idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-i2rs-traceability-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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too? Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 4, 2016) is 3002 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-07 == Outdated reference: A later version (-11) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement-04 == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-17) exists of draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-info-model-08 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 6536 (Obsoleted by RFC 8341) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 I2RS J. Clarke 3 Internet-Draft G. Salgueiro 4 Intended status: Informational C. Pignataro 5 Expires: August 7, 2016 Cisco 6 February 4, 2016 8 Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) Traceability: Framework and 9 Information Model 10 draft-ietf-i2rs-traceability-07 12 Abstract 14 This document describes a framework for traceability in the Interface 15 to the Routing System (I2RS) and information model for that 16 framework. It specifies the motivation, requirements, use cases, and 17 defines an information model for recording interactions between 18 elements implementing the I2RS protocol. This framework provides a 19 consistent tracing interface for components implementing the I2RS 20 architecture to record what was done, by which component, and when. 21 It aims to improve the management of I2RS implementations, and can be 22 used for troubleshooting, auditing, forensics, and accounting 23 purposes. 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 http://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 August 7, 2016. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2016 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 (http://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 60 2. Terminology and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 4. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 5. Information Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 5.1. I2RS Traceability Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 5.2. I2RS Trace Log Mandatory Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 66 5.3. End of Message Marker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 67 6. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 68 7. Operational Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 69 7.1. Trace Log Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 70 7.2. Trace Log Temporary Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 71 7.3. Trace Log Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 72 7.4. Trace Log Retrieval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 73 7.4.1. Retrieval Via Syslog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 74 7.4.2. Retrieval Via I2RS Information Collection . . . . . . 11 75 7.4.3. Retrieval Via I2RS Pub-Sub . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 76 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 77 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 78 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 79 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 80 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 81 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 82 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 84 1. Introduction 86 The architecture for the Interface to the Routing System 87 ([I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture]) specifies that I2RS Clients wishing to 88 retrieve or change routing state on a routing element MUST 89 authenticate to an I2RS Agent. The I2RS Client will have a unique 90 identity it provides for authentication, and should provide another, 91 opaque identity for applications communicating through it. The 92 programming of routing state will produce a return code containing 93 the results of the specified operation and associated reason(s) for 94 the result. All of this is critical information to be used for 95 understanding the history of I2RS interactions. 97 This document describes use cases for I2RS traceability. Based on 98 these use cases, the document proposes an information model and 99 reporting requirements to provide for effective recording of I2RS 100 interactions. In this context, effective troubleshooting means being 101 able to identify what operation was performed by a specific I2RS 102 Client, what was the result of the operation, and when that operation 103 was performed. 105 Discussions about the retention of the data logged as part of I2RS 106 traceability, while important, are outside of the scope of this 107 document. 109 2. Terminology and Conventions 111 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 112 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 113 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 115 The architecture specification for I2RS [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 116 defines additional terms used in this document that are specific to 117 the I2RS domain, such as "I2RS Agent", "I2RS Client", etc. The 118 reader is expected to be familiar with the terminology and concepts 119 defined in [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture]. 121 The IP addresses used in the example in this document correspond to 122 the documentation address blocks 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1), 123 198.51.100.0/24 (TEST-NET-2) and 203.0.113.0/24 (TEST-NET-3) as 124 described in [RFC5737]. 126 3. Motivation 128 As networks scale and policy becomes an increasingly important part 129 of the control plane that creates and maintains the forwarding state, 130 operational complexity increases as well. I2RS offers more granular 131 and coherent control over policy and control plane state, but it also 132 removes or reduces the locality of the policy that has been applied 133 to the control plane at any individual forwarding device. The 134 ability to automate and abstract even complex policy-based controls 135 highlights the need for an equally scalable traceability function to 136 provide event-level granularity of the routing system compliant with 137 the requirements of I2RS (Section 5 of 138 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-problem-statement]). 140 4. Use Cases 142 An obvious motivation for I2RS traceability is the need to 143 troubleshoot and identify root-causes of problems in these 144 increasingly complex routing systems. For example, since I2RS is a 145 high-throughput multi-channel, full duplex and highly responsive 146 interface, I2RS Clients may be performing a large number of 147 operations on I2RS Agents concurrently or at nearly the same time and 148 quite possibly in very rapid succession. As these many changes are 149 made, the network reacts accordingly. These changes might lead to a 150 race condition, performance issues, data loss, or disruption of 151 services. In order to isolate the root cause of these issues it is 152 critical that a network operator or administrator has visibility into 153 what changes were made via I2RS at a specific time. 155 Some network environments have strong auditing requirements for 156 configuration and runtime changes. Other environments have policies 157 that require saving logging information for operational or regulatory 158 compliance considerations. These requirements therefore demand that 159 I2RS provides an account of changes made to network element routing 160 systems. 162 As I2RS becomes increasingly pervasive in routing environments, a 163 traceability model offers significant advantages and facilitates the 164 following use cases: 166 o Automated event correlation, trend analysis, and anomaly 167 detection; 169 o Trace log storage for offline (manual or tools) analysis; 171 o Improved accounting of routing system operations; 173 o Standardized structured data format for writing common tools; 175 o Common reference for automated testing and incident reporting; 177 o Real-time monitoring and troubleshooting; 179 o Enhanced network audit, management and forensic analysis 180 capabilities. 182 5. Information Model 184 5.1. I2RS Traceability Framework 186 This section describes a framework for I2RS traceability based on the 187 I2RS Architecture. Some notable elements on the architecture are in 188 this section. 190 The interaction between the optional northbound application, I2RS 191 Client, I2RS Agent, the Routing System and the data captured in the 192 I2RS trace log is shown in Figure 1. 194 +----------------+ 195 |Application | 196 |.............. | 197 | Application ID | 198 +----------------+ 199 ^ 200 | 0 .. N 201 | 202 V 203 +-------------+ 204 |I2RS Client | 205 |.............| 206 | Client ID | 207 +-------------+ 208 ^ 209 | 1 .. N 210 | 211 V 212 +-------------+ +-----------------------------+ 213 |I2RS Agent |---------------->|Trace Log | 214 | | |.............................| 215 +-------------+ |Log Entry [1 .. N] | 216 ^ |.............................| 217 | |Request Timestamp | 218 | |Client ID | 219 | |Client Priority | 220 | ^ |Secondary ID | 221 Operation + | Result Code |Client Address | 222 Op Data | |Requested Operation | 223 V | |Applied Operation | 224 | |Operation Data Present | 225 | |Requested Operation Data | 226 | |Applied Operation Data | 227 | |Transaction ID | 228 | |Result Code | 229 | |Result Timestamp | 230 | |Timeout Occurred | 231 V |End Of Message | 232 +-------------+ +-----------------------------+ 233 |Routing | 234 |System | 235 +-------------+ 237 Figure 1: I2RS Interaction Trace Log Capture 239 5.2. I2RS Trace Log Mandatory Fields 241 In order to ensure that each I2RS interaction can be properly traced 242 back to the Client that made the request at a specific point in time, 243 the following information MUST be collected and stored by the Agent. 245 The list below describes the fields captured in the I2RS trace log. 247 Entry ID: This is a unique identifier for each entry in the I2RS 248 trace log. Since multiple operations can occur from the same 249 Client at the same time, it is important to have an identifier 250 that can be unambiguously associated to a specific entry. 252 Request Timestamp: The specific time at which the I2RS operation 253 was received by the Agent. The time is passed in the [RFC3339] 254 format. Given that many I2RS operations can occur in rapid 255 succession, the use of fractional seconds MUST be used to provide 256 adequate granularity. Fractional seconds SHOULD be expressed 257 using human-readable 32-bit second and 32-bit microsecond 258 granularity in second.microsecond format. 260 Client Identity: The I2RS Client identity used to authenticate the 261 Client to the I2RS Agent. 263 Client Priority: The I2RS Client priority assigned by the access 264 control model that authenticates the Client. For example, this 265 can be set by the NETCONF Access Control Model (NACM) as described 266 in [RFC6536]. 268 Secondary Identity: This is an opaque identity that may be known to 269 the Client from a northbound controlling application. This is 270 used to trace the northbound application driving the actions of 271 the Client. The Client may not provide this identity to the Agent 272 if there is no external application driving the Client. However, 273 this field MUST be logged. If the Client does not provide an 274 application ID, then the Agent MUST log an UNAVAILABLE value in 275 the field. 277 Client Address: This is the network address of the Client that 278 connected to the Agent. For example, this may be an IPv4 or IPv6 279 address. 281 Requested Operation: This is the I2RS operation that was requested 282 to be performed. For example, this may be an add route operation 283 if a route is being inserted into a routing table. This may not 284 be the operation that was actually applied to the Agent. 286 Applied Operation: This is the I2RS operation that was actually 287 performed. This can differ from the Requested Operation in cases 288 where the Agent cannot satisfy the Requested Operation. 290 Operation Data Present: This is a Boolean field that indicates 291 whether or not addition per-Operation Data is present. 293 Requested Operation Data: This field comprises the data passed to 294 the Agent to complete the desired operation. For example, if the 295 operation is a route add operation, the Operation Data would 296 include the route prefix, prefix length, and next hop information 297 to be inserted as well as the specific routing table to which the 298 route will be added. If Operation Data is provided, then the 299 Operation Data Present field MUST be set to TRUE. Some operations 300 may not provide operation data. In those cases, the Operation 301 Data Present field MUST be set to FALSE, and this field MUST be 302 empty. This may not represent the data that was used for the 303 operation that was actually applied on the Agent. 305 Applied Operation Data: This field comprises the data that was 306 actually applied as part of the Applied Operation. If the Agent 307 cannot satisfy the Requested Operation with the Requested 308 Operation Data, then this field can differ from the Requested 309 Operation Data. 311 Transaction ID: The Transaction Identity represents that this 312 particular operation is part of a long-running I2RS transaction 313 that can consist of multiple, related I2RS operations. Using this 314 value, one can relate multiple log entries together as they are 315 part of a single, overall I2RS operation. [NOTE: The requirements 316 for transactions and long-running requests are being discussed in 317 the NETCONF working group, and this text will follow the 318 requirements set forth there.] 320 Result Code: This field holds the result of the operation. In the 321 case of RIB operations, this MUST be the return code as specified 322 in Section 4 of [I-D.ietf-i2rs-rib-info-model]. The operation may 323 not complete with a result code in the case of a timeout. If the 324 operation fails to complete, it MUST still log the attempted 325 operation with an appropriate result code (e.g., a result code 326 indicating a timeout). 328 Timeout Occurred: This is a Boolean field that indicates whether or 329 not a timeout occurred in the operation. When this is true, the 330 value of the Result Timestamp MUST be set to the time the Agent 331 recorded for the timeout occurrence. 333 Result Timestamp: The specific time at which the I2RS operation was 334 completed by the Agent. The time is passed in the [RFC3339] 335 format. Given that many I2RS operations can occur in rapid 336 succession, the use of fractional seconds MUST be used to provide 337 adequate granularity. Fractional seconds SHOULD be expressed 338 using human-readable 32-bit second and 32-bit microsecond 339 granularity in second.microsecond format. 341 End Of Message: Each log entry SHOULD have an appropriate End Of 342 Message (EOM) indicator. See section Section 5.3 below for more 343 details. 345 5.3. End of Message Marker 347 Because of variability within I2RS trace log fields, implementors 348 MUST use a format-appropriate end of message (EOM) indicator in order 349 to signify the end of a particular record. That is, regardless of 350 format, the I2RS trace log MUST provide a distinct way of 351 distinguishing between the end of one record and the beginning of 352 another. For example, in a linear formated log (similar to syslog) 353 the EOM marker may be a newline character. In an XML formated log, 354 the schema would provide for element tags that denote beginning and 355 end of records. In a JSON formated log, the syntax would provide 356 record separation (likely by comma-separated array elements). 358 6. Examples 360 Here is a proposed sample of what the fields might look like in an 361 I2RS trace log. This is only an early proposal. These values are 362 subject to change. 364 Entry ID: 1 365 Request Timestamp: 2013-09-03T12:00:01.21+00:00 366 Client ID: 5CEF1870-0326-11E2-A21F-0800200C9A66 367 Client Priority: 100 368 Secondary ID com.example.RoutingApp 369 Client Address: 192.0.2.2 370 Requested Operation: ROUTE_ADD 371 Applied Operation: ROUTE_ADD 372 Operation Data Present: TRUE 373 Requested Operation Data: PREFIX 203.0.113.0 PREFIX-LEN 24 NEXT-HOP 374 198.51.100.1 375 Applied Operation Data: PREFIX 203.0.113.0 PREFIX-LEN 24 NEXT-HOP 376 198.51.100.1 377 Transaction ID: 2763461 378 Result Code: SUCCESS(0) 379 Timeout Occurred: FALSE 380 Result Timestamp: 2013-09-03T12:00:01.23+00:00 382 7. Operational Guidance 384 Specific operational procedures regarding temporary log storage, 385 rollover, retrieval, and access of I2RS trace logs is out of scope 386 for this document. Organizations employing I2RS trace logging are 387 responsible for establishing proper operational procedures that are 388 appropriately suited to their specific requirements and operating 389 environment. In this section we only provide fundamental and 390 generalized operational guidelines that are implementation- 391 independent. 393 7.1. Trace Log Creation 395 The I2RS Agent interacts with the Routing and Signaling functions of 396 the Routing Element. Since the I2RS Agent is responsible for 397 actually making the routing changes on the associated network device, 398 it creates and maintains a log of operations that can be retrieved to 399 troubleshoot I2RS-related impact to the network. 401 7.2. Trace Log Temporary Storage 403 The trace information may be temporarily stored either in an in- 404 memory buffer or as a file local to the Agent. Care should be given 405 to the number of I2RS operations expected on a given Agent so that 406 the appropriate storage medium is used and to maximize the 407 effectiveness of the log while not impacting the performance and 408 health of the Agent. Client requests may not always be processed 409 synchronously or within a bounded time period. Consequently, to 410 ensure that trace log fields, such as "Operation" and "Result Code", 411 are part of the same trace log record it may require buffering of the 412 trace log entries. This buffering may result in additional resource 413 load on the Agent and the network element. 415 Section 7.3 discusses rotating the trace log in order to preserve the 416 operation history without exhausting Agent or network device 417 resources. It is perfectly acceptable, therefore, to use both an in- 418 memory buffer for recent operations while rotating or archiving older 419 operations to a local file. 421 It is outside the scope of this document to specify the 422 implementation details (i.e., size, throughput, data protection, 423 privacy, etc.) for the physical storage of the I2RS log file. Data 424 retention policies of the I2RS traceability log is also outside the 425 scope of this document. 427 7.3. Trace Log Rotation 429 In order to prevent the exhaustion of resources on the I2RS Agent or 430 its associated network device, it is RECOMMENDED that the I2RS Agent 431 implements trace log rotation. The details on how this is achieved 432 are left to the implementation and outside the scope of this 433 document. However, it should be possible to do file rotation based 434 on either time or size of the current trace log. If file rollover is 435 supported, multiple archived log files should be supported in order 436 to maximize the troubleshooting and accounting benefits of the trace 437 log. 439 7.4. Trace Log Retrieval 441 Implementors are free to provide their own, proprietary interfaces 442 and develop custom tools to retrieve and display the I2RS trace log. 443 These may include the display of the I2RS trace log as Command Line 444 Interface (CLI) output. However, a key intention of defining this 445 information model is to establish an vendor-agnostic and consistent 446 interface to collect I2RS trace data. Correspondingly, retrieval of 447 the data should also be made vendor-agnostic. 449 Despite the fact that export of I2RS trace log information could be 450 an invaluable diagnostic tool for off-box analysis, exporting this 451 information MUST NOT interfere with the ability of the Agent to 452 process new incoming operations. 454 The following three sections describe potential ways the trace log 455 can be accessed. At least one of these three MUST be used, with the 456 I2RS mechanisms being preferred as they are vendor-independent 457 approaches to retrieving the data. 459 7.4.1. Retrieval Via Syslog 461 The syslog protocol [RFC5424] is a standard way of sending event 462 notification messages from a host to a collector. However, the 463 protocol does not define any standard format for storing the 464 messages, and thus implementors of I2RS tracing would be left to 465 define their own format. So, while the data contained within the 466 syslog message would adhere to this information model, and may be 467 consumable by a human operator, it would not be easily parseable by a 468 machine. Syslog MAY be employed as a means of retrieving or 469 disseminating the I2RS trace log contents. 471 If syslog is used for trace log retrieval, then existing logging 472 infrastructure and capabilities of syslog [RFC5424] should be 473 leveraged without the need to define or extend existing formats. For 474 example, the various fields described in Section 5.2 SHOULD be 475 modeled and encoded as Structured Data Elements (referred to as "SD- 476 ELEMENT"), as described in Section 6.3.1 of [RFC5424]. 478 7.4.2. Retrieval Via I2RS Information Collection 480 Section 6.7 of the I2RS architecture [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 481 defines a mechanism for information collection. The information 482 collected includes obtaining a snapshot of a large amount of data 483 from the network element. It is the intent of I2RS to make this data 484 available in an implementor-agnostic fashion. Therefore, the I2RS 485 trace log SHOULD be made available via the I2RS information 486 collection mechanism either as a single snapshot or via a 487 subscription stream. 489 7.4.3. Retrieval Via I2RS Pub-Sub 491 Section 7.6 of the I2RS architecture [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 492 goes on to describe notification mechanisms for a feed of changes 493 happening within the I2RS layer. Specifically, the requirements for 494 a publish-subscribe system for I2RS are defined in 495 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements]. I2RS Agents SHOULD support 496 publishing I2RS trace log information to that feed as described in 497 that document. Subscribers would then receive a live stream of I2RS 498 interactions in trace log format and could flexibly choose to do a 499 number of things with the log messages. For example, the subscribers 500 could log the messages to a datastore, aggregate and summarize 501 interactions from a single Client, etc. The full range of potential 502 activites is virtually limitless and the details of how they are 503 performed are outside the scope of this document, however. 505 8. IANA Considerations 507 This document makes no request of IANA. 509 9. Security Considerations 511 The I2RS trace log, like any log file, reveals the state of the 512 entity producing it as well as the identifying information elements 513 and detailed interactions of the system containing it. The 514 information model described in this document does not itself 515 introduce any security issues, but it does define the set of 516 attributes that make up an I2RS log file. These attributes may 517 contain sensitive information and thus should adhere to the security, 518 privacy and permission policies of the organization making use of the 519 I2RS log file. 521 It is outside the scope of this document to specify how to protect 522 the stored log file, but it is expected that adequate precautions and 523 security best practices such as disk encryption, appropriately 524 restrictive file/directory permissions, suitable hardening and 525 physical security of logging entities, mutual authentication, 526 transport encryption, channel confidentiality, and channel integrity 527 if transferring log files. Additionally, the potentially sensitive 528 information contained in a log file SHOULD be adequately anonymized 529 or obfuscated by operators to ensure its privacy. 531 10. Acknowledgments 533 The authors would like to thank Alia Atlas for her initial feedback 534 and overall support for this work. Additionally, the authors 535 acknowledge Alvaro Retana, Russ White, Matt Birkner, Jeff Haas, Joel 536 Halpern, Dean Bogdanovich, Ignas Bagdonas, Nobo Akiya, Kwang-koog 537 Lee, Sue Hares, Mach Chen, and Alex Clemm for their reviews, 538 contributed text, and suggested improvements to this document. 540 11. References 542 11.1. Normative References 544 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-architecture] 545 Atlas, A., Halpern, J., Hares, S., Ward, D., and T. 546 Nadeau, "An Architecture for the Interface to the Routing 547 System", draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-07 (work in 548 progress), December 2014. 550 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-problem-statement] 551 Atlas, A., Nadeau, T., and D. Ward, "Interface to the 552 Routing System Problem Statement", draft-ietf-i2rs- 553 problem-statement-04 (work in progress), June 2014. 555 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-pub-sub-requirements] 556 Voit, E., Clemm, A., and A. Prieto, "Requirements for 557 Subscription to YANG Datastores", draft-ietf-i2rs-pub-sub- 558 requirements-03 (work in progress), October 2015. 560 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 561 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 563 11.2. Informative References 565 [I-D.ietf-i2rs-rib-info-model] 566 Bahadur, N., Kini, S., and J. Medved, "Routing Information 567 Base Info Model", draft-ietf-i2rs-rib-info-model-08 (work 568 in progress), October 2015. 570 [RFC3339] Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the 571 Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002. 573 [RFC5424] Gerhards, R., "The Syslog Protocol", RFC 5424, March 2009. 575 [RFC5737] Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks 576 Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737, January 2010. 578 [RFC6536] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration 579 Protocol (NETCONF) Access Control Model", RFC 6536, March 580 2012. 582 Authors' Addresses 584 Joe Clarke 585 Cisco Systems, Inc. 586 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 587 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 588 US 590 Phone: +1-919-392-2867 591 Email: jclarke@cisco.com 592 Gonzalo Salgueiro 593 Cisco Systems, Inc. 594 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 595 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 596 US 598 Email: gsalguei@cisco.com 600 Carlos Pignataro 601 Cisco Systems, Inc. 602 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 603 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 604 US 606 Email: cpignata@cisco.com