"City of the site.";
}
leaf country-code {
type string;
description
"Country of the site.";
}
description
"Location of the site.";
}
description
"This grouping defines customer location
parameters";
}
grouping site-diversity {
container site-diversity {
leaf type {
type placement-diversity;
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
leaf-list site-group {
type uint32;
description
"IDs of group.";
}
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
description
"This grouping defines site diversity
parameters";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
grouping access-diversity {
container access-diversity {
leaf type {
type placement-diversity;
default "pe-diverse";
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
description
"This grouping defines access diversity
parameters";
}
grouping operational-requirements {
leaf requested-site-start {
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating requested date
and time
when the service at a particular site is
expected
to start";
}
leaf requested-site-stop {
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating requested date
and time
when the service at a particular site is
expected
to stop";
}
leaf actual-site-start {
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time
when the service at a particular site
actually
started";
}
leaf actual-site-stop {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time
when the service at a particular site
actually
stopped";
}
description
"This grouping defines some operational parameters
parameters";
}
grouping flow-definition {
container match-flow {
leaf dscp {
type uint8 {
range "0 .. 63";
}
description
"DSCP value.";
}
leaf tos {
type uint8 {
range "0 .. 254";
}
description
"TOS value.";
}
leaf ipv4-src-prefix {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv4 src address.";
}
leaf ipv6-src-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv6 src address.";
}
leaf ipv4-dst-prefix {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv4 dst address.";
}
leaf ipv6-dst-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"Match on IPv6 dst address.";
}
leaf l4-src-port {
type uint16;
description
"Match on layer 4 src port.";
}
leaf l4-dst-port {
type uint16;
description
"Match on layer 4 dst port.";
}
leaf protocol-field {
type union {
type uint8;
type identityref {
base protocol-type;
}
}
description
"Match on IPv4 protocol or
Ipv6 Next Header
field.";
}
description
"Describe flow matching
criterions.";
}
description
"Flow definition based on criteria.";
}
grouping site-service-basic {
leaf svc-input-bandwidth {
type uint32;
units bps;
description
"From the PE perspective, the service input
bandwidth of the connection.";
}
leaf svc-output-bandwidth {
type uint32;
units bps;
description
"From the PE perspective, the service output
bandwidth of the connection.";
}
leaf svc-mtu {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
type uint16;
units bytes;
description
"MTU at service level.
If the service is IP,
it refers to the IP MTU.";
}
description
"Defines basic service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-service-protection {
container traffic-protection {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
description
"Enables protection of PE-CE link.";
}
description
"Fast reroute service parameters
for the site.";
}
description
"Defines protection service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-service-mpls {
container mpls {
leaf signalling-type {
type enumeration {
enum "ldp" {
description
"Use LDP as signalling
protocol between PE and CE.";
}
enum "bgp" {
description
"Use BGP 3107 as signalling
protocol between PE and CE.
In this case, bgp must be also
configured
as routing-protocol.
";
}
}
description
"MPLS signalling type.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"This container is used when customer provides
MPLS based services.
This is used in case of Carrier
Supporting Carrier.";
}
description
"Defines MPLS service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-service-qos-profile {
container qos {
container qos-classification-policy {
list rules {
key id;
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"ID of the rule.";
}
uses flow-definition;
leaf target-class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the
class of service.
This identifier is internal to
the administration.";
}
description
"List of marking rules.";
}
description
"Need to express marking rules ...";
}
leaf std-qos-profile {
type string;
description
"QoS profile to be used";
}
container custom-qos-profile {
list class {
key class-id;
leaf class-id {
type string;
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"Identification of the
class of service.
This identifier is internal to
the administration.";
}
leaf rate-limit {
type uint8;
units percent;
description
"To be used if class must
be rate
limited. Expressed as
percentage of the svc-bw.";
}
leaf priority-level {
type uint8;
description
"Defines the level of the
class in
term of priority queueing.
The higher the level is the
higher
is the priority.";
}
leaf guaranteed-bw-percent {
type uint8;
units percent;
description
"To be used to define the
guaranteed
BW in percent of the svc-bw
available at the priority-level.";
}
description
"List of class of services.";
}
description
"Custom qos profile.";
}
description
"QoS configuration.";
}
description
"This grouping defines QoS parameters
for a site";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
grouping site-security-authentication {
container authentication {
description
"Authentication parameters";
}
description
"This grouping defines authentication
parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-security-encryption {
container encryption {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
description
"If true, access encryption is required.";
}
leaf layer {
type enumeration {
enum layer2 {
description
"Encryption will occur at layer2.";
}
enum layer3 {
description
"IPSec is requested.";
}
}
description
"Layer on which encryption is applied.";
}
container encryption-profile {
choice profile {
case provider-profile {
leaf profile-name {
type string;
description
"Name of the SP profile
to be applied.";
}
}
case customer-profile {
leaf algorithm {
type string;
description
"Encryption algorithm to
be used.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
choice key-type {
case psk {
leaf preshared-key {
type string;
description
"Key coming from
customer.";
}
}
case pki {
}
description
"Type of keys to be used.";
}
}
description
"Choice of profile.";
}
description
"Profile of encryption to be applied.";
}
description
"Encryption parameters.";
}
description
"This grouping defines encryption parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-attachment-bearer {
container bearer {
leaf type {
type string;
description
"Type of bearer Ethernet, DSL, Wireless ...
Operator specific.";
}
leaf bearer-reference {
type string;
description
"This is an internal reference for the
service provider.";
}
description
"Bearer specific parameters.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
To be augmented.";
}
description
"Defines physical properties of
a site attachment.";
}
grouping site-routing {
container routing-protocols {
list routing-protocol {
key type;
leaf type {
type identityref {
base routing-protocol-type;
}
description
"Type of routing protocol.";
}
container ospf {
when "../type = 'ospf'" {
description
"Only applies
when protocol is OSPF.";
}
leaf-list address-family {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
}
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
leaf area-address {
type yang:dotted-quad;
description
"Area address.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
description
"Metric of PE-CE link.";
}
list sham-link {
key target-site;
leaf target-site {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
type svc-id;
description
"Target site for the sham link
connection.
The site is referred through it's ID.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
description
"Metric of the sham link.";
}
description
"Creates a shamlink with another
site";
}
description
"OSPF specific configuration.";
}
container bgp {
when "../type = 'bgp'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is BGP.";
}
leaf autonomous-system {
type uint32;
description
"AS number.";
}
leaf-list address-family {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
}
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
description
"BGP specific configuration.";
}
container static {
when "../type = 'static'" {
description
"Only applies when protocol
is static.";
}
container cascaded-lan-prefixes {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
list ipv4-lan-prefixes {
key "lan next-hop";
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 inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Nexthop address to use at customer
side.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes for
the site.
";
}
list ipv6-lan-prefixes {
key "lan next-hop";
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 inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Nexthop address to use at
customer side.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes for the site.
";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
}
description
"Static routing
specific configuration.";
}
container rip {
when "../type = 'rip'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is RIP.";
}
leaf-list address-family {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
}
description
"Address family to be
activated.";
}
description
"RIP routing specific
configuration.";
}
container vrrp {
when "../type = 'vrrp'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is VRRP.";
}
leaf-list address-family {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
}
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
description
"VRRP routing specific configuration.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"List of routing protocols used
on the site.
Need to be augmented.";
}
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
}
description
"Grouping for routing protocols.";
}
grouping site-attachment-ip-connection {
container ip-connection {
container ipv4 {
leaf address-allocation-type {
type identityref {
base address-allocation-type;
}
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated.
Need to be detailed further.";
}
choice subnet {
case subnet-only {
leaf subnet-prefix {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Interco subnet.";
}
}
case addresses {
leaf provider-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Provider side address.";
}
leaf customer-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Customer side address.";
}
leaf mask {
type uint8 {
range "0..32";
}
description
"Subnet mask expressed
in bits";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
}
description
"Choice for addressing
customer to network link.";
}
description
"IPv4 specific parameters";
}
container ipv6 {
leaf address-allocation-type {
type string;
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated.
Need to be detailled further.";
}
choice subnet {
case subnet-only {
leaf subnet-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Interco subnet.";
}
}
case addresses {
leaf provider-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Provider side address.";
}
leaf customer-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Customer side address.";
}
leaf mask {
type uint8 {
range "0..128";
}
description
"Subnet mask expressed
in bits";
}
}
description
"Choice for addressing
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
customer to network link.";
}
description
"IPv6 specific parameters";
}
container oam {
container bfd {
leaf bfd-enabled {
type boolean;
description
"BFD activation";
}
choice holdtime {
case profile {
leaf profile-name {
type string;
description
"Service provider well
known profile.";
}
description
"Service provider well
known profile.";
}
case fixed {
leaf fixed-value {
type uint32;
units msec;
description
"Expected holdtime
expressed
in msec.";
}
}
description
"Choice for holdtime flavor.";
}
description
"Container for BFD.";
}
description
"Define the OAM used on the connection.";
}
description
"Defines connection parameters.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
description
"This grouping defines IP connection parameters.";
}
grouping site-service-multicast {
container multicast {
leaf multicast-site-type {
type enumeration {
enum receiver-only {
description
"The site has only receivers.";
}
enum source-only {
description
"The site has only sources.";
}
enum source-receiver {
description
"The site has both
sources & receivers.";
}
}
default "source-receiver";
description
"Type of multicast site.";
}
container multicast-transport-protocol {
leaf ipv4 {
type boolean;
default true;
description
"Enables ipv4 multicast transport";
}
leaf ipv6 {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enables ipv6 multicast transport";
}
description
"Defines protocol to transport multicast.";
}
leaf protocol-type {
type enumeration {
enum host {
description
"
Hosts are directly connected
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
to the provider network.
Host protocols like IGMP, MLD
are required.
";
}
enum router {
description
"
Hosts are behind a customer router.
PIM will be implemented.
";
}
enum both {
description
"Some Hosts are behind a customer
router and some others are directly
connected to the provider network.
Both host and routing protocols must be
used. Typically IGMP and PIM will be
implemented.
";
}
}
default "both";
description
"Multicast protocol type to be used
with the customer site.";
}
description
"Multicast parameters for the site.";
}
description
"Multicast parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-management {
container management {
leaf type {
type identityref {
base management;
}
description
"Management type of the connection.";
}
leaf management-transport {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
description
"Transport protocol used for management.";
}
leaf address {
type union {
type inet:ipv4-address;
type inet:ipv6-address;
}
description
"Management address";
}
description
"Management configuration";
}
description
"Management parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-vpn-policy {
container vpn-policy {
list entries {
key id;
leaf id {
type svc-id;
description
"Unique identifier for
the policy entry.";
}
container filter {
container lan-prefixes {
list ipv4-lan-prefixes {
key lan;
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Lan prefixes.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes
for the site.
";
}
list ipv6-lan-prefixes {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
key lan;
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Lan prefixes.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes
for the site.
";
}
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
}
leaf-list lan-tag {
type string;
description
"List of lan-tags to be matched.";
}
description
"If used, it permit to split site LANs
among multiple VPNs.
If no filter used, all the LANs will be
part of the same VPNs with the same
role.";
}
container vpn {
leaf vpn {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/vpn-svc/vpn-id";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Reference to an IPVPN.";
}
leaf site-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
mandatory true;
description
"Role of the site in the IPVPN.";
}
description
"List of VPNs the LAN is associated to.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"List of entries for export policy.";
}
description
"VPN policy.";
}
description
"VPN policy parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-maximum-routes {
container maximum-routes {
list address-family {
key af;
leaf af {
type identityref {
base rt:address-family;
}
description
"Address-family.";
}
leaf maximum-routes {
type uint32;
description
"Maximum prefixes the VRF can
accept for this
address-family.";
}
description
"List of address families.";
}
description
"Define maximum-routes for the VRF.";
}
description
"Define maximum-routes for the site.";
}
grouping site-security {
container security {
uses site-security-authentication;
uses site-security-encryption;
description
"Site specific security parameters.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
}
description
"Grouping for security parameters.";
}
grouping site-service {
container service {
uses site-service-basic;
uses site-service-qos-profile;
uses site-service-protection;
uses site-service-mpls;
uses site-service-multicast;
description
"Service parameters on the attachement.";
}
description
"Grouping for service parameters.";
}
grouping transport-constraint {
list constraint-list {
key constraint-type;
leaf constraint-type {
type identityref {
base transport-constraint;
}
description
"Constraint type to be applied.";
}
leaf constraint-opaque-value {
type string;
description
"Opaque value that can be used to
specify constraint parameters.";
}
description
"List of constraints";
}
description
"Grouping for transport constraint.";
}
grouping transport-constraints {
container transport-constraints {
container unicast-transport-constraints {
list constraints {
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
key constraint-id;
leaf constraint-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Defines an ID for the constraint
rule.";
}
leaf site1 {
type svc-id;
description
"The ID refers to one site end.";
}
leaf site2 {
type svc-id;
description
"The ID refers to the other
site end.";
}
uses transport-constraint;
description
"List of constraints.
Constraints are bidirectional.";
}
description
"Unicast transport constraints.";
}
container multicast-transport-constraints {
list constraints {
key constraint-id;
leaf constraint-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Defines an ID for the constraint
rule.";
}
leaf src-site {
type svc-id;
description
"The ID refers to source site.";
}
leaf dst-site {
type svc-id;
description
"The ID refers to the receiver
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
site.";
}
uses transport-constraint;
description
"List of constraints.
Constraints are unidirectional.";
}
description
"Multicast transport constraints.";
}
description
"transport constraints.";
}
description
"Grouping for transport constraints
description.";
}
/* Main blocks */
container l3vpn-svc {
list vpn-svc {
key vpn-id;
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"VPN identifier. Local administration meaning.";
}
leaf customer-name {
type string;
description
"Name of the customer.";
}
leaf topology {
type identityref {
base vpn-topology;
}
default "any-to-any";
description
"VPN topology.";
}
uses vpn-service-cloud-access;
uses vpn-service-multicast;
uses vpn-service-mpls;
uses transport-constraints;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
description "
List of VPN services.
";
}
list sites {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifier of the site.";
}
leaf apply-template {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/site-templates/site-template-id";
}
description
"Reference to template to be applied.
The template is called through it's ID.";
}
uses operational-requirements;
uses customer-location-info;
uses site-diversity;
uses site-management;
uses site-vpn-policy;
uses site-maximum-routes;
uses site-security;
uses site-service;
uses site-routing;
container site-network-accesses {
list site-network-access {
key site-network-access-id;
leaf site-network-access-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifier for the access";
}
leaf apply-template {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/site-templates/site-template-id";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
"Reference to template to be applied.
The template is called through it's ID.";
}
uses access-diversity;
uses site-attachment-bearer;
uses site-attachment-ip-connection;
uses site-security;
uses site-service;
uses site-routing;
container availability {
leaf access-priority {
type uint32;
default 1;
description
"Defines the priority for the access.
The highest the priority value is,
the highest the
preference of the access is.";
}
description
"Availability parameters
(used for multihoming)";
}
description
"List of accesses for a site.";
}
description
"List of accesses for a site.";
}
description "List of sites.";
}
list site-templates {
key site-template-id;
leaf site-template-id {
type template-id;
description
"Identifier of the site.";
}
uses operational-requirements;
uses customer-location-info;
uses site-diversity;
uses site-management;
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
uses site-vpn-policy;
uses site-maximum-routes;
uses site-security;
uses site-service;
uses site-routing;
container site-network-access {
uses access-diversity;
uses site-attachment-bearer;
uses site-attachment-ip-connection;
uses site-security;
uses site-service;
uses site-routing;
container availability {
leaf access-priority {
type uint32;
default 1;
description
"Defines the priority for the access.
The highest the priority value is,
the highest the
preference of the access is.";
}
description
"Availability parameters
(used for multihoming)";
}
description
"Parameters of the attachment.";
}
description "List of sites.";
}
description
"Main container for L3VPN service configuration.";
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
9. Security Considerations
TBD.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
10. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Qin Wu, Maxim Klyus, Luis Miguel Contreras, Gregory Mirsky,
Zitao Wang, Jing Zhao, Kireeti Kompella, Eric Rosen, Aijun Wang,
Kenichi Ogaki and Andrew Leu for the contributions to the document.
11. IANA Considerations
TBD.
12. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/
RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[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,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4110>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[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, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4577>.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, DOI 10.17487/
RFC4862, September 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<http://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,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg December 2015
[RFC6513] Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6513>.
Appendix A. Example: NETCONF <get> Reply
This section gives an example of a reply to the NETCONF <get> request
for a device that implements the data model defined in this document.
The example is written in XML.
Authors' Addresses
Stephane Litkowski
Orange Business Service
Email: stephane.litkowski@orange.com
Rob Shakir
BT
Email: rob.shakir@bt.com
Luis Tomotaki
Verizon
Email: luis.tomotaki@verizon.com
Kevin D'Souza
ATT
Email: kd6913@att.com
Litkowski, et al. Expires June 17, 2016 [Page 100]
