wdiff rfc8527.original rfc8527.txt

Network Working Group
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Bjorklund
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 8527 Tail-f Systems
Updates: 8040 (if approved) J. Schoenwaelder
Intended status:
Category: Standards Track Jacobs University
Expires: April 12, 2019
ISSN: 2070-1721 P. Shafer
Juniper Networks
K. Watsen
Juniper
Watsen Networks
R. Wilton
Cisco Systems
October 9, 2018
February 2019

RESTCONF Extensions to Support the
Network Management Datastore Architecture
draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-05

Abstract

This document extends the RESTCONF protocol defined in RFC 8040 in
order to support the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
defined in RFC 8342.

This document updates RFC 8040 by introducing new datastore
resources, adding a new query parameter, and requiring the usage of
I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis
the YANG library (described in RFC 8525) by RESTCONF servers
implementing the
Network Management Datastore Architecture.

RFC Ed.: Please replace "I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis" above with its
final RFC assignment and remove this note. NMDA.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents an Internet Standards Track document.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for a maximum publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of six months RFC 7841.

Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on April 12, 2019.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8527.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)
(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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2
2. Datastore and YANG Library Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. RESTCONF Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. New Datastore Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Protocol Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1. With-defaults query parameter The "with-defaults" Query Parameter on the operational
state datastore . . . . . .
Operational State Datastore . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4
3.2.2. New "with-origin" Query Parameter . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1. Introduction

This document extends the RESTCONF protocol defined in [RFC8040] in
order to support the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
defined in [RFC8342].

This document updates [RFC8040] in order to enable RESTCONF clients
to discover which datastores are supported by the RESTCONF server,
determine which modules are supported in each datastore, and to interact
with all the datastores supported by the NMDA. Specifically, the
update introduces new datastore resources, adds a new query
parameter, and requires the usage of
[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis] the YANG library [RFC8525] by
RESTCONF servers implementing the NMDA.

The solution presented in this document is backwards compatible with
[RFC8040]. This is achieved by only adding new resources and leaving
the semantics of the existing resources unchanged.

1.1. Terminology

This document uses the terminology defined by the NMDA [RFC8342].

The keywords 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, 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.

2. Datastore and YANG Library Requirements

RFC Ed.: Please update 201X-XX-XX below with correct date and remove
this note.

An NMDA-compliant RESTCONF server MUST support the operational state
datastore and it MUST implement at least revision 201X-XX-XX 2019-01-04 of the
"ietf-yang-library" module defined in [I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis]. [RFC8525].

Such a server identifies that it supports the NMDA both by
implementing the {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:operational resource, resource
and by implementing at least revision 201X-XX-XX 2019-01-04 of the
"ietf-yang-library" module.

A RESTCONF client can test if a server supports the NMDA by using
either the HEAD or GET methods on {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
datastores:operational.

A RESTCONF client can discover which datastores and YANG modules the
server supports by reading the YANG library information from the
operational state datastore.

3. RESTCONF Extensions

This section describes the RESTCONF extensions needed to support the
NMDA.

3.1. New Datastore Resources

This document defines a set of new resources representing datastores
as defined in [RFC8342]. These resources are available using the
following resource path template:

{+restconf}/ds/<datastore>

The <datastore> path component is encoded as an "identityref"
according to the JSON encoding rules for identities, defined in
Section 6.8 of [RFC7951]. The namespace-qualified form MUST be used.
Such an identity MUST be derived from the "datastore" identity
defined in the "ietf-datastores" YANG module [RFC8342].

Specifically:

o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:operational refers to
the operational state datastore.

o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:running refers to the
running configuration datastore.

o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:intended refers to the
intended configuration datastore.

An NMDA-compliant server MUST implement {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
datastores:operational. Other datastore resources MAY be
implemented.

YANG actions can only be invoked in {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
datastores:operational.

As an example, if a server implements other datastores, such as the example a datastore "ds-ephemeral" called
"ds-ephemeral", defined in the a module called "example-ds-ephemeral",
then the server would implement the resource {+restconf}/ds/example- ds-
ephemeral:ds-ephemeral.
ds-ephemeral:ds-ephemeral.

3.2. Protocol Operations

The protocol operations available for the new datastore resources
(Section
(see Section 3.1) are the same as the protocol operations defined in
[RFC8040] for the {+restconf}/data resource with the following
exceptions:

o Dynamic configuration datastores are excluded, as each dynamic
configuration datastore definition needs to be reviewed for what
protocol operations it supports.

o Some datastores are read-only by nature (e.g., <intended>), and
hence <intended>); hence,
any attempt to modify these datastores will fail. A server MUST
return a response with a "405 Method Not Allowed" status-line and
an error-tag value of "operation-not-supported".

o The semantics of the "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040],
Section 4.8.9) differs
(Section 4.8.9 of [RFC8040]) differ when interacting with the
operational state datastore. The semantics are described below, in
Section 3.2.1.

o [RFC8040], Section 3.5.4, paragraph 3 does not apply when
interacting with any resource under {+restconf}/ds.

3.2.1. With-defaults query parameter The "with-defaults" Query Parameter on the operational state datastore

The Operational State
Datastore

Support for the "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040], Section 4.8.9) (Section 4.8.9 of
[RFC8040]) is OPTIONAL to support when interacting with {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
datastores:operational. The associated capability to indicate a
server's support is identified with the URI:

urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0

For servers that support it, the behavior of the "with-defaults"
query parameter on the operational state datastore is defined as
follows:

o If no "with-defaults" query parameter is specified, or if it is
set to "explicit", "report-all", or "report-all-tagged", then the
"in use" values, as defined in [RFC8342] section 5.3, Section 5.3 of [RFC8342], are
returned from the operational state datastore, even if a node
happens to have a default statement in the YANG module and this
default value is being used by the server. If the "with-defaults"
parameter is set to "report-all-tagged", any values that match the
schema default are tagged with additional metadata, as described
in
[RFC8040], Section 4.8.9. 4.8.9 of [RFC8040].

o If the "with-defaults" query parameter is set to "trim", all "in
use" values are returned, except that the output is filtered to
exclude any values that match the default defined in the YANG
schema.

Servers are not required to support all values in the "with-defaults"
query parameter on the operational state datastore. If a request is
made using a value that is not supported, then the error handling
behavior is as described in ([RFC8040], Section 4.8.9). 4.8.9 of [RFC8040].

3.2.2. New "with-origin" Query Parameter

A new query parameter named "with-origin" is added to the GET
operation. If present, it requests that the server includes "origin"
metadata annotations in its response, as detailed in the NMDA. This
parameter is only valid when querying {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
datastores:operational or any datastores with identities derived from
the "operational" identity. Otherwise, if an invalid datastore is
specified
specified, then the server MUST return a response with a "400 Bad
Request" status-line, using an error-tag value of "invalid-value".
"origin" metadata annotations are not included unless a client
explicitly requests them.

Data in the operational state datatstore can come from multiple
sources. The server should return the most accurate value for the "origin" metadata annotation as possible, indicating
value that most accurately indicates the source of the operational
value, as specified in Section 5.3.4 of [RFC8342].

When encoding the origin "origin" metadata annotation for a hierarchy of
returned nodes, the annotation can be omitted for a child node when
the value matches that of the parent node, as described in the
"ietf-origin" YANG module [RFC8342].

The

Support for the "with-origin" query parameter is OPTIONAL to support. OPTIONAL. It is
identified with the URI:

urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0

4. IANA Considerations

This document defines two capability identifier URNs in the "RESTCONF
Capability URNs" registry defined in [RFC8040]:

Index
Capability Identifier
---------------------

:with-origin
urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0

:with-operational-defaults
urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0

5. Security Considerations

This document extends the RESTCONF protocol by introducing new
datastore resources. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the
mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC8446]. The
RESTCONF protocol uses the network configuration access control model
[RFC8341], which provides the means to restrict access for particular
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available RESTCONF
protocol operations and content.

The security constraints for the base RESTCONF protocol (see
Section 12 of [RFC8040]) apply to the new RESTCONF datastore
resources defined in this document.

6. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis]
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "YANG Library", draft-ietf-netconf-
rfc7895bis-06 (work in progress), April 2018.

[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>.
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

[RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG",
RFC 7951, DOI 10.17487/RFC7951, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7951>.

[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.

[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>.

[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.

[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.

[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

[RFC8525] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "YANG Library", RFC 8525,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8525, February 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8525>.

Authors' Addresses

Martin Bjorklund
Tail-f Systems

Email: mbj@tail-f.com

Juergen Schoenwaelder
Jacobs University

Email: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
Phil Shafer
Juniper Networks

Email: phil@juniper.net

Kent Watsen
Juniper
Watsen Networks

Email: kwatsen@juniper.net kent+ietf@watsen.net

Robert Wilton
Cisco Systems

Email: rwilton@cisco.com