A YANG Data Model for Path Computation Element Communications Protocol (PCEP)
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-17
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Dhruv Dhody , Jonathan Hardwick , Vishnu Pavan Beeram , Jeff Tantsura | ||
| Last updated | 2021-10-23 | ||
| Replaces | draft-pkd-pce-pcep-yang | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-18)
by Mahesh Jethanandani
On the Right Track
YANGDOCTORS Early review
(of
-08)
by Mahesh Jethanandani
On the Right Track
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Associated WG milestone |
|
||
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-17
PCE Working Group D. Dhody, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track J. Hardwick
Expires: 26 April 2022 Metaswitch
V. Beeram
Juniper Networks
J. Tantsura
Apstra, Inc.
23 October 2021
A YANG Data Model for Path Computation Element Communications Protocol
(PCEP)
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-17
Abstract
This document defines a YANG data model for the management of Path
Computation Element communications Protocol (PCEP) for communications
between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a Path Computation
Element (PCE), or between two PCEs. The data model includes
configuration and state data.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 26 April 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Tree Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Refrences in the Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. The Design of PCEP Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. The Overview of PCEP Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. The Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3. The Peer Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.4. The Session Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.5. Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.6. RPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. The Design of PCEP Statistics Data Model . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Advanced PCE Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.1. Stateful PCE's LSP-DB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8.1. PCEP over TLS (PCEPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
9. PCEP YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
9.1. ietf-pcep module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
9.2. ietf-pcep-stats module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
12. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Appendix A. The Full PCEP Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Appendix B. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Appendix C. Contributor Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
1. Introduction
The Path Computation Element (PCE) defined in [RFC4655] is an entity
that is capable of computing a network path or route based on a
network graph, and applying computational constraints. A Path
Computation Client (PCC) may make requests to a PCE for paths to be
computed.
PCEP is the communication protocol between a PCC and PCE and is
defined in [RFC5440]. PCEP interactions include path computation
requests and path computation replies as well as notifications of
specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
Traffic Engineering (TE). [RFC8231] specifies extensions to PCEP to
enable stateful control of MPLS TE LSPs.
This document defines a YANG [RFC7950] data model for the management
of PCEP speakers. It is important to establish a common data model
for how PCEP speakers are identified, configured, and monitored. The
data model includes configuration data and state data.
This document contains a specification of the PCEP YANG module,
"ietf-pcep" which provides the PCEP [RFC5440] data model.
The PCEP operational state is included in the same tree as the PCEP
configuration consistent with Network Management Datastore
Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]. The origin of the data is indicated
as per the origin metadata annotation.
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. Terminology and Notation
This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC4655] and
[RFC5440]. In particular, it uses the following acronyms.
* Path Computation Request message (PCReq).
* Path Computation Reply message (PCRep).
* Notification message (PCNtf).
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
* Error message (PCErr).
* Request Parameters object (RP).
* Synchronization Vector object (SVEC).
* Explicit Route object (ERO).
This document also uses the following terms defined in [RFC7420]:
* PCEP entity: a local PCEP speaker.
* PCEP peer: to refer to a remote PCEP speaker.
* PCEP speaker: where it is not necessary to distinguish between
local and remote.
Further, this document also uses the following terms defined in
[RFC8231] :
* Stateful PCE, Passive Stateful PCE, Active Stateful PCE
* Delegation, Revocation, Redelegation
* LSP State Report, Path Computation Report message (PCRpt).
* LSP State Update, Path Computation Update message (PCUpd).
* PLSP-ID: a PCEP-specific identifier for the LSP.
* SRP: Stateful PCE Request Parameters
[RFC8281] :
* PCE-initiated LSP, Path Computation LSP Initiate Message
(PCInitiate).
[RFC8408] :
* Path Setup Type (PST).
[RFC8664] :
* Segment Routing (SR).
[RFC5541] :
* Objective Function (OF).
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[RFC8697] :
* Association.
[RFC6241] :
* Configuration data.
* State data.
3.1. Tree Diagrams
A simplified graphical representation of the data model is used in
this document. The meaning of the symbols in these diagrams is
defined in [RFC8340].
3.2. Prefixes in Data Node Names
In this document, names of data nodes and other data model objects
are often used without a prefix, as long as it is clear from the
context in which YANG module each name is defined. Otherwise, names
are prefixed using the standard prefix associated with the
corresponding YANG module, as shown in Table 1.
+=========+==================+======================================+
|Prefix | YANG module | Reference |
+=========+==================+======================================+
|yang | ietf-yang-types | [RFC6991] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|inet | ietf-inet-types | [RFC6991] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|te-types | ietf-te-types | [RFC8776] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|key-chain| ietf-key-chain | [RFC8177] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|nacm | ietf-netconf-acm | [RFC8341] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|tlss | ietf-tls-server | [I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|tlsc | ietf-tls-client | [I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|ospf | ietf-ospf | [I-D.ietf-ospf-yang] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
|isis | ietf-isis | [I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg] |
+---------+------------------+--------------------------------------+
Table 1: Prefixes and corresponding YANG modules
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
3.3. Refrences in the Model
Following documents are refrenced in the model defined in this
document -
+==========================+======================================+
| Documents | Reference |
+==========================+======================================+
| OSPF Protocol Extensions | [RFC5088] |
| for Path Computation | |
| Element (PCE) Discovery | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| IS-IS Protocol | [RFC5089] |
| Extensions for Path | |
| Computation Element | |
| (PCE) Discovery | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Path Computation Element | [RFC5440] |
| (PCE) Communication | |
| Protocol (PCEP) | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Preserving Topology | [RFC5520] |
| Confidentiality in | |
| Inter-Domain Path | |
| Computation Using a | |
| Path-Key-Based Mechanism | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Encoding of Objective | [RFC5541] |
| Functions in the Path | |
| Computation Element | |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Path Computation Element | [RFC5557] |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) Requirements and | |
| Protocol Extensions in | |
| Support of Global | |
| Concurrent Optimization | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Common YANG Data Types | [RFC6991] |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| YANG Data Model for Key | [RFC8177] |
| Chains | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Path Computation Element | [RFC8231] |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) Extensions for | |
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| Stateful PCE | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Optimizations of Label | [RFC8232] |
| Switched Path State | |
| Synchronization | |
| Procedures for a | |
| Stateful PCE | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| PCEPS: Usage of TLS to | [RFC8253] |
| Provide a Secure | |
| Transport for the Path | |
| Computation Element | |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Path Computation Element | [RFC8281] |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) Extensions for | |
| PCE-Initiated LSP Setup | |
| in a Stateful PCE Model | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Extensions to the Path | [RFC8306] |
| Computation Element | |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) for Point-to- | |
| Multipoint Traffic | |
| Engineering Label | |
| Switched Paths | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Network Configuration | [RFC8341] |
| Access Control Model | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Conveying Path Setup | [RFC8408] |
| Type in PCE | |
| Communication Protocol | |
| (PCEP) Messages | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Traffic Engineering | [RFC8776] |
| Common YANG Types | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| A YANG Data Model for | [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te] |
| Traffic Engineering | |
| Tunnels and Interfaces | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| YANG Groupings for TLS | [I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server] |
| Clients and TLS Servers | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| PCEP Extensions for | [RFC8664] |
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| Segment Routing | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| PCEP Extensions for | [RFC8697] |
| Establishing | |
| Relationships Between | |
| Sets of LSPs | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| YANG Data Model for OSPF | [I-D.ietf-ospf-yang] |
| Protocol | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| YANG Data Model for IS- | [I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg] |
| IS Protocol | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| PCEP extensions for | [RFC8779] |
| GMPLS | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| ASSOCIATION Type Field | [IANA-PCEP] |
| in Path Computation | |
| Element Protocol (PCEP) | |
| Numbers | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Path Computation Element | [IANA-OSPF] |
| (PCE) Capability Flags | |
| in Open Shortest Path | |
| First v2 (OSPFv2) | |
| Parameters | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
Table 2: Refrences in the YANG modules
4. Objectives
This section describes some of the design objectives for the model:
* In case of existing implementations, it needs to map the data
model defined in this document to their proprietary native data
model. To facilitate such mappings, the data model should be
simple.
* The data model should be suitable for new implementations to use
as is.
* Mapping to the PCEP MIB Module should be clear.
* The data model should allow for static configurations of peers.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
* The data model should include read-only counters in order to
gather statistics for sent and received PCEP messages, received
messages with errors, and messages that could not be sent due to
errors. This could be in a separate model which augments the base
data model.
* It should be fairly straightforward to augment the base data model
for advanced PCE features.
5. The Design of PCEP Data Model
5.1. The Overview of PCEP Data Model
The PCEP YANG module defined in this document has all the common
building blocks for the PCEP protocol.
module: ietf-pcep
+--rw pcep!
+--rw entity
+--rw addr inet:ip-address
+--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw role pcep-role
+--rw description? string
+--rw speaker-entity-id? string {sync-opt}?
+--rw admin-status? boolean
+--ro index? uint32
+--ro oper-status? pcep-oper-status
+--rw domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--...
+--rw capability
| +--...
+--rw pce-info
| +--rw scope
| | +--...
| +--rw neighbour-domains
| | +--...
| +--rw path-key {path-key}?
| | +--...
| +--...
+--...
+--ro lsp-db {stateful}?
| +--ro db-ver? uint64 {sync-opt}?
| +--ro association-list*
| | [type id source global-source extended-id]
| | {association}?
| | +--...
| +--ro lsp* [plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id]
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--...
+--ro path-keys {path-key}?
| +--ro path-keys* [path-key]
| +--...
+--rw peers
+--rw peer* [addr]
+--...
+--ro sessions
+--ro session* [initiator]
+--...
rpcs:
+---x trigger-resync {stateful,sync-opt}?
+---w input
+---w pcc? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
notifications:
+---n pcep-session-up
| +--...
+---n pcep-session-down
| +--...
+---n pcep-session-local-overload
| +--...
+---n pcep-session-local-overload-clear
| +--...
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload
| +--...
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload-clear
+--...
5.2. The Entity
The PCEP yang module may contain status information for the local
PCEP entity.
The entity has an IP address (using ietf-inet-types [RFC6991]) and a
"role" leaf (the local entity PCEP role) as mandatory.
Note that, the PCEP MIB module [RFC7420] uses an entity list and a
system generated entity index as a primary index to the read only
entity table. If the device implements the PCEP MIB, the "index"
leaf MUST contain the value of the corresponding pcePcepEntityIndex
and only one entity is assumed.
The various information related to this entity such as its domain,
capabilities etc. Further incase when the entity is PCE it could
also have path-key and the LSP-DB information.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
module: ietf-pcep
+--rw pcep!
+--rw entity
+--rw addr inet:ip-address
+--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw role pcep-role
+--rw description? string
+--rw speaker-entity-id? string {sync-opt}?
+--rw admin-status? boolean
+--ro index? uint32
+--ro oper-status? pcep-oper-status
+--rw domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw capability
| +--rw capability? bits
| +--rw pce-initiated? boolean {pce-initiated}?
| +--rw include-db-ver? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-resync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-initial-sync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw incremental-sync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw sr {sr}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw msd-limit? boolean
| +--rw nai? boolean
+--rw msd? uint8 {sr}?
+--rw pce-info
| +--rw scope
| | +--rw path-scope? bits
| | +--rw intra-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-as-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-layer-pref? uint8
| +--rw neighbour-domains
| | +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| | +--rw domain-type identityref
| | +--rw domain-info domain
| +--rw path-key {path-key}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw discard-timer? uint32
| +--rw reuse-time? uint32
| +--rw pce-id? inet:ip-address
+--rw connect-timer? uint16
+--rw connect-max-retry? uint32
+--rw init-back-off-timer? uint16
+--rw max-back-off-timer? uint32
+--ro open-wait-timer? uint16
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--ro keep-wait-timer? uint16
+--rw keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw dead-timer? uint8
+--rw allow-negotiation? boolean
+--rw max-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw max-dead-timer? uint8
+--rw min-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw min-dead-timer? uint8
+--rw sync-timer? uint16 {svec}?
+--rw request-timer? uint16
+--rw max-sessions? uint32
+--rw max-unknown-reqs? uint32
+--rw max-unknown-msgs? uint32
+--rw pcep-notification-max-rate uint32
+--rw stateful-parameter {stateful}?
| +--rw state-timeout? uint32
| +--rw redelegation-timeout? uint32
| +--rw rpt-non-pcep-lsp? boolean
+--rw of-list {objective-function}?
| +--rw objective-function* [of]
| +--rw of identityref
+--ro lsp-db {stateful}?
| +--ro db-ver? uint64 {sync-opt}?
| +--ro association-list*
| | [type id source global-source extended-id]
| | {association}?
| | +--ro type identityref
| | +--ro id uint16
| | +--ro source inet:ip-address
| | +--ro global-source uint32
| | +--ro extended-id string
| | +--ro lsp* [plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id]
| | +--ro plsp-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/plsp-id
| | +--ro pcc-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/pcc-id
| | +--ro lsp-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/lsp-id
| +--ro lsp* [plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id]
| +--ro plsp-id uint32
| +--ro pcc-id inet:ip-address
| +--ro source? inet:ip-address
| +--ro destination? inet:ip-address
| +--ro tunnel-id? uint16
| +--ro lsp-id uint16
| +--ro extended-tunnel-id? inet:ip-address
| +--ro admin-state? boolean
| +--ro operational-state? operational-state
| +--ro delegated
| | +--ro enabled? boolean
| | +--ro peer? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| | +--ro srp-id? uint32
| +--ro initiation {pce-initiated}?
| | +--ro enabled? boolean
| | +--ro peer? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro symbolic-path-name? string
| +--ro last-error? identityref
| +--ro pst? identityref
| +--ro association-list*
| [type id source global-source extended-id]
| {association}?
| +--ro type
| | -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/association-list/type
| +--ro id
| | -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/association-list/id
| +--ro source leafref
| +--ro global-source leafref
| +--ro extended-id leafref
+--ro path-keys {path-key}?
| +--ro path-keys* [path-key]
| +--ro path-key uint16
| +--ro cps
| | +--ro explicit-route-objects* [index]
| | +--ro index uint32
| | +--ro (type)?
| | +--:(numbered-node-hop)
| | | +--ro numbered-node-hop
| | | +--ro node-id te-node-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | +--:(numbered-link-hop)
| | | +--ro numbered-link-hop
| | | +--ro link-tp-id te-tp-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | | +--ro direction? te-link-direction
| | +--:(unnumbered-link-hop)
| | | +--ro unnumbered-link-hop
| | | +--ro link-tp-id te-tp-id
| | | +--ro node-id te-node-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | | +--ro direction? te-link-direction
| | +--:(as-number)
| | | +--ro as-number-hop
| | | +--ro as-number inet:as-number
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | +--:(label)
| | +--ro label-hop
| | +--ro te-label
| | ...
| +--ro pcc-original? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--ro req-id? uint32
| +--ro retrieved? boolean
| +--ro pcc-retrieved? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro creation-time? yang:timestamp
| +--ro discard-time? uint32
| +--ro reuse-time? uint32
+--rw peers
+--rw peer* [addr]
+--...
5.3. The Peer Lists
The peer list contains peer(s) that the local PCEP entity knows
about. A PCEP speaker is identified by its IP address. If there is
a PCEP speaker in the network that uses multiple IP addresses then it
looks like multiple distinct peers to the other PCEP speakers in the
network.
Since PCEP sessions can be ephemeral, the peer list tracks a peer
even when no PCEP session currently exists to that peer. The
statistics contained are an aggregate of the statistics for all
successive sessions to that peer.
To limit the quantity of information that is stored, an
implementation MAY choose to discard this information if and only if
no PCEP session exists to the corresponding peer.
The data model for PCEP peer presented in this document uses a flat
list of peers. Each peer in the list is identified by its IP address
(addr-type, addr).
There is a list for static peer configuration and operational state
of all peers (i.e.static as well as discovered)("/pcep/entity/
peers"). The list is used to enable remote PCE configuration at PCC
(or PCE) and has the operational state of these peers as well as the
remote PCE peer which were discovered and PCC peers that have
initiated session.
module: ietf-pcep
+--rw pcep!
+--rw entity
+--...
+--rw peers
+--rw peer* [addr]
+--rw addr inet:ip-address
+--rw role pcep-role
+--rw description? string
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--rw domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw capability
| +--rw capability? bits
| +--rw pce-initiated? boolean
| | {pce-initiated}?
| +--rw include-db-ver? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-resync? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-initial-sync? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw incremental-sync? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw sr {sr}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw msd-limit? boolean
| +--rw nai? boolean
+--rw msd? uint8 {sr}?
+--rw pce-info
| +--rw scope
| | +--rw path-scope? bits
| | +--rw intra-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-as-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-layer-pref? uint8
| +--rw neighbour-domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw delegation-pref? uint8 {stateful}?
+--rw auth
| +--rw (auth-type-selection)?
| +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | +--rw key-chain?
| | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| +--:(auth-key)
| | +--rw crypto-algorithm identityref
| | +--rw (key-string-style)?
| | +--:(keystring)
| | | +--rw keystring? string
| | +--:(hexadecimal)
| | {key-chain:hex-key-string}?
| | +--rw hexadecimal-string?
| | yang:hex-string
| +--:(auth-tls) {tls}?
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--rw (role)?
| +--:(server)
| | +--rw tls-server
| | ...
| +--:(client)
| +--rw tls-client
| ...
+--ro discontinuity-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro initiate-session? boolean
+--ro session-exists? boolean
+--ro session-up-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro session-fail-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro session-fail-up-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro sessions
+--ro session* [initiator]
+--...
5.4. The Session Lists
The session list contains PCEP session that the PCEP entity (PCE or
PCC) is currently participating in. The statistics in session are
semantically different from those in peer since the former applies to
the current session only, whereas the latter is the aggregate for all
sessions that have existed to that peer.
Although [RFC5440] forbids more than one active PCEP session between
a given pair of PCEP entities at any given time, there is a window
during session establishment where two sessions may exist for a given
pair, one representing a session initiated by the local PCEP entity
and the other representing a session initiated by the peer. If
either of these sessions reaches active state first, then the other
is discarded.
The data model for PCEP session presented in this document uses a
flat list of sessions. Each session in the list is identified by its
initiator. This index allows two sessions to exist transiently for a
given peer, as discussed above.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
module: ietf-pcep
+--rw pcep!
+--rw entity
+--...
+--rw peers
+--rw peer* [addr]
+--...
+--ro sessions
+--ro session* [initiator]
+--ro initiator pcep-initiator
+--ro role?
| -> /pcep/entity/role
+--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
+--ro state?
| pcep-sess-state
+--ro session-creation? yang:timestamp
+--ro connect-retry? yang:counter32
+--ro local-id? uint8
+--ro remote-id? uint8
+--ro keepalive-timer? uint8
+--ro peer-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--ro dead-timer? uint8
+--ro peer-dead-timer? uint8
+--ro ka-hold-time-rem? uint8
+--ro overloaded? boolean
+--ro overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+--ro overload-time? uint32
+--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
+--ro peer-overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+--ro peer-overload-time? uint32
+--ro lspdb-sync? sync-state
| {stateful}?
+--ro recv-db-ver? uint64
| {stateful,sync-opt}?
+--ro of-list {objective-function}?
| +--ro objective-function* [of]
| +--ro of identityref
+--ro pst-list
| +--ro path-setup-type* [pst]
| +--ro pst identityref
+--ro assoc-type-list {association}?
| +--ro assoc-type* [at]
| +--ro at identityref
+--ro speaker-entity-id? string
{sync-opt}?
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
5.5. Notifications
This YANG model defines a list of notifications to inform client of
important events detected during the protocol operation. The
notifications defined cover the PCEP MIB notifications.
notifications:
+---n pcep-session-up
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
| +--ro state? pcep-sess-state
+---n pcep-session-down
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator? pcep-initiator
| +--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
| +--ro state? pcep-sess-state
+---n pcep-session-local-overload
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro overloaded? boolean
| +--ro overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
| +--ro overload-time? uint32
+---n pcep-session-local-overload-clear
| +--ro peer-addr?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro overloaded? boolean
| +--ro overloaded-clear-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload
| +--ro peer-addr?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
| +--ro peer-overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
| +--ro peer-overload-time? uint32
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload-clear
+--ro peer-addr?
| -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
+--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
+--ro peer-overloaded-clear-timestamp? yang:timestamp
5.6. RPC
This YANG model defines a RPC to trigger state resynchronization to a
particular PCEP peer.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
rpcs:
+---x trigger-resync {stateful,sync-opt}?
+---w input
+---w pcc? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
6. The Design of PCEP Statistics Data Model
The module, "ietf-pcep-stats", augments the ietf-pcep module to
include statistics at the PCEP peer and session level.
module: ietf-pcep-stats
augment /pcep:pcep/pcep:entity/pcep:peers/pcep:peer:
+--ro num-sess-setup-ok? yang:counter32
+--ro num-sess-setup-fail? yang:counter32
+--ro pcep-stats
+--ro discontinuity-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro rsp-time-avg? uint32
+--ro rsp-time-lwm? uint32
+--ro rsp-time-hwm? uint32
+--ro num-pcreq-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcreq-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcrep-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcrep-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcerr-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcerr-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcntf-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcntf-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-keepalive-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-keepalive-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-unknown-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-corrupt-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-pend-rep? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-ero-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-nopath-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-cancel-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-error-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-timeout? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-cancel-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-pend-rep? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-ero-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-nopath-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-cancel-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-cancel-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-rep-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--ro num-req-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
+--ro svec {pcep:svec}?
| +--ro num-svec-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-req-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-req-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro stateful {pcep:stateful}?
| +--ro num-pcrpt-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcrpt-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcupd-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcupd-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-undelegated? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro initiation {pcep:pce-initiated}?
| +--ro num-pcinitiate-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcinitiate-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro path-key {pcep:path-key}?
| +--ro num-unknown-path-key? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-exp-path-key? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-dup-path-key? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-path-key-no-attempt? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-closed? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-closed? yang:counter32
augment /pcep:pcep/pcep:entity/pcep:peers/pcep:peer/pcep:sessions
/pcep:session:
+--ro pcep-stats
+--ro discontinuity-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro rsp-time-avg? uint32
+--ro rsp-time-lwm? uint32
+--ro rsp-time-hwm? uint32
+--ro num-pcreq-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcreq-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcrep-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcrep-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcerr-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcerr-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcntf-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-pcntf-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-keepalive-sent? yang:counter32
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--ro num-keepalive-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-unknown-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-corrupt-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-pend-rep? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-ero-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-nopath-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-cancel-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-error-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-timeout? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-sent-cancel-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-pend-rep? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-ero-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-nopath-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-cancel-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-cancel-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro num-rep-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
+--ro num-req-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
+--ro svec {pcep:svec}?
| +--ro num-svec-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-req-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-svec-req-rcvd? yang:counter32
+--ro stateful {pcep:stateful}?
| +--ro num-pcrpt-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcrpt-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcupd-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcupd-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-rpt-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-unknown? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-undelegated? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-upd-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro initiation {pcep:pce-initiated}?
| +--ro num-pcinitiate-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-pcinitiate-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-sent? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-rcvd? yang:counter32
| +--ro num-initiate-rcvd-error-sent? yang:counter32
+--ro path-key {pcep:path-key}?
+--ro num-unknown-path-key? yang:counter32
+--ro num-exp-path-key? yang:counter32
+--ro num-dup-path-key? yang:counter32
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--ro num-path-key-no-attempt? yang:counter32
7. Advanced PCE Features
This document contains a specification of the base PCEP YANG module,
"ietf-pcep" which provides the basic PCEP [RFC5440] data model.
This document further handles advanced PCE features like -
* Capability and Scope
* Domain information (local/neighbour)
* Path-Key
* Objective Function (OF)
* Global Concurrent Optimization (GCO)
* P2MP
* GMPLS
* Inter-Layer
* Stateful PCE
* Segment Routing (SR)
* Authentication including PCEPS (TLS)
7.1. Stateful PCE's LSP-DB
In the operational state of PCEP which supports stateful PCE mode,
the list of LSP state are maintained in LSP-DB. The key is the PLSP-
ID and the PCC IP address.
The PCEP data model contains the operational state of LSPs
(/pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/) with PCEP specific attributes. The
generic TE attributes of the LSP are defined in
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te]. A reference to LSP state in TE model is
maintained.
8. Other Considerations
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
8.1. PCEP over TLS (PCEPS)
[RFC8253] describe the use of TLS in PCEP. The peer acting as the
PCEP client must act as the TLS client. The TLS client actively
opens the TLS connection and the TLS server passively listens for the
incoming TLS connections. The well-known TCP port number 4189 is
used by PCEP servers to listen for TCP connections established by
PCEP over TLS clients. The TLS client sends the TLS ClientHello
message to begin the TLS handshake. The TLS server sends a
CertificateRequest in order to request a certificate from the TLS
client. Once the TLS handshake has finished, the client and the
server begin to exchange PCEP messages. Client and server identity
verification is done before the PCEP open message is sent. This
means that the identity verification is completed before the PCEP
session is started.
9. PCEP YANG Modules
9.1. ietf-pcep module
RFC Ed.: In this section, replace all occurrences of 'XXXX' with the
actual RFC number and all occurrences of the revision date below with
the date of RFC publication (and remove this note).
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-pcep@2021-10-23.yang"
module ietf-pcep {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep";
prefix pcep;
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types";
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types";
}
import ietf-te-types {
prefix te-types;
reference
"RFC 8776: Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering";
}
import ietf-key-chain {
prefix key-chain;
reference
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"RFC 8177: YANG Data Model for Key Chains";
}
import ietf-netconf-acm {
prefix nacm;
reference
"RFC 8341: Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Access
Control Model";
}
import ietf-tls-server {
prefix tlss;
reference
"I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server: YANG Groupings for TLS
Clients and TLS Servers";
}
import ietf-tls-client {
prefix tlsc;
reference
"I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server: YANG Groupings for TLS
Clients and TLS Servers";
}
import ietf-ospf {
prefix ospf;
reference
"I-D.ietf-ospf-yang: YANG Data Model for OSPF Protocol";
}
import ietf-isis {
prefix isis;
reference
"I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg: YANG Data Model for IS-IS
Protocol";
}
organization
"IETF PCE (Path Computation Element) Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/pce/>
WG List: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
Editor: Dhruv Dhody
<mailto:dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>";
description
"The YANG module defines a generic configuration and
operational model for PCEP.
The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL
NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'NOT RECOMMENDED',
'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when,
they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see the
RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2021-10-23 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Path Computation
Element Communications Protocol (PCEP)";
}
/*
* Typedefs
*/
typedef pcep-role {
type enumeration {
enum unknown {
value 0;
description
"An unknown role";
}
enum pcc {
value 1;
description
"The role of a Path Computation Client";
}
enum pce {
value 2;
description
"The role of Path Computation Element";
}
enum pcc-and-pce {
value 3;
description
"The role of both Path Computation Client and
Path Computation Element";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
description
"The role of a PCEP speaker.
Takes one of the following values
- unknown(0): the role is not known.
- pcc(1): the role is of a Path Computation
Client (PCC).
- pce(2): the role is of a Path Computation
Server (PCE).
- pccAndPce(3): the role is of both a PCC and
a PCE.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
typedef pcep-oper-status {
type enumeration {
enum oper-status-up {
value 1;
description
"The PCEP entity is active";
}
enum oper-status-down {
value 2;
description
"The PCEP entity is inactive";
}
enum oper-status-going-up {
value 3;
description
"The PCEP entity is activating";
}
enum oper-status-going-down {
value 4;
description
"The PCEP entity is deactivating";
}
enum oper-status-failed {
value 5;
description
"The PCEP entity has failed and will recover
when possible.";
}
enum oper-status-failed-perm {
value 6;
description
"The PCEP entity has failed and will not recover
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
without operator intervention";
}
}
description
"The operational status of the PCEP entity.
Takes one of the following values
- oper-status-up(1): Active
- oper-status-down(2): Inactive
- oper-status-going-up(3): Activating
- oper-status-going-down(4): Deactivating
- oper-status-failed(5): Failed
- oper-status-failed-perm(6): Failed Permanantly";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
typedef pcep-initiator {
type enumeration {
enum local {
value 1;
description
"The local PCEP entity initiated the session";
}
enum remote {
value 2;
description
"The remote PCEP peer initiated the session";
}
}
description
"The initiator of the session, that is, whether the TCP
connection was initiated by the local PCEP entity or
the remote peer.
Takes one of the following values
- local(1): Initiated locally
- remote(2): Initiated remotely";
}
typedef pcep-sess-state {
type enumeration {
enum tcp-pending {
value 1;
description
"The TCPPending state of PCEP session.";
}
enum open-wait {
value 2;
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"The OpenWait state of PCEP session.";
}
enum keep-wait {
value 3;
description
"The KeepWait state of PCEP session.";
}
enum session-up {
value 4;
description
"The SessionUP state of PCEP session.";
}
}
description
"The current state of the session.
The set of possible states excludes the idle state
since entries do not exist in the idle state.
Takes one of the following values
- tcp-pending(1): PCEP TCPPending state
- open-wait(2): PCEP OpenWait state
- keep-wait(3): PCEP KeepWait state
- session-up(4): PCEP SessionUP state";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
typedef domain-ospf-area {
type ospf:area-id-type;
description
"OSPF Area ID.";
reference
"I-D.ietf-ospf-yang: YANG Data Model for OSPF Protocol";
}
typedef domain-isis-area {
type isis:area-address;
description
"IS-IS Area ID.";
reference
"I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg: YANG Data Model for IS-IS
Protocol";
}
typedef domain-as {
type inet:as-number;
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"Autonomous System number.";
}
typedef domain {
type union {
type domain-ospf-area;
type domain-isis-area;
type domain-as;
}
description
"The Domain Information";
}
typedef operational-state {
type enumeration {
enum down {
value 0;
description
"not active.";
}
enum up {
value 1;
description
"signalled.";
}
enum active {
value 2;
description
"up and carrying traffic.";
}
enum going-down {
value 3;
description
"LSP is being torn down, resources are
being released.";
}
enum going-up {
value 4;
description
"LSP is being signalled.";
}
}
description
"The operational status of the LSP";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
typedef sync-state {
type enumeration {
enum pending {
value 0;
description
"The state synchronization
has not started.";
}
enum ongoing {
value 1;
description
"The state synchronization
is ongoing.";
}
enum finished {
value 2;
description
"The state synchronization
is finished.";
}
}
description
"The LSP-DB state synchronization operational
status.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
/*
* Features
*/
feature svec {
description
"Support synchronized path computation.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
feature gmpls {
description
"Support GMPLS.";
reference
"RFC 8779: PCEP extensions for GMPLS";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
feature objective-function {
description
"Support OF as per RFC 5541.";
reference
"RFC 5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
feature global-concurrent {
description
"Support Global Concurrent Optimization (GCO) as per RFC
5557.";
reference
"RFC 5557: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Requirements and Protocol Extensions in Support of
Global Concurrent Optimization";
}
feature path-key {
description
"Support path-key as per RFC 5520.";
reference
"RFC 5520: Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-
Domain Path Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism";
}
feature p2mp {
description
"Support Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) as per RFC 8306.";
reference
"RFC 8306: Extensions to the Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Point-to-Multipoint
Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths";
}
feature stateful {
description
"Support Stateful PCE as per RFC 8231.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
feature sync-opt {
description
"Support Stateful state synchronization optimization
as per RFC 8232";
reference
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
}
feature pce-initiated {
description
"Support PCE-Initiated LSP as per
RFC 8281.";
reference
"RFC 8281: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful
PCE Model";
}
feature tls {
description
"Support PCEP over TLS as per RFC 8253.";
reference
"RFC 8253: PCEPS: Usage of TLS to Provide a Secure Transport
for the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP)";
}
feature sr {
description
"Support Segment Routing (SR) for PCE.";
reference
"RFC 8664: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing";
}
feature association {
description
"Support Association in PCEP.";
reference
"RFC 8697: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Establishing Relationships between
Sets of Label Switched Paths (LSPs)";
}
/*
* Identities
*/
identity domain-type {
description
"Base Domain Type for PCE";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
identity ospf-area {
base domain-type;
description
"The OSPF area.";
}
identity isis-area {
base domain-type;
description
"The IS-IS area.";
}
identity autonomous-system {
base domain-type;
description
"The Autonomous System (AS).";
}
identity lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
description
"Base LSP error";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity no-error-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"No error, LSP is fine.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity unknown-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"Unknown reason.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity limit-lsp-error {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"Limit reached for PCE-controlled LSPs.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity pending-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"Too many pending LSP update requests.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity unacceptable-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"Unacceptable parameters.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity internal-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"Internal error.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity admin-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"LSP administratively brought down.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
identity preempted-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"LSP preempted.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
identity rsvp-lsp-error {
if-feature "stateful";
base lsp-error;
description
"RSVP signaling error.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
/*
* Groupings
*/
grouping pce-scope {
description
"This grouping defines PCE path computation scope
information which maybe relevant to PCE selection.
This information corresponds to PCE auto-discovery
information.";
reference
"RFC 5088: OSPF Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery
RFC 5089: IS-IS Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery";
leaf path-scope {
type bits {
bit intra-area-scope {
description
"PCE can compute intra-area paths (L bit).";
}
bit inter-area-scope {
description
"PCE can compute inter-area paths (R bit).";
}
bit inter-area-scope-default {
description
"PCE can act as a default PCE for inter-area
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
path computation. (Rd bit)";
}
bit inter-as-scope {
description
"PCE can compute inter-AS paths (S bit).";
}
bit inter-as-scope-default {
description
"PCE can act as a default PCE for inter-AS
path computation (Sd bit).";
}
bit inter-layer-scope {
description
"PCE can compute inter-layer paths (Y bit).";
}
}
description
"The field corresponding to the path scope bits";
}
leaf intra-area-pref {
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"The PCE's preference for intra-area TE LSP
computation (PrefL field). Where 7 reflects
the highest preference.";
}
leaf inter-area-pref {
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"The PCE's preference for inter-area TE LSP
computation (PrefR field). Where 7 reflects
the highest preference.";
}
leaf inter-as-pref {
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"The PCE's preference for inter-AS TE LSP
computation (PrefS field). Where 7 reflects
the highest preference.";
}
leaf inter-layer-pref {
type uint8 {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
range "0..7";
}
description
"The PCE's preference for inter-layer TE LSP
computation (PrefY field). Where 7 reflects
the highest preference.";
}
}
//pce-scope
grouping domain {
description
"This grouping specifies a Domain where the
PCEP speaker has topology visibility.";
leaf domain-type {
type identityref {
base domain-type;
}
description
"The domain type.";
}
leaf domain-info {
type domain;
description
"The domain Information.";
}
}
//domain
grouping info {
description
"This grouping specifies all information which
maybe relevant to both PCC and PCE.
This information corresponds to PCE auto-discovery
information.";
container domains {
description
"The local domain for the PCEP entity";
list domains {
key "domain-type domain-info";
description
"The local domain.";
uses domain {
description
"The local domain for the PCEP entity.";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
}
container capability {
description
"The PCEP entity capability information of local
PCEP entity. This maybe relevant to PCE selection
as well. This information corresponds to PCE auto-
discovery information.";
reference
"IANA OSPF: Path Computation Element (PCE) Capability
Flags in Open Shortest Path First v2 (OSPFv2)
Parameters
RFC 5088: OSPF Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery
RFC 5089: IS-IS Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery";
leaf capability {
type bits {
bit gmpls {
if-feature "gmpls";
description
"Path computation with GMPLS link
constraints.";
}
bit bi-dir {
description
"Bidirectional path computation.";
}
bit diverse {
description
"Diverse path computation.";
}
bit load-balance {
description
"Load-balanced path computation.";
}
bit synchronize {
if-feature "svec";
description
"Synchronized paths computation.";
}
bit objective-function {
if-feature "objective-function";
description
"Support for multiple objective functions.";
}
bit add-path-constraint {
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"Support for additive path constraints (max
hop count, etc.).";
}
bit prioritization {
description
"Support for request prioritization.";
}
bit multi-request {
description
"Support for multiple requests per message.";
}
bit global-concurrent {
if-feature "global-concurrent";
description
"Support for Global Concurrent Optimization
(GCO).";
}
bit p2mp {
if-feature "p2mp";
description
"Support for P2MP path computation.";
}
bit active {
if-feature "stateful";
description
"Support for active stateful PCE.";
}
bit passive {
if-feature "stateful";
description
"Support for passive stateful PCE.";
}
bit p2mp-active {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "p2mp";
description
"Support for active stateful PCE for P2MP.";
}
bit p2mp-passive {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "p2mp";
description
"Support for passive stateful PCE for P2MP.";
}
bit p2mp-pce-initiated {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "pce-initiated";
if-feature "p2mp";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"Support for PCE-initiated LSP for P2MP.";
}
}
description
"The bits string indicating the capabiliies";
reference
"RFC 5088: OSPF Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery
RFC 5089: IS-IS Protocol Extensions for Path
Computation Element (PCE) Discovery";
}
leaf pce-initiated {
if-feature "pce-initiated";
type boolean;
description
"Set to true if PCE-initiated LSP capability is
enabled.";
reference
"RFC 8281: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP
Setup in a Stateful PCE Model";
}
leaf include-db-ver {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
type boolean;
description
"Support inclusion of LSP-DB-VERSION
in LSP object";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
}
leaf trigger-resync {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
type boolean;
description
"Support PCE triggered re-synchronization";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
}
leaf trigger-initial-sync {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
type boolean;
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"PCE triggered initial synchronization";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
}
leaf incremental-sync {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
type boolean;
description
"Support incremental (delta) sync";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
}
container sr {
if-feature "sr";
description
"If segment routing is supported";
reference
"RFC 8664: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
description
"Set to true if SR is enabled";
}
leaf msd-limit {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"True indicates no limit on MSD, the
leaf msd is ignored";
}
leaf nai {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"True indicates capability to resolve Node or
Adjacency Identifier (NAI) to Segment
Identifier (SID)";
}
}
//sr
}
//capability
leaf msd {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
if-feature "sr";
type uint8;
description
"Maximum SID Depth for SR";
reference
"RFC 8664: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing";
}
}
//info
grouping pce-info {
description
"This grouping specifies all PCE information
which maybe relevant to the PCE selection.
This information corresponds to PCE auto-discovery
information.";
container scope {
description
"The path computation scope";
uses pce-scope;
}
container neighbour-domains {
description
"The list of neighbour PCE-Domain
toward which a PCE can compute
paths";
list domains {
key "domain-type domain-info";
description
"The neighbour domain.";
uses domain {
description
"The PCE neighbour domain.";
}
}
}
}
//pce-info
grouping notification-instance-hdr {
description
"This group describes common instance specific data
for notifications.";
leaf peer-addr {
type leafref {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
description
"Reference to peer address";
}
}
// notification-instance-hdr
grouping notification-session-hdr {
description
"This group describes common session instance specific
data for notifications.";
leaf session-initiator {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/"
+ "session/initiator";
}
description
"Reference to pcep session initiator leaf";
}
}
// notification-session-hdr
grouping of-list {
description
"List of Objective Functions (OF)";
reference
"RFC 5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in the Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
list objective-function {
key "of";
description
"The list of authorized OF";
leaf of {
type identityref {
base te-types:objective-function-type;
}
description
"The OF authorized";
}
}
}
/*
* Configuration data nodes
*/
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
container pcep {
presence "The PCEP is enabled";
description
"Parameters for list of configured PCEP entities
on the device.";
container entity {
description
"The configured PCEP entity on the device.";
leaf addr {
type inet:ip-address;
mandatory true;
description
"The local Internet address of this PCEP entity.
If operating as a PCE server, the PCEP entity
listens on this address. If operating as a PCC,
the PCEP entity binds outgoing TCP connections
to this address. It is possible for the PCEP entity
to operate both as a PCC and a PCE Server, in which
case it uses this address both to listen for incoming
TCP connections and to bind outgoing TCP connections.";
}
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"The administrative status of this PCEP
Entity; set to true when UP.";
}
leaf role {
type pcep-role;
mandatory true;
description
"The role that this entity can play.
Takes one of the following values.
- unknown(0): this PCEP Entity role is not
known.
- pcc(1): this PCEP Entity is a PCC.
- pce(2): this PCEP Entity is a PCE.
- pcc-and-pce(3): this PCEP Entity is both
a PCC and a PCE.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Description of the PCEP entity configured
by the user";
}
leaf speaker-entity-id {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
if-feature "sync-opt";
type string;
description
"The Speaker Entity Identifier";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched
Path State Synchronization Procedures for
a Stateful PCE";
}
leaf admin-status {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"The administrative status of this PCEP Entity.
The value true represents admin status as up.
This is the desired operational status as
currently set by an operator or by default in
the implementation. The value of oper-status
represents the current status of an attempt to
reach this desired status.";
}
leaf index {
type uint32;
config false;
description
"The index of the operational PECP entity";
}
leaf oper-status {
type pcep-oper-status;
config false;
description
"The operational status of the PCEP entity.
Takes one of the following values.
- oper-status-up(1): the PCEP entity is active.
- oper-status-down(2): the PCEP entity is inactive.
- oper-status-going-up(3): the PCEP entity is
activating.
- oper-status-going-down(4): the PCEP entity is
deactivating.
- oper-status-failed(5): the PCEP entity has
failed and will recover when possible.
- oper-status-failed-perm(6): the PCEP entity
has failed and will not recover without
operator intervention.";
}
uses info {
description
"Local PCEP entity information";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
container pce-info {
when "../role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"These fields are applicable when the role is PCE.";
}
description
"The Local PCE Entity PCE information";
uses pce-info {
description
"Local PCE information";
}
container path-key {
if-feature "path-key";
description
"Path-Key Configuration";
reference
"RFC 5520: Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-
Domain Path Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
description
"Enabled or Disabled; set to true when Enabled";
}
leaf discard-timer {
type uint32;
units "minutes";
default "10";
description
"A timer to discard unwanted path-keys";
}
leaf reuse-time {
type uint32;
units "minutes";
default "30";
description
"A time after which the path-keys could be reused";
}
leaf pce-id {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"PCE Address to be used in each Path-Key Subobject
(PKS)";
}
}
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
leaf connect-timer {
type uint16 {
range "1..65535";
}
units "seconds";
default "60";
description
"The time in seconds that the PCEP entity will wait
to establish a TCP connection with a peer. If a
TCP connection is not established within this time
then PCEP aborts the session setup attempt.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf connect-max-retry {
type uint32;
default "5";
description
"The maximum number of times the system tries to
establish a TCP connection to a peer before the
session with the peer transitions to the idle
state.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf init-back-off-timer {
type uint16 {
range "1..65535";
}
units "seconds";
description
"The initial back-off time in seconds for retrying
a failed session setup attempt to a peer.
The back-off time increases for each failed
session setup attempt, until a maximum back-off
time is reached. The maximum back-off time is the
max-back-off-timer leaf.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf max-back-off-timer {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"The maximum back-off time in seconds for retrying
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
a failed session setup attempt to a peer.
The back-off time increases for each failed session
setup attempt, until this maximum value is reached.
Session setup attempts then repeat periodically
without any further increase in back-off time.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf open-wait-timer {
type uint16;
units "seconds";
default "60";
config false;
description
"The time in seconds that the PCEP entity will wait
to receive an Open message from a peer after the
TCP connection has come up.
If no Open message is received within this time then
PCEP terminates the TCP connection and deletes the
associated sessions.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf keep-wait-timer {
type uint16;
units "seconds";
default "60";
config false;
description
"The time in seconds that the PCEP entity will wait
to receive a Keepalive or PCErr message from a peer
during session initialization after receiving an
Open message. If no Keepalive or PCErr message is
received within this time then PCEP terminates the
TCP connection and deletes the associated
sessions.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf keepalive-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
default "30";
description
"The Keepalive timer that this PCEP
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
entity will propose in the initial Open message of
each session it is involved in. This is the
maximum time between two consecutive messages sent
to a peer. Zero means that the PCEP entity prefers
not to send Keepalives at all.
Note that the actual Keepalive transmission
intervals, in either direction of an active PCEP
session, are determined by negotiation between the
peers as specified by RFC 5440, and so may differ
from this configured value.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf dead-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
must '(. > ../keepalive-timer)' {
error-message "The DeadTimer must be "
+ "larger than the Keepalive timer";
}
default "120";
description
"The DeadTimer that this PCEP entity will propose
in the initial Open message of each session it is
involved in. This is the time after which a peer
should declare a session down if it does not
receive any PCEP messages. Zero suggests that the
peer does not run a DeadTimer at all.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf allow-negotiation {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"Whether the PCEP entity will permit negotiation of
session parameters.";
}
leaf max-keepalive-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
description
"In PCEP session parameter negotiation in seconds,
the maximum value that this PCEP entity will
accept from a peer for the interval between
Keepalive transmissions. Zero means that the PCEP
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
entity will allow no Keepalive transmission at
all.";
}
leaf max-dead-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
description
"In PCEP session parameter negotiation in seconds,
the maximum value that this PCEP entity will accept
from a peer for the DeadTimer. Zero means that
the PCEP entity will allow not running a
DeadTimer.";
}
leaf min-keepalive-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
description
"In PCEP session parameter negotiation in seconds,
the minimum value that this PCEP entity will
accept for the interval between Keepalive
transmissions. Zero means that the PCEP entity
insists on no Keepalive transmission at all.";
}
leaf min-dead-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
description
"In PCEP session parameter negotiation in
seconds, the minimum value that this PCEP entity
will accept for the DeadTimer. Zero means that
the PCEP entity insists on not running a
DeadTimer.";
}
leaf sync-timer {
if-feature "svec";
type uint16;
units "seconds";
default "60";
description
"The value of SyncTimer in seconds is used in the
case of synchronized path computation request
using the SVEC object. Consider the case where a
PCReq message is received by a PCE that contains
the SVEC object referring to M synchronized path
computation requests. If after the expiration of
the SyncTimer all the M path computation requests
have not been, received a protocol error is
triggered and the PCE must cancel the whole set
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
of path computation requests.
The aim of the SyncTimer is to avoid the storage
of unused synchronized requests should one of
them get lost for some reasons (for example, a
misbehaving PCC).
Zero means that the PCEP entity does not use the
SyncTimer.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf request-timer {
type uint16 {
range "1..65535";
}
units "seconds";
description
"The maximum time that the PCEP entity will wait
for a response to a PCReq message.";
}
leaf max-sessions {
type uint32;
description
"Maximum number of sessions involving this PCEP
entity that can exist at any time.";
}
leaf max-unknown-reqs {
type uint32;
default "5";
description
"The maximum number of unrecognized requests and
replies that any session on this PCEP entity is
willing to accept per minute before terminating
the session.
A PCRep message contains an unrecognized reply
if it contains an RP object whose request ID
does not correspond to any in-progress request
sent by this PCEP entity.
A PCReq message contains an unrecognized request
if it contains an RP object whose request ID is
zero.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf max-unknown-msgs {
type uint32;
default "5";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"The maximum number of unknown messages that any
session on this PCEP entity is willing to accept
per minute before terminating the session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf pcep-notification-max-rate {
type uint32;
mandatory true;
description
"This variable indicates the maximum number of
notifications issued per second. If events
occur more rapidly, the implementation may
simply fail to emit these notifications during
that period, or may queue them until an
appropriate time. A value of 0 means no
notifications are emitted and all should be
discarded (that is, not queued).";
}
container stateful-parameter {
if-feature "stateful";
description
"The configured stateful PCE parameters";
leaf state-timeout {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"When a PCEP session is terminated, a PCC
waits for this time period before flushing
LSP state associated with that PCEP session
and reverting to operator-defined default
parameters or behaviours.";
}
leaf redelegation-timeout {
when "../../role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"This field is applicable when the role is
PCC";
}
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"When a PCEP session is terminated, a PCC
waits for this time period before revoking
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
LSP delegation to a PCE and attempting to
redelegate LSPs associated with the
terminated PCEP session to an alternate
PCE.";
}
leaf rpt-non-pcep-lsp {
when "../../role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"This field is applicable when the role is
PCC";
}
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"If set, a PCC reports LSPs that are not
controlled by any PCE (for example, LSPs
that are statically configured at the
PCC). ";
}
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
container of-list {
when "../role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"These field are applicable when the role is
PCE";
}
if-feature "objective-function";
uses of-list;
description
"The authorized OF-List at PCE for all peers";
}
container lsp-db {
if-feature "stateful";
config false;
description
"The LSP-DB";
leaf db-ver {
when "../../role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"This field is applicable when the role is
PCC";
}
if-feature "sync-opt";
type uint64;
description
"The LSP State Database Version Number";
}
list association-list {
if-feature "association";
key "type id source global-source extended-id";
description
"List of all PCEP associations";
reference
"RFC 8697: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing
Relationships between Sets of Label Switched
Paths (LSPs)";
leaf type {
type identityref {
base te-types:association-type;
}
description
"The PCEP Association Type";
reference
"IANA PCEP: ASSOCIATION Type Field in Path
Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers";
}
leaf id {
type uint16;
description
"PCEP Association ID";
}
leaf source {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"PCEP Association Source.";
}
leaf global-source {
type uint32;
description
"PCEP Global Association Source.";
}
leaf extended-id {
type string;
description
"Additional information to support unique
identification (Extended Association ID).";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
list lsp {
key "plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id";
description
"List of all LSP in this association";
leaf plsp-id {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "lsp/plsp-id";
}
description
"Reference to PLSP-ID in LSP-DB";
}
leaf pcc-id {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "lsp/pcc-id";
}
description
"Reference to PCC-ID in LSP-DB";
}
leaf lsp-id {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "lsp/lsp-id";
}
description
"Reference to LSP ID in LSP-DB";
}
}
}
list lsp {
key "plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id";
description
"List of all LSPs in LSP-DB";
leaf plsp-id {
type uint32 {
range "1..1048575";
}
description
"A PCEP-specific identifier for the LSP. A PCC
creates a unique PLSP-ID for each LSP that is
constant for the lifetime of a PCEP session.
PLSP-ID is 20 bits with 0 and 0xFFFFF are
reserved";
}
leaf pcc-id {
type inet:ip-address;
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"The local internet address of the PCC, that
generated the PLSP-ID.";
}
leaf source {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Tunnel sender address extracted from
LSP-IDENTIFIERS TLV";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf destination {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Tunnel endpoint address extracted from
LSP-IDENTIFIERS TLV";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf tunnel-id {
type uint16;
description
"Tunnel identifier used in the LSP-IDENTIFIERS
TLV that remains constant over the life
of the tunnel.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf lsp-id {
type uint16;
description
"Identifier used in the LSP-IDENTIFIERS TLV
that can be changed to allow a sender to share
resources with itself.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf extended-tunnel-id {
type inet:ip-address;
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"Extended Tunnel ID of the LSP in LSP-IDENTIFIERS
TLV.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf admin-state {
type boolean;
default "true";
description
"The desired operational state";
}
leaf operational-state {
type operational-state;
description
"The operational status of the LSP";
}
container delegated {
description
"The delegation related parameters";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"LSP is delegated or not; set to true when
delegated";
}
leaf peer {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
must '(../enabled = true())' {
error-message "The LSP must be delegated";
}
description
"At the PCC, the reference to the PCEP peer to
which LSP is delegated; At the PCE, the
reference to the PCEP peer which delegated this
LSP";
}
leaf srp-id {
type uint32 {
range "1..4294967294";
}
description
"The last SRP-ID-number associated with this
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
LSP.";
}
}
container initiation {
if-feature "pce-initiated";
description
"The PCE initiation related parameters";
reference
"RFC 8281: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP
Setup in a Stateful PCE Model";
leaf enabled {
type boolean;
default "false";
description
"Set to true if this LSP is initiated by a PCE";
}
leaf peer {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
must '(../enabled = true())' {
error-message "The LSP must be PCE-Initiated";
}
description
"At the PCC, the reference to the PCEP peer
that initiated this LSP; At the PCE, the
reference to the PCEP peer where the LSP
is initiated";
}
}
leaf symbolic-path-name {
type string;
description
"The symbolic path name associated with the LSP.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf last-error {
type identityref {
base lsp-error;
}
description
"The last error for the LSP.";
}
leaf pst {
type identityref {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
base te-types:path-signaling-type;
}
default "te-types:path-setup-rsvp";
description
"The Path Setup Type (PST)";
reference
"RFC 8408: Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Messages";
}
list association-list {
if-feature "association";
key "type id source global-source extended-id";
description
"List of all PCEP associations";
leaf type {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "association-list/type";
}
description
"PCEP Association Type";
}
leaf id {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "association-list/id";
}
description
"PCEP Association ID";
}
leaf source {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "association-list/source";
}
description
"PCEP Association Source.";
}
leaf global-source {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "association-list/global-source";
}
description
"PCEP Association Global Source.";
}
leaf extended-id {
type leafref {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
path "/pcep/entity/lsp-db/"
+ "association-list/extended-id";
}
description
"Additional information to
support unique identification.";
}
reference
"RFC 8697: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing
Relationships between Sets of Label Switched
Paths (LSPs)";
}
}
}
container path-keys {
when "../role = 'pce' or ../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"These fields are applicable when the role is
PCE";
}
if-feature "path-key";
config false;
description
"The path-keys generated by the PCE";
reference
"RFC 5520: Preserving Topology Confidentiality
in Inter-Domain Path Computation Using a Path-
Key-Based Mechanism";
list path-keys {
key "path-key";
description
"The list of path-keys generated by the PCE";
leaf path-key {
type uint16;
description
"The identifier, or token used to represent
the Confidential Path Segment (CPS) within
the context of the PCE";
}
container cps {
description
"The Confidential Path Segment (CPS)";
list explicit-route-objects {
key "index";
description
"List of explicit route objects";
leaf index {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
type uint32;
description
"ERO subobject index";
}
uses te-types:explicit-route-hop;
}
}
leaf pcc-original {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
description
"Reference to PCC peer address of
the original request";
}
leaf req-id {
type uint32;
description
"The request ID of the original PCReq.";
}
leaf retrieved {
type boolean;
description
"If path-key has been retrieved yet";
}
leaf pcc-retrieved {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
must '(../retrieved = true())' {
error-message "The Path-key should be retrieved";
}
description
"Reference to PCC peer address which
retreived the path-key";
}
leaf creation-time {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value at the time this Path-Key
was created.";
}
leaf discard-time {
type uint32;
units "minutes";
description
"A time after which this path-keys will be
discarded";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
leaf reuse-time {
type uint32;
units "minutes";
description
"A time after which this path-keys could be
reused";
}
}
}
container peers {
description
"The list of configured peers for the
entity (remote PCE)";
list peer {
key "addr";
description
"The peer configured for the entity.
(remote PCE)";
leaf addr {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"The local Internet address of this
PCEP peer.";
}
leaf role {
type pcep-role;
mandatory true;
description
"The role of the PCEP Peer.
Takes one of the following values.
- unknown(0): this PCEP peer role is not
known.
- pcc(1): this PCEP peer is a PCC.
- pce(2): this PCEP peer is a PCE.
- pcc-and-pce(3): this PCEP peer
is both a PCC and a PCE.";
}
leaf description {
type string;
description
"Description of the PCEP peer
configured by the user";
}
uses info {
description
"PCE Peer information";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
container pce-info {
uses pce-info {
description
"PCE Peer information";
}
description
"The PCE Peer information";
}
leaf delegation-pref {
if-feature "stateful";
type uint8 {
range "0..7";
}
description
"The PCE peer delegation preference.";
}
container auth {
description
"The Authentication options";
choice auth-type-selection {
description
"Options for expressing authentication
setting.";
case auth-key-chain {
leaf key-chain {
type key-chain:key-chain-ref;
description
"key-chain name.";
}
}
case auth-key {
leaf crypto-algorithm {
type identityref {
base key-chain:crypto-algorithm;
}
mandatory true;
description
"Cryptographic algorithm associated
with key.";
}
choice key-string-style {
description
"Key string styles";
case keystring {
leaf keystring {
nacm:default-deny-all;
type string;
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"Key string in ASCII format.";
}
}
case hexadecimal {
if-feature "key-chain:hex-key-string";
leaf hexadecimal-string {
nacm:default-deny-all;
type yang:hex-string;
description
"Key in hexadecimal string format. When
compared to ASCII, specification in
hexadecimal affords greater key entropy
with the same number of internal
key-string octets. Additionally, it
discourages usage of well-known words or
numbers.";
}
}
}
}
case auth-tls {
if-feature "tls";
choice role {
description
"The role of the local entity";
case server {
container tls-server {
uses tlss:tls-server-grouping {
description
"Server TLS information.";
}
description
"TLS related information";
}
}
case client {
container tls-client {
uses tlsc:tls-client-grouping {
description
"Client TLS information.";
}
description
"TLS related information";
}
}
}
}
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
leaf discontinuity-time {
type yang:timestamp;
config false;
description
"The timestamp of the time when the information and
statistics were last reset.";
}
leaf initiate-session {
type boolean;
config false;
description
"Indicates whether the local PCEP entity initiates
sessions to this peer, or waits for the peer to
initiate a session.";
}
leaf session-exists {
type boolean;
config false;
description
"Indicates whether a session with
this peer currently exists.";
}
leaf session-up-time {
type yang:timestamp;
config false;
description
"The timestamp value of the last time a
session with this peer was successfully
established.";
}
leaf session-fail-time {
type yang:timestamp;
config false;
description
"The timestamp value of the last time a
session with this peer failed to be
established.";
}
leaf session-fail-up-time {
type yang:timestamp;
config false;
description
"The timestamp value of the last time a
session with this peer failed from
active.";
}
container sessions {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
config false;
description
"This entry represents a single PCEP
session in which the local PCEP entity participates.
This entry exists only if the corresponding PCEP
session has been initialized by some event, such as
manual user configuration, auto-discovery of a peer,
or an incoming TCP connection.";
list session {
key "initiator";
description
"The list of sessions, note that for a time being
two sessions may exist for a peer";
leaf initiator {
type pcep-initiator;
description
"The initiator of the session,that is, whether
the TCP connection was initiated by the local
PCEP entity or the peer.
There is a window during session
initialization where two sessions can exist
between a pair of PCEP speakers, each
initiated by one of the speakers. One of
these sessions is always discarded before it
leaves OpenWait state. However, before it is
discarded, two sessions to the given peer
appear transiently in this YANG module. The
sessions are distinguished by who initiated
them, and so this field is the key.";
}
leaf role {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/role";
}
description
"The reference to peer role .";
}
leaf state-last-change {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value at the time this
session entered its current state as
denoted by the state leaf.";
}
leaf state {
type pcep-sess-state;
description
"The current state of the session.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
The set of possible states excludes the
idle state since entries do not exist
in the idle state.";
}
leaf session-creation {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value at the time this
session was created.";
}
leaf connect-retry {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of times that the local PCEP
entity has attempted to establish a TCP
connection for this session without
success. The PCEP entity gives up when
this reaches connect-max-retry.";
}
leaf local-id {
type uint8;
description
"The value of the PCEP session ID used by
the local PCEP entity in the Open message
for this session. If state is tcp-pending
then this is the session ID that will be
used in the Open message. Otherwise, this
is the session ID that was sent in the
Open message.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf remote-id {
type uint8;
must "((../state != 'tcp-pending'"
+ "and "
+ "../state != 'open-wait' )"
+ "or "
+ "((../state = 'tcp-pending'"
+ " or "
+ "../state = 'open-wait' )"
+ "and (. = 0)))" {
error-message "Invalid remote-id";
description
"If state is TCPPending or OpenWait then
this leaf is not used and MUST be set to
zero.";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
description
"The value of the PCEP session ID used by the
peer in its Open message for this session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf keepalive-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
must "(../state = 'session-up'"
+ "or "
+ "(../state != 'session-up'"
+ "and (. = 0)))" {
error-message "Invalid Keepalive timer";
description
"This field is used if and only if state is
session-up. Otherwise, it is not used and
MUST be set to zero.";
}
description
"The agreed maximum interval at which the local
PCEP entity transmits PCEP messages on this PCEP
session. Zero means that the local PCEP entity
never sends Keepalives on this session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf peer-keepalive-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
must "(../state = 'session-up'"
+ "or "
+ "(../state != 'session-up'"
+ "and "
+ "(. = 0)))" {
error-message "Invalid Peer Keepalive timer";
description
"This field is used if and only if state is
session-up. Otherwise, it is not used and MUST
be set to zero.";
}
description
"The agreed maximum interval at which the peer
transmits PCEP messages on this PCEP session.
Zero means that the peer never sends Keepalives
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
on this session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf dead-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
description
"The DeadTimer interval for this PCEP session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf peer-dead-timer {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
must "((../state != 'tcp-pending'"
+ "and "
+ "../state != 'open-wait' )"
+ "or "
+ "((../state = 'tcp-pending'"
+ " or "
+ "../state = 'open-wait' )"
+ "and "
+ "(. = 0)))" {
error-message "Invalid Peer DeadTimer";
description
"If state is TCPPending or OpenWait then this
leaf is not used and MUST be set to zero.";
}
description
"The peer's DeadTimer interval
for this PCEP session.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf ka-hold-time-rem {
type uint8;
units "seconds";
must "((../state != 'tcp-pending'"
+ "and "
+ "../state != 'open-wait' ) "
+ "or "
+ "((../state = 'tcp-pending'"
+ "or "
+ "../state = 'open-wait' )"
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+ "and "
+ "(. = 0)))" {
error-message
"Invalid Keepalive hold time remaining";
description
"If state is TCPPending or OpenWait then this
field is not used and MUST be set to zero.";
}
description
"The Keepalive hold time remaining for this
session.";
}
leaf overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the local PCEP entity has informed the peer that
it is currently overloaded, then this is set to true.
Otherwise, it is set to false.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf overloaded-timestamp {
when '(../overloaded = true())' {
description
"Valid when overloaded";
}
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
overloaded field was set to true.";
}
leaf overload-time {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
must '((../overloaded = true()) '
+ 'or ((../overloaded != true()) '
+ 'and (. = 0)))' {
error-message "Invalid overload-time";
description
"This field is only used if overloaded is set to
true. Otherwise, it is not used and MUST be set
to zero.";
}
description
"The interval of time that is remaining until the
local PCEP entity will cease to be overloaded on
this session.";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf peer-overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the peer has informed the local PCEP entity
that it is currently overloaded, then this is
set to true. Otherwise, it is set to false.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
leaf peer-overloaded-timestamp {
when '(../peer-overloaded = true())' {
description
"Valid when Peer is overloaded";
}
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
peer-overloaded field was set to true.";
}
leaf peer-overload-time {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
must '((../peer-overloaded = '
+ 'true()) or '
+ '((../peer-overloaded !='
+ 'true())'
+ ' and '
+ '(. = 0)))' {
error-message "Invalid peer overload time";
description
"This field is only used if peer-overloaded
is set to true. Otherwise, it is not used
and MUST be set to zero.";
}
description
"The interval of time that is remaining until
the peer will cease to be overloaded. If it
is not known how long the peer will stay in
overloaded state, this leaf is set to zero.";
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol (PCEP)";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
leaf lspdb-sync {
if-feature "stateful";
type sync-state;
description
"The LSP-DB state synchronization status.";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
leaf recv-db-ver {
when "../role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"This field is applicable when the role is
PCC";
}
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
type uint64;
description
"The last received LSP State Database Version
Number";
reference
"RFC 8231: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE";
}
container of-list {
when "../role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"These fields are applicable when the role is
PCE";
}
if-feature "objective-function";
uses of-list;
description
"Indicate the list of supported OF on this
session";
reference
"RFC 5541: Encoding of Objective Functions in
the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
container pst-list {
when "../role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+ "../role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"These fields are applicable when the role is
PCE";
}
description
"Indicate the list of supported
PST on this session";
reference
"RFC 8408: Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Messages";
list path-setup-type {
key "pst";
description
"The list of PST";
leaf pst {
type identityref {
base te-types:path-signaling-type;
}
description
"The PST supported";
}
}
}
container assoc-type-list {
if-feature "association";
description
"Indicate the list of supported association types
on this session";
reference
"RFC 8697: Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing
Relationships between Sets of Label Switched
Paths (LSPs)";
list assoc-type {
key "at";
description
"The list of authorized association types";
leaf at {
type identityref {
base te-types:association-type;
}
description
"The association type authorized";
}
}
}
leaf speaker-entity-id {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
if-feature "sync-opt";
type string;
description
"The Speaker Entity Identifier";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched
Path State Synchronization Procedures for
a Stateful PCE";
}
}
// session
}
// sessions
}
//peer
}
//peers
}
//entity
}
//pcep
/*
* Notifications
*/
notification pcep-session-up {
description
"This notification is sent when the value of
'/pcep/peers/peer/sessions/session/state'
enters the 'session-up' state.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
uses notification-session-hdr;
leaf state-last-change {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value at the time this session
entered its current state as denoted by the state
leaf.";
}
leaf state {
type pcep-sess-state;
description
"The current state of the session.
The set of possible states excludes the idle state
since entries do not exist in the idle state.";
}
reference
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
notification pcep-session-down {
description
"This notification is sent when the value of
'/pcep/peers/peer/sessions/session/state'
leaves the 'session-up' state.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
leaf session-initiator {
type pcep-initiator;
description
"The initiator of the session.";
}
leaf state-last-change {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value at the time this session
entered its current state as denoted by the state
leaf.";
}
leaf state {
type pcep-sess-state;
description
"The current state of the session.
The set of possible states excludes the idle state
since entries do not exist in the idle state.";
}
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
notification pcep-session-local-overload {
description
"This notification is sent when the local PCEP entity
enters overload state for a peer.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
uses notification-session-hdr;
leaf overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the local PCEP entity has informed the peer
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
that it is currently overloaded, then this is set
to true. Otherwise, it is set to false.";
}
leaf overloaded-timestamp {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
overloaded field was set to true.";
}
leaf overload-time {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"The interval of time that is remaining until the
local PCEP entity will cease to be overloaded on
this session.";
}
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
notification pcep-session-local-overload-clear {
description
"This notification is sent when the local PCEP entity
leaves overload state for a peer.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
leaf overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the local PCEP entity has informed the peer
that it is currently overloaded, then this is set
to true. Otherwise, it is set to false.";
}
leaf overloaded-clear-timestamp {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
overloaded field was set to false.";
}
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
notification pcep-session-peer-overload {
description
"This notification is sent when a peer enters overload
state.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
uses notification-session-hdr;
leaf peer-overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the peer has informed the local PCEP entity that
it is currently overloaded, then this is set to
true. Otherwise, it is set to false.";
}
leaf peer-overloaded-timestamp {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
peer-overloaded field was set to true.";
}
leaf peer-overload-time {
type uint32;
units "seconds";
description
"The interval of time that is remaining until the
peer will cease to be overloaded. If it is not
known how long the peer will stay in overloaded
state, this leaf is set to zero.";
}
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
notification pcep-session-peer-overload-clear {
description
"This notification is sent when a peer leaves overload
state.";
uses notification-instance-hdr;
leaf peer-overloaded {
type boolean;
description
"If the peer has informed the local PCEP entity that
it is currently overloaded, then this is set to
true. Otherwise, it is set to false.";
}
leaf peer-overloaded-clear-timestamp {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
peer-overloaded field was set to false.";
}
reference
"RFC 5440: Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication
Protocol (PCEP)";
}
//notification
/*
* RPC
*/
rpc trigger-resync {
if-feature "stateful";
if-feature "sync-opt";
description
"Trigger the resynchronization at the PCE";
reference
"RFC 8232: Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE";
input {
leaf pcc {
type leafref {
path "/pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr";
}
description
"The IP address to identify the PCC. The state
syncronization is re-triggered for all LSPs from
the PCC. The rpc on the PCC will be ignored.";
}
}
//input
}
//rpc
}
<CODE ENDS>
9.2. ietf-pcep-stats module
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-pcep-stats@2021-10-23.yang"
module ietf-pcep-stats {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep-stats";
prefix pcep-stats;
import ietf-pcep {
prefix pcep;
reference
"RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Path Computation
Element Communications Protocol (PCEP)";
}
import ietf-yang-types {
prefix yang;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types";
}
organization
"IETF PCE (Path Computation Element) Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/pce/>
WG List: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
Editor: Dhruv Dhody
<mailto:dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>";
description
"The YANG module augments the PCEP yang operational
model with statistics, counters and telemetry data.
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see the
RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2021-10-23 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Path Computation
Element Communications Protocol (PCEP)";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
/*
* Groupings
*/
grouping pcep-stats {
description
"This grouping defines statistics for PCEP. It is used
for both peer and current session.";
leaf discontinuity-time {
type yang:timestamp;
description
"The timestamp value of the time when the
statistics were last reset.";
}
leaf rsp-time-avg {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type uint32;
units "milliseconds";
description
"The average response time. If an average response time
has not been calculated then this leaf has the value
zero.";
}
leaf rsp-time-lwm {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type uint32;
units "milliseconds";
description
"The smallest (low-water mark) response time seen.
If no responses have been received then this leaf has
the value zero.";
}
leaf rsp-time-hwm {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type uint32;
units "milliseconds";
description
"The greatest (high-water mark) response time seen.
If no responses have been received then this object
has the value zero.";
}
leaf num-pcreq-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCReq messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcreq-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCReq messages received.";
}
leaf num-pcrep-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCRep messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcrep-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCRep messages received.";
}
leaf num-pcerr-sent {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCErr messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcerr-rcvd {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCErr messages received.";
}
leaf num-pcntf-sent {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCNtf messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcntf-rcvd {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCNtf messages received.";
}
leaf num-keepalive-sent {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of Keepalive messages sent.";
}
leaf num-keepalive-rcvd {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of Keepalive messages received.";
}
leaf num-unknown-rcvd {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of unknown messages received.";
}
leaf num-corrupt-rcvd {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of corrupted PCEP message received.";
}
leaf num-req-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests sent. A request corresponds
1:1 with an RP object in a PCReq message. This might
be greater than num-pcreq-sent because multiple
requests can be batched into a single PCReq
message.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-pend-rep {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been sent for
which a response is still pending.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-ero-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been sent for
which a response with an ERO object was received.
Such responses indicate that a path was
successfully computed by the peer.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-nopath-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"The number of requests that have been sent for
which a response with a NO-PATH object was
received. Such responses indicate that the peer
could not find a path to satisfy the
request.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-cancel-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were cancelled with
a PCNtf message. This might be different than
num-pcntf-rcvd because not all PCNtf messages are
used to cancel requests, and a single PCNtf message
can cancel multiple requests.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-error-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were rejected with a
PCErr message. This might be different than
num-pcerr-rcvd because not all PCErr messages are
used to reject requests, and a single PCErr message
can reject multiple requests.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-timeout {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been sent to a peer
and have been abandoned because the peer has taken too
long to respond to them.";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
leaf num-req-sent-cancel-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were sent to the peer and
explicitly cancelled by the local PCEP entity sending
a PCNtf.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests received. A request
corresponds 1:1 with an RP object in a PCReq
message.
This might be greater than num-pcreq-rcvd because
multiple requests can be batched into a single
PCReq message.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-pend-rep {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been received for
which a response is still pending.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-ero-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been received for
which a response with an ERO object was sent. Such
responses indicate that a path was successfully
computed by the local PCEP entity.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-nopath-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that have been received for
which a response with a NO-PATH object was sent. Such
responses indicate that the local PCEP entity could
not find a path to satisfy the request.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-cancel-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests received that were cancelled
by the local PCEP entity sending a PCNtf message.
This might be different than num-pcntf-sent because
not all PCNtf messages are used to cancel requests,
and a single PCNtf message can cancel multiple
requests.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-error-sent {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests received that were cancelled
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
by the local PCEP entity sending a PCErr message.
This might be different than num-pcerr-sent because
not all PCErr messages are used to cancel requests,
and a single PCErr message can cancel multiple
requests.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-cancel-rcvd {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were received from the
peer and explicitly cancelled by the peer sending
a PCNtf.";
}
leaf num-rep-rcvd-unknown {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of responses to unknown requests
received. A response to an unknown request is a
response whose RP object does not contain the
request ID of any request that is currently
outstanding on the session.";
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-unknown {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of unknown requests that have been
received. An unknown request is a request
whose RP object contains a request ID of zero.";
}
container svec {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
if-feature "pcep:svec";
description
"If synchronized path computation is supported";
leaf num-svec-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of SVEC objects sent in PCReq messages.
An SVEC object represents a set of synchronized
requests.";
}
leaf num-svec-req-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests sent that appeared in one
or more SVEC objects.";
}
leaf num-svec-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of SVEC objects received in PCReq
messages. An SVEC object represents a set of
synchronized requests.";
}
leaf num-svec-req-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests received that appeared
in one or more SVEC objects.";
}
}
//svec
container stateful {
if-feature "pcep:stateful";
description
"Stateful PCE related statistics";
leaf num-pcrpt-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCRpt messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcrpt-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCRpt messages received.";
}
leaf num-pcupd-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCUpd messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcupd-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCUpd messages received.";
}
leaf num-rpt-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP Reports sent. A LSP report
corresponds 1:1 with an LSP object in a PCRpt
message. This might be greater than
num-pcrpt-sent because multiple reports can
be batched into a single PCRpt message.";
}
leaf num-rpt-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP Reports received. A LSP report
corresponds 1:1 with an LSP object in a PCRpt
message.
This might be greater than num-pcrpt-rcvd because
multiple reports can be batched into a single
PCRpt message.";
}
leaf num-rpt-rcvd-error-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of reports of LSPs received that were
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 90]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
responded by the local PCEP entity by sending a
PCErr message.";
}
leaf num-upd-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP updates sent. A LSP update
corresponds 1:1 with an LSP object in a PCUpd
message. This might be greater than
num-pcupd-sent because multiple updates can
be batched into a single PCUpd message.";
}
leaf num-upd-rcvd {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP Updates received. A LSP update
corresponds 1:1 with an LSP object in a PCUpd
message.
This might be greater than num-pcupd-rcvd because
multiple updates can be batched into a single
PCUpd message.";
}
leaf num-upd-rcvd-unknown {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of updates to unknown LSPs
received. An update to an unknown LSP is a
update whose LSP object does not contain the
PLSP-ID of any LSP that is currently
present.";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 91]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
leaf num-upd-rcvd-undelegated {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of updates to not delegated LSPs
received. An update to an undelegated LSP is a
update whose LSP object does not contain the
PLSP-ID of any LSP that is currently
delegated to current PCEP session.";
}
leaf num-upd-rcvd-error-sent {
when "../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of updates to LSPs received that were
responded by the local PCEP entity by sending a
PCErr message.";
}
container initiation {
if-feature "pcep:pce-initiated";
description
"PCE-Initiated related statistics";
leaf num-pcinitiate-sent {
when "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCInitiate messages sent.";
}
leaf num-pcinitiate-rcvd {
when "../../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 92]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of PCInitiate messages received.";
}
leaf num-initiate-sent {
when "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP Initiation sent via PCE.
A LSP initiation corresponds 1:1 with an LSP
object in a PCInitiate message. This might be
greater than num-pcinitiate-sent because
multiple initiations can be batched into a
single PCInitiate message.";
}
leaf num-initiate-rcvd {
when "../../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of LSP Initiation received from
PCE. A LSP initiation corresponds 1:1 with
an LSP object in a PCInitiate message. This
might be greater than num-pcinitiate-rcvd
because multiple initiations can be batched
into a single PCInitiate message.";
}
leaf num-initiate-rcvd-error-sent {
when "../../../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 93]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"The number of initiations of LSPs received
that were responded by the local PCEP entity
by sending a PCErr message.";
}
}
//initiation
}
//stateful
container path-key {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
if-feature "pcep:path-key";
description
"If Path-Key is supported";
leaf num-unknown-path-key {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of attempts to expand an unknown
path-key.";
}
leaf num-exp-path-key {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of attempts to expand an expired
path-key.";
}
leaf num-dup-path-key {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of duplicate attempts to expand same
path-key.";
}
leaf num-path-key-no-attempt {
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of expired path-keys with no attempt to
expand it.";
}
}
//path-key
}
//pcep-stats
/*
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 94]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
* Augment modules to add statistics
*/
augment "/pcep:pcep/pcep:entity/pcep:peers/pcep:peer" {
description
"Augmenting the statistics";
leaf num-sess-setup-ok {
type yang:counter32;
config false;
description
"The number of PCEP sessions successfully established with
the peer, including any current session. This counter is
incremented each time a session with this peer is
successfully established.";
}
leaf num-sess-setup-fail {
type yang:counter32;
config false;
description
"The number of PCEP sessions with the peer
that have been attempted but failed
before being fully established. This
counter is incremented each time a
session retry to this peer fails.";
}
container pcep-stats {
config false;
description
"The container for all statistics at peer level.";
uses pcep-stats {
description
"Since PCEP sessions can be ephemeral, the peer statistics
tracks a peer even when no PCEP session currently exists
to that peer. The statistics contained are an aggregate of
the statistics for all successive sessions to that peer.";
}
leaf num-req-sent-closed {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pce'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCE";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were sent to the peer and
implicitly cancelled when the session they were sent
over was closed.";
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 95]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
}
leaf num-req-rcvd-closed {
when "../../pcep:role = 'pcc'"
+ "or "
+ "../../pcep:role = 'pcc-and-pce'" {
description
"Valid for PCEP Peer as PCC";
}
type yang:counter32;
description
"The number of requests that were received from the peer
and implicitly cancelled when the session they were
received over was closed.";
}
}
//pcep-stats
}
//augment
augment "/pcep:pcep/pcep:entity/pcep:peers/pcep:peer/"
+ "pcep:sessions/pcep:session" {
description
"Augmenting the statistics";
container pcep-stats {
description
"The container for all statistics at session level.";
uses pcep-stats {
description
"The statistics contained are for the current sessions to
that peer. These are lost when the session goes down.";
}
}
//pcep-stats
}
//augment
}
<CODE ENDS>
10. Security Considerations
The YANG modules defined in this document is designed to be accessed
via network management protocol such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF
[RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport layer
and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is SSH [RFC6242].
The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement
secure transport is TLS [RFC8446]
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 96]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
The NETCONF access control model [RFC8341] provides the means to
restrict access for particular NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a pre-
configured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol
operations and content.
There are a number of data nodes defined in the ietf-pcep YANG module
which are writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true, which is
the default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or
vulnerable in some network environments. Write operations (e.g.,
<edit-config>) to these data nodes without proper protection can have
a negative effect on network operations. These are the subtrees and
data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
/pcep/entity/ - configure local parameters, capabilities etc.
/pcep/entity/peers - configure remote peers to setup PCEP session.
Unauthorized access to above list can adversely affect the PCEP
session between the local entity and the peers. This may lead to
inability to compute new paths, stateful operations on the delegated
as well as PCE-initiated LSPs.
Some of the readable data nodes in the ietf-pcep YANG module may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It
is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config,
or notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and
data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
/pcep/lsp-db - All the LSPs in the network. Unauthorized access
to this could provide the all path and network usage information.
/pcep/path-keys/ - The Confidential Path Segments (CPS) are hidden
using path-keys. Unauthorized access to this could leak
confidential path information.
Some of the RPC operations in the ietf-pcep YANG module may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It
is thus important to control access to these operations. These are
the operations and their sensitivity/vulnerability:
trigger-resync - trigger resynchronization with the PCE.
Unauthorized access to this could force a PCEP session into
continuous state synchronization.
Further, this document also include another YANG module (called ietf-
pcep-stats) for maintaining the statistics by augmenting the ietf-
pcep YANG module. There are no data nodes defined in this module
which are writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., config true). The
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 97]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered sensitive
or vulnerable in some network environments. The statistics could
provide information related to the current usage patterns of the
network. It is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get,
get-config, or notification).
The actual authentication key data (whether locally specified or part
of a key-chain) is sensitive and needs to be kept secret from
unauthorized parties; compromise of the key data would allow an
attacker to forge PCEP traffic that would be accepted as authentic,
potentially compromising the TE domain.
The model describes several notifications, implementations must rate-
limit the generation of these notifications to avoid creating
significant notification load. Otherwise, this notification load may
have some side effects on the system stability and may be exploited
as an attack vector.
11. IANA Considerations
This document request the IANA to register two URIs in the "IETF XML
Registry" [RFC3688]. Following the format in RFC 3688, the following
registrations are requested -
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep
Registrant Contact: The IESG
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep-stats
Registrant Contact: The IESG
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document request the IANA to register two YANG modules in the
"YANG Module Names" registry [RFC6020], as follows -
Name: ietf-pcep
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep
Prefix: pcep
Reference: [This.I-D]
Name: ietf-pcep-stats
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-pcep-stats
Prefix: pcep-stats
Reference: [This.I-D]
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 98]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
12. Implementation Status
[Note to the RFC Editor - remove this section before publication, as
well as remove the reference to RFC 7942.]
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
The description of implementations in this section is intended to
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.
According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
Currently, there are no known implementations of the YANG Module as
specified.
13. Acknowledgements
The initial document is based on the PCEP MIB [RFC7420]. We would
like to thank the authors of aforementioned documents.
Thanks to Mahesh Jethmalani for the Yang Doctor review.
Thanks to Martin Bjorklund and Tom Petch for providing guidance
regarding the Yang guidelines.
14. References
14.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg]
Litkowski, S., Yeung, D., Lindem, A., Zhang, J., and L.
Lhotka, "YANG Data Model for IS-IS Protocol", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg-
42, 15 October 2019, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/
draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg-42.txt>.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 99]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[I-D.ietf-netconf-tls-client-server]
Watsen, K., "YANG Groupings for TLS Clients and TLS
Servers", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
netconf-tls-client-server-25, 18 June 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-netconf-tls-
client-server-25.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-yang]
Yeung, D., Qu, Y., Zhang, J., Chen, I., and A. Lindem,
"YANG Data Model for OSPF Protocol", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ospf-yang-29, 17 October 2019,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ospf-yang-
29.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te]
Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V. P., Bryskin, I.,
and O. G. D. Dios, "A YANG Data Model for Traffic
Engineering Tunnels, Label Switched Paths and Interfaces",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-
27, 8 July 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-
ietf-teas-yang-te-27.txt>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC5088] Le Roux, JL., Ed., Vasseur, JP., Ed., Ikejiri, Y., and R.
Zhang, "OSPF Protocol Extensions for Path Computation
Element (PCE) Discovery", RFC 5088, DOI 10.17487/RFC5088,
January 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5088>.
[RFC5089] Le Roux, JL., Ed., Vasseur, JP., Ed., Ikejiri, Y., and R.
Zhang, "IS-IS Protocol Extensions for Path Computation
Element (PCE) Discovery", RFC 5089, DOI 10.17487/RFC5089,
January 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5089>.
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 100]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[RFC5520] Bradford, R., Ed., Vasseur, JP., and A. Farrel,
"Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-Domain Path
Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism", RFC 5520,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5520, April 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5520>.
[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>.
[RFC5557] Lee, Y., Le Roux, JL., King, D., and E. Oki, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Requirements and Protocol Extensions in Support of Global
Concurrent Optimization", RFC 5557, DOI 10.17487/RFC5557,
July 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5557>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[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>.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 101]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J.
Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8177>.
[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.
[RFC8232] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., Varga, R., Zhang, X.,
and D. Dhody, "Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE", RFC 8232,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8232, September 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8232>.
[RFC8253] Lopez, D., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Wu, Q., and D. Dhody,
"PCEPS: Usage of TLS to Provide a Secure Transport for the
Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)",
RFC 8253, DOI 10.17487/RFC8253, October 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8253>.
[RFC8281] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Sivabalan, S., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE
Model", RFC 8281, DOI 10.17487/RFC8281, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8281>.
[RFC8306] Zhao, Q., Dhody, D., Ed., Palleti, R., and D. King,
"Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) for Point-to-Multipoint Traffic
Engineering Label Switched Paths", RFC 8306,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8306, November 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8306>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 102]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[RFC8408] Sivabalan, S., Tantsura, J., Minei, I., Varga, R., and J.
Hardwick, "Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Messages", RFC 8408, DOI 10.17487/RFC8408,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8408>.
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
[RFC8664] Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,
and J. Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8664,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8664, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8664>.
[RFC8697] Minei, I., Crabbe, E., Sivabalan, S., Ananthakrishnan, H.,
Dhody, D., and Y. Tanaka, "Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing
Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths
(LSPs)", RFC 8697, DOI 10.17487/RFC8697, January 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8697>.
[RFC8776] Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V., and I. Bryskin,
"Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering",
RFC 8776, DOI 10.17487/RFC8776, June 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8776>.
[RFC8779] Margaria, C., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., and F.
Zhang, Ed., "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for GMPLS", RFC 8779,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8779, July 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8779>.
14.2. Informative References
[IANA-OSPF]
"Path Computation Element (PCE) Capability Flags in Open
Shortest Path First v2 (OSPFv2) Parameters",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters/
ospfv2-parameters.xhtml#ospfv2-parameters-14>.
[IANA-PCEP]
"ASSOCIATION Type Field in Path Computation Element
Protocol (PCEP) Numbers",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/
pcep.xhtml#association-type-field>.
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 103]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.-P., and J. Ash, "A Path
Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655>.
[RFC7420] Koushik, A., Stephan, E., Zhao, Q., King, D., and J.
Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Management Information Base (MIB) Module",
RFC 7420, DOI 10.17487/RFC7420, December 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7420>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
Appendix A. The Full PCEP Data Model
The module, "ietf-pcep", defines the basic components of a PCE
speaker. The tree depth in the tree is set to 10.
module: ietf-pcep
+--rw pcep!
+--rw entity
+--rw addr inet:ip-address
+--rw enabled? boolean
+--rw role pcep-role
+--rw description? string
+--rw speaker-entity-id? string {sync-opt}?
+--rw admin-status? boolean
+--ro index? uint32
+--ro oper-status? pcep-oper-status
+--rw domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw capability
| +--rw capability? bits
| +--rw pce-initiated? boolean {pce-initiated}?
| +--rw include-db-ver? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-resync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-initial-sync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw incremental-sync? boolean {stateful,sync-opt}?
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 104]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--rw sr {sr}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw msd-limit? boolean
| +--rw nai? boolean
+--rw msd? uint8 {sr}?
+--rw pce-info
| +--rw scope
| | +--rw path-scope? bits
| | +--rw intra-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-as-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-layer-pref? uint8
| +--rw neighbour-domains
| | +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| | +--rw domain-type identityref
| | +--rw domain-info domain
| +--rw path-key {path-key}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw discard-timer? uint32
| +--rw reuse-time? uint32
| +--rw pce-id? inet:ip-address
+--rw connect-timer? uint16
+--rw connect-max-retry? uint32
+--rw init-back-off-timer? uint16
+--rw max-back-off-timer? uint32
+--ro open-wait-timer? uint16
+--ro keep-wait-timer? uint16
+--rw keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw dead-timer? uint8
+--rw allow-negotiation? boolean
+--rw max-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw max-dead-timer? uint8
+--rw min-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--rw min-dead-timer? uint8
+--rw sync-timer? uint16 {svec}?
+--rw request-timer? uint16
+--rw max-sessions? uint32
+--rw max-unknown-reqs? uint32
+--rw max-unknown-msgs? uint32
+--rw pcep-notification-max-rate uint32
+--rw stateful-parameter {stateful}?
| +--rw state-timeout? uint32
| +--rw redelegation-timeout? uint32
| +--rw rpt-non-pcep-lsp? boolean
+--rw of-list {objective-function}?
| +--rw objective-function* [of]
| +--rw of identityref
+--ro lsp-db {stateful}?
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 105]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--ro db-ver? uint64 {sync-opt}?
| +--ro association-list*
| | [type id source global-source extended-id]
| | {association}?
| | +--ro type identityref
| | +--ro id uint16
| | +--ro source inet:ip-address
| | +--ro global-source uint32
| | +--ro extended-id string
| | +--ro lsp* [plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id]
| | +--ro plsp-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/plsp-id
| | +--ro pcc-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/pcc-id
| | +--ro lsp-id -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/lsp/lsp-id
| +--ro lsp* [plsp-id pcc-id lsp-id]
| +--ro plsp-id uint32
| +--ro pcc-id inet:ip-address
| +--ro source? inet:ip-address
| +--ro destination? inet:ip-address
| +--ro tunnel-id? uint16
| +--ro lsp-id uint16
| +--ro extended-tunnel-id? inet:ip-address
| +--ro admin-state? boolean
| +--ro operational-state? operational-state
| +--ro delegated
| | +--ro enabled? boolean
| | +--ro peer? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| | +--ro srp-id? uint32
| +--ro initiation {pce-initiated}?
| | +--ro enabled? boolean
| | +--ro peer? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro symbolic-path-name? string
| +--ro last-error? identityref
| +--ro pst? identityref
| +--ro association-list*
| [type id source global-source extended-id]
| {association}?
| +--ro type
| | -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/association-list/type
| +--ro id
| | -> /pcep/entity/lsp-db/association-list/id
| +--ro source leafref
| +--ro global-source leafref
| +--ro extended-id leafref
+--ro path-keys {path-key}?
| +--ro path-keys* [path-key]
| +--ro path-key uint16
| +--ro cps
| | +--ro explicit-route-objects* [index]
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 106]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| | +--ro index uint32
| | +--ro (type)?
| | +--:(numbered-node-hop)
| | | +--ro numbered-node-hop
| | | +--ro node-id te-node-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | +--:(numbered-link-hop)
| | | +--ro numbered-link-hop
| | | +--ro link-tp-id te-tp-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | | +--ro direction? te-link-direction
| | +--:(unnumbered-link-hop)
| | | +--ro unnumbered-link-hop
| | | +--ro link-tp-id te-tp-id
| | | +--ro node-id te-node-id
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | | +--ro direction? te-link-direction
| | +--:(as-number)
| | | +--ro as-number-hop
| | | +--ro as-number inet:as-number
| | | +--ro hop-type? te-hop-type
| | +--:(label)
| | +--ro label-hop
| | +--ro te-label
| | ...
| +--ro pcc-original? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro req-id? uint32
| +--ro retrieved? boolean
| +--ro pcc-retrieved? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro creation-time? yang:timestamp
| +--ro discard-time? uint32
| +--ro reuse-time? uint32
+--rw peers
+--rw peer* [addr]
+--rw addr inet:ip-address
+--rw role pcep-role
+--rw description? string
+--rw domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw capability
| +--rw capability? bits
| +--rw pce-initiated? boolean
| | {pce-initiated}?
| +--rw include-db-ver? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-resync? boolean
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 107]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw trigger-initial-sync? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw incremental-sync? boolean
| | {stateful,sync-opt}?
| +--rw sr {sr}?
| +--rw enabled? boolean
| +--rw msd-limit? boolean
| +--rw nai? boolean
+--rw msd? uint8 {sr}?
+--rw pce-info
| +--rw scope
| | +--rw path-scope? bits
| | +--rw intra-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-area-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-as-pref? uint8
| | +--rw inter-layer-pref? uint8
| +--rw neighbour-domains
| +--rw domains* [domain-type domain-info]
| +--rw domain-type identityref
| +--rw domain-info domain
+--rw delegation-pref? uint8 {stateful}?
+--rw auth
| +--rw (auth-type-selection)?
| +--:(auth-key-chain)
| | +--rw key-chain?
| | key-chain:key-chain-ref
| +--:(auth-key)
| | +--rw crypto-algorithm identityref
| | +--rw (key-string-style)?
| | +--:(keystring)
| | | +--rw keystring? string
| | +--:(hexadecimal)
| | {key-chain:hex-key-string}?
| | +--rw hexadecimal-string?
| | yang:hex-string
| +--:(auth-tls) {tls}?
| +--rw (role)?
| +--:(server)
| | +--rw tls-server
| | ...
| +--:(client)
| +--rw tls-client
| ...
+--ro discontinuity-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro initiate-session? boolean
+--ro session-exists? boolean
+--ro session-up-time? yang:timestamp
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 108]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
+--ro session-fail-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro session-fail-up-time? yang:timestamp
+--ro sessions
+--ro session* [initiator]
+--ro initiator pcep-initiator
+--ro role?
| -> /pcep/entity/role
+--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
+--ro state?
| pcep-sess-state
+--ro session-creation? yang:timestamp
+--ro connect-retry? yang:counter32
+--ro local-id? uint8
+--ro remote-id? uint8
+--ro keepalive-timer? uint8
+--ro peer-keepalive-timer? uint8
+--ro dead-timer? uint8
+--ro peer-dead-timer? uint8
+--ro ka-hold-time-rem? uint8
+--ro overloaded? boolean
+--ro overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+--ro overload-time? uint32
+--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
+--ro peer-overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+--ro peer-overload-time? uint32
+--ro lspdb-sync? sync-state
| {stateful}?
+--ro recv-db-ver? uint64
| {stateful,sync-opt}?
+--ro of-list {objective-function}?
| +--ro objective-function* [of]
| +--ro of identityref
+--ro pst-list
| +--ro path-setup-type* [pst]
| +--ro pst identityref
+--ro assoc-type-list {association}?
| +--ro assoc-type* [at]
| +--ro at identityref
+--ro speaker-entity-id? string
{sync-opt}?
rpcs:
+---x trigger-resync {stateful,sync-opt}?
+---w input
+---w pcc? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
notifications:
+---n pcep-session-up
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 109]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
| +--ro state? pcep-sess-state
+---n pcep-session-down
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator? pcep-initiator
| +--ro state-last-change? yang:timestamp
| +--ro state? pcep-sess-state
+---n pcep-session-local-overload
| +--ro peer-addr? -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro overloaded? boolean
| +--ro overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
| +--ro overload-time? uint32
+---n pcep-session-local-overload-clear
| +--ro peer-addr?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro overloaded? boolean
| +--ro overloaded-clear-timestamp? yang:timestamp
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload
| +--ro peer-addr?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
| +--ro session-initiator?
| | -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/sessions/session/initiator
| +--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
| +--ro peer-overloaded-timestamp? yang:timestamp
| +--ro peer-overload-time? uint32
+---n pcep-session-peer-overload-clear
+--ro peer-addr?
| -> /pcep/entity/peers/peer/addr
+--ro peer-overloaded? boolean
+--ro peer-overloaded-clear-timestamp? yang:timestamp
Appendix B. Example
The example below provide an overview of PCEP peer session
informations and LSP-DB in the Yang Module.
+-------+ +-------+
| | | |
| PCC1 |<---------------->| |
| | | |
+-------+ | |
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 110]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
IP:192.0.2.1 | |
| PCE |
| |
+-------+ | |
| | | |
| PCC2 |<---------------->| |
| | | |
+-------+ | |
IP:192.0.2.2 | |
| |
| |
+-------+ | |
| | | |
| PCC4 |<---------------->| |
| | | |
+-------+ | |
IP:2001:DB8::4 | |
+-------+
IP:192.0.2.3
2001:DB8::3
at PCE:
{
"entity": [
{
"addr": "192.0.2.3",
"oper-status": "oper-status-up",
"role":"pce",
"capability" : {
"stateful": {
"enabled": true
}
}
"lsp-db" : [
"lsp" : {
"plsp-id": 3,
"pcc-id" :"192.0.2.1",
"source": "192.0.2.1",
"destination": "192.0.2.4"
"tunnel-id": 16,
"lsp-id": 3,
"extended-tunnel-id": 0,
"oper-status": "oper-status-up",
"delegated": true,
"symbolic-path-name": "iewauh",
},
"lsp" : {
"plsp-id": 4,
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 111]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"pcc-id" :"192.0.2.2",
"source": "192.0.2.2",
"destination": "192.0.2.5"
"tunnel-id": 17,
"lsp-id": 4
"extended-tunnel-id": 0,
"oper-status": "oper-status-up",
"delegated": true,
"symbolic-path-name": "iewauhiewauh",
"extended-tunnel-id": 0
}
]
"peers":[
{
"peer": {
"addr":"192.0.2.1",
"role": "pcc",
"capability": {
"stateful" : {
"enabled": true,
"active": yes,
}
}
"sessions": [
{
"session": {
"initiator": "remote",
"role": "pcc",
}
}
]
}
},
{
"peer": {
"addr":"192.0.2.2",
"role": "pcc",
"capability": {
"stateful" : {
"enabled": true,
"active": true,
}
}
"sessions": [
{
"session": {
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 112]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
"initiator": "remote",
"role": "pcc",
}
}
]
}
}
]
},
{
"addr": "2001:DB8::3",
"oper-status": "oper-status-up",
"role":"pce",
"peers":[
{
"peer": {
"addr":"2001:DB8::4",
"role": "pcc",
"sessions": [
{
"session": {
"initiator": "remote",
"role": "pcc",
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
Appendix C. Contributor Addresses
Rohit Pobbathi
Nokia Networks
India
EMail: rohit.pobbathi_ashok@nokia.com
Vinod KumarS
Huawei Technologies
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
Bangalore, Karnataka 560066
India
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 113]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
EMail: vinods.kumar@huawei.com
Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems
Canada
EMail: zali@cisco.com
Xufeng Liu
Volta Networks
EMail: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
Young Lee
Samsung
EMail: younglee.tx@gmail.com
Udayasree Palle
EMail: udayasreereddy@gmail.com
Xian Zhang
Huawei Technologies
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129
P.R.China
EMail: zhang.xian@huawei.com
Avantika
ECI Telecom
India
EMail: avantika.srm@gmail.com
Shashikanth
Huawei Technologies
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
Bangalore, Karnataka 560066
India
EMail: shashikanth.vh@huawei.com
Authors' Addresses
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 114]
Internet-Draft PCE-YANG October 2021
Dhruv Dhody (editor)
Huawei Technologies
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
Bangalore 560066
Karnataka
India
Email: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com
Jonathan Hardwick
Metaswitch
100 Church Street
Enfield
EN2 6BQ
United Kingdom
Email: jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com
Vishnu Pavan Beeram
Juniper Networks
India
Email: vbeeram@juniper.net
Jeff Tantsura
Apstra, Inc.
United States of America
Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
Dhody, et al. Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 115]