idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-07.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'SHOULD not' in this paragraph: 9. Ephemeral data stores SHOULD not require support interactions with writable-running, candidate data store, confirmed commit, and a distinct start-up capability, == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'SHOULD not' in this paragraph: 9. Ephemeral data stores SHOULD not require support for interactions with writeable-running, candidate data stores, confirmed commit, and a distinct start-up capability. -- The document date (May 25, 2016) is 2885 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: 'I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture' is mentioned on line 536, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC6241' is mentioned on line 604, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf' is mentioned on line 568, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements' is mentioned on line 547, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements' is mentioned on line 542, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push' is mentioned on line 588, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-library' is mentioned on line 578, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-call-home' is mentioned on line 563, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-server-model' is mentioned on line 573, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-patch' is mentioned on line 583, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netconf-zerotouch' is mentioned on line 594, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs' is mentioned on line 552, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-i2rs-traceability' is mentioned on line 557, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-metadata' is mentioned on line 599, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC6536' is defined on line 626, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-hares-i2rs-protocol-strawman-02 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 6536 (Obsoleted by RFC 8341) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 19 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 I2RS working group J. Haas 3 Internet-Draft Juniper 4 Intended status: Standards Track S. Hares 5 Expires: November 26, 2016 Huawei 6 May 25, 2016 8 I2RS Ephemeral State Requirements 9 draft-ietf-i2rs-ephemeral-state-07 11 Abstract 13 This document covers requests to the NETMOD and NETCONF Working 14 Groups for functionality to support the ephemeral state requirements 15 to implement the I2RS architecture. 17 Status of This Memo 19 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 20 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 24 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 25 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 28 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 29 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 30 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on November 26, 2016. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 44 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 45 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 46 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 47 described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 Table of Contents 51 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 52 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 53 2. Review of Requirements from I2RS architecture document . . . 3 54 3. Ephemeral State Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 55 3.1. Persistence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 56 3.2. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 57 3.3. Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 4. YANG Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol version 1 5 59 5. NETCONF Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol 60 version 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 61 6. RESTCONF Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol 62 version 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 63 7. Requirements regarding Supporting Multi-Head Control via 64 Client Priority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 65 8. Multiple Message Transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 66 9. Pub/Sub Requirements Expanded for Ephemeral State . . . . . . 11 67 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 68 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 69 12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 70 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 71 13.1. Normative References: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 72 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 73 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 75 1. Introduction 77 The Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) Working Group is chartered 78 with providing architecture and mechanisms to inject into and 79 retrieve information from the routing system. The I2RS Architecture 80 document [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] abstractly documents a number 81 of requirements for implementing the I2RS requirements. Section 2 82 reviews 10 key requirements related to ephemeral state. 84 The I2RS Working Group has chosen to use the YANG data modeling 85 language [RFC6020] as the basis to implement its mechanisms. 87 Additionally, the I2RS Working group has chosen to re-use two 88 existing protocols, NETCONF [RFC6241] and its similar but lighter- 89 weight relative RESTCONF [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf], as the 90 protocols for carrying I2RS. 92 What does re-use of a protocol mean? Re-use means that while YANG, 93 NETCONF and RESTCONF are a good starting basis for the I2RS protocol, 94 the creation of the I2RS protocol implementations requires that the 95 I2RS requirements 96 1. select features from YANG, NETCONF, and RESTCONF per version of 97 the I2RS protocol (See sections 4, 5, and 6) 99 2. propose additions to YANG, NETCONF, and RESTCONF per version of 100 the I2RS protocol for key functions (ephemeral state, protocol 101 security, publication/subscription service, traceability), 103 3. suggest protocol strawman as ideas for the NETCONF, RESTCONF, and 104 YANG changes. 106 The purpose of these requirements and the suggested protocol straw 107 man is to provide a quick turnaround on creating the I2RS protocol. 109 Support for ephemeral state is I2RS protocol requirement that 110 requires datastore changes (see section 3), Yang additions (see 111 section 4), NETCONF additions (see section 5), and RESTCONF additions 112 (see section 6). 114 Sections 7-9 provide details that expand upon the changes in sections 115 3-6 to clarify requirements discussed by the I2RS and NETCONF working 116 groups. Sections 7 provide additional requirements that detail how 117 write-conflicts should be resolved if two I2RS client write the same 118 data. Section 8 provides an additional requirement that details on 119 I2RS support of multiple message transactions. Section 9 highlights 120 two requirements in the I2RS publication/subscription requirements 121 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements] that must be expanded for 122 ephemeral state. 124 1.1. Requirements Language 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 130 2. Review of Requirements from I2RS architecture document 132 The I2RS architecture defines important high-level requirements for 133 the I2RS protocol. The following are ten requirements that 134 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] contains which provide context for the 135 ephemeral data state requirements given in sections 3-8: 137 1. The I2RS protocol SHOULD support highly reliable notifications 138 (but not perfectly reliable notifications) from an I2RS agent to 139 an I2RS client. 141 2. The I2RS protocol SHOULD support a high bandwidth, asynchronous 142 interface, with real-time guarantees on getting data from an 143 I2RS agent by an I2RS client. 145 3. The I2RS protocol will operate on data models which MAY be 146 protocol independent or protocol dependent. 148 4. I2RS Agent MUST record the client identity when a node is 149 created or modified. The I2RS Agent SHOULD to be able to read 150 the client identity of a node and use the client identity's 151 associated priority to resolve conflicts. The secondary 152 identity is useful for traceability and may also be recorded. 154 5. Client identity MUST have only one priority for the client's 155 identifer. A collision on writes is considered an error, but 156 the priority associated with each client identifier is utilized 157 to compare requests from two different clients in order to 158 modify an existing node entry. Only an entry from a client 159 which is higher priority can modify an existing entry (First 160 entry wins). Priority only has meaning at the time of use. 162 6. The Agent identity and the Client identity SHOULD be passed 163 outside of the I2RS protocol in a authentication and 164 authorization protocol (AAA). Client priority may be passed in 165 the AAA protocol. The values of identities are originally set 166 by operators, and not standardized. 168 7. An I2RS Client and I2RS Agent MUST mutually authenticate each 169 other based on pre-established authenticated identities. 171 8. Secondary identity data is read-only meta-data that is recorded 172 by the I2RS agent associated with a data model's node is 173 written, updated or deleted. Just like the primary identity, 174 the secondary identity SHOULD only be recorded when the data 175 node is written or updated or deleted 177 9. I2RS agent MAY have a lower priority I2RS client attempting to 178 modify a higher priority client's entry in a data model. The 179 filtering out of lower priority clients attempting to write or 180 modify a higher priority client's entry in a data model SHOULD 181 be effectively handled and not put an undue strain on the I2RS 182 agent. 184 10. The I2RS protocol MUST support the use of a secure transport. 185 However, certain functions such as notifications MAY use a non- 186 secure transport. Each model or service (notification, logging) 187 must define within the model or service the valid uses of a non- 188 secure transport. 190 3. Ephemeral State Requirements 192 3.1. Persistence 194 Ephemeral-REQ-01: I2RS requires ephemeral state; i.e. state that does 195 not persist across reboots. If state must be restored, it should be 196 done solely by replay actions from the I2RS client via the I2RS 197 agent. 199 While at first glance this may seem equivalent to the writable- 200 running data store in NETCONF, running-config can be copied to a 201 persistent data store, like startup config. I2RS ephemeral state 202 MUST NOT be persisted. 204 3.2. Constraints 206 Ephemeral-REQ-02: Non-ephemeral state MUST NOT refer to ephemeral 207 state for constraint purposes; it SHALL be considered a validation 208 error if it does. 210 Ephemeral-REQ-03: Ephemeral state must be able to utilized temporary 211 operational state (e.g. MPLS LSP-ID or a BGP IN-RIB) as a 212 constraints. 214 Ephemeral-REQ-04: Ephemeral state MAY refer to non-ephemeral state 215 for purposes of implementing constraints. The designer of ephemeral 216 state modules are advised that such constraints may impact the speed 217 of processing ephemeral state commits and should avoid them when 218 speed is essential. 220 3.3. Hierarchy 222 Ephemeral-REQ-05: The ability to augment an object with appropriate 223 YANG structures that have the property of being ephemeral. An object 224 defined as Yang module, schema tree, a schema node, submodule or 225 components of a submodule (derived types, groupings, data node, RPCs, 226 actions, and notifications". 228 4. YANG Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol version 1 230 Ephemeral-REQ-06: Yang MUST have a way to indicate in a data model 231 that nodes have the following properties: ephemeral, writable/not- 232 writable, status/configuration, and secure/non-secure transport. (If 233 you desire examples, please see [I-D.hares-i2rs-protocol-strawman] 234 for potential yang syntax). 236 5. NETCONF Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol version 1 238 Ephemeral-REQ-07: The conceptual changes to NETCONF 240 1. protocol version support for I2RS modifications - (e.g. I2RS 241 version 1) 243 2. support for ephemeral model scope indication - which indicates 244 whether a module is an ephemeral-only module, mixed config module 245 (ephemeral and config), mixed derived state (ephemeral and 246 config). 248 3. multiple message support - supports the I2RS "all or nothing" 249 concept ([I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] section 7.9) which is the 250 same as NETCONF "roll-back-on-error". 252 4. support for the following transports protocol supported: "TCP", 253 "SSH", "TLS", and non-secure transport (see 254 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements] section 3.2 in 255 requirements SEC-REQ-09 and SEC-REQ-11 for details). NETCONF 256 should be able to expand the number of secure transport protocols 257 supported as I2RS may add additional transport protocols. 259 5. ability to restrict insecure transport support to specific 260 portions of a data models marked as valid to transfer via 261 insecure protocol. 263 6. ephemeral state overwriting of configuration state MUST be 264 controlled by the following policy knobs (as defined by 265 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] section 6.3 and 6.3.1): 267 * ephemeral configuration overwrites local configuration (true/ 268 false; normal value: true), and 270 * Update of local configuration value supercedes and overwrites 271 the ephemeral configuration (true/false; normal value: false). 273 7. The ephemeral overwriting to local configuration described in (8) 274 above is considered to be the composite of all ephemeral values 275 by all clients. Some may consider this approach as a single pane 276 of glass for ephemeral state. 278 8. The ephemeral state must support notification of write conflicts 279 using the priority requirements defined in section 3.7 below in 280 requirements Ephemeral-REQ-09 through Ephemeral-REQ-14). 282 9. Ephemeral data stores SHOULD not require support interactions 283 with writable-running, candidate data store, confirmed commit, 284 and a distinct start-up capability, 286 This list of requirements require the following the following 287 existing features are supported: 289 support for the following encodings: XML or JSON. 291 support for the following transports protocol supported: "TCP", 292 "SSH", "TLS". 294 all of the following NETCONF protocol [RFC6241] specifications: 296 * yang pub-sub push [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push], 298 * yang module library [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-library], 300 * call-home [I-D.ietf-netconf-call-home], and 302 * server model [I-D.ietf-netconf-server-model] with the server 303 module must be augmented to support mutual authentication (see 304 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements] section 3.1 in 305 requirements: SEC-REQ-01 to SEC-REQ-08). 307 6. RESTCONF Features for Ephemeral State for I2RS Protocol version 1 309 Ephemeral-REQ-08: The conceptual changes to RESTCONF are: 311 1. protocol version support for I2RS protocol modification (e.g. 312 I2RS-version 1). 314 2. ephemeral model scope allowed - ephemeral modules, mixed config 315 module (ephemeral and config), mixed derived state (ephemeral and 316 config). 318 3. support for both of the following transport protocol suites: 320 * HTTP over TLS (secure HTTP as defined in RESTCONF 321 [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf] section 2), 323 * HTTP used in a non-secure fashion (See 324 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements], section 3.2, 325 requirements SEC-REQ-09 and SEC-REQ-11 for details), and 327 * RESTCONF SHOULD be able to expand the transports supported as 328 as future I2RS protocol versions may support other transports. 330 4. The ability to restrict insecure transports to specific portions 331 of a data model marked as valid to transfer via an insecure 332 protocol. 334 5. Support for the development of a RESTCONF based yang pub-sub push 335 based on the requirements in [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements] 336 and equivalent to the netconf . [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push] 338 6. ephemeral state overwriting of configuration state MUST be 339 controlled by the following policy knobs (as defined by 340 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] section 6.3 and 6.3.1) 342 * Ephemeral configuration overwrites local configuration (true/ 343 false; normal value:true), and 345 * Update of local configuration value supercedes and overwrites 346 the ephemeral configuration (true/false; normal value:false). 348 7. The ephemeral state overwriting a local configuration described 349 above is considered to be the composite of all ephemeral state 350 values by all clients. Some may consider this a single "pane of 351 glass" for the ephemeral values. 353 8. RESTCONF support ephemeral state MUST support notification of 354 write conflicts using the priority requirements (see section 3.7 355 below, specifically requirements Ephemeral-REQ-09 through 356 Ephemeral-REQ-14). Expansion of existing "edit-collision" 357 features (timestamp and Entity tag) to include I2RS client- 358 priorities is preferred since I2RS client-Agents exchange MAY 359 wish to use the existing edit-collision features in RESTCONF. 361 9. Ephemeral data stores SHOULD not require support for interactions 362 with writeable-running, candidate data stores, confirmed commit, 363 and a distinct start-up capability. 365 This requirement also requires that RESTCONF support all of the 366 following specifications: 368 1. support for the following encodings: XML or JSON. 370 2. all of the following curren RESTCONF specifications: 372 1. RESTCONF [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf], 374 2. the yang-patch features as specified in 375 [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-patch], 377 3. yang module library [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-library] as 378 defined in RESTCONF [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf] section 379 3.3.3), 381 4. call-home [I-D.ietf-netconf-call-home], 383 5. zero-touch [I-D.ietf-netconf-zerotouch], and 385 6. server modules [I-D.ietf-netconf-server-model] (server module 386 must be augmented to support mutual authentication). 388 7. Requirements regarding Supporting Multi-Head Control via Client 389 Priority 391 To support Multi-Headed Control, I2RS requires that there be a 392 decidable means of arbitrating the correct state of data when 393 multiple clients attempt to manipulate the same piece of data. This 394 is done via a priority mechanism with the highest priority winning. 395 This priority is per-client. 397 Ephemeral-REQ-09: The data nodes MAY store I2RS client identity and 398 not the effective priority at the time the data node is stored. Per 399 SEC-REQ-07 in section 3.1 of 400 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements], an identifier must 401 have just one priority. Therefore, the data nodes MAY store I2RS 402 client identity and not the effective priority of the I2RS client at 403 the time the data node is stored. The priority MAY be dynamically 404 changed by AAA, but the exact actions are part of the protocol 405 definition as long as collisions are handled as described in 406 Ephemeral-REQ-10, Ephemeral-REQ-11, and Ephemeral-REQ-12. 408 Ephemeral-REQ-10: When a collision occurs as two clients are trying 409 to write the same data node, this collision is considered an error 410 and priorities were created to give a deterministic result. When 411 there is a collision, a notification MUST BE sent to the original 412 client to give the original client a chance to deal with the issues 413 surrounding the collision. The original client may need to fix their 414 state. 416 Ephemeral-REQ-11: The requirement to support multi-headed control is 417 required for collisions and the priority resolution of collisions. 418 Multi-headed control is not tied to ephemeral state. I2RS is not 419 mandating how AAA supports priority. Mechanisms which prevent 420 collisions of two clients trying the same node of data are the focus. 422 Ephemeral-REQ-12: If two clients have the same priority, the 423 architecture says the first one wins. The I2RS protocol has this 424 requirement to prevent was the oscillation between clients. If one 425 uses the last wins scenario, you may oscillate. That was our 426 opinion, but a design which prevents oscillation is the key point. 428 8. Multiple Message Transactions 430 Ephemeral-REQ-13: Section 7.9 of the [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 431 states the I2RS architecture does not include multi-message atomicity 432 and roll-back mechanisms. I2RS notes multiple operations in one or 433 more messages handling can handle errors within the set of operations 434 in many ways. No multi-message commands SHOULD cause errors to be 435 inserted into the I2RS ephemeral data-store. 437 Explanation: 439 I2RS suggests the following are some of the potential error handling 440 techniques for multiple message sent to the I2RS client: 442 1. Perform all or none: All operations succeed or none of them will 443 be applied. This useful when there are mutual dependencies. 445 2. Perform until error: Operations are applied in order, and when 446 error occurs the processing stops. This is useful when 447 dependencies exist between multiple-message operations, and order 448 is important. 450 3. Perform all storing errors: Perform all actions storing error 451 indications for errors. This method can be used when there are 452 no dependencies between operations, and the client wants to sort 453 it out. 455 Is important to reliability of the data store that none of these 456 error handling for multiple operations in one more multiple messages 457 cause errors into be insert the I2RS ephemeral data-store. 459 Discussion of Current NETCONF/RESTCONF versus 461 RESTCONF does an atomic action within a http session, and NETCONF has 462 atomic actions within a commit. These features may be used to 463 perform these features. 465 I2RS processing is dependent on the I2RS model. The I2RS model must 466 consider the dependencies within multiple operations work within a 467 model. 469 9. Pub/Sub Requirements Expanded for Ephemeral State 471 I2RS clients require the ability to monitor changes to ephemeral 472 state. While subscriptions are well defined for receiving 473 notifications, the need to create a notification set for all 474 ephemeral configuration state may be overly burdensome to the user. 476 There is thus a need for a general subscription mechanism that can 477 provide notification of changed state, with sufficient information to 478 permit the client to retrieve the impacted nodes. This should be 479 doable without requiring the notifications to be created as part of 480 every single I2RS module. 482 The publication/subscription requirements for I2RS are in 483 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements], and the following general 484 requirements SHOULD be understood to be expanded to to include 485 ephemeral state: 487 o Pub-Sub-REQ-01: The Subscription Service MUST support 488 subscriptions against ephemeral data in operational data stores, 489 configuration data stores or both. 491 o Pub-Sub-REQ-02: The Subscription Service MUST support filtering so 492 that subscribed updates under a target node might publish only 493 ephemeral data in operational data or configuration data, or 494 publish both ephemeral and operational data. 496 10. IANA Considerations 498 There are no IANA requirements for this document. 500 11. Security Considerations 502 The security requirements for the I2RS protocol are covered in 503 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements] document. The 504 security requirements for the I2RS protocol environment are in 505 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs]. 507 12. Acknowledgements 509 This document is an attempt to distill lengthy conversations on the 510 I2RS mailing list for an architecture that was for a long period of 511 time a moving target. Some individuals in particular warrant 512 specific mention for their extensive help in providing the basis for 513 this document: 515 o Alia Atlas 516 o Andy Bierman 518 o Martin Bjorklund 520 o Dean Bogdanavich 522 o Rex Fernando 524 o Joel Halpern 526 o Thomas Nadeau 528 o Juergen Schoenwaelder 530 o Kent Watsen 532 13. References 534 13.1. Normative References: 536 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 537 Atlas, A., Halpern, J., Hares, S., Ward, D., and T. 538 Nadeau, "An Architecture for the Interface to the Routing 539 System", draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-15 (work in 540 progress), April 2016. 542 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements] 543 Hares, S., Migault, D., and J. Halpern, "I2RS Security 544 Related Requirements", draft-ietf-i2rs-protocol-security- 545 requirements-06 (work in progress), May 2016. 547 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements] 548 Voit, E., Clemm, A., and A. Prieto, "Requirements for 549 Subscription to YANG Datastores", draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub- 550 requirements-09 (work in progress), May 2016. 552 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs] 553 Migault, D., Halpern, J., and S. Hares, "I2RS Environment 554 Security Requirements", draft-ietf-i2rs-security- 555 environment-reqs-01 (work in progress), April 2016. 557 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-traceability] 558 Clarke, J., Salgueiro, G., and C. Pignataro, "Interface to 559 the Routing System (I2RS) Traceability: Framework and 560 Information Model", draft-ietf-i2rs-traceability-11 (work 561 in progress), May 2016. 563 [I-D.ietf-netconf-call-home] 564 Watsen, K., "NETCONF Call Home and RESTCONF Call Home", 565 draft-ietf-netconf-call-home-17 (work in progress), 566 December 2015. 568 [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf] 569 Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF 570 Protocol", draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-13 (work in 571 progress), April 2016. 573 [I-D.ietf-netconf-server-model] 574 Watsen, K. and J. Schoenwaelder, "NETCONF Server and 575 RESTCONF Server Configuration Models", draft-ietf-netconf- 576 server-model-09 (work in progress), March 2016. 578 [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-library] 579 Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG Module 580 Library", draft-ietf-netconf-yang-library-06 (work in 581 progress), April 2016. 583 [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-patch] 584 Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG Patch 585 Media Type", draft-ietf-netconf-yang-patch-08 (work in 586 progress), March 2016. 588 [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push] 589 Clemm, A., Prieto, A., Voit, E., Tripathy, A., and E. 590 Einar, "Subscribing to YANG datastore push updates", 591 draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-02 (work in progress), March 592 2016. 594 [I-D.ietf-netconf-zerotouch] 595 Watsen, K. and M. Abrahamsson, "Zero Touch Provisioning 596 for NETCONF or RESTCONF based Management", draft-ietf- 597 netconf-zerotouch-08 (work in progress), April 2016. 599 [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-metadata] 600 Lhotka, L., "Defining and Using Metadata with YANG", 601 draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-07 (work in progress), 602 March 2016. 604 [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., 605 and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol 606 (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, 607 . 609 13.2. Informative References 611 [I-D.hares-i2rs-protocol-strawman] 612 Hares, S., Bierman, A., and a. amit.dass@ericsson.com, 613 "I2RS protocol strawman", draft-hares-i2rs-protocol- 614 strawman-02 (work in progress), May 2016. 616 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 617 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 618 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 619 . 621 [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for 622 the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, 623 DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, 624 . 626 [RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration 627 Protocol (NETCONF) Access Control Model", RFC 6536, 628 DOI 10.17487/RFC6536, March 2012, 629 . 631 Authors' Addresses 633 Jeff Haas 634 Juniper 636 Email: jhaas@juniper.net 638 Susan Hares 639 Huawei 640 Saline 641 US 643 Email: shares@ndzh.com