idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-08.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC7049]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (March 25, 2019) is 1858 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: '-2' is mentioned on line 925, but not defined -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '257' on line 925 == Missing Reference: '0-9' is mentioned on line 1191, but not defined == Missing Reference: '1-9' is mentioned on line 1182, but not defined == Missing Reference: '0-4' is mentioned on line 1191, but not defined == Missing Reference: '0-5' is mentioned on line 1191, but not defined == Missing Reference: '0-9a-fA-F' is mentioned on line 1190, but not defined -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '01' on line 1191 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 7049 (Obsoleted by RFC 8949) == Outdated reference: A later version (-17) exists of draft-ietf-core-comi-04 == Outdated reference: A later version (-24) exists of draft-ietf-core-sid-05 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 7159 (Obsoleted by RFC 8259) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 7223 (Obsoleted by RFC 8343) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 7277 (Obsoleted by RFC 8344) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 9 warnings (==), 6 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force M. Veillette, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft Trilliant Networks Inc. 4 Intended status: Standards Track A. Pelov, Ed. 5 Expires: September 26, 2019 Acklio 6 A. Somaraju 7 Tridonic GmbH & Co KG 8 R. Turner 9 Landis+Gyr 10 A. Minaburo 11 I. Petrov, Ed. 12 Acklio 13 March 25, 2019 15 CBOR Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG 16 draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-08 18 Abstract 20 This document defines encoding rules for serializing configuration 21 data, state data, RPC input and RPC output, Action input, Action 22 output and notifications defined within YANG modules using the 23 Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) [RFC7049]. 25 Status of This Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 26, 2019. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 2. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 2.1. YANG Schema Item iDentifier (SID) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 2.2. CBOR diagnostic notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 3. Properties of the CBOR Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 4. Encoding of YANG Schema Node Instances . . . . . . . . . . . 7 65 4.1. The 'leaf' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 66 4.2. The 'container' and other collections . . . . . . . . . . 8 67 4.2.1. SIDs as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 68 4.2.2. Member names as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 69 4.3. The 'leaf-list' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 70 4.4. The 'list' and 'list' instance(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 71 4.4.1. SIDs as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 72 4.4.2. Member names as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 73 4.5. The 'anydata' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 74 4.6. The 'anyxml' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 75 5. Encoding of YANG data templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 76 5.1. SIDs as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 77 5.2. Member names as keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 78 6. Representing YANG Data Types in CBOR . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 79 6.1. The unsigned integer Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 80 6.2. The integer Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 81 6.3. The 'decimal64' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 82 6.4. The 'string' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 83 6.5. The 'boolean' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 84 6.6. The 'enumeration' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 85 6.7. The 'bits' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 86 6.8. The 'binary' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 87 6.9. The 'leafref' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 88 6.10. The 'identityref' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 89 6.10.1. SIDs as identityref . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 90 6.10.2. Name as identityref . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 91 6.11. The 'empty' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 92 6.12. The 'union' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 93 6.13. The 'instance-identifier' Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 94 6.13.1. SIDs as instance-identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 95 6.13.2. Names as instance-identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 96 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 97 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 98 8.1. Tags Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 99 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 100 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 101 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 102 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 103 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 105 1. Introduction 107 The specification of the YANG 1.1 data modelling language [RFC7950] 108 defines an XML encoding for data instances, i.e. contents of 109 configuration datastores, state data, RPC inputs and outputs, action 110 inputs and outputs, and event notifications. 112 A new set of encoding rules has been defined to allow the use of the 113 same data models in environments based on the JavaScript Object 114 Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format [RFC7159]. This is 115 accomplished in the JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG 116 specification [RFC7951]. 118 The aim of this document is to define a set of encoding rules for the 119 Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) [RFC7049]. The resulting 120 encoding is more compact compared to XML and JSON and more suitable 121 for Constrained Nodes and/or Constrained Networks as defined by 122 [RFC7228]. 124 2. Terminology and Notation 126 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 127 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 128 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 130 The following terms are defined in [RFC7950]: 132 o action 134 o anydata 136 o anyxml 138 o data node 140 o data tree 142 o datastore 144 o feature 145 o identity 147 o module 149 o notification 151 o RPC 153 o schema node 155 o schema tree 157 o submodule 159 The following terms are defined in [RFC7951]: 161 o member name 163 o name of an identity 165 o namespace-qualified 167 The following terms are defined in [RFC8040]: 169 o yang-data (YANG extension) 171 o YANG data template 173 This specification also makes use of the following terminology: 175 o child: A schema node defined within a collection such as a 176 container, a list, a case, a notification, an RPC input, an RPC 177 output, an action input, an action output. 179 o delta: Difference between the current SID and a reference SID. A 180 reference SID is defined for each context for which deltas are 181 used. 183 o item: A schema node, an identity, a module, a submodule or a 184 feature defined using the YANG modeling language. 186 o parent: The collection in which a schema node is defined. 188 o YANG Schema Item iDentifier (SID): Unsigned integer used to 189 identify different YANG items. 191 2.1. YANG Schema Item iDentifier (SID) 193 Some of the items defined in YANG [RFC7950] require the use of a 194 unique identifier. In both NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040], 195 these identifiers are implemented using names. To allow the 196 implementation of data models defined in YANG in constrained devices 197 and constrained networks, a more compact method to identify YANG 198 items is required. This compact identifier, called YANG Schema Item 199 iDentifier (SID), is encoded using an unsigned integer. The 200 following items are identified using SIDs: 202 o identities 204 o data nodes 206 o RPCs and associated input(s) and output(s) 208 o actions and associated input(s) and output(s) 210 o notifications and associated information 212 o YANG modules, submodules and features 214 To minimize its size, in certain positions, SIDs are represented 215 using a (signed) delta from a reference SID and the current SID. 216 Conversion from SIDs to deltas and back to SIDs are stateless 217 processes solely based on the data serialized or deserialized. 219 Mechanisms and processes used to assign SIDs to YANG items and to 220 guarantee their uniqueness is outside the scope of the present 221 specification. If SIDs are to be used, the present specification is 222 used in conjunction with a specification defining this management. 223 One example for such a specification is under development as 224 [I-D.ietf-core-sid]. 226 2.2. CBOR diagnostic notation 228 Within this document, CBOR binary contents are represented using an 229 equivalent textual form called CBOR diagnostic notation as defined in 230 [RFC7049] section 6. This notation is used strictly for 231 documentation purposes and is never used in the data serialization. 232 Table 1 below provides a summary of this notation. 234 +----------+------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ 235 | CBOR | CBOR | Diagnostic notation | Example | CBOR | 236 | content | type | | | encoding | 237 +----------+------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ 238 | Unsigned | 0 | Decimal digits | 123 | 18 7B | 239 | integer | | | | | 240 | Negative | 1 | Decimal digits prefixed | -123 | 38 7A | 241 | integer | | by a minus sign | | | 242 | Byte | 2 | Hexadecimal value | h'F15C' | 42 f15C | 243 | string | | enclosed between single | | | 244 | | | quotes and prefixed by | | | 245 | | | an 'h' | | | 246 | Text | 3 | String of Unicode | "txt" | 63 | 247 | string | | characters enclosed | | 747874 | 248 | | | between double quotes | | | 249 | Array | 4 | Comma-separated list of | [ 1, 2 ] | 82 01 02 | 250 | | | values within square | | | 251 | | | brackets | | | 252 | Map | 5 | Comma-separated list of | { 1: 123, | a2 | 253 | | | key : value pairs within | 2: 456 } | 01187B | 254 | | | curly braces | | 021901C8 | 255 | Boolean | 7/20 | false | false | F4 | 256 | | 7/21 | true | true | F5 | 257 | Null | 7/22 | null | null | F6 | 258 | Not | 7/23 | undefined | undefined | F7 | 259 | assigned | | | | | 260 +----------+------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ 262 Table 1: CBOR diagnostic notation summary 264 The following extensions to the CBOR diagnostic notation are 265 supported: 267 o Any text within and including a pair of slashes is considered a 268 comment. 270 o Deltas are visualized as numbers preceded by a '+' or '-' sign. 271 The use of the '+' sign for positive deltas represents an 272 extension to the CBOR diagnostic notation as defined by [RFC7049] 273 section 6. 275 3. Properties of the CBOR Encoding 277 This document defines CBOR encoding rules for YANG schema trees and 278 their subtrees. 280 A collection such as container, list instance, notification, RPC 281 input, RPC output, action input and action output is serialized using 282 a CBOR map in which each child schema node is encoded using a key and 283 a value. This specification supports two type of CBOR keys; YANG 284 Schema Item iDentifier (SID) as defined in Section 2.1 and member 285 names as defined in [RFC7951]. Each of these key types is encoded 286 using a specific CBOR type which allows their interpretation during 287 the deserialization process. Protocols or mechanisms implementing 288 this specification can mandate the use of a specific key type. 290 In order to minimize the size of the encoded data, the proposed 291 mapping avoids any unnecessary meta-information beyond those natively 292 supported by CBOR. For instance, CBOR tags are used solely in the 293 case of anyxml schema nodes and the union datatype to distinguish 294 explicitly the use of different YANG datatypes encoded using the same 295 CBOR major type. 297 Unless specified otherwise by the protocol or mechanism implementing 298 this specification, the infinite lengths encoding as defined in 299 [RFC7049] section 2.2 SHALL be supported by CBOR decoders. 301 Data nodes implemented using a CBOR array, map, byte string, and text 302 string can be instantiated but empty. In this case, they are encoded 303 with a length of zero. 305 Application payloads carrying a value serialized using the rules 306 defined by this specification (e.g. CoAP Content-Format) SHOULD 307 include the identifier (e.g. SID, namespace-qualified member name, 308 instance-identifier) of this value. When SIDs are used as 309 identifiers, the reference SID SHALL be included in the payload to 310 allow stateless conversion of delta values to SIDs. Formats of these 311 application payloads are not defined by the current specification and 312 are not shown in the examples. 314 4. Encoding of YANG Schema Node Instances 316 Schema node instances defined using the YANG modeling language are 317 encoded using CBOR [RFC7049] based on the rules defined in this 318 section. We assume that the reader is already familiar with both 319 YANG [RFC7950] and CBOR [RFC7049]. 321 4.1. The 'leaf' 323 A 'leaf' MUST be encoded accordingly to its datatype using one of the 324 encoding rules specified in Section 6. 326 4.2. The 'container' and other collections 328 Collections such as containers, list instances, notification 329 contents, rpc inputs, rpc outputs, action inputs and action outputs 330 MUST be encoded using a CBOR map data item (major type 5). A map is 331 comprised of pairs of data items, with each data item consisting of a 332 key and a value. Each key within the CBOR map is set to a schema 333 node identifier, each value is set to the value of this schema node 334 instance according to the instance datatype. 336 This specification supports two type of CBOR keys; SID as defined in 337 Section 2.1 and member names as defined in [RFC7951]. 339 The following examples shows the encoding of a 'system-state' 340 container instance using SIDs or member names. 342 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 344 typedef date-and-time { 345 type string { 346 pattern '\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}T\d{2}:\d{2}:\d{2}(\.\d+)?(Z|[\+\-] 347 \d{2}:\d{2})'; 348 } 349 } 351 container system-state { 353 container clock { 354 leaf current-datetime { 355 type date-and-time; 356 } 358 leaf boot-datetime { 359 type date-and-time; 360 } 361 } 362 } 364 4.2.1. SIDs as keys 366 CBOR map keys implemented using SIDs MUST be encoded using a CBOR 367 unsigned integer (major type 0) or CBOR negative integer (major type 368 1), depending on the actual delta value. Delta values are computed 369 as follows: 371 o In the case of a 'container', deltas are equal to the SID of the 372 current schema node minus the SID of the parent 'container'. 374 o In the case of an 'rpc input' or 'rcp output', deltas are equal to 375 the SID of the current schema node minus the SID of the 'rpc'. 377 o In the case of an 'action input' or 'action output', deltas are 378 equal to the SID of the current schema node minus the SID of the 379 'action'. 381 CBOR diagnostic notation: 383 { / system-state (SID 1720) / 384 +1 : { / clock (SID 1721) / 385 +2 : "2015-10-02T14:47:24Z-05:00", / current-datetime (SID 1723)/ 386 +1 : "2015-09-15T09:12:58Z-05:00" / boot-datetime (SID 1722) / 387 } 388 } 390 CBOR encoding: 392 A1 # map(1) 393 01 # unsigned(1) 394 A2 # map(2) 395 02 # unsigned(2) 396 78 1A # text(26) 397 323031352d31302d30325431343a34373a32345a2d30353a3030 398 01 # unsigned(1) 399 78 1a # text(26) 400 323031352d30392d31355430393a31323a35385a2d30353a3030 402 4.2.2. Member names as keys 404 CBOR map keys implemented using member names MUST be encoded using a 405 CBOR text string data item (major type 3). A namespace-qualified 406 member name MUST be used each time the namespace of a schema node and 407 its parent differ. In all other cases, the simple form of the member 408 name MUST be used. Names and namespaces are defined in [RFC7951] 409 section 4. 411 The following example shows the encoding of a 'system' container 412 instance using names. 414 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 416 typedef date-and-time { 417 type string { 418 pattern '\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}T\d{2}:\d{2}:\d{2}(\.\d+)?(Z|[\+\-] 419 \d{2}:\d{2})'; 420 } 421 } 423 container system-state { 425 container clock { 426 leaf current-datetime { 427 type date-and-time; 428 } 430 leaf boot-datetime { 431 type date-and-time; 432 } 433 } 434 } 436 CBOR diagnostic notation: 438 { 439 "ietf-system:clock" : { 440 "current-datetime" : "2015-10-02T14:47:24Z-05:00", 441 "boot-datetime" : "2015-09-15T09:12:58Z-05:00" 442 } 443 } 445 CBOR encoding: 447 A1 # map(1) 448 71 # text(17) 449 696574662D73797374656D3A636C6F636B # "ietf-system:clock" 450 A2 # map(2) 451 70 # text(16) 452 63757272656E742D6461746574696D65 # "current-datetime" 453 78 1A # text(26) 454 323031352D31302D30325431343A34373A32345A2D30353A3030 455 6D # text(13) 456 626F6F742D6461746574696D65 # "boot-datetime" 457 78 1A # text(26) 458 323031352D30392D31355430393A31323A35385A2D30353A3030 460 4.3. The 'leaf-list' 462 A leaf-list MUST be encoded using a CBOR array data item (major type 463 4). Each entry of this array MUST be encoded accordingly to its 464 datatype using one of the encoding rules specified in Section 6. 466 The following example shows the encoding of the 'search' leaf-list 467 instance containing two entries, "ietf.org" and "ieee.org". 469 Definition example [RFC7317]: 471 typedef domain-name { 472 type string { 473 length "1..253"; 474 pattern '((([a-zA-Z0-9_]([a-zA-Z0-9\-_]){0,61})?[a-zA-Z0-9].) 475 *([a-zA-Z0-9_]([a-zA-Z0-9\-_]){0,61})?[a-zA-Z0-9]\.? 476 )|\.'; 477 } 478 } 480 leaf-list search { 481 type domain-name; 482 ordered-by user; 483 } 485 CBOR diagnostic notation: [ "ietf.org", "ieee.org" ] 487 CBOR encoding: 82 68 696574662E6F7267 68 696565652E6F7267 489 4.4. The 'list' and 'list' instance(s) 491 A list or a subset of a list MUST be encoded using a CBOR array data 492 item (major type 4). Each list instance within this CBOR array is 493 encoded using a CBOR map data item (major type 5) based on the 494 encoding rules of a collection as defined in Section 4.2. 496 It is important to note that this encoding rule also apply to a 497 single 'list' instance. 499 The following examples show the encoding of a 'server' list using 500 SIDs or member names. 502 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 504 list server { 505 key name; 507 leaf name { 508 type string; 509 } 510 choice transport { 511 case udp { 512 container udp { 513 leaf address { 514 type host; 515 mandatory true; 516 } 517 leaf port { 518 type port-number; 519 } 520 } 521 } 522 } 523 leaf association-type { 524 type enumeration { 525 enum server; 526 enum peer; 527 enum pool; 528 } 529 default server; 530 } 531 leaf iburst { 532 type boolean; 533 default false; 534 } 535 leaf prefer { 536 type boolean; 537 default false; 538 } 539 } 541 4.4.1. SIDs as keys 543 The encoding rules of each 'list' instance are defined in 544 Section 4.2.1. Deltas of list members are equal to the SID of the 545 current schema node minus the SID of the 'list'. 547 CBOR diagnostic notation: 549 [ / server (SID 1756) / 550 { 551 +3 : "NRC TIC server", / name (SID 1759) / 552 +5 : { / udp (SID 1761) / 553 +1 : "tic.nrc.ca", / address (SID 1762) / 554 +2 : 123 / port (SID 1763) / 555 }, 556 +1 : 0, / association-type (SID 1757) / 557 +2 : false, / iburst (SID 1758) / 558 +4 : true / prefer (SID 1760) / 559 }, 560 { 561 +3 : "NRC TAC server", / name (SID 1759) / 562 +5 : { / udp (SID 1761) / 563 +1 : "tac.nrc.ca" / address (SID 1762) / 564 } 565 } 566 ] 568 CBOR encoding: 570 82 # array(2) 571 A5 # map(5) 572 03 # unsigned(3) 573 6E # text(14) 574 4E52432054494320736572766572 # "NRC TIC server" 575 05 # unsigned(5) 576 A2 # map(2) 577 01 # unsigned(1) 578 6A # text(10) 579 7469632E6E72632E6361 # "tic.nrc.ca" 580 02 # unsigned(2) 581 18 7B # unsigned(123) 582 01 # unsigned(1) 583 00 # unsigned(0) 584 02 # unsigned(2) 585 F4 # primitive(20) 586 04 # unsigned(4) 587 F5 # primitive(21) 588 A2 # map(2) 589 03 # unsigned(3) 590 6E # text(14) 591 4E52432054414320736572766572 # "NRC TAC server" 592 05 # unsigned(5) 593 A1 # map(1) 594 01 # unsigned(1) 595 6A # text(10) 596 7461632E6E72632E6361 # "tac.nrc.ca" 598 4.4.2. Member names as keys 600 The encoding rules of each 'list' instance are defined in 601 Section 4.2.2. 603 CBOR diagnostic notation: 605 [ 606 { 607 "ietf-system:name" : "NRC TIC server", 608 "ietf-system:udp" : { 609 "address" : "tic.nrc.ca", 610 "port" : 123 611 }, 612 "ietf-system:association-type" : 0, 613 "ietf-system:iburst" : false, 614 "ietf-system:prefer" : true 615 }, 616 { 617 "ietf-system:name" : "NRC TAC server", 618 "ietf-system:udp" : { 619 "address" : "tac.nrc.ca" 620 } 621 } 622 ] 624 CBOR encoding: 626 82 # array(2) 627 A5 # map(5) 628 70 # text(16) 629 696574662D73797374656D3A6E616D65 # "ietf-system:name" 630 6E # text(14) 631 4E52432054494320736572766572 # "NRC TIC server" 632 6F # text(15) 633 696574662D73797374656D3A756470 # "ietf-system:udp" 634 A2 # map(2) 635 67 # text(7) 636 61646472657373 # "address" 637 6A # text(10) 638 7469632E6E72632E6361 # "tic.nrc.ca" 639 64 # text(4) 640 706F7274 # "port" 641 18 7B # unsigned(123) 642 78 1C # text(28) 643 696574662D73797374656D3A6173736F63696174696F6E2D74797065 644 00 # unsigned(0) 645 72 # text(18) 646 696574662D73797374656D3A696275727374 # "ietf-system:iburst" 647 F4 # primitive(20) 648 72 # text(18) 649 696574662D73797374656D3A707265666572 # "ietf-system:prefer" 650 F5 # primitive(21) 651 A2 # map(2) 652 70 # text(16) 653 696574662D73797374656D3A6E616D65 # "ietf-system:name" 654 6E # text(14) 655 4E52432054414320736572766572 # "NRC TAC server" 656 6F # text(15) 657 696574662D73797374656D3A756470 # "ietf-system:udp" 658 A1 # map(1) 659 67 # text(7) 660 61646472657373 # "address" 661 6A # text(10) 662 7461632E6E72632E6361 # "tac.nrc.ca" 664 4.5. The 'anydata' 666 An anydata serves as a container for an arbitrary set of schema nodes 667 that otherwise appear as normal YANG-modeled data. An anydata 668 instance is encoded using the same rules as a container, i.e., CBOR 669 map. The requirement that anydata content can be modeled by YANG 670 implies the following: 672 o CBOR map keys of any inner schema nodes MUST be set to valid 673 deltas or member names. 675 o The CBOR array MUST contain either unique scalar values (as a 676 leaf-list, see Section 4.3), or maps (as a list, see Section 4.4). 678 o CBOR map values MUST follow the encoding rules of one of the 679 datatypes listed in Section 4. 681 The following example shows a possible use of an anydata. In this 682 example, an anydata is used to define a schema node containing a 683 notification event, this schema node can be part of a YANG list to 684 create an event logger. 686 Definition example: 688 module event-log { 689 ... 690 anydata event; # SID 60123 692 This example also assumes the assistance of the following 693 notification. 695 module example-port { 696 ... 698 notification example-port-fault { # SID 60200 699 leaf port-name { # SID 60201 700 type string; 701 } 702 leaf port-fault { # SID 60202 703 type string; 704 } 705 } 706 } 708 CBOR diagnostic notation: 710 { / event (SID=60123) / 711 +78 : "0/4/21", / port-name (SID=60201) / 712 +79 : "Open pin 2" / port-fault (SID=60202) / 713 } 715 CBOR encoding: 717 A2 # map(2) 718 18 4E # unsigned(78) 719 66 # text(6) 720 302F342F3231 # "0/4/21" 721 18 4F # unsigned(79) 722 6A # text(10) 723 4F70656E2070696E2032 # "Open pin 2" 725 4.6. The 'anyxml' 727 An anyxml schema node is used to serialize an arbitrary CBOR content, 728 i.e., its value can be any CBOR binary object. anyxml value MAY 729 contain CBOR data items tagged with one of the tag listed in 730 Section 8.1, these tags shall be supported. 732 The following example shows a valid CBOR encoded instance consisting 733 of a CBOR array containing the CBOR simple values 'true', 'null' and 734 'true'. 736 Definition example from [RFC7951]: 738 anyxml bar; 740 CBOR diagnostic notation: [true, null, true] 742 CBOR encoding: 83 f5 f6 f5 744 5. Encoding of YANG data templates 746 YANG data templates are data structures defined in YANG but not 747 intended to be implemented as part of a datastore. YANG data 748 templates are defined using the 'yang-data' extension as described by 749 RFC 8040. 751 YANG data templates SHOULD be encoded using the encoding rules of a 752 collection as defined in Section 4.2. 754 Just like YANG containers, YANG data templates can be encoded using 755 either SIDs or names. 757 Definition example from [I-D.ietf-core-comi]: 759 import ietf-restconf { 760 prefix rc; 761 } 763 rc:yang-data yang-errors { 764 container error { 765 leaf error-tag { 766 type identityref { 767 base error-tag; 768 } 769 } 770 leaf error-app-tag { 771 type identityref { 772 base error-app-tag; 773 } 774 } 775 leaf error-data-node { 776 type instance-identifier; 777 } 778 leaf error-message { 779 type string; 780 } 781 } 782 } 784 5.1. SIDs as keys 786 This example shows a serialization example of the yang-errors 787 template using SIDs as CBOR map key. The reference SID of a YANG 788 data template is zero, this imply that the CBOR map keys of the top 789 level members of the template are set to SIDs. 791 CBOR diagnostic notation: 793 { 794 1024 : { / error (SID 1024) / 795 +4 : 1011, / error-tag (SID 1028) / 796 / = invalid-value (SID 1011) / 797 +1 : 1018, / error-app-tag (SID 1025) / 798 / = not-in-range (SID 1018) / 799 +2 : 1740, / error-data-node (SID 1026) / 800 / = timezone-utc-offset (SID 1740) / 801 +3 : "Maximum exceeded" / error-message (SID 1027) / 802 } 803 } 805 CBOR encoding: 807 A1 # map(1) 808 19 0400 # unsigned(1024) 809 A4 # map(4) 810 04 # unsigned(4) 811 19 03F3 # unsigned(1011) 812 01 # unsigned(1) 813 19 03FA # unsigned(1018) 814 02 # unsigned(2) 815 19 06CC # unsigned(1740) 816 03 # unsigned(3) 817 70 # text(16) 818 4D6178696D756D206578636565646564 820 5.2. Member names as keys 822 This example shows a serialization example of the yang-errors 823 template using member names as CBOR map key. 825 CBOR diagnostic notation: 827 { 828 "ietf-comi:error" : { 829 "error-tag" : "invalid-value", 830 "error-app-tag" : "not-in-range", 831 "error-data-node" : "timezone-utc-offset", 832 "error-message" : "Maximum exceeded" 833 } 834 } 836 CBOR encoding: 838 A1 # map(1) 839 6F # text(15) 840 696574662D636F6D693A6572726F72 # "ietf-comi:error" 841 A4 # map(4) 842 69 # text(9) 843 6572726F722D746167 # "error-tag" 844 6D # text(13) 845 696E76616C69642D76616C7565 # "invalid-value" 846 6D # text(13) 847 6572726F722D6170702D746167 # "error-app-tag" 848 6C # text(12) 849 6E6F742D696E2D72616E6765 # "not-in-range" 850 6F # text(15) 851 6572726F722D646174612D6E6F6465 # "error-data-node" 852 73 # text(19) 853 74696D657A6F6E652D7574632D6F6666736574 # "timezone-utc-offset" 854 6D # text(13) 855 6572726F722D6D657373616765 # "error-message" 856 70 # text(16) 857 4D6178696D756D206578636565646564 859 6. Representing YANG Data Types in CBOR 861 The CBOR encoding of an instance of a leaf or leaf-list schema node 862 depends on the built-in type of that schema node. The following sub- 863 section defined the CBOR encoding of each built-in type supported by 864 YANG as listed in [RFC7950] section 4.2.4. Each subsection shows an 865 example value assigned to a schema node instance of the discussed 866 built-in type. 868 6.1. The unsigned integer Types 870 Leafs of type uint8, uint16, uint32 and uint64 MUST be encoded using 871 a CBOR unsigned integer data item (major type 0). 873 The following example shows the encoding of a 'mtu' leaf instance set 874 to 1280 bytes. 876 Definition example from [RFC7277]: 878 leaf mtu { 879 type uint16 { 880 range "68..max"; 881 } 882 } 884 CBOR diagnostic notation: 1280 885 CBOR encoding: 19 0500 887 6.2. The integer Types 889 Leafs of type int8, int16, int32 and int64 MUST be encoded using 890 either CBOR unsigned integer (major type 0) or CBOR negative integer 891 (major type 1), depending on the actual value. 893 The following example shows the encoding of a 'timezone-utc-offset' 894 leaf instance set to -300 minutes. 896 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 898 leaf timezone-utc-offset { 899 type int16 { 900 range "-1500 .. 1500"; 901 } 902 } 904 CBOR diagnostic notation: -300 906 CBOR encoding: 39 012B 908 6.3. The 'decimal64' Type 910 Leafs of type decimal64 MUST be encoded using a decimal fraction as 911 defined in [RFC7049] section 2.4.3. 913 The following example shows the encoding of a 'my-decimal' leaf 914 instance set to 2.57. 916 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 918 leaf my-decimal { 919 type decimal64 { 920 fraction-digits 2; 921 range "1 .. 3.14 | 10 | 20..max"; 922 } 923 } 925 CBOR diagnostic notation: 4([-2, 257]) 927 CBOR encoding: C4 82 21 19 0101 929 6.4. The 'string' Type 931 Leafs of type string MUST be encoded using a CBOR text string data 932 item (major type 3). 934 The following example shows the encoding of a 'name' leaf instance 935 set to "eth0". 937 Definition example from [RFC7223]: 939 leaf name { 940 type string; 941 } 943 CBOR diagnostic notation: "eth0" 945 CBOR encoding: 64 65746830 947 6.5. The 'boolean' Type 949 Leafs of type boolean MUST be encoded using a CBOR simple value 950 'true' (major type 7, additional information 21) or 'false' (major 951 type 7, additional information 20). 953 The following example shows the encoding of an 'enabled' leaf 954 instance set to 'true'. 956 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 958 leaf enabled { 959 type boolean; 960 } 962 CBOR diagnostic notation: true 964 CBOR encoding: F5 966 6.6. The 'enumeration' Type 968 Leafs of type enumeration MUST be encoded using a CBOR unsigned 969 integer (major type 0) or CBOR negative integer (major type 1), 970 depending on the actual value. Enumeration values are either 971 explicitly assigned using the YANG statement 'value' or automatically 972 assigned based on the algorithm defined in [RFC7950] section 9.6.4.2. 974 The following example shows the encoding of an 'oper-status' leaf 975 instance set to 'testing'. 977 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 979 leaf oper-status { 980 type enumeration { 981 enum up { value 1; } 982 enum down { value 2; } 983 enum testing { value 3; } 984 enum unknown { value 4; } 985 enum dormant { value 5; } 986 enum not-present { value 6; } 987 enum lower-layer-down { value 7; } 988 } 989 } 991 CBOR diagnostic notation: 3 993 CBOR encoding: 03 995 6.7. The 'bits' Type 997 Leafs of type bits MUST be encoded using a CBOR byte string data item 998 (major type 2). Bits position are either explicitly assigned using 999 the YANG statement 'position' or automatically assigned based on the 1000 algorithm defined in [RFC7950] section 9.7.4.2. 1002 Bits position 0 to 7 are assigned to the first byte within the byte 1003 string, bits 8 to 15 to the second byte, and subsequent bytes are 1004 assigned similarly. Within each byte, bits are assigned from least 1005 to most significant. 1007 The following example shows the encoding of a 'mybits' leaf instance 1008 with the 'disable-nagle' and '10-Mb-only' flags set. 1010 Definition example from [RFC7950]: 1012 leaf mybits { 1013 type bits { 1014 bit disable-nagle { 1015 position 0; 1016 } 1017 bit auto-sense-speed { 1018 position 1; 1019 } 1020 bit 10-Mb-only { 1021 position 2; 1022 } 1023 } 1024 } 1025 CBOR diagnostic notation: h'05' 1027 CBOR encoding: 41 05 1029 6.8. The 'binary' Type 1031 Leafs of type binary MUST be encoded using a CBOR byte string data 1032 item (major type 2). 1034 The following example shows the encoding of an 'aes128-key' leaf 1035 instance set to 0x1f1ce6a3f42660d888d92a4d8030476e. 1037 Definition example: 1039 leaf aes128-key { 1040 type binary { 1041 length 16; 1042 } 1043 } 1045 CBOR diagnostic notation: h'1F1CE6A3F42660D888D92A4D8030476E' 1047 CBOR encoding: 50 1F1CE6A3F42660D888D92A4D8030476E 1049 6.9. The 'leafref' Type 1051 Leafs of type leafref MUST be encoded using the rules of the schema 1052 node referenced by the 'path' YANG statement. 1054 The following example shows the encoding of an 'interface-state-ref' 1055 leaf instance set to "eth1". 1057 Definition example from [RFC7223]: 1059 typedef interface-state-ref { 1060 type leafref { 1061 path "/interfaces-state/interface/name"; 1062 } 1063 } 1065 container interfaces-state { 1066 list interface { 1067 key "name"; 1068 leaf name { 1069 type string; 1070 } 1071 leaf-list higher-layer-if { 1072 type interface-state-ref; 1073 } 1074 } 1075 } 1077 CBOR diagnostic notation: "eth1" 1079 CBOR encoding: 64 65746831 1081 6.10. The 'identityref' Type 1083 This specification supports two approaches for encoding identityref, 1084 a YANG Schema Item iDentifier (SID) as defined in Section 2.1 or a 1085 name as defined in [RFC7951] section 6.8. 1087 6.10.1. SIDs as identityref 1089 When schema nodes of type identityref are implemented using SIDs, 1090 they MUST be encoded using a CBOR unsigned integer data item (major 1091 type 0). (Note that no delta mechanism is employed for SIDs as 1092 identityref.) 1094 The following example shows the encoding of a 'type' leaf instance 1095 set to the value 'iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd' (SID 1880). 1097 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 1099 identity interface-type { 1100 } 1102 identity iana-interface-type { 1103 base interface-type; 1104 } 1106 identity ethernetCsmacd { 1107 base iana-interface-type; 1108 } 1110 leaf type { 1111 type identityref { 1112 base interface-type; 1113 } 1114 } 1116 CBOR diagnostic notation: 1880 1118 CBOR encoding: 19 0758 1120 6.10.2. Name as identityref 1122 Alternatively, an identityref MAY be encoded using a name as defined 1123 in [RFC7951] section 6.8. When names are used, identityref MUST be 1124 encoded using a CBOR text string data item (major type 3). If the 1125 identity is defined in different module than the leaf node containing 1126 the identityref value, the namespace-qualified form MUST be used. 1127 Otherwise, both the simple and namespace-qualified forms are 1128 permitted. Names and namespaces are defined in [RFC7951] section 4. 1130 The following example shows the encoding of the identity 'iana-if- 1131 type:ethernetCsmacd' using its name. This example is described in 1132 Section 6.10.1. 1134 CBOR diagnostic notation: "iana-if-type:ethernetCsmacd" 1136 CBOR encoding: 78 1b 1137 69616E612D69662D747970653A65746865726E657443736D616364 1139 6.11. The 'empty' Type 1141 Leafs of type empty MUST be encoded using the CBOR null value (major 1142 type 7, additional information 22). 1144 The following example shows the encoding of a 'is-router' leaf 1145 instance when present. 1147 Definition example from [RFC7277]: 1149 leaf is-router { 1150 type empty; 1151 } 1153 CBOR diagnostic notation: null 1155 CBOR encoding: F6 1157 6.12. The 'union' Type 1159 Leafs of type union MUST be encoded using the rules associated with 1160 one of the types listed. When used in a union, the following YANG 1161 datatypes are prefixed by CBOR tag to avoid confusion between 1162 different YANG datatypes encoded using the same CBOR major type. 1164 o bits 1166 o enumeration 1168 o identityref 1170 o instance-identifier 1172 See Section 8.1 for the assigned value of these CBOR tags. 1174 The following example shows the encoding of an 'ip-address' leaf 1175 instance when set to "2001:db8:a0b:12f0::1". 1177 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 1179 typedef ipv4-address { 1180 type string { 1181 pattern '(([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])\.){3} 1182 ([0-9][1-9][0-9]|1[0-9][0-9]|2[0-4][0-9]|25[0-5])(%[\p{N} 1183 \p{L}]+)?'; 1184 } 1185 } 1187 typedef ipv6-address { 1188 type string { 1189 pattern '((:|[0-9a-fA-F]{0,4}):)([0-9a-fA-F]{0,4}:){0,5}((([0-9a 1190 -fA-F]{0,4}:)?(:|[0-9a-fA-F]{0,4}))|(((25[0-5]|2[0-4][0 1191 -9]|[01]?[0-9]?[0-9])\.){3}(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0 1192 -9]?[0-9])))(%[\p{N}\p{L}]+)?'; 1193 pattern '(([^:]+:){6}(([^:]+:[^:]+)|(.*\..*)))|((([^:]+:)*[^:]+) 1194 ?::(([^:]+:)*[^:]+)?)(%.+)?'; 1195 } 1196 } 1198 typedef ip-address { 1199 type union { 1200 type ipv4-address; 1201 type ipv6-address; 1202 } 1203 } 1205 leaf address { 1206 type inet:ip-address; 1207 } 1209 CBOR diagnostic notation: "2001:db8:a0b:12f0::1" 1211 CBOR encoding: 74 323030313A6462383A6130623A313266303A3A31 1213 6.13. The 'instance-identifier' Type 1215 This specification supports two approaches for encoding an instance- 1216 identifier, one based on YANG Schema Item iDentifier (SID) as defined 1217 in Section 2.1 and one based on names as defined in [RFC7951] section 1218 6.11. 1220 6.13.1. SIDs as instance-identifier 1222 SIDs uniquely identify a schema node. In the case of a single 1223 instance schema node, i.e. a schema node defined at the root of a 1224 YANG module or submodule or schema nodes defined within a container, 1225 the SID is sufficient to identify this instance. 1227 In the case of a schema node member of a YANG list, a SID is combined 1228 with the list key(s) to identify each instance within the YANG 1229 list(s). 1231 Single instance schema nodes MUST be encoded using a CBOR unsigned 1232 integer data item (major type 0) and set to the targeted schema node 1233 SID. 1235 Schema nodes member of a YANG list MUST be encoded using a CBOR array 1236 data item (major type 4) containing the following entries: 1238 o The first entry MUST be encoded as a CBOR unsigned integer data 1239 item (major type 0) and set to the targeted schema node SID. 1241 o The following entries MUST contain the value of each key required 1242 to identify the instance of the targeted schema node. These keys 1243 MUST be ordered as defined in the 'key' YANG statement, starting 1244 from top level list, and follow by each of the subordinate 1245 list(s). 1247 Examples within this section assume the definition of a schema node 1248 of type 'instance-identifier': 1250 Definition example from [RFC7950]: 1252 container system { 1253 ... 1254 leaf reporting-entity { 1255 type instance-identifier; 1256 } 1258 leaf contact { type string; } 1260 leaf hostname { type inet:domain-name; } } ~~~~ 1262 *First example:* 1264 The following example shows the encoding of the 'reporting-entity' 1265 value referencing data node instance "/system/contact" (SID 1741). 1267 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 1269 container system { 1271 leaf contact { 1272 type string; 1273 } 1275 leaf hostname { 1276 type inet:domain-name; 1277 } 1278 } 1280 CBOR diagnostic notation: 1741 1282 CBOR encoding: 19 06CD 1284 *Second example:* 1286 The following example shows the encoding of the 'reporting-entity' 1287 value referencing list instance "/system/authentication/user/ 1288 authorized-key/key-data" (SID 1734) for user name "bob" and 1289 authorized-key "admin". 1291 Definition example from [RFC7317]: 1293 list user { 1294 key name; 1296 leaf name { 1297 type string; 1298 } 1299 leaf password { 1300 type ianach:crypt-hash; 1301 } 1303 list authorized-key { 1304 key name; 1306 leaf name { 1307 type string; 1308 } 1309 leaf algorithm { 1310 type string; 1311 } 1312 leaf key-data { 1313 type binary; 1314 } 1315 } 1316 CBOR diagnostic notation: [1734, "bob", "admin"] 1318 CBOR encoding: 1320 83 # array(3) 1321 19 06C6 # unsigned(1734) 1322 63 # text(3) 1323 626F62 # "bob" 1324 65 # text(5) 1325 61646D696E # "admin" 1327 *Third example:* 1329 The following example shows the encoding of the 'reporting-entity' 1330 value referencing the list instance "/system/authentication/user" 1331 (SID 1730) corresponding to user name "jack". 1333 CBOR diagnostic notation: [1730, "jack"] 1335 CBOR encoding: 1337 82 # array(2) 1338 19 06C2 # unsigned(1730) 1339 64 # text(4) 1340 6A61636B # "jack" 1342 6.13.2. Names as instance-identifier 1344 The use of names as instance-identifier is defined in [RFC7951] 1345 section 6.11. The resulting xpath MUST be encoded using a CBOR text 1346 string data item (major type 3). 1348 *First example:* 1350 This example is described in Section 6.13.1. 1352 CBOR diagnostic notation: "/ietf-system:system/contact" 1354 CBOR encoding: 1356 78 1c 2F696574662D73797374656D3A73797374656D2F636F6E74616374 1358 *Second example:* 1360 This example is described in Section 6.13.1. 1362 CBOR diagnostic notation: 1364 "/ietf-system:system/authentication/user[name='bob']/authorized-key 1365 [name='admin']/key-data" 1367 CBOR encoding: 1369 78 59 1370 2F696574662D73797374656D3A73797374656D2F61757468656E74696361 1371 74696F6E2F757365725B6E616D653D27626F62275D2F617574686F72697A 1372 65642D6B65790D0A5B6E616D653D2761646D696E275D2F6B65792D64617461 1374 *Third example:* 1376 This example is described in Section 6.13.1. 1378 CBOR diagnostic notation: 1380 "/ietf-system:system/authentication/user[name='bob']" 1382 CBOR encoding: 1384 78 33 1385 2F696574662D73797374656D3A73797374656D2F61757468656E74696361 1386 74696F6E2F757365725B6E616D653D27626F62275D 1388 7. Security Considerations 1390 The security considerations of [RFC7049] and [RFC7950] apply. 1392 This document defines an alternative encoding for data modeled in the 1393 YANG data modeling language. As such, this encoding does not 1394 contribute any new security issues in addition of those identified 1395 for the specific protocol or context for which it is used. 1397 To minimize security risks, software on the receiving side SHOULD 1398 reject all messages that do not comply to the rules of this document 1399 and reply with an appropriate error message to the sender. 1401 8. IANA Considerations 1403 8.1. Tags Registry 1405 This specification requires the assignment of CBOR tags for the 1406 following YANG datatypes. These tags are added to the Tags Registry 1407 as defined in section 7.2 of [RFC7049]. 1409 +-----+---------------------+---------------------------+-----------+ 1410 | Tag | Data Item | Semantics | Reference | 1411 +-----+---------------------+---------------------------+-----------+ 1412 | xx | bits | YANG bits datatype | RFC XXXX | 1413 | xx | enumeration | YANG enumeration datatype | RFC XXXX | 1414 | xx | identityref | YANG identityref datatype | RFC XXXX | 1415 | xx | instance-identifier | YANG instance-identifier | RFC XXXX | 1416 | | | datatype | | 1417 +-----+---------------------+---------------------------+-----------+ 1419 // RFC Ed.: update Tag values using allocated tags and remove this 1420 note // RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with RFC number and remove this note 1422 9. Acknowledgments 1424 This document has been largely inspired by the extensive works done 1425 by Andy Bierman and Peter van der Stok on [I-D.ietf-core-comi]. 1426 [RFC7951] has also been a critical input to this work. The authors 1427 would like to thank the authors and contributors to these two drafts. 1429 The authors would also like to acknowledge the review, feedback, and 1430 comments from Ladislav Lhotka and Juergen Schoenwaelder. 1432 10. References 1434 10.1. Normative References 1436 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1437 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 1438 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 1439 . 1441 [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., 1442 and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol 1443 (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, 1444 . 1446 [RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object 1447 Representation (CBOR)", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049, 1448 October 2013, . 1450 [RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", 1451 RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016, 1452 . 1454 10.2. Informative References 1456 [I-D.ietf-core-comi] 1457 Veillette, M., Stok, P., Pelov, A., and A. Bierman, "CoAP 1458 Management Interface", draft-ietf-core-comi-04 (work in 1459 progress), November 2018. 1461 [I-D.ietf-core-sid] 1462 Veillette, M., Pelov, A., and I. Petrov, "YANG Schema Item 1463 iDentifier (SID)", draft-ietf-core-sid-05 (work in 1464 progress), December 2018. 1466 [RFC7159] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data 1467 Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March 1468 2014, . 1470 [RFC7223] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface 1471 Management", RFC 7223, DOI 10.17487/RFC7223, May 2014, 1472 . 1474 [RFC7228] Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for 1475 Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228, 1476 DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014, 1477 . 1479 [RFC7277] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for IP Management", 1480 RFC 7277, DOI 10.17487/RFC7277, June 2014, 1481 . 1483 [RFC7317] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "A YANG Data Model for 1484 System Management", RFC 7317, DOI 10.17487/RFC7317, August 1485 2014, . 1487 [RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG", 1488 RFC 7951, DOI 10.17487/RFC7951, August 2016, 1489 . 1491 [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF 1492 Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, 1493 . 1495 Authors' Addresses 1496 Michel Veillette (editor) 1497 Trilliant Networks Inc. 1498 610 Rue du Luxembourg 1499 Granby, Quebec J2J 2V2 1500 Canada 1502 Phone: +14503750556 1503 Email: michel.veillette@trilliantinc.com 1505 Alexander Pelov (editor) 1506 Acklio 1507 1137A avenue des Champs Blancs 1508 Cesson-Sevigne, Bretagne 35510 1509 France 1511 Email: a@ackl.io 1513 Abhinav Somaraju 1514 Tridonic GmbH & Co KG 1515 Farbergasse 15 1516 Dornbirn, Vorarlberg 6850 1517 Austria 1519 Phone: +43664808926169 1520 Email: abhinav.somaraju@tridonic.com 1522 Randy Turner 1523 Landis+Gyr 1524 30000 Mill Creek Ave 1525 Suite 100 1526 Alpharetta, GA 30022 1527 US 1529 Phone: ++16782581292 1530 Email: randy.turner@landisgyr.com 1531 URI: http://www.landisgyr.com/ 1533 Ana Minaburo 1534 Acklio 1535 1137A avenue des Champs Blancs 1536 Cesson-Sevigne, Bretagne 35510 1537 France 1539 Email: ana@ackl.io 1540 Ivaylo Petrov (editor) 1541 Acklio 1542 1137A avenue des Champs Blancs 1543 Cesson-Sevigne, Bretagne 35510 1544 France 1546 Email: ivaylo@ackl.io