Internet DRAFT - draft-majumdar-idr-bgp-srte-yang
draft-majumdar-idr-bgp-srte-yang
Inter-Domain Routing Working Group K. Majumdar
Internet-Draft K. Raza
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco
Expires: January 8, 2020 B. Decraene
Orange
Z. Jiang
Tencent
July 07, 2019
YANG data model for BGP Segment Routing TE Extensions
draft-majumdar-idr-bgp-srte-yang-00
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to configure
and manage Segment Routing TE extensions in BGP.
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 January 8, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. BGP Segment Routing Traffic Engineering Yang model . . . . . 3
2.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. SR Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Automatic Steering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Yang Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. SR Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Automatic Steering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Yang Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1. Introduction
YANG [RFC6020] is a data definition language that was introduced to
define the contents of a conceptual data store that allows networked
devices to be managed using NETCONF [RFC6241]. YANG is proving
relevant beyond its initial confines, as bindings to other interfaces
(e.g. ReST) [RFC8040] and encodings other than XML (e.g. JSON)
[RFC7951] are being defined. Furthermore, YANG data models can be
used as the basis of implementation for other interfaces, such as CLI
and programmatic APIs.
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
This document defines the YANG model for Segment Routing TE specific
extensions in BGP.
1.1. Requirements Language
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.
2. BGP Segment Routing Traffic Engineering Yang model
2.1. Overview
Segment Routing (SR), as defined in [RFC8402], leverages the source
routing paradigm where a node steers a packet through an ordered list
of instructions, called segments. SR, thus, allows enforcing a flow
through any topological path and/or service chain while maintaining
per-flow state only at the ingress nodes to the SR domain.
When applied to ipv6 data-plane (i.e. SRv6), the ordered set of
instructions are realized via SRv6 SIDs. The various functions and
behaviors corresponding to network programming using SRv6 are
specified in [I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming].
This document defines Yang model for the Segment Routing TE
extensions applicable for BGP as following:
o BGP signaled SR Policy as described in
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
o Automatic Steering as described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] and
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
The Yang extensions proposed in this model augment the base BGP model
defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model].
Note: Base BGP model does not have a common structure for BGP RIB.
The placeholder containers defined in this model can be removed once
base BGP model has the BGP RIB structure.
The modeling in this document complies with the Network Management
Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]. The operational state data
is combined with the associated configuration data in the same
hierarchy [RFC8407]. When protocol states are retrieved from the
NMDA operational state datastore, the returned states cover all
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
"config true" (rw) and "config false" (ro) nodes defined in the
schema.
2.2. SR Policy
Architecture for SR Policies is described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]. BGP Signaled SR Policies
are described in the [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
Following Yang extensions for SR Policy configuration and state data
are applicable:
o Addition of identies extending the BGP-AFI-SAFI base identity.
This is to add two new address families namely IPv4 SR-policy and
IPv6 SR-policy, as described in
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
o BGP Signaled SR Policy candidate paths. These refer to the
explicit candidate paths signaled via BGP as SAFI NLRIs, state of
which is applicable in the context of BGP speaker process. This
is modeled by adding SR Policy address family specific container
under generic BGP afi-safi list entry defined in the base BGP
model [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model].
o On Demand SR Policy candidate paths. These refer to the dynamic
candidate paths as described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]. There are two parts to
this in the context of BGP. A set of authorized SR Policy colors
for on demand policy triggers, and the actual instantiated
candidate paths per BGP next-hop. New containers and lists are
added under BGP global mode to model this information.
o SR Policy state in the context of BGP speaker. This represents
the state SR Policies (regardless of method of instantiation per
candidate path). The SR Policy state is maintained in the context
of BGP speaker process to realize the Automatic Steering of
overlay routes. Automatic Steering extensions are described in
the next section.
Note: The common parameters and datatypes for the SR Policy,
currently defined in this model, should be imported from SR Policy
Manager model, once available.
2.3. Automatic Steering
Automatic Steering (AS) refers to the ability to forward traffic over
a SR Policy on the head-end, as described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]. When a BGP route is
received with the color extended community and if the color value
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
matches the color of an authorized SR Policy installed on the head-
end, the route is programmed to resolve over SR Policy in forwarding.
Automatic Steering information associated with the BGP routes is
modeled as state information per route.
TBD: The configuration parameters for Automatic Steering are yet to
be added as an augmentation to the BGP route policy model. Such as,
extensions for opaque color extended community in BGP policy model,
and the Color Only (CO) flags controlling the Automatic Steering
behavior as described in [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].
3. Yang Tree
3.1. SR Policy
On Demand Nexthop (ODN) policies triggered by BGP
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global:
+--rw segment-routing
+--rw on-demand-policies
| +--ro authorized-colors
| | +--ro colors* [color]
| | +--ro color uint32
| +--ro installed-policies
| +--ro sr-policy* [color end-point]
| +--ro color uint32
| +--ro end-point inet:ip-address
+--ro policy-state
+--ro sr-policy* [color end-point]
+--ro color uint32
+--ro end-point inet:ip-address
+--ro policy-state? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? sid-type
+--ro steering-disabled? empty
+--ro ref-count? uint32
BGP Signaled Explicit SR Policies under ipv4 and ipv6 SR-Policy SAFI
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi:
+--rw ipv4-srpolicy
+--ro explicit-policies
+--ro sr-policy* [distinguisher color end-point]
+--ro distinguisher uint32
+--ro color uint32
+--ro end-point inet:ip-address
+--ro preference? uint32
+--ro explicit-binding-sid
| +--ro binding-sid? sid-type
| +--ro strict? boolean
| +--ro drop-on-invalid? boolean
+--ro usable? boolean
+--ro registered? boolean
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi:
+--rw ipv6-srpolicy
+--ro explicit-policies
+--ro sr-policy* [distinguisher color end-point]
+--ro distinguisher uint32
+--ro color uint32
+--ro end-point inet:ip-address
+--ro preference? uint32
+--ro explicit-binding-sid
| +--ro binding-sid? sid-type
| +--ro strict? boolean
| +--ro drop-on-invalid? boolean
+--ro usable? boolean
+--ro registered? boolean
3.2. Automatic Steering
Yang Tree for Automatic Steering with example of ipv4-unicast SAFI
module: ietf-bgp-srte
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-unicast:
+--ro routes
+--ro route* [prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro prefix union
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-unicast:
+--ro routes
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
+--ro route* [prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro prefix union
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-labeled-unicast:
+--ro routes
+--ro route* [prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro prefix union
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-labeled-unicast:
+--ro routes
+--ro route* [prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro prefix union
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv4-unicast:
+--ro routes
+--ro route* [rd prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro rd rt-types:route-distinguisher
+--ro prefix union
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv6-unicast:
+--ro routes
+--ro route* [rd prefix neighbor add-path-id]
+--ro rd rt-types:route-distinguisher
+--ro prefix union
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
+--ro neighbor inet:ip-address
+--ro add-path-id uint32
+--ro automatic-steering
+--ro color? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/color
+--ro end-point? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/end-point
+--ro co-flag? enumeration
+--ro binding-sid? -> /rt:routing/control-plane-protocols/control-plane-protocol/bgp:bgp/global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/policy-state/sr-policy/binding-sid
...
4. Yang Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-bgp-srte@2019-07-07.yang"
module ietf-bgp-srte {
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bgp-srte";
prefix "ietf-bgp-srte";
import ietf-routing-types {
prefix rt-types;
}
import ietf-routing {
prefix "rt";
}
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
import ietf-bgp {
prefix bgp;
}
import ietf-bgp-types {
prefix bgp-types;
}
import ietf-srv6-types {
prefix srv6-types;
}
organization
"IETF Inter-Domain Routing Working Group";
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
contact
"Inter-Domain working group - idr@ietf.org";
description
"This YANG module defines a data model to configure and
manage segment routing extensions in BGP.
Terms and Acronyms
AF : Address Family
BGP (bgp) : Border Gateway Protocol
SR : Segment Routing
SID : Segment Identifier
SRv6 : Segment Routing with IPv6 Data plane
VPN : Virtual Private Network
VRF : Virtual Routing and Forwarding
";
revision 2018-06-26 {
description
"Initial revision" ;
reference "";
}
//
// New identities and typedefs for SR extensions
//
// SR Policy SAFI identities
identity IPV4_SRPOLICY {
base bgp-types:afi-safi-type;
description
"IPv4 SR Policy (AFI,SAFI = 1,73)";
reference "TBD";
}
identity IPV6_SRPOLICY {
base bgp-types:afi-safi-type;
description
"IPv6 SR Policy (AFI,SAFI = 2,73)";
reference "TBD";
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
}
// Sid type union
typedef sid-type {
type union {
type rt-types:mpls-label;
type srv6-types:srv6-sid;
}
description "Type definition for Segment Identifier. This is
a union type which can be either a SR MPLS SID in the
form of a label, or a SRv6 SID in the form of
an IPv6 address.";
reference "TBD";
}
//
// SR Policy Related Groupings
//
//Color and Endpoint of the SR Policy
grouping sr-policy-color-endpoint {
description "Common grouping for SR Policy Color and
Endpoint";
leaf color {
type uint32;
description "Color of the policy";
}
leaf end-point {
type inet:ip-address;
description "Endpoint of the policy";
}
}
// Authorized colors for On Demand SR Policy programming
grouping sr-odn-auth-colors {
description
"Authorized colors for On Demand (dynamic) SR Policies
towards BGP nexthops";
container authorized-colors {
config false;
description
"Authorized colors for On Demand (dynamic) SR policies
towards BGP nexthops";
list colors {
key "color";
description "List of SR Policy Colors";
leaf color {
type uint32;
description "Color value";
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
}
}
}
}
grouping sr-policy-cmn-state {
description "Common state parameters applicable to
SR Policies";
leaf policy-state {
type enumeration {
enum UP {
description "SR Policy state UP";
}
enum DOWN {
description "SR Policy state DOWN";
}
}
description "SR Policy forwarding state";
}
leaf binding-sid {
type sid-type;
description "Binding SID of the SR Policy";
}
leaf steering-disabled {
type empty;
description "This attribute is set if steering
is disabled on this SR policy";
}
leaf ref-count {
type uint32;
description "Count of routes steering over this policy";
}
}
//
// SR Policy State grouping
//
grouping sr-policy-state {
description "SR Policy State";
container policy-state {
config false;
description "SR Policy State";
list sr-policy {
key "color end-point";
description "List of SR Policies";
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
uses sr-policy-color-endpoint;
// State of the SR Policy in BGP
uses sr-policy-cmn-state;
}
}
}
grouping sr-exp-policy-cp-state {
description "State of BGP signaled SR Policy (explicit)
candidate paths";
container explicit-policies {
config false;
description "BGP signaled explicit SR Policies";
list sr-policy {
key "distinguisher color end-point";
description "List of BGP signaled explicit SR Policies";
leaf distinguisher {
type uint32;
description "Distinguisher of the SR Policy
candidate path";
}
uses sr-policy-color-endpoint;
leaf preference {
type uint32;
description "Preference of the SR Policy candidate path";
}
container explicit-binding-sid {
description "Explicitly supplied Binding SID
for this policy";
leaf binding-sid {
type sid-type;
description "Binding SID value";
}
leaf strict {
type boolean;
description "Boolean indicating that the node
must use only the supplied Binding SID
for this SR Policy.
reference: TBD";
}
leaf drop-on-invalid {
type boolean;
description "Boolean to indicate drop upon invalid
policy, behavior. This overwrites the
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
default behavior of fallback to IGP path
, when SR Policy is (or becomes) invalid.
reference: TBD";
}
}
leaf usable {
type boolean;
description "Boolean to indicate that the SR Policy is
usable on this node.
reference: TBD";
}
leaf registered {
type boolean;
description "Boolean to indicate that the SR policy
is registered with policy manager to
install the corresponding forwarding entry";
}
// TODO: Segment Lists and other parameters from SR Policy model
// to be imported here.
}
}
}
grouping sr-odn-policies {
description "SR On Demand (dynamic) SR Policies";
container installed-policies {
config false;
description "BGP triggered On Demand (dynamic) SR Policies
corresponding to the BGP nexthops";
list sr-policy {
key "color end-point";
description "SR Policy list";
uses sr-policy-color-endpoint;
}
}
}
grouping sr-policy-steering-state {
description "Per route Automatic Steering parameters";
container automatic-steering {
description "Per route Automatic Steering parameters";
leaf color {
type leafref {
path "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:policy-state/ietf-bgp-srte:sr-policy/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:color";
}
description "Color of the SR Policy being used for
Automatic Steering";
}
leaf end-point {
type leafref {
path "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:policy-state/ietf-bgp-srte:sr-policy/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:end-point";
}
description "End-point of the SR Policy being used
for Automatic Steering";
}
leaf co-flag {
type enumeration {
enum 00 {
description "Color-Only flag 00";
}
enum 01 {
description "Color-Only flag 01";
}
enum 10 {
description "Color-Only flag 10";
}
}
default "00";
description "Color-Only (CO) flags applicable for
Automatic Steering of this route";
}
leaf binding-sid {
type leafref {
path "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/ietf-bgp-srte:segment-routing/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:policy-state/ietf-bgp-srte:sr-policy/" +
"ietf-bgp-srte:binding-sid";
}
description "Binding SID of the SR Policy";
}
}
}
grouping route-key-leafs {
description "Grouping for key leafs identifying a route";
leaf prefix {
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
type union {
type inet:ip-prefix;
type string;
}
description "BGP Prefix. This is a temp definition to
cover ip-prefix and other NLRI formats.
Import the type once defined in base
BGP RIB model";
}
leaf neighbor {
type inet:ip-address;
description "BGP Neighbor";
}
leaf add-path-id {
type uint32;
description "Add-path ID";
}
}
grouping common-bgp-route-grouping {
description "BGP route list" ;
container routes {
config false;
description "BGP Route in local RIB";
list route {
key "prefix neighbor add-path-id";
description "BGP route list";
uses route-key-leafs;
}
}
}
grouping common-bgp-vpn-route-grouping {
description "BGP route list" ;
container routes {
config false;
description "BGP VPN Route in local RIB";
list route {
key "rd prefix neighbor add-path-id";
description "Route List";
leaf rd {
type rt-types:route-distinguisher;
description "Route Distinguisher";
}
uses route-key-leafs;
}
}
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
}
//
// BGP Specific Paramters
//
// Augment AF with route list
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-route-grouping;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-route-grouping;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-labeled-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-route-grouping;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-labeled-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-route-grouping;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv4-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-vpn-route-grouping;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv6-unicast" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route";
uses common-bgp-vpn-route-grouping;
}
// SR Policy Related
// On Demand authorized colors table
// SR Policy state data
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global" {
description
"Segment Routing parameters in BGP global model";
container segment-routing {
description "Segment Routing parameters";
container on-demand-policies {
description
"Segment Routing On Demand Nexthop
(ODN) SR Policies";
uses sr-odn-auth-colors;
uses sr-odn-policies;
}
uses sr-policy-state;
}
}
// Steering state in overlay BGP routes
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv4-labeled-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:ipv6-labeled-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv4-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/" +
"bgp:afi-safi/bgp:l3vpn-ipv6-unicast/ietf-bgp-srte:routes/ietf-bgp-srte:route" {
description
"Augment BGP SAFI route with steering info";
uses sr-policy-steering-state;
}
// BGP Signaled SR Policy explicit candidate paths state
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi" {
description "Augment IPv4 SR Policy SAFI list entry";
container ipv4-srpolicy {
when "../afi-safi-name = 'bgp-types:IPV4_SRPOLICY'" {
description
"Include this container for IPv4 SR Policy specific
configuration";
}
description "IPv4 SR Policy specific parameters";
uses sr-exp-policy-cp-state;
}
}
augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/rt:control-plane-protocol/" +
"bgp:bgp/bgp:global/bgp:afi-safis/bgp:afi-safi" {
description "Augment IPv6 SR Policy SAFI list entry";
container ipv6-srpolicy {
when "../afi-safi-name = 'bgp-types:IPV6_SRPOLICY'" {
description
"Include this container for IPv6 SR Policy specific
configuration";
}
description "IPv6 SR Policy specific parameters";
uses sr-exp-policy-cp-state;
}
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
5. Contributors
Dhanendra Jain
Cisco Systems
US
Email: dhanendra.ietf@gmail.com
Zhichun Jiang
Cisco Systems
US
Email: zcjiang@tencent.com
Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems
US
Email: zali@cisco.com
Sharmila Palani
Cisco Systems
US
Email: spalani@cisco.com
6. IANA Considerations
7. Security Considerations
The transport protocol used for sending the BGP Segment Routing data
MUST support authentication and SHOULD support encryption. The data-
model by itself does not create any security implications.
This draft does not change any underlying security issues inherent in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model].
8. Acknowledgements
TBD.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and S. Hares, "BGP YANG Model
for Service Provider Networks", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-
model-06 (work in progress), June 2019.
[I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Mattes, P., Rosen, E., Jain,
D., and S. Lin, "Advertising Segment Routing Policies in
BGP", draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-07 (work in
progress), July 2019.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d.,
bogdanov@google.com, b., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing
Policy Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-
policy-03 (work in progress), May 2019.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming]
Filsfils, C., Camarillo, P., Leddy, J.,
daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "SRv6
Network Programming", draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-
programming-01 (work in progress), July 2019.
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
[RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG",
RFC 7951, DOI 10.17487/RFC7951, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7951>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
[RFC8407] Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of
Documents Containing YANG Data Models", BCP 216, RFC 8407,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8407, October 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8407>.
Authors' Addresses
Kausik Majumdar
Cisco
170 W. Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: kmajumda@cisco.com
Kamran Raza
Cisco
2000 Innovation Drive
Kanata, ON K2K-3E8
CA
Email: skraza@cisco.com
Bruno Decraene
Orange
France
Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Yang Model for BGP Segment Routing TE July 2019
Zhichun Jiang
Tencent
Email: zcjiang@tencent.com
Majumdar, et al. Expires January 8, 2020 [Page 22]
