Network Working Group R. Atarashi Internet-Draft Internet Initiative Japan Inc. Expires: April 26, 2005 T. Shimojo Nara Institute of Science and Technology/Alaxala Networks, Corp. Y. Atarashi M. Kitani Alaxala Networks, Corp. F. Baker Cisco Systems October 26, 2004 Netconf Architecture Model draft-atarashi-netconfmodel-architecture-01 Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions of section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 26, 2005. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). Abstract Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 For the new network configuration concept discussed at NETCONF, we mention the importance of building new network architecture. We can not develop and discuss the concept using XML because it is only tools but the concept is confusable. The consensus of architecture is required to clarify the items and technologies that should be discussed and standardized at IETF. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Related Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 11 Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 1. Introduction For the new network configuration concept discussed at NETCONF, we mention the importance of building new network architecture. We can not develop and discuss the concept using XML because it is only tools but the concept is confusable. The consensus of architecture is required to clarify the items and technologies that should be discussed and standardized at IETF. As such, we will make specific recommendations for all applications. In doing so, we will use the language described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 2. Proposal In the discussion for XML configuration at NETCONF, a global architecture SHOULD be developed to arrange the technology components and make common image for configuration. Since XML is only tool, it can not be defined concept and architecture. The configuration tool using XML tag without consideration of architecture may be useful at once, it will obsolete by new technology and standard. It is useful for the network operator to configure network equipments and to see MIB information and network configuration using XML. It is important to discuss SOAP, MIB, security, and so on as tools for configuration, but is difficult to share the whole image of requirements. We need to review the global network architecture to check and confirm the action item. XML is only tools based on the concept of metadata and RDF, and have many possibilities for network architecture. We are required to understand the concept of XML related technologies and to discuss the application of these technologies for standard. Since XML technologies are originally defined for contents and applications, it is also suitable for contents delivery network. We can describe the network policy using XML. The Distributed Management Task Force, inc. Distributed Management Task Force, inc. [1] (DMTF) discuss the XML mapping tool of Common Information Model (CIM). We develop the whole architecture by including existing concepts and technologies related network configuration and management. The global architecture including next generation internet technologies such as IPv6 and QoS also involve the new network architecture. The Migration strategy is required for the new architecture. Since XML is developed for contents and application, it has not been considered to apply to the network control. There are not tools and implementations for network. It is required to implement some technologies for network configuration such as tools, APIs, and so on using XML. Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 3. Related Components This is the list for related components and technologies that are available for network configuration. Network configuration architecture needs many kinds of components for abstraction, description, implementation, operation and others. It is required to consider each role of these components and clear the topics to be open issues. See reference for details. o Resource Description * Resource Description Framework Resource Description Framework [2] * XML Scheme * Ontology Language (OWL) * Metadata work o Description of network devices of policies * Distributed Management Task Force, inc. (DMTF), Common Information Model (CIM) o Topology * Visual Design Tool * Unified Modeling Language (UML) o Configuration Protocol * SSH * SOAP * BEEP o Security Protection * ssh * SSL * IPsec * XML Signature o Management and Monitor * SNMT * slow * netflow Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 4. Architecture Figure 1 presents a proposed architecture for network configuration system. Network configuration system consists of two parts. One is Data model and Description part that manage abstract configuration information. The other is network monitoring and management based on SNMP. Netconf datamodel(2) collaborate with netconf datamodel(1). +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Network +------+ +--------+ Data | | Configuration |Visual|<----------------->|XML | Model | | System |Design| +------------+ |Database| and | | |Tool | |netconf | |(Policy,| Description| | +--+---+ |detamodel(1)| | rules, | | | | +------------+ | Device,| | | | | etc. | | | | +---+----+ | | | | | | | +----------+ | | | +---->|XML Config|<---------+ | | |Controller| | | +-+---+--+-+ | +-------------------------/-----\--\-----------------------------+ / \ \ netconf protocol / \ \ +-----+ ISP Service +----V--+ \ +--------->/ \ Area |Router/| +V------+ / \ |Switch | |Router/| +---------+ +-------+ |Switch | |Home/SOHO| ^ +----+--+ | -PDA | | | | -Video | | +-------+ | | -Devices| | |Router/| | +---------+ | >Switch | | | /+---+---+ | | / | | | / | | +----------------------/-------------------------------------+ | | / | | | | Current +------+++ | +---+----+ | | Management |BB/ | | |SNMP/MIB| | | System |PolicyDB| | +---+----+ | | +--------+ | | | | | | | | | +---V----+ | | +--->| NMS | Monitoring/ | Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 | +--------+ Observation | | | | +---------------------------------------|--------------------+ V netconf datamodel (2) Figure 1: netconf architecture model Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 5. IANA Considerations No action has been requested of IANA. Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 6. Security Considerations This document discusses motivation and architecture of XML network management. If implemented as described, it should ask the network to do nathing that the network has already allowd. If that is the case, no new security issues should arise from the use of such a architecture. 7 Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [1] [2] Authors' Addresses Ray S. Atarashi Internet Initiative Japan Inc. Jinbocho Mitsui Bldg., 1-105 Kanda Jinbo-cho Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-0051 JP Phone: +81-3-5205-6464 Fax: +81-3-5205-6466 EMail: ray@iijlab.net Toshio Shimojo Nara Institute of Science and Technology/Alaxala Networks, Corp. 8916-5 Takayama Ikoma, Nara 630-0101 JP Phone: +81-743-72-5210 Fax: +81-743-72-5291 EMail: toshio-s@is.naist.jp, shimojou@alaxala.com Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 Yoshifumi Atarashi Alaxala Networks, Corp. Shinkawasaki Mitsui Bldg, West Tower 890 Kashimada, Saiwai, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 212-0058 JP Phone: +81-44-549-1306 Fax: +81-44-549-1272 EMail: atarashi@alaxala.net Makoto Kitani Alaxala Networks, Corp. Shinkawasaki Mitsui Bldg, West Tower 890 Kashimada, Saiwai, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 212-0058 JP Phone: +81-44-549-1306 Fax: +81-44-549-1272 EMail: makoto.kitani@alaxala.com Fred Baker Cisco Systems 1121 Via Del Rey Santa Barbara, CA 93117 US Phone: +1-408-526-4257 Fax: +1-413-473-2403 EMail: fred@cisco.com Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Document October 2004 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Disclaimer of Validity This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Atarashi, et al. Expires April 26, 2005 [Page 11]