<?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 1.7.19 (Ruby 3.3.3) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-boucadair-nmop-rfc3535-20years-later-05" category="info" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.23.2 -->
  <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-05"/>
    <author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair">
      <organization>Orange</organization>
      <address>
        <email>mohamed.boucadair@orange.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Luis Miguel Contreras Murillo">
      <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.co</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="October" day="16"/>
    <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="30" month="September" 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-02"/>
      </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="23" month="July" 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-18"/>
      </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="10" month="October" 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.

   Also, the document specifies a set of reusable groupings.  Whether
   other service models reuse structures defined in the AC models or
   simply include an AC reference is a design choice of these service
   models.  Utilizing the AC service model to manage ACs over which a
   service is delivered has the advantage of decoupling service
   management from upgrading AC components to incorporate recent AC
   technologies or features.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-17"/>
      </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="5" month="September" 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-13"/>
      </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. L." surname="Servin">
            <organization>Google</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Tom Strickx" initials="T." surname="Strickx">
            <organization>Cloudflare</organization>
          </author>
          <date day="30" month="May" 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-05"/>
      </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="4" month="July" 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-14"/>
      </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>
          <date day="5" month="July" 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-03"/>
      </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>
