IETF 94 Yokohama BFD YANG Model and LIME

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LIME OAM Model Design Team (DT) Discussion Qin WU (Design Team member) Gregory Mirsky (Design Team member) Tom Taylor (Design Team member) Deepak Kumar.
Advertisements

BFD Stability use case (draft-ashesh-bfd-stability-01.txt) A.Mishra S. Pallagatti M. Jethanandani M. Chen A. Saxena.
IETF YANG routing models VRF centric vs Protocol centric.
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) presented by: chitralekha tamrakar (B.S.E.) divya krit tamrakar (B.S.E.) Rashmi shrivastava(B.S.E.) prakriti.
1 Multi Protocol Label Switching Presented by: Petros Ioannou Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, UCY.
Model-based Programmable Networks
Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding draft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label-01 Kireeti Kompella Juniper Networks Shane Amante Level 3 Communications.
MPLS-TP OAM Analysis Nurit Sprecher / Nokia Siemens Networks Tom Nadeau / BT Huub van Helvoort / Huawei Yaacov Weingarten / Nokia Siemens Networks.
Connectionless OAM yang model Deepak Kumar Qin WU Zitao Wang Reshad Rahman Srihari Raghavan 1IETF96, Berlin, Germany.
MPLS Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)
Design Work of Tunnel Models
L2VPN Yang Model IETF 93 Prague, CZ draft-shah-pals-mpls-l2vpn-yang-00
Connecting MPLS-SPRING Islands over IP Networks
YANG Data Model for RIP draft-liu-rtgwg-yang-rip-01
Transport of Media Independent HO Messages over IP
Connectionless OAM yang model
Zhenbin Li (Presenter), Jinhui Zhang
Layer Independent OAM Management in the Multi-Layer Environment LIME
Tal Mizrahi Marvell IETF Meeting 78, July 2010
draft-liu-pim-single-stream-multicast-frr-01
IP Router-Alert Considerations and usage
IETF 95 – Buenos Aires April 2016
L2VPN & EVPN Yang Model IETF 94 Yokohama, Japan Movember, 2015 draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang-00.txt draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang-00.txt.
Advertising Encapsulation Capability Using OSPF
LIME Base YANG Model Work Update draft-tissa-lime-yang-oam-model draft-wang-lime-yang-pm Deepak Kumar Qin WU IETF93 Prage,Czech.
Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)
MPLS P2MP OAM <draft-swallow-mpls-mcast-cv-00.txt>
Routing Area Yang Architecture Design Team Update
Overlay OAM Design Team Report
Multi-domain MPLS Deployment Enhancement
YANG Data Model for FDM Abstract
Greg Mirsky Vero Zheng Mach Chen Giuseppe Fioccola
Performance Monitoring Analysis for L3VPN
draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-04
LIME CL Model Updated
draft-haas-bfd-large-packets
Greg Mirsky IETF-99 July 2017, Prague
Zhenbin Li, Shunwan Zhuang Huawei Technologies
Michale Wang Qin Wu Roni Even Wen Bin IETF 103 Bangkok, Tailand
Greg Mirsky Jeff Tantsura Mach Chen Ilya Varlashkin
draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model-03 Impact on LxVPN device models
BFD Directed Return Path draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-07
DetNet Information Model Consideration
YANG Data Models for TE and RSVP draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-06 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-07 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-te-00 draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang-04 code.
draft-gandhi-pce-pm-07
Deepak Kumar Zitao Wang Qin Wu Reshad Rahman Srihari Raghavan
BFD for VXLAN draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan
1 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS). 2 MPLS Overview A forwarding scheme designed to speed up IP packet forwarding (RFC 3031) Idea: use a fixed length.
Jeffrey Haas Reshad Rahman
Generic Associated Channel Advertisement Protocol
Venkatesan Mahalingam
LIME CO Model Update draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model-07
DetNet Data Plane design team IETF 98, Chicago, 2017
DetNet Configuration YANG Model Update
Jeffrey Haas Reshad Rahman
IETF BIER, November 2017, Singapore
Use of p2mp BFD in PIM-SM (over shared-media segment) draft-mirsky-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case Greg Mirsky Ji Xiaoli
Jeffrey Haas Reshad Rahman
OAM for Deterministic Networks with IP Data Plane draft-mirsky-detnet-ip-oam Greg Mirsky Mach Chen IETF-105 July 2019, Montreal.
Active OAM in Geneve draft-mmbb-nvo3-geneve-oam
How OAM Identified in Overlay Protocols draft-mirsky-rtgwg-oam-identify Greg Mirsky IETF-104 March 2019, Prague.
IETF Prague BFD Unsolicited
IETF Montreal BFD YANG Data Model
IETF BIER, November 2018, Bangkok
YANG Models for MPLS-TP
YANG Data Models for TE and RSVP draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-21 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-11 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-te-07 Tarek Saad, Juniper Networks Rakesh.
An HTTPS-based Transport for Subscribed Notifications
YANG Model for ETH TE Topology CCAMP WG, IETF 105, Montreal, Canada draft-zheng-ccamp-client-topo-yang-06 Italo Busi, Haomian Zheng, Aihua Guo (Huawei)
YANG Data Models for TE and RSVP draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-21 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-11 draft-ietf-teas-yang-rsvp-te-07 Tarek Saad, Juniper Networks Rakesh.
E. Bellagamba, Ericsson P. Sköldström, Acreo D. Ward, Juniper
Presentation transcript:

IETF 94 Yokohama BFD YANG Model and LIME Lianshu Zheng (editor), Reshad Rahman (editor), Santosh Pallagati, Mahesh Jethanandani, Greg Mirsky draft-ietf-bfd-yang-00

What is in draft-ietf-bfd-yang-00 Support for BFD IP single-hop, IP multi-hop, MPLS-TE tunnel, MPLS-LDP FEC and LAG. No S-BFD support for now. Configuration, operational and notification models. No RPCs. VRF-centric: augments routing-protocol BFD IP single-hop configuration “exported” to routing applications by having a grouping which contains interval(s), multiplier and enabled flag Discussions ongoing regarding NOT augmenting routing-protocol, centralizing configuration in BFD (no more in routing applications) etc Does NOT use/extend LIME model

BFD and LIME concerns Having a generic model which fits all networking technologies and OAM tools is no easy task. It’s a very big challenge! For example the concept of MDs and MAs does NOT apply to all uses of BFD. Even if we use IP routing attributes for MDs and MAs, depending on the deployment it might make sense to use different values. E.g. using AS# as MD might make sense in some cases but not for others. BFD is a bit different from other OAM tools, once configured it goes on forever and its client apps get notifications

BFD and LIME concerns (contd) CFM is more configuration heavy than typical IP OAM, some operators will not like CFM-like configuration model for IP networks. There are attributes in the base model which might not be needed by all the technologies, e.g. packet-size and monitor-stats in the RPC There are networking technologies (e.g. VXLAN, BIER) on which we might decide to use BFD in the future. Can we ensure that these new uses of BFD will work with the generic model?

Next Steps We believe that the BFD YANG model should NOT augment the generic LIME model and that it should be an independent YANG model. In the future, LIME might use groupings from BFD for networking technologies which are more “IEEE-like” Need to look into how reporting of a failure at a layer could indicate the next layer down e.g. by using identifyref. This is a big task! More discussions needed between BFD and LIME teams.