TEAS Working Group Fabio Peruzzini
Internet Draft TIM
Intended status: Informational Italo Busi
Huawei
Daniel King
Old Dog Consulting
Sergio Belotti
Nokia
Gabriele Galimberti
Cisco
Expires: April 2020 October 31, 2019
Applicability of Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered
Networks (ACTN) to Packet Optical Integration (POI)
draft-peru-teas-actn-poi-applicability-02.txt
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), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 31, 2020.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. 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.
Abstract
This document considers the applicability of ACTN to Packet Optical
Integration (POI) and IP and Optical DWDM domain internetworking,
and specifically the YANG models being defined by the IETF to
support this deployment architecture.
In this document we highlight the IETF protocols and data models
that may be used for the ACTN and control of POI networks, with
particular focus on the interfaces between the MDSC (Multi-Domain
Service Coordinator) and the underlying Packet and Optical Domain
Controllers (P-PNC and O-PNC) to support Packet Optical Integration
(POI) use cases.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3
2. Reference Scenario.............................................4
2.1. Generic Assumptions.......................................6
3. Scenario 1 - Multi-Layer Topology Coordination.................7
3.1. Discovery of existing Och, ODU, IP links, IP tunnels and
IP services...............................................7
3.1.1. Common YANG models used at the MPIs..................7
3.1.1.1. YANG models used at the Optical MPIs............8
3.1.1.2. Required YANG models at the Packet MPIs.........8
3.1.2. Inter-domain link Discovery..........................9
3.2. Provisioning of an IP Link/LAG over DWDM.................10
3.2.1. YANG models used at the MPIs........................10
3.2.1.1. YANG models used at the Optical MPIs...........10
3.2.1.2. Required YANG models at the Packet MPIs........11
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
3.2.2. IP Link Setup Procedure.............................11
3.3. Provisioning of an IP link/LAG over DWDM with path
constraints...................................................12
3.3.1. YANG models used at the MPIs........................12
3.4. Provisioning of an additional link member to an existing
LAG with or without path constraints.....................12
3.4.1. YANG models used at the MPIs........................13
4. Multi-Layer Recovery Coordination.............................13
4.1. Ensuring Network Resiliency during Maintenance Events....13
4.2. Router port failure......................................13
5. Security Considerations.......................................14
6. Operational Considerations....................................14
7. IANA Considerations...........................................15
8. References....................................................15
8.1. Normative References.....................................15
8.2. Informative References...................................16
9. Acknowledgments...............................................16
10. Authors' Addresses...........................................16
1. Introduction
Packet Optical Integration (POI) is an advanced use case of traffic
engineering. In wide area networks, a packet network based on the
Internet Protocol (IP) and possibly Multiprotocol Label Switching
(MPLS) is typically realized on top of an optical transport network
that uses Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM). In many
existing network deployments, the packet and the optical networks
are engineered and operated independently of each other. There are
technical differences between the technologies (e.g., routers vs.
optical switches) and the corresponding network engineering and
planning methods (e.g., inter-domain peering optimization in IP vs.
dealing with physical impairments in DWDM, or very different time
scales). In addition, customers and customer needs can be different
between a packet and an optical network, and it is not uncommon to
use different vendors in both domains. Last but not least, state-of-
the-art packet and optical networks use sophisticated but complex
technologies, and for a network engineer it may not be trivial to be
a full expert in both areas. As a result, packet and optical
networks are often operated in technical and organizational silos.
This separation is inefficient for many reasons. Both capital
expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX) could be
significantly reduced by better integrating the packet and the
optical network. Multi-layer online topology insight can speed up
troubleshooting (e.g., alarm correlation) and network operation
(e.g., coordination of maintenance events), multi-layer offline
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
topology inventory can improve service quality (e.g., detection of
diversity constraint violations) and multi-layer traffic engineering
can use the available network capacity more efficiently (e.g.,
coordination of restoration). In addition, provisioning workflows
can be simplified or automated as needed across layers (e.g, to
achieve bandwidth on demand, or to perform maintenance events).
Fully leveraging these benefits requires an integration between the
management and control of the packet and the optical network. The
Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) framework defines
functions and interfaces between a Multi-Domain Service Coordinator
(MDSC) and Provisioning Network Controllers (PNCs) that can be used
for coordinating the packet and optical layers.
In this document, key use cases for Packet Optical Integration (POI)
are described both from the point of view of the optical and the
packet layer. The objective is to explain the benefit and the impact
for both the packet and the optical layer, and to identify the
required interaction between both layers. Precise definitions of use
cases can help with achieving a common understanding across
different disciplines. The focus of the use cases are IP networks
operated as client of optical DWDM networks. The use cases are
ordered by increasing level of integration and complexity. For each
multi-layer use case, the document analyzes how to use the
interfaces and data models of the ACTN architecture.
Understanding the level of standardization and the gaps will help to
better assess the feasibility of integration between IP and Optical
DWDM domain, in an end-to-end multi-vendor service provisioning
perspective.
2. Reference Scenario
This document is considering a network scenario with multiple
Optical domains and multiple Packet domains.
Figure 1 shows this scenario in case of two Optical domains and two
Packet domains:
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
+----------+
| MDSC |
+-----+----+
|
+-----------+-----+------+-----------+
| | | |
+----+----+ +----+----+ +----+----+ +----+----+
| P-PNC 1 | | O-PNC 1 | | O-PNC 2 | | P-PNC 2 |
+----+----+ +----+----+ +----+----+ +----+----+
| | | |
| \ / |
+-------------------+ \ / +-------------------+
CE / PE ASBR \ | / / ASBR PE \ CE
o--/---o o---\-|-------|--/---o o---\--o
\ : : / | | \ : : /
\ : AS Domain 1 : / | | \ : AS Domain 2 : /
+-:---------------:-+ | | +-:---------------:--+
: : | | : :
: : | | : :
+-:---------------:------+ +-------:---------------:--+
/ : : \ / : : \
/ o...............o \ / o...............o \
\ Optical Domain 1 / \ Optical Domain 2 /
\ / \ /
+------------------------+ +--------------------------+
Figure 1 - Reference Scenario
The ACTN architecture, defined in [RFC8453], is used to control this
multi-domain network where each Packet PNC (P-PNC) is responsible
for controlling its IP domain (AS), and each Optical PNC (O-PNC) is
responsible for controlling its Optical Domain. The MDSC is
responsible for coordinating the whole multi-domain multi-layer
(Packet and Optical) network. A specific standard interface (MPI)
permits MDSC to interact with the different Provisioning Network
Controller (O/P-PNCs). The MPI interface presents an abstracted
topology to MDSC hiding technology-specific aspects of the network
and hiding topology details depending on the policy chosen regarding
the level of abstraction supported. The level of abstraction can be
obtained based on P-PNC and O-PNC configuration parameters (e.g.
provide the potential connectivity between any PE and any ABSR in an
MPLS-TE network).
The MDSC in Figure 1 is responsible for multi-domain and multi-layer
coordination acrosso multiple Packet and Optical domains, as well as
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
to provide IP services to different CNCs at its CMIs (e.g., using
L2SM, L3SM).
The multi-domain coordination mechanisms for the IP tunnels
supporting these IP services are outside the scope of this document
and described in [ACTN-VPN]. In some cases, the MDSC could also rely
on the multi-layer Packet Optical Integration mechanisms, described
in this draft, to support multi-layer optimizations for these IP
services and tunnels.
In the network scenario of Figure 1, it is assumed that:
o The domain boundaries between the IP and Optical domains are
congruent. In other words, one Optical domain supports
connectivity between Routers in one and only one Packet Domain.
o Inter-domain links exist only between Packet domains (i.e.,
between ASBR routers) and between Packet and Optical domains
(i.e., between routers and ROADMs). In other words, there are no
inter-domain links between Optical domains
o The interfaces between the routers and the ROADM's are "Ethernet"
physical interfaces
o The interfaces between the ASBR routers are "Ethernet" physical
interfaces
2.1. Generic Assumptions
This section describes general assumptions which are applicable at
all the MPI interfaces, between each PNC (Optical or Packet) and the
MDSC, and also to all the scenarios discussed in this document.
The data models used on these interfaces are assumed to use the YANG
1.1 Data Modeling Language, as defined in [RFC7950].
The RESTCONF protocol, as defined in [RFC8040], using the JSON
representation, defined in [RFC7951], is assumed to be used at these
interfaces.
As required in [RFC8040], the "ietf-yang-library" YANG module
defined in [RFC8525] is used to allow the MDSC to discover the set
of YANG modules supported by each PNC at its MPI.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
3. Scenario 1 - Multi-Layer Topology Coordination
In this scenario, the MSDC needs to discover the network topology,
at both WDM and IP layers, in terms of nodes (NEs) and links,
including inter AS domain links as well as cross-layer links.
Each PNC provides to the MDSC an abstract topology view of the WDM
or of the IP topology of the domain it controls. This topology is
abstracted in the sense that some detailed NE information is hidden
at the MPI, and all or some of the NEs and related physical links
are exposed as abstract nodes and logical (virtual) links, depending
on the level of abstraction the user want. This detailed information
is key to understand both the inter-AS domain links (seen by each
controller as UNI interfaces but as I-NNI interfaces by the MDSC) as
well as the cross-layer mapping between IP and WDM layer.
The MDSC also maintains an up-to-date network inventory of both IP
and WDM layers through the use of IETF notifications through MPI
with the PNCs.
For the cross-layer links it is key for MDSC to be able to correlate
automatically the information about the physical ports from the
routers (single link or bundle links for LAG) to client ports in the
ROADM.
3.1. Discovery of existing Och, ODU, IP links, IP tunnels and IP
services
In this scenarios MDSC must be able to automatically discover
network topology of both WDM and IP layers (links and NE, links
between two domains).
o An abstract view of the WDM and IP topology must be available.
o MDSC must keep an up-to-date network inventory of both IP and WDM
layers and it should be possible to correlate such information
(e.g.: which port, lambda/OTSi, direction is used by a specific
IP service on the WDM equipment).
o It should be possible at MDSC level to easily correlate WDM and
IP layers alarms to speed-up troubleshooting.
3.1.1. Common YANG models used at the MPIs
Both Optical and Packet PNCs use the following common topology YANG
models at the MPI to report their abstract topologies:
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
o The Base Network Model, defined in the "ietf-network" YANG module
of [RFC8345]
o The Base Network Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-network-
topology" YANG module of [RFC8345], which augments the Base
Network Model
o The TE Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-te-topology" YANG
module of [TE-TOPO], which augments the Base Network Topology
Model
These common YANG models are generic and augmented by technology-
specific YANG modules as described in the following sections.
3.1.1.1. YANG models used at the Optical MPIs
The Optical PNC also uses at least the following technology-specific
topology YANG models, providing WDM and Ethernet technology-specific
augmentations of the generic TE Topology Model:
o The WSON Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-wson-topology" YANG
modules of [WSON-TOPO], or the Flexi-grid Topology Model, defined
in the "ietf-flexi-grid-topology" YANG module of [Flexi-TOPO].
o The Ethernet Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-eth-te-
topology" YANG module of [CLIENT-TOPO]
The WSON Topology Model or, alternatively, the Flexi-grid Topology
model is used to report the DWDM network topology (e.g., ROADMs and
links) depending on whether the DWDM optical network is based on
fixed grid or flexible-grid.
The Ethernet Topology is used to report the access links between the
IP routers and the edge ROADMs.
3.1.1.2. Required YANG models at the Packet MPIs
The Packet PNC also uses at least the following technology-specific
topology YANG models, providing IP and Ethernet technology-specific
augmentations of the generic Topology Models:
o The L3 Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-l3-unicast-topology"
YANG modules of [RFC8346], which augments the Base Network
Topology Model
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
o The Ethernet Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-eth-te-
topology" YANG module of [CLIENT-TOPO], which augments the TE
Topology Model
The Ethernet Topology Model is used to report the access links
between the IP routers and the edge ROADMs as well as the
inter-domain links between ASBRs, while the L3 Topology Model is
used to report the IP network topology (e.g., IP routers and links).
3.1.2. Inter-domain link Discovery
In the reference network of Figure 1, there are two types of
inter-domain links:
o Links between two IP domains (ASes)
o Links between an IP router and a ROADM
Both types of links are Ethernet physical links.
The inter-domain link information is reported to the MDSC by the two
adjacent PNCs, controlling the two ends of the inter-domain link.
The MDSC can understand how to merge these inter-domain links
together using the plug-id attribute defined in the TE Topology
Model [TE-TOPO], as described in as described in section 4.3 of [TE-
TOPO].
A more detailed description of how the plug-id can be used to
discover inter-domain link is also provided in section 5.1.4 of
[TNBI].
Both types of inter-domain links are discovered using the plug-id
attributes reported in the Ethernet Topologies exposed by the two
adjacent PNCs. The MDSC can also discover an inter-domain IP
link/adjacency between the two IP LTPs, reported in the IP
Topologies exposed by the two adjacent P-PNCs, supported by the two
ETH LTPs of an Ethernet Link discovered between these two P-PNCs.
Two options are possible to discover these inter-domain links:
1. Static configuration
2. LLDP [IEEE 802.1AB] automatic discovery
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
Since the static configuration requires an administrative burden to
configure network-wide unique identifiers, the automatic discovery
solution based on LLDP is preferable when LLDP is supported.
As outlined in [TNBI], the encoding of the plug-id namespace as well
as of the LLDP information within the plug-id value is
implementation specific and needs to be consistent across all the
PNCs.
3.2. Provisioning of an IP Link/LAG over DWDM
In this scenario, the MSDC needs to coordinate the creation of an IP
link, or a LAG, between two routers through a DWDM network.
It is assumed that the MDSC has already discovered the whole network
topology as described in section 3.1.
3.2.1. YANG models used at the MPIs
3.2.1.1. YANG models used at the Optical MPIs
The Optical PNC uses at least the following YANG models:
o The TE Tunnel Model, defined in the "ietf-te" YANG module of
[TE-TUNNEL]
o The WSON Tunnel Model, defined in the "ietf-wson-tunnel" YANG
modules of [WSON-TUNNEL], or the Flexi-grid Media Channel Model,
defined in the "ietf-flexi-grid-media-channel" YANG module of
[Flexi-MC]
o The Ethernet Client Signal Model, defined in the "ietf-eth-tran-
service" YANG module of [CLIENT-SIGNAL]
The TE Tunnel model is generic and augmented by technology-specific
models such as the WSON Tunnel Model and the Flexi-grid Media
Channel Model.
The WSON Tunnel Model or, alternatively, the Flexi-grid Media
Channel Model are used to setup connectivity within the DWDM network
depending on whether the DWDM optical network is based on fixed grid
or flexible-grid.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
The Ethernet Client Signal Model is used to configure the steering
of the Ethernet client traffic between Ethernet access links and TE
Tunnels, which in this case could be either WSON Tunnels or
Flexi-Grid Media Channels. This model is generic and applies to any
technology-specific TE Tunnel: technology-specific attributes are
provided by the technology-specific models which augment the generic
TE-Tunnel Model.
3.2.1.2. Required YANG models at the Packet MPIs
The Packet PNC uses at least the following topology YANG models:
o The Base Network Model, defined in the "ietf-network" YANG module
of [RFC8345] (see section 3.1.1)
o The Base Network Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-network-
topology" YANG module of [RFC8345] (see section 3.1.1)
o The L3 Topology Model, defined in the "ietf-l3-unicast-topology"
YANG modules of [RFC8346] (see section 3.1.1.1)
If, as discussed in section 3.2.2, IP Links created over DWDM can be
automatically discovered by the P-PNC, the IP Topology is needed
only to report these IP Links after being discovered by the P-PNC.
The IP Topology can also be used to configure the IP Links created
over DWDM.
3.2.2. IP Link Setup Procedure
The MDSC requires the O-PNC to setup a WDM Tunnel (either a WSON
Tunnel or a Flexi-grid Tunnel) within the DWDM network between the
two Optical Transponders (OTs) associated with the two access links.
The Optical Transponders are reported by the O-PNC as Trail
Termination Points (TTPs), defined in [TE-TOPO], within the WDM
Topology. The association between the Ethernet access link and the
WDM TTP is reported by the Inter-Layer Lock (ILL) identifiers,
defined in [TE-TOPO], reported by the O-PNC within the Ethernet
Topology and WDM Topology.
The MDSC also requires the O-PNC to steer the Ethernet client
traffic between the two access Ethernet Links over the WDM Tunnel.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
After the WDM Tunnel has been setup and the client traffic steering
configured, the two IP routers can exchange Ethernet packets between
themselves, including LLDP messages.
If LLDP [IEEE 802.1AB] is used between the two routers, the P-PNC
can automatically discover the IP Link being setup by the MDSC. The
IP LTPs terminating this IP Link are supported by the ETH LTPs
terminating the two access links.
Otherwise, the MDSC needs to require the P-PNC to configure an IP
Link between the two routers: the MDSC also configures the two ETH
LTPs which support the two IP LTPs terminating this IP Link.
3.3. Provisioning of an IP link/LAG over DWDM with path constraints
MDSC must be able to provision an IP link with a fixed maximum
latency constraint, or with the minimum latency available constraint
within each domain but as well inter-domain when required (e.g. by
monitoring traffic KPIs trends for this IP link). Through the O-PNC
fixed latency path/minimum latency path is chosen between PE and
ASBR in each optical domain. Then MDSC needs to select the inter-AS
domain with less latency (in case we have several interconnection
links) to have the right low latency constraint fulfilled end-to-end
across domains.
MDSC must be able to automatically create two IP links between two
routers, over DWDM network, with physical path diversity (avoiding
SRLGs communicated by O-PNCs to the MDSC).
MDSC must be responsible to route each of this IP links through
different inter-AS domain links so that end-to-end IP links are
fully disjoint.
Optical connectivity must be set up accordingly by MDSC through O-
PNCs.
3.3.1. YANG models used at the MPIs
This is for further study
3.4. Provisioning of an additional link member to an existing LAG with
or without path constraints
For adding an additional link member to a LAG between two routers
with or without path latency/diversity constraint. MDSC must be able
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
to force additional optical connection to use the same physical path
in the optical domain where the LAG capacity increase is required.
3.4.1. YANG models used at the MPIs
This is for further study
4. Multi-Layer Recovery Coordination
4.1. Ensuring Network Resiliency during Maintenance Events
Before planned maintenance operation on DWDM network takes place, IP
traffic should be moved hitless to another link.
MDSC must reroute IP traffic before the events takes place. It
should be possible to lock IP traffic to the protection route until
the maintenance event is finished, unless a fault occurs on such
path.
4.2. Router port failure
The focus is on client-side protection scheme between IP router and
reconfigurable ROADM. Scenario here is to define only one port in
the routers and in the ROADM muxponder board at both ends as back-up
ports to recover any other port failure on client-side of the ROADM
(either on router port side or on muxponder side or on the link
between them). When client-side port failure occurs, alarms are
raised to MDSC by IP-PNC and O-PNC (port status down, LOS etc.).
MDSC checks with OP-PNC(s) that there is no optical failure in the
optical layer.
There can be two cases here:
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
a) LAG was defined between the two end routers. MDSC, after checking
that optical layer is fine between the two end ROADMs, triggers
the ROADM configuration so that the router back-up port with its
associated muxponder port can reuse the OCh that was already in
use previously by the failed router port and adds the new link to
the LAG on the failure side.
While the ROADM reconfiguration takes place, IP/MPLS traffic is
using the reduced bandwidth of the IP link bundle, discarding
lower priority traffic if required. Once backup port has been
reconfigured to reuse the existing OCh and new link has been
added to the LAG then original Bandwidth is recovered between the
end routers.
Note: in this LAG scenario let assume that BFD is running at LAG
level so that there is nothing triggered at MPLS level when one
of the link member of the LAG fails.
b) If there is no LAG then the scenario is not clear since a router
port failure would automatically trigger (through BFD failure)
first a sub-50ms protection at MPLS level :FRR (MPLS RSVP-TE
case) or TI-LFA (MPLS based SR-TE case) through a protection
port. At the same time MDSC, after checking that optical network
connection is still fine, would trigger the reconfiguration of
the back-up port of the router and of the ROADM muxponder to re-
use the same OCh as the one used originally for the failed router
port. Once everything has been correctly configured, MDSC Global
PCE could suggest to the operator to trigger a possible re-
optimisation of the back-up MPLS path to go back to the MPLS
primary path through the back-up port of the router and the
original OCh if overall cost, latency etc. is improved. However,
in this scenario, there is a need for protection port PLUS back-
up port in the router which does not lead to clear port savings.
5. Security Considerations
Several security considerations have been identified and will be
discussed in future versions of this document.
6. Operational Considerations
Telemetry data, such as the collection of lower-layer networking
health and consideration of network and service performance from POI
domain controllers, may be required. These requirements and
capabilities will be discussed in future versions of this document.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
7. IANA Considerations
This document requires no IANA actions.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M. et al., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling
Language", RFC 7950, August 2016.
[RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG", RFC
7951, August 2016.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A. et al., "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, January
2017.
[RFC8345] Clemm, A., Medved, J. et al., "A Yang Data Model for
Network Topologies", RFC8345, March 2018.
[RFC8346] Clemm, A. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Layer 3
Topologies", RFC8346, March 2018.
[RFC8453] Ceccarelli, D., Lee, Y. et al., "Framework for Abstraction
and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)", RFC8453, August 2018.
[RFC8525] Bierman, A. et al., "YANG Library", RFC 8525, March 2019.
[IEEE 802.1AB] IEEE 802.1AB-2016, "IEEE Standard for Local and
metropolitan area networks - Station and Media Access
Control Connectivity Discovery", March 2016.
[TE-TOPO] Liu, X. et al., "YANG Data Model for TE Topologies",
draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo, work in progress.
[WSON-TOPO] Lee, Y. et al., " A YANG Data Model for WSON (Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks)", draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang,
work in progress.
[Flexi-TOPO] Lopez de Vergara, J. E. et al., "YANG data model for
Flexi-Grid Optical Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-
yang, work in progress.
[CLIENT-TOPO] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Client-layer
Topology", draft-zheng-ccamp-client-topo-yang, work in
progress.
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
[TE-TUNNEL] Saad, T. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Traffic
Engineering Tunnels and Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang-
te, work in progress.
[WSON-TUNNEL] Lee, Y. et al., "A Yang Data Model for WSON Tunnel",
draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-tunnel-model, work in progress.
[Flexi-MC] Lopez de Vergara, J. E. et al., "YANG data model for
Flexi-Grid media-channels", draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-
media-channel-yang, work in progress.
[CLIENT-SIGNAL] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Transport
Network Client Signals", draft-ietf-ccamp-client-signal-
yang, work in progress.
8.2. Informative References
[TNBI] Busi, I., Daniel, K. et al., "Transport Northbound
Interface Applicability Statement", draft-ietf-ccamp-
transport-nbi-app-statement, work in progress.
[ACTN-VPN] Lee, Y. et al., " Applicability of ACTN to Support
Packet and Optical Integration", draft-lee-teas-actn-poi-
applicability, work in progress.
9. Acknowledgments
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Some of this analysis work was supported in part by the European
Commission funded H2020-ICT-2016-2 METRO-HAUL project (G.A. 761727).
10. Authors' Addresses
Fabio Peruzzini
TIM
Email: fabio.peruzzini@telecomitalia.it
Italo Busi
Huawei
Email: Italo.busi@huawei.com
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft ACTN POI October 2019
Daniel King
Old Dog Consulting
Email: daniel@olddog.co.uk
Sergio Belotti
Nokia
Email: sergio.belotti@nokia.com
Gabriele Galimberti
Cisco
Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
Zheng Yanlei
China Unicom
Email: zhengyanlei@chinaunicom.cn
Washington Costa Pereira Correia
TIM Brasil
Email: wcorreia@timbrasil.com.br
Jean-Francois Bouquier
Vodafone
Email: jeff.bouquier@vodafone.com
Peruzzini et al. Expires April 31, 2020 [Page 17]