<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.21 (Ruby 3.3.6) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-boucadair-nmop-rfc3535-20years-later-06" category="info" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.24.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="RFC 3535, 20 Years Later">RFC 3535,  20 Years Later: An Update of Operators Requirements on Network Management Protocols and Modelling</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-boucadair-nmop-rfc3535-20years-later-06"/>
    <author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair">
      <organization>Orange</organization>
      <address>
        <email>mohamed.boucadair@orange.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Luis M. Contreras">
      <organization>Telefonica</organization>
      <address>
        <email>luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Oscar Gonzalez de Dios">
      <organization>Telefonica</organization>
      <address>
        <email>oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Thomas Graf">
      <organization>Swisscom</organization>
      <address>
        <email>thomas.graf@swisscom.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Reshad Rahman">
      <organization>Equinix</organization>
      <address>
        <email>rrahman@equinix.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Lionel Tailhardat">
      <organization>Orange</organization>
      <address>
        <email>lionel.tailhardat@orange.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2024" month="November" day="25"/>
    <keyword>network management</keyword>
    <keyword>future networks</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 68?>

<t>The IAB organized an important workshop
to establish a dialog between network operators and
protocol developers, and to guide the IETF focus on work
regarding network management.  The outcome of that workshop
was documented in the "IAB Network Management Workshop" (RFC 3535)
which was instrumental for developing NETCONF and YANG, in particular.</t>
      <t>20 years later, it is time to evaluate what has been achieved since then and
identify the operational barriers for making these
technologies widely implemented. Also, this document captures new
requirements for network management operations.</t>
    </abstract>
    <note removeInRFC="true">
      <name>Discussion Venues</name>
      <t>Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
    <eref target="https://github.com/boucadair/rfc3535-20years-later"/>.</t>
    </note>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 82?>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>The IAB organized a workshop (June 4-June 6, 2002)
to establish a dialog between network operators and
protocol developers, and to guide the IETF to focus on work
regarding network management.  The outcome of that workshop
was documented in the "IAB Network Management Workshop" <xref target="RFC3535"/>
which was instrumental for developing NETCONF <xref target="RFC6241"/> and YANG <xref target="RFC6020"/><xref target="RFC7950"/>.</t>
      <t>More than 20 years later, new requirements on network management operations are emerging from the operators. This document captures these requirements that reflect the progress in this area. The following table lists the new ops requirements; more details are provided in <xref target="sec-obs"/>.</t>
      <table>
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th align="left">NEW Ops Requirement Label</th>
            <th align="center">Section</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-STRENGTHEN-DM</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-dm"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW -OPS-REQ-DM-RATIONALIZE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-frag"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW -OPS-REQ-EASE-EXPOSURE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-cons"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW -OPS-REQ-NW-API-DISCOVERY</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-cons"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-DM-API</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-api"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-PROFILING</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-pro"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-REASSESS</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-pro"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-AGILE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-agile"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-INTEGRATION</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-int"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-Y2KG</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-dama"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-SCALE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-dama"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-LOSSLESS</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-map"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-REUSABILITY</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-con"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-NEW-NEED</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-distinct"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-UNSILO</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-dep"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-TIMELY-DM</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-pub"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-READILTY-IMPLEM</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-impl"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-IT-INTEGRATION</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-it"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-IETF-TOOLS</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-ietf-in"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-CLIENT-TOOLS</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-client"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-BRIDGE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-skills"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-GLUE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-new"/></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">NEW-OPS-REQ-GUIDANCE</td>
            <td align="center">
              <xref target="sec-guid"/></td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      <t>The document also provide an assessment of the RFC3535 recommendations (<xref target="sec-assessment"/>) and to what extend that roadmap was driving network management efforts within the IETF (<xref target="sec-reca"/>).</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="technology-advances-since-rfc-3535">
      <name>Technology Advances Since RFC 3535</name>
      <t>Since the publication of <xref target="RFC3535"/> major advances were achieved in the Network Managment area, such as (but not limited to):</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>NETCONF <xref target="RFC6241"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>YANG <xref target="RFC7950"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>RESTCONF  <xref target="RFC8040"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>SDN &amp; Programmable Networks <xref target="RFC7149"/><xref target="RFC7426"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Automation <xref target="RFC8969"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Virtualization <xref target="RFC8568"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Containerization <xref target="I-D.ietf-bmwg-containerized-infra"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Intent-based <xref target="RFC9315"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Network APIs</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Models for management of services, networks, and devices <xref target="RFC8199"/><xref target="RFC8309"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Telemetry <xref target="RFC9232"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG <xref target="RFC7951"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF) <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-comi"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>YANG to CBOR mapping <xref target="RFC9254"/></t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>YANG Schema Item iDentifier (YANG SID) <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-sid"/></t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>See also "An Overview of the IETF Network Management Standards" <xref target="RFC6632"/>.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-assessment">
      <name>Assessment of RFC 3535 Operator Requirements</name>
      <t><xref section="3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC3535"/> includes the following recommendations:</t>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 Ease of use is a key requirement for any network management
   technology from the operators point of view.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is still a valid requirement. It is
     even exacerbated with the amount of techniques and extensions
     that were specified since then.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It is necessary to make a clear distinction between configuration
   data, data that describes operational state and statistics.  Some
   devices make it very hard to determine which parameters were
   administratively configured and which were obtained via other
   mechanisms such as routing protocols.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This requirement was taken into account when
     designing IETF solutions. Specifically, datastores are a fundamental
     concept in NETCONF/YANG (e.g., <xref target="RFC8342"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It is required to be able to fetch separately configuration data,
   operational state data, and statistics from devices, and to be
   able to compare these between devices.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is supported by NETCONF and RESTCONF.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It is necessary to enable operators to concentrate on the
   configuration of the network as a whole rather than individual
   devices.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>Protocols such as NETCONF supports means to
     handle transactions at the level of a network. For example, a
     controller can establish parallel sessions with a set of devices
     and make use of confirmed commit.</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>Also, <xref target="RFC8969"/> describes
     how YANG/RESTONF/YANG can be used to manage a network and map it
     to involves underlying functions/nodes. Several service and network
     data models are required for this aim.</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF defined in the past
     models to manage few servcies such as VPN at both service and network
     levels (e.g.,  the Layer 2 Service Model (L2SM) <xref target="RFC8466"/>,
     the Layer 3 Service Model (L3SM) <xref target="RFC8299"/>, the Layer 2 Network Model (L2NM) <xref target="RFC9291"/>,
     and the Layer 3 Network Model (L3NM) <xref target="RFC9182"/>).</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>A similar effort is currently
     ongoing for handling attachement circuits at both service and network layers (e.g.,
     <xref target="I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit"/>, <xref target="I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit"/>).</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>More effort is still needed in this area.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 Support for configuration transactions across a number of devices
   would significantly simplify network configuration management.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This feature is supported by NETCONF.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 Given configuration A and configuration B, it should be possible
   to generate the operations necessary to get from A to B with
   minimal state changes and effects on network and systems.  It is
   important to minimize the impact caused by configuration changes.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This feature is supported by NETCONF.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 A mechanism to dump and restore configurations is a primitive
   operation needed by operators.  Standards for pulling and pushing
   configurations from/to devices are desirable.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This feature is supported by NETCONF.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It must be easy to do consistency checks of configurations over
   time and between the ends of a link in order to determine the
   changes between two configurations and whether those
   configurations are consistent.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>A mechanism is specified in <xref target="RFC9144"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 Network wide configurations are typically stored in central
   master databases and transformed into formats that can be pushed
   to devices, either by generating sequences of CLI commands or
   complete configuration files that are pushed to devices.  There
   is no common database schema for network configuration, although
   the models used by various operators are probably very similar.
   It is desirable to extract, document, and standardize the common
   parts of these network wide configuration database schemas.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>Covered by current implementations.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It is highly desirable that text processing tools such as diff,
   and version management tools such as RCS or CVS, can be used to
   process configurations, which implies that devices should not
   arbitrarily reorder data such as access control lists.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is deployment-specific.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The granularity of access control needed on management interfaces
   needs to match operational needs.  Typical requirements are a
   role-based access control model and the principle of least
   privilege, where a user can be given only the minimum access
   necessary to perform a required task.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>RBAC is supported by existing implementation. Also,
     the IETF defined <xref target="RFC8341"/> for this purpose.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It must be possible to do consistency checks of access control
   lists across devices.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is implementation-specific.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 It is important to distinguish between the distribution of
   configurations and the activation of a certain configuration.
   Devices should be able to hold multiple configurations.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is supported by existing NETCONF methods.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 SNMP access control is data-oriented, while CLI access control is
   usually command (task) oriented.  Depending on the management
   function, sometimes data-oriented or task-oriented access control
   makes more sense.  As such, it is a requirement to support both
   data-oriented and task-oriented access control.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>This is supported by <xref target="RFC8341"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-reca">
      <name>Assessment of RFC 3535 Recommendations</name>
      <t><xref section="6" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC3535"/> includes the following recommendations:</t>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended that the IETF stop forcing working groups
   to provide writable MIB modules.  It should be the decision of
   the working group whether they want to provide writable objects
   or not.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>In 2014, the IESG published a statement Writable MIB Module, which states that:
</t>
          <ul empty="true">
            <li>
              <t>SNMP MIB modules creating and modifying configuration state should only be produced by working groups in cases of clear utility and consensus to use SNMP
 write operations for configuration, and in consultation with the OPS ADs/MIB doctors.</t>
            </li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended that a group be formed to investigate why
   current MIB modules do not contain all the objects needed by
   operators to monitor their networks.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>No such group was formed to our knowledge.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended that a group be formed to investigate why
   the current SNMP protocol does not satisfy all the monitoring
   requirements of operators.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>No such group was formed to our knowledge.</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>This SNMP shortcoming was also reiterated in <xref section="3.5.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC5345"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended, with strong consensus from both protocol
   developers and operators, that the IETF focus resources on the
   standardization of configuration management mechanisms.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>NETCONF <xref target="RFC6241"/>, RESTCONF <xref target="RFC8040"/>, CORECONF <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-comi"/>, YANG.</t>
        </dd>
        <dt/>
        <dd>
          <t>YANG is a transport-independent data modeling language. It can be used independently of NETCONF/RESTCONF. For example, YANG can be used to define abstract data structures <xref target="RFC8791"/> that can be manipulated by other protocols (e.g., <xref target="RFC9132"/>).</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended, with strong consensus from the operators
   and rough consensus from the protocol developers, that the
   IETF/IRTF should spend resources on the development and
   standardization of XML-based device configuration and management
   technologies (such as common XML configuration schemas, exchange
   protocols and so on).
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>OK. This recommendation was also mirrored in other documents such as <xref target="RFC5706"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended, with strong consensus from the operators
   and rough consensus from the protocol developers, that the
   IETF/IRTF should not spend resources on developing HTML-based or
   HTTP-based methods for configuration management.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF deviated from this recommendation, e.g., RESTCONF <xref target="RFC8040"/> or CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF) <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-comi"/>.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended, with rough consensus from the operators
   and strong consensus from the protocol developers, that the IETF
   should continue to spend resources on the evolution of the
   SMI/SPPI data definition languages as being done in the SMIng
   working group.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>SMIng WG was concluded in 2003-04-04.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop recommended, with split consensus from the operators
   and rough consensus from the protocol developers, that the IETF
   should spend resources on fixing the MIB development and
   standardization processs.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF dedicated some resources to fix some SNMP shortcomings with a focus on security (e.g., Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the SNMP <xref target="RFC6353"/> or <xref target="RFC9456"/>, HMAC-SHA-2 Authentication Protocols in User-Based Security Model (USM) for SNMPv3 <xref target="RFC7860"/>).</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <t><xref section="6" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC3535"/> also includes the following but without tagging them as recommendations:</t>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop had split consensus from the operators and rough
   consensus from the protocol developers, that the IETF should not
   focus resources on CIM extensions.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF didn't dedicate any resources on CIM extensions.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop had rough consensus from the protocol developers
   that the IETF should not spend resources on COPS-PR development.
   So far, the operators have only very limited experience with
   COPS-PR.  In general, however, they felt that further development
   of COPS-PR might be a waste of resources as they assume that
   COPS-PR does not really address their requirements.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF has reclassified COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning <xref target="RFC3084"/>
to Historic status.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <blockquote>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 The workshop had rough consensus from the protocol developers
   that the IETF should not spend resources on SPPI PIB definitions.
   The operators had rough consensus that they do not care about
   SPPI PIBs.
]]></artwork>
      </blockquote>
      <dl>
        <dt><strong>Status Update</strong>:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The IETF has reclassified Structure of Policy Provisioning Information <xref target="RFC3159"/>, as well as
three Policy Information Bases (<xref target="RFC3317"/>, <xref target="RFC3318"/>, and <xref target="RFC3571"/>) to
Historic status.</t>
        </dd>
      </dl>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec-obs">
      <name>Observations and New Requirements</name>
      <section anchor="sec-dm">
        <name>On the Importance of Data Models</name>
        <t>An appealing aspect about network automation techniques is that they almost apply to any kind of network. From that perspective, the functional component of a network automation framework that probably matters the most, and independent of the underlying interfaces and protocols, are the data models. Concretely, data models are instrumental in the automation of networks, especially that they can provide closed-loop control for adaptive and deterministic service creation, delivery, and maintenance.</t>
        <t>Data models can be used to derive required configuration information for both network and service components, and state information that will be monitored and tracked. Likewise, they can be used during the service/network management life cycle (e.g., service instantiation, provisioning, optimization, monitoring, diagnostic, and assurance).</t>
        <t>More than three decades of "Internet standardization" have shown that the specification of data models is not that straightforward. This is because of at least two major reasons:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>For more than 30 years, legacy network equipment manufacturers have considered their technology as a competitive advantage, thereby leading to proprietary, vendor-specific, data models and the burden of vendor lock-ins. For example, there are more YANG proprietary modules than standarized ones.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Over the same period, operators have also developed their savoir-faire as a key competitive advantage. Such savoir-faire had to rely upon these proprietary data models. Operators were reluctant in the past to share their design and management practices.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The situation has  changed since network "softwarization" strategies have been disclosed by vendors and operators. From a business standpoint, network "softwarization" is seen as a major transformation effort by operators, because of the flexibility and the "a la carte" approach that is promoted by "X-as-a-service" (XaaS) designs, "X" being network, platform, Network Slice, etc.</t>
        <t>XaaS designs assume the availability of data models that are dynamically instantiated (along with a set of relevant policies) as a function of the "X" (and its design, for that matter). <strong>XaaS services cannot be designed, delivered, and operated without data models.</strong> Standard data models are thus key as they allow to:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>Ease mapping among many (network/service) layers.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Ease data correlation from distinct sources.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Nullify (soften) CLI specifics to vendors.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Support both top-down and bottom-up approaches:</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Accurate control loops for adaptive and deterministic service creation, delivery, and maintenance.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Feed an intelligence that will drive appropriate actions to adjust the current status to align with the intended status.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-STRENGTHEN-DM:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Network softwarization can only happen with a strong, committed standardization effort, complemented by active involvement in open-source projects that facilitate access to code.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>Particularly, <strong>without data models, a Network API is essentially useless</strong> (see also <xref target="sec-api"/>).</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-frag">
        <name>Fragmented Ecosystem</name>
        <t>The current YANG device models ecosystem is <strong>fragmented</strong>: some standards models are defined through the IETF, while similar ones are defined in other forums such as Openconfig or ONF.
Unlike service and network models, IETF-defined device models are not widely implemented.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-DM-RATIONALIZE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>There is a need to rationalize this space and avoid redundant efforts.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-cons">
        <name>The Network Becomes Consumable</name>
        <t>Network connectivity can support tailored services in terms of Service Level Obejctives (SLOs), for instance, by means of Network Slice Services <xref target="RFC9543"/>. This approach of "consuming" the network flexibly and dynamically is made possible by enabling means of exposing network capabilities to either internal or external applications. Then, network management is no longer limited to collect network status information, but it should be now extended to permit the exposure of resources, capabilities, functionality, and associated information (e.g., inventory based data).</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-EASE-EXPOSURE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Focus on protocols and data models to expose network/service capabilities, network-wide services, and related operations.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-NW-API-DISCOVERY:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Define a reference approach/process for service exposure discovery (APIs discovery).</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-api">
        <name>Network APIfication</name>
        <t>APIs are getting momentum as means of interworking between parties, also at the time of providing network services. As an example, <xref target="I-D.ramseyer-grow-peering-api"/> defines an API for dynamically establishing BGP peering sessions between Autonomous Systems of different administrative domains. That same objective is also covered by the YANG data model defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit"/> as exemplified in Appendix A.10. Tools such as YANG/OpenAPI transforms are key to leverage existing data models and allow for better integration and mapping to actual realization models.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-DM-API:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Readily available API specifications could be generalized from YANG modules for fast development, prototyping, and validation.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-pro">
        <name>Lack of Profiling</name>
        <t>Many NETCONF-related features are (being) specified by the IETF, but these features are not widely supported (e.g., YANG-Push <xref target="RFC8639"/>).</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-PROFILING:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Editing a profile document that outlines a set of recommendations for core/key features, along with appropriate justifications, will help foster more implementations that meet operators’ needs.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
        <ul empty="true">
          <li>
            <t>Examples of such profile documents are the various RFCs that were published by the Behavior Engineering for Hindrance Avoidance (behave) WG <xref target="BCP127"/>.
Another approach could be to consider a model similar to the "Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification Documents" <xref target="RFC7414"/>.
Such a document would serve as a guide and reference for implementers and others seeking information on 'NETCONF/RESTCONF/YANG'-related RFCs.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-REASSESS:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Additionally, reassessing the value of some IETF proposals compared to competing or emerging solutions (e.g., gRPC vs. YANG-Push) would be beneficial.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-agile">
        <name>Lack of Agile Process for (The Maintenance of) YANG Modules</name>
        <t>RFCs might not be suited for documenting YANG modules (it takes much too long, especiallly for updates). In the meantime, there is a need for "reference models" and "sufficiently stable models".</t>
        <t>An hybrid approach might be investigated for documenting IETF-endorsed YANG modules, such as considering an RFC to describe the initial module sketch and objectives and an official IETF repository for maintaining intermediate YANG versions.</t>
        <t>By drawing a parallel between YANG data models and the concept of ontology used in the field of Semantic Web, the topic of YANG module maintenance could greatly benefit from proven methodologies in knowledge engineering such as <xref target="LOT2019"/> and automatic documentation tools like <xref target="Widoco2017"/>.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-AGILE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Develop a more agile process for the development and maintenance of YANG modules in the IETF.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-int">
        <name>Integration Complexity</name>
        <t><xref section="3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC3535"/> describes a set of network operator requirements. One of the requirements is the ease of use which, according to <xref section="3.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC6244"/>, is addressed by NETCONF and YANG. For configuration this holds true, for network observability it is unfortunately not yet. This has been confirmed with a set of network operators asking how long it takes from subscribing YANG data to make it accessible to the operator. Minutes, Hours, Days, or Weeks. None of them answered Minutes or Hours. All of them responded Days or Weeks. Hinting manual post processing of YANG data.</t>
        <t>Collecting YANG metrics from networks is already a struggle due to late arrival of <xref target="RFC8639"/>, <xref target="RFC8640"/>, <xref target="RFC8641"/>, <xref target="I-D.ietf-netconf-https-notif"/>, and <xref target="I-D.ietf-netconf-udp-notif"/> for configured subscription transport protocols which defined YANG-Push in the industry. This caused network vendors to implement alternative solutions to collect real-time streaming data in the meanwhile, such as gNMI which was proposed in 2018 in <xref target="I-D.openconfig-rtgwg-gnmi-spec"/> to the IETF but not followed up on. Unfortunately, these implementations differ between network Operating Systems due to the lack of standardization, specifically for the metadata which would ensure machine readability.</t>
        <t>When a set of network operators where asked to where operational YANG data needs to be integrated to, the answer homogeneously was Apache Kafka Message Broker and Time Series Databases. There is a need to specify how YANG-Push can be integrated into Apache Kafka and references needed YANG-Push extensions and YANG schema registry development. The YANG-Push extensions addressing needs to make YANG-Push messages machine readable and against semantic validate able to ensure a consistent data processing.</t>
        <t>Another challenge is that the subscribed YANG data referenced with datastore-subtree-filter or datastore-xpath-filter breaks semantic integrity which needs to be addressed by either updating <xref section="4" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC8641"/> or proposing a new YANG module being used at the YANG-Push receiver.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-INTEGRATION:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Consider approaches to ease integration by-design (e.g., protocols and data models).</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-dama">
        <name>YANG-formatted Data Manipulation</name>
        <t>The use of a flat tree hierarchy in YANG models may induce some performance issues compared to other graph models.
This can be the case, for example, during a path calculation on a network topology.
Different approaches using graph theory and compatible with YANG are currently available, but require further experimentation to generalize their adoption.
For instance, <xref target="ODL"/> implements an in-memory connected graph version of YANG-based data to enable fast breadth-first search (BFS).</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-Y2KG:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Need for a reference specification to translate YANG-based data into the knowledge graph (KG).</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
        <t>For example, <xref target="I-D.marcas-nmop-knowledge-graph-yang"/> and <xref target="I-D.tailhardat-nmop-incident-management-noria"/> discuss YANG-2-KG proposals to leverage automated reasoning and graph traversal techniques.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-SCALE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Consider approaches for YANG models to scale.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-map">
        <name>Translation and Mapping Between Service/Network and Device Models</name>
        <t>Navigating among multiple levels of the hierarchy (service, network, device) relies
currently on proprietary solutions to graft and translate between two layers. There
is no programmatic approach to ensure lossless mappings.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-LOSSLESS:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Consider programmatic approaches to ensure lossless mappings between service/network/device data models.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-con">
        <name>(In)Consistent Data Structures in Network Protocols for Data Export</name>
        <t>Network Telemetry, as described in <xref target="RFC9232"/>, involve a set of protocols. Due to the different requirements, one Network Telemetry protocol doesn't address all needs. This is mainly due to the nature of the subscribed data. BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) <xref target="RFC7854"/> adds monitoring and tracing capabilities natively to the BGP process to minimize the processing overhead. While IPFIX <xref target="RFC7011"/><xref target="RFC7012"/> can be applied according to <xref target="RFC5472"/> to gain visibility into the data and forwarding planes, due to the amount of data, sampling as defined in <xref target="RFC5476"/> and applied to IPFIX in <xref target="RFC5477"/> and aggregation as defined in <xref target="RFC7015"/> for IPFIX is needed to reduce the amount of exposed data. While YANG-Push focuses on exposing already YANG modelled data, which eases the correlation among network configuration and operational data.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC9232"/> is an informational document and does not specify what these Network Telemetry protocols should have in common to ensure consistent data structures for data export. While data types are fairly good aligned, a lack of metadata standardization among the Network Telemetry protocols is observed. In particular describing from where the metrics has been exported from and timestamping. In <xref section="4.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7854"/> timestamps are optional and sysName <xref target="RFC1213"/> is only carried in the BMP initiation message (<xref section="4.3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7854"/>), while the message header of IPFIX defined in <xref section="4.3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7011"/> lacks the sysName definition.</t>
        <t>The lack of information from where the data is being pushed from is only known to the Network Telemetry data collection due to the transport session being established from the network node exporting the information. When Network Telemetry messages are being transformed and forwarded, this information is being lost. Therefore, it is common among network operators to augment sysName and other metadata at the data collection.</t>
        <t>The same common principle applies to when observation timestamping is missing in the Network Telemetry message. Since the data collection is the closest element to the network, a time stamp is added to give the network operator at least the information when the Network Telemetry message was collected. However, since Network Telemetry addresses real-time streaming needs, this is often not accurate enough for data correlation.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-REUSABILITY:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Consider approach to ensure reuse/consistent data structure.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-limit">
        <name>Proprietary YANG Modules, CLI, and Limited Abstraction</name>
        <t>Leveraging on pluggins, propietary YANG models or even CLI is still the rule in many operations, sometimes forced by the need of operating legacy infrastructures.</t>
        <t>The complexity of developing and maintaining these means of operation is huge, as it is required to to cover many OS and vendors along the lifetime of the network device.</t>
        <t>Network models for the realization of services provide some "level" of abstraction and then automation.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-distinct">
        <name>Distinct Networks, Distinct Management Requirements</name>
        <t>From the time <xref target="RFC3535"/> was released up to now, new kind of services and applications have been developed and deployed over the time, with very diverse, and some times contradicting, requirements. Those services have been engineered on top of multi-service networks for the sake of efficiency and simplicity, accommodating such a variety of needs. As a result, services requiring mobility, data replication, large capacity, adaptability, multi-path support, determinism, etc., coexist on the same shared network, needing from it mechanisms for graceful operation.</t>
        <t>Likewise, such diversity of services also require different management capabilities. For example, session continuity, distribution trees, traffic engineering, congestion status notification, reordering, or on-time delivery impose very different management needs to be satisfied.</t>
        <t>This reality is different from the one existing at the time of <xref target="RFC3535"/>, and as such, the new identified needs can require from novel approaches to guarantee the aforementioned co-existence of services.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-NEW-NEED:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Some networks have specific network management requirements such as the need for asynchronous operations or constraints on data compactness. An example of such networks is Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) <xref target="RFC838"/> or DetNet <xref target="RFC8557"/>.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-dep">
        <name>Implications of External Dependency</name>
        <t>Networks are being updated to abandon the silo approach from the past towards an increasing convergence. Specifically, there are trends towards a tighter interaction and integration of different technologies previously considered as totally separated from an operational perspective. Examples of that trends are the IP and Optical integration (e.g., the introduction of colored interfaces on routers), or the extension of deterministic-behavior features to Layer 3 networks. This kind of convergence in most cases creates dependencies on the conventional network management features, which require to incorporate or integrate functionality from other technological domains.</t>
        <t>Such convergence is also reflected on the need of interacting and interworking with distinct network parts participating in the end-to-end service delivery. Mobile access, fixed access, data center, enterprise, radio functional split (i.e., fronthaul and midhaul), neutral exchanges, intensive data networks (e.g., scientific academic networks), content distribution, etc., represent network parts constituent of end-to-end services that can impose dependencies of the management of an intermediate network.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-UNSILO:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>The convergence observed in recent years also implies the need for an up-to-date refresh of management capabilities and tools for conventional networks.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>It highlights the necessity to handle the heterogeneity of data, configuration, and network management/requirements.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>From a YANG perspective, this involves easily mapping and relating the data models used to manage each specific segment.</t>
          </dd>
          <dt/>
          <dd>
            <t>Resolving such issue could draw on insights from parallel technical fields such as knowledge engineering practices and concepts associated with Linked Data in the Semantic Web, areas where it is common to manage problems of heterogeneity and data reconciliation across various application domains.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-pub">
        <name>Too Much Time Between Publication of New Networking Functionality and the Associated YANG</name>
        <t>For example, <xref target="RFC8667"/> (IS-IS extensions for SR) was published in December 2019, while <xref target="I-D.ietf-isis-sr-yang"/> will be published ~5 years after.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-TIMELY-DM:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>Consider having YANG as part of the protocol specification/change where possible, or have the YANG document progress in parallel.
That may slow down the protocol specification, though.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-impl">
        <name>Lack of Implementation of Proposed Solutions</name>
        <t>New solutions proposed by WGs such as NETMOD and NETCONF very often lack an implementation or only have a partial implementation. The situation has improved with the last hackathons (e.g., for YANG-Push), but these solutions became RFCs without a known implementation:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>YANG-Push <xref target="RFC8641"/></t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Schema-mount <xref target="RFC8528"/></t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>NMDA <xref target="RFC8342"/></t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>Schema-mount allegedly has only one known implementation because of the complexity of the solution. That means the IETF most likely spent lots of cycles for something which won't be deployed ever.</t>
        <t>While hackathons have improved the situation, the availablability of implementation is concerning. For open-source, 'sysrepo'/'libyang' are decent choices.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-READILTY-IMPLEM:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>It is tempting to consider mandating at least one implementation. However, there were areas which imposed in the past rules for implementations for I-Ds to be published as PS (e.g., <xref target="RFC1264"/>), but these rules were relaxed for reasons described, e.g., <xref target="RFC4794"/> and left it to the WGs to decide about the actual measures to put in place. To date, only IDR WG has clear guidance on two implementations.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="tooling-skills">
        <name>Tooling &amp; Skills</name>
        <section anchor="sec-it">
          <name>Integration with "native" IT Tooling</name>
          <dl>
            <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-IT-INTEGRATION:</dt>
            <dd>
              <t>There is a need to ease the integration of low-level/network-oriented solution with native "IT tooling" (e.g., "https://opentelemetry.io/").</t>
            </dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec-ietf-in">
          <name>IETF Support for Better YANG Integration</name>
          <dl>
            <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-IETF-TOOLS</dt>
            <dd>
              <t>Ease exposure of libraries and host tools (e.g., <tt>yangkit</tt>) to ease integration.</t>
            </dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec-client">
          <name>Open-source Tools</name>
          <t>While there are open-source implementations for NETCONF (e.g., NETOPEER), the gRPC/gNMI suite seems to have more support for tools on the client side.
For example, "ygot" generates structures from YANG models and these can easily be used by a client to configure a device with gNMI. NETCONF is not supported though (we need the XML tags).</t>
          <dl>
            <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-CLIENT-TOOLS:</dt>
            <dd>
              <t>Focus on tooling is needed, especially on the client side.</t>
            </dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec-skills">
          <name>Skills</name>
          <t>The IETF is not the expert community in data engineering. The experts are in the data industry. Without them, integration in data processing chains like Data Mesh is going to be a challenge.</t>
          <dl>
            <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-BRIDGE:</dt>
            <dd>
              <t>Create an eco-system where data and networking engineers can collaborate.</t>
            </dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-new">
        <name>New Service Approaches</name>
        <t>The virtualization trend have made posible to dynamically instantiate Service Functions (SFs) in distributed compute facilities in the form of virtual machines or containers, as micro-services. The instantiation of the SFs is governed by cloud management systems, as it is the connectivity among the different instances or micro-services. That connectivity is typically realized by using overlay mechanisms, without any further interaction with the network. However, this appraoch seems to be insuficient for future services demanding stringent requirements in terms of SLOs.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-GLUE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>The distinct approaches followed in both the compute and the network environments makes necessary to define suitable mechanisms for enabling an efficient interplay, while highly automating the overall service delivery procedure.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec-guid">
        <name>Many Solutions for the Same Problem, but Lack of Clear Applicably Guidance</name>
        <t>There are several solutions that were standardized for network management purposes. For example, management of ACLs by means to BGP FlowSpec <xref target="RFC8955"/><xref target="RFC8956"/> or  by means of NETCONF/YANG <xref target="RFC8519"/>. There is no cross referencing between the two standards or delimits its applicability scope vs the other approach.</t>
        <dl>
          <dt>NEW-OPS-REQ-GUIDANCE:</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>The target application/applicability of a network management approach should be integrated in the specification itself.</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>This document does not define any protocol or architecture.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>This document has no IANA actions.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
      <name>Informative References</name>
      <reference anchor="ODL" target="https://docs.opendaylight.org/projects/bgpcep/en/latest/graph/graph-user-guide-graph-model.html#">
        <front>
          <title>Graph Model Overview</title>
          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2023"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="Widoco2017" target="http://dgarijo.com/papers/widoco-iswc2017.pdf">
        <front>
          <title>WIDOCO: a wizard for documenting ontologies</title>
          <author initials="D." surname="Garijo" fullname="Daniel Garijo">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2017"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="LOT2019" target="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2022.104755">
        <front>
          <title>LOT: An industrial oriented ontology engineering framework</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Poveda-Villalon" fullname="Maria Poveda-Villalon">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Fernandez-Izquierdo" fullname="Alba Fernandez-Izquierdo">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="M." surname="Fernandez-Lopez" fullname="Mariano Fernandez-Lopez">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="R." surname="Garcia-Castro" fullname="Raul Garcia-Castro">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2022"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3535">
        <front>
          <title>Overview of the 2002 IAB Network Management Workshop</title>
          <author fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" initials="J." surname="Schoenwaelder"/>
          <date month="May" year="2003"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document provides an overview of a workshop held by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) on Network Management. The workshop was hosted by CNRI in Reston, VA, USA on June 4 thru June 6, 2002. The goal of the workshop was to continue the important dialog started between network operators and protocol developers, and to guide the IETFs focus on future work regarding network management. This report summarizes the discussions and lists the conclusions and recommendations to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) community. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3535"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3535"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6241">
        <front>
          <title>Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
          <author fullname="R. Enns" initials="R." role="editor" surname="Enns"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <author fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Schoenwaelder"/>
          <author fullname="A. Bierman" initials="A." role="editor" surname="Bierman"/>
          <date month="June" year="2011"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) defined in this document provides mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the configuration of network devices. It uses an Extensible Markup Language (XML)-based data encoding for the configuration data as well as the protocol messages. The NETCONF protocol operations are realized as remote procedure calls (RPCs). This document obsoletes RFC 4741. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6241"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6241"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6020">
        <front>
          <title>YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <date month="October" year="2010"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration and state data manipulated by the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), NETCONF remote procedure calls, and NETCONF notifications. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6020"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6020"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7950">
        <front>
          <title>The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language</title>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <date month="August" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration data, state data, Remote Procedure Calls, and notifications for network management protocols. This document describes the syntax and semantics of version 1.1 of the YANG language. YANG version 1.1 is a maintenance release of the YANG language, addressing ambiguities and defects in the original specification. There are a small number of backward incompatibilities from YANG version 1. This document also specifies the YANG mappings to the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7950"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7950"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8040">
        <front>
          <title>RESTCONF Protocol</title>
          <author fullname="A. Bierman" initials="A." surname="Bierman"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <author fullname="K. Watsen" initials="K." surname="Watsen"/>
          <date month="January" year="2017"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes an HTTP-based protocol that provides a programmatic interface for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastore concepts defined in the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8040"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8040"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7149">
        <front>
          <title>Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider Environment</title>
          <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." surname="Boucadair"/>
          <author fullname="C. Jacquenet" initials="C." surname="Jacquenet"/>
          <date month="March" year="2014"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Software-Defined Networking (SDN) has been one of the major buzz words of the networking industry for the past couple of years. And yet, no clear definition of what SDN actually covers has been broadly admitted so far. This document aims to clarify the SDN landscape by providing a perspective on requirements, issues, and other considerations about SDN, as seen from within a service provider environment.</t>
            <t>It is not meant to endlessly discuss what SDN truly means but rather to suggest a functional taxonomy of the techniques that can be used under an SDN umbrella and to elaborate on the various pending issues the combined activation of such techniques inevitably raises. As such, a definition of SDN is only mentioned for the sake of clarification.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7149"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7149"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7426">
        <front>
          <title>Software-Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture Terminology</title>
          <author fullname="E. Haleplidis" initials="E." role="editor" surname="Haleplidis"/>
          <author fullname="K. Pentikousis" initials="K." role="editor" surname="Pentikousis"/>
          <author fullname="S. Denazis" initials="S." surname="Denazis"/>
          <author fullname="J. Hadi Salim" initials="J." surname="Hadi Salim"/>
          <author fullname="D. Meyer" initials="D." surname="Meyer"/>
          <author fullname="O. Koufopavlou" initials="O." surname="Koufopavlou"/>
          <date month="January" year="2015"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Software-Defined Networking (SDN) refers to a new approach for network programmability, that is, the capacity to initialize, control, change, and manage network behavior dynamically via open interfaces. SDN emphasizes the role of software in running networks through the introduction of an abstraction for the data forwarding plane and, by doing so, separates it from the control plane. This separation allows faster innovation cycles at both planes as experience has already shown. However, there is increasing confusion as to what exactly SDN is, what the layer structure is in an SDN architecture, and how layers interface with each other. This document, a product of the IRTF Software-Defined Networking Research Group (SDNRG), addresses these questions and provides a concise reference for the SDN research community based on relevant peer-reviewed literature, the RFC series, and relevant documents by other standards organizations.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7426"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7426"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8969">
        <front>
          <title>A Framework for Automating Service and Network Management with YANG</title>
          <author fullname="Q. Wu" initials="Q." role="editor" surname="Wu"/>
          <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Boucadair"/>
          <author fullname="D. Lopez" initials="D." surname="Lopez"/>
          <author fullname="C. Xie" initials="C." surname="Xie"/>
          <author fullname="L. Geng" initials="L." surname="Geng"/>
          <date month="January" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Data models provide a programmatic approach to represent services and networks. Concretely, they can be used to derive configuration information for network and service components, and state information that will be monitored and tracked. Data models can be used during the service and network management life cycle (e.g., service instantiation, service provisioning, service optimization, service monitoring, service diagnosing, and service assurance). Data models are also instrumental in the automation of network management, and they can provide closed-loop control for adaptive and deterministic service creation, delivery, and maintenance.</t>
            <t>This document describes a framework for service and network management automation that takes advantage of YANG modeling technologies. This framework is drawn from a network operator perspective irrespective of the origin of a data model; thus, it can accommodate YANG modules that are developed outside the IETF.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8969"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8969"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8568">
        <front>
          <title>Network Virtualization Research Challenges</title>
          <author fullname="CJ. Bernardos" initials="CJ." surname="Bernardos"/>
          <author fullname="A. Rahman" initials="A." surname="Rahman"/>
          <author fullname="JC. Zuniga" initials="JC." surname="Zuniga"/>
          <author fullname="LM. Contreras" initials="LM." surname="Contreras"/>
          <author fullname="P. Aranda" initials="P." surname="Aranda"/>
          <author fullname="P. Lynch" initials="P." surname="Lynch"/>
          <date month="April" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes open research challenges for network virtualization. Network virtualization is following a similar path as previously taken by cloud computing. Specifically, cloud computing popularized migration of computing functions (e.g., applications) and storage from local, dedicated, physical resources to remote virtual functions accessible through the Internet. In a similar manner, network virtualization is encouraging migration of networking functions from dedicated physical hardware nodes to a virtualized pool of resources. However, network virtualization can be considered to be a more complex problem than cloud computing as it not only involves virtualization of computing and storage functions but also involves abstraction of the network itself. This document describes current research and engineering challenges in network virtualization including the guarantee of quality of service, performance improvement, support for multiple domains, network slicing, service composition, device virtualization, privacy and security, separation of control concerns, network function placement, and testing. In addition, some proposals are made for new activities in the IETF and IRTF that could address some of these challenges. This document is a product of the Network Function Virtualization Research Group (NFVRG).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8568"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8568"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-bmwg-containerized-infra">
        <front>
          <title>Considerations for Benchmarking Network Performance in Containerized Infrastructures</title>
          <author fullname="Trần Minh Ngọc" initials="T. M." surname="Ngọc">
            <organization>Soongsil University</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Sridhar Rao" initials="S." surname="Rao">
            <organization>The Linux Foundation</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Jangwon Lee" initials="J." surname="Lee">
            <organization>Soongsil University</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Younghan Kim" initials="Y." surname="Kim">
            <organization>Soongsil University</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="4" month="November" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   Recently, the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group has extended the
   laboratory characterization from physical network functions (PNFs) to
   virtual network functions (VNFs).  Considering the network function
   implementation trend moving from virtual machine-based to container-
   based, system configurations and deployment scenarios for
   benchmarking will be partially changed by how the resources
   allocation and network technologies are specified for containerized
   network functions.  This draft describes additional considerations
   for benchmarking network performance when network functions are
   containerized and performed in general-purpose hardware.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-bmwg-containerized-infra-03"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9315">
        <front>
          <title>Intent-Based Networking - Concepts and Definitions</title>
          <author fullname="A. Clemm" initials="A." surname="Clemm"/>
          <author fullname="L. Ciavaglia" initials="L." surname="Ciavaglia"/>
          <author fullname="L. Z. Granville" initials="L. Z." surname="Granville"/>
          <author fullname="J. Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura"/>
          <date month="October" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Intent and Intent-Based Networking are taking the industry by storm. At the same time, terms related to Intent-Based Networking are often used loosely and inconsistently, in many cases overlapping and confused with other concepts such as "policy." This document clarifies the concept of "intent" and provides an overview of the functionality that is associated with it. The goal is to contribute towards a common and shared understanding of terms, concepts, and functionality that can be used as the foundation to guide further definition of associated research and engineering problems and their solutions.</t>
            <t>This document is a product of the IRTF Network Management Research Group (NMRG). It reflects the consensus of the research group, having received many detailed and positive reviews by research group participants. It is published for informational purposes.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9315"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9315"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8199">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Module Classification</title>
          <author fullname="D. Bogdanovic" initials="D." surname="Bogdanovic"/>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." surname="Claise"/>
          <author fullname="C. Moberg" initials="C." surname="Moberg"/>
          <date month="July" year="2017"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications throughout the networking industry at large. Many standards development organizations (SDOs), open-source software projects, vendors, and users are using YANG to develop and publish YANG modules for a wide variety of applications. At the same time, there is currently no well-known terminology to categorize various types of YANG modules.</t>
            <t>A consistent terminology would help with the categorization of YANG modules, assist in the analysis of the YANG data modeling efforts in the IETF and other organizations, and bring clarity to the YANG- related discussions between the different groups.</t>
            <t>This document describes a set of concepts and associated terms to support consistent classification of YANG modules.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8199"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8199"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8309">
        <front>
          <title>Service Models Explained</title>
          <author fullname="Q. Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu"/>
          <author fullname="W. Liu" initials="W." surname="Liu"/>
          <author fullname="A. Farrel" initials="A." surname="Farrel"/>
          <date month="January" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The IETF has produced many modules in the YANG modeling language. The majority of these modules are used to construct data models to model devices or monolithic functions.</t>
            <t>A small number of YANG modules have been defined to model services (for example, the Layer 3 Virtual Private Network Service Model (L3SM) produced by the L3SM working group and documented in RFC 8049).</t>
            <t>This document describes service models as used within the IETF and also shows where a service model might fit into a software-defined networking architecture. Note that service models do not make any assumption of how a service is actually engineered and delivered for a customer; details of how network protocols and devices are engineered to deliver a service are captured in other modules that are not exposed through the interface between the customer and the provider.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8309"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8309"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9232">
        <front>
          <title>Network Telemetry Framework</title>
          <author fullname="H. Song" initials="H." surname="Song"/>
          <author fullname="F. Qin" initials="F." surname="Qin"/>
          <author fullname="P. Martinez-Julia" initials="P." surname="Martinez-Julia"/>
          <author fullname="L. Ciavaglia" initials="L." surname="Ciavaglia"/>
          <author fullname="A. Wang" initials="A." surname="Wang"/>
          <date month="May" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Network telemetry is a technology for gaining network insight and facilitating efficient and automated network management. It encompasses various techniques for remote data generation, collection, correlation, and consumption. This document describes an architectural framework for network telemetry, motivated by challenges that are encountered as part of the operation of networks and by the requirements that ensue. This document clarifies the terminology and classifies the modules and components of a network telemetry system from different perspectives. The framework and taxonomy help to set a common ground for the collection of related work and provide guidance for related technique and standard developments.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9232"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9232"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7951">
        <front>
          <title>JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG</title>
          <author fullname="L. Lhotka" initials="L." surname="Lhotka"/>
          <date month="August" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines encoding rules for representing configuration data, state data, parameters of Remote Procedure Call (RPC) operations or actions, and notifications defined using YANG as JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) text.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7951"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7951"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-core-comi">
        <front>
          <title>CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF)</title>
          <author fullname="Michel Veillette" initials="M." surname="Veillette">
            <organization>Trilliant Networks Inc.</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Peter Van der Stok" initials="P." surname="Van der Stok">
            <organization>consultant</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Alexander Pelov" initials="A." surname="Pelov">
            <organization>IMT Atlantique</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Andy Bierman" initials="A." surname="Bierman">
            <organization>YumaWorks</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Carsten Bormann" initials="C." surname="Bormann">
            <organization>Universität Bremen TZI</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="3" month="November" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document describes a network management interface for
   constrained devices and networks, called CoAP Management Interface
   (CORECONF).  The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is used to
   access datastore and data node resources specified in YANG, or SMIv2
   converted to YANG.  CORECONF uses the YANG to CBOR mapping and
   converts YANG identifier strings to numeric identifiers for payload
   size reduction.  CORECONF extends the set of YANG based protocols,
   NETCONF and RESTCONF, with the capability to manage constrained
   devices and networks.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-core-comi-19"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9254">
        <front>
          <title>Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG in the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)</title>
          <author fullname="M. Veillette" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Veillette"/>
          <author fullname="I. Petrov" initials="I." role="editor" surname="Petrov"/>
          <author fullname="A. Pelov" initials="A." surname="Pelov"/>
          <author fullname="C. Bormann" initials="C." surname="Bormann"/>
          <author fullname="M. Richardson" initials="M." surname="Richardson"/>
          <date month="July" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>YANG (RFC 7950) is a data modeling language used to model configuration data, state data, parameters and results of Remote Procedure Call (RPC) operations or actions, and notifications.</t>
            <t>This document defines encoding rules for YANG in the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) (RFC 8949).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9254"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9254"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-core-sid">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Schema Item iDentifier (YANG SID)</title>
          <author fullname="Michel Veillette" initials="M." surname="Veillette">
            <organization>Trilliant Networks Inc.</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Alexander Pelov" initials="A." surname="Pelov">
            <organization>IMT Atlantique</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Ivaylo Petrov" initials="I." surname="Petrov">
            <organization>Google Switzerland GmbH</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Carsten Bormann" initials="C." surname="Bormann">
            <organization>Universität Bremen TZI</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Michael Richardson" initials="M." surname="Richardson">
            <organization>Sandelman Software Works</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="22" month="December" year="2023"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   YANG Schema Item iDentifiers (YANG SID) are globally unique 63-bit
   unsigned integers used to identify YANG items, as a more compact
   method to identify YANG items that can be used for efficiency and in
   constrained environments (RFC 7228).  This document defines the
   semantics, the registration, and assignment processes of YANG SIDs
   for IETF managed YANG modules.  To enable the implementation of these
   processes, this document also defines a file format used to persist
   and publish assigned YANG SIDs.


   // The present version (–24) is intended to address the remaining
   // IESG comments.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-core-sid-24"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6632">
        <front>
          <title>An Overview of the IETF Network Management Standards</title>
          <author fullname="M. Ersue" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Ersue"/>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." surname="Claise"/>
          <date month="June" year="2012"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document gives an overview of the IETF network management standards and summarizes existing and ongoing development of IETF Standards Track network management protocols and data models. The document refers to other overview documents, where they exist and classifies the standards for easy orientation. The purpose of this document is, on the one hand, to help system developers and users to select appropriate standard management protocols and data models to address relevant management needs. On the other hand, the document can be used as an overview and guideline by other Standard Development Organizations or bodies planning to use IETF management technologies and data models. This document does not cover Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) technologies on the data-path, e.g., OAM of tunnels, MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) OAM, and pseudowire as well as the corresponding management models. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6632"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6632"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8342">
        <front>
          <title>Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)</title>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <author fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" initials="J." surname="Schoenwaelder"/>
          <author fullname="P. Shafer" initials="P." surname="Shafer"/>
          <author fullname="K. Watsen" initials="K." surname="Watsen"/>
          <author fullname="R. Wilton" initials="R." surname="Wilton"/>
          <date month="March" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Datastores are a fundamental concept binding the data models written in the YANG data modeling language to network management protocols such as the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) and RESTCONF. This document defines an architectural framework for datastores based on the experience gained with the initial simpler model, addressing requirements that were not well supported in the initial model. This document updates RFC 7950.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8342"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8342"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8466">
        <front>
          <title>A YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) Service Delivery</title>
          <author fullname="B. Wen" initials="B." surname="Wen"/>
          <author fullname="G. Fioccola" initials="G." role="editor" surname="Fioccola"/>
          <author fullname="C. Xie" initials="C." surname="Xie"/>
          <author fullname="L. Jalil" initials="L." surname="Jalil"/>
          <date month="October" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to configure a Layer 2 provider-provisioned VPN service. It is up to a management system to take this as an input and generate specific configuration models to configure the different network elements to deliver the service. How this configuration of network elements is done is out of scope for this document.</t>
            <t>The YANG data model defined in this document includes support for point-to-point Virtual Private Wire Services (VPWSs) and multipoint Virtual Private LAN Services (VPLSs) that use Pseudowires signaled using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) and the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) as described in RFCs 4761 and 6624.</t>
            <t>The YANG data model defined in this document conforms to the Network Management Datastore Architecture defined in RFC 8342.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8466"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8466"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8299">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery</title>
          <author fullname="Q. Wu" initials="Q." role="editor" surname="Wu"/>
          <author fullname="S. Litkowski" initials="S." surname="Litkowski"/>
          <author fullname="L. Tomotaki" initials="L." surname="Tomotaki"/>
          <author fullname="K. Ogaki" initials="K." surname="Ogaki"/>
          <date month="January" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a YANG data model that can be used for communication between customers and network operators and to deliver a Layer 3 provider-provisioned VPN service. This document is limited to BGP PE-based VPNs as described in RFCs 4026, 4110, and 4364. This model is intended to be instantiated at the management system to deliver the overall service. It is not a configuration model to be used directly on network elements. This model provides an abstracted view of the Layer 3 IP VPN service configuration components. It will be up to the management system to take this model as input and use specific configuration models to configure the different network elements to deliver the service. How the configuration of network elements is done is out of scope for this document.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 8049; it replaces the unimplementable module in that RFC with a new module with the same name that is not backward compatible. The changes are a series of small fixes to the YANG module and some clarifications to the text.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8299"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8299"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9291">
        <front>
          <title>A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 2 VPNs</title>
          <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Boucadair"/>
          <author fullname="O. Gonzalez de Dios" initials="O." role="editor" surname="Gonzalez de Dios"/>
          <author fullname="S. Barguil" initials="S." surname="Barguil"/>
          <author fullname="L. Munoz" initials="L." surname="Munoz"/>
          <date month="September" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines an L2VPN Network Model (L2NM) that can be used to manage the provisioning of Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) services within a network (e.g., a service provider network). The L2NM complements the L2VPN Service Model (L2SM) by providing a network-centric view of the service that is internal to a service provider. The L2NM is particularly meant to be used by a network controller to derive the configuration information that will be sent to relevant network devices.</t>
            <t>Also, this document defines a YANG module to manage Ethernet segments and the initial versions of two IANA-maintained modules that include a set of identities of BGP Layer 2 encapsulation types and pseudowire types.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9291"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9291"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9182">
        <front>
          <title>A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 3 VPNs</title>
          <author fullname="S. Barguil" initials="S." surname="Barguil"/>
          <author fullname="O. Gonzalez de Dios" initials="O." role="editor" surname="Gonzalez de Dios"/>
          <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Boucadair"/>
          <author fullname="L. Munoz" initials="L." surname="Munoz"/>
          <author fullname="A. Aguado" initials="A." surname="Aguado"/>
          <date month="February" year="2022"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>As a complement to the Layer 3 Virtual Private Network Service Model (L3SM), which is used for communication between customers and service providers, this document defines an L3VPN Network Model (L3NM) that can be used for the provisioning of Layer 3 Virtual Private Network (L3VPN) services within a service provider network. The model provides a network-centric view of L3VPN services.</t>
            <t>The L3NM is meant to be used by a network controller to derive the configuration information that will be sent to relevant network devices. The model can also facilitate communication between a service orchestrator and a network controller/orchestrator.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9182"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9182"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Data Models for Bearers and 'Attachment Circuits'-as-a-Service (ACaaS)</title>
          <author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair" initials="M." surname="Boucadair">
            <organization>Orange</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Richard Roberts" initials="R." surname="Roberts">
            <organization>Juniper</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Oscar Gonzalez de Dios" initials="O. G." surname="de Dios">
            <organization>Telefonica</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Samier Barguil" initials="S." surname="Barguil">
            <organization>Nokia</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Bo Wu" initials="B." surname="Wu">
            <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="7" month="November" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document specifies a YANG service data model for Attachment
   Circuits (ACs).  This model can be used for the provisioning of ACs
   before or during service provisioning (e.g., Network Slice Service).
   The document also specifies a service model for managing bearers over
   which ACs are established.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-18"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit">
        <front>
          <title>A Network YANG Data Model for Attachment Circuits</title>
          <author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair" initials="M." surname="Boucadair">
            <organization>Orange</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Richard Roberts" initials="R." surname="Roberts">
            <organization>Juniper</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Oscar Gonzalez de Dios" initials="O. G." surname="de Dios">
            <organization>Telefonica</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Samier Barguil" initials="S." surname="Barguil">
            <organization>Nokia</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Bo Wu" initials="B." surname="Wu">
            <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="7" month="November" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document specifies a network model for attachment circuits.  The
   model can be used for the provisioning of attachment circuits prior
   or during service provisioning (e.g., VPN, Network Slice Service).  A
   companion service model is specified in the YANG Data Models for
   Bearers and 'Attachment Circuits'-as-a-Service (ACaaS) (I-D.ietf-
   opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit).

   The module augments the base network ('ietf-network') and the Service
   Attachment Point (SAP) models with the detailed information for the
   provisioning of attachment circuits in Provider Edges (PEs).

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit-14"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9144">
        <front>
          <title>Comparison of Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) Datastores</title>
          <author fullname="A. Clemm" initials="A." surname="Clemm"/>
          <author fullname="Y. Qu" initials="Y." surname="Qu"/>
          <author fullname="J. Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura"/>
          <author fullname="A. Bierman" initials="A." surname="Bierman"/>
          <date month="December" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a Remote Procedure Call (RPC) operation to compare management datastores that comply with the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9144"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9144"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8341">
        <front>
          <title>Network Configuration Access Control Model</title>
          <author fullname="A. Bierman" initials="A." surname="Bierman"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <date month="March" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The standardization of network configuration interfaces for use with the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) or the RESTCONF protocol requires a structured and secure operating environment that promotes human usability and multi-vendor interoperability. There is a need for standard mechanisms to restrict NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol access for particular users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol operations and content. This document defines such an access control model.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 6536.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="91"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8341"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8341"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5345">
        <front>
          <title>Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Traffic Measurements and Trace Exchange Formats</title>
          <author fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" initials="J." surname="Schoenwaelder"/>
          <date month="October" year="2008"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) is widely deployed to monitor, control, and (sometimes also) configure network elements. Even though the SNMP technology is well documented, it remains relatively unclear how SNMP is used in practice and what typical SNMP usage patterns are.</t>
            <t>This document describes an approach to carrying out large-scale SNMP traffic measurements in order to develop a better understanding of how SNMP is used in real-world production networks. It describes the motivation, the measurement approach, and the tools and data formats needed to carry out such a study.</t>
            <t>This document was produced within the IRTF's Network Management Research Group (NMRG), and it represents the consensus of all of the active contributors to this group. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5345"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5345"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8791">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Data Structure Extensions</title>
          <author fullname="A. Bierman" initials="A." surname="Bierman"/>
          <author fullname="M. Björklund" initials="M." surname="Björklund"/>
          <author fullname="K. Watsen" initials="K." surname="Watsen"/>
          <date month="June" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes YANG mechanisms for defining abstract data structures with YANG.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8791"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8791"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9132">
        <front>
          <title>Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel Specification</title>
          <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Boucadair"/>
          <author fullname="J. Shallow" initials="J." surname="Shallow"/>
          <author fullname="T. Reddy.K" initials="T." surname="Reddy.K"/>
          <date month="September" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document specifies the Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) signal channel, a protocol for signaling the need for protection against Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks to a server capable of enabling network traffic mitigation on behalf of the requesting client.</t>
            <t>A companion document defines the DOTS data channel, a separate reliable communication layer for DOTS management and configuration purposes.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 8782.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9132"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9132"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5706">
        <front>
          <title>Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions</title>
          <author fullname="D. Harrington" initials="D." surname="Harrington"/>
          <date month="November" year="2009"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>New protocols or protocol extensions are best designed with due consideration of the functionality needed to operate and manage the protocols. Retrofitting operations and management is sub-optimal. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to authors and reviewers of documents that define new protocols or protocol extensions regarding aspects of operations and management that should be considered. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5706"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5706"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6353">
        <front>
          <title>Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)</title>
          <author fullname="W. Hardaker" initials="W." surname="Hardaker"/>
          <date month="July" year="2011"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes a Transport Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), that uses either the Transport Layer Security protocol or the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol. The TLS and DTLS protocols provide authentication and privacy services for SNMP applications. This document describes how the TLS Transport Model (TLSTM) implements the needed features of an SNMP Transport Subsystem to make this protection possible in an interoperable way.</t>
            <t>This Transport Model is designed to meet the security and operational needs of network administrators. It supports the sending of SNMP messages over TLS/TCP and DTLS/UDP. The TLS mode can make use of TCP's improved support for larger packet sizes and the DTLS mode provides potentially superior operation in environments where a connectionless (e.g., UDP) transport is preferred. Both TLS and DTLS integrate well into existing public keying infrastructures.</t>
            <t>This document also defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols. In particular, it defines objects for managing the TLS Transport Model for SNMP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="78"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6353"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6353"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9456">
        <front>
          <title>Updates to the TLS Transport Model for SNMP</title>
          <author fullname="K. Vaughn" initials="K." role="editor" surname="Vaughn"/>
          <date month="November" year="2023"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document updates RFC 6353 ("Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)") to reflect changes necessary to support Transport Layer Security version 1.3 (TLS 1.3) and Datagram Transport Layer Security version 1.3 (DTLS 1.3), which are jointly known as "(D)TLS 1.3". This document is compatible with (D)TLS 1.2 and is intended to be compatible with future versions of SNMP and (D)TLS.</t>
            <t>This document updates the SNMP-TLS-TM-MIB as defined in RFC 6353.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9456"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9456"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7860">
        <front>
          <title>HMAC-SHA-2 Authentication Protocols in User-Based Security Model (USM) for SNMPv3</title>
          <author fullname="J. Merkle" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Merkle"/>
          <author fullname="M. Lochter" initials="M." surname="Lochter"/>
          <date month="April" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document specifies several authentication protocols based on the SHA-2 hash functions for the User-based Security Model (USM) for SNMPv3 defined in RFC 3414. It obsoletes RFC 7630, in which the MIB MODULE-IDENTITY value was incorrectly specified.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7860"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7860"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3084">
        <front>
          <title>COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)</title>
          <author fullname="K. Chan" initials="K." surname="Chan"/>
          <author fullname="J. Seligson" initials="J." surname="Seligson"/>
          <author fullname="D. Durham" initials="D." surname="Durham"/>
          <author fullname="S. Gai" initials="S." surname="Gai"/>
          <author fullname="K. McCloghrie" initials="K." surname="McCloghrie"/>
          <author fullname="S. Herzog" initials="S." surname="Herzog"/>
          <author fullname="F. Reichmeyer" initials="F." surname="Reichmeyer"/>
          <author fullname="R. Yavatkar" initials="R." surname="Yavatkar"/>
          <author fullname="A. Smith" initials="A." surname="Smith"/>
          <date month="March" year="2001"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes the use of the Common Open Policy Service (COPS) protocol for support of policy provisioning (COPS-PR). [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3084"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3084"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3159">
        <front>
          <title>Structure of Policy Provisioning Information (SPPI)</title>
          <author fullname="K. McCloghrie" initials="K." surname="McCloghrie"/>
          <author fullname="M. Fine" initials="M." surname="Fine"/>
          <author fullname="J. Seligson" initials="J." surname="Seligson"/>
          <author fullname="K. Chan" initials="K." surname="Chan"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hahn" initials="S." surname="Hahn"/>
          <author fullname="R. Sahita" initials="R." surname="Sahita"/>
          <author fullname="A. Smith" initials="A." surname="Smith"/>
          <author fullname="F. Reichmeyer" initials="F." surname="Reichmeyer"/>
          <date month="August" year="2001"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document, the Structure of Policy Provisioning Information (SPPI), defines the adapted subset of SNMP's Structure of Management Information (SMI) used to write Policy Information Base (PIB) modules. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3159"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3159"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3317">
        <front>
          <title>Differentiated Services Quality of Service Policy Information Base</title>
          <author fullname="K. Chan" initials="K." surname="Chan"/>
          <author fullname="R. Sahita" initials="R." surname="Sahita"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hahn" initials="S." surname="Hahn"/>
          <author fullname="K. McCloghrie" initials="K." surname="McCloghrie"/>
          <date month="March" year="2003"/>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3317"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3317"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3318">
        <front>
          <title>Framework Policy Information Base</title>
          <author fullname="R. Sahita" initials="R." role="editor" surname="Sahita"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hahn" initials="S." surname="Hahn"/>
          <author fullname="K. Chan" initials="K." surname="Chan"/>
          <author fullname="K. McCloghrie" initials="K." surname="McCloghrie"/>
          <date month="March" year="2003"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a set of PRovisioning Classes (PRCs) and textual conventions that are common to all clients that provision policy using Common Open Policy Service (COPS) protocol for Provisioning.</t>
            <t>Structure of Policy Provisioning Information (SPPI) describes a structure for specifying policy information that can then be transmitted to a network device for the purpose of configuring policy at that device. The model underlying this structure is one of well-defined (PRCs) and instances of these classes (PRIs) residing in a virtual information store called the Policy Information Base (PIB).</t>
            <t>One way to provision policy is by means of the (COPS) protocol with the extensions for provisioning. This protocol supports multiple clients, each of which may provision policy for a specific policy domain such as QoS, virtual private networks, or security.</t>
            <t>As described in COPS usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR), each client supports a non-overlapping and independent set of PIB modules. However, some PRovisioning Classes are common to all subject-categories (client-types) and need to be present in each.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3318"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3318"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC3571">
        <front>
          <title>Framework Policy Information Base for Usage Feedback</title>
          <author fullname="D. Rawlins" initials="D." surname="Rawlins"/>
          <author fullname="A. Kulkarni" initials="A." surname="Kulkarni"/>
          <author fullname="K. Ho Chan" initials="K." surname="Ho Chan"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bokaemper" initials="M." surname="Bokaemper"/>
          <author fullname="D. Dutt" initials="D." surname="Dutt"/>
          <date month="August" year="2003"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes a portion of the Policy Information Base (PIB) to control policy usage collection and reporting in a device. The provisioning classes specified here allow a Policy Decision Point (PDP) to select which policy objects should collect usage information, what information should be collected and when it should be reported. This PIB requires the presence of other PIBs (defined elsewhere) that provide the policy objects from which usage information is collected. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3571"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3571"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9543">
        <front>
          <title>A Framework for Network Slices in Networks Built from IETF Technologies</title>
          <author fullname="A. Farrel" initials="A." role="editor" surname="Farrel"/>
          <author fullname="J. Drake" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Drake"/>
          <author fullname="R. Rokui" initials="R." surname="Rokui"/>
          <author fullname="S. Homma" initials="S." surname="Homma"/>
          <author fullname="K. Makhijani" initials="K." surname="Makhijani"/>
          <author fullname="L. Contreras" initials="L." surname="Contreras"/>
          <author fullname="J. Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura"/>
          <date month="March" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes network slicing in the context of networks built from IETF technologies. It defines the term "IETF Network Slice" to describe this type of network slice and establishes the general principles of network slicing in the IETF context.</t>
            <t>The document discusses the general framework for requesting and operating IETF Network Slices, the characteristics of an IETF Network Slice, the necessary system components and interfaces, and the mapping of abstract requests to more specific technologies. The document also discusses related considerations with monitoring and security.</t>
            <t>This document also provides definitions of related terms to enable consistent usage in other IETF documents that describe or use aspects of IETF Network Slices.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9543"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9543"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ramseyer-grow-peering-api">
        <front>
          <title>Peering API</title>
          <author fullname="Carlos Aguado" initials="C." surname="Aguado">
            <organization>Amazon</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Matt Griswold" initials="M." surname="Griswold">
            <organization>FullCtl</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Jenny Ramseyer" initials="J." surname="Ramseyer">
            <organization>Meta</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Arturo L. Servin" initials="A." surname="Servin">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Tom Strickx" initials="T." surname="Strickx">
            <organization>Cloudflare</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="4" month="November" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   We propose an API standard for BGP Peering, also known as interdomain
   interconnection through global Internet Routing.  This API offers a
   standard way to request public (settlement-free) peering, verify the
   status of a request or BGP session, and list potential connection
   locations.  The API is backed by PeeringDB OIDC, the industry
   standard for peering authentication.  We also propose future work to
   cover private peering, and alternative authentication methods.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ramseyer-grow-peering-api-06"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8639">
        <front>
          <title>Subscription to YANG Notifications</title>
          <author fullname="E. Voit" initials="E." surname="Voit"/>
          <author fullname="A. Clemm" initials="A." surname="Clemm"/>
          <author fullname="A. Gonzalez Prieto" initials="A." surname="Gonzalez Prieto"/>
          <author fullname="E. Nilsen-Nygaard" initials="E." surname="Nilsen-Nygaard"/>
          <author fullname="A. Tripathy" initials="A." surname="Tripathy"/>
          <date month="September" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a YANG data model and associated mechanisms enabling subscriber-specific subscriptions to a publisher's event streams. Applying these elements allows a subscriber to request and receive a continuous, customized feed of publisher-generated information.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8639"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8639"/>
      </reference>
      <referencegroup anchor="BCP127" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp127">
        <reference anchor="RFC4787" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4787">
          <front>
            <title>Network Address Translation (NAT) Behavioral Requirements for Unicast UDP</title>
            <author fullname="F. Audet" initials="F." role="editor" surname="Audet"/>
            <author fullname="C. Jennings" initials="C." surname="Jennings"/>
            <date month="January" year="2007"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines basic terminology for describing different types of Network Address Translation (NAT) behavior when handling Unicast UDP and also defines a set of requirements that would allow many applications, such as multimedia communications or online gaming, to work consistently. Developing NATs that meet this set of requirements will greatly increase the likelihood that these applications will function properly. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="127"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4787"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4787"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6888" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6888">
          <front>
            <title>Common Requirements for Carrier-Grade NATs (CGNs)</title>
            <author fullname="S. Perreault" initials="S." role="editor" surname="Perreault"/>
            <author fullname="I. Yamagata" initials="I." surname="Yamagata"/>
            <author fullname="S. Miyakawa" initials="S." surname="Miyakawa"/>
            <author fullname="A. Nakagawa" initials="A." surname="Nakagawa"/>
            <author fullname="H. Ashida" initials="H." surname="Ashida"/>
            <date month="April" year="2013"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines common requirements for Carrier-Grade NATs (CGNs). It updates RFC 4787.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="127"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6888"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6888"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7857" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7857">
          <front>
            <title>Updates to Network Address Translation (NAT) Behavioral Requirements</title>
            <author fullname="R. Penno" initials="R." surname="Penno"/>
            <author fullname="S. Perreault" initials="S." surname="Perreault"/>
            <author fullname="M. Boucadair" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Boucadair"/>
            <author fullname="S. Sivakumar" initials="S." surname="Sivakumar"/>
            <author fullname="K. Naito" initials="K." surname="Naito"/>
            <date month="April" year="2016"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document clarifies and updates several requirements of RFCs 4787, 5382, and 5508 based on operational and development experience. The focus of this document is Network Address Translation from IPv4 to IPv4 (NAT44).</t>
              <t>This document updates RFCs 4787, 5382, and 5508.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="127"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7857"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7857"/>
        </reference>
      </referencegroup>
      <reference anchor="RFC7414">
        <front>
          <title>A Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification Documents</title>
          <author fullname="M. Duke" initials="M." surname="Duke"/>
          <author fullname="R. Braden" initials="R." surname="Braden"/>
          <author fullname="W. Eddy" initials="W." surname="Eddy"/>
          <author fullname="E. Blanton" initials="E." surname="Blanton"/>
          <author fullname="A. Zimmermann" initials="A." surname="Zimmermann"/>
          <date month="February" year="2015"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document contains a roadmap to the Request for Comments (RFC) documents relating to the Internet's Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). This roadmap provides a brief summary of the documents defining TCP and various TCP extensions that have accumulated in the RFC series. This serves as a guide and quick reference for both TCP implementers and other parties who desire information contained in the TCP-related RFCs.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 4614.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7414"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7414"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6244">
        <front>
          <title>An Architecture for Network Management Using NETCONF and YANG</title>
          <author fullname="P. Shafer" initials="P." surname="Shafer"/>
          <date month="June" year="2011"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) gives access to native capabilities of the devices within a network, defining methods for manipulating configuration databases, retrieving operational data, and invoking specific operations. YANG provides the means to define the content carried via NETCONF, both data and operations. Using both technologies, standard modules can be defined to give interoperability and commonality to devices, while still allowing devices to express their unique capabilities.</t>
            <t>This document describes how NETCONF and YANG help build network management applications that meet the needs of network operators. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6244"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6244"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8640">
        <front>
          <title>Dynamic Subscription to YANG Events and Datastores over NETCONF</title>
          <author fullname="E. Voit" initials="E." surname="Voit"/>
          <author fullname="A. Clemm" initials="A." surname="Clemm"/>
          <author fullname="A. Gonzalez Prieto" initials="A." surname="Gonzalez Prieto"/>
          <author fullname="E. Nilsen-Nygaard" initials="E." surname="Nilsen-Nygaard"/>
          <author fullname="A. Tripathy" initials="A." surname="Tripathy"/>
          <date month="September" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document provides a Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) binding to the dynamic subscription capability of both subscribed notifications and YANG-Push.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8640"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8640"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8641">
        <front>
          <title>Subscription to YANG Notifications for Datastore Updates</title>
          <author fullname="A. Clemm" initials="A." surname="Clemm"/>
          <author fullname="E. Voit" initials="E." surname="Voit"/>
          <date month="September" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes a mechanism that allows subscriber applications to request a continuous and customized stream of updates from a YANG datastore. Providing such visibility into updates enables new capabilities based on the remote mirroring and monitoring of configuration and operational state.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8641"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8641"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-netconf-https-notif">
        <front>
          <title>An HTTPS-based Transport for YANG Notifications</title>
          <author fullname="Mahesh Jethanandani" initials="M." surname="Jethanandani">
            <organization>Kloud Services</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Kent Watsen" initials="K." surname="Watsen">
            <organization>Watsen Networks</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="1" month="February" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document defines a protocol for sending asynchronous event
   notifications similar to notifications defined in RFC 5277, but over
   HTTPS.  YANG modules for configuring publishers are also defined.
   Examples are provided illustrating how to configure various
   publishers.

   This document requires that the publisher is a "server" (e.g., a
   NETCONF or RESTCONF server), but does not assume that the receiver is
   a server.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-netconf-https-notif-15"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-netconf-udp-notif">
        <front>
          <title>UDP-based Transport for Configured Subscriptions</title>
          <author fullname="Guangying Zheng" initials="G." surname="Zheng">
            <organization>Huawei</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Tianran Zhou" initials="T." surname="Zhou">
            <organization>Huawei</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Thomas Graf" initials="T." surname="Graf">
            <organization>Swisscom</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Pierre Francois" initials="P." surname="Francois">
            <organization>INSA-Lyon</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Alex Huang Feng" initials="A. H." surname="Feng">
            <organization>INSA-Lyon</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Paolo Lucente" initials="P." surname="Lucente">
            <organization>NTT</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="21" month="October" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document describes a UDP-based protocol for YANG notifications
   to collect data from network nodes.  A shim header is proposed to
   facilitate the data streaming directly from the publishing process on
   network processor of line cards to receivers.  The objective is to
   provide a lightweight approach to enable higher frequency and less
   performance impact on publisher and receiver processes compared to
   already established notification mechanisms.


            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-16"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.openconfig-rtgwg-gnmi-spec">
        <front>
          <title>gRPC Network Management Interface (gNMI)</title>
          <author fullname="Rob Shakir" initials="R." surname="Shakir">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Anees Shaikh" initials="A." surname="Shaikh">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Paul Borman" initials="P." surname="Borman">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Marcus Hines" initials="M." surname="Hines">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Carl Lebsack" initials="C." surname="Lebsack">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Chris Morrow" initials="C." surname="Morrow">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="5" month="March" year="2018"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document describes the gRPC Network Management Interface (gNMI),
   a network management protocol based on the gRPC framework.  gNMI
   supports retrieval and manipulation of state from network elements
   where the data is represented by a tree structure, and addressable by
   paths.  The gNMI service defines operations for configuration
   management, operational state retrieval, and bulk data collection via
   streaming telemetry.  The authoritative gNMI specification is
   maintained at [GNMI-SPEC].

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-openconfig-rtgwg-gnmi-spec-01"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.marcas-nmop-knowledge-graph-yang">
        <front>
          <title>Knowledge Graphs for YANG-based Network Management</title>
          <author fullname="Ignacio Dominguez Martinez-Casanueva" initials="I. D." surname="Martinez-Casanueva">
            <organization>Telefonica</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Lucía Cabanillas Rodríguez" initials="L. C." surname="Rodríguez">
            <organization>Telefonica</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Pedro Martinez-Julia" initials="P." surname="Martinez-Julia">
            <organization>NICT</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="21" month="October" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   The success of the YANG language and YANG-based protocols for
   managing the network has unlocked new opportunities in network
   analytics.  However, the wide heterogeneity of YANG models hinders
   the consumption and analysis of network data.  Besides, data encoding
   formats and transport protocols will differ depending on the network
   management protocol supported by the network device.  These
   challenges call for new data management paradigms that facilitate the
   discovery, understanding, integration and access to silos of
   heterogenous YANG data, abstracting from the complexities of the
   network devices.

   This document introduces the knowledge graph paradigm as a solution
   to this data management problem, with focus on YANG-based network
   management.  The document provides background on related topics such
   as ontologies and graph standards, and shares guidelines for
   implementing knowledge graphs from YANG data.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-marcas-nmop-knowledge-graph-yang-05"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.tailhardat-nmop-incident-management-noria">
        <front>
          <title>Knowledge Graphs for Enhanced Cross-Operator Incident Management and Network Design</title>
          <author fullname="Lionel Tailhardat" initials="L." surname="Tailhardat">
            <organization>Orange</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Raphaël Troncy" initials="R." surname="Troncy">
            <organization>EURECOM</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Yoan Chabot" initials="Y." surname="Chabot">
            <organization>Orange</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="29" month="August" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   Operational efficiency in incident management on telecom and computer
   networks requires correlating and interpreting large volumes of
   heterogeneous technical information.  Knowledge graphs can provide a
   unified view of complex systems through shared vocabularies.  YANG
   data models enable describing network configurations and automating
   their deployment.  However, both approaches face challenges in
   vocabulary alignment and adoption, hindering knowledge capitalization
   and sharing on network designs and best practices.  To address this,
   the concept of a IT Service Management (ITSM) Knowledge Graph (KG) is
   introduced to leverage existing network infrastructure descriptions
   in YANG format and enable abstract reasoning on network behaviors.
   The key principle to achieve the construction of such ITSM-KG is to
   transform YANG representations of network infrastructures into an
   equivalent knowledge graph representation, and then embed it into a
   more extensive data model for Anomaly Detection (AD) and Risk
   Management applications.  In addition to use case analysis and design
   pattern analysis, an experiment is proposed to assess the potential
   of the ITSM-KG in improving network quality and designs.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-tailhardat-nmop-incident-management-noria-01"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7854">
        <front>
          <title>BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)</title>
          <author fullname="J. Scudder" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Scudder"/>
          <author fullname="R. Fernando" initials="R." surname="Fernando"/>
          <author fullname="S. Stuart" initials="S." surname="Stuart"/>
          <date month="June" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP), which can be used to monitor BGP sessions. BMP is intended to provide a convenient interface for obtaining route views. Prior to the introduction of BMP, screen scraping was the most commonly used approach to obtaining such views. The design goals are to keep BMP simple, useful, easily implemented, and minimally service affecting. BMP is not suitable for use as a routing protocol.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7854"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7854"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7011">
        <front>
          <title>Specification of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the Exchange of Flow Information</title>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Claise"/>
          <author fullname="B. Trammell" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Trammell"/>
          <author fullname="P. Aitken" initials="P." surname="Aitken"/>
          <date month="September" year="2013"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document specifies the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) protocol, which serves as a means for transmitting Traffic Flow information over the network. In order to transmit Traffic Flow information from an Exporting Process to a Collecting Process, a common representation of flow data and a standard means of communicating them are required. This document describes how the IPFIX Data and Template Records are carried over a number of transport protocols from an IPFIX Exporting Process to an IPFIX Collecting Process. This document obsoletes RFC 5101.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="77"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7011"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7011"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7012">
        <front>
          <title>Information Model for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)</title>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Claise"/>
          <author fullname="B. Trammell" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Trammell"/>
          <date month="September" year="2013"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines the data types and management policy for the information model for the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) protocol. This information model is maintained as the IANA "IPFIX Information Elements" registry, the initial contents of which were defined by RFC 5102. This information model is used by the IPFIX protocol for encoding measured traffic information and information related to the traffic Observation Point, the traffic Metering Process, and the Exporting Process. Although this model was developed for the IPFIX protocol, it is defined in an open way that allows it to be easily used in other protocols, interfaces, and applications. This document obsoletes RFC 5102.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7012"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7012"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5472">
        <front>
          <title>IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Applicability</title>
          <author fullname="T. Zseby" initials="T." surname="Zseby"/>
          <author fullname="E. Boschi" initials="E." surname="Boschi"/>
          <author fullname="N. Brownlee" initials="N." surname="Brownlee"/>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." surname="Claise"/>
          <date month="March" year="2009"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>In this document, we describe the applicability of the IP Flow Information eXport (IPFIX) protocol for a variety of applications. We show how applications can use IPFIX, describe the relevant Information Elements (IEs) for those applications, and present opportunities and limitations of the protocol. Furthermore, we describe relations of the IPFIX framework to other architectures and frameworks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5472"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5472"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5476">
        <front>
          <title>Packet Sampling (PSAMP) Protocol Specifications</title>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Claise"/>
          <author fullname="A. Johnson" initials="A." surname="Johnson"/>
          <author fullname="J. Quittek" initials="J." surname="Quittek"/>
          <date month="March" year="2009"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document specifies the export of packet information from a Packet SAMPling (PSAMP) Exporting Process to a PSAMP Collecting Process. For export of packet information, the IP Flow Information eXport (IPFIX) protocol is used, as both the IPFIX and PSAMP architecture match very well, and the means provided by the IPFIX protocol are sufficient. The document specifies in detail how the IPFIX protocol is used for PSAMP export of packet information. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5476"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5476"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5477">
        <front>
          <title>Information Model for Packet Sampling Exports</title>
          <author fullname="T. Dietz" initials="T." surname="Dietz"/>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." surname="Claise"/>
          <author fullname="P. Aitken" initials="P." surname="Aitken"/>
          <author fullname="F. Dressler" initials="F." surname="Dressler"/>
          <author fullname="G. Carle" initials="G." surname="Carle"/>
          <date month="March" year="2009"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This memo defines an information model for the Packet SAMPling (PSAMP) protocol. It is used by the PSAMP protocol for encoding sampled packet data and information related to the Sampling process. As the PSAMP protocol is based on the IP Flow Information eXport (IPFIX) protocol, this information model is an extension to the IPFIX information model. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5477"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5477"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7015">
        <front>
          <title>Flow Aggregation for the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Protocol</title>
          <author fullname="B. Trammell" initials="B." surname="Trammell"/>
          <author fullname="A. Wagner" initials="A." surname="Wagner"/>
          <author fullname="B. Claise" initials="B." surname="Claise"/>
          <date month="September" year="2013"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document provides a common implementation-independent basis for the interoperable application of the IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) protocol to the handling of Aggregated Flows, which are IPFIX Flows representing packets from multiple Original Flows sharing some set of common properties. It does this through a detailed terminology and a descriptive Intermediate Aggregation Process architecture, including a specification of methods for Original Flow counting and counter distribution across intervals.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7015"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7015"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC1213">
        <front>
          <title>Management Information Base for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets: MIB-II</title>
          <author fullname="K. McCloghrie" initials="K." surname="McCloghrie"/>
          <author fullname="M. Rose" initials="M." surname="Rose"/>
          <date month="March" year="1991"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This memo defines the second version of the Management Information Base (MIB-II) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="17"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="1213"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC1213"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC838">
        <front>
          <title>Who talks TCP?</title>
          <author fullname="D. Smallberg" initials="D." surname="Smallberg"/>
          <date month="January" year="1983"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This RFC is a survey of hosts to identify the implementation status of Telnet, FTP, and Mail on TCP. The list of hosts was taken from the NIC hostname table of 31-Dec-82. The tests were run on 18-Jan-83.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="838"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC0838"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8557">
        <front>
          <title>Deterministic Networking Problem Statement</title>
          <author fullname="N. Finn" initials="N." surname="Finn"/>
          <author fullname="P. Thubert" initials="P." surname="Thubert"/>
          <date month="May" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This paper documents the needs in various industries to establish multi-hop paths for characterized flows with deterministic properties.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8557"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8557"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8667">
        <front>
          <title>IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing</title>
          <author fullname="S. Previdi" initials="S." role="editor" surname="Previdi"/>
          <author fullname="L. Ginsberg" initials="L." role="editor" surname="Ginsberg"/>
          <author fullname="C. Filsfils" initials="C." surname="Filsfils"/>
          <author fullname="A. Bashandy" initials="A." surname="Bashandy"/>
          <author fullname="H. Gredler" initials="H." surname="Gredler"/>
          <author fullname="B. Decraene" initials="B." surname="Decraene"/>
          <date month="December" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).</t>
            <t>This document describes the IS-IS extensions that need to be introduced for Segment Routing operating on an MPLS data plane.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8667"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8667"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-isis-sr-yang">
        <front>
          <title>A YANG Data Model for IS-IS Segment Routing for the MPLS Data Plane</title>
          <author fullname="Stephane Litkowski" initials="S." surname="Litkowski">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Yingzhen Qu" initials="Y." surname="Qu">
            <organization>Futurewei Technologies</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Pushpasis Sarkar" initials="P." surname="Sarkar">
            <organization>Individual</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Ing-Wher (Helen) Chen" initials="H." surname="Chen">
            <organization>The MITRE Corporation</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Jeff Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura">
            <organization>Nvidia</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="1" month="July" year="2024"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document defines a YANG data module that can be used to
   configure and manage IS-IS Segment Routing for MPLS data plane.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-22"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8528">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Schema Mount</title>
          <author fullname="M. Bjorklund" initials="M." surname="Bjorklund"/>
          <author fullname="L. Lhotka" initials="L." surname="Lhotka"/>
          <date month="March" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a mechanism that adds the schema trees defined by a set of YANG modules onto a mount point defined in the schema tree in another YANG module.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8528"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8528"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC1264">
        <front>
          <title>Internet Engineering Task Force Internet Routing Protocol Standardization Criteria</title>
          <author fullname="R.M. Hinden" initials="R.M." surname="Hinden"/>
          <date month="October" year="1991"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This informational RFC presents procedures for creating and documenting Internet standards on routing protocols. These procedures have been established by the Internet Activities Board (IAB) in consultation with the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specifiy an Internet standard.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="1264"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC1264"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC4794">
        <front>
          <title>RFC 1264 Is Obsolete</title>
          <author fullname="B. Fenner" initials="B." surname="Fenner"/>
          <date month="December" year="2006"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>RFC 1264 was written during what was effectively a completely different time in the life of the Internet. It prescribed rules to protect the Internet against new routing protocols that may have various undesirable properties. In today's Internet, there are so many other pressures against deploying unreasonable protocols that we believe that existing controls suffice, and the RFC 1264 rules just get in the way. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4794"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4794"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8955">
        <front>
          <title>Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules</title>
          <author fullname="C. Loibl" initials="C." surname="Loibl"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hares" initials="S." surname="Hares"/>
          <author fullname="R. Raszuk" initials="R." surname="Raszuk"/>
          <author fullname="D. McPherson" initials="D." surname="McPherson"/>
          <author fullname="M. Bacher" initials="M." surname="Bacher"/>
          <date month="December" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a Border Gateway Protocol Network Layer Reachability Information (BGP NLRI) encoding format that can be used to distribute (intra-domain and inter-domain) traffic Flow Specifications for IPv4 unicast and IPv4 BGP/MPLS VPN services. This allows the routing system to propagate information regarding more specific components of the traffic aggregate defined by an IP destination prefix.</t>
            <t>It also specifies BGP Extended Community encoding formats, which can be used to propagate Traffic Filtering Actions along with the Flow Specification NLRI. Those Traffic Filtering Actions encode actions a routing system can take if the packet matches the Flow Specification.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes both RFC 5575 and RFC 7674.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8955"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8955"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8956">
        <front>
          <title>Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for IPv6</title>
          <author fullname="C. Loibl" initials="C." role="editor" surname="Loibl"/>
          <author fullname="R. Raszuk" initials="R." role="editor" surname="Raszuk"/>
          <author fullname="S. Hares" initials="S." role="editor" surname="Hares"/>
          <date month="December" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>"Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules" (RFC 8955) provides a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) extension for the propagation of traffic flow information for the purpose of rate limiting or filtering IPv4 protocol data packets.</t>
            <t>This document extends RFC 8955 with IPv6 functionality. It also updates RFC 8955 by changing the IANA Flow Spec Component Types registry.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8956"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8956"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8519">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs)</title>
          <author fullname="M. Jethanandani" initials="M." surname="Jethanandani"/>
          <author fullname="S. Agarwal" initials="S." surname="Agarwal"/>
          <author fullname="L. Huang" initials="L." surname="Huang"/>
          <author fullname="D. Blair" initials="D." surname="Blair"/>
          <date month="March" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a data model for Access Control Lists (ACLs). An ACL is a user-ordered set of rules used to configure the forwarding behavior in a device. Each rule is used to find a match on a packet and define actions that will be performed on the packet.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8519"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8519"/>
      </reference>
    </references>
    <?line 641?>

<section numbered="false" anchor="acknowledgments">
      <name>Acknowledgments</name>
      <t>Thanks to Christian Jacquenet and Jean-Michel Combes for their inputs.</t>
    </section>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
