Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model
draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model
L3SM Working Group S. Litkowski
Internet-Draft Orange Business Services
Intended status: Standards Track L. Tomotaki
Expires: May 8, 2017 Verizon
K. Ogaki
KDDI
November 04, 2016
YANG Data Model for L3VPN service delivery
draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model-19
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used for
communication between customers and network operators and to deliver
a Layer 3 Provider Provisioned VPN service. The document is limited
to the BGP PE-based VPNs as described in [RFC4026], [RFC4110] and
[RFC4364]. This model is intended to be instantiated at management
system to deliver the overall service. This model is not a
configuration model to be used directly on network elements. This
model provides an abstracted view of the Layer 3 IPVPN service
configuration components. It will be up to a management system to
take this as an input and use specific configurations models to
configure the different network elements to deliver the service. How
configuration of network elements is done is out of scope of the
document.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 8, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Tree diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Layer 3 IP VPN service model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Service data model usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Design of the Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1. Features and augmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.2. VPN service overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.1. VPN service topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.1.1. Route Target allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.1.2. Any to any . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.2.1.3. Hub and Spoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.2.1.4. Hub and Spoke disjoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.2.2. Cloud access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.2.3. Multicast service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.2.4. Extranet VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.3. Site overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3.1. Devices and locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.3.2. Site network accesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.3.2.1. Bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.3.2.2. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.3.2.3. Inheritance of parameters between site and site-
network-access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.4. Site role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.5. Site belonging to multiple VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.5.1. Site vpn flavor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.5.1.1. Single VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-single . 30
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.5.1.2. Multi VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-multi . . 31
6.5.1.3. Sub VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-sub . . . . 31
6.5.1.4. NNI : site-vpn-flavor-nni . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.5.2. Attaching a site to a VPN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.5.2.1. Reference a VPN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6.5.2.2. VPN policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6.6. Deciding where to connect the site . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6.6.1. Constraint: Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.6.2. Constraint/parameter: Site location . . . . . . . . . 39
6.6.3. Constraint/parameter: access type . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.6.4. Constraint: access diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.6.5. Impossible access placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.6.6. Examples of access placement . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.6.6.1. Multihoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.6.6.2. Site offload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.6.6.3. Parallel links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.6.6.4. SubVPN with multihoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.6.7. Route Distinguisher and VRF allocation . . . . . . . 61
6.7. Site network access availability . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
6.8. Traffic protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
6.9. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.9.1. Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.9.2. Encryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.10. Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.11. Routing protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.11.1. Dual stack handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.11.2. Direct LAN connection onto SP network . . . . . . . 67
6.11.3. Direct LAN connection onto SP network with
redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6.11.4. Static routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6.11.5. RIP routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6.11.6. OSPF routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6.11.7. BGP routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
6.12. Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.12.1. Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.12.2. QoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.12.2.1. QoS classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.12.2.2. QoS profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
6.12.3. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6.13. Enhanced VPN features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6.13.1. Carrier's Carrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6.14. External ID references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.15. Defining NNIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.15.1. Defining NNI with option A flavor . . . . . . . . . 83
6.15.2. Defining NNI with option B flavor . . . . . . . . . 86
6.15.3. Defining NNI with option C flavor . . . . . . . . . 88
7. Service model usage example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
8. Interaction with Other YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
9. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
11. Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
13. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
14. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
14.1. Changes between versions -18 and-19 . . . . . . . . . . 154
14.2. Changes between versions -17 and-18 . . . . . . . . . . 155
14.3. Changes between versions -16 and-17 . . . . . . . . . . 155
14.4. Changes between versions -15 and-16 . . . . . . . . . . 156
14.5. Changes between versions -13 and-14 . . . . . . . . . . 156
14.6. Changes between versions -12 and-13 . . . . . . . . . . 156
14.7. Changes between versions -11 and-12 . . . . . . . . . . 156
14.8. Changes between versions -09 and-10 . . . . . . . . . . 156
14.9. Changes between versions -08 and-09 . . . . . . . . . . 157
14.10. Changes between versions -07 and-08 . . . . . . . . . . 157
14.11. Changes between versions -06 and-07 . . . . . . . . . . 157
14.12. Changes between versions -05 and-06 . . . . . . . . . . 157
14.13. Changes between versions -04 and-05 . . . . . . . . . . 158
14.14. Changes between versions -02 and-03 . . . . . . . . . . 158
14.15. Changes between versions -01 and-02 . . . . . . . . . . 158
14.16. Changes between versions -00 and-01 . . . . . . . . . . 159
15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
1. Introduction
This document defines a Layer 3 VPN service data model written in
YANG. The model defines service configuration elements that can be
used in communication protocols between customers and network
operators. Those elements can be used also as input to automated
control and configuration applications.
1.1. Terminology
The following terms are defined in [RFC6241] and are not redefined
here:
o client
o configuration data
o server
o state data
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The following terms are defined in [RFC7950] and are not redefined
here:
o augment
o data model
o data node
The terminology for describing YANG data models is found in
[RFC7950].
This document presents some configuration examples using XML
representation.
1.2. Tree diagram
A simplified graphical representation of the data model is presented
in Section 6.
The meaning of the symbols in these diagrams is as follows:
o Brackets "[" and "]" enclose list keys.
o Curly braces "{" and "}" contain names of optional features that
make the corresponding node conditional.
o Abbreviations before data node names: "rw" means configuration
(read-write), and "ro" state data (read-only).
o Symbols after data node names: "?" means an optional node and "*"
denotes a "list" or "leaf-list".
o Parentheses enclose choice and case nodes, and case nodes are also
marked with a colon (":").
o Ellipsis ("...") stands for contents of subtrees that are not
shown.
2. Acronyms
AAA: Authentication, Authorization, Accounting.
ACL: Access Control List.
ASM: Any-Source Multicast.
BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
BGP: Border Gateway Protocol.
CE: Customer Edge.
CLI: Command Line Interface.
CsC: Carrier's Carrier.
CSP: Cloud Service Provider.
DHCP: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol.
IGMP: Internet Group Management Protocol.
LAN: Local Area Network.
MLD: Multicast Listener Discovery.
MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit.
NAT: Network Address Translation.
NNI: Network to Network Interface.
OAM: Operation Administration and Management.
OSPF: Open Shortest Path First.
OSS: Operations Support System.
PE: Provider Edge.
POP: Point Of Presence.
PIM: Protocol Independent Multicast.
QoS: Quality Of Service.
RIP: Routing Information Protocol.
RD: Route Distinguisher.
RP: Rendez-vous Point.
RT: Route Target.
SLA: Service Level Agreement.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
SLAAC: Stateless Address AutoConfiguration.
SP: Service Provider.
SSM: Source-Specific Multicast.
VPN: Virtual Private Network.
VRF: VPN Routing and Forwarding.
VRRP: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol.
3. Definitions
Customer Edge (CE) Device: Equipment that is dedicated to a
particular customer and is directly connected (at layer 3) to one or
more PE devices via attachment circuits. A CE is usually located at
the customer premises, and is usually dedicated to a single VPN,
although it may support multiple VPNs if each one has separate
attachment circuits.
Provider Edge (PE) Device: Equipment managed by the Service Provider
(SP) that can support multiple VPNs for different customers, and is
directly connected (at layer 3) to one or more CE devices via
attachment circuits. A PE is usually located at an SP point of
presence (PoP) and is managed by the SP.
PE-Based VPNs: The PE devices know that certain traffic is VPN
traffic. They forward the traffic (through tunnels) based on the
destination IP address of the packet, and optionally on based on
other information in the IP header of the packet. The PE devices are
themselves the tunnel endpoints. The tunnels may make use of various
encapsulations to send traffic over the SP network (such as, but not
restricted to, GRE, IP-in-IP, IPsec, or MPLS tunnels).
4. Layer 3 IP VPN service model
A layer 3 IPVPN service is a collection of sites that are authorized
to exchange traffic between each other over a shared IP
infrastructure. This layer 3 VPN service model aims at providing a
common understanding on how the corresponding IP VPN service is to be
deployed over the shared infrastructure. This service model is
limited to BGP PE-Based VPNs as described in [RFC4110] and [RFC4364].
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
5. Service data model usage
L3VPN-SVC |
MODEL |
|
+------------------+ +-----+
| Orchestration | < --- > | OSS |
+------------------+ +-----+
| |
+----------------+ |
| Config manager | |
+----------------+ |
| |
| Netconf/CLI ...
| |
+------------------------------------------------+
Network
+++++++
+ AAA +
+++++++
++++++++ Bearer ++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
+ CE A + ------- + PE A + + PE B + ---- + CE B +
++++++++ Cnct ++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
Site A Site B
The idea of the L3 IPVPN service model is to propose an abstracted
interface between customers and network operators to manage
configuration of components of a L3VPN service. A typical usage is
to use this model as an input for an orchestration layer who will be
responsible to translate it to orchestrated configuration of network
elements who will be part of the service. The network elements can
be routers, but also servers (like AAA), and not limited to these
examples. The configuration of network elements can be done by the
CLI, or by NETCONF ([RFC6241])/RESTCONF ([I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf])
coupled with specific configuration YANG data models (BGP, VRF, BFD
...) or any other way.
The usage of this service model is not limited to this example, it
can be used by any component of the management system but not
directly by network elements.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6. Design of the Data Model
The YANG module is divided in two main containers : vpn-services,
sites.
The vpn-service under vpn-services defines global parameters for the
VPN service for a specific customer.
A site is composed of at least one site-network-access and may have
multiple site-network-access in case of multihoming. The site-
network-access attachment is done through a bearer with an IP
connection on top. The bearer refers to properties of the attachment
that are below layer 3 while the connection refers to layer 3
protocol oriented properties. The bearer may be allocated
dynamically by the service provider and the customer may provide some
constraints or parameters to drive the placement.
Authorization of traffic exchange is done through what we call a VPN
policy or VPN service topology defining routing exchange rules
between sites.
The figure below describe the overall structure of the YANG module:
module: ietf-l3vpn-svc
+--rw l3vpn-svc
+--rw vpn-services
| +--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
| +--rw vpn-id svc-id
| +--rw customer-name? string
| +--rw vpn-service-topology? identityref
| +--rw cloud-accesses {cloud-access}?
| | +--rw cloud-access* [cloud-identifier]
| | +--rw cloud-identifier string
| | +--rw (list-flavor)?
| | | +--:(permit-any)
| | | | +--rw permit-any? empty
| | | +--:(deny-any-except)
| | | | +--rw permit-site* leafref
| | | +--:(permit-any-except)
| | | +--rw deny-site* leafref
| | +--rw authorized-sites
| | | +--rw authorized-site* [site-id]
| | | +--rw site-id leafref
| | +--rw denied-sites
| | | +--rw denied-site* [site-id]
| | | +--rw site-id leafref
| | +--rw address-translation
| | +--rw nat44
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw nat44-customer-address? inet:ipv4-address
| +--rw multicast {multicast}?
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw customer-tree-flavors
| | | +--rw tree-flavor* identityref
| | +--rw rp
| | +--rw rp-group-mappings
| | | +--rw rp-group-mapping* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw provider-managed
| | | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | | +--rw rp-redundancy? boolean
| | | | +--rw optimal-traffic-delivery? boolean
| | | +--rw rp-address? inet:ip-address
| | | +--rw groups
| | | +--rw group* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw (group-format)?
| | | +--:(startend)
| | | | +--rw group-start? inet:ip-address
| | | | +--rw group-end? inet:ip-address
| | | +--:(singleaddress)
| | | +--rw group-address? inet:ip-address
| | +--rw rp-discovery
| | +--rw rp-discovery-type? identityref
| | +--rw bsr-candidates
| | +--rw bsr-candidate-address* inet:ip-address
| +--rw carrierscarrier? boolean {carrierscarrier}?
| +--rw extranet-vpns {extranet-vpn}?
| +--rw extranet-vpn* [vpn-id]
| +--rw vpn-id svc-id
| +--rw local-sites-role? identityref
+--rw sites
+--rw site* [site-id]
+--rw site-id svc-id
+--rw requested-site-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw requested-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw locations
| +--rw location* [location-id]
| +--rw location-id svc-id
| +--rw address? string
| +--rw postal-code? string
| +--rw state? string
| +--rw city? string
| +--rw country-code? string
+--rw devices
| +--rw device* [device-id]
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| +--rw device-id svc-id
| +--rw location? leafref
| +--rw management
| +--rw address-family? address-family
| +--rw address? inet:ip-address
+--rw site-diversity {site-diversity}?
| +--rw groups
| +--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
+--rw management
| +--rw type? identityref
+--rw vpn-policies
| +--rw vpn-policy* [vpn-policy-id]
| +--rw vpn-policy-id svc-id
| +--rw entries* [id]
| +--rw id svc-id
| +--rw filter
| | +--rw (lan)?
| | +--:(prefixes)
| | | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefix* inet:ipv4-prefix {ipv4}?
| | | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefix* inet:ipv6-prefix {ipv6}?
| | +--:(lan-tag)
| | +--rw lan-tag* string
| +--rw vpn
| +--rw vpn-id leafref
| +--rw site-role? identityref
+--rw site-vpn-flavor? identityref
+--rw maximum-routes
| +--rw address-family* [af]
| +--rw af address-family
| +--rw maximum-routes? uint32
+--rw security
| +--rw authentication
| +--rw encryption {encryption}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw layer enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | +--rw profile-name? string
| +--:(customer-profile)
| +--rw algorithm? string
| +--rw (key-type)?
| +--:(psk)
| | +--rw preshared-key? string
| +--:(pki)
+--rw service
| +--rw qos {qos}?
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rule* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | | +--rw dscp? inet:dscp
| | | | | +--rw dot1p? uint8
| | | | | +--rw ipv4-src-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv6-src-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv4-dst-prefix? inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | | | +--rw ipv6-dst-prefix? inet:ipv6-prefix
| | | | | +--rw l4-src-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw target-sites* svc-id
| | | | | +--rw l4-src-port-range
| | | | | | +--rw lower-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | | +--rw upper-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw l4-dst-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw l4-dst-port-range
| | | | | | +--rw lower-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | | +--rw upper-port? inet:port-number
| | | | | +--rw protocol-field? union
| | | | +--:(match-application)
| | | | +--rw match-application? identityref
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw qos-profile
| | +--rw (qos-profile)?
| | +--:(standard)
| | | +--rw profile? string
| | +--:(custom)
| | +--rw classes {qos-custom}?
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | +--rw class-id string
| | +--rw rate-limit? uint8
| | +--rw latency
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
| | | ...
| | +--rw jitter
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
| | | ...
| | +--rw bandwidth
| | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent? uint8
| | +--rw end-to-end? empty
| +--rw carrierscarrier {carrierscarrier}?
| | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast {multicast}?
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-address-family
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| | +--rw ipv4? boolean {ipv4}?
| | +--rw ipv6? boolean {ipv6}?
| +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
+--rw traffic-protection {fast-reroute}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw ospf {rtg-ospf}?
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw sham-links {rtg-ospf-sham-link}?
| | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | +--rw target-site svc-id
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| +--rw bgp {rtg-bgp}?
| | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop] {ipv4}?
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop] {ipv6}?
| | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv6-address
| +--rw rip {rtg-rip}?
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| +--rw vrrp {rtg-vrrp}?
| +--rw address-family* address-family
+--ro actual-site-start? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw site-network-accesses
+--rw site-network-access* [site-network-access-id]
+--rw site-network-access-id svc-id
+--rw site-network-access-type? identityref
+--rw (location-flavor)
| +--:(location)
| | +--rw location-reference? leafref
| +--:(device)
| +--rw device-reference? leafref
+--rw access-diversity {site-diversity}?
| +--rw groups
| | +--rw group* [group-id]
| | +--rw group-id string
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| +--rw constraints
| +--rw constraint* [constraint-type]
| +--rw constraint-type identityref
| +--rw target
| +--rw (target-flavor)?
| +--:(id)
| | +--rw group* [group-id]
| | ...
| +--:(all-accesses)
| | +--rw all-other-accesses? empty
| +--:(all-groups)
| +--rw all-other-groups? empty
+--rw bearer
| +--rw requested-type {requested-type}?
| | +--rw requested-type? string
| | +--rw strict? boolean
| +--rw always-on? boolean {always-on}?
| +--rw bearer-reference? string {bearer-reference}?
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {ipv4}?
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint8
| | +--rw dhcp-relay
| | | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | | +--rw server-ip-address* inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw addresses
| | +--rw provider-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw mask? uint8
| +--rw ipv6 {ipv6}?
| | +--rw address-allocation-type? identityref
| | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint8
| | +--rw dhcp-relay
| | | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | | +--rw server-ip-address* inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw addresses
| | +--rw provider-address? inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw mask? uint8
| +--rw oam
| +--rw bfd {bfd}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw (holdtime)?
| +--:(profile)
| | +--rw profile-name? string
| +--:(fixed)
| +--rw fixed-value? uint32
+--rw security
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| +--rw authentication
| +--rw encryption {encryption}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw layer enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | +--rw profile-name? string
| +--:(customer-profile)
| +--rw algorithm? string
| +--rw (key-type)?
| +--:(psk)
| | ...
| +--:(pki)
+--rw service
| +--rw svc-input-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-output-bandwidth? uint32
| +--rw svc-mtu? uint16
| +--rw qos {qos}?
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rule* [id]
| | | +--rw id uint16
| | | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | | ...
| | | | +--:(match-application)
| | | | +--rw match-application? identityref
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw qos-profile
| | +--rw (qos-profile)?
| | +--:(standard)
| | | +--rw profile? string
| | +--:(custom)
| | +--rw classes {qos-custom}?
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | ...
| +--rw carrierscarrier {carrierscarrier}?
| | +--rw signalling-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast {multicast}?
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-address-family
| | +--rw ipv4? boolean {ipv4}?
| | +--rw ipv6? boolean {ipv6}?
| +--rw protocol-type? enumeration
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
| +--rw ospf {rtg-ospf}?
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| | +--rw area-address? yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw sham-links {rtg-ospf-sham-link}?
| | +--rw sham-link* [target-site]
| | +--rw target-site svc-id
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| +--rw bgp {rtg-bgp}?
| | +--rw autonomous-system? uint32
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop] {ipv4}?
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop] {ipv6}?
| | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | +--rw next-hop inet:ipv6-address
| +--rw rip {rtg-rip}?
| | +--rw address-family* address-family
| +--rw vrrp {rtg-vrrp}?
| +--rw address-family* address-family
+--rw availability
| +--rw access-priority? uint32
+--rw vpn-attachment
+--rw (attachment-flavor)
+--:(vpn-policy-id)
| +--rw vpn-policy-id? leafref
+--:(vpn-id)
+--rw vpn-id? leafref
+--rw site-role? identityref
6.1. Features and augmentation
The model implements a lot of features allowing implementations to be
modular. As example, an implementation may support only IPv4 VPNs
(ipv4 feature), IPv6 (ipv6 feature), or both (by advertising both
features). The routing protocols proposed to the customer may also
be enabled through features. This model proposes also some features
for more advanced options like : extranet-vpn support
(Section 6.2.4), site diversity (Section 6.6), qos (Section 6.12.2),
...
In addition, as for any YANG model, this service model can be
augmented to implement new behaviors or specific features. For
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
example, this model proposes different options for the IP address
assignment, if those options are not filling all requirements, new
options can be added through augmentation.
6.2. VPN service overview
A vpn-service list item contains generic informations about the VPN
service. The vpn-id of the vpn-service refers to an internal
reference for this VPN service, while customer name refers to a more
explicit reference to the customer. This identifier is purely
internal to the organization responsible for the VPN service.
6.2.1. VPN service topology
The type of VPN service topology is required for configuration.
Current proposal supports: any-to-any, hub and spoke (where hubs can
exchange traffic), and hub and spoke disjoint (where hubs cannot
exchange traffic). New topologies could be added by augmentation.
By default, any-to-any VPN service topology is used.
6.2.1.1. Route Target allocation
Layer 3 PE-based VPN is built using route-targets as described in
[RFC4364]. It is expected the management system to allocate
automatically a set of route-targets upon a VPN service creation
request. How the management system allocates route-targets is out of
scope of the document but multiple ways could be envisaged as
described below.
Management system
<------------------------------------------------->
Request RT
+-----------------------+ Topo a2a +----------+
RESTCONF | | -----> | |
User ------------- | Service Orchestration | |NetworkOSS|
l3vpn-svc | | <----- | |
model +-----------------------+ Response +----------+
RT1,RT2
In the example above, a service orchestration, owning the
instantiation of this service model, request route-targets to the
network OSS. Based on the requested VPN service topology, the
network OSS replies with one or multiple route-targets. The
interface between this service orchestration and network OSS is out
of scope of this document.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+---------------------------+
RESTCONF | |
User ------------- | Service Orchestration |
l3vpn-svc | |
model | |
| RT pool : 10:1->10:10000 |
| RT pool : 20:50->20:5000 |
+---------------------------+
In the example above, a service orchestration, owning the
instantiation of this service model, owns one or more pools of route-
target (specified by service provider) that can be allocated. Based
on the requested VPN service topology, it will allocate one or
multiple route-targets from the pool.
The mechanism displayed above are just examples and should not be
considered as an exhaustive list of solutions.
6.2.1.2. Any to any
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| VPN1_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ VPN1_Site2 |
| |
| VPN1_Site3 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ VPN1_Site4 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Any-to-any VPN service topology
In the any-to-any VPN service topology, all VPN sites can communicate
between each other without any restriction. It is expected that the
management system that receives an any-to-any IPVPN service request
through this model needs to assign and then configure the VRF and
route-targets on the appropriate PEs. In the any-to-any case, in
general a single route-target is required and every VRF imports and
exports this route-target.
6.2.1.3. Hub and Spoke
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
| +----------------------------------+
| |
| +----------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Hub and Spoke VPN service topology
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
In the hub and spoke VPN service topology, all spoke sites can
communicate only with Hub sites but not between each other, and hubs
can also communicate between each other. It is expected that the
management system that owns an any to any IPVPN service request
through this model, needs to assign and then configure the VRF and
route-targets on the appropriate PEs. In the hub and spoke case, in
general a two route-targets are required (one route-target for Hub
routes, one route-target for spoke routes). A Hub VRF, connecting
Hub sites, will export Hub routes with Hub route-target, and will
import Spoke routes through Spoke route-target. It will also import
the Hub route-target to allow Hub to Hub communication. A Spoke VRF,
connecting Spoke sites, will export Spoke routes with Spoke route-
target, and will import Hub routes through Hub route-target.
The management system MUST take into account Hub and Spoke
connections constraints. For example, if a management system decides
to mesh a spoke site and a hub site on the same PE, it needs to mesh
connections in different VRFs as displayed in the figure below.
Hub_Site ------- (VRF_Hub) PE1
(VRF_Spoke)
/ |
Spoke_Site1 -------------------+ |
|
Spoke_Site2 -----------------------+
6.2.1.4. Hub and Spoke disjoint
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure - Hub and Spoke disjoint VPN service topology
In the Hub and Spoke disjoint VPN service topology, all Spoke sites
can communicate only with Hub sites but not between each other and
Hubs cannot communicate between each other. It is expected that the
management system that owns an any to any IPVPN service request
through this model, needs to assign and then configure the VRF and
route-targets on the appropriate PEs. In the Hub and Spoke case, two
route-targets are required (one route-target for Hub routes, one
route-target for Spoke routes). A Hub VRF, connecting Hub sites,
will export Hub routes with Hub route-target, and will import Spoke
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
routes through Spoke route-target. A Spoke VRF, connecting Spoke
sites, will export Spoke routes with Spoke route-target, and will
import Hub routes through Hub route-target.
The management system MUST take into account Hub and Spoke
connections constraints as in the previous case.
Hub and Spoke disjoint can also be seen as multiple Hub and Spoke
VPNs (one per Hub) sharing with a common set of Spoke sites.
6.2.2. Cloud access
The proposed model provides a cloud access configuration through the
cloud-access container. The usage of cloud-access is targeted for
public cloud. An Internet access can also be considered as a public
cloud access service. The cloud-access container provides parameters
for network address translations and authorization rules.
A private cloud access may be addressed through NNIs as described in
Section 6.15.
A cloud identifier is used to reference the target service. This
identifier is local to each administration.
The model allows for source address translation before accessing the
cloud. IPv4 to IPv4 address translation (nat44) is the only
supported option but other options can be added through augmentation.
If IP source address translation is required to access the cloud, the
enabled leaf MUST be set to true in the "nat44" container. An IP
address may be provided in the customer-address leaf, in case the
customer is providing the IP address to be used for the cloud access.
If the service provider is providing this address, the customer-
address is not necessary as it can be picked from a service provider
pool.
By default, all sites in the IPVPN MUST be authorized to access to
the cloud. In case restrictions are required, a user MAY configure
the permit-site or deny-site leaf-list. The "permit-site" defines
the list of sites authorized for cloud access. The "deny-site"
defines the list of sites denied for cloud access. The model
supports both "deny any except" and "permit any except"
authorization.
How the restrictions will be configured on network elements is out of
scope of this document.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
IPVPN
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++
+ Site 3 + --- + Cloud1 +
+ Site 1 + +++++++++++
+ +
+ Site 2 + --- ++++++++++++
+ + + Internet +
+ Site 4 + ++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
++++++++++
+ Cloud2 +
++++++++++
In the example above, we may configure the global VPN to access
Internet by creating a cloud-access pointing to the cloud identifier
for the Internet service. No authorized-sites will be configured as
all sites are required to access the Internet. The "address-
translation/nat44/enabled" leaf will be set to true.
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>123456487</vpn-id>
<cloud-accesses>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>INTERNET</cloud-identifier>
<address-translation>
<nat44>
<enabled>true</enabled>
</nat44>
</address-translation>
</cloud-access>
</cloud-accesses>
</vpn-service>
If Site1 and Site2 requires access to Cloud1, a new cloud-access will
be created pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud1. The "permit-
site" leaf-list will be filled with a reference to Site1 and Site2.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>123456487</vpn-id>
<cloud-accesses>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>Cloud1</cloud-identifier>
<permit-site>site1</permit-site>
<permit-site>site2</permit-site>
<cloud-access>
</cloud-accesses>
</vpn-service>
If all sites except Site1 requires access to Cloud2, a new cloud-
access will be created pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud2.
The "deny-site" leaf-list will be filled with a reference to Site1.
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>123456487</vpn-id>
<cloud-accesses>
<cloud-access>
<cloud-identifier>Cloud2</cloud-identifier>
<deny-site>site1</deny-site>
</cloud-access>
</cloud-accesses>
</vpn-service>
6.2.3. Multicast service
Multicast in IP VPN is described in [RFC6513].
If multicast support is required for an IPVPN, some global multicast
parameters are required as input of the service request.
The user of this model will need to fill the flavor of trees that
will be used by customer within the IPVPN (Customer tree). The
proposed model supports bidirectional, shared and source-based trees
(and can be augmented). Multiple flavors of tree can be supported
simultaneously.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Operator network
______________
/ \
| |
(SSM tree) |
Recv (IGMPv3) -- Site2 ------- PE2 |
| PE1 --- Site1 --- Source1
| | \
| | -- Source2
| |
(ASM tree) |
Recv (IGMPv2) -- Site3 ------- PE3 |
| |
(SSM tree) |
Recv (IGMPv3) -- Site4 ------- PE4 |
| / |
Recv (IGMPv2) -- Site5 -------- |
(ASM tree) |
| |
\_______________/
In case of an ASM flavor requested, this model requires to fill the
rp and rp-discovery parameters. Multiple RP to group mappings can be
created using the rp-group-mappings container. For each mapping, the
RP service can be managed by the service provider using the leaf
"provider-managed/enabled" set to true. In case of provider managed
RP, the user can request a rendez-vous point redundancy and/or an
optimal traffic delivery. Those parameters will help the service
provider to select the appropriate technology or architecture to
fulfill the customer service requirement: for instance, in case of a
request for an optimal traffic delivery, a service provider may use
Anycast-RP or RP-tree to SPT switchover architectures.
In case of a customer managed RP, the RP address must be filled in
the RP to group mappings using the "rp-address" leaf. This leaf is
not needed for a provider managed RP.
User can define a specific rp-discovery mechanism like: auto-rp,
static-rp, bsr-rp modes. By default, the model considers static-rp
if ASM is requested. A single rp-discovery mechanism is allowed for
the VPN. The "rp-discovery" container can be used for both provider
and customer managed RPs. In case of a provider managed RP, if the
user wants to use bsr-rp as a discovery protocol, a service provider
should consider the provider managed rp-group-mappings for the bsr-rp
configuration. The service provider will then configure its selected
RPs to be bsr-rp-candidates. In case of a customer managed RP and a
bsr-rp discovery mechanism, the rp-address provided will be
considered as bsr-rp candidate.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.2.4. Extranet VPNs
There are some cases where a particular VPN needs to access to
resources (servers, hosts ...) that are external. These resources
may be located in another VPN.
+-----------+ +-----------+
/ \ / \
SiteA -- | VPN A | --- | VPN B | --- SiteB
\ / \ / (Shared
+-----------+ +-----------+ resources)
In the figure above, VPN B has some resources on Site B that need to
be available to some customers/partners. VPN A must be able to
access those VPN B resources.
Such VPN connection scenario can be achieved by the VPN policy
defined in Section 6.5.2.2. But there are some simple cases where a
particular VPN (VPN A) needs to access to all resources in a VPN B.
The model provides an easy way to setup this connection using the
"extranet-vpns" container.
The "extranet-vpns" container defines a list of VPNs a particular VPN
wants to access. The "extranet-vpns" must be used on customer VPNs
accessing extranet resources in another VPN. In the figure above, in
order to give access for VPN A to VPN B, extranet-vpns container
needs to be configured under VPN A with an entry corresponding to VPN
B and there is no service configuration requirement on VPN B.
Readers should note that even if there is no configuration
requirement on VPN B, if VPN A lists VPN B as extranet, all sites in
VPN B will gain access to all sites in VPN A.
The "site-role" leaf defines the role of the local VPN sites in the
target extranet VPN service topology. Site roles are defined in
Section 6.4. Based on this, the requirements described in
Section 6.4 regarding the site-role leaf are also applicable here.
In the example below, VPN A accesses to VPN B resources through an
extranet connection, a Spoke role is required for VPN A sites as
sites from VPN A must not be able to communicate between each other
through the extranet VPN connection.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<vpn-service-topology>hub-Spoke</vpn-service-topology>
</vpn-service>
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<vpn-service-topology>any-to-any</vpn-service-topology>
<extranet-vpns>
<extranet-vpn>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</extranet-vpn>
</extranet-vpns>
</vpn-service>
This model does not define how the extranet configuration will be
achieved.
Any more complex VPN interconnection scenario (e.g. only part of
sites of VPN A accessing only part of sites of VPN B) needs to be
achieved using the vpn attachment defined in Section 6.5.2 and
especially the VPN policy defined in Section 6.5.2.2.
6.3. Site overview
A site represents a connection of a customer office to one or more
VPN services.
+-------------+
/ \
+------------------+ +-----| VPN1 |
| | | \ /
| New York Office | ----- (site) -----+ +-------------+
| | | +-------------+
+------------------+ | / \
+-----| VPN2 |
\ /
+-------------+
A site is composed of some characteristics :
o Unique identifier (site-id): to uniquely identify the site within
the overall network infrastructure. The identifier is a string
allowing to any encoding for the local administration of the VPN
service.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o Locations (locations): site location information to allow easy
retrieval on nearest available resources. A site may be composed
of multiple locations.
o Devices: the customer can request one or more customer premise
equipments from the service provider for a particular site.
o Management (management): defines the model of management of the
site, for example : co-managed, customer managed or provider
managed.
o Site network accesses (site-network-accesses): defines the list of
network accesses associated to the sites and their properties :
especially bearer, connection and service parameters.
A site-network-access represents an IP logical connection of a site.
A site may have multiple site-network-accesses.
+------------------+ Site
| |-----------------------------------
| |****** (site-network-access#1) ******
| New York Office |
| |****** (site-network-access#2) ******
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
Multiple site-network-accesses are used for instance in case of
multihoming. Some other meshing cases may also involve multiple
site-network-accesses.
The site configuration is viewed as a global entity, we assume that
it is mostly the role of the management to split the parameters
between the different elements within the network. For example, in
the case of the site-network-access configuration, the management
system needs to split the overall parameters between the PE
configuration and the CE configuration.
6.3.1. Devices and locations
A site may be composed of multiple locations. All the locations will
need to be configured as part of the "locations" container and list.
A typical example of multilocation site is an headquarter in a city
composed of multiple buildings. Those buildings may be located in
different parts of the city and may be linked by intra-city fibers
(customer metropolitan area network). In such a case, when
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
connecting to a VPN service, the customer may ask for multihoming
based on its distributed locations.
New York Site
+------------------+ Site
| +--------------+ |-----------------------------------
| | Manhattan | |****** (site-network-access#1) ******
| +--------------+ |
| +--------------+ |
| | Brooklyn | |****** (site-network-access#2) ******
| +--------------+ |
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
A customer may also request some premise equipments (CEs) to the
service provider through the "devices" container. Requesting a CE
implies a provider-managed or co-managed model. A particular device
must be ordered to a particular already configured location. This
would help the service provider to send the device to the appropriate
postal address. In a multilocation site, a customer may for example
request a CE for each location on the site where multihoming must be
implemented. In the figure above, one device may be requested for
the Manhattan location and one other for the Brooklyn location.
By using devices and locations, the user can influence the
multihoming scenario he wants to implement: single CE, dual CE...
6.3.2. Site network accesses
As mentioned, a site may be multihomed. Each IP network access for a
site is defined in the site-network-accesses list. The site-network-
access defines how the site is connected on the network and is split
into three main classes of parameters:
o bearer: defines requirements of the attachment (below Layer 3).
o connection: defines Layer 3 protocol parameters of the attachment.
o availability: defines the site availability policy. The
availability parameters are defined in Section 6.7
The site-network-access has a specific type (site-network-access-
type). This documents defines two types :
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o point-to-point: describes a point to point connection between the
service provider and the customer.
o multipoint: describes a multipoint connection between the service
provider and the customer.
The type of site-network-access may have an impact on the parameters
offered to the customer, e.g., a service provider may not offer
encryption for multipoint accesses. Deciding what parameter is
supported for point-to-point and/or multipoint accesses is up to the
provider and is out of scope of this document. Some containers
proposed in the model may require extension in order to work properly
for multipoint accesses.
6.3.2.1. Bearer
The "bearer" container defines the requirements for the site
attachment to the provider network that are below Layer 3.
The bearer parameters will help to determine the access media to be
used. This is further described in Section 6.6.3.
6.3.2.2. Connection
The "ip-connection" container defines the protocol parameters of the
attachment (IPv4 and IPv6). Depending on the management mode, it
refers to the PE-CE addressing or CE to customer LAN addressing. In
any case, it describes the provider to customer responsibility
boundary. For a customer managed site, it refers to the PE-CE
connection. For a provider managed site, it refers to the CE to LAN
connection.
6.3.2.2.1. IP addressing
An IP subnet can be configured for either layer 3 protocols. For a
dual stack connection, two subnets will be provided, one for each
address family.
The address-allocation-type determines how the address allocation
needs to be done. The current model proposes five ways of IP address
allocation:
o provider-dhcp: the provider will provide DHCP service for customer
equipments, this is can be applied to either IPv4 and IPv6
containers.
o provider-dhcp-relay: the provider will provide DHCP relay service
for customer equipments, this is applicable to both IPv4 and IPv6
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
addressing. The customer needs to fill DHCP server list to be
used.
o static-address: Addresses will be assigned manually, this is
applicable to both IPv4 and IPv6 addressing.
o slaac: enables stateless address autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]).
This is applicable only for IPv6.
o provider-dhcp-slaac: the provider will provide DHCP service for
customer equipments as well as stateless address
autoconfiguration. This is applicable only for IPv6.
In the dynamic addressing mechanism, it is expected from the service
provider to provide at least the IP address, mask and default gateway
information.
6.3.2.2.2. OAM
A customer may require a specific IP connectivity fault detection
mechanism on the IP connection. The model supports BFD as a fault
detection mechanism. This can be extended with other mechanisms by
augmentation. The provider can propose some profiles to the customer
depending of the service level the customer wants to achieve.
Profile names must be communicated to the customer. This
communication is out of scope of this document. Some fixed values
for the holdtime period may also be imposed by the customer if the
provider enables it.
The OAM container can easily be augmented by other mechanisms,
especially work from LIME Working Group may be reused.
6.3.2.3. Inheritance of parameters between site and site-network-access
Some parameters can be configured both at the site level at the site-
network-access level: e.g. routing, services, security... Inheritance
applies when parameters are defined at site level. If a parameter is
configured at both site and access level, the access level parameter
MUST override the site level parameter. Those parameters will be
described later in the document.
In terms of provisionning impact, it will be up to the implementation
to decide of the appropriate behavior when modifying existing
configurations. But the service provider will need to communicate to
the user about the impact of using inheritance. For example, if we
consider that a site has already provisionned three site-network-
accesses, what will happen if customer is changing a service
parameter at site level ? An implementation of this model may update
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
the service parameters of all already provisionned site-network-
accesses (with potential impact on live traffic) or it may take into
account this new parameter only for the new sites.
6.4. Site role
A VPN has a particular service topology as described in
Section 6.2.1. As a consequence, each site belonging to a VPN is
assigned with a particular role in this topology. The site-role
defines the role of the site in a particular VPN topology.
In the any-to-any VPN service topology, all sites MUST have the same
role which is any-to-any-role.
In the hub-spoke or hub-spoke-disjoint VPN service topology, sites
MUST have a hub-role or a spoke-role.
6.5. Site belonging to multiple VPNs
6.5.1. Site vpn flavor
A site may be part of one or multiple VPNs. The site flavor defines
the way the VPN multiplexing is done. The current version of the
model supports four flavors:
o site-vpn-flavor-single: the site belongs to only one VPN.
o site-vpn-flavor-multi: the site belongs to multiple VPNs and all
the logical accesses of the sites belongs to the same set of VPNs.
o site-vpn-flavor-sub: the site belongs to multiple VPNs with
multiple logical accesses. Each logical access may map to
different VPNs (one or many).
o site-vpn-flavor-nni: the site represents an option A NNI.
6.5.1.1. Single VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-single
The figure below describes the single VPN attachment. The site
connects to only one VPN.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+--------+
+------------------+ Site / \
| |-----------------------------| |
| |***(site-network-access#1)***| VPN1 |
| New York Office | | |
| |***(site-network-access#2)***| |
| |-----------------------------| |
+------------------+ \ /
+--------+
6.5.1.2. Multi VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-multi
The figure below describes a site connected to multiple VPNs.
+---------+
+---/----+ \
+------------------+ Site / | \ |
| |--------------------------------- | |VPN B|
| |***(site-network-access#1)******* | | |
| New York Office | | | | |
| |***(site-network-access#2)******* \ | /
| |-----------------------------| VPN A+-----|---+
+------------------+ \ /
+--------+
In the example above, the New York office is multihomed, both logical
accesses are using the same VPN attachment rules. Both logical
accesses are connected to VPN A and VPN B.
Reaching VPN A or VPN B from New York office will be based on
destination based routing. Having the same destination reachable
from the two VPNs may cause routing troubles. This would be the role
of the customer administration to ensure the appropriate mapping of
its prefixes in each VPN.
6.5.1.3. Sub VPN attachment : site-vpn-flavor-sub
The figure below describes a subVPN attachment. The site connects to
multiple VPNs but each logical access is attached to a particular set
of VPN. A typical use case of subVPN is a customer site used by
multiple affiliates with private resources for each affiliates that
cannot be shared (communication is prevented between the affiliates).
It is similar than having separate sites instead that the customer
wants to share some physical components while keeping a strong
communication isolation between affiliates. In the example, the
access#1 is attached to VPN B while the access#2 is attached to VPNA.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+------------------+ Site +--------+
| |----------------------------------/ \
| |****(site-network-access#1)******| VPN B |
| New York Office | \ /
| | +--------+
| | +--------+
| | / \
| |****(site-network-access#2)******| VPN A |
| | \ /
| | +--------+
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
MultiVPN can be implemented in addition to subVPN, as a consequence,
each site-network-access can access to multiple VPNs. In the example
below, access#1 is mapped to VPN B and VPN C, while access#2 is
mapped to VPN A and VPN D.
+------------------+ Site +-----+
| |----------------------------------/ +----+
| |****(site-network-access#1)******| VPN B/ \
| New York Office | \ | VPN C |
| | +----\ /
| | +-----+
| |
| | +------+
| | / +-----+
| |****(site-network-access#2)******| VPN A/ \
| | \ | VPN D |
| | +------\ /
| |----------------------------------- +---+
+------------------+
Multihoming is also possible with subVPN, in this case, site-network-
accesses are grouped, and a particular group will access to the same
set of VPNs. In the example below, access#1 and #2 are part of the
same group (multihomed together) and are mapped to VPN B and C, in
addition access#3 and #4 are part of the same group (multihomed
together) and are mapped to VPN A and D.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+------------------+ Site +-----+
| |----------------------------------/ +----+
| |****(site-network-access#1)******| VPNB / \
| New York Office |****(site-network-access#2)******\ | VPN C |
| | +----\ /
| | +-----+
| |
| | +------+
| | / +-----+
| |****(site-network-access#3)******| VPNA / \
| |****(site-network-access#4)****** \ | VPN D |
| | +------\ /
| |----------------------------------- +---+
+------------------+
In terms of service configuration, subVPN can be achieved by
requesting the site-network-access to use the same bearer (see
Section 6.6.4 and Section 6.6.6.4 for more details).
6.5.1.4. NNI : site-vpn-flavor-nni
Some Network to Network Interface (NNI) scenario may be modeled using
the site container (see Section 6.15.1). Using the site container to
model an NNI is only one possible option for NNI (see Section 6.15).
This option is called option A by reference to the option A NNI
defined in [RFC4364]. It is helpful for the service provider to
identify that the requested VPN connection is not a regular site but
a NNI as specific default device configuration parameters may be
applied in case of NNI (e.g. ACLs, routing policies...).
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
SP A SP B
--------------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + (VRF1)--(VPN1)----(VRF1) + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (VRF2)--(VPN2)----(VRF2) + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + (VRF1)--(VPN1)----(VRF1) + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (VRF2)--(VPN2)----(VRF2) + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
-------------------- -------------------
The figure above describes an option A NNI scenario that can be
modeled using the site container. In order to connect its customer
VPN (VPN1 and VPN2) on the SP B network, SP A may request the
creation of some site-network-accesses to SP B. The site-vpn-flavor-
nni will be used to inform SP B that this is an NNI and not a regular
customer site. The site-vpn-flavor-nni may be multihomed and
multiVPN as well.
6.5.2. Attaching a site to a VPN
Due to the multiple site-vpn flavors, the attachment of a site to an
IPVPN is done at the site-network-access (logical access) level
through the vpn-attachment container. The vpn-attachment container
is mandatory. The model provides two ways of attachment:
o By referencing directly the target VPN.
o By referencing a VPN policy for more complex attachments.
A choice is implemented to allow user to choose the best fitting
flavor.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.5.2.1. Reference a VPN
Referencing a vpn-id provides an easy way to attach a particular
logical access to a VPN. This is the best way in case of single VPN
attachment or subVPN with single VPN attachment per logical access.
When referencing a vpn-id, the site-role must be added to express the
role of the site in the target VPN service topology.
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>LA1</site-network-access-id>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>LA2</site-network-access-id>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
The example above describes a subVPN case where a site SITE1 has two
logical accesses (LA1 and LA2) with LA1 attached to VPNA and LA2
attached to VPNB.
6.5.2.2. VPN policy
The vpn-policy helps to express a multiVPN scenario where a logical
access belongs to multiple VPNs. Multiple VPN policies can be
created to handle the subVPN case where each logical access is part
of a different set of VPNs.
As a site can belong to multiple VPNs, the vpn-policy may be composed
of multiple entries. A filter can be applied to specify that only
some LANs of the site should be part of a particular VPN. Each time
a site (or LAN) is attached to a VPN, the user must precisely
describe its role (site-role) within the target VPN service topology.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Site1 ------ PE7 |
+-------------------------+ [VPN2] |
| |
+-------------------------+ |
| Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Site3 |
+----------------------------------+ |
| |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| Site4 ------ PE5 | PE6 ------ Site5 | |
| | |
| [VPN3] | |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| |
+---------------------------+
In the example above, Site5 is part of two VPNs: VPN3 and VPN2. It
will play a hub-role in VPN2 and an any-to-any role in VPN3. We can
express such multiVPN scenario as follows:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site>
<site-id>Site5</site-id>
<vpn-policies>
<vpn-policy>
<vpn-policy-id>POLICY1</vpn-policy-id>
<entries>
<id>ENTRY1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn-id>VPN2</vpn-id>
<site-role>hub-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
<entries>
<id>ENTRY2</id>
<vpn>
<vpn-id>VPN3</vpn-id>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
</vpn-policies>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>LA1</site-network-access-id>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-policy-id>POLICY1</vpn-policy-id>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
Now, if a more granular VPN attachment is necessary, filtering can be
used. For example, if LAN1 from Site5 must be attached to VPN2 as
Hub and LAN2 must be attached to VPN3, the following configuration
can be used:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site>
<site-id>Site5</site-id>
<vpn-policies>
<vpn-policy>
<vpn-policy-id>POLICY1</vpn-policy-id>
<entries>
<id>ENTRY1</id>
<filter>
<lan-tag>LAN1</lan-tag>
</filter>
<vpn>
<vpn-id>VPN2</vpn-id>
<site-role>hub-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
<entries>
<id>ENTRY2</id>
<filter>
<lan-tag>LAN2</lan-tag>
</filter>
<vpn>
<vpn-id>VPN3</vpn-id>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
</vpn-policies>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>LA1</site-network-access-id>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-policy-id>POLICY1</vpn-policy-id>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6. Deciding where to connect the site
The management system will have to determine where to connect each
site-network-access of a particular site to the provider network (PE,
aggregation switch ...).
The current model proposes parameters and constraints that can
influence the meshing of the site-network-access.
The management system SHOULD honor the customer constraints, if the
constraint is too strict and can not be filled, the management system
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
MUST not provision the site and SHOULD provide an information to the
user. How the information is provided is out of scope of the
document. It would then be up to the user to relax the constraint or
not.
Parameters are just hints for the management system for service
placement.
In addition to parameters and constraints, the management system
decision MAY be based on any other internal constraint that are up to
the service provider: least load, distance ...
6.6.1. Constraint: Device
In case of provider-management or co-management, one or more devices
have been ordered by the customer. The customer may force a
particular site-network-access to be connected on a particular device
he ordered.
New York Site
+------------------+ Site
| +--------------+ |-----------------------------------
| | Manhattan | |
| | CE1********* (site-network-access#1) ******
| +--------------+ |
| +--------------+ |
| | Brooklyn CE2********* (site-network-access#2) ******
| +--------------+ |
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
In the figure above, the site-network-access#1 is associated to CE1
in the service request. The service provider must ensure the
provisionning of this connection.
6.6.2. Constraint/parameter: Site location
The location information provided in this model MAY be used by a
management system to determine the target PE to mesh the site
(service provider side). A particular location must be associated to
each site network access when configuring it. The service provider
MUST honor the termination of the access on the location associated
with the site network access (customer side). The country-code in
the site-location SHOULD be expressed as an ISO ALPHA-2 code.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The site-network-access location is determined by the "location-
flavor". In case of provider-managed or co-managed site, the user is
expected to configure a "device-reference" (device case) that will
bind the site-network-access to a particular device the customer
ordered. As each device is already associated to a particular
location, in such case the location information is retrieved from the
device location. In case of customer-managed site, the user is
expected to configure a "location-reference" (location case), this
provides a reference to an existing configured location and will help
the placement.
PoP#1 (New York)
+---------+
| PE1 |
Site #1 ---... | PE2 |
(Atlantic City) | PE3 |
+---------+
PoP#2 (Washington)
+---------+
| PE4 |
| PE5 |
| PE6 |
+---------+
PoP#3 (Philadelphia)
+---------+
| PE7 |
Site #2 CE#1---... | PE2 |
(Reston) | PE9 |
+---------+
In the example above, Site#1 is a customer managed site with a
location L1, while Site#2 is a provider-managed site for which a CE#1
was ordered, Site#2 is configured with L2 as location. When
configuring a site-network-access for Site#1, the user will need to
reference the location L1, so the management system will know that
the access will need to terminate on this location. Then this
management system may mesh Site#1 on a PE in the Philadelphia PoP for
distance reason. It may also take into account resources available
on PEs to determine the exact target PE (e.g. least loaded).
Regarding Site#2, the user is expected to configure the site-network-
access with a device-reference to CE#1, so the management system will
know that the access must terminate on the location of CE#1 and must
be connected to CE#1. For placing the service provider side of the
access connection, in case of shortest distance PE used, it may mesh
Site #2 on the Washington PoP.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.6.3. Constraint/parameter: access type
The management system needs to elect the access media to connect the
site to the customer (for example : xDSL, leased line, Ethernet
backhaul ...). The customer may provide some parameters/constraints
that will provide hints to the management system.
The bearer container information SHOULD be used as first input :
o The "requested-type" provides an information about the media type
the customer would like. If the "strict" leaf is equal to "true",
this MUST be considered as a strict constraint, so the management
system cannot connect the site with another media type. If the
"strict" leaf is equal to "false" (default), if the requested-type
cannot be fulfilled, the management system can select another
type. The supported media types SHOULD be communicated by the
service provider to the customer by a mechanism that is out of
scope of the document.
o The "always-on" leaf defines a strict constraint: if set to
"true", the management system MUST elect a media type which is
always-on (this means no dial access type).
o The "bearer-reference" is used in case the customer has already
ordered a network connection to the service provider apart of the
IPVPN site and wants to reuse this connection. The string used in
an internal reference from the service provider describing the
already available connection. This is also a strict requirement
that cannot be relaxed. How the reference is given to the
customer is out of scope of the document but as a pure example,
when the customer ordered the bearer (through a process out of
this model), the service provider may had provided the bearer
reference that can be used for provisionning services on top.
Any other internal parameters from the service provider can be used
in addition. The management system MAY use other parameters such as
the requested svc-input-bandwidth and svc-output-bandwidth to help to
decide the access type to be used.
6.6.4. Constraint: access diversity
Each site-network-access may have one or more constraints that would
drive the placement of the access. By default, the model assumes no
constraint but is expected allocation of a unique bearer per site-
network-access.
In order to help the different placement scenarios, a site-network-
access may be tagged using one or multiple group identifiers. The
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
group identifier is a string so it can accommodate both explicit
naming of a group of sites (e.g. "multihomed-set1" or "subVPN") or a
numbered identifier (e.g. 12345678). The meaning of each group-id is
local to each customer administrator. And the management system MUST
ensure that different customers can use the same group-ids. One or
more group-ids can also be defined at the site-level, as a
consequence, all site-network-accesses under the site MUST inherit
the group-ids of the site they are belonging to. When, in addition
to the site group-ids, some group-ids are defined at the site-
network-access level, the management system MUST consider the union
of all groups (site level and site network access level) for this
particular site-network-access.
For an already configured site-network-access, each constraint MUST
be expressed against a targeted set of site-network-accesses, this
site-network-access MUST never be taken into account in the targeted
set: e.g. "My site-network-access S must not be connected on the
same PoP as the site-network-accesses that are part of group 10".
The set of site-network-accesses against which the constraint is
evaluated can be expressed as a list of groups or "all-other-
accesses" or "all-other-groups". The "all-other-accesses" option
means that the current site-network-access constraint MUST be
evaluated against all the other site-network-accesses belonging to
the current site. The "all-other-groups" option means that the
constraint MUST be evaluated against all groups the current site-
network-access is not belonging to.
The current model proposes multiple constraint-types:
pe-diverse: the current site-network-access MUST not be connected
to the same PE as the targeted site-network-accesses.
pop-diverse: the current site-network-access MUST not be connected
to the same PoP as the targeted site-network-accesses.
linecard-diverse: the current site-network-access MUST not be
connected to the same linecard as the targeted site-network-
accesses.
bearer-diverse: the current site-network-access MUST NOT use
common bearer components compared to bearers used by the targeted
site-network-accesses. "bearer-diverse" provides some level of
diversity at the access level. As an example, two "bearer-
diverse" site-network-accesses must not use the same DSLAM or BAS
or layer 2 switch...
same-pe: the current site-network-access MUST be connected to the
same PE as the targeted site-network-accesses.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
same-bearer: the current site-network-access MUST be connected
using the same bearer as the targeted site-network-accesses.
These constraint-types can be extended through augmentation.
Each constraint is expressed as "The site-network-access S must be
<constraint-type> (e.g. pe-diverse, pop-diverse) from these <target>
site-network-accesses".
The group-id used to target some site-network-accesses may be the
same as the one used by the current site-network-access. This eases
configuration of scenarios where a group of site-network-access has a
constraint between each other. As an example if we want a set of
sites (site#1 up to #5) to be connected on different PEs, we can tag
them with the same group-id and express a pe-diverse constraint for
this group-id.
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE2</site-id>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
...
<site>
<site-id>SITE5</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
The group-id used to target some site-network-accesses may be also
different than the one used by the current site-network-access. This
can be used to express that a group of site has some constraints
against another group of sites, but there is no constraint within the
group. As an example, if we consider a set of 6 sites with two sets
and we want to ensure that a site in the first set must be pop-
diverse from a site in the second set.
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
<site>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site-id>SITE2</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
...
<site>
<site-id>SITE5</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE6</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6.5. Impossible access placement
Some impossible placement scenarios may be created through the
proposed configuration framework. Impossible scenarios could come
from too restrictive constraints leading to impossible placement in
the network or conflicting constraints that would also lead to
impossible placement. An example of conflicting rules would be to
request a site-network-access#1 to be pe-diverse from a site-network-
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
access#2 and to request at the same time that site-network-access#2
to be on the same PE as site-network-access#1. When the management
system cannot determine the placement of a site-network-access, it
SHOULD return an error message indicating that placement was not
possible.
6.6.6. Examples of access placement
6.6.6.1. Multihoming
The customer wants to create a multihomed site. The site will be
composed of two site-network-accesses and the customer wants the two
site-network-accesses to be meshed on different PoPs for resiliency
purpose.
PoP#1
+-------+ +---------+
| | | PE1 |
| |---site_network_access#1 ---- | PE2 |
| | | PE3 |
| | +---------+
| Site#1|
| | PoP#2
| | +---------+
| | | PE4 |
| |---site_network_access#2 ---- | PE5 |
| | | PE6 |
| | +---------+
+-------+
This scenario can be expressed in the following way:
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>2</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
But it can also be expressed as:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<all-other-accesses/>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>2</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<all-other-accesses/>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6.6.2. Site offload
The customer has six branch offices in a particular region and he
wants to prevent to have all branch offices to be connected on the
same PE.
He wants to express that three branch offices cannot be connected on
the same linecard. And the other branch offices must be connected on
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
a different PoP. Those other branch offices cannot also be connected
on the same linecard.
PoP#1
+---------+
| PE1 |
Office#1 ---... | PE2 |
Office#2 ---... | PE3 |
Office#3 ---... | PE4 |
+---------+
PoP#2
+---------+
Office#4 ---... | PE4 |
Office#5 ---... | PE5 |
Office#6 ---... | PE6 |
+---------+
This scenario can be expressed in the following way:
o We need to create two sets of sites: set#1 composed of Office#1 up
to 3, set#2 composed of Office#4 up to 6.
o Sites within set#1 must be pop-diverse from sites within set#2 and
vice versa.
o Sites within set#1 must be linecard-diverse from other sites in
set#1 (same for set#2).
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE2</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE3</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE4</site-id>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE5</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site>
<site>
<site-id>SITE6</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pop-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>linecard-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNA</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6.6.3. Parallel links
To increase its site bandwidth at a cheaper cost, a customer wants to
order two parallel site-network-accesses that will be connected to
the same PE.
*******SNA1**********
Site 1 *******SNA2********** PE1
This scenario can be expressed in the following way:
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>PE-linkgrp-1</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-pe</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>PE-linkgrp-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>2</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>PE-linkgrp-1</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-pe</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>PE-linkgrp-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6.6.4. SubVPN with multihoming
A customer has site which is dualhomed. The dualhoming must be done
on two different PEs. The customer wants also to implement two
subVPNs on those multihomed accesses.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
+------------------+ Site +-----+
| |----------------------------------/ +----+
| |****(site-network-access#1)******| VPNB / \
| New York Office |****(site-network-access#2)*************| VPN C |
| | +----\ /
| | +-----+
| |
| | +------+
| | / +-----+
| |****(site-network-access#3)******| VPNB / \
| |****(site-network-access#4)**************| VPN C |
| | +------\ /
| |----------------------------------- +---+
+------------------+
This scenario can be expressed in the following way:
o The site will have 4 site network accesses (2 subVPN coupled with
dual homing).
o Site-network-access#1 and #3 will correspond to the multihoming of
the subVPN B. A PE-diverse constraint is required between them.
o Site-network-access#2 and #4 will correspond to the multihoming of
the subVPN C. A PE-diverse constraint is required between them.
o To ensure proper usage of the same bearer for the subVPN, site-
network-access #1 and #2 must share the same bearer as site-
network-access #3 and #4.
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-bearer</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>2</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-bearer</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNC</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>3</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-bearer</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNB</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>4</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-1</group-id>
</group>
</target>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</constraint>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>same-bearer</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>dualhomed-2</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPNC</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
6.6.7. Route Distinguisher and VRF allocation
The route-distinguisher is a critical parameter of PE-based L3VPNs as
described in [RFC4364] that allows to distinguish common addressing
plans in different VPNs. As for route-targets, it is expected that a
management system will allocate a VRF on the target PE and a route-
distinguisher for this VRF.
If a VRF already exists on the target PE, and the VRF fulfils the
connectivity constraints for the site, there is no need to recreate
another VRF and the site MAY be meshed within this existing VRF. How
the management system checks that an existing VRF fulfils the
connectivity constraints for a site is out of scope of this document.
If no such a VRF exists on the target PE, the management system has
to initiate a new VRF creation on the target PE and has to allocate a
new route-distinguisher for this new VRF.
The management system MAY apply a per-VPN or per-VRF allocation
policy for the route-distinguisher depending on the service provider
policy. In a per-VPN allocation policy, all VRFs (dispatched on
multiple PEs) within a VPN will share the same route distinguisher
value. In a per-VRF model, all VRFs should always have a unique
route-distinguisher value. Some other allocation policies are also
possible, and this document does not restrict the allocation policies
to be used.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The allocation of route-distinguishers MAY be done in the same way as
route-targets. The example provided in Section 6.2.1.1 could be
reused.
Note that a service provider MAY configure a target PE for an
automated allocation of route-distinguishers. In this case, there
will be no need for any backend system to allocate a route-
distinguisher value.
6.7. Site network access availability
A site may be multihomed, meaning it has multiple site-network-access
points. Placement constraints defined in previous sections will help
to ensure physical diversity.
When the site-network-accesses are placed on the network, a customer
may want to use a particular routing policy on those accesses.
The "site-network-access/availability" container defines parameters
for the site redundancy. The "access-priority" leaf defines a
preference for a particular access. This preference is used to model
loadbalancing or primary/backup scenarios. The higher the access-
priority the higher the preference will be.
The figure below describes how the access-priority attribute can be
used.
Hub#1 LAN (Primary/backup) Hub#2 LAN (Loadsharing)
| |
| access-priority 1 access-priority 1 |
|--- CE1 ------- PE1 PE3 --------- CE3 --- |
| |
| |
|--- CE2 ------- PE2 PE4 --------- CE4 --- |
| access-priority 2 access-priority 1 |
PE5
|
|
|
CE5
|
Spoke#1 site (Single-homed)
In the figure above, Hub#2 requires loadsharing so all the site-
network-accesses must use the same access-priority value. On the
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
contrary, as Hub#1 requires primary/backup, an higher access-priority
will be configured on the primary access.
More complex scenarios can be modeled. Let's consider a Hub site
with five accesses to the network (A1,A2,A3,A4,A5). The customer
wants to loadshare its traffic on A1,A2 in the nominal situation. If
A1 and A2 fails, he wants to loadshare its traffic on A3 and A4, and
finally if A1 to A4 are down, he wants to use A5. We can model it
easily by configuring the following access-priorities: A1=100,
A2=100, A3=50, A4=50, A5=10.
The access-priority has some limitation. A scenario like the
previous one with five accesses but with the constraint of having
traffic loadshared between A3 and A4 in case of A1 OR A2 being down
is not achievable. But the authors consider that the access-priority
covers most of the deployment use cases and the model can still be
extended by augmentation to support additional use cases.
6.8. Traffic protection
The service model supports the ability to protect the traffic for a
site. A protection provides a better availability to multihoming by,
for example, using local-repair techniques in case of failures. The
associated level of service guarantee would be based on an agreement
between customer and service provider and is out of scope of this
document.
Site#1 Site#2
CE1 ----- PE1 -- P1 P3 -- PE3 ---- CE3
| | |
| | |
CE2 ----- PE2 -- P2 P4 -- PE4 ---- CE4
/
/
CE5 ----+
Site#3
In the figure above, we consider an IPVPN service with three sites
including two dual homed sites (site#1 and #2). For dual homed
sites, we consider PE1-CE1 and PE3-CE3 as primary, and
PE2-CE2,PE4-CE4 as backup for the example (even if protection also
applies to loadsharing scenarios).
In order to protect Site#2 against a failure, user may set the
"traffic-protection/enabled" leaf to true for site#2. How the
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
traffic protection will be implemented is out of scope of the
document. But as an example, in such a case, if we consider traffic
coming from a remote site (site#1 or site#3), where the primary path
is to use PE3 as egress PE. PE3 may have preprogrammed a backup
forwarding entry pointing to backup path (through PE4-CE4) for all
prefixes going through PE3-CE3 link. How the backup path is computed
is out of scope of the document. When PE3-CE3 link fails, traffic is
still received by PE3 but PE3 switch automatically traffic to the
backup entry, path will so be PE1-P1-(...)-P3-PE3-PE4-CE4 until
remote PEs reconverge and use PE4 as the egress PE.
6.9. Security
The "security" container defines customer specific security
parameters for the site. The security options supported in the model
are limited but may be extended by augmentation.
6.9.1. Authentication
The current model does not support any authentication parameters for
the site connection, but such parameters may be added in the
"authentication" container through augmentation.
6.9.2. Encryption
A traffic encryption can be requested on the connection. It may be
performed at layer 2 or layer 3 by selecting the appropriate
enumeration in "layer" leaf. For example, a service provider may use
IPSec when a customer is requesting layer 3 encryption. The
encryption profile can be a service provider defined profile or a
customer specific.
When a service provider profile is used and a key (e.g. a preshared
key) is allocated by the provider to be used by a customer, the
service provider should provide a way to communicate the key in a
secured way to the customer.
When a customer profile is used, the model supports only preshared
key for authentication with the preshared key provided through the
NETCONF or RESTCONF request. A secure channel must be used to ensure
that the preshared key cannot be intercepted.
It may be necessary for the customer to change the preshared key on a
regular basis for security reasons. To perform a key change, the
user can request to the service provider by submitting a new
preshared key for the site configuration (as displayed below). This
mechanism may not to be hitless.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site>
<site-id>SITE1</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1</site-network-access-id>
<security>
<encryption-profile>
<preshared-key>MY_NEW_KEY</preshared-key>
</encryption-profile>
</security>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
</site>
An hitless key change mechanism may be added through augmentation.
Other key management methodology may be added through augmentation.
A "pki" empty container has been created to help support of PKI
through augmentation.
6.10. Management
The model proposes three types of common management options:
o provider-managed: the CE router is managed only by the provider.
In this model, the responsibility boundary between SP and customer
is between CE and customer network.
o customer-managed: the CE router is managed only by the customer.
In this model, the responsibility boundary between SP and customer
is between PE and CE.
o co-managed: the CE router is primarly managed by the provider and
in addition SP lets customer accessing the CE for some
configuration/monitoring purpose. In the co-managed mode the
responsibility boundary is the same as the provider-managed model.
Based on the management model, different security options MAY be
derived.
In case of "co-managed", the model proposes some options to define
the management address family (IPv4 or IPv6) and the associated
management address.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.11. Routing protocols
Routing-protocol defines which routing protocol must be activated
between the provider and the customer router. The current model
supports: bgp, rip, ospf, static, direct, vrrp.
The routing protocol defined applies at the provider to customer
boundary. Depending on the management of the management model, it
may apply to the PE-CE boundary or CE to customer boundary. In case
of a customer managed site, the routing-protocol defined will be
activated between the PE and the CE router managed by the customer.
In case of a provider managed site, the routing-protocol defined will
be activated between the CE managed by the SP and the router or LAN
belonging to the customer. In this case, it is expected that the PE-
CE routing will be configured based on the service provider rules as
both are managed by the same entity.
Rtg protocol
192.0.2.0/24 ----- CE ----------------- PE1
Customer managed site
Rtg protocol
Customer router ----- CE ----------------- PE1
Provider managed site
All the examples below will refer to a customer managed site case.
6.11.1. Dual stack handling
All routing protocol types support dual stack by using address-family
leaf-list.
Example of Dual stack using the same routing protocol:
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>static</type>
<static>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6</address-family>
</static>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example of Dual stack using two different routing protocols:
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>rip</type>
<rip>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
</rip>
</routing-protocol>
<routing-protocol>
<type>ospf</type>
<ospf>
<address-family>ipv6</address-family>
</ospf>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
6.11.2. Direct LAN connection onto SP network
Routing-protocol "direct" SHOULD be used when a customer LAN is
directly connected to the provider network and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
LAN attached directly to provider network:
192.0.2.0/24 ----- PE1
In this case, the customer has a default route to the PE address.
6.11.3. Direct LAN connection onto SP network with redundancy
Routing-protocol "vrrp" SHOULD be used when a customer LAN is
directly connected to the provider network and must be advertised in
the IPVPN and LAN redundancy is expected.
LAN attached directly to provider network with LAN redundancy:
192.0.2.0/24 ------ PE1
|
+--- PE2
In this case, the customer has a default route to the service
provider network.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.11.4. Static routing
Routing-protocol "static" MAY be used when a customer LAN is
connected to the provider network through a CE router and must be
advertised in the IPVPN.
Static rtg
192.0.2.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
| |
| Static route 192.0.2.0/24 nh CE
Static route 0.0.0.0/0 nh PE
In this case, the customer has a default route to the service
provider network.
6.11.5. RIP routing
Routing-protocol "rip" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN. For IPv4, the model assumes usage of RIP version 2.
In case of dual stack routing requested through this model, the
management system will be responsible to configure rip (including
right version number) and associated address-families on network
elements.
RIP rtg
192.0.2.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
6.11.6. OSPF routing
Routing-protocol "ospf" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
It can be used to extend an existing OSPF network and interconnect
different areas. See [RFC4577] for more details.
+---------------------+
| |
OSPF | | OSPF
area 1 | | area 2
(OSPF | | (OSPF
area 1) --- CE ---------- PE PE ----- CE --- area 2)
| |
+---------------------+
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The model also proposes an option to create an OSPF sham-link between
two sites sharing the same area and having a backdoor link. The
sham-link is created by referencing the target site sharing the same
OSPF area. The management system will be responsible to check if
there is already a shamlink configured for this VPN and area between
the same pair of PEs. If there is no existing shamlink, the
management system will provision it. This shamlink MAY be reused by
other sites.
+------------------------+
| |
| |
| PE (--shamlink--)PE |
| | | |
+----|----------------|--+
| OSPF area1 | OSPF area 1
| |
CE1 CE2
| |
(OSPF area1) (OSPF area1)
| |
+----------------+
Regarding Dual stack support, user MAY specify both IPv4 and IPv6
address families, if both protocols should be routed through OSPF.
As OSPF uses separate protocol instances for IPv4 and IPv6, the
management system will need to configure both ospf version 2 and
version 3 on the PE-CE link.
Example of OSPF routing parameters in service model.
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>ospf</type>
<ospf>
<area-address>0.0.0.1</area-address>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6</address-family>
</ospf>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example of PE configuration done by management system:
router ospf 10
area 0.0.0.1
interface Ethernet0/0
!
router ospfv3 10
area 0.0.0.1
interface Ethernet0/0
!
6.11.7. BGP routing
Routing-protocol "bgp" MAY be used when a customer LAN is connected
to the provider network through a CE router and must be advertised in
the IPVPN.
BGP rtg
192.0.2.0/24 ------ CE -------------- PE
The session addressing will be derived from connection parameters as
well as internal knowledge of SP.
In case of dual stack access, user MAY request BGP routing for both
IPv4 and IPv6 by specifying both address-families. It will be up to
SP and management system to determine how to decline the
configuration (two BGP sessions, single, multisession ...).
The service configuration below activates BGP on PE-CE link for both
IPv4 and IPv6.
BGP activation requires SP to know the address of the customer peer.
"static-address" allocation type for the IP connection MUST be used.
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>bgp</type>
<bgp>
<autonomous-system>65000</autonomous-system>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6</address-family>
<bgp>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
This service configuration can be derived by management system into
multiple flavors depending on SP flavor.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example #1 of PE configuration done by management system
(single session IPv4 transport session):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
neighbor 203.0.113.2 route-map SET-NH-IPV6 out
Example #2 of PE configuration done
by management system (two sessions):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
neighbor 2001::2 remote-as 65000
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 2001::2 activate
Example #3 of PE configuration done
by management system (multisession):
router bgp 100
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 65000
neighbor 203.0.113.2 multisession per-af
address-family ipv4 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
address-family ipv6 vrf Cust1
neighbor 203.0.113.2 activate
neighbor 203.0.113.2 route-map SET-NH-IPV6 out
6.12. Service
The service defines service parameters associated with the site.
6.12.1. Bandwidth
The service bandwidth refers to the bandwidth requirement between PE
and CE (WAN link bandwidth). The requested bandwidth is expressed as
svc-input-bandwidth and svc-output-bandwidth in bits per seconds.
Input/output direction is using customer site as reference: input
bandwidth means download bandwidth for the site, and output bandwidth
means upload bandwidth for the site.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The service bandwidth is only configurable at site-network-access
level.
Using a different input and output bandwidth will allow service
provider to know if customer allows for asymmetric bandwidth access
like ADSL. It can also be used to set rate-limit in a different way
upload and download on a symmetric bandwidth access.
The bandwidth is a service bandwidth: expressed primarily as IP
bandwidth but if the customer enables MPLS for carrier's carrier,
this becomes MPLS bandwidth.
6.12.2. QoS
The model proposes to define QoS parameters in an abstracted way:
o qos-classification-policy: define a set of ordered rules to
classify customer traffic.
o qos-profile: QoS scheduling profile to be applied.
6.12.2.1. QoS classification
QoS classification rules are handled by qos-classification-policy.
The qos-classification-policy is an ordered list of rules that match
a flow or application and set the appropriate target class of service
(target-class-id). The user can define the match using an
application reference or a more specific flow definition (based layer
3 source and destination address, layer 4 ports, layer 4 protocol).
When a flow definition is used, the user can use a target-sites leaf-
list to identify the destination of a flow rather than using
destination IP addresses. In such a case, an association between the
site abstraction and the IP addresses used by this site must be done
dynamically. How this association is done is out of scope of this
document and an implementation may not support this criterion and
should advertise a deviation in this case. A rule that does not have
a match statement is considered as a match-all rule. A service
provider may implement a default terminal classification rule if the
customer does not provide it. It will be up to the service provider
to determine its default target class. The current model defines
some applications but new application identities may be added through
augmentation. The exact meaning of each application identity is up
to the service provider, so it will be necessary for the service
provider to advise customer on usage of application matching.
Where the classification is done depends on the SP implementation of
the service, but classification concerns the flow coming from the
customer site and entering the network.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Provider network
+-----------------------+
192.0.2.0/24
198.51.100.0/24 ---- CE --------- PE
Traffic flow
---------->
In the figure above, the management system should implement the
classification rule:
o in the ingress direction on the PE interface, if the CE is
customer managed.
o in the ingress direction on the CE interface connected to customer
LAN, if the CE is provider managed.
The figure below describes a sample service description of qos-
classification for a site :
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<service>
<qos>
<qos-classification-policy>
<rule>
<id>1</id>
<match-flow>
<ipv4-src-prefix>192.0.2.0/24</ipv4-src-prefix>
<ipv4-dst-prefix>203.0.113.1/32</ipv4-dst-prefix>
<l4-dst-port>80</l4-dst-port>
<l4-protocol>tcp</l4-protocol>
</match-flow>
<target-class-id>DATA2</target-class-id>
</rule>
<rule>
<id>2</id>
<match-flow>
<ipv4-src-prefix>192.0.2.0/24</ipv4-src-prefix>
<ipv4-dst-prefix>203.0.113.1/32</ipv4-dst-prefix>
<l4-dst-port>21</l4-dst-port>
<l4-protocol>tcp</l4-protocol>
</match-flow>
<target-class-id>DATA2</target-class-id>
</rule>
<rule>
<id>3</id>
<match-application>p2p</match-application>
<target-class-id>DATA3</target-class-id>
</rule>
<rule>
<id>4</id>
<target-class-id>DATA1</target-class-id>
</rule>
</qos-classification-policy>
</qos>
</service>
In the example above:
o HTTP traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 LAN destinated to 203.0.113.1/32
will be classified in DATA2.
o FTP traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 LAN destinated to 203.0.113.1/32
will be classified in DATA2.
o Peer to peer traffic will be classified in DATA3.
o All other traffic will be classified in DATA1.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The order of rules is really important. The management system
responsible for translating those rules in network element
configuration MUST keep the same processing order in network element
configuration. The order of rule is defined by the "id" leaf. The
lowest "id" MUST be processed first.
6.12.2.2. QoS profile
User can choose between standard profile provided by the operator or
custom profile. The qos-profile defines the traffic scheduling
policy to be used by the service provider.
Provider network
+-----------------------+
192.0.2.0/24
198.51.100.0/24 ---- CE --------- PE
\ /
qos-profile
In case of provider managed or co-managed connection, the provider
should ensure scheduling according to the requested policy in both
traffic directions (SP to customer and customer to SP). As example
of implementation, a device scheduling policy may be implemented both
at PE and CE side on the WAN link. In case of customer managed
connection, the provider is only responsible to ensure scheduling
from SP network to the customer site. As example of implementation,
a device scheduling policy may be implemented only at PE side on the
WAN link towards the customer.
A custom qos-profile is defined as a list of class of services and
associated properties. The properties are:
o rate-limit: used to rate-limit the class of service. The value is
expressed as a percentage of the global service bandwidth. When
the qos-profile is implemented at CE side the svc-output-bandwidth
is taken into account as reference. When it is implemented at PE
side, the svc-input-bandwidth is used.
o latency: used to define the latency constraint of the class. The
latency constraint can be expressed as the lowest possible latency
or a latency boundary expressed in milliseconds. How this latency
constraint will be fulfilled is up to the service provider
implementation: a strict priority queueing may be used on the
access and in the core network, and/or a low latency routing may
be created for this traffic class.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o jitter: used to define the jitter constraint of the class. The
jitter constraint can be expressed as the lowest possible jitter
or a jitter boundary expressed in microseconds. How this jitter
constraint will be fulfilled is up to the service provider
implementation: a strict priority queueing may be used on the
access and in the core network, and/or a jitter-aware routing may
be created for this traffic class.
o bandwidth: used to define a guaranteed amount of bandwidth for the
class of service. It is expressed as a percentage. The
guaranteed-bw-percent uses available bandwidth as a reference.
When the qos-profile is implemented at CE side the svc-output-
bandwidth is taken into account as reference. When it is
implemented at PE side, the svc-input-bandwidth is used. By
default, the bandwidth reservation is only guaranteed at the
access level. The user can use the "end-to-end" leaf to request
an end-to-end bandwidth reservation including the MPLS transport
network.
Some constraints may not be offered by a service provider, in this
case a deviation should be advertised. In addition, due to the
network conditions, some constraints may not be completely fulfilled
by the service provider, in this case, the service provider should
advise the customer about the limitations. How this communication is
done is out of scope of this document.
Example of service configuration using a standard qos profile:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>1245HRTFGJGJ154654</site-network-access-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>100000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>100000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<qos-profile>
<profile>PLATINUM</profile>
</qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</site-network-access>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>555555AAAA2344</site-network-access-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>2000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>2000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<qos-profile>
<profile>GOLD</profile>
</qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</site-network-access>
Example of service configuration using a custom qos profile:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>Site1</site-network-access-id>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>100000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>100000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
<qos>
<qos-profile>
<classes>
<class>
<class-id>REAL_TIME</class-id>
<rate-limit>10</rate-limit>
<latency>
<use-lowest-latency/>
</latency>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA1</class-id>
<latency>
<latency-boundary>70</latency-boundary>
</latency>
<bandwidth>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>
80
</guaranteed-bw-percent>
</bandwidth>
</class>
<class>
<class-id>DATA2</class-id>
<latency>
<latency-boundary>200</latency-boundary>
</latency>
<bandwidth>
<guaranteed-bw-percent>
5
</guaranteed-bw-percent>
<end-to-end/>
</bandwidth>
</class>
</classes>
</qos-profile>
</qos>
</service>
</site-network-access>
The custom qos-profile for site1 defines a REAL_TIME class with a
lowest possible latency constraint. It defines also two data classes
DATA1 and DATA2. The two classes express a latency boundary
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
constraint as well as a bandwidth reservation. As the REAL_TIME
class is rate-limited to 10% of the service bandwidth (10% of 100Mbps
= 10Mbps). In case of congestion, the REAL_TIME traffic can go up to
10Mbps (let's assume that only 5Mbps are consumed). DATA1 and DATA2
will share the remaining bandwidth (95Mbps) according to their
percentage. So the DATA1 class will be served with at least 76Mbps
of bandwidth while the DATA2 class will be served with at least
4.75Mbps. The latency boundary information of the data class may
help the service provider to define a specific buffer tuning or a
specific routing within the network. The maximum percentage to be
used is not limited by this model but MUST be limited by the
management system according to the policies authorized by the service
provider.
6.12.3. Multicast
The multicast section defines the type of site in the customer
multicast service topology: source, receiver, or both. These
parameters will help management system to optimize the multicast
service. User can also define the type of multicast relation with
the customer: router (requires a protocol like PIM), host (IGMP or
MLD), or both. Address family (IPv4 or IPv6 or both) can also be
defined.
6.13. Enhanced VPN features
6.13.1. Carrier's Carrier
In case of Carrier's Carrier ([RFC4364]), a customer may want to
build MPLS service using an IPVPN to carry its traffic.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
LAN customer1
|
|
CE1
|
| -------------
(vrf_cust1)
CE1_ISP1
| ISP1 PoP
| MPLS link
| -------------
|
(vrf ISP1)
PE1
(...) Provider backbone
PE2
(vrf ISP1)
|
| ------------
|
| MPLS link
| ISP1 PoP
CE2_ISP1
(vrf_cust1)
|-------------
|
CE2
|
Lan customer1
In the figure above, ISP1 resells IPVPN service but has no core
network infrastructure between its PoPs. ISP1 uses an IPVPN as core
network infrastructure (belonging to another provider) between its
PoPs.
In order to support CsC, the VPN service must be declared MPLS
support using the "carrierscarrier" leaf set to true in vpn-service.
The link between CE1_ISP1/PE1 and CE2_ISP1/PE2 must also run an MPLS
signalling protocol. This configuration is done at the site level.
In the proposed model, LDP or BGP can be used as the MPLS signalling
protocol. In case of LDP, an IGP routing protocol MUST also be
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
activated. In case of BGP signalling, BGP MUST also be configured as
routing-protocol.
In case Carrier's Carrier is enabled, the requested svc-mtu will
refer to the MPLS MTU and not to the IP MTU.
6.14. External ID references
The service model sometimes refers to external information through
identifiers. As an example, to order a cloud-access to a particular
Cloud Service Provider (CSP), the model uses an identifier to refer
to the targeted CSP. In case, a customer is using directly this
service model as an API (through REST or NETCONF for example) to
order a particular service, the service provider should provide a
list of authorized identifiers. In case of cloud-access, the service
provider will provide the identifiers associated of each available
CSP. The same applies to other identifiers like std-qos-profile, oam
profile-name, provider-profile for encryption ...
How an SP provides those identifiers meaning to the customer is out
of scope of this document.
6.15. Defining NNIs
An autonomous system is a single network or group of networks that is
controlled by a common system administration group and that uses a
single, clearly defined routing protocol. In some cases, VPNs need
to span across different autonomous systems in different geographic
areas or across different service providers. The connection between
autonomous systems is established by the Service Providers and is
seamless to the customer.
Some examples are: Partnership between service providers (carrier,
cloud ...) to extend their VPN service seamlessly, or internal
administrative boundary within a single service provider (Backhaul vs
Core vs Datacenter ...).
NNIs (Network to Network Interfaces) have to be defined to extend the
VPNs across multiple autonomous systems.
[RFC4364] defines multiple flavors of VPN NNI implementations. Each
implementation has different pros/cons that are outside the scope of
this document. As an example: In an Inter-AS Option A, ASBR peers
are connected by multiple interfaces with at least one interface
which VPN spans the two autonomous systems. These ASBRs associate
each interface with a VPN routing and forwarding (VRF) instance and a
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) session to signal unlabeled IP
prefixes. As a result, traffic between the back-to-back VRFs is IP.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
In this scenario, the VPNs are isolated from each other, and because
the traffic is IP, QoS mechanisms that operate on IP traffic can be
applied to achieve customer Service Level Agreements (SLAs).
-------- -------------- -----
/ \ / \ / \
| Cloud | | | | |
| Provider | ----NNI---- | | ---NNI---| DC |
| #1 | | | | |
\ / | | \ /
-------- | | ----
| |
-------- | My network | -----------
/ \ | | / \
| Cloud | | | | |
| Provider | ----NNI---- | |---NNI---| L3VPN |
| #2 | | | | Partner |
\ / | | | |
-------- | | | |
\ / | |
-------------- \ /
| ----------
|
NNI
|
|
-------------------
/ \
| |
| |
| |
| L3VPN partner |
| |
\ /
------------------
The figure above describes a service provider network "My network"
that has several NNIs. This network uses NNI to:
o increase its footprint by relying on L3VPN partners.
o connect its own datacenter services to the customer IPVPN.
o enable customer to access to its private resources located in
private cloud owned by some cloud service providers.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
6.15.1. Defining NNI with option A flavor
AS A AS B
--------------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + (VRF1)--(VPN1)----(VRF1) + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (VRF2)--(VPN2)----(VRF2) + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + (VRF1)--(VPN1)----(VRF1) + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (VRF2)--(VPN2)----(VRF2) + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
-------------------- -------------------
In option A, the two ASes are connected between each other with
physical links on Autonomous System Border Routers (ASBR). There may
be multiple physical connections between the ASes for a resiliency
purpose. A VPN connection, physical or logical (on top of physical),
is created for each VPN that needs to cross the AS boundary. A back-
to-back VRF model is so created.
This VPN connection can be seen as a site from a service model
perspective. Let's say that AS B wants to extend some VPN connection
for VPN C on AS A. Administrator of AS B can use this service model
to order a site on AS A. All connection scenarios could be realized
using the current model features. As an example, the figure above,
where two physical connections are involved with logical connections
per VPN on top, could be seen as a dualhomed subVPN scenario. And
for example, administrator from AS B will be able to choose the
appropriate routing protocol (e.g. ebgp) to dynamically exchange
routes between ASes.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
This document assumes that option A NNI flavor SHOULD reuse the
existing VPN site modeling.
Example: a customer wants from its cloud service provider A to attach
its virtual network N to an existing IPVPN (VPN1) he has from a L3VPN
service provider B.
CSP A L3VPN SP B
----------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | | |
| VM --| ++++++++ NNI ++++++++ |---- VPN1
| | + +_________+ + | Site#1
| |--------(VRF1)---(VPN1)--(VRF1)+ |
| | + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| | + +_________+ + |
| | ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| VM --| | | |---- VPN1
| |Virtual | | | Site#2
| |Network | | |
| VM --| | | |---- VPN1
| | | | | Site#3
\ / \ /
---------------- -------------------
|
|
VPN1
Site#4
The cloud service provider or the customer may use our L3VPN service
model exposed by service provider B to create the VPN connectivity.
We could consider that, as the NNI is shared, the physical connection
(bearer) between CSP A and SP B already exists. CSP A may request
through a service model a new site creation with a single site-
network-access (single homing used in the diagram). As placement
constraint, CSP A may use the existing bearer reference it has from
SP A to force the placement of the VPN NNI on the existing link. The
XML below describes what could be the configuration request to SP B:
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<site>
<site-id>CSP_A_attachment</site-id>
<location>
<city>NY</city>
<country-code>US</country-code>
</location>
<site-vpn-flavor>site-vpn-flavor-nni</site-vpn-flavor>
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>bgp</type>
<bgp>
<autonomous-system>500</autonomous-system>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
</bgp>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>CSP_A_VN1</site-network-access-id>
<ip-connection>
<ipv4>
<address-allocation-type>
static-address
</address-allocation-type>
<addresses>
<provider-address>203.0.113.1</provider-address>
<customer-address>203.0.113.2</customer-address>
<mask>30</mask>
</addresses>
</ipv4>
</ip-connection>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>450000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>450000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>VPN1</vpn-id>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
<management>
<type>customer-managed</type>
</management>
</site>
The case described above is different from the cloud-access container
usage as the cloud-access provides a public cloud access while this
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
example enables access to private resources located in a cloud
service provider network.
6.15.2. Defining NNI with option B flavor
AS A AS B
--------------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR +<---mpebgp--->+ ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR +<---mpebgp--->+ ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
-------------------- -------------------
In option B, the two ASes are connected between each other with
physical links on Autonomous System Border Routers (ASBR). There may
be multiple physical connections between the ASes for a resiliency
purpose. The VPN "connection" between ASes is done by exchanging VPN
routes through MP-BGP.
There are multiple flavors of implementations of such NNI, for
example:
1. The NNI is a provider internal NNI between a backbone and a DC.
There is enough trust between the domains to not filter the VPN
routes. So all the VPN routes are exchanged. Route target
filtering may be implemented to save some unnecessary route
states.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
2. The NNI is used between providers that agreed to exchange VPN
routes for specific route-targets only. Each provider is
authorized to use the route-target values from the other
provider.
3. The NNI is used between providers that agreed to exchange VPN
routes for specific route-targets only. Each provider has its
own route-target scheme. So a customer spanning the two networks
will have different route-target in each network for a particular
VPN.
Case 1 does not require any service modeling, as the protocol enables
dynamic exchange of necessary VPN routes.
Case 2 requires to maintain some route-target filtering policy on
ASBRs. From a service modeling point of view, it is necessary to
agree on the list of route target to authorize.
In case 3, both ASes need to agree on the VPN route-target to
exchange and in addition how to map a VPN route-target from AS A to
the corresponding route-target in AS B (and vice-versa).
Those modelings are currently out of scope of this document.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Cloud SP L3VPN SP B
A
----------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | | |
| VM --| ++++++++ NNI ++++++++ |---- VPN1
| | + +_________+ + | Site#1
| |-------+ + + + |
| | + ASBR +<-mpebgp->+ ASBR + |
| | + +_________+ + |
| | ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| VM --| | | |---- VPN1
| |Virtual | | | Site#2
| |Network | | |
| VM --| | | |---- VPN1
| | | | | Site#3
\ / | |
---------------- | |
\ /
-------------------
|
|
VPN1
Site#4
The example above describes an NNI connection between the service
provider network B and a cloud service provider A. Both service
providers do not trust themselves and use a different route-target
allocation policy. So, in term of implementation, the customer VPN
has a different route-target in each network (RT A in CSP A and RT B
is CSP B). In order to connect the customer virtual network in CSP A
to the customer IPVPN (VPN1) in SP B network, CSP A should request SP
B to open the customer VPN on the NNI (accept the appropriate RT).
Who does the RT translation is up to an agreement between the two
service providers: SP B may permit CSP A to request VPN (RT)
translation.
6.15.3. Defining NNI with option C flavor
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
AS A AS B
--------------------- --------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Multihop ebgp++++++++ |
| + + + + |
| + + + + |
| + RGW +<---mpebgp--->+ RGW + |
| + + + + |
| + + + + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ InterAS link ++++++++ |
| + +_____________ + + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
-------------------- -------------------
From a VPN service perspective, option C NNI is very similar to
option B as an MP-BGP session is used to exchange VPN routes between
the ASes. The difference is that the forwarding and control plane
are on different nodes, so the MP-BGP is multihop between routing
gateway (RGW) nodes.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Modeling option B and C will be identical from a VPN service point of
view.
7. Service model usage example
As explained in Section 5, this service model is intended to be
instantiated at a management layer and is not intended to be used
directly on network elements. The management system serves as a
central point of configuration of the overall service.
This section provides an example on how a management system can use
this model to configure an IPVPN service on network elements.
The example wants to achieve the provisionning of a VPN service for 3
sites using Hub and Spoke VPN service topology. One of the sites
will be dual homed and loadsharing is expected.
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
| | +----------------------------------+
| | |
| | +----------------------------------+
| Hub_Site ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
The following XML describes the overall simplified service
configuration of this VPN.
<vpn-service>
<vpn-id>12456487</vpn-id>
<vpn-service-topology>hub-spoke</vpn-service-topology>
</vpn-service>
When receiving the request for provisioning the VPN service, the
management system will internally (or through communication with
another OSS component) allocates VPN route-targets. In this specific
case two RTs will be allocated (100:1 for Hub and 100:2 for Spoke).
The output below describes the configuration of Spoke1.
<site>
<site-id>Spoke_Site1</site-id>
<location>
<city>NY</city>
<country-code>US</country-code>
</location>
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>bgp</type>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<bgp>
<autonomous-system>500</autonomous-system>
<address-family>ipv4</address-family>
<address-family>ipv6</address-family>
</bgp>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<site-network-access-id>Spoke_Site1</site-network-access-id>
<access-diversity>
<groups>
<group>
<group-id>20</group-id>
</group>
</groups>
<constraints>
<constraint>
<constraint-type>pe-diverse</constraint-type>
<target>
<group>
<group-id>10</group-id>
</group>
</target>
</constraint>
</constraints>
</access-diversity>
<ip-connection>
<ipv4>
<address-allocation-type>
static-address
</address-allocation-type>
<addresses>
<provider-address>203.0.113.254</provider-address>
<customer-address>203.0.113.2</customer-address>
<mask>24</mask>
</addresses>
</ipv4>
<ipv6>
<address-allocation-type>
static-address
</address-allocation-type>
<addresses>
<provider-address>2001:db8::1</provider-address>
<customer-address>2001:db8::2</customer-address>
<mask>64</mask>
</addresses>
</ipv6>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</ip-connection>
<service>
<svc-input-bandwidth>450000000</svc-input-bandwidth>
<svc-output-bandwidth>450000000</svc-output-bandwidth>
</service>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-id>12456487</vpn-id>
<site-role>spoke-role</site-role>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
<management>
<type>provider-managed</type>
</management>
</site>
When receiving the request for provisioning Spoke1 site, the
management system MUST allocate network resources for this site. It
MUST first determine the target network elements to provision the
access, and especially the PE router (and may be an aggregation
switch). As described in Section 6.6, the management system SHOULD
use the location information and SHOULD use the access-diversity
constraint to find the appropriate PE. In this case, we consider
Spoke1 requires PE diversity with Hub and that management system
allocate PEs based on lowest distance. Based on the location
information, the management system finds the available PEs in the
nearest area of the customer and picks one that fits the access-
diversity constraint.
When the PE is chosen, the management system needs to allocate
interface resources on the node. One interface is selected from the
PE available pool. The management system can start provisioning the
PE node by using any mean (Netconf, CLI, ...). The management system
will check if a VRF is already present that fits the needs. If not,
it will provision the VRF: Route distinguisher will come from
internal allocation policy model, route-targets are coming from the
vpn-policy configuration of the site (management system allocated
some RTs for the VPN). As the site is a Spoke site (site-role), the
management system knows which RT must be imported and exported. As
the site is provider managed, some management route-targets may also
be added (100:5000). Standard provider VPN policies MAY also be
added in the configuration.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example of generated PE configuration:
ip vrf Customer1
export-map STD-CUSTOMER-EXPORT <---- Standard SP configuration
route-distinguisher 100:3123234324
route-target import 100:1
route-target import 100:5000 <---- Standard SP configuration
route-target export 100:2 for provider managed
!
When the VRF has been provisioned, the management system can start
configuring the access on the PE using the allocated interface
information. IP addressing is chosen by the management system. One
address will be picked from an allocated subnet for the PE, another
will be used for the CE configuration. Routing protocols will also
be configured between PE and CE and due to provider managed model,
the choice is up to service provider: BGP was chosen for the example.
This choice is independant of the routing protocol chosen by
customer. For the CE - LAN part, BGP will be used as requested in
the service model. Peering addresses will be derived from those of
the connection. As CE is provider managed, CE AS number can be
automatically allocated by the management system. Some provider
standard configuration templates may also be added.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example of generated PE configuration:
interface Ethernet1/1/0.10
encapsulation dot1q 10
ip vrf forwarding Customer1
ip address 198.51.100.1 255.255.255.252 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
ipv6 address 2001:db8::10:1/64
ip access-group STD-PROTECT-IN <---- Standard SP config
!
router bgp 100
address-family ipv4 vrf Customer1
neighbor 198.51.100.2 remote-as 65000 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 198.51.100.2 route-map STD in <---- Standard SP config
neighbor 198.51.100.2 filter-list 10 in <---- Standard SP config
!
address-family ipv6 vrf Customer1
neighbor 2001:db8::0A10:2 remote-as 65000 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 2001:db8::0A10:2 route-map STD in <---- Standard SP config
neighbor 2001:db8::0A10:2 filter-list 10 in <---- Standard SP config
!
ip route vrf Customer1 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.255 198.51.100.2
! Static route for provider administration of CE
!
As the CE router is not reachable at this stage, the management
system can produce a complete CE configuration that can be uploaded
to the node by manual operation before sending the CE to customer
premise. The CE configuration will be built as for the PE. Based on
the CE type (vendor/model) allocated to the customer and bearer
information, the management system knows which interface must be
configured on the CE. PE-CE link configuration is expected to be
handled automatically using the service provider OSS as both
resources are managed internally. CE to LAN interface parameters
like IP addressing are derived from ip-connection taking into account
how management system distributes addresses between PE and CE within
the subnet. This will allow to produce a plug'n'play configuration
for the CE.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Example of generated CE configuration:
interface Loopback10
description "Administration"
ip address 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.255
!
interface FastEthernet10
description "WAN"
ip address 198.51.100.2 255.255.255.252 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
ipv6 address 2001:db8::0A10:2/64
!
interface FastEthernet11
description "LAN"
ip address 203.0.113.254 255.255.255.0 <---- Comes from
ip-connection
ipv6 address 2001:db8::1/64
!
router bgp 65000
address-family ipv4
redistribute static route-map STATIC2BGP <---- Standard SP
configuration
neighbor 198.51.100.1 remote-as 100 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 203.0.113.2 remote-as 500 <---- Comes from
ip-connection
address-family ipv6
redistribute static route-map STATIC2BGP <---- Standard SP
configuration
neighbor 2001:db8::0A10:1 remote-as 100 <---- Comes from
automated allocation
neighbor 2001:db8::2 remote-as 500 <---- Comes from
ip-connection
!
route-map STATIC2BGP permit 10
match tag 10
!
8. Interaction with Other YANG Modules
As expressed in Section 5, this service module is intended to be
instantiated in management system and not directly on network
elements.
It will be the role of the management system to configure the network
elements. The management system may be modular, so the component
instantiating the service model (let's call it service component) and
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
the component responsible for network element configuration (let's
call it configuration component) may be different.
L3VPN-SVC |
service model |
|
+----------------------+
| Service component | service datastore
+----------------------+
|
|
+----------------------+
+----| Config component |-------+
/ +----------------------+ \ Network
/ / \ \ Configuration
/ / \ \ models
/ / \ \
+++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++
+ CEA + ------- + PE A + + PE B + ----- + CEB + Config
+++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++ datastore
Site A Site B
In the previous sections, we provided some example of translation of
service provisioning request to router configuration lines as an
illustration. In the NETCONF/YANG ecosystem, it will be expected
NETCONF/YANG to be used between configuration component and network
elements to configure the requested service on these elements.
In this framework, it is expected from standardization to also work
on specific configuration YANG modelization of service components on
network elements. There will be a strong relation between the
abstracted view provided by this service model and the detailed
configuration view that will be provided by specific configuration
models for network elements.
Authors of this document are expecting definition of YANG models for
network elements on this non exhaustive list of items:
o VRF definition including VPN policy expression.
o Physical interface.
o IP layer (IPv4, IPv6).
o QoS: classification, profiles...
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o Routing protocols: support of configuration of all protocols
listed in the document, as well as routing policies associated
with these protocols.
o Multicast VPN.
o Network Address Translation.
o ...
Example of VPN site request at service level using this model:
<site>
<site-id>Site A</site-id>
<site-network-accesses>
<site-network-access>
<ip-connection>
<ipv4>
<address-allocation-type>
static-address
</address-allocation-type>
<addresses>
<provider-address>203.0.113.254</provider-address>
<customer-address>203.0.113.2</customer-address>
<mask>24</mask>
</addresses>
</ipv4>
</ip-connection>
<vpn-attachment>
<vpn-policy-id>VPNPOL1</vpn-policy-id>
</vpn-attachment>
</site-network-access>
</site-network-accesses>
<routing-protocols>
<routing-protocol>
<type>static</type>
<static>
<cascaded-lan-prefixes>
<ipv4-lan-prefixes>
<lan>198.51.100.0/30</lan>
<next-hop>203.0.113.2</next-hop>
</ipv4-lan-prefixes>
</cascaded-lan-prefixes>
</static>
</routing-protocol>
</routing-protocols>
<management>
<type>customer-managed</type>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
</management>
<vpn-policies>
<vpn-policy>
<vpn-policy-id>VPNPOL1</vpn-policy-id>
<entries>
<id>1</id>
<vpn>
<vpn-id>VPN1</vpn-id>
<site-role>any-to-any-role</site-role>
</vpn>
</entries>
</vpn-policy>
</vpn-policies>
</site>
In the service example above, it is expected that the service
component requests to the configuration component of the management
system the configuration of the service elements. If we consider
that service component selected a PE (PE A) as target PE for the
site, the configuration component will need to push the configuration
to PE A. The configuration component will use several YANG data
models to define the configuration to be applied to PE A. The XML
configuration of PE-A may look like this:
<if:interfaces>
<if:interface>
<if:name>eth0</if:name>
<if:type>ianaift:ethernetCsmacd</if:type>
<if:description>
Link to CEA.
</if:description>
<ip:ipv4>
<ip:address>
<ip:ip>203.0.113.254</ip:ip>
<ip:prefix-length>24</ip:prefix-length>
</ip:address>
<ip:forwarding>true</ip:forwarding>
</ip:ipv4>
</if:interface>
</if:interfaces>
<rt:routing>
<rt:routing-instance>
<rt:name>VRF_CustA</rt:name>
<rt:type>l3vpn:vrf</rt:type>
<rt:description>VRF for CustomerA</rt:description>
<l3vpn:route-distinguisher>
100:1546542343
</l3vpn:route-distinguisher>
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
<l3vpn:import-rt>100:1</l3vpn:import-rt>
<l3vpn:export-rt>100:1</l3vpn:export-rt>
<rt:interfaces>
<rt:interface>
<rt:name>eth0</rt:name>
</rt:interface>
</rt:interfaces>
<rt:routing-protocols>
<rt:routing-protocol>
<rt:type>rt:static</rt:type>
<rt:name>st0</rt:name>
<rt:static-routes>
<v4ur:ipv4>
<v4ur:route>
<v4ur:destination-prefix>
198.51.100.0/30
</v4ur:destination-prefix>
<v4ur:next-hop>
<v4ur:next-hop-address>
203.0.113.2
</v4ur:next-hop-address>
</v4ur:next-hop>
</v4ur:route>
</v4ur:ipv4>
</rt:static-routes>
</rt:routing-protocol>
</rt:routing-protocols>
</rt:routing-instance>
</rt:routing>
9. YANG Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-l3vpn-svc@2016-11-04.yang"
module ietf-l3vpn-svc {
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-svc";
prefix l3vpn-svc;
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
organization
"IETF L3SM Working Group";
contact
"WG List: <mailto:l3sm@ietf.org>
Editor:
L3SM WG
Chairs:
Adrian Farrel, Qin Wu
";
description
"The YANG module defines a generic service configuration
model for Layer 3 VPN common across all of the vendor
implementations.";
revision 2016-11-03 {
description
"Initial document";
reference
"RFC XXXX";
}
/* Features */
feature cloud-access {
description
"Allow VPN to connect to a Cloud Service
provider.";
}
feature multicast {
description
"Enables multicast capabilities in a VPN";
}
feature ipv4 {
description
"Enables IPv4 support in a VPN";
}
feature ipv6 {
description
"Enables IPv6 support in a VPN";
}
feature carrierscarrier {
description
"Enables support of carrier's carrier";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
feature extranet-vpn {
description
"Enables support of extranet VPNs";
}
feature site-diversity {
description
"Enables support of site diversity constraints";
}
feature encryption {
description
"Enables support of encryption";
}
feature qos {
description
"Enables support of Class of Services";
}
feature qos-custom {
description
"Enables support of custom qos profile";
}
feature rtg-bgp {
description
"Enables support of BGP routing protocol.";
}
feature rtg-rip {
description
"Enables support of RIP routing protocol.";
}
feature rtg-ospf {
description
"Enables support of OSPF routing protocol.";
}
feature rtg-ospf-sham-link {
description
"Enables support of OSPF sham-links.";
}
feature rtg-vrrp {
description
"Enables support of VRRP routing protocol.";
}
feature fast-reroute {
description
"Enables support of Fast Reroute.";
}
feature bfd {
description
"Enables support of BFD.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
feature always-on {
description
"Enables support for always-on access
constraint.";
}
feature requested-type {
description
"Enables support for requested-type access
constraint.";
}
feature bearer-reference {
description
"Enables support for bearer-reference access
constraint.";
}
/* Typedefs */
typedef svc-id {
type string;
description
"Defining a type of service component
identificators.";
}
typedef template-id {
type string;
description
"Defining a type of service template
identificators.";
}
typedef address-family {
type enumeration {
enum ipv4 {
description
"IPv4 address family";
}
enum ipv6 {
description
"IPv6 address family";
}
}
description
"Defining a type for address-family.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
/* Identities */
identity site-network-access-type {
description
"Base identity for site-network-access type";
}
identity point-to-point {
base site-network-access-type;
description
"Identity for point-to-point connection";
}
identity multipoint {
base site-network-access-type;
description
"Identity for multipoint connection
Example : ethernet broadcast segment";
}
identity placement-diversity {
description
"Base identity for site placement
constraints";
}
identity bearer-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for bearer diversity.
The bearers should not use common elements.";
}
identity pe-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for PE diversity";
}
identity pop-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for POP diversity";
}
identity linecard-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for linecard diversity";
}
identity same-pe {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for having sites connected
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
on the same PE";
}
identity same-bearer {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for having sites connected
using the same bearer";
}
identity customer-application {
description
"Base identity for customer application";
}
identity web {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for web application (e.g. HTTP,HTTPS)";
}
identity mail {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for mail applications";
}
identity file-transfer {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for file transfer applications (
e.g. FTP, SFTP, ...)";
}
identity database {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for database applications";
}
identity social {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for social network applications";
}
identity games {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for gaming applications";
}
identity p2p {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for peer to peer applications";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
identity network-management {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for management applications (e.g. telnet
syslog, snmp ...)";
}
identity voice {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for voice applications";
}
identity video {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for video conference applications";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor {
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-single {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used when the site belongs to only one VPN.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-multi {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used when a logical connection of a site
belongs to multiple VPNs.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-sub {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used when a site has multiple logical connections.
Each of the connection may belong to different
multiple VPNs.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-nni {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used to describe a NNI option A connection.";
}
identity management {
description
"Base identity for site management scheme.";
}
identity co-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for comanaged site.";
}
identity customer-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for customer managed site.";
}
identity provider-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for provider managed site.";
}
identity address-allocation-type {
description
"Base identity for address-allocation-type
for PE-CE link.";
}
identity provider-dhcp {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Provider network provides DHCP service to customer.";
}
identity provider-dhcp-relay {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Provider network provides DHCP relay service to customer.";
}
identity provider-dhcp-slaac {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Provider network provides DHCP service to customer
as well as SLAAC.";
}
identity static-address {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Provider to customer addressing is static.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
identity slaac {
base address-allocation-type;
description
"Use IPv6 SLAAC.";
}
identity site-role {
description
"Base identity for site type.";
}
identity any-to-any-role {
base site-role;
description
"Site in a any to any IPVPN.";
}
identity spoke-role {
base site-role;
description
"Spoke Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity hub-role {
base site-role;
description
"Hub Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity vpn-topology {
description
"Base identity for VPN topology.";
}
identity any-to-any {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for any to any VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke-disjoint {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology
where Hubs cannot talk between each other.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
identity multicast-tree-type {
description
"Base identity for multicast tree type.";
}
identity ssm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for SSM tree type.";
}
identity asm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for ASM tree type.";
}
identity bidir-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for BiDir tree type.";
}
identity multicast-rp-discovery-type {
description
"Base identity for rp discovery type.";
}
identity auto-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
description
"Base identity for auto-rp discovery type.";
}
identity static-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
description
"Base identity for static type.";
}
identity bsr-rp {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
description
"Base identity for BDR discovery type.";
}
identity routing-protocol-type {
description
"Base identity for routing-protocol type.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
identity ospf {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for OSPF protocol type.";
}
identity bgp {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for BGP protocol type.";
}
identity static {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for static routing protocol type.";
}
identity rip {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for RIP protocol type.";
}
identity vrrp {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for VRRP protocol type.
This is to be used when LAn are directly connected
to provider Edge routers.";
}
identity direct {
base routing-protocol-type;
description
"Identity for direct protocol type.
.";
}
identity protocol-type {
description
"Base identity for protocol field type.";
}
identity tcp {
base protocol-type;
description
"TCP protocol type.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
identity udp {
base protocol-type;
description
"UDP protocol type.";
}
identity icmp {
base protocol-type;
description
"icmp protocol type.";
}
identity icmp6 {
base protocol-type;
description
"icmp v6 protocol type.";
}
identity gre {
base protocol-type;
description
"GRE protocol type.";
}
identity ipip {
base protocol-type;
description
"IPinIP protocol type.";
}
identity hop-by-hop {
base protocol-type;
description
"Hop by Hop IPv6 header type.";
}
identity routing {
base protocol-type;
description
"Routing IPv6 header type.";
}
identity esp {
base protocol-type;
description
"ESP header type.";
}
identity ah {
base protocol-type;
description
"AH header type.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
/* Groupings */
grouping vpn-service-cloud-access {
container cloud-accesses {
if-feature cloud-access;
list cloud-access {
key cloud-identifier;
leaf cloud-identifier {
type string;
description
"Identification of cloud service. Local
admin meaning.";
}
choice list-flavor {
case permit-any {
leaf permit-any {
type empty;
description
"Allow all sites.";
}
}
case deny-any-except {
leaf-list permit-site {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID to be authorized.";
}
}
case permit-any-except {
leaf-list deny-site {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID to be denied.";
}
}
description
"Choice for cloud access policy.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 111]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
container authorized-sites {
list authorized-site {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID.";
}
description
"List of authorized sites.";
}
description
"Configuration of authorized sites";
}
container denied-sites {
list denied-site {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID.";
}
description
"List of denied sites.";
}
description
"Configuration of denied sites";
}
container address-translation {
container nat44 {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Control if
address translation is required or not.";
}
leaf nat44-customer-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
must "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Applicable only if
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 112]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
address translation is enabled.";
}
description
"Address to be used for translation.
This is to be used in case customer is providing
the address.";
}
description
"IPv4 to IPv4 translation.";
}
description
"Container for NAT";
}
description
"Cloud access configuration.";
}
description
"Container for cloud access configurations";
}
description
"grouping for vpn cloud definition";
}
grouping multicast-rp-group-cfg {
choice group-format {
case startend {
leaf group-start {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"First group address.";
}
leaf group-end {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Last group address.";
}
}
case singleaddress {
leaf group-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Group address";
}
}
description
"Choice for group format.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 113]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Definition of groups for
RP to group mapping.";
}
grouping vpn-service-multicast {
container multicast {
if-feature multicast;
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enable multicast.";
}
container customer-tree-flavors {
leaf-list tree-flavor {
type identityref {
base multicast-tree-type;
}
description
"Type of tree to be used.";
}
description
"Type of trees used by customer.";
}
container rp {
container rp-group-mappings {
list rp-group-mapping {
key "id";
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"Unique identifier for the mapping.";
}
container provider-managed {
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Set to true, if the RP must be a
provider
managed node.
Set to false, if it is a customer
managed node.";
}
leaf rp-redundancy {
when "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 114]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Relevant when RP
is provider managed.";
}
type boolean;
default false;
description
"If true, redundancy
mechanism for RP is required.";
}
leaf optimal-traffic-delivery {
when "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Relevant when RP
is provider managed.";
}
type boolean;
default false;
description
"If true, SP must ensure
that traffic uses an optimal path.";
}
description
"Parameters for provider managed RP.";
}
leaf rp-address {
when "../provider-managed/enabled = 'false'" {
description
"Relevant when RP
is provider managed.";
}
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Defines the address of the
RendezvousPoint.
Used if RP is customer managed.";
}
container groups {
list group {
key id;
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"Identifier for the group.";
}
uses multicast-rp-group-cfg;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 115]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"List of groups.";
}
description
"Multicast groups associated with RP.";
}
description
"List of RP to group mappings.";
}
description
"RP to group mappings.";
}
container rp-discovery {
leaf rp-discovery-type {
type identityref {
base multicast-rp-discovery-type;
}
default static-rp;
description
"Type of RP discovery used.";
}
container bsr-candidates {
when "../rp-discovery-type = 'bsr-rp'" {
description
"Only applicable if discovery type
is BSR-RP";
}
leaf-list bsr-candidate-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Address of BSR candidate";
}
description
"Customer BSR candidates address";
}
description
"RP discovery parameters";
}
description
"RendezvousPoint parameters.";
}
description
"Multicast global parameters for the VPN service.";
}
description
"grouping for multicast vpn definition";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 116]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
grouping vpn-service-mpls {
leaf carrierscarrier {
if-feature carrierscarrier;
type boolean;
default false;
description
"The VPN is using Carrier's Carrier,
and so MPLS is required.";
}
description
"grouping for mpls CsC definition";
}
grouping customer-location-info {
container locations {
list location {
key location-id;
leaf location-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifier for a particular location";
}
leaf address {
type string;
description
"Address (number and street)
of the site.";
}
leaf postal-code {
type string;
description
"Postal code of the site.";
}
leaf state {
type string;
description
"State of the site.
This leaf can also be used
to describe a region
for country who does not have
states.
";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 117]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
leaf city {
type string;
description
"City of the site.";
}
leaf country-code {
type string {
pattern '[A-Z]{2}';
}
description
"Country of the site.
Expressed as ISO
ALPHA-2 code.";
}
description
"Location of the site.";
}
description
"List of locations for the site";
}
description
"This grouping defines customer location
parameters";
}
grouping site-group {
container groups {
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id the site
is belonging to";
}
description
"List of group-id";
}
description
"Groups the site or site-network-access
is belonging to.";
}
description
"Grouping definition to assign
group-ids to site or site-network-access";
}
grouping site-diversity {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 118]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
container site-diversity {
if-feature site-diversity;
uses site-group;
description
"Diversity constraint type.
Group values defined here will be inherited
to all site-network-accesses.";
}
description
"This grouping defines site diversity
parameters";
}
grouping access-diversity {
container access-diversity {
if-feature site-diversity;
uses site-group;
container constraints {
list constraint {
key constraint-type;
leaf constraint-type {
type identityref {
base placement-diversity;
}
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
container target {
choice target-flavor {
case id {
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"The constraint will apply
against this particular
group-id";
}
description
"List of groups";
}
}
case all-accesses {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 119]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
leaf all-other-accesses {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply
against all other site network
access
of this site";
}
}
case all-groups {
leaf all-other-groups {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply
against all other groups the
customer
is managing";
}
}
description
"Choice for the group definition";
}
description
"The constraint will apply against
this list of groups";
}
description
"List of constraints";
}
description
"Constraints for placing this site
network access";
}
description
"Diversity parameters.";
}
description
"This grouping defines access diversity
parameters";
}
grouping operational-requirements {
leaf requested-site-start {
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating requested date
and time
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 120]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
when the service at a particular site is
expected
to start";
}
leaf requested-site-stop {
type yang:date-and-time;
description
"Optional leaf indicating requested date
and time
when the service at a particular site is
expected
to stop";
}
description
"This grouping defines some operational parameters
parameters";
}
grouping operational-requirements-ops {
leaf actual-site-start {
type yang:date-and-time;
config false;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time
when the service at a particular site
actually
started";
}
leaf actual-site-stop {
type yang:date-and-time;
config false;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time
when the service at a particular site
actually
stopped";
}
description
"This grouping defines some operational parameters
parameters";
}
grouping flow-definition {
container match-flow {
leaf dscp {
type inet:dscp;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 121]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"DSCP value.";
}
leaf dot1p {
type uint8 {
range "0 .. 7";
}
description
"802.1p matching.";
}
leaf ipv4-src-prefix {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv4 src address.";
}
leaf ipv6-src-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv6 src address.";
}
leaf ipv4-dst-prefix {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv4 dst address.";
}
leaf ipv6-dst-prefix {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Match on IPv6 dst address.";
}
leaf l4-src-port {
type inet:port-number;
description
"Match on layer 4 src port.";
}
leaf-list target-sites {
type svc-id;
description
"Identify a site as traffic destination.";
}
container l4-src-port-range {
leaf lower-port {
type inet:port-number;
description
"Lower boundary for port.";
}
leaf upper-port {
type inet:port-number;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 122]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
must ". >= ../lower-port" {
description
"Upper boundary must be higher
than lower boundary";
}
description
"Upper boundary for port.";
}
description
"Match on layer 4 src port range.";
}
leaf l4-dst-port {
type inet:port-number;
description
"Match on layer 4 dst port.";
}
container l4-dst-port-range {
leaf lower-port {
type inet:port-number;
description
"Lower boundary for port.";
}
leaf upper-port {
type inet:port-number;
must ". >= ../lower-port" {
description
"Upper boundary must be higher
than lower boundary";
}
description
"Upper boundary for port.";
}
description
"Match on layer 4 dst port range.";
}
leaf protocol-field {
type union {
type uint8;
type identityref {
base protocol-type;
}
}
description
"Match on IPv4 protocol or
Ipv6 Next Header
field.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 123]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"Describe flow matching
criterions.";
}
description
"Flow definition based on criteria.";
}
grouping site-service-basic {
leaf svc-input-bandwidth {
type uint32;
units bps;
description
"From the PE perspective, the service input
bandwidth of the connection.";
}
leaf svc-output-bandwidth {
type uint32;
units bps;
description
"From the PE perspective, the service output
bandwidth of the connection.";
}
leaf svc-mtu {
type uint16;
units bytes;
description
"MTU at service level.
If the service is IP,
it refers to the IP MTU.";
}
description
"Defines basic service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-protection {
container traffic-protection {
if-feature fast-reroute;
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enables
traffic protection of access link.";
}
description
"Fast reroute service parameters
for the site.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 124]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Defines protection service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-service-mpls {
container carrierscarrier {
if-feature carrierscarrier;
leaf signalling-type {
type enumeration {
enum "ldp" {
description
"Use LDP as signalling
protocol between PE and CE.";
}
enum "bgp" {
description
"Use BGP 3107 as signalling
protocol between PE and CE.
In this case, bgp must be also
configured
as routing-protocol.
";
}
}
description
"MPLS signalling type.";
}
description
"This container is used when customer provides
MPLS based services.
This is used in case of Carrier's
Carrier.";
}
description
"Defines MPLS service parameters for a site.";
}
grouping site-service-qos-profile {
container qos {
if-feature qos;
container qos-classification-policy {
list rule {
key id;
ordered-by user;
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"ID of the rule.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 125]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
choice match-type {
case match-flow {
uses flow-definition;
}
case match-application {
leaf match-application {
type identityref {
base customer-application;
}
description
"Defines the application
to match.";
}
}
description
"Choice for classification";
}
leaf target-class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the
class of service.
This identifier is internal to
the administration.";
}
description
"List of marking rules.";
}
description
"Need to express marking rules ...";
}
container qos-profile {
choice qos-profile {
description
"Choice for QoS profile.
Can be standard profile or custom.";
case standard {
leaf profile {
type string;
description
"QoS profile to be used";
}
}
case custom {
container classes {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 126]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
if-feature qos-custom;
list class {
key class-id;
leaf class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the
class of service.
This identifier is internal to
the administration.";
}
leaf rate-limit {
type uint8;
units percent;
description
"To be used if class must
be rate
limited. Expressed as
percentage of the svc-bw.";
}
container latency {
choice flavor {
case lowest {
leaf use-lowest-latency {
type empty;
description
"The traffic class should use
the lowest latency path";
}
}
case boundary {
leaf latency-boundary {
type uint16;
units msec;
description
"The traffic class should use
a path with a defined maximum
latency.";
}
}
description
"Latency constraint on the traffic
class";
}
description
"Latency constraint on the traffic
class";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 127]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
container jitter {
choice flavor {
case lowest {
leaf use-lowest-jitter {
type empty;
description
"The traffic class should use
the lowest jitter path";
}
}
case boundary {
leaf latency-boundary {
type uint32;
units usec;
description
"The traffic class should use
a path with a defined maximum
jitter.";
}
}
description
"Jitter constraint on the traffic
class";
}
description
"Jitter constraint on the traffic
class";
}
container bandwidth {
leaf guaranteed-bw-percent {
type uint8;
units percent;
description
"To be used to define the
guaranteed
BW in percent of the svc-bw
available.";
}
leaf end-to-end {
type empty;
description
"Used if the bandwidth reservation
must be done on the MPLS network too";
}
description
"Bandwidth constraint on the traffic
class";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 128]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
description
"List of class of services.";
}
description
"Container for
list of class of services.";
}
}
}
description
"Qos profile configuration.";
}
description
"QoS configuration.";
}
description
"This grouping defines QoS parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-security-authentication {
container authentication {
description
"Authentication parameters";
}
description
"This grouping defines authentication
parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-security-encryption {
container encryption {
if-feature encryption;
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"If true, access encryption is required.";
}
leaf layer {
type enumeration {
enum layer2 {
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 129]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Encryption will occur at layer 2.";
}
enum layer3 {
description
"Encryption will occur at layer 3.
IPSec may be used as example.";
}
}
mandatory true;
description
"Layer on which encryption is applied.";
}
container encryption-profile {
choice profile {
case provider-profile {
leaf profile-name {
type string;
description
"Name of the SP profile
to be applied.";
}
}
case customer-profile {
leaf algorithm {
type string;
description
"Encryption algorithm to
be used.";
}
choice key-type {
case psk {
leaf preshared-key {
type string;
description
"Key coming from
customer.";
}
}
case pki {
}
description
"Type of keys to be used.";
}
}
description
"Choice of profile.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 130]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"Profile of encryption to be applied.";
}
description
"Encryption parameters.";
}
description
"This grouping defines encryption parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-attachment-bearer {
container bearer {
container requested-type {
if-feature requested-type;
leaf requested-type {
type string;
description
"Type of requested bearer Ethernet, DSL,
Wireless ...
Operator specific.";
}
leaf strict {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"define if the requested-type is a preference
or a strict requirement.";
}
description
"Container for requested type.";
}
leaf always-on {
if-feature always-on;
type boolean;
default true;
description
"Request for an always on access type.
This means no Dial access type for
example.";
}
leaf bearer-reference {
if-feature bearer-reference;
type string;
description
"This is an internal reference for the
service provider.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 131]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
Used ";
}
description
"Bearer specific parameters.
To be augmented.";
}
description
"Defines physical properties of
a site attachment.";
}
grouping site-routing {
container routing-protocols {
list routing-protocol {
key type;
leaf type {
type identityref {
base routing-protocol-type;
}
description
"Type of routing protocol.";
}
container ospf {
when "../type = 'ospf'" {
description
"Only applies
when protocol is OSPF.";
}
if-feature rtg-ospf;
leaf-list address-family {
type address-family;
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
leaf area-address {
type yang:dotted-quad;
description
"Area address.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
description
"Metric of PE-CE link.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 132]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
container sham-links {
if-feature rtg-ospf-sham-link;
list sham-link {
key target-site;
leaf target-site {
type svc-id;
description
"Target site for the sham link
connection.
The site is referred through it's ID.";
}
leaf metric {
type uint16;
description
"Metric of the sham link.";
}
description
"Creates a shamlink with another
site";
}
description
"List of Sham links";
}
description
"OSPF specific configuration.";
}
container bgp {
when "../type = 'bgp'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is BGP.";
}
if-feature rtg-bgp;
leaf autonomous-system {
type uint32;
description
"AS number.";
}
leaf-list address-family {
type address-family;
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 133]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"BGP specific configuration.";
}
container static {
when "../type = 'static'" {
description
"Only applies when protocol
is static.";
}
container cascaded-lan-prefixes {
list ipv4-lan-prefixes {
if-feature ipv4;
key "lan next-hop";
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"Lan prefixes.";
}
leaf lan-tag {
type string;
description
"Internal tag to be used in vpn
policies.";
}
leaf next-hop {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Nexthop address to use at customer
side.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes for
the site.
";
}
list ipv6-lan-prefixes {
if-feature ipv6;
key "lan next-hop";
leaf lan {
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"Lan prefixes.";
}
leaf lan-tag {
type string;
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 134]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Internal tag to be used
in vpn policies.";
}
leaf next-hop {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Nexthop address to use at
customer side.";
}
description "
List of LAN prefixes for the site.
";
}
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
}
description
"Static routing
specific configuration.";
}
container rip {
when "../type = 'rip'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is RIP.";
}
if-feature rtg-rip;
leaf-list address-family {
type address-family;
description
"Address family to be
activated.";
}
description
"RIP routing specific
configuration.";
}
container vrrp {
when "../type = 'vrrp'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol is VRRP.";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 135]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
if-feature rtg-vrrp;
leaf-list address-family {
type address-family;
description
"Address family to be activated.";
}
description
"VRRP routing specific configuration.";
}
description
"List of routing protocols used
on the site.
Need to be augmented.";
}
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
}
description
"Grouping for routing protocols.";
}
grouping site-attachment-ip-connection {
container ip-connection {
container ipv4 {
if-feature ipv4;
leaf address-allocation-type {
type identityref {
base address-allocation-type;
}
default "static-address";
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated.
";
}
leaf number-of-dynamic-address {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'provider-dhcp'"
{
description
"Only applies when
addresses are dhcp allocated";
}
type uint8;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 136]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
default 1;
description
"Describes the number of IP addresses the
customer requires";
}
container dhcp-relay {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'provider-dhcp-relay'"
{
description
"Only applies when
provider is required to implementations
DHCP relay function";
}
container customer-dhcp-servers {
leaf-list server-ip-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"IP address of customer DHCP server";
}
description
"Container for list of customer DHCP server";
}
description
"DHCP relay provided by operator.";
}
container addresses {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'static-address'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol allocation type is static";
}
leaf provider-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Provider side address.";
}
leaf customer-address {
type inet:ipv4-address;
description
"Customer side address.";
}
leaf mask {
type uint8 {
range "0..31";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 137]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Subnet mask expressed
in bits";
}
description
"Describes IP addresses used";
}
description
"IPv4 specific parameters";
}
container ipv6 {
if-feature ipv6;
leaf address-allocation-type {
type identityref {
base address-allocation-type;
}
default "static-address";
description
"Defines how addresses are allocated.
";
}
leaf number-of-dynamic-address {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'provider-dhcp' "+
"or ../address-allocation-type "+
"= 'provider-dhcp-slaac'" {
description
"Only applies when
addresses are dhcp allocated";
}
type uint8;
default 1;
description
"Describes the number of IP addresses the
customer requires";
}
container dhcp-relay {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'provider-dhcp-relay'"
{
description
"Only applies when
provider is required to implementations
DHCP relay function";
}
container customer-dhcp-servers {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 138]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
leaf-list server-ip-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"IP address of customer DHCP server";
}
description
"Container for list of customer DHCP server";
}
description
"DHCP relay provided by operator.";
}
container addresses {
when
"../address-allocation-type = 'static-address'" {
description
"Only applies when
protocol allocation type is static";
}
leaf provider-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Provider side address.";
}
leaf customer-address {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"Customer side address.";
}
leaf mask {
type uint8 {
range "0..127";
}
description
"Subnet mask expressed
in bits";
}
description
"Describes IP addresses used";
}
description
"IPv6 specific parameters";
}
container oam {
container bfd {
if-feature bfd;
leaf enabled {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 139]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
type boolean;
default false;
description
"BFD activation";
}
choice holdtime {
case profile {
leaf profile-name {
type string;
description
"Service provider well
known profile.";
}
description
"Service provider well
known profile.";
}
case fixed {
leaf fixed-value {
type uint32;
units msec;
description
"Expected holdtime
expressed
in msec.";
}
}
description
"Choice for holdtime flavor.";
}
description
"Container for BFD.";
}
description
"Define the OAM used on the connection.";
}
description
"Defines connection parameters.";
}
description
"This grouping defines IP connection parameters.";
}
grouping site-service-multicast {
container multicast {
if-feature multicast;
leaf multicast-site-type {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 140]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
type enumeration {
enum receiver-only {
description
"The site has only receivers.";
}
enum source-only {
description
"The site has only sources.";
}
enum source-receiver {
description
"The site has both
sources & receivers.";
}
}
default "source-receiver";
description
"Type of multicast site.";
}
container multicast-address-family {
leaf ipv4 {
if-feature ipv4;
type boolean;
default true;
description
"Enables ipv4 multicast";
}
leaf ipv6 {
if-feature ipv6;
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Enables ipv6 multicast";
}
description
"Defines protocol to carry multicast.";
}
leaf protocol-type {
type enumeration {
enum host {
description
"
Hosts are directly connected
to the provider network.
Host protocols like IGMP, MLD
are required.
";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 141]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
enum router {
description
"
Hosts are behind a customer router.
PIM will be implemented.
";
}
enum both {
description
"Some Hosts are behind a customer
router and some others are directly
connected to the provider network.
Both host and routing protocols must be
used. Typically IGMP and PIM will be
implemented.
";
}
}
default "both";
description
"Multicast protocol type to be used
with the customer site.";
}
description
"Multicast parameters for the site.";
}
description
"Multicast parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-management {
container management {
leaf type {
type identityref {
base management;
}
description
"Management type of the connection.";
}
description
"Management configuration";
}
description
"Management parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-devices {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 142]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
container devices {
must "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type = "+
"'provider-managed' or "+
"/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type ="+
"'co-managed'" {
description
"Applicable only for provider-managed or
co-managed device";
}
list device {
key device-id;
leaf device-id {
type svc-id;
description
"identifier for the device";
}
leaf location {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/locations/"+
"location/location-id";
}
description
"Location of the device";
}
container management {
must "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type"+
"= 'co-managed'" {
description
"Applicable only for
co-managed device";
}
leaf address-family {
type address-family;
description
"Address family used for management.";
}
leaf address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Management address";
}
description
"Management configuration. Only for
co-managed case.";
}
description
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 143]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
"Device configuration";
}
description
"List of devices requested by customer";
}
description
"Grouping for device allocation";
}
grouping site-vpn-flavor {
leaf site-vpn-flavor {
type identityref {
base site-vpn-flavor;
}
default site-vpn-flavor-single;
description
"Defines if the site
is a single VPN site, or multiVPN or ...";
}
description
"Grouping for site-vpn-flavor.";
}
grouping site-vpn-policy {
container vpn-policies {
list vpn-policy {
key vpn-policy-id;
leaf vpn-policy-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Unique identifier for
the VPN policy.";
}
list entries {
key id;
leaf id {
type svc-id;
description
"Unique identifier for
the policy entry.";
}
container filter {
choice lan {
case prefixes {
leaf-list ipv4-lan-prefix {
if-feature ipv4;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 144]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
type inet:ipv4-prefix;
description
"List of IPv4 prefixes to be
matched.";
}
leaf-list ipv6-lan-prefix {
if-feature ipv6;
type inet:ipv6-prefix;
description
"List of IPv6 prefixes to be
matched.";
}
}
case lan-tag {
leaf-list lan-tag {
type string;
description
"List of lan-tags to be matched.";
}
}
description
"Choice for LAN matching type";
}
description
"If used, it permit to split site LANs
among multiple VPNs.
If no filter used, all the LANs will be
part of the same VPNs with the same
role.";
}
container vpn {
leaf vpn-id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/vpn-services/"
+"vpn-service/vpn-id";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Reference to an IPVPN.";
}
leaf site-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"Role of the site in the IPVPN.";
}
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 145]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"List of VPNs the LAN is associated to.";
}
description
"List of entries for export policy.";
}
description
"List of VPN policies.";
}
description
"VPN policy.";
}
description
"VPN policy parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-maximum-routes {
container maximum-routes {
list address-family {
key af;
leaf af {
type address-family;
description
"Address-family.";
}
leaf maximum-routes {
type uint32;
description
"Maximum prefixes the VRF can
accept for this
address-family.";
}
description
"List of address families.";
}
description
"Define maximum-routes for the VRF.";
}
description
"Define maximum-routes for the site.";
}
grouping site-security {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 146]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
container security {
uses site-security-authentication;
uses site-security-encryption;
description
"Site specific security parameters.";
}
description
"Grouping for security parameters.";
}
grouping site-service {
container service {
uses site-service-qos-profile;
uses site-service-mpls;
uses site-service-multicast;
description
"Service parameters on the attachement.";
}
description
"Grouping for service parameters.";
}
grouping site-network-access-service {
container service {
uses site-service-basic;
uses site-service-qos-profile;
uses site-service-mpls;
uses site-service-multicast;
description
"Service parameters on the attachement.";
}
description
"Grouping for service parameters.";
}
grouping vpn-extranet {
container extranet-vpns {
if-feature extranet-vpn;
list extranet-vpn {
key vpn-id;
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifies the target VPN";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 147]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
leaf local-sites-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"This describes the role of the
local sites in the target VPN topology.";
}
description
"List of extranet VPNs the local
VPN is attached to.";
}
description
"Container for extranet vpn cfg.";
}
description
"grouping for extranet VPN configuration.
Extranet provides a way to interconnect all sites
from two VPNs in a easy way.";
}
grouping site-attachment-availability {
container availability {
leaf access-priority {
type uint32;
default 1;
description
"Defines the priority for the access.
The highest the priority value is,
the highest the
preference of the access is.";
}
description
"Availability parameters
(used for multihoming)";
}
description
"Defines site availability parameters.";
}
grouping access-vpn-policy {
container vpn-attachment {
choice attachment-flavor {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 148]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
case vpn-policy-id {
leaf vpn-policy-id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/"+
"vpn-policies/vpn-policy/"+
"vpn-policy-id";
}
description
"Reference to a VPN policy.";
}
}
case vpn-id {
leaf vpn-id {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/vpn-services"+
"/vpn-service/vpn-id";
}
description
"Reference to a VPN.";
}
leaf site-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"Role of the site in the IPVPN.";
}
}
mandatory true;
description
"Choice for VPN attachment flavor.";
}
description
"Defines VPN attachment of a site.";
}
description
"Defines the VPN attachment rules
for a site logical access.";
}
grouping vpn-svc-cfg {
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"VPN identifier. Local administration meaning.";
}
leaf customer-name {
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 149]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
type string;
description
"Name of the customer.";
}
leaf vpn-service-topology {
type identityref {
base vpn-topology;
}
default "any-to-any";
description
"VPN service topology.";
}
uses vpn-service-cloud-access;
uses vpn-service-multicast;
uses vpn-service-mpls;
uses vpn-extranet;
description
"grouping for vpn-svc configuration.";
}
grouping site-top-level-cfg {
uses operational-requirements;
uses customer-location-info;
uses site-devices;
uses site-diversity;
uses site-management;
uses site-vpn-policy;
uses site-vpn-flavor;
uses site-maximum-routes;
uses site-security;
uses site-service;
uses site-protection;
uses site-routing;
description
"Grouping for site top level cfg.";
}
grouping site-network-access-top-level-cfg {
leaf site-network-access-type {
type identityref {
base site-network-access-type;
}
default "point-to-point";
description
"Describes the type of connection, e.g. :
point-to-point or multipoint";
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 150]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
}
choice location-flavor {
case location {
when "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type = "+
"'customer-managed'" {
description
"Applicable only for customer-managed";
}
leaf location-reference {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/locations/"+
"location/location-id";
}
description
"Location of the site-network-access";
}
}
case device {
when "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type = "+
"'provider-managed' or "+
"/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/management/type = "+
"'co-managed'" {
description
"Applicable only for provider-managed or
co-managed device";
}
leaf device-reference {
type leafref {
path "/l3vpn-svc/sites/site/devices/"+
"device/device-id";
}
description
"Identifier of CE to use";
}
}
mandatory true;
description
"Choice on how to describe the site location";
}
uses access-diversity;
uses site-attachment-bearer;
uses site-attachment-ip-connection;
uses site-security;
uses site-network-access-service;
uses site-routing;
uses site-attachment-availability;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 151]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
uses access-vpn-policy;
description
"Grouping for site network access
top level cfg.";
}
/* Main blocks */
container l3vpn-svc {
container vpn-services {
list vpn-service {
key vpn-id;
uses vpn-svc-cfg;
description "
List of VPN services.
";
}
description
"top level container
for the VPN services.";
}
container sites {
list site {
key site-id;
leaf site-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifier of the site.";
}
uses site-top-level-cfg;
uses operational-requirements-ops;
container site-network-accesses {
list site-network-access {
key site-network-access-id;
leaf site-network-access-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifier for the access";
}
uses site-network-access-top-level-cfg;
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 152]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
description
"List of accesses for a site.";
}
description
"List of accesses for a site.";
}
description "List of sites.";
}
description
"Container for sites";
}
description
"Main container for L3VPN service configuration.";
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
10. Security Considerations
The YANG modules defined in this document MAY be accessed via the
RESTCONF protocol [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf] or NETCONF protocol
([RFC6241]. The lowest RESTCONF or NETCONF layer requires that the
transport-layer protocol provides both data integrity and
confidentiality, see Section 2 in [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf] and
[RFC6241]. The client MUST carefully examine the certificate
presented by the server to determine if it meets the client's
expectations, and the server MUST authenticate client access to any
protected resource. The client identity derived from the
authentication mechanism used is subject to the NETCONF Access
Control Module (NACM) ([RFC6536]). Other protocols to access this
YANG module are also required to support the similar mechanism.
The data nodes defined in the "ietf-l3vpn-svc" YANG module MUST be
carefully created/read/updated/deleted. The entries in the lists
below include customer proprietary or confidential information,
therefore only authorized clients MUST access the information and the
other clients MUST NOT be able to access the information.
o /l3vpn-svc/vpn-services/vpn-service
o /l3vpn-svc/sites/site
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 153]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
The data model proposes some security parameters than can be extended
by augmentation as part of the customer service request: those
parameters are described in Section 6.9.
11. Contribution
Authors would like to thank Rob Shakir for his major contribution on
the initial modeling and use cases.
12. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Qin Wu, Maxim Klyus, Luis Miguel Contreras, Gregory Mirsky,
Zitao Wang, Jing Zhao, Kireeti Kompella, Eric Rosen, Aijun Wang,
Michael Scharf, Xufeng Liu, David Ball, Lucy Yong, Jean-Philippe
Landry and Andrew Leu for the contributions to the document.
13. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to assign a new URI from the IETF XML registry
([RFC3688]). Authors are suggesting the following URI:
ID: yang:ietf-l3vpn-svc
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-svc
Filename: [ TBD-at-registration ]
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]
Registrant Contact: L3SM WG
XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace
This document also requests a new YANG module name in the YANG Module
Names registry ([RFC7950]) with the following suggestion:
Name: ietf-l3vpn-svc
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l3vpn-svc
Prefix: l3vpn-svc
Module:
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]
14. Change Log
14.1. Changes between versions -18 and-19
o Country code string pattern enforced to ISO ALPHA-2 code.
o zip-code renamed to postal-code.
o Added new address-allocation-type: provider-dhcp-slaac.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 154]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o Removed transport-constraints and include transport constraints
(jitter,latency, bandwidth) in the qos-profile.
o qos-profile simplified with more abstraction.
o added target-sites in flow-definition.
14.2. Changes between versions -17 and-18
o Removed TOS from flow matching.
14.3. Changes between versions -16 and-17
o Renamed "vpn-svc" list to "vpn-service".
o Renamed "vpn-policy-list" to "vpn-policies".
o Renamed "management-transport" to "address-family".
o Renamed "multicast-transport" to "address-family".
o Modified cloud access policy using a choice.
o any-to-any-role as default site-role.
o "address-family" is now an enumeration instead of identity.
o cloud-access feature moved to container level.
o Added "address-translation" container for cloud-access.
o Renamed "customer-nat-address" to "customer-address".
o New type ip:address for "customer-address".
o "tree-flavor" moved to leaf-list.
o "bsr-candidate" list moved to "bsr-candidate-address" leaf-list.
o layer becomes mandatory in security-encryption.
o ip-subnet mask range modified.
o multicast transport constraint destination moved to leaf-list.
o lan-prefixes in vpn-policy moved to leaf-list ang tag has been
renamed "prefixes".
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 155]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o Added source and destination port range in QoS classification.
o QoS classification uses more existing inet:types.
o Grouping defined for site group list.
14.4. Changes between versions -15 and-16
o Rename "topology" leaf to "vpn-service-topology".
14.5. Changes between versions -13 and-14
o Choice between device reference and location reference.
14.6. Changes between versions -12 and-13
o Removed rip-ng identity (rip container has AF information)
o renamed pe-dhcp to provider-dhcp
o add provider-dhcp-relay identity and container
o BW/MTU is now only under site-network-access
o Add list of location and location ID
o Site-network-access mapped to location Identifier
o Add list of devices (provided by operator) requested by customer
o Some management parameters moved under device list
o Site-network-access mapped to device identifier
14.7. Changes between versions -11 and-12
o Fixing some 'when' statements that prevented compilation.
14.8. Changes between versions -09 and-10
o Removed templates.
o Add site-network-access-type.
o Add a leaf number-of-dynamic-address in case of pe-dhcp
addressing.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 156]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
14.9. Changes between versions -08 and-09
o Add site-vpn-flavor NNI.
14.10. Changes between versions -07 and-08
o Traffic protection moved to site level.
o Decouple operational-requirements in two containers.
14.11. Changes between versions -06 and-07
o Set config false to actual-site-start and stop.
o Add a container before cloud-access list.
o Add a container before authorized-sites list.
o Add a container before denied-sites list.
o Modified access-diversity modeling.
o Replacing type placement diversity by an identity.
14.12. Changes between versions -05 and-06
o Added linecard diverse for site diversity
o Added a new diversity enum in placement-diversity: none
o Added state to site location
o remove reference to core routing model: created new address family
identities
o added features
o Modified bearer parameters
o Modified union for ipv4/ipv6 addresses to ip-address type
o Add BSR parameters for multicast
o Add applications matching for QoS classification
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 157]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
14.13. Changes between versions -04 and-05
o Modify VPN policy and creating a vpn-policy-list
o Add VPN policy reference and VPN ID reference under site-network-
access
14.14. Changes between versions -02 and-03
o Add extranet-vpn container in vpn-svc
o Creating top level containers
o Refine groupings
o Added site-vpn-flavor
o qos-profile moved to choice
o vpn leaf moved to vpn-id in vpn-policy
o added ordered-by user to qos classification list
o moved traffic protection to access availability
o creating a choice in matching filter for VPN policy
o added dot1p matching field in flow-definition
14.15. Changes between versions -01 and-02
o A site is now a collection of site-accesses. This was introduced
to support M to N availability.
o Site-availability has been removed, replaced by availability
parameters under site-accesses
o Added transport-constraints within vpn-svc
o Add ToS support in match-flow
o nexthop in cascaded lan as mandatory
o customer-specific-info deleted and moved to routing protocols
o customer-lan-connection modified: need prefix and CE address
o add choice in managing PE-CE addressing
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 158]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
o Simplifying traffic protection
o Refine groupings for vpn-svc
o Removed name in vpn-svc
o id in vpn-svc moved to string
o Rename id in vpn-svc to vpn-id
o Changed key of vpn-svc list to vpn-id
o Add DSCP support in flow definition
o Removed ACL from security
o Add FW for site and cloud access
14.16. Changes between versions -00 and-01
o Creating multiple reusable groupings
o Added mpls leaf in vpn-svc for carrier's carrier case
o Modify identity single to single-site
o Modify site-type to site-role and also child identities.
o Creating OAM container under site and moved BFD in.
o Creating flow-definition grouping to be reused in ACL, QoS ...
o Simplified VPN policy.
o Adding multicast static group to RP mappings.
o Removed native-vpn and site-role from global site cfg, now managed
within the VPN policy.
o Creating a separate list for site templates.
15. References
15.1. Normative References
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 159]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
[I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf]
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-18 (work in
progress), October 2016.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/
RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC4026] Andersson, L. and T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual
Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026, DOI
10.17487/RFC4026, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4026>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC4577] Rosen, E., Psenak, P., and P. Pillay-Esnault, "OSPF as the
Provider/Customer Edge Protocol for BGP/MPLS IP Virtual
Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4577, DOI 10.17487/RFC4577,
June 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4577>.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, DOI 10.17487/
RFC4862, September 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6513] Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6513>.
[RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Protocol (NETCONF) Access Control Model", RFC 6536, DOI
10.17487/RFC6536, March 2012,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6536>.
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 160]
Internet-Draft l3vpn-svc-cfg November 2016
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
15.2. Informative References
[RFC4110] Callon, R. and M. Suzuki, "A Framework for Layer 3
Provider-Provisioned Virtual Private Networks (PPVPNs)",
RFC 4110, DOI 10.17487/RFC4110, July 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4110>.
Authors' Addresses
Stephane Litkowski
Orange Business Services
Email: stephane.litkowski@orange.com
Luis Tomotaki
Verizon
Email: luis.tomotaki@verizon.com
Kenichi Ogaki
KDDI
Email: ke-oogaki@kddi.com
Litkowski, et al. Expires May 8, 2017 [Page 161]
