Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit
draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit
OPSAWG M. Boucadair, Ed.
Internet-Draft Orange
Intended status: Standards Track R. Roberts, Ed.
Expires: 5 September 2024 Juniper
O. G. D. Dios
Telefonica
S. B. Giraldo
Nokia
B. Wu
Huawei Technologies
4 March 2024
YANG Data Models for Bearers and 'Attachment Circuits'-as-a-Service
(ACaaS)
draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-07
Abstract
This document specifies a YANG service data model for Attachment
Circuits (ACs). This model can be used for the provisioning of ACs
before or during service provisioning (e.g., Network Slice Service).
The document also specifies a service model for managing bearers over
which ACs are established.
Also, the document specifies a set of reusable groupings. Whether
other service models reuse structures defined in the AC models or
simply include an AC reference is a design choice of these service
models. Utilizing the AC service model to manage ACs over which a
service is delivered has the advantage of decoupling service
management from upgrading AC components to incorporate recent AC
technologies or features.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this document takes place on the Operations and
Management Area Working Group Working Group mailing list
(opsawg@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/boucadair/attachment-circuit-model.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 September 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Scope and Intended Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Position ACaaS vs. Other Data Models . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.1. Why Not Using the L2SM as Reference Data Model for
ACaaS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.2. Why Not Using the L3SM as Reference Data Model for
ACaaS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Sample Uses of the Data Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1. ACs Terminated by One or Multiple Customer Edges (CEs) . 8
3.2. Separate AC Provisioning vs. Actual Service
Provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Description of the Data Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1. The Bearer Service ("ietf-bearer-svc") YANG Module . . . 11
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
4.2. The Attachment Circuit Service ("ietf-ac-svc") YANG
Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2.1. Overall Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2.2. Service Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2.3. Attachment Circuits Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2.4. AC Placement Contraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2.5. Attachment Circuits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.1. The Bearer Service ("ietf-bearer-svc") YANG Module . . . 42
5.2. The AC Service ("ietf-ac-svc") YANG Module . . . . . . . 51
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Appendix A. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
A.1. Create A New Bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
A.2. Create An AC over An Existing Bearer . . . . . . . . . . 83
A.3. Create An AC for a Known Peer SAP . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
A.4. One CE, Two ACs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
A.5. Control Precedence over Multiple ACs . . . . . . . . . . 92
A.6. Create Multiple ACs Bound to Multiple CEs . . . . . . . . 93
A.7. Binding Attachment Circuits to an IETF Network Slice . . 95
A.8. Connecting a Virtualized Environment Running in a Cloud
Provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
A.9. Connect Customer Network (CE) Through BGP . . . . . . . . 107
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
1. Introduction
1.1. Scope and Intended Use
Connectivity services are provided by networks to customers via
dedicated terminating points, such as Service Functions [RFC7665],
customer edges (CEs), peer Autonomous System Border Routers (ASBRs),
data centers gateways, or Internet Exchange Points. A connectivity
service is basically about ensuring data transfer received from or
destined to a given terminating point to or from other terminating
points within the same customer/service, an interconnection node, or
an ancillary node. The objectives for the connectivity service can
be negotiated and agreed upon between the customer and the network
provider. To facilitate data transfer within the provider network,
it is assumed that the appropriate setup is provisioned over the
links that connect customer terminating points and a provider
network, allowing successfully data exchanged over these links. The
required setup is referred to in this document as Attachment Circuits
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
(ACs), while the underlying link is referred to as "bearers".
This document adheres to the definition of an Attachment Circuit as
provided in Section 1.2 of [RFC4364], especially:
Routers can be attached to each other, or to end systems, in a
variety of different ways: PPP connections, ATM Virtual Circuits
(VCs), Frame Relay VCs, ethernet interfaces, Virtual Local Area
Networks (VLANs) on ethernet interfaces, GRE tunnels, Layer 2
Tunneling Protocol (L2TP) tunnels, IPsec tunnels, etc. We will
use the term "attachment circuit" to refer generally to some such
means of attaching to a router. An attachment circuit may be the
sort of connection that is usually thought of as a "data link", or
it may be a tunnel of some sort; what matters is that it be
possible for two devices to be network layer peers over the
attachment circuit.
When a customer requests a new value-added service, the service can
be bound to existing attachment circuits or trigger the instantiation
of new attachment circuits. The provisioning of a value-added
service should, thus, accommodate both deployments.
Also, because the instantiation of an attachment circuit requires
coordinating the provisioning of endpoints that might not belong to
the same administrative entity (customer vs. provider or distinct
operational teams within the same provider, etc.), *providing
programmatic means to expose 'attachment circuits'-as-a-service will
greatly simplify the provisioning of value-added services* delivered
over an attachment circuits. For example, management systems of
adjacent domains that need to connect via an AC will use such means
to agree on the resources that are required for the activation of
both sides of an AC (e.g., Layer 2 tags, IP address family, or IP
subnets).
This document specifies a YANG service data model ("ietf-ac-svc") for
managing attachment circuits that are exposed by a network to its
customers, such as an enterprise site, a network function, a hosting
infrastructure, or a peer network provider. The model can be used
for the provisioning of ACs prior or during advanced service
provisioning (e.g., Network Slice Service).
The "ietf-ac-svc" module (Section 5.2) includes a set of reusable
groupings. Whether a service model reuses structures defined in the
"ietf-ac-svc" or simply includes an AC reference (that was
communicated during AC service instantiation) is a design choice of
these service models. Relying upon the AC service model to manage
ACs over which services are delivered has the merit to decorrelate
the management of the (core) service vs. upgrade the AC components to
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
reflect recent AC technologies or new features (e.g., new encryption
scheme, additional routing protocol). *This document favors the
approach of completely relying upon the AC service model instead of
duplicating data nodes into specific modules of advanced services
that are delivered over an Attachment Circuit.*
Since the provisioning of an AC requires a bearer to be in place,
this document introduces a new module called "ietf-bearer-svc" that
enables customers to manage their bearer requests (Section 5.1). The
customers can then retrieve a provider-assigned bearer reference that
they will include in their AC service requests. Likewise, the
customer may retrieve whether this bearer supports a synchronization
mechanism such as Sync Ethernet (SyncE) [ITU-T-G.781]. An example to
retrieve a bearer reference is provided in Appendix A.1.
An AC service request can provide a reference to a bearer or a set of
peer SAPs. Both schemes are supported in the AC service model. When
several bearers are available, the AC service request may filter them
based on the bearer type, synchronization support, etc.
Each AC is identified with a unique identifier within a (provider)
domain. From a network provider standpoint, an AC can be bound to a
single or multiple Service Attachment Points (SAPs) [RFC9408].
Likewise, the same SAP can be bound to one or multiple ACs. However,
the mapping between an AC and a PE in the provider network that
terminates that AC is hidden to the application that makes use of the
AC service model. Such mapping information is internal to the
network controllers. As such, the details about the (node-specific)
attachment interfaces are not exposed in the AC service model.
The AC service model *does not make any assumptions about the
internal structure or even the nature or the services that will be
delivered over an attachment circuit or a set of attachment
circuits*. Customers do not have access to that network view other
than the ACs that the ordered. For example, the AC service model can
be used to provision a set of ACs to connect multiple sites (Site1,
Site2, ..., SiteX) for customer who also requested VPN services. If
these provisioning of these services require specific configuration
on ASBR nodes, such configuration is handled at the network level and
is not exposed to the customer at the service level. However, the
network controller will have access to such a view as the service
points in these ASBRs will be exposed as SAPs with "role" set to
"ietf-sap-ntw:nni" [RFC9408].
The AC service model can be used in a variety of contexts, such as
(but not limited to) those provided in Appendix A:
* Create an AC over an existing bearer Appendix A.2.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
* Request an attachment circuit for a known peer SAP (Appendix A.3).
* Instantiate multiple attachment circuits over the same bearer
(Appendix A.4).
* Control the precedence over multiple attachment circuits
(Appendix A.5).
* Create Multiple ACs bound to Multiple CEs (Appendix A.6).
* Bind a slice service to a set of pre-provisioned attachment
circuits (Appendix A.7).
* Connect a Cloud Infrastructure to a service provider network
(Appendix A.8). Note that the AC model can be used between
service providers for other interconnection purposes.
The examples provided in Appendix A use the IPv4 address blocks
reserved for documentation [RFC5737], the IPv6 prefix reserved for
documentation [RFC3849], and the Autonomous System (AS) numbers
reserved for documentation [RFC5398].
The YANG data models in this document conform to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in [RFC8342].
1.2. Position ACaaS vs. Other Data Models
The AC model specified in this document *is not a network model*
[RFC8969]. As such, the model does not expose details related to
specific nodes in the provider's network that terminate an AC (e.g.,
network node identifiers). The mapping between an AC as seen by a
customer and the network implementation of an AC is maintained by the
network controllers and is not exposed to the customer. This mapping
can be maintained using a variety of network models, such as
augmented SAP AC network model
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit].
The AC service model *is not a device model*. A network provider may
use a variety of device models (e.g., Routing management [RFC8349] or
BGP [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]) to provision an AC service in relevant
network nodes.
1.2.1. Why Not Using the L2SM as Reference Data Model for ACaaS?
The L2SM [RFC8466] covers some AC-related considerations.
Nevertheless, the L2SM structure is primarily focused on Layer 2
aspects. For example, the L2SM does not cover Layer 3 provisioning,
which is required for the typical AC instantiation.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
1.2.2. Why Not Using the L3SM as Reference Data Model for ACaaS?
Like the L2SM, the L3SM [RFC8299] addresses certain AC-related
aspects. However, the L3SM structure does not sufficiently address
Layer 2 provisioning requirements. Additionally, the L3SM is
primarily designed for conventional L3VPN deployments and, as such,
has some limitations for instantiating ACs in other deployment
contexts (e.g., cloud environments). For example, the L3SM does not
provide the capability to provision multiple BGP peer groups over the
same AC.
2. Conventions and Definitions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
The meanings of the symbols in the YANG tree diagrams are defined in
[RFC8340].
This document uses the following terms:
Bearer: A physical or logical link that connects a customer node (or
site) to a provider network. A bearer can be a wireless or wired
link. One or multiple technologies can be used to build a bearer.
The bearer type can be specified by a customer.
The operator allocates a unique bearer reference to identify a
bearer within its network (e.g., customer line identifier). Such
a reference can be retrieved by a customer and used in subsequent
service placement requests to unambiguously identify where a
service is to be bound.
The concept of bearer can be generalized to refer to the required
underlying connection for the provisioning of an attachment
circuit. One or multiple attachment circuits may be hosted over
the same bearer (e.g., multiple VLANs on the same bearer that is
provided by a physical link).
Network controller: Denotes a functional entity responsible for the
management of the service provider network.
Service orchestrator: Refers to a functional entity that interacts
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
with the customer of a network service. The service orchestrator
is typically responsible for the attachment circuits, the Provider
Edge (PE) selection, and requesting the activation of the
requested service to a network controller.
Service provider network: A network that is able to provide network
services (e.g., Layer 2 VPN, Layer 3, and Network Slice Services).
Service provider: A service provider that offers network services
(e.g., Layer 2 VPN, Layer 3, and Network Slice Services).
3. Sample Uses of the Data Models
3.1. ACs Terminated by One or Multiple Customer Edges (CEs)
Figure 1 depicts two target topology flavors that involve ACs. These
topologies have the following characteristics:
* A Customer Edges (CEs) can be either a physical device or a
logical entity. Such logical entity is typically a software
component (e.g., a virtual service function that is hosted within
the provider's network or a third-party infrastructure). A CE is
seen by the network as a peer SAP.
* An AC service request may include one or multiple ACs, which may
be associated to a single CE or multiple CEs.
* CEs may be either dedicated to one single connectivity service or
host multiple connectivity services (e.g., CEs with roles of
service functions [RFC7665]).
* A network provider may bind a single AC to one or multiple peer
SAPs (e.g., CE#1 and CE#2 are tagged as peer SAPs for the same
AC). For example, and as discussed in [RFC4364], multiple CEs can
be attached to a PE over the same attachment circuit. This
scenario is typically implemented when the Layer 2 infrastructure
between the CE and the network is a multipoint service.
* A single CE may terminate multiple ACs, which can be associated
with the same bearer or distinct bearers.
* Customers may request protection schemes in which the ACs
associated with their endpoints are terminated by the same PE
(e.g., CE#3), distinct PEs (e.g., CE#34), etc. The network
provider uses this request to decide where to terminate the AC in
the network provider network and also whether to enable specific
capabilities (e.g., Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
.-------. .--------------------. .-------.
│ +------. | +---AC----+ |
│ CE#1 │ | | +---AC----+ CE#3 |
'-------' | | | '-------'
+---AC----+ Network |
.-------. | | |
| | | | | .-------.
| CE#2 +------' | +---AC----+ CE#4 |
'-------' | | '----+--'
'-----------+--------' |
| |
'-----------AC----------'
Figure 1: Examples of ACs
3.2. Separate AC Provisioning vs. Actual Service Provisioning
The procedure to provision a service in a service provider network
may depend on the practices adopted by a service provider. This
includes the flow put in place for the provisioning of advanced
network services and how they are bound to an attachment circuit.
For example, a single attachment circuit may be used to host multiple
connectivity services. In order to avoid service interference and
redundant information in various locations, a service provider may
expose an interface to manage ACs network-wide. Customers can then
request a bearer or an attachment circuit to be put in place, and
then refer to that bearer or AC when requesting services that are
bound to the bearer or AC.
Figure 2 shows the positioning of the AC service model is the overall
service delivery process.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
.---------------.
| Customer |
'-------+-------'
Customer Service Model |
e.g., slice-svc, ac-svc,| and bearer-svc
.-------+-------.
| Service |
| Orchestration |
'-------+-------'
Network Model |
e.g., l3vpn-ntw, sap, and ac-ntw|
.-------+-------.
| Network |
| Orchestration |
'-------+-------'
Network Configuration Model |
.-----------+-----------.
| |
.--------+------. .--------+------.
| Domain | | Domain |
| Orchestration | | Orchestration |
'---+-----------' '--------+------'
Device | | |
Configuration | | |
Model | | |
.----+----. | |
| Config | | |
| Manager | | |
'----+----' | |
| | |
| NETCONF/CLI..................
| | |
.--------------------------------.
.----. Bearer | | Bearer .----.
|CE#1+--------+ Network +--------+CE#2|
'----' | | '----'
'--------------------------------'
Site A Site B
Figure 2: An Example of AC Model Usage
In order to ease the mapping between the service model and underlying
network models (e.g., L3NM, SAP), the name conventions used in
existing network data models are reused as much as possible. For
example, "local-address" is used rather than "provider-address" (or
similar) to refer to an IP address used in the provider network.
This approach is consistent with the automation framework defined in
[RFC8969].
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
4. Description of the Data Models
4.1. The Bearer Service ("ietf-bearer-svc") YANG Module
Figure 3 shows the tree for managing the bearers (that is, the
properties of an attachment that are below Layer 3). A bearer can be
a physical or logical link (e.g., Link Aggregation Group (LAG)
[IEEE802.1AX]). Also, a bearer can be a wireless or wired link. A
reference to a bearer is generated by the operator. Such a reference
can be used, e.g., in a subsequent service request to create an AC.
The anchoring of the AC can also be achieved by indicating (with or
without a bearer reference), a peer SAP identifier (e.g., an
identifier of a Service Function).
module: ietf-bearer-svc
+--rw bearers
+--rw placement-constraints
| +--rw constraint* [constraint-type]
| {vpn-common:placement-diversity}?
| +--rw constraint-type identityref
| +--rw target
| +--rw (target-flavor)?
| +--:(id)
| | +--rw group* [group-id]
| | +--rw group-id string
| +--:(all-bearers)
| | +--rw all-other-bearers? empty
| +--:(all-groups)
| +--rw all-other-groups? empty
+--rw bearer* [name]
+--rw name string
+--rw description? string
+--rw groups
| +--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
+--rw op-comment? string
+--rw bearer-parent-ref? bearer-svc:bearer-ref
+--ro bearer-lag-member* bearer-svc:bearer-ref
+--ro sync-phy-capable? boolean
+--rw sync-phy-enabled? boolean
+--rw sync-phy-type? identityref
+--rw customer-point
| +--rw identified-by? identityref
| +--rw device
| | +--rw device-id? string
| | +--rw location
| | +--rw location-name? string
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| | +--rw address? string
| | +--rw postal-code? string
| | +--rw state? string
| | +--rw city? string
| | +--rw country-code? string
| +--rw site
| | +--rw site-id? string
| | +--rw location
| | +--rw location-name? string
| | +--rw address? string
| | +--rw postal-code? string
| | +--rw state? string
| | +--rw city? string
| | +--rw country-code? string
| +--rw custom-id? string
+--rw type? identityref
+--rw test-only? empty
+--ro bearer-reference? string
| {vpn-common:bearer-reference}?
+--ro ac-svc-ref* ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference
+--rw requested-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw requested-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-start? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw status
+--rw admin-status
| +--rw status? identityref
| +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
+--ro oper-status
+--ro status? identityref
+--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
Figure 3: Bearer Service Tree Structure
The same customer site (CE, NF, etc.) can terminate one or multiple
bearers; each of them uniquely identified by a reference that is
assigned by the network provider. These bearers can terminate on the
same or distinct network nodes. CEs that terminate multiple bearers
are called multi-homed CEs.
A bearer can be created, modified, or discovered from the network.
For example, the following deployment options can be considered:
Greenfield creation: In this scenario, bearers are created from
scratch using specific requests made to a network controller.
This method allows providers to tailor bearer creation to meet
customer-specific needs. For example, a bearer request may
indicate some hints about the placement constraints ('placement-
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
constraints'). These constraints are used by a provider to
determine how/where to terminate a bearer in the network side
(e.g., PoP/PE selection).
Auto-discovery using network protocols: Devices can use specific
protocols (e.g., Link Layer Discovery Protocol (LLDP)) to
automatically discover and connect to available network resources.
A network controller can use such reported information to expose
discovered bearers from the network using the same bearer data
model structure.
A request to create a bearer may include a set of constraints
("placement-constraints") that are used by a controller to decide the
network terminating side of a bearer (e.g., PE selection, PE
redundancy, or PoP selection). Future placement criteria
("constraint-type") may be defined in the future to accommodate
specific deployment contexts.
The descriptions of the bearer data nodes are as follows:
'name': Used to uniquely identify a bearer. This name is typically
selected by the client when requesting a bearer.
'description': Includes a textual description of the bearer.
'group': Tags a bearer with one ore more identifiers that are used
to group a set of bearers.
'op-comment': Includes operational comments that may be useful for
managing the bearer (building, level, etc.). No structure is
associated with this data node to accommodate all deployments.
'bearer-parent-ref': Specifies the parent bearer. This data node
can be used, e.g., if a bearer is a member of a LAG.
'bearer-lag-member': Lists the bearers that are members of a LAG.
Members can be declared as part of a LAG using 'bearer-parent-
ref'.
'sync-phy-capable': Reports whether a synchronization physical (Sync
PHY) mechanism is supported for this bearer.
'sync-phy-enabled': Indicates whether a Sync PHY mechanism is
enabled for a bearer. Only applies when 'sync-phy-capable' is set
to 'true'.
'sync-phy-type': Specifies the Sync PHY mechanism (e.g., SynchE
[ITU-T-G.781]) enabled for the bearer.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'customer-point': Specifies the customer terminating point for the
bearer. A bearer request can indicate a device, a site, a
combination thereof, or a custom information when requesting a
bearer. All these schemes are supported in the model.
'type': Specifies the bearer type (Ethernet, wireless, LAG, etc.).
'test-only': Indicates that a request is only for test and not for
setting, even if there are no errors. This is used for
feasibility checks. This data node is applicable only when the
data model is used with protocols which do not natively support
such option. For example, this data node is redundant with the
"test-only" value of the <test-option> parameter in the NETCONF
<edit-config> operation (Section 7.2 of [RFC6241]).
'bearer-reference': Returns an internal reference for the service
provider to uniquely identify the bearer. This reference can be
used when requesting services. Appendix A.1 provides an example
about how this reference can be retrieved by a customer.
Whether the 'bearer-reference' mirrors the content of the 'name'
is deployment-specific. The module does not assume nor preclude
such schemes.
'ac-svc-ref': Specifies the set of attachment circuits that are
bound to the bearer.
'requested-start': Specifies the requested date and time when the
bearer is expected to be active.
'requested-stop': Specifies the requested date and time when the
bearer is expected to be disabled.
'actual-start': Reports the actual date and time when the bearer
actually was enabled.
'actual-stop': Reports the actual date and time when the bearer
actually was disabled.
'status': Used to track the overall status of a given bearer. Both
operational and administrative status are maintained together with
a timestamp.
The "admin-status" attribute is typically configured by a network
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
operator to indicate whether the service is enabled, disabled, or
subjected to additional testing or pre-deployment checks. These
additional options, such as 'admin-testing' and 'admin-pre-
deployment', provide the operators the flexibility to conduct
additional validations on the bearer before deploying services
over that connection.
'oper-status': The "oper-status" of a bearer reflects its
operational state as observed. As a bearer can contain multiple
services, the operational status should only reflect the status of
the bearer connection. To obtain network-level service status,
specific network models such as those in Section 7.3 of [RFC9182]
or Section 7.3 of [RFC9291] should be consulted.
It is important to note that the "admin-status" attribute should
remain independent of the "oper-status". In other words, the
setting of the intended administrative state (e.g., whether
"admin-up" or "admin-testing") MUST NOT be influenced by the
current operational state. If the bearer is administratively set
to 'admin-down', it is expected that the bearer will also be
operationally 'op-down' as a result of this administrative
decision.
To assess the service delivery status for a given bearer
comprehensively, it is recommended to consider both administrative
and operational service status values in conjunction. This
holistic approach allows a network controller or operator to
identify anomalies effectively.
For instance, when a bearer is administratively enabled but the
"operational-status" of that bearer is reported as "op-down", it
should be expected that the "oper-status" of services transported
over that bearer is also down. If these status values differ, a
trigger to detect an anomaly.
See [RFC9181] for more details.
4.2. The Attachment Circuit Service ("ietf-ac-svc") YANG Module
The full tree diagram of the module can be generated using the
"pyang" tool [PYANG]. That tree is not included here because it is
too long (Section 3.3 of [RFC8340]). Instead, subtrees are provided
for the reader's convenience.
4.2.1. Overall Structure
The overall tree structure of the AC service module is shown in
Figure 4.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 4: Overall AC Service Tree Structure
The rationale for deciding whether a reusable grouping should be
maintained in this document or be moved into the AC common module
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac] is as follows:
* Groupings that are reusable among the AC service module, AC
network module, other service models, and network models are
included in the AC common module.
* Groupings that are reusable only by other service models are
maintained in the "ietf-ac-svc" module.
Each AC is identified with a unique name ('../ac/name') within a
domain. The mapping between this AC and a local PE that terminates
the AC is hidden to the application that makes use of the AC service
model. This information is internal to the Network controller. As
such, the details about the (node-specific) attachment interfaces are
not exposed in this service model.
The AC service model uses groupings and types defined in the AC
common model [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac]. Therefore, the
description of these nodes are not reiterated in the following
subsections.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
4.2.2. Service Profiles
4.2.2.1. Description
The 'specific-provisioning-profiles' container (Figure 5) can be used
by a service provider to maintain a set of reusable profiles. The
profiles definition are similar to those defined in [RFC9181],
including: Quality of Service (QoS), Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection (BFD), forwarding, and routing profiles. The exact
definition of the profiles is local to each service provider. The
model only includes an identifier for these profiles in order to
facilitate identifying and binding local policies when building an
AC.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
module: ietf-ac-svc
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| +--rw valid-provider-identifiers
| +--rw encryption-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw qos-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw bfd-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw forwarding-profile-identifier* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw routing-profile-identifier* [id]
| +--rw id string
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| +--rw service-profile-identifier* [id]
| +--rw id string
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 5: Service Profiles
As shown in Figure 5, two profile types can be defined: 'specific-
provisioning-profiles' and 'service-provisioning-profiles'. Whether
only specific profiles, service profiles, or a combination thereof
are used is local to each service provider.
The following specific provisioning profiles can be defined:
'encryption-profile-identifier': Refers to a set of policies related
to the encryption setup that can be applied when provisioning an
AC.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'qos-profile-identifier': Refers to a set of policies, such as
classification, marking, and actions (e.g., [RFC3644]).
'bfd-profile-identifier': Refers to a set of Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection (BFD) policies [RFC5880] that can be invoked
when building an AC.
'forwarding-profile-identifier': Refers to the policies that apply
to the forwarding of packets conveyed within an AC. Such policies
may consist, for example, of applying Access Control Lists (ACLs).
'routing-profile-identifier': Refers to a set of routing policies
that will be invoked (e.g., BGP policies) when building an AC.
4.2.2.2. Referencing Service/Specific Profiles
All the abovementioned profiles are uniquely identified by the
NETCONF/RESTCONF server by an identifier. To ease referencing these
profiles by other data models, specific typedefs are defined for each
of these profiles. Likewise, an attachment circuit reference typedef
is defined when referencing a (global) attachment circuit by its name
is required. These typedefs SHOULD be used when other modules need a
reference to one of these profiles or attachment circuits.
4.2.3. Attachment Circuits Profiles
The 'ac-group-profile' defines reusable parameters for a set of ACs.
Each profile is identified by 'name'. Some of the data nodes can be
adjusted at the 'ac'. These adjusted values take precedence over the
global values. The structure of 'ac-group-profile' is similar to the
one used to model each 'ac' (Figure 7).
4.2.4. AC Placement Contraints
The 'placement-constraints' specifies the placement constraints of an
AC. For example, this container can be used to request avoiding to
connecting two ACs to the same PE. The full set of supported
constraints is defined in [RFC9181] (see 'placement-diversity', in
particular).
The structure of 'placement-constraints' is shown in Figure 6.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| +--rw constraint* [constraint-type]
| +--rw constraint-type identityref
| +--rw target
| +--rw (target-flavor)?
| +--:(id)
| | +--rw group* [group-id]
| | +--rw group-id string
| +--:(all-accesses)
| | +--rw all-other-accesses? empty
| +--:(all-groups)
| +--rw all-other-groups? empty
+--rw ac* [name]
...
Figure 6: Placement Constraints Subtree Structure
4.2.5. Attachment Circuits
The structure of 'attachment-circuits' is shown in Figure 7.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
+--rw customer-name? string
+--rw description? string
+--rw test-only? empty
+--rw requested-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw requested-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-start? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw peer-sap-id* string
+--rw ac-group-profile* ac-group-reference
+--rw ac-parent-ref? ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference
+--ro child-ac-ref* ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference
+--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
| +--rw precedence? identityref
+--ro service-ref* [service-type service-id]
| +--ro service-type identityref
| +--ro service-id string
+--rw name string
+--rw service-profile* service-profile-reference
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 7: Attachment Circuits Tree Structure
The description of the data nodes is as follows:
'customer-name': Indicates the name of the customer who ordered the
AC.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'description': Includes a textual description of the AC.
'test-only': Indicates that a request is only for test and not for
setting, even if there are no errors. This is used for
feasibility checks. This data node is applicable only when the
data model is used with protocols which do not natively support
such option.
'requested-start': Specifies the requested date and time when the
attachment circuit is expected to be active.
'requested-stop': Specifies the requested date and time when the
attachment circuit is expected to be disabled.
'actual-start': Reports the actual date and time when the attachment
circuit actually was enabled.
'actual-stop': Reports the actual date and time when the attachment
circuit actually was disabled.
'peer-sap-id': Includes references to the remote endpoints of an
attachment circuit [RFC9408].
'ac-group-profile': Indicates references to one or more profiles
that are defined in Section 4.2.3.
'ac-parent-ref': Specifies an AC that is inherited by an attachment
circuit.
In contexts where dynamic terminating points are managed for a
given AC, a parent AC can be defined with a set of stable and
common information, while "child" ACs are defined to track dynamic
information. These "child" ACs are bound to the parent AC, which
is exposed to services (as a stable reference).
Whenever a parent AC is deleted, all its "child" ACs MUST be
deleted.
'child-ac-ref': Lists one or more references of child ACs that rely
upon this attachment circuit as a parent AC.
'group': Lists the groups to which an AC belongs [RFC9181]. For
example, the 'group-id' is used to associate redundancy or
protection constraints of ACs. An example is provided in
Appendix A.5.
'service-ref': Reports the set of services that are bound to the
attachment circuit. The services are indexed by their type.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'name': Associates a name that uniquely identifies an AC within a
service provider network.
'service-profile': References a set of service-specific profiles.
'l2-connection': See Section 4.2.5.1.
'ip-connection': See Section 4.2.5.2.
'routing': See Section 4.2.5.3.
'oam': See Section 4.2.5.7.
'security': See Section 4.2.5.8.
'service': See Section 4.2.5.9.
4.2.5.1. Layer 2 Connection Structure
The 'l2-connection' container (Figure 8) is used to configure the
relevant Layer 2 properties of an AC including: encapsulation details
and tunnel terminations. For the encapsulation details, the model
supports the definition of the type as well as the Identifiers (e.g.,
VLAN-IDs) of each of the encapsulation-type defined. For the second
case, attributes for pseudowire, Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS),
and Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN) tunnel terminations
are included.
'bearer-reference' is used to link an AC with a bearer over which the
AC is instantiated.
This structure relies upon the common groupings defined in
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac].
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw name string
+--rw l2-connection
| +--rw encapsulation
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| | +--rw type? identityref
| | +--rw dot1q
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw cvlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw priority-tagged
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | +--rw qinq
| | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | +--rw svlan-id uint16
| | +--rw cvlan-id uint16
| +--rw (l2-service)?
| | +--:(l2-tunnel-service)
| | | +--rw l2-tunnel-service
| | | +--rw type? identityref
| | | +--rw pseudowire
| | | | +--rw vcid? uint32
| | | | +--rw far-end? union
| | | +--rw vpls
| | | | +--rw vcid? uint32
| | | | +--rw far-end* union
| | | +--rw vxlan
| | | +--rw vni-id uint32
| | | +--rw peer-mode? identityref
| | | +--rw peer-ip-address* inet:ip-address
| | +--:(l2vpn)
| | +--rw l2vpn-id? vpn-common:vpn-id
| +--rw bearer-reference? string
| {vpn-common:bearer-reference}?
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 8: Layer 2 Connection Tree Structure
4.2.5.2. IP Connection Structure
The 'ip-connection' container is used to configure the relevant IP
properties of an AC. The model supports the usage of dynamic and
static addressing. This structure relies upon the common groupings
defined in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac]. Both IPv4 and IPv6
parameters are supported.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Figure 9 shows the structure of the IPv4 connection.
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | +--rw local-address?
| | | inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw virtual-address?
| | | inet:ipv4-address
| | +--rw prefix-length? uint8
| | +--rw address-allocation-type?
| | | identityref
| | +--rw (allocation-type)?
| | +--:(dynamic)
| | | +--rw (address-assign)?
| | | | +--:(number)
| | | | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint16
| | | | +--:(explicit)
| | | | +--rw customer-addresses
| | | | +--rw address-pool* [pool-id]
| | | | +--rw pool-id string
| | | | +--rw start-address
| | | | | inet:ipv4-address
| | | | +--rw end-address?
| | | | inet:ipv4-address
| | | +--rw (provider-dhcp)?
| | | | +--:(dhcp-service-type)
| | | | +--rw dhcp-service-type?
| | | | enumeration
| | | +--rw (dhcp-relay)?
| | | +--:(customer-dhcp-servers)
| | | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | | +--rw server-ip-address*
| | | inet:ipv4-address
| | +--:(static-addresses)
| | +--rw address* [address-id]
| | +--rw address-id string
| | +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv4-address
| +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| ...
Figure 9: Layer 3 Connection Tree Structure (IPv4)
Figure 10 shows the structure of the IPv6 connection.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| +--rw ipv4 {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | ...
| +--rw ipv6 {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| +--rw local-address?
| | inet:ipv6-address
| +--rw virtual-address?
| | inet:ipv6-address
| +--rw prefix-length? uint8
| +--rw address-allocation-type?
| | identityref
| +--rw (allocation-type)?
| +--:(dynamic)
| | +--rw (address-assign)?
| | | +--:(number)
| | | | +--rw number-of-dynamic-address? uint16
| | | +--:(explicit)
| | | +--rw customer-addresses
| | | +--rw address-pool* [pool-id]
| | | +--rw pool-id string
| | | +--rw start-address
| | | | inet:ipv6-address
| | | +--rw end-address?
| | | inet:ipv6-address
| | +--rw (provider-dhcp)?
| | | +--:(dhcp-service-type)
| | | +--rw dhcp-service-type?
| | | enumeration
| | +--rw (dhcp-relay)?
| | +--:(customer-dhcp-servers)
| | +--rw customer-dhcp-servers
| | +--rw server-ip-address*
| | inet:ipv6-address
| +--:(static-addresses)
| +--rw address* [address-id]
| +--rw address-id string
| +--rw customer-address? inet:ipv6-address
...
Figure 10: Layer 3 Connection Tree Structure (IPv6)
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
4.2.5.3. Routing
As shown in the tree depicted in Figure 11, the 'routing-protocols'
container defines the required parameters to enable the desired
routing features for an AC. One or more routing protocols can be
associated with an AC. Such routing protocols will be then enabled
between a PE and the customer terminating points. Each routing
instance is uniquely identified by the combination of the 'id' and
'type' to accommodate scenarios where multiple instances of the same
routing protocol have to be configured on the same link.
In addition to static routing (Section 4.2.5.3.1), the module
supports BGP (Section 4.2.5.3.2), OSPF (Section 4.2.5.3.3), IS-IS
(Section 4.2.5.4), and RIP (Section 4.2.5.5). It also includes a
reference to the 'routing-profile-identifier' defined in
Section 4.2.2, so that additional constraints can be applied to a
specific instance of each routing protocol.
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
+--rw customer-name? string
+--rw description? string
+--rw requested-start? yang:date-and-time
+--rw requested-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-start? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw peer-sap-id* string
+--rw ac-group-profile* ac-group-reference
+--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
| +--rw precedence? identityref
+--rw name string
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 11: Routing Tree Structure
4.2.5.3.1. Static Routing
The static tree structure is shown in Figure 12.
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | +--rw cascaded-lan-prefixes
| | +--rw ipv4-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | | {vpn-common:ipv4}?
| | | +--rw lan inet:ipv4-prefix
| | | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | | +--rw next-hop union
| | | +--rw metric? uint32
| | | +--rw bfd-profile? bfd-profile-reference
| | | +--rw status
| | | +--rw admin-status
| | | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| | | +--ro oper-status
| | | +--ro status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--rw ipv6-lan-prefixes* [lan next-hop]
| | {vpn-common:ipv6}?
| | +--rw lan inet:ipv6-prefix
| | +--rw lan-tag? string
| | +--rw next-hop union
| | +--rw metric? uint32
| | +--rw bfd-profile? bfd-profile-reference
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
Figure 12: Static Routing Tree Structure
As depicted in Figure 12, the following data nodes can be defined for
a given IP prefix:
'lan-tag': Indicates a local tag (e.g., "myfavorite-lan") that is
used to enforce local policies.
'next-hop': Indicates the next hop to be used for the static route.
It can be identified by an IP address, a predefined next-hop type
(e.g., 'discard' or 'local-link'), etc.
'metric': Indicates the metric associated with the static route
entry. This metric is used when the route is exported into an
IGP.
'bfd-profile': Indicates a BFD profile that applies for this entry.
'status': Used to convey the status of a static route entry. This
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
data node can also be used to control the (de)activation of
individual static route entries.
4.2.5.3.2. BGP
The BGP tree structure is shown in Figure 13.
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | +--rw peer-groups
| | | +--rw peer-group* [name]
| | | +--rw name string
| | | +--ro local-as? inet:as-number
| | | +--rw peer-as? inet:as-number
| | | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | | +--ro local-address? inet:ip-address
| | | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(ao)
| | | | +--rw enable-ao? boolean
| | | | +--rw ao-keychain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(md5)
| | | | +--rw md5-keychain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(explicit)
| | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm?
| | | identityref
| | +--rw neighbor* [id]
| | +--rw id string
| | +--rw remote-address? inet:ip-address
| | +--ro local-address? inet:ip-address
| | +--rw peer-group?
| | | -> ../../peer-groups/peer-group/name
| | +--rw bfd-profile? bfd-profile-reference
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| | +--ro local-as? inet:as-number
| | +--rw peer-as? inet:as-number
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(ao)
| | | | +--rw enable-ao? boolean
| | | | +--rw ao-keychain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(md5)
| | | | +--rw md5-keychain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(explicit)
| | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
Figure 13: BGP Tree Structure
The following data nodes are supported for each BGP 'peer-group':
'name': Defines a name for the peer group.
'local-as': Indicates a local AS Number (ASN).
'peer-as': Indicates the peer's ASN.
'address-family': Indicates the address family of the peer. It can
be set to 'ipv4', 'ipv6', or 'dual-stack'.
This address family might be used together with the service type
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
that uses an AC (e.g., 'vpn-type' [RFC9182]) to derive the
appropriate Address Family Identifiers (AFIs) / Subsequent Address
Family Identifiers (SAFIs) that will be part of the derived device
configurations (e.g., unicast IPv4 MPLS L3VPN (AFI,SAFI = 1,128)
as defined in Section 4.3.4 of [RFC4364]).
'local-address': Specifies an address or a reference to an interface
to use when establishing the BGP transport session.
'authentication': The module adheres to the recommendations in
Section 13.2 of [RFC4364], as it allows enabling the TCP
Authentication Option (TCP-AO) [RFC5925] and accommodates the
installed base that makes use of MD5. In addition, the module
includes a provision for using IPsec.
Similar to [RFC9182], this version of the ACaaS assumes that
parameters specific to the TCP-AO are preconfigured as part of the
key chain that is referenced in the ACaaS. No assumption is made
about how such a key chain is preconfigured. However, the
structure of the key chain should cover data nodes beyond those in
[RFC8177], mainly SendID and RecvID (Section 3.1 of [RFC5925]).
For each neighbor, the following data nodes are supported in addition
to similar parameters that are provided for a peer group:
'remote-address': Specifies the remote IP address of a BGP neighbor.
'peer-group': A name of a peer group.
Parameters that are provided at the 'neighbor' level takes
precedence over the ones provided in the peer group.
'bfd-profile': Indicates a BFD profile that applies for a BGP
neighbor.
'status': Indicates the status of the BGP routing instance.
4.2.5.3.3. OSPF
The OSPF tree structure is shown in Figure 14.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw area-id yang:dotted-quad
| | +--rw metric? uint16
| | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | | | +--rw key-chain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(auth-key-explicit)
| | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
Figure 14: OSPF Tree Structure
The following OSPF data nodes are supported:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'area-id': Indicates the OSPF Area ID.
'metric': Associates a metric with OSPF routes.
'sham-links': Used to create OSPF sham links between two ACs sharing
the same area and having a backdoor link (Section 4.2.7 of
[RFC4577] and Section 5 of [RFC6565]).
'authentication': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled
for the OSPF instance. The following options are supported: IPsec
for OSPFv3 authentication [RFC4552], and the Authentication
Trailer for OSPFv2 [RFC5709][RFC7474] and OSPFv3 [RFC7166].
'status': Indicates the status of the OSPF routing instance.
4.2.5.4. IS-IS
The IS-IS tree structure is shown in Figure 15.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw area-address area-address
| | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | | | +--rw key-chain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(auth-key-explicit)
| | | +--rw key-id? uint32
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
Figure 15: IS-IS Tree Structure
The following IS-IS data nodes are supported:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated.
'area-address': Indicates the IS-IS area address.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'authentication': Controls the authentication schemes to be enabled
for the IS-IS instance. Both the specification of a key chain
[RFC8177] and the direct specification of key and authentication
algorithms are supported.
'status': Indicates the status of the IS-IS routing instance.
4.2.5.5. RIP
The RIP tree structure is shown in Figure 16.
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw authentication
| | | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw keying-material
| | | +--rw (option)?
| | | +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | | | +--rw key-chain?
| | | | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| | | +--:(auth-key-explicit)
| | | +--rw key? string
| | | +--rw crypto-algorithm? identityref
| | +--rw status
| | +--rw admin-status
| | | +--rw status? identityref
| | | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| | +--ro oper-status
| | +--ro status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--rw vrrp
| ...
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Figure 16: RIP Tree Structure
'address-family' indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated. For example, this parameter is used to
determine whether RIPv2 [RFC2453], RIP Next Generation (RIPng), or
both are to be enabled [RFC2080].
4.2.5.6. VRRP
The model supports the Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)
[RFC5798] on an AC (Figure 17).
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| +--rw routing-protocol* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw routing-profiles* [id]
| | +--rw id routing-profile-reference
| | +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw static
| | ...
| +--rw bgp
| | ...
| +--rw ospf
| | ...
| +--rw isis
| | ...
| +--rw rip
| | ...
| +--rw vrrp
| +--rw address-family? identityref
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
Figure 17: VRRP Tree Structure
The following data nodes are supported:
'address-family': Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address
families are to be activated. Note that VRRP version 3 [RFC5798]
supports both IPv4 and IPv6.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'status': Indicates the status of the VRRP instance.
Note that no authentication data node is included for VRRP, as there
isn't any type of VRRP authentication at this time (see Section 9 of
[RFC5798]).
4.2.5.7. OAM
As shown in the tree depicted in Figure 18, the 'oam' container
defines OAM-related parameters of an AC.
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| +--rw bfd {vpn-common:bfd}?
| +--rw profile? bfd-profile-reference
| +--rw holdtime? uint32
| +--rw status
| +--rw admin-status
| | +--rw status? identityref
| | +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
| +--ro oper-status
| +--ro status? identityref
| +--ro last-change? yang:date-and-time
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
...
Figure 18: OAM Tree Structure
This version of the module supports BFD. The following BFD data
nodes can be specified:
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
'profile': Refers to a BFD profile.
'holdtime': Used to indicate the expected BFD holddown time, in
milliseconds.
'status': Indicates the status of the BFD over an AC.
4.2.5.8. Security
As shown in the tree depicted in Figure 19, the 'security' container
defines a set of AC security parameters.
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| +--rw encryption {vpn-common:encryption}?
| | +--rw enabled? boolean
| | +--rw layer? enumeration
| +--rw encryption-profile
| +--rw (profile)?
| +--:(provider-profile)
| | +--rw provider-profile?
| | encryption-profile-reference
| +--:(customer-profile)
| +--rw customer-key-chain?
| key-chain:key-chain-ref
+--rw service
...
Figure 19: Security Tree Structure
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
The 'security' container specifies the authentication and the
encryption to be applied to traffic for a given AC. Tthe model can
be used to directly control the encryption to be applied (e.g., Layer
2 or Layer 3 encryption) or invoke a local encryption profile.
4.2.5.9. Service
The structure of the 'service' container is depicted in Figure 20.
+--rw specific-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw service-provisioning-profiles
| ...
+--rw attachment-circuits
+--rw ac-group-profile* [name]
| ...
+--rw placement-constraints
| ...
+--rw ac* [name]
...
+--rw l2-connection
| ...
+--rw ip-connection
| ...
+--rw routing-protocols
| ...
+--rw oam
| ...
+--rw security
| ...
+--rw service
+--rw svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth {vpn-common:inbound-bw}?
| +--rw bandwidth* [bw-type]
| +--rw bw-type identityref
| +--rw (type)?
| +--:(per-cos)
| | +--rw cos* [cos-id]
| | +--rw cos-id uint8
| | +--rw cir? uint64
| | +--rw cbs? uint64
| | +--rw eir? uint64
| | +--rw ebs? uint64
| | +--rw pir? uint64
| | +--rw pbs? uint64
| +--:(other)
| +--rw cir? uint64
| +--rw cbs? uint64
| +--rw eir? uint64
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
| +--rw ebs? uint64
| +--rw pir? uint64
| +--rw pbs? uint64
+--rw svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth {vpn-common:outbound-bw}?
| +--rw bandwidth* [bw-type]
| +--rw bw-type identityref
| +--rw (type)?
| +--:(per-cos)
| | +--rw cos* [cos-id]
| | +--rw cos-id uint8
| | +--rw cir? uint64
| | +--rw cbs? uint64
| | +--rw eir? uint64
| | +--rw ebs? uint64
| | +--rw pir? uint64
| | +--rw pbs? uint64
| +--:(other)
| +--rw cir? uint64
| +--rw cbs? uint64
| +--rw eir? uint64
| +--rw ebs? uint64
| +--rw pir? uint64
| +--rw pbs? uint64
+--rw qos {vpn-common:qos}?
| +--rw qos-profiles
| +--rw qos-profile* [profile]
| +--rw profile qos-profile-reference
| +--rw direction? identityref
+--rw access-control-list
+--rw acl-profiles
+--rw acl-profile* [profile]
+--rw profile forwarding-profile-reference
Figure 20: Bandwidth Tree Structure
The 'service' container defines the following data nodes:
'mtu': Specifies the Layer 2 MTU, in bytes, for the AC.
'svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth' and'svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth':
'svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth': Indicates the inbound bandwidth of the AC
(i.e., download bandwidth from the service provider to the
customer site).
'svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth': Indicates the outbound bandwidth of the AC
(i.e., upload bandwidth from the customer site to the service
provider).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Both 'svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth' and 'svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth' can be
represented using the Committed Information Rate (CIR), the Excess
Information Rate (EIR), or the Peak Information Rate (PIR). Both
reuse the 'bandwidth-per-type' grouping defined in
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac].
'qos': Specifies a list of QoS profiles to apply for this AC.
'access-control-list': Specifies a list of ACL profiles to apply for
this AC.
5. YANG Modules
5.1. The Bearer Service ("ietf-bearer-svc") YANG Module
This module uses types defined in [RFC6991] and [RFC9181].
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-bearer-svc@2023-11-13.yang"
module ietf-bearer-svc {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bearer-svc";
prefix bearer-svc;
import ietf-vpn-common {
prefix vpn-common;
reference
"RFC 9181: A Common YANG Data Model for Layer 2 and Layer 3
VPNs";
}
import ietf-ac-common {
prefix ac-common;
reference
"RFC CCCC: A Common YANG Data Model for Attachment Circuits";
}
import ietf-ac-svc {
prefix ac-svc;
reference
"RFC XXXX: YANG Service Data Models for Attachment Circuits";
}
organization
"IETF OPSAWG (Operations and Management Area Working Group)";
contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/>
WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Editor: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Author: Richard Roberts
<mailto:rroberts@juniper.net>
Author: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
<mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>
Author: Samier Barguil
<mailto:ssamier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com>
Author: Bo Wu
<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>";
description
"This YANG module defines a generic YANG model for exposing
network bearers as a service.
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC xxx; see the
RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2023-11-13 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC xxxx: A YANG Service Data Model for Attachment Circuits";
}
// Typedef to ease referencing cross-modules
typedef bearer-ref {
type leafref {
path "/bearer-svc:bearers/bearer-svc:bearer/bearer-svc:name";
}
description
"Defines a type to reference a bearer.";
}
// Identities
identity identification-type {
description
"Base identity for identification of bearers.";
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
identity device-id {
base identification-type;
description
"Identification of bearers based on device.";
}
identity site-id {
base identification-type;
description
"Identification of bearers based on site.";
}
identity site-and-device-id {
base identification-type;
description
"Identification of bearers based on site and device.";
}
identity custom {
base identification-type;
description
"Identification of bearers based on other custom criteria.";
}
identity bearer-type {
description
"Base identity for bearers type.";
}
identity ethernet {
base bearer-type;
description
"Ethernet.";
}
identity wireless {
base bearer-type;
description
"Wireless.";
}
identity lag {
base bearer-type;
description
"Link Aggregation Group (LAG).";
}
identity network-termination-hint {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
base vpn-common:placement-diversity;
description
"A hint about the termination at the network side
is provided (e.g., geoproximity).";
}
identity syncPHY-type {
description
"Base identity for physical layer synchronization.";
}
identity syncE {
base syncPHY-type;
description
"Sync Ethernet (SyncE).";
reference
"ITU-T G.781: Synchronization layer functions for frequency
synchronization based on the physical layer";
}
grouping location-information {
description
"Basic location information";
container location {
description
"Location of the node.";
leaf location-name {
type string;
description
"Provides a location name. This data node can be mapped,
e.g., to the 3GPP NRM IOC ManagedElement.";
}
leaf address {
type string;
description
"Address (number and street) of the device/site.";
}
leaf postal-code {
type string;
description
"Postal code of the device/site.";
}
leaf state {
type string;
description
"State of the device/site. This leaf can also be
used to describe a region for a country that
does not have states.";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
leaf city {
type string;
description
"City of the device/site.";
}
leaf country-code {
type string {
pattern '[A-Z]{2}';
}
description
"Country of the device/site.
Expressed as ISO ALPHA-2 code.";
}
}
}
grouping placement-constraints {
description
"Constraints related to placement of a bearer.";
list constraint {
if-feature vpn-common:placement-diversity;
key "constraint-type";
description
"List of constraints.";
leaf constraint-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:placement-diversity;
}
must "not(derived-from-or-self(current(), "
+ "'vpn-common:bearer-diverse') or "
+ "derived-from-or-self(current(), "
+ "'vpn-common:same-bearer'))" {
error-message "Only bearer-specific diversity"
+ "constraints must be provided.";
}
description
"Diversity constraint type for bearers.";
}
container target {
description
"The constraint will apply against this list of
groups.";
choice target-flavor {
description
"Choice for the group definition.";
case id {
list group {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
key "group-id";
description
"List of groups.";
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"The constraint will apply against this
particular group ID.";
}
}
}
case all-bearers {
leaf all-other-bearers {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply against all other
bearers of a site.";
}
}
case all-groups {
leaf all-other-groups {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply against all other
groups managed by the customer.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
container bearers {
description
"Main container for the bearers.";
container placement-constraints {
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
uses placement-constraints;
}
list bearer {
key "name";
description
"Maintains a list of bearers.";
leaf name {
type string;
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"A name that uniquely identifies a bearer for
a given customer.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"A description of this bearer.";
}
uses vpn-common:vpn-components-group;
leaf op-comment {
type string;
description
"Includes comments that can be shared with operational
teams and which may be useful for the activation of a
bearer. This may include, for example, information
about the building, level, etc.";
}
leaf bearer-parent-ref {
type bearer-svc:bearer-ref;
description
"Specifies the parent bearer. This can be used, e.g.,
for a Link Aggregation Group (LAG).";
}
leaf-list bearer-lag-member {
type bearer-svc:bearer-ref;
config false;
description
"Reports LAG members.";
}
leaf sync-phy-capable {
type boolean;
config false;
description
"Indicates when set to true that a mechanism for physical
layer synchronization is supported for this bearer. No such
mechanism is supported if set to false.";
}
leaf sync-phy-enabled {
when "../sync-phy-capable='true'";
type boolean;
description
"Indicates when set to true that a mechanism for physical
layer synchronization is enabled for this bearer. No such
mechanism is enabled if set to false.";
}
leaf sync-phy-type {
when "../sync-phy-enabled='true'";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
type identityref {
base syncPHY-type;
}
description
"Type of the physical layer synchronization.";
}
container customer-point {
description
"Base container to link the Bearer existence";
leaf identified-by {
type identityref {
base identification-type;
}
description
"Attribute used to identify the bearer";
}
container device {
when
"derived-from-or-self(../identified-by, "
+ "'bearer-svc:device-id') or "
+ "derived-from-or-self(../identified-by, "
+ "'bearer-svc:site-and-device-id')" {
description
"Only applicable if identified-by is device.";
}
description
"Bearer is linked to device.";
leaf device-id {
type string;
description
"Identifier for the device where that bearer belongs.";
}
uses location-information;
}
container site {
when
"derived-from-or-self(../identified-by, "
+ "'bearer-svc:site-id') or "
+ "derived-from-or-self(../identified-by, "
+ "'bearer-svc:site-and-device-id')" {
description
"Only applicable if identified-by is site.";
}
description
"Bearer is linked to a site.";
leaf site-id {
type string;
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"Identifier for the site or sites where that bearer
belongs.";
}
uses location-information;
}
leaf custom-id {
when "derived-from-or-self(../identified-by, "
+ "'bearer-svc:custom')" {
description
"Only enabled id identified-by is custom.";
}
type string;
description
"The semantic of this identifier is shared between the
customer/provider using out-of-band means.";
}
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
base bearer-type;
}
description
"Type of the bearer (e.g., Ethernet or wireless).";
}
leaf test-only {
type empty;
description
"When present, this indicates that this is a feasibility
check request. No resources are commited for such bearer
requests.";
}
leaf bearer-reference {
if-feature "vpn-common:bearer-reference";
type string;
config false;
description
"This is an internal reference for the service provider
to identify the bearers.";
}
leaf-list ac-svc-ref {
type ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference;
config false;
description
"Specifies the set of ACes that are bound to the bearer.";
}
uses ac-common:op-instructions;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
5.2. The AC Service ("ietf-ac-svc") YANG Module
This module uses types defined in [RFC6991], [RFC9181], [RFC8177],
and [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac].
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-ac-svc@2023-11-13.yang"
module ietf-ac-svc {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-svc";
prefix ac-svc;
import ietf-ac-common {
prefix ac-common;
reference
"RFC CCCC: A Common YANG Data Model for Attachment Circuits";
}
import ietf-vpn-common {
prefix vpn-common;
reference
"RFC 9181: A Common YANG Data Model for Layer 2 and Layer 3
VPNs";
}
import ietf-netconf-acm {
prefix nacm;
reference
"RFC 8341: Network Configuration Access Control Model";
}
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types, Section 4";
}
import ietf-key-chain {
prefix key-chain;
reference
"RFC 8177: YANG Data Model for Key Chains";
}
organization
"IETF OPSAWG (Operations and Management Area Working Group)";
contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/>
WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Editor: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Author: Richard Roberts
<mailto:rroberts@juniper.net>
Author: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
<mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>
Author: Samier Barguil
<mailto:ssamier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com>
Author: Bo Wu
<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>";
description
"This YANG module defines a YANG model for exposing
attachment circuits as a service (ACaaS).
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see the
RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2023-11-13 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC XXXX: YANG Service Data Models for Attachment Circuits";
}
/* A set of typedefs to ease referencing cross-modules */
typedef attachment-circuit-reference {
type leafref {
path "/ac-svc:attachment-circuits/ac-svc:ac/ac-svc:name";
}
description
"Defines a reference to an attachment circuit that can be used
by other modules.";
}
typedef ac-group-reference {
type leafref {
path "/ac-svc:attachment-circuits/ac-svc:ac-group-profile"
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
+ "/ac-svc:name";
}
description
"Defines a reference to an attachment circuit profile.";
}
typedef encryption-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:specific-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/ac-svc:encryption-profile-identifier/ac-svc:id";
}
description
"Defines a type to an encryption profile for referencing
purposes.";
}
typedef qos-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:specific-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/ac-svc:qos-profile-identifier/ac-svc:id";
}
description
"Defines a type to a QoS profile for referencing purposes.";
}
typedef bfd-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:specific-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/ac-svc:bfd-profile-identifier/ac-svc:id";
}
description
"Defines a type to a BFD profile for referencing purposes.";
}
typedef forwarding-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:specific-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/ac-svc:forwarding-profile-identifier/ac-svc:id";
}
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"Defines a type to a forwarding profile for referencing
purposes.";
}
typedef routing-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:specific-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:valid-provider-identifiers"
+ "/ac-svc:routing-profile-identifier/ac-svc:id";
}
description
"Defines a type to a routing profile for referencing
purposes.";
}
typedef service-profile-reference {
type leafref {
path
"/ac-svc:service-provisioning-profiles"
+ "/ac-svc:service-profile-identifier"
+ "/ac-svc:id";
}
description
"Defines a type to a service profile for referencing
purposes.";
}
/******************** Reusable groupings ********************/
// Basic Layer 2 connection
grouping l2-connection-basic {
description
"Defines Layer 2 protocols and parameters that can be
factorized when provisioning Layer 2 connectivity
among multiple ACs.";
container encapsulation {
description
"Container for Layer 2 encapsulation.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:encapsulation-type;
}
description
"Encapsulation type.";
}
container dot1q {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, 'vpn-common:dot1q')" {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged interface
is 'dot1q'.";
}
description
"Tagged interface.";
uses ac-common:dot1q;
}
container qinq {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, 'vpn-common:qinq')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged interface
is 'qinq'.";
}
description
"Includes QinQ parameters.";
uses ac-common:qinq;
}
}
}
// Full Layer 2 connection
grouping l2-connection {
description
"Defines Layer 2 protocols and parameters that are used to
enable AC connectivity.";
container encapsulation {
description
"Container for Layer 2 encapsulation.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:encapsulation-type;
}
description
"Indicates the encapsulation type.";
}
container dot1q {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, 'vpn-common:dot1q')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged interface
is 'dot1q'.";
}
description
"Tagged interface.";
uses ac-common:dot1q;
}
container priority-tagged {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:priority-tagged')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged interface is
'priority-tagged'.";
}
description
"Priority-tagged interface.";
uses ac-common:priority-tagged;
}
container qinq {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, 'vpn-common:qinq')" {
description
"Only applies when the type of the tagged interface
is 'qinq'.";
}
description
"Includes QinQ parameters.";
uses ac-common:qinq;
}
}
choice l2-service {
description
"The Layer 2 connectivity service can be provided by
indicating a pointer to an L2VPN or by specifying a
Layer 2 tunnel service.";
container l2-tunnel-service {
description
"Defines a Layer 2 tunnel termination.
It is only applicable when a tunnel is required.";
uses ac-common:l2-tunnel-service;
}
case l2vpn {
leaf l2vpn-id {
type vpn-common:vpn-id;
description
"Indicates the L2VPN service associated with an
Integrated Routing and Bridging (IRB) interface.";
}
}
}
leaf bearer-reference {
if-feature "vpn-common:bearer-reference";
type string;
description
"This is an internal reference for the service provider
to identify the bearer associated with this AC.";
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
// Basic IP connection
grouping ip-connection-basic {
description
"Defines basic IP connection parameters.";
container ipv4 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
description
"IPv4-specific parameters.";
uses ac-common:ipv4-connection-basic;
}
container ipv6 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6";
description
"IPv6-specific parameters.";
uses ac-common:ipv6-connection-basic;
}
}
// Full IP connection
grouping ip-connection {
description
"Defines IP connection parameters.";
container ipv4 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
description
"IPv4-specific parameters.";
uses ac-common:ipv4-connection;
}
container ipv6 {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv6";
description
"IPv6-specific parameters.";
uses ac-common:ipv6-connection;
}
}
// Routing protocol list
grouping routing-protocol-list {
description
"List of routing protocols used on the AC.";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:routing-protocol-type;
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
description
"Type of routing protocol.";
}
list routing-profiles {
key "id";
description
"Routing profiles.";
leaf id {
type routing-profile-reference;
description
"Reference to the routing profile to be used.";
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:ie-type;
}
description
"Import, export, or both.";
}
}
}
// Static routing with BFD
grouping ipv4-static-rtg-with-bfd {
description
"Configuration specific to IPv4 static routing with
BFD.";
list ipv4-lan-prefixes {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
key "lan next-hop";
description
"List of LAN prefixes for the site.";
uses ac-common:ipv4-static-rtg-entry;
leaf bfd-profile {
type bfd-profile-reference;
description
"Points to a BFD profile.";
}
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
}
grouping ipv6-static-rtg-with-bfd {
description
"Configuration specific to IPv6 static routing with
BFD.";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
list ipv6-lan-prefixes {
if-feature "vpn-common:ipv4";
key "lan next-hop";
description
"List of LAN prefixes for the site.";
uses ac-common:ipv4-static-rtg-entry;
leaf bfd-profile {
type bfd-profile-reference;
description
"Points to a BFD profile.";
}
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
}
// BGP Service
grouping bgp-svc {
description
"Configuration specific to BGP.";
container peer-groups {
description
"Configuration for BGP peer-groups";
list peer-group {
key "name";
description
"List of BGP peer-groups configured on the local
system - uniquely identified by peer-group
name.";
uses ac-common:bgp-peer-group-with-name;
leaf local-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The local IP address that will be used to establish
the BGP session.";
}
uses ac-common:bgp-authentication;
}
}
list neighbor {
key "id";
description
"List of BGP neighbors.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"A neighbor identifier.";
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
leaf remote-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The remote IP address of this entry's BGP peer.
If this leaf is not present, this means that the primary
customer IP address is used as remote IP address.";
}
leaf local-address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The local IP address that will be used to establish
the BGP session.";
}
leaf peer-group {
type leafref {
path "../../peer-groups/peer-group/name";
}
description
"The peer-group with which this neighbor is associated.";
}
leaf bfd-profile {
type bfd-profile-reference;
description
"Points to a BFD profile.";
}
uses ac-common:bgp-peer-group-without-name;
uses ac-common:bgp-authentication;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
}
// OSPF Service
grouping ospf-svc {
description
"Service configuration specific to OSPF.";
uses ac-common:ospf-basic;
uses ac-common:ospf-authentication;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
// IS-IS Service
grouping isis-svc {
description
"Service configuration specific to IS-IS.";
uses ac-common:isis-basic;
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
uses ac-common:isis-authentication;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
// RIP Service
grouping rip-svc {
description
"Service configuration specific to RIP routing.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address families
are to be activated.";
}
uses ac-common:rip-authentication;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
// VRRP Service
grouping vrrp-svc {
description
"Service configuration specific to VRRP.";
reference
"RFC 5798: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)
Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both
address families are to be enabled.";
}
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
// Basic routing parameters
grouping routing-basic {
description
"Defines basic parameters for routing protocols.";
list routing-protocol {
key "id";
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"List of routing protocols used on the AC.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier for the routing protocol.";
}
uses routing-protocol-list;
container bgp {
when
"derived-from-or-self(../type, 'vpn-common:bgp-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is BGP.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to BGP.";
container peer-groups {
description
"Configuration for BGP peer-groups";
list peer-group {
key "name";
description
"List of BGP peer-groups configured on the local
system - uniquely identified by peer-group
name.";
uses ac-common:bgp-peer-group-with-name;
}
}
}
container ospf {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:ospf-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is OSPF.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to OSPF.";
uses ac-common:ospf-basic;
}
container isis {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:isis-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is IS-IS.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to IS-IS.";
uses ac-common:isis-basic;
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
container rip {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:rip-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is RIP.
For IPv4, the model assumes that RIP
version 2 is used.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to RIP routing.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both
address families are to be activated.";
}
}
container vrrp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:vrrp-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is the
Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP).";
}
description
"Configuration specific to VRRP.";
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:address-family;
}
description
"Indicates whether IPv4, IPv6, or both address families
are to be enabled.";
}
}
}
}
// Full routing parameters
grouping routing {
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
list routing-protocol {
key "id";
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"List of routing protocols used on the AC.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier for the routing protocol.";
}
uses routing-protocol-list;
container static {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:static-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is static routing
protocol.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to static routing.";
container cascaded-lan-prefixes {
description
"LAN prefixes from the customer.";
uses ipv4-static-rtg-with-bfd;
uses ipv6-static-rtg-with-bfd;
}
}
container bgp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:bgp-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is BGP.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to BGP.";
uses bgp-svc {
refine "peer-groups/peer-group/local-address" {
config false;
}
refine "neighbor/local-address" {
config false;
}
}
}
container ospf {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:ospf-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is OSPF.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to OSPF.";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
uses ospf-svc;
}
container isis {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:isis-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is IS-IS.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to IS-IS.";
uses isis-svc;
}
container rip {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:rip-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is RIP.
For IPv4, the model assumes that RIP version 2 is
used.";
}
description
"Configuration specific to RIP routing.";
uses rip-svc;
}
container vrrp {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, "
+ "'vpn-common:vrrp-routing')" {
description
"Only applies when the protocol is the Virtual Router
Redundancy Protocol (VRRP).";
}
description
"Configuration specific to VRRP.";
uses vrrp-svc;
}
}
}
// Encryption choice
grouping encryption-choice {
description
"Container for the encryption profile.";
choice profile {
description
"Choice for the encryption profile.";
case provider-profile {
leaf provider-profile {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
type encryption-profile-reference;
description
"Reference to a provider encryption profile.";
}
}
case customer-profile {
leaf customer-key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"Customer-supplied key chain.";
}
}
}
}
// Basic security parameters
grouping ac-security-basic {
description
"AC-specific security parameters.";
container encryption {
if-feature "vpn-common:encryption";
description
"Container for AC security encryption.";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
description
"If set to 'true', traffic encryption on the connection
is required. Otherwise, it is disabled.";
}
leaf layer {
when "../enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Included only when encryption is enabled.";
}
type enumeration {
enum layer2 {
description
"Encryption occurs at Layer 2.";
}
enum layer3 {
description
"Encryption occurs at Layer 3.
For example, IPsec may be used when a customer
requests Layer 3 encryption.";
}
}
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"Indicates the layer on which encryption is applied.";
}
}
container encryption-profile {
when "../encryption/enabled = 'true'" {
description
"Indicates the layer on which encryption is enabled.";
}
description
"Container for the encryption profile.";
uses encryption-choice;
}
}
// Bandwith parameters
grouping bandwidth {
description
"Container for bandwidth.";
container svc-pe-to-ce-bandwidth {
if-feature "vpn-common:inbound-bw";
description
"From the customer site's perspective, the inbound
bandwidth of the AC or download bandwidth from the
service provider to the site.";
uses ac-common:bandwidth-per-type;
}
container svc-ce-to-pe-bandwidth {
if-feature "vpn-common:outbound-bw";
description
"From the customer site's perspective, the outbound
bandwidth of the AC or upload bandwidth from
the CE to the PE.";
uses ac-common:bandwidth-per-type;
}
}
// Basic AC parameters
grouping ac-basic {
description
"Grouping for basic parameters for an attachment circuit.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"An identifier of the AC.";
}
container l2-connection {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"Defines Layer 2 protocols and parameters that are required
to enable AC connectivity.";
uses l2-connection-basic;
}
container ip-connection {
description
"Defines IP connection parameters.";
uses ip-connection-basic;
}
container routing-protocols {
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
uses routing-basic;
}
container oam {
description
"Defines the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
(OAM) mechanisms used.";
container bfd {
if-feature "vpn-common:bfd";
description
"Container for BFD.";
uses ac-common:bfd;
}
}
container security {
description
"AC-specific security parameters.";
uses ac-security-basic;
}
container service {
description
"AC-specific bandwith parameters.";
leaf mtu {
type uint32;
units "bytes";
description
"Layer 2 MTU.";
}
uses bandwidth;
}
}
// Full AC parameters
grouping ac {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"Grouping for an attachment circuit.";
leaf name {
type string;
description
"A name of the AC. Data models that need to reference
an attachment circuit should use
attachment-circuit-reference.";
}
leaf-list service-profile {
type service-profile-reference;
description
"A reference to a service profile.";
}
container l2-connection {
description
"Defines Layer 2 protocols and parameters that are required
to enable AC connectivity.";
uses l2-connection;
}
container ip-connection {
description
"Defines IP connection parameters.";
uses ip-connection;
}
container routing-protocols {
description
"Defines routing protocols.";
uses routing;
}
container oam {
description
"Defines the OAM mechanisms used.";
container bfd {
if-feature "vpn-common:bfd";
description
"Container for BFD.";
leaf profile {
type bfd-profile-reference;
description
"Points to a BFD profile.";
}
uses ac-common:bfd;
uses ac-common:service-status;
}
}
container security {
description
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"AC-specific security parameters.";
uses ac-security-basic;
}
container service {
description
"AC-specific bandwith parameters.";
uses bandwidth;
container qos {
if-feature "vpn-common:qos";
description
"QoS configuration.";
container qos-profiles {
description
"QoS profile configuration.";
list qos-profile {
key "profile";
description
"Points to a QoS profile.";
leaf profile {
type qos-profile-reference;
description
"QoS profile to be used.";
}
leaf direction {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:qos-profile-direction;
}
description
"The direction to which the QoS profile
is applied.";
}
}
}
}
container access-control-list {
description
"Container for the Access Control List (ACL).";
container acl-profiles {
description
"ACL profile configuration.";
list acl-profile {
key "profile";
description
"Points to an ACL profile.";
leaf profile {
type forwarding-profile-reference;
description
"Forwarding profile to be used.";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
}
}
}
}
}
/******************** Main AC containers ********************/
container specific-provisioning-profiles {
description
"Contains a set of valid profiles to reference for an AC.";
uses ac-common:ac-profile-cfg;
}
container service-provisioning-profiles {
description
"Contains a set of valid profiles to reference for an AC.";
list service-profile-identifier {
key "id";
description
"List of generic service profile identifiers.";
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the service profile to be used.
The profile only has significance within the service
provider's administrative domain.";
}
}
nacm:default-deny-write;
}
container attachment-circuits {
description
"Main container for the attachment circuits.";
list ac-group-profile {
key "name";
description
"Maintains a list of profiles that are shared among
a set of ACs.";
uses ac;
}
container placement-constraints {
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
uses vpn-common:placement-constraints;
}
list ac {
key "name";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"Global provisioning of attachment circuits.";
leaf customer-name {
type string;
description
"Indicates the name of the customer that requested this
AC.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Associates a description with an AC.";
}
leaf test-only {
type empty;
description
"When present, this indicates that this is a feasibility
check request. No resources are commited for such AC
requests.";
}
uses ac-common:op-instructions;
leaf-list peer-sap-id {
type string;
description
"One or more peer SAPs can be indicated.";
}
leaf-list ac-group-profile {
type ac-group-reference;
description
"A reference to an AC profile.";
}
leaf ac-parent-ref {
type ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference;
description
"Specifies the parent AC that is inherited by an AC.
In contexts where dynamic terminating points are
bound to the same AC, a parent AC with stable
information is created with a set of child ACs
to track dynamic AC information.";
}
leaf-list child-ac-ref {
type ac-svc:attachment-circuit-reference;
config false;
description
"Specifies a child AC that relies upon a parent AC.";
}
list group {
key "group-id";
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
description
"List of group-ids.";
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Indicates the group-id to which the network access
belongs.";
}
leaf precedence {
type identityref {
base ac-common:precedence-type;
}
description
"Defines redundancy of an AC.";
}
}
list service-ref {
key "service-type service-id";
config false;
description
"Reports the set of services that are bound to the AC.";
leaf service-type {
type identityref {
base vpn-common:service-type;
}
description
"Indicates the service type (e.g., L3VPN, Network Slice
Service).";
reference
"RFC 9408: A YANG Network Data Model for Service
Attachment Points (SAPs), Section 5";
}
leaf service-id {
type string;
description
"Indicates an identifier of a service instance
of a given type that uses the AC.";
}
}
uses ac;
}
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
6. Security Considerations
This section uses the template described in Section 3.7 of
[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis].
The YANG modules specified in this document define schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC8446].
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or
RESTCONF protocol operations and content.
There are a number of data nodes defined in these YANG modules that
are writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is the
default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable
in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config)
and delete operations to these data nodes without proper protection
or authentication can have a negative effect on network operations.
Specifically, the following subtrees and data nodes have particular
sensitivities/vulnerabilities in the "ietf-bearer-svc" module:
'placement-constraints': An attacker who is able to access this data
node can modify the attributes to influence how a service is
delivered to a customer, and this lead to Service Level Agreement
(SLA) violations.
'bearer': An attacker who is able to access this data node can
modify the attributes of bearer and, thus, hinder how ACs are
built.
In addition, an attacker could attempt to add a new bearer or
delete existing ones. An attacker may also change the requested
type or the activation scheduling.
The following subtrees and data nodes have particular sensitivities/
vulnerabilities in the "ietf-ac-svc" module:
'specific-provisioning-profiles': This container includes a set of
sensitive data that influence how an AC will be delivered. For
example, an attacker who has access to these data nodes may be
able to manipulate routing policies, QoS policies, or encryption
properties.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
These data nodes are defined with "nacm:default-deny-write"
tagging [I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac].
'service-provisioning-profiles': An attacker who has access to these
data nodes may be able to manipulate service-specific policies to
be applied for an AC.
These data nodes are defined with "nacm:default-deny- write"
tagging.
'ac': An attacker who is able to access this data node can modify
the attributes of an AC (e.g., QoS, bandwidth, routing protocols,
keying material), leading to malfunctioning of services that will
be delivered over that AC and therefore to SLA violations. In
addition, an attacker could attempt to add a new AC.
Some of the readable data nodes in these YANG modules may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It
is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config,
or notification) to these data nodes. Specifically, the following
subtrees and data nodes have particular sensitivities/vulnerabilities
in the "ietf-bearer-svc" module:
'customer-point': An attacker can retrieve privacy-related
information about location from where the customer is connected.
Disclosing such information may be used to infer the identity of
the customer.
The following subtrees and data nodes have particular sensitivities/
vulnerabilities in the "ietf-ac-svc" module:
'customer-name', 'l2-connection', and 'ip-connection': An attacker
can retrieve privacy-related information, which can be used to
track a customer. Disclosing such information may be considered a
violation of the customer-provider trust relationship.
'keying-material': An attacker can retrieve the cryptographic keys
protecting the underlying connectivity services (routing, in
particular). These keys could be used to inject spoofed routing
advertisements.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Several data nodes ('bgp', 'ospf', 'isis', and 'rip') rely upon
[RFC8177] for authentication purposes. As such, the AC service
module inherits the security considerations discussed in Section 5 of
[RFC8177]. Also, these data nodes support supplying explicit keys as
strings in ASCII format. The use of keys in hexadecimal string
format would afford greater key entropy with the same number of key-
string octets. However, such a format is not included in this
version of the AC service model because it is not supported by the
underlying device modules (e.g., [RFC8695]).
7. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register the following URIs in the "ns"
subregistry within the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688]:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bearer-svc
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-svc
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
IANA is requested to register the following YANG modules in the "YANG
Module Names" subregistry [RFC6020] within the "YANG Parameters"
registry.
Name: ietf-bearer-svc
Maintained by IANA? N
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bearer-svc
Prefix: bearer-svc
Reference: RFC xxxx
Name: ietf-ac-svc
Maintained by IANA? N
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-svc
Prefix: ac-svc
Reference: RFC xxxx
8. References
8.1. Normative References
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac]
Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S.,
and B. Wu, "A Common YANG Data Model for Attachment
Circuits", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
opsawg-teas-common-ac-05, 9 February 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-
teas-common-ac-05>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3688>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4364>.
[RFC4552] Gupta, M. and N. Melam, "Authentication/Confidentiality
for OSPFv3", RFC 4552, DOI 10.17487/RFC4552, June 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4552>.
[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, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4577>.
[RFC5709] Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Fanto, M., White, R., Barnes, M.,
Li, T., and R. Atkinson, "OSPFv2 HMAC-SHA Cryptographic
Authentication", RFC 5709, DOI 10.17487/RFC5709, October
2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5709>.
[RFC5798] Nadas, S., Ed., "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)
Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6", RFC 5798,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5798, March 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5798>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5880>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6020>.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6242>.
[RFC6565] Pillay-Esnault, P., Moyer, P., Doyle, J., Ertekin, E., and
M. Lundberg, "OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge
(PE-CE) Routing Protocol", RFC 6565, DOI 10.17487/RFC6565,
June 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6565>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6991>.
[RFC7166] Bhatia, M., Manral, V., and A. Lindem, "Supporting
Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3", RFC 7166,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7166, March 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7166>.
[RFC7474] Bhatia, M., Hartman, S., Zhang, D., and A. Lindem, Ed.,
"Security Extension for OSPFv2 When Using Manual Key
Management", RFC 7474, DOI 10.17487/RFC7474, April 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7474>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8040>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J.
Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8177>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8341>.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8342>.
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8446>.
[RFC9181] Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M.,
Ed., and Q. Wu, "A Common YANG Data Model for Layer 2 and
Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9181, DOI 10.17487/RFC9181, February
2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9181>.
[RFC9182] Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M.,
Ed., Munoz, L., and A. Aguado, "A YANG Network Data Model
for Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9182, DOI 10.17487/RFC9182,
February 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9182>.
[RFC9291] Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Barguil,
S., and L. Munoz, "A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 2
VPNs", RFC 9291, DOI 10.17487/RFC9291, September 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9291>.
[RFC9408] Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil, S., Wu,
Q., and V. Lopez, "A YANG Network Data Model for Service
Attachment Points (SAPs)", RFC 9408, DOI 10.17487/RFC9408,
June 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9408>.
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., Hares, S., and J. Haas, "YANG
Model for Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4)", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-17, 5
July 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
ietf-idr-bgp-model-17>.
[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis]
Bierman, A., Boucadair, M., and Q. Wu, "Guidelines for
Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data
Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
netmod-rfc8407bis-09, 28 February 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-
rfc8407bis-09>.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit]
Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., de Dios, O. G., Barguil, S.,
and B. Wu, "A Network YANG Data Model for Attachment
Circuits", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit-05, 9 February 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-
ntw-attachment-circuit-05>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang]
Wu, B., Dhody, D., Rokui, R., Saad, T., and J. Mullooly,
"A YANG Data Model for the RFC AAAA Network Slice
Service", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-09, 17 February 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-
ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-09>.
[IEEE802.1AX]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks--Link Aggregation", May 2020,
<https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2020.9105034>.
[Instance-Data]
"Example of AC SVC Instance Data", 2024,
<https://github.com/boucadair/attachment-circuit-
model/blob/main/xml-examples/svc-full-instance.xml>.
[ITU-T-G.781]
ITU-T, "Synchronization layer functions for frequency
synchronization based on the physical layer", January
2024, <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.781>.
[PYANG] "pyang", 2023, <https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang>.
[RFC2080] Malkin, G. and R. Minnear, "RIPng for IPv6", RFC 2080,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2080, January 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2080>.
[RFC2453] Malkin, G., "RIP Version 2", STD 56, RFC 2453,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2453, November 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2453>.
[RFC3644] Snir, Y., Ramberg, Y., Strassner, J., Cohen, R., and B.
Moore, "Policy Quality of Service (QoS) Information
Model", RFC 3644, DOI 10.17487/RFC3644, November 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3644>.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[RFC3849] Huston, G., Lord, A., and P. Smith, "IPv6 Address Prefix
Reserved for Documentation", RFC 3849,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3849, July 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3849>.
[RFC5398] Huston, G., "Autonomous System (AS) Number Reservation for
Documentation Use", RFC 5398, DOI 10.17487/RFC5398,
December 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5398>.
[RFC5737] Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks
Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5737, January 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5737>.
[RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP
Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925,
June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5925>.
[RFC6151] Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations
for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms",
RFC 6151, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6151>.
[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6952>.
[RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function
Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7665>.
[RFC8299] Wu, Q., Ed., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki,
"YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8299, January 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8299>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8340>.
[RFC8349] Lhotka, L., Lindem, A., and Y. Qu, "A YANG Data Model for
Routing Management (NMDA Version)", RFC 8349,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8349, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8349>.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
[RFC8466] Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Ed., Xie, C., and L. Jalil, "A YANG
Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN)
Service Delivery", RFC 8466, DOI 10.17487/RFC8466, October
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8466>.
[RFC8695] Liu, X., Sarda, P., and V. Choudhary, "A YANG Data Model
for the Routing Information Protocol (RIP)", RFC 8695,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8695, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8695>.
[RFC8969] Wu, Q., Ed., Boucadair, M., Ed., Lopez, D., Xie, C., and
L. Geng, "A Framework for Automating Service and Network
Management with YANG", RFC 8969, DOI 10.17487/RFC8969,
January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8969>.
Appendix A. Examples
This section includes a non-exhaustive list of examples to illustrate
the use of the service models defined in this document. An example
instance data can also be found at [Instance-Data].
A.1. Create A New Bearer
An example of a request message body to create a bearer is shown in
Figure 21.
{
"ietf-bearer-svc:bearers": {
"bearer": [
{
"name": "a-name-choosen-by-client",
"description": "A bearer example",
"customer-point": {
"device": {
"device-id": "CE_X_SITE_Y"
}
},
"type": "ietf-bearer-svc:ethernet"
}
]
}
}
Figure 21: Example of a Message Body to Create A New Bearer
A bearer-reference is then generated by the controller for this
bearer. Figure 22 shows the example of a response message body that
is sent by the controller to reply to a GET request:
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"ietf-bearer-svc:bearers": {
"bearer": [
{
"name": "a-name-choosen-by-client",
"description": "A bearer example",
"sync-phy-capable": true,
"customer-point": {
"device": {
"device-id": "CE_X_SITE_Y"
}
},
"type": "ietf-bearer-svc:ethernet",
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
}
]
}
}
Figure 22: Example of a Response Message Body with the Bearer
Reference
Note that the response also indicates that Sync Phy is supported for
this bearer.
A.2. Create An AC over An Existing Bearer
An example of a request message body to create a simple AC over an
existing bearer is shown in Figure 23. The bearer reference is
assumed to be known to both the customer and the network provider.
Such a reference can be retrieved, e.g., following the example
described in Appendix A.1 or using other means (including, exchanged
out-of-band or via proprietary APIs).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac4585",
"description": "An AC on an existing bearer",
"requested-ac-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q"
},
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 23: Example of a Message Body to Request an AC over an
Existing Bearer
Figure 24 shows the message body of a response received from the
controller and which indicates the "cvlan-id" that was assigned for
the requested AC.
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac4585",
"description": "An AC on an existing bearer",
"requested-ac-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"tag-type": "ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id": 550
}
},
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
}
}
]
}
}
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Figure 24: Example of a Message Body of a Response to Assign a
CVLAN ID
A.3. Create An AC for a Known Peer SAP
An example of a request to create a simple AC, when the peer SAP is
known, is shown in Figure 25. In this example, the peer SAP
identifier points to an identifier of a service function. The
(topological) location of that service function is assumed to be
known to the network controller. For example, this can be determined
as part of an on-demand procedure to instantiate a service function
in a cloud. That instantiated service function can be granted a
connectivity service via the provider network.
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac4585",
"description": "An AC on an existing bearer",
"requested-ac-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"peer-sap-id": [
"nf-termination-ip"
],
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"tag-type": "ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id": 550
}
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 25: Example of a Message Body to Request an AC with a Peer SAP
A.4. One CE, Two ACs
Let’s consider the example of an eNodeB (CE) that is directly
connected to the access routers of the mobile backhaul (see
Figure 26). In this example, two ACs are needed to service the
eNodeB (e.g., distinct VLANs for Control and User Planes).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
.-------------. .------------------.
| | | PE |
| | | 192.0.2.1 |
| eNodeB |==================| 2001:db8::1 |
| | VLAN 1 | |
| |==================| |
| | VLAN 2 | |
| | Direct | |
'-------------' Routing | |
| |
| |
| |
'------------------'
Figure 26: Example of a CE-PE ACs
An example of a request to create the ACs to service the eNodeB is
shown in Figure 27. This example assumes that static addressing is
used for both ACs.
=============== NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 ================
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits":{
"ac":[
{
"name":"ac1",
"description":"a first ac with a same peer node",
"l2-connection":{
"encapsulation":{
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:dot1q"
},
"bearer-reference":"line-156"
},
"ip-connection":{
"ipv4":{
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"ipv6":{
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"routing-protocols":{
"routing-protocol":[
{
"id":"1",
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:direct-routing"
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
}
]
}
}
},
{
"name":"ac2",
"description":"a second ac with a same peer node",
"l2-connection":{
"encapsulation":{
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:dot1q"
},
"bearer-reference":"line-156"
},
"ip-connection":{
"ipv4":{
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"ipv6":{
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"routing-protocols":{
"routing-protocol":[
{
"id":"1",
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:direct-routing"
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 27: Example of a Message Body to Request Two ACs on The
Same Link (Not Recommended)
Figure 28 shows the message body of a response received from the
controller.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac1",
"description": "a first ac with a same peer node",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 1
}
},
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1",
"prefix-length": 30,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
},
"ipv6": {
"local-address": "2001:db8::1",
"prefix-length": 64,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "2001:db8::2"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:direct-routing"
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "ac2",
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"description": "a second ac with a same peer node",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 2
}
},
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1",
"prefix-length": 30,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
},
"ipv6": {
"local-address": "2001:db8::1",
"prefix-length": 64,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "2001:db8::2"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:direct-routing"
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 28: Example of a Message Body of a Response to Create Two
ACs on The Same Link (Not Recommended)
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
The example shown Figure 28 is not optimal as it includes many
redundant data. Figure 29 shows a more compact request that
factorizes all the redundant data.
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac-group-profile": [
{
"id": "simple-node-profile",
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1",
"prefix-length": 30,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
},
"ipv6": {
"local-address": "2001:db8::1",
"prefix-length": 64,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "2001:db8::2"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:direct-routing"
}
]
}
}
],
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac1",
"description": "a first ac with a same peer node",
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"ac-group-profile": ["simple-node-profile"],
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 1
}
}
}
},
{
"name": "ac2",
"description": "a second ac with a same peer node",
"ac-group-profile": ["simple-node-profile"],
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 2
}
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 29: Example of a Message Body to Request Two ACs on The
Same Link (Node Profile)
A customer may request adding a new AC by simply referring to an
existing per-node AC profile as shown in Figure 30. This AC inherits
all the data that was enclosed in the indicated per-node AC profile
(IP addressing, routing, etc.).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac3",
"description": "a third AC with a same peer node",
"ac-group-profile": [
"simple-node-profile"
],
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 3
}
},
"bearer-reference": "line-156"
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 30: Example of a Message Body to Add a new AC over an
existing link (Node Profile)
A.5. Control Precedence over Multiple ACs
When multiple ACs are requested by the same customer for the same
site, the request can tag one of these ACs as "primary" and the other
ones as "secondary". An example of such a request is shown in
Figure 32. In this example, both ACs are bound to the same "group-
id", and the "precedence" data node is set as a function of the
intended role of each AC (primary or secondary).
.---.
ac1: primary | |
.--------------------+PE1|
.---. | bearerX@site1 | |
| +-------' '---'
|CE |
| +-------. .---.
'---' | ac2: secondary | |
'--------------------+PE2|
bearerY@site1 | |
'---'
Figure 31: An Example Topology for AC Precedence Enforcement
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac1",
"description": "Example to illustrate AC precedence usage",
"group": [
{
"group-id": "1",
"precedence": "ietf-ac-common:primary"
}
],
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "bearerX@site1"
}
},
{
"name": "ac2",
"description": "Example to illustrate AC precedence usage",
"group": [
{
"group-id": "1",
"precedence": "ietf-ac-common:secondary"
}
],
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "bearerY@site1"
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 32: Example of a Message Body to Associate a Precedence
Level with ACs
A.6. Create Multiple ACs Bound to Multiple CEs
Figure 33 shows an example of CEs that are interconnected by a
service provider network.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
.----------------------------------.
.----. | | .----.
| CE1+-------+ +-------+ CE3|
'----' | | '----'
| Network |
.----. | | .----.
|CE2 +-------+ +-------+ CE4|
'----' | | '----'
'----------------------------------'
Figure 33: Network Topology Example
Figure 34 depicts an example of the message body of a response to a
request to instantiate the various ACs that are shown in Figure 33.
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac-group-profile": [
{
"id": "simple-profile",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"cvlan-id": 1
}
}
}
}
],
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac1",
"description": "First site",
"ac-group-profile": [
"simple-profile"
],
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "ce1-network"
}
},
{
"name": "ac2",
"description": "Second Site",
"ac-group-profile": [
"simple-profile"
],
"l2-connection": {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"bearer-reference": "ce2-network"
}
},
{
"name": "ac3",
"description": "Third site",
"ac-group-profile": [
"simple-profile"
],
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "ce3-network"
}
},
{
"name": "ac4",
"description": "Another site",
"ac-group-profile": [
"simple-profile"
],
"l2-connection": {
"bearer-reference": "ce4-network"
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 34: Example of a Message Body of a Request to Create
Multiple ACs bound to Multiple CEs
A.7. Binding Attachment Circuits to an IETF Network Slice
This example shows how the AC service model complements
[I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang] to connect a site to a
slice service.
First, Figure 35 describes the end-to-end network topology as well
the orchestration scopes:
* The topology is made up of two sites (site1 and site2),
interconnected via a Transport Network (e.g. IP/MPLS Network). A
Network Function is deployed within each site in a dedicated IP
Subnet.
* A 5G SMO is responsible for the deployment Network Functions and
the indirect management of a local Gateway (i.e., CE device).
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
* An IETF Network Slice Controller is responsible for the deployment
of IETF Network Slices across the TN.
Network Functions are deployed within each site.
5G SMO IETF NSC 5G SMO
| (TN Orchestrator) |
| | |
<-----+-----> <---------+--------> <----+---->
Site1 Transport Network Site2
.---. .--------------. .---.
│NF1│ | | │NF2│
'-+-' .---. .---. .---. .---. '-+-'
| | | │ │ │ │ │ │ |
--+-----+GW1+--------+PE1│ │PE2+--------+GW2+----+--
^ | | ^ | | │ │ ^ │ │ ^
| '---' | '-+-' '-+-' | '---' |
| | │ │ | |
| | '--------------' | |
LAN1 | | LAN2
198.51.100.0/24 | | 203.0.113.0/24
| |
| |
Physical Link ID: Physical Link ID:
bearerX@site1 bearerX@site2
Figure 35: An Example of a Network Topology Used to Deploy Slices
Figure 36 describes the logical connectivity enforced thanks to both
IETF Network Slice and Attachment Circuit models.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
AS 65536 <----BGP--> AS 65550
.---. .--------. .---.
│NF1│ 192.0.2.0/30 | | 192.0.2.4/30 │NF2│
'-+-' .---. .--+. .+--. .---. '-+-'
| | |.1 .2| | | |.6 .5| | |
--+-----+GW1+----------+PE1| |PE2+----------+GW2+----+----
| | vlan-id | | | | vlan-id | |
'---' 100 '--+' '+--' 200 '---'
198.51.100.0/24 | | 203.0.113.0/24
'--------+'
sdp1 sdp2
<----------> <------------> <------->
Attachment Network Slice Attachment
Circuit "ac1" EMBB_UP Circuit "ac2"
* "ac1" properties:
- bearer-reference: bearerX@site1
- vlan-id: 100
- CE address (GW1): 192.0.2.1/30
- PE address: 192.0.2.2/30
- Routing: static 198.51.100.0/24 via
192.0.2.1 tag primary_UP_slice
* "ac2" properties:
- bearer-reference: bearerY@site2
- vlan-id: 200
- CE address (GW2): 192.0.2.5/30
- PE address: 192.0.2.6/30
- Routing: BGP local-as: 65536
customer-as: 65550
customer-address: 192.0.2.5
Figure 36: Logical Overview
Figure 37 shows the message body of the request to create the
required ACs using the Attachment Circuit module.
=============== NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 ================
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits":{
"ac":[
{
"name":"ac1",
"description":"Connection to site1 on vlan 100",
"requested-start":"2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection":{
"encapsulation":{
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q":{
"tag-type":"ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan"
},
"bearer-reference":"bearerX@site1"
},
"ip-connection":{
"ipv4":{
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:\
static-address"
},
"routing-protocols":{
"routing-protocol":[
{
"id":"1",
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:static-routing",
"static":{
"cascaded-lan-prefixes":{
"ipv4-lan-prefixes":[
{
"lan":"198.51.100.0/24",
"next-hop":"192.0.2.1",
"lan-tag":"primary_UP_slice"
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
},
{
"name":"ac2",
"description":"Connection to site2 on vlan 200",
"requested-start":"2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection":{
"encapsulation":{
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q":{
"tag-type":"ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan"
}
},
"bearer-reference":"bearerY@site2"
},
"ip-connection":{
"ipv4":{
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"address-allocation-type":"ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"routing-protocols":{
"routing-protocol":[
{
"id":"1",
"type":"ietf-vpn-common:bgp-routing",
"bgp":{
"neighbor":[
{
"id":"1",
"peer-as":65550
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 37: Message Body of a Request to Create Required ACs
Figure 38 shows the message body of a reponse received from the
controller.
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac1",
"description": "Connection to site1 on vlan 100",
"requested-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"tag-type": "ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id": 100
}
},
"bearer-reference": "bearerX@site1"
},
"ip-connection": {
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.2",
"prefix-length": 30,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.1"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:static-routing",
"static": {
"cascaded-lan-prefixes": {
"ipv4-lan-prefixes": [
{
"lan": "198.51.100.0/24",
"next-hop": "192.0.2.1",
"lan-tag": "primary_UP_slice"
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
},
{
"name": "ac2",
"description": "Connection to site2 on vlan 200",
"requested-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"tag-type": "ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id": 200
}
},
"bearer-reference": "bearerY@site2"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.6",
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"prefix-length": 30,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.5"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:bgp-routing",
"bgp": {
"neighbor": [
{
"id": "1",
"peer-as": 65550,
"local-as": 65536
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 38: Example of a Message Body of a Response Indicating the
Creation of the ACs
Figure 39 shows the message body of the request to create the a slice
service bound to the ACs created using Figure 37. Only references to
these ACs are included in the Slice Service request. This example
assumes that the module that "glues" the service/AC is also supported
by the NSC.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
=============== NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 ================
{
"ietf-network-slice-service:network-slice-services": {
"slo-sle-templates": {
"slo-sle-template": [
{
"id": "low-latency-template",
"template-description": "Lowest possible latencey \
forwarding behavior"
}
]
},
"slice-service": [
{
"service-id": "Slice URLLC_UP",
"service-description": "Dedicate TN Slice for URLLC-UP",
"slo-sle-template": "low-latency-template",
"status": {},
"sdps": {
"sdp": [
{
"sdp-id": "sdp1",
"ac-svc-name": ["ac1"]
},
{
"sdp-id": "sdp2",
"ac-svc-name": ["ac2"]
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 39: Message Body of a Request to Create a Slice Service
Referring to the ACs
A.8. Connecting a Virtualized Environment Running in a Cloud Provider
This example (Figure 40) shows how the AC service model can be used
to connect a Cloud Infrastructure to a service provider network.
This example makes the following assumptions:
1. A customer (e.g., Mobile Network Team or partner) has a
virtualized infrastructure running in a Cloud Provider. A
simplistic deployment is represented here with a set of Virtual
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Machines running in a Virtual Private Environment. The
deployment and management of this infrastructure is achieved via
private APIs that are supported by the Cloud Provider: this
realization is out of the scope of this document.
2. The connectivity to the Data Center is achieved thanks to a
service based on direct attachment (physical connection), which
is delivered upon ordering via an API exposed by the Cloud
Provider. When ordering that connection, a unique "Connection
Identifier" is generated and returned via the API.
3. The customer provisions the networking logic within the Cloud
Provider based on that unique connection Identifier (i.e.,
logical interfaces, IP addressing, and routing).
.--------------------------------------------------------.
| Cloud Provider DC |
| |
| .---. .---. .---. |
| │VM1│ │VM2│ │VM3│ Virtual Private Cloud |
| '-+-' '-+-' '-+-' |
| │.2 │.5 │.12 198.51.100.0/24 |
| -+-----+-----+---+----------------------- |
| │.1 |
| .---+----. |
| │ CLOUD │ BGP_ASN: 65536 |
| │PROVIDER│ BGP md5: |
| │ GW │ "nyxNER_c5sdn608fFQl3331d" |
| '---+----' |
| │ ^ .2 |
'--------------------│-│---------------------------------'
│ │
Direct Interconnection │ │
connection_id: │BGP vlan-id:50
1234-56789 │ │ 192.0.2.0/24
│ │
│ │ .1
.--------------------│-v---------------------------------.
| If-A.--+--. Service Provider Network |
| │ │ |
| │ PE1 │ BGP_ASN: 65550 |
| │ │ |
| '-----' |
| |
| |
| |
'--------------------------------------------------------'
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Figure 40: An Example of Realization for Connecting a Cloud Site
Figure 41 illustrates the pre-provisioning logic for the physical
connection to the Cloud Provider. After this connection is delivered
to the service provider, the network inventory is updated with
"bearer-reference" set to the value of the "Connection Identifier".
Customer Cloud
Orchestration DIRECT INTERCONNECTION ORDERING (API) Provider
------------------------------------------------>
Connection Created with "Connection ID:1234-56789"
<------------------------------------------------
x
x
x
x
Physical Connection 1234-56789 is delivered and
connected to PE1
Network Inventory Updated with:
bearer-reference: 1234-56789 for PE1/Interface If-A
Figure 41: Illustration of Pre-provisioning
Next, API workflows can be initiated:
* Cloud Provider for the configuration as per (3) above.
* Service provider network via the Attachment Circuit model. This
request can be used in conjunction with additional requests based
on L3SM (VPN provisioning) or Network Slice Service model (5G
hybrid Cloud deployment).
Figure 42 shows the message body of the request to create the
required ACs to connect the Cloud Provider Virtualized (VM) using the
Attachment Circuit module.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
=============== NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 ================
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac--BXT-DC-customer-VPC-foo",
"description": "Connection to Cloud Provider BXT on \
connection 1234-56789",
"requested-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q"
},
"bearer-reference": "1243-56789"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"address-allocation-type": "ietf-ac-common:static-\
address"
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:bgp-routing",
"bgp": {
"neighbor": [
{
"id": "1",
"peer-as": 65536
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 42: Message Body of a Request to Create the ACs for
Connecting to the Cloud Provider
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Figure 43 shows the message body of the response received from the
provider. Note that this Cloud Provider mandates the use of MD5
authentication for establishing BGP connections.
The module supports MD5 to basically accommodate the installed BGP
base (including by some Cloud Providers). Note that MD5 suffers
from the security weaknesses discussed in Section 2 of [RFC6151]
and Section 2.1 of [RFC6952].
=============== NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 ================
{
"ietf-ac-svc:attachment-circuits": {
"ac": [
{
"name": "ac--BXT-DC-customer-VPC-foo",
"description": "Connection to Cloud Provider BXT on \
connection 1234-56789",
"requested-start": "2023-12-12T05:00:00.00Z",
"l2-connection": {
"encapsulation": {
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:dot1q",
"dot1q": {
"tag-type": "ietf-vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id": 50
}
},
"bearer-reference": "1243-56789"
},
"ip-connection": {
"ipv4": {
"local-address": "192.0.2.1",
"prefix-length": 24,
"address": [
{
"address-id": "1",
"customer-address": "192.0.2.2"
}
]
}
},
"routing-protocols": {
"routing-protocol": [
{
"id": "1",
"type": "ietf-vpn-common:bgp-routing",
"bgp": {
"neighbor": [
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
{
"id": "1",
"peer-as": 65536,
"local-as": 65550,
"authentication": {
"keying-material": {
"md5-keychain": "nyxNER_c5sdn608fFQl3331d"
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Figure 43: Message Body of a Response to the Request to Create
ACs for Connecting to the Cloud Provider
A.9. Connect Customer Network (CE) Through BGP
CE-PE routing using BGP is a common scenario in the context of MPLS
VPNs and is widely used in enterprise networks. In the example
depicted in Figure 44, the CE routers are customer-owned devices
belonging to an Autonomous System (ASN 65536). CEs are located at
the edge of the provider's network (PE, or Provider Edge) and use
point-to-point interfaces to establish BGP sessions. The point-to-
point interfaces rely upon a physical bearer (Line-113) to reach the
provider network.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
+------------------------+ +-------------------+
| Provider Network | | Customer Network |
| | | |
| +------------+ | Attachment-Circuit 1 | +-------+ |
| | PE1(VRF11) +----------------------------+ CE1 | AS65536 |
| | | | Bearer=Line-113 | +-------+ |
| | PE1(VRF12) | | | |
| | | | +-------------------+
| | PE1(VRF1n) | |
| | | |
| +------------+ |
| AS1 |
| +------------+ |
| | PE2(VRF21) | |
| +------------+ |
| . |
| . |
| . |
| +------------+ |
| | PEm(VRFmn) | |
| +------------+ |
| |
+------------------------+
Figure 44: Illustration of Provider Network Scenario
The attachment circuit in this case uses a SAP identifier to refer to
the physical interface used for the connection between the PE and the
CE. The attachment circuit includes all the additional logical
attributes to describe the connection between the two ends, including
VLAN information and IP addressing. Also, the configuration details
of the BGP session makes use of peer group details instead of
defining the entire configuration inside the 'neighbor' data node.
{
"attachment-circuits":{
"ac":{
"name":"IPT-CUST-ABC",
"customer-name":"CUST-ABC",
"description":"CUST-ABC-113",
"peer-sap-id":"sap#113",
"ip-connection":{
"ipv4":{
"local-address":"192.0.2.1",
"prefix-length":30,
"address-allocation-type":"ac-common:static-address"
}
},
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
"l2-connection":{
"encapsulation":{
"dot1q":{
"tag-type":"vpn-common:c-vlan",
"cvlan-id":"113"
}
},
"bearer-reference":"line-113"
},
"routing-protocols":{
"routing-protocol":{
"id":"BGP-Single-Access",
"type":"vpn-common:bgp-routing",
"bgp":{
"peer-groups":{
"peer-group":{
"name":"IPT-CUST-ABC",
"peer-as":65536,
"address-family":"vpn-common:ipv4"
}
},
"neighbor":{
"id":"BGP-DIA-Single-1",
"remote-address":"192.0.2.2",
"peer-group":"IPT-CUST-ABC",
"status":{
"admin-status":{
"status":"vpn-common:admin-up"
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
Figure 45: Message Body of a Request to Create ACs for Connecting
CEs to a Provider Network
This scenario allows the provider to maintain a list of ACs belonging
to the same customer without requiring the full service
configuration.
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Acknowledgments
The document leverages [RFC9182] and [RFC9291].
Thanks to Ebben Aries for the YANG Doctors review and for providing
[Instance-Data].
Contributors
Victor Lopez
Nokia
Email: victor.lopez@nokia.com
Ivan Bykov
Ribbon Communications
Email: Ivan.Bykov@rbbn.com
Qin Wu
Huawei
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
Kenichi Ogaki
KDDI
Email: ke-oogaki@kddi.com
Luis Angel Munoz
Vodafone
Email: luis-angel.munoz@vodafone.com
Authors' Addresses
Mohamed Boucadair (editor)
Orange
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Richard Roberts (editor)
Juniper
Email: rroberts@juniper.net
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
Telefonica
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft ACaaS March 2024
Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
Samier Barguil Giraldo
Nokia
Email: samier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com
Bo Wu
Huawei Technologies
Email: lana.wubo@huawei.com
Boucadair, et al. Expires 5 September 2024 [Page 111]
