GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc8432

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Ahlberg, Ed. Request for Comments: 8432 Ericsson AB Category: Informational M. Ye, Ed. ISSN: 2070-1721 Huawei Technologies

                                                                 X. Li
                                               NEC Laboratories Europe
                                                         LM. Contreras
                                                        Telefonica I+D
                                                         CJ. Bernardos
                                      Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
                                                          October 2018
             A Framework for Management and Control of
         Microwave and Millimeter Wave Interface Parameters

Abstract

 The unification of control and management of microwave radio link
 interfaces is a precondition for seamless multi-layer networking and
 automated network provisioning and operation.
 This document describes the required characteristics and use cases
 for control and management of radio link interface parameters using a
 YANG data model.
 The purpose is to create a framework to identify the necessary
 information elements and define a YANG data model for control and
 management of the radio link interfaces in a microwave node.  Some
 parts of the resulting model may be generic and could also be used by
 other technologies, e.g., Ethernet technology.

Status of This Memo

 This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
 published for informational purposes.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
 approved by the IESG are 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://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8432.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 1] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2018 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. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................5
 2. Terminology and Definitions .....................................5
 3. Approaches to Manage and Control Radio Link Interfaces ..........7
    3.1. Network Management Solutions ...............................7
    3.2. Software-Defined Networking ................................7
 4. Use Cases .......................................................8
    4.1. Configuration Management ...................................9
    4.2. Inventory .................................................10
    4.3. Status and Statistics .....................................10
    4.4. Performance Management ....................................10
    4.5. Fault Management ..........................................11
    4.6. Troubleshooting and Root Cause Analysis ...................11
 5. Requirements ...................................................11
 6. Gap Analysis on Models .........................................12
    6.1. Microwave Radio Link Functionality ........................13
    6.2. Generic Functionality .....................................14
    6.3. Summary ...................................................15
 7. Security Considerations ........................................16
 8. IANA Considerations ............................................16
 9. References .....................................................16
    9.1. Normative References ......................................16
    9.2. Informative References ....................................17
 Contributors ......................................................19
 Authors' Addresses ................................................20

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 2] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

1. Introduction

 Microwave radio is a technology that uses high-frequency radio waves
 to provide high-speed wireless connections that can send and receive
 voice, video, and data information.  It is a general term used for
 systems covering a very large range of traffic capacities, channel
 separations, modulation formats, and applications over a wide range
 of frequency bands from 1.4 GHz up to and above 100 GHz.
 The main application for microwave is backhaul for mobile broadband.
 Those networks will continue to be modernized using a combination of
 microwave and fiber technologies.  The choice of technology depends
 on fiber presence and cost of ownership, not capacity limitations in
 microwave.
 Today, microwave is already able to fully support the capacity needs
 of a backhaul in a radio access network and will evolve to support
 multiple gigabits in traditional frequency bands and more than 10
 gigabits in higher-frequency bands with more bandwidth.  Layer 2 (L2)
 Ethernet features are normally an integrated part of microwave nodes,
 and more advanced L2 and Layer 3 (L3) features will be introduced
 over time to support the evolution of the transport services that
 will be provided by a backhaul/transport network.  Note that wireless
 access technologies such as 3/4/5G and Wi-Fi are not within the scope
 of this document.
 Open and standardized interfaces are a prerequisite for efficient
 management of equipment from multiple vendors, integrated in a single
 system/controller.  This framework addresses management and control
 of the radio link interface(s) and their relationship to other
 interfaces (typically, Ethernet interfaces) in a microwave node.  A
 radio link provides the transport over the air, using one or several
 carriers in aggregated or protected configurations.  Managing and
 controlling a transport service over a microwave node involves both
 radio link and packet transport functionality.
 Today, there are already numerous IETF data models, RFCs, and
 Internet-Drafts with technology-specific extensions that cover a
 large part of the L2 and L3 domains.  Examples include IP Management
 [RFC8344], Routing Management [RFC8349], and Provider Bridge
 [IEEE802.1Qcp].  These are based on the IETF YANG data model for
 Interface Management [RFC8343], which is an evolution of the SNMP
 IF-MIB [RFC2863].
 Since microwave nodes will contain more and more L2 and L3 (packet)
 functionality that is expected to be managed using those models,
 there are advantages if radio link interfaces can be modeled and
 managed using the same structure and the same approach.  This is

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 3] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

 especially true for use cases in which a microwave node is managed as
 one common entity that includes both the radio link and the L2 and L3
 functionality, e.g., basic configuration of the node and connections,
 centralized troubleshooting, upgrade, and maintenance.  All
 interfaces in a node, irrespective of technology, would then be
 accessed from the same core model, i.e., [RFC8343], and could be
 extended with technology-specific parameters in models augmenting
 that core model.  The relationship/connectivity between interfaces
 could be given by the physical equipment configuration.  For example,
 the slot where the Radio Link Terminal (modem) is plugged in could be
 associated with a specific Ethernet port due to the wiring in the
 backplane of the system, or it could be flexible and therefore
 configured via a management system or controller.
 +------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Interface [RFC8343]                                              |
 |                +---------------+                                 |
 |                | Ethernet Port |                                 |
 |                +---------------+                                 |
 |                      \                                           |
 |                    +---------------------+                       |
 |                    | Radio Link Terminal |                       |
 |                    +---------------------+                       |
 |                       /              \                           |
 |     +---------------------+       +---------------------+        |
 |     | Carrier Termination |       | Carrier Termination |        |
 |     +---------------------+       +---------------------+        |
 +------------------------------------------------------------------+
          Figure 1: Relationship between Interfaces in a Node
 There will always be certain implementations that differ among
 products, so it is practically impossible to achieve industry
 consensus on every design detail.  It is therefore important to focus
 on the parameters that are required to support the use cases
 applicable for centralized, unified, multi-vendor management and to
 allow other parameters to either be optional or be covered by
 extensions to the standardized model.  Furthermore, a standard that
 allows for a certain degree of freedom encourages innovation and
 competition, which benefits the entire industry.  Thus, it is
 important that a radio link management model covers all relevant
 functions but also leaves room for product- and feature-specific
 extensions.
 Models are available for microwave radio link functionality:
 "Microwave Information Model" by the ONF [ONF-MW] and "Microwave
 Radio Link YANG Data Models" submitted to and discussed by the CCAMP
 Working Group [CCAMP-MW].  The purpose of this document is to reach

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

 consensus within the industry around one common approach with respect
 to the use cases and requirements to be supported, the type and
 structure of the model, and the resulting attributes to be included.
 This document describes the use cases, requirements, and expected
 characteristics of the model.  It also includes an analysis of how
 the models in the two ongoing initiatives fulfill these expectations
 and recommendations for what can be reused and what gaps need to be
 filled by a new and evolved model ("A YANG Data Model for Microwave
 Radio Link" by the IETF [IETF-MW]).

1.1. Conventions Used in This Document

 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
 BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
 capitals, as shown here.

2. Terminology and Definitions

 Microwave radio:  a term commonly used for technologies that operate
    in both microwave and millimeter wavelengths and in frequency
    bands from 1.4 GHz up to and beyond 100 GHz.  In traditional
    bands, it typically supports capacities of 1-3 Gbps; in the 70/80
    GHz band, it supports up to 10 Gbps.  Using multi-carrier systems
    operating in frequency bands with wider channels, the technology
    will be capable of providing capacities of up to 100 Gbps.
 Microwave radio technology:  widely used for point-to-point
    telecommunications because its small wavelength allows
    conveniently sized antennas to direct radio waves in narrow beams
    and its comparatively higher frequencies allow broad bandwidth and
    high data-transmission rates.  It is used for a broad range of
    fixed and mobile services, including high-speed, point-to-point
    wireless local area networks (WLANs) and broadband access.
    The ETSI EN 302 217 series defines the characteristics and
    requirements of microwave equipment and antennas.  In particular,
    ETSI EN 302 217-2 [EN302217-2] specifies the essential parameters
    for the systems operating from 1.4 GHz to 86 GHz.
 Carrier Termination and Radio Link Terminal:  two concepts defined to
    support modeling of microwave radio link features and parameters
    in a structured yet simple manner.
  • Carrier Termination: an interface for the capacity provided

over the air by a single carrier. It is typically defined by

       its transmitting and receiving frequencies.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 5] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

  • Radio Link Terminal: an interface providing Ethernet capacity

and/or Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) capacity to the

       associated Ethernet and/or TDM interfaces in a node.  It is
       used for setting up a transport service over a microwave radio
       link.
    Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of the Carrier
    Termination and Radio Link Terminal concepts.
               /--------- Radio Link ---------\
                Near End              Far End
         +---------------+           +---------------+
         |    Radio Link |           | Radio Link    |
         |      Terminal |           | Terminal      |
         |               |           |               |
         |           (Protected or Bonded)           |
         |               |           |               |
         | +-----------+ |           | +-----------+ |
         | |           | | Carrier A | |           | |
         | |  Carrier  | |<--------->| |  Carrier  | |
         | |Termination| |           | |Termination| |
  ETH----| |           | |           | |           | |----ETH
         | +-----------+ |           | +-----------+ |
  TDM----|               |           |               |----TDM
         | +-----------+ |           | +-----------+ |
         | |           | | Carrier B | |           | |
         | |  Carrier  | |<--------->| |  Carrier  | |
         | |Termination| |           | |Termination| |
         | |           | |           | |           | |
         | +-----------+ |           | +-----------+ |
         |               |           |               |
         +---------------+           +---------------+
   \--- Microwave Node ---/          \--- Microwave Node ---/
         Figure 2: Radio Link Terminal and Carrier Termination
 Software-Defined Networking (SDN):  an architecture that decouples
    the network control and forwarding functions, enabling the network
    control to become directly programmable and the underlying
    infrastructure to be abstracted for applications and network
    services.  SDN can be used for automation of traditional network
    management functionality using an SDN approach of standardized
    programmable interfaces for control and management [RFC7426].

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 6] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

3. Approaches to Manage and Control Radio Link Interfaces

 This framework addresses the definition of an open and standardized
 interface for radio link functionality in a microwave node.  The
 application of such an interface used for management and control of
 nodes and networks typically varies from one operator to another in
 terms of the systems used and how they interact.  Possible approaches
 include using a Network Management System (NMS), Software-Defined
 Networking (SDN), or some combination of the two.  As there are still
 many networks where the NMS is implemented as one component/interface
 and the SDN controller is scoped to control-plane functionality as a
 separate component/interface, this document does not preclude either
 model.  The aim of this document is to provide a framework for
 development of a common YANG data model for both management and
 control of microwave interfaces.

3.1. Network Management Solutions

 The classic network management solutions, with vendor-specific domain
 management combined with cross-domain functionality for service
 management and analytics, still dominate the market.  These solutions
 are expected to evolve and benefit from an increased focus on
 standardization by simplifying multi-vendor management and removing
 the need for vendor- or domain-specific management.

3.2. Software-Defined Networking

 One of the main drivers for applying SDN from an operator perspective
 is simplification and automation of network provisioning as well as
 end-to-end network service management.  The vision is to have a
 global view of the network conditions spanning different vendors'
 equipment and multiple technologies.
 If nodes from different vendors are managed by the same SDN
 controller via a node management interface without the extra effort
 of introducing intermediate systems, all nodes must align their node
 management interfaces.  Hence, an open and standardized node
 management interface is required in a multi-vendor environment.  Such
 a standardized interface enables unified management and configuration
 of nodes from different vendors by a common set of applications.
 In addition to SDN applications for configuring, managing, and
 controlling the nodes and their associated transport interfaces
 (including the L2 Ethernet, L3 IP, and radio interfaces), there are
 also a large variety of more advanced SDN applications that can be
 utilized and/or developed.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 7] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

 A potentially flexible approach for operators is to use SDN in a
 logically controlled way, managing the radio links by selecting a
 predefined operation mode.  The operation mode is a set of logical
 metrics or parameters describing a complete radio link configuration,
 such as capacity, availability, priority, and power consumption.
 An example of an operation mode table is shown in Figure 3.  Based on
 its operation policy (e.g., power consumption or traffic priority),
 the SDN controller selects one operation mode and translates that
 into the required configuration of the individual parameters for the
 Radio Link Terminals and the associated Carrier Terminations.
 +----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
 | ID |Description    | Capacity   |Availability | Priority  |Power |
 +----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
 | 1  |High capacity  |  400 Mbps  |  99.9%      | Low       |High  |
 +----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
 | 2  |High avail-    |  100 Mbps  |  99.999%    | High      |Low   |
 |    | ability       |            |             |           |      |
 +----+---------------+------------+-------------+-----------+------+
             Figure 3: Example of an Operation Mode Table
 An operation mode bundles together the values of a set of different
 parameters.  How each operation mode maps a certain set of attributes
 is out of the scope of this document.

4. Use Cases

 The use cases described should be the basis for identifying and
 defining the parameters to be supported by a YANG data model for
 management of radio links that will be applicable to centralized,
 unified, multi-vendor management.  The use cases involve
 configuration management, inventory, status and statistics,
 performance management, fault management, and troubleshooting and
 root cause analysis.
 Other product-specific use cases, e.g., addressing installation or
 on-site troubleshooting and fault resolution, are outside the scope
 of this framework.  If required, these use cases are expected to be
 supported by product-specific extensions to the standardized model.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 8] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

4.1. Configuration Management

 Configuration management involves configuring a Radio Link Terminal,
 the constituent Carrier Terminations, and, when applicable, the
 relationship to IP/Ethernet and TDM interfaces.
 o  Understand the capabilities and limitations
    Exchange of information between a manager and a device about the
    capabilities supported and specific limitations in the parameter
    values and enumerations that can be used.
    Examples of information that could be exchanged include the
    maximum modulation supported and support (or lack of support) for
    the Cross Polarization Interference Cancellation (XPIC) feature.
 o  Initial Configuration
    Initial configuration of a Radio Link Terminal, enough to
    establish Layer 1 (L1) connectivity to an associated Radio Link
    Terminal on a device at the far end over the hop.  It may also
    include configuration of the relationship between a Radio Link
    Terminal and an associated traffic interface, e.g., an Ethernet
    interface, unless that is given by the equipment configuration.
    Frequency, modulation, coding, and output power are examples of
    parameters typically configured for a Carrier Termination and type
    of aggregation/bonding or protection configurations expected for a
    Radio Link Terminal.
 o  Radio link reconfiguration and optimization
    Reconfiguration, update, or optimization of an existing Radio Link
    Terminal.  Output power and modulation for a Carrier Termination
    as well as protection schemas and activation/deactivation of
    carriers in a Radio Link Terminal are examples on parameters that
    can be reconfigured and used for optimization of the performance
    of a network.
 o  Radio link logical configuration
    Radio Link Terminals configured to include a group of carriers are
    widely used in microwave technology.  There are several kinds of
    groups: aggregation/bonding, 1+1 protection/redundancy, etc.  To
    avoid configuration on each Carrier Termination directly, a
    logical control provides flexible management by mapping a logical
    configuration to a set of physical attributes.  This could also be

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 9] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

    applied in a hierarchical SDN environment where some domain
    controllers are located between the SDN controller and the Radio
    Link Terminal.

4.2. Inventory

 o  Retrieve logical inventory and configuration from device
    Request from manager and response by device with information about
    radio interfaces, e.g., their constitution and configuration.
 o  Retrieve physical/equipment inventory from device
    Request from manager about physical and/or equipment inventory
    associated with the Radio Link Terminals and Carrier Terminations.

4.3. Status and Statistics

 o  Actual status and performance of a radio link interface
    Manager requests and device responds with information about actual
    status and statistics of configured radio link interfaces and
    their constituent parts.  It's important to report the effective
    bandwidth of a radio link since it can be configured to
    dynamically adjust the modulation based on the current signal
    conditions.

4.4. Performance Management

 o  Configuration of historical performance measurements
    Configuration of historical performance measurements for a radio
    link interface and/or its constituent parts.  See Section 4.1.
 o  Collection of historical performance data
    Collection of historical performance data in bulk by the manager
    is a general use case for a device and not specific to a radio
    link interface.
    Collection of an individual counter for a specific interval is in
    some cases required as a complement to the retrieval in bulk as
    described above.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 10] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

4.5. Fault Management

 o  Configuration of alarm reporting
    Configuration of alarm reporting associated specifically with
    radio interfaces, e.g., configuration of alarm severity, is a
    subset of the configuration use case to be supported.  See
    Section 4.1.
 o  Alarm management
    Alarm synchronization, visualization, handling, notifications, and
    events are generic use cases for a device and should be supported
    on a radio link interface.  There are, however, radio-specific
    alarms that are important to report.  Signal degradation of the
    radio link is one example.

4.6. Troubleshooting and Root Cause Analysis

 Provide information and suggest actions required by a manager/
 operator to investigate and understand the underlying issue to a
 problem in the performance and/or functionality of a Radio Link
 Terminal and the associated Carrier Terminations.

5. Requirements

 For managing a microwave node including both the radio link and the
 packet transport functionality, a unified data model is desired to
 unify the modeling of the radio link interfaces and the L2/L3
 interfaces using the same structure and the same modeling approach.
 If some part of the model is generic for other technology usage, it
 should be clearly stated.
 The purpose of the YANG data model is for management and control of
 the radio link interface(s) and the relationship/connectivity to
 other interfaces, typically to Ethernet interfaces, in a microwave
 node.
 The capability of configuring and managing microwave nodes includes
 the following requirements for the model:
 1.  It MUST be possible to configure, manage, and control a Radio
     Link Terminal and the constituent Carrier Terminations.
     A.  Configuration of frequency, channel bandwidth, modulation,
         coding, and transmitter output power MUST be supported for a
         Carrier Termination.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 11] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

     B.  A Radio Link Terminal MUST configure the associated Carrier
         Terminations and the type of aggregation/bonding or
         protection configurations expected for the Radio Link
         Terminal.
     C.  The capability (e.g., the maximum modulation supported) and
         the actual status/statistics (e.g., administrative status of
         the carriers) SHOULD also be supported by the data model.
     D.  The definition of the features and parameters SHOULD be based
         on established microwave equipment and radio standards, such
         as ETSI EN 302 217 [EN302217-2], which specifies the
         essential parameters for microwave systems operating from 1.4
         GHz to 86 GHz.
 2.  It MUST be possible to map different traffic types (e.g., TDM and
     Ethernet) to the transport capacity provided by a specific Radio
     Link Terminal.
 3.  It MUST be possible to configure and collect historical
     measurements (for the use case described in Section 4.4) to be
     performed on a radio link interface (e.g., minimum, maximum,
     average transmit power, and received level in dBm).
 4.  It MUST be possible to configure and retrieve alarms reporting
     associated with the radio interfaces (e.g., configuration fault,
     signal lost, modem fault, and radio fault).

6. Gap Analysis on Models

 The purpose of the gap analysis is to identify and recommend what
 models to use in a microwave device to support the use cases and
 requirements specified in the previous sections.  This document also
 makes a recommendation for how the gaps not supported should be
 filled, including the need for development of new models and
 evolution of existing models and documents.
 Models are available for microwave radio link functionality:
 "Microwave Information Model" by the ONF [ONF-MW] and "Microwave
 Radio Link YANG Data Models" submitted to and discussed by the CCAMP
 Working Group [CCAMP-MW].  The analysis in this document takes these
 initiatives into consideration and makes a recommendation on how to
 use and complement them in order to fill the gaps identified.
 For generic functionality, not functionality specific to radio link,
 the ambition is to refer to existing or emerging models that could be
 applicable for all functional areas in a microwave node.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 12] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

6.1. Microwave Radio Link Functionality

 [ONF-CIM] defines a CoreModel of the ONF Common Information Model.
 An information model describes the things in a domain in terms of
 objects, their properties (represented as attributes), and their
 relationships.  The ONF information model is expressed in Unified
 Modeling Language (UML).  The ONF CoreModel is independent of
 specific data-plane technology.  The technology-specific content,
 acquired in a runtime solution via "filled in" cases of
 specification, augments the CoreModel by providing a forwarding
 technology-specific representation.
 IETF data models define implementations and protocol-specific
 details.  YANG is a data modeling language used to model the
 configuration and state data.  [RFC8343] defines a generic YANG data
 model for interface management that doesn't include technology-
 specific information.  To describe the technology-specific
 information, several YANG data models have been proposed in the IETF
 to augment [RFC8343], e.g., the data model defined in [RFC8344].  The
 YANG data model is a popular approach for modeling interfaces for
 many packet transport technologies and is thereby well positioned to
 become an industry standard.  In light of this trend, [CCAMP-MW]
 provides a YANG data model proposal for radio interfaces that is well
 aligned with the structure of other technology-specific YANG data
 models augmenting [RFC8343].
 [RFC3444] explains the difference between Information Models (IMs)
 and Data Models (DMs).  An IM models managed objects at a conceptual
 level for designers and operators, while a DM is defined at a lower
 level and includes many details for implementers.  In addition, the
 protocol-specific details are usually included in a DM.  Since
 conceptual models can be implemented in different ways, multiple DMs
 can be derived from a single IM.
 It is recommended to use the structure of the model described in
 [CCAMP-MW] as the starting point, since it is a data model providing
 the wanted alignment with [RFC8343].  To cover the identified gaps,
 it is recommended to define new leafs/parameters and include those in
 the new model [IETF-MW] while taking reference from [ONF-CIM].  It is
 also recommended to add the required data nodes to describe the
 interface layering for the capacity provided by a Radio Link Terminal
 and the associated Ethernet and TDM interfaces in a microwave node.
 The principles and data nodes for interface layering described in
 [RFC8343] should be used as a basis.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 13] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

6.2. Generic Functionality

 For generic functionality, not functionality specific to radio links,
 the recommendation is to refer to existing RFCs or emerging Internet-
 Drafts according to Figure 4.  "[IETF-MW]" is used in Figure 4 for
 the cases where the functionality is recommended to be included in
 the new model [IETF-MW] as described in Section 6.1.
 +------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
 | Generic Functionality              | Recommendation              |
 |                                    |                             |
 +------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
 |1. Fault Management                 |                             |
 |                                    |                             |
 |   Alarm Configuration              | [IETF-MW]                   |
 |                                    |                             |
 |   Alarm Notifications/             | [YANG-ALARM]                |
 |   Synchronization                  |                             |
 +------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
 |2. Performance Management           |                             |
 |                                    |                             |
 |   Performance Configuration/       | [IETF-MW]                   |
 |   Activation                       |                             |
 |                                    |                             |
 |   Performance Collection           | [IETF-MW] and XML files     |
 +------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
 |3.  Physical/Equipment Inventory    | [RFC8348]                   |
 +------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
   Figure 4: Recommendation for How to Support Generic Functionality
 Microwave-specific alarm configurations are recommended to be
 included in the new model [IETF-MW] and could be based on what is
 supported in the models described in [ONF-MW] and [CCAMP-MW].  Alarm
 notifications and synchronization are general and are recommended to
 be supported by a generic model, such as [YANG-ALARM].
 Activation of interval counters and thresholds could be a generic
 function, but it is recommended to be supported by the new model
 [IETF-MW].  It can be based on the models described in [ONF-MW] and
 [CCAMP-MW].
 Collection of interval/historical counters is a generic function that
 needs to be supported in a node.  File-based collection via the SSH
 File Transfer Protocol (SFTP) and collection via NETCONF/YANG
 interfaces are two possible options; the recommendation is to include

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 14] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

 support for the latter in the new model [IETF-MW].  The models
 described in [ONF-MW] and [CCAMP-MW] can also be used as a basis in
 this area.
 Physical and/or equipment inventory associated with the Radio Link
 Terminals and Carrier Terminations is recommended to be covered by a
 generic model for the complete node, e.g., the model defined in
 [RFC8348].  It is thereby outside the scope of the new model
 [IETF-MW].

6.3. Summary

 The conclusions and recommendations from the analysis can be
 summarized as follows:
 1.  A new YANG data model for radio link [IETF-MW] should be defined
     with enough scope to support the use cases and requirements in
     Sections 4 and 5 of this document.
 2.  Use the structure of the model described in [CCAMP-MW] as the
     starting point.  It augments [RFC8343] and is thereby as required
     aligned with the structure of the models for management of the L2
     and L3 domains.
 3.  Use established microwave equipment and radio standards (such as
     [EN302217-2], the model described in [CCAMP-MW], and the model
     described in [ONF-MW]) as the basis for the definition of the
     detailed leafs/ parameters to support the specified use cases and
     requirements, proposing new ones to cover identified gaps.
 4.  Add the required data nodes to describe the interface layering
     for the capacity provided by a Radio Link Terminal and the
     associated Ethernet and TDM interfaces, using the principles and
     data nodes for interface layering described in [RFC8343] as a
     basis.
 5.  Include support for configuration of microwave-specific alarms in
     the new YANG data model [IETF-MW] and rely on a generic model
     such as [YANG-ALARM] for notifications and alarm synchronization.
 6.  Use a generic model such as [RFC8348] for physical/equipment
     inventory.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 15] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

7. Security Considerations

 The configuration information may be considered sensitive or
 vulnerable in network environments.  Unauthorized access to
 configuration data nodes can have a negative effect on network
 operations, e.g., interrupting the ability to forward traffic or
 increasing the interference level of the network.  The status and
 inventory reveal some network information that could be very helpful
 to an attacker.  A malicious attack to that information may result in
 a loss of customer data.  Security issues concerning the access
 control to management interfaces can be generally addressed by
 authentication techniques providing origin verification, integrity,
 and confidentiality.  In addition, management interfaces can be
 physically or logically isolated by configuring them to be only
 accessible out-of-band, through a system that is physically or
 logically separated from the rest of the network infrastructure.  In
 cases where management interfaces are accessible in-band at the
 client device or within the microwave transport network domain,
 filtering or firewalling techniques can be used to restrict
 unauthorized in-band traffic.  Additionally, authentication
 techniques may be used in all cases.
 This framework describes the requirements and characteristics of a
 YANG data model for control and management of the radio link
 interfaces in a microwave node.  It is supposed to be accessed via a
 management protocol with a secure transport layer, such as NETCONF
 [RFC6241].

8. IANA Considerations

 This document has no IANA actions.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
 [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
            2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
            May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 16] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

9.2. Informative References

 [CCAMP-MW] Ahlberg, J., Carlson, J-O., Lund, H-A., Olausson, T.,
            Ye, M., and M. Vaupotic, "Microwave Radio Link YANG Data
            Models", Work in Progress, draft-ahlberg-ccamp-microwave-
            radio-link-01, May 2016.
 [EN302217-2]
            ETSI, "Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics and
            requirements for point-to-point equipment and antennas;
            Part 2: Digital systems operating in frequency bands from
            1 GHz to 86 GHz; Harmonised Standard covering the
            essential requirements of article 3.2 of Directive
            2014/53/EU", ETSI EN 302 217-2, V3.1.1, May 2017.
 [IEEE802.1Qcp]
            IEEE, "Bridges and Bridged Networks Ammendment: YANG Data
            Model", Work in Progress, Draft 2.2, March 2018,
            <https://1.ieee802.org/tsn/802-1qcp/>.
 [IETF-MW]  Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., Spreafico, D., and
            M. Vaupotic, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Radio Link",
            Work in Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-mw-yang-10, October
            2018.
 [ONF-CIM]  ONF, "Core Information Model (CoreModel)", ONF
            TR-512, version 1.2, September 2016,
            <https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/
            sdn-resources/technical-reports/
            TR-512_CIM_(CoreModel)_1.2.zip>.
 [ONF-MW]   ONF, "Microwave Information Model", ONF TR-532, version
            1.0, December 2016,
            <https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/
            sdn-resources/technical-reports/
            TR-532-Microwave-Information-Model-V1.pdf>.
 [RFC2863]  McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
            MIB", RFC 2863, DOI 10.17487/RFC2863, June 2000,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2863>.
 [RFC3444]  Pras, A. and J. Schoenwaelder, "On the Difference between
            Information Models and Data Models", RFC 3444,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC3444, January 2003,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3444>.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 17] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

 [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>.
 [RFC7426]  Haleplidis, E., Ed., Pentikousis, K., Ed., Denazis, S.,
            Hadi Salim, J., Meyer, D., and O. Koufopavlou, "Software-
            Defined Networking (SDN): Layers and Architecture
            Terminology", RFC 7426, DOI 10.17487/RFC7426, January
            2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7426>.
 [RFC8343]  Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface
            Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8343>.
 [RFC8344]  Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for IP Management",
            RFC 8344, DOI 10.17487/RFC8344, March 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8344>.
 [RFC8348]  Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Dong, J., and D. Romascanu, "A
            YANG Data Model for Hardware Management", RFC 8348,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8348, March 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8348>.
 [RFC8349]  Lhotka, L., Lindem, A., and Y. Qu, "A YANG Data Model for
            Routing Management (NMDA Version)", RFC 8349,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8349, March 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8349>.
 [YANG-ALARM]
            Vallin, S. and M. Bjorklund, "YANG Alarm Module", Work in
            Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-alarm-module-04, October 2018.

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 18] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

Contributors

 Marko Vaupotic
 Aviat Networks
 Motnica 9
 Trzin-Ljubljana  1236
 Slovenia
 Email: Marko.Vaupotic@aviatnet.com
 Jeff Tantsura
 Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
 Koji Kawada
 NEC Corporation
 1753, Shimonumabe Nakahara-ku
 Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
 Japan
 Email: k-kawada@ah.jp.nec.com
 Ippei Akiyoshi
 NEC
 1753, Shimonumabe Nakahara-ku
 Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
 Japan
 Email: i-akiyoshi@ah.jp.nec.com
 Daniela Spreafico
 Nokia - IT
 Via Energy Park, 14
 Vimercate (MI)  20871
 Italy
 Email: daniela.spreafico@nokia.com

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 19] RFC 8432 Microwave Framework October 2018

Authors' Addresses

 Jonas Ahlberg (editor)
 Ericsson AB
 Lindholmspiren 11
 Goteborg  417 56
 Sweden
 Email: jonas.ahlberg@ericsson.com
 Min Ye (editor)
 Huawei Technologies
 No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue
 Chengdu  611731
 China
 Email: amy.yemin@huawei.com
 Xi Li
 NEC Laboratories Europe
 Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
 Heidelberg  69115
 Germany
 Email: Xi.Li@neclab.eu
 Luis Contreras
 Telefonica I+D
 Ronda de la Comunicacion, S/N
 Madrid  28050
 Spain
 Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com
 Carlos J. Bernardos
 Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
 Av. Universidad, 30
 Madrid, Leganes  28911
 Spain
 Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es

Ahlberg, et al. Informational [Page 20]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc8432.txt · Last modified: 2018/10/19 18:27 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki