draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-04.txt		draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-05.txt
	Network Working Group M. Bjorklund		Network Working Group M. Bjorklund
	Internet-Draft Tail-f Systems		Internet-Draft Tail-f Systems
	Updates: 8040 (if approved) J. Schoenwaelder		Updates: 8040 (if approved) J. Schoenwaelder
	Intended status: Standards Track Jacobs University		Intended status: Standards Track Jacobs University
	Expires: October 22, 2018 P. Shafer		Expires: April 12, 2019 P. Shafer
	K. Watsen		K. Watsen
	Juniper Networks		Juniper Networks
	R. Wilton		R. Wilton
	Cisco Systems		Cisco Systems
	April 20, 2018		October 9, 2018
	RESTCONF Extensions to Support the Network Management Datastore		RESTCONF Extensions to Support the Network Management Datastore
	Architecture		Architecture
	draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-04		draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-05
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document extends the RESTCONF protocol defined in RFC 8040 in		This document extends the RESTCONF protocol defined in RFC 8040 in
	order to support the Network Management Datastore Architecture		order to support the Network Management Datastore Architecture
	defined in RFC 8342.		defined in RFC 8342.
	This document updates RFC 8040 by introducing new datastore		This document updates RFC 8040 by introducing new datastore
	resources, adding a new query parameter, and requiring the usage of		resources, adding a new query parameter, and requiring the usage of
	I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis by RESTCONF servers implementing the		I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis by RESTCONF servers implementing the
	skipping to change at page 1, line 47 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 47 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on October 22, 2018.		This Internet-Draft will expire on April 12, 2019.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 4, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 5 ¶
	NMDA.		NMDA.
	3.1. New Datastore Resources		3.1. New Datastore Resources
	This document defines a set of new resources representing datastores		This document defines a set of new resources representing datastores
	as defined in [RFC8342]. These resources are available using the		as defined in [RFC8342]. These resources are available using the
	following resource path template:		following resource path template:
	{+restconf}/ds/<datastore>		{+restconf}/ds/<datastore>
	The <datastore> path component is encoded as an "identity" according		The <datastore> path component is encoded as an "identityref"
	to the JSON encoding rules for identities, defined in Section 4 of		according to the JSON encoding rules for identities, defined in
	[RFC7951]. Such an identity MUST be derived from the "datastore"		Section 6.8 of [RFC7951]. The namespace-qualified form MUST be used.
	identity defined in the "ietf-datastores" YANG module [RFC8342].		Such an identity MUST be derived from the "datastore" identity
			defined in the "ietf-datastores" YANG module [RFC8342].
	Specifically:		Specifically:
	o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:operational refers to		o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:operational refers to
	the operational state datastore.		the operational state datastore.
	o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:running refers to the		o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:running refers to the
	running configuration datastore.		running configuration datastore.
	o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:intended refers to the		o The resource {+restconf}/ds/ietf-datastores:intended refers to the
	intended configuration datastore.		intended configuration datastore.
	An NMDA-compliant server MUST implement {+restconf}/ds/ietf-		An NMDA-compliant server MUST implement {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
	datastores:operational. Other datastore resources are optional to		datastores:operational. Other datastore resources MAY be
	implement.		implemented.
	YANG actions can only be invoked in {+restconf}/ds/ietf-		YANG actions can only be invoked in {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
	datastores:operational.		datastores:operational.
	If a server implements the example datastore "ds-ephemeral" in the		If a server implements other datastores, such as the example
	module "example-ds-ephemeral", it would implement the resource		datastore "ds-ephemeral" in the module "example-ds-ephemeral", the
	{+restconf}/ds/example-ds-ephemeral:ds-ephemeral.		server would implement the resource {+restconf}/ds/example- ds-
			ephemeral:ds-ephemeral.
	3.2. Protocol Operations		3.2. Protocol Operations
	The protocol operations available for the new datastore resources		The protocol operations available for the new datastore resources
	(Section 3.1) are the same as the protocol operations defined in		(Section 3.1) are the same as the protocol operations defined in
	[RFC8040] for the {+restconf}/data resource with the following		[RFC8040] for the {+restconf}/data resource with the following
	exceptions:		exceptions:
	o Dynamic configuration datastores are excluded, as each dynamic		o Dynamic configuration datastores are excluded, as each dynamic
	configuration datastore definition needs to be reviewed for what		configuration datastore definition needs to be reviewed for what
	skipping to change at page 5, line 11 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 11 ¶
	o The semantics of the "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040],		o The semantics of the "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040],
	Section 4.8.9) differs when interacting with the operational state		Section 4.8.9) differs when interacting with the operational state
	datastore. The semantics are described below, in Section 3.2.1.		datastore. The semantics are described below, in Section 3.2.1.
	o [RFC8040], Section 3.5.4, paragraph 3 does not apply when		o [RFC8040], Section 3.5.4, paragraph 3 does not apply when
	interacting with any resource under {+restconf}/ds.		interacting with any resource under {+restconf}/ds.
	3.2.1. With-defaults query parameter on the operational state datastore		3.2.1. With-defaults query parameter on the operational state datastore
	The "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040], Section 4.8.9) is		The "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040], Section 4.8.9) is
	optional to support when interacting with {+restconf}/ds/ietf-		OPTIONAL to support when interacting with {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
	datastores:operational. The associated capability to indicate a		datastores:operational. The associated capability to indicate a
	server's support is identified with the URI:		server's support is identified with the URI:
	urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0		urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0
	For servers that support it, the behavior of the "with-defaults"		For servers that support it, the behavior of the "with-defaults"
	query parameter on the operational state datastore is defined as		query parameter on the operational state datastore is defined as
	follows:		follows:
	o If no "with-defaults" query parameter is specified, or if it is		o If no "with-defaults" query parameter is specified, or if it is
	skipping to change at page 6, line 15 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 15 ¶
	Data in the operational state datatstore can come from multiple		Data in the operational state datatstore can come from multiple
	sources. The server should return the most accurate value for the		sources. The server should return the most accurate value for the
	"origin" metadata annotation as possible, indicating the source of		"origin" metadata annotation as possible, indicating the source of
	the operational value, as specified in Section 5.3.4 of [RFC8342].		the operational value, as specified in Section 5.3.4 of [RFC8342].
	When encoding the origin metadata annotation for a hierarchy of		When encoding the origin metadata annotation for a hierarchy of
	returned nodes, the annotation can be omitted for a child node when		returned nodes, the annotation can be omitted for a child node when
	the value matches that of the parent node, as described in		the value matches that of the parent node, as described in
	"ietf-origin" YANG module [RFC8342].		"ietf-origin" YANG module [RFC8342].
	The "with-origin" query parameter is optional to support. It is		The "with-origin" query parameter is OPTIONAL to support. It is
	identified with the URI:		identified with the URI:
	urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0		urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0
	4. IANA Considerations		4. IANA Considerations
	This document defines two capability identifier URNs in the "RESTCONF		This document defines two capability identifier URNs in the "RESTCONF
	Capability URNs" registry defined in [RFC8040]:		Capability URNs" registry defined in [RFC8040]:
	Index		Index
	skipping to change at page 6, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 37 ¶
	---------------------		---------------------
	:with-origin		:with-origin
	urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0		urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-origin:1.0
	:with-operational-defaults		:with-operational-defaults
	urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0		urn:ietf:params:restconf:capability:with-operational-defaults:1.0
	5. Security Considerations		5. Security Considerations
	This documents extends the RESTCONF protocol by introducing new		This document extends the RESTCONF protocol by introducing new
	datastore resources. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the		datastore resources. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the
	mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC5246]. The		mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC8446]. The
	RESTCONF protocol uses the network configuration access control model		RESTCONF protocol uses the network configuration access control model
	[RFC8341], which provides the means to restrict access for particular		[RFC8341], which provides the means to restrict access for particular
	RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available RESTCONF		RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available RESTCONF
	protocol operations and content.		protocol operations and content.
	The security constraints for the base RESTCONF protocol (see		The security constraints for the base RESTCONF protocol (see
	Section 12 of [RFC8040] apply to the new RESTCONF datastore resources		Section 12 of [RFC8040]) apply to the new RESTCONF datastore
	defined in this document.		resources defined in this document.
	6. Normative References		6. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis]		[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis]
	Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Watsen, K.,		Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Watsen, K.,
	and R. Wilton, "YANG Library", draft-ietf-netconf-		and R. Wilton, "YANG Library", draft-ietf-netconf-
	rfc7895bis-06 (work in progress), April 2018.		rfc7895bis-06 (work in progress), April 2018.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-
	rfc2119>.		editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
	(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, DOI 10.17487/
	RFC5246, August 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/
	rfc5246>.
	[RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG", RFC		[RFC7951] Lhotka, L., "JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG",
	7951, DOI 10.17487/RFC7951, August 2016, <https://www.rfc-		RFC 7951, DOI 10.17487/RFC7951, August 2016,
	editor.org/info/rfc7951>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7951>.
	[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF		[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
	Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,		Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
	[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC		[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
	2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,		2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
	May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.		May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
	[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration		[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
	Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, DOI 10.17487/		Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
	RFC8341, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/		DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-
	rfc8341>.		editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
	[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,		[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
	and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture		and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
	(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,		(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
			[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
			Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
			<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Martin Bjorklund		Martin Bjorklund
	Tail-f Systems		Tail-f Systems
	Email: mbj@tail-f.com		Email: mbj@tail-f.com
	Juergen Schoenwaelder		Juergen Schoenwaelder
	Jacobs University		Jacobs University
	Email: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de		Email: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
End of changes. 16 change blocks.
	33 lines changed or deleted		34 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/