One document matched: draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-01.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!-- One method to get references from the online citation libraries.
There has to be one entity for each item to be referenced.
An alternate method (rfc include) is described in the references. -->
<!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC6136 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6136.xml">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<!-- used by XSLT processors -->
<!-- For a complete list and description of processing instructions (PIs),
please see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html. -->
<!-- Below are generally applicable Processing Instructions (PIs) that most I-Ds might want to use.
(Here they are set differently than their defaults in xml2rfc v1.32) -->
<?rfc strict="no" ?>
<!-- give errors regarding ID-nits and DTD validation -->
<!-- control the table of contents (ToC) -->
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<!-- generate a ToC -->
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<!-- the number of levels of subsections in ToC. default: 3 -->
<!-- control references -->
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<!-- use symbolic references tags, i.e, [RFC2119] instead of [1] -->
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<!-- sort the reference entries alphabetically -->
<!-- control vertical white space
(using these PIs as follows is recommended by the RFC Editor) -->
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<!-- do not start each main section on a new page -->
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<!-- keep one blank line between list items -->
<!-- end of list of popular I-D processing instructions -->
<rfc category="info" docName="draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-01" ipr="trust200902">
<!-- category values: std, bcp, info, exp, and historic
ipr values: trust200902, noModificationTrust200902, noDerivativesTrust200902
pre5378Trust200902
you can add the attributes updates="NNNN" and obsoletes="NNNN"
they will automatically be output with "(if approved)" -->
<!-- ***** FRONT MATTER ***** -->
<front>
<!-- The abbreviated title is used in the page header - it is only necessary if the
full title is longer than 39 characters -->
<title>NVO3 Operational Requirements</title>
<author fullname="Peter Ashwood-Smith" initials="P."
surname="Ashwood-Smith">
<organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>303 Terry Fox Drive, Suite 400</street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>Kanata</city>
<region>Ontario</region>
<country>Canada</country>
<code>K2K 3J1</code>
</postal>
<phone>+1 613 595-1900</phone>
<email>Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Ranga Iyengar" initials="R." surname="Iyengar">
<organization>Huawei Technologies USA</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>2330 Central Expy</street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>Santa Clara</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>95050</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<phone></phone>
<email>ranga.Iyengar@huawei.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Tina Tsou" initials="T." surname="Tsou">
<organization>Huawei Technologies USA</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>2330 Central Expy</street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>Santa Clara</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>95050</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<phone></phone>
<email>Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Ali Sajassi" initials="A." surname="Sajassi">
<organization>Cisco Technologies</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>170 West Tasman Drive</street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>San Jose</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>95134</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<phone></phone>
<email>sajassi@cisco.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Mohamed Boucadair" initials="M." surname="Boucadair">
<organization>France Telecom</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street></street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>Rennes</city>
<region></region>
<code>35000</code>
<country>France</country>
</postal>
<phone></phone>
<email>mohamed.boucadair@orange.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Christian Jacquenet" initials="C." surname="Jacquenet">
<organization>France Telecom</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street></street>
<!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->
<city>Rennes</city>
<region></region>
<code>35000</code>
<country>France</country>
</postal>
<phone></phone>
<email>christian.jacquenet@orange.com</email>
<!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
</address>
</author>
<date month="November" year="2012" />
<!-- If the month and year are both specified and are the current ones,
xml2rfc will fill in the current day for you. If only the current year is
specified, xml2rfc will fill in the current day and month for you. If the
year is not the current one, it is necessary to specify at least a month
(xml2rfc assumes day="1" if not specified for the purpose of calculating
the expiry date). With drafts it is normally sufficient to specify just
the year. -->
<!-- Meta-data Declarations -->
<area>General</area>
<workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
<!-- WG name at the upperleft corner of the doc,
IETF is fine for individual submissions.
If this element is not present, the default is "Network Working Group",
which is used by the RFC Editor as a nod to the history of the IETF. -->
<keyword>network virtualization over layer 3</keyword>
<keyword>NVO3</keyword>
<!-- Keywords will be incorporated into HTML output
files in a meta tag but they have no effect on text or nroff
output. If you submit your draft to the RFC Editor, the
keywords will be used for the search engine. -->
<abstract>
<t>This document provides framework and requirements for Network
Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) Operations, Administration,
and Maintenance (OAM). This document for the most part gathers
requirements from existing IETF drafts and RFCs which have
already extensively studied this subject for different data
planes and layering. As a result this draft is high level and
broad. We begin to ask which are truly required for NVO3 and
expect the list to be narrowed by the working group as
subsequent versions of this draft are created.</t>
</abstract>
</front>
<middle>
<section title="Introduction">
<t>This document provides framework and requirements for Network
virtualization over Layer 3(NVO3) Operation, Administration,
and Maintenance (OAM). Given that this OAM subject is far from
new and has been under extensive investigation by various IETF
working groups (and several other standards bodies) for many
years, this document draws from existing work, starting with
<xref target="RFC6136"/>. As a result, sections of
<xref target="RFC6136"/> have been reused
with minor changes with the permission of the authors. </t>
<t>NVO3 OAM requirements are expected to be a subset of
IETF/IEEE etc. work done so far; however, we begin with a full
set of requirements and expect to prune them through several
iterations of this document. </t>
<section title="OSI Definitions of OAM" anchor="OSIdef">
<t>The scope of OAM for any service and/or transport/network
infrastructure technologies can be very broad in nature. OSI
has defined the following five generic functional areas
commonly abbreviated as "FCAPS" [NM-Standards]:
<list style="symbols">
<t>Fault Management,</t>
<t>Configuration Management,</t>
<t>Accounting Management,</t>
<t>Performance Management, and</t>
<t>Security Management.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>This document focuses on the Fault, Performance and to a
limited extent the Configuration Management aspects. Other
functional aspects of FCAPS and their relevance (or not) to
NVO3 are for further study.</t>
<t>Fault Management can typically be viewed in terms of the
following categories:
<list style="symbols">
<t>Fault Detection</t>
<t>Fault Verification</t>
<t>Fault Isolation</t>
<t>Fault Notification and Alarm Suppression</t>
<t>Fault Recovery</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Fault detection deals with mechanism(s) that can detect
both hard failures such as link and device failures, and soft
failures, such as software failure, memory corruption,
misconfiguration, etc.Fault detection relies upon a set of mechanisms
that first allow the observation of an event, then the use of a protocol
to dynamically notify a network/system operator (or management system)
about the event occurrence, then diagnosis tools to assess the nature
and the gravity of the fault.
After verifying that a fault has occurred along the data path,
it is important to be able to isolate the fault to the level
of a given device or link. Therefore, a fault isolation
mechanism is needed in Fault Management. A fault notification
mechanism should be used in conjunction with a fault detection mechanism to
notify the devices upstream and downstream to the fault
detection point. The fault notification mechanism should also notify NMS systems.
For example, when there is a client/server relationship
between two layered networks (for example the NVO3 layer would
be a client of the outer IP server layer) while the inner IP layer would be a client
of the NVO3 server layer 2); fault detection at the server
layer may result in the following fault notifications:
<list style="symbols">
<t>Sending a forward fault notification from the server
layer to the client layer network(s) using the fault
notification format appropriate to the client layer.</t>
<t>Sending a backward fault notification at the server
layer, if applicable, in the reverse direction.</t>
<t>Sending a backward fault notification at the client
layer, if applicable, in the reverse direction.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Finally, fault recovery deals with recovering from the
detected failure by switching to an alternate available data
path (depending on the nature of the fault) using alternate
devices or links.
Note, given that the IP network on which NVO3 resides is
usually self healing, it is expected that recovery would not
normally be required by the NVO3 layer. The special case of a
static IP overlay network, or possibly a centrally controlled
IP overlay network may however require NVO3 involvement in
fault recovery.</t>
<t>Performance Management deals with mechanism(s) that allow
determining and measuring the performance of the
network/services under consideration. Performance Management
can be used to verify the compliance to both the service-level
and network-level metric objectives/specifications.
Performance Management typically consists of measuring
performance metrics, e.g., Frame Loss, Frame Delay, Frame
Delay Variation (aka Jitter), etc., across managed entities
when the managed entities are in available state.
Performance Management is suspended across unavailable
managed entities.</t>
</section> <!-- OSIdef -->
<section title="Requirements Language">
<t>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 <xref target="RFC2119"/>.</t>
</section>
<section title="Relationship with Other OAM Work">
<t>This document leverages requirements that originate with
other OAM work, specifically the following:
<list style="symbols">
<t><xref target="RFC6136"/> provides a template and some of
the high level requirements and introductory wording.</t>
<t><xref target="IEEE802.1ag"/> is expected to provide a
subset of the requirements for NVO3 both at the Tenant level
and also within the L3 Overlay network.</t>
<t><xref target="Y.1731"/> is expected to provide a subset
of the requirements for NVO3 at the Tenant level.</t>
<t>Section 3.8 of <xref target="NVO3-DP-Reqs"/> lists several
requirements specifically concerning ECMP/LAG.</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
</section> <!-- Introduction -->
<section title="Terminology">
<t>The terminology defined in <xref target="NVO3-framework"/>
and <xref target="NVO3-DP-Reqs"/> is used throughout this
document. We introduce no new terminology. </t>
</section>
<section title="NVO3 Reference Model" anchor="refModel">
<t><xref target="fig1"/> below reproduces the generic NVO3
reference model as per <xref target="NVO3-framework"/>.</t>
<figure title="Generic reference model for DC network virtualization over a Layer3 infrastructure" anchor="fig1">
<artwork>
+--------+ +--------+
| Tenant | | Tenant |
| End +--+ +---| End |
| System | | | | System |
+--------+ | ................... | +--------+
| +-+--+ +--+-+ |
| | NV | | NV | |
+--|Edge| |Edge|--+
+-+--+ +--+-+
/ . L3 Overlay . \
+--------+ / . Network . \ +--------+
| Tenant +--+ . . +----| Tenant |
| End | . . | End |
| System | . +----+ . | System |
+--------+ .....| NV |........ +--------+
|Edge|
+----+
|
|
+--------+
| Tenant |
| End |
| System |
+--------+
</artwork>
</figure>
<t><xref target="fig2"/> below, reproduces the Generic reference
model for the NV Edge (NVE) as per
<xref target="NVO3-DP-Reqs"/>.</t>
<figure title="Generic reference model for NV Edge"
anchor="fig2">
<artwork>
+------- L3 Network ------+
| |
| Tunnel Overlay |
+------------+--------+ +--------+------------+
| +----------+------+ | | +------+----------+ |
| | Overlay Module | | | | Overlay Module | |
| +--------+--------+ | | +--------+--------+ |
| | VNID | | | VNID |
| | | | | |
| +-------+-------+ | | +-------+-------+ |
| | VNI | | | | VNI | |
NVE1 | +-+-----------+-+ | NVE2 | +-+-----------+-+ |
| | VAPs | | | | VAPs | |
+----+-----------+----+ +----+-----------+----+
| | | |
-------+-----------+-----------------+-----------+-------
| | Tenant | |
| | Service IF | |
Tenant End Systems Tenant End Systems
</artwork>
</figure>
</section> <!-- refModel -->
<section title="OAM Framework for NVO3" anchor="frame">
<t><xref target="fig1"/> showed the generic reference model for
a DC network virtualization over an L3 (or L3VPN) infrastructure
while <xref target="fig2"/> showed the generic reference model
for the Network Virtualization (NV) Edge.</t>
<t>L3 network(s) or L3 VPN networks (either IPv6 or IPv4, or
a combination thereof), provide transport for an emulated layer
2 created by NV Edge devices. Unicast and multicast tunneling
methods (de-multiplexed by Virtual Network Identifier (VNID))
are used to provide connectivity between the NV Edge devices.
The NV Edge devices then present an emulated layer 2 network to
the Tenant End Systems at a Virtual Network Interface (VNI)
through Virtual Access Points (VAPs). The NV Edge devices map
layer 2 unicast to layer 3 unicast point-to-point tunnels and
may either map layer 2 multicast to layer 3 multicast tunnels
or may replicate packets onto multiple layer 3 unicast tunnels.
</t>
<section title="OAM Layering">
<t>The emulated layer 2 network is provided by the NV Edge
devices to which the Tenant End Systems are connected. This
network of NV Edges can be operated by a single service
provider or can span across multiple administrative domains. Likewise,
the L3 Overlay Network can be operated by a single service
provider or span across multiple administrative domains.</t>
<t>While each of the layers is responsible for its own OAM,
each layer may consist of several different administrative
domains. <xref target="fig3"/> shows an example.</t>
<figure title="OAM layers in an NVO3 network" anchor="fig3">
<artwork>
OAM
---
TENANT |----------------------------| TENANT {all IP/ETH}
NV Edge |----------------------| NV Edge {t.b.d.}
IP(VPN) |---| IP (VPN) |---| IP(VPN) {IP(VPN)/ETH}
</artwork>
</figure>
<t>For example, at the bottom, at the L3 IP overlay network
layer IP(VPN) and/or Ethernet OAM mechanisms are used to probe
link by link, node to node etc. OAM addressing here means
physical node loopback or interface addresses.</t>
<t>Further up, at the NV Edge layer, NVO3 OAM messages are
used to probe the NV Edge to NV Edge tunnels and NV Edge
entity status. OAM addressing here likely means the physical
node loopback together with the VNI (to de-multiplex the
tunnels).</t>
<t>Finally, at the Tenant layer, the IP and/or Ethernet OAM
mechanisms are again used but here they are operating over the
logical L2/L3 provided by the NV-Edge through the VAP. OAM
addressing at this layer deals with the logical interfaces on
Vswitches and Virtual Machines.
</t>
</section> <!-- layering -->
<section title="OAM Domains">
<t>Complex OAM relationships exist as a result of the
hierarchical layering of responsibility and of breaking up of
end-to-end responsibility.</t>
<t>The OAM domain above NVO3, is expected to be supported by
existing IP and L2 OAM methods and tools.</t>
<t>The OAM domain below NVO3, is expected to be supported by
existing IP/L2 and MPLS OAM methods and tools. Where this
layer is actually multiple domains spliced together, the
existing methods to deal with these boundaries are unchanged.
Note however that exposing LAG/ECMP detailed behavior may
result in additional requirements to this domain, the deatils of
which will be specified in the future versions of this draft.</t>
<t>When we refer to an OAM domain in this document, or just
'domain', we therefore refer to a closed set
of NV Edges and the tunnels which interconnect them. Inter-domain
OAM considersations will be specified in the future versions of this
draft</t>
</section>
</section> <!-- frame -->
<section title="NVO3 OAM Requirements">
<t>The following numbered requirements originate from
<xref target="RFC6136"/>. All are included however where they
seem obviously not relevant (to the present authors) an
explanation as to why is included.</t>
<section title="Discovery">
<t>R1) NVO3 OAM MUST allow an NV Edge device to dynamically
discover other NV Edge devices that share the same VNI within
a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Connectivity Fault Management">
<section title="Connectivity Fault Detection">
<t>R2) NVO3 OAM MUST allow proactive
connectivity monitoring between two NV Edge devices that
support the same VNIs within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
<t>R3) NVO3 OAM MUST allow monitoring/tracing of all
possible paths between NV Edge devices. Using this feature, equal cost
paths that traverse LAG and/or ECMP may be differentiated.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Connectivity Fault Verification">
<t>R4) NVO3 OAM MUST allow connectivity fault verification
between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI
within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Connectivity Fault localization">
<t>R5) NVO3 OAM MUST allow connectivity fault localization
between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within
a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Connectivity Fault Notification and Alarm Suppression">
<t>R6) NVO3 OAM MUST support fault notification to be
triggered as a result of the faults occured at the underneath network
infrastructure.
This fault notification SHOULD be used for the suppression
of redundant service-level alarms.</t>
</section>
</section> <!-- Connect fault mgmt -->
<section title="Frame Loss">
<t>R7) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI frame/packet
loss between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI
within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Frame Delay">
<t>R8) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI two-way
frame/packet delay between two NV edge devices that support
the same VNI within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
<t>R9) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI one-way
frame/packet delay between two NV Edge devices that support
the same VNI within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Frame Delay Variation">
<t>R10) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI
frame/packet delay variation between two NV Edge devices that
support the same VNI within a given NVO3 domain.</t>
</section>
<section title="Availability">
<t>A service may be considered unavailable if the service
frames/packets do not reach their intended destination (e.g.,
connectivity is down) or the service is degraded (e.g.,
frame/packet loss and/or frame/packet delay and/or delay
variation threshold is exceeded). Entry and exit conditions
may be defined for the unavailable state. Availability itself
may be defined in the context of a service type. Since
availability measurement may be associated with connectivity,
frame/packet loss, frame/packet delay, and frame/packet delay
variation measurements, no additional requirements are
specified currently.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Data Path Forwarding">
<t>R11) NVO3 OAM frames MUST be forwarded along the same path
(i.e., links (including LAG members) and nodes) as the NVO3
data frames.</t>
<t>R12) NVO3 OAM frames MUST provide a mechanism to
exercise/trace all data paths that result due to ECMP/LAG
hops.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Scalability">
<t>R13) NVO3 OAM MUST be scalable such that an NV edge device
can support proactive OAM for each VNI that is supported by
the device. (Note - Likely very hard to achieve with hash
based ECMP/LAG).</t>
</section>
<section title="Extensibility">
<t>R14) NVO3 OAM MUST be extensible such that new
functionality and information elements related to this
functionality can be introduced in the future.</t>
<t>R15) NVO3 OAM MUST be defined such that devices not
supporting the OAM are able to forward the OAM frames in a
similar fashion as the regular NVO3 data frames/packets.</t>
</section>
<section title="Security">
<t>R16) NVO3 OAM frames MUST be prevented from leaking outside
their NVO3 domain.</t>
<t>R17) NVO3 OAM frames from outside an NVO3 domain MUST be
prevented from entering the said NVO3 domain when such OAM
frames belong to the same level or to a lower-level OAM.
(Trivially met because hierarchical domains are independent
technologies.)
</t>
<t>R18) NVO3 OAM frames from outside an NVO3 domain MUST be
transported transparently inside the NVO3 domain when such OAM
frames belong to a higher-level NVO3 domain. (Trivially met
because hierarchical domains are independent technologies).
</t>
</section>
<section title="Transport Independence">
<t>Similar to transport requirement from
<xref target="RFC6136"/>, we expect NVO3 OAM will leverage the
OAM capabilities of the transport layer (e.g., IP underlay).
</t>
<t>R19) NVO3 OAM MAY allow adaptation/interworking with its IP
underlay OAM functions. For example, this would be useful to
allow fault notifications from the IP layer to be sent to the
NVO3 layer and likewise exposure of LAG / ECMP will require
such non-independence.</t>
</section>
<section title="Application Independence">
<t>R20) NVO3 OAM MUST be independent of the application
technologies and specific application OAM capabilities.</t>
</section>
</section> <!-- OAM reqs -->
<section title="Items for Further Discussion">
<t>This section identifies a set of operational items which may
be elaborated further if these items fail within the scope of
the NVO3.
<list style="symbols">
<t>VNID renumbering support
<list style="symbols">
<t>Means to change the VNID assigned to a given instance
MUST be supported.</t>
<t>VNID renumbering MUST NOT alter the service availability.
</t>
<t>A VNE MUST be able to map a VNID with a virtual network
context.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>VNI migration and management operations
<list style="symbols">
<t>Means to delete an existing VNI MUST be supported.</t>
<t>Means to add a new VNI MUST be supported.</t>
<t>Means to merge several VNIs SHOULD be supported.</t>
<t>Means to retrieve reporting data per VNI MUST be
supported.</t>
<t>Means to monitor the network resources per VNI MUST be
supported.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Support of planned maintenance operations on the NVO3
infrastructure
<list style="symbols">
<t>Graceful procedure to allow for planned maintenance
operation on NVE MUST be supported.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Inter-VNI communication support
<list style="symbols">
<t>For global reachability purposes, inter-VNI communication
MUST be supported. This can be enforced using a NAT
function.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Activation of new network-related services to the NVO3
<list style="symbols">
<t>Means to assist in activating new network services
(e.g., multicast) without impacting running service should
be supported.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>Inter-operator NVO3 considerations
<list style="symbols">
<t>As NVO3 may be deployed over inter-operator
infrastructure, coordinating OAM actions in each individual
domain are required to ensure an e2e OAM. In particular,
this assumes existence of agreements on the measurement and
monitoring methods, fault detection and repair actions,
extending QoS classes (e.g., DSCP mapping policies), etc.
<list>
<t>[[DISCUSSION NOTE: Should inter-operator issues be
declared out of scope?]]</t>
</list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
<t>This memo includes no request to IANA.</t>
</section>
<section anchor="Security" title="Security Considerations">
<t>TBD</t>
</section>
</middle>
<!-- *****BACK MATTER ***** -->
<back>
<!-- References split into informative and normative -->
<references title="Normative References">
&RFC2119;
</references>
<references title="Informative References">
&RFC6136;
<reference anchor="NVO3-framework">
<front>
<title>Framework for DC Network Virtualization</title>
<author initials="M." surname="Lasserre">
<organization>Alcatel-Lucent</organization>
</author>
<author initials="F." surname="Balus">
<organization>Alcatel-Lucent</organization>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Morin">
<organization>France Telecom Orange</organization>
</author>
<author initials="N." surname="Bitar">
<organization>Verizon</organization>
</author>
<author initials="Y." surname="Rekhter">
<organization>Juniper</organization>
</author>
<date month="July" year="2012" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="NVO3-DP-Reqs">
<front>
<title>NVO3 Data Plane Requirements</title>
<author initials="N." surname="Bitar">
<organization>Verizon</organization>
</author>
<author initials="M." surname="Lasserre">
<organization>Alcatel-Lucent</organization>
</author>
<author initials="F." surname="Balus">
<organization>Alcatel-Lucent</organization>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Morin">
<organization>France Telecom Orange</organization>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Jin">
<organization>ZTE</organization>
</author>
<author initials="B." surname="Khasnabish">
<organization>ZTE</organization>
</author>
<date month="October" year="2012" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1ag">
<front>
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks, Amendment 5: Connectivity Fault Management</title>
<author initials="" surname="">
<organization>IEEE</organization>
</author>
<date year="2007" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="IEEE802.1ah">
<front>
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks, Amendment 6: Provider Backbone Bridges</title>
<author initials="" surname="">
<organization>IEEE</organization>
</author>
<date year="2008" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="Y.1731">
<front>
<title>ITU-T Recommendation Y.1731 (02/08) - OAM functions and mechanisms for Ethernet based networks</title>
<author initials="" surname="">
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="February" year="2008" />
</front>
</reference>
<reference anchor="NM-Standards">
<front>
<title>ITU-T Recommendation M.3400 (02/2000) - TMN Management Functions</title>
<author initials="" surname="">
<organization>ITU-T</organization>
</author>
<date month="February" year="2000" />
</front>
</reference>
</references>
</back>
</rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 11:05:26 |