YANG Model for Logical Network Elements
RFC 8530
| 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-lne-model | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Yang Validation | ☯ 0 errors, 0 warnings | ||
| Reviews |
OPSDIR Last Call review
(of
-05)
Has Issues
SECDIR Last Call review
(of
-05)
Has Issues
GENART Last Call review
(of
-05)
Not Ready
RTGDIR Early review
(of
-02)
Has Nits
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-02)
Ready with Issues
|
||
| Additional resources |
Yang catalog entry for ietf-logical-network-element@2018-03-20.yang
Yang impact analysis for draft-ietf-rtgwg-lne-model Mailing list discussion |
||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Yingzhen Qu | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2018-01-15 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 8530 (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 8530
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Berger
Request for Comments: 8530 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 Model for Logical Network Elements
Abstract
This document defines a logical network element (LNE) YANG module
that is compliant with the Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA). This module can be used to manage the logical resource
partitioning that may be present on a network device. Examples of
common industry terms for logical resource partitioning are logical
systems or logical routers. The YANG model in this document conforms
with NMDA as 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/rfc8530.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs 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. Logical Network Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. LNE Instantiation and Resource Assignment . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. LNE Management -- LNE View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. LNE Management -- Host Network Device View . . . . . . . 7
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Logical Network Element Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A.1. Example: Host-Device-Managed LNE . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A.1.1. Configuration Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.1.2. State Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.2. Example: Self-Managed LNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
A.2.1. Configuration Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A.2.2. State Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
1. Introduction
This document defines an NMDA-compliant YANG module [RFC6020] to
support the creation of logical network elements (LNEs) on a network
device. An LNE is an independently managed virtual device made up of
resources allocated to it from the host or parent network device. An
LNE running on a host network device conceptually parallels a virtual
machine running on a host system. Using host-virtualization
terminology, one could refer to an LNE as a "Guest" and the
containing network device as the "Host". While LNEs may be
implemented via host-virtualization technologies, this is not a
requirement. The YANG model in this document conforms with the
Network Management Datastore Architecture defined in [RFC8342].
This document also defines the necessary augmentations for allocating
host resources to a given LNE. As the interface management model
[RFC8343] is the only module that currently defines host resources,
this document currently defines only a single augmentation to cover
the assignment of interfaces to an LNE. Future modules that define
support for the control of host device resources are expected to,
where appropriate, provide parallel support for the assignment of
controlled resources to LNEs.
As each LNE is an independently managed device, each will have its
own set of YANG-modeled data that is independent of the host device
and other LNEs. For example, multiple LNEs may all have their own
"Tunnel0" interface defined, which will not conflict with each other
and will not exist in the host's interface model. An LNE will have
its own management interfaces, possibly including independent
instances of NETCONF/RESTCONF/etc servers to support the
configuration of their YANG models. As an example of this
independence, an implementation may choose to completely rename
assigned interfaces; so, on the host, the assigned interface might be
called "Ethernet0/1" while within the LNE it might be called "eth1".
In addition to standard management interfaces, a host device
implementation may support accessing LNE configuration and
operational YANG models directly from the host system. When
supported, such access is accomplished through a yang-schema-mount
mount point [RFC8528] under which the root-level LNE YANG models may
be accessed.
Examples of vendor terminology for an LNE include logical system or
logical router and virtual switch, chassis, or fabric.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs 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 YANG Tree Diagrams [RFC8340].
2. Overview
In this document, we consider network devices that support protocols
and functions defined within the IETF Routing Area, 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 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 VPN
Routing and Forwarding (VRF) and Virtual Switching Instance (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 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
A model for LNEs is described in Section 3, and the model for NIs is
covered in [RFC8529].
The interface management model [RFC8343] is an existing model that is
impacted by the definition of LNEs and NIs. This document and
[RFC8529] define augmentations to the interface model to support LNEs
and NIs. Similar elements, although perhaps only for LNEs, may also
need to be included as part of the definition of the future hardware
and QoS modules.
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, 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]. The logical-network-element module augments existing
interface management models by adding an identifier that is used on
interfaces to identify an associated LNE.
The interface-related augmentation is as follows:
module: ietf-logical-network-element
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface:
+--rw bind-lne-name? ->
/logical-network-elements/logical-network-element/name
The interface model defined in [RFC8343] is structured to include all
interfaces in a flat list, without regard to logical assignment of
resources supported on the device. The bind-lne-name and leaf
provides the association between an interface and its associated LNE.
Note that as currently defined, to assign an interface to both an LNE
and NI, the interface would first be assigned to the LNE and then
within that LNE's interface model, the LNE's representation of that
interface would be assigned to an NI using the mechanisms defined in
[RFC8529].
3. Logical Network Elements
Logical network elements support the ability of some devices to
partition resources into independent logical routers and/or switches.
Device support for multiple logical network elements is
implementation specific. Systems without such capabilities need not
include support for the logical-network-element module. In physical
devices, some hardware features are shared across partitions, but
control-plane (e.g., routing) protocol instances, tables, and
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
configuration are managed separately. For example, in logical
routers or VNFs, this may correspond to establishing multiple logical
instances using a single software installation. The model supports
configuration of multiple instances on a single device by creating a
list of logical network elements, each with their own configuration
and operational state related to routing and switching protocols.
The LNE model can be represented as:
module: ietf-logical-network-element
+--rw logical-network-elements
+--rw logical-network-element* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw managed? boolean
+--rw description? string
+--mp root
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface:
+--rw bind-lne-name?
-> /logical-network-elements/logical-network-element/name
notifications:
+---n bind-lne-name-failed
+--ro name -> /if:interfaces/interface/name
+--ro bind-lne-name
| -> /if:interfaces/interface/lne:bind-lne-name
+--ro error-info? string
'name' identifies the logical network element. 'managed' indicates
if the server providing the host network device will provide the
client LNE information via the 'root' structure. The root of an
LNE's specific data is the schema mount point 'root'. bind-lne-name
is used to associate an interface with an LNE, and bind-lne-name-
failed is used in certain failure cases.
An LNE root MUST contain at least the YANG library [RFC7895] and
interface module [RFC8343].
3.1. LNE Instantiation and Resource Assignment
Logical network elements may be controlled by clients using existing
list operations. When list entries are created, a new LNE is
instantiated. The models mounted under an LNE root are expected to
be dependent on the server implementation. When a list entry is
deleted, an existing LNE is destroyed. For more information, see
[RFC7950], Section 7.8.6.
Once instantiated, host network device resources can be associated
with the new LNE. As previously mentioned, this document augments
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
ietf-interfaces with the bind-lne-name leaf to support such
associations for interfaces. When a bind-lne-name is set to a valid
LNE name, an implementation MUST take whatever steps are internally
necessary to assign the interface to the LNE 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, or after asynchronous processing. Error notification in the
latter case is supported via a notification.
On a successful interface assignment to an LNE, an implementation
MUST also make the resource available to the LNE by providing a
system-created interface to the LNE. The name of the system-created
interface is a local matter and may be identical or completely
different and mapped from and to the name used in the context of the
host device. The system-created interface SHOULD be exposed via the
LNE-specific instance of the interface model [RFC8343].
3.2. LNE Management -- LNE View
Each LNE instance is expected to support management functions from
within the context of the LNE root, via a server that provides
information with the LNE's root exposed as the device root.
Management functions operating within the context of an LNE are
accessed through the LNE's standard management interfaces, e.g.,
NETCONF and SNMP. Initial configuration, much like the initial
configuration of the host device, is a local implementation matter.
When accessing an LNE via the LNE's management interface, a network
device representation will be presented, but its scope will be
limited to the specific LNE. Normal YANG/NETCONF mechanisms,
together with the required YANG library [RFC7895] instance, can be
used to identify the available modules. Each supported module will
be presented as a top-level module. Only LNE-associated resources
will be reflected in resource-related modules, e.g., interfaces,
hardware, and perhaps QoS. From the management perspective, there
will be no difference between the available LNE view (information)
and a physical network device.
3.3. LNE Management -- Host Network Device View
There are multiple implementation approaches possible to enable a
network device to support the logical-network-element module and
multiple LNEs. Some approaches will allow the management functions
operating at the network device level to access LNE configuration and
operational information, while others will not. Similarly, even when
LNE management from the network device is supported by the
implementation, it may be prohibited by user policy.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
Independent of the method selected by an implementation, the
'managed' boolean mentioned above is used to indicate when LNE
management from the network device context is possible. When the
'managed' boolean is 'false', the LNE cannot be managed by the host
system and can only be managed from within the context of the LNE as
described in Section 3.2. Attempts to access information below a
root node whose associated 'managed' boolean is set to 'false' MUST
result in the error message indicated below. In some
implementations, it may not be possible to change this value. For
example, when an LNE is implemented using virtual machine and
traditional hypervisor technologies, it is likely that this value
will be restricted to a 'false' value.
It is an implementation choice if the information can be accessed and
modified from within the context of the LNE, or even the context of
the host device. When the 'managed' boolean is 'true', LNE
information SHALL be accessible from the context of the host device.
When the associated schema-mount definition has the 'config' leaf set
to 'true', then LNE information SHALL also be modifiable from the
context of the host device. When LNE information is available from
both the host device and from within the context of the LNE, the same
information MUST be made available via the 'root' element, with paths
modified as described in [RFC8528].
An implementation MAY represent an LNE's schema using either the
'inline' or the 'shared-schema' approaches defined in [RFC8528]. The
choice of which to use is completely an implementation choice. The
inline approach is anticipated to be generally used in the cases
where the 'managed' boolean will always be 'false'. The 'shared-
schema' approach is expected to be most useful in the case where all
LNEs share the same schema. When 'shared-schema' is used with an LNE
mount point, the YANG library rooted in the LNE's mount point MUST
match the associated schema defined according to the ietf-yang-
schema-mount module.
Beyond the two modules that will always be present for an LNE, as an
LNE is a network device itself, all modules that may be present at
the top-level network device MAY also be present for the LNE. The
list of available modules is expected to be implementation dependent,
as is the method used by an implementation to support LNEs.
Appendix A provides example uses of LNEs.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
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.
LNE information represents device and network configuration
information. As such, the security of this information is important,
but it is fundamentally no different than any other interface or
device configuration information that has already been covered in
other documents such as [RFC8343], [RFC7317], and [RFC8349].
The vulnerable "config true" parameters and subtrees are the
following:
/logical-network-elements/logical-network-element: This list
specifies the logical network element and the related logical
device configuration.
/logical-network-elements/logical-network-element/managed: While
this leaf is contained in the previous list, it is worth
particular attention as it controls whether information under the
LNE mount point is accessible by both the host device and within
the LNE context. There may be extra sensitivity to this leaf in
environments where an LNE is managed by a different party than the
host device, and that party does not wish to share LNE information
with the operator of the host device.
/if:interfaces/if:interface/bind-lne-name: This leaf indicates the
LNE instance to which an interface is assigned. Implementations
should pay particular attention to when changes to this leaf are
permitted as removal of an interface from an LNE can have a major
impact on the LNE's operation as it is similar to physically
removing an interface from the device. Implementations can reject
a reassignment using the previously described error message
generation.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
Unauthorized access to any of these lists can adversely affect the
security 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-logical-network-element
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-logical-network-element
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-logical-network-element
prefix: lne
reference: RFC 8530
6. Logical Network Element Model
The structure of the model defined in this document is described by
the YANG module below.
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-logical-network-element@2019-01-25.yang"
module ietf-logical-network-element {
yang-version 1.1;
// namespace
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-logical-network-element";
prefix lne;
// import some basic types
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
reference
"RFC 8343: A YANG Data Model for Interface Management";
}
import ietf-yang-schema-mount {
prefix yangmnt;
reference
"RFC 8528: YANG Schema Mount";
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
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 logical network
elements on a single physical or virtual system.
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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8530; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2019-01-25 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC 8530: YANG Model for Logical Network Elements";
}
// top level device definition statements
container logical-network-elements {
description
"Allows a network device to support multiple logical
network element (device) instances.";
list logical-network-element {
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
key "name";
description
"List of logical network elements.";
leaf name {
type string;
description
"Device-wide unique identifier for the
logical network element.";
}
leaf managed {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"True if the host can access LNE information
using the root mount point. This value
may not be modifiable in all implementations.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Description of the logical network element.";
}
container root {
description
"Container for mount point.";
yangmnt:mount-point "root" {
description
"Root for models supported per logical
network element. This mount point may or may not
be inline based on the server implementation. It
SHALL always contain a YANG library and interfaces
instance.
When the associated 'managed' leaf is 'false', any
operation that attempts to access information below
the root SHALL fail with an error-tag of
'access-denied' and an error-app-tag of
'lne-not-managed'.";
}
}
}
}
// augment statements
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface" {
description
"Add a node for the identification of the logical network
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
element associated with an interface. Applies to
interfaces that can be assigned per logical network
element.
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 'lne-assignment-failed'. A meaningful
error-info that indicates the source of the assignment
failure SHOULD also be provided.";
leaf bind-lne-name {
type leafref {
path "/logical-network-elements/logical-network-element/name";
}
description
"Logical network element ID to which the interface is
bound.";
}
}
// notification statements
notification bind-lne-name-failed {
description
"Indicates an error in the association of an interface to an
LNE. Only generated after success is initially returned
when bind-lne-name is set.";
leaf name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface/if:name";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Contains the interface name associated with the
failure.";
}
leaf bind-lne-name {
type leafref {
path "/if:interfaces/if:interface/lne:bind-lne-name";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Contains the bind-lne-name associated with the
failure.";
}
leaf error-info {
type string;
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
description
"Optionally, indicates the source of the assignment
failure.";
}
}
}
<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>.
[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 14]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs 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>.
[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
[DEVICE-MODEL]
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.
[OSPF-YANG]
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.
[RFC7317] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "A YANG Data Model for
System Management", RFC 7317, DOI 10.17487/RFC7317, August
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7317>.
[RFC7895] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG Module
Library", RFC 7895, DOI 10.17487/RFC7895, June 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7895>.
[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>.
[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>.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
[RFC8348] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Dong, J., and D. Romascanu, "A
YANG Data Model for Hardware Management", RFC 8348,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8348, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8348>.
[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>.
[RFC8529] Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D., and
X. Liu, "YANG Data Model for Network Instances", RFC 8529,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8529, March 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8529>.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
Appendix A. Examples
The following subsections provide example uses of LNEs.
A.1. Example: Host-Device-Managed LNE
This section describes an example of the LNE model using schema mount
to achieve the parent management. An example device supports
multiple instances of LNEs (logical routers), each of which supports
features of Layer 2 and Layer 3 interfaces [RFC8343], a routing
information base [RFC8349], and the OSPF protocol [OSPF-YANG]. Each
of these features is specified by a YANG model, and they are combined
using the YANG schema mount as shown below. Not all possible mounted
modules are shown. For example, implementations could also mount the
model defined in [RFC8348].
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
module: ietf-logical-network-element
+--rw logical-network-elements
+--rw logical-network-element* [name]
+--rw name string
+--mp root
+--ro yanglib:modules-state/
| +--ro module-set-id string
| +--ro module* [name revision]
| +--ro name yang:yang-identifier
+--rw sys:system/
| +--rw contact? string
| +--rw hostname? inet:domain-name
| +--rw authentication {authentication}?
| +--rw user-authentication-order* identityref
| +--rw user* [name] {local-users}?
| +--rw name string
| +--rw password? ianach:crypt-hash
| +--rw authorized-key* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw algorithm string
| +--rw key-data binary
+--ro sys:system-state/
| ...
+--rw rt:routing/
| +--rw router-id? yang:dotted-quad
| +--rw control-plane-protocols
| +--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name]
| +--rw ospf:ospf/
| +--rw areas
| +--rw area* [area-id]
| +--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| +--rw name if:interface-ref
| +--rw cost? uint16
+--rw if:interfaces/
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw ip:ipv4!/
| +--rw address* [ip]
| ...
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw lne:bind-lne-name? string
+--ro oper-status enumeration
module: ietf-yang-library
+--ro modules-state
+--ro module-set-id string
+--ro module* [name revision]
+--ro name yang:yang-identifier
module: ietf-system
+--rw system
| +--rw contact? string
| +--rw hostname? inet:domain-name
| +--rw authentication {authentication}?
| +--rw user-authentication-order* identityref
| +--rw user* [name] {local-users}?
| +--rw name string
| +--rw password? ianach:crypt-hash
| +--rw authorized-key* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw algorithm string
| +--rw key-data binary
+--ro system-state
+--ro platform
| +--ro os-name? string
| +--ro os-release? string
To realize the above schema, the example device implements the
following schema mount instance:
"ietf-yang-schema-mount:schema-mounts": {
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-logical-network-element",
"label": "root",
"shared-schema": {}
}
]
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
By using the implementation of the YANG schema mount, an operator can
create instances of logical routers. An interface can be assigned to
a logical router, so that the logical router has the permission to
access this interface. The OSPF protocol can then be enabled on this
assigned interface.
For this implementation, a parent management session has access to
the schemas of both the parent hosting system and the child logical
routers. In addition, each child logical router can grant its own
management sessions, which have the following schema:
module: ietf-yang-library
+--ro modules-state
+--ro module-set-id string
+--ro module* [name revision]
+--ro name yang:yang-identifier
module: ietf-system
+--rw system
| +--rw contact? string
| +--rw hostname? inet:domain-name
| +--rw authentication {authentication}?
| +--rw user-authentication-order* identityref
| +--rw user* [name] {local-users}?
| +--rw name string
| +--rw password? ianach:crypt-hash
| +--rw authorized-key* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw algorithm string
| +--rw key-data binary
+--ro system-state
+--ro platform
+--ro os-name? string
+--ro os-release? string
module: ietf-routing
rw-- routing
+--rw router-id? yang:dotted-quad
+--rw control-plane-protocols
+--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name]
+--rw ospf:ospf/
+--rw areas
+--rw area* [area-id]
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name if:interface-ref
+--rw cost? uint16
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--ro oper-status enumeration
A.1.1. Configuration Data
The following shows an example where two customer-specific LNEs are
configured:
{
"ietf-logical-network-element:logical-network-elements": {
"logical-network-element": [
{
"name": "cust1",
"root": {
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "john",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
},
"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 21]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"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
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
},
{
"name": "cust2",
"root": {
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "john",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
},
"ietf-routing:routing": {
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"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": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth0",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"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": "cust1:eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "cust1"
},
{
"name": "cust2:eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "cust2"
}
]
},
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "root",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
A.1.2. State Data
The following shows possible state data associated with the above
configuration data:
{
"ietf-logical-network-element:logical-network-elements": {
"logical-network-element": [
{
"name": "cust1",
"root": {
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2018-03-03",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 25]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"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",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"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-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"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",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 26]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"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": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::11",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
},
{
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 27]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"name": "cust2",
"root": {
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2018-03-03",
"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"
},
{
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 28]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"name": "ietf-system",
"revision": "2014-08-06",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"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-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"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": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 29]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"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-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
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 30]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
}
]
},
"ietf-ip:ipv6": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "2001:db8:0:2::10",
"prefix-length": 64
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "cust1: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-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "cust1"
},
{
"name": "cust2:eth1",
"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-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "cust2"
}
]
},
"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": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 31]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-logical-network-element",
"revision": "2017-03-13",
"feature": [
"bind-lne-name"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-logical-network-element",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2018-03-03",
"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",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 32]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"revision": "2014-08-06",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-schema-mount",
"revision": "2017-05-16",
"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-logical-network-element",
"label": "root",
"shared-schema": {}
}
]
}
}
A.2. Example: Self-Managed LNE
This section describes an example of the LNE model using schema mount
to achieve child-independent management. An example device supports
multiple instances of LNEs (logical routers), each of which has the
features of Layer 2 and Layer 3 interfaces [RFC8343], a routing
information base [RFC8349], and the OSPF protocol. Each of these
features is specified by a YANG model, and they are put together by
the YANG schema mount as follows:
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 33]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
module: ietf-logical-network-element
+--rw logical-network-elements
+--rw logical-network-element* [name]
+--rw name string
+--mp root
// The internal modules of the LNE are not visible to
// the parent management.
// The child manages its modules, including ietf-routing
// and ietf-interfaces
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw lne:bind-lne-name? string
+--ro oper-status enumeration
module: ietf-yang-library
+--ro modules-state
+--ro module-set-id string
+--ro module* [name revision]
+--ro name yang:yang-identifier
module: ietf-system
+--rw system
| +--rw contact? string
| +--rw hostname? inet:domain-name
| +--rw authentication {authentication}?
| +--rw user-authentication-order* identityref
| +--rw user* [name] {local-users}?
| +--rw name string
| +--rw password? ianach:crypt-hash
| +--rw authorized-key* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw algorithm string
| +--rw key-data binary
+--ro system-state
+--ro platform
| +--ro os-name? string
| +--ro os-release? string
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 34]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
To realize the above schema, the device implements the following
schema mount instance:
"ietf-yang-schema-mount:schema-mounts": {
"mount-point": [
{
"module": "ietf-logical-network-element",
"label": "root",
"inline": {}
}
]
}
By using the implementation of the YANG schema mount, an operator can
create instances of logical routers, each with their logical router-
specific inline modules. An interface can be assigned to a logical
router, so that the logical router has the permission to access this
interface. The OSPF protocol can then be enabled on this assigned
interface. Each logical router independently manages its own set of
modules, which may or may not be the same as other logical routers.
The following is an example of schema set implemented on one
particular logical router:
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 35]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
module: ietf-yang-library
+--ro modules-state
+--ro module-set-id string
+--ro module* [name revision]
+--ro name yang:yang-identifier
module: ietf-system
+--rw system
| +--rw contact? string
| +--rw hostname? inet:domain-name
| +--rw authentication {authentication}?
| +--rw user-authentication-order* identityref
| +--rw user* [name] {local-users}?
| +--rw name string
| +--rw password? ianach:crypt-hash
| +--rw authorized-key* [name]
| +--rw name string
| +--rw algorithm string
| +--rw key-data binary
+--ro system-state
+--ro platform
| +--ro os-name? string
| +--ro os-release? string
module: ietf-routing
+--rw routing
+--rw router-id? yang:dotted-quad
+--rw control-plane-protocols
+--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name]
+--rw ospf:ospf/
+--rw areas
+--rw area* [area-id]
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name if:interface-ref
+--rw cost? uint16
module: ietf-interfaces
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
+--rw name string
+--ro oper-status enumeration
A.2.1. Configuration Data
Each of the child virtual routers is managed through its own sessions
and configuration data.
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 36]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
A.2.1.1. Logical Network Element 'vnf1'
The following shows an example of configuration data for the LNE name
"vnf1":
{
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "john",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
},
"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
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 37]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
A.2.1.2. Logical Network Element 'vnf2'
The following shows an example of configuration data for the LNE name
"vnf2":
{
"ietf-system:system": {
"authentication": {
"user": [
{
"name": "john",
"password": "$0$password"
}
]
}
},
"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": "eth1",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 38]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd",
"ietf-ip:ipv4": {
"address": [
{
"ip": "192.0.2.11",
"prefix-length": 24
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
A.2.2. State Data
The following sections show possible state data associated with the
above configuration data. Note that there are three views: the host
device's view and each of the LNE's views.
A.2.2.1. Host Device
The following shows state data for the device hosting the example
LNEs:
{
"ietf-logical-network-element:logical-network-elements": {
"logical-network-element": [
{
"name": "vnf1",
"root": {
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 39]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
},
{
"name": "vnf2",
"root": {
}
}
]
},
"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
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "vnf1: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-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "vnf1"
},
{
"name": "vnf2: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-logical-network-element:bind-lne-name": "vnf2"
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 40]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
]
},
"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": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-logical-network-element",
"revision": "2017-03-13",
"feature": [
"bind-lne-name"
],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-logical-network-element",
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 41]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-system",
"revision": "2014-08-06",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-schema-mount",
"revision": "2017-05-16",
"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-logical-network-element",
"label": "root",
"inline": {}
}
]
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 42]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
A.2.2.2. Logical Network Element 'vnf1'
The following shows state data for the example LNE with the name
"vnf1":
{
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
{
"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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2018-03-03",
"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"
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 43]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
},
{
"name": "ietf-system",
"revision": "2014-08-06",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"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-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"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 44]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"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
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
A.2.2.3. Logical Network Element 'vnf2'
The following shows state data for the example LNE with the name
"vnf2":
{
"ietf-yang-library:modules-state": {
"module-set-id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426655440000",
"module": [
{
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2014-05-08",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type",
"conformance-type": "import"
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 45]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs 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": "2014-05-08",
"feature": [
"arbitrary-names",
"pre-provisioning"
],
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ip",
"revision": "2014-06-16",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ip",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-ospf",
"revision": "2018-03-03",
"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",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-system",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-library",
"revision": "2016-06-21",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-library",
"conformance-type": "implement"
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 46]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types",
"conformance-type": "import"
}
]
},
"ietf-system:system-state": {
"platform": {
"os-name": "NetworkOS"
}
},
"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": "eth1",
"cost": 10
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 47]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs March 2019
"ietf-interfaces:interfaces": {
"interface": [
{
"name": "eth1",
"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
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Berger, et al. Standards Track [Page 48]
RFC 8530 YANG LNEs 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. Useful review
comments were also received by Martin Bjorklund, John Scudder, Dan
Romascanu, and Taylor Yu.
This document was motivated by, and derived from "Network Device YANG
Logical Organization" [DEVICE-MODEL].
Thanks to Alvaro Retana for the IESG review.
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 49]