NETMOD Working Group K. Watsen Internet-Draft Juniper Networks Intended status: Standards Track A. Bierman Expires: March 5, 2016 Yumaworks M. Bjorklund Tail-f Systems J. Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen September 2, 2015 Operational State Enhancements for YANG, NETCONF, and RESTCONF draft-kwatsen-netmod-opstate-00 Abstract This document presents enhancements to YANG, NETCONF, and RESTCONF to better support the definition of and access to operational state data. 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 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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." This Internet-Draft will expire on March 5, 2016. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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 Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 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 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Conceptual Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Enhancements to YANG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. The related-state Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1.1. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1.2. Usage Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Enhancements to NETCONF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. The Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1.1. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. The Applied Configuration Capability . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2.1. Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2.2. Dependencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.3. Capability Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.4. New Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.5. Modifications to Existing Operations . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.6. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.7. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Enhancements to RESTCONF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1. The Applied Configuration Capability . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.1. Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.2. The applied capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1.3. The "applied" Query Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction Support for operational state has been defined in YANG [RFC6020], NETCONF [RFC6241], and RESTCONF [draft-ietf-netconf-restconf] since their beginnings. However, after some operational experience, the support defined by these standards has been found to be limiting [draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate] as follows: o YANG * Inability to associate operational state with configured state Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 o NETCONF * Inability to retrieve operational state without also retrieving running configuration * Inability to inspect the configuration as it is operationally running o RESTCONF * Inability to inspect the configuration as it is operationally running Addressing these limitations is the focus of this document. 2. Terminology The following terms are defined in [draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate], but are redefined here as follows: o intended configuration - this data represents the configuration state that the network operator intends the configuration controlled by the NETCONF/RESTCONF server to be in. In the NETCONF protocol, the intended configuration is specified in the "running" datastore. In the RESTCONF protocol, the intended configuration is specified in its conceptual datastore. o applied configuration - this data represents the configuration state that the NETCONF/RESTCONF server is actually in, i.e., that which is currently being run by particular software modules (e.g., the BGP daemon), or other systems within the server (e.g., a secondary control-plane, or line card). The data model for applied configuration is the same as the intended configuration's data model. That is, the applied configuration data model is also defined by the config true nodes in YANG modules supported by the NETCONF/RESTCONF server. The data within the applied configuration is the same as the data within the intended configuration except as follows: * When the intended configuration has not been communicated to an external software entity * When post-processing or flattening of the intended configuration occurs to present a simpler view to the external software entities The transition from intended config to applied config commences in NETCONF when or is called, for :writable- Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 running or :candidate respectively, and in RESTCONF immediately whenever a POST, PUT, DELETE, or PATCH operation is called. Neither NETCONF nor RESTCONF currently enable inspection of the applied configuration. o derived state - this data represents information which is generated as part of the system's own interactions. For example, derived state may consist of the results of protocol interactions (the negotiated duplex state of an Ethernet link), statistics (such as message queue depth), or counters (such as packet input or output bytes). Derived stated is defined in YANG using config false nodes, retrievable in NETCONF using the RPC, and retrievable in RESTCONF using the content=nonconfiguration query parameter. The following terms are defined in this document: o intended state - a synonym for "intended configuration". o operational state - the combination of applied state and derived state. 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]. 3. Conceptual Model The following diagram illustrates the conceptual model presented in this document: Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 + intended | operational state | state | | +----------+ | +---------+ config true | intended | | | applied | YANG nodes | config | | | config | +----------+ | +---------+ | +-------------------------------------------------------+ | | +---------+ config false | | derived | YANG nodes | | state | | +---------+ | + Not illustrated in the diagram above: o The intended and applied configurations share the same YANG- defined data model, specified by the config true nodes in the YANG modules supported by the server. o The transition of the intended config to the applied commences immediately, whenever the intended config is updated. 4. Enhancements to YANG 4.1. The related-state Statement The "related-state" statement identifies a path to where additional operational state associated for a config true node can be found. This operational state being in addition to any descendant config false nodes, which are implicitly associated to the parent config true node. The "related-state" statement takes as an argument a string that is used to specify the path to a config false node holding the associated operational state. The format of the argument is the same as for the leafref's "path" statement, Section 9.9.2 in [RFC6020]. Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 4.1.1. YANG Module module ietf-yang-related-state { namespace urn:example:ietf-yang-related-state; prefix yrs; extension related-state { argument path; description "The related-state statement is used to identify a node that contains additional operational state associated for a config true node. The format of the argument is the same as for a leafref's "path" statement. The related-state statement can be specified in the following YANG statements: o leaf o leaf-list o container o list The related-state statement allows the following YANG substatements: o description Multiple related-state statements can be given in a specific node."; } } 4.1.2. Usage Example The following example illustrates the related-state statement in use: Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 module ex-interfaces { namespace "http://example.com/interfaces"; prefix xif; import ietf-yang-related-state { prefix yrs; } container interfaces { list interface { key name; yrs:related-state "/interfaces-state/interface[name=current()/name]"; leaf name { type string } leaf mtu { type uint16; } ... } } container interfaces-state { config false; list interface { key name; leaf name { type string; } ... } } } 5. Enhancements to NETCONF 5.1. The Operation One of the limitations identified in the Section 1 section was the inability for the NETCONF protocol to retrieve operational state without also retrieving running configuration. That is, the only defined NETCONF operation capable of returning operational state is the operation ([RFC6241], Section 7.7), but it also returns the "running" configuration for the nodes selected by the passed filter. While it is possible to construct data-models whereby configuration and operational state are in completely isolated sub-trees, and thereby eliminate the retrieval of configuration when selecting an operational state node, requiring all models to be structured this way is not ideal. Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 5.1.1. YANG Module module ietf-netconf-get-state { namespace urn:example:ietf-netconf-get-state; prefix ncgs; import ietf-netconf { prefix nc; } rpc get-state { description "Retrieve device state information."; reference "RFC 6241, Section 7.7"; input { anyxml filter { description "This parameter specifies the portion of the system configuration and state data to retrieve."; nc:get-filter-element-attributes; } } output { anyxml data { description "Copy of the running datastore subset and/or state data that matched the filter criteria (if any). An empty data container indicates that the request did not produce any results."; } } } } 5.2. The Applied Configuration Capability 5.2.1. Description The applied configuration capability indicates that the device supports an applied configuration datastore, which is used to hold a read-only copy of configuration data as it is known to the operational components of the system (e.g., the data plane). The applied configuration datastore contains applied configuration, as defined in Section 2. Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 5.2.2. Dependencies None. 5.2.3. Capability Identifier The :applied capability is identified by the following capability string: :ietf:params:netconf:capability:applied:1.0 5.2.4. New Operations None. 5.2.5. Modifications to Existing Operations The :applied capability enables to be passed as the argument to the and operations. The :applied capability does not modify any other existing operations. In particular, the value may not be used as the argument to any operation. Note, the :applied capability has no impact to the operation because the operation is defined as returning the "running" configuration, without any parameter to specify otherwise. The parameter is formally defined in Section 5.2.6. 5.2.6. YANG Module Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 module ietf-netconf-applied-config { namespace urn:example:ietf-netconf-applied-config; prefix ncac; import ietf-netconf { prefix nc; } augment /nc:get-config/nc:input/nc:source/nc:config-source { leaf applied { type empty; } } augment /nc:copy-config/nc:input/nc:source/nc:config-source { leaf applied { type empty; } } } 5.2.7. Example To retrieve the "/interfaces" subtree from the applied configuration datastore: 6. Enhancements to RESTCONF 6.1. The Applied Configuration Capability 6.1.1. Description The applied configuration capability indicates that the device supports an applied configuration datastore, which is used to hold a read-only copy of configuration data as it is known to the operational components of the system (e.g., the data plane). Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 The applied configuration datastore contains applied configuration, as defined in section Section 2. 6.1.2. The applied capability A RESTCONF server supports the applied configuration datastore when it presents the following URI in its "capability" leaf-list, as defined in [RFC6241], Section 9.3. urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:applied:1.0 6.1.3. The "applied" Query Parameter The "applied" parameter is only available when the RESTCONF server supports the "urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:applied:1.0" capability. The "applied" parameter is used to specify that the GET request should be directed to the applied configuration datastore. The "applied" parameter does not have a value assignment. This parameter is only allowed for GET methods on API, datastore, and data resources. A 400 Bad Request error is returned if it used for other methods or resource types. 7. Security Considerations TBD 8. IANA Considerations TBD 9. Acknowledgements TBD 10. References 10.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, October 2010. Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 11] Internet-Draft Op-State Enhancements September 2015 [RFC6241] Enns, R., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., and A. Bierman, "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, June 2011. [draft-ietf-netconf-restconf] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", draft-ieft-netconf-restconf-04 (work in progress), 2014, . 10.2. Informative References [draft-openconfig-netmod-opstate] Shakir, R., Shaikh, A., and M. Hines, "Consistent Modeling of Operational State Data in YANG", 2015, . Authors' Addresses Kent Watsen Juniper Networks EMail: kwatsen@juniper.net Andy Bierman Yumaworks EMail: andy@yumaworks.com Martin Bjorklund Tail-f Systems EMail: mbj@tail-f.com Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen EMail: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Watsen, et al. Expires March 5, 2016 [Page 12]