RFC 8921: Dynamic Service Negotiation: The Connectivity Provisioning Negotiation Protocol (CPNP)
- M. Boucadair, Ed.,
- C. Jacquenet,
- D. Zhang,
- P. Georgatsos
Abstract
This document defines the Connectivity Provisioning Negotiation Protocol (CPNP), which is designed to facilitate the dynamic negotiation of service parameters.¶
CPNP is a generic protocol that can be used for various negotiation purposes that include (but are not necessarily limited to) connectivity provisioning services, storage facilities, Content Delivery Networks, etc.¶
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.¶
This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its discretion and makes no statement about its value for implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by the RFC Editor are not candidates for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://
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://
1. Introduction
This document defines the Connectivity Provisioning Negotiation
Protocol (CPNP) that is meant to dynamically exchange and negotiate
connectivity provisioning parameters and other service
CPNP is a generic protocol that can be used for negotiation purposes other than connectivity provisioning. For example, CPNP can be used to request extra storage resources, to extend the footprint of a Content Delivery Network (CDN), to enable additional features from a cloud Provider, etc. CPNP can be extended with new Information Elements (IEs). Sample negotiation use cases are described in Section 5. Section 4 introduces several order processing models and defines those that are targeted by CPNP. The CPNP negotiation model is then detailed in Section 7.¶
[RFC7297] describes a Connectivity Provisioning Profile (CPP) template to capture connectivity requirements to be met by a transport infrastructure for the delivery of various services such as Voice over IP (VoIP), IPTV, and Virtual Private Network (VPN) services [RFC4026]. The CPP document defines the set of IP transfer parameters that reflect the guarantees that can be provided by the underlying transport network together with reachability scope and capacity needs. CPNP uses the CPP template to encode connectivity provisioning clauses that are subject to negotiation. The accepted CPP will then be passed to other functional elements that are responsible for the actual service activation and provisioning. For example, Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040] can be used to activate adequate network features that are required to deliver the accepted service. How the outcome of CPNP negotiation is translated into service and network provisioning actions is out of scope of this document.¶
As a reminder, several proposals have been made in the past by the (research) community (e.g., Common Open Policy Service protocol for supporting Service Level Specification [COPS-SLS], Service Negotiation Protocol [SrNP], Dynamic Service Negotiation Protocol [DSNP], Resource Negotiation and Pricing Protocol [RNAP], Service Negotiation and Acquisition Protocol [SNAP]). CPNP leverages the authors' experience with SrNP by separating the negotiation primitives from the service under negotiation. Moreover, careful examination of the other proposals revealed certain deficiencies that were easier to address through the creation of a new protocol rather than the modification of existing protocols. For example:¶
One of the primary motivations of this document is to provide a permanent reference to exemplify how service negotiation can be automated.¶
Implementation details are out of scope. An example of required modules and interfaces to implement this specification is sketched in Section 4 of [AGAVE]. This specification builds on that effort.¶
2. Terminology
This document makes use of the following terms:¶
- Customer:
-
Is a business role that denotes an entity that is involved in the definition and the possible negotiation of an order, including a Connectivity Provisioning Agreement, with a Provider. A connectivity provisioning document is captured in a dedicated CPP template-based document, which may specify (among other information) the sites to be connected, border nodes, outsourced operations (e.g., routing, traffic steering).¶
The right to invoke the subscribed service may be delegated by the Customer to third-party end users or brokering services.¶
A Customer can be a Service Provider, an application owner, an enterprise, a user, etc.¶
- Network Provider (or Provider):
-
Owns and administers one or many transport domain(s) (typically Autonomous Systems (ASes)) composed of (IP) switching and transmission resources (e.g., routing, switching, forwarding, etc.). Network Providers are responsible for delivering and operating connectivity services (e.g., offering global or restricted reachability at specific rates). Offered connectivity services may not necessarily be restricted to IP.¶
The policies to be enforced by the connectivity service delivery components can be derived from the technology
-specific clauses that might be included in agreements with the Customers. If no such clauses are included in the agreement, the mapping between the connectivity requirements and the underlying technology -specific policies to be enforced is deployment specific.¶ - Quotation Order:
- Denotes a request made by the
Customer to the Provider that includes a set of requirements. The
Customer may express its service
-specific requirements by assigning (strictly or loosely defined) values to the information items included in the commonly understood template (e.g., CPP template) describing the offered service. These requirements constitute the parameters to be mutually agreed upon.¶ - Offer:
-
Refers to a response made by the Provider to a Customer's quotation order that describes the ability of the Provider to satisfy the order at the time of its receipt. Offers reflect the capability of the Provider in accommodating received Customer orders beyond monolithic 'yes/no' answers.¶
An offer may fully or partially meet the requirements of the corresponding order. In the latter case, it may include alternative suggestions that the Customer may take into account by issuing a new order.¶
- Agreement:
- Refers to an order placed by the Customer and accepted by the Provider. It signals the successful conclusion of a negotiation cycle.¶
3. CPNP Functional Elements
The following functional elements are defined:¶
- CPNP client (or client):
-
Denotes a software instance that sends CPNP requests and receives CPNP responses. The current operations that can be performed by a CPNP client are listed below:¶
- CPNP server (or server):
-
Denotes a software instance that receives CPNP requests and sends back CPNP responses accordingly. The CPNP server is responsible for the following operations:¶
4. Order Processing Models
For preparing their service orders, Customers may need to be aware of
the offered services. Therefore, Providers should first proceed with the
announcement (or the exposure) of the services they can provide. The
service announcement process may take place at designated global or
Provider
With or without such service announcement
- Frozen model:
- The Customer cannot actually negotiate the parameters of the service(s) offered by a Provider. After consulting the Provider's service portfolio, the Customer selects the service offer to which he or she wants to subscribe and places an order to the Provider. Order handling is quite simple on the Provider side because the service is not customized per Customer's requirements, but rather designed to address a Customer base that shares the same requirements (i.e., these Customers share the same Connectivity Provisioning Profile). This mode can be implemented using existing tools such as [RFC8309].¶
- Negotiation
-based model: - Unlike the frozen model, the Customer documents his/her requirements in a request for a quotation, which is then sent to one or several Providers. Solicited Providers check whether they can address these requirements or not, and get back to the Customer accordingly, possibly with an offer that may not exactly match the Customer's requirements (e.g., a 100 Mbps connection cannot be provisioned given the amount of available resources, but an 80 Mbps connection can be provided). A negotiation between the Customer and the Provider(s) then follows until both parties reach an agreement (or do not).¶
Both frozen and negotiation
Order processing management on the Network Provider's side usually solicits features supported by the following functional blocks:¶
CPNP does not assume any specific knowledge about these functional blocks, drawing an explicit line between protocol operation and the logic for handling connectivity provisioning requests. An order processing logic is typically fed with the information manipulated by the aforementioned functional blocks. For example, the resources that can be allocated to accommodate the Customer's requirements may depend on network availability estimates as calculated by the planning functions and related policies, as well as the number of orders to be processed simultaneously over a given period of time.¶
This document does not elaborate on how Customers are identified and subsequently managed by the Provider's information system.¶
5. Sample Use Cases
A non-exhaustive list of CPNP use cases is provided below:¶
6. CPNP Deployment Models
Several CPNP deployment models can be envisaged. Two examples are listed below:¶
Once the negotiation of connectivity provisioning parameters is successfully concluded, that is, an order has been placed by the Customer, the actual network provisioning operations are initiated. The specification of related dynamic resource allocation and policy enforcement schemes, as well as how CPNP servers interact with the network provisioning functional blocks on the Provider side, are out of the scope of this document.¶
This document does not make any assumptions about the CPNP deployment model either.¶
7. CPNP Negotiation Model
CPNP runs between a Customer and a Provider, carrying service orders
from the Customer and corresponding responses from the Provider in
order to reach a service provisioning agreement. As the services
offered by the Provider are well described, by means of the CPP template
for connectivity matters, the negotiation process is essentially a
value
The content that CPNP carries and the negotiation logic invoked at Customer and Provider sides to manipulate the content (i.e., the information carried in CPNP messages to proceed with the negotiation) is transparent to the protocol.¶
The protocol aims to facilitate the execution of the negotiation logic by providing the required generic communication primitives.¶
Since negotiations are initiated and primarily driven by the Customer's negotiation logic, it is reasonable to assume that the Customer is the only party that can call for an agreement. An implicit approach is adopted for not overloading the protocol with additional messages. In particular, the acceptance of an offer made by the Provider signals a call for agreement from the Customer. Note that it is almost certain the Provider will accept this call since it refers to an offer that the Provider made. Of course, at any point the Provider or the Customer may quit the negotiations, each on its own grounds.¶
Based on the above, CPNP adopts a quotation order
Multiple instances of CPNP may run at a Customer's or a Provider's domains. A CPNP client may be engaged in multiple, simultaneous negotiations with the same or different CPNP servers (parallel negotiations, see Section 8.10), and a CPNP server may need to negotiate with other Provider(s) as part of negotiations that are ongoing with a CPNP client (cascaded negotiations, see Section 8.8).¶
CPNP relies on various timers to run its operations. Two types of
timers are defined: those that are specific to CPNP message transmission
and those that are specific to the negotiation logic. The latter are
used to guide the negotiation logic at both CPNP client and CPNP server
sides, particularly in cases where the CPNP client is involved in
parallel negotiations with several CPNP servers or in cases where the
CPNP server is, in turn, involved in negotiations with other Providers for
processing a given Customer
Providers may need to publish available services to the Customers (see Section 4). CPNP may optionally support this functionality. Dedicated templates can be defined for the purpose of service announcement, which will be used by the CPNP clients to initiate their CPNP negotiation cycles.¶
For the sake of simplicity, a single offer/answer stage is assumed within one CPNP negotiation cycle. Nevertheless, as already stated, multiple CPNP negotiation cycles can be undertaken by a CPNP client (see Figure 4).¶
The model is flexible enough to accommodate changing conditions during the lifetime of a service (e.g., the introduction of an additional VPN site).¶
The means used by a CPNP client to retrieve a list of active/accepted offers are not defined in this document.¶
An order can be implicitly or explicitly activated. Section 3.11 of [RFC7297] specifies a dedicated clause called Activation Means. Such a clause indicates the required action(s) to be undertaken to activate access to the (IP connectivity) service. This document defines a dedicated CPNP message that can be used for explicit activation (Section 9.2.11).¶
8. Protocol Overview
8.1. Client/Server Communication
CPNP is a client/server protocol that can run over any transport protocol. The default transport mode is UDP secured with Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC6347]. No permanent CPNP transport session needs to be maintained between the client and the server.¶
The CPNP client can be configured with the CPNP server(s). Typically, the CPNP client is configured with an IP address together with a port number using manual or dynamic configuration means (e.g., DHCP). Alternatively, a Provider may advertise the port number (CPNP_PORT) it uses to bind the CPNP service using SRV [RFC2782].¶
The CPNP client may be provided with a domain name of the CPNP server for PKIX-based authentication purposes. CPNP servers should prefer the use of DNS-ID and SRV-ID over CN-ID identifier types in certificate requests (Section 2.3 of [RFC6125]). URI-IDs should not be used for CPNP server identity verification.¶
The client sends CPNP requests using CPNP_PORT as the destination port number. The same port number used as the source port number of a CPNP request sent to a CPNP server is used by the server to reply to that request.¶
CPNP is independent of the IP address family.¶
CPNP retransmission for unreliable transports is discussed in Section 11.4.¶
Considerations related to mutual authentication are discussed in Section 13.¶
8.2. Policy Configuration on the CPNP Server
As an input to its decision-making process, the CPNP server may be connected to various external modules such as Customer Profiles, Network Topology, Network Resource Management, Order Repositories, AAA, and Network Provisioning Manager (an example is shown in Figure 5).¶
These external modules provide inputs to the CPNP server so that it can do the following:¶
The above list of CPNP server operations is not exhaustive.¶
The following order-handling modes can also be configured on the server:¶
- Fully automated mode:
- This mode does not require any action from the administrator when receiving a request for a service. The server can execute its decision-making process related to the orders received and can generate corresponding offers.¶
- Administrative validation checking:
- Some or all of the server's operations are subject to administrative validation procedures. This mode requires an action from the administrator for every request received. To that aim, the CPNP methods that can be automatically handled by the server (or are subject to one or several validation administrative checks) can be configured on the server.¶
8.3. CPNP Session Entries
A CPNP session entry is represented by a tuple defined as follows:¶
8.4. CPNP Transactions
A CPNP transaction occurs between a client and a server for completing, modifying, or withdrawing a service agreement, and comprises all CPNP messages exchanged between the client and the server, from the first request sent by the client to the final response sent by the server. A CPNP transaction is bound to a CPNP session (Section 8.3).¶
Because multiple CPNP transactions can be maintained by the CPNP client, the client must assign an identifier to uniquely identify a given transaction. This identifier is the Transaction-ID.¶
The Transaction-ID must be randomly assigned by the CPNP client, according to the best current practice for generating random numbers [RFC4086] that cannot be guessed easily. The Transaction-ID is used for validating CPNP responses received by the client.¶
In the context of a transaction, the client needs to select a sequence number randomly and then needs to assign it to the first CPNP message to send. This number is then incremented for each request message that is subsequently sent within the ongoing CPNP transaction (see Section 11.3).¶
8.5. CPNP Timers
CPNP adopts a simple retransmission procedure that relies on a retransmission timer represented by RETRANS_TIMER and a maximum retry threshold. The use of RETRANS_TIMER and a maximum retry threshold are described in Section 11.¶
The response timer
The expected offer timer
An offer expiration timer
8.6. CPNP Operations
CPNP operations are listed below. They may be augmented depending on the nature of some transactions or because of security considerations that may necessitate a distinct CPNP client/server authentication phase before negotiation begins.¶
- QUOTATION (Section 9.2.1):
- This operation is used by the client to initiate
a PQO. Upon receipt of a QUOTATION
request, the server may respond with a PROCESSING, OFFER, or a FAIL
message. A QUOTATION
-initiated transaction can be terminated by a FAIL message.¶ - PROCESSING (Section 9.2.2):
- This operation is used to inform the remote party that its message (the order quotation or the offer) was received and it is being processed. This message can also be issued by the server to request more time, in which case, the client may reply with an ACK or FAIL message depending on whether extra time can or cannot be granted.¶
- OFFER (Section 9.2.3):
- This operation is used by the server to inform the client about an offer that can best accommodate the requirements indicated in the previously received QUOTATION message.¶
- ACCEPT (Section 9.2.4):
- This operation is used by the client to confirm the acceptance of an offer made by the server. This message implies a call for agreement. An agreement is reached when an ACK is subsequently received from the server, which is likely to happen if the message is sent before the offer validity time expires; the server is unlikely to reject an offer that it has already made.¶
- DECLINE (Section 9.2.5):
- This operation is used by the client to reject an offer made by the server. The ongoing transaction may not be terminated immediately, e.g., the client may issue another order or the server may issue another offer.¶
- ACK (Section 9.2.6):
- This operation is used by the server to acknowledge the receipt of an ACCEPT or WITHDRAW message or by the client to confirm the server's request for a time extension (conveyed in a PROCESSING message) in order to process the last received quotation order.¶
- CANCEL (Section 9.2.7):
- This operation is used by the client to cancel (quit) the ongoing transaction.¶
- WITHDRAW (Section 9.2.8):
- This operation is used by the client to withdraw a completed order (i.e., an agreement).¶
- UPDATE (Section 9.2.9):
- This operation is used by the client to update an existing agreement. For example, this method can be invoked to add a new VPN site. This method will trigger a new negotiation cycle.¶
- FAIL (Section 9.2.10):
-
This operation is used by the server to indicate that it cannot accommodate the requirements documented in the PQO conveyed in the QUOTATION message or to inform the client about an error encountered when processing the received message. In either case, the message implies that the server is unable to make offers, and, as a consequence, it terminates the ongoing transaction.¶
This message is also used by the client to reject a time extension request in a PROCESSING message received from the server. The message includes a status code that provides explanatory information.¶
The above CPNP primitives are service independent. CPNP messages
may transparently carry service
The document defines the service objects that are required for
connectivity provisioning negotiation purposes
(see Section 8.7).
Additional service
8.7. Connectivity Provisioning Documents
CPNP makes use of several flavors of Connectivity Provisioning Documents (CPD). These documents follow the same CPP template described in [RFC7297].¶
- Requested CPD:
- Refers to the CPD included by a CPNP client in a QUOTATION request.¶
- Offered CPD:
- This document is included by a CPNP server in an OFFER message. Its information reflects the proposal of the server to accommodate all or a subset of the clauses depicted in a Requested CPD. A validity time is associated with the offer made.¶
- Accepted CPD:
- If the client accepts an offer made by the server, the Offered CPD is included in an ACCEPT message. This CPD is also included in an ACK message. Thus, a three-way handshake procedure is followed for successfully completing the negotiation.¶
Figure 6 shows a typical CPNP negotiation cycle and the use of the different types of CPDs.¶
A CPD can include parameters with fixed values, loosely defined values, or any combination thereof. A CPD is said to be concrete if all clauses have fixed values.¶
A typical evolution of a negotiation cycle would start with a quotation order with loosely defined parameters, and then, as offers are made, it would conclude with a concrete CPD for calling for the agreement.¶
8.8. Child PQOs
If the server detects that network resources from another Network Provider need to be allocated in order to accommodate the requirements described in a PQO (e.g., in the context of an inter-domain VPN service, additional Provider Edge (PE) router resources need to be allocated), the server may generate child PQOs to request the appropriate network provisioning operations (see Figure 7). In such a situation, the server also behaves as a CPNP client. The server associates the parent order with its child PQOs. How this is achieved is implementation specific (e.g., this can be typically achieved by locally adding the reference of the child PQO to the parent order).¶
Note that the server must not activate recursion for an order if the client includes a negotiation option to restrict the negotiation scope to the resources of the server's domain (Section 9.1.10.3).¶
If recursion is not explicitly disabled, the server may notify the client when appropriate (Section 9.2.2). Such notification may depend on the nature of the service and also regulatory considerations.¶
8.9. Multi-Segment Service
A composite service (e.g., connectivity) requested by a Customer could imply multi-segment services (e.g., multi-segment connectivity spanning an end-to-end scope), in the sense that one single CPNP request is decomposed into multiple connectivity requests on the Provider's side (thereby leading to child orders). The Provider is in charge of handling the complexity of splitting the generic provisioning order in a multi-segment context. Such complexity is local to the Provider.¶
8.10. Negotiating with Multiple CPNP Servers
A CPNP client may undertake multiple negotiations in parallel with several servers for various reasons, such as cost optimization and fail-safety. These multiple negotiations may lead to one or many agreements.¶
The salient point underlining the parallel negotiation scenarios is that, although the negotiation protocol is strictly between two parties, this may not be the case of the negotiation logic. The CPNP client negotiation logic may need to collectively drive parallel negotiations, as the negotiation with one server may affect the negotiation with other servers; for example, it may need to use the responses from all servers as an input for determining the messages (and their content) to subsequently send within the course of each individual negotiation. Therefore, timing is an important aspect on the client's side. The CPNP client needs to have the ability to synchronize the receipt of the responses from the servers. CPNP takes into account this requirement by allowing clients to specify in the QUOTATION message the time by which the server needs to respond (see Section 9.1.6).¶
8.11. State Management
Both the client and the server maintain repositories to store ongoing orders. How these repositories are maintained is deployment specific. It is out of scope of this document to elaborate on such considerations. Timestamps are also logged to track state change. Tracking may be needed for various reasons, including regulatory or billing ones.¶
In order to accommodate failures that may lead to the reboot of the client or the server, the use of permanent storage is recommended, thereby facilitating state recovery.¶
8.11.1. On the Client Side
This is the list of the typical states that can be associated with a given order on the client's side:¶
- Created:
- The order has been created. It is not handled by the client until the administrator allows it to be processed.¶
- Awaiting
Processing : - The administrator has approved the processing of a created order, but the order has not been handled yet.¶
- PQOSent:
- The order has been sent to the server.¶
- Server
Processing : - The server has confirmed the receipt of the order.¶
- OfferReceived:
- An offer has been received from the server.¶
- OfferProcessing:
- A received offer is being processed by the client.¶
- AcceptSent:
- The client has confirmed the offer to the server.¶
- Completed:
- The offer has been acknowledged by the server.¶
- Cancelled:
- The order has failed or was cancelled.¶
Sub-states may be defined (e.g., to track failed vs. cancelled orders), but those are not shown in Figure 8.¶
8.11.2. On the Server Side
The following lists the states on the server's side that can be associated with a given order and a corresponding offer:¶
- PQOReceived:
- The order has been received from the client.¶
- Awaiting
Processing : - The order is being processed by the server. An action from the server administrator may be needed.¶
- OfferProposed:
- The request has been successfully handled, and an offer has been sent to the client.¶
- Processing
Received : - The server has received a PROCESSING message for an offer sent to the client.¶
- AcceptReceived:
- The server has received a confirmation for the offer from the client.¶
- Completed:
- The server has acknowledged the offer (accepted by client) to the client. Transitioning to this state assumes that the ACK was received by the client (this can be detected by the server if it receives a retransmitted ACCEPT message from the client).¶
- Cancelled:
- The order cannot be accommodated, or it has been cancelled by the client. Associated resources must be released in the latter case, if previously reserved.¶
- ChildCreated:
- A child order has been created in cases where resources from another Network Provider are needed.¶
- ChildPQOSent:
- A child order has been sent to the remote server.¶
- Child
Server Processing : - A child order is being processed by the remote server.¶
- Child
Offer Received : - The remote server has received an offer to a child order.¶
- Child
Offer Processing : - A received offer to a child order is being processed.¶
- ChildAcceptSent:
- The child offer (the offer received from the remote server in response to a child order) is confirmed to the remote server.¶
- ChildCompleted:
- The accepted child offer has been acknowledged by the remote server.¶
9. CPNP Objects
This section defines CPNP objects using the Routing Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) format defined in [RFC5511]. Please also note the following:¶
9.1. Attributes
9.1.1. CUSTOMER_ORDER_IDENTIFIER
The CUSTOMER
Rules for assigning this identifier (including the structure and
semantics) are specific to the client (Customer). The value of
CUSTOMER
The client (Customer) assigns an identifier to an order under negotiation before an agreement is reached. This identifier will be used to unambiguously identify the resulting agreement at the client side (Customer).¶
The server handles the CUSTOMER
9.1.2. PROVIDER_ORDER_IDENTIFIER
The PROVIDER
Rules for assigning this identifier (including the structure and
semantics) are specific to the server (Provider).
The PROVIDER
The server (Provider) assigns an identifier to an order under negotiation before an agreement is reached. This identifier will be used to unambiguously identify the resulting agreement at the server side (Provider).¶
The client handles the PROVIDER
9.1.3. TRANSACTION_ID
This object conveys the Transaction-ID introduced in Section 8.4.¶
9.1.4. SEQUENCE_NUMBER
The sequence number is a number that is monotonically incremented in every new CPNP message pertaining to a given CPNP transaction. This number is used to avoid replay attacks.¶
Refer to Section 11.3.¶
9.1.5. NONCE
The NONCE is a random value assigned by the CPNP server. Assigning a unique NONCE value for each order is recommended.¶
It is mandatory to then include the NONCE in subsequent CPNP client operations on the associated order (including the resulting agreement) such as withdrawing the order or updating the order.¶
If the NONCE validation checks fail, the server rejects the request with a FAIL message that includes the appropriate failure reason code.¶
9.1.6. EXPECTED_RESPONSE_TIME
This attribute indicates the time by when the CPNP client is expecting to receive a response from the CPNP server to a given PQO. If no offer is received by then, the CPNP client will consider the quotation order to be rejected.¶
The EXPECTED
9.1.7. EXPECTED_OFFER_TIME
This attribute indicates the time by when the CPNP server is expecting to make an offer to the CPNP client. If no offer is received by then, the CPNP client will consider the order rejected.¶
The CPNP server may propose an expected offer time that does not match the expected response time indicated in the quotation order message. The CPNP client can accept or reject the proposed expected time by when the CPNP server will make an offer.¶
The CPNP server can always request extra time for its processing, but this may be accepted or rejected by the CPNP client.¶
The EXPECTED
9.1.8. VALIDITY_OFFER_TIME
This attribute indicates the time of validity of an offer made by the CPNP server. If the offer is not accepted before this time expires, the CPNP server will consider the CPNP client as having rejected the offer; the CPNP server will silently remove this order from its base.¶
The VALIDITY
9.1.9. SERVICE_DESCRIPTION
This document defines a machinery to negotiate any aspect subject to negotiation. Service clauses that are under negotiation are conveyed using this attribute.¶
The structure of the connectivity provisioning clauses is provided in the following subsection.¶
9.1.10. CPNP Information Elements
An Information Element (IE) is an optional object that can be included in a CPNP message.¶
9.1.10.1. Customer Description
The client may include administrative information such as the following:¶
The format of this Information Element is as follows:¶
9.1.10.2. Provider Description
The server may include administrative information in an offer such as the following:¶
The format of this Information Element is as follows:¶
9.1.10.3. Negotiation Options
The client may include some negotiation options such as the following:¶
- Setup purpose:
- A client may request the setup of a service (e.g., connectivity) only for testing purposes during a limited period. The order can be extended to become permanent if the client was satisfied during the test period. This operation is achieved using the UPDATE method.¶
- Activation type:
- A client may request a permanent or scheduled activation type. If no activation type clause is included during the negotiation, this means that the order will be immediately activated right after the negotiation ends.¶
The format of this Information Element is as follows:¶
9.2. Operation Messages
This section defines the RBNF format of CPNP operation messages. The following operation codes are used:¶
These codes are used to unambiguously identify a CPNP operation; the operation code is conveyed in the METHOD_CODE attribute mentioned in the following subsections.¶
In the following, VERSION refers to the CPNP version number. This attribute must be set to 1.¶
9.2.1. QUOTATION
The format of the QUOTATION message is shown below:¶
A QUOTATION message must include an order
identifier that is generated by the client
The message may include an EXPECTED
The message may include ACTIVATION_TYPE to request a permanent or scheduled activation type (e.g., using the ACTIVATE method defined in Section 9.2.11). If no such clause is included, the default mode is to assume that the order will be active once the accepted activation means are successfully invoked (e.g., Section 3.11 of [RFC7297]).¶
When the client sends the QUOTATION message to the server, the state of the order changes to "PQOSent" at the client side.¶
9.2.2. PROCESSING
The format of the PROCESSING message is shown below:¶
Upon receipt of a QUOTATION message, the
server proceeds with the parsing rules (see Section 10).
If no error is encountered, the server
generates a PROCESSING response to the client to indicate the PQO
has been received and it is being processed. The server must
generate an order identifier that identifies the order in its local
order repository. The server must copy the content of the
CUSTOMER
Upon receipt of a PROCESSING message, the client verifies whether
it has issued a PQO that contains the
CUSTOMER
If the server requires more time to process the quotation
order, it may send a PROCESSING message that includes a new
EXPECTED
The server may provide more details in the PROCESSING
9.2.3. OFFER
The format of the OFFER message is shown below:¶
The server answers a QUOTATION request received from the client with an OFFER message. The offer will be considered to be rejected by the client if no confirmation (i.e., an ACCEPT message sent by the client) is received by the server before the expiration of the validity time.¶
The server may include ACTIVATION_TYPE to indicate whether the
offer is about a permanent or scheduled activation type. The message
may include ACTIVATION
9.2.4. ACCEPT
The format of the ACCEPT message is shown below:¶
This message is used by a client to confirm the acceptance of an offer received from a server. The fields of this message must be copied from the received OFFER message. This message should not be sent after the validity time of the offer expires, as indicated by the server (Section 9.2.3).¶
9.2.5. DECLINE
The format of the DECLINE message is shown below:¶
The client may issue a DECLINE
message to reject an offer. CUSTOMER
A DECLINE message may include an Information Element to indicate the reason for declining an offer. The following codes are defined:¶
If no order is found, the server returns a FAIL message to the requesting client. In order to prevent DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attacks, the server should restrict the number of FAIL messages sent to a requesting client. It may also rate-limit FAIL messages.¶
9.2.6. ACK
The format of the ACK message is shown below:¶
This message is issued by the server to close a CPNP transaction or by a client to grant more negotiation time to the server.¶
This message is sent by the server as a response to an ACCEPT, WITHDRAW, DECLINE, or CANCEL message. In this case, the ACK message must include the copy of the service description (i.e., CPD for connectivity services) as stored by the server. In particular, the following considerations are taken into account for connectivity provisioning services:¶
A client may issue an ACK message as a response to a time
extension request (conveyed in PROCESSING) received from the server.
In such case, the ACK message must include an EXPECTED
9.2.7. CANCEL
The format of the CANCEL message is shown below:¶
The client can issue a CANCEL
message at any stage during the CPNP negotiation process before an
agreement is reached. The CUSTOMER
If no quotation order is found, the server returns a FAIL message to the requesting client.¶
9.2.8. WITHDRAW
The format of the WITHDRAW message is shown below:¶
This message is used to withdraw an offer already accepted by the Customer. Figure 14 shows a typical usage of this message.¶
The WITHDRAW message must include the same
CUSTOMER
Upon receipt of a WITHDRAW message, the server checks whether an order matching the request is found. If an order is found, the state of the order is changed to "Cancelled", and an ACK message including an Empty CPD is returned to the requesting client. If no order is found, the server returns a FAIL message to the requesting client.¶
9.2.9. UPDATE
The format of the UPDATE message is shown below:¶
This message is sent by the CPNP client
to update an existing service agreement (e.g., Accepted
CPD). The UPDATE message must include the same
CUSTOMER
Upon receipt of an UPDATE message, the server checks whether an
order, having state "Completed", matches
CUSTOMER
A flow chart that illustrates the use of UPDATE operation is shown in Figure 15.¶
9.2.10. FAIL
The format of the FAIL message is shown below:¶
This message is sent in the following cases:¶
The status code indicates the error code. The following codes are supported:¶
9.2.11. ACTIVATE
The format of the ACTIVATE message is shown below:¶
This message is sent by the CPNP client
to request the activation of an existing service agreement. The
message must include the same CUSTOMER
Upon receipt of an ACTIVATE message, the server checks whether an
order, having state "Completed", matches
CUSTOMER
10. CPNP Message Validation
Both the client and the server proceed with CPNP message validation. The following tables summarize the validation checks to be followed.¶
10.1. On the Client Side
10.2. On the Server Side
11. Theory of Operation
Both the CPNP client and server proceed with message validation checks as specified in Section 10.¶
11.1. Client Behavior
11.1.1. Order Negotiation Cycle
To place a PQO, the client first initiates a local quotation order object identified by a unique identifier assigned by the client (Client Order Identifier). The state of the quotation order is set to "Created". The client then generates a QUOTATION request that includes the assigned identifier, possibly an expected response time, a Transaction-ID, and a requested service (e.g., Requested CPD). The client may include additional Information Elements such as Customer Description or Negotiation Options.¶
The client may be configured to not enforce negotiation checks on
EXPECTED
Once the request is sent to the server, the state of the request is set to "PQOSent", and if a response time is included in the quotation order, a timer is set to the expiration time as included in the QUOTATION request. The client also maintains a copy of the CPNP session entry details used to generate the QUOTATION request. The CPNP client must listen on the same port number that it used to send the QUOTATION request.¶
If no answer is received from the server before the retransmission timer expires (i.e., RETRANS_TIMER, Section 8.5), the client retransmits the message until maximum retry is reached (e.g., three times). The same sequence number is used for retransmitted packets.¶
If a FAIL message is received, the client may decide to issue another (corrected) request towards the same server, cancel the local order, or contact another server. The behavior of the client depends on the error code returned by the server in the FAIL message.¶
If a PROCESSING message matching the CPNP session entry (Section 8.3) is received, the client updates the CPNP
session entry with the PROVIDER
As a response to a time extension request (conveyed in a
PROCESSING message that included a new EXPECTED
If an OFFER message matching the CPNP session entry is received,
the client checks if a PROCESSING message having the same
PROVIDER
If an offer is received from the server (i.e., as documented in an OFFER message), the client may accept or reject the offer. The client accepts the offer by generating an ACCEPT message that confirms that the client agrees to subscribe to the offer documented in the OFFER message; the state of the order is passed to "AcceptSent". The transaction is terminated if an ACK message is received from the server. If no ACK is received from the server, the client proceeds with the retransmission of the ACCEPT message until the maximum retry is reached (Section 11.4).¶
The client may also decide to reject the offer by sending a DECLINE message. The state of the order is set by the client to "Cancelled". If an offer is not acceptable to the client, the client may decide to contact a new server or submit another order to the same server. Guidelines to issue an updated order or terminate the negotiation are specific to the client.¶
An order can be activated (or deactivated) using the ACTIVATE message or other accepted activation means (Section 3.11 of [RFC7297]).¶
11.1.2. Order Withdrawal Cycle
A client may withdraw a completed order. This is achieved by issuing a WITHDRAW message. This message must include the Customer Order Identifier, Provider Order Identifier, and Nonce returned during the order negotiation cycle, as specified in Section 11.1.1.¶
If no ACK is received from the server, the client proceeds with the retransmission of the message. If no ACK is received after the maximum retry is exhausted, the client should log the information and must send an alarm to the administrator. If there is no specific instruction from the administrator, the client should schedule another Withdrawal cycle. The client must not retry this Withdrawal cycle more frequently than every 300 seconds and must not retry more frequently than every 60 seconds.¶
11.1.3. Order Update Cycle
A client may update a completed order. This is achieved by issuing an UPDATE message. This message must include the Customer Order Identifier, Provider Order Identifier, and Nonce returned during the order negotiation cycle specified in Section 11.1.1. The client must include in the UPDATE message an Updated CPD with the requested changes.¶
The subsequent message exchange is similar to what is documented in Section 11.1.1.¶
11.2. Server Behavior
11.2.1. Order Processing
Upon receipt of a QUOTATION message from a client, the server
sets a CPNP session, stores the Transaction-ID, and generates a Provider
Order Identifier. Once preliminary validation checks are completed
(Section 10), the server may return a
PROCESSING message to inform the client that the quotation order is
received and it is under processing; the server may include an
expected offer time to notify the client by when an offer will be
proposed. An order with state "Awaiting
If the server cannot make an offer, it sends backs a FAIL message with the appropriate error code (Section 9.2.10).¶
If the server requires more negotiation time, it must send a
PROCESSING message with a new EXPECTED
If the server can honor the request, or if it can make an offer that
meets only some of the requirements, it creates an OFFER message.
The server must indicate the Transaction-ID, the Customer Order
Identifier as indicated in the QUOTATION message, and the Provider
Order Identifier generated for this order. The server must also
include the Nonce and the offered service document (e.g., Offered
CPD). The server includes an offer
validity time as well. Once sent to the client, the server changes
the state of the order to "Offer
If the server determines that additional network resources from another Network Provider are needed to accommodate a quotation order, it will create child PQO(s) and will behave as a CPNP client to negotiate child PQO(s) with possible partnering Providers (see Figure 7).¶
If no PROCESSING, ACCEPT, or DECLINE message is received before the expiry of the RETRANS_TIMER, the server resends the same offer to the client. This procedure is repeated until maximum retry is reached.¶
If an ACCEPT message is received before the offered validity time
expires, the server proceeds with validation checks as specified in
Section 10. The state of the corresponding
order is passed to "Accept
If a CANCEL or a DECLINE message is received, the server proceeds with the cancellation of the order. The state of the order is then passed to "Cancelled".¶
11.2.2. Order Withdrawal
A client may withdraw a completed order by issuing a WITHDRAW message. Upon receipt of a WITHDRAW message, the server proceeds with the validation checks, as specified in Section 10:¶
11.2.3. Order Update
A client may update an order by issuing an UPDATE message. Upon receipt of an UPDATE message, the server proceeds with the validation checks as specified in Section 10:¶
11.3. Sequence Numbers
In each transaction, sequence numbers are used to protect the transaction against replay attacks. Each communicating partner of the transaction maintains two sequence numbers, one for incoming packets and one for outgoing packets. When a partner receives a message, it will check whether the sequence number in the message is larger than the incoming sequence number maintained locally. If not, the message will be discarded. If the message is proved to be legitimate, the value of the incoming sequence number maintained locally will be replaced by the value of the sequence number in the message. When a partner sends out a message, it will insert the value of the outgoing sequence number into the message and increase the outgoing sequence number maintained locally by 1.¶
11.4. Message Retransmission
If a transaction partner sends out a message and does not receive any expected reply before the retransmission timer expires (i.e., RETRANS_TIMER), a transaction partner will try to retransmit the message. The procedure is reiterated until a maximum retry is reached (e.g., three times). An exception is the last message (e.g., ACK) sent from the server in a transaction. After sending this message, the retransmission timer will be disabled since no additional feedback is expected.¶
In addition, if the partner receives a retransmission of the last incoming packet it handled, the partner can resend the same answer to the incoming packet with a limited frequency. If an answer cannot be generated right after the request is received, the partner needs to generate a PROCESSING message as the answer.¶
To optimize message retransmission, a partner could also store the last incoming packet and the associated answer. Note that the times of retransmission could be decided by the local policy, and retransmission will not cause any change of sequence numbers.¶
12. Some Operational Guidelines
12.1. CPNP Server Logging
The CPNP server should be configurable to log various events and associated information. Such information may include the following:¶
The exact logging details are deployment specific.¶
12.2. Business Guidelines and Objectives
The CPNP server can operate in the following modes:¶
- Fully automated mode:
- The CPNP server is provisioned with a set of business guidelines and objectives that will be used as an input to the decision-making process. The CPNP server will service received orders that fall into these business guidelines; otherwise, requests will be escalated to an administrator that will formally validate or invalidate an order request. The set of policies to be configured to the CPNP server are specific to each administrative entity managing a CPNP server.¶
- Administrative
-based mode: - This mode assumes some or all of the CPNP server's operations are subject to a formal administrative validation. CPNP events will trigger appropriate validation requests that will be forwarded to the contact person(s) or department that is responsible for validating the orders. Administrative validation messages are relayed using another protocol (e.g., SMTP) or a dedicated tool.¶
Business guidelines are local to each administrative entity. How validation requests are presented to an administrator are out of scope of this document; each administrative entity may decide the appropriate mechanism to enable for that purpose.¶
13. Security Considerations
Means to defend the server against denial
The client and the server must be mutually authenticated. Authenticated encryption must be used for data confidentiality and message integrity.¶
The protocol does not provide security mechanisms to protect the
confidentiality and integrity of the packets transported between the
client and the server. An underlying security protocol such as (e.g.,
Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC6347],
Transport Layer Security (TLS) [RFC8446]) must be
used to protect the integrity and confidentiality of protocol messages.
In this case, if it is possible to provide automated key management
(Section 2.1 of [RFC4107])
and associate each transaction with a different key, inter
DTLS and TLS with a cipher suite offering confidentiality protection and the guidance given in [RFC7525] must be followed to avoid attacks on (D)TLS.¶
The client must silently discard CPNP responses received from unknown
CPNP servers. The use of a randomly generated Transaction-ID makes it
hard to forge a response from a server with a spoofed IP address
belonging to a legitimate CPNP server. Furthermore, CPNP demands that
messages from the server must include the correct identifiers of the
orders. Two order identifiers are used: one generated by the client and
a second one generated by the server. Both the CPNP client and server
maintain the local identifier they assigned and the one assigned by the
peer for a given order. Means to detect swapping of these identifiers
(even when such swapping occurs inadvertently at the client or the
server) should be enabled by CPNP clients
The Provider must enforce the means to protect privacy-related information included in the documents (see Section 8.7) exchanged in CPNP messages [RFC6462]. In particular, this information must not be revealed to external parties without the consent of Customers. Providers should enforce policies to make Customer fingerprinting difficult to achieve (e.g., in a recursion request). For more discussion about privacy, refer to [RFC6462] [RFC6973].¶
The Nonce and the Transaction-ID attributes provide sufficient randomness and can effectively tolerate attacks raised by off-path adversaries, who do not have the capability of eavesdropping and intercepting the packets transported between the client and the server. Only authorized clients must be able to modify accepted CPNP orders. The use of a randomly generated Nonce by the server makes it hard to modify an agreement on behalf of a malicious third party.¶
14. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.¶
15. References
15.1. Normative References
- [RFC3339]
-
Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3339 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3339 - [RFC4086]
-
Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4086 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4086 - [RFC5511]
-
Farrel, A., "Routing Backus-Naur Form (RBNF): A Syntax Used to Form Encoding Rules in Various Routing Protocol Specifications", RFC 5511, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5511 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5511 - [RFC6347]
-
Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6347 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6347 - [RFC7297]
-
Boucadair, M., Jacquenet, C., and N. Wang, "IP Connectivity Provisioning Profile (CPP)", RFC 7297, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7297 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7297 - [RFC7525]
-
Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre, "Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 7525, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7525 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7525 - [RFC8446]
-
Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8446 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8446
15.2. Informative References
- [AGAVE]
-
Boucadair, M., Georgatsos, P., Wang, N., Griffin, D., Pavlou, G., Howarth, M., and A. Elizondo, "The AGAVE Approach for Network Virtualization: Differentiated Services Delivery", Annals of Telecommunicati
on, Volume 64, 277-288 , DOI 10.1007 , , <https:///s12243 -009 -0103 -4 rd >..springer .com /article /10 .1007 /s12243 -009 -0103 -4 - [COPS-SLS]
-
Nguyen, T., "COPS Usage for SLS negotiation (COPS-SLS)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-nguyen , , <https://-rap -cops -sls -03 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -nguyen -rap -cops -sls -03 - [DSNP]
-
Chen, J., "Dynamic Service Negotiation Protocol (DSNP)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-itsumo , , <https://-dsnp -03 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -itsumo -dsnp -03 - [ETICS]
-
EU FP7 ETICS Project, "Economics and Technologies of Inter-Carrier Services", , <https://
cordis >..europa .eu /project /id /248567 - [L2VPN
-NETWORK -YANG] -
Barguil, S., Dios, O. G. D., Boucadair, M., Munoz, L. A., Jalil, L., and J. Ma, "A Layer 2 VPN Network YANG Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-opsawg -l2nm -00 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -ietf -opsawg -l2nm -00 - [L3VPN
-NETWORK -YANG] -
Barguil, S., Dios, O. G. D., Boucadair, M., Munoz, L. A., and A. Aguado, "A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-opsawg -l3sm -l3nm -05 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -ietf -opsawg -l3sm -l3nm -05 - [LISP
-MS -DISCOVERY] -
Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Mapping Service Discovery at Large", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-boucadair , , <https://-lisp -idr -ms -discovery -01 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -boucadair -lisp -idr -ms -discovery -01 - [NETSLICES-ARCH]
-
Geng, L., Dong, J., Bryant, S., Makhijani, K., Galis, A., Foy, X. D., and S. Kuklinski, "Network Slicing Architecture", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-geng , , <https://-netslices -architecture -02 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -geng -netslices -architecture -02 - [RFC2782]
-
Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2782 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2782 - [RFC3084]
-
Chan, K., Seligson, J., Durham, D., Gai, S., McCloghrie, K., Herzog, S., Reichmeyer, F., Yavatkar, R., and A. Smith, "COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)", RFC 3084, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3084 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3084 - [RFC4026]
-
Andersson, L. and T. Madsen, "Provider Provisioned Virtual Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4026 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4026 - [RFC4107]
-
Bellovin, S. and R. Housley, "Guidelines for Cryptographic Key Management", BCP 107, RFC 4107, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4107 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4107 - [RFC4176]
-
El Mghazli, Y., Ed., Nadeau, T., Boucadair, M., Chan, K., and A. Gonguet, "Framework for Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (L3VPN) Operations and Management", RFC 4176, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4176 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4176 - [RFC6125]
-
Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hodges, "Representation and Verification of Domain-Based Application Service Identity within Internet Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX) Certificates in the Context of Transport Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 6125, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6125 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6125 - [RFC6241]
-
Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6241 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6241 - [RFC6462]
-
Cooper, A., "Report from the Internet Privacy Workshop", RFC 6462, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6462 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6462 - [RFC6574]
-
Tschofenig, H. and J. Arkko, "Report from the Smart Object Workshop", RFC 6574, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6574 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6574 - [RFC6770]
-
Bertrand, G., Ed., Stephan, E., Burbridge, T., Eardley, P., Ma, K., and G. Watson, "Use Cases for Content Delivery Network Interconnection
" , RFC 6770, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC6770 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6770 - [RFC6793]
-
Vohra, Q. and E. Chen, "BGP Support for Four-Octet Autonomous System (AS) Number Space", RFC 6793, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6793 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6793 - [RFC6830]
-
Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6830 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6830 - [RFC6973]
-
Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J., Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6973 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6973 - [RFC7049]
-
Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)", RFC 7049, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7049 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7049 - [RFC7149]
-
Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software
-Defined Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider Environment" , RFC 7149, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC7149 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7149 - [RFC7215]
-
Jakab, L., Cabellos
-Aparicio, A. , Coras, F., Domingo-Pascual, J. , and D. Lewis, "Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) Network Element Deployment Considerations" , RFC 7215, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC7215 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7215 - [RFC7491]
-
King, D. and A. Farrel, "A PCE-Based Architecture for Application
-Based Network Operations" , RFC 7491, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC7491 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7491 - [RFC8040]
-
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8040 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8040 - [RFC8259]
-
Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8259 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8259 - [RFC8299]
-
Wu, Q., Ed., Litkowski, S., Tomotaki, L., and K. Ogaki, "YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery", RFC 8299, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8299 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8299 - [RFC8309]
-
Wu, Q., Liu, W., and A. Farrel, "Service Models Explained", RFC 8309, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8309 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8309 - [RFC8329]
-
Lopez, D., Lopez, E., Dunbar, L., Strassner, J., and R. Kumar, "Framework for Interface to Network Security Functions", RFC 8329, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8329 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8329 - [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 , , <https:///RFC8466 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8466 - [RFC8597]
-
Contreras, LM., Bernardos, CJ., Lopez, D., Boucadair, M., and P. Iovanna, "Cooperating Layered Architecture for Software
-Defined Networking (CLAS)" , RFC 8597, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC8597 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8597 - [RNAP]
-
Wang, X., "A Resource Negotiation and Pricing Protocol (RNAP)", <http://
www >..cs .columbia .edu /~xinwang /public /projects /protocol .html - [SNAP]
-
Czajkowski, K., Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Sander, V., and S. Tuecke, "SNAP: A Protocol for Negotiating Service Level Agreements and Coordinating Resource Management in Distributed Systems", DOI 10.1.1.19.5907, , <http://
citeseerx >..ist .psu .edu /viewdoc /summary ?doi =10 .1 .1 .19 .5907 - [SrNP]
-
Georgatsos, P. and G. Giannakopoulos, "Service Negotiation Protocol (SrNP)", <https://
www >..ist -tequila .org /presentations /srnp -pipcm .pdf - [TEAS-SLICE-NBI]
-
Contreras, L. M., Homma, S., and J. A. Ordonez-Lucena, "Considerations for defining a Transport Slice NBI", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-contreras , , <https://-teas -slice -nbi -02 tools >..ietf .org /html /draft -contreras -teas -slice -nbi -02
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Diego R. Lopez, Adrian Farrel, Éric Vyncke, Eric Kline, and Benjamin Kaduk for the comments.¶
Thanks to those that reviewed this document for publication in the Independent Stream.¶
Special thanks to Luis Miguel Contreras Murillo for the detailed review.¶