Re: [L3sm] [l3sm] #9 (draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model): Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?

<> Mon, 02 November 2015 15:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35FA1B48EB for <>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 07:57:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zdn_QWkFyqMq for <>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 07:57:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFACB1B48EA for <>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 07:57:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown [xx.xx.xx.3]) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 096B022C186; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 16:57:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown []) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id DBF794C06E; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 16:57:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe]) by OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::787e:db0c:23c4:71b3%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 16:57:04 +0100
To: l3sm issue tracker <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [l3sm] #9 (draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model): Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?
Thread-Index: AQHRFU1NFGwQi/MN3kuNvEdNJdmyNJ6IjnCAgABQ0vA=
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 15:57:03 +0000
Message-ID: <21002_1446479824_563787D0_21002_8294_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF921673C165@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version:, Antispam-Engine:, Antispam-Data: 2015.11.2.153317
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [L3sm] [l3sm] #9 (draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model): Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: L3VPN Service YANG Model discussion group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 15:57:09 -0000

What is possible is to provide basic constraint (let say : latency, BW and disjointness) and let vendor augment with new constraints.

Now regarding modeling of the transport constraint, I do not see a real sexy way for now.
 Proposal #1 :
	Create a transport-constraint container within the vpn-svc to describe the constraints. Example :

rw vpn-svc
    +--rw transport-constraint
               +--rw list [id]
                      +--rw id                uint32
                      +--rw src-site     leafref
                      +--rw dst-site    leafref
                      +--rw constraint-type        identityref
                      +--rw constraint-value      ???

=> constraint-value may have a variable type depending of the constraint-type, for example, expressing latency boundary, or disjointness group ...

Proposal#2 :
	Put the constraint in the site

rw site 
  +--rw services
        +--rw transport-constraint
             +--rw  dst-site-list         [dst-site]
                      +--rw dst-site                        leafref
                      +--rw constraint-type        identityref
                      +--rw constraint-value      ???

Thoughts ?

-----Original Message-----
From: l3sm issue tracker [] 
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 12:52
Subject: Re: [l3sm] #9 (draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model): Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?

#9: Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?

Comment (by

 I think that would be useful input to the SDN controller realizing the  connectivity.

 The key question is if there is a simple and abstract way to model those  customer requirements. It is relatively simply to model constraints for  the L3VPN as a whole (e.g., that all sites should be connected with lowest  possible latency), but for connectivity between specific sites an abstract  specification could be a bit more challenging.


 Reporter:                           |       Owner:  draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-      |
     Type:  enhancement              |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                    |   Milestone:
Component:  draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-   |     Version:
  service-model                      |  Resolution:
 Severity:  -                        |
 Keywords:                           |

Ticket URL: <>
l3sm <>


Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.