draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-00.txt   draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-01.txt 
TEAS Working Group T. Saad, Ed. TEAS Working Group T. Saad
Internet-Draft R. Gandhi Internet-Draft R. Gandhi
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems Inc Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems Inc
Expires: March 16, 2019 X. Liu Expires: April 10, 2019 X. Liu
Volta Networks Volta Networks
V. Beeram V. Beeram
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
H. Shah
Ciena
I. Bryskin I. Bryskin
Y. Lee
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
September 12, 2018 October 07, 2018
Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types Traffic Engineering Common YANG Types
draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-00 draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-01
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a collection of common data types and groupings This document defines a collection of common data types and groupings
in YANG data modeling language. These derived common types and in YANG data modeling language. These derived common types and
groupings are intended to be imported by modules that model Traffic groupings are intended to be imported by modules that model Traffic
Engineering (TE) configuration and state capabilities. Engineering (TE) configuration and state capabilities.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 16, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 10, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 15
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IETF TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IETF MPLS TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 3.1. TE Types Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.2. MPLS TE Types Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4. IETF TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5. IETF MPLS TE Types YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
YANG [RFC6020] [RFC7950] is a data modeling language used to model YANG [RFC6020] and [RFC7950] is a data modeling language used to
configuration data, state data, Remote Procedure Calls, and model configuration data, state data, Remote Procedure Calls, and
notifications for network management protocols. The YANG language notifications for network management protocols such as NETCONF
supports a small set of built-in data types and provides mechanisms [RFC6241]. The YANG language supports a small set of built-in data
to derive other types from the built-in types. types and provides mechanisms to derive other types from the built-in
types.
This document introduces a collection of common data types derived This document introduces a collection of common data types derived
from the built-in YANG data types. The derived types are designed to from the built-in YANG data types. The derived types and groupings
be the common types applicable for modeling for TE features (e.g. in are designed to be the common types applicable for modeling Traffic
models defined in [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te] and Engineering (TE) features, e.g. in models defined in
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te], [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo] and
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-rsvp]). [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-rsvp]).
1.1. Terminology 1.1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
[RFC2119]. 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
The terminology for describing YANG data models is found in
[RFC7950].
1.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names 1.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names
In this document, names of data nodes and other data model objects In this document, names of data nodes and other data model objects
are prefixed using the standard prefix associated with the are prefixed using the standard prefix associated with the
corresponding YANG imported modules, as shown in Table 1. corresponding YANG imported modules, as shown in Table 1.
+---------------+--------------------+---------------+ +---------------+--------------------+---------------+
| Prefix | YANG module | Reference | | Prefix | YANG module | Reference |
+---------------+--------------------+---------------+ +---------------+--------------------+---------------+
| yang | ietf-yang-types | [RFC6991] | | yang | ietf-yang-types | [RFC6991] |
| inet | ietf-inet-types | [RFC6991] | | inet | ietf-inet-types | [RFC6991] |
| rt-types | ietf-routing-types | [RFC8294] |
| te-types | ietf-te-types | this document | | te-types | ietf-te-types | this document |
| te-mpls-types | ietf-te-mpls-types | this document | | te-mpls-types | ietf-te-mpls-types | this document |
+---------------+--------------------+---------------+ +---------------+--------------------+---------------+
Table 1: Prefixes and corresponding YANG modules Table 1: Prefixes and corresponding YANG modules
2. Overview 2. Abbreviations
The TE generic types module covers the building blocks that are GMPLS: Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching
independent and agnostic of any specific technology or control plane
instance. The MPLS TE types modules covers the common types reusable LSP: Label Switched Path
groupings specific to MPLS technology. Other technology specific TE
types are outside the scope of this document. LSR: Label Switching Router
LER: Label Edge Router
MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching
RSVP: Resource Reservation Protocol
TE: Traffic Engineering
DS-TE: Differentiated Services Traffic Engineering
SRLG: Shared Link Risk Group
3. Overview
This document defines two YANG modules for common TE types: ietf-te- This document defines two YANG modules for common TE types: ietf-te-
types and ietf-te-mpls-types. The TE module imports (ietf-yang- types for TE generic types and ietf-te-mpls-types for MPLS technology
types, ietf-inet-types and ietf-routing-types; see Section 3) are specific types. Other technology specific TE types are outside the
from [RFC6991] and [RFC8294]. scope of this document.
3. IETF TE Types YANG Module 3.1. TE Types Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-te-types@2018-09-13.yang" The ietf-te-types module contains common TE types that are
independent and agnostic of any specific technology or control plane
instance.
The ietf-te-types module imports the followinig modules:
o ietf-yang-types and ietf-inet-types defined in [RFC6991]
o ietf-routing-types defined in [RFC8294]
The ietf-te-types module contains the following YANG reusable types
and groupings:
te-bandwidth:
A YANG grouping that defines the generic TE bandwidth. The
modeling structure allows augmentation for each technology. For
un-specified technologies, the string encoded te-bandwidth type is
used.
te-label:
A YANG grouping that defines the generic TE label. The modeling
structure allows augmentation for each technology. For un-
specified technologies, rt-types:generalized-label is used.
te-ds-class:
A type representing the Differentiated-Services (DS) Class-Type of
traffic as defined in [RFC4124].
te-label-direction:
An enumerated type for specifying the forward or reverse direction
of a label.
te-hop-type:
An enumerated type for specifying hop as loose or strict.
te-global-id:
A type representing the identifier that uniquely identify an
operator, which can be either a provider or a client. The
definition of this type is taken from [RFC6370] and [RFC5003].
This attribute type is used solely to provide a globally unique
context for TE topologies.
te-node-id:
A type representing the identifier for a node in a topology. The
identifier is represented as 32-bit unsigned integer in the
dotted-quad notation. This attribute is mapped to Router ID in
[RFC3630], [RFC5329], [RFC5305], and [RFC6119].
te-topology-id:
A type representing the identifier for a topology. It is optional
to have one or more prefixes at the beginning, separated by
colons. The prefixes can be the network-types, defined in ietf-
network, to help user to understand the topology better before
further inquiry.
te-tp-id:
A type representing the identifier of a TE interface link
termination endpoint (TP) on a specific TE node where the TE link
connects. This attribute is mapped to local or remote link
identifier in [RFC3630] and [RFC5305].
te-path-disjointness:
A type representing the different resource disjointness options
for a TE tunnel path as defined in [RFC4872].
admin-groups:
A union type for TE link's classic or extended administrative
groups as defined in [RFC3630] and [RFC5305].
srlg:
A type representing the Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) as defined
in [RFC4203] and [RFC5307].
te-metric:
A type representing the TE link metric as defined in [RFC3785].
te-recovery-status:
An enumerated type for the different status of a recovery action
as defined in [RFC4427] and [RFC6378].
restoration-scheme-type:
A base YANG identity for supported LSP restoration schemes as
defined in [RFC4872].
protection-external-commands:
A base YANG identity for supported protection external commands
for trouble shooting purposes as defined in [RFC4427].
association-type:
A base YANG identity for supported Label Switched Path (LSP)
association types as defined in [RFC6780], [RFC4872], [RFC4873].
objective-function-type:
A base YANG identity for supported path computation objective
functions as defined in [RFC5541].
te-tunnel-type:
A base YANG identity for supported TE tunnel types as defined in
[RFC3209] and [RFC4875].
lsp-encoding-types:
base YANG identity for supported LSP encoding types as defined in
[RFC3471].
lsp-protection-type:
A base YANG identity for supported LSP protection types as defined
in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873].
switching-capabilities:
A base YANG identity for supported interface switching
capabilities as defined in [RFC3471].
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].
path-metric-type:
A base YANG identity for supported path metric types as defined in
[RFC3785] and [RFC7471].
performance-metric-container:
A YANG grouping that defines supported performance metrics as
defined in [RFC7471] and [RFC7810].
explicit-route-hop:
A YANG grouping that defines supported explicit routes as defined
in [RFC3209] and [RFC3477].
te-link-access-type:
An enumerated type for the different TE link access types as
defined in [RFC3630].
3.2. MPLS TE Types Module
The ietf-te-mpls-types module covers the common types and groupings
specific to MPLS technology.
The ietf-te-mpls-types module contains the following YANG reusable
types and groupings:
backup-protection-type:
A base YANG identity for supported protection types that a backup
or bypass tunnel can provide as defined in [RFC4090].
te-class-type:
A type that represents the Diffserv-TE class-type as defined in
[RFC4124].
bc-type:
A type that represents the Diffserv-TE Bandwidth Constraint (BC)
as defined in [RFC4124].
bc-model-type:
A base YANG identity for supported Diffserv-TE bandwidth
constraint models as defined in [RFC4125], [RFC4126] and
[RFC4127].
te-bandwidth-requested-type:
An enumerated type for the different options to request bandwidth
for a specific tunnel.
4. IETF TE Types YANG Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-te-types@2018-10-08.yang"
module ietf-te-types { module ietf-te-types {
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types"; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types";
/* Replace with IANA when assigned */ /* Replace with IANA when assigned */
prefix "te-types"; prefix "te-types";
import ietf-inet-types { import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet; prefix inet;
} }
skipping to change at page 4, line 47 skipping to change at page 9, line 27
Editor: Igor Bryskin Editor: Igor Bryskin
<mailto:Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> <mailto:Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com>
Editor: Young Lee Editor: Young Lee
<mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com>"; <mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com>";
description description
"This module contains a collection of generally "This module contains a collection of generally
useful TE specific YANG data type definitions."; useful TE specific YANG data type definitions.";
revision "2018-09-13" { revision "2018-10-08" {
description "Latest revision of TE types"; description "Latest revision of TE types";
reference "RFC3209"; reference "RFC3209";
} }
/** /**
* Typedefs * Typedefs
*/ */
typedef te-bandwidth { typedef te-bandwidth {
type string { type string {
pattern pattern
'0[xX](0((\.0?)?[pP](\+)?0?|(\.0?))|' '0[xX](0((\.0?)?[pP](\+)?0?|(\.0?))|'
+ '1(\.([\da-fA-F]{0,5}[02468aAcCeE]?)?)?[pP](\+)?(12[0-7]|' + '1(\.([\da-fA-F]{0,5}[02468aAcCeE]?)?)?[pP](\+)?(12[0-7]|'
+ '1[01]\d|0?\d?\d)?)|0[xX][\da-fA-F]{1,8}|\d+' + '1[01]\d|0?\d?\d)?)|0[xX][\da-fA-F]{1,8}|\d+'
+ '(,(0[xX](0((\.0?)?[pP](\+)?0?|(\.0?))|' + '(,(0[xX](0((\.0?)?[pP](\+)?0?|(\.0?))|'
skipping to change at page 6, line 40 skipping to change at page 11, line 19
description description
"strict hop in an explicit path"; "strict hop in an explicit path";
} }
} }
description description
"enumerated type for specifying loose or strict "enumerated type for specifying loose or strict
paths"; paths";
reference "RFC3209: section-4.3.2"; reference "RFC3209: section-4.3.2";
} }
typedef optimization-goal {
type enumeration {
enum minimize {
description "Pick lowest path metric goal";
}
enum maximize {
description "Pick highest path metric goal";
}
enum randomize {
description
"Pick a path at random from list of
equally favorable ones";
}
}
description "TE optimization goal";
}
typedef percentage {
type uint8 {
range "0..100";
}
description
"Integer indicating a percentage value";
}
typedef performance-metric-normality { typedef performance-metric-normality {
type enumeration { type enumeration {
enum "unknown" { enum "unknown" {
value 0; value 0;
description description
"Unknown."; "Unknown.";
} }
enum "normal" { enum "normal" {
value 1; value 1;
description description
skipping to change at page 17, line 32 skipping to change at page 21, line 33
is specified as an absolute value"; is specified as an absolute value";
} }
identity LSP_METRIC_INHERITED { identity LSP_METRIC_INHERITED {
base LSP_METRIC_TYPE; base LSP_METRIC_TYPE;
description description
"The metric for the LSPs to which this identity refers is "The metric for the LSPs to which this identity refers is
not specified explicitly - but rather inherited from the IGP not specified explicitly - but rather inherited from the IGP
cost directly"; cost directly";
} }
identity tunnel-type { identity te-tunnel-type {
description description
"Base identity from which specific tunnel types are "Base identity from which specific tunnel types are
derived."; derived.";
} }
identity tunnel-p2p { identity te-tunnel-p2p {
base tunnel-type; base te-tunnel-type;
description description
"TE point-to-point tunnel type."; "TE point-to-point tunnel type.";
} }
identity tunnel-p2mp { identity te-tunnel-p2mp {
base tunnel-type; base te-tunnel-type;
description description
"TE point-to-multipoint tunnel type."; "TE point-to-multipoint tunnel type.";
reference "RFC4875"; reference "RFC4875";
} }
identity tunnel-action-type { identity tunnel-action-type {
description description
"Base identity from which specific tunnel action types "Base identity from which specific tunnel action types
are derived."; are derived.";
} }
skipping to change at page 21, line 22 skipping to change at page 25, line 25
"Restoration LSP is preconfigured prior to the failure"; "Restoration LSP is preconfigured prior to the failure";
} }
identity restoration-scheme-precomputed { identity restoration-scheme-precomputed {
base restoration-scheme-type; base restoration-scheme-type;
description description
"Restoration LSP is precomputed prior to the failure"; "Restoration LSP is precomputed prior to the failure";
} }
identity restoration-scheme-presignaled { identity restoration-scheme-presignaled {
base restoration-scheme-type; base restoration-scheme-type;
description description
"Restoration LSP is presignaledd prior to the failure"; "Restoration LSP is presignaled prior to the failure";
} }
identity lsp-protection-type { identity lsp-protection-type {
description description
"Base identity from which LSP protection types are "Base identity from which LSP protection types are
derived."; derived.";
} }
identity lsp-protection-unprotected { identity lsp-protection-unprotected {
base lsp-protection-type; base lsp-protection-type;
description description
skipping to change at page 25, line 22 skipping to change at page 29, line 23
the extra traffic signal, the normal traffic signal, or the the extra traffic signal, the normal traffic signal, or the
null signal to the protection transport entity, unless an null signal to the protection transport entity, unless an
equal or higher priority switch command is in effect."; equal or higher priority switch command is in effect.";
reference reference
"ITU-T G.808, RFC 4427"; "ITU-T G.808, RFC 4427";
} }
identity action-manual-switch { identity action-manual-switch {
base protection-external-commands; base protection-external-commands;
description description
"A switch action initiated by an operator command to switch "A switch action initiated by an operator command to switch
the extra traffic signal, the normal traffic signal #i, or the extra traffic signal, the normal traffic signal, or
the null signal to the protection transport entity, unless the null signal to the protection transport entity, unless
a fault condition exists on other transport entities or an a fault condition exists on other transport entities or an
equal or higher priority switch command is in effect."; equal or higher priority switch command is in effect.";
reference reference
"ITU-T G.808, RFC 4427"; "ITU-T G.808, RFC 4427";
} }
identity action-exercise { identity action-exercise {
base protection-external-commands; base protection-external-commands;
description description
"An action to start testing if the APS communication is "An action to start testing if the APS communication is
skipping to change at page 28, line 4 skipping to change at page 32, line 6
} }
identity lsp-encoding-fiber { identity lsp-encoding-fiber {
base lsp-encoding-types; base lsp-encoding-types;
description description
"Fiber LSP encoding"; "Fiber LSP encoding";
reference "RFC3471"; reference "RFC3471";
} }
identity lsp-encoding-fiber-channel { identity lsp-encoding-fiber-channel {
base lsp-encoding-types; base lsp-encoding-types;
description description
"FiberChannel LSP encoding"; "Fiber Channel LSP encoding";
reference "RFC3471"; reference "RFC3471";
} }
identity lsp-encoding-oduk { identity lsp-encoding-oduk {
base lsp-encoding-types; base lsp-encoding-types;
description description
"G.709 ODUk (Digital Path)LSP encoding"; "G.709 ODUk (Digital Path) LSP encoding";
} }
identity lsp-encoding-optical-channel { identity lsp-encoding-optical-channel {
base lsp-encoding-types; base lsp-encoding-types;
description description
"Line (e.g., 8B/10B) LSP encoding"; "Line (e.g., 8B/10B) LSP encoding";
} }
identity lsp-encoding-line { identity lsp-encoding-line {
base lsp-encoding-types; base lsp-encoding-types;
description description
"Line (e.g., 8B/10B) LSP encoding"; "Line (e.g., 8B/10B) LSP encoding";
skipping to change at page 30, line 4 skipping to change at page 34, line 6
identity path-metric-igp { identity path-metric-igp {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
description description
"IGP path metric"; "IGP path metric";
reference "RFC3785"; reference "RFC3785";
} }
identity path-metric-hop { identity path-metric-hop {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
description description
"Hop path metric"; "Hop path metric";
} }
identity path-metric-delay-average { identity path-metric-delay-average {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
description description
"Unidirectional average link delay"; "Unidirectional average link delay";
reference "RFC7471"; reference "RFC7471";
} }
identity path-metric-delay-minimum {
base path-metric-type;
description
"Unidirectional minimum link delay";
reference "RFC7471";
}
identity path-metric-residual-bandwidth { identity path-metric-residual-bandwidth {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
description description
"Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth, which is defined to be "Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth, which is defined to be
Maximum Bandwidth [RFC3630] minus the bandwidth currently Maximum Bandwidth [RFC3630] minus the bandwidth currently
allocated to LSPs."; allocated to LSPs.";
reference "RFC7471"; reference "RFC7471";
} }
identity path-metric-optimize-includes { identity path-metric-optimize-includes {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
description description
"A metric that optimizes the number of included resources "A metric that optimizes the number of included resources
specified in a set"; specified in a set";
} }
identity path-metric-optimize-excludes { identity path-metric-optimize-excludes {
base path-metric-type; base path-metric-type;
skipping to change at page 30, line 48 skipping to change at page 35, line 8
identity path-tiebreaker-minfill { identity path-tiebreaker-minfill {
base path-tiebreaker-type; base path-tiebreaker-type;
description description
"Min-Fill LSP path placement"; "Min-Fill LSP path placement";
} }
identity path-tiebreaker-maxfill { identity path-tiebreaker-maxfill {
base path-tiebreaker-type; base path-tiebreaker-type;
description description
"Max-Fill LSP path placement"; "Max-Fill LSP path placement";
} }
identity path-tiebreaker-randoom { identity path-tiebreaker-random {
base path-tiebreaker-type; base path-tiebreaker-type;
description description
"Random LSP path placement"; "Random LSP path placement";
} }
identity bidir-provisioning-mode {
description
"Base identity for bidirectional provisioning
mode.";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity bidir-provisioning-single-sided {
base bidir-provisioning-mode;
description
"Single-sided bidirectional provisioning mode";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity bidir-provisioning-double-sided {
base bidir-provisioning-mode;
description
"Double-sided bidirectional provisioning mode";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity bidir-association-type {
description
"Base identity for bidirectional association type";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity bidir-assoc-corouted {
base bidir-association-type;
description
"Co-routed bidirectional association type";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity bidir-assoc-non-corouted {
base bidir-association-type;
description
"Non co-routed bidirectional association type";
reference "RFC7551";
}
identity resource-affinities-type { identity resource-affinities-type {
description description
"Base identity for resource affinities"; "Base identity for resource affinities";
reference "RFC2702"; reference "RFC2702";
} }
identity resource-aff-include-all { identity resource-aff-include-all {
base resource-affinities-type; base resource-affinities-type;
description description
"The set of attribute filters associated with a "The set of attribute filters associated with a
skipping to change at page 53, line 28 skipping to change at page 57, line 5
uses explicit-route-hop; uses explicit-route-hop;
} }
} }
} }
} }
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
Figure 1: TE basic types YANG module Figure 1: TE basic types YANG module
4. IETF MPLS TE Types YANG Module 5. IETF MPLS TE Types YANG Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-te-mpls-types@2018-09-13.yang" <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-te-mpls-types@2018-10-08.yang"
module ietf-te-mpls-types { module ietf-te-mpls-types {
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-mpls-types"; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-mpls-types";
/* Replace with IANA when assigned */ /* Replace with IANA when assigned */
prefix "te-mpls-types"; prefix "te-mpls-types";
organization organization
"IETF TEAS Working Group"; "IETF TEAS Working Group";
skipping to change at page 54, line 28 skipping to change at page 58, line 5
Editor: Igor Bryskin Editor: Igor Bryskin
<mailto:Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> <mailto:Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com>
Editor: Young Lee Editor: Young Lee
<mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com>"; <mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com>";
description description
"This module contains a collection of generally "This module contains a collection of generally
useful MPLS TE specific YANG data type definitions."; useful MPLS TE specific YANG data type definitions.";
revision "2018-09-13" { revision "2018-10-08" {
description "Latest revision of TE MPLS types"; description "Latest revision of TE MPLS types";
reference "RFC3209"; reference "RFC3209";
} }
/**
* Typedefs
*/
typedef te-bandwidth-requested-type {
type enumeration {
enum SPECIFIED {
description
"Bandwidth is explicitly specified";
}
enum AUTO {
description
"Bandwidth is automatically computed";
}
}
description
"enumerated type for specifying whether bandwidth is
explicitly specified or automatically computed";
}
typedef te-class-type {
type uint8;
description
"Diffserv-TE class-type that defines a set of Traffic
Trunks crossing a link that is governed by a specific
set of bandwidth constraints. CT is used for the
purposes of link bandwidth allocation, constraint-
based routing and admission control.";
reference "RFC4124: Protocols for Diffserv-aware TE";
}
typedef bc-type {
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"Diffserv-TE bandwidth constraint as defined in RFC4124";
reference "RFC4124: Protocols for Diffserv-aware TE";
}
typedef bandwidth-kbps {
type uint64;
units "Kbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in kilobits per second";
}
typedef bandwidth-mbps {
type uint64;
units "Mbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in megabits per second";
}
typedef bandwidth-gbps {
type uint64;
units "Gbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in gigabits per second";
}
identity backup-protection-type { identity backup-protection-type {
description description
"Base identity for backup protection type"; "Base identity for backup protection type";
} }
identity backup-protection-link { identity backup-protection-link {
base backup-protection-type; base backup-protection-type;
description description
"backup provides link protection only"; "backup provides link protection only";
} }
skipping to change at page 55, line 6 skipping to change at page 59, line 42
identity backup-protection-node-link { identity backup-protection-node-link {
base backup-protection-type; base backup-protection-type;
description description
"backup offers node (preferred) or link protection"; "backup offers node (preferred) or link protection";
} }
identity bc-model-type { identity bc-model-type {
description description
"Base identity for Diffserv-TE bandwidth constraint "Base identity for Diffserv-TE bandwidth constraint
model type"; model type";
reference "RFC4124: Protocols for Diffserv-aware TE";
} }
identity bc-model-rdm { identity bc-model-rdm {
base bc-model-type; base bc-model-type;
description description
"Russian Doll bandwidth constraint model type."; "Russian Doll bandwidth constraint model type.";
reference "RFC4127: Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE";
} }
identity bc-model-mam { identity bc-model-mam {
base bc-model-type; base bc-model-type;
description description
"Maximum Allocation bandwidth constraint "Maximum Allocation bandwidth constraint
model type."; model type.";
reference "RFC4125: Maximum Allocation Model for DS-TE";
} }
identity bc-model-mar { identity bc-model-mar {
base bc-model-type; base bc-model-type;
description description
"Maximum Allocation with Reservation "Maximum Allocation with Reservation
bandwidth constraint model type."; bandwidth constraint model type.";
} reference "RFC4126: MAR Bandwidth Constraints Model for DS-TE";
typedef bandwidth-kbps {
type uint64;
units "Kbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in kilobits per second";
}
typedef bandwidth-mbps {
type uint64;
units "Mbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in megabits per second";
}
typedef bandwidth-gbps {
type uint64;
units "Gbps";
description
"Bandwidth values expressed in gigabits per second";
}
typedef te-bandwidth-type {
type enumeration {
enum SPECIFIED {
description
"Bandwidth is explicitly specified";
}
enum AUTO {
description
"Bandwidth is automatically computed";
}
}
description
"enumerated type for specifying whether bandwidth is
explicitly specified or automatically computed";
}
typedef bfd-type {
type enumeration {
enum classical {
description "BFD classical session type.";
}
enum seamless {
description "BFD seamless session type.";
}
}
default "classical";
description
"Type of BFD session";
}
typedef bfd-encap-mode-type {
type enumeration {
enum gal {
description
"BFD with GAL mode";
}
enum ip {
description
"BFD with IP mode";
}
}
default ip;
description
"Possible BFD transport modes when running over TE
LSPs.";
} }
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
Figure 2: TE MPLS types YANG module Figure 2: TE MPLS types YANG module
5. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document registers the following URIs in the IETF XML registry This document registers the following URIs in the IETF XML registry
[RFC3688]. Following the format in [RFC3688], the following [RFC3688]. Following the format in [RFC3688], the following
registration is requested to be made. registration is requested to be made.
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types XML: N/A, the URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-types XML: N/A, the
requested URI is an XML namespace. requested URI is an XML namespace.
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-mpls-types XML: N/A, the URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-mpls-types XML: N/A, the
requested URI is an XML namespace. requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document registers a YANG module in the YANG Module Names This document registers a YANG module in the YANG Module Names
registry [RFC6020]. registry [RFC6020].
name: ietf-te-types namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te- name: ietf-te-types namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-te-
types prefix: ietf-te-types reference: RFC3209 types prefix: ietf-te-types reference: RFC3209
name: ietf-te-mpls-types namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf- name: ietf-te-mpls-types namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-
te-mpls-types prefix: ietf-te-mpls-types reference: RFC3209 te-mpls-types prefix: ietf-te-mpls-types reference: RFC3209
6. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed via This document defines common TE type definitions (i.e., typedef,
the NETCONF protocol [RFC6241]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the identity and grouping statements) using the YANG data modeling
secure transport layer and the mandatory-to-implement secure language. The definitions themselves have no security or privacy
transport is SSH [RFC6242]. The NETCONF access control model impact on the Internet, but the usage of these definitions in
[RFC8341] provides means to restrict access for particular NETCONF concrete YANG modules might have. The security considerations
users to a pre-configured subset of all available NETCONF protocol spelled out in the YANG 1.1 specification [RFC7950] apply for this
operations and content. document as well.
7. Acknowledgement 8. Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the members of the multi-vendor YANG The authors would like to thank the members of the multi-vendor YANG
design team who are involved in the definition of these data types. design team who are involved in the definition of these data types.
The authors would also like to thank Loa Andersson, Lou Berger, The authors would also like to thank Loa Andersson, Lou Berger,
Sergio Belotti, Italo Busi, Carlo Perocchio, Francesco Lazzeri, Aihua Sergio Belotti, Italo Busi, Carlo Perocchio, Francesco Lazzeri, Aihua
Guo, Dhruv Dhody, Anurag Sharma, and Xian Zhang for their comments Guo, Dhruv Dhody, Anurag Sharma, and Xian Zhang for their comments
and providing valuable feedback on this document. and providing valuable feedback on this document.
8. Normative References 9. Contributors
Himanshu Shah
Ciena
Email: hshah@ciena.com
Young Lee
Huawei Technologies
Email: leeyoung@huawei.com
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-rsvp] [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-rsvp]
Beeram, V., Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Bryskin, I.,
and H. Shah, "A YANG Data Model for Resource Reservation and H. Shah, "A YANG Data Model for Resource Reservation
Protocol (RSVP)", draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-09 (work in Protocol (RSVP)", draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-09 (work in
progress), May 2018. progress), May 2018.
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te] [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te]
Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V., Shah, H., and Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V., Shah, H., and
I. Bryskin, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering I. Bryskin, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering
Tunnels and Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-16 (work Tunnels and Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-16 (work
in progress), July 2018. in progress), July 2018.
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te-topo]
Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V., Saad, T., Shah, H., and
O. Dios, "YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering (TE)
Topologies", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-18 (work in
progress), June 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description",
RFC 3471, DOI 10.17487/RFC3471, January 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3471>.
[RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered Links
in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering
(RSVP-TE)", RFC 3477, DOI 10.17487/RFC3477, January 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3477>.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC3785] Le Faucheur, F., Uppili, R., Vedrenne, A., Merckx, P., and
T. Telkamp, "Use of Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Metric
as a second MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric", BCP 87,
RFC 3785, DOI 10.17487/RFC3785, May 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3785>.
[RFC4090] Pan, P., Ed., Swallow, G., Ed., and A. Atlas, Ed., "Fast
Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC 4090,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4090, May 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4090>.
[RFC4124] Le Faucheur, F., Ed., "Protocol Extensions for Support of
Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering", RFC 4124,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4124, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4124>.
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, DOI 10.17487/RFC4203, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4203>.
[RFC4872] Lang, J., Ed., Rekhter, Y., Ed., and D. Papadimitriou,
Ed., "RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Recovery", RFC 4872, DOI 10.17487/RFC4872, May 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4872>.
[RFC4873] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., and A. Farrel,
"GMPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, DOI 10.17487/RFC4873,
May 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4873>.
[RFC4875] Aggarwal, R., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Ed., and S.
Yasukawa, Ed., "Extensions to Resource Reservation
Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-
Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 4875,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4875, May 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4875>.
[RFC5003] Metz, C., Martini, L., Balus, F., and J. Sugimoto,
"Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for
Aggregation", RFC 5003, DOI 10.17487/RFC5003, September
2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5003>.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>.
[RFC5329] Ishiguro, K., Manral, V., Davey, A., and A. Lindem, Ed.,
"Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF Version 3",
RFC 5329, DOI 10.17487/RFC5329, September 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5329>.
[RFC5541] Le Roux, JL., Vasseur, JP., and Y. Lee, "Encoding of
Objective Functions in the Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5541,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5541, June 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5541>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6119] Harrison, J., Berger, J., and M. Bartlett, "IPv6 Traffic
Engineering in IS-IS", RFC 6119, DOI 10.17487/RFC6119,
February 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6119>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure [RFC6370] Bocci, M., Swallow, G., and E. Gray, "MPLS Transport
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011, Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers", RFC 6370,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>. DOI 10.17487/RFC6370, September 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6370>.
[RFC6378] Weingarten, Y., Ed., Bryant, S., Osborne, E., Sprecher,
N., and A. Fulignoli, Ed., "MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-
TP) Linear Protection", RFC 6378, DOI 10.17487/RFC6378,
October 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6378>.
[RFC6780] Berger, L., Le Faucheur, F., and A. Narayanan, "RSVP
ASSOCIATION Object Extensions", RFC 6780,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6780, October 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6780>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC7471] Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., Atlas, A., and S.
Previdi, "OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric
Extensions", RFC 7471, DOI 10.17487/RFC7471, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7471>.
[RFC7810] Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and
Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions",
RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", [RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016, RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8294] Liu, X., Qu, Y., Lindem, A., Hopps, C., and L. Berger, [RFC8294] Liu, X., Qu, Y., Lindem, A., Hopps, C., and L. Berger,
"Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area", RFC 8294, "Common YANG Data Types for the Routing Area", RFC 8294,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8294, December 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8294, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8294>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8294>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration 10.2. Informative References
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, [RFC2702] Awduche, D., Malcolm, J., Agogbua, J., O'Dell, M., and J.
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>. McManus, "Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS",
RFC 2702, DOI 10.17487/RFC2702, September 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2702>.
[RFC4125] Le Faucheur, F. and W. Lai, "Maximum Allocation Bandwidth
Constraints Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic
Engineering", RFC 4125, DOI 10.17487/RFC4125, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4125>.
[RFC4126] Ash, J., "Max Allocation with Reservation Bandwidth
Constraints Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic
Engineering & Performance Comparisons", RFC 4126,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4126, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4126>.
[RFC4127] Le Faucheur, F., Ed., "Russian Dolls Bandwidth Constraints
Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering",
RFC 4127, DOI 10.17487/RFC4127, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4127>.
[RFC4427] Mannie, E., Ed. and D. Papadimitriou, Ed., "Recovery
(Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4427,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4427, March 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4427>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Tarek Saad (editor) Tarek Saad
Cisco Systems Inc Cisco Systems Inc
Email: tsaad@cisco.com Email: tsaad@cisco.com
Rakesh Gandhi Rakesh Gandhi
Cisco Systems Inc Cisco Systems Inc
Email: rgandhi@cisco.com Email: rgandhi@cisco.com
Xufeng Liu Xufeng Liu
Volta Networks Volta Networks
Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
skipping to change at page 59, line 27 skipping to change at page 66, line 19
Xufeng Liu Xufeng Liu
Volta Networks Volta Networks
Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
Vishnu Pavan Beeram Vishnu Pavan Beeram
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
Email: vbeeram@juniper.net Email: vbeeram@juniper.net
Himanshu Shah
Ciena
Email: hshah@ciena.com
Igor Bryskin Igor Bryskin
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Email: Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com Email: Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com
Young Lee
Huawei Technologies
Email: leeyoung@huawei.com
 End of changes. 58 change blocks. 
210 lines changed or deleted 519 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/