A Formal Validation Model for the Netconf Protocol

  • Sylvain Hallé
  • Rudy Deca
  • Omar Cherkaoui
  • Roger Villemaire
  • Daniel Puche
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3278)


Netconf is a protocol proposed by the IETF that defines a set of operations for network configuration. One of the main issues of Netconf is to define operations such as validate and commit, which currently lack a clear description and an information model. We propose in this paper a model for validation based on XML schema trees. By using an existing logical formalism called TQL, we express important dependencies between parameters that appear in those information models, and automatically check these dependencies on sample XML trees in reasonable time. We illustrate our claim by showing different rules and an example of validation on a Virtual Private Network.


Virtual Private Network Remote Procedure Call Tree Rule Semistructured Data Common Information Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bush, R., Griffin, T.: Integrity for Virtual Private Routed Networks. In: Proc. IEEE INFOCOM (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cardelli, L.: Describing semistructured data. SIGMOD Record 30(4), 80–85 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cardelli, L., Ghelli, G.: TQL: A query language for semistructured data based on the ambient logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (to appear)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deca, R., Cherkaoui, O., Puche, D.: A Validation Solution for Network Configuration. In: Communications Networks and Services Research Conference (CNSR 2004), Fredericton, N.B. (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DSP111, DMTF white paper, Common Information Model core model, version 2.4, August 30 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Enns, R.: NETCONF Configuration Protocol. Internet draft (February 2004),
  7. 7.
    Gottlob, G., Koch, C.: Monadic queries over tree-structured data. In: LICS 2002, pp. 189–202 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hallé, S., Deca, R., Cherkaoui, O., Villemaire, R.: Automated Validation of Service Configuration on Network Devices. In: Vicente, J.B., Hutchison, D. (eds.) MMNS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3271, pp. 176–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2004) (to appear)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lymberopoulos, L., Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: Ponder Policy Implementation and Validation in a CIM and Differentiated Services Framework. In: NOMS 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    López de Vergara, J.E., Villagrá, V.A., Berrocal, J.: Semantic Management: advantages of using an ontology-based management information meta-model. In: HP-OVUA 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pepelnjak, I., Guichard, J.: MPLS VPN Architectures. Cisco Press (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosen, E., Rekhter, Y.: BGP/MPLS VPNs. RFC 2547 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scott, C., Wolfe, P., Erwin, M.: Virtual Private Networks. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Strassner, J., Baker, F.: Directory Enabled Networks. Macmillan Technical Publishing, Basingstoke (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    TQL web site, Università di Pisa,

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvain Hallé
    • 1
  • Rudy Deca
    • 1
  • Omar Cherkaoui
    • 1
  • Roger Villemaire
    • 1
  • Daniel Puche
    • 2
  1. 1.Université du Québec à MontréalCanada
  2. 2.Cisco Systems, IncUSA

Personalised recommendations