From 6fcbf726ff30e865acf9d10f9a7c178b7e10d34f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: italobusi Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2026 00:50:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Added information about implementations and clean-up --- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md | 89 ++- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt | 358 ++++++--- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml | 745 +++++++++++++----- .../figures/mp-link-example.txt | 20 +- .../figures/p2mp-link-example.txt | 12 +- 5 files changed, 883 insertions(+), 341 deletions(-) diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md index 15ff3ba..bd6fc4b 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md @@ -52,6 +52,46 @@ contributor: org: Nokia email: sergio.belotti@nokia.com +informative: + ACTN-TEST: + title: "ACTN Transport Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing" + author: + - + name: Lei Wang + - + name: Yang Zhao + - + name: Aihua Guo + - + name: Igor Bryskin + - + name: Chris Janz + - + name: Yingxi Yaoi + - + name: Italo Busi + - + name: Young Lee + - + name: Sergio Belotti + date: March 2018 + seriesinfo: + IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 82-89 + DOI 10.1109/MCOMSTD.2018.1700085 + target: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8334928 + ETSI_MW-TEST-1: + title: "1st mWT SDN Plugtests Event" + author: + org: European Telecommunications Standards Institute + date: January 2019 + seriesinfo: ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 (2019-01) + ETSI_MW-TEST-2: + title: "2nd and 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event" + author: + org: European Telecommunications Standards Institute + date: November 2020 + seriesinfo: ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 (2020-11) + --- abstract This document describes how profiles of the @@ -97,7 +137,7 @@ However, the 'te' container in the context of {{!RFC8795}}, should be understood # Examples of generic profiles {#examples} -## UNI Topology Discovery {#uni-discovery} +## Multi-domain Links Discovery {#uni-discovery} The following profile of the Topology YANG data model, defined in {{!RFC8795}}, can be used to support the UNI Topology Discovery, or in general, inter-domain link discovery: @@ -288,7 +328,7 @@ Each access point can have different directionality with respect to the multipoi - an access point of a multipoint link can be able only to receive traffic: this access point can be modelled as a TP (e.g., TP B in {{mp-link-example}}) with only one incoming link (e.g., Link 3 in {{mp-link-example}}); - an access point of a multipoint link can be able only to transmit traffic: this access point can be modelled as a TP (e.g., TP C in {{mp-link-example}}) with only one outgoing link (e.g., Link 4 in {{mp-link-example}}). -~~~~ ascii-art +~~~~ aasvg {::include ./figures/mp-link-example.txt} ~~~~ {:#mp-link-example title="Example of a pseudonode modelling a multipoint link"} @@ -307,7 +347,7 @@ It is worth noting that the directionality of the access point of a multipoint l Therefore, the connectivity matrix of a pseudonode modelling a point-to-multipoint unidirectional link, does not need to report that connectivity is only possible from the root TP to the leaf TPs but it can report that connectivity is possible by default between all the TPs of the node. The pseudonode represents a point-to-multipoint unidirectional link, as indicated by a single root TP that can only receive traffic and one or more leaf TPs that can only transmit traffic. -~~~~ ascii-art +~~~~ aasvg {::include ./figures/p2mp-link-example.txt} ~~~~ {:#p2mp-link-example title="Example of a pseudonode modelling an undirectional point-to-multipoint link"} @@ -326,7 +366,7 @@ For example, {{p2mp-link-example}} shows an example of a pseudonode representing The first option is to define a technology-specific TE Topology Model which augments the TE Topology Model, as shown in {{te-augment-fig}}: -~~~~ +~~~~ aasvg +-------------------+ | Network Topology | +-------------------+ @@ -373,7 +413,7 @@ multiple inheritance capability, which is implicit in the network- types definition of {{!RFC8345}}, to allow using also the generic attributes defined in the TE Topology model: -~~~~ +~~~~ aasvg +-----------------------+ | Network Topology | +-----------------------+ @@ -403,7 +443,7 @@ a technology-specific Network Topology Model which augments the Network Topology Model and to rely on the multiple inheritance capability, as shown in {{double-augment-fig}}: -~~~~ +~~~~ aasvg +-----------------------+ | Network Topology | +-----------------------+ @@ -528,9 +568,36 @@ max-link-bandwidth can only be defined in the technology-specific TE Topology Model (Option 1 or Option 3). These attributes can be TE or non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. +# Implementation Status {#implementations} + +Different profiles of the TE topology model, defined in {{!RFC8795}}, has been implemented and pubicly demonstrated. + +## ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests + +A profile has been implmented and publicly demonstrated in the first multi-vendor interoperability test of the IETF-defined ACTN framework and YANG model standards perfmed in 2017 and involving Huawei and Nokia Shanghai Bell, organized by and conducted in the lab facility of China Mobile. + +This interoperability test covered also multi-layer, multi-domain topology auto-discovery, based on a work-in-progress version of the Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as {{!RFC8795}}. + +The results of the results obtained in extensive ACTN interoperability tests are reported in {{ACTN-TEST}}. + +## ETSI Plugtests + +ETSI has held two millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT) SDN to test the northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: + +1. The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 – 24 January 2019 +1. The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia Antipolis, France on November 2020 + +Both plugtests covered multi-layer and multi-domain topology discovery scenarios, based on a work-in-progress version of the Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as {{!RFC8795}}. + +Both plugtests have been attended by the majority of the MW vendors and proved a good level of multi-vendor support. + +The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in {{ETSI_MW-TEST-1}} and {{ETSI_MW-TEST-2}}, which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. + +It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in {{?RFC9656}}. + # Open Issues {#open-issues} -## Implemented profiles {#implement} +## Implemented profiles When a server implements a profile of the TE topology model, there is no standardized mechanism for the server to report to the client the subset of the model being implemented. @@ -542,6 +609,14 @@ More investigation is instead required in case the TE topology profile is config It is also worth noting that the supported profile may also depend on other attributes (for example the network type), so the YANG deviation mechanism is not applicable to this scenario. +It is worth noting that existing implementations of {{!RFC8795}}, including those reported in {{implementations}}, have described the implemented profiled by manually pruning the YANG tree generated fom the YANG module defined in {{!RFC8795}}. + +The pruned/profiled YANG trees were sufficient to the implementers to generate proper APIs. + +However, it is possible to use the YANG deviation statements to programmatically generate a pruned/profiled YANG tree. + +> Some investigations are on-going to see whether it is sufficient to define YANG deviations to document the pruned/profiled YANG trees to be implemented for a specific application or whether other existing tools can be leveraged to generate proper APIs. + Note: that this issue is also tracked in github as issue #161. # Security Considerations {#security} diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt index 81daa8c..acf3e87 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt @@ -5,14 +5,14 @@ TEAS Working Group I. Busi Internet-Draft Huawei Intended status: Informational X. Liu -Expires: 23 April 2026 Alef Edge +Expires: 1 September 2026 Alef Edge I. Bryskin Individual T. Saad Cisco Systems Inc O. Gonzalez de Dios Telefonica - 20 October 2025 + 28 February 2026 Profiles for Traffic Engineering (TE) Topology Data Model and @@ -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 23 April 2026. + This Internet-Draft will expire on 1 September 2026. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. @@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Copyright Notice -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 1] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 1] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Examples of generic profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 2.1. UNI Topology Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.1. Multi-domain Links Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. Administrative and Operational status management . . . . 5 2.3. Overlay and Underlay Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3.1. Supporting relationships in RFC8345 . . . . . . . . . 8 @@ -80,16 +80,19 @@ Table of Contents 3. Technology-specific augmentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.1. Multi-inheritance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.2. Example (Link augmentation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 4. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 4.1. Implemented profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 4. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests . . . . . . . . 17 + 4.2. ETSI Plugtests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5.1. Implemented profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1. Introduction @@ -98,22 +101,26 @@ Table of Contents cases but can be addressed by a profile (sub-set) of the Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8795]. - Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in [I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis] as - aspects of Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of - performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP - networks. TE encompasses the application of technology and - scientific principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, - and control of Internet traffic. -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 2] + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 2] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in [I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis] as + aspects of Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of + performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP + networks. TE encompasses the application of technology and + scientific principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, + and control of Internet traffic. + The Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8795], augments the Network Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8345], with generic and technology-agnostic features that are not only applicable to TE- @@ -151,6 +158,18 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 the model can be used to address specific scenarios irrespective of whether they are TE-centric or not. + + + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 3] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + + The implementation of profiles can simplify and expedite adoption of the Topology YANG data model, defined [RFC8795], and allow for its reuse even for non-TE-centric use-cases. The key question is whether @@ -162,14 +181,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 model, defined in [RFC8795], can be used to address some generic use cases applicable to both TE-centric and non-TE-centric deployments. - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 3] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - Understanding that these profiles are generic would be more straightforward if the profiled YANG data nodes where defined under a container with a different name than 'te' or directly under the @@ -179,7 +190,7 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 2. Examples of generic profiles -2.1. UNI Topology Discovery +2.1. Multi-domain Links Discovery The following profile of the Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8795], can be used to support the UNI Topology Discovery, or in @@ -205,6 +216,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement], which can be configured either OTN UNI or Ethernet UNI or SDH UNI. + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 4] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + + The UNI Topology profiled YANG data model shown in Figure 1 can also be used with technology-specific UNI augmentations, as described in Section 3. Technology-specific augmentations can for example @@ -218,14 +239,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 The [I-D.ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang] provides another example, where: - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 4] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - * the client-svc container is defined to represent the capabilities of the TP to be configured as an transparent client UNI (e.g., STM-N, Fiber Channel or transparent Ethernet); @@ -264,22 +277,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 5] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 5] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 module: ietf-te-topology @@ -333,9 +333,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 6] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 6] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 module: ietf-te-topology @@ -389,9 +389,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 7] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 7] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 * the underlay or the overlay network topology is a multi-layer @@ -445,9 +445,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 8] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 8] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 The following profile of the Topology YANG data model, defined in @@ -501,9 +501,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 9] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 9] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 | @@ -516,19 +516,21 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 \ / +--------+-+--------+ / \ - / \ + + + | | | | - Link 1 | | + Link 2 | | Link 4 + +-+ | | +-+ + / \| |/ \ + ---->+ | | + + + B | Psedonode | C +-----> + <----+ | | + + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ - ----->/ \| |/ \ - | A | Psedonode | C |-----> - <-----\ /| |\ / - +-+ | | +-+ Link 4 - Link 2 | | + Link 1 | | | | | | - \ / + + + \ / +-------------------+ @@ -555,11 +557,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 10] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 10] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 It is worth noting that the directionality of the access point of a @@ -589,19 +589,21 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 \ / +--------+-+--------+ / \ - / \ + + + | | | | Link 2 | | Link 3 +-+ | | +-+ / \| |/ \ - <----| B | Psedonode | C |-----> + + | | + + <----+ B | Psedonode | C +-----> + + | | + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ | | | | | | - \ / + + + \ / +-------------------+ @@ -611,11 +613,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 11] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 11] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 For example, Figure 6 shows an example of a pseudonode representing @@ -669,9 +669,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 12] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 12] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 It is worth noting that a profile of the technology-specific TE @@ -725,9 +725,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 13] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 13] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +-----------------------+ @@ -781,9 +781,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 14] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 14] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 { @@ -837,9 +837,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 15] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 15] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +--rw link* [link-id] @@ -883,20 +883,82 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 1 or Option 3). These attributes can be TE or non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. -4. Open Issues +4. Implementation Status + + Different profiles of the TE topology model, defined in [RFC8795], + has been implemented and pubicly demonstrated. -4.1. Implemented profiles - When a server implements a profile of the TE topology model, there is - no standardized mechanism for the server to report to the client the - subset of the model being implemented. -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 16] + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 16] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + + +4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests + + A profile has been implmented and publicly demonstrated in the first + multi-vendor interoperability test of the IETF-defined ACTN framework + and YANG model standards perfmed in 2017 and involving Huawei and + Nokia Shanghai Bell, organized by and conducted in the lab facility + of China Mobile. + + This interoperability test covered also multi-layer, multi-domain + topology auto-discovery, based on a work-in-progress version of the + Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as [RFC8795]. + + The results of the results obtained in extensive ACTN + interoperability tests are reported in [ACTN-TEST]. + +4.2. ETSI Plugtests + + ETSI has held two millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT) SDN to test the + northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: + + 1. The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on + 21 – 24 January 2019 + + 2. The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia + Antipolis, France on November 2020 + + Both plugtests covered multi-layer and multi-domain topology + discovery scenarios, based on a work-in-progress version of the + Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as [RFC8795]. + + Both plugtests have been attended by the majority of the MW vendors + and proved a good level of multi-vendor support. + + The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in [ETSI_MW-TEST-1] + and [ETSI_MW-TEST-2], which also describe the different profiles of + the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the + Ethernet topology model. + + It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as + the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been + specified also in the MW topology model defined in [RFC9656]. + +5. Open Issues + + + + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 17] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + +5.1. Implemented profiles + + When a server implements a profile of the TE topology model, there is + no standardized mechanism for the server to report to the client the + subset of the model being implemented. This might not be an issue in case the TE topology profile is read by the the client because the server reports in the operational @@ -912,9 +974,25 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 other attributes (for example the network type), so the YANG deviation mechanism is not applicable to this scenario. + It is worth noting that existing implementations of [RFC8795], + including those reported in Section 4, have described the implemented + profiled by manually pruning the YANG tree generated fom the YANG + module defined in [RFC8795]. + + The pruned/profiled YANG trees were sufficient to the implementers to + generate proper APIs. + + However, it is possible to use the YANG deviation statements to + programmatically generate a pruned/profiled YANG tree. + + Some investigations are on-going to see whether it is sufficient + to define YANG deviations to document the pruned/profiled YANG + trees to be implemented for a specific application or whether + other existing tools can be leveraged to generate proper APIs. + Note: that this issue is also tracked in github as issue #161. -5. Security Considerations +6. Security Considerations This document provides only information about how the Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8795], can be profiled to address some @@ -923,7 +1001,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 As such, this document does not introduce any additional security considerations besides those already defined in [RFC8795]. -6. IANA Considerations + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 18] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + + +7. IANA Considerations This document requires no IANA actions. @@ -947,13 +1034,6 @@ Normative References (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018, . - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 17] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - [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 @@ -967,6 +1047,35 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 Informative References + [ACTN-TEST] + Wang, L., Zhao, Y., Guo, A., Bryskin, I., Janz, C., Yaoi, + Y., Busi, I., Lee, Y., and S. Belotti, "ACTN Transport + Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing", IEEE + Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. + 82-89 DOI 10.1109/MCOMSTD.2018.1700085 , March 2018, + . + + + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 19] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + + + [ETSI_MW-TEST-1] + European Telecommunications Standards Institute, "1st mWT + SDN Plugtests Event", ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 + (2019-01) , January 2019. + + [ETSI_MW-TEST-2] + European Telecommunications Standards Institute, "2nd and + 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event", ETSI Plugtests Test Plan + V1.0 (2020-11) , November 2020. + [I-D.ietf-ccamp-eth-client-te-topo-yang] Yu, C., Zheng, H., Guo, A., Busi, I., Xu, Y., Zhao, Y., and X. Liu, "A YANG Data Model for Ethernet TE Topology", @@ -995,24 +1104,23 @@ Informative References Havel, O., Claise, B., de Dios, O. G., and T. Graf, "SIMAP: Concept, Requirements, and Use Cases", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-nmop-simap-concept- - 07, 18 October 2025, + 08, 23 February 2026, . + simap-concept-08>. [I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis] Farrel, A., "Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- + ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-27, 12 August 2023, + . -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 18] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 20] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-27, 12 August 2023, - . [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-sr-te-topo] Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V. P., Saad, T., Shah, H., @@ -1022,6 +1130,11 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 2024, . + [RFC9656] Mansfield, S., Ed., Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., and D. + Spreafico, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Topology", + RFC 9656, DOI 10.17487/RFC9656, September 2024, + . + Contributors Aihua Guo @@ -1056,16 +1169,17 @@ Authors' Addresses Email: i_bryskin@yahoo.com - Tarek Saad - Cisco Systems Inc -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 19] + +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 21] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 + Tarek Saad + Cisco Systems Inc Email: tsaad.net@gmail.com @@ -1115,6 +1229,4 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles October 2025 - - -Busi, et al. Expires 23 April 2026 [Page 20] +Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 22] diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml index bf02c7d..a029859 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ - + TEAS Working Group @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ - + This document describes how profiles of the Topology YANG data model, defined in RFC8795, can be used to address @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ irrespective of whether they are TE-centric or not. - +
Introduction @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ However, the 'te' container in the context of , should b
Examples of generic profiles -
UNI Topology Discovery +
Multi-domain Links Discovery The following profile of the Topology YANG data model, defined in , can be used to support the UNI Topology Discovery, or in general, inter-domain link discovery: @@ -311,7 +311,57 @@ between termination points across the nodes: - an access point of a multipoint link can be able only to receive traffic: this access point can be modelled as a TP (e.g., TP B in ) with only one incoming link (e.g., Link 3 in ); - an access point of a multipoint link can be able only to transmit traffic: this access point can be modelled as a TP (e.g., TP C in ) with only one outgoing link (e.g., Link 4 in ). -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Link3 +B +Link +2 +Link +4 +B +Psedonode +C +Link +1 + + + \ / +--------+-+--------+ / \ - / \ + + + | | | | - Link 1 | | + Link 2 | | Link 4 + +-+ | | +-+ + / \| |/ \ + ---->+ | | + + + B | Psedonode | C +-----> + <----+ | | + + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ - ----->/ \| |/ \ - | A | Psedonode | C |-----> - <-----\ /| |\ / - +-+ | | +-+ Link 4 - Link 2 | | + Link 1 | | | | | | - \ / + + + \ / +-------------------+ -]]>
+]]> The switching limitations of the pseudonode, as defined in , provides sufficient information to identify the type of multipoint link: - in case of multipoint links, the connectivity matrix of the pseudnode, reports that connectivity is enabled by default between all the TPs of the node; @@ -353,7 +405,53 @@ between termination points across the nodes: Therefore, the connectivity matrix of a pseudonode modelling a point-to-multipoint unidirectional link, does not need to report that connectivity is only possible from the root TP to the leaf TPs but it can report that connectivity is possible by default between all the TPs of the node. The pseudonode represents a point-to-multipoint unidirectional link, as indicated by a single root TP that can only receive traffic and one or more leaf TPs that can only transmit traffic. -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Link1 +A +Link +2 +Link +3 +B +Psedonode +C + + + + + | | + + <----+ B | Psedonode | C +-----> + + | | + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ - | | | | | | - \ / + | | + + + \ / +-------------------+ -]]>
+]]> For example, shows an example of a pseudonode representing an unidirectional point-to-multipoint link where the TP A is the root TP and TPs B and C are the two leaf TPs. @@ -397,7 +497,37 @@ The pseudonode represents a point-to-multipoint unidirectional link, as indicate The first option is to define a technology-specific TE Topology Model which augments the TE Topology Model, as shown in : -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Network +Topology +Augments +TE +Topology +(profile) +Augments +Technology-Specific +TE +Topology + + +
+]]> This approach is more suitable for cases when the technology-specific TE topology model provides augmentations to the TE Topology @@ -443,7 +573,41 @@ multiple inheritance capability, which is implicit in the network- types definition of , to allow using also the generic attributes defined in the TE Topology model: -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Network +Topology +Augments +Augments +TE +Topology +Technology-specific +(profile) +Network +Topology + + + | TE Topology | | Technology-specific | | (profile) | | Network Topology | +-------------+ +---------------------+ -]]>
+]]> This approach is more suitable in cases where the technology-specific Network Topology Model provides augmentation only to the constructs @@ -472,7 +636,55 @@ a technology-specific Network Topology Model which augments the Network Topology Model and to rely on the multiple inheritance capability, as shown in : -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Network +Topology +Augments +Augments +TE +Topology +Technology-specific +(profile) +Network +Topology +Augments +References +Technology-Specific +TE +Topology + + +: | Technology-Specific +--------------+ | TE Topology | +---------------------+ -]]>
+]]> This option does not provide any technical advantage with respect to the first option, shown in , but could be useful to add @@ -596,11 +808,43 @@ max-link-bandwidth can only be defined in the technology-specific TE Topology Model (Option 1 or Option 3). These attributes can be TE or non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. +
+
+
Implementation Status + +Different profiles of the TE topology model, defined in , has been implemented and pubicly demonstrated. + +
ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests + +A profile has been implmented and publicly demonstrated in the first multi-vendor interoperability test of the IETF-defined ACTN framework and YANG model standards perfmed in 2017 and involving Huawei and Nokia Shanghai Bell, organized by and conducted in the lab facility of China Mobile. + +This interoperability test covered also multi-layer, multi-domain topology auto-discovery, based on a work-in-progress version of the Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as . + +The results of the results obtained in extensive ACTN interoperability tests are reported in . + +
+
ETSI Plugtests + +ETSI has held two millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT) SDN to test the northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: + + + The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 – 24 January 2019 + The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia Antipolis, France on November 2020 + + +Both plugtests covered multi-layer and multi-domain topology discovery scenarios, based on a work-in-progress version of the Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as . + +Both plugtests have been attended by the majority of the MW vendors and proved a good level of multi-vendor support. + +The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in and , which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. + +It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in . +
Open Issues -
Implemented profiles +
Implemented profiles When a server implements a profile of the TE topology model, there is no standardized mechanism for the server to report to the client the subset of the model being implemented. @@ -612,6 +856,16 @@ in section 5.3 of . It is also worth noting that the supported profile may also depend on other attributes (for example the network type), so the YANG deviation mechanism is not applicable to this scenario. +It is worth noting that existing implementations of , including those reported in , have described the implemented profiled by manually pruning the YANG tree generated fom the YANG module defined in . + +The pruned/profiled YANG trees were sufficient to the implementers to generate proper APIs. + +However, it is possible to use the YANG deviation statements to programmatically generate a pruned/profiled YANG tree. + +
  • + Some investigations are on-going to see whether it is sufficient to define YANG deviations to document the pruned/profiled YANG trees to be implemented for a specific application or whether other existing tools can be leveraged to generate proper APIs. +
+ Note: that this issue is also tracked in github as issue #161.
@@ -711,6 +965,60 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. + + + ACTN Transport Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1st mWT SDN Plugtests Event + + European Telecommunications Standards Institute + + + + + + + + 2nd and 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event + + European Telecommunications Standards Institute + + + + + @@ -863,7 +1171,7 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. Swisscom - + This document defines the concept of Service & Infrastructure Maps (SIMAP) and identifies a set of SIMAP requirements and use cases. @@ -875,7 +1183,7 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. - + @@ -912,6 +1220,22 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. + + + A YANG Data Model for Microwave Topology + + + + + + + + This document defines a YANG data model to describe microwave and millimeter-wave radio links in a network topology. + + + + + @@ -945,174 +1269,201 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/mp-link-example.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/mp-link-example.txt index 7666817..1c668cb 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/mp-link-example.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/mp-link-example.txt @@ -9,18 +9,20 @@ \ / +--------+-+--------+ / \ - / \ + + + | | | | - Link 1 | | + Link 2 | | Link 4 + +-+ | | +-+ + / \| |/ \ + ---->+ | | + + + B | Psedonode | C +-----> + <----+ | | + + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ - ----->/ \| |/ \ - | A | Psedonode | C |-----> - <-----\ /| |\ / - +-+ | | +-+ Link 4 - Link 2 | | + Link 1 | | | | | | - \ / + + + \ / - +-------------------+ + +-------------------+ \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/p2mp-link-example.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/p2mp-link-example.txt index 05b44c5..c3811fb 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/p2mp-link-example.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/figures/p2mp-link-example.txt @@ -9,18 +9,20 @@ \ / +--------+-+--------+ / \ - / \ + + + | | | | Link 2 | | Link 3 +-+ | | +-+ / \| |/ \ - <----| B | Psedonode | C |-----> + + | | + + <----+ B | Psedonode | C +-----> + + | | + \ /| |\ / +-+ | | +-+ - | | | | | | - \ / + | | + + + \ / - +-------------------+ + +-------------------+ \ No newline at end of file From dafdb600c723be1c73c0a7a49b43a21388fa0a5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: italobusi Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2026 00:55:54 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/4] Added clarification about MW not being TE-centric --- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md | 4 +- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt | 22 ++++----- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml | 46 ++++++++++--------- 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md index bd6fc4b..e82d756 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md @@ -593,7 +593,9 @@ Both plugtests have been attended by the majority of the MW vendors and proved a The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in {{ETSI_MW-TEST-1}} and {{ETSI_MW-TEST-2}}, which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. -It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in {{?RFC9656}}. +The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in {{?RFC9656}}. + +It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology, however the approach of profiling {{!RFC8795}} worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. # Open Issues {#open-issues} diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt index acf3e87..c0f9f1a 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ Table of Contents 4. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests . . . . . . . . 17 4.2. ETSI Plugtests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - 5. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 5. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 5.1. Implemented profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 @@ -936,15 +936,15 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. - It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as - the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been - specified also in the MW topology model defined in [RFC9656]. - -5. Open Issues - - - + The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology- + specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology + model defined in [RFC9656]. + It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology + and not even a switching technology, however the approach of + profiling [RFC8795] worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave + links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the + overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. @@ -954,6 +954,8 @@ Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 17] Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +5. Open Issues + 5.1. Implemented profiles When a server implements a profile of the TE topology model, there is @@ -1003,8 +1005,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 18] Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml index a029859..1a3754d 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml @@ -838,7 +838,9 @@ non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in and , which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. -It is also worth noting that the use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in . +The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in . + +It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology, however the approach of profiling worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology.
@@ -1444,26 +1446,28 @@ GAfRUBZCvwwIPhjTeblaAFUdFxjzBmgdse8qfa0hkOMB+7//+V92+CC+zNS0 bLZG9RkRWU3DTi6F7mUpqrmZtW06jK8WTSiSbOXuErXkGKZcwpb7idHfFBdc jvcLUGRrEB43wL6BpXhH0pL/rayCAwsvXjPNc7RzDK0gusBsjtfk4IVtuTfV DHMy6nDvOgCBQcTpQemSd3x7rrPp4zto/b0Z8SEYffRia5HgMlHYwbZeY9f2 -rUvd3Q4C2HzHSaNEHwhWLBghDnQh9S4UArIxUtNPoilgmaRhud3RxIdqgD6+ -+uLzLzQTwVzjBTvV147e3AE2VKT6ElJ9eP80kIsWq0lCqYs43amBupwto7oh -Kj3CODzLYQUREfMShg7iRC0d6k0HwQkLs6Gp73GgIs1ECScDjauT7qcNRLqV -NEu8ysru5fFCX7fqjiYNTZPEg2Hc+1w9ADbqJIDVnjWyaXiC1LgYLqJq9C25 -QBgwAS+FjY31ExuAHqecTaKUs/ejQIpDmtEX2D5IcLTA59wGjkhQLnAIRiWb -bjPmII+9GbkeNUVrMH5ZyqmndDsjdOkovL+q9F1+QYyRjkPq3+V13bZjYixe -t1lt/sYS2xzeMmn4BBA28V6dYCqwVHbDFDxtbzMmotMkp8OQxaXUOPW0qnP9 -tOKMyd8Y3Cs3tCPg9hdaCm73vjKfPU9HIse8s60fk2p7GTrLIiXco0iLdBSw -mNpqVTWFtRlpwGRT6ssx6MJLc3jJqpJNLtaEY9NxI2hRTO/FCSexVbRjKAbC -nac1a9sDqf33tneEGBYTO351in56d/ebjvgK99vtimxNmbt7yV5vOQf1GDf5 -Mxq764cPAw39PgIdYtlaYVqageGjz6Xh7WlCuMOSGsB4oCYkIIZQx3fZa8jr -9djrxpAhHXN/1WR0u3PloLHX8dh9rbLMnQXnb+kdxvtZidewmzVHIZLEQs3C -xMRSbzQxzMGybSZ0XIyK3Dn44oAkzrnIGlI1npibUX1uMPPmfftKdueEJcbZ -zey1MDs8Lu7t1pmpHIpbtzEm/sZOo3bYG8yDa13xQpAxbWth3Iy5BdnfJ2/3 -Qu0F63o3FHqRNme6GXeSxRiZCGVOhOKKN3uSaxYciOvjs+MuXiUveAenRhSQ -GKZqOiUYzvHNkUt1/NudGUysTujOjjM8MwxYMrEKOvlsA+BVysS/5PKNYYC8 -eMN+AL20aNgrfglYfiwApOWIPQW+KWClPhFZBtgEA2XEfgd4UOx4kUOnc9K+ -zrOyrtkLTMMpUXmn8E0fBWz2elUzn+trRW0YDw4RdeZxe7yoPa+Aa3KcMr1j -+AbgmZZXdHsyRibCVBg93GiOUX199WfUwGH6uqym6eXheH8MvGWFufXGU7yq -9f8BOpzL/qCIAAA= +rUvd3Q4CoHE2SvT1Yjm/kdMw9VJvNGFfG4Mx/TyZApYPGq7aBTg+NwMk8NUX +n3+xNpokAsRkLKF0++4WqdaFoPieTpjw4HiKLzNCmxivY4pDZtz9ZFg6yqWE +awCvGUF1BtNp6QT9dh9uSkeNZwG76eYNX2zI4RodK7MJcbrTaQ+aBYmxXHMB +pklBebmC5k71La03d4BrF6m+s1XnOjgN1AhLhElCmZ44XUGCqq8to7oRPT26 +S3j0xcptWvtLQD1IX7V0lGo6CA6kmP1ffe2FHuNECacyGM8wXecbaEBWMC/x +5i+79ckLfTutO8k1RPISz9Fx76L2ANggnQBWezTLZi0KMgljdI2q0RXn4obA +Yr4UNpTYL5IA9DhDbxJl6L0fxZ0c0up4ge2DwoMOizm3cTYSdDEcgtFgp9uM +OUj7b0auR03BLYxflnLqdwHsjNAdrfD+qtJXHwYhWTpsq39T3HXbDiGyeN3m +kkZ/wYttDi/lNGwVCJtElc7HFRh2u2HGorZzHvP2aZLTUdviUmqcelq1jCYK +yyb3bHAN3xDPctsxLXuge72bTzaoA7djUdM2J8gSuAx9i5HN4lGkNSDURzAT +2KpqCmti04DJBNd3idD9oOasl9W8m1ysiV6n01nQopjei/NzYqvI9ShkxB0/ +NmvbA6m3O2zvCDEsJnb86hS3NdxVeTpALgxPsCuyNWXuqip7G+gcrAmMicho +7K4fPgw09PsIVK5la4Vp4Q92oj7Gh5fNCeHOlmoA44GaCIoYQh0OZ29tr9dj +rxtyh3TM/c2c0WXYlYPG3l5ktwHLMncGr7/UeBjvZyXeWm/WHEWUEgs1CxPz +cL3RxDAHeddM6HQdFblz8MUBSZxzkTWkmT0xF8n6VGrmzfv2DfbOZ02Ms5sI +bWE2xFyY4K0TeTkUty6vTPwFp0ZLsxe+B7fg4v0pY9oFxDAjc2m0A95tHdv7 +6PXmMfQibYp5M+4kizEyEcocoMUVb7Zw1yw4ENfHZ8ddvEpe8A5OjSggMUzV +dAY1nOObI5cZ+rc7M5hYnf+eHWd4xBqwZEI7dK7eBsCrlAkXyuUbwwB58Yb9 +AGp80bBX/BKw/FgASMsRewp8U8BKfSKyDLAJ9tyI/Q7woNjxIodO56S/nGdl +DTodZi2VaOtQtKsPmjZb46qZz/UtrDbqCYeIJsa4PV40NlbANTlOmd5gfQPw +TMsrumwaAzlhKozZYhTtqL6+KTVq4DB9XVbT9PJwvD8G3rLCVITjKd5s+/9V +CPbgz4kAAA== --> From 90974a0d94cd3e6f9781bd3500ba1af1e88fc37e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: italobusi Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 12:34:52 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] Few additional updates Added quote from RFC9522 about the debate of what is TE Updated the text on ETSI plugtest based on Leo suggestions --- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md | 29 +- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt | 350 +++++++------ .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml | 491 +++++++++--------- 3 files changed, 489 insertions(+), 381 deletions(-) diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md index e82d756..c559825 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md @@ -85,12 +85,21 @@ informative: org: European Telecommunications Standards Institute date: January 2019 seriesinfo: ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 (2019-01) + target: https://portal.etsi.org/Portals/0/TBpages/CTI/Docs/mWT_Plugtest1_TestPlan_v1.0.pdf ETSI_MW-TEST-2: title: "2nd and 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event" author: org: European Telecommunications Standards Institute date: November 2020 seriesinfo: ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 (2020-11) + target: https://portal.etsi.org/Portals/0/TBpages/CTI/Docs/mWT_Plugtests2-3_TestPlan_v1_0.pdf + ETSI_MW-PROFILE: + title: "millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT); Definition of a Wireless Transport Profile for Standard SDN Northbound Interfaces" + author: + org: European Telecommunications Standards Institute + date: March 2022 + seriesinfo: ETSI GS mWT 024 V1.1.1 (2022-03) + target: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/mWT/001_099/024/01.01.01_60/gs_mWT024v010101p.pdf --- abstract @@ -105,13 +114,25 @@ irrespective of whether they are TE-centric or not. Many network scenarios are being discussed in various IETF Working Groups (WGs) that are not classified as "Traffic Engineering" use cases but can be addressed by a profile (sub-set) of the Topology YANG data model, defined in {{!RFC8795}}. -Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in {{?I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis}} as aspects of +Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in {{?RFC9522}} as aspects of Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP networks. TE encompasses the application of technology and scientific principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, and control of Internet traffic. +According to section 1.2 of {{?RFC9522}}: + +> The key elements required in any TE solution are as follows: +> +> 1. Policy +> 1. Path steering +> 1. Resource management +> +> Some TE solutions rely on these elements to a lesser or greater extent. Debate remains about whether a solution can truly be called "TE" if it does not include all of these elements. For the sake of this document, we assert that all TE solutions must include some aspects of all of these elements. Other solutions can be classed as "partial TE" and also fall in scope of this document. + +As a consequence, the line between what is TE and what is not TE is quite blurred. + The Topology YANG data model, defined in {{!RFC8795}}, augments the Network Topology YANG data model, defined in {{!RFC8345}}, with generic and technology-agnostic features that are not only applicable to TE-centric deployments, but also applicable to non-TE-centric yet TE-aware deployments. A TE-aware deployment is one where the topology carries information that can be used to influence how traffic can be engineered within the network. In some scenarios, this information can be leveraged even in use cases where traffic doesn't need to be engineered. @@ -593,9 +614,11 @@ Both plugtests have been attended by the majority of the MW vendors and proved a The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in {{ETSI_MW-TEST-1}} and {{ETSI_MW-TEST-2}}, which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. +Based on the success of the plugtests, an ETSI Group Specification (GS) {{ETSI_MW-PROFILE}} has been published to document a common profile to be implemented at the northbound of MW network controllers. + The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in {{?RFC9656}}. -It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology, however the approach of profiling {{!RFC8795}} worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. +It is worth noting that MW radio link technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology: in MW networks, switching is performed at higher layers (e.g., Ethernet or IP) and modelled as overlay topologies on top of the MW radio link topology. The approach of profiling {{!RFC8795}} worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. # Open Issues {#open-issues} @@ -641,6 +664,8 @@ This document requires no IANA actions. The authors would like to thank Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Daniele Ceccarelli, Jonas Ahlberg and Scott Mansfield for providing useful suggestions for this draft. +The authors would like to thank Leonica Macciotta for his support on the the section describing the ETSI MW plugtests. + This document was prepared using kramdown. Initial versions of this document were prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt index c0f9f1a..47b0ddd 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt @@ -5,14 +5,14 @@ TEAS Working Group I. Busi Internet-Draft Huawei Intended status: Informational X. Liu -Expires: 1 September 2026 Alef Edge +Expires: 3 September 2026 Alef Edge I. Bryskin Individual T. Saad Cisco Systems Inc O. Gonzalez de Dios Telefonica - 28 February 2026 + 2 March 2026 Profiles for Traffic Engineering (TE) Topology Data Model and @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ 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 1 September 2026. + This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 September 2026. Copyright Notice @@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Copyright Notice -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 1] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 1] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal @@ -72,27 +72,27 @@ Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Examples of generic profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Multi-domain Links Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 2.2. Administrative and Operational status management . . . . 5 - 2.3. Overlay and Underlay Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 2.3.1. Supporting relationships in RFC8345 . . . . . . . . . 8 - 2.4. Nodes with switching limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 2.5. Multipoint links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 - 3. Technology-specific augmentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 3.1. Multi-inheritance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 3.2. Example (Link augmentation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 4. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests . . . . . . . . 17 - 4.2. ETSI Plugtests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - 5. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 5.1. Implemented profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 2.2. Administrative and Operational status management . . . . 6 + 2.3. Overlay and Underlay Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 2.3.1. Supporting relationships in RFC8345 . . . . . . . . . 9 + 2.4. Nodes with switching limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 2.5. Multipoint links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3. Technology-specific augmentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 3.1. Multi-inheritance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 3.2. Example (Link augmentation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 4. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests . . . . . . . . 18 + 4.2. ETSI Plugtests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 5.1. Implemented profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 1. Introduction @@ -109,17 +109,38 @@ Table of Contents -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 2] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 2] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 - Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in [I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis] as - aspects of Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of - performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP - networks. TE encompasses the application of technology and - scientific principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, - and control of Internet traffic. + Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in [RFC9522] as aspects of + Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of performance + evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP networks. + TE encompasses the application of technology and scientific + principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, and + control of Internet traffic. + + According to section 1.2 of [RFC9522]: + + The key elements required in any TE solution are as follows: + + 1. Policy + + 2. Path steering + + 3. Resource management + + Some TE solutions rely on these elements to a lesser or greater + extent. Debate remains about whether a solution can truly be + called "TE" if it does not include all of these elements. For the + sake of this document, we assert that all TE solutions must + include some aspects of all of these elements. Other solutions + can be classed as "partial TE" and also fall in scope of this + document. + + As a consequence, the line between what is TE and what is not TE is + quite blurred. The Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8795], augments the Network Topology YANG data model, defined in [RFC8345], with generic @@ -141,6 +162,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 It is also worth noting that also the boundary between the TE- specific model constructs and the core network topology model constructs is also blurred since new applications may need to + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 3] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + leverage on constructs which was originally defined to support TE- centric scenarios but that are also needed to support these new applications. @@ -158,18 +187,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 the model can be used to address specific scenarios irrespective of whether they are TE-centric or not. - - - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 3] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - The implementation of profiles can simplify and expedite adoption of the Topology YANG data model, defined [RFC8795], and allow for its reuse even for non-TE-centric use-cases. The key question is whether @@ -196,6 +213,19 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 [RFC8795], can be used to support the UNI Topology Discovery, or in general, inter-domain link discovery: + + + + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 4] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + module: ietf-te-topology augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nw:network-types: +--rw te-topology! @@ -216,16 +246,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement], which can be configured either OTN UNI or Ethernet UNI or SDH UNI. - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 4] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - The UNI Topology profiled YANG data model shown in Figure 1 can also be used with technology-specific UNI augmentations, as described in Section 3. Technology-specific augmentations can for example @@ -254,6 +274,14 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 any external link) for TE and non-TE networks as well as multi-layer networks encompassing both TE and non-TE layers. + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 5] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + The advantages of using the UNI Topology profiled YANG data model shown in Figure 1 as a core network topology model is to have a common solutions for: @@ -277,9 +305,37 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 5] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 6] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 module: ietf-te-topology @@ -333,9 +389,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 6] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 7] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 module: ietf-te-topology @@ -389,9 +445,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 7] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 8] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 * the underlay or the overlay network topology is a multi-layer @@ -445,9 +501,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 8] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 9] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 The following profile of the Topology YANG data model, defined in @@ -501,9 +557,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 9] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 10] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 | @@ -557,9 +613,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 10] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 11] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 It is worth noting that the directionality of the access point of a @@ -613,9 +669,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 11] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 12] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 For example, Figure 6 shows an example of a pseudonode representing @@ -669,9 +725,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 12] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 13] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 It is worth noting that a profile of the technology-specific TE @@ -725,9 +781,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 13] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 14] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 +-----------------------+ @@ -781,9 +837,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 14] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 15] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 { @@ -837,9 +893,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 15] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 16] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 +--rw link* [link-id] @@ -893,9 +949,9 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 16] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 17] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 4.1. ACTN multi-vendor interoperability tests @@ -936,23 +992,32 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. + Based on the success of the plugtests, an ETSI Group Specification + (GS) [ETSI_MW-PROFILE] has been published to document a common + profile to be implemented at the northbound of MW network + controllers. + The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology- specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in [RFC9656]. - It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology - and not even a switching technology, however the approach of - profiling [RFC8795] worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave - links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the - overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 17] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 18] -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + It is worth noting that MW radio link technology is not a TE-centric + technology and not even a switching technology: in MW networks, + switching is performed at higher layers (e.g., Ethernet or IP) and + modelled as overlay topologies on top of the MW radio link topology. + The approach of profiling [RFC8795] worked well to model the + bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay + relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting + underlay MW topology. 5. Open Issues @@ -994,6 +1059,13 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 Note: that this issue is also tracked in github as issue #161. + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 19] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + 6. Security Considerations This document provides only information about how the Topology YANG @@ -1003,13 +1075,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 As such, this document does not introduce any additional security considerations besides those already defined in [RFC8795]. - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 18] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - 7. IANA Considerations This document requires no IANA actions. @@ -1020,6 +1085,9 @@ Acknowledgments Ceccarelli, Jonas Ahlberg and Scott Mansfield for providing useful suggestions for this draft. + The authors would like to thank Leonica Macciotta for his support on + the the section describing the ETSI MW plugtests. + This document was prepared using kramdown. Initial versions of this document were prepared using 2-Word- @@ -1047,6 +1115,13 @@ Normative References Informative References + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 20] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + [ACTN-TEST] Wang, L., Zhao, Y., Guo, A., Bryskin, I., Janz, C., Yaoi, Y., Busi, I., Lee, Y., and S. Belotti, "ACTN Transport @@ -1055,26 +1130,27 @@ Informative References 82-89 DOI 10.1109/MCOMSTD.2018.1700085 , March 2018, . - - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 19] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - + [ETSI_MW-PROFILE] + European Telecommunications Standards Institute, + "millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT); Definition of a + Wireless Transport Profile for Standard SDN Northbound + Interfaces", ETSI GS mWT 024 V1.1.1 (2022-03) , March + 2022, . [ETSI_MW-TEST-1] European Telecommunications Standards Institute, "1st mWT SDN Plugtests Event", ETSI Plugtests Test Plan V1.0 - (2019-01) , January 2019. + (2019-01) , January 2019, + . [ETSI_MW-TEST-2] European Telecommunications Standards Institute, "2nd and 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event", ETSI Plugtests Test Plan - V1.0 (2020-11) , November 2020. + V1.0 (2020-11) , November 2020, + . [I-D.ietf-ccamp-eth-client-te-topo-yang] Yu, C., Zheng, H., Guo, A., Busi, I., Xu, Y., Zhao, Y., @@ -1092,6 +1168,16 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 . + + + + + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 21] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + [I-D.ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement] Busi, I., King, D., Zheng, H., and Y. Xu, "Transport Northbound Interface Applicability Statement", Work in @@ -1108,20 +1194,6 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 . - [I-D.ietf-teas-rfc3272bis] - Farrel, A., "Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic - Engineering", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- - ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-27, 12 August 2023, - . - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 20] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-sr-te-topo] Liu, X., Bryskin, I., Beeram, V. P., Saad, T., Shah, H., and S. Litkowski, "YANG Data Model for SR and SR TE @@ -1130,6 +1202,10 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 2024, . + [RFC9522] Farrel, A., Ed., "Overview and Principles of Internet + Traffic Engineering", RFC 9522, DOI 10.17487/RFC9522, + January 2024, . + [RFC9656] Mansfield, S., Ed., Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., and D. Spreafico, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Topology", RFC 9656, DOI 10.17487/RFC9656, September 2024, @@ -1152,6 +1228,12 @@ Contributors Email: sergio.belotti@nokia.com + +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 22] + +Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 + + Authors' Addresses Italo Busi @@ -1169,15 +1251,6 @@ Authors' Addresses Email: i_bryskin@yahoo.com - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 21] - -Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - Tarek Saad Cisco Systems Inc Email: tsaad.net@gmail.com @@ -1212,21 +1285,4 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles February 2026 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Busi, et al. Expires 1 September 2026 [Page 22] +Busi, et al. Expires 3 September 2026 [Page 23] diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml index 1a3754d..aa17256 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ - + TEAS Working Group @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ - + This document describes how profiles of the Topology YANG data model, defined in RFC8795, can be used to address @@ -75,19 +75,35 @@ irrespective of whether they are TE-centric or not. - +
Introduction Many network scenarios are being discussed in various IETF Working Groups (WGs) that are not classified as "Traffic Engineering" use cases but can be addressed by a profile (sub-set) of the Topology YANG data model, defined in . -Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in as aspects of +Traffic Engineering (TE) is defined in as aspects of Internet network engineering that deal with the issues of performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational IP networks. TE encompasses the application of technology and scientific principles to the measurement, characterization, modeling, and control of Internet traffic. +According to section 1.2 of : + +
  • + The key elements required in any TE solution are as follows: + + + Policy + Path steering + Resource management + + + Some TE solutions rely on these elements to a lesser or greater extent. Debate remains about whether a solution can truly be called "TE" if it does not include all of these elements. For the sake of this document, we assert that all TE solutions must include some aspects of all of these elements. Other solutions can be classed as "partial TE" and also fall in scope of this document. +
+ +As a consequence, the line between what is TE and what is not TE is quite blurred. + The Topology YANG data model, defined in , augments the Network Topology YANG data model, defined in , with generic and technology-agnostic features that are not only applicable to TE-centric deployments, but also applicable to non-TE-centric yet TE-aware deployments. A TE-aware deployment is one where the topology carries information that can be used to influence how traffic can be engineered within the network. In some scenarios, this information can be leveraged even in use cases where traffic doesn't need to be engineered. @@ -838,9 +854,11 @@ non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. The results of these ETSI plugtests are reported in and , which also describe the different profiles of the TE topology model used for the MW topology model and for the Ethernet topology model. +Based on the success of the plugtests, an ETSI Group Specification (GS) has been published to document a common profile to be implemented at the northbound of MW network controllers. + The use of the TE topology profile as the basis for MW technology-specific augmentations have been specified also in the MW topology model defined in . -It is worth noting that MW technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology, however the approach of profiling worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology. +It is worth noting that MW radio link technology is not a TE-centric technology and not even a switching technology: in MW networks, switching is performed at higher layers (e.g., Ethernet or IP) and modelled as overlay topologies on top of the MW radio link topology. The approach of profiling worked well to model the bandwdith of microwave links as well as the overlay/underlay relationship between the overlay Ethernet topology and the supporting underlay MW topology.
@@ -892,6 +910,8 @@ considerations besides those already defined in . The authors would like to thank Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Daniele Ceccarelli, Jonas Ahlberg and Scott Mansfield for providing useful suggestions for this draft. +The authors would like to thank Leonica Macciotta for his support on the the section describing the ETSI MW plugtests. + This document was prepared using kramdown. Initial versions of this document were prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. @@ -1001,7 +1021,7 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. - + 1st mWT SDN Plugtests Event @@ -1011,7 +1031,7 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. - + 2nd and 3rd mWT SDN Plugtests Event @@ -1021,36 +1041,30 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. + + + millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT); Definition of a Wireless Transport Profile for Standard SDN Northbound Interfaces + + European Telecommunications Standards Institute + + + + + - - - - Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering - - Old Dog Consulting - - - - This document describes the principles of traffic engineering (TE) in - the Internet. The document is intended to promote better - understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in IP - networks and the networks that support IP networking, and to provide - a common basis for the development of traffic engineering - capabilities for the Internet. The principles, architectures, and - methodologies for performance evaluation and performance optimization - of operational networks are also discussed. - - This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002. This document - obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text in - line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and - to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF. - - - - - - + + + Overview and Principles of Internet Traffic Engineering + + + + This document describes the principles of traffic engineering (TE) in the Internet. The document is intended to promote better understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in IP networks and the networks that support IP networking and to provide a common basis for the development of traffic-engineering capabilities for the Internet. The principles, architectures, and methodologies for performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational networks are also discussed. + This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002. This document obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text in line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF. + + + + @@ -1271,203 +1285,216 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft. From 9ba4dc3d7a256672d69968a03ab05ff731fd0f0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: italobusi Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 18:58:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] Fixed idnits --- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md | 2 +- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt | 2 +- .../draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml | 422 +++++++++--------- 3 files changed, 213 insertions(+), 213 deletions(-) diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md index c559825..79d0f92 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.md @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ The results of the results obtained in extensive ACTN interoperability tests are ETSI has held two millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT) SDN to test the northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: -1. The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 – 24 January 2019 +1. The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 - 24 January 2019 1. The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia Antipolis, France on November 2020 Both plugtests covered multi-layer and multi-domain topology discovery scenarios, based on a work-in-progress version of the Internet-Draft which was then finalized and published as {{!RFC8795}}. diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt index 47b0ddd..abce57e 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.txt @@ -975,7 +975,7 @@ Internet-Draft TE Topology Profiles March 2026 northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: 1. The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on - 21 – 24 January 2019 + 21 - 24 January 2019 2. The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia Antipolis, France on November 2020 diff --git a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml index aa17256..9b649f9 100644 --- a/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml +++ b/drafts/te-topo-profile/draft-ietf-teas-te-topology-profiles.xml @@ -844,7 +844,7 @@ non-TE and require the implementation of the te container. ETSI has held two millimetre Wave Transmission (mWT) SDN to test the northbound interface exposed by microwave (MW) network controllers: - The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 – 24 January 2019 + The first Plugtest has been held in Sophia Antipolis, France on 21 - 24 January 2019 The second and third Plugtest have been merged and held in Sophia Antipolis, France on November 2020 @@ -1285,216 +1285,216 @@ for providing useful suggestions for this draft.