diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff-spaces.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff-spaces.txt index ff9c424..52b68aa 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff-spaces.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff-spaces.txt @@ -1,46 +1,63 @@ - 11c11,12 + 11c11 < "RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; --- - > "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; - 12a14,15 + > "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + 12a13,14 > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number > // and remove this note - 22c25 + 22c24 < --- > - 41c44 + 37,39c39,49 + < data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully + < conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture + < (NMDA). + --- + > data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + > (TE). + > + > The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + > Architecture (NMDA). + > + > 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + > they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + 41c51 < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as --- - > Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - 46c49 + > Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + 46c56 < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 51,52c54,71 + 51,52c61,80 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-07-10 { + > revision 2024-01-25 { > description > "Added common TE packet identities: - > - bandwidth-profile-type. + > - bandwidth-profile-type; + > - path-metric-loss; + > - path-metric-delay-variation. > > Added common TE packet groupings: > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - > - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; + > - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + > + > Updated module description."; > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note - 61c80,126 + 61c89,187 < /** --- > /* @@ -89,13 +106,65 @@ > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; > } > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-loss { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + > encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + > links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The basic unit is 0.000003%, + > where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + > path loss percentage that can be expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-delay-variation { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + > delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + > (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + > maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + > expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > > /* - 180a246,249 + 180a307,310 > /* > * Groupings > */ > - 472a542,611 + 472a603,672 > } > } > diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff.txt index c93abf9..fe0b68b 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-diff.txt @@ -1,46 +1,63 @@ -11c11,12 +11c11 < "RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; --- -> "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; -12a14,15 +> "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; +12a13,14 > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number > // and remove this note -22c25 +22c24 < --- > -41c44 +37,39c39,49 +< data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully +< conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture +< (NMDA). +--- +> data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering +> (TE). +> +> The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore +> Architecture (NMDA). +> +> 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, +> they appear in all capitals, as shown here. +41c51 < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as --- -> Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as -46c49 +> Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as +46c56 < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set -51,52c54,71 +51,52c61,80 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; -> -> revision 2023-07-10 { +> revision 2024-01-25 { > description > "Added common TE packet identities: -> - bandwidth-profile-type. +> - bandwidth-profile-type; +> - path-metric-loss; +> - path-metric-delay-variation. > > Added common TE packet groupings: > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; -> - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; +> - te-packet-link-bandwidth. +> +> Updated module description."; > reference -> "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; +> "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note -61c80,126 +61c89,187 < /** --- > /* @@ -89,13 +106,65 @@ > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; > } > +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has +> // been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity path-metric-loss { +> base te-types:path-metric-type; +> description +> "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type +> encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all +> links traversed by a P2P path. +> +> The basic unit is 0.000003%, +> where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the +> path loss percentage that can be expressed. +> +> Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be +> encoded as the maximum value."; +> reference +> "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element +> Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label +> Switched Paths (LSPs); +> +> RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; +> +> RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; +> } +> +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has +> // been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity path-metric-delay-variation { +> base te-types:path-metric-type; +> description +> "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional +> delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. +> +> The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where +> (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the +> maximum value of the path delay variation that can be +> expressed. +> +> Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be +> encoded as the maximum value."; +> reference +> "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element +> Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label +> Switched Paths (LSPs); +> +> RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; +> +> RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; +> } +> > /* -180a246,249 +180a307,310 > /* > * Groupings > */ > -472a542,611 +472a603,672 > } > } > diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-updates.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-updates.txt index ff9c424..52b68aa 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-updates.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-pkt-types/model-updates.txt @@ -1,46 +1,63 @@ - 11c11,12 + 11c11 < "RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; --- - > "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; - 12a14,15 + > "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + 12a13,14 > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number > // and remove this note - 22c25 + 22c24 < --- > - 41c44 + 37,39c39,49 + < data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully + < conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture + < (NMDA). + --- + > data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + > (TE). + > + > The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + > Architecture (NMDA). + > + > 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + > they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + 41c51 < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as --- - > Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - 46c49 + > Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + 46c56 < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 51,52c54,71 + 51,52c61,80 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-07-10 { + > revision 2024-01-25 { > description > "Added common TE packet identities: - > - bandwidth-profile-type. + > - bandwidth-profile-type; + > - path-metric-loss; + > - path-metric-delay-variation. > > Added common TE packet groupings: > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - > - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; + > - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + > + > Updated module description."; > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note - 61c80,126 + 61c89,187 < /** --- > /* @@ -89,13 +106,65 @@ > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; > } > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-loss { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + > encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + > links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The basic unit is 0.000003%, + > where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + > path loss percentage that can be expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-delay-variation { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + > delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + > (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + > maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + > expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > > /* - 180a246,249 + 180a307,310 > /* > * Groupings > */ > - 472a542,611 + 472a603,672 > } > } > diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff-spaces.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff-spaces.txt index df17eab..55cc508 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff-spaces.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff-spaces.txt @@ -21,21 +21,21 @@ < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 65,66c75,108 + 65,66c75,113 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-06-27 { + > revision 2023-11-25e { > description > "Added: > - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; > - identity association-type-diversity; > - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; > - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; + > - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; > - base identity path-computation-error-reason and > its derived identities; > - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -47,19 +47,54 @@ > > Updated: > - description of the base identity objective-function-type; - > - description and reference of identity action-exercise. + > - description and reference of identity action-exercise; + > - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. > > Obsoleted: - > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link - > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; + > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; + > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; + > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute. + > + > Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as + > explicit-route-objects."; > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note - 545a588,615 + 353c400,403 + < type yang:dotted-quad; + --- + > type union { + > type yang:dotted-quad; + > type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; + > } + 357,358c407,411 + < The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad + < notation. + --- + > + > The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in + > dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, + > or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. + > + 362,363c415,418 + < Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the + < TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. + --- + > Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE + > Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the + > IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. + > + 368a424 + > + 370a427 + > + 371a429 + > + 545a604,631 > // CHANGE NOTE: The typedef path-type below has been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -88,7 +123,7 @@ > path."; > } > - 606a677,684 + 606a693,700 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -97,7 +132,7 @@ > "Base identity for LSP provisioning errors."; > } > - 982a1061,1078 + 982a1077,1094 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity association-type-diversity below has > // been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -116,45 +151,45 @@ > // objective-function-type has been updated > // in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 985c1081 + 985c1097 < "Base objective function type."; --- > "Base identity for path objective function type."; - 1015a1112,1114 + 1015a1128,1130 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1017a1117 + 1017a1133 > status obsolete; - 1020c1120 + 1020c1136 < consumption."; --- > consumption."; - 1023c1123 + 1023c1139 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1025a1126,1128 + 1025a1142,1144 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1027a1131 + 1027a1147 > status obsolete; - 1030c1134 + 1030c1150 < is carrying the highest load."; --- > is carrying the highest load."; - 1033c1137 + 1033c1153 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1035a1140,1142 + 1035a1156,1158 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-cost-path-set > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1037a1145 + 1037a1161 > status obsolete; - 1216a1325,1336 + 1216a1341,1352 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -167,7 +202,7 @@ > when it is not used by the client layer."; > } > - 1321a1442,1450 + 1321a1458,1466 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-restoration-restore-none > // below has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -177,25 +212,90 @@ > "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; > } > - 1628a1758,1761 + 1339a1485,1499 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting + > // below has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { + > base restoration-scheme-type; + > description + > "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. + > + > This restoration scheme is also known as + > 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; + > reference + > "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology + > for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; + > } + > + 1383a1544,1546 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1385a1549 + > status obsolete; + 1387c1551,1555 + < "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. + > + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1392a1561,1563 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1394a1566 + > status obsolete; + 1396c1568,1572 + < "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. + > + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1628a1805,1808 > // cCHANGE NOTE: The description and reference of the > // identity action-exercise have been updated in this module > // revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1632,1633c1765,1767 + 1632,1633c1812,1814 < "An action that starts testing whether or not APS communication < is operating correctly. It is of lower priority than any --- > "An action that starts testing whether or not Automatic > Protection Switching (APS) communication is operating > correctly. It is of lower priority than any - 1636,1637c1770,1771 + 1636,1637c1817,1818 < "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology < for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; --- > "ITU-T G.808.1 v4.0 (05/2014): Generic protection switching - > Linear trail and subnetwork protection"; - 2110a2245,2641 + 1916a2098,2100 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type + > // has been updated in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1919c2103,2106 + < "Base identity for the path metric type."; + --- + > "Base identity for the path metric type. + > + > Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value + > of the path metric types they define."; + 1939a2127,2129 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop + > // has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1943a2134,2136 + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; + 1945a2139 + > + 2110a2305,2708 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision @@ -211,7 +311,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified > reason."; > reference - > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; + > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) + > Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -242,7 +343,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -389,7 +491,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -403,7 +506,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -414,7 +518,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because path computation > server is unavailable."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -440,7 +545,9 @@ > description > "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol > (PCEP)."; - > reference "RFC5440"; + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -593,7 +700,7 @@ > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > - 2514a3046,3054 + 2514a3113,3121 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; @@ -603,9 +710,9 @@ > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2517d3056 + 2517d3123 < mandatory true; - 2566a3106,3116 + 2566a3173,3183 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -617,30 +724,30 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2569d3118 + 2569d3185 < mandatory true; - 2574a3124,3128 + 2574a3191,3195 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2577d3130 + 2577d3197 < mandatory true; - 2646a3200,3203 + 2646a3267,3270 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } - 2648a3206,3210 + 2648a3273,3277 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2651d3212 + 2651d3279 < mandatory true; - 2696a3258,3268 + 2696a3325,3335 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -652,21 +759,37 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2699d3270 + 2699d3337 < mandatory true; - 2704a3276,3280 + 2704a3343,3347 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2968a3545,3549 + 2968a3612,3616 > leaf network-id { > type nw:network-id; > description > "The network topology identifier."; > } - 3379c3960,3987 + 2977c3625 + < container explicit-route-objects-always { + --- + > container explicit-route-objects { + 3124,3126c3772,3778 + < "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero + < indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific + < 'metric-type'."; + --- + > "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. + > + > A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the + > specific 'metric-type'. + > + > The unit of is interpreted in the context of the + > path-metric-type."; + 3379c4031,4058 < } \ No newline at end of file --- diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff.txt index 71e3825..12d4791 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-diff.txt @@ -21,21 +21,21 @@ < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set -65,66c75,108 +65,66c75,113 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; -> -> revision 2023-06-27 { +> revision 2023-11-25e { > description > "Added: > - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; > - identity association-type-diversity; > - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; > - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; +> - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; > - base identity path-computation-error-reason and > its derived identities; > - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -47,19 +47,54 @@ > > Updated: > - description of the base identity objective-function-type; -> - description and reference of identity action-exercise. +> - description and reference of identity action-exercise; +> - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. > > Obsoleted: -> - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption -> - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link -> - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; +> - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; +> - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; +> - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; +> - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; +> - identity lsp-protection-reroute. +> +> Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as +> explicit-route-objects."; > reference -> "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; +> "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note -545a588,615 +353c400,403 +< type yang:dotted-quad; +--- +> type union { +> type yang:dotted-quad; +> type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; +> } +357,358c407,411 +< The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad +< notation. +--- +> +> The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in +> dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, +> or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. +> +362,363c415,418 +< Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the +< TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. +--- +> Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE +> Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the +> IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. +> +368a424 +> +370a427 +> +371a429 +> +545a604,631 > // CHANGE NOTE: The typedef path-type below has been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -88,7 +123,7 @@ > path."; > } > -606a677,684 +606a693,700 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -97,7 +132,7 @@ > "Base identity for LSP provisioning errors."; > } > -982a1061,1078 +982a1077,1094 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity association-type-diversity below has > // been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -116,45 +151,45 @@ > // objective-function-type has been updated > // in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -985c1081 +985c1097 < "Base objective function type."; --- > "Base identity for path objective function type."; -1015a1112,1114 +1015a1128,1130 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1017a1117 +1017a1133 > status obsolete; -1020c1120 +1020c1136 < consumption."; --- > consumption."; -1023c1123 +1023c1139 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; -1025a1126,1128 +1025a1142,1144 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1027a1131 +1027a1147 > status obsolete; -1030c1134 +1030c1150 < is carrying the highest load."; --- > is carrying the highest load."; -1033c1137 +1033c1153 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; -1035a1140,1142 +1035a1156,1158 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-cost-path-set > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1037a1145 +1037a1161 > status obsolete; -1216a1325,1336 +1216a1341,1352 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -167,7 +202,7 @@ > when it is not used by the client layer."; > } > -1321a1442,1450 +1321a1458,1466 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-restoration-restore-none > // below has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -177,25 +212,90 @@ > "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; > } > -1628a1758,1761 +1339a1485,1499 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting +> // below has been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { +> base restoration-scheme-type; +> description +> "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. +> +> This restoration scheme is also known as +> 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; +> reference +> "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology +> for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; +> } +> +1383a1544,1546 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra +> // below has been obsoleted in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1385a1549 +> status obsolete; +1387c1551,1555 +< "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; +--- +> "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. +> +> This identity has been obsoleted: the +> 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used +> instead."; +1392a1561,1563 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute +> // below has been obsoleted in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1394a1566 +> status obsolete; +1396c1568,1572 +< "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; +--- +> "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. +> +> This identity has been obsoleted: the +> 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used +> instead."; +1628a1805,1808 > // cCHANGE NOTE: The description and reference of the > // identity action-exercise have been updated in this module > // revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1632,1633c1765,1767 +1632,1633c1812,1814 < "An action that starts testing whether or not APS communication < is operating correctly. It is of lower priority than any --- > "An action that starts testing whether or not Automatic > Protection Switching (APS) communication is operating > correctly. It is of lower priority than any -1636,1637c1770,1771 +1636,1637c1817,1818 < "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology < for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; --- > "ITU-T G.808.1 v4.0 (05/2014): Generic protection switching - > Linear trail and subnetwork protection"; -2110a2245,2641 +1916a2098,2100 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type +> // has been updated in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1919c2103,2106 +< "Base identity for the path metric type."; +--- +> "Base identity for the path metric type. +> +> Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value +> of the path metric types they define."; +1939a2127,2129 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop +> // has been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1943a2134,2136 +> reference +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP)"; +1945a2139 +> +2110a2305,2708 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision @@ -211,7 +311,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified > reason."; > reference -> "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; +> "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) +> Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -242,7 +343,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -389,7 +491,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -403,7 +506,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -414,7 +518,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because path computation > server is unavailable."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -440,7 +545,9 @@ > description > "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol > (PCEP)."; -> reference "RFC5440"; +> reference +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -593,7 +700,7 @@ > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > -2514a3046,3054 +2514a3113,3121 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; @@ -603,9 +710,9 @@ > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2517d3056 +2517d3123 < mandatory true; -2566a3106,3116 +2566a3173,3183 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -617,30 +724,30 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } -2569d3118 +2569d3185 < mandatory true; -2574a3124,3128 +2574a3191,3195 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2577d3130 +2577d3197 < mandatory true; -2646a3200,3203 +2646a3267,3270 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } -2648a3206,3210 +2648a3273,3277 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2651d3212 +2651d3279 < mandatory true; -2696a3258,3268 +2696a3325,3335 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -652,21 +759,37 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } -2699d3270 +2699d3337 < mandatory true; -2704a3276,3280 +2704a3343,3347 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2968a3545,3549 +2968a3612,3616 > leaf network-id { > type nw:network-id; > description > "The network topology identifier."; > } -3379c3960,3987 +2977c3625 +< container explicit-route-objects-always { +--- +> container explicit-route-objects { +3124,3126c3772,3778 +< "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero +< indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific +< 'metric-type'."; +--- +> "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. +> +> A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the +> specific 'metric-type'. +> +> The unit of is interpreted in the context of the +> path-metric-type."; +3379c4031,4058 < } \ No newline at end of file --- diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-updates.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-updates.txt index df17eab..55cc508 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-updates.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/diffs/te-types/model-updates.txt @@ -21,21 +21,21 @@ < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 65,66c75,108 + 65,66c75,113 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-06-27 { + > revision 2023-11-25e { > description > "Added: > - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; > - identity association-type-diversity; > - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; > - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; + > - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; > - base identity path-computation-error-reason and > its derived identities; > - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -47,19 +47,54 @@ > > Updated: > - description of the base identity objective-function-type; - > - description and reference of identity action-exercise. + > - description and reference of identity action-exercise; + > - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. > > Obsoleted: - > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link - > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; + > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; + > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; + > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute. + > + > Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as + > explicit-route-objects."; > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note - 545a588,615 + 353c400,403 + < type yang:dotted-quad; + --- + > type union { + > type yang:dotted-quad; + > type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; + > } + 357,358c407,411 + < The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad + < notation. + --- + > + > The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in + > dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, + > or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. + > + 362,363c415,418 + < Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the + < TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. + --- + > Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE + > Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the + > IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. + > + 368a424 + > + 370a427 + > + 371a429 + > + 545a604,631 > // CHANGE NOTE: The typedef path-type below has been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -88,7 +123,7 @@ > path."; > } > - 606a677,684 + 606a693,700 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -97,7 +132,7 @@ > "Base identity for LSP provisioning errors."; > } > - 982a1061,1078 + 982a1077,1094 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity association-type-diversity below has > // been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -116,45 +151,45 @@ > // objective-function-type has been updated > // in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 985c1081 + 985c1097 < "Base objective function type."; --- > "Base identity for path objective function type."; - 1015a1112,1114 + 1015a1128,1130 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1017a1117 + 1017a1133 > status obsolete; - 1020c1120 + 1020c1136 < consumption."; --- > consumption."; - 1023c1123 + 1023c1139 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1025a1126,1128 + 1025a1142,1144 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1027a1131 + 1027a1147 > status obsolete; - 1030c1134 + 1030c1150 < is carrying the highest load."; --- > is carrying the highest load."; - 1033c1137 + 1033c1153 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1035a1140,1142 + 1035a1156,1158 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-cost-path-set > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1037a1145 + 1037a1161 > status obsolete; - 1216a1325,1336 + 1216a1341,1352 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -167,7 +202,7 @@ > when it is not used by the client layer."; > } > - 1321a1442,1450 + 1321a1458,1466 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-restoration-restore-none > // below has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -177,25 +212,90 @@ > "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; > } > - 1628a1758,1761 + 1339a1485,1499 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting + > // below has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { + > base restoration-scheme-type; + > description + > "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. + > + > This restoration scheme is also known as + > 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; + > reference + > "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology + > for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; + > } + > + 1383a1544,1546 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1385a1549 + > status obsolete; + 1387c1551,1555 + < "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. + > + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1392a1561,1563 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1394a1566 + > status obsolete; + 1396c1568,1572 + < "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. + > + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1628a1805,1808 > // cCHANGE NOTE: The description and reference of the > // identity action-exercise have been updated in this module > // revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1632,1633c1765,1767 + 1632,1633c1812,1814 < "An action that starts testing whether or not APS communication < is operating correctly. It is of lower priority than any --- > "An action that starts testing whether or not Automatic > Protection Switching (APS) communication is operating > correctly. It is of lower priority than any - 1636,1637c1770,1771 + 1636,1637c1817,1818 < "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology < for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; --- > "ITU-T G.808.1 v4.0 (05/2014): Generic protection switching - > Linear trail and subnetwork protection"; - 2110a2245,2641 + 1916a2098,2100 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type + > // has been updated in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1919c2103,2106 + < "Base identity for the path metric type."; + --- + > "Base identity for the path metric type. + > + > Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value + > of the path metric types they define."; + 1939a2127,2129 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop + > // has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1943a2134,2136 + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; + 1945a2139 + > + 2110a2305,2708 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision @@ -211,7 +311,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified > reason."; > reference - > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; + > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) + > Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -242,7 +343,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -389,7 +491,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -403,7 +506,8 @@ > It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -414,7 +518,8 @@ > "Path computation has failed because path computation > server is unavailable."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -440,7 +545,9 @@ > description > "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol > (PCEP)."; - > reference "RFC5440"; + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -593,7 +700,7 @@ > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > - 2514a3046,3054 + 2514a3113,3121 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; @@ -603,9 +710,9 @@ > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2517d3056 + 2517d3123 < mandatory true; - 2566a3106,3116 + 2566a3173,3183 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -617,30 +724,30 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2569d3118 + 2569d3185 < mandatory true; - 2574a3124,3128 + 2574a3191,3195 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2577d3130 + 2577d3197 < mandatory true; - 2646a3200,3203 + 2646a3267,3270 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } - 2648a3206,3210 + 2648a3273,3277 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2651d3212 + 2651d3279 < mandatory true; - 2696a3258,3268 + 2696a3325,3335 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -652,21 +759,37 @@ > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2699d3270 + 2699d3337 < mandatory true; - 2704a3276,3280 + 2704a3343,3347 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2968a3545,3549 + 2968a3612,3616 > leaf network-id { > type nw:network-id; > description > "The network topology identifier."; > } - 3379c3960,3987 + 2977c3625 + < container explicit-route-objects-always { + --- + > container explicit-route-objects { + 3124,3126c3772,3778 + < "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero + < indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific + < 'metric-type'."; + --- + > "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. + > + > A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the + > specific 'metric-type'. + > + > The unit of is interpreted in the context of the + > path-metric-type."; + 3379c4031,4058 < } \ No newline at end of file --- diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.md b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.md index e1f48e1..f2cb225 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.md +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.md @@ -308,9 +308,17 @@ resource-affinities-type: > A base YANG identity for supported attribute filters associated with a tunnel that must be satisfied for a link to be acceptable as defined in {{?RFC2702}} and {{?RFC3209}}. +CHANGE NOTE: The description of the path-metric-type has been updated + +RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note + path-metric-type: -> A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in {{?RFC3785}} and {{?RFC7471}}. +> A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in {{?RFC3630}} {{?RFC3785}}, {{!RFC5440}}, {{?RFC7471}}, {{?RFC8233}} and {{?RFC8570}}. + +> The unit of the path metric value is interpreted in the context of the path metric type. The derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value of the path metric types they define. + +> For example, the bound of the 'path-metric-loss', defined in 'ietf-te-packet-types', is defined in multiples of the basic unit 0.000003% as described in {{?RFC7471}} and {{?RFC8570}}. explicit-route-hop: @@ -463,7 +471,7 @@ RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note {::include ../../ietf-te-types.yang} ~~~~ {: #fig-te-yang title="TE Types YANG module" -sourcecode-markers="true" sourcecode-name="ietf-te-types@2023-06-27.yang"} +sourcecode-markers="true" sourcecode-name="ietf-te-types@2024-01-25.yang"} {: #pkt-yang-code} @@ -479,7 +487,7 @@ RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note {::include ../../ietf-te-packet-types.yang} ~~~~ {: #fig-pkt-yang title="Packet TE Types YANG module" -sourcecode-markers="true" sourcecode-name="ietf-te-packet-types@2023-07-10.yang"} +sourcecode-markers="true" sourcecode-name="ietf-te-packet-types@2024-01-25.yang"} # IANA Considerations diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.txt b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.txt index b186a6c..7e77ae6 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.txt +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.txt @@ -6,13 +6,13 @@ TEAS Working Group I. Busi Internet-Draft Huawei Obsoletes: 8776 (if approved) A. Guo Intended status: Standards Track Futurewei Technologies -Expires: 18 March 2024 X. Liu +Expires: 28 July 2024 X. Liu Alef Edge T. Saad Cisco Systems Inc. I. Bryskin Individual - 15 September 2023 + 25 January 2024 Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering @@ -41,11 +41,11 @@ Status of This Memo 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 18 March 2024. + This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 July 2024. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. @@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Copyright Notice -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 1] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 1] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal @@ -80,19 +80,19 @@ Table of Contents 3.1.2. Protocol Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3.2. Packet TE Types Module Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5. Packet TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 - 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 - 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 - 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 - 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 - 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 - Appendix A. Changes from RFC 8776 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 - A.1. TE Types YANG Diffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 - A.2. Packet TE Types YANG Diffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 - Appendix B. Option Considered for updating RFC8776 . . . . . . . 140 - Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 - Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 + 5. Packet TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 + 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 + 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 + 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 + 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 + 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 + Appendix A. Changes from RFC 8776 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 + A.1. TE Types YANG Diffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 + A.2. Packet TE Types YANG Diffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 + Appendix B. Option Considered for updating RFC8776 . . . . . . . 147 + Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 + Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 1. Introduction @@ -109,9 +109,9 @@ Table of Contents -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 2] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 2] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 This document introduces a collection of common data types derived @@ -165,9 +165,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 3] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 3] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 +=================+======================+===========+ @@ -221,9 +221,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 4] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 4] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 DS-TE: @@ -277,9 +277,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 5] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 5] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 te-bandwidth: @@ -333,9 +333,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 6] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 6] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 A type representing the identifier for a node in a TE topology. @@ -389,9 +389,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 7] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 7] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 path-attribute-flags: @@ -445,9 +445,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 8] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 8] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption, of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link @@ -484,10 +484,31 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 with a tunnel that must be satisfied for a link to be acceptable as defined in [RFC2702] and [RFC3209]. + CHANGE NOTE: The description of the path-metric-type has been updated + + RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note + path-metric-type: A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in - [RFC3785] and [RFC7471]. + [RFC3630] [RFC3785], [RFC5440], [RFC7471], [RFC8233] and + [RFC8570]. + + The unit of the path metric value is interpreted in the context of + the path metric type. The derived identities SHOULD describe the + unit and maximum value of the path metric types they define. + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 9] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + For example, the bound of the 'path-metric-loss', defined in + 'ietf-te-packet-types', is defined in multiples of the basic unit + 0.000003% as described in [RFC7471] and [RFC8570]. explicit-route-hop: @@ -499,13 +520,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 An enumerated type for the different TE link access types as defined in [RFC3630]. - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 9] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - CHANGE NOTE: The module "ietf-te-types" has been updated to add the following YANG identities, types and groupings. @@ -539,6 +553,15 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 encoding-and-switching-type: + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 10] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + This is a common grouping to define the LSP encoding and switching types. @@ -554,14 +577,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 RFC Editor: remove the two CHANGE NOTEs above and this note - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 10] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - 3.1.1. Path Computation Errors The "ietf-te-types" module contains the YANG reusable identities for @@ -594,6 +609,15 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 The "ietf-te-packet-types" module (Section 5) covers the common types and groupings that are specific to packet technology. + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 11] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + The "ietf-te-packet-types" module contains the following YANG reusable types and groupings: @@ -609,15 +633,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 bc-type: - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 11] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - A type that represents Diffserv-TE Bandwidth Constraints (BCs) as defined in [RFC4124]. @@ -650,6 +665,15 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 te-packet-path-bandwidth + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 12] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + A YANG grouping that defines the path bandwidth information and could be used in any Packet TE model (e.g., MPLS-TE topology model) for the path bandwidth representation (e.g., the bandwidth @@ -662,18 +686,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 The Packet TE path bandwidth can be represented by a bandwidth profile as follow: - - - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 12] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - +--:(packet) +--rw bandwidth-profile-name? string +--rw bandwidth-profile-type? identityref @@ -710,26 +722,26 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 [RFC4736], [RFC6004], [RFC6511], [RFC7139], [RFC7308], [RFC7551], [RFC7571], [RFC7579], and [ITU-T_G.709]. + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 13] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + CHANGE NOTE: Please focus your review only on the updates to the YANG model: see also Appendix A.1. RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note - file "ietf-te-types@2023-06-27.yang" + file "ietf-te-types@2024-01-25.yang" module ietf-te-types { yang-version 1.1; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types"; prefix te-types; import ietf-inet-types { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 13] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - prefix inet; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types"; @@ -766,6 +778,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Editor: Rakesh Gandhi + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 14] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Editor: Vishnu Pavan Beeram @@ -778,14 +798,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "; description "This YANG module contains a collection of generally useful - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 14] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - YANG data type definitions specific to TE. The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA). @@ -809,42 +821,47 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; - - revision 2023-06-27 { + revision 2023-11-25e { description "Added: - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; - identity association-type-diversity; - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; + - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; - base identity path-computation-error-reason and its derived identities; - base identity protocol-origin-type and its derived identities; - base identity svec-objective-function-type and its derived + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 15] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identities; - base identity svec-metric-type and its derived identities; - grouping encoding-and-switching-type. Updated: - description of the base identity objective-function-type; - - description and reference of identity action-exercise. + - description and reference of identity action-exercise; + - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. Obsoleted: - - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link - - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 15] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - + - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; + - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; + - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; + - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; + - identity lsp-protection-reroute. + Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as + explicit-route-objects."; reference - "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date // information and remove this note @@ -873,6 +890,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 configured value may be omitted for brevity."; reference "RFC 3630: Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 16] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Version 2 RFC 5305: IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering RFC 7308: Extended Administrative Groups in MPLS Traffic @@ -890,14 +915,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 typedef extended-admin-group { type yang:hex-string; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 16] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Extended administrative group / resource class / color representation in 'hex-string' type. @@ -929,6 +946,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Unknown."; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 17] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + enum normal { value 1; description @@ -946,14 +971,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC 7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions RFC 7823: Performance-Based Path Selection for Explicitly - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 17] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - Routed Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Using TE Metric Extensions RFC 8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions"; @@ -985,6 +1002,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "In some test mode."; } enum preparing-maintenance { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 18] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "The resource is disabled in the control plane to prepare for a graceful shutdown for maintenance purposes."; @@ -1002,14 +1027,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Status is unknown."; } } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 18] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Defines a type representing the common states of a TE resource."; @@ -1041,6 +1058,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 For the Optical Transport Network (OTN) switching type, a list of integers can be used, such as '0,2,3,1', indicating two ODU0s and one ODU3. ('ODU' stands for 'Optical Data + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 19] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Unit'.) For Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM), a list of pairs of slot numbers and widths can be used, such as '0,2,3,3', indicating a frequency slot 0 with @@ -1058,14 +1083,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 range "0..7"; } description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 19] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "The Differentiated Services Class-Type of traffic."; reference "RFC 4124: Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware @@ -1097,6 +1114,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "A strict hop in an explicit path."; } } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 20] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Enumerated type for specifying loose or strict paths."; reference @@ -1114,14 +1139,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "The link is multi-access, including broadcast and NBMA."; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 20] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } description "Defines a type representing the access type of a TE link."; @@ -1153,6 +1170,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "The explicit route represents an incoming link on a node."; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 21] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + enum outgoing { description "The explicit route represents an outgoing link on @@ -1170,37 +1195,47 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "TE metric."; reference "RFC 3785: Use of Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Metric as a - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 21] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - second MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric"; } typedef te-node-id { - type yang:dotted-quad; + type union { + type yang:dotted-quad; + type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; + } description "A type representing the identifier for a node in a TE topology. - The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad - notation. + + The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in + dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, + or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. + This attribute MAY be mapped to the Router Address TLV described in Section 2.4.1 of RFC 3630, the TE Router ID described in Section 3 of RFC 6827, the Traffic Engineering - Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the - TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. + Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE + Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the + IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. + The reachability of such a TE node MAY be achieved by a mechanism such as that described in Section 6.2 of RFC 6827."; reference "RFC 3630: Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2, Section 2.4.1 + RFC 5305: IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering, Section 4.3 + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 22] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + RFC 6119: IPv6 Traffic Engineering in IS-IS, Section 3.2.1 + RFC 6827: Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) Routing for OSPFv2 Protocols, Section 3"; } @@ -1226,14 +1261,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Node disjoint."; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 22] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - bit link { position 1; description @@ -1255,6 +1282,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 typedef te-recovery-status { type enumeration { enum normal { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 23] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Both the recovery span and the working span are fully allocated and active, data traffic is being @@ -1282,14 +1317,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 enum reversion-succeeded { description "The reversion action has succeeded."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 23] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } enum reversion-failed { description @@ -1311,6 +1338,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "The recovery domain is recovering from a failure/degrade condition on the working span that is being controlled by the Wait-to-Restore (WTR) timer."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 24] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } } description @@ -1338,14 +1373,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "A TE node or TE link has been added."; } enum remove { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 24] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - value 1; description "A TE node or TE link has been removed."; @@ -1367,6 +1394,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 // empty string } type string { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 25] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + pattern '([a-zA-Z0-9\-_.]+:)*' + '/?([a-zA-Z0-9\-_.]+)(/[a-zA-Z0-9\-_.]+)*'; } @@ -1394,14 +1429,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 This attribute is mapped to a local or remote link identifier as defined in RFCs 3630 and 5305."; reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 25] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "RFC 3630: Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2 RFC 5305: IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering"; @@ -1423,6 +1450,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 enum primary-reverse-path { description "Indicates that the TE path is a primary reverse path."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 26] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } enum secondary-reverse-path { description @@ -1450,14 +1485,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Indicates support for TE Fast Reroute (FRR)."; reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 26] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "RFC 4090: Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels"; } @@ -1480,6 +1507,13 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Indicates support for named extended administrative groups."; } + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 27] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + feature named-srlg-groups { description "Indicates support for named SRLG groups."; @@ -1506,14 +1540,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason // has been added in this module revision - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 27] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason { description @@ -1536,6 +1562,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity se-style-desired { base session-attributes-flags; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 28] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Shared explicit style, to allow the LSP to be established and share resources with the old LSP."; @@ -1562,14 +1596,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity node-protection-desired { base session-attributes-flags; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 28] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Requests FRR node protection on LSRs, if present."; reference @@ -1592,6 +1618,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity soft-preemption-desired { base session-attributes-flags; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 29] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Soft preemption of LSP resources is desired."; reference "RFC 5712: MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption"; @@ -1619,13 +1653,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Route Object (ERO)"; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 29] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity boundary-rerouting-desired { base lsp-attributes-flags; description @@ -1647,6 +1674,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Route Object (ERO)"; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 30] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity segment-based-rerouting-desired { base lsp-attributes-flags; description @@ -1675,13 +1710,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Route Object (ERO)"; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 30] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity contiguous-lsp-desired { base lsp-attributes-flags; description @@ -1702,6 +1730,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "RFC 5150: Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE) RFC 7570: Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in the Explicit + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 31] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Route Object (ERO)"; } @@ -1730,14 +1766,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity oob-mapping-flag { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 31] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base lsp-attributes-flags; description "Indicates that signaling of the egress binding information is @@ -1759,6 +1787,13 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Route Object (ERO)"; } + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 32] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity oam-mep-entity-desired { base lsp-attributes-flags; description @@ -1786,14 +1821,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC 7570: Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in the Explicit Route Object (ERO) - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 32] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - RFC 8001: RSVP-TE Extensions for Collecting Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) Information"; } @@ -1815,6 +1842,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "P2MP-TE tree re-evaluation request."; reference "RFC 8149: RSVP Extensions for Reoptimization of Loosely Routed + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 33] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Point-to-Multipoint Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (LSPs)"; } @@ -1842,14 +1877,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity link-protection-extra-traffic { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 33] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base link-protection-type; description "Extra-Traffic protected link type."; @@ -1871,6 +1898,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base link-protection-type; description "One-for-one (1:1) protected link type."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 34] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; @@ -1898,14 +1933,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity association-type-recovery { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 34] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base association-type; description "Association type for recovery, used to associate LSPs of the @@ -1927,6 +1954,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity association-type-double-sided-bidir { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 35] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + base association-type; description "Association type for double-sided bidirectional LSPs, @@ -1954,14 +1989,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 // been added in this module revision // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity association-type-diversity { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 35] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base association-type; description "Association Type diversity used to associate LSPs whose @@ -1983,6 +2010,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity of-minimize-cost-path { base objective-function-type; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 36] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Objective function for minimizing path cost."; reference @@ -2010,14 +2045,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 36] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - // below has been obsoleted in this module revision // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption { @@ -2039,6 +2066,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 status obsolete; description "Objective function for minimizing the load on the link that + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 37] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + is carrying the highest load."; reference "RFC 5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path @@ -2066,14 +2101,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity path-locally-computed { base path-computation-method; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 37] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Indicates a constrained-path LSP in which the path is computed by the local LER."; reference @@ -2095,6 +2122,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "RFC 3272: Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering RFC 4657: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 38] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Protocol Generic Requirements"; } @@ -2122,14 +2157,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 refers is specified as a value relative to the IGP metric cost to the LSP's tail end."; reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 38] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "RFC 4657: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol Generic Requirements"; } @@ -2151,6 +2178,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 not specified explicitly; rather, it is directly inherited from the IGP cost."; reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 39] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "RFC 4657: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol Generic Requirements"; } @@ -2178,14 +2213,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Label Switched Paths (LSPs)"; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 39] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity tunnel-action-type { description "Base identity from which specific tunnel action types @@ -2207,6 +2234,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity tunnel-action-switchpath { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 40] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + base tunnel-action-type; description "TE tunnel action that switches the tunnel's LSP to use the @@ -2234,14 +2269,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity tunnel-action-inprogress { base te-action-result; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 40] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "TE action is in progress."; } @@ -2263,6 +2290,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 41] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + // has been added in this module revision // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity tunnel-admin-state-auto { @@ -2291,13 +2326,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Tunnel's state is down."; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 41] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity lsp-state-type { description "Base identity for TE LSP states."; @@ -2318,6 +2346,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity lsp-path-computation-failed { base lsp-state-type; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 42] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "State path computation failed."; } @@ -2346,14 +2382,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity lsp-state-tearing-down { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 42] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base lsp-state-type; description "State is being torn down."; @@ -2374,6 +2402,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base path-invalidation-action-type; description "Upon invalidation of the TE tunnel path, the tunnel remains + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 43] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + valid, but any packet mapped over the tunnel is dropped."; reference "RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels, @@ -2403,13 +2439,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 43] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity lsp-restoration-restore-any { base lsp-restoration-type; description @@ -2428,6 +2457,29 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Base identity for LSP restoration schemes."; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 44] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + // below has been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { + base restoration-scheme-type; + description + "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. + + This restoration scheme is also known as + 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; + reference + "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology + for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; + } + identity restoration-scheme-preconfigured { base restoration-scheme-type; description @@ -2458,19 +2510,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity lsp-protection-type { description "Base identity from which LSP protection types are derived."; + reference + "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End + Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; + } -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 44] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 45] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 - reference - "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End - Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; - } - identity lsp-protection-unprotected { base lsp-protection-type; description @@ -2480,19 +2531,35 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra + // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra { base lsp-protection-type; + status obsolete; description - "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; + "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. + + This identity has been obsoleted: the + 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + instead."; reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute + // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity lsp-protection-reroute { base lsp-protection-type; + status obsolete; description - "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; + "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. + + This identity has been obsoleted: the + 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + instead."; reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; @@ -2503,6 +2570,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "'1:N Protection with Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 46] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; } @@ -2514,14 +2589,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 45] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } identity lsp-protection-unidir-1-plus-1 { @@ -2559,6 +2626,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity normal { base lsp-protection-state; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 47] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Normal state."; } @@ -2570,14 +2645,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 command."; reference "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 46] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; } @@ -2615,6 +2682,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "There is a signal degrade condition on either the working path or the protection path."; reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 48] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; } @@ -2626,14 +2701,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 47] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } identity wait-to-restore { @@ -2671,6 +2738,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 used for troubleshooting purposes are derived."; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 49] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity action-freeze { base protection-external-commands; description @@ -2682,14 +2757,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 48] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity clear-freeze { base protection-external-commands; description @@ -2727,7 +2794,15 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 command to ensure that the protection transport entity is temporarily not available to transport a traffic signal (either normal or Extra-Traffic)."; - reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 50] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + reference "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; } @@ -2738,14 +2813,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "A switchover action initiated by an operator command to switch the Extra-Traffic signal, the normal traffic signal, or the null signal to the protection transport entity, unless a - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 49] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - switchover command of equal or higher priority is in effect."; reference "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology @@ -2783,6 +2850,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity clear { base protection-external-commands; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 51] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "An action that clears the active near-end lockout of a protection, forced switchover, manual switchover, WTR state, @@ -2794,14 +2869,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity switching-capabilities { description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 50] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Base identity for interface switching capabilities."; reference "RFC 3471: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) @@ -2839,6 +2906,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base switching-capabilities; description "Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM)."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 52] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC 3471: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description"; @@ -2850,14 +2925,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "OTN-TDM capable."; reference "RFC 7138: Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for GMPLS - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 51] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks"; } @@ -2896,6 +2963,13 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Signaling Functional Description"; } + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 53] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity lsp-encoding-packet { base lsp-encoding-types; description @@ -2906,14 +2980,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity lsp-encoding-ethernet { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 52] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base lsp-encoding-types; description "Ethernet LSP encoding."; @@ -2952,6 +3018,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity lsp-encoding-lambda { base lsp-encoding-types; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 54] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Lambda (photonic) LSP encoding."; reference "RFC 3471: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) @@ -2962,14 +3036,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base lsp-encoding-types; description "Fiber LSP encoding."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 53] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - reference "RFC 3471: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description"; @@ -3008,6 +3074,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base lsp-encoding-types; description "Line (e.g., 8B/10B) LSP encoding."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 55] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC 6004: Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support for Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet Service Switching"; @@ -3019,13 +3093,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 are derived."; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 54] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity path-setup-static { base path-signaling-type; description @@ -3063,6 +3130,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity path-scope-end-to-end { base path-scope-type; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 56] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Path scope end to end."; reference "RFC 4873: GMPLS Segment Recovery"; @@ -3074,14 +3149,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity route-include-object { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 55] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base route-usage-type; description "'Include route' object."; @@ -3105,14 +3172,28 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type + // has been updated in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity path-metric-type { description - "Base identity for the path metric type."; + "Base identity for the path metric type. + + Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value + of the path metric types they define."; } identity path-metric-te { base path-metric-type; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 57] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "TE path metric."; reference "RFC 3785: Use of Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Metric as a @@ -3128,20 +3209,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 second MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop + // has been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity path-metric-hop { base path-metric-type; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 56] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Hop path metric."; + reference + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP)"; } + identity path-metric-delay-average { base path-metric-type; description @@ -3162,6 +3242,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base path-metric-type; description "Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth, which is defined to be + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 58] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Maximum Bandwidth (RFC 3630) minus the bandwidth currently allocated to LSPs."; reference @@ -3186,14 +3274,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity path-tiebreaker-type { description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 57] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Base identity for the path tiebreaker type."; } @@ -3218,6 +3298,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity resource-affinities-type { description "Base identity for resource class affinities."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 59] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC 2702: Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS"; } @@ -3242,14 +3330,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC 2702: Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels"; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 58] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } identity resource-aff-exclude-any { @@ -3274,6 +3354,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 base te-optimization-criterion; description "Optimization is not applied."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 60] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } identity cost { @@ -3299,13 +3387,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Base identity for SRLG path computation."; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 59] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity srlg-ignore { base path-computation-srlg-type; description @@ -3330,6 +3411,13 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Includes a weighted SRLG check in the path computation."; } + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 61] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason // and its derived identities below have been // added in this module revision @@ -3345,7 +3433,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified reason."; reference - "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; + "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) + Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; } identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -3355,13 +3444,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 with the provided topology-identifier."; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 60] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity path-computation-error-no-dependent-server { base path-computation-error-reason; description @@ -3383,7 +3465,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 62] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -3410,14 +3501,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity path-computation-error-no-resource { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 61] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base path-computation-error-reason; description "Path computation has failed because there is no @@ -3439,6 +3522,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 It corresponds to bit 21 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 63] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC8685; @@ -3466,14 +3557,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 problem. It corresponds to bit 24 of the Flags field of the - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 62] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference "RFC8306; @@ -3495,6 +3578,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 64] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity path-computation-error-no-gco-solution { base path-computation-error-reason; description @@ -3523,13 +3614,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 63] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity path-computation-error-brpc-chain-unavailable { base path-computation-error-no-dependent-server; description @@ -3550,10 +3634,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Path computation has failed because source node is unknown. + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 65] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -3567,7 +3660,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -3578,15 +3672,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Path computation has failed because path computation server is unavailable."; reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 64] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -3603,6 +3690,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 identity protocol-origin-api { base protocol-origin-type; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 66] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Protocol origin is via Application Programmable Interface (API)."; } @@ -3612,7 +3707,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol (PCEP)."; - reference "RFC5440"; + reference + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP)"; } identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -3634,14 +3731,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 65] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identity svec-of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption { base svec-objective-function-type; description @@ -3657,6 +3746,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Objective function for minimizing the load on the link that is carrying the highest load (MLL)."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 67] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + reference "RFC5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; @@ -3690,14 +3787,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 links (MSL)."; reference "RFC8685: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 66] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path Computation Element (H-PCE) Architecture."; } @@ -3713,6 +3802,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Element (H-PCE) Architecture."; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 68] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + identity svec-of-minimize-shared-nodes { base svec-objective-function-type; description @@ -3746,14 +3843,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } identity svec-metric-cumul-igp { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 67] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - base svec-metric-type; description "Cumulative IGP cost."; @@ -3769,6 +3858,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 reference "RFC5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 69] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } identity svec-metric-aggregate-bandwidth-consumption { @@ -3802,14 +3899,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 The modeling structure can be augmented later for other technologies."; container te-bandwidth { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 68] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Container that specifies TE bandwidth. The choices can be augmented for specific data-plane technologies."; @@ -3825,6 +3914,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } } } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 70] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } } @@ -3858,14 +3955,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type te-label-direction; default "forward"; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 69] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Label direction."; } } @@ -3881,8 +3970,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type te-global-id; default "0"; description - "An identifier to uniquely identify a provider. - If omitted, it assumes that the topology provider ID + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 71] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + "An identifier to uniquely identify a provider. + If omitted, it assumes that the topology provider ID value = 0 (the default)."; } leaf client-id { @@ -3914,14 +4011,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 be applicable to links or connections. PM defined in this grouping are applicable to generic TE PM as well as packet TE PM."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 70] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - reference "RFC 7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions RFC 7823: Performance-Based Path Selection for Explicitly @@ -3937,6 +4026,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } leaf one-way-delay-normality { type te-types:performance-metrics-normality; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 72] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "One-way delay normality."; } @@ -3970,14 +4067,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 grouping performance-metrics-one-way-bandwidth { description "PM information in real time that can be applicable to links. - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 71] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - PM defined in this grouping are applicable to generic TE PM as well as packet TE PM."; reference @@ -3993,6 +4082,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Residual bandwidth that subtracts tunnel reservations from Maximum Bandwidth (or link capacity) (RFC 3630) and + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 73] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + provides an aggregated remainder across QoS classes."; reference "RFC 3630: Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF @@ -4026,14 +4123,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 units "bytes per second"; default "0x0p0"; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 72] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Bandwidth utilization that represents the actual utilization of the link (i.e., as measured in the router). For a bundled link, bandwidth utilization is defined to @@ -4049,6 +4138,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 grouping one-way-performance-metrics { description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 74] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "One-way PM throttle grouping."; leaf one-way-delay { type uint32 { @@ -4082,14 +4179,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 sum of the component link available bandwidths."; } leaf one-way-utilized-bandwidth { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 73] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - type rt-types:bandwidth-ieee-float32; units "bytes per second"; default "0x0p0"; @@ -4105,6 +4194,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Two-way PM throttle grouping."; leaf two-way-delay { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 75] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + type uint32 { range "0..16777215"; } @@ -4138,14 +4235,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 uses performance-metrics-one-way-bandwidth; } container performance-metrics-two-way { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 74] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "Two-way link performance information in real time."; reference @@ -4161,6 +4250,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 container throttle { must 'suppression-interval >= measure-interval' { error-message "'suppression-interval' cannot be less than " + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 76] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + "'measure-interval'."; description "Constraint on 'suppression-interval' and @@ -4194,14 +4291,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 default "0"; description "Interval, in seconds, to advertise the extended metric - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 75] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - values."; } leaf suppression-interval { @@ -4217,6 +4306,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Extensions, Section 6"; } container threshold-out { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 77] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + uses performance-metrics-thresholds; description "If the measured parameter falls outside an upper bound @@ -4250,14 +4347,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 **/ grouping explicit-route-hop { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 76] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - description "The explicit route entry grouping."; choice type { @@ -4273,6 +4362,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type nw:node-id; description "The identifier of a node in the topology."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 78] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } leaf node-id { type te-node-id; @@ -4306,14 +4403,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type te-hop-type; default "strict"; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 77] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Strict or loose hop."; } leaf direction { @@ -4329,6 +4418,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Section 4.3, EXPLICIT_ROUTE in RSVP-TE RFC 3477: Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)"; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 79] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } } case unnumbered-link-hop { @@ -4362,14 +4459,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "The identifier of a node in the TE topology."; } leaf hop-type { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 78] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - type te-hop-type; default "strict"; description @@ -4385,6 +4474,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "Unnumbered link explicit route hop."; reference "RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels, + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 80] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + Section 4.3, EXPLICIT_ROUTE in RSVP-TE RFC 3477: Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)"; @@ -4418,14 +4515,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "The label explicit route hop type."; } } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 79] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } grouping record-route-state { @@ -4441,6 +4530,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 choice type { description "The Record Route entry type."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 81] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + case numbered-node-hop { container numbered-node-hop { must "node-id-uri or node-id" { @@ -4474,14 +4571,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Numbered node route hop."; } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 80] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - case numbered-link-hop { container numbered-link-hop { description @@ -4497,6 +4586,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Path attributes flags."; reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 82] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels RFC 4090: Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels @@ -4530,14 +4627,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 leaf node-id-uri { type nw:node-id; description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 81] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "The identifier of a node in the topology."; } leaf node-id { @@ -4553,6 +4642,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels RFC 4090: Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 83] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + RFC 4561: Definition of a Record Route Object (RRO) Node-Id Sub-Object"; } @@ -4586,14 +4683,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "The label Record Route entry types."; } } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 82] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } grouping label-restriction-info { @@ -4609,6 +4698,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "The label or label range is exclusive."; } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 84] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } default "inclusive"; description @@ -4642,14 +4739,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 container label-end { must "(not(../label-start/te-label/direction) and" + " not(te-label/direction))" - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 83] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - + " or " + "(../label-start/te-label/direction = te-label/direction)" + " or " @@ -4665,6 +4754,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "This is the ending label if a label range is specified. This attribute is not set if a single label is specified."; uses te-label; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 85] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } container label-step { description @@ -4698,14 +4795,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 to the left in the byte sequence. Leading zero bytes in the configured value may be omitted for brevity. Each bit position in the 'range-bitmap' 'hex-string' maps - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 84] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - to a label in the range derived from 'label-start'. For example, assuming that 'label-start' = 16000 and @@ -4721,6 +4810,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } grouping label-set-info { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 86] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Grouping for the list of label restrictions specifying what labels may or may not be used."; @@ -4754,14 +4851,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } leaf weight { type uint8; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 85] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - default "1"; description "TE path metric normalization weight."; @@ -4777,6 +4866,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 when "../metric-type = " + "'te-types:path-metric-optimize-includes'"; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 87] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Container for the 'include route' object list."; uses path-route-include-objects; } @@ -4810,14 +4907,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "TE LSP requested setup priority."; reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 86] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "RFC 3209: RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels"; } leaf hold-priority { @@ -4833,6 +4922,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 leaf signaling-type { type identityref { base path-signaling-type; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 88] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } default "te-types:path-setup-rsvp"; description @@ -4857,7 +4954,7 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "List of route entries to be included or excluded when performing the path computation."; - container explicit-route-objects-always { + container explicit-route-objects { description "Container for the 'exclude route' object list."; list route-object-exclude-always { @@ -4866,14 +4963,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "List of route objects to always exclude from the path computation."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 87] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - leaf index { type uint32; description @@ -4889,6 +4978,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "List of route objects to include or exclude in the path computation."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 89] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + leaf explicit-route-usage { type identityref { base route-usage-type; @@ -4922,14 +5019,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } description "Augmentation for a generic explicit route for SRLG - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 88] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - exclusion."; } } @@ -4945,6 +5034,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 key "index"; ordered-by user; description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 90] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "List of Explicit Route Objects to be included in the path computation."; leaf index { @@ -4978,14 +5075,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 uses explicit-route-hop { augment "type" { case srlg { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 89] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - container srlg { description "SRLG container."; @@ -5001,6 +5090,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "Augmentation for a generic explicit route for SRLG exclusion."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 91] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } } } @@ -5028,20 +5125,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type uint64; default "0"; description - "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero - indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific - 'metric-type'."; + "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. + + A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the + specific 'metric-type'. + + The unit of is interpreted in the context of the + path-metric-type."; } } } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 90] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - } grouping generic-path-optimization { @@ -5053,6 +5146,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 attributes to impose when computing a TE path."; choice algorithm { description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 92] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + "Optimizations algorithm."; case metric { if-feature "path-optimization-metric"; @@ -5090,14 +5191,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "The objective function container that includes attributes to impose when computing a TE path."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 91] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - leaf objective-function-type { type identityref { base objective-function-type; @@ -5109,6 +5202,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } } } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 93] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + } } @@ -5146,14 +5247,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 description "List of named affinity constraints."; leaf usage { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 92] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - type identityref { base resource-affinities-type; } @@ -5165,6 +5258,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 key "name"; leaf name { type string; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 94] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + description "Identifies a named affinity entry."; } @@ -5202,14 +5303,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } container path-srlgs-names { description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 93] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - "Container for the list of named SRLGs."; list path-srlgs-name { key "usage"; @@ -5221,6 +5314,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } description "Identifies an entry in a list of named SRLGs to either + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 95] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + include or exclude."; } leaf-list names { @@ -5258,14 +5359,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 grouping generic-path-constraints { description "Global named path constraints configuration grouping."; - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 94] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - container path-constraints { description "TE named path constraints container."; @@ -5277,6 +5370,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 grouping generic-path-properties { description "TE generic path properties grouping."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 96] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + container path-properties { config false; description @@ -5314,14 +5415,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 type uint32; description "Route object entry index. The index is used to - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 95] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - identify an entry in the list. The order of entries is defined by the user without relying on key values."; @@ -5333,6 +5426,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } // NOTE: The grouping encoding-and-switching-type below has been + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 97] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + // added in this module revision // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note grouping encoding-and-switching-type { @@ -5371,16 +5472,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 CHANGE NOTE: Please focus your review only on the updates to the YANG model: see also Appendix A.1. - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 96] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note - file "ietf-te-packet-types@2023-07-10.yang" + file "ietf-te-packet-types@2024-01-25.yang" module ietf-te-packet-types { yang-version 1.1; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-packet-types"; @@ -5388,11 +5482,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 /* Import TE generic types */ + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 98] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + import ietf-te-types { prefix te-types; reference - "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number // and remove this note @@ -5420,22 +5521,31 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "; description "This YANG module contains a collection of generally useful YANG - data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully - conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture - (NMDA). + data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + (TE). - Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + Architecture (NMDA). + + 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + + Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. + Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or + without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to + -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 97] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 99] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 - Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or - without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents @@ -5444,18 +5554,20 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; - - revision 2023-07-10 { + revision 2024-01-25 { description "Added common TE packet identities: - - bandwidth-profile-type. + - bandwidth-profile-type; + - path-metric-loss; + - path-metric-delay-variation. Added common TE packet groupings: - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; + - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + + Updated module description."; reference - "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date // information and remove this note @@ -5485,9 +5597,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 98] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 100] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 description @@ -5521,6 +5633,66 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-loss { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + links traversed by a P2P path. + + The basic unit is 0.000003%, + where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + path loss percentage that can be expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 101] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-delay-variation { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + + The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + /* * Typedefs */ @@ -5534,18 +5706,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 enum auto { description "Bandwidth is automatically computed."; - } - } - description - "Enumerated type for specifying whether bandwidth is -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 99] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 102] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + } + } + description + "Enumerated type for specifying whether bandwidth is explicitly specified or automatically computed."; } @@ -5590,18 +5762,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 typedef bandwidth-gbps { type uint64; units "Gbps"; - description - "Bandwidth values, expressed in gigabits per second."; - } - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 100] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 103] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + description + "Bandwidth values, expressed in gigabits per second."; + } + identity backup-protection-type { description "Base identity for the backup protection type."; @@ -5646,18 +5818,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"; } - identity bc-model-mar { - base bc-model-type; - description - "Maximum Allocation with Reservation Bandwidth Constraints -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 101] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 104] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + identity bc-model-mar { + base bc-model-type; + description + "Maximum Allocation with Reservation Bandwidth Constraints Model type."; reference "RFC 4126: Max Allocation with Reservation Bandwidth @@ -5702,18 +5874,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 } leaf one-way-delay-variation { type uint32 { - range "0..16777215"; - } - description - "One-way delay variation in microseconds."; -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 102] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 105] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + range "0..16777215"; + } + description + "One-way delay variation in microseconds."; reference "RFC 5481: Packet Delay Variation Applicability Statement, Section 4.2"; @@ -5758,18 +5930,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 TE Metric Extensions RFC 8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions"; - } - description - "PM one-way packet-specific augmentation for a generic PM - grouping."; -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 103] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 106] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + } + description + "PM one-way packet-specific augmentation for a generic PM + grouping."; } augment "performance-metrics-two-way" { leaf two-way-min-delay { @@ -5814,18 +5986,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Explicitly Routed Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Using TE Metric Extensions RFC 8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric - Extensions"; - } - leaf two-way-delay-variation { - type uint32 { -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 104] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 107] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + Extensions"; + } + leaf two-way-delay-variation { + type uint32 { range "0..16777215"; } default "0"; @@ -5870,18 +6042,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 "PM two-way packet-specific augmentation for a generic PM grouping."; reference - "RFC 7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions - RFC 7823: Performance-Based Path Selection for - Explicitly Routed Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Using - TE Metric Extensions -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 105] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 108] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + "RFC 7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions + RFC 7823: Performance-Based Path Selection for + Explicitly Routed Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Using + TE Metric Extensions RFC 8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions"; } @@ -5926,18 +6098,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 sent over a configurable interval. The finest precision is 0.000003%."; } - } - - grouping two-way-performance-metrics-packet { - description -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 106] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 109] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + } + + grouping two-way-performance-metrics-packet { + description "Two-way packet PM throttle grouping."; leaf two-way-min-delay { type uint32 { @@ -5982,18 +6154,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 uses te-types:performance-metrics-throttle-container { augment "throttle/threshold-out" { uses one-way-performance-metrics-packet; - uses two-way-performance-metrics-packet; - description - "PM threshold-out packet augmentation for a - generic grouping."; -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 107] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 110] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + uses two-way-performance-metrics-packet; + description + "PM threshold-out packet augmentation for a + generic grouping."; } augment "throttle/threshold-in" { uses one-way-performance-metrics-packet; @@ -6038,18 +6210,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 leaf cbs { type uint64; units "bits/second"; - mandatory true; - description - "Committed Burst Size (CBS)."; - } -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 108] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 111] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + mandatory true; + description + "Committed Burst Size (CBS)."; + } leaf eir { type uint64; units "bits/second"; @@ -6094,18 +6266,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Figure 2: Packet TE Types YANG module -6. IANA Considerations - - For the following URIs in the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688], IANA has - updated the reference field to refer to this document: -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 109] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 112] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 +6. IANA Considerations + + For the following URIs in the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688], IANA has + updated the reference field to refer to this document: + URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types Registrant Contact: The IESG. XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace. @@ -6149,19 +6322,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 (e.g., typedef, identity, and grouping statements) in YANG data modeling language to be imported and used by other TE modules. When imported and used, the resultant schema will have data nodes that can - be writable or readable. Access to such 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. - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 110] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 113] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + be writable or readable. Access to such 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. + The security considerations spelled out in the YANG 1.1 specification [RFC7950] apply for this document as well. @@ -6203,21 +6376,22 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 DOI 10.17487/RFC5541, June 2009, . - [RFC5557] Lee, Y., Le Roux, JL., King, D., and E. Oki, "Path - Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) - Requirements and Protocol Extensions in Support of Global - Concurrent Optimization", RFC 5557, DOI 10.17487/RFC5557, - July 2009, . -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 111] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 114] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + [RFC5557] Lee, Y., Le Roux, JL., King, D., and E. Oki, "Path + Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) + Requirements and Protocol Extensions in Support of Global + Concurrent Optimization", RFC 5557, DOI 10.17487/RFC5557, + July 2009, . + [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, @@ -6260,20 +6434,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 DOI 10.17487/RFC8306, November 2017, . - [RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration - Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, - DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, - . - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 112] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 115] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + [RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration + Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, + DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, + . + [RFC8345] Clemm, A., Medved, J., Varga, R., Bahadur, N., Ananthakrishnan, H., and X. Liu, "A YANG Data Model for Network Topologies", RFC 8345, DOI 10.17487/RFC8345, March @@ -6312,22 +6485,17 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V. P., Saad, T., Shah, H. C., and O. G. de Dios, "YANG Data Model for Layer 3 TE Topologies", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- - teas-yang-l3-te-topo-14, 12 March 2023, + teas-yang-l3-te-topo-15, 21 October 2023, . - - - + yang-l3-te-topo-15>. - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 113] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 116] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-path-computation] @@ -6339,12 +6507,12 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 yang-path-computation-21>. [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te] - Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V. P., Bryskin, I., - and O. G. de Dios, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic - Engineering Tunnels, Label Switched Paths and Interfaces", - Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-yang-te- - 33, 4 July 2023, . + Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V. P., and I. + Bryskin, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering + Tunnels, Label Switched Paths and Interfaces", Work in + Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-35, 12 + January 2024, . [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-mpls] Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V. P., and I. @@ -6381,9 +6549,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 114] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 117] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC3272] Awduche, D., Chiu, A., Elwalid, A., Widjaja, I., and X. @@ -6437,9 +6605,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 115] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 118] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC4125] Le Faucheur, F. and W. Lai, "Maximum Allocation Bandwidth @@ -6493,9 +6661,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 116] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 119] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC4736] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Ikejiri, Y., and R. Zhang, @@ -6549,9 +6717,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 117] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 120] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions @@ -6605,9 +6773,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 118] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 121] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC6780] Berger, L., Le Faucheur, F., and A. Narayanan, "RSVP @@ -6661,9 +6829,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 119] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 122] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 [RFC7571] Dong, J., Chen, M., Li, Z., and D. Ceccarelli, "GMPLS @@ -6700,29 +6868,35 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 Networks", RFC 8169, DOI 10.17487/RFC8169, May 2017, . + [RFC8233] Dhody, D., Wu, Q., Manral, V., Ali, Z., and K. Kumaki, + "Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication + Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label Switched + Paths (LSPs)", RFC 8233, DOI 10.17487/RFC8233, September + 2017, . + [RFC8570] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions", RFC 8570, DOI 10.17487/RFC8570, March 2019, . - [RFC9314] Jethanandani, M., Ed., Rahman, R., Ed., Zheng, L., Ed., - Pallagatti, S., and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 9314, - DOI 10.17487/RFC9314, September 2022, - . - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 120] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 123] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 -Appendix A. Changes from RFC 8776 + [RFC9314] Jethanandani, M., Ed., Rahman, R., Ed., Zheng, L., Ed., + Pallagatti, S., and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for + Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 9314, + DOI 10.17487/RFC9314, September 2022, + . + +Appendix A. Changes from RFC 8776 To be added in a future revision of this draft. @@ -6764,37 +6938,37 @@ A.1. TE Types YANG Diffs < --- > - 55c65 - < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - --- - > Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - 60c70 - < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 121] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 124] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + 55c65 + < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + --- + > Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + 60c70 + < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 65,66c75,108 + 65,66c75,113 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-06-27 { + > revision 2023-11-25e { > description > "Added: > - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; > - identity association-type-diversity; > - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; > - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; + > - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; > - base identity path-computation-error-reason and > its derived identities; > - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -6806,19 +6980,62 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > > Updated: > - description of the base identity objective-function-type; - > - description and reference of identity action-exercise. + > - description and reference of identity action-exercise; + > - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. > > Obsoleted: - > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link - > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; + > - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; + > - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; + > - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; + > - identity lsp-protection-reroute. + > + > Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as + > explicit-route-objects."; > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 125] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note - 545a588,615 + 353c400,403 + < type yang:dotted-quad; + --- + > type union { + > type yang:dotted-quad; + > type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; + > } + 357,358c407,411 + < The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad + < notation. + --- + > + > The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in + > dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, + > or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. + > + 362,363c415,418 + < Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the + < TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. + --- + > Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE + > Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the + > IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. + > + 368a424 + > + 370a427 + > + 371a429 + > + 545a604,631 > // CHANGE NOTE: The typedef path-type below has been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6826,14 +7043,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > type enumeration { > enum primary-path { > description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 122] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > "Indicates that the TE path is a primary path."; > } > enum secondary-path { @@ -6841,6 +7050,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "Indicates that the TE path is a secondary path."; > } > enum primary-reverse-path { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 126] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > description > "Indicates that the TE path is a primary reverse path."; > } @@ -6855,7 +7072,7 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > path."; > } > - 606a677,684 + 606a693,700 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6864,7 +7081,7 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "Base identity for LSP provisioning errors."; > } > - 982a1061,1078 + 982a1077,1094 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity association-type-diversity below has > // been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6882,54 +7099,54 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the base identity > // objective-function-type has been updated > // in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 985c1097 + < "Base objective function type."; + --- + > "Base identity for path objective function type."; + 1015a1128,1130 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 123] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 127] -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 - > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 985c1081 - < "Base objective function type."; - --- - > "Base identity for path objective function type."; - 1015a1112,1114 - > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1017a1117 + 1017a1133 > status obsolete; - 1020c1120 + 1020c1136 < consumption."; --- > consumption."; - 1023c1123 + 1023c1139 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1025a1126,1128 + 1025a1142,1144 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1027a1131 + 1027a1147 > status obsolete; - 1030c1134 + 1030c1150 < is carrying the highest load."; --- > is carrying the highest load."; - 1033c1137 + 1033c1153 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; - 1035a1140,1142 + 1035a1156,1158 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-cost-path-set > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1037a1145 + 1037a1161 > status obsolete; - 1216a1325,1336 + 1216a1341,1352 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6938,21 +7155,21 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Tunnel administrative auto state. The administrative status > in state datastore transitions to 'tunnel-admin-up' when the - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 124] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > tunnel used by the client layer, and to 'tunnel-admin-down' > when it is not used by the client layer."; > } > - 1321a1442,1450 + 1321a1458,1466 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-restoration-restore-none > // below has been added in this module revision + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 128] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note > identity lsp-restoration-restore-none { > base lsp-restoration-type; @@ -6960,30 +7177,111 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; > } > - 1628a1758,1761 + 1339a1485,1499 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting + > // below has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { + > base restoration-scheme-type; + > description + > "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. + > + > This restoration scheme is also known as + > 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; + > reference + > "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology + > for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; + > } + > + 1383a1544,1546 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1385a1549 + > status obsolete; + 1387c1551,1555 + < "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. + > + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1392a1561,1563 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute + > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1394a1566 + > status obsolete; + 1396c1568,1572 + < "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; + --- + > "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. + > + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 129] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + > This identity has been obsoleted: the + > 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + > instead."; + 1628a1805,1808 > // cCHANGE NOTE: The description and reference of the > // identity action-exercise have been updated in this module > // revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - 1632,1633c1765,1767 + 1632,1633c1812,1814 < "An action that starts testing whether or not APS communication < is operating correctly. It is of lower priority than any --- > "An action that starts testing whether or not Automatic > Protection Switching (APS) communication is operating > correctly. It is of lower priority than any - 1636,1637c1770,1771 + 1636,1637c1817,1818 < "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology < for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; --- > "ITU-T G.808.1 v4.0 (05/2014): Generic protection switching - > Linear trail and subnetwork protection"; - 2110a2245,2641 + 1916a2098,2100 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type + > // has been updated in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1919c2103,2106 + < "Base identity for the path metric type."; + --- + > "Base identity for the path metric type. + > + > Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value + > of the path metric types they define."; + 1939a2127,2129 + > // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop + > // has been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + 1943a2134,2136 + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; + 1945a2139 + > + 2110a2305,2708 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note > identity path-computation-error-reason { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 130] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > description > "Base identity for path computation error reasons."; > } @@ -6994,15 +7292,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified > reason."; > reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 125] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; + > "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) + > Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -7033,11 +7324,20 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } > + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 131] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > identity path-computation-error-no-inclusion-hop { > base path-computation-error-reason; > description @@ -7050,14 +7350,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Path computation has failed because the destination node is > unknown in indicated destination domain. - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 126] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > > It corresponds to bit 19 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; @@ -7094,6 +7386,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 132] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > > identity path-computation-error-destination-domain-unknown { > base path-computation-error-reason; @@ -7106,14 +7406,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > reference > "RFC8685; > - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 127] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } > @@ -7150,6 +7442,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Path computation has failed because of no GCO solution > found. + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 133] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > > It corresponds to bit 25 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; @@ -7162,14 +7462,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > identity path-computation-error-pks-expansion { > base path-computation-error-reason; > description - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 128] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > "Path computation has failed because of Path-Key Subobject > (PKS) expansion failure. > @@ -7204,7 +7496,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 134] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7218,15 +7519,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 129] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7237,7 +7531,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "Path computation has failed because path computation > server is unavailable."; > reference - > "RFC5440; + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7259,11 +7554,21 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > } > > identity protocol-origin-pcep { + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 135] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > base protocol-origin-type; > description > "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol > (PCEP)."; - > reference "RFC5440"; + > reference + > "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + > Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -7274,14 +7579,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > } > > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity svec-objective-function-type - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 130] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -7313,6 +7610,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 136] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > identity svec-of-minimize-cost-path-set { > base svec-objective-function-type; > description @@ -7330,14 +7635,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > transit domains (MCTD)."; > reference > "RFC8685: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 131] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path Computation > Element (H-PCE) Architecture."; > } @@ -7369,6 +7666,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Objective function for minimizing the number of shared > nodes (MSN)."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 137] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > reference > "RFC8685: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol > (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path Computation @@ -7386,14 +7691,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > "RFC5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 132] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > > identity svec-metric-cumul-te { > base svec-metric-type; @@ -7425,6 +7722,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > identity svec-metric-aggregate-bandwidth-consumption { > base svec-metric-type; > description + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 138] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + > "Aggregate bandwidth consumption."; > reference > "RFC5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path @@ -7440,16 +7745,8 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > - 2514a3046,3054 + 2514a3113,3121 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 133] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } @@ -7458,9 +7755,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2517d3056 + 2517d3123 < mandatory true; - 2566a3106,3116 + 2566a3173,3183 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -7472,40 +7769,40 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2569d3118 + 2569d3185 < mandatory true; - 2574a3124,3128 + 2574a3191,3195 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2577d3130 + 2577d3197 + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 139] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + < mandatory true; - 2646a3200,3203 + 2646a3267,3270 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } - 2648a3206,3210 + 2648a3273,3277 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2651d3212 + 2651d3279 < mandatory true; - 2696a3258,3268 + 2696a3325,3335 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 134] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > description > "At least one node identifier and at least one Link > Termination Point (LTP) identifier MUST be present."; @@ -7515,21 +7812,45 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } - 2699d3270 + 2699d3337 < mandatory true; - 2704a3276,3280 + 2704a3343,3347 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } - 2968a3545,3549 + 2968a3612,3616 > leaf network-id { > type nw:network-id; > description > "The network topology identifier."; > } - 3379c3960,3987 + 2977c3625 + < container explicit-route-objects-always { + --- + > container explicit-route-objects { + 3124,3126c3772,3778 + < "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero + < indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific + < 'metric-type'."; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 140] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + --- + > "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. + > + > A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the + > specific 'metric-type'. + > + > The unit of is interpreted in the context of the + > path-metric-type."; + 3379c4031,4058 < } \ No newline at end of file --- @@ -7554,14 +7875,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 > type identityref { > base te-types:switching-capabilities; > } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 135] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - > description > "LSP switching type."; > reference @@ -7577,6 +7890,14 @@ A.2. Packet TE Types YANG Diffs This section provides the diff between the YANG module in section 3.2 of [RFC8776] and the YANG model revision in Section 5. + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 141] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + The intention of this appendix is to facilitate focusing the review of the YANG model in Section 5 to the changes compared with the YANG model in [RFC8776]. @@ -7593,206 +7914,283 @@ A.2. Packet TE Types YANG Diffs The output (model-updates.txt) is reported here: - 11c11,12 - < "RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; - --- - > "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; - 12a14,15 - > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number - > // and remove this note - 22c25 - < - --- - > - 41c44 - < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - --- - > Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as - 46c49 - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 136] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set - --- - > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set - 51,52c54,71 - < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the - < RFC itself for full legal notices."; - --- - > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX - > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself - > for full legal notices."; - > - > revision 2023-07-10 { - > description - > "Added common TE packet identities: - > - bandwidth-profile-type. - > - > Added common TE packet groupings: - > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - > - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; - > reference - > "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - > Engineering"; - > } - > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date - > // information and remove this note - 61c80,126 - < /** - --- - > /* - > * Identities - > */ - > - > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity bandwidth-profile-type and - > // its derived identities below have been - > // added in this module revision - > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - > identity bandwidth-profile-type { - > description - > "Bandwidth Profile Types"; - > } - > - > identity mef-10-bwp { - > base bandwidth-profile-type; - > description - > "MEF 10 Bandwidth Profile"; - > reference - > "MEF 10.3: Ethernet Services Attributes Phase 3"; - > } - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 137] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - > - > identity rfc-2697-bwp { - > base bandwidth-profile-type; - > description - > "RFC 2697 Bandwidth Profile"; - > reference - > "RFC2697: A Single Rate Three Color Marker"; - > } - > - > identity rfc-2698-bwp { - > base bandwidth-profile-type; - > description - > "RFC 2698 Bandwidth Profile"; - > reference - > "RFC2698: A Two Rate Three Color Marker"; - > } - > - > identity rfc-4115-bwp { - > base bandwidth-profile-type; - > description - > "RFC 4115 Bandwidth Profile"; - > reference - > "RFC4115: A Differentiated Service Two-Rate, Three-Color - > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; - > } - > - > /* - 180a246,249 - > /* - > * Groupings - > */ - > - 472a542,611 - > } - > } - > - > // CHANGE NOTE: The te-packet-path-bandwidth below has been - > // added in this module revision - > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - > grouping te-packet-path-bandwidth { - > description - > "Path bandwidth for Packet. "; - > leaf bandwidth-profile-name { - > type string; - > description "Name of Bandwidth Profile."; - > } - > leaf bandwidth-profile-type { - > type identityref { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 138] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - > base bandwidth-profile-type; - > } - > description "Type of Bandwidth Profile."; - > } - > leaf cir { - > type uint64; - > units "bits/second"; - > mandatory true; - > description - > "Committed Information Rate (CIR)."; - > } - > leaf cbs { - > type uint64; - > units "bits/second"; - > mandatory true; - > description - > "Committed Burst Size (CBS)."; - > } - > leaf eir { - > type uint64; - > units "bits/second"; - > description - > "Excess Information Rate (EIR)."; - > } - > leaf ebs { - > type uint64; - > units "bytes"; - > description - > "Excess Burst Size (EBS)."; - > } - > leaf pir { - > type uint64; - > units "bits/second"; - > description - > "Peak Information Rate (PIR)."; - > } - > leaf pbs { - > type uint64; - > units "bytes"; - > description - > "Peak Burst Size (PBS)."; - > } - > } - > - > // CHANGE NOTE: The te-packet-path-bandwidth below has been - > // added in this module revision - > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note - > grouping te-packet-link-bandwidth { - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 139] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - > description - > "Link Bandwidth for Packet. "; - > leaf packet-bandwidth { - > type uint64; - > units "bits/second"; - > description - > "Available bandwith value."; + 11c11 + < "RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + --- + > "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + 12a13,14 + > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number + > // and remove this note + 22c24 + < + --- + > + 37,39c39,49 + < data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully + < conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture + < (NMDA). + --- + > data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + > (TE). + > + > The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + > Architecture (NMDA). + > + > 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + > they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + 41c51 + < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + --- + > Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + 46c56 + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 142] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set + --- + > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set + 51,52c61,80 + < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the + < RFC itself for full legal notices."; + --- + > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX + > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself + > for full legal notices."; + > revision 2024-01-25 { + > description + > "Added common TE packet identities: + > - bandwidth-profile-type; + > - path-metric-loss; + > - path-metric-delay-variation. + > + > Added common TE packet groupings: + > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; + > - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + > + > Updated module description."; + > reference + > "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; + > } + > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date + > // information and remove this note + 61c89,187 + < /** + --- + > /* + > * Identities + > */ + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity bandwidth-profile-type and + > // its derived identities below have been + > // added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity bandwidth-profile-type { + > description + > "Bandwidth Profile Types"; + > } + > + > identity mef-10-bwp { + > base bandwidth-profile-type; + > description + > "MEF 10 Bandwidth Profile"; + > reference + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 143] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + > "MEF 10.3: Ethernet Services Attributes Phase 3"; + > } + > + > identity rfc-2697-bwp { + > base bandwidth-profile-type; + > description + > "RFC 2697 Bandwidth Profile"; + > reference + > "RFC2697: A Single Rate Three Color Marker"; + > } + > + > identity rfc-2698-bwp { + > base bandwidth-profile-type; + > description + > "RFC 2698 Bandwidth Profile"; + > reference + > "RFC2698: A Two Rate Three Color Marker"; + > } + > + > identity rfc-4115-bwp { + > base bandwidth-profile-type; + > description + > "RFC 4115 Bandwidth Profile"; + > reference + > "RFC4115: A Differentiated Service Two-Rate, Three-Color + > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-loss { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + > encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + > links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The basic unit is 0.000003%, + > where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + > path loss percentage that can be expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 144] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + > // been added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > identity path-metric-delay-variation { + > base te-types:path-metric-type; + > description + > "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + > delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + > + > The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + > (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + > maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + > expressed. + > + > Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + > encoded as the maximum value."; + > reference + > "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + > Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + > Switched Paths (LSPs); + > + > RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + > + > RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + > } + > + > /* + 180a307,310 + > /* + > * Groupings + > */ + > + 472a603,672 + > } + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The te-packet-path-bandwidth below has been + > // added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > grouping te-packet-path-bandwidth { + > description + > "Path bandwidth for Packet. "; + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 145] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + > leaf bandwidth-profile-name { + > type string; + > description "Name of Bandwidth Profile."; + > } + > leaf bandwidth-profile-type { + > type identityref { + > base bandwidth-profile-type; + > } + > description "Type of Bandwidth Profile."; + > } + > leaf cir { + > type uint64; + > units "bits/second"; + > mandatory true; + > description + > "Committed Information Rate (CIR)."; + > } + > leaf cbs { + > type uint64; + > units "bits/second"; + > mandatory true; + > description + > "Committed Burst Size (CBS)."; + > } + > leaf eir { + > type uint64; + > units "bits/second"; + > description + > "Excess Information Rate (EIR)."; + > } + > leaf ebs { + > type uint64; + > units "bytes"; + > description + > "Excess Burst Size (EBS)."; + > } + > leaf pir { + > type uint64; + > units "bits/second"; + > description + > "Peak Information Rate (PIR)."; + > } + > leaf pbs { + > type uint64; + > units "bytes"; + > description + > "Peak Burst Size (PBS)."; + > } + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 146] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 + + + > } + > + > // CHANGE NOTE: The te-packet-path-bandwidth below has been + > // added in this module revision + > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + > grouping te-packet-link-bandwidth { + > description + > "Link Bandwidth for Packet. "; + > leaf packet-bandwidth { + > type uint64; + > units "bits/second"; + > description + > "Available bandwith value."; Appendix B. Option Considered for updating RFC8776 @@ -7829,18 +8227,18 @@ Appendix B. Option Considered for updating RFC8776 * describe within the document only the updates to the ietf-te-types YANG module proposed by this document; - * include the whole updated YANG model within the main body; - * add some notes, to be removed before publication, within updated - YANG model to focus the review only to the updates to the ietf-te- - types YANG module proposed by this document. +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 147] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 140] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 + * include the whole updated YANG model within the main body; + * add some notes, to be removed before publication, within updated + YANG model to focus the review only to the updates to the ietf-te- + types YANG module proposed by this document. Based on the feedbacks from IETF 114 discussion, this version has been restructured to become an RFC8776-bis, with some notes, to be @@ -7884,18 +8282,17 @@ Authors' Addresses Email: italo.busi@huawei.com - Aihua Guo - Futurewei Technologies - Email: aihuaguo.ietf@gmail.com - +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 148] + +Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types January 2024 -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 141] - -Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 + Aihua Guo + Futurewei Technologies + Email: aihuaguo.ietf@gmail.com Xufeng Liu @@ -7944,9 +8341,4 @@ Internet-Draft TE Common YANG Types September 2023 - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 18 March 2024 [Page 142] +Busi, et al. Expires 28 July 2024 [Page 149] diff --git a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.xml b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.xml index 5f28d91..3c7715c 100644 --- a/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.xml +++ b/drafts/te-types-update/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update.xml @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ - + TEAS Working Group @@ -407,10 +407,22 @@ appear in all capitals, as shown here. A base YANG identity for supported attribute filters associated with a tunnel that must be satisfied for a link to be acceptable as defined in and . +CHANGE NOTE: The description of the path-metric-type has been updated + +RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note + path-metric-type:
  • - A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in and . + A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in , , , and . +
+ +
  • + The unit of the path metric value is interpreted in the context of the path metric type. The derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value of the path metric types they define. +
+ +
  • + For example, the bound of the 'path-metric-loss', defined in 'ietf-te-packet-types', is defined in multiples of the basic unit 0.000003% as described in and .
explicit-route-hop: @@ -604,7 +616,7 @@ appear in all capitals, as shown here. RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note -
RFC Editor: remove the CHANGE NOTE above and this note -
"; description "This YANG module contains a collection of generally useful YANG - data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully - conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture - (NMDA). + data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + (TE). + + The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + Architecture (NMDA). - Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + + Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or @@ -4660,18 +4750,20 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; - - revision 2023-07-10 { + revision 2024-01-25 { description "Added common TE packet identities: - - bandwidth-profile-type. + - bandwidth-profile-type; + - path-metric-loss; + - path-metric-delay-variation. Added common TE packet groupings: - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; + - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + + Updated module description."; reference - "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date // information and remove this note @@ -4729,6 +4821,58 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-loss { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + links traversed by a P2P path. + + The basic unit is 0.000003%, + where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + path loss percentage that can be expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-delay-variation { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + + The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + /* * Typedefs */ @@ -5471,6 +5615,20 @@ Names" registry : + + + Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) + + + + + This document specifies the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactions include path computation requests and path computation replies as well as notifications of specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering. PCEP is designed to be flexible and extensible so as to easily allow for the addition of further messages and objects, should further requirements be expressed in the future. [STANDARDS-TRACK] + + + + + + Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path Computation Element (H-PCE) Architecture @@ -5489,20 +5647,6 @@ Names" registry : - - - Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) - - - - - This document specifies the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactions include path computation requests and path computation replies as well as notifications of specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering. PCEP is designed to be flexible and extensible so as to easily allow for the addition of further messages and objects, should further requirements be expressed in the future. [STANDARDS-TRACK] - - - - - - A Backward-Recursive PCE-Based Computation (BRPC) Procedure to Compute Shortest Constrained Inter-Domain Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths @@ -5675,7 +5819,7 @@ Names" registry : - + A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering Tunnels, Label Switched Paths and Interfaces @@ -5693,10 +5837,7 @@ Names" registry : Individual - - Telefonica - - + This document defines a YANG data model for the provisioning and management of Traffic Engineering (TE) tunnels, Label Switched Paths @@ -5710,7 +5851,7 @@ Names" registry : - + @@ -5761,11 +5902,11 @@ Names" registry : - + YANG Data Model for Layer 3 TE Topologies - IBM Corporation + Alef Edge Individual @@ -5782,7 +5923,7 @@ Names" registry : Telefonica - + This document defines a YANG data model for layer 3 traffic engineering topologies. @@ -5790,7 +5931,7 @@ Names" registry : - + @@ -6394,6 +6535,24 @@ Names" registry : + + + Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label Switched Paths (LSPs) + + + + + + + + In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial information networks (e.g., stock market data providers), network performance criteria (e.g., latency) are becoming as critical to data path selection as other metrics and constraints. These metrics are associated with the Service Level Agreement (SLA) between customers and service providers. The link bandwidth utilization (the total bandwidth of a link in actual use for the forwarding) is another important factor to consider during path computation. + IGP Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions describe mechanisms with which network performance information is distributed via OSPF and IS-IS, respectively. The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Client (PCC) requests. This document describes the extension to PCEP to carry latency, delay variation, packet loss, and link bandwidth utilization as constraints for end-to-end path computation. + + + + + + Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) @@ -6779,21 +6938,21 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set -65,66c75,108 +65,66c75,113 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; -> -> revision 2023-06-27 { +> revision 2023-11-25e { > description > "Added: > - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; > - identity association-type-diversity; > - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; > - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; +> - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; > - base identity path-computation-error-reason and > its derived identities; > - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -6805,19 +6964,54 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > > Updated: > - description of the base identity objective-function-type; -> - description and reference of identity action-exercise. +> - description and reference of identity action-exercise; +> - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. > > Obsoleted: -> - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption -> - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link -> - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; +> - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; +> - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; +> - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; +> - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; +> - identity lsp-protection-reroute. +> +> Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as +> explicit-route-objects."; > reference -> "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; +> "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note -545a588,615 +353c400,403 +< type yang:dotted-quad; +--- +> type union { +> type yang:dotted-quad; +> type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; +> } +357,358c407,411 +< The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad +< notation. +--- +> +> The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in +> dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, +> or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. +> +362,363c415,418 +< Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the +< TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. +--- +> Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE +> Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the +> IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. +> +368a424 +> +370a427 +> +371a429 +> +545a604,631 > // CHANGE NOTE: The typedef path-type below has been > // added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6846,7 +7040,7 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > path."; > } > -606a677,684 +606a693,700 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6855,7 +7049,7 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > "Base identity for LSP provisioning errors."; > } > -982a1061,1078 +982a1077,1094 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity association-type-diversity below has > // been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6874,45 +7068,45 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > // objective-function-type has been updated > // in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -985c1081 +985c1097 < "Base objective function type."; --- > "Base identity for path objective function type."; -1015a1112,1114 +1015a1128,1130 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1017a1117 +1017a1133 > status obsolete; -1020c1120 +1020c1136 < consumption."; --- > consumption."; -1023c1123 +1023c1139 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; -1025a1126,1128 +1025a1142,1144 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1027a1131 +1027a1147 > status obsolete; -1030c1134 +1030c1150 < is carrying the highest load."; --- > is carrying the highest load."; -1033c1137 +1033c1153 < Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; --- > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; -1035a1140,1142 +1035a1156,1158 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity of-minimize-cost-path-set > // below has been obsoleted in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1037a1145 +1037a1161 > status obsolete; -1216a1325,1336 +1216a1341,1352 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity tunnel-admin-state-auto below > // has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6925,7 +7119,7 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > when it is not used by the client layer."; > } > -1321a1442,1450 +1321a1458,1466 > // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-restoration-restore-none > // below has been added in this module revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note @@ -6935,25 +7129,90 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > "No LSP affected by a failure is restored."; > } > -1628a1758,1761 +1339a1485,1499 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting +> // below has been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { +> base restoration-scheme-type; +> description +> "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. +> +> This restoration scheme is also known as +> 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; +> reference +> "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology +> for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; +> } +> +1383a1544,1546 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra +> // below has been obsoleted in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1385a1549 +> status obsolete; +1387c1551,1555 +< "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; +--- +> "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. +> +> This identity has been obsoleted: the +> 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used +> instead."; +1392a1561,1563 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute +> // below has been obsoleted in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1394a1566 +> status obsolete; +1396c1568,1572 +< "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; +--- +> "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. +> +> This identity has been obsoleted: the +> 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used +> instead."; +1628a1805,1808 > // cCHANGE NOTE: The description and reference of the > // identity action-exercise have been updated in this module > // revision > // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note -1632,1633c1765,1767 +1632,1633c1812,1814 < "An action that starts testing whether or not APS communication < is operating correctly. It is of lower priority than any --- > "An action that starts testing whether or not Automatic > Protection Switching (APS) communication is operating > correctly. It is of lower priority than any -1636,1637c1770,1771 +1636,1637c1817,1818 < "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology < for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; --- > "ITU-T G.808.1 v4.0 (05/2014): Generic protection switching - > Linear trail and subnetwork protection"; -2110a2245,2641 +1916a2098,2100 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type +> // has been updated in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1919c2103,2106 +< "Base identity for the path metric type."; +--- +> "Base identity for the path metric type. +> +> Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value +> of the path metric types they define."; +1939a2127,2129 +> // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop +> // has been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +1943a2134,2136 +> reference +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP)"; +1945a2139 +> +2110a2305,2708 > // CHANGE NOTE: The base identity path-computation-error-reason > // and its derived identities below have been > // added in this module revision @@ -6969,7 +7228,8 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified > reason."; > reference -> "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; +> "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) +> Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -7000,7 +7260,8 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7147,7 +7408,8 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7161,7 +7423,8 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the > NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7172,7 +7435,8 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > "Path computation has failed because path computation > server is unavailable."; > reference -> "RFC5440; +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP); > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; > } @@ -7198,7 +7462,9 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > description > "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol > (PCEP)."; -> reference "RFC5440"; +> reference +> "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication +> Protocol (PCEP)"; > } > > identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -7351,7 +7617,7 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)."; > } > -2514a3046,3054 +2514a3113,3121 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; @@ -7361,9 +7627,9 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2517d3056 +2517d3123 < mandatory true; -2566a3106,3116 +2566a3173,3183 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -7375,30 +7641,30 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } -2569d3118 +2569d3185 < mandatory true; -2574a3124,3128 +2574a3191,3195 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2577d3130 +2577d3197 < mandatory true; -2646a3200,3203 +2646a3267,3270 > must "node-id-uri or node-id" { > description > "At least one node identifier MUST be present."; > } -2648a3206,3210 +2648a3273,3277 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2651d3212 +2651d3279 < mandatory true; -2696a3258,3268 +2696a3325,3335 > must "(link-tp-id-uri or link-tp-id) and " + > "(node-id-uri or node-id)" { > description @@ -7410,21 +7676,37 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > description > "Link Termination Point (LTP) identifier."; > } -2699d3270 +2699d3337 < mandatory true; -2704a3276,3280 +2704a3343,3347 > leaf node-id-uri { > type nw:node-id; > description > "The identifier of a node in the topology."; > } -2968a3545,3549 +2968a3612,3616 > leaf network-id { > type nw:network-id; > description > "The network topology identifier."; > } -3379c3960,3987 +2977c3625 +< container explicit-route-objects-always { +--- +> container explicit-route-objects { +3124,3126c3772,3778 +< "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero +< indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific +< 'metric-type'."; +--- +> "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. +> +> A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the +> specific 'metric-type'. +> +> The unit of is interpreted in the context of the +> path-metric-type."; +3379c4031,4058 < } \ No newline at end of file --- @@ -7480,49 +7762,66 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt The output (model-updates.txt) is reported here:
"RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; -12a14,15 +> "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; +12a13,14 > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number > // and remove this note -22c25 +22c24 < --- > -41c44 +37,39c39,49 +< data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully +< conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture +< (NMDA). +--- +> data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering +> (TE). +> +> The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore +> Architecture (NMDA). +> +> 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, +> they appear in all capitals, as shown here. +41c51 < Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as --- -> Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as -46c49 +> Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as +46c56 < the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set --- > the license terms contained in, the Revised BSD License set -51,52c54,71 +51,52c61,80 < This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8776; see the < RFC itself for full legal notices."; --- > This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself > for full legal notices."; -> -> revision 2023-07-10 { +> revision 2024-01-25 { > description > "Added common TE packet identities: -> - bandwidth-profile-type. +> - bandwidth-profile-type; +> - path-metric-loss; +> - path-metric-delay-variation. > > Added common TE packet groupings: > - te-packet-path-bandwidth; -> - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; +> - te-packet-link-bandwidth. +> +> Updated module description."; > reference -> "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic -> Engineering"; +> "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; > } > // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date > // information and remove this note -61c80,126 +61c89,187 < /** --- > /* @@ -7571,13 +7870,65 @@ sed 's/^ > / > /' model-diff-spaces.txt > Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; > } > +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has +> // been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity path-metric-loss { +> base te-types:path-metric-type; +> description +> "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type +> encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all +> links traversed by a P2P path. +> +> The basic unit is 0.000003%, +> where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the +> path loss percentage that can be expressed. +> +> Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be +> encoded as the maximum value."; +> reference +> "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element +> Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label +> Switched Paths (LSPs); +> +> RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; +> +> RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; +> } +> +> // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has +> // been added in this module revision +> // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note +> identity path-metric-delay-variation { +> base te-types:path-metric-type; +> description +> "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional +> delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. +> +> The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where +> (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the +> maximum value of the path delay variation that can be +> expressed. +> +> Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be +> encoded as the maximum value."; +> reference +> "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element +> Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label +> Switched Paths (LSPs); +> +> RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; +> +> RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; +> } +> > /* -180a246,249 +180a307,310 > /* > * Groupings > */ > -472a542,611 +472a603,672 > } > } > @@ -7713,750 +8064,822 @@ about the process to follow to provide tiny updates to a YANG module already pub diff --git a/ietf-te-mpls.yang b/ietf-te-mpls.yang index c651796..41255c5 100644 --- a/ietf-te-mpls.yang +++ b/ietf-te-mpls.yang @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ module ietf-te-mpls { // RFC Ed.: update the date below with the date of RFC publication // and remove this note. - revision "2023-05-25" { + revision "2023-11-16" { description "Latest update to MPLS TE YANG module."; reference "RFCXXXX: A YANG Data Model for MPLS-TE Tunnels and LSP(s)"; @@ -101,17 +101,6 @@ module ietf-te-mpls { description "Resetup tunnel action type"; } - identity path-metric-loss { - base te-types:path-metric-type; - description - "The path loss metric type (as a packet percentage) that - encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all - links traversed by a P2P path. The basic unit is 0.000003%, - where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the highest packet-loss - percentage that can be expressed."; - reference "RFC8233, RFC4710, and RFC8570"; - } - /* MPLS TE tunnel properties*/ grouping tunnel-igp-shortcut-config { description "TE tunnel IGP shortcut configs"; diff --git a/ietf-te-packet-types.yang b/ietf-te-packet-types.yang index 2d0d545..e1d1f59 100644 --- a/ietf-te-packet-types.yang +++ b/ietf-te-packet-types.yang @@ -8,8 +8,7 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { import ietf-te-types { prefix te-types; reference - "RFCXXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFCXXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number // and remove this note @@ -37,11 +36,19 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { "; description "This YANG module contains a collection of generally useful YANG - data type definitions specific to MPLS TE. The model fully - conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture - (NMDA). - - Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as + data type definitions specific to Packet Traffic Enginnering + (TE). + + The model fully conforms to the Network Management Datastore + Architecture (NMDA). + + 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 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, + they appear in all capitals, as shown here. + + Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or @@ -54,18 +61,20 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; - - revision 2023-07-10 { + revision 2024-01-25 { description "Added common TE packet identities: - - bandwidth-profile-type. + - bandwidth-profile-type; + - path-metric-loss; + - path-metric-delay-variation. Added common TE packet groupings: - te-packet-path-bandwidth; - - te-packet-link-bandwidth."; + - te-packet-link-bandwidth. + + Updated module description."; reference - "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date // information and remove this note @@ -123,6 +132,58 @@ module ietf-te-packet-types { Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-loss below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-loss { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path loss (as a packet percentage) metric type + encodes a function of the unidirectional loss metrics of all + links traversed by a P2P path. + + The basic unit is 0.000003%, + where (2^24 - 2) or 50.331642% is the maximum value of the + path loss percentage that can be expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity path-metric-delay-variation below has + // been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity path-metric-delay-variation { + base te-types:path-metric-type; + description + "The path delay variation encodes the sum of the unidirectional + delay variation metrics of all links traversed by a P2P path. + + The path delay variation metric unit is in microseconds, where + (2^24 - 1) or 16,777,215 microseconds (16.777215 sec) is the + maximum value of the path delay variation that can be + expressed. + + Values that are larger than the maximum value SHOULD be + encoded as the maximum value."; + reference + "RFC8233: Extensions to the Path Computation Element + Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label + Switched Paths (LSPs); + + RFC7471: OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions; + + RFC8570: IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions."; + } + /* * Typedefs */ diff --git a/ietf-te-types.yang b/ietf-te-types.yang index 9757ebb..0cba2bf 100644 --- a/ietf-te-types.yang +++ b/ietf-te-types.yang @@ -75,14 +75,14 @@ module ietf-te-types { This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices."; - - revision 2023-06-27 { + revision 2023-11-25e { description "Added: - base identity lsp-provisioning-error-reason; - identity association-type-diversity; - identity tunnel-admin-state-auto; - identity lsp-restoration-restore-none; + - identity restoration-scheme-rerouting; - base identity path-computation-error-reason and its derived identities; - base identity protocol-origin-type and @@ -94,15 +94,20 @@ module ietf-te-types { Updated: - description of the base identity objective-function-type; - - description and reference of identity action-exercise. + - description and reference of identity action-exercise; + - typedef te-node-id to support also 16 octects TE identifiers. Obsoleted: - - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption - - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link - - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set"; + - identity of-minimize-agg-bandwidth-consumption; + - identity of-minimize-load-most-loaded-link; + - identity of-minimize-cost-path-set; + - identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra; + - identity lsp-protection-reroute. + + Container explicit-route-objects-always renamed as + explicit-route-objects."; reference - "RFC XXXX: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic - Engineering"; + "RFC XXXX: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering"; } // RFC Editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number, update date // information and remove this note @@ -392,25 +397,36 @@ module ietf-te-types { } typedef te-node-id { - type yang:dotted-quad; + type union { + type yang:dotted-quad; + type inet:ipv6-address-no-zone; + } description "A type representing the identifier for a node in a TE topology. - The identifier is represented as 4 octets in dotted-quad - notation. + + The identifier is represented either as 4 octets in + dotted-quad notation or 16 octets in full, mixed, shortened, + or shortened-mixed IPv6 address notation. + This attribute MAY be mapped to the Router Address TLV described in Section 2.4.1 of RFC 3630, the TE Router ID described in Section 3 of RFC 6827, the Traffic Engineering - Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, or the - TE Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119. + Router ID TLV described in Section 4.3 of RFC 5305, the TE + Router ID TLV described in Section 3.2.1 of RFC 6119, or the + IPv6 TE Router ID TLV described in Section 4.1 of RFC 6119. + The reachability of such a TE node MAY be achieved by a mechanism such as that described in Section 6.2 of RFC 6827."; reference "RFC 3630: Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2, Section 2.4.1 + RFC 5305: IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering, Section 4.3 + RFC 6119: IPv6 Traffic Engineering in IS-IS, Section 3.2.1 + RFC 6827: Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) Routing for OSPFv2 Protocols, Section 3"; } @@ -1466,6 +1482,21 @@ module ietf-te-types { "Base identity for LSP restoration schemes."; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity restoration-scheme-rerouting + // below has been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note + identity restoration-scheme-rerouting { + base restoration-scheme-type; + description + "Restoration LSP is computed after the failure detection. + + This restoration scheme is also known as + 'Full LSP Re-routing.'"; + reference + "RFC 4427: Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology + for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)"; + } + identity restoration-scheme-preconfigured { base restoration-scheme-type; description @@ -1510,19 +1541,35 @@ module ietf-te-types { Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra + // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity lsp-protection-reroute-extra { base lsp-protection-type; + status obsolete; description - "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type."; + "'(Full) Rerouting' LSP protection type. + + This identity has been obsoleted: the + 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + instead."; reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The identity lsp-protection-reroute + // below has been obsoleted in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity lsp-protection-reroute { base lsp-protection-type; + status obsolete; description - "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type."; + "'Rerouting without Extra-Traffic' LSP protection type. + + This identity has been obsoleted: the + 'restoration-scheme-rerouting' identity SHOULD be used + instead."; reference "RFC 4872: RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery"; @@ -2048,9 +2095,15 @@ module ietf-te-types { Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The description of the identity path-metric-type + // has been updated in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity path-metric-type { description - "Base identity for the path metric type."; + "Base identity for the path metric type. + + Derived identities SHOULD describe the unit and maximum value + of the path metric types they define."; } identity path-metric-te { @@ -2071,12 +2124,19 @@ module ietf-te-types { second MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric"; } + // CHANGE NOTE: The reference for the identity path-metric-hop + // has been added in this module revision + // RFC Editor: remove the note above and this note identity path-metric-hop { base path-metric-type; description "Hop path metric."; + reference + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP)"; } + identity path-metric-delay-average { base path-metric-type; description @@ -2257,7 +2317,8 @@ module ietf-te-types { "Path computation has failed because of an unspecified reason."; reference - "Section 7.5 of RFC5440"; + "Section 7.5 of RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) + Communication Protocol (PCEP)"; } identity path-computation-error-no-topology { @@ -2288,7 +2349,8 @@ module ietf-te-types { It corresponds to bit 31 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -2435,7 +2497,8 @@ module ietf-te-types { It corresponds to bit 29 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -2449,7 +2512,8 @@ module ietf-te-types { It corresponds to bit 30 of the Flags field of the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -2460,7 +2524,8 @@ module ietf-te-types { "Path computation has failed because path computation server is unavailable."; reference - "RFC5440; + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP); https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml"; } @@ -2486,7 +2551,9 @@ module ietf-te-types { description "Protocol origin is Path Computation Engine Protocol (PCEP)."; - reference "RFC5440"; + reference + "RFC5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication + Protocol (PCEP)"; } identity protocol-origin-bgp { @@ -3555,7 +3622,7 @@ module ietf-te-types { description "List of route entries to be included or excluded when performing the path computation."; - container explicit-route-objects-always { + container explicit-route-objects { description "Container for the 'exclude route' object list."; list route-object-exclude-always { @@ -3702,9 +3769,13 @@ module ietf-te-types { type uint64; default "0"; description - "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. A zero - indicates an unbounded upper limit for the specific - 'metric-type'."; + "Upper bound on the end-to-end TE path metric. + + A zero indicates an unbounded upper limit for the + specific 'metric-type'. + + The unit of is interpreted in the context of the + path-metric-type."; } } } diff --git a/mpls-static-json-examples/node-a-configuration.json b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-a-configuration.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..babc53b --- /dev/null +++ b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-a-configuration.json @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@ +{ + "ietf-routing:routing": { + "ietf-mpls:mpls": { + "interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-1", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-2", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-3", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-4", + "mpls-enabled": true + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static:static-lsps": { + "static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp1-forward", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 101, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-A-1" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-multiple": { + "nhlfe": [ + { + "index": "1", + "backup-index": "2", + "role": "primary", + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 202 + }, + { + "id": 2, + "label": 103 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-A-3" + }, + { + "index": "2", + "role": "backup", + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 304 + }, + { + "id": 2, + "label": 103 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-A-4" + } + ] + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp1-reverse", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 111 + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 110 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-A-1" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp2-forward", + "operation": "impose-and-forward", + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 202 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-A-3" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp2-reverse", + "operation": "pop-and-lookup", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 211, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-A-3" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp3-forward", + "operation": "impose-and-forward", + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 304 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-A-4" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp3-reverse", + "operation": "pop-and-lookup", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 311, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-A-4" + } + } + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static-extended:bidir-static-lsps": { + "bidir-static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp1", + "forward-lsp": "lsp1-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp1-reverse" + }, + { + "name": "lsp2", + "forward-lsp": "lsp2-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp2-reverse" + }, + { + "name": "lsp3", + "forward-lsp": "lsp3-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp3-reverse" + } + ] + } + } + }, + "ietf-interfaces:interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-1", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-2", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-3", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-A-4", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/mpls-static-json-examples/node-b-configuration.json b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-b-configuration.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..99c149b --- /dev/null +++ b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-b-configuration.json @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ +{ + "ietf-routing:routing": { + "ietf-mpls:mpls": { + "interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-B-1", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-B-2", + "mpls-enabled": true + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static:static-lsps": { + "static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp2-forward", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 202, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-B-1" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 203 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-B-2" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp2-reverse", + "operation": "pop-and-lookup", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 212, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-B-2" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 211 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-B-1" + } + } + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static-extended:bidir-static-lsps": { + "bidir-static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp2", + "forward-lsp": "lsp2-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp2-reverse" + } + ] + } + } + }, + "ietf-interfaces:interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-B-1", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-B-2", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/mpls-static-json-examples/node-c-configuration.json b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-c-configuration.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6dce6dc --- /dev/null +++ b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-c-configuration.json @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@ +{ + "ietf-routing:routing": { + "ietf-mpls:mpls": { + "interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-1", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-2", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-3", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-4", + "mpls-enabled": true + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static:static-lsps": { + "static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp1-forward", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 103 + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 100 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-C-3" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp1-reverse", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 113, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-C-3" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-multiple": { + "nhlfe": [ + { + "index": "1", + "backup-index": "2", + "role": "primary", + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 212 + }, + { + "id": 2, + "label": 111 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-C-1" + }, + { + "index": "2", + "role": "backup", + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 314 + }, + { + "id": 2, + "label": 111 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-C-2" + } + ] + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp2-forward", + "operation": "pop-and-lookup", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 203, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-C-1" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp2-reverse", + "operation": "impose-and-forward", + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 212 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-C-1" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp3-forward", + "operation": "pop-and-lookup", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 303, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-C-2" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp3-reverse", + "operation": "impose-and-forward", + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 314 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-C-2" + } + } + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static-extended:bidir-static-lsps": { + "bidir-static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp1", + "forward-lsp": "lsp1-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp1-reverse" + }, + { + "name": "lsp2", + "forward-lsp": "lsp2-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp2-reverse" + }, + { + "name": "lsp3", + "forward-lsp": "lsp3-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp3-reverse" + } + ] + } + } + }, + "ietf-interfaces:interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-1", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-2", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-3", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-C-4", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/mpls-static-json-examples/node-d-configuration.json b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-d-configuration.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..96eaaae --- /dev/null +++ b/mpls-static-json-examples/node-d-configuration.json @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ +{ + "ietf-routing:routing": { + "ietf-mpls:mpls": { + "interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-D-1", + "mpls-enabled": true + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-D-2", + "mpls-enabled": true + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static:static-lsps": { + "static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp3-forward", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 304, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-D-1" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 303 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-D-2" + } + } + }, + { + "name": "lsp3-reverse", + "operation": "swap-and-forward", + "in-segment": { + "fec": { + "incoming-label": 314, + "incoming-interface": "mpls-if-D-2" + } + }, + "out-segment": { + "nhlfe-single": { + "mpls-label-stack": { + "entry": [ + { + "id": 1, + "label": 311 + } + ] + }, + "outgoing-interface": "mpls-if-D-1" + } + } + } + ] + }, + "ietf-mpls-static-extended:bidir-static-lsps": { + "bidir-static-lsp": [ + { + "name": "lsp3", + "forward-lsp": "lsp3-forward", + "reverse-lsp": "lsp3-reverse" + } + ] + } + } + }, + "ietf-interfaces:interfaces": { + "interface": [ + { + "name": "mpls-if-D-1", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + }, + { + "name": "mpls-if-D-2", + "type": "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/mpls-static-json-examples/reference-network.txt b/mpls-static-json-examples/reference-network.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..34d7804 --- /dev/null +++ b/mpls-static-json-examples/reference-network.txt @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ + + LSP1 +<==============================================================> + + LSP2 (Working) + <==============================> + + +--------+ +--------------+ +--------+ + | | | | | | +<----->O(1) (2)O<----->O(1) Node B (2)O<----->O(1) (3)O<-----> + | | | | | | + | | +--------------+ | | + | Node A | | Node C | + | | +--------------+ | | + | | | | | | + O(3) (4)O<----->O(1) Node D (2)O<----->O(2) (4)O + | | | | | | + +--------+ +--------------+ +--------+ + + <==============================> + LSP3 (Protection)