YANG Data Model for Network Instances
RFC 8529
| Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (March 2019) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Lou Berger , Christian Hopps , Acee Lindem , Dean Bogdanović , Xufeng Liu | ||
| Last updated | 2019-03-06 | ||
| Replaces | draft-rtgyangdt-rtgwg-ni-model | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Yang Validation | ☯ 0 errors, 0 warnings | ||
| Reviews |
SECDIR Last Call review
(of
-06)
Has Issues
RTGDIR Early review
(of
-02)
Has Issues
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-02)
Not Ready
|
||
| Additional resources |
Yang catalog entry for ietf-network-instance@2018-03-20.yang
Yang impact analysis for draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model Mailing list discussion |
||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Yingzhen Qu | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2018-01-16 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 8529 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Alia Atlas | ||
| Send notices to | Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com> | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - Actions Needed | |
| IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack |
RFC 8529
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Berger
Request for Comments: 8529 C. Hopps
Category: Standards Track LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
ISSN: 2070-1721 A. Lindem
Cisco Systems
D. Bogdanovic
X. Liu
Volta Networks
March 2019
YANG Data Model for Network Instances
Abstract
This document defines a network instance module. This module can be
used to manage the virtual resource partitioning that may be present
on a network device. Examples of common industry terms for virtual
resource partitioning are VPN Routing and Forwarding (VRF) instances
and Virtual Switch Instances (VSIs).
The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in RFC 8342.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8529.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Network Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. NI Types and Mount Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.1. Well-Known Mount Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.2. NI Type Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2. NIs and Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3. Network Instance Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4. Network Instance Instantiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Network Instance Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Appendix A. Example NI Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.1. Configuration Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.2. State Data - Non-NMDA Version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
A.3. State Data - NMDA Version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
1. Introduction
This document defines the second of two new modules that are defined
to support the configuration and operation of network devices that
allow for the partitioning of resources from both, or either,
management and networking perspectives. Both leverage the YANG
functionality enabled by YANG Schema Mount [RFC8528].
The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture defined in [RFC8342].
The first form of resource partitioning provides a logical
partitioning of a network device where each partition is separately
managed as essentially an independent network element that is
"hosted" by the base network device. These hosted network elements
are referred to as logical network elements, or LNEs, and are
supported by the logical-network-element module defined in [RFC8530].
That module is used to identify LNEs and associate resources from the
network device with each LNE. LNEs themselves are represented in
YANG as independent network devices; each is accessed independently.
Examples of vendor terminology for an LNE include logical system or
logical router and virtual switch, chassis, or fabric.
The second form, which is defined in this document, provides support
for what are commonly referred to as VPN Routing and Forwarding (VRF)
instances as well as Virtual Switch Instances (VSI); see [RFC4026]
and [RFC4664]. In this form of resource partitioning, multiple
control-plane and forwarding/bridging instances are provided by and
managed through a single (physical or logical) network device. This
form of resource partitioning is referred to as a Network Instance
(NI) and is supported by the network instance module defined below.
Configuration and operation of each network instance is always via
the network device and the network instance module.
One notable difference between the LNE model and the NI model is that
the NI model provides a framework for VRF and VSI management. This
document envisions the separate definition of models specific to VRF
and VSI -- i.e., L3 and L2 VPN -- technology. An example of such can
be found in the emerging L3VPN model defined in [YANG-L3VPN] and the
examples discussed below.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
1.1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
Readers are expected to be familiar with terms and concepts of YANG
[RFC7950] and YANG Schema Mount [RFC8528].
This document uses the graphical representation of data models
defined in [RFC8340].
2. Overview
In this document, we consider network devices that support protocols
and functions defined within the IETF -- e.g., routers, firewalls,
and hosts. Such devices may be physical or virtual, e.g., a classic
router with custom hardware or one residing within a server-based
virtual machine implementing a virtual network function (VNF). Each
device may subdivide their resources into logical network elements
(LNEs), each of which provides a managed logical device. Examples of
vendor terminology for an LNE include logical system or logical
router and virtual switch, chassis, or fabric. Each LNE may also
support VRF and VSI functions, which are referred to below as network
instances (NIs). This breakdown is represented in Figure 1.
,''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''`.
| Network Device (Physical or Virtual) |
| ..................... ..................... |
| : Logical Network : : Logical Network : |
| : Element : : Element : |
| :+-----+-----+-----+: :+-----+-----+-----+: |
| :| Net | Net | Net |: :| Net | Net | Net |: |
| :|Inst.|Inst.|Inst.|: :|Inst.|Inst.|Inst.|: |
| :+-----+-----+-----+: :+-----+-----+-----+: |
| : | | | | | | : : | | | | | | : |
| :..|.|...|.|...|.|..: :..|.|...|.|...|.|..: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
`'''|'|'''|'|'''|'|'''''''''|'|'''|'|'''|'|'''''
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Interfaces Interfaces
Figure 1: Module Element Relationships
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
A model for LNEs is described in [RFC8530], and the model for NIs is
covered in Section 3 of this document.
The current interface management model [RFC8343] is impacted by the
definition of LNEs and NIs. This document and [RFC8530] define
augmentations to the interface module to support LNEs and NIs.
The network instance model supports the configuration of VRFs and
VSIs. Each instance is supported by information that relates to the
device -- for example, the route target used when advertising VRF
routes via the mechanisms defined in [RFC4364], and information that
relates to the internal operation of the NI, such as for routing
protocols [RFC8349] and OSPF [YANG-OSPF]. This document defines the
network instance module that provides a basis for the management of
both types of information.
NI information that relates to the device, including the assignment
of interfaces to NIs, is defined as part of this document. The
defined module also provides a placeholder for the definition of
NI-technology-specific information both at the device level and for
NI internal operation. Information related to NI internal operation
is supported via schema mount [RFC8528] and mounting appropriate
modules under the mount point. Well-known mount points are defined
for L3VPN, L2VPN, and L2+L3VPN NI types.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
3. Network Instances
The network instance container is used to represent VRFs and VSIs.
VRFs and VSIs are commonly used to isolate routing and switching
domains -- for example, to create virtual private networks, each with
their own active protocols and routing/switching policies. The model
supports both core/provider and virtual instances. Core/provider
instance information is accessible at the top level of the server,
while virtual instance information is accessible under the root
schema mount points.
module: ietf-network-instance
+--rw network-instances
+--rw network-instance* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw description? string
+--rw (ni-type)?
+--rw (root-type)
+--:(vrf-root)
| +--mp vrf-root
+--:(vsi-root)
| +--mp vsi-root
+--:(vv-root)
+--mp vv-root
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface:
+--rw bind-ni-name? -> /network-instances/network-instance/name
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4:
+--rw bind-ni-name? -> /network-instances/network-instance/name
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6:
+--rw bind-ni-name? -> /network-instances/network-instance/name
notifications:
+---n bind-ni-name-failed
+--ro name -> /if:interfaces/interface/name
+--ro interface
| +--ro bind-ni-name?
| -> /if:interfaces/interface/ni:bind-ni-name
+--ro ipv4
| +--ro bind-ni-name?
| -> /if:interfaces/interface/ip:ipv4/ni:bind-ni-name
+--ro ipv6
| +--ro bind-ni-name?
| -> /if:interfaces/interface/ip:ipv6/ni:bind-ni-name
+--ro error-info? string
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
A network instance is identified by a "name" string. This string is
used both as an index within the network instance module and to
associate resources with a network instance, as shown above in the
interface augmentation. The ni-type and root-type choice statements
are used to support different types of L2 and L3 VPN technologies.
The bind-ni-name-failed notification is used in certain failure
cases.
3.1. NI Types and Mount Points
The network instance module is structured to facilitate the
definition of information models for specific types of VRFs and VSIs
using augmentations. For example, the information needed to support
L2VPN, such as VPLS and EVPN, are likely to be quite different.
Example models under development that could be restructured to take
advantage on NIs include models for L3VPNs [YANG-L3VPN] and L2VPNs
[YANG-L2VPN].
Documents defining new YANG data models for the support of specific
types of network instances should augment the network instance
module. The basic structure that should be used for such
augmentations includes a case statement with containers for
configuration and state data and, when needed, a type-specific mount
point. Generally, NI types are expected to not need to define type-
specific mount points but rather reuse one of the well-known mount
points, as defined in the next section. The following is an example
type-specific augmentation:
augment "/ni:network-instances/ni:network-instance/ni:ni-type" {
case l3vpn {
container l3vpn {
...
}
container l3vpn-state {
...
}
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
3.1.1. Well-Known Mount Points
YANG Schema Mount [RFC8528] identifies mount points by name within a
module. This definition allows for the definition of mount points
whose schema can be shared across NI types. As discussed above,
ni-types largely differ in the configuration information needed in
the core/top-level instance to support the NI, rather than in the
information represented within an NI. This allows the use of shared
mount points across certain NI types.
The expectation is that there are actually very few different schemas
that need to be defined to support NIs for an implementation. In
particular, it is expected that the following three forms of NI
schema are needed, and each can be defined with a well-known mount
point that can be reused by future modules defining NI types.
The three well-known mount points are:
vrf-root
vrf-root is intended for use with L3VPN-type NI types.
vsi-root
vsi-root is intended for use with L2VPN-type Ni types.
vv-root
vv-root is intended for use with NI types that simultaneously
support L2VPN bridging and L3VPN routing capabilities.
Future model definitions should use the above mount points whenever
possible. When a well-known mount point isn't appropriate, a model
may define a type-specific mount point via augmentation.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
3.1.2. NI Type Example
The following is an example of an L3VPN VRF using a hypothetical
augmentation to the network instance schema defined in [YANG-L3VPN].
More detailed examples can be found in Appendix A.
module: ietf-network-instance
+--rw network-instances
+--rw network-instance* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw description? string
+--rw (ni-type)?
| +--:(l3vpn)
| +--rw l3vpn:l3vpn
| | ... // config data
| +--ro l3vpn:l3vpn-state
| | ... // state data
+--rw (root-type)
+--:(vrf-root)
+--mp vrf-root
+--rw rt:routing/
| +--rw router-id? yang:dotted-quad
| +--rw control-plane-protocols
| +--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name]
| +--rw ospf:ospf
| +--rw area* [area-id]
| +--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| +--rw name if:interface-ref
| +--rw cost? uint16
+--ro if:interfaces@
| ...
This shows YANG Routing Management [RFC8349] and YANG OSPF
[YANG-OSPF] as mounted modules. The mounted modules can reference
interface information via a parent-reference to the containers
defined in [RFC8343].
3.2. NIs and Interfaces
Interfaces are a crucial part of any network device's configuration
and operational state. They generally include a combination of raw
physical interfaces, link-layer interfaces, addressing configuration,
and logical interfaces that may not be tied to any physical
interface. Several system services and Layer 2 and Layer 3 protocols
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
may also associate configuration or operational state data with
different types of interfaces (these relationships are not shown for
simplicity). The interface management model is defined by [RFC8343].
As shown below, the network instance module augments the existing
interface management model by adding a name that is used on interface
or sub-interface types to identify an associated network instance.
Similarly, this name is also added for IPv4 and IPv6 types, as
defined in [RFC8344].
The following is an example of envisioned usage. The interfaces
container includes a number of commonly used components as examples:
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw ip:ipv4!
| | +--rw ip:enabled? boolean
| | +--rw ip:forwarding? boolean
| | +--rw ip:mtu? uint16
| | +--rw ip:address* [ip]
| | | +--rw ip:ip inet:ipv4-address-no-zone
| | | +--rw (ip:subnet)
| | | +--:(ip:prefix-length)
| | | | +--rw ip:prefix-length? uint8
| | | +--:(ip:netmask)
| | | +--rw ip:netmask? yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw ip:neighbor* [ip]
| | | +--rw ip:ip inet:ipv4-address-no-zone
| | | +--rw ip:link-layer-address yang:phys-address
| | +--rw ni:bind-network-instance-name? string
| +--rw ni:bind-network-instance-name? string
The "ietf-interfaces" module [RFC8343] is structured to include all
interfaces in a flat list, without regard to virtual instances (e.g.,
VRFs) supported on the device. The bind-network-instance-name leaf
provides the association between an interface and its associated NI
(e.g., VRF or VSI). Note that as currently defined, to assign an
interface to both an LNE and an NI, the interface would first be
assigned to the LNE using the mechanisms defined in [RFC8530] and
then, within that LNE's interface module, the LNE's representation of
that interface would be assigned to an NI.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
3.3. Network Instance Management
Modules that may be used to represent network instance information
will be available under the "root" mount point specific to the
ni-type. The "shared-schema" method defined in the "ietf-yang-
schema-mount" module [RFC8528] MUST be used to identify accessible
modules. A future version of this document could relax this
requirement. Mounted modules SHOULD be defined with access, via the
appropriate schema mount parent-references [RFC8528], to device
resources such as interfaces. An implementation MAY choose to
restrict parent-referenced information to information related to a
specific instance. For example, it might only allow references to
interfaces that have a "bind-network-instance-name" that is identical
to the instance's "name".
All modules that represent control-plane and data-plane information
may be present at the "root" mount point and accessible via paths
modified per [RFC8528]. The list of available modules is expected to
be implementation dependent, as is the method used by an
implementation to support NIs.
For example, the following could be used to define the data
organization of the example NI shown in Section 3.1.2:
"ietf-yang-schema-mount:schema-mounts": {
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-network-instance",
"label": "vrf-root",
"shared-schema": {
"parent-reference": [
"/*[namespace-uri() = 'urn:ietf:...:ietf-interfaces']"
]
}
}
]
}
Module data identified according to the ietf-yang-schema-mount module
will be instantiated under the mount point identified under
"mount-point". These modules will be able to reference information
for nodes belonging to top-level modules that are identified under
"parent-reference". Parent-referenced information is available to
clients via their top-level paths only and not under the associated
mount point.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
To allow a client to understand the previously mentioned instance
restrictions on parent-referenced information, an implementation MAY
represent such restrictions in the "parent-reference" leaf-list. For
example:
"namespace": [
{
"prefix": "if",
"uri": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
},
{
"prefix": "ni",
"uri": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance"
}
],
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-network-instance",
"label": "vrf-root",
"shared-schema": {
"parent-reference": [
"/if:interfaces/if:interface
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]",
"/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]",
"/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]"
]
}
}
],
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
The same such "parent-reference" restrictions for non-NMDA
implementations can be represented based on [RFC8343] and [RFC8344]
as:
"namespace": [
{
"prefix": "if",
"uri": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
},
{
"prefix": "ni",
"uri": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance"
}
],
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-network-instance",
"label": "vrf-root",
"shared-schema": {
"parent-reference": [
"/if:interfaces/if:interface
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]",
"/if:interfaces-state/if:interface
[if:name = /if:interfaces/if:interface
[ni:bind-ni-name = current()/../ni:name]/if:name]",
"/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]",
"/if:interfaces-state/if:interface/ip:ipv4
[if:name = /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4
[ni:bind-ni-name = current()/../ni:name]/if:name]",
"/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6
[ni:bind-network-instance-name = current()/../ni:name]",
"/if:interfaces-state/if:interface/ip:ipv6
[if:name = /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6
[ni:bind-ni-name = current()/../ni:name]/if:name]"
]
}
}
],
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
3.4. Network Instance Instantiation
Network instances may be controlled by clients using existing list
operations. When a list entry is created, a new instance is
instantiated. The models mounted under an NI root are expected to be
dependent on the server implementation. When a list entry is
deleted, an existing network instance is destroyed. For more
information, see Section 7.8.6 of [RFC7950].
Once instantiated, host network device resources can be associated
with the new NI. As previously mentioned, this document augments
ietf-interfaces with the bind-ni-name leaf to support such
associations for interfaces. When a bind-ni-name is set to a valid
NI name, an implementation MUST take whatever steps are internally
necessary to assign the interface to the NI or provide an error
message (defined below) with an indication of why the assignment
failed. It is possible for the assignment to fail while processing
the set operation or after asynchronous processing. Error
notification in the latter case is supported via a notification.
4. Security Considerations
The YANG modules specified in this document define a schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC8446].
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or
RESTCONF protocol operations and content.
There are two different sets of security considerations to consider
in the context of this document. One set is security related to
information contained within mounted modules. The security
considerations for mounted modules are not substantively changed
based on the information being accessible within the context of an
NI. For example, when considering the modules defined in [RFC8349],
the security considerations identified in that document are equally
applicable, whether those modules are accessed at a server's root or
under an NI instance's root node.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
The second area for consideration is information contained in the NI
module itself. NI information represents network configuration and
route distribution policy information. As such, the security of this
information is important, but it is fundamentally no different than
any other interface or routing configuration information that has
already been covered in [RFC8343] and [RFC8349].
The vulnerable "config true" parameters and subtrees are the
following:
/network-instances/network-instance: This list specifies the network
instances and the related control plane protocols configured on a
device.
/if:interfaces/if:interface/*/bind-network-instance-name: This leaf
indicates the NI instance to which an interface is assigned.
Unauthorized access to any of these lists can adversely affect the
routing subsystem of both the local device and the network. This may
lead to network malfunctions, delivery of packets to inappropriate
destinations, and other problems.
5. IANA Considerations
This document registers a URI in the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688].
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document registers a YANG module in the "YANG Module Names"
registry [RFC6020].
name: ietf-network-instance
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance
prefix: ni
reference: RFC 8529
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
6. Network Instance Model
The structure of the model defined in this document is described by
the YANG module below.
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-network-instance@2019-01-21.yang"
module ietf-network-instance {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance";
prefix ni;
// import some basic types
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
reference
"RFC 8343: A YANG Data Model for Interface Management";
}
import ietf-ip {
prefix ip;
reference
"RFC 8344: A YANG Data Model for IP Management";
}
import ietf-yang-schema-mount {
prefix yangmnt;
reference
"RFC 8528: YANG Schema Mount";
}
organization
"IETF Routing Area (rtgwg) Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/rtgwg>
WG List: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
Author: Lou Berger
<mailto:lberger@labn.net>
Author: Christian Hopps
<mailto:chopps@chopps.org>
Author: Acee Lindem
<mailto:acee@cisco.com>
Author: Dean Bogdanovic
<mailto:ivandean@gmail.com>";
description
"This module is used to support multiple network instances
within a single physical or virtual device. Network
instances are commonly known as VRFs (VPN Routing and
Forwarding) and VSIs (Virtual Switching Instances).
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL',
'SHALL NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED',
'NOT RECOMMENDED', 'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this document
are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 (RFC 2119)
(RFC 8174) when, and only when, they appear in all capitals,
as shown here.
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD
License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8529; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2019-01-21 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC 8529";
}
// top-level device definition statements
container network-instances {
description
"Network instances, each of which consists of
VRFs and/or VSIs.";
reference
"RFC 8349: A YANG Data Model for Routing Management";
list network-instance {
key "name";
description
"List of network instances.";
leaf name {
type string;
mandatory true;
description
"device-scoped identifier for the network
instance.";
}
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
default "true";
description
"Flag indicating whether or not the network
instance is enabled.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Description of the network instance
and its intended purpose.";
}
choice ni-type {
description
"This node serves as an anchor point for different types
of network instances. Each 'case' is expected to
differ in terms of the information needed in the
parent/core to support the NI and may differ in their
mounted-schema definition. When the mounted schema is
not expected to be the same for a specific type of NI,
a mount point should be defined.";
}
choice root-type {
mandatory true;
description
"Well-known mount points.";
container vrf-root {
description
"Container for mount point.";
yangmnt:mount-point "vrf-root" {
description
"Root for L3VPN-type models. This will typically
not be an inline-type mount point.";
}
}
container vsi-root {
description
"Container for mount point.";
yangmnt:mount-point "vsi-root" {
description
"Root for L2VPN-type models. This will typically
not be an inline-type mount point.";
}
}
container vv-root {
description
"Container for mount point.";
yangmnt:mount-point "vv-root" {
description
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"Root models that support both L2VPN-type bridging
and L3VPN-type routing. This will typically
not be an inline-type mount point.";
}
}
}
}
}
// augment statements
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface" {
description
"Add a node for the identification of the network
instance associated with the information configured
on a interface.
Note that a standard error will be returned if the
identified leafref isn't present. If an interface cannot
be assigned for any other reason, the operation SHALL fail
with an error-tag of 'operation-failed' and an
error-app-tag of 'ni-assignment-failed'. A meaningful
error-info that indicates the source of the assignment
failure SHOULD also be provided.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/network-instances/network-instance/name";
}
description
"Network instance to which an interface is bound.";
}
}
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4" {
description
"Add a node for the identification of the network
instance associated with the information configured
on an IPv4 interface.
Note that a standard error will be returned if the
identified leafref isn't present. If an interface cannot
be assigned for any other reason, the operation SHALL fail
with an error-tag of 'operation-failed' and an
error-app-tag of 'ni-assignment-failed'. A meaningful
error-info that indicates the source of the assignment
failure SHOULD also be provided.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/network-instances/network-instance/name";
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
}
description
"Network instance to which IPv4 interface is bound.";
}
}
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6" {
description
"Add a node for the identification of the network
instance associated with the information configured
on an IPv6 interface.
Note that a standard error will be returned if the
identified leafref isn't present. If an interface cannot
be assigned for any other reason, the operation SHALL fail
with an error-tag of 'operation-failed' and an
error-app-tag of 'ni-assignment-failed'. A meaningful
error-info that indicates the source of the assignment
failure SHOULD also be provided.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/network-instances/network-instance/name";
}
description
"Network instance to which IPv6 interface is bound.";
}
}
// notification statements
notification bind-ni-name-failed {
description
"Indicates an error in the association of an interface to an
NI. Only generated after success is initially returned when
bind-ni-name is set.
Note: Some errors may need to be reported for multiple
associations, e.g., a single error may need to be reported
for an IPv4 and an IPv6 bind-ni-name.
At least one container with a bind-ni-name leaf MUST be
included in this notification.";
leaf name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface/if:name";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Contains the interface name associated with the
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
failure.";
}
container interface {
description
"Generic interface type.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface"
+ "/ni:bind-ni-name";
}
description
"Contains the bind-ni-name associated with the
failure.";
}
}
container ipv4 {
description
"IPv4 interface type.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4/ni:bind-ni-name";
}
description
"Contains the bind-ni-name associated with the
failure.";
}
}
container ipv6 {
description
"IPv6 interface type.";
leaf bind-ni-name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv6"
+ "/ni:bind-ni-name";
}
description
"Contains the bind-ni-name associated with the
failure.";
}
}
leaf error-info {
type string;
description
"Optionally, indicates the source of the assignment
failure.";
}
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
<CODE ENDS>
7. References
7.1. 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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
[RFC8343] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface
Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8343>.
[RFC8344] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for IP Management",
RFC 8344, DOI 10.17487/RFC8344, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8344>.
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
[RFC8528] Bjorklund, M. and L. Lhotka, "YANG Schema Mount",
RFC 8528, DOI 10.17487/RFC8528, March 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8528>.
7.2. Informative References
[RFC4026] Andersson, L. and T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual
Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4026, March 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4026>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC4664] Andersson, L., Ed. and E. Rosen, Ed., "Framework for Layer
2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 4664,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4664, September 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4664>.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
[RFC8349] Lhotka, L., Lindem, A., and Y. Qu, "A YANG Data Model for
Routing Management (NMDA Version)", RFC 8349,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8349, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8349>.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
[RFC8530] Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D., and X.
Liu, "YANG Model for Logical Network Elements", RFC 8530,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8530, March 2019.
[YANG-L2VPN]
Shah, H., Brissette, P., Chen, I., Hussain, I., Wen, B.,
and K. Tiruveedhula, "YANG Data Model for MPLS-based
L2VPN", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang-09,
October 2018.
[YANG-L3VPN]
Jain, D., Patel, K., Brissette, P., Li, Z., Zhuang, S.,
Liu, X., Haas, J., Esale, S., and B. Wen, "Yang Data Model
for BGP/MPLS L3 VPNs", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-bess-
l3vpn-yang-04, October 2018.
[YANG-NETWORK]
Lindem, A., Berger, L., Bogdanovic, D., and C. Hopps,
"Network Device YANG Logical Organization", Work in
Progress, draft-ietf-rtgwg-device-model-02, March 2017.
[YANG-OSPF]
Yeung, D., Qu, Y., Zhang, Z., Chen, I., and A. Lindem,
"YANG Data Model for OSPF Protocol", Work in Progress,
draft-ietf-ospf-yang-21, January 2019.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
Appendix A. Example NI Usage
The following subsections provide example uses of NIs.
A.1. Configuration Data
The following shows an example where two customer-specific network
instances are configured:
{
"ietf-network-instance:network-instances": {
"network-instance": [
{
"name": "vrf-red",
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-routing:routing": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.1",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "vrf-blue",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 25]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-routing:routing": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.2",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth2",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
}
]
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth0",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.10",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 26]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::10",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
},
"ietf-network-instance:bind-network-instance-name": "vrf-red"
},
{
"name": "eth2",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 27]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
},
"ietf-network-instance:bind-network-instance-name":
"vrf-blue"
}
]
},
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "john",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
}
}
A.2. State Data - Non-NMDA Version
The following shows state data for the configuration example above
based on [RFC8343], [RFC8344], and [RFC8349].
{
"ietf-network-instance:network-instances": {
"network-instance": [
{
"name": "vrf-red",
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 28]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing",
"conformance-type": "implement"
}
]
},
"ietf-routing:routing-state": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.1",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "vrf-blue",
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 29]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing",
"conformance-type": "implement"
}
]
},
"ietf-routing:routing-state": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.2",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth2",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
}
]
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 30]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces-state": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth0",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C0",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.10",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::10",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C1",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 31]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "eth2",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C2",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
}
]
},
"ietf-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2018-07-03",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 32]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
},
{
"name": "ietf-inet-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-inet-types",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"name": "ietf-interfaces",
"revision": "2018-02-20",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2018-01-09",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-network-instance",
"revision": "2018-02-03",
"feature": [
"bind-network-instance-name"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-system",
"revision": "2014-08-06",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 33]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-schema-mount",
"revision": "2019-01-14",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-schema-mount",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types",
"conformance-type": "import"
}
]
},
"ietf-yang-schema-mount:schema-mounts": {
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-network-instance",
"label": "vrf-root",
"shared-schema": {
"parent-reference": [
"/*[namespace-uri() = 'urn:ietf:...:ietf-interfaces']"
]
}
}
]
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 34]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
A.3. State Data - NMDA Version
The following shows state data for the configuration example above
based on [RFC8343], [RFC8344], and [RFC8349].
{
"ietf-network-instance:network-instances": {
"network-instance": [
{
"name": "vrf-red",
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-yang-library:yang-library": {
"content-id": "41e2ab5dc325f6d86f743e8da3de323f1a61a801",
"module-set": [
{
"name": "ni-modules",
"module": [
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing"
}
],
"import-only-module": [
{
"name": "ietf-inet-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-inet-types"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types"
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 35]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores",
"revision": "2018-02-14",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
}
]
}
],
"schema": [
{
"name": "ni-schema",
"module-set": [ "ni-modules" ]
}
],
"datastore": [
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:running",
"schema": "ni-schema"
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:operational",
"schema": "ni-schema"
}
]
},
"ietf-routing:routing": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.1",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 36]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "vrf-blue",
"vrf-root": {
"ietf-yang-library:yang-library": {
"checksum": "41e2ab5dc325f6d86f743e8da3de323f1a61a801",
"module-set": [
{
"name": "ni-modules",
"module": [
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing",
"conformance-type": "implement"
}
],
"import-only-module": [
{
"name": "ietf-inet-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-inet-types"
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 37]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types"
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores",
"revision": "2018-02-14",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
}
]
}
],
"schema": [
{
"name": "ni-schema",
"module-set": [ "ni-modules" ]
}
],
"datastore": [
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:running",
"schema": "ni-schema"
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:operational",
"schema": "ni-schema"
}
]
},
"ietf-routing:routing": {
"router-id": "192.0.2.2",
"control-plane-protocols": {
"control-plane-protocol": [
{
"type": "ietf-routing:ospf",
"name": "1",
"ietf-ospf:ospf": {
"af": "ipv4",
"areas": {
"area": [
{
"area-id": "203.0.113.1",
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 38]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"name": "eth2",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
}
]
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth0",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C0",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.10",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::10",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 39]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C1",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "eth2",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"oper-status": "up",
"phys-address": "00:01:02:A1:B1:C2",
"statistics": {
"discontinuity-time": "2017-06-26T12:34:56-05:00"
},
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
}
]
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 40]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
},
"ietf-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"ietf-yang-library:yang-library": {
"content-id": "75a43df9bd56b92aacc156a2958fbe12312fb285",
"module-set": [
{
"name": "host-modules",
"module": [
{
"name": "ietf-interfaces",
"revision": "2018-02-20",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2018-01-09",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip"
},
{
"name": "ietf-network-instance",
"revision": "2018-02-03",
"feature": [
"bind-network-instance-name"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-network-instance"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2019-01-24",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf"
},
{
"name": "ietf-routing",
"revision": "2018-03-13",
"namespace":
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 41]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-routing"
},
{
"name": "ietf-system",
"revision": "2014-08-06",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2019-01-04",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-schema-mount",
"revision": "2019-01-14",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-schema-mount"
}
],
"import-only-module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2018-07-03",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type"
},
{
"name": "ietf-inet-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-inet-types"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types"
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores",
"revision": "2018-02-14",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
}
]
}
],
"schema": [
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 42]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
{
"name": "host-schema",
"module-set": [ "host-modules" ]
}
],
"datastore": [
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:running",
"schema": "host-schema"
},
{
"name": "ietf-datastores:operational",
"schema": "host-schema"
}
]
},
"ietf-yang-schema-mount:schema-mounts": {
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-network-instance",
"label": "vrf-root",
"shared-schema": {
"parent-reference": [
"/*[namespace-uri() = 'urn:ietf:...:ietf-interfaces']"
]
}
}
]
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 43]
RFC 8529 YANG NIs March 2019
Acknowledgments
The Routing Area Yang Architecture design team members included Acee
Lindem, Anees Shaikh, Christian Hopps, Dean Bogdanovic, Lou Berger,
Qin Wu, Rob Shakir, Stephane Litkowski, and Yan Gang. Martin
Bjorklund and John Scudder provided useful review comments.
This document was motivated by, and derived from, "Network Device
YANG Logical Organization" [YANG-NETWORK].
Thanks for Area Director and IETF last-call comments from Alia Atlas,
Liang Xia, Benoit Claise, and Adam Roach.
Authors' Addresses
Lou Berger
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: lberger@labn.net
Christian Hopps
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: chopps@chopps.org
Acee Lindem
Cisco Systems
301 Midenhall Way
Cary, NC 27513
United States of America
Email: acee@cisco.com
Dean Bogdanovic
Volta Networks
Email: ivandean@gmail.com
Xufeng Liu
Volta Networks
Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 44]