Internet DRAFT - draft-ogondio-opsawg-dmanm
draft-ogondio-opsawg-dmanm
Operations and Management Area Working Group O. G. D. Dios
Internet-Draft Telefonica
Intended status: Informational V. Lopez
Expires: 25 April 2024 Nokia
M. Boucadair
Orange
23 October 2023
An Approach to Expose 'Device Models'-as-'Network Models'
draft-ogondio-opsawg-dmanm-00
Abstract
This document describes an approach for exposing Device Models as
Network Models (DMaNM). In particular, this document provides
guidance for structuring a data model to facilitate the reuse of
device models within the customer-facing interface of Software-
Defined Networking (SDN) controllers. The objective of this approach
is to enhance the reusability of device models in various network
scenarios and ease the mapping between network/service models with
device models.
About This Document
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
The latest revision of this draft can be found at
https://vlopezalvarez.github.io/draft-ogondio-opsawg-dmanm/draft-
ogondio-opsawg-dmanm.html. Status information for this document may
be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ogondio-opsawg-
dmanm/.
Discussion of this document takes place on the Operations and
Management Area Working Group Working Group mailing list
(mailto:opsawg@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/. Subscribe at
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/vlopezalvarez/draft-ogondio-opsawg-dmanm.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
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 25 April 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 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
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Terminology and Notations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3. Prefix in Data Node Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Sample Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. "Device Config"-as-a-Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Guidelines to Use Device Models in the Customer-facing
Interface of SDN Controllers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Groups of Network Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. YANG Structure for Extending the Models . . . . . . . . . 8
5. DMaNM YANG Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. Groups of Network Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. Usage Example: Applying the Guidelines to The 'foo'
Module" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
Network operators need to efficiently manage network elements
throughout their infrastructure. By implementing network-wide
management and configuration practices, operators can achieve
centralized control and visibility over their network elements. This
enables them to streamline operations, monitor performance, and
promptly respond to network events. Moreover, network-wide
management facilitates the enforcement of standardized policies and
configurations, thus ensuring consistent behavior and minimizing the
risk of errors or misconfigurations that may result in service
disruptions. Additionally, it enables operators to implement
proactive actions such as performance optimization, load balancing,
and security policies across the entire network, fostering a more
secure and efficient infrastructure.
The ability to reuse device models may play a crucial role in network
management. Multiple teams within an organization, such as network
engineering, operations, and planning, can benefit from accessing
these device models. These models serve as a common language for
understanding and configuring network elements, ensuring consistency
and interoperability across different teams and systems. The
utilization of models from various teams is a key requirement for
network operators.
The IETF has made remarkable progress in defining device models to
manage network element capabilities. These device models, often
represented using YANG data modeling language, provide a structured,
standardized approach to manage various network devices and their
features. By leveraging YANG models, network operators can
effectively manage the network element functionalities. These models
not only streamline network management but also promote
interoperability between different vendors and platforms, fostering a
more efficient and robust networking ecosystem.
Some examples of these device models are:
* "ietf-routing-policy" [RFC8349]: This YANG model defines a generic
data model for managing routing policies that can be applied to
various routing protocols. The model provides a framework for
creating, modifying, and applying routing policies, which allows
defining how routes are selected, filtered, and modified. The
"ietf-routing-policy" model covers features like policy
definition, policy attachment, route filters, and route actions.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
* "ietf-bgp-policy" [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]: This YANG model
defines a data model for the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). The
"ietf-bgp-policy" model is designed to configure and manage BGP
routers and sessions, as well as provide a representation of BGP
operational state data. The model covers BGP-specific features
such as peer configuration, address families, route filters, and
route actions. The model is intended to work alongside the "ietf-
routing-policy" model to manage BGP routing policies.
* "ietf-access-list" [RFC8519]: This YANG model provides a data
model for configuring and managing network access control lists
(ACLs). This model provides a generic structure for representing
ACLs, along with the ability to define rules for permitting,
denying, or assigning a specific action to matching packets.
Software-Defined Networking (SDN) [RFC7149][RFC7426] controllers
facilitate seamless communication and coordination between high-level
management systems and the underlying network infrastructure. This
arrangement enables efficient translation of network-wide policies
and objectives, defined by the Operations Support Systems (OSS), into
granular, device-specific configurations and commands for the network
elements. A similar concept applies for orchestration scenarios like
in network slicing. Consequently, SDN controllers are typically
placed as intermediate entities between the OSS and the network
elements. Figure 1 represents this scenario, where the SDN
controller exposes its customer-facing interface to the OSS or
orchestration layer.
+-----+ +------+
| OSS | | Orch |
+-----+ +------+
^ ^
| | Customer-Facing
v v Interface
+-------------------+
| SDN Controller(s) |
+-------------------+
^ ^ ^
| | | Network-Facing
v v v Interface
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| NE1 | | NE2 | | NE3 |
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+
Figure 1: An Example of SDN Scenario
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
Figure 1 illustrates the hierarchical relationship between the OSS,
SDN controller and the network elements. Typically, the OSS acts as
the central management system responsible for overseeing the entire
network. Similarly, an orchestrator acts with a similar role in
scenarios like network slicing. The SDN controller, positioned in
the middle, acts as an intermediary, facilitating communication and
coordination between the OSS and the network elements. At the
bottom, the network elements are directly controlled and configured
by the SDN controller. This archicture enables efficient translation
of high-level network policies into device-specific configurations,
ultimately streamlining network management and decoupling the systems
from the network evolution.
Device models were defined to be applicable in the network-facing
interface of an SDN controller. As a result, these models do not
inherently possess the necessary network concepts to make them
directly applicable in the customer-facing interface of the SDN
controller.
Within the scope of the IETF, efforts can be focused on two
approaches when it comes to creating network models for device
models. The first approach involves creating network models specific
to each device model, while the second approach entails developing a
generic and reusable structure for all models. This document puts
forth a proposal for a reusable structure, aligning with the latter
approach.
The YANG data model defined in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in [RFC8342].
2. Terminology
2.1. Terminology and Notations
The document uses the following terms from [RFC8309] and [RFC8969]:
Service Model: Describes a service and the parameters of the service
in a portable way that can be used uniformly and independent of
the equipment and operating environment.
Examples of service models are the L3VPN Service Model (L3SM)
[RFC8299] and the L2VPN Service Model (L2SM) [RFC8466].
Network Model: Describes a network-level abstraction (or a subset of
aspects of a network infrastructure), including devices and their
subsystems, and relevant protocols operating at the link and
network layers across multiple devices. This model corresponds to
the network configuration model discussed in [RFC8309]. : It can
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
be used by a network operator to allocate resources (e.g., tunnel
resource, topology resource) for the service or schedule resources
to meet the service requirements defined in a service model.
Examples of network models are the L3VPN Network Model (L3NM)
[RFC9182] or the L2VPN Network Model (L2NM) [RFC9291].
Device Model: Refers to the Network Element YANG data model
described in [RFC8199] or the device configuration model discussed
in [RFC8309].
Device models are also used to refer to model a function embedded
in a device (e.g., Access Control Lists (ACLs) [RFC8519]).
2.2. 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.
2.3. Prefix in Data Node Names
In this document, names of data nodes and other data model objects
will be prefixed using the standard prefix associated with the
corresponding YANG imported modules, as shown in the following table.
+========+=====================+===========+
| Prefix | Yang Module | Reference |
+========+=====================+===========+
| ntwdev | ietf-network-device | RFCXXX |
+--------+---------------------+-----------+
Table 1: Prefixes and corresponding YANG
modules
RFC Editor Note: Please replace XXXX with the RFC number assigned to
this document. Please remove this note in that case.
3. Sample Use Cases
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
3.1. "Device Config"-as-a-Service
"Device Config"-as-a-Service involves the use of device models by an
OSS to configure network elements through an SDN controller. In this
scenario, the SDN controller acts as an intermediary between the OSS
and the network elements, providing a configuration service for each
network element.
By leveraging device models, the OSS gains a common representation of
the network elements' capabilities and configuration parameters.
These device models define the desired configuration for specific
functions, such as ACLs or routing policies. The OSS utilizes these
device models to define the desired configuration for each network
element.
Through an SDN controller, the OSS can send the configuration
instructions based on the device models to the respective network
elements. The SDN controller translates and applies the
configuration, ensuring consistency and correctness across the
network. Moreover, the mediation of the SDN controller facilitates
the access to the network elements from several users, applications
or OSS minimizing the impact on the device.
3.2. Profiles
By leveraging device models, network operators can design profile
that represent configurations for specific network functionalities,
protocols, or services. These templates serve as reusable building
blocks, encapsulating best practices, and ensuring consistency in
network configuration and management. Once a profile is created, it
can be applied to one or multiple network elements, either
individually or in groups, depending on the specific network
requirements.
This approach not only simplifies the configuration process but also
reduces the likelihood of errors and misconfigurations, ultimately
improving network stability and performance. Moreover, this process
facilitates the lifecycle of the configurations enabling updating the
profiles and, later, the network elements in a consistent manner
across multiple network elements as a network-wide operation.
4. Guidelines to Use Device Models in the Customer-facing Interface of
SDN Controllers
This section outlines two key concepts for the guidelines on
utilizing device models in the Customer-facing Interface of SDN
controllers: (1) groups of network elements and (2) a YANG structure
for extending device models to enable network-wide utilization.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
4.1. Groups of Network Elements
The management of groups of network elements is a requirement to
cover the previous use cases. It is intended to have a YANG model to
tag a group of network elements under the same identifier, so the
operator can apply a given configuration to a set of devices. This
document defines a module called "ietf-grp-ntw-elements", which
provides a structured approach to represent and manage groups of
network elements, enabling efficient network management.
The "ietf-grp-ntw-elements" module defines a YANG model for
representing a group of network elements. Within the module, there
is a list called "grp-ntw-element" that includes the groups of
network elements. Each group is uniquely identified by the "grp-ne-
id" leaf, which has a string data type and represents the group's
identifier. The "grp-ntw-element" list has a nested list called
"ntw-elements" to specify the individual network elements within each
group. The "ntw-element" list has a key of "ne-id" to uniquely
identify each network element. The "ne-id" leaf represents the
identifier of each network element and has a string data type.
Figure 2 represents the tree of the proposed YANG model. Tree
diagrams used in this document follow the notation defined in
[RFC8340].
module: ietf-grp-ntw-elements
+--rw grp-ntw-element* [grp-ne-id]
+--rw grp-ne-id string
+--rw ntw-element* [ne-id]
+--rw ne-id string
Figure 2: Group of Network Elements
4.2. YANG Structure for Extending the Models
The document proposes a structure to enable the reutilization of the
device models in network scenarios. The objective is to create a
YANG model with the device model and providing a nested structure to
store deployment information for network elements associated with
each instance in the list. The guideline is to follow the next
structure:
* An import of the device model.
* A container named deployment that includes:
* A list called "ntw-element" with the following elements:
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
* A leaf named "ne-id" of type string that serves as the network
element identifier (which is the key).
* A leaf named "devmod-alias" of type string that serves as the
device module alias for the deployment.
* A list called "grp-ntw-element" with the following elements:
- A leaf named "grp-ne-id" of type string that serves as the
network element identifier (which is the key).
- A leaf named "devmod-alias" of type string that serves as the
device module alias for the deployment.
Let us assume that there is a device model called "foo.yang". The
tree of the "foo.yang" model is shown in Figure 3.
module: foo
+--rw foo? empty
Figure 3: Foo Tree Structure
This document proposes the creation of a module that consists of a
list of instances from the "foo.yang" model. To iterate through the
list, a key named "devmod-name" must be defined, which will be a
string. Additionally, the new model will import "foo.yang". Lastly,
a container called "deployment" will encompass a list of network
elements, with each element identified by the "ne-id" and having a
"devmod-alias" as an alias for the "devmod-name" configuration in the
network element.
An example of the proposed structure is shown in Figure 4.
module: foo-ntwdev
+--rw devmod-list* [devmod-name]
+--rw devmod-name string
+--rw foo? -> /foo:foo
+--rw deployment
+--rw ntw-element* [ne-id]
| +--rw ne-id string
| +--rw devmod-alias? string
+--rw grp-ntw-element* [grp-ne-id]
+--rw grp-ne-id string
+--rw devmod-alias? string
Figure 4: Usage Example for 'foo' Module
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
5. DMaNM YANG Model
5.1. Groups of Network Elements
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-grp-ntw-elements@2023-10-23.yang"
module ietf-grp-ntw-elements {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-grp-ntw-elements";
prefix "grp";
organization
"IETF OPSA (Operations and Management Area) Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/>
WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Editor: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
<mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>
Editor: Victor Lopez
<mailto:victor.lopez@nokia.com>
Editor: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>";
description
"YANG model for group of network elements.
Copyright (c) 2023 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 "2023-10-23" {
description "Initial revision.";
reference "RFC XXXX: An Approach to Expose 'Device Models'
-as-'Network Models'";
}
list grp-ntw-element {
key "grp-ne-id";
description "List of groups of network elements.";
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
leaf grp-ne-id {
type string;
description "Group of network element identifier.";
}
list ntw-element {
key "ne-id";
description "List of network elements.";
leaf ne-id {
type string;
description "Network element identifier.";
}
}
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
5.2. Usage Example: Applying the Guidelines to The 'foo' Module"
module foo-ntwdev {
namespace "urn:example:foo-ntwdev";
prefix "netdevfoo";
import foo {
prefix "foo";
}
organization "Example Organization";
contact "example@example.com";
description "YANG model for foo-dev.";
revision "2023-10-23" {
description "Initial revision.";
reference "RFC XXXX: YANG Model for foo-dev";
}
leaf foo {
type leafref {
path "/foo:foo";
}
description "Reference to foo leaf from foo.yang";
}
container deployment {
description "Deployment container.";
list ntw-element {
key "ne-id";
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
description "List of network elements.";
leaf ne-id {
type string;
description "Network element identifier.";
}
leaf devmod-alias {
type string;
description "Device module alias for the deployment.";
}
}
list grp-ntw-element {
key "grp-ne-id";
description "List of group of network elements.";
leaf grp-ne-id {
type string;
description "Group of network element identifier.";
}
leaf devmod-alias {
type string;
description "Device module alias for the deployment.";
}
}
}
}
6. Security Considerations
The YANG module specified in this document defines 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 this YANG module 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
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
or authentication can have a negative effect on network operations.
These are the subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/
vulnerability in the "xxx" module:
* TBC
* TBC
Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module 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. These are the subtrees and data
nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability in the "ixxx" module:
* TBC
* TBC
7. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register the following URI in the "ns"
subregistry within the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688]:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:xxxx Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
IANA is requested to register the following YANG module in the "YANG
Module Names" registry [RFC6020] within the "YANG Parameters"
registry group.
Name: xxx Maintained by IANA? N Namespace:
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:xxx Prefix: xxx Reference: RFC xxxx
8. Implementation Status
This section will be used to track the status of the implementations
of the model. It is aimed at being removed if the document becomes
RFC.
9. Normative 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>.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC7149] Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software-Defined
Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider
Environment", RFC 7149, DOI 10.17487/RFC7149, March 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7149>.
[RFC7426] Haleplidis, E., Ed., Pentikousis, K., Ed., Denazis, S.,
Hadi Salim, J., Meyer, D., and O. Koufopavlou, "Software-
Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture
Terminology", RFC 7426, DOI 10.17487/RFC7426, January
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7426>.
[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>.
[RFC8199] Bogdanovic, D., Claise, B., and C. Moberg, "YANG Module
Classification", RFC 8199, DOI 10.17487/RFC8199, July
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8199>.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
[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>.
[RFC8309] Wu, Q., Liu, W., and A. Farrel, "Service Models
Explained", RFC 8309, DOI 10.17487/RFC8309, January 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8309>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC8519] Jethanandani, M., Agarwal, S., Huang, L., and D. Blair,
"YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs)",
RFC 8519, DOI 10.17487/RFC8519, March 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8519>.
[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>.
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft DMaNM October 2023
[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>.
Acknowledgments
TODO acknowledge.
Authors' Addresses
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
Telefonica
Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
Victor Lopez
Nokia
Email: victor.lopez@nokia.com
Mohamed Boucadair
Orange
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Dios, et al. Expires 25 April 2024 [Page 16]
