rfc9833v1.txt   rfc9833.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Boucadair, Ed. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Boucadair, Ed.
Request for Comments: 9833 Orange Request for Comments: 9833 Orange
Category: Standards Track R. Roberts, Ed. Category: Standards Track R. Roberts, Ed.
ISSN: 2070-1721 Juniper ISSN: 2070-1721 Juniper
O. Gonzalez de Dios O. Gonzalez de Dios
Telefonica Telefonica
S. Barguil Giraldo S. Barguil
Nokia Nokia
B. Wu B. Wu
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
August 2025 September 2025
A Common YANG Data Model for Attachment Circuits A Common YANG Data Model for Attachment Circuits
Abstract Abstract
The document specifies a common attachment circuits (ACs) YANG data The document specifies a common attachment circuits (ACs) YANG data
model, which is designed to be reusable by other models. This design model, which is designed to be reusable by other models. This design
is meant to ensure consistent AC structures among models that is meant to ensure consistent AC structures among models that
manipulate ACs. For example, this common model can be reused by manipulate ACs. For example, this common model can be reused by
service models to expose ACs as a service, service models that service models to expose ACs as a service, service models that
skipping to change at line 95 skipping to change at line 95
For that data transfer to take place within the provider network, it For that data transfer to take place within the provider network, it
is assumed that adequate setup is provisioned over the links is assumed that adequate setup is provisioned over the links
connecting the customer's terminating points to the provider network connecting the customer's terminating points to the provider network
(typically, a Provider Edge (PE)), thereby enabling successful data (typically, a Provider Edge (PE)), thereby enabling successful data
exchange. This necessary provisioning is referred to in this exchange. This necessary provisioning is referred to in this
document as an "attachment circuit" (AC), while the underlying link document as an "attachment circuit" (AC), while the underlying link
is referred to as the "bearer". is referred to as the "bearer".
When a customer requests a new service, that service can be When a customer requests a new service, that service can be
associated with existing attachment circuits or may require the associated with existing ACs or may require the instantiation of new
instantiation of new attachment circuits. Whether these attachment ACs. Whether these ACs are dedicated to a particular service or
circuits are dedicated to a particular service or shared among shared among multiple services depends on the specific deployment.
multiple services depends on the specific deployment.
Examples of attachment circuits are depicted in Figure 1. A Customer Examples of ACs are depicted in Figure 1. A Customer Edge (CE) may
Edge (CE) may be realized as a physical node or a logical entity. be realized as a physical node or a logical entity. From the
From the network's perspective, a CE is treated as a peer Service network's perspective, a CE is treated as a peer Service Attachment
Attachment Point (SAP) [RFC9408]. CEs can be dedicated to a single Point (SAP) [RFC9408]. CEs can be dedicated to a single service
service (e.g., Layer 3 Virtual Private Network (VPN) or Layer 2 VPN) (e.g., Layer 3 Virtual Private Network (VPN) or Layer 2 VPN) or can
or can host multiple services (e.g., Service Functions [RFC7665]). A host multiple services (e.g., SFs [RFC7665]). A single AC, as viewed
single AC, as viewed by the network provider, may be bound to one or by the network provider, may be bound to one or more peer SAPs (e.g.,
more peer SAPs (e.g., "CE1" and "CE2"). For instance, as discussed "CE1" and "CE2"). For instance, as discussed in [RFC4364], multiple
in [RFC4364], multiple CEs can attach to a PE over the same CEs can attach to a PE over the same AC. This approach is typically
attachment circuit. This approach is typically deployed when the deployed when the Layer 2 infrastructure between the CE and the
Layer 2 infrastructure between the CE and the network supports a network supports a multipoint service. A single CE may also
multipoint service. A single CE may also terminate multiple ACs terminate multiple ACs (e.g., "CE3" and "CE4"), which may be carried
(e.g., "CE3" and "CE4"), which may be carried over the same or over the same or distinct bearers.
distinct bearers.
.--------------------. .--------------------.
| | | |
.------. | .--. (b1) .-----. .------. | .--. (b1) .-----.
| +----. | | +---AC---+ | | +----. | | +---AC---+ |
| CE1 | | | |PE+---AC---+ CE3 | | CE1 | | | |PE+---AC---+ CE3 |
'------' | .--. '--' (b2) '-----' '------' | .--. '--' (b2) '-----'
+---AC--+PE| Network | +---AC--+PE| Network |
.------. | '--' .--. (b3) .-----. .------. | '--' .--. (b3) .-----.
| | | | | +---AC---+ | | | | | | +---AC---+ |
skipping to change at line 135 skipping to change at line 133
'------' | '--' (b3) '---+-' '------' | '--' (b3) '---+-'
| .--. | | | .--. | |
'----------+PE+------' | '----------+PE+------' |
'--' | '--' |
| | | |
'-----------AC----------' '-----------AC----------'
(bx) = bearer Id x (bx) = bearer Id x
Figure 1: Examples of ACs Figure 1: Examples of ACs
This document specifies a common module ("ietf-ac-common") for This document specifies a common module ("ietf-ac-common") for ACs
attachment circuits (Section 5). The module is designed to be (Section 5). The module is designed to be reusable by other models,
reusable by other models, thereby ensuring consistent AC structures thereby ensuring consistent AC structures among modules that
among modules that manipulate ACs. For example, the common module manipulate ACs. For example, the common module can be reused by
can be reused by service models to expose AC-as-a-Service (ACaaS) service models to expose AC as a Service (ACaaS) (e.g., [RFC9834]) or
(e.g., [RFC9834]) or by service models that require binding a service by service models that require binding a service to a set of ACs
to a set of ACs (e.g., Network Slice Service [YANG-NSS])). It can (e.g., RFC 9543 Network Slice Service [YANG-NSS])). It can also be
also be used by network models to provision ACs (e.g., [RFC9835]) and used by network models to provision ACs (e.g., [RFC9835]) and device
device models, among others. models, among others.
The common AC module eases data inheritance between modules (e.g., The common AC module eases data inheritance between modules (e.g.,
from service to network models as per [RFC8969]). from service to network models as per [RFC8969]).
The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in [RFC8342]. Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) defined in [RFC8342].
2. Conventions and Definitions 2. Conventions and Definitions
The meanings of the symbols in the YANG tree diagrams are defined in The meanings of the symbols in the YANG tree diagrams are defined in
[RFC8340]. [RFC8340].
LxSM refers to both the Layer 2 Service Model (L2SM) [RFC8466] and LxSM refers to both the L2VPN Service Model (L2SM) [RFC8466] and the
the Layer 3 Service Model (L3SM) [RFC8299]. L3VPN Service Model (L3SM) [RFC8299].
LxNM refers to both the Layer 2 Network Model (L2NM) [RFC9291] and LxNM refers to both the L2VPN Network Model (L2NM) [RFC9291] and the
the Layer 3 Network Model (L3NM) [RFC9182]. L3VPN Network Model (L3NM) [RFC9182].
This document uses the following term: This document uses the following term:
Bearer: A physical or logical link that connects a CE (or site) to a Bearer: A physical or logical link that connects a CE (or site) to a
provider network. provider network.
A bearer can be a wireless or wired link. One or multiple A bearer can be a wireless or wired link. One or multiple
technologies can be used to build a bearer. The bearer type can technologies can be used to build a bearer. The bearer type can
be specified by a customer. be specified by a customer.
The operator allocates a unique bearer reference to identify a The operator allocates a unique bearer reference to identify a
bearer within its network (e.g., customer line identifier). Such bearer within its network (e.g., customer line identifier). Such
a reference can be retrieved by a customer and then used in a reference can be retrieved by a customer and then used in
subsequent service placement requests to unambiguously identify subsequent service placement requests to unambiguously identify
where a service is to be bound. where a service is to be bound.
The concept of bearer can be generalized to refer to the required The concept of bearer can be generalized to refer to the required
underlying connection for the provisioning of an attachment underlying connection for the provisioning of an AC.
circuit.
One or multiple attachment circuits may be hosted over the same One or multiple ACs may be hosted over the same bearer (e.g.,
bearer (e.g., multiple Virtual Local Area Networks (VLANs) on the multiple Virtual Local Area Networks (VLANs) on the same bearer
same bearer that is provided by a physical link). that is provided by a physical link).
The names of data nodes are prefixed using the prefix associated with The names of data nodes are prefixed using the prefix associated with
the corresponding imported YANG module as shown in Table 1. the corresponding imported YANG module as shown in Table 1.
+============+==================+========================+ +============+==================+========================+
| Prefix | Module | Reference | | Prefix | Module | Reference |
+============+==================+========================+ +============+==================+========================+
| inet | ietf-inet-types | Section 4 of [RFC6991] | | inet | ietf-inet-types | Section 4 of [RFC6991] |
+------------+------------------+------------------------+ +------------+------------------+------------------------+
| key-chain | ietf-key-chain | [RFC8177] | | key-chain | ietf-key-chain | [RFC8177] |
skipping to change at line 267 skipping to change at line 264
The module defines the following features: The module defines the following features:
'layer2-ac': Used to indicate support of ACs with Layer 2 'layer2-ac': Used to indicate support of ACs with Layer 2
properties. properties.
'layer3-ac': Used to indicate support of ACs with Layer 3 'layer3-ac': Used to indicate support of ACs with Layer 3
properties. properties.
'server-assigned-reference': Used to indicate support of server- 'server-assigned-reference': Used to indicate support of server-
generated references to access relevant resources. For example, a generated references to access relevant resources. Typically, a
server can be a network controller or a router in a provider server can be a network controller or a router in a provider
network. network.
For example, a bearer request is first created using a name that For example, a bearer request is first created using a name that
is assigned by the client, but if this feature is supported, the is assigned by the client, but if this feature is supported, the
request will also include a server-generated reference. That request will also include a server-generated reference. That
reference can be used when requesting the creation of an AC over reference can be used when requesting the creation of an AC over
the existing bearer. the existing bearer.
4.2. Identities 4.2. Identities
skipping to change at line 599 skipping to change at line 596
configuration that is required for the activation of OSPF and configuration that is required for the activation of OSPF and
IS-IS. IS-IS.
Static routing: Parameters to configure an entry or a list of IP Static routing: Parameters to configure an entry or a list of IP
static routing entries. static routing entries.
The 'redundancy-group' grouping lists the groups to which an AC The 'redundancy-group' grouping lists the groups to which an AC
belongs [RFC9181]. For example, the 'group-id' is used to belongs [RFC9181]. For example, the 'group-id' is used to
associate redundancy or protection constraints of ACs. associate redundancy or protection constraints of ACs.
grouping bgp-authentication: grouping bgp-authentication:
+-- authentication +-- authentication
+-- enabled? boolean +-- enabled? boolean
+-- keying-material +-- keying-material
+-- (option)? +-- (option)?
+--:(ao) +--:(ao)
| +-- enable-ao? boolean | +-- enable-ao? boolean
| +-- ao-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref | +-- ao-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
+--:(md5) +--:(md5)
| +-- md5-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref | +-- md5-keychain? key-chain:key-chain-ref
+--:(explicit) +--:(explicit)
skipping to change at line 718 skipping to change at line 715
Bandwidth parameters (Figure 7): Bandwidth parameters can be Bandwidth parameters (Figure 7): Bandwidth parameters can be
represented using the Committed Information Rate (CIR), the Excess represented using the Committed Information Rate (CIR), the Excess
Information Rate (EIR), or the Peak Information Rate (PIR). Information Rate (EIR), or the Peak Information Rate (PIR).
These parameters can be provided per bandwidth type. Type values These parameters can be provided per bandwidth type. Type values
are taken from [RFC9181]. For example, the following values can are taken from [RFC9181]. For example, the following values can
be used: be used:
'bw-per-cos': The bandwidth is per Class of Service (CoS). 'bw-per-cos': The bandwidth is per Class of Service (CoS).
'bw-per-site': The bandwidth is to all ACs that belong to the 'bw-per-site': The bandwidth is for all ACs that belong to the
same site. same site.
grouping bandwidth-parameters: grouping bandwidth-parameters:
+-- cir? uint64 +-- cir? uint64
+-- cbs? uint64 +-- cbs? uint64
+-- eir? uint64 +-- eir? uint64
+-- ebs? uint64 +-- ebs? uint64
+-- pir? uint64 +-- pir? uint64
+-- pbs? uint64 +-- pbs? uint64
grouping bandwidth-per-type: grouping bandwidth-per-type:
skipping to change at line 753 skipping to change at line 750
+-- cbs? uint64 +-- cbs? uint64
+-- eir? uint64 +-- eir? uint64
+-- ebs? uint64 +-- ebs? uint64
+-- pir? uint64 +-- pir? uint64
+-- pbs? uint64 +-- pbs? uint64
Figure 7: Bandwidth Groupings Figure 7: Bandwidth Groupings
5. Common Attachment Circuit YANG Module 5. Common Attachment Circuit YANG Module
This module uses types defined in [RFC6991], [RFC8177], and This module uses types defined in [RFC6991], [RFC8177], [RFC9181],
[RFC9181]. and [IEEE_802.1Q].
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-ac-common@2025-08-11.yang" <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-ac-common@2025-08-11.yang"
module ietf-ac-common { module ietf-ac-common {
yang-version 1.1; yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-common"; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-common";
prefix ac-common; prefix ac-common;
import ietf-vpn-common { import ietf-vpn-common {
prefix vpn-common; prefix vpn-common;
reference reference
skipping to change at line 797 skipping to change at line 794
} }
organization organization
"IETF OPSAWG (Operations and Management Area Working Group)"; "IETF OPSAWG (Operations and Management Area Working Group)";
contact contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/> "WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/>
WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> WG List: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Editor: Mohamed Boucadair Editor: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> <mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Author: Richard Roberts Editor: Richard Roberts
<mailto:rroberts@juniper.net> <mailto:rroberts@juniper.net>
Author: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios Author: Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
<mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com> <mailto:oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com>
Author: Samier Barguil Author: Samier Barguil
<mailto:ssamier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com> <mailto:ssamier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com>
Author: Bo Wu Author: Bo Wu
<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>"; <mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>";
description description
"This YANG module defines a common attachment circuit (AC) "This YANG module defines a common attachment circuit (AC)
YANG module with a set of reusable features, types, YANG module with a set of reusable features, types,
skipping to change at line 999 skipping to change at line 996
identity precedence-type { identity precedence-type {
description description
"Redundancy type. Attachment to a network can be created "Redundancy type. Attachment to a network can be created
with primary and secondary tagging."; with primary and secondary tagging.";
} }
identity primary { identity primary {
base precedence-type; base precedence-type;
description description
"Identifies the main attachment circuit."; "Identifies the main AC.";
} }
identity secondary { identity secondary {
base precedence-type; base precedence-type;
description description
"Identifies a secondary attachment circuit."; "Identifies a secondary AC.";
} }
// AC type // AC type
identity role { identity role {
description description
"Base identity for the network role of an AC."; "Base identity for the network role of an AC.";
} }
identity uni { identity uni {
skipping to change at line 2438 skipping to change at line 2435
uses bandwidth-parameters; uses bandwidth-parameters;
} }
} }
} }
} }
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This section is modeled after the template described in Section 3.7
of [YANG-GUIDELINES].
The "ietf-ac-common" YANG module defines a data model that is The "ietf-ac-common" YANG module defines a data model that is
designed to be accessed via YANG-based management protocols, such as designed to be accessed via YANG-based management protocols, such as
NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040]. These protocols have to NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040]. These protocols have to
use a secure transport layer (e.g., SSH [RFC4252], TLS [RFC8446], and use a secure transport layer (e.g., SSH [RFC4252], TLS [RFC8446], and
QUIC [RFC9000]) and have to use mutual authentication. QUIC [RFC9000]) and have to use mutual authentication.
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or
RESTCONF protocol operations and content. RESTCONF protocol operations and content.
skipping to change at line 2499 skipping to change at line 2493
Name: ietf-ac-common Name: ietf-ac-common
Maintained by IANA? N Maintained by IANA? N
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-common Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ac-common
Prefix: ac-common Prefix: ac-common
Reference: RFC 9833 Reference: RFC 9833
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[IEEE_802.1Q]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks-Bridges and Bridged Networks", IEEE Std 802.1Q-
2022, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.10004498, December 2022,
<https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.10004498>.
[ISO10589] ISO/IEC, "Information technology - Telecommunications and [ISO10589] ISO/IEC, "Information technology - Telecommunications and
information exchange between systems - Intermediate System information exchange between systems - Intermediate System
to Intermediate System intra-domain routeing information to Intermediate System intra-domain routeing information
exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol exchange protocol for use in conjunction with the protocol
for providing the connectionless-mode network service for providing the connectionless-mode network service
(ISO8473)", ISO/IEC 10589:2002, November 2002, (ISO8473)", ISO/IEC 10589:2002, November 2002,
<https://www.iso.org/standard/30932.html>. <https://www.iso.org/standard/30932.html>.
[RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and [RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and
dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195, dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195,
skipping to change at line 2546 skipping to change at line 2546
[RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP [RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP
Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925, Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925,
June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>. June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[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>.
[RFC6565] Pillay-Esnault, P., Moyer, P., Doyle, J., Ertekin, E., and [RFC6565] Pillay-Esnault, P., Moyer, P., Doyle, J., Ertekin, E., and
M. Lundberg, "OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge M. Lundberg, "OSPFv3 as a Provider Edge to Customer Edge
(PE-CE) Routing Protocol", RFC 6565, DOI 10.17487/RFC6565, (PE-CE) Routing Protocol", RFC 6565, DOI 10.17487/RFC6565,
June 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6565>. June 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6565>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger, [RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual
eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for
Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3 Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3
Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014, Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>.
[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>.
[RFC8077] Martini, L., Ed. and G. Heron, Ed., "Pseudowire Setup and [RFC8077] Martini, L., Ed. and G. Heron, Ed., "Pseudowire Setup and
Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)", Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)",
STD 84, RFC 8077, DOI 10.17487/RFC8077, February 2017, STD 84, RFC 8077, DOI 10.17487/RFC8077, February 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8077>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8077>.
[RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J. [RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J.
Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177, Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8177>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8177>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration [RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K., [RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018, (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
[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>.
[RFC9181] Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M., [RFC9181] Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M.,
Ed., and Q. Wu, "A Common YANG Data Model for Layer 2 and Ed., and Q. Wu, "A Common YANG Data Model for Layer 2 and
Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9181, DOI 10.17487/RFC9181, February Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9181, DOI 10.17487/RFC9181, February
2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9181>. 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9181>.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[MEF17] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "Service OAM Requirements & [MEF17] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "Service OAM Requirements &
Framework - Phase 1", MEF Technical Specification, MEF 17, Framework - Phase 1", MEF Technical Specification, MEF 17,
April 2007, <https://www.mef.net/wp- April 2007, <https://www.mef.net/wp-
skipping to change at line 2666 skipping to change at line 2653
[RFC6004] Berger, L. and D. Fedyk, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support [RFC6004] Berger, L. and D. Fedyk, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support
for Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet Service for Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet Service
Switching", RFC 6004, DOI 10.17487/RFC6004, October 2010, Switching", RFC 6004, DOI 10.17487/RFC6004, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6004>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6004>.
[RFC6215] Bocci, M., Levrau, L., and D. Frost, "MPLS Transport [RFC6215] Bocci, M., Levrau, L., and D. Frost, "MPLS Transport
Profile User-to-Network and Network-to-Network Profile User-to-Network and Network-to-Network
Interfaces", RFC 6215, DOI 10.17487/RFC6215, April 2011, Interfaces", RFC 6215, DOI 10.17487/RFC6215, April 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6215>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6215>.
[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>.
[RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function [RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function
Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665, Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7665>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7665>.
[RFC7676] Pignataro, C., Bonica, R., and S. Krishnan, "IPv6 Support [RFC7676] Pignataro, C., Bonica, R., and S. Krishnan, "IPv6 Support
for Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 7676, for Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 7676,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7676, October 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7676, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7676>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7676>.
[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>.
[RFC8299] Wu, Q., Ed., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki, [RFC8299] Wu, Q., Ed., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki,
"YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299, "YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8299, January 2018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8299, January 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8299>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8299>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", [RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018, BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.
[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>.
[RFC8466] Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Ed., Xie, C., and L. Jalil, "A YANG [RFC8466] Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Ed., Xie, C., and L. Jalil, "A YANG
Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN)
Service Delivery", RFC 8466, DOI 10.17487/RFC8466, October Service Delivery", RFC 8466, DOI 10.17487/RFC8466, October
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8466>. 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8466>.
[RFC8695] Liu, X., Sarda, P., and V. Choudhary, "A YANG Data Model [RFC8695] Liu, X., Sarda, P., and V. Choudhary, "A YANG Data Model
for the Routing Information Protocol (RIP)", RFC 8695, for the Routing Information Protocol (RIP)", RFC 8695,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8695, February 2020, DOI 10.17487/RFC8695, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8695>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8695>.
skipping to change at line 2727 skipping to change at line 2727
S., and L. Munoz, "A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 2 S., and L. Munoz, "A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 2
VPNs", RFC 9291, DOI 10.17487/RFC9291, September 2022, VPNs", RFC 9291, DOI 10.17487/RFC9291, September 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9291>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9291>.
[RFC9408] Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil, S., Wu, [RFC9408] Boucadair, M., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil, S., Wu,
Q., and V. Lopez, "A YANG Network Data Model for Service Q., and V. Lopez, "A YANG Network Data Model for Service
Attachment Points (SAPs)", RFC 9408, DOI 10.17487/RFC9408, Attachment Points (SAPs)", RFC 9408, DOI 10.17487/RFC9408,
June 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9408>. June 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9408>.
[RFC9834] Boucadair, M., Ed., Roberts, R., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, [RFC9834] Boucadair, M., Ed., Roberts, R., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios,
O., Barguil Giraldo, S., and B. Wu, "YANG Data Models for O., Barguil, S., and B. Wu, "YANG Data Models for Bearers
Bearers and 'Attachment Circuits'-as-a-Service (ACaaS)", and Attachment Circuits as a Service (ACaaS)", RFC 9834,
RFC 9834, August 2025, September 2025, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9834>.
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9834>.
[RFC9835] Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil [RFC9835] Boucadair, M., Roberts, R., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Barguil,
Giraldo, S., and B. Wu, "A Network YANG Data Model for S., and B. Wu, "A Network YANG Data Model for Attachment
Attachment Circuits", RFC 9835, August 2025, Circuits", RFC 9835, September 2025,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9835>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9835>.
[RFC9836] Boucadair, M., Ed., Roberts, R., Barguil Giraldo, S., and [RFC9836] Boucadair, M., Ed., Roberts, R., Barguil, S., and O.
O. Gonzalez de Dios, "A YANG Data Model for Augmenting VPN Gonzalez de Dios, "A YANG Data Model for Augmenting VPN
Service and Network Models with Attachment Circuits", Service and Network Models with Attachment Circuits",
RFC 9836, August 2025, RFC 9836, September 2025,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9836>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9836>.
[YANG-GUIDELINES]
Bierman, A., Boucadair, M., Ed., and Q. Wu, "Guidelines
for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG
Data Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-22, 14 January 2025,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-
rfc8407bis-22>.
[YANG-NSS] Wu, B., Dhody, D., Rokui, R., Saad, T., and J. Mullooly, [YANG-NSS] Wu, B., Dhody, D., Rokui, R., Saad, T., and J. Mullooly,
"A YANG Data Model for the RFC 9543 Network Slice "A YANG Data Model for the RFC 9543 Network Slice
Service", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- Service", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-25, 9 May 2025, teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-25, 9 May 2025,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas- <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-
ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-25>. ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-25>.
[YANG-SCHEDULE] [YANG-SCHEDULE]
Ma, Q., Ed., Wu, Q., Boucadair, M., Ed., and D. King, "A Ma, Q., Ed., Wu, Q., Boucadair, M., Ed., and D. King, "A
Common YANG Data Model for Scheduling", Work in Progress, Common YANG Data Model for Scheduling", Work in Progress,
skipping to change at line 3095 skipping to change at line 3086
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Richard Roberts (editor) Richard Roberts (editor)
Juniper Juniper
Email: rroberts@juniper.net Email: rroberts@juniper.net
Oscar Gonzalez de Dios Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
Telefonica Telefonica
Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
Samier Barguil Giraldo Samier Barguil
Nokia Nokia
Email: samier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com Email: samier.barguil_giraldo@nokia.com
Bo Wu Bo Wu
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Email: lana.wubo@huawei.com Email: lana.wubo@huawei.com
 End of changes. 30 change blocks. 
81 lines changed or deleted 72 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48.