]> Applicability of MCP for the Network Management Huawei
China yangyuanyuan55@huawei.com
Huawei
China bill.wu@huawei.com
Telefonica
Spain diego.r.lopez@telefonica.com
Deutsche Telekom
Germany nathalie.romo-moreno@telekom.de
Orange Research
France lionel.tailhardat@orange.com
Nokia
India shailesh.prabhu@nokia.com
OPS and ART Network Management Working Group large language model model context protocol The application of MCP in the network management field is meant to refactor network management operation and network capabilities as tools and provide more agile and extensible architecture to expose these AI integration capabilities. This document discusses the applicability of MCP to the network management plane in the IP network that utilizes IETF technologies. It explores MCP for network exposure, multiple MCP server discovery, communication between Network Elements or between the Network element and the Network Controller/Network Gateway.
Introduction The Model Context Protocol (MCP) decouples LLMs from tools and provides a standardized way for LLMs to access and utilize information from different data sources and tools, making it easier to build AI applications that can interact with external LLM models and software tools and enable workflows automation. MCP has seen rapid adoption across both startups and enterprises since it was announced in November 2024. Key use cases include AI coding assistants in IDEs, data analysis tools that can query databases, and productivity tools that can interact with services like Slack or Google Drive. The application of MCP for the network management is meant to refactor network management operation and network capabilities as tools and provide more agile and extensible architecture to expose or consume these AI integration capabilities. With integration of MCP into the network management system, it allows you to develop various AI-driven network applications, realize intent based network management, automate workflows in the multi-vendor heterogeneous network platform. By providing a common interface for tool discovery and invocation, MCP can support:
  • Unified operation abstraction through normalized MCP tool definitions
  • LLM integration through structured tool descriptions and calls
  • Automation Execution Ability
This document discusses the applicability of MCP to the network management plane in the IP network that utilizes IETF technologies. It explores MCP for network exposure, multiple MCP server discovery, communication between Network Elements or between the Network element and the Network Controller/Network Gateway.
Terminology & Notation Conventions 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 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. The following terms are used throughout this document:
MCP
  • MCP Protocol: MCP is an open standard designed to facilitate communication between LLMs and external data sources or tools.
  • MCP Host: The entity initiating the LLM request.
  • MCP Client: A built-in module within a host, specifically designed for interaction with the MCP server.
  • MCP Server: A dedicated entity that exposes tools, resources, or prompts to MCP clients.
  • CLI: Command Line Interface
Others
  • LLM: Large Language Model
  • NETCONF: Network Configuration Protocol
  • RESTCONF: RESTful Network Configuration Protocol
  • SNMP: A Simple Network Management Protocol
The values of coupling MCP with the network management There are 3 values for MCP coupling with the network management
  • Network MCP Server support
    • Exposing network capabilities as tools provided by MCP Servers for 3rd-party AI Agents & applications
  • In Network Service
    • Empowering network services by leveraging MCP ecosystem tools & contents
    • Network service as a unified interface to various and rich capabilities for network users
  • Network Management Intelligence
    • Making network architecture really agile and friendly for innovation
    • Decoupling network management functions into network agents and network tools
The high level Challenges in adopting MCP in NM
  • Protocol Design
    • Error Handling o MCP distinguishes protocol errors from tool execution errors. Network management tools still need to report operation-specific failures, including partial execution of command sequences.
    • Stateful o MCP supports stdio and Streamable HTTP. Streamable HTTP can use SSE and optional session identifiers; it does not require every exchange to use SSE. Implementations need to distinguish MCP session state from device CLI session state.
    • Context Handling o Tool descriptions, retrieved documents, and tool results from multiple MCP servers can increase the amount of content supplied to the LLM. The host needs to select relevant content and limit its size to manage context-window usage.
  • Security Consideration
    • Malicious Actors The protocol's ability to grant LLMs access to external systems introduces potential vulnerabilities that require careful consideration o Prompt injection, where malicious instructions embedded in user inputs or tool descriptions could lead to unintended actions by the LLM; o Tool poisoning, where attackers modify tool definitions, or rug pulls (similar to tool poisoning but occurs post-installation); o Tool shadowing, where tools from different servers are confused during selection or routing. Hosts need to retain the association between a tool and its source server;
    • Security enforcement o MCP defines an authorization framework for HTTP-based transports. Network management implementations still need to enforce permissions for the requested device and operation.
    • Identity Management o Determining clear identity management - whether requests originate from the end user, the AI agent, or a shared system account - remains an area needing clearer definition.
MCP for Network Exposure Network exposure is the process of making network capabilities, such as data and connectivity services, available to external users, applications, and developers through secure APIs. It allows for more agility and the creation of programmable networks. The MCP can be used to expose network capabilities to AI applications or consume external sources for LLMs.
The Third Party as IETF network Exposure Consumer | | |NF1| |NF2| |NF3| ... | |+----------+| | +---+ +---+ +---+ | Heart ||Other APIs|| | <--------->+----------+| +-----------------------------+ Beat +------------+ ]]> Step 1: External tools or data source publish a set of APIs to MCP server in the Network Controller. Step 2: MCP client sends a specific tool request to discover tools and MCP Server provides authorization to the MCP client. Step 3: After successful authorization, MCP server returns the API list corresponding to the tool request sent by the MCP client. Step 4: MCP Client invokes tools with authorization.
The Network Controller Consumes external sources | | Management |3.MCP Service Response | | AI Agents <--------+ | +--------------+ | | | Network Controller | | | +------------------------------+ ]]> Step 0: MCP Client is preconfigured with the MCP Server address. Step 1: IETF Network Management AI Agent sends a MCP Service Request to the MCP client within the Network Controller. Step 2: The MCP client discovers tools provided by the external MCP server. Step 3: The MCP client provides the available tools list to the IETF Network Management AI Agent.
MCP Server Discovery The MCP Server Discovery involves clients querying servers to find available tools, resources, and functions. In case MCP servers are distributed in different locations, MCP Repository can be established to keep track of the location of each MCP servers.
MCP core function o MCP Repository: * Maintain the description of MCP servers * Support MCP server discovery for Client. o MCP client: consuming the services provided by MCP servers o MCP servers: including authentication/session/policy tools, the memory/prompts used for Agents
Procedure for Multi-MCP servers Discovery The following procedure illustrates a registry-based deployment. Registration and synchronization mechanisms are deployment-specific. | | | +------+------+ | | | | Search for | | | | | Proper MCP | | | | | Server | | | +-------------+ | | | 2.2 Address of MCP Server | | <------------------+ | | 3. oAuth Authz | | <------------------------------->| | | 4. Consume Tools/Resources/Prompts | +------------------+-------------|-------------| | | | ]]> Step 0: The MCP Server syncs up on the info of tools, when tools are added or removed, tools changes will be automatically synced up with the MCP server. Step 1: Each new MCP server will register to the centralized MCP registry. Step 2.1: MCP Client sends the MCP service request to the MCP registry for specific capability. Step 2.2: The MCP registry returns a specific MCP server to the MCP client. Step 3: The MCP Client request authorization from the MCP server. Step 4: The MCP Client invokes specific tools with authorization.
Network Management Capability Metadata In MCP-based network management environments, exposed tools may represent operationally sensitive network management actions, including telemetry retrieval, diagnostics, configuration modification, service provisioning, policy updates, or device control operations. While the MCP repository maintains information about MCP servers, tools, and capabilities, additional network-management-specific capability metadata may improve operational safety, interoperability, and automated decision-making. MCP repositories and MCP servers may associate tools with metadata describing both functional capabilities and operational constraints of the exposed capability as follows:
  • Functional capability metadata: operation type, operational scope, supported management protocols, rollback support capability, and operational risk level.
  • Operational constraint metadata authorization requirements, human approval requirements, freshness indicators, and synchronization version information.
Such metadata may assist MCP clients, AI agents, and orchestration systems in evaluating the suitability, applicability, and operational safety of MCP tools prior to authorization and invocation, particularly in large-scale distributed network management deployments.
Deployment Consideration in adopting MCP in the Network Management This section describes MCP deployment requirements for network management environments, followed by implementation scenarios. Key architectural requirements include:
  • Function-Specific MCP Servers: To maintain proper architecture and performance with growing tool volumes, servers should be categorized by network management functions. Typical categories include network log analysis, device configuration management, energy consumption management, and security operations, etc.
  • Secure and Scalable Architecture: The architecture must:
    • Enforce strict access controls limiting MCP operations to authorized AI models and users
    • Scale efficiently with increasing number of network devices while maintaining performance
  • Automated Workflows: MCP implementations should support LLM-coordinated automation of:
    • Real-time monitoring and diagnostics
    • Fault remediation workflows
    • Other common management operations to reduce operator workload
While these core requirements apply universally, operational characteristics vary based on deployment location. The following subsections detail these deployment scenarios.
Network Element Inter-Communication using MCP In this network scenario, the MCP client is deployed in one smart network element while the MCP server is deployed in another smart network element. The MCP client communicates with the MCP server using the MCP protocol and invokes specific tools and gets access to specific data in the network element as a data source. In addition, human operator can use natural language to interact with smart network element to investigate protocol troubleshooting information. Network elements usually have limited resources (CPU, memory, etc.). Deploying MCP Client together with SLM may occupy a large amount of resources, affecting the normal operation of the device. MCP Server| | | | |+---+ +----------+| | | | +----------+ | | | +------------------+ | | +------------------+ | +-------------------------+ +-------------------------+ Smart Network Element Smart Network Element ]]>
Network Controller consumes API or Data source using MCP In this network scenario, the MCP client is deployed in the network controller while the MCP server is deployed in either the 3rd party management system or external data source. The MCP client communicates with the MCP server using the MCP protocol and invokes specific tools and gets access to specific data in the 3rd party management system or external data source. MCP Server|| | +-------+ | | |+----------+| | | | +------------+ | | | | | | +------------+ | | | | | | | | |Data Source | | | | |+----------+| | | |--->MCP Server|| | | |+----------+| | | | | +------------------------+ +------------+ ]]>
Standalone MCP server to Expose APIs and tools to the Network Controller In this network scenario, the MCP client is deployed in the network controller while the MCP server is deployed standalone to manage all the network elements. For legacy networks, native MCP implementation on individual Network Elements can be redundant or resource-constrained. Instead, pre-existing network automation scripts (e.g., Python scripts powered by pyATS or Netmiko) can be directly refactored as MCP tools. In this scenario, the standalone MCP server or Network Controller hosts these scripts and exposes them to the MCP client via standardized tool descriptors. When an AI agent requests a device operation, the MCP server invokes the corresponding Python script via local shell execution or tool pools. This approach achieves direct device control and backward compatibility without modifying the legacy device control plane.
The Network Gateway/Controller and the Network Element Communication using MCP In this network scenario, the MCP client is deployed in the network gateway device while the MCP server is deployed in each network device. The MCP client communicates with the MCP server using the MCP protocol. The LLM is a pre-trained model and deployed in the same Network gateway as the MCP client. Network devices usually have limited resources (CPU, memory, etc.). Deploying MCP Server may occupy a large amount of resources, affecting the normal operation of the device.
Co-located Agent and MCP Server within a Network Element An agent and an MCP server can run on the same network element. The agent uses an MCP client to invoke local tools for device operations or documentation retrieval. A local HTTP deployment can bind the server to the loopback address. Binding to loopback limits network exposure but does not establish the identity or permissions of local callers. The server can dispatch requests to local plugins. A CLI plugin can invoke a local command adapter, while a retrieval plugin queries a documentation backend. Device-internal communication remains behind these plugins. The client-server interface follows MCP; the plugin interface and device-internal messages are implementation-specific. Appendix A.3 illustrates this arrangement.
MCP architecture Design for Network Management
Encapsulating Device Operations into MCP Tools
  • Objective: Expose device operations through tool descriptions and tool calls.
  • Implementation:
    • Tool Abstraction: Vendor-specific commands are wrapped into discrete MCP Tools with uniform schemas.
    • Tool Registry: A centralized database stores MCP Tools with metadata (e.g., names, descriptions, parameters).
  • Benefits:
    • Eliminates manual translation of commands across different vendors
    • Enables the plug-and-play integration of new device types.
    • Objective: Expose device operations through tool descriptions and tool calls.**
  • Implementation:
    • Tool Description: Define the tool name, description, input schema, and, where provided, output schema.
    • Local Tool Registry: Maintain a mapping between tool names, descriptions, and execution handlers. This can be an in-memory table; it is separate from the repository used to discover MCP servers.
    • Plugin Loading: One implementation option is to load configured shared libraries at server startup. Each plugin provides an initialization entry point and an execution handler. The server registers a tool after loading and initializing its implementation. Shared libraries and their calling conventions are local implementation choices.
    • Schema Consistency: Check that configuration-derived tool descriptions match the parameters and results handled by the plugin. Validate invocation arguments before dispatch.
    • Execution: Dispatch the request to the registered handler and map its output or failure into an MCP tool result. Handlers need to support concurrent calls safely, or the server needs to serialize calls to them.
  • Benefits:
    • Tool implementations can be maintained separately from request dispatch and logging.
    • Vendor-specific command handling remains in the tool implementation. A common tool interface does not by itself translate commands between vendors.
LLM for Intent-to-Tool-Request Translation
  • Objective: Allow AI models (such as Claude) to understand natural language commands and trigger operations.
  • Workflow:
    • Intent Recognition: The LLM first analyzes the user's natural language query to identify：
      • The user's intent or goal
      • Required actions or operations
      • Entities, parameters, and constraints mentioned
      • Context from previous interactions
    • Network Entity Object Extraction：The LLM or a apecialized sub-module extracts network-specificsemantic entities (e.g.,Device Names, Interface IDs, Protocal Instances, VRF contexts) from the input. These extracted entities are mapped onto a network semantic graph or topology data model to ensure that the paramenters paased to the MCP tool correspond to valid, existing operational assets.
    • Tool Discovery and Toolchain Generation: The LLM accesses tool descriptions provided by MCP servers, and matches the identified intent with available tools.
    • Parameter Extraction and Mapping: The LLM maps natural language references to structured parameter names and extracts relevant information from the user query.
    • Structured Invocation Generation: The LLM generates properly formatted tool calls following MCP's protocol.
  • Benefits:
    • Bridge natural language to tool invocation requests in a fixed format, then return this request to the client, enabling the client to properly parse the request.
Tool Invocation and Execution Workflow This workflow separates documentation retrieval from device execution. It does not assume automatic recovery or rollback. - Tool Discovery: After MCP initialization, the client obtains tool descriptions with tools/list. The host provides relevant descriptions and the operator's request to the LLM. - Context Retrieval: If documentation is needed, the host invokes a retrieval tool through the MCP client. The tool can query a local backend or an existing retrieval service and return relevant document excerpts. Retrieval supplies context; it does not execute device commands or authorize configuration changes. - Tool Selection: The LLM proposes the next tool and its arguments. The host applies permission and approval checks before invocation. An informational question can be answered from retrieved material without calling a device configuration tool. - Device Execution: The client sends a tools/call request. The server validates the arguments and dispatches them to the selected handler. A CLI handler can invoke a local command adapter and capture its output and error information. - Result Handling: The server returns the result or execution error. The host can display the result directly or supply it to the LLM for explanation. Command output alone does not establish that the requested network state has been reached. - Logging: The server records each tool invocation. Request and session identifiers can correlate calls with execution records. Log format and retention are implementation choices. Such records document tool execution; they do not necessarily capture the model's reasoning. These steps use MCP methods rather than dedicated REST paths. With Streamable HTTP, tools/list and tools/call are JSON-RPC messages sent by HTTP POST to the MCP endpoint. A custom such as GET /tools or POST /execute API requires adaptation before it can serve a standard MCP client. A closed-loop workflow additionally requires checks of the resulting device state. Retry and rollback depend on the operation and backend support; they are not guaranteed by MCP tool invocation.
Interworking with the Network Management protocol and YANG data models MCP can be seen as AI protocol and used to invoke AI integrated capabilities. MCP is not in the position to replace the network management and YANG data model. Instead, it can be integrated together, e.g.,
  • Integrated MCP with CLI, allow the MCP client invoke CLI capabilities; For a device-local implementation, a CLI tool can invoke an adapter executable. The adapter sends the command to an existing device component through a socket; that component forwards it to the CLI execution component using the device's internal messaging interface. Command output returns through the adapter to the tool. This reuses the existing CLI execution path.
The socket type, internal message format, and plugin calling convention are implementation details, not MCP messages. The MCP server maps tool requests to this path and returns MCP tool results. Authorization, command parsing, and execution errors need to be handled at the relevant boundaries.
  • Integrated MCP with YANG, allow YANG being consumed by MCP client or allow the MCP client invoke YANG interface related capabilities;
IANA Considerations This document has no IANA actions.
Security Considerations The MCP protocol needs to consider scenarios where either the client or server encounters issues, such as crashes. If one or both parties go offline during communication, the entire process may remain stuck waiting for messages, potentially leading to an infinite loop. Furthermore, certain tool operations may be interrupted, and some irreversible network management operations could be affected. Due to network latency, some operations might not return in time, yet from the user's perspective, these operations may appear either unexecuted or failed. If the user then initiates another tool request to the server, problems may occur. For complex network management workflows, while LLM's tool invocation process may generally function correctly, issues can arise in the details. Users must verify each LLM operation to prevent unintended hazardous actions. Capability metadata associated with MCP-exposed network management tools may assist MCP clients and AI agents in evaluating operational risk, rollback capabilities, and approval requirements prior to tool invocation. Orchestration systems may use such metadata to enforce authorization, approval, and policy constraints as part of the execution workflow. This distinction can help reduce unsafe or unintended operations in AI-assisted network management environments by allowing clients and agents to consume metadata for planning, while enforcement points apply policy controls before execution. Loading native tool plugins places executable code inside the server process. Plugin files and their configuration need protection against unauthorized modification. Native plugins loaded into the server process do not, by themselves, provide an isolation boundary; a plugin failure can affect the server. CLI tools need to validate command parameters and apply operation permissions before execution. Passing model-generated strings to a shell introduces command-injection risk. Implementations should avoid unnecessary shell interpretation and define how command sequences are handled when one command fails. Caller names and session identifiers supplied in request metadata are useful for correlation but do not prove caller identity. Authorization decisions need to use authenticated identity and applicable policy. Logs should exclude credentials and protect sensitive command output. Retrieved documentation should be treated as input data, not as authority to change device configuration.
Normative References Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings. Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) defined in this document provides mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the configuration of network devices. It uses an Extensible Markup Language (XML)-based data encoding for the configuration data as well as the protocol messages. The NETCONF protocol operations are realized as remote procedure calls (RPCs). This document obsoletes RFC 4741. [STANDARDS-TRACK] RESTCONF Protocol This document describes an HTTP-based protocol that provides a programmatic interface for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastore concepts defined in the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF). Coexistence between Version 1, Version 2, and Version 3 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework The purpose of this document is to describe coexistence between version 3 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework, (SNMPv3), version 2 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework (SNMPv2), and the original Internet-standard Network Management Framework (SNMPv1). This document also describes how to convert MIB modules from SMIv1 format to SMIv2 format. This document obsoletes RFC 2576. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
MCP Usage Examples
Routing Protocol Troubleshooting using Embedded SLM Model and Natural Language Interface The figure shows a troubleshooting workflow. To integrate this workflow with MCP, the troubleshooting application can use an MCP client to invoke scripts exposed as tools by an MCP server. This is a possible integration point; the figure does not specify the MCP roles or transport. Knowledge+--> LLM +--->Workflow | | | | | | protocol | | RAG | +-----+ | Code | | | | | | fault | +----------+ +----+----+ | | | | +----------+ | | | | +------------------------------------------------+------------+ | | | | | | | | | | | +------------------------------------------------+------------+ | | |OPS Env:Online Natural Language Interaction------V-------+ | | | | +----------+Troubleshooting| | | | | | | Package Build| | | | | | +---------------+ | | | |+--------+ +----V---+ +-------------+ | | | || User | +-------+ |Intent | | Execute | | | | || Nature | | Device| |Parse | |Workflow | | | | ||Language+--> SLM +--->Fault +----> Script | | | | || Prompt | | ONNX | |Pattern | |Locating root| | | | |+--------+ +-------+ |Match | | Cause | | | | | +--------+ +-------------+ | | | | | | | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ ]]> Step 1. When ISIS neighbour establishment fails, the network maintenance engineer queries the fault cause via natural language in the CLI interface. Step 2. A small model deployed on the device's CPU understands the user's intent and matches the fault pattern. Step 3. Troubleshooting scripts are invoked to locate the root cause of the fault. Step 4. The query is repeated until service operations get back to normal.
Device Configuration using MCP+CLI In this example, the network element implements the MCP Server and exposes all CLI interfaces and documentation as tools to the MCP Client. The Network controller implements the MCP client and interact with MCP server in the Network element. The MCP server provides the following registered tool descriptor information: Tools description: It describes the name, use, and parameters of tools. Tools implementation: MCP implementation describes how the tools are invoked. See Tool descriptor information example as follows: Tool Descriptor: Tool Implementation Suppose a user submits a request (via the client) such as "Configure OSPF Area 0 with process ID 100 for all core switches in the Beijing data center," the MCP client retrieves the necessary tooling descriptor information from the MCP server and forwards it along with the request to the LLM. The LLM determines the appropriate tools and responds in JSON format as follows: The MCP server responds to the call instruction, converts it into the below CLIs of different vendors, and then the devices execute the CLIs. The results are returned to the MCP client in JSON as below and are forwarded to the LLM. The LLM parses the response, generates a natural-language summary, and sends it back to the client for final presentation to the user.
Contributors Huawei
maqiufang1@huawei.com
Huawei
China zengguanming@huawei.com