L2SM Working Group B. Wen
Internet-Draft Comcast
Intended status: Standards Track G. Fioccola, Ed.
Expires: July 19, 2018 Telecom Italia
C. Xie
China Telecom
L. Jalil
Verizon
January 15, 2018
A YANG Data Model for L2VPN Service Delivery
draft-ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model-05
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to configure
a Layer 2 Provider Provisioned VPN service.
This model is intended to be instantiated at management system to
deliver the overall service. This model is not a configuration model
to be used directly on network elements, but provides an abstracted
view of the Layer 2 VPN service configuration components. It is up
to a management system to take this as an input and generate specific
configurations models to configure the different network elements to
deliver the service. How configuration of network elements is done
is out of scope of the document.
The data model in this document includes support for point-to-point
Virtual Private Wire Services (VPWS) and multipoint Virtual Private
LAN services (VPLS) that use Pseudowires signaled using the Label
Distribution Protocol (LDP) and the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) as
described in RFC4761 and RFC6624.
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.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
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 July 19, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Tree diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. The Layer 2 VPN Service Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Layer 2 VPN Service Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Layer 2 VPN Physical Network Topology . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Service Data Model Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Design of the Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. Features and Augmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.2. VPN Service Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2.1. VPN Service Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2.2. VPN Service Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2.2.1. Route Target Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2.2.2. Any-to-Any . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2.2.3. Hub and Spoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.2.4. Hub and Spoke Disjoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.3. Cloud Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.2.4. Extranet VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
5.2.5. Frame Delivery Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.3. Site Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.3.1. Devices and Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.3.2. Site Network Accesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.3.2.1. Bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.3.2.2. Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.4. Site Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.5. Site Belonging to Multiple VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.5.1. Site VPN Flavor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.5.1.1. Single VPN Attachment: site-vpn-flavor-single . . 37
5.5.1.2. MultiVPN Attachment: site-vpn-flavor-multi . . . 37
5.5.1.3. NNI: site-vpn-flavor-nni . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.5.1.4. E2E: site-vpn-flavor-e2e . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.5.2. Attaching a Site to a VPN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.5.2.1. Referencing a VPN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.5.2.2. VPN Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.6. Deciding Where to Connect the Site . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.6.1. Constraint: Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.6.2. Constraint/Parameter: Site Location . . . . . . . . . 44
5.6.3. Constraint/Parameter: Access Type . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.6.4. Constraint: Access Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.7. Route Distinguisher and Network Instance Allocation . . . 48
5.8. Site Network Access Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.9. SVC MTU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.10. Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.10.1. Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.10.2. QoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.10.2.1. QoS Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.10.2.2. QoS Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.10.3. Broadcast Multicast Unknow Unicast Support . . . . . 54
5.11. Site Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.12. MAC Loop Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.13. MAC Address Limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.14. Enhanced VPN Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.14.1. Carriers' Carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.15. External ID References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.16. Defining NNIs and Inter-AS support . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.16.1. Defining an NNI with the Option A Flavor . . . . . . 59
5.16.2. Defining an NNI with the Option B Flavor . . . . . . 62
5.16.3. Defining an NNI with the Option C Flavor . . . . . . 64
5.17. Applicability of L2SM model in Inter-Provider and Inter-
Domain Orchestration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6. Interaction with Other YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
7. Service Model Usage Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
8. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Appendix A. Changes Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
1. Introduction
This document defines a YANG data model for Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN)
service configuration. This model is intended to be instantiated at
management system to allow a user (a customer or an application) to
request the service from a service provider. This model is not a
configuration model to be used directly on network elements, but
provides an abstracted view of the L2VPN service configuration
components. It is up to a management system to take this as an input
and generate specific configurations models to configure the
different network elements to deliver the service. How configuration
of network elements is done is out of scope of the document.
The data model in this document includes support for point-to-point
Virtual Private Wire Services (VPWS) and multipoint Virtual Private
LAN services (VPLS) that use Pseudowires signaled using the Label
Distribution Protocol (LDP) and the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) as
described in [RFC4761] and [RFC6624].
Further discussion of the way that services are modeled in YANG and
the relationship between "customer service models" like the one
described in this document and configuration models can be found in
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained] and [RFC8199]. Section 4
and Section 6 also provide more information of how this service model
could be used and how it fits into the overall modeling architecture.
1.1. Terminology
The following terms are defined in [RFC6241] and are not redefined
here:
o client
o configuration data
o server
o state data
The following terms are defined in [RFC6020] and are not redefined
here:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o augment
o data model
o data node
The terminology for describing YANG data models is found in
[RFC6020].
1.2. Tree diagram
A simplified graphical representation of the data model is presented
in Section 5.
The meaning of the symbols in these diagrams is as follows:
o Brackets "[" and "]" enclose list keys.
o Curly braces "{" and "}" contain names of optional features that
make the corresponding node conditional.
o Abbreviations before data node names: "rw" means configuration
(read-write), and "ro" state data (read-only).
o Symbols after data node names: "?" means an optional node and "*"
denotes a "list" or "leaf-list".
o Parentheses enclose choice and case nodes, and case nodes are also
marked with a colon (":").
o Ellipsis ("...") stands for contents of subtrees that are not
shown.
2. Definitions
This document uses the following terms:
Service Provider (SP): The organization (usually a commercial
undertaking) responsible for operating the network that offers VPN
services to clients and customers.
Customer Edge (CE) Device: Equipment that is dedicated to a
particular customer and is directly connected to one or more PE
devices via attachment circuits. A CE is usually located at the
customer premises, and is usually dedicated to a single VPN,
although it may support multiple VPNs if each one has separate
attachment circuits. The CE devices can be routers, bridges,
switches, or hosts.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Provider Edge (PE) Device: Equipment managed by the SP that can
support multiple VPNs for different customers, and is directly
connected to one or more CE devices via attachment circuits. A PE
is usually located at an SP point of presence (PoP) and is managed
by the SP.
Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS): A VPLS is a provider service
that emulates the full functionality of a traditional Local Area
Network (LAN). A VPLS makes it possible to interconnect several
LAN segments over a packet switched network (PSN) and makes the
remote LAN segments behave as one single LAN.
Virtual Private Wire Service (VPWS): A VPWS is a point-to-point
circuit (i.e., link) connecting two CE devices. The link is
established as a logical through a packet switched network. The
CE in the customer network is connected to a PE in the provider
network via an Attachment Circuit (AC): the AC is either a
physical or a logical circuit. A VPWS differs from a VPLS in that
the VPLS is point-to-multipoint, while the VPWS is point-to-point.
In some implementations, a set of VPWSs is used to create a multi-
site L2VPN network.
Pseudowire(PW): A pseudowire is an emulation of a native service
over a packet switched network (PSN). The native service may be
ATM, frame relay, Ethernet, low-rate TDM, or SONET/SDH, while the
PSN may be MPLS, IP (either IPv4 or IPv6), or L2TPv3.
MAC-VRF: A Virtual Routing and Forwarding table for Media Access
Control (MAC) addresses on a PE. It is sometime also referred to
VSI.
UNI: The physical demarcation point between the responsibility of
Customer and the responsibility of Provider.
NNI: a reference point representing the boundary between two
Networks that are operated as separate administrative domains.
The two networks may belong to the same provider or two different
providers.
This document uses the following abbreviations:
BSS: Business Support System
B-U-M: Broadcast-UnknownUnicast-Multicast
CoS: Class of Service
LAG: Link Aggregation Group
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
LLDP: Link Level Discovery Protocol
OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
OSS: Operations Support System
PDU: Protocol Data Unit
QoS: Quality of Service
VSI: Virtual Switching Instance
UNI: User to Network Interface
NNI: Network to Network Interface
3. The Layer 2 VPN Service Model
A Layer 2 VPN service is a collection of sites that are authorized to
exchange traffic between each other over a shared infrastructure of a
common technology. This Layer 2 VPN service model (L2SM) provides a
common understanding of how the corresponding Layer 2 VPN service is
to be deployed over the shared infrastructure.
This document presents the L2SM using the YANG data modeling language
[RFC6020] as a formal language that is both human-readable and
parsable by software for use with protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241]
and RESTCONF [RFC8040].
This service model is limited to VPWS and VPLS based VPNs as
described in [RFC4761] and [RFC6624], EVPN as described in [RFC7432].
3.1. Layer 2 VPN Service Types
From technology perspective, a set of basic L2VPN service types
include:
o Point-to-point Virtual Private Wire Services (VPWS) that use LDP-
signaled Psedowires or L2TP-signaled Psedowires [RFC6074];
o Multipoint Virtual Private LAN services (VPLS) that use LDP-
signaled Pseudowires or L2TP-signaled Psedowires [RFC6074];
o Multipoint Virtual Private LAN services (VPLS) that use a Border
Gateway Protocol (BGP) control plane as described in [RFC4761]
and[RFC6624] ;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o IP-Only LAN-Like Service (IPLS) which is a functional subset of
the VPLS service [RFC4664] ;
o BGP MPLS-based Ethernet VPN Servie [RFC7432][RFC7209];
o Ethernet VPN VPWS specified in [RFC8214] and [RFC7432];
3.2. Layer 2 VPN Physical Network Topology
Figure 1depicts a typical service provider's physical network
topology. Most service providers have deployed an IP, MPLS, or
Segment Routing (SR) multi-service core infrastructure. Ingress
Layer 2 service frames will be mapped to either Ethernet Pseudowire
(PWE) or VxLAN PE-to-PE tunnel. The details of these tunneling
mechanism are at the provider's discretion and not part of the L2SM.
A L2VPN provides end-to-end L2 connectivity over this multi-service
core infrastructure between two or more locations of Customers or a
collection of sites. Attachment Circuit are placed between CE
devices and PE Devices that backhaul layer 2 service frames from the
customer over the access network to the Provider Network or remote
Site. The demarcation point (i.e.,UNI) between customer and service
provider can be either placed between C and Customer Edge Device or
between Customer Edge Device and Provider Edge Device. The actual
bearer, connection between CE and PE will be discussed in the L2SM
model.
The service provider may also choose a Seamless MPLS approach to
expand the PWE or VxLAN tunnel between sites.
The service provider may leverage multi-protocol BGP to auto-discover
and signal the PWE or VxLAN tunnel end points.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Site A | |Site B
--- ---- | VXLAN/PW | ---
| | | | |<------------------------>| | |
| C +---+ CE | | | | C |
| | | | | --------- | | |
--- ----\ | ( ) | /---
\ -|-- ( ) -|-- ---- /
\| | ( ) | | | |/
| PE +---+ IP/MPLS/SR +---+ PE +---+ CE |
/| | ( Network ) | | | |\
/ ---- ( ) ---- ---- \
--- ----/ ( ) \---
| | | | ----+---- | |
| C +---+ CE | | | C |
| | | | --+-- | |
--- ---- | PE | ---
--+--
| Site C
--+--
| CE |
--+--
|
--+--
| C |
-----
Figure 1: Reference Network for the Use of the L2VPN Service Model
From the customer perspective, however, all the customer edge devices
are connected over a simulated LAN environment as shown in Figure 2.
Broadcast and multicast packets are sent to all participants in the
same bridge domain.
CE---+----+---+---CE
| | |
| | |
| | |
CE---+ CE +---CE
Figure 2: Customer View of the L2VPN
4. Service Data Model Usage
The L2VPN service model provides an abstracted interface to request,
configure, and manage the components of a L2VPN service. The model
is used by a customer who purchases connectivity and other services
from an SP to communicate with that SP.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
A typical usage for this model is to be an input to an orchestration
layer that is responsible for translating it into configuration
commands for the network elements that deliver/enable the service.
The network elements may be routers, but also servers (like AAA) that
are necessary within the network.
The configuration of network elements may be done using the Command
Line Interface (CLI), or any other configuration (or "southbound")
interface such as NETCONF [RFC6241] in combination with device-
specific and protocol-specific YANG models.
This way of using the service model is illustrated in Figure 3 and
described in more detail in [I-D.ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained]
and [RFC8199]. The usage of this service model is not limited to
this example: it can be used by any component of the management
system, but not directly by network elements.
The usage and structure of this model should be compared to the Layer
3 VPN service model defined in [RFC8049].
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
----------------------------
| Customer Service Requester |
----------------------------
|
L2VPN |
Service |
Model |
|
-----------------------
| Service Orchestration |
-----------------------
|
| Service +-------------+
| Delivery +------>| Application |
| Model | | BSS/OSS |
| V +-------------+
-----------------------
| Network Orchestration |
-----------------------
| |
+----------------+ |
| Config manager | |
+----------------+ | Device
| | Models
| |
--------------------------------------------
Network
+++++++
+ AAA +
+++++++
++++++++ Bearer ++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
+ CE A + ----------- + PE A + + PE B + ---- + CE B +
++++++++ Connection ++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
Site A Site B
Figure 3: Reference Architecture for the Use of the L2VPN Service
Model
5. Design of the Data Model
The L2SM model is structured in a way that allows the provider to
list multiple circuits of various service types for the same
customer.A circuit represents an end-to-end connection between two or
more locations of Customers.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
The YANG module is divided in two main containers: vpn-services, and
sites. The vpn-svc container under vpn-services defines global
parameters for the VPN service for a specific customer.
A site contains at least one network access (i.e., site network
accesses providing access to the sites defined in Section 5.3.2) and
there may be multiple network accesses in case of multihoming. The
site to network access attachment is done through a bearer with a
Layer 2 connection on top. The bearer refers to properties of the
attachment that are below layer 2 while the connection refers to
layer 2 protocol oriented properties. The bearer may be allocated
dynamically by the service provider and the customer may provide some
constraints or parameters to drive the placement.
Authorization of traffic exchange is done through what we call a VPN
policy or VPN topology defining routing exchange rules between sites.
An end to end Multi-segment connectivity can be realized using
combination of Per Site connectivity and Per Segment connectivity at
different segments.
The figure below describe the overall structure of the YANG module:
module: ietf-l2vpn-svc
+--rw l2vpn-svc
+--rw vpn-profiles
| +--rw valid-provider-identifiers
| +--rw cloud-identifier* [id] {cloud-access}?
| | +--rw id string
| +--rw qos-profile-identifier* [id]
| +--rw id string
+--rw vpn-services
| +--rw vpn-service* [vpn-id]
| +--rw vpn-id svc-id
| +--rw svc-type? identityref
| +--rw customer-name? string
| +--rw svc-topo? identityref
| +--rw cloud-accesses {cloud-access}?
| | +--rw cloud-access* [cloud-identifier]
| | +--rw cloud-identifier leafref
| | +--rw (list-flavor)?
| | +--:(permit-any)
| | | +--rw permit-any? empty
| | +--:(deny-any-except)
| | | +--rw permit-site*
-> /l2vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id
| | +--:(permit-any-except)
| | +--rw deny-site*
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
-> /l2vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id
| +--rw frame-delivery {frame-delivery}?
| | +--rw customer-tree-flavors
| | | +--rw tree-flavor* identityref
| | +--rw bum-frame-delivery
| | | +--rw bum-frame-delivery* [frame-type]
| | | +--rw frame-type identityref
| | | +--rw delivery-mode? identityref
| | +--rw multicast-gp-port-mapping identityref
| +--rw extranet-vpns {extranet-vpn}?
| | +--rw extranet-vpn* [vpn-id]
| | +--rw vpn-id svc-id
| | +--rw local-sites-role? identityref
| +--rw ce-vlan-preservation? boolean
| +--rw ce-vlan-cos-perservation? boolean
| +--rw carrierscarrier? boolean {carrierscarrier}?
+--rw sites
+--rw site* [site-id]
+--rw site-id string
+--rw site-vpn-flavor? identityref
+--rw devices
| +--rw device* [device-id]
| +--rw device-id string
| +--rw location
-> ../../../locations/location/location-id
| +--rw management
| +--rw management-transport? identityref
| +--rw address? inet:ip-address
+--rw locations
| +--rw location* [location-id]
| +--rw location-id string
| +--rw address? string
| +--rw zip-code? string
| +--rw state? string
| +--rw city? string
| +--rw country-code? string
+--rw management
| +--rw type identityref
+--rw site-diversity {site-diversity}?
| +--rw groups
| +--rw group* [group-id]
| +--rw group-id string
+--rw vpn-policies
| +--rw vpn-policy* [vpn-policy-id]
| +--rw vpn-policy-id string
| +--rw entries* [id]
| +--rw id string
| +--rw filters
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
| | +--rw filter* [type]
| | +--rw type identityref
| | +--rw lan-tag* uint32 {lan-tag}?
| +--rw vpn* [vpn-id]
| +--rw vpn-id leafref
| +--rw site-role? identityref
+--rw service
| +--rw svc-bandwidth {input-bw}?
| | +--rw bandwidth* [direction type]
| | +--rw direction identityref
| | +--rw type identityref
| | +--rw cos-id? uint8
| | +--rw vpn-id? svc-id
| | +--rw cir? uint64
| | +--rw cbs? uint64
| | +--rw eir? uint64
| | +--rw ebs? uint64
| | +--rw pir? uint64
| | +--rw pbs? uint64
| +--rw svc-mtu uint16
| +--rw qos {qos}?
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rule* [id]
| | | +--rw id string
| | | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | | +--rw dscp? inet:dscp
| | | | | +--rw dot1q? uint16
| | | | | +--rw pcp? uint8
| | | | | +--rw src-mac? yang:mac-address
| | | | | +--rw dst-mac? yang:mac-address
| | | | | +--rw color-type? identityref
| | | | | +--rw target-sites* svc-id {target-sites}?
| | | | | +--rw any? empty
| | | | | +--rw vpn-id? svc-id
| | | | +--:(match-phy-port)
| | | | | +--rw match-phy-port? uint16
| | | | +--:(match-application)
| | | | +--rw match-application? identityref
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw qos-profile
| | +--rw (qos-profile)?
| | +--:(standard)
| | | +--rw profile? leafref
| | +--:(custom)
| | +--rw classes {qos-custom}?
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
| | +--rw class-id string
| | +--rw direction? identityref
| | +--rw policing? identityref
| | +--rw byte-offset? uint16
| | +--rw frame-delay
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
| | | +--:(lowest)
| | | | +--rw use-lowest-latency? empty
| | | +--:(boundary)
| | | +--rw delay-bound? uint16
| | +--rw frame-jitter
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
| | | +--:(lowest)
| | | | +--rw use-lowest-jitter? empty
| | | +--:(boundary)
| | | +--rw delay-bound? uint32
| | +--rw frame-loss
| | | +--rw fr-loss-rate? decimal64
| | +--rw bandwidth
| | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent decimal64
| | +--rw end-to-end? empty
| +--rw carrierscarrier {carrierscarrier}?
| +--rw signalling-type? identityref
+--rw broadcast-unknown-unicast-multicast
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-gp-address-mapping* [id]
| | +--rw id uint16
| | +--rw vlan-id? uint32
| | +--rw mac-gp-address? yang:mac-address
| | +--rw port-lag-number? uint32
| +--rw bum-overall-rate? uint32
| +--rw bum-rate-per-type* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw rate? uint32
+--rw mac-loop-prevention
| +--rw frequency? uint32
| +--rw protection-type? identityref
| +--rw number-retries? uint32
+--rw access-control-list
| +--rw mac* [mac-address]
| +--rw mac-address yang:mac-address
+--ro actual-site-start? yang:date-and-time
+--ro actual-site-stop? yang:date-and-time
+--rw bundling-type? identityref
+--rw default-ce-vlan-id? uint32
+--rw site-network-accesses
+--rw site-network-access* [network-access-id]
+--rw network-access-id string
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
+--rw remote-carrier-name? string
+--rw site-network-access-type? identityref
+--rw (location-flavor)
| +--:(location)
| | +--rw location-reference? leafref
| +--:(device)
| +--rw device-reference?
-> ../../../devices/device/device-id
+--rw access-diversity {site-diversity}?
| +--rw groups
| | +--rw fate-sharing-group-size? uint16
| | +--rw group-color? string
| | +--rw group* [group-id]
| | +--rw group-id string
| +--rw 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 bearer
| +--rw requested-type {requested-type}?
| | +--rw requested-type? string
| | +--rw strict? boolean
| +--rw always-on? boolean {always-on}?
| +--rw bearer-reference? string {bearer-reference}?
+--rw connection
| +--rw encapsulation-type? identityref
| +--rw eth-inf-type? identityref
| +--rw tagged-interface
| | +--rw tagged-inf-type? identityref
| | +--rw dot1q-vlan-tagged {dot1q}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw cvlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw priority-tagged
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | +--rw qinq {qinq}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
| | | +--rw svlan-id? uint16
| | | +--rw cvlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw qinany {qinany}?
| | | +--rw tag-type? identityref
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
| | | +--rw svlan-id? uint16
| | +--rw vxlan {vxlan}?
| | +--rw vni-id? uint32
| | +--rw peer-mode? identityref
| | +--rw peer-list* [peer-ip]
| | +--rw peer-ip inet:ip-address
| +--rw untagged-interface
| | +--rw ifindex? uint32
| | +--rw port-speed? uint32
| | +--rw mode? neg-mode
| | +--rw phy-mtu? uint32
| | +--rw flow-control? string
| | +--rw lldp? boolean
| | +--rw oam-802.3ah-link {oam-3ah}?
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | +--rw uni-loop-prevention? boolean
| +--rw lag-interface {lag-interface}?
| | +--rw lag-interface* [lag-ifindex]
| | +--rw lag-ifindex uint32
| | +--rw lacp
| | +--rw lacp-state? boolean
| | +--rw lacp-mode? boolean
| | +--rw lacp-speed? uint32
| | +--rw mini-link? uint32
| | +--rw system-priority? uint16
| | +--rw micro-bfd {micro-bfd}?
| | | +--rw micro-bfd-on-off? enumeration
| | | +--rw bfd-interval? uint32
| | | +--rw bfd-hold-timer? uint32
| | +--rw bfd {bfd}?
| | | +--rw bfd-enabled? boolean
| | | +--rw (holdtime)?
| | | +--:(profile)
| | | | +--rw profile-name? string
| | | +--:(fixed)
| | | +--rw fixed-value? uint32
| | +--rw member-link-list
| | | +--rw member-link* [name]
| | | +--rw name string
| | | +--rw port-speed? uint32
| | | +--rw mode? neg-mode
| | | +--rw link-mtu? uint32
| | | +--rw oam-802.3ah-link {oam-3ah}?
| | | +--rw enable? boolean
| | +--rw flow-control? string
| | +--rw lldp? boolean
| +--rw cvlan-id-to-svc-map* [svc-id]
| | +--rw svc-id
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
-> /l2vpn-svc/vpn-services/vpn-service/vpn-id
| | +--rw cvlan-id* [vid]
| | +--rw vid uint16
| +--rw l2cp-control {L2CP-control}?
| | +--rw stp-rstp-mstp? control-mode
| | +--rw pause? control-mode
| | +--rw lacp-lamp? control-mode
| | +--rw link-oam? control-mode
| | +--rw esmc? control-mode
| | +--rw l2cp-802.1x? control-mode
| | +--rw e-lmi? control-mode
| | +--rw lldp? boolean
| | +--rw ptp-peer-delay? control-mode
| | +--rw garp-mrp? control-mode
| +--rw oam
| +--rw md-name? string
| +--rw md-level? uint8
| +--rw cfm-802.1-ag* [maid]
| | +--rw maid string
| | +--rw mep-id? uint32
| | +--rw mep-level? uint32
| | +--rw mep-up-down? enumeration
| | +--rw remote-mep-id? uint32
| | +--rw cos-for-cfm-pdus? uint32
| | +--rw ccm-interval? uint32
| | +--rw ccm-holdtime? uint32
| | +--rw alarm-priority-defect? identityref
| | +--rw ccm-p-bits-pri? ccm-priority-type
| +--rw y-1731* [maid]
| +--rw maid string
| +--rw mep-id? uint32
| +--rw type? identityref
| +--rw remote-mep-id? uint32
| +--rw message-period? uint32
| +--rw measurement-interval? uint32
| +--rw cos? uint32
| +--rw loss-measurement? boolean
| +--rw synthethic-loss-measurement? boolean
| +--rw delay-measurement
| | +--rw enable-dm? boolean
| | +--rw two-way? boolean
| +--rw frame-size? uint32
| +--rw session-type? enumeration
+--rw availability
| +--rw access-priority? uint32
| +--rw (redundancy-mode)?
| +--:(single-active)
| | +--rw single-active? boolean
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
| +--:(all-active)
| +--rw all-active? boolean
+--rw vpn-attachment
| +--rw attachment-device-id? string
| +--rw management
| | +--rw address-family? identityref
| | +--rw address inet:ip-address
| +--rw (attachment-flavor)
| +--:(vpn-policy-id)
| | +--rw vpn-policy-id? leafref
| +--:(vpn-id)
| | +--rw vpn-id? leafref
| | +--rw site-role? identityref
+--rw service
| +--rw qos {qos}?
| | +--rw qos-classification-policy
| | | +--rw rule* [id]
| | | +--rw id string
| | | +--rw (match-type)?
| | | | +--:(match-flow)
| | | | | +--rw match-flow
| | | | | +--rw dscp? inet:dscp
| | | | | +--rw dot1q? uint16
| | | | | +--rw pcp? uint8
| | | | | +--rw src-mac? yang:mac-address
| | | | | +--rw dst-mac? yang:mac-address
| | | | | +--rw color-type? identityref
| | | | | +--rw target-sites* svc-id {target-sites}?
| | | | | +--rw any? empty
| | | | | +--rw vpn-id? svc-id
| | | | +--:(match-phy-port)
| | | | | +--rw match-phy-port? uint16
| | | | +--:(match-application)
| | | | +--rw match-application? identityref
| | | +--rw target-class-id? string
| | +--rw qos-profile
| | +--rw (qos-profile)?
| | +--:(standard)
| | | +--rw profile? -> /l2vpn-svc/vpn-profiles/valid-provider-identifiers/qos-profile-identifier/id
| | +--:(custom)
| | +--rw classes {qos-custom}?
| | +--rw class* [class-id]
| | +--rw class-id string
| | +--rw direction? identityref
| | +--rw policing? identityref
| | +--rw byte-offset? uint16
| | +--rw frame-delay
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
| | | +--:(lowest)
| | | | +--rw use-lowest-latency? empty
| | | +--:(boundary)
| | | +--rw delay-bound? uint16
| | +--rw frame-jitter
| | | +--rw (flavor)?
| | | +--:(lowest)
| | | | +--rw use-lowest-jitter? empty
| | | +--:(boundary)
| | | +--rw delay-bound? uint32
| | +--rw frame-loss
| | | +--rw fr-loss-rate? decimal64
| | +--rw bandwidth
| | +--rw guaranteed-bw-percent decimal64
| | +--rw end-to-end? empty
| +--rw carrierscarrier {carrierscarrier}?
| +--rw signalling-type? identityref
+--rw broadcast-unknown-unicast-multicast
| +--rw multicast-site-type? enumeration
| +--rw multicast-gp-address-mapping* [id]
| | +--rw id uint16
| | +--rw vlan-id? uint32
| | +--rw mac-gp-address? yang:mac-address
| | +--rw port-lag-number? uint32
| +--rw bum-overall-rate? uint32
| +--rw bum-rate-per-type* [type]
| +--rw type identityref
| +--rw rate? uint32
+--rw mac-loop-prevention
| +--rw frequency? uint32
| +--rw protection-type? identityref
| +--rw number-retries? uint32
+--rw access-control-list
| +--rw mac* [mac-address]
| +--rw mac-address yang:mac-address
+--rw mac-addr-limit
+--rw mac-num-limit? uint16
+--rw time-interval? uint32
+--rw action? identityref
Figure 4
5.1. Features and Augmentation
The model defined in this document implements many features that
allow implementations to be modular. As an example, the layer 2
protocols parameters (Section 5.3.3.2) proposed to the customer may
also be enabled through features. This model also proposes some
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
features for options that are more advanced, such as support for
extranet VPNs (Section 5.2.6), site diversity (Section 5.6), and QoS
(Section 5.10.2).
In addition, as for any YANG model, this service model can be
augmented to implement new behaviors or specific features. For
example, this model proposes VXLAN [RFC7348] for Ethernet packet
Encapsulation; if VXLAN Encapsulation do not fulfill all
requirements, new options can be added through augmentation.
5.2. VPN Service Overview
A vpn-service list item contains generic information about the VPN
service. The vpn-id of the vpn-service refers to an internal
reference for this VPN service. This identifier is purely internal
to the organization responsible for the VPN service.
A vpn-service is composed of some characteristics:
Customer information: Used to identify the customer.
VPN Service Type (svc-type): Used to indicate VPN service Type. The
identifier is a string allowing to any encoding for the local
administration of the VPN service.
Cloud Access (cloud-access): All sites in the L2VPN MUST be
authorized to access to the cloud.The cloud-access container
provides parameters for authorization rules. A cloud identifier
is used to reference the target service. This identifier is local
to each administration.
Service Topology (svc-topo): Used to identify the type of VPN
service topology is required for configuration.
Frame Delivery Service (frame-delivery): Provide frame Delivery
support for L2VPN,e.g.,multicast delivery, unicast delivery,
broadcast delivery.
Extranet VPN (extranet-vpns): Allow a particular VPN needs access to
resources located in another VPN.
5.2.1. VPN Service Type
The "svc-type" defines service type for provider provisioned L2VPNs.
The current version of the model supports ten flavors:
o Point-to-point Virtual Private Wire Services (VPWS) connecting two
customer Sites;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o Point-to-point or point-to-multipoint Virtual Private Wire
Services (VPWS) connecting a set of customer sites [RFC8214];
o Multipoint Virtual Private LAN services (VPLS) connecting a set of
customer sites;
o Multipoint Virtual Private LAN services (VPLS) connecting one or
more root sites and a set of leave sites, but preventing inter-
leaf sites communication.
o EVPN Service connecting a set of customer sites.
o Ethernet VPN VPWS between two customer sites or a set of customer
sites specified in [RFC8214] and [RFC7432];
Other L2VPN Service Type could be included by augmentation. Note
that EPL service and EVPL service are E-Line service or point to
point EVC service while EP-LAN service and EVP-LAN service are E-LAN
service or multiple point to multipoint EVC service.
5.2.2. VPN Service Topology
The type of VPN service topology can be used for configuration if
needed. The module currently supports: any-to-any, hub and spoke
(where hubs can exchange traffic),hub and spoke disjoint(where Hubs
cannot exchange traffic). New topologies could be added by
augmentation. By default, the any-to-any VPN service topology is
used.
5.2.2.1. Route Target Allocation
A Layer 2 PE-based VPN (such as VPLS based VPN or EVPN that uses BGP
as signaling protocol ) can be built using route targets (RTs) as
described in [RFC4364][RFC7432]. The management system is expected
to automatically allocate a set of RTs upon receiving a VPN service
creation request. How the management system allocates RTs is out of
scope for this document, but multiple ways could be envisaged, as
described in the section 6.2.1.1 of [RFC8049].
5.2.2.2. Any-to-Any
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| VPN1_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ VPN1_Site2 |
| |
| VPN1_Site3 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ VPN1_Site4 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Any-to-Any VPN Service Topology
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
In the any-to-any VPN service topology, all VPN sites can communicate
with each other without any restrictions. The management system that
receives an any-to-any L2VPN service request through this model is
expected to assign and then configure the MAC-VRF and RTs on the
appropriate PEs. In the any-to-any case, a single RT is generally
required, and every MAC-VRF imports and exports this RT.
5.2.2.3. Hub and Spoke
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
| +----------------------------------+
| |
| +----------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Hub-and-Spoke VPN Service Topology
In the Hub-and-Spoke VPN service topology, all Spoke sites can
communicate only with Hub sites but not with each other, and Hubs can
also communicate with each other. The management system that owns a
Hub and Spoke L2 VPN service request through this model is expected
to assign and then configure the MAC-VRF and RTs on the appropriate
PEs. In the Hub-and-Spoke case, two RTs are generally required (one
RT for Hub routes and one RT for Spoke routes). A Hub MAC-VRF that
connects Hub sites will export Hub routes with the Hub RT and will
import Spoke routes through the Spoke RT. It will also import the
Hub RT to allow Hub-to-Hub communication. A Spoke MAC-VRF that
connects Spoke sites will export Spoke routes with the Spoke RT and
will import Hub routes through the Hub RT.
5.2.2.4. Hub and Spoke Disjoint
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hub_Site1 ------ PE1 PE2 ------ Spoke_Site1 |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| |
+--------------------------+ +-------------------------------+
| Hub_Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Spoke_Site2 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Hub and Spoke Disjoint VPN Service Topology
In the Hub and Spoke disjoint VPN service topology, all Spoke sites
can communicate only with Hub sites but not with each other, and Hubs
cannot communicate with each other. The management system that owns
a Hub and Spoke Disjoint L2VPN service request through this model is
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
expected to assign and then configure the VRF and RTs on the
appropriate PEs. In the Hub-and-Spoke case, two RTs are required
(one RT for Hub routes and one RT for Spoke routes). A Hub VRF that
connects Hub sites will export Hub routes with the Hub RT and will
import Spoke routes through the Spoke RT. A Spoke VRF that connects
Spoke sites will export Spoke routes with the Spoke RT and will
import Hub routes through the Hub RT.
The management system MUST take into account constraints on Hub-and-
Spoke connections, as in the previous case.
Hub and Spoke disjoint can also be seen as multiple Hub-and-Spoke
VPNs (one per Hub) that share a common set of Spoke sites.
5.2.3. Cloud Access
This model provides cloud access configuration through the cloud-
access container. The usage of cloud-access is targeted for public
cloud and Internet Access. The cloud-access container provides
parameters for authorization rules.
Private cloud access may be addressed through the site container as
described in Section 5.3 with the use consistent with sites of type
NNI.
A cloud identifier is used to reference the target service. This
identifier is local to each administration.
By default, all sites in the L2VPN MUST be authorized to access the
cloud. If restrictions are required, a user MAY configure the
"permit-site" or "deny-site" leaf-list. The permit-site leaf-list
defines the list of sites authorized for cloud access. The deny-site
leaf-list defines the list of sites denied for cloud access. The
model supports both "deny-any-except" and "permit-any-except"
authorization.
How the restrictions will be configured on network elements is out of
scope for this document.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
L2VPN
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++
+ Site 3 + --- + Cloud 1 +
+ Site 1 + ++++++++++++
+ +
+ Site 2 + --- ++++++++++++
+ + + Internet +
+ Site 4 + ++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
+++++++++++
+ Cloud 2 +
+++++++++++
In the example above, we configure the global VPN to access the
Internet by creating a cloud-access pointing to the cloud identifier
for the Internet service. No authorized sites will be configured, as
all sites are required to access the Internet.
123456487
INTERNET
If Site 1 and Site 2 require access to Cloud 1, a new cloud-access
pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud 1 will be created. The
permit-site leaf-list will be filled with a reference to Site 1 and
Site 2.
123456487
Cloud1
site1
site2
If all sites except Site 1 require access to Cloud 2, a new cloud-
access pointing to the cloud identifier of Cloud 2 will be created.
The deny-site leaf-list will be filled with a reference to Site 1.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
123456487
Cloud2
site1
5.2.4. Extranet VPNs
There are some cases where a particular VPN needs access to resources
(servers, hosts, etc.) that are external. Those resources may be
located in another VPN.
+-----------+ +-----------+
/ \ / \
Site A -- | VPN A | --- | VPN B | --- Site B
\ / \ / (Shared
+-----------+ +-----------+ resources)
In the figure above, VPN B has some resources on Site B that need to
be available to some customers/partners. VPN A must be able to
access those VPN B resources.
Such a VPN connection scenario can be achieved via a VPN policy as
defined in Section 5.5.2.2. But there are some simple cases where a
particular VPN (VPN A) needs access to all resources in another VPN
(VPN B). The model provides an easy way to set up this connection
using the "extranet-vpns" container.
The extranet-vpns container defines a list of VPNs a particular VPN
wants to access. The extranet-vpns container must be used on
customer VPNs accessing extranet resources in another VPN. In the
figure above, in order to provide VPN A with access to VPN B, the
extranet-vpns container needs to be configured under VPN A with an
entry corresponding to VPN B. There is no service configuration
requirement on VPN B.
Readers should note that even if there is no configuration
requirement on VPN B, if VPN A lists VPN B as an extranet, all sites
in VPN B will gain access to all sites in VPN A.
The "site-role" leaf defines the role of the local VPN sites in the
target extranet VPN service topology. Site roles are defined in
Section 5.4.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
In the example below, VPN A accesses VPN B resources through an
extranet connection. A Spoke role is required for VPN A sites, as
sites from VPN A must not be able to communicate with each other
through the extranet VPN connection.
VPNB
hub-spoke
VPNA
any-to-any
VPNB
spoke-role
This model does not define how the extranet configuration will be
achieved.
Any VPN interconnection scenario that is more complex (e.g., only
certain parts of sites on VPN A accessing only certain parts of sites
on VPN B) needs to be achieved using a VPN attachment as defined in
Section 5.5.2, and especially a VPN policy as defined in
Section 5.5.2.2.
5.2.5. Frame Delivery Service
If Frame Delivery Service support is required for an L2VPN, some
global frame delivery parameters are required as input for the
service request. When a CE sends (1) Broadcast, (2) Multicast, or
(3) Unknown destination unicast, replication occurs at ingress PE,
therefore three frame type is supported.
Users of this model will need to provide the flavors of trees that
will be used by customers within the L2VPN (customer tree). The
proposed model supports bidirectional, shared, and source-based trees
(and can be augmented). Multiple flavors of trees can be supported
simultaneously.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Operator network
______________
/ \
| |
| |
Recv -- Site2 ------- PE2 |
| PE1 --- Site1 --- Source1
| | \
| | -- Source2
| |
| |
Recv -- Site3 ------- PE3 |
| |
| |
Recv -- Site4 ------- PE4 |
| / |
Recv -- Site5 -------- |
| |
| |
\_______________/
Multicast Group to port mappings can be created using the "rp-group-
mappings" leaf. Two group to port mapping method are supported:
o Static configuration of multicast Ethernet addresses and ports/
interfaces.
o Multicast control protocol based on Layer-2 technology that
signals mappings of multicast addresses to ports/interfaces, such
as Generic Attribute Registration Protocol / GARP Multicast
Registration Protocol (GARP/GMRP) [802.1D].
5.3. Site Overview
A site represents a connection of a customer office to one or more
VPN services. Each site is associated with one or more location.
+-------------+
/ \
+------------------+ +-----| VPN1 |
| | | \ /
| New York Office |------ (site) -----+ +-------------+
| | | +-------------+
+------------------+ | / \
+-----| VPN2 |
\ /
+-------------+
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
The "site" container is used for the provider to store information of
detailed implementation arrangements made with either the customer or
peer operators at each inter-connect location.
We are restricting the L2SM to exterior interfaces only, so all
internal interfaces and the underlying topology are outside the scope
of L2SM.
Typically, the following characteristics of a site interface handoff
need to be documented as part of the service design:
Unique identifier (site-id): An arbitrary string to uniquely
identify the site within the overall network infrastructure. The
format of site-id is determined by the local administration of the
VPN service.
Device (device): The customer can request one or more customer
premise equipments from the service provider for a particular
site.
Management (management): Defines the model of management of the
site, for example: type, management-transport, address.
Location (location): The site location information to allow easy
retrieval of data on which are the nearest available resources.
Site diversity (site-diversity): Presents some parameters to support
site diversity.
Site Network Accesses (site-network-accesses): Defines the list of
ports to the sites and their properties: especially bearer,
connection and service parameters.
A site-network-access represents an Ethernet logical connection of a
site. A site may have multiple site-network-accesses.
+------------------+ Site
| |-----------------------------------
| |****** (site-network-access#1) ******
| New York Office |
| |****** (site-network-access#2) ******
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
Multiple site-network-accesses are used, for instance, in the case of
multihoming. Some other meshing cases may also include multiple
site-network-accesses.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
The site configuration is viewed as a global entity; we assume that
it is mostly the management system's role to split the parameters
between the different elements within the network. For example, in
the case of the site-network-access configuration, the management
system needs to split the overall parameters between the PE
configuration and the CE configuration.
5.3.1. Devices and Locations
The information in the "location" sub-container under a "site"and
"device" container allows easy retrieval of data about which are the
nearest available facilities and can be used for access topology
planning. It may also be used by other network orchestration
component to choose the targeted upstream PE and downstream CE.
Location is expressed in terms of postal information.
A site may be composed of multiple locations. All the locations will
need to be configured as part of the "locations" container and list.
A typical example of a multi-location site is a headquarters office
in a city composed of multiple buildings. Those buildings may be
located in different parts of the city and may be linked by intra-
city fibers (customer metropolitan area network). In such a case,
when connecting to a VPN service, the customer may ask for
multihoming based on its distributed locations.
New York Site
+------------------+ Site
| +--------------+ |-----------------------------------
| | Manhattan | |****** (site-network-access#1) ******
| +--------------+ |
| +--------------+ |
| | Brooklyn | |****** (site-network-access#2) ******
| +--------------+ |
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
A customer may also request some premises equipment entities (CEs)
from the SP via the "devices" container. Requesting a CE implies a
provider-managed or co-managed model. A particular device must be
ordered to a particular already-configured location. This would help
the SP send the device to the appropriate postal address. In a
multi-location site, a customer may, for example, request a CE for
each location on the site where multihoming must be implemented. In
the figure above, one device may be requested for the Manhattan
location and one other for the Brooklyn location.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
By using devices and locations, the user can influence the
multihoming scenario he wants to implement: single CE, dual CE, etc.
5.3.2. Site Network Accesses
The L2SM includes a set of essential physical interface properties
and Ethernet layer characteristics in the "site-network-accesses"
container. Some of these are critical implementation arrangements
that require consent from both customer and provider.
As mentioned earlier, a site may be multihomed. Each logical network
access for a site is defined in the "site-network-accesses"
container. The site-network-access parameter defines how the site is
connected on the network and is split into three main classes of
parameters:
o bearer: defines requirements of the attachment (below Layer 2).
o connection: defines Layer 2 protocol parameters of the attachment.
o availability: defines the site's availability policy. The
availability parameters are defined in Section 5.2.8.
The site-network-access has a specific type (site-network-access-
type). This document defines two types:
o point-to-point: describes a point-to-point connection between the
SP and the customer.
o multipoint: describes a multipoint connection between the SP and
the customer.
This site-network-access type may have an impact on the parameters
offered to the customer, e.g., an SP may not offer encryption for
multipoint accesses. It is up to the provider to decide what
parameter is supported for point-to-point and/or multipoint accesses;
which is out of scope for this document. Some containers proposed in
the model may require extensions in order to work properly for
multipoint accesses.
5.3.2.1. Bearer
The "bearer" container defines the requirements for the site
attachment to the provider network that are below Layer 3.
The bearer parameters will help to determine the access media to be
used.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
5.3.2.2. Connection
The "connection" container defines the layer 2 protocol parameters of
the attachment(e.g.,vlan-id or circuit-id) and provides connectivity
between customer Ethernet switches. Depending on the management
mode, it refers to PE-CE- LAN segment addressing or CE-to-customer-
LAN segment addressing. In any case, it describes the responsibility
boundary between the provider and the customer. For a customer-
managed site, it refers to the PE- CE LAN Segment connection. For a
provider-managed site, it refers to the CE-to-LAN Segment connection.
"encapsulation-type" is for user to select between Ethernet
encapsulation (port-based) or Ethernet VLAN encapsulation (VLAN-
based). All allowed Ethernet interface types of service frames can
be listed under "ether-inf-type", e.g., untagged interface, tagged
interface, LAG interface
Corresponding to "ether-inf-type",the connection container also
presents three sets of link attributes: untagged interface,tagged
interface or optional LAG interface attributes. These parameters are
essential for the connection between customer and provider edge
devices to establish properly. The connection container also defines
L2CP attribute to allow control plane protocol interaction between
the CE devices and PE device.
5.3.2.2.1. Untagged Interface
For each untagged interface (untagged-interface), there are basic
configuration parameters like interface index and speed, interface
MTU, auto-negotiation and flow-control settings, etc. In addition,
the customer and provider may decide to enable advanced features,
such as LLDP, 802.3AH link OAM, MAC loop detection/ prevention at a
UNI, based on mutual agreement. If Loop avoidance is required, the
attribute "uni-loop-prevention" must be set to TRUE.
5.3.2.2.2. Tagged Interface
If the tagged service is enabled on a logical unit on the connection
at the interface, "encapsulation-type ", should be specified as
Ethernet VLAN ecapsulation(VLAN-based) or VXLAN encapsulation and
"eth-inf-type" should be specified as tagged interface.
In addition, "tagged-interface-type" should be specified under
"tagged-interface" container to determines how tagging needs to be
done. The current model proposed 5 ways to perform VLAN tagging:
o priority-tagged: Service providers encapsulate and tag packets
between CE and PE with the frame priority level.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o dot1q-vlan-tagged: Service providers encapsulate packets between
CE and PE with one or a set of customer VLAN IDs C-VLANs)
o qinq: service providers encapsulate packets that enter the
service-provider network with multiple customer VLAN IDs (C-VLANs)
and a single VLAN tag with a single service provider VLAN
(S-VLAN).
o qinany: service providers encapsulate packets that enter the
service-provider network with unknown C-VLAN and a single VLAN tag
with a single service provider VLAN (S-VLAN).
o vxlan: service providers encapsulate packets that enter the
service-provider network with VNI and peer list.
The overall S-tag for the Ethernet circuit and C-tag to SVC mapping,
if applicable, has been placed in the service container. For qinq an
qinany options, the S-tag under "qinq" and "qinany" should match the
S-tag in the service container in most cases, however, vlan
translation is required for the S-tag in certain deployment at the
external facing interface or upstream PEs to "normalize" the outer
VLAN tag to the service S-tag into the network and translate back to
the site's S-tag in the opposite direction. One example of this is
with a Layer 2 aggregation switch along the path: the S-tag for the
SVC has been previously assigned to another service thus can not be
used by this attachment circuit.
5.3.2.2.3. LAG Interface
Sometimes, the customer may require multiple physical links bundled
together to form a single, logical, point-to-point LAG connection to
the service provider. Typically, LACP (Link Aggregation Control
Protocol) is used to dynamically manage adding or deleting member
links of the aggregate group. In general, LAG allows for increased
service bandwidth beyond the speed of a single physical link while
providing graceful degradation as failure occurs, thus increased
availability.
In the L2SM, there is a set of attributes under "LAG-interface"
related to link aggregation functionality. The customer and provider
first need to decide on whether LACP PDU will be exchanged between
the edge device by specifying the "LACP-state" to "On" or "Off". If
LACP is to be enabled, then both parties need to further specify
whether it will be running in active versus passive mode, plus the
time interval and priority level of the LACP PDU. The customer and
provider can also determine the minimum aggregate bandwidth for a LAG
to be considered valid path by specifying the optional "mini-link"
attribute. To enable fast detection of faulty links, micro-bfd runs
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
independent UDP sessions to monitor the status of each member link.
Customer and provider should consent to the BFD hello interval and
hold time.
Each member link will be listed under the LAG interface with basic
physical link properties. Certain attributes like flow-control,
encapsulation type, allowed ingress Ethertype and LLDP settings are
at the LAG level.
5.3.2.2.4. CVLAN ID To SVC MAP
When more than one service is multiplexed onto the same interface,
ingress service frames are conditionally transmitted through one of
L2VPN services based upon pre-arranged customer VLAN to SVC mapping.
Multiple customer VLANs can be bundled across the same SVC. The
bundling type will determine how a group of CVLAN is bundled into one
VPN service(i.e.,VLAN-Bundling).
"cvlan-id-to-svc-map", when applicable, contains the list of customer
vlans that are mapped to the same service. In most cases, this will
be the VLAN access-list for the inner 802.1q tag (the C-tag).
An VPN Service can be set to preserve the CE-VLAN ID and CE-VLAN CoS
from source site to destination site. This is required when the
customer is using the VLAN header information between its locations
of two sites. CE-VLAN ID Preservation and CE-VLAN CoS Preservation
are applied on each site-network-access within sites. Preservation
means that the value of CE-VLAN ID and/or CE-VLAN CoS at source site
must be equal to the value at a destination site belonging to the
same L2VPN Service.
If All-to-One bundling is Enabled (i.e., bundling type is set to all-
to-one bundling), then preservation applies to all Ingress service
frames. If All-to-One bundling is Disabled , then preservation
applies to tagged Ingress service frames having CE-VLAN ID.
5.3.2.2.5. L2CP Control Support
Customer and Service provider should make pre-arrangement on whether
to allow control plane protocol interaction between the CE devices
and PE device. To provide seamless operation with multicast data
transport, the transparent operation of Ethernet control protocols
(e.g., Spanning Tree Protocol [802.1D]) can be employed by customers.
To support efficient dynamic transport, Ethernet multicast control
frames (e.g., GARP/GMRP [802.1D]) can be used between CE and PE.
However, solutions MUST NOT assume all CEs are always running such
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
protocols (typically in the case where a CE is a router and is not
aware of Layer-2 details).
The destination MAC addresses of these L2CP PDUs fall within two
reserved blocks specified by the IEEE 802.1 Working Group. Packet
with destination MAC in these multicast ranges have special
forwarding rules.
o Bridge Block of Protocols: 01-80-C2-00-00-00 through
01-80-C2-00-00-0F
o MRP Block of Protocols: 01-80-C2-00-00-20 through
01-80-C2-00-00-2F
Layer 2 protocol tunneling allows service providers to pass
subscriber Layer 2 control PDUs across the network without being
interpreted and processed by intermediate network devices. These
L2CP PDUs are transparently encapsulated across the MPLS-enabled core
network in Q-in-Q fashion.
The "L2CP-control" container contains the list of commonly used L2CP
protocols and parameters. The service provider can specify DISCARD,
PEER, or TUNNEL mode actions for each individual protocol.
5.3.2.2.6. Ethernet Service OAM
The advent of Ethernet as a wide-area network technology brings
additional requirements of end-to-end service monitoring and fault
management in the SP network, particularly in the area of service
availability and Mean Time To Repair (MTTR). Ethernet Service OAM in
the L2SM model refers to the combined protocol suites of IEEE 802.1ag
([IEEE-802-1ag]) and ITU-T Y.1731 ([ITU-T-Y-1731]).
Generally speaking, Ethernet Service OAM enables service providers to
perform service continuity check, fault-isolation, and packet delay/
jitter measurement at per customer per site network access
granularity. The information collected from Ethernet Service OAM
data sets is complementary to other higher layer IP/MPLS OSS tools to
ensure the required service level agreements (SLAs) can be meet.
The 802.1ag Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) functional model is
structured with hierarchical maintenance domains (MDs), each assigned
with a unique maintenance level. Higher level MDs can be nested over
lower level MDs. However, the MDs cannot intersect. The scope of
each MD can be solely within a customer network, solely within the SP
network, interact between the customer-to-provider or provider-to-
provider edge equipment, or tunnel over another SP network.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Depending on the use case scenario, one or more maintenance end
points (MEPs) can be placed on the external facing interface, sending
CFM PDUs towards the core network (UP MEP) or downstream link (DOWN
MEP).
The "cfm-802.1-ag" sub-container under "site-network-access"
currently presents CFM maintenance association (MA): i.e.,DOWN MEP
for UNI MA. For each MA, the user can define the maintenance domain
ID (MAID), MEP level, MEP direction, remote MEP ID, CoS level of the
CFM PDUs, Continuity Check Message (CCM) interval and hold time,
alarm priority defect, CCM priority-type, etc.
ITU-T Y.1731 Performance Monitoring (PM) provides essential network
telemetry information that includes the measurement of Ethernet
service frame delay, frame delay variation, frame loss, and frame
throughput. The delay/jitter measurement can be either one-way or
two-way. Typically, a Y.1731 PM probe sends a small amount of
synthetic frames along with service frames to measure the SLA
parameters.
The "y-1731" sub-container under "site-network-access" contains a set
of parameters for use to define the PM probe information, including
MAID, local and remote MEP-ID, PM PDU type, message period and
measurement interval, CoS level of the PM PDUs, loss measurement by
synthetic or service frame options, one-way or two-way delay
measurement, PM frame size, and session type.
5.4. Site Role
A VPN has a particular service topology, as described in
Section 5.1.3. As a consequence, each site belonging to a VPN is
assigned with a particular role in this topology. The site-role leaf
defines the role of the site in a particular VPN topology.
In the any-to-any VPN service topology, all sites MUST have the same
role, which will be "any-to-any-role".
In the Hub-and-Spoke VPN service topology or the Hub and Spoke
disjoint VPN service topology, sites MUST have a Hub role or a Spoke
role.
5.5. Site Belonging to Multiple VPNs
5.5.1. Site VPN Flavor
A site may be part of one or multiple VPNs. The "site-vpn-flavor"
defines the way the VPN multiplexing is done. There are three
possible types of external facing connections associated with an
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Ethernet VPN service and a site. Therefore the current version of
the model supports three flavors:
o site-vpn-flavor-single: The site belongs to only one VPN.
o site-vpn-flavor-multi: The site belongs to multiple VPNs, and all
the logical accesses of the sites belong to the same set of VPNs.
o site-vpn-flavor-nni: The site represents an NNI where two
administrative domains belonging to the same or different
providers inter-connect with each other.
o site-vpn-flavor-e2e: The site represents end to end mult-segment
connection.
5.5.1.1. Single VPN Attachment: site-vpn-flavor-single
The figure below describes a single VPN attachment. The site
connects to only one VPN.
+--------+
+------------------+ Site / \
| |-----------------------------| |
| |***(site-network-access#1)***| VPN1 |
| New York Office | | |
| |***(site-network-access#2)***| |
| |-----------------------------| |
+------------------+ \ /
+--------+
5.5.1.2. MultiVPN Attachment: site-vpn-flavor-multi
The figure below describes a site connected to multiple VPNs.
+---------+
+---/----+ \
+------------------+ Site / | \ |
| |--------------------------------- | |VPN B|
| |***(site-network-access#1)******* | | |
| New York Office | | | | |
| |***(site-network-access#2)******* \ | /
| |-----------------------------| VPN A+-----|---+
+------------------+ \ /
+--------+
In the example above, the New York office is multihomed. Both
logical accesses are using the same VPN attachment rules, and both
are connected to VPN A and VPN B.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Reaching VPN A or VPN B from the New York office will be done via
destination-based routing. Having the same destination reachable
from the two VPNs may cause routing troubles. The customer
administration's role in this case would be to ensure the appropriate
mapping of its prefixes in each VPN.
5.5.1.3. NNI: site-vpn-flavor-nni
A Network-to-Network Interface (NNI) scenario may be modeled using
the sites container. It is helpful for the SP to indicate that the
requested VPN connection is not a regular site but rather is an NNI,
as specific default device configuration parameters may be applied in
the case of NNIs (e.g., ACLs, routing policies).
SP A SP B
------------------- -------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + (MAC-VRF1)-(VPN1)-(MAC-VRF1)+ |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (MAC-VRF2)-(VPN2)-(MAC-VRF2)+ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + (MAC-VRF1)-(VPN1)-(MAC-VRF1)+ |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (MAC-VRF2)-(VPN2)-(MAC-VRF2)+ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
------------------- -------------------
The figure above describes an option A NNI scenario that can be
modeled using the sites container. In order to connect its customer
VPNs (VPN1 and VPN2) in SP B, SP A may request the creation of some
site-network-accesses to SP B. The site-vpn-flavor-nni will be used
to inform SP B that this is an NNI and not a regular customer site.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
5.5.1.4. E2E: site-vpn-flavor-e2e
A end to end multi-segment VPN connection to be constructed out of
several connectivity segments may be modeled. It is helpful for the
SP to indicate the requested VPN connection is not a regular site but
rather is an end to end VPN connectivity, as specific default device
configuration parameters may be applied in case of site-vpn-flavor-
e2e (e.g., QoS configuration). In order to establish connection
between Site 1 in SP A and Site 2 in SP B spanning across multi-
domains, SP A may request the creation of end to end connectivity to
SP B. The site-vpn-flavor-e2e will be used to inform that this is an
end to end connectivity setup and not a regular customer site.
5.5.2. Attaching a Site to a VPN
Due to the multiple site-vpn flavors, the attachment of a site to an
L2VPN is done at the site-network-access (logical access) level
through the "vpn-attachment" container. The vpn-attachment container
is mandatory. The model provides two ways to attach a site to a VPN:
o By referencing the target VPN directly.
o By referencing a VPN policy for attachments that are more complex.
A choice is implemented to allow the user to choose the flavor that
provides the best fit.
5.5.2.1. Referencing a VPN
Referencing a vpn-id provides an easy way to attach a particular
logical access to a VPN. This is the best way in the case of a
single VPN attachment. When referencing a vpn-id, the site-role
setting must be added to express the role of the site in the target
VPN service topology.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
SITE1
LA1
VPNA
spoke-role
LA2
VPNB
spoke-role
The example above describes a multiVPN case where a site (SITE1) has
two logical accesses (LA1 and LA2), attached to both VPNA and VPNB.
5.5.2.2. VPN Policy
The "vpn-policy" list helps express a multiVPN scenario where a
logical access belongs to multiple VPNs.
As a site can belong to multiple VPNs, the vpn-policy list may be
composed of multiple entries. A filter can be applied to specify
that only some LANs of the site should be part of a particular VPN.
Each time a site (or LAN) is attached to a VPN, the user must
precisely describe its role (site-role) within the target VPN service
topology.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Site1 ------ PE7 |
+-------------------------+ [VPN2] |
| |
+-------------------------+ |
| Site2 ------ PE3 PE4 ------ Site3 |
+----------------------------------+ |
| |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| Site4 ------ PE5 | PE6 ------ Site5 | |
| | |
| [VPN3] | |
+------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| |
+---------------------------+
In the example above, Site5 is part of two VPNs: VPN3 and VPN2. It
will play a Hub role in VPN2 and an any-to-any role in VPN3. We can
express such a multiVPN scenario as follows:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Site5
POLICY1
ENTRY1
VPN2
hub-role
ENTRY2
VPN3
any-to-any-role
LA1
POLICY1
Now, if a more-granular VPN attachment is necessary, filtering can be
used. For example, if LAN1 from Site5 must be attached to VPN2 as a
Hub and LAN2 must be attached to VPN3, the following configuration
can be used:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Site5
POLICY1
ENTRY1
LAN1
VPN2
hub-role
ENTRY2
LAN2
VPN3
any-to-any-role
LA1
POLICY1
5.6. Deciding Where to Connect the Site
The management system will have to determine where to connect each
site-network-access of a particular site to the provider network
(e.g., PE, aggregation switch).
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
The current model proposes parameters and constraints that can
influence the meshing of the site-network-access.
The management system MUST honor all customer constraints, or if a
constraint is too strict and cannot be fulfilled, the management
system MUST NOT provision the site and MUST provide information to
the user about which constraints that could not be fulfilled.How the
information is provided is out of scope for this document. Whether
or not to relax the constraint would then be left up to the user.
Parameters such as site location (see Section 5.6.2) and access type
are just hints (see Section 5.6.3) for the management system for
service placement.
In addition to parameters and constraints, the management system's
decision MAY be based on any other internal constraints that are left
up to the SP: least load, distance, etc.
5.6.1. Constraint: Device
In the case of provider management or co-management, one or more
devices have been ordered by the customer to a particular already-
configured location. The customer may force a particular site-
network-access to be connected on a particular device that he
ordered.
New York Site
+------------------+ Site
| +--------------+ |-----------------------------------
| | Manhattan | |
| | CE1********* (site-network-access#1) ******
| +--------------+ |
| +--------------+ |
| | Brooklyn CE2********* (site-network-access#2) ******
| +--------------+ |
| |-----------------------------------
+------------------+
In the figure above, site-network-access#1 is associated with CE1 in
the service request. The SP must ensure the provisioning of this
connection.
5.6.2. Constraint/Parameter: Site Location
The location information provided in this model MAY be used by a
management system to determine the target PE to mesh the site (SP
side). A particular location must be associated with each site
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
network access when configuring it. The SP MUST honor the
termination of the access on the location associated with the site
network access (customer side). The "country-code" in the site
location should be expressed as an ISO ALPHA-2 code.
The site-network-access location is determined by the "location-
flavor". In the case of a provider-managed or co-managed site, the
user is expected to configure a "device-reference" (device case) that
will bind the site-network-access to a particular device that the
customer ordered. As each device is already associated with a
particular location, in such a case the location information is
retrieved from the device location. In the case of a customer-
managed site, the user is expected to configure a "location-
reference" (location case); this provides a reference to an existing
configured location and will help with placement.
POP#1 (New York)
+---------+
| PE1 |
Site #1 ---... | PE2 |
(Atlantic City) | PE3 |
+---------+
POP#2 (Washington)
+---------+
| PE4 |
| PE5 |
| PE6 |
+---------+
POP#3 (Philadelphia)
+---------+
| PE7 |
Site #2 CE#1---... | PE8 |
(Reston) | PE9 |
+---------+
In the example above, Site #1 is a customer-managed site with a
location L1, while Site #2 is a provider-managed site for which a CE
(CE#1) was ordered. Site #2 is configured with L2 as its location.
When configuring a site-network-access for Site #1, the user will
need to reference location L1 so that the management system will know
that the access will need to terminate on this location. Then, for
distance reasons, this management system may mesh Site #1 on a PE in
the Philadelphia POP. It may also take into account resources
available on PEs to determine the exact target PE (e.g., least
loaded). For Site #2, the user is expected to configure the site-
network-access with a device-reference to CE#1 so that the management
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
system will know that the access must terminate on the location of
CE#1 and must be connected to CE#1. For placement of the SP side of
the access connection, in the case of the nearest PE used, it may
mesh Site #2 on the Washington POP.
5.6.3. Constraint/Parameter: Access Type
The management system needs to elect the access media to connect the
site to the customer (for example, xDSL, leased line, Ethernet
backhaul). The customer may provide some parameters/constraints that
will provide hints to the management system.
The bearer container information SHOULD be the first piece of
information considered when making this decision:
o The "requested-type" parameter provides information about the
media type that the customer would like to use. If the "strict"
leaf is equal to "true", this MUST be considered a strict
constraint so that the management system cannot connect the site
with another media type. If the "strict" leaf is equal to "false"
(default) and if the requested media type cannot be fulfilled, the
management system can select another media type. The supported
media types SHOULD be communicated by the SP to the customer via a
mechanism that is out of scope for this document.
o The "always-on" leaf defines a strict constraint: if set to true,
the management system MUST elect a media type that is "always-on"
(e.g., this means no dial access type).
o The "bearer-reference" parameter is used in cases where the
customer has already ordered a network connection to the SP apart
from the L2VPN site and wants to reuse this connection. The
string used is an internal reference from the SP and describes the
already-available connection. This is also a strict requirement
that cannot be relaxed. How the reference is given to the
customer is out of scope for this document, but as a pure example,
when the customer ordered the bearer (through a process that is
out of scope for this model), the SP may have provided the bearer
reference that can be used for provisioning services on top.
Any other internal parameters from the SP can also be used. The
management system MAY use other parameters, such as the requested
"svc-input-bandwidth" and "svc-output-bandwidth", to help decide
which access type to use.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
5.6.4. Constraint: Access Diversity
Each site-network-access may have one or more constraints that would
drive the placement of the access. By default, the model assumes
that there are no constraints, but allocation of a unique bearer per
site-network-access is expected.
In order to help with the different placement scenarios, a site-
network-access may be tagged using one or multiple group identifiers.
The group identifier is a string, so it can accommodate both explicit
naming of a group of sites (e.g., "multihomed-set1") and the use of a
numbered identifier (e.g., 12345678). The meaning of each group-id
is local to each customer administrator, and the management system
MUST ensure that different customers can use the same group-ids. One
or more group-ids can also be defined at the site level; as a
consequence, all site-network-accesses under the site MUST inherit
the group-ids of the site they belong to. When, in addition to the
site group-ids some group-ids are defined at the site-network-access
level, the management system MUST consider the union of all groups
(site level and site network access level) for this particular site-
network-access.
For an already-configured site-network-access, each constraint MUST
be expressed against a targeted set of site-network-accesses. This
site-network-access MUST never be taken into account in the targeted
set -- for example, "My site-network-access S must not be connected
on the same POP as the site-network-accesses that are part of Group
10." The set of site-network-accesses against which the constraint
is evaluated can be expressed as a list of groups, "all-other-
accesses", or "all-other-groups". The all-other-accesses option
means that the current site-network-access constraint MUST be
evaluated against all the other site-network-accesses belonging to
the current site. The all-other-groups option means that the
constraint MUST be evaluated against all groups that the current
site-network-access does not belong to.
The current model proposes multiple constraint-types:
o pe-diverse: The current site-network-access MUST NOT be connected
to the same PE as the targeted site-network-accesses.
o pop-diverse: The current site-network-access MUST NOT be connected
to the same POP as the targeted site-network-accesses.
o linecard-diverse: The current site-network-access MUST NOT be
connected to the same linecard as the targeted site-network-
accesses.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o bearer-diverse: The current site-network-access MUST NOT use
common bearer components compared to bearers used by the targeted
site-network-accesses. "bearer-diverse" provides some level of
diversity at the access level. As an example, two bearer-diverse
site-network-accesses must not use the same DSLAM, BAS, or Layer 2
switch.
o same-pe: The current site-network-access MUST be connected to the
same PE as the targeted site-network-accesses.
o same-bearer: The current site-network-access MUST be connected
using the same bearer as the targeted site-network-accesses.
These constraint-types can be extended through augmentation. Each
constraint is expressed as "The site-network-access S must be
(e.g., pe-diverse, pop-diverse) from these
site-network-accesses."
The group-id used to target some site-network-accesses may be the
same as the one used by the current site-network-access. This eases
the configuration of scenarios where a group of site-network-access
points has a constraint between the access points in the group.
5.7. Route Distinguisher and Network Instance Allocation
The route distinguisher (RD) is a critical parameter of BGP-based
L2VPNs as described in [RFC4364] that provides the ability to
distinguish common addressing plans in different VPNs. As for route
targets (RTs), a management system is expected to allocate a MAC-VRF
on the target PE and an RD for this MAC-VRF.This RD MUST be unique
across all MAC-VRFs on the target PE.
If a MAC-VRF already exists on the target PE and the MAC-VRF fulfills
the connectivity constraints for the site, there is no need to
recreate another MAC-VRF, and the site MAY be meshed within this
existing MAC-VRF. How the management system checks that an existing
MAC-VRF fulfills the connectivity constraints for a site is out of
scope for this document.
If no such MAC-VRF exists on the target PE, the management system has
to initiate the creation of a new MAC-VRF on the target PE and has to
allocate a new RD for this new MAC-VRF.
The management system MAY apply a per-VPN or per-MAC-VRF allocation
policy for the RD, depending on the SP's policy. In a per-VPN
allocation policy, all MAC-VRFs (dispatched on multiple PEs) within a
VPN will share the same RD value. In a per-MAC-VRF model, all MAC-
VRF should always have a unique RD value. Some other allocation
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
policies are also possible, and this document does not restrict the
allocation policies to be used.
The allocation of RDs MAY be done in the same way as RTs. The
examples provided in Section 5.2.3.1 could be reused in this
scenario.
Note that an SP MAY configure a target PE for an automated allocation
of RDs. In this case, there will be no need for any backend system
to allocate an RD value.
5.8. Site Network Access Availability
A site may be multihomed, meaning that it has multiple site-network-
access points. Placement constraints defined in previous sections
will help ensure physical diversity.
When the site-network-accesses are placed on the network, a customer
may want to use a particular routing policy on those accesses. The
"site-network-access/availability" container defines parameters for
site redundancy. The "access-priority" leaf defines a preference for
a particular access. This preference is used to model load-balancing
or primary/backup scenarios. The higher the access-priority value,
the higher the preference will be. The "redundancy mode" attribute
is defined for an multi-homing site and used to model single-active
and active/active scenarios. It allows for multiple active paths in
forwarding state and for load-balancing options.
The figure below describes how the access-priority attribute can be
used.
Hub#1 LAN (Primary/backup) Hub#2 LAN (Load-sharing)
| |
| access-priority 1 access-priority 1 |
|--- CE1 ------- PE1 PE3 --------- CE3 --- |
| |
| |
|--- CE2 ------- PE2 PE4 --------- CE4 --- |
| access-priority 2 access-priority 1 |
PE5
|
|
|
CE5
|
Spoke#1 site (Single-homed)
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
In the figure above, Hub#2 requires load-sharing, so all the site-
network-accesses must use the same access-priority value. On the
other hand, as Hub#1 requires a primary site-network-access and a
backup site-network-access, a higher access-priority setting will be
configured on the primary site-network-access.
Scenarios that are more complex can be modeled. Let's consider a Hub
site with five accesses to the network (A1,A2,A3,A4,A5). The
customer wants to load-share its traffic on A1,A2 in the nominal
situation. If A1 and A2 fail, the customer wants to load-share its
traffic on A3 and A4; finally, if A1 to A4 are down, he wants to use
A5. We can model this easily by configuring the following access-
priority values: A1=100, A2=100, A3=50, A4=50, A5=10.
The access-priority scenario has some limitations. An access-
priority scenario like the previous one with five accesses but with
the constraint of having traffic load-shared between A3 and A4 in the
case where A1 OR A2 is down is not achievable. But the authors
believe that using the access-priority attribute will cover most of
the deployment use cases and that the model can still be extended via
augmentation to support additional use cases.
5.9. SVC MTU
The maximum MTU of subscriber service frames can be derived from the
physical interface MTU by default, or specified under the "svc-mtu"
leaf if it is different than the default number.
5.10. Service
The "service" container defines service parameters associated with
the site.
5.10.1. Bandwidth
The service bandwidth refers to the bandwidth requirement between CE
and PE. The requested bandwidth is expressed as ingress bandwidth
and egress bandwidth. Ingress/egress direction is using customer
site as reference: Ingress direction bandwidth means download
bandwidth for the site, and egresss bandwidth means upload bandwidth
for the site.
The service bandwidth is only configurable at the site-network-access
level (i.e., for the site network access associated with the site).
Using a different ingress and egress bandwidth will allow service
provider to know if a customer allows for asymmetric bandwidth access
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
like ADSL. It can also be used to set different rate limit in a
different way for upload and download on symmetric bandwidth access.
The svc-bandwidth has specific type. This document defines four
types:
o bw-per-access Bandwidth is per connection or site network access,
providing rate enforcement for all service frames at the interface
that are associated with a particular network access.
o bw-per-cos Bandwidth is per cos ,providing rate enforcement for
all service frames for a given class of service with specific cos-
id.
o bw-per-svc bandwidth is per site, providing rate enforcement for
all service frames that are associated with a particular vpn
service.
o opaque bandwidth is the total bandwidth that is not associated
with any particular cos-id, vpn service identified with vpn-id or
site network access id.
The svc-bandwidth must include a "cos-id" parameter if the 'type' is
set as 'bw-per-cos'. The cos-id can be assigned based on dot1p value
in C-tag, or DSCP in IP header. service frames are metered against
the bandwidth profile based on the cos- identifier.
The svc-bandwidth must be associated specific "site-network-access-
id" parameter if the 'type' is set as 'bw-per-access'. Multiple
bandwidth per-cos-id can be associated with the same Site Network
access.
The svc-bandwidth must include specific "vpn-id" parameter if the
'type' is set as 'bw-per-svc'. Multiple bandwidth per-cos-id can be
associated with the same Ethernet VPN service.
5.10.2. QoS
The model defines QoS parameters as an abstraction:
o qos-classification-policy: Defines a set of ordered rules to
classify customer traffic.
o qos-profile: Provides a QoS scheduling profile to be applied.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
5.10.2.1. QoS Classification
QoS classification rules are handled by qos-classification-policy.
The qos-classification-policy is an ordered list of rules that match
a flow or application and set the appropriate target class of service
(target-class-id). The user can define the match using physical port
reference or a more specific flow definition (based layer 2 source
and destination MAC address, cos,dscp,cos-id, color-id etc.). A
"color-id" will be assigned to a service frame to identify its QoS
profile conformance. A service frame is "green" if it is conformant
with "committed" rate of the bandwidth profile. A Service Frame is
"yellow" if it is exceeding the "committed" rate but conformant with
the "excess" rate of the bandwidth profile. Finally, a service frame
is "red" if it is conformant with neither the "committed" nor
"excess" rates of the bandwidth profile.
When a flow definition is used, the user can use a target-sites leaf-
list to identify the destination of a flow rather than using
destination addresses. In such a case, an association between the
site abstraction and the MAC addresses used by this site must be done
dynamically. How this association is done is out of scope for this
document. The association of a site to an L2VPN is done through the
"vpn-attachment" container. Therefore the user can also employ
"target-sites" leaf-list and "vpn-attachment" to identify the
destination of a flow targeted to specific vpn service. A rule that
does not have a match statement is considered as a match-all rule. A
service provider may implement a default terminal classification rule
if the customer does not provide it. It will be up to the service
provider to determine its default target class. The current model
defines some applications, but new application identities may be
added through augmentation. The exact meaning of each application
identity is up to the SP, so it will be necessary for the SP to
advise the customer on the usage of application matching.
5.10.2.2. QoS Profile
User can choose between standard profile provided by the operator or
a custom profile. The qos-profile defines the traffic scheduling
policy to be used by the service provider.
A custom qos-profile is defined as a list of class of services and
associated properties. The properties are:
o direction: Used to specify the direction which qos profile is
applied to. Our proposed model supports "Site-to-WAN" direction,
"WAN-to-Site"direction and "both" direction. By default, "both"
direction is used. In case of "both" direction, the provider
should ensure scheduling according to the requested policy in both
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
traffic directions (SP to customer and customer to SP). As an
example, a device-scheduling policy may be implemented on both the
PE side and the CE side of the WAN link. In case of "WAN-to-Site"
direction, the provider should ensure scheduling from the SP
network to the customer site. As an example, a device- scheduling
policy may be implemented only on the PE side of the WAN link
towards the customer.
o policing: The optional "policing" indicates whether policing
setting is one rates two colors or two rates, three colors.
o byte-offset: The optional "byte-offset" indicates how many bytes
in the service frame header are excluded from rate enforcement.
o frame-delay: Used to define the latency constraint of the class.
The latency constraint can be expressed as the lowest possible
latency or a latency boundary expressed in milliseconds. How this
latency constraint will be fulfilled is up to the service provider
implementation: a strict priority queueing may be used on the
access and in the core network, and/or a low latency routing may
be created for this traffic class.
o frame-jitter: Used to define the jitter constraint of the class.
The jitter constraint can be expressed as the lowest possible
jitter or a jitter boundary expressed in microseconds. How this
jitter constraint will be fulfilled is up to the service provider
implementation: a strict priority queueing may be used on the
access and in the core network, and/or a jitter-aware routing may
be created for this traffic class.
o bandwidth: used to define a guaranteed amount of bandwidth for the
class of service. It is expressed as a percentage. The
"guaranteed-bw-percent" parameter uses available bandwidth as a
reference. The available bandwidth should not fall below
Committed Information Rate(CIR) defined under svc-input-bandwidth
or svc-output-bandwidth. When the qos-profile container is
implemented on the CE side, svc-output-bandwidth is taken into
account as a reference. When it is implemented on the PE side,
svc-input-bandwidth is used. By default, the bandwidth
reservation is only guaranteed at the access level. The user can
use the "end-to-end" leaf to request an end-to-end bandwidth
reservation, including across the MPLS transport network. (In
other words, the SP will activate something in the MPLS core to
ensure that the bandwidth request from the customer will be
fulfilled by the MPLS core as well.) How this is done (e.g., RSVP
reservation, controller reservation) is out of scope for this
document.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
In addition, due to network conditions, some constraints may not be
completely fulfilled by the SP; in this case, the SP should advise
the customer about the limitations. How this communication is done
is out of scope for this document.
5.10.3. Broadcast Multicast Unknow Unicast Support
The "broadcast-unknowunicast-multicast" container defines the type of
site in the customer multicast service topology: source, receiver, or
both. These parameters will help the management system optimize the
multicast service.
Multiple multicast group to port mappings can be created using the
"multicast-gp-address-mapping" list. The "multicast-gp-address-
mapping" defines multicast group address and port lag number. Those
parameters will help the SP select the appropriate association
between interface and multicast group to fulfill the customer service
requirement.
A whole Layer-2 multicast frame (whether for data or control) SHOULD
NOT be altered from a CE to CE(s) EXCEPT for the VLAN ID field,
ensuring that it is transparently transported. If VLAN IDs are
assigned by the SP, they can be altered.
For point-to-point services, the provider only needs to deliver a
single copy of each service frame to the remote PE, regardless
whether the destination MAC address of the incoming frame is unicast,
multicast or broadcast. Therefore, all service frames should be
delivered unconditionally.
B-U-M (Broadcast-UnknownUnicast-Multicast) frame forwarding in
multipoint-to-multipoint services, on the other hand, involves both
local flooding to other attachment circuits on the same PE and remote
replication to all other PEs, thus consumes additional resources and
core bandwidth. Special B-U-M frame disposition rules can be
implemented at external facing interfaces (UNI or E-NNI) to rate-
limit the B-U-M frames, in term of number of packets per second or
bits per second.
The threshold can apply to all B-U-M traffic, or one for each
category.
5.11. Site Management
The "management" sub-container is intended for site management
options, depending on the device ownership and security access
control. The followings are three common management models:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
CE Provider Managed: The provider has the sole ownership of the CE
device. Only the provider has access to the CE. The
responsibility boundary between SP and customer is between CE and
customer network. This is the most common use case.
CE Customer Managed: The customer has the sole ownership of the CE
device. Only the customer has access to the CE. In this model,
the responsibility boundary between SP and customer is between PE
and CE.
CE Co-managed: The provider has ownership of the CE device and
responsible for managing the CE. However, the provider grants the
customer access to the CE for some configuration/monitoring
purposes. In this co-managed mode, the responsibility boundary is
the same as for the provider-managed model.
The selected management mode is specified under the "type" leaf. The
"address" leaf stores CE device management IP information. And the
"management-transport" leaf is used to identify the transport
protocol for management traffic: IPv4 or IPv6. Additional security
options may be derived based on the particular management model
selected.
5.12. MAC Loop Protection
MAC address flapping between different physical ports typically
indicates a bridge loop condition in the customer network.
Misleading entries in the MAC cache table can cause service frames to
circulate around the network indefinitely and saturate the links
throughout the provider's network, affecting other services in the
same network. In case of EVPN, it also introduces massive BGP
updates and control plane instability.
The service provider may opt to implement a switching loop prevention
mechanism at the external facing interfaces for multipoint-to-
multipoint services by imposing a MAC address move threshold.
The MAC move rate and prevention-type options are listed in the "mac-
loop-prevention" container.
5.13. MAC Address Limit
The optional "mac-address-limit" container contains the customer MAC
address limit and information to describe the action when the limit
is exceeded and the aging time for a MAC address.
When multiple services are provided on the same network element, the
MAC address table (and the Routing Information Base space for MAC-
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
routes in the case of EVPN) is a shared common resource. Service
providers may impose a maximum number of MAC addresses learned from
the customer for a single service instance by using 'mac-limit'leaf,
and may use 'action' leaft to specify the action when the upper limit
is exceeded: drop the packet, flood the packet, or simply send a
warning log message.
For point-to-point services, if MAC learning is disabled then the MAC
address limit is not necessary.
5.14. Enhanced VPN Features
5.14.1. Carriers' Carriers
In the case of CsC [RFC6624], a customer may want to build an MPLS
service using an L2VPN to carry its traffic.
LAN customer1
|
|
CE1
|
| -------------
(vrf_cust1)
CE1_ISP1
| ISP1 POP
| MPLS link
| -------------
|
(vrf ISP1)
PE1
(...) Provider backbone
PE2
(vrf ISP1)
|
| ------------
|
| MPLS link
| ISP1 POP
CE2_ISP1
(vrf_cust1)
| ------------
|
CE2
|
LAN customer1
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
In the figure above, ISP1 resells an L2VPN service but has no core
network infrastructure between its POPs. ISP1 uses an L2VPN as the
core network infrastructure (belonging to another provider) between
its POPs.
In order to support CsC, the VPN service must indicate MPLS support
by setting the "carrierscarrier" leaf to true in the vpn-service
list. The link between CE1_ISP1/PE1 and CE2_ISP1/PE2 must also run
an MPLS signalling protocol. This configuration is done at the site
level.
In the proposed model, LDP or BGP can be used as the MPLS signalling
protocol. In the case of LDP, an IGP routing protocol MUST also be
activated. In the case of BGP signalling, BGP MUST also be
configured as the routing protocol.
If CsC is enabled, the requested "svc-mtu" leaf will refer to the
MPLS MTU and not to the link MTU.
5.15. External ID References
The service model sometimes refers to external information through
identifiers. As an example, to order a cloud-access to a particular
cloud service provider (CSP), the model uses an identifier to refer
to the targeted CSP. If a customer is directly using this service
model as an API (through REST or NETCONF, for example) to order a
particular service, the SP should provide a list of authorized
identifiers. In the case of cloud-access, the SP will provide the
associated identifiers for each available CSP. The same applies to
other identifiers, such as std-qos-profile.
How an SP provides the meanings of those identifiers to the customer
is out of scope for this document.
5.16. Defining NNIs and Inter-AS support
An autonomous system (AS) is a single network or group of networks
that is controlled by a common system administration group and that
uses a single, clearly defined routing protocol. In some cases, VPNs
need to span different ASes in different geographic areas or span
different SPs. The connection between ASes is established by the SPs
and is seamless to the customer. Examples include:
o A partnership between SPs (e.g., carrier, cloud) to extend their
VPN service seamlessly.
o An internal administrative boundary within a single SP (e.g.,
backhaul versus core versus data center).
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
NNIs (network-to-network interfaces) have to be defined to extend the
VPNs across multiple ASes. [RFC4761] defines multiple flavors of VPN
NNI implementations. Each implementation has pros and cons; this
topic is outside the scope of this document. For example, in an
Inter-AS option A, autonomous system border router (ASBR) peers are
connected by multiple interfaces with at least one of those
interfaces spanning the two ASes while being present in the same VPN.
In order for these ASBRs to signal label blocks, they associate each
interface with a Virtual Switching (MAC-VRF) instance and a Border
Gateway Protocol (BGP) session. As a result, traffic between the
back-to-back VPLS is Ethernet. In this scenario, the VPNs are
isolated from each other, and because the traffic is ethernet, QoS
mechanisms that operate on Ethernet traffic can be applied to achieve
customer service level agreements (SLAs).
-------- -------------- -----------
/ \ / \ / \
| Cloud | | | | |
| Provider |-----NNI-----| |----NNI---| Data Center |
| #1 | | | | |
\ / | | \ /
-------- | | -----------
| |
-------- | My network | -----------
/ \ | | / \
| Cloud | | | | |
| Provider |-----NNI-----| |---NNI---| L2VPN |
| #2 | | | | Partner |
\ / | | | |
-------- | | | |
\ / | |
-------------- \ /
| -----------
|
NNI
|
|
-------------------
/ \
| |
| |
| |
| L2VPN Partner |
| |
\ /
-------------------
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
The figure above describes an SP network called "My network" that has
several NNIs. This network uses NNIs to:
o increase its footprint by relying on L2VPN partners.
o connect its own data center services to the customer L2VPN.
o enable the customer to access its private resources located in a
private cloud owned by some CSPs.
5.16.1. Defining an NNI with the Option A Flavor
AS A AS B
------------------- -------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| +(MAC-VRF1)-(VPN1)--(MAC-VRF1) + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + (MAC-VRF2)-(VPN2)--(MAC-VRF2)+ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| +(MAC-VRF1)--(VPN1)--(MAC-VRF1)+ |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| +(MAC-VRF2)--(VPN2)--(MAC-VRF2)+ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
------------------- -------------------
In option A, the two ASes are connected to each other with physical
links on ASBRs. For resiliency purposes, there may be multiple
physical connections between the ASes. A VPN connection -- physical
or logical (on top of physical) -- is created for each VPN that needs
to cross the AS boundary, thus providing a back-to-back VPLS model.
From a service model's perspective, this VPN connection can be seen
as a site. Let's say that AS B wants to extend some VPN connections
for VPN C on AS A. The administrator of AS B can use this service
model to order a site on AS A. All connection scenarios could be
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
realized using the features of the current model. As an example, the
figure above shows two physical connections that have logical
connections per VPN overlaid on them. This could be seen as a
multiVPN scenario. Also, the administrator of AS B will be able to
choose the appropriate routing protocol (e.g., E-BGP) to dynamically
exchange routes between ASes.
This document assumes that the option A NNI flavor SHOULD reuse the
existing VPN site modeling.
Example: a customer wants its CSP A to attach its virtual network N
to an existing L2VPN (VPN1) that he has from L2VPN SP B.
CSP A L2VPN SP B
----------------- -------------------
/ \ / \
| | | | |
| VM --| ++++++++ NNI ++++++++ |--- VPN1
| | + +_________+ + | Site#1
| |--------(MAC-VRF1)-(VPN1)-(MAC-VRF1)+ |
| | + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| | + +_________+ + |
| | ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| VM --| | | |--- VPN1
| |Virtual | | | Site#2
| |Network | | |
| VM --| | | |--- VPN1
| | | | | Site#3
\ / \ /
----------------- -------------------
|
|
VPN1
Site#4
To create the VPN connectivity, the CSP or the customer may use the
L2VPN service model that SP B exposes. We could consider that, as
the NNI is shared, the physical connection (bearer) between CSP A and
SP B already exists. CSP A may request through a service model the
creation of a new site with a single site-network-access (single-
homing is used in the figure). As a placement constraint, CSP A may
use the existing bearer reference it has from SP A to force the
placement of the VPN NNI on the existing link. The XML below
illustrates a possible configuration request to SP B:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
CSP_A_attachment
NY
US
site-vpn-flavor-nni
CSP_A_VN1
vlan
tagged
dot1q-vlan
17
input-bw
opaque
450000000
20000000
1000000000
200000000
bgp
12456487
spoke-role
customer-managed
The case described above is different from a scenario using the
cloud-accesses container, as the cloud-access provides a public cloud
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
access while this example enables access to private resources located
in a CSP network.
5.16.2. Defining an NNI with the Option B Flavor
AS A AS B
------------------- -------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR +<---MP-BGP---->+ ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR +<---MP-BGP---->+ ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
------------------- -------------------
In option B, the two ASes are connected to each other with physical
links on ASBRs. For resiliency purposes, there may be multiple
physical connections between the ASes. The VPN "connection" between
ASes is done by exchanging VPN routes through MP-BGP [RFC4761].
There are multiple flavors of implementations of such an NNI. For
example:
1. The NNI is internal to the provider and is situated between a
backbone and a data center. There is enough trust between the
domains to not filter the VPN routes. So, all the VPN routes are
exchanged. RT filtering may be implemented to save some
unnecessary route states.
2. The NNI is used between providers that agreed to exchange VPN
routes for specific RTs only. Each provider is authorized to use
the RT values from the other provider.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
3. The NNI is used between providers that agreed to exchange VPN
routes for specific RTs only. Each provider has its own RT
scheme. So, a customer spanning the two networks will have
different RTs in each network for a particular VPN.
Case 1 does not require any service modeling, as the protocol enables
the dynamic exchange of necessary VPN routes.
Case 2 requires that an RT-filtering policy on ASBRs be maintained.
From a service modeling point of view, it is necessary to agree on
the list of RTs to authorize.
In Case 3, both ASes need to agree on the VPN RT to exchange, as well
as how to map a VPN RT from AS A to the corresponding RT in AS B (and
vice versa).
Those modelings are currently out of scope for this document.
CSP A L3VPN SP B
----------------- ------------------
/ \ / \
| | | | |
| VM --| ++++++++ NNI ++++++++ |--- VPN1
| | + +__________+ + | Site#1
| |-------+ + + + |
| | + ASBR +<-MP-BGP->+ ASBR + |
| | + +__________+ + |
| | ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| VM --| | | |--- VPN1
| |Virtual | | | Site#2
| |Network | | |
| VM --| | | |--- VPN1
| | | | | Site#3
\ / | |
----------------- | |
\ /
------------------
|
|
VPN1
Site#4
The example above describes an NNI connection between CSP A and SP
network B. Both SPs do not trust themselves and use a different RT
allocation policy. So, in terms of implementation, the customer VPN
has a different RT in each network (RT A in CSP A and RT B in SP
network B). In order to connect the customer virtual network in CSP
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
A to the customer L2VPN (VPN1) in SP network B, CSP A should request
that SP network B open the customer VPN on the NNI (accept the
appropriate RT). Who does the RT translation depends on the
agreement between the two SPs: SP B may permit CSP A to request VPN
(RT) translation.
5.16.3. Defining an NNI with the Option C Flavor
AS A AS B
------------------- -------------------
/ \ / \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Multihop E-BGP ++++++++ |
| + + + + |
| + + + + |
| + RGW +<----MP-BGP---->+ RGW + |
| + + + + |
| + + + + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| ++++++++ Inter-AS link ++++++++ |
| + +_______________+ + |
| + + + + |
| + ASBR + + ASBR + |
| + + + + |
| + +_______________+ + |
| ++++++++ ++++++++ |
| | | |
| | | |
\ / \ /
------------------- -------------------
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
From a VPN service's perspective, the option C NNI is very similar to
option B, as an MP-BGP session is used to exchange VPN routes between
the ASes. The difference is that the forwarding plane and the
control plane are on different nodes, so the MP-BGP session is
multihop between routing gateway (RGW) nodes. From a VPN service's
point of view, modeling options B and C will be identical.
5.17. Applicability of L2SM model in Inter-Provider and Inter-Domain
Orchestration
In the case where the ASes belong to different providers, one might
imagine that providers would like to have fewer signaling sessions
crossing the AS boundary and that the entities that terminate the
sessions could be restricted to a smaller set of devices. Two
approaches can be taken:
(a) Inter-provider control connections to run only between the two
border routers
(b) Allow an end-to-end, multi-segment connectivity to be
constructed out of several connectivity segments, without
maintaining an end-to-end control connection.
Inter-provider control connection described in (a) can be realized
using techniques of section 5.15(i.e., defining NNI). Multi-segment
connectivity described in (b) can produce an inter-AS solution that
more closely resembles option (b) in [RFC4364]. It may be realized
using stitching of Per Site connectivity and service segment at
different domains, e.g., end to end connectivity between site_1 and
Site 3 spans across multiple domains(i.e., Metro networks described
in section 5.2.5.) and can be constructed by stitching network access
connectivity within site_1 with SEG1, SEG3, SEG4 and network access
connectivity within site3 (See the following figure). The assumption
is service orchestration layer in figure 5 should have visibility of
the complete abstract topology and resource availability. This may
rely on network planning to achieve that.
Note that OVC can also be regarded as network access connectivity
within a site and can be created as a normal site using L2SM service
model.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
---------- ---------- ----------
| | | | | |
+--+ +---+ +---+ +--+
Site_1|PE|==SEG1==| |==SEG3==| |==SEG4==|PE|Site_3
+--+ +---+ | | +--+
| | | | | | ----------
| | | | | | | |
+--+ +---+ | | +---+ +--+
Site_2|PE|==SEG2==| |==SEG5==| |==SEG6==| |==SEG7==|PE|Site_4
+--+ +---+ +---+ +---+ +--+
| | | | | | | |
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
In this figure, we use EBGP redistribution of L2VPN NLRI from AS to
neighboring AS. First, the PE routers use Internal BGP (IBGP) to
redistribute L2VPN NLRI either to an ASBR, or to a route reflector of
which an ASBR is a client. The ASBR then uses EBGP to redistribute
those L2VPN NLRI to an ASBR in another AS, which in turn distributes
them to the PE routers in that AS, or perhaps to another ASBR which
in turn distributes them, and so on.
In this case, a PE can learn the address of an ASBR through which it
could reach another PE to which it wishes to establish a
connectivity. That is, a local PE will receive a BGP advertisement
containing L2VPN NLRI corresponding to an L2VPN instance in which the
local PE has some attached members. The BGP next-hop for that L2VPN
NLRI will be an ASBR of the local AS. Then, rather than building a
control connection all the way to the remote PE, it builds one only
to the ASBR. A connectivity segment can now be established from the
PE to the ASBR. The ASBR in turn can establish a connectivity to the
ASBR of the next AS, and stitching that connectivity to the
connectivity from the PE as described in Section 3.5.4 and [RFC6073].
Repeating the process at each ASBR leads to a sequence of
connectivity segments that, when stitching together, connect the two
PEs.
Note that in the approach just described, the local PE may never
learn the IP address of the remote PE. It learns the L2VPN NLRI
advertised by the remote PE, which need not contain the remote PE
address, and it learns the IP address of the ASBR that is the BGP
next hop for that NLRI.
When this approach is used for VPLS, or for full-mesh VPWS, it leads
to a full mesh of connectivity among the PEs, but it does not require
a full mesh of control connections (LDP or L2TPv3 sessions).
Instead, the control connections within a single AS run among all the
PEs of that AS and the ASBRs of the AS. A single control connection
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
between the ASBRs of adjacent ASes can be used to support however
many AS-to-AS connectivity segments are needed.
6. Interaction with Other YANG Modules
As expressed in Section 4, this service module is not intended to
configure the network element, but is instantiated in a management
system.
The management system might follow modular design and comprise at
least two different components:
a. The component instantiating the service model (let's call it the
service component)
b. The component responsible for network element configuration
(let's call it the configuration component)
In some cases, when a split is needed between the behavior and
functions that a customer requests and the technology that the
network operator has available to deliver the service
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained], a new component can be
separated out of the service component (let's call it the control
component). This component is responsible for network-centric
operation and is aware of many features such as topology, technology,
and operator policy. As an optional component, it can use the
service model as input and is not required at all if the control
component delegates its control operations to the configuration
component.
In Section 7 we provide some example of translation of service
provisioning requests to router configuration lines as an
illustration. In the NETCONF/YANG ecosystem, it is expected that
NETCONF and YANG will be used between the configuration component and
network elements to configure the requested service on those
elements.
In this framework, it is expected that YANG models will be used for
configuring service components on network elements. There will be a
strong relationship between the abstracted view provided by this
service model and the detailed configuration view that will be
provided by specific configuration models for network elements such
as those defined in [I-D.ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang] and
[I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang]. Service components needing configuration
on network elements in support of the service model defined in this
document include:
o Network Instance definition including VPN policy expression.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o Physical interface.
o Ethernet layer (VLAN ID).
o QoS: classification, profiles, etc.
o Ethernet Service OAM Support.
7. Service Model Usage Example
As explained in Section 4, this service model is intended to be
instantiated at a management layer and is not intended to be used
directly on network elements. The management system serves as a
central point of configuration of the overall service.
This section provides an example on how a management system can use
this model to configure an L2VPN service on network elements.
The example is to provide a VPN service for 3 sites using point-to-
point VPWS and a Hub and Spoke VPN service topology as shown in
Figure Figure 5. Loadbalancing is not considered in this case.
Site1
............
: : P2P VPWS
:Spoke Site:-----PE1--------------------------+
: : | Site3
:..........: | ............
| : :
PE3-----: Hub Site :
Site2 | : :
............ | :..........:
: : P2P VPWS |
:Spoke Site:-----PE2--------------------------+
: :
:..........:
Figure 5: Reference Network for Simple Example
The following XML describes the overall simplified service
configuration of this VPN.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
12456487
vpws
hub-spoke
12456488
vpws
hub-spoke
When receiving the request for provisioning the VPN service, the
management system will internally (or through communication with
another OSS component) allocates VPN route-targets. In this specific
case two Route Targets (RTs) will be allocated (100:1 for Hubs and
100:2 for Spokes). The output below describes the configuration of
Spoke Site1.
Spoke_Site1
NY
US
Spoke_UNI-Site1
20
dot1q
17
TUNNEL
TRUE
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
input-bw
opaque
450000000
20000000
1000000000
200000000
bgp
12456487
spoke-role
provider-managed
When receiving the request for provisioning Spoke1 site, the
management system MUST allocate network resources for this site. It
MUST first determine the target network elements to provision the
access, and especially the PE router (and may be an aggregation
switch). As described in Section 5.3.1, the management system SHOULD
use the location information and MUST use the access-diversity
constraint to find the appropriate PE. In this case, we consider
Spoke1 requires PE diversity with Hub and that management system
allocate PEs based on lowest distance. Based on the location
information, the management system finds the available PEs in the
nearest area of the customer and picks one that fits the access-
diversity constraint.
When the PE is chosen, the management system needs to allocate
interface resources on the node. One interface is selected from the
PE available pool. The management system can start provisioning the
PE node by using any mean (Netconf, CLI, ...). The management system
will check if a VSI is already present that fits the needs. If not,
it will provision the VSI: Route Distinguisher will come from
internal allocation policy model, route-targets are coming from the
vpn-policy configuration of the site (management system allocated
some RTs for the VPN). As the site is a Spoke site (site-role), the
management system knows which RT must be imported and exported. As
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
the site is provider managed, some management route-targets may also
be added (100:5000). Standard provider VPN policies MAY also be
added in the configuration.
Example of generated PE configuration:
l2vpn vsi context one
vpn id 12456487
autodiscovery bgp signaling bgp
ve id 1001 <----identify the PE routers within the VPLS domain
ve range 50 <---- VE size
route-distinguisher 100:3123234324
route-target import 100:1
route-target import 100:5000 <---- Standard SP configuration
route-target export 100:2 for provider managed CE
!
When the VSI has been provisioned, the management system can start
configuring the access on the PE using the allocated interface
information. The tag or VLAN (e.g., service instance tag)is chosen
by the management system. One tag will be picked from an allocated
subnet for the PE, another will be used for the CE configuration.
LACP protocols will also be configured between PE and CE and due to
provider managed model, the choice is up to service provider. This
choice is independent of the LACP protocol chosen by customer.
Example of generated PE configuration:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
!
bridge-domain 1
member Ethernet0/0 service-instance 100
member vsi one
!
l2 router-id 10.100.1.1
!
interface Ethernet0/0
no ip address
service instance 100 ethernet
encapsulation dot1q 100
!
!
router bgp 1
bgp log-neighbor-changes
neighbor 10.100.1.4 remote-as 1
neighbor 10.100.1.4 update-source Loopback0
!
address-family l2vpn vpls
neighbor 10.100.1.4 activate
neighbor 10.100.1.4 send-community extended
neighbor 10.100.1.4 suppress-signaling-protocol ldp
exit-address-family
!
interface vlan 100 <-- Associating the Attachment
no ip address Circuit with the MAC-VRF at the PE
xconnect vsi PE1-VPLS-A
!
vlan 100
state active
As the CE router is not reachable at this stage, the management
system can produce a complete CE configuration that can be uploaded
to the node by manual operation before sending the CE to customer
premise. The CE configuration will be built as for the PE. Based on
the CE type (vendor/model) allocated to the customer and bearer
information, the management system knows which interface must be
configured on the CE. PE-CE link configuration is expected to be
handled automatically using the service provider OSS as both
resources are managed internally. CE to LAN interface parameters
like dot1Q tag are derived from the ethernet-connection taking into
account how management system distributes dot1Q tag between PE and CE
within subnet. This will allow to produce a plug'n'play
configuration for the CE.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Example of generated CE configuration:
interface Ethernet0/1
switchport trunk allowed vlan none
switchport mode trunk
service instance 100 ethernet
encapsulation default
l2protocol forward cdp
xconnect 1.1.1.1 100 encapsulation mpls
!
8. YANG Module
file "ietf-l2vpn-svc@2018-01-08.yang"
module ietf-l2vpn-svc {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l2vpn-svc";
prefix l2vpn-svc;
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
}
import ietf-netconf-acm {
prefix nacm;
}
organization
"IETF L2SM Working Group.";
contact
"WG List: l2sm@ietf.org
Editor: giuseppe.fioccola@telecomitalia.it
";
description
"The YANG module defines a generic service configuration
model for Layer 2 VPN services common across all of the
vendor implementations.";
revision 2018-01-08{
description
"Initial revision -04 version";
reference
"draft-ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model-05.txt
A YANG Data Model for L2VPN Service Delivery.";
}
/* Features */
feature carrierscarrier {
description
"Enables support of CsC.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
feature frame-delivery{
description
"Enables frame-delivery capabilities support in a L2VPN.";
}
feature extranet-vpn{
description
"Enable the Support of Extranet VPN.";
}
feature L2CP-control {
description
"Enable the Support of L2CP control.";
}
feature input-bw {
description
"Enable the suppport of Input Bandwidth in a VPN.";
}
feature output-bw {
description
"Enable the support of Output Bandwidth in a VPN";
}
feature uni-list {
description
"Enable the support of UNI list in a VPN.";
}
feature cloud-access {
description
"Allow VPN to connect to a Cloud Service
provider.";
}
feature oam-3ah {
description
"Enables the support of OAM 802.3ah.";
}
feature micro-bfd {
description
"Enables the support of Micro-BFD.";
}
feature bfd {
description
"Enables the support of BFD.";
}
feature signaling-options {
description
"Enable the support of signalling option.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
feature site-diversity {
description
"Enables the support of site diversity constraints in a VPN.";
}
feature encryption {
description
"Enables support of encryption.";
}
feature always-on {
description
"Enables support for always-on access
constraint.";
}
feature requested-type {
description
"Enables support for requested-type access
constraint.";
}
feature bearer-reference {
description
"Enables support for bearer-reference access
constraint.";
}
feature qos {
description
"Enables support of Class of Services.";
}
feature qos-custom {
description
"Enables support of custom qos profile.";
}
feature lag-interface{
description
"Enable lag-interface.";
}
feature vlan {
description
"Enable the support of VLAN.";
}
feature dot1q{
description
"Enable the support of Dot1Q.";
}
feature sub-inf{
description
"Enable the support of Sub Interface.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
feature qinq {
description
"Enable the support of QinQ.";
}
feature qinany{
description
"Enable the support of QinAny.";
}
feature vxlan {
description
"Enable the support of VxLAN.";
}
feature lan-tag {
description
"Enables LAN Tag support in a VPN.";
}
feature target-sites {
description
"Enables support of the 'target-sites' match flow parameter.";
}
/* Typedefs */
typedef svc-id {
type string;
description
"Defines a type of service component identifier.";
}
typedef ccm-priority-type {
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"A 3 bit priority value to be used in the VLAN tag,
if present in the transmitted frame.";
}
typedef control-mode {
type enumeration {
enum peer {
description
"Peer mode,i.e.,participate in the protocol towards the CE.
Peering is common for LACP and E-LMI and occasionally
for LLDP. For virtual private services the Subscriber
can also request that the Service Provider peer
spanning tree.";
}
enum tunnel {
description
"Tunnel mode,i.e.,pass to the egress or destination site.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
For EPL, the expectation is that L2CP frames are tunneled.";
}
enum discard {
description
"Discard mode,i.e.,discard the frame.";
}
}
description
"Defining a type of the control mode on L2CP protocols.";
}
typedef neg-mode {
type enumeration {
enum full-duplex {
description
"Defining Full duplex mode";
}
enum auto-neg {
description
"Defining Auto negotiation mode";
}
}
description
"Defining a type of the negotiation mode";
}
/* Identities */
identity site-network-access-type {
description
"Base identity for site-network-access type.";
}
identity point-to-point {
base site-network-access-type;
description
"Identity for point-to-point connection.";
}
identity multipoint {
base site-network-access-type;
description
"Identity for multipoint connection.
Example: Ethernet broadcast segment.";
}
identity tag-type {
description
"Base identity from which all tag types
are derived from";
}
identity c-vlan {
base tag-type;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"A Customer-VLAN tag, normally using the 0x8100
Ethertype";
}
identity s-vlan {
base tag-type;
description
"A Service-VLAN tag.";
}
identity multicast-tree-type {
description
"Base identity for multicast tree type.";
}
identity ssm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for SSM tree type.";
}
identity asm-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for ASM tree type.";
}
identity bidir-tree-type {
base multicast-tree-type;
description
"Identity for bidirectional tree type.";
}
identity mapping-type{
description
"Identity mapping-type";
}
identity static-mapping{
base mapping-type;
description
"Identity for static mapping, i.e.,attach the interface
to the Multicast group as static member";
}
identity dynamic-mapping{
base mapping-type;
description
"Identity for dynamic mapping, i.e.,interface was added
to the Multicast group as a result of snooping";
}
identity tf-type{
description
"Identity traffic-type";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity multicast-traffic {
base tf-type;
description
"Identity for multicast traffic";
}
identity broadcast-traffic {
base tf-type;
description
"Identity for broadcast traffic";
}
identity unknown-unicast-traffic {
base tf-type;
description
"Identity for unknown unicast traffic";
}
identity encapsulation-type {
description
"Identity for encapsulation type";
}
identity ethernet {
base encapsulation-type;
description
"Identity for ethernet type";
}
identity vlan {
base encapsulation-type;
description
"Identity for VLAN type";
}
identity carrierscarrier-type{
description
"Identity of carrierscarrier";
}
identity ldp {
base carrierscarrier-type;
description
"Use LDP as the signalling protocol
between the PE and the CE.";
}
identity bgp {
base carrierscarrier-type;
description
"Use BGP (as per RFC 3107) as the signalling protocol
between the PE and the CE.
In this case, BGP must also be configured as
the routing protocol.";
}
identity eth-inf-type {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Identity of Ethernet Interface Type.";
}
identity tagged {
base eth-inf-type;
description
"Identity of tagged Interface type.";
}
identity untagged {
base eth-inf-type;
description
"Identity of untagged Interface type.";
}
identity lag {
base eth-inf-type;
description
"Identity of LAG Interface type";
}
identity bw-type {
description
"Identity of bandwidth";
}
identity bw-per-cos {
base bw-type;
description
"Bandwidth is per cos";
}
identity bw-per-port {
base bw-type;
description
"Bandwidth is per site network access";
}
identity opaque {
base bw-type;
description
"Opaque";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor {
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-single {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used when the site belongs to only one VPN.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity site-vpn-flavor-multi {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used when a logical connection of a site
belongs to multiple VPNs.";
}
identity site-vpn-flavor-nni {
base site-vpn-flavor;
description
"Base identity for the site VPN service flavor.
Used to describe an NNI option A connection.";
}
identity service-type {
description
"Base Identity of service type.";
}
identity vpws {
base service-type;
description
"point-to-point Virtual Private Wire Services(VPWS) type.";
}
identity pwe3 {
base service-type;
description
"Pseudo-Wire Emulation Edge to
Edge(PWE3)Service type. .";
}
identity ldp-l2tp-vpls {
base service-type;
description
"LDP based or L2TP based multipoint Virtual Private LAN
services (VPLS) Service Type.This VPLS uses LDP-signaled
Pseudowires or L2TP signaled Pseudowires.";
}
identity bgp-vpls {
base service-type;
description
"BGP based multipoint Virtual Private LAN services (VPLS)
Service Type. This VPLS uses a Border Gateway Protocol
(BGP) control plane as described in RFC4761 and RFC6624.";
}
identity vpws-evpn {
base service-type;
description
"VPWS Service Type using Ethernet VPN(EVPN) specified in RFC 7432.";
}
identity pbb-evpn {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
base service-type;
description
"PBB Service Type using Ethernet VPN(EVPN) specified in RFC 7432.";
}
identity bundling-type {
description
"This is base identity for Bundling type. It supports
multiple CE-VLAN associated with L2VPN service or
all CE-VLANs associated with L2VPN service.";
}
identity multi-svc-bundling {
base bundling-type;
description
"Identity for multiple service bundling,i.e.,
multiple CE-VLAN IDs can be associated with an
L2VPN Service at site.";
}
identity one2one-bundling {
base bundling-type;
description
"Identity for one to one service bundling,i.e.,
Each L2VPN can be associated with only one CE-VLAN IDs
at site.";
}
identity all2one-Bundling {
base bundling-type;
description
"Identity for all to one bundling,i.e.,all CE-VLAN IDs
are mapped to one L2VPN Service";
}
identity color-id {
description
"base identity of color id";
}
identity color-id--cvlan {
base color-id;
description
"Identity of color id base on CVLAN ";
}
identity cos-id {
description
"Identity of class of service id";
}
identity cos-id-pcp {
base cos-id;
description
"Identity of cos id based on PCP";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
identity cos-id--dscp {
base cos-id;
description
"Identity of cos id based on DSCP";
}
identity color-type {
description
"Identity of color types";
}
identity green {
base color-type;
description
"Identity of green type";
}
identity yellow {
base color-type;
description
"Identity of yellow type";
}
identity red {
base color-type;
description
"Identity of red type";
}
identity policing {
description
"Identity of policing type";
}
identity one-rate-two-color {
base policing;
description
"Identity of one-rate, two-color (1R2C).";
}
identity two-rate-three-color {
base policing;
description
"Identity of two-rate, three-color (2R3C).";
}
identity bum-type {
description
"Identity of BUM type.";
}
identity broadcast {
base bum-type;
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Identity of broadcast.";
}
identity unicast {
base bum-type;
description
"Identity of unicast";
}
identity multicast {
base bum-type;
description
"Identity of multicast.";
}
identity loop-prevention-type{
description
"Identity of loop prevention.";
}
identity shut {
base loop-prevention-type;
description
"Identity of shut protection.";
}
identity trap {
base loop-prevention-type;
description
"Identity of trap protection.";
}
identity lacp-state {
description
"Identity of LACP state.";
}
identity lacp-on {
base lacp-state;
description
"Identity of LCAP on.";
}
identity lacp-off {
base lacp-state;
description
"Identity of LACP off";
}
identity lacp-mode {
description
"Identity of LACP mode";
}
identity lacp-passive {
base lacp-mode;
description
"Identity of LACP passive";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
identity lacp-active {
base lacp-mode;
description
"Identity of LACP active";
}
identity lacp-speed {
description
"Identity of LACP speed";
}
identity lacp-fast {
base lacp-speed;
description
"Identity of LACP fast";
}
identity lacp-slow {
base lacp-speed;
description
"Identity of LACP slow";
}
identity bw-direction{
description
"Identity for bandwidth direction";
}
identity input-bw{
base bw-direction;
description
"Identity for input bandwidth";
}
identity output-bw{
base bw-direction;
description
"Identity for output bandwidth";
}
identity management {
description
"Base identity for site management scheme.";
}
identity co-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for co-managed site.";
}
identity customer-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for customer managed site.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity provider-managed {
base management;
description
"Base identity for provider managed site.";
}
identity address-family {
description
"Base identity for an address family.";
}
identity ipv4 {
base address-family;
description
"Identity for IPv4 address family.";
}
identity ipv6 {
base address-family;
description
"Identity for IPv6 address family.";
}
identity vpn-topology {
description
"Base identity for VPN topology.";
}
identity any-to-any {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for any to any VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology.";
}
identity hub-spoke-disjoint {
base vpn-topology;
description
"Identity for Hub'n'Spoke VPN topology
where Hubs cannot talk between each other.";
}
identity site-role {
description
"Base identity for site type.";
}
identity any-to-any-role {
base site-role;
description
"Site in an any to any IPVPN.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity spoke-role {
base site-role;
description
"Spoke Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity hub-role {
base site-role;
description
"Hub Site in a Hub & Spoke IPVPN.";
}
identity pm-type {
description
"Performance monitor type";
}
identity loss {
base pm-type;
description
"Loss measurement";
}
identity delay {
base pm-type;
description
"Delay measurement";
}
identity fault-alarm-defect-type {
description
"Indicating the alarm priority defect";
}
identity remote-rdi {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
description
"Indicates the aggregate health of the remote MEPs.";
}
identity remote-mac-error {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
description
"Indicates that one or more of the remote MEPs is
reporting a failure in its Port Status TLV or
Interface Status TLV.";
}
identity remote-invalid-ccm {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
description
"Indicates that at least one of the Remote MEP
state machines is not receiving valid CCMs
from its remote MEP.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity invalid-ccm {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
description
"Indicates that one or more invalid CCMs has been
received and that 3.5 times that CCMs transmission
interval has not yet expired.";
}
identity cross-connect-ccm {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
description
"Indicates that one or more cross connect CCMs has been
received and that 3.5 times of at least one of those
CCMs transmission interval has not yet expired.";
}
identity frame-delivery-mode {
description
"Delivery types";
}
identity discard {
base frame-delivery-mode;
description
"Service Frames are discarded.";
}
identity unconditional {
base frame-delivery-mode;
description
"Service Frames are unconditionally
delivered to the destination site.";
}
identity unknown-discard {
base frame-delivery-mode;
description
"Service Frame are conditionally
delivered to the destination site and
the packet with unknown destination address
will be discarded.";
}
identity placement-diversity {
description
"Base identity for site placement
constraints.";
}
identity bearer-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for bearer diversity.
The bearers should not use common elements.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity pe-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for PE diversity";
}
identity pop-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for POP diversity";
}
identity linecard-diverse {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for linecard diversity";
}
identity same-pe {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for having sites connected
on the same PE";
}
identity same-bearer {
base placement-diversity;
description
"Identity for having sites connected
using the same bearer";
}
identity tagged-inf-type {
description
"Identity for the tagged
interface type.";
}
identity priority-tagged {
base tagged-inf-type;
description
"This identity the priority-tagged interface.";
}
identity qinq{
base tagged-inf-type;
description
"Identity for the qinq tagged interface.";
}
identity dot1q{
base tagged-inf-type;
description
"Identity for dot1q vlan tagged interface.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
identity qinany{
base tagged-inf-type;
description
"Identity for qinany tagged inteface.";
}
identity vxlan{
base tagged-inf-type;
description
"Identity for vxlan tagged inteface.";
}
identity provision-model {
description
"base identity for provision model.";
}
identity single-side-provision {
description
"Identity for single side provisioning with discovery.";
}
identity doubled-side-provision {
description
"Identity for double side provisioning.";
}
identity mac-learning-mode {
description
"MAC learning mode";
}
identity data-plane {
base mac-learning-mode;
description
"User MAC addresses are learned through ARP broadcast.";
}
identity control-plane {
base mac-learning-mode;
description
"User MAC addresses are advertised through EVPN-BGP";
}
identity vpn-policy-filter-type {
description
"Base identity for filter type.";
}
identity lan {
base vpn-policy-filter-type;
description
"Identity for lan tag filter type.";
}
identity mac-action {
description
"Base identity for MAC action.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
identity drop {
base mac-action;
description
"Identity for packet drop.";
}
identity flood {
base mac-action;
description
"Identity for packet flooding.";
}
identity warning {
base mac-action;
description
"Identity for sending a warning log message.";
}
identity load-balance-method {
description
"Base identity for load balance method.";
}
identity fat-pw {
base load-balance-method;
description
"Identity for Fat PW. Fat label is
applied to Pseudowires across MPLS
network.";
}
identity entropy-label {
base load-balance-method;
description
"Identity for entropy label.Entropy label
is applied to IP forwarding,
L2VPN or L3VPN across MPLS network";
}
identity vxlan-source-port {
base load-balance-method;
description
"Identity for vxlan source port.VxLAN
Source Port is one load balancing method.";
}
identity qos-profile-direction {
description
"Base identity for qos profile direction.";
}
identity site-to-wan {
base qos-profile-direction;
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Identity for Site to WAN direction.";
}
identity wan-to-site {
base qos-profile-direction;
description
"Identity for WAN to Site direction.";
}
identity bidirection {
base qos-profile-direction;
description
"Identity for both WAN to Site direction
and Site to WAN direction.";
}
identity vxlan-peer-mode {
description
"Base identity for vxlan peer mode.";
}
identity static-mode {
base vxlan-peer-mode;
description
"Identity for the vxlan access in static mode.";
}
identity bgp-mode {
base vxlan-peer-mode;
description
"Identity for the vxlan access by bgp evpn learning.";
}
identity customer-application {
description
"Base identity for customer application.";
}
identity web {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for Web application (e.g., HTTP, HTTPS).";
}
identity mail {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for mail application.";
}
identity file-transfer {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for file transfer application (e.g., FTP, SFTP).";
}
identity database {
base customer-application;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Identity for database application.";
}
identity social {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for social-network application.";
}
identity games {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for gaming application.";
}
identity p2p {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for peer-to-peer application.";
}
identity network-management {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for management application
(e.g., Telnet, syslog, SNMP).";
}
identity voice {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for voice application.";
}
identity video {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for video conference application.";
}
identity embb {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for enhanced Mobile Broadband(eMBB)
application. Note that eMBB application demands
the network performance with wide variety of
characteristics such as data rate, latency,
loss rate, reliability and many other parameters.";
}
identity urllc {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency
Communications (URLLC) application. Note that
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
URLLC application demands the network performance
with wide variety of characteristics such as latency,
reliability and many other parameters.";
}
identity mmtc {
base customer-application;
description
"Identity for massive Machine Type
Communications (mMTC) application. Note that
mMTC application demands the network performance
with wide variety of characteristics such as data
rate, latency, loss rate, reliability and many
other parameters.";
}
/* Groupings */
grouping vpn-service-cloud-access {
container cloud-accesses {
if-feature cloud-access;
list cloud-access {
key cloud-identifier;
leaf cloud-identifier {
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/vpn-profiles/"+
"valid-provider-identifiers/cloud-identifier/id";
}
description
"Identification of cloud service.
Local administration meaning.";
}
choice list-flavor {
case permit-any {
leaf permit-any {
type empty;
description
"Allow all sites.";
}
}
case deny-any-except {
leaf-list permit-site {
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID to be authorized.";
}
}
case permit-any-except {
leaf-list deny-site {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/sites/site/site-id";
}
description
"Site ID to be denied.";
}
}
description
"Choice for cloud access policy.";
}
description
"Cloud access configuration.";
}
description
"Container for cloud access configurations";
}
description
"Grouping for vpn cloud definition";
}
grouping site-vpn-flavor {
leaf site-vpn-flavor {
type identityref {
base site-vpn-flavor;
}
default site-vpn-flavor-single;
description
"Defines the way the VPN multiplexing is done ,e.g.,whether
the site belongs to a single VPN site or a multiVPN;";
}
description
"Grouping for site VPN flavor.";
}
grouping site-device {
container devices {
when "derived-from-or-self(../management/type, 'l2vpn-svc:provider-managed') or "+
"derived-from-or-self(../management/type, 'l2vpn-svc:co-managed')" {
description
"Applicable only for provider-managed or
co-managed device.";
}
list device {
key "device-id";
leaf device-id {
type string;
description
"Identifier for the device.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
leaf location {
type leafref {
path "../../../locations/"+
"location/location-id";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Location of the device.";
}
container management {
when "derived-from-or-self(../../../management/type,"+
"'l2vpn-svc:co-managed')" {
description
"Applicable only for co-managed device.";
}
leaf management-transport {
type identityref {
base address-family;
}
description
"Transport protocol or Address family used for management.";
}
leaf address {
when "(../management-transport)" {
description
"If address-family is specified, then address should
also be specified.If management transport is not specified,
then address should also not be specified.";
}
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Management address.";
}
description
"Management configuration. Applicable only for
co-managed device.";
}
description
"List of devices requested by customer.";
}
description
"Devices configuration";
}
description
"Device parameters for the site.";
}
grouping site-management {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
container management {
leaf type {
type identityref {
base management;
}
mandatory true;
description
"Management type of the connection.";
}
description
"Management configuration.";
}
description
"Management parameter for the site.";
}
grouping site-vpn-policy {
container vpn-policies {
list vpn-policy {
key vpn-policy-id;
leaf vpn-policy-id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier for the VPN policy.";
}
list entries {
key id;
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Unique identifier for the policy entry.";
}
container filters {
list filter {
key type;
ordered-by user;
leaf type {
type identityref {
base vpn-policy-filter-type;
}
description
"Type of VPN Policy filter.";
}
leaf-list lan-tag {
when "derived-from-or-self(../type, 'l2vpn-svc:lan')" {
description
"Only applies when VPN Policy filter is LAN Tag filter.";
}
if-feature lan-tag;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
type uint32;
description
"List of Ethernet LAN Tag to be matched. Ethernet LAN Tag
identifies a particular broadcast domain in a VPN. ";
}
description
"List of filters used on the site. This list can
be augmented.";
}
description
"If a more-granular VPN attachment is necessary, filtering can
be used. If used, it permits the splitting of site LANs among
multiple VPNs.The Site LAN can be split based on either LAN-tag
or LAN prefix. If no filter is used, all the LANs will be
part of the same VPNs with the same role.";
}
list vpn {
key vpn-id;
leaf vpn-id {
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/vpn-services/"+
"vpn-service/vpn-id";
}
mandatory true;
description
"Reference to an IP VPN.";
}
leaf site-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"Role of the site in the IP VPN.";
}
description
"List of VPNs the LAN is associated with.";
}
description
"List of entries for export policy.";
}
description
"List of VPN policies.";
}
description
"VPN policy.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"VPN policy parameters for the site.";
}
grouping bum-frame-delivery {
container bum-frame-delivery {
list bum-frame-delivery {
key frame-type;
leaf frame-type {
type identityref {
base tf-type;
}
description
"Type of frame delivery. It support unicast
frame delivery, multicast frame delivery
and broadcast frame delivery.";
}
leaf delivery-mode {
type identityref {
base frame-delivery-mode;
}
description
"Define Frame Delivery Mode
(unconditional[default], conditional, or discard).";
}
description
"List of frame delivery type and mode.";
}
description
"Define frame delivery type and mode.";
}
description
"Grouping for unicast, mulitcast, broadcast frame delivery";
}
grouping cvlan-svc-map-grouping {
list cvlan-id-to-svc-map {
key "svc-id";
leaf svc-id {
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/vpn-services/vpn-service/vpn-id";
}
description
"VPN Service identifier";
}
list cvlan-id {
key vid;
leaf vid {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
type uint16;
description
"CVLAN ID";
}
description
"List of CVLAN-ID to SVC Map configurations";
}
description
"List for cvlan-id to L2VPn Service map configurations";
}
description
"Grouping for cvlan to L2VPN service mapping";
}
grouping customer-location-info {
container locations {
list location {
key location-id;
leaf location-id {
type string;
description
"Location ID";
}
leaf address {
type string;
description
"Address (number and street) of the site.";
}
leaf zip-code {
type string;
description
"ZIP code of the site.";
}
leaf state {
type string;
description
"State of the site. This leaf can also be used to
describe a region for country who does not have
states.";
}
leaf city {
type string;
description
"City of the site.";
}
leaf country-code {
type string;
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Country of the site.";
}
description
"List for location";
}
description
"Location of the site.";
}
description
"This grouping defines customer location parameters";
}
grouping site-diversity {
container site-diversity {
if-feature site-diversity;
container groups {
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id the site is belonging to";
}
description
"List of group-id";
}
description
"Groups the site is belonging to.
All site network accesses will inherit those group
values.";
}
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
description
"This grouping defines site diversity parameters";
}
grouping vpn-service-multicast {
container frame-delivery {
if-feature frame-delivery;
container customer-tree-flavors {
leaf-list tree-flavor {
type identityref {
base multicast-tree-type;
}
description
"Type of tree to be used.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
description
"Type of trees used by customer.";
}
uses bum-frame-delivery;
leaf multicast-gp-port-mapping {
type identityref {
base mapping-type;
}
mandatory true;
description
"Describe the way in which each interface is
associated with the Multicast group";
}
description
"Multicast global parameters for the VPN service.";
}
description
"Grouping for multicast VPN definition.";
}
grouping vpn-extranet {
container extranet-vpns {
if-feature extranet-vpn;
list extranet-vpn {
key vpn-id;
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifies the target VPN the local VPN want to access.";
}
leaf local-sites-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"This describes the role of the local sites in the target
VPN topology. In the any-to-any VPN service topology,
the local sites must have the same role, which will be
'any-to-any-role '. In the Hub-and-Spoke VPN service
topology or the Hub and Spoke disjoint VPN service topology,
the local sites must have a Hub role or a Spoke role";
}
description
"List of extranet VPNs the local VPN is attached to.";
}
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Container for extranet VPN configuration.";
}
description
"Grouping for extranet VPN configuration.
This provides an easy way to interconnect
all sites from two VPNs.";
}
grouping operational-requirements-ops {
leaf actual-site-start {
type yang:date-and-time;
config false;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time when the service at a particular
site actually started";
}
leaf actual-site-stop {
type yang:date-and-time;
config false;
description
"Optional leaf indicating actual date
and time when the service at a particular
site actually stopped";
}
leaf bundling-type {
type identityref {
base bundling-type;
}
description
"Bundling type";
}
leaf default-ce-vlan-id {
type uint32;
description
"Default CE VLAN ID set at site level.";
}
description
"This grouping defines some operational parameters
parameters";
}
grouping cfm-802-grouping {
leaf maid {
type string;
description
"Identify an Maintenance Association (MA).";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
leaf mep-id {
type uint32;
description
"Local Maintenance End Point (MEP) ID";
}
leaf mep-level {
type uint32;
description
"Define Maintenance End Point (MEP) level.";
}
leaf mep-up-down {
type enumeration {
enum up {
description
"MEP up";
}
enum down {
description
"MEP down";
}
}
description
"MEP up/down";
}
leaf remote-mep-id {
type uint32;
description
"Remote MEP ID";
}
leaf cos-for-cfm-pdus {
type uint32;
description
"COS for CFM PDUs";
}
leaf ccm-interval {
type uint32;
description
" Continuity Check Message(CCM) interval.";
}
leaf ccm-holdtime {
type uint32;
description
"CCM hold time";
}
leaf alarm-priority-defect {
type identityref {
base fault-alarm-defect-type;
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"The lowest priority defect that is
allowed to generate a Fault Alarm.
The non-existence of this leaf means
that no defects are to be reported";
}
leaf ccm-p-bits-pri {
type ccm-priority-type;
description
"The priority parameter for CCMs transmitted by the MEP.";
}
description
"Grouping for 802.1ag CFM attributes.";
}
grouping y-1731 {
list y-1731 {
key maid;
leaf maid {
type string;
description
"Identify an Maintenance Association (MA). ";
}
leaf mep-id {
type uint32;
description
"Local Maintenance End Point(MEP) ID.";
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
base pm-type;
}
description
"Performance monitor types.";
}
leaf remote-mep-id {
type uint32;
description
"Remote MEP ID.";
}
leaf message-period {
type uint32;
description
"Defines the interval between OAM messages. The message
period is expressed in milliseconds.";
}
leaf measurement-interval {
type uint32;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Specifies the measurement interval for statistics. The
measurement interval is expressed in seconds.";
}
leaf cos {
type uint32;
description
"Class of service.";
}
leaf loss-measurement {
type boolean;
description
"Whether enable loss measurement.";
}
leaf synthethic-loss-measurement {
type boolean;
description
"Indicate whether enable synthetic loss measurement.";
}
container delay-measurement {
leaf enable-dm {
type boolean;
description
"Whether to enable delay measurement.";
}
leaf two-way {
type boolean;
description
"Whether delay measurement is two-way (true) of one-
way (false).";
}
description
"Container for delay measurement.";
}
leaf frame-size {
type uint32;
description
"Frame size.";
}
leaf session-type {
type enumeration {
enum proactive {
description
"Proactive mode.";
}
enum on-demand {
description
"On demand mode.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
}
description
"Session type.";
}
description
"List for y-1731.";
}
description
"Grouping for y.1731.";
}
grouping site-acl {
container access-control-list {
list mac {
key "mac-address";
leaf mac-address {
type yang:mac-address;
description
"MAC address.";
}
description
"List for MAC.";
}
description
"Container for access control List.";
}
description
"This grouping defines Access Control List.";
}
grouping lacp-grouping {
container lacp {
leaf lacp-state {
type boolean;
description
"LACP on/off.";
}
leaf lacp-mode {
type boolean;
description
"LACP mode.";
}
leaf lacp-speed {
type uint32;
description
"LACP speed.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
leaf mini-link {
type uint32;
description
"The minimum aggregate bandwidth for a LAG.";
}
leaf system-priority {
type uint16;
description
"Indicates the LACP priority for the system.
The range is from 0 to 65535.
The default is 32768.";
}
container micro-bfd {
if-feature micro-bfd;
leaf micro-bfd-on-off {
type enumeration {
enum on {
description
"Micro-bfd on.";
}
enum off {
description
"Micro-bfd off.";
}
}
description
"Micro BFD ON/OFF.";
}
leaf bfd-interval {
type uint32;
description
"BFD interval.";
}
leaf bfd-hold-timer {
type uint32;
description
"BFD hold timer.";
}
description
"Container of Micro-BFD configurations.";
}
container bfd {
if-feature bfd;
leaf bfd-enabled {
type boolean;
description
"BFD activation";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
choice holdtime {
default fixed;
case profile {
leaf profile-name {
type string;
description
"Service provider well known profile.";
}
description
"Service provider well known profile.";
}
case fixed {
leaf fixed-value {
type uint32;
units msec;
description
"Expected hold time expressed in msec.";
}
}
description
"Choice for hold time flavor.";
}
description
"Container for BFD.";
}
container member-link-list {
list member-link {
key "name";
leaf name {
type string;
description
"Member link name.";
}
leaf port-speed {
type uint32;
description
"Port speed.";
}
leaf mode {
type neg-mode;
description
"Negotiation mode.";
}
leaf link-mtu {
type uint32;
description
"Link MTU size.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
container oam-802.3ah-link {
if-feature oam-3ah;
leaf enable {
type boolean;
description
"Indicate whether support oam 802.3 ah link.";
}
description
"Container for oam 802.3 ah link.";
}
description
"Member link";
}
description
"Container of Member link list";
}
leaf flow-control {
type string;
description
"Flow control.";
}
leaf lldp {
type boolean;
description
"LLDP.";
}
description
"LACP.";
}
description
"Grouping for lacp.";
}
grouping untagged-interface-grouping {
container untagged-interface {
leaf ifindex {
type uint32;
description
"Index for the physical interface.";
}
leaf port-speed {
type uint32;
description
"Port speed.";
}
leaf mode {
type neg-mode;
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Negotiation mode.";
}
leaf phy-mtu {
type uint32;
description
"PHY MTU.";
}
leaf flow-control {
type string;
description
"Flow control.";
}
leaf lldp {
type boolean;
description
"LLDP.";
}
container oam-802.3ah-link {
if-feature oam-3ah;
leaf enable {
type boolean;
description
"Indicate whether support oam 802.3 ah link";
}
description
"Container for oam 802.3 ah link.";
}
leaf uni-loop-prevention {
type boolean;
description
"If this leaf set to truth that the port automatically
goes down when a physical loopback is detect.";
}
description
"Container of Untagged Interface Attributes
configurations.";
}
description
"Grouping for Untagged interface.";
}
grouping lag-interface-grouping {
container lag-interface {
if-feature lag-interface;
list lag-interface {
key "lag-ifindex";
leaf lag-ifindex {
type uint32;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 111]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"LAG interface index.";
}
uses lacp-grouping;
description
"List of LAG interfaces.";
}
description
"Container of LAG interface attributes configuration";
}
description
"Grouping for LAG interface";
}
grouping tagged-interface-grouping {
container tagged-interface {
leaf tagged-inf-type {
type identityref {
base tagged-inf-type;
}
description
"Tagged interface type.";
}
container dot1q-vlan-tagged {
when "derived-from-or-self(../tagged-inf-type, 'l2vpn-svc:dot1q')" {
description
"Only applies when Tagged interface type is dot1q.";
}
if-feature dot1q;
leaf tag-type {
type identityref{
base tag-type;
}
description
"TAG type.";
}
leaf cvlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"VLAN identifier.";
}
description
"Tagged interface.";
}
container priority-tagged {
when "derived-from-or-self(../tagged-inf-type, 'l2vpn-svc:priority-tagged')" {
description
"Only applies when Tagged interface type
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 112]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
is priority tagged interface.";
}
leaf tag-type {
type identityref{
base tag-type;
}
description
"TAG type.";
}
description
"Priority tagged.";
}
container qinq {
when "derived-from-or-self(../tagged-inf-type, 'l2vpn-svc:qinq')" {
description
"Only applies when Tagged interface type is qinq.";
}
if-feature qinq;
leaf tag-type {
type identityref{
base tag-type;
}
description
"Tag type.";
}
leaf svlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"S-VLAN Identifier.";
}
leaf cvlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"C-VLAN Identifier";
}
description
"QinQ.";
}
container qinany {
when "derived-from-or-self(../tagged-inf-type, 'l2vpn-svc:qinany')" {
description
"Only applies when Tagged interface type is qinany.";
}
if-feature qinany;
leaf tag-type {
type identityref{
base tag-type;
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 113]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Tag type.";
}
leaf svlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"S-Vlan ID.";
}
description
"Container for Q in Any.";
}
container vxlan {
when "derived-from-or-self(../tagged-inf-type, 'l2vpn-svc:vxlan')" {
description
"Only applies when Tagged interface type is vxlan.";
}
if-feature vxlan;
leaf vni-id {
type uint32;
description
"VNI Identifier.";
}
leaf peer-mode {
type identityref {
base vxlan-peer-mode;
}
description
"specify the vxlan access mode";
}
list peer-list {
key peer-ip;
leaf peer-ip {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Peer IP.";
}
description
"List for peer IP.";
}
description
"QinQ.";
}
description
"Container for tagged Interface.";
}
description
"Grouping for tagged interface.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 114]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
grouping site-attachment-ethernet-connection {
container connection {
leaf encapsulation-type {
type identityref {
base encapsulation-type;
}
description
"Encapsulation Type";
}
leaf eth-inf-type {
type identityref {
base eth-inf-type;
}
description
"Ethernet Interface Type";
}
uses tagged-interface-grouping;
uses untagged-interface-grouping;
uses lag-interface-grouping;
uses cvlan-svc-map-grouping;
uses l2cp-grouping;
uses ethernet-svc-oam-grouping;
description
"Container for bearer";
}
description
"Grouping for bearer.";
}
grouping svc-mtu {
leaf svc-mtu {
type uint16;
units bytes;
mandatory true;
description
"SVC MTU, it is also known as the maximum transmission unit or
maximum frame size,When a frame is larger than the MTU, it is
broken down, or fragmented, into smaller pieces by the network
protocol to accommodate the MTU of the network. If CsC is
enabled,the requested svc-mtu leaf will refer to the
MPLS MTU and not to the link MTU. ";
}
description
"Grouping for service mtu.";
}
grouping svc-preservation-grouping {
leaf ce-vlan-preservation {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 115]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
type boolean;
description
"Preserve the CE-VLAN ID from ingress to egress,i.e.,
CE-VLAN tag of the egress frame are identical to
those of the ingress frame that yielded this
egress service frame. If All-to-One bundling within a site
is Enabled, then preservation applies to all Ingress service
frames. If All-to-One bundling is Disabled , then preservation
applies to tagged Ingress service frames having CE-VLAN ID 1
through 4094.";
}
leaf ce-vlan-cos-perservation {
type boolean;
description
"CE vlan CoS preservation. PCP bits in the CE-VLAN tag of the egress
frame are identical to those of the ingress frame that yielded this
egress service frame.";
}
description
"Grouping for service preservation.";
}
grouping site-mac-addr-limit {
container mac-addr-limit {
leaf mac-num-limit {
type uint16;
description
"maximum number of MAC addresses learned from
the subscriber for a single service instance.";
}
leaf time-interval {
type uint32;
units milliseconds;
description
"The aging time of the mac address.";
}
leaf action {
type identityref {
base mac-action;
}
description
"specify the action when the upper limit is
exceeded: drop the packet, flood the
packet, or simply send a warning log message.";
}
description
"Container of MAC-Addr limit configurations";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 116]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Grouping for mac address limit";
}
grouping site-attachment-availability {
container availability {
leaf access-priority {
type uint32;
description
"Access priority.";
}
choice redundancy-mode {
case single-active {
leaf single-active {
type boolean;
description
"Single active.";
}
description
"Single active case.";
}
case all-active {
leaf all-active {
type boolean;
description
"All active.";
}
description
"All active case.";
}
description
"Redundancy mode choice.";
}
description
"Container of availability optional configurations.";
}
description
"Grouping for availability.";
}
grouping l2cp-grouping {
container l2cp-control {
if-feature L2CP-control;
leaf stp-rstp-mstp {
type control-mode;
description
"STP/RSTP/MSTP protocol type applicable to all Sites.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 117]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
leaf pause {
type control-mode;
description
"Pause protocol type applicable to all Sites.";
}
leaf lacp-lamp {
type control-mode;
description
"LACP/LAMP.";
}
leaf link-oam {
type control-mode;
description
"Link OAM.";
}
leaf esmc {
type control-mode;
description
"ESMC.";
}
leaf l2cp-802.1x {
type control-mode;
description
"IEEE 802.x.";
}
leaf e-lmi {
type control-mode;
description
"E-LMI.";
}
leaf lldp {
type boolean;
description
"LLDP protocol type applicable to all sites.";
}
leaf ptp-peer-delay {
type control-mode;
description
"PTP peer delay.";
}
leaf garp-mrp {
type control-mode;
description
"GARP/MRP.";
}
description
"Container of L2CP control configurations";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 118]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Grouping for l2cp control.";
}
grouping site-bum {
container broadcast-unknown-unicast-multicast{
leaf multicast-site-type {
type enumeration {
enum receiver-only {
description
"The site only has receivers.";
}
enum source-only {
description
"The site only has sources.";
}
enum source-receiver {
description
"The site has both sources and receivers.";
}
}
default "source-receiver";
description
"Type of multicast site.";
}
list multicast-gp-address-mapping {
key id;
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"Unique identifier for the mapping.";
}
leaf vlan-id {
type uint32;
description
"the VLAN ID of the Multicast group.";
}
leaf mac-gp-address {
type yang:mac-address;
description
"the MAC address of the Multicast group.";
}
leaf port-lag-number {
type uint32;
description
"the ports/LAGs belonging to the Multicast group.";
}
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 119]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"List of Port to group mappings.";
}
leaf bum-overall-rate {
type uint32;
description
"overall rate for BUM.";
}
list bum-rate-per-type {
key "type";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base bum-type;
}
description
"BUM type.";
}
leaf rate {
type uint32;
description
"rate for BUM.";
}
description
"List of rate per type.";
}
description
"Container of broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast
configurations.";
}
description
"Grouping for broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast.";
}
grouping site-mac-loop-prevention {
container mac-loop-prevention {
leaf frequency {
type uint32;
description
"Frequency.";
}
leaf protection-type {
type identityref {
base loop-prevention-type;
}
description
"Protection type.";
}
leaf number-retries {
type uint32;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 120]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Number of retries.";
}
description
"Container of MAC loop prevention.";
}
description
"Grouping for MAC loop prevention.";
}
grouping ethernet-svc-oam-grouping {
container oam {
leaf md-name {
type string;
description
"Maintenance domain name.";
}
leaf md-level {
type uint8;
description
"Maintenance domain level.";
}
list cfm-802.1-ag {
key "maid";
uses cfm-802-grouping;
description
"List of 802.1ag CFM attributes";
}
uses y-1731;
description
"Container for Ethernet service OAM.";
}
description
"Grouping for Ethernet service OAM.";
}
grouping fate-sharing-group {
container groups {
leaf fate-sharing-group-size {
type uint16;
description
"Fate sharing group size.";
}
leaf group-color {
type string;
description
"Group color associated with a particular VPN.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 121]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id the site network access
is belonging to.";
}
description
"List of group-id.";
}
description
"Groups the fate sharing group member
is belonging to.";
}
description
"Grouping for Fate sharing group.";
}
grouping site-group {
container groups {
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"Group-id the site is belonging to.";
}
description
"List of group-id";
}
description
"Groups the site or site-network-access
is belonging to.";
}
description
"Grouping definition to assign
group-ids to site or site-network-access.";
}
grouping access-diversity {
container access-diversity {
if-feature site-diversity;
uses fate-sharing-group;
container constraints {
list constraint {
key constraint-type;
leaf constraint-type {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 122]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
type identityref {
base placement-diversity;
}
description
"Diversity constraint type.";
}
container target {
choice target-flavor {
default id;
case id {
list group {
key group-id;
leaf group-id {
type string;
description
"The constraint will apply
against this particular
group-id.";
}
description
"List of groups.";
}
}
case all-accesses {
leaf all-other-accesses {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply
against all other site network
access of this site.";
}
}
case all-groups {
leaf all-other-groups {
type empty;
description
"The constraint will apply
against all other groups the
customer is managing.";
}
}
description
"Choice for the group definition.";
}
description
"The constraint will apply against
this list of groups.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 123]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"List of constraints.";
}
description
"Constraints for placing this site
network access.";
}
description
"Diversity parameters.";
}
description
"This grouping defines access diversity
parameters";
}
grouping request-type-profile-grouping {
container request-type-profile {
choice request-type-choice {
case dot1q-case {
container dot1q {
leaf physical-if {
type string;
description
"Physical interface.";
}
leaf vlan-id {
type uint16;
description
"VLAN ID.";
}
description
"Container for dot1q.";
}
description
"Case for dot1q.";
}
case physical-case {
leaf physical-if {
type string;
description
"Physical interface.";
}
leaf circuit-id {
type string;
description
"Circuit ID.";
}
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 124]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"Physical case.";
}
description
"Choice for request type.";
}
description
"Container for request type profile.";
}
description
"Grouping for request type profile.";
}
grouping site-attachment-bearer {
container bearer {
container requested-type {
if-feature requested-type;
leaf requested-type {
type string;
description
"Type of requested bearer Ethernet, ATM, Frame
Relay, IP Layer 2 Transport, Frame Relay DLCI,
SONET/SDH,PPP.";
}
leaf strict {
type boolean;
default false;
description
"Define if the requested-type is a preference
or a strict requirement.";
}
description
"Container for requested type.";
}
leaf always-on {
if-feature always-on;
type boolean;
default true;
description
"Request for an always on access type.
For example.This could mean no Dial access type.";
}
leaf bearer-reference {
if-feature bearer-reference;
type string;
description
"This is an internal reference for the
service provider.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 125]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Bearer specific parameters.
To be augmented.";
}
description
"Grouping to define physical properties of
a site attachment.";
}
grouping site-vpn-attachment {
container vpn-attachment {
leaf attachment-device-id {
type string;
description
"Identifier for the attachment device.";
}
container management {
when "derived-from-or-self(../../../../management/type,"+
"'l2vpn-svc:co-managed')" {
description
"Applicable only for co-managed device.";
}
leaf address-family {
type identityref {
base address-family;
}
description
"Address family used for management.";
}
leaf address {
when "(../address-family)" {
description
"If address-family is specified, then address should
also be specified.If address-family is not specified,
then address should also not be specified.";
}
type inet:ip-address;
mandatory true;
description
"Management address.";
}
description
"Management configuration.";
}
choice attachment-flavor {
case vpn-id {
leaf vpn-id {
type leafref {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 126]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
path "/l2vpn-svc/vpn-services"+
"/vpn-service/vpn-id";
}
description
"Reference to a L2VPN. Referencing a vpn-id provides
an easy way to attach a particular logical access to
a VPN. In this case, vpn-id must be configured.";
}
leaf site-role {
type identityref {
base site-role;
}
default any-to-any-role;
description
"Role of the site in the L2VPN. When referencing a vpn-id,
the site-role setting must be added to express the role of
the site in the target VPN service topology.";
}
}
case vpn-policy-id {
leaf vpn-policy-id {
type leafref {
path "../../../../"+
"vpn-policies/vpn-policy/"+
"vpn-policy-id";
}
description
"Reference to a vpn policy.";
}
}
mandatory true;
description
"Choice for VPN attachment flavor.";
}
description
"Defines VPN attachment of a site.";
}
description
"Grouping for access attachment.";
}
grouping site-service-basic {
container svc-bandwidth {
if-feature input-bw;
list bandwidth {
key "direction type";
leaf direction{
type identityref {
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 127]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
base bw-direction;
}
description
"Indicate the bandwidth direction. It can be bandwidth download
direction from the SP to the site or bandwidth upload direction
from the site to the SP.";
}
leaf type {
type identityref {
base bw-type;
}
description
"Bandwidth Type.";
}
leaf cos-id {
type uint8;
description
"Identifier of Class of Service
, indicated by DSCP or a CE-CLAN
CoS(802.1p)value in the service frame.";
}
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Identifies the target VPN.";
}
leaf cir {
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Committed Information Rate. The maximum number of
bits that a port can receive or send during
one-second over an interface.";
}
leaf cbs {
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Committed Burst Size.CBS controls the bursty nature
of the traffic. Traffic that does not use the configured
CIR accumulates credits until the credits reach the
configured CBS.";
}
leaf eir {
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Excess Information Rate,i.e.,Excess frame delivery
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 128]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
allowed not subject to SLA.The traffic rate can be
limited by eir.";
}
leaf ebs {
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Excess Burst Size. The bandwidth available for burst
traffic from the EBS is subject to the amount of
bandwidth that is accumulated during periods when
traffic allocated by the EIR policy is not used.";
}
leaf pir{
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Peak Information Rate, i.e., maixmum frame delivery
allowed.It is equal to or less than sum of cir
and eir.";
}
leaf pbs {
type uint64;
units bps;
description
"Peak Burst Size. It is measured in bytes per second.";
}
description
"List for bandwidth.";
}
description
"From the customer site's perspective, the service
input/out bandwidth of the connection or download/upload
bandwidth from the SP/site to the site/SP.";
}
uses svc-mtu;
description
"Define basic service parameters for the site.";
}
grouping flow-definition {
container match-flow {
leaf dscp {
type inet:dscp;
description
"DSCP value.";
}
leaf dot1q {
type uint16;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 129]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"802.1q matching. It is VLAN Tag added into frame.";
}
leaf pcp {
type uint8{
range "0 .. 7";
}
description
"PCP value.";
}
leaf src-mac {
type yang:mac-address;
description
"Source MAC";
}
leaf dst-mac {
type yang:mac-address;
description
"Destination MAC.";
}
leaf color-type {
type identityref {
base color-type;
}
description
"Color Types.";
}
leaf-list target-sites {
if-feature target-sites;
type svc-id;
description
"Identify a site as traffic destination.";
}
leaf any {
type empty;
description
"Allow all.";
}
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Reference to the target VPN.";
}
description
"Describe flow matching criteria.";
}
description
"Flow definition based on criteria.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 130]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
grouping site-service-qos-profile {
container qos {
if-feature qos;
container qos-classification-policy {
list rule {
key id;
ordered-by user;
leaf id {
type string;
description
"A description identifying qos classification
policy rule.";
}
choice match-type {
default match-flow;
case match-flow {
uses flow-definition;
}
case match-phy-port {
leaf match-phy-port {
type uint16;
description
"Defines the physical port
to match.";
}
}
case match-application {
leaf match-application {
type identityref {
base customer-application;
}
description
"Defines the application to match.";
}
}
description
"Choice for classification";
}
leaf target-class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the class of service.
This identifier is internal to the
administration.";
}
description
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 131]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
"List of marking rules.";
}
description
"Configuration of the traffic classification policy.";
}
container qos-profile {
choice qos-profile {
description
"Choice for QoS profile.
Can be standard profile or customized profile.";
case standard {
description
"Standard QoS profile.";
leaf profile {
type leafref {
path "/l2vpn-svc/vpn-profiles/valid-provider-identifiers"+
"/qos-profile-identifier/id";
}
description
"QoS Profile to be used.";
}
}
case custom {
description
"Customized QoS profile.";
container classes {
if-feature qos-custom;
list class {
key class-id;
leaf class-id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the class of
service. This identifier is internal
to the administration.";
}
leaf direction {
type identityref {
base qos-profile-direction;
}
default bidirection;
description
"The direction which QoS profile is applied to";
}
leaf policing {
type identityref {
base policing;
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 132]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"The policing can be either one-rate,
two-color (1R2C) or two-rate, three-color
(2R3C).";
}
leaf byte-offset {
type uint16;
description
"For not including extra VLAN tags in the QoS
calculation.";
}
container frame-delay {
choice flavor {
case lowest {
leaf use-lowest-latency {
type empty;
description
"The traffic class should use
the lowest delay path.";
}
}
case boundary {
leaf delay-bound {
type uint16;
units msec;
description
"The traffic class should use
a path with a defined maximum
delay.";
}
}
description
"Delay constraint on the traffic
class.";
}
description
"Delay constraint on the traffic
class.";
}
container frame-jitter {
choice flavor {
case lowest {
leaf use-lowest-jitter {
type empty;
description
"The traffic class should use
the lowest jitter path.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 133]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
case boundary {
leaf delay-bound {
type uint32;
units usec;
description
"The traffic class should use
a path with a defined maximum
jitter.";
}
}
description
"Jitter constraint on the traffic
class.";
}
description
"Jitter constraint on the traffic
class.";
}
container frame-loss {
leaf fr-loss-rate {
type decimal64 {
fraction-digits 2;
}
description
"Loss constraint on the traffic class.";
}
description
"Container for frame loss.";
}
container bandwidth {
leaf guaranteed-bw-percent {
type decimal64 {
fraction-digits 5;
range "0..100";
}
units percent;
mandatory true;
description
"To be used to define the guaranteed bandwidth
as a percentage of the available service
bandwidth.";
}
leaf end-to-end {
type empty;
description
"Used if the bandwidth reservation
must be done on the MPLS network too.";
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 134]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
}
description
"Bandwidth constraint on the traffic class.";
}
description
"List of class of services.";
}
description
"Container for list of class of services.";
}
}
}
description
"Qos profile configuration.";
}
description
"QoS configuration.";
}
description
"This grouping defines QoS parameters
for a site";
}
grouping site-service {
container service {
uses site-service-basic;
uses site-service-qos-profile;
uses site-service-mpls;
description
"Service parameters on the attachment.";
}
description
"Grouping for Service parameters.";
}
grouping site-service-mpls {
container carrierscarrier {
if-feature carrierscarrier;
leaf signalling-type {
type identityref{
base carrierscarrier-type;
}
description
"Carrierscarrier";
}
description
"Container for carrierscarrier";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 135]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
description
"Grouping for carrierscarrier";
}
grouping site-network-access-service {
container service {
uses site-service-qos-profile;
uses site-service-mpls;
description
"Container for service";
}
description
"Grouping for service.";
}
grouping vpn-profile-cfg {
container valid-provider-identifiers {
list cloud-identifier {
if-feature cloud-access;
key id;
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Identification of cloud service.
Local administration meaning.";
}
description
"List for Cloud Identifiers.";
}
list qos-profile-identifier {
key id;
leaf id {
type string;
description
"Identification of the QoS Profile to be used.
Local administration meaning.";
}
description
"List for QoS Profile Identifiers.";
}
nacm:default-deny-write;
description
"Container for Valid Provider Identifies.";
}
description
"Grouping for VPN Profile configuration.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 136]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
grouping site-network-access-top-level-cfg {
leaf site-network-access-type {
type identityref {
base site-network-access-type;
}
default point-to-point;
description
"Describes the type of connection, e.g.,
point-to-point or multipoint.";
}
choice location-flavor {
case location {
when "derived-from-or-self(../../management/type, "+
"'l2vpn-svc:customer-managed')" {
description
"Applicable only for customer-managed device.";
}
leaf location-reference {
type leafref {
path "../../../locations/location/location-id";
}
description
"Location of the site-network-access.";
}
}
case device {
when "derived-from-or-self(../../management/type, "+
"'l2vpn-svc:provider-managed') or "+
"derived-from-or-self(../../management/type, "+
"'l2vpn-svc:co-managed')" {
description
"Applicable only for provider-managed
or co-managed device.";
}
leaf device-reference {
type leafref {
path "../../../devices/device/device-id";
}
description
"Identifier of CE to use.";
}
}
mandatory true;
description
"Choice of how to describe the site's location.";
}
uses access-diversity;
uses site-attachment-bearer;
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 137]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
uses site-attachment-ethernet-connection;
uses site-attachment-availability;
uses site-vpn-attachment;
uses site-network-access-service;
uses site-bum;
uses site-mac-loop-prevention;
uses site-acl;
uses site-mac-addr-limit;
description
"Grouping for site network access top-level
configuration.";
}
/* MAIN L2VPN SERVICE */
container l2vpn-svc {
container vpn-profiles {
uses vpn-profile-cfg;
description
"Container for VPN Profiles.";
}
container vpn-services {
list vpn-service {
key "vpn-id";
leaf vpn-id {
type svc-id;
description
"Defining a service id.";
}
leaf svc-type {
type identityref {
base service-type;
}
description
"Service type.";
}
leaf customer-name {
type string;
description
"Customer name.";
}
leaf svc-topo {
type identityref {
base vpn-topology;
}
description
"Defining service topology, such as
any-to-any,hub-spoke, etc.";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 138]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
uses vpn-service-cloud-access;
uses vpn-service-multicast;
uses vpn-extranet;
uses svc-preservation-grouping;
leaf carrierscarrier {
if-feature carrierscarrier;
type boolean;
default false;
description
"The VPN is using CsC, and so MPLS
is required.";
}
description
"List of vpn services.";
}
description
"Container for VPN services.";
}
/* SITE */
container sites {
list site {
key "site-id";
leaf site-id {
type string;
description
"Identifier of the site.";
}
uses site-vpn-flavor;
uses site-device;
uses customer-location-info;
uses site-management;
uses site-diversity;
uses site-vpn-policy;
uses site-service;
uses site-bum;
uses site-mac-loop-prevention;
uses site-acl;
uses operational-requirements-ops;
container site-network-accesses {
list site-network-access {
key "network-access-id";
leaf network-access-id {
type string;
description
"Identifier of network access";
}
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 139]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
leaf remote-carrier-name {
when "derived-from-or-self(../../../site-vpn-flavor,"+
"'l2vpn-svc:site-vpn-flavor-nni')" {
description
"Site type = site-vpn-flavor-nni";
}
type string;
description
"Remote carrier name.";
}
uses site-network-access-top-level-cfg;
description
"List of Site Network Accesses.";
}
description
"Container of port configurations.";
}
description
"List of sites.";
}
description
"Container of site configurations.";
}
description
"Container for L2VPN service.";
}
}
9. Security Considerations
The YANG modules defined in this document MAY be accessed via the
RESTCONF protocol [RFC8040] or NETCONF protocol ([RFC6241]). The
lowest RESTCONF or NETCONF layer requires that the transport-layer
protocol provides both data integrity and confidentiality, see
Section 2 in [RFC8040] and [RFC6241]. 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
[RFC5246].
The NETCONF access control model [RFC6536] 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
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 140]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable
in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config)
to these data nodes without proper protection can have a negative
effect on network operations. These are the subtrees and data nodes
and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
o /l2vpn-svc/vpn-services/vpn-service
The entries in the list above include the whole vpn service
configurations which the customer subscribes, and indirectly
create or modify the PE and CE device configurations. Unexpected
changes to these entries could lead to the service disruption and/
or network misbehavior.
o /l2vpn-svc/sites/site
The entries in the list above include the customer site
configurations. As above, unexpected changes to these entries
could lead to the service disruption and/or network misbehavior.
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:
o /l2vpn-svc/vpn-services/vpn-service
o /l2vpn-svc/sites/site
The entries in the lists above include customer-proprietary or
confidential information, e.g., customer-name, site location, what
service the customer subscribes.
The data model defines some security parameters that can be extended
via augmentation as part of the customer service request; those
parameters are described in Section 5.12 and Section 5.13.
10. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Qin Wu and Adrian Farrel for facilitating work on the
initial revisions of this document. Thanks to Zonghe Huang, Wei Deng
and Xiaoling Song to help review this draft.
This document has drawn on the work of the L3SM Working Group
expressed in [RFC8049].
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 141]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
11. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to assign a new URI from the IETF XML registry
([RFC3688]). The following URI is suggested:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l2vpn-svc
Registrant Contact: L2SM WG
XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace
This document also requests a new YANG module name in the YANG Module
Names registry ([RFC6020]) with the following suggestion:
name: ietf-l2vpn-svc
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-l2vpn-svc
prefix: l2vpn-svc
reference: RFC XXXX
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
.
[RFC4448] Martini, L., Ed., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., and G. Heron,
"Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Ethernet over MPLS
Networks", RFC 4448, DOI 10.17487/RFC4448, April 2006,
.
[RFC4664] Andersson, L., Ed. and E. Rosen, Ed., "Framework for Layer
2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 4664,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4664, September 2006,
.
[RFC4761] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Virtual Private
LAN Service (VPLS) Using BGP for Auto-Discovery and
Signaling", RFC 4761, DOI 10.17487/RFC4761, January 2007,
.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 142]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
[RFC4762] Lasserre, M., Ed. and V. Kompella, Ed., "Virtual Private
LAN Service (VPLS) Using Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
Signaling", RFC 4762, DOI 10.17487/RFC4762, January 2007,
.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
.
[RFC6073] Martini, L., Metz, C., Nadeau, T., Bocci, M., and M.
Aissaoui, "Segmented Pseudowire", RFC 6073,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6073, January 2011,
.
[RFC6074] Rosen, E., Davie, B., Radoaca, V., and W. Luo,
"Provisioning, Auto-Discovery, and Signaling in Layer 2
Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 6074,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6074, January 2011,
.
[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,
.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
.
[RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Protocol (NETCONF) Access Control Model", RFC 6536,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6536, March 2012,
.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
.
[RFC7224] Bjorklund, M., "IANA Interface Type YANG Module",
RFC 7224, DOI 10.17487/RFC7224, May 2014,
.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 143]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual
eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for
Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3
Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,
.
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based
Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February
2015, .
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
.
[RFC8049] Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki, "YANG Data
Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8049,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8049, February 2017,
.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, .
[RFC8214] Boutros, S., Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Drake, J., and J.
Rabadan, "Virtual Private Wire Service Support in Ethernet
VPN", RFC 8214, DOI 10.17487/RFC8214, August 2017,
.
12.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang]
Brissette, P., Sajassi, A., Shah, H., Li, Z.,
Tiruveedhula, K., Hussain, I., and J. Rabadan, "Yang Data
Model for EVPN", draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-03 (work in
progress), October 2017.
[I-D.ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang]
Shah, H., Brissette, P., Chen, I., Hussain, I., Wen, B.,
and K. Tiruveedhula, "YANG Data Model for MPLS-based
L2VPN", draft-ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang-07 (work in progress),
October 2017.
[I-D.ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained]
Wu, Q., LIU, W., and A. Farrel, "Service Models
Explained", draft-ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained-05
(work in progress), October 2017.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 144]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
[IEEE-802-1ag]
IEEE, "802.1ag - Connectivity Fault Management", December
2007.
[ITU-T-Y-1731]
ITU-T, "Recommendation Y.1731 - OAM functions and
mechanisms for Ethernet based networks", February 2008.
[MEF-23-2]
MEF Forum, "Implementation Agreement MEF 23.2 : Carrier
Ethernet Class of Service - Phase 3", August 2016.
[RFC6624] Kompella, K., Kothari, B., and R. Cherukuri, "Layer 2
Virtual Private Networks Using BGP for Auto-Discovery and
Signaling", RFC 6624, DOI 10.17487/RFC6624, May 2012,
.
[RFC8199] Bogdanovic, D., Claise, B., and C. Moberg, "YANG Module
Classification", RFC 8199, DOI 10.17487/RFC8199, July
2017, .
Appendix A. Changes Log
Changes in v-(01) include:
o Reference Update.
o Fix figure in section 3.3 and section 3.4
o Consider VPWS, VPLS, EVPN as basic service and view EVC related
service as additional service.
o Model structure change, move two customer information related
parameter into VPN Services container, remove 'customer-info
'container
o Redefine vpn-type to cover VPWS, VPLS, EVPN service;
o Consolidate EVC and OVC container, make them optional since for
some L2VPN service such as EVPN sevice, OVC, EVC are not needed.
o Add service and security filter under sites container and change
"ports" into "site-network-accesses" to get consistent with L3SM
and also make it generalized.
o Fixed usage examples in the l2sm model draft.
Changes in v-(02) include:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 145]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o Fix figure 3 and figure 4 in section 3.4 to apply IEEE802.3 on the
segment between C and CE and apply IEEE802.1Q on the segment
between CE and PE.
o Update Signaling Option section and add L2TP support and classify
the signaling option type into BGP-L2VPN, BGP-EVPN, LDP-PWE, L2TP-
PW.
o Add Multicast Support in section 5.2.13, section 5.10.3 and move
the text in BUM Storm Control section into section 5.10.3.
o Add new section 5.3.1, section 5.4, section 5.5, section 5.6,
section 5.7, section 5.8, section 5.11to explain the usage of
constraint parameters and service placement related parameters.
o Add new section 5.1 and 5.14 to allow augmentation and external ID
References.
o Add new section to discuss inter-AS support and inter-provider
support with NNI and EVC, OVC.
o Update Service Section 5.10 and define four type for svc-input-
bandwidth and svc-output-bandwidth and add guaranteed-bw-percent
parameter and related description.
o Add extranet VPN support.
o Remove duplicated parameters from cloud access.
o Move L2CP control plane protocol parameters under connection.
o Update section 5.3.3.2 to address loop avoidance issue and divide
section 5.3.3.2 into Physical interface section, LAG interface
section and Addressing Section.
o Reference Update.
Changes in v-(03) include:
o Introduce additional terminology.
o Modify figure 5 to get consistent with RFC8049.
o Add end to end Multi-segment connectivity support and site-vpn-
flavor-e2e attribute.
o Add usage example to explain how to use EVC and OVC.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 146]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o Discuss applicability of this model to inter-provider support.
o Reduce redundant parameters related to encapsulation type and
Ethernet type in the model.
o Clarify the relationship between guarantee-bandwidth-percent and
CIR, EIR and PIR.
o Modify model structure for VPN service to make it consistent with
the text in section 5.
o Remove Sub-inf parameter since it is similar to QinQ parameter.
o Add "direction" parameter for QoS profile.
o Update XML example and figure in section 5.16.
Changes in v-(04) include:
o Remove EVC and OVC related attributes.
o Remove Metro-Network related attributes.
o Remove Customer Account Number attributes.
o Update L2VPN service Types.
o Remove load banlancing options since access-priority within
availability can be used to support load balancing.
o Remove service protection attribute since we have site diversity
attributes.
o Move SVC-MTU to service level.
o Move CVLAN to Service Mapping to Network Access Level.
o Add two new parameters under qos-classification-policy.
o Remove Security Container.
o Remove IPv4/IPv6 prefix filter from VPN policy.
o Add Delivery mode support at service level.
Changes in v-(05) include:
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 147]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
o Change type from 16-bit integer to string for the leaf id under
"qos-classification-policy" container.
o Stick to using ordered-by user and remove inefficiency to map
service model sequence number to device model sequence number.
o Remove mandating the use of deviations and add "if-feature target-
sites" under the leaf-list target-sites in section 5.10.2.
o RFC2119 language changes on operation of the management system in
Section 5.6,3rd paragraph and section 7.
o Fix incomplete description statements.
o Change the use of the absolute paths to the use of relative paths
in the "must" statement or "path" statement for vpn-policy-id leaf
node, management container, location leaf node, devices container,
location case, location-reference leaf, device case, device-
reference leaf to make configuration is only applicable to the
current sites.
o Change "must" statement to "when" statement for management
container device container.
o Define new grouping vpn-profile-cfg for all the identifiers
provided by SP to the customer. The identifiers include cloud-
identifier, std-qos-profile.
o Add in the XPATH string representation and remove unqualified
name.
o Remove redundant parameters in the cloud access.
o Add a few text to clarify what the site is in section 6.3.
o Add multi-filter and multi-VPN per entry support for VPN policy.
o Modify description for svc-bandwidth leaf to make it consistent
with the text in section 5.10.1.
o Add text to clarify the way to achieve Per-VPN QoS policy.
o Change guaranteed-bw-percent data type from uint8 to decimal64.
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 148]
Internet-Draft L2VPN Service Model January 2018
Authors' Addresses
Bin Wen
Comcast
Email: bin_wen@comcast.com
Giuseppe Fioccola (editor)
Telecom Italia
Email: giuseppe.fioccola@telecomitalia.it
Chongfeng Xie
China Telecom
Email: xiechf@ctbri.com.cn
Luay Jalil
Verizon
Email: luay.jalil@verizon.com
Wen, et al. Expires July 19, 2018 [Page 149]