[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05

TEAS Working Group                                               D. King
Internet-Draft                                        Old Dog Consulting
Intended status: Informational                                  J. Drake
Expires: December 18, 2020                              Juniper Networks
                                                                H. Zheng
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           June 16, 2020


Applicability of Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered Networks
                      (ACTN) to TE Network Slicing
             draft-king-teas-applicability-actn-slicing-05

Abstract

   Network abstraction is a technique that can be applied to a network
   domain that utilizes a set of policies to select network resources
   and obtain a view of potential connectivity across the network.

   Network slicing is an approach to network operations that builds on
   the concept of network abstraction to provide programmability,
   flexibility, and modularity.  It may use techniques such as Software
   Defined Networking (SDN) and Network Function Virtualization (NFV) to
   create multiple logical or virtual networks, each tailored for a set
   of services share the same set of requirements.

   Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) is
   described in RFC 8453.  It defines an SDN-based architecture that
   relies on the concept of network and service abstraction to detach
   network and service control from the underlying data plane.

   This document outlines the applicability of ACTN to transport network
   slicing in a Traffic Engineering (TE) network that utilizes IETF
   technology.  It also identifies the features of network slicing not
   currently within the scope of ACTN, and indicates where ACTN might be
   extended.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.





King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 18, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Requirements for Network Slicing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  Resource Slicing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.2.  Service Isolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.3.  Network Virtualization  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.4.  Control and Orchestration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered (TE) Networks
       (ACTN)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.1.  ACTN Virtual Network as a Network Slice . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.2.  Examples of ACTN Delivering Types of Network Slices . . .   8
       3.2.1.  ACTN Used for Virtual Private Line Model  . . . . . .   9
       3.2.2.  ACTN Used for VPN Delivery Model  . . . . . . . . . .  10
       3.2.3.  ACTN Used to Deliver a Virtual Consumer Network . . .  11
       3.2.4.  Network Slice Service Mapping from TE to ACTN VN
               Models  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.3.  ACTN VN Telemetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   8.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


1.  Introduction

   The principles of network resource separation are not new.  For
   years, separated overlay and logical (virtual) networking have
   existed, allowing multiple services to be deployed over a single
   physical network comprised of single or multiple layers.  However,
   several key differences exist that differentiate overlay and virtual
   networking from network slicing.

   A network slice is a virtual (that is, logical) network with its own
   network topology and a set of network resources that are used to
   provide connectivity that conforms to a specific Service Level
   Agreement (SLA) or Service Level Objective (SLO).  The network
   resources used to realize a network slice belong to the network that
   is sliced.  The resources may be assigned and dedicated to an
   individual slice, or they may be shared with other slices enabling
   different degrees of service guarantee and providing different levels
   of isolaiton between the traffic in each slice.

   The term "Transport Network Slice" is used to describe a network
   slice that is used to support another network service by carrying
   traffic across one or more networks.  A transport network slice could
   span multiple technologies (such as IP, MPLS, or optical) and
   multiple administrative domains.

   The logical network that is a transport network slice may be kept
   separate from other concurrent logical networks each with independent
   control and management.  Each can be created or modified on demand.

   At one end of the spectrum, a virtual private wire or a virtual
   private network (VPN) may be used to build a network slice.  In these
   cases, the network slices do not require the service provider to
   isolate network resources for the provision of the service - the
   service is "virtual".

   At the other end of the spectrum there may be a detailed description
   of a complex service that will meet the needs of a set of
   applications with connectivity and service function requirements that
   may include compute resource, storage capability, and access to
   content.  Such a service may be requested dynamically (that is,
   instantiated when an application needs it, and released when the
   application no longer needs it), and modified as the needs of the
   application change.  This type of enhanced VPN is described in more
   detail in [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn].

   Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN) [RFC8453] is a
   framework that facilitates the abstraction of underlying network
   resources to higher-layer applications and that allows nework



King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   operators to create virtual networks for their customers through the
   abstraction of the operators' network resources.  ACTN is described
   further in Section 3.

   This document outlines the application of ACTN and associated
   enabling technologies to provide transport network slicing in a
   network that utilizes IETF technologies such as IP, MPLS, or GMPLS.
   It describes how the ACTN functional components can be used to
   support model-driven partitioning of variable-sized bandwidth to
   facilitate network sharing and virtualization.  Furthermore, the use
   of model-based interfaces to dynamically request the instantiation of
   virtual networks can be extended to encompass requesting and
   instantiation of specific service functions (which may be both
   physical or virtual), and to partition network resources such as
   compute resource, storage capability, and access to content.

   Various efforts within the IETF are investigating the concept of
   network slicing (for example, [I-D.nsdt-teas-ns-framework]) and
   investigate the applicability of IETF protocols to the delivery of
   network slicing (for example, [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn]).  This
   document highlights how the ACTN approach might be extended to
   address the requirements of network slicing where the underlying
   network is TE-capable.  It is not the intention that this work
   contradicts or competes with other IETF work.

1.1.  Terminology

   This document uses the following terminology.  Many of these terms
   are in common usage in other work in the IETF and do not always have
   consistent meanings (see for example, [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn]
   and [I-D.nsdt-teas-ns-framework]).  The terms defined below are
   intended to give context and meaning for use in this document only
   and do not force wider applicability.

   Service Provider:  A server network or collection of server networks.
      The persons or organization responsible for operating such
      networks.

   Consumer:  Any application, client network, or customer of a service
      provider.

   Service Functions (SFs):  Components that provide specific functions
      within a network.  SFs are often combined in a specific sequence
      called a service function chain to deliver services [RFC7665].

   Resource:  Any feature including connectivity, compute, storage, and
      content delivery that forms part of or can be accessed through a




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


      network.  Resources may be shared between users, applications, and
      clients, or they may be dedicated for use by a unique consumer.

   Infrastructure Resources:  The hardware and software for hosting and
      connecting SFs.  These resources may include computing hardware,
      storage capacity, network resources (e.g., links and switching/
      routing devices enabling network connectivity), and physical
      assets for radio access.

   Service Level Agreement (SLA):  An agreement between a consumer and
      network provider that describes the quality with which features
      and functions are to be delivered.  It may include measures of
      bandwidth, latency, and jitter; the types of service (such as
      firewalls or billing) to be provided; the location, nature, and
      quantities of services (such as the amount and location of compute
      resources and the accelerators required).

   Network Slice:  An agreement between a consumer and a service
      provider to deliver network resources according to a specific
      service level agreement.  A slice could span multiple technologies
      (e.g., radio, transport and cloud) and administrative domains.

   Transport Network Slice:  A network slice that is used to support
      another network service by carrying traffic across one or more
      networks.  A transport network slice could span multiple transport
      technologies (such as IP, MPLS, or optical) and multiple
      administrative domains.

2.  Requirements for Network Slicing

   The concept of network slicing is a key capability to serve consumers
   with a wide variety of different service needs express in term of
   latency, reliability, capacity, and service function specific
   capabilities.

   This section outlines the key capabilities required to realize
   network slicing in an IETF technology network.  Consideration of
   slicing in other technology networks (such as radio access networks)
   is out of scope.

2.1.  Resource Slicing

   Network resources need to be allocated and dedicated for use by a
   specific network slice, or they may be shared among multiple slices.
   This allows a flexible approach that can deliver a range of services
   by partitioning (that is, slicing) the available network resources to
   present make them available to meet the consumer's SLA.




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


2.2.  Service Isolation

   A consumer may request, through their SLA, that the service deliver
   to them is isolated from any other services delivered to any other
   consumers.  That is, the SLA may request that changes to the other
   services do not have any negative impact on the delivery of the
   service.

   Delivery of such service isolation may be achieved in the underlying
   network by various forms of resource partitioning ranging from
   dedicated allocation of resources for a specific slice, to sharing or
   resources with safeguards.

   Although multiple network slices may utilize resources from a single
   underlying network, isolation should be understood in terms of:

   o  Performance isolation requires that service delivery on one
      network slice does not adversely impact congestion or performance
      levels of other slices.

   o  Security isolation means that attacks or faults occurring in one
      slice do not impact on other slices.  Moreover, the security
      functions supporting each slice must operate independently so that
      an attack or misconfiguration of security in one slice will not
      prevent proper security function in the other slices.

   o  Management isolation means that each slice must be independently
      viewed, utilized and managed as a separate network.  Furthermore,
      it should be possible to prevent the operator of one slice from
      being able to control, view, or detect any aspect of any other
      network slice.

2.3.  Network Virtualization

   Network virtualization enables the creation of multiple isolated
   virtual networks that are operationally decoupled from the underlying
   physical network, and are run on top of it.  Slicing should enable
   the creation of virtual networks as consumer services.

2.4.  Control and Orchestration

   Orchestration combines and coordinates multiple control methods to
   provide a mechanism to operate one or more networks to deliver
   services.  In a network slicing environment, an orchestrator is
   needed to coordinate disparate processes and resources for creating,
   managing, and deploying the end-to-end service.  Two aspects of
   orchestration are required:




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   o  Multi-domain Orchestration: Managing connectivity setup of the
      transport network slice across multiple administrative domains.

   o  End-to-end Orchestration: Combining resources for an end-to-end
      service (e.g., transport connectivity with firewalling and
      guaranteed bandwidth with minimum delay).

3.  Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered (TE) Networks (ACTN)

   ACTN facilitates end-to-end connections and provides them to the
   user.  The ACTN framework [RFC8453] introduces three functional
   components and two interfaces:

   o  Customer Network Controller (CNC)

   o  Multi-domain Service Coordinator (MDSC)

   o  Provisioning Network Controller (PNC)

   o  CNC-MDSC Interface (CMI)

   o  MDSC-PNC Interface (MPI)

   RFC 8453 also highlights how:

   o  Abstraction of the underlying network resources is provided to
      higher-layer applications and consumers.

   o  Virtualization is achieved by selecting resources according to
      criteria derived from the details and requirements of the
      consumer, application, or service.

   o  Creation of a virtualized environment is performed to allow
      operators to view and control multi-domain networks as a single
      virtualized network.

   o  The presentation of networks to a consumer as a single virtual
      network via open and programmable interfaces.

   The ACTN managed infrastructure consists of traffic engineered
   network resources, which may include:

   o  Statistical packet bandwidth.

   o  Physical forwarding plane sources, such as: wavelengths and time
      slots.

   o  Forwarding and cross-connect capabilities.



King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   The ACTN network is "sliced" with consumers being given a different
   partial and abstracted topology view of the physical underlying
   network.

3.1.  ACTN Virtual Network as a Network Slice

   To support multiple consumers, each with its own view of and control
   of the server network, a service provider needs to partition the
   server network resources to create slices assigned to each consumer.

   An ACTN Virtual Network (VN) is a consumer view that is a slice of
   the ACTN-managed infrastructure.  It is a network slice that is
   presented to the consumer by the ACTN provider as a set of abstracted
   resources.  See [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang] for detailed ACTN VN.

   Depending on the agreement between consumer and provider various VN
   operations possible:

   o  Network Slice Creation: A VN could be pre-configured and created
      through static configuration or through dynamic request and
      negotiation between consumer and service provider.  The VN must
      meet the network slice requirements specified in the SLA to
      satisfy the consumer's objectives.

   o  Network Slice Operations: The VN may be modified and deleted based
      on consumer requests.  The consumer can further act upon the VN to
      manage traffic flows across the network slice.

   o  Network Slice View: The VN topology may be viewed from the
      consumer's perspective.  This may be the entire VN topology or a
      collection of tunnels that are expressed as consumer end points,
      access links, intra domain paths and inter-domain links.

   [RFC8454] describes a set of functional primitives that support these
   different ACTN VN operations.

3.2.  Examples of ACTN Delivering Types of Network Slices

   The examples that follow build on the ACTN framework to provide
   control, management, and orchestration for the network slice life-
   cycle.  These network slices utilize common physical infrastructure,
   and meet specific requirements.

   Three examples are shown.  Each uses ACTN to achieve a different
   network slicing scenario.  All three scenarios can be scaled up in
   capacity or be subject to topology changes as well as changes of
   consumer requirements.




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


3.2.1.  ACTN Used for Virtual Private Line Model

   In the example shown in Figure 1, ACTN provides virtual connections
   between multiple consumer locations, requested by the requester of a
   Virtual Private Line (VPL) service (CNC-A).  Benefits of this model
   include:

   o  Automated: the service set-up and operation is network provider
      managed.

   o  Virtual: the private line connectivity is provided from Site A to
      Site C (VPL1) and from Site B to Site C (VPL2) across the ACTN-
      managed physical network.

   o  Agile: on-demand when the consumer needs connectivity and fully
      adjustable bandwidth.



































King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


                     (Consumer VPL Request)
                                :
                             -------
                            | CNC-A |
      Boundary               -------
      Between  . . . . . . . . .:. . . . . . . . . . .
      Consumer &                :
      Network Provider       ------
                            | MDSC |
                             ------
                                :
                              -----
                             | PNC |
           Site A           ( ----- )           Site B
           ------          (         )          ------
          | vCE1 |========(  Physical )========| vCE2 |
           ------          ( Network )          ------
                 \          (_______)          /
                  \             ||            /
                   \            ||           /
              VPL 1 \           ||          / VPL 2
                     \          ||         /
                      \         ||        /
                       \      ------     /
                        -----| vCE3 |----
                              ------
                              Site C

      Key:   ... ACTN control connectivity
             === Physical connectivity
             --- Logical connectivity


                   Figure 1: Virtual Private Line Model

3.2.2.  ACTN Used for VPN Delivery Model

   In the example shown in Figure 2, ACTN provides VPN connectivity
   between two sites across three physical networks.  The VPN requestor
   (CNC) is managed by the consumer expressed as users of the two VPN
   sites.  The CNC interacts with the network provider's MDSC.  Benefits
   of this model include:

   o  Provides edge-to-edge VPN multi-access connectivity.

   o  Most of the function is managed by the network provider, with some
      flexibility delegated to the consumer managed CNC.




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


                      --------------     --------------
                     | Site-A Users |   | Site-B Users |
                      --------------     --------------
                                 :         :
                                -------------
                               |     CNC     |
      Boundary                  -------------
      Between   . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . .
      Consumer &                      :
      Network Provider                :
                      ---------------------------------
                     |               MDSC              |
                      ---------------------------------
                       :              :              :
                       :              :              :
                    -------        -------        -------
                   |  PNC  |      |  PNC  |      |  PNC  |
                    -------        -------        -------
                       :              :              :
                       :              :              :
        ______       -----          -----          -----       ______
       <      >     (     )        (     )        (     )     <      >
       <Site A>====( Phys. )======( Phys. )======( Phys. )====<Site B>
       <      >     ( Net )        ( Net )        ( Net )     <      >
       <      >      -----          -----          -----      <      >
       <      >-----------------------------------------------<      >
       <______>                                               <______>

      Key:   ... ACTN control connectivity
             === Physical connectivity
             --- Logical connectivity


                            Figure 2: VPN Model

3.2.3.  ACTN Used to Deliver a Virtual Consumer Network

   In this example (shown in Figure 3), ACTN provides a virtual network
   to the consumer.  This virtual network is managed by the consumer.
   Benefits of this model include:

   o  The MDSC provides the topology as part of the consumer view so
      that the consumer can control their network slice to fit their
      needs.

   o  Service isolation can be provided through selection of physical
      netowrking resources.




King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   o  Applications can interact with their assigned network slices
      directly.  The consumer may implement their own network control
      methods and traffic prioritization, manage their own addressing
      schemes, and further slice their vitrual networks.

   o  The network slice may include nodes with specific capabilities.
      These are delivered as Physical Network Functions (PNFs) or
      Virtual Network Functions (VNFs).


                      -------------             (  Network  )
                     |    CNC      |----------->(  Slice 2  )
                      -------------           __(________   )
                   -------------             (           )__)
                  |    CNC      |----------->(  Network  ) ^
                   -------------             (  Slice 1  ) :
                        ^                    (___________) :
                        |                        ^    ^    :
      Boundary          |                        :    :    :
      Between    . . . .|. . . . . . . . . . . . : . .:. . : . . .
      Consumer &        |                        :    :    :
      Network Provider  |                        :    :    :
                        v                        :    :    :
                   -------------                 :    :....:
                  |    MDSC     |                :         :
                   -------------                 :         :
                        ^                  ------^--       :
                        |                 (         )      :
                        v                (  Physical )     :
                     -------              ( Network )      :
                    |  PNC  |<------------>(       )    ---^-----
                   -------  |               -------    (         )
                  |  PNC  |-                          (  Physical )
                  |       |<-------------------------->( Network )
                   -------                              (       )
                                                         -------

      Key: --- ACTN control connection
           ... Virtualization/abstraction through slicing


                         Figure 3: Network Slicing

3.2.4.  Network Slice Service Mapping from TE to ACTN VN Models

   The role of the TE-service mapping model
   [I-D.ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang] is to create a binding
   relationship across a Layer 3 Service Model (L3SM) [RFC8049], Layer 2



King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   Service Model (L2SM) [RFC8466], and TE Tunnel model
   [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te], via the generic ACTN Virtual Network (VN)
   model [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang].

   The ACTN VN model is a generic virtual network service model that
   allows consumers to specify a VN that meets the consumer's service
   objectives with various constraints on how the service is delivered.

   The TE-service mapping model [I-D.ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang]
   is used to bind the L3SM with TE-specific parameters.  This binding
   facilitates seamless service operation and enables visibility of the
   underlay TE network.  The TE-service model developed in that document
   can also be extended to support other services including L2SM, and
   the Layer 1 Connectivity Service Model (L1CSM)
   [I-D.ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang] L1CSM network service models.

   Figure 4 shows the relationship between the models discussed above.


       --------------          --------------
      |    L3SM      |<=======|              |            ----------
       --------------  augment|              |..........>| ACTN VN  |
       --------------         |   Augmented  | reference  ----------
      |    L2SM      |<=======|   Service    |
       --------------  augment|   Model      |            ----------
       --------------         |              |..........>| TE-topo  |
      |    L1CSM     |<=======|              | reference  ----------
       --------------  augment|              |
       --------------         |              |            ----------
      | TE & Service |------->|              |..........>| TE-tunnel|
      | Mapping Types| import  --------------  reference  ----------
       --------------


                       Figure 4: TE-Service Mapping

3.3.  ACTN VN Telemetry

   The ACTN VN KPI telemetry model
   [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-pm-telemetry-autonomics] provides a way for a
   consumer to define performance monitoring relevant for its VN/network
   slice via the NETCONF subscription mechanisms [RFC8639], [RFC8640] or
   the equivalent mechanisms in RESTCONF [RFC8641], [RFC8650].

   Key characteristics of [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-pm-telemetry-autonomics]
   include:





King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   o  An ability to provide scalable VN-level telemetry aggregation
      based on consumer subscription model for key performance
      parameters defined by the consumer.

   o  An ability to facilitate proactive re-optimization and
      reconfiguration of VNs/network slices based on network autonomic
      traffic engineering scaling configuration mechanism.

4.  IANA Considerations

   This document makes no requests for action by IANA.

5.  Security Considerations

   Network slicing involves the control of network resources in order to
   meet the service requirements of consumers.  In some deployment
   models, the consumer is able to directly request modification in the
   behaviour of resources owned and operated by a service provider.
   Such changes could significantly affect the service provider's
   ability to provide services to other consumers.  Furthermore, the
   resources allocated for or consumed by a consumer will normally be
   billable by the service provider.

   Therefore, it is crucial that the mechanisms used in any network
   slicing system allow for authentication of requests, security of
   those requests, and tracking of resource allocations.

   It should also be noted that while the partitioning or slicing of
   resources is virtual, the consumers expect and require that there is
   no risk of leakage of data from one slice to another, no transfer of
   knowledge of the structure or even existence of other slices, and
   that changes to one slice (under the control of one consumer) should
   not have detrimental effects on the operation of other slices
   (whether under control of different or the same consumers) beyond the
   limits allowed within the SLA.  Thus, slices are assumed to be
   private and to provide the appearance of genuine physical
   connectivity.

   ACTN operates using the NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]
   protocols and assumes the security characteristics of those
   protocols.  Deployment models for ACTN should fully explore the
   authentication and other security aspects before networks start to
   carry live traffic.








King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


6.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to Qin Wu, Andy Jones, Ramon Casellas, and Gert Grammel for
   their insight and useful discussions about network slicing.

7.  Contributors

   The following people contributed text to this document.

         Young Lee
         Email: younglee.tx@gmail.com

         Mohamed Boucadair
         Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com

         Sergio Belotti
         Email: sergio.belotti@nokia.com

         Daniele Ceccarelli
         Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com

         Adrian Farrel
         adrian@olddog.co.uk


8.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang]
              Lee, Y., Lee, K., Zheng, H., Dhody, D., Dios, O., and D.
              Ceccarelli, "A YANG Data Model for L1 Connectivity Service
              Model (L1CSM)", draft-ietf-ccamp-l1csm-yang-11 (work in
              progress), March 2020.

   [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-pm-telemetry-autonomics]
              Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Karunanithi, S., Vilata, R., King, D.,
              and D. Ceccarelli, "YANG models for VN/TE Performance
              Monitoring Telemetry and Scaling Intent Autonomics",
              draft-ietf-teas-actn-pm-telemetry-autonomics-02 (work in
              progress), March 2020.

   [I-D.ietf-teas-actn-vn-yang]
              Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., Bryskin, I., and B.
              Yoon, "A Yang Data Model for VN Operation", draft-ietf-
              teas-actn-vn-yang-08 (work in progress), March 2020.







King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn]
              Dong, J., Bryant, S., Li, Z., Miyasaka, T., and Y. Lee, "A
              Framework for Enhanced Virtual Private Networks (VPN+)
              Services", draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-05 (work in
              progress), February 2020.

   [I-D.ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-yang]
              Lee, Y., Dhody, D., Fioccola, G., WU, Q., Ceccarelli, D.,
              and J. Tantsura, "Traffic Engineering (TE) and Service
              Mapping Yang Model", draft-ietf-teas-te-service-mapping-
              yang-03 (work in progress), March 2020.

   [I-D.ietf-teas-yang-te]
              Saad, T., Gandhi, R., Liu, X., Beeram, V., and I. Bryskin,
              "A YANG Data Model for Traffic Engineering Tunnels and
              Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-23 (work in
              progress), March 2020.

   [I-D.nsdt-teas-ns-framework]
              Gray, E. and J. Drake, "Framework for Transport Network
              Slices", draft-nsdt-teas-ns-framework-03 (work in
              progress), April 2020.

   [RFC6241]  Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
              and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
              (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.

   [RFC7665]  Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function
              Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7665>.

   [RFC8040]  Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
              Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.

   [RFC8049]  Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki, "YANG Data
              Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8049,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8049, February 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8049>.

   [RFC8453]  Ceccarelli, D., Ed. and Y. Lee, Ed., "Framework for
              Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)", RFC 8453,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8453, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8453>.





King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft          ACTN and Network Slicing               June 2020


   [RFC8454]  Lee, Y., Belotti, S., Dhody, D., Ceccarelli, D., and B.
              Yoon, "Information Model for Abstraction and Control of TE
              Networks (ACTN)", RFC 8454, DOI 10.17487/RFC8454,
              September 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8454>.

   [RFC8466]  Wen, B., Fioccola, G., Ed., Xie, C., and L. Jalil, "A YANG
              Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN)
              Service Delivery", RFC 8466, DOI 10.17487/RFC8466, October
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8466>.

   [RFC8639]  Voit, E., Clemm, A., Gonzalez Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard,
              E., and A. Tripathy, "Subscription to YANG Notifications",
              RFC 8639, DOI 10.17487/RFC8639, September 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8639>.

   [RFC8640]  Voit, E., Clemm, A., Gonzalez Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard,
              E., and A. Tripathy, "Dynamic Subscription to YANG Events
              and Datastores over NETCONF", RFC 8640,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8640, September 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8640>.

   [RFC8641]  Clemm, A. and E. Voit, "Subscription to YANG Notifications
              for Datastore Updates", RFC 8641, DOI 10.17487/RFC8641,
              September 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8641>.

   [RFC8650]  Voit, E., Rahman, R., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., Clemm, A., and
              A. Bierman, "Dynamic Subscription to YANG Events and
              Datastores over RESTCONF", RFC 8650, DOI 10.17487/RFC8650,
              November 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8650>.

Authors' Addresses

   Daniel King
   Old Dog Consulting

   Email: daniel@olddog.co.uk


   John Drake
   Juniper Networks

   Email: jdrake@juniper.net


   Haomian Zheng
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: zhenghaomian@huawei.com



King, et al.            Expires December 18, 2020              [Page 17]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/