Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework
draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework
CCAMP Working Group J. Ahlberg, Ed.
Internet-Draft Ericsson AB
Intended status: Informational M. Ye, Ed.
Expires: December 7, 2018 Huawei Technologies
X. Li
NEC Laboratories Europe
LM. Contreras
Telefonica I+D
CJ. Bernardos
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
June 5, 2018
A framework for Management and Control of microwave and millimeter wave
interface parameters
draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework-07
Abstract
The unification of control and management of microwave radio link
interfaces is a precondition for seamless multilayer networking and
automated network provisioning and operation.
This document describes the required characteristics and use cases
for control and management of radio link interface parameters using a
YANG Data Model.
The purpose is to create a framework for identification of the
necessary information elements and definition of a YANG Data Model
for control and management of the radio link interfaces in a
microwave node. Some parts of the resulting model may be generic
which could also be used by other technologies, e.g., Ethernet
technology.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 7, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Approaches to manage and control radio link interfaces . . . 6
3.1. Network Management Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Software Defined Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Status and statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4. Performance management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.5. Fault Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.6. Troubleshooting and Root Cause Analysis . . . . . . . . . 11
5. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Gap Analysis on Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Microwave Radio Link Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2. Generic Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
1. Introduction
Microwave radio is a technology that uses high frequency radio waves
to provide high speed wireless connections that can send and receive
voice, video, and data information. It is a general term used for
systems covering a very large range of traffic capacities, channel
separations, modulation formats and applications over a wide range of
frequency bands from 1.4 GHz up to and above 100 GHz.
The main application for microwave is backhaul for mobile broadband.
Those networks will continue to be modernized using a combination of
microwave and fiber technologies. The choice of technology is a
question about fiber presence and cost of ownership, not about
capacity limitations in microwave.
Microwave is already today able to fully support the capacity needs
of a backhaul in a radio access network and will evolve to support
multiple gigabits in traditional frequency bands and beyond 10
gigabits in higher frequency bands with more bandwidth. L2 Ethernet
features are normally an integrated part of microwave nodes and more
advanced L2 and L3 features will over time be introduced to support
the evolution of the transport services to be provided by a backhaul/
transport network. Note that the wireless access technologies such
as 3/4/5G and Wi-Fi are not within the scope of this microwave model
work.
Open and standardized interfaces are a pre-requisite for efficient
management of equipment from multiple vendors, integrated in a single
system/controller. This framework addresses management and control
of the radio link interface(s) and the relationship to other
interfaces, typically to Ethernet interfaces, in a microwave node. A
radio link provides the transport over the air, using one or several
carriers in aggregated or protected configurations. Managing and
controlling a transport service over a microwave node involves both
radio link and packet transport functionality.
Already today there are numerous IETF data models, RFCs and drafts,
with technology specific extensions that cover a large part of the L2
and L3 domains. Examples are IP Management [RFC8344], Routing
Management [RFC8349] and Provider Bridge [PB-YANG]. They are based
on the IETF YANG model for Interface Management [RFC8343], which is
an evolution of the SNMP IF-MIB [RFC2863].
Since microwave nodes will contain more and more L2 and L3(packet)
functionality which is expected to be managed using those models,
there are advantages if radio link interfaces can be modeled and
managed using the same structure and the same approach, specifically
for use cases in which a microwave node is managed as one common
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
entity including both the radio link and the L2 and L3 functionality,
e.g. at basic configuration of node and connections, centralized
trouble shooting, upgrade and maintenance. All interfaces in a node,
irrespective of technology, would then be accessed from the same core
model, i.e. [RFC8343], and could be extended with technology specific
parameters in models augmenting that core model. The relationship/
connectivity between interfaces could be given by the physical
equipment configuration, e.g. the slot in which the Radio Link
Terminal (modem) is plugged in could be associated with a specific
Ethernet port due to the wiring in the backplane of the system, or it
could be flexible and therefore configured via a management system or
controller.
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Interface [RFC8343] |
| +---------------+ |
| | Ethernet Port | |
| +---------------+ |
| \ |
| +---------------------+ |
| | Radio Link Terminal | |
| +---------------------+ |
| / \ |
| +---------------------+ +---------------------+ |
| | Carrier Termination | | Carrier Termination | |
| +---------------------+ +---------------------+ |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 1: Relationship between interfaces in a node
There will always be certain implementations that differ among
products and it is therefore practically impossible to achieve
industry consensus on every design detail. It is therefore important
to focus on the parameters that are required to support the use cases
applicable for centralized, unified, multi-vendor management and to
allow other parameters to be optional or to be covered by extensions
to the standardized model. Furthermore, a standard that allows for a
certain degree of freedom encourages innovation and competition which
is something that benefits the entire industry. It is therefore
important that a radio link management model covers all relevant
functions but also leaves room for product/feature-specific
extensions.
For microwave radio link functionality work has been initiated (ONF:
Microwave Modeling [ONF-model], IETF: Radio Link Model
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang]). The purpose of this effort is to reach
consensus within the industry around one common approach, with
respect to the use cases and requirements to be supported, the type
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
and structure of the model and the resulting attributes to be
included. This document describes the use cases and requirements
agreed to be covered, the expected characteristics of the model and
at the end includes an analysis of how the models in the two on-going
initiatives fulfill these expectations and a recommendation on what
can be reused and what gaps need to be filled by a new and evolved
radio link model.
1.1. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174]
when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
2. Terminology and Definitions
Microwave radio is a term commonly used for technologies that operate
in both microwave and millimeter wave lengths and in frequency bands
from 1.4 GHz up to and beyond 100 GHz. In traditional bands it
typically supports capacities of 1-3 Gbps and in 70/80 GHz band up to
10 Gbps. Using multi-carrier systems operating in frequency bands
with wider channels, the technology will be capable of providing
capacities of up to 100 Gbps.
The microwave radio technology is widely used for point-to-point
telecommunications because of its small wavelength that allows
conveniently-sized antennas to direct them in narrow beams, and the
comparatively higher frequencies that allow broad bandwidth and high
data transmission rates. It is used for a broad range of fixed and
mobile services including high-speed, point-to-point wireless local
area networks (WLANs) and broadband access.
ETSI EN 302 217 series defines the characteristics and requirements
of microwave equipment and antennas. Especially ETSI EN 302 217-2
[EN302217-2] specifies the essential parameters for the systems
operating from 1.4GHz to 86GHz.
Carrier Termination and Radio Link Terminal are two concepts defined
to support modeling of microwave radio link features and parameters
in a structured and yet simple manner.
Carrier Termination is an interface for the capacity provided over
the air by a single carrier. It is typically defined by its
transmitting and receiving frequencies.
Radio Link Terminal is an interface providing Ethernet capacity and/
or Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) capacity to the associated
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
Ethernet and/or TDM interfaces in a node and used for setting up a
transport service over a microwave radio link.
Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of Carrier Termination
and Radio Link Terminal concepts.
/--------- Radio Link ---------\
Near End Far End
+---------------+ +---------------+
| Radio Link | | Radio Link |
| Terminal | | Terminal |
| | | |
| (Protected or Bonded) |
| | | |
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
| | | | Carrier A | | | |
| | Carrier | |<--------->| | Carrier | |
| |Termination| | | |Termination| |
ETH----| | | | | | | |----ETH
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
TDM----| | | |----TDM
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
| | | | Carrier B | | | |
| | Carrier | |<--------->| | Carrier | |
| |Termination| | | |Termination| |
| | | | | | | |
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
| | | |
+---------------+ +---------------+
\--- Microwave Node ---/ \--- Microwave Node ---/
Figure 2: Radio Link Terminal and Carrier Termination
Software Defined Networking (SDN) is an architecture that decouples
the network control and forwarding functions enabling the network
control to become directly programmable and the underlying
infrastructure to be abstracted for applications and network
services. SDN can be used for automation of traditional network
management functionality using an SDN approach of standardized
programmable interfaces for control and management [RFC7426].
3. Approaches to manage and control radio link interfaces
This framework addresses the definition of an open and standardized
interface for the radio link functionality in a microwave node. The
application of such an interface used for management and control of
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
nodes and networks typically vary from one operator to another, in
terms of the systems used and how they interact. Possible approaches
include via the use of a network management system (NMS), via
software defined networking (SDN) and via some combination of NMS and
SDN. As there are still many networks where the NMS is implemented
as one component/interface and the SDN controller is scoped to
control plane functionality as a separate component/interface, this
document does not preclude either model. The aim of this document is
to provide a framework for development of a common YANG Data Model
for both management and control of microwave interfaces.
3.1. Network Management Solutions
The classic network management solutions, with vendor specific domain
management combined with cross domain functionality for service
management and analytics, still dominate the market. These solutions
are expected to evolve and benefit from an increased focus on
standardization by simplifying multi-vendor management and remove the
need for vendor/domain specific management.
3.2. Software Defined Networking
One of the main drivers for applying SDN from an operator perspective
is simplification and automation of network provisioning as well as
end to end network service management. The vision is to have a
global view of the network conditions spanning across different
vendors' equipment and multiple technologies.
If nodes from different vendors are be managed by the same SDN
controller via a node management interface (north bound interface,
NBI), without the extra effort of introducing intermediate systems,
all nodes must align their node management interfaces. Hence, an
open and standardized node management interface is required in a
multi-vendor environment. Such a standardized interface enables a
unified management and configuration of nodes from different vendors
by a common set of applications.
On top of SDN applications to configure, manage and control the nodes
and their associated transport interfaces including the L2 Ethernet
and L3 IP interfaces as well as the radio interfaces, there are also
a large variety of other more advanced SDN applications that can be
utilized and/or developed.
A potentially flexible approach for the operators is to use SDN in a
logical control way to manage the radio links by selecting a
predefined operation mode. The operation mode is a set of logical
metrics or parameters describing a complete radio link configuration,
such as capacity, availability, priority and power consumption.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
An example of an operation mode table is shown in Figure 3. Based on
its operation policy (e.g., power consumption or traffic priority),
the SDN controller selects one operation mode and translates that
into the required configuration of the individual parameters for the
radio link terminals and the associated carrier terminations.
+----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
| ID |Description | Capacity |Availability | Priority |Power |
+----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
| 1 |High capacity | 400 Mbps | 99.9% | Low |High |
+----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
| 2 |High avail- | 100 Mbps | 99.999% | High |Low |
| | ability | | | | |
+----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
Figure 3: Example of an operation mode table
An operation mode bundles together the values of a set of different
parameters. How each operation mode maps into certain set of
attributes is out of scope of this document.
4. Use Cases
The use cases described should be the basis for identification and
definition of the parameters to be supported by a YANG Data model for
management of radio links, applicable for centralized, unified,
multi-vendor management. The use cases involve configuration
management, inventory, status and statistics, performance management,
fault management, troubleshooting and root cause analysis.
Other product specific use cases, addressing e.g. installation, on-
site trouble shooting and fault resolution, are outside the scope of
this framework. If required, these use cases are expected to be
supported by product specific extensions to the standardized model.
4.1. Configuration Management
Configuration of a radio link terminal, the constituent carrier
terminations and when applicable the relationship to IP/Ethernet and
TDM interfaces.
o Understand the capabilities and limitations
Exchange of information between a manager and a device about the
capabilities supported and specific limitations in the parameter
values and enumerations that can be used.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
Support for the XPIC (Cross Polarization Interference
Cancellation) feature or not and the maximum modulation supported
are two examples on information that could be exchanged.
o Initial Configuration
Initial configuration of a radio link terminal, enough to
establish L1 connectivity to an associated radio link terminal on
a device at far end over the hop. It may also include
configuration of the relationship between a radio link terminal
and an associated traffic interface, e.g. an Ethernet interface,
unless that is given by the equipment configuration.
Frequency, modulation, coding and output power are examples of
parameters typically configured for a carrier termination and type
of aggregation/bonding or protection configurations expected for a
radio link terminal.
o Radio link re-configuration and optimization
Re-configuration, update or optimization of an existing radio link
terminal. Output power and modulation for a carrier termination
and protection schemas and activation/de-activation of carriers in
a radio link terminal are examples on parameters that can be re-
configured and used for optimization of the performance of a
network.
o Radio link logical configuration
Radio link terminals configured to include a group of carriers are
widely used in microwave technology. There are several kinds of
groups: aggregation/bonding, 1+1 protection/redundancy, etc. To
avoid configuration on each carrier termination directly, a
logical control provides flexible management by mapping a logical
configuration to a set of physical attributes. This could also be
applied in a hierarchical SDN environment where some domain
controllers are located between the SDN controller and the radio
link terminal.
4.2. Inventory
o Retrieve logical inventory and configuration from device
Request from manager and response by device with information about
radio interfaces, their constitution and configuration.
o Retrieve physical/equipment inventory from device
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
Request from manager about physical and/or equipment inventory
associated with the radio link terminals and carrier terminations.
4.3. Status and statistics
o Actual status and performance of a radio link interface
Manager requests and device responds with information about actual
status and statistics of configured radio link interfaces and
their constituent parts. It's important to report the effective
bandwidth of a radio link since it can be configured to
dynamically adjust the modulation based on the current signal
conditions.
4.4. Performance management
o Configuration of historical performance measurements
Configuration of historical performance measurements for a radio
link interface and/or its constituent parts. See Section 4.1
above.
o Collection of historical performance data
Collection of historical performance data in bulk by the manager
is a general use case for a device and not specific to a radio
link interface.
Collection of an individual counter for a specific interval is in
same cases required as a complement to the retrieval in bulk as
described above.
4.5. Fault Management
o Configuration of alarm reporting
Configuration of alarm reporting associated specifically with
radio interfaces, e.g. configuration of alarm severity, is a
subset of the configuration use case to be supported. See
Section 4.1 above.
o Alarm management
Alarm synchronization, visualization, handling, notifications and
events are generic use cases for a device and should be supported
on a radio link interface. There are however radio-specific
alarms that are important to report, where signal degradation of
the radio link is one example.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
4.6. Troubleshooting and Root Cause Analysis
Information and actions required by a manager/operator to investigate
and understand the underlying issue to a problem in the performance
and/or functionality of a radio link terminal and the associated
carrier terminations.
5. Requirements
For managing a microwave node including both the radio link and the
packet transport functionality, a unified data model is desired to
unify the modeling of the radio link interfaces and the L2/L3
interfaces using the same structure and the same modelling approach.
If some part of model is generic for other technology usage, it
should be clearly stated.
The purpose of the YANG Data Model is for management and control of
the radio link interface(s) and the relationship/connectivity to
other interfaces, typically to Ethernet interfaces, in a microwave
node.
The capability of configuring and managing microwave nodes includes
the following requirements for the modelling:
1. It MUST be possible to configure, manage and control a radio link
terminal and the constituent carrier terminations.
A. Configuration of frequency, channel bandwidth, modulation,
coding and transmitter output power MUST be supported for a
carrier termination.
B. A radio link terminal MUST configure the associated carrier
terminations and the type of aggregation/bonding or
protection configurations expected for the radio link
terminal.
C. The capability, e.g. the maximum modulation supported, and
the actual status/statistics, e.g. administrative status of
the carriers, SHOULD also be supported by the data model.
D. The definition of the features and parameters SHOULD be based
on established microwave equipment and radio standards, such
as ETSI EN 302 217 [EN302217-2] which specifies the essential
parameters for microwave systems operating from 1.4GHz to
86GHz.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
2. It MUST be possible to map different traffic types (e.g. TDM,
Ethernet) to the transport capacity provided by a specific radio
link terminal.
3. It MUST be possible to configure and collect historical
measurements (for the use case described in section 5.4) to be
performed on a radio link interface, e.g. minimum, maximum and
average transmit power and receive level in dBm.
4. It MUST be possible to configure and retrieve alarms reporting
associated with the radio interfaces, e.g. configuration of alarm
severity, supported alarms like configuration fault, signal lost,
modem fault, radio fault.
6. Gap Analysis on Models
The purpose of the gap analysis is to identify and recommend what
models to use in a microwave device to support the use cases and
requirements specified in the previous chapters. This draft shall
also make a recommendation on how the gaps not supported should be
filled, including the need for development of new models and
evolution of existing models and drafts.
For microwave radio link functionality work has been initiated (ONF:
Microwave Modeling [ONF-model], IETF: Radio Link Model
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang]. The analysis is expected to take these
initiatives into consideration and make a recommendation on how to
make use of them and how to complement them in order to fill the gaps
identified.
For generic functionality, not specific for radio link, the ambition
is to refer to existing or emerging models that could be applicable
for all functional areas in a microwave node.
6.1. Microwave Radio Link Functionality
[ONF-CIM] defines a CoreModel of the ONF Common Information Model.
An information model describes the things in a domain in terms of
objects, their properties (represented as attributes), and their
relationships. The ONF information model is expressed in Unified
Modeling Language (UML). The ONF CoreModel is independent of
specific data plane technology. The technology specific content,
acquired in a runtime solution via "filled in" cases of
specification, augment the CoreModel to provide a forwarding
technology-specific representation.
IETF Data Model defines an implementation and protocol-specific
details. YANG is a data modeling language used to model the
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
configuration and state data. [RFC8343] defines a generic YANG data
model for interface management which doesn't include technology
specific information. To describe the technology specific
information, several YANG data models have been proposed in IETF by
augmenting [RFC8343], e.g. [RFC8344]. The YANG data model is a
popular approach for modeling many packet transport technology
interfaces, and it is thereby well positioned to become an industry
standard. In light of this trend, [I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] provides
a YANG data model proposal for radio interfaces, which is well
aligned with the structure of other technology-specific YANG data
models augmenting [RFC8343].
[RFC3444] explains the difference between Information Model(IM) and
Data Models(DM). IM is to model managed objects at a conceptual
level for designers and operators, while DM is defined at a lower
level and includes many details for implementers. In addition, the
protocol-specific details are usually included in DM. Since
conceptual models can be implemented in different ways, multiple DMs
can be derived from a single IM.
It is recommended to use the structure of the IETF: Radio Link Model
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] as the starting point, since
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] is a data model providing the wanted
alignment with [RFC8343]. To cover the identified gaps, it is
recommended to define new leafs/parameters in
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] while taking reference from [ONF-CIM]. It
is also recommended to add the required data nodes to describe the
interface layering for the capacity provided by a radio link terminal
and the associated Ethernet and TDM interfaces in a microwave node.
The principles and data nodes for interface layering described in
[RFC8343] should be used as a basis.
6.2. Generic Functionality
For generic functionality, not specific for radio link, the
recommendation is to refer to existing RFCs or emerging drafts
according to the table in Figure 4 below. New Radio Link Model is
used in the table for the cases where the functionality is
recommended to be included in the new radio link model as described
in Section 6.1.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
+------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Generic Functionality | Recommendation |
| | |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
|1.Fault Management | |
| | |
| Alarm Configuration | New Radio Link Model |
| | |
| Alarm notifications/ | [I-D.ietf-ccamp- |
| synchronization | alarm-module] |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
|2.Performance Management | |
| | |
| Performance Configuration/ | New Radio Link Model |
| Activation | |
| | |
| Performance Collection | New Radio Link Model and |
| | XML files |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
|3.Physical/Equipment Inventory | [RFC8348] |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
Figure 4: Recommendation on how to support generic functionality
Microwave specific alarm configurations are recommended to be
included in the new radio link model and could be based on what is
supported in the IETF and ONF Radio Link Models. Alarm notifications
and synchronization are general and is recommended to be supported by
a generic model, such as [I-D.ietf-ccamp-alarm-module].
Activation of interval counters and thresholds could be a generic
function but it is recommended to be supported by the new radio link
specific model and can be based on both the ONF and IETF Microwave
Radio Link models.
Collection of interval/historical counters is a generic function that
needs to be supported in a node. File based collection via SSH File
Transfer Protocol(SFTP) and collection via a NETCONF/YANG interfaces
are two possible options and the recommendation is to include support
for the latter in the new radio link specific model. The ONF and
IETF Microwave Radio Link models can be used as a basis also in this
area.
Physical and/or equipment inventory associated with the radio link
terminals and carrier terminations is recommended to be covered by a
model generic for the complete node, e.g. [RFC8348] and it is
thereby outside the scope of the radio link specific model.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
6.3. Summary
The conclusions and recommendations from the analysis can be
summarized as follows:
1. A Microwave Radio Link YANG Data Model should be defined with a
scope enough to support the use cases and requirements in
Sections 4 and 5 of this document.
2. Use the structure in the IETF: Radio Link Model
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] as the starting point. It augments
[RFC8343] and is thereby as required aligned with the structure
of the models for management of the L2 and L3 domains.
3. Use established microwave equipment and radio standards, such as
[EN302217-2], and the IETF: Radio Link Model
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang] and the ONF: Microwave Modeling
[ONF-model] as the basis for the definition of the detailed
leafs/parameters to support the specified use cases and
requirements, and proposing new ones to cover identified gaps.
4. Add the required data nodes to describe the interface layering
for the capacity provided by a radio link terminal and the
associated Ethernet and TDM interfaces, using the principles and
data nodes for interface layering described in [RFC8343] as a
basis.
5. Include support for configuration of microwave specific alarms in
the Microwave Radio Link model and rely on a generic model such
as [I-D.ietf-ccamp-alarm-module] for notifications and alarm
synchronization.
6. Use a generic model such as [RFC8348] for physical/equipment
inventory.
7. Security Considerations
The configuration information may be considered sensitive or
vulnerable in the network environments. Unauthorized access to
configuration data nodes can have a negative effect on network
operations, e.g., interrupting the ability to forward traffic, or
increasing the interference level of the network. The status and
inventory reveal some network information that could be very helpful
to an attacker. A malicious attack to that information may result in
a loss of customer data. Security issue concerning the access
control to Management interfaces can be generally addressed by
authentication techniques providing origin verification, integrity
and confidentiality. In addition, management interfaces can be
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
physically or logically isolated, by configuring them to be only
accessible out-of-band, through a system that is physically or
logically separated from the rest of the network infrastructure. In
case where management interfaces are accessible in-band at the client
device or within the microwave transport network domain, filtering or
firewalling techniques can be used to restrict unauthorized in-band
traffic. Authentication techniques may be additionally used in all
cases.
This framework describes the requirements and characteristics of a
YANG Data Model for control and management of the radio link
interfaces in a microwave node. It is supposed to be accessed via a
management protocol with a secure transport layer, such as NETCONF
[RFC6241].
8. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
9. References
9.1. 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>.
[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>.
9.2. Informative References
[EN302217-2]
"Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics and requirements for
point to-point equipment and antennas; Part 2: Digital
systems operating in frequency bands from 1 GHz to 86 GHz;
Harmonised Standard covering the essential requirements of
article 3.2 of Directive 2014/53/EU", EN 302 217-2
V3.1.1 , May 2017.
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-alarm-module]
Vallin, S. and M. Bjorklund, "YANG Alarm Module", draft-
ietf-ccamp-alarm-module-01 (work in progress), February
2018.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-mw-yang]
Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., Spreafico, D., and M.
Vaupotic, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Radio Link",
draft-ietf-ccamp-mw-yang-05 (work in progress), March
2018.
[ONF-CIM] "Core Information Model", version 1.2 , September 2016,
<https://www.opennetworking.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/10/TR-512_CIM_(CoreModel)_1.2.zip>.
[ONF-model]
"Microwave Information Model", version 1.0 , December
2016,
<https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/
sdn-resources/technical-reports/
TR-532-Microwave-Information-Model-V1.pdf>.
[PB-YANG] "IEEE 802.1X and 802.1Q Module Specifications", version
0.4 , May 2015,
<http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2015/
new-mholness-YANG-8021x-0515-v04.pdf>.
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, DOI 10.17487/RFC2863, June 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2863>.
[RFC3444] Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between
Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3444, January 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3444>.
[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>.
[RFC7426] Haleplidis, E., Ed., Pentikousis, K., Ed., Denazis, S.,
Hadi Salim, J., Meyer, D., and O. Koufopavlou, "Software-
Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture
Terminology", RFC 7426, DOI 10.17487/RFC7426, January
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7426>.
[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>.
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
[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>.
[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>.
Appendix A. Contributors
Marko Vaupotic
Aviat Networks
Motnica 9
Trzin-Ljubljana 1236
Slovenia
Email: Marko.Vaupotic@aviatnet.com
Jeff Tantsura
Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
Koji Kawada
NEC Corporation
1753, Shimonumabe Nakahara-ku
Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
Japan
Email: k-kawada@ah.jp.nec.com
Ippei Akiyoshi
NEC
1753, Shimonumabe Nakahara-ku
Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
Japan
Email: i-akiyoshi@ah.jp.nec.com
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
Daniela Spreafico
Nokia - IT
Via Energy Park, 14
Vimercate (MI) 20871
Italy
Email: daniela.spreafico@nokia.com
Authors' Addresses
Jonas Ahlberg (editor)
Ericsson AB
Lindholmspiren 11
Goteborg 417 56
Sweden
Email: jonas.ahlberg@ericsson.com
Ye Min (editor)
Huawei Technologies
No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue
Chengdu 611731
P.R.China
Email: amy.yemin@huawei.com
Xi Li
NEC Laboratories Europe
Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
Heidelberg 69115
Germany
Email: Xi.Li@neclab.eu
Luis Contreras
Telefonica I+D
Ronda de la Comunicacion, S/N
Madrid 28050
Spain
Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Microwave Framework June 2018
Carlos Bernardos
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Av. Universidad, 30
Madrid, Leganes 28911
Spain
Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
Ahlberg, et al. Expires December 7, 2018 [Page 20]
