A YANG Model for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration
draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06
The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Michael Scharf , Mahesh Jethanandani , Vishal Murgai | ||
Last updated | 2022-05-04 (Latest revision 2022-02-03) | ||
Replaces | draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp | ||
RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
Formats | |||
Reviews |
TSVART Last Call review
by Gorry Fairhurst
Ready w/nits
SECDIR Last Call review
by Hilarie Orman
Has issues
OPSDIR Last Call review
by Gyan Mishra
Not ready
YANGDOCTORS Early review
by Ebben Aries
On the right track
|
||
Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
Document shepherd | Yoshifumi Nishida | ||
Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2022-02-07 | ||
IESG | IESG state | Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised I-D Needed | |
Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | Martin Duke | ||
Send notices to | nsd.ietf@gmail.com | ||
IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - Actions Needed | |
IANA expert review state | Expert Reviews OK |
draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06
TCPM M. Scharf Internet-Draft Hochschule Esslingen Intended status: Standards Track M. Jethanandani Expires: 7 August 2022 Kloud Services V. Murgai Samsung 3 February 2022 A YANG Model for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-06 Abstract This document specifies a minimal YANG model for TCP on devices that are configured by network management protocols. The YANG model defines a container for all TCP connections and groupings of authentication parameters that can be imported and used in TCP implementations or by other models that need to configure TCP parameters. The model also includes basic TCP statistics. The model is compliant with Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) (RFC 8342). Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on 7 August 2022. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 1] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Note to RFC Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. YANG Module Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Model Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3. Tree Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. TCP YANG Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.1. The IETF XML Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2. The YANG Module Names Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Appendix B. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 B.1. Keepalive Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 B.2. TCP-AO Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Appendix C. Complete Tree Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 1. Introduction The Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) [I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis] is used by many applications in the Internet, including control and management protocols. As such, TCP is implemented on network elements that can be configured via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. This document specifies a minimal YANG 1.1 [RFC7950] model for configuring TCP on network elements that support YANG. This YANG module is compliant with Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]. The YANG module has a narrow scope and focuses on a subset of fundamental TCP functions and basic statistics. It defines a container for TCP connection that includes definitions from YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers [I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server]. This model adheres to the Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 2] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 recommendation in BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks [RFC4364] as it allows enabling of TCP-AO [RFC5925], and accommodates the installed base that makes use of MD5. The module can be augmented or updated to address more advanced or implementation-specific TCP features in the future. Many protocol stacks on IP hosts use other methods to configure TCP, such as operating system configuration or policies. Many TCP/IP stacks cannot be configured by network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. Moreover, many existing TCP/IP stacks do not use YANG data models. Such TCP implementations often have other means to configure the parameters listed in this document. Such other means are outside the scope of this document. This specification is orthogonal to the Management Information Base (MIB) for the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) [RFC4022]. The basic statistics defined in this document follow the model of the TCP MIB. An TCP Extended Statistics MIB [RFC4898] is also available, but this document does not cover such extended statistics. The YANG module also omits some selected parameters included in TCP MIB, most notably the configured Retransmission Timeout (RTO) algorithm. This is conscious decision as these parameters hardly matter in a state- of-the-art TCP implementation. It would also be possible also to translate a MIB into a YANG module, for instance using Translation of Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2) MIB Modules to YANG Modules [RFC6643]. However, this approach is not used in this document, because a translated model would not be up-to-date. There are other existing TCP-related YANG models, which are orthogonal to this specification. Examples are: * TCP header attributes are modeled in other security-related models, such as YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs) [RFC8519], Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Thread Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel Specification [RFC8783], or I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model [I-D.ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model]. * TCP-related configuration of a NAT (e.g., NAT44, NAT64, Destination NAT) is defined in A YANG Module for Network Address Translation (NAT) and Network Prefix Translation (NPT) [RFC8512] and A YANG Data Model for Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) [RFC8513]. * TCP-AO and TCP MD5 configuration for Layer 3 VPNs is modeled in A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model [I-D.ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm]. This model assumes that TCP-AO specific parameters are preconfigured in addition to the keychain parameters. This issue is further discussed below. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 3] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 2. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. 2.1. Note to RFC Editor This document uses several placeholder values throughout the document. Please replace them as follows and remove this note before publication. RFC XXXX, where XXXX is the number assigned to this document at the time of publication. 2022-02-04 with the actual date of the publication of this document. 3. YANG Module Overview 3.1. Scope TCP is implemented on different system architectures. As a result, there are many different and often implementation-specific ways to configure parameters of the TCP engine. In addition, in many TCP/IP stacks configuration exists for different scopes: * Global configuration: Many TCP implementations have configuration parameters that affect all TCP connections. Typical examples include enabling or disabling optional protocol features. * Interface configuration: It can be useful to use different TCP parameters on different interfaces, e.g., different device ports or IP interfaces. In that case, TCP parameters can be part of the interface configuration. Typical examples are the Maximum Segment Size (MSS) or configuration related to hardware offloading. * Connection parameters: Many implementations have means to influence the behavior of each TCP connection, e.g., on the programming interface used by applications. Typical examples are socket options in the socket API, such as disabling the Nagle algorithm by TCP_NODELAY. If an application uses such an interface, it is possible that the configuration of the application or application protocol includes TCP-related parameters. An example is the BGP YANG Model for Service Provider Networks [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 4] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 * Policies: Setting of TCP parameters can also be part of system policies, templates, or profiles. An example would be the preferences defined in An Abstract Application Layer Interface to Transport Services [I-D.ietf-taps-interface]. As a result, there is no ground truth for setting certain TCP parameters, and traditionally different TCP implementation have used different modeling approaches. For instance, one implementation may define a given configuration parameter globally, while another one uses per-interface settings, and both approaches work well for the corresponding use cases. Also, different systems may use different default values. In addition, TCP can be implemented in different ways and design choices by the protocol engine often affect configuration options. Nonetheless, a number of TCP stack parameters require configuration by YANG models. This document therefore defines a minimal YANG model with fundamental parameters directly following from TCP standards. An important use case is the TCP configuration on network elements such as routers, which often use YANG data models. The model therefore specifies TCP parameters that are important on such TCP stacks. This in particular applies to the support of TCP-AO [RFC5925]. TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) is used on routers to secure routing protocols such as BGP. In that case, a YANG model for TCP-AO configuration is required. The model defined in this document includes the required parameters for TCP-AO configuration, such as the values of SendID and RecvID. The keychain for TCP-AO can be modeled by the YANG Data Model for Key Chains [RFC8177]. The groupings defined in this document can be imported and used as part of such a preconfiguration. Given an installed base, the model also allows enabling of the legacy TCP MD5 [RFC2385] signature option. As the TCP MD5 signature option is obsoleted by TCP-AO, it is strongly RECOMMENDED to use TCP-AO. Similar to the TCP MIB [RFC4022], this document also specifies basic statistics and a TCP connection table. * Statistics: Counters for the number of active/passive opens, sent and received segments, errors, and possibly other detailed debugging information Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 5] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 * TCP connection table: Access to status information for all TCP connections. Note, the connection table is modeled as a list that is read-writeable, even though a connection cannot be created by adding entries to the table. Similarly, deletion of connections from this list is implementation-specific. This allows implementations of TCP MIB [RFC4022] to migrate to the YANG model defined in this memo. Note that the TCP MIB does not include means to reset statistics, which are defined in this document. This is not a major addition, as a reset can simply be implemented by storing offset values for the counters. This version of the module does not cover Multipath TCP [RFC8684]. 3.2. Model Design The YANG model defined in this document includes definitions from the YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers [I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server]. Similar to that model, this specification defines YANG groupings. This allows reuse of these groupings in different YANG data models. It is intended that these groupings will be used either standalone or for TCP-based protocols as part of a stack of protocol-specific configuration models. An example could be the BGP YANG Model for Service Provider Networks [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model]. 3.3. Tree Diagram This section provides an abridged tree diagram for the YANG module defined in this document. Annotations used in the diagram are defined in YANG Tree Diagrams [RFC8340]. module: ietf-tcp +--rw tcp! +--rw connections | ... +--ro statistics {statistics}? ... 4. TCP YANG Model This YANG module references The TCP Authentication Option [RFC5925], Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature [RFC2385], Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification [I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis], and imports Common YANG Data Types [RFC6991], The NETCONF Access Control Model [RFC8341], and YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers [I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server]. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 6] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-tcp@2022-02-04.yang" module ietf-tcp { yang-version "1.1"; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcp"; prefix "tcp"; import ietf-yang-types { prefix "yang"; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types."; } import ietf-tcp-common { prefix "tcpcmn"; reference "I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server: YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers."; } import ietf-inet-types { prefix "inet"; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types."; } import ietf-netconf-acm { prefix nacm; reference "RFC 8341: Network Configuration Access Control Model"; } organization "IETF TCPM Working Group"; contact "WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/tcpm/about> WG List: <tcpm@ietf.org> Authors: Michael Scharf (michael.scharf at hs-esslingen dot de) Mahesh Jethanandani (mjethanandani at gmail dot com) Vishal Murgai (vmurgai at gmail dot com)"; description "This module focuses on fundamental TCP functions and basic statistics. The model can be augmented to address more advanced or implementation specific TCP features. Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 7] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices. The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'NOT RECOMMENDED', 'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here."; revision "2022-02-04" { description "Initial Version"; reference "RFC XXXX, A YANG Model for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Configuration."; } // Features feature statistics { description "This implementation supports statistics reporting."; } // TCP-AO Groupings grouping ao { leaf enable-ao { type boolean; default "false"; description "When set to true, TCP-Authentication Option (TCP-AO) is enabled."; } leaf send-id { type uint8 { range "0..max"; } must "../enable-ao = 'true'"; description "The SendID is inserted as the KeyID of the TCP-AO option Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 8] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 of outgoing segments. The SendID must match the RecvID at the other endpoint."; reference "RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication Option, Section 3.1."; } leaf recv-id { type uint8 { range "0..max"; } must "../enable-ao = 'true'"; description "The RecvID is matched against the TCP-AO KeyID of incoming segments. The RecvID must match the SendID at the other endpoint."; reference "RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication Option, Section 3.1."; } leaf include-tcp-options { type boolean; must "../enable-ao = 'true'"; default true; description "When set to true, TCP options are included in MAC calculation."; reference "RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication Option, Section 3.1."; } leaf accept-key-mismatch { type boolean; must "../enable-ao = 'true'"; description "Accept, when set to true, TCP segments with a Master Key Tuple (MKT) that is not configured."; reference "RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication Option, Section 7.3."; } description "Authentication Option (AO) for TCP."; reference "RFC 5925: The TCP Authentication Option."; } // MD5 grouping grouping md5 { Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 9] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 description "Grouping for use in authenticating TCP sessions using MD5."; reference "RFC 2385: Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature."; leaf enable-md5 { type boolean; default "false"; description "Enables, when set to true, support of MD5 to authenticate a TCP session. As the TCP MD5 signature option is obsoleted by TCP-AO, it is strongly RECOMMENDED to use TCP-AO instead."; } } // TCP configuration container tcp { presence "The container for TCP configuration."; description "TCP container."; container connections { list connection { key "local-address remote-address local-port remote-port"; leaf local-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Identifies the address that is used by the local endpoint for the connection, and is one of the four elements that form the connection identifier."; } leaf remote-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Identifies the address that is used by the remote endpoint for the connection, and is one of the four elements that form the connection identifier."; } leaf local-port { type inet:port-number; description "Identifies the local TCP port used for the connection, Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 10] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 and is one of the four elements that form the connection identifier."; } leaf remote-port { type inet:port-number; description "Identifies the remote TCP port used for the connection, and is one of the four elements that form the connection identifier."; } container common { uses tcpcmn:tcp-common-grouping; choice authentication { case ao { uses ao; description "Use TCP-AO to secure the connection."; } case md5 { uses md5; description "Use TCP-MD5 to secure the connection."; } description "Choice of TCP authentication."; } description "Common definitions of TCP configuration. This includes parameters such as how to secure the connection, that can be part of either the client or server."; } description "List of TCP connections with their parameters. The list is modeled as writeable, but implementations may not allow creation of new TCP connections by adding entries to the list. Furthermore, the behavior upon removal is implementation-specific. Implementations may support closing or resetting a TCP connection upon an operation that removes the entry from the list."; } description "A container of all TCP connections."; } Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 11] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 container statistics { if-feature statistics; config false; leaf active-opens { type yang:counter32; description "The number of times that TCP connections have made a direct transition to the SYN-SENT state from the CLOSED state."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf passive-opens { type yang:counter32; description "The number of times TCP connections have made a direct transition to the SYN-RCVD state from the LISTEN state."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf attempt-fails { type yang:counter32; description "The number of times that TCP connections have made a direct transition to the CLOSED state from either the SYN-SENT state or the SYN-RCVD state, plus the number of times that TCP connections have made a direct transition to the LISTEN state from the SYN-RCVD state."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf establish-resets { type yang:counter32; description "The number of times that TCP connections have made a direct transition to the CLOSED state from either the ESTABLISHED state or the CLOSE-WAIT state."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 12] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 leaf currently-established { type yang:gauge32; description "The number of TCP connections for which the current state is either ESTABLISHED or CLOSE-WAIT."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf in-segments { type yang:counter64; description "The total number of segments received, including those received in error. This count includes segments received on currently established connections."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf out-segments { type yang:counter64; description "The total number of segments sent, including those on current connections but excluding those containing only retransmitted octets."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf retransmitted-segments { type yang:counter32; description "The total number of segments retransmitted; that is, the number of TCP segments transmitted containing one or more previously transmitted octets."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf in-errors { type yang:counter32; description "The total number of segments received in error (e.g., bad TCP checksums)."; Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 13] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } leaf out-resets { type yang:counter32; description "The number of TCP segments sent containing the RST flag."; reference "I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis: Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification."; } action reset { nacm:default-deny-all; description "Reset statistics action command."; input { leaf reset-at { type yang:date-and-time; description "Time when the reset action needs to be executed."; } } output { leaf reset-finished-at { type yang:date-and-time; description "Time when the reset action command completed."; } } } description "Statistics across all connections."; } } } <CODE ENDS> 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. The IETF XML Registry This document registers an URI in the "ns" subregistry of the IETF XML Registry [RFC3688]. Following the format in IETF XML Registry [RFC3688], the following registration is requested: Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 14] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcp Registrant Contact: The IESG. XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace. 5.2. The YANG Module Names Registry This document registers a YANG module in the "YANG Module Names" registry YANG - A Data Modeling Language [RFC6020]. Following the format in YANG - A Data Modeling Language [RFC6020], the following registration is requested: name: ietf-tcp namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcp prefix: tcp reference: RFC XXXX The registration is not maintained by IANA. 6. Security Considerations The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is Secure Shell (SSH) described in Using the NETCONF protocol over SSH [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC8446]. The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol operations and content. There are a number of data nodes defined in this YANG module that are writable/creatable/deletable (i.e., "config true", which is the default). These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config) to these data nodes without proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations. These are the subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability: * Common configuration included from NETCONF Client and Server Models [I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server]. Unrestricted access to all the nodes, e.g., keepalive idle-timer, can cause connections to fail or to timeout prematurely. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 15] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 * Authentication configuration. Unrestricted access to the nodes under authentication configuration can prevent the use of authenticated communication and cause connection setups to fail. This can result in massive security vulnerabilities and service disruption for the traffic requiring authentication. Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability: * Unrestricted access to connection information of the client or server can be used by a malicious user to launch an attack, e.g. MITM. * Similarly, unrestricted access to statistics of the client or server can be used by a malicious user to exploit any vulnerabilities of the system. Some of the RPC operations in this YANG module may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to control access to these operations. These are the operations and their sensitivity/vulnerability: * The YANG module allows for the statistics to be cleared by executing the reset action. This action should be restricted to users with the right permission. The module specified in this document supports MD5 to basically accommodate the installed BGP base. MD5 suffers from the security weaknesses discussed in Section 2 of RFC 6151 [RFC6151] or Section 2.1 of RFC 6952 [RFC6952]. 7. References 7.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server] Watsen, K. and M. Scharf, "YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- ietf-netconf-tcp-client-server-11, 14 December 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-netconf-tcp- client-server-11.txt>. [I-D.ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis] Eddy, W. M., "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 16] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-25, 7 September 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm- rfc793bis-25.txt>. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC2385] Heffernan, A., "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature Option", RFC 2385, DOI 10.17487/RFC2385, August 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2385>. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. [RFC5925] Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925, June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>. [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>. [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. [RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>. [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>. [RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>. [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 17] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. [RFC8177] Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J. Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177, DOI 10.17487/RFC8177, June 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8177>. [RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>. [RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>. [RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K., and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018, <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>. 7.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model] Hares, S., Jeong, J. (., Kim, J. (., Moskowitz, R., and Q. Lin, "I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-22, 22 January 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft- ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-22.txt>. [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-model] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., Hares, S., and J. Haas, "BGP YANG Model for Service Provider Networks", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-12, 25 October 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- idr-bgp-model-12.txt>. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 18] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 [I-D.ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm] Barguil, S., Dios, O. G. D., Boucadair, M., Munoz, L. A., and A. Aguado, "A Layer 3 VPN Network YANG Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-18, 8 October 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft- ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-18.txt>. [I-D.ietf-taps-interface] Trammell, B., Welzl, M., Enghardt, T., Fairhurst, G., Kuehlewind, M., Perkins, C., Tiesel, P. S., Wood, C. A., Pauly, T., and K. Rose, "An Abstract Application Layer Interface to Transport Services", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-taps-interface-14, 3 January 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-taps- interface-14.txt>. [I-D.ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors] Touch, J. and J. Kuusisaari, "TCP-AO Test Vectors", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test- vectors-06, 30 January 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test- vectors-06.txt>. [RFC4022] Raghunarayan, R., Ed., "Management Information Base for the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)", RFC 4022, DOI 10.17487/RFC4022, March 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4022>. [RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>. [RFC4898] Mathis, M., Heffner, J., and R. Raghunarayan, "TCP Extended Statistics MIB", RFC 4898, DOI 10.17487/RFC4898, May 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4898>. [RFC6151] Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms", RFC 6151, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151>. [RFC6643] Schoenwaelder, J., "Translation of Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2) MIB Modules to YANG Modules", RFC 6643, DOI 10.17487/RFC6643, July 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6643>. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 19] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 [RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>. [RFC8512] Boucadair, M., Ed., Sivakumar, S., Jacquenet, C., Vinapamula, S., and Q. Wu, "A YANG Module for Network Address Translation (NAT) and Network Prefix Translation (NPT)", RFC 8512, DOI 10.17487/RFC8512, January 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8512>. [RFC8513] Boucadair, M., Jacquenet, C., and S. Sivakumar, "A YANG Data Model for Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite)", RFC 8513, DOI 10.17487/RFC8513, January 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8513>. [RFC8519] Jethanandani, M., Agarwal, S., Huang, L., and D. Blair, "YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs)", RFC 8519, DOI 10.17487/RFC8519, March 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8519>. [RFC8684] Ford, A., Raiciu, C., Handley, M., Bonaventure, O., and C. Paasch, "TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses", RFC 8684, DOI 10.17487/RFC8684, March 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8684>. [RFC8783] Boucadair, M., Ed. and T. Reddy.K, Ed., "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel Specification", RFC 8783, DOI 10.17487/RFC8783, May 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8783>. Appendix A. Acknowledgements Michael Scharf was supported by the StandICT.eu project, which is funded by the European Commission under the Horizon 2020 Programme. The following persons have contributed to this document by reviews: Mohamed Boucadair, and Tom Petch. Appendix B. Examples B.1. Keepalive Configuration This particular example demonstrates how both a particular connection can be configured for keepalives. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 20] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!-- This example shows how TCP keepalive can be configured for a given connection. An idle connection is dropped after idle-time + (max-probes * probe-interval). --> <tcp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcp"> <connections> <connection> <local-address>192.0.2.1</local-address> <remote-address>192.0.2.2</remote-address> <local-port>1025</local-port> <remote-port>80</remote-port> <common> <keepalives> <idle-time>5</idle-time> <max-probes>5</max-probes> <probe-interval>10</probe-interval> </keepalives> </common> </connection> </connections> </tcp> B.2. TCP-AO Configuration The following example demonstrates how to model a TCP-AO [RFC5925] configuration for the example in TCP-AO Test Vectors [I-D.ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors]. Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 21] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!-- This example sets TCP-AO configuration parameters as demonstrated by examples in draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors. --> <tcp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcp"> <connections> <connection> <local-address>fd00::1</local-address> <remote-address>fd00::2</remote-address> <local-port>1025</local-port> <remote-port>179</remote-port> <common> <enable-ao>true</enable-ao> <send-id>61</send-id> <recv-id>84</recv-id> </common> </connection> </connections> </tcp> <key-chains xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-key-chain"> <key-chain> <name>ao-config</name> <description>"An example for TCP-AO configuration."</description>\ <key> <key-id>61</key-id> <crypto-algorithm>hmac-sha-1</crypto-algorithm> <key-string> <keystring>testvector</keystring> </key-string> </key> <key> <key-id>84</key-id> <crypto-algorithm>hmac-sha-1</crypto-algorithm> <key-string> <keystring>testvector</keystring> </key-string> </key> </key-chain> </key-chains> Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 22] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 Appendix C. Complete Tree Diagram Here is the complete tree diagram for the TCP YANG model. module: ietf-tcp +--rw tcp! +--rw connections | +--rw connection* | [local-address remote-address local-port remote-port] | +--rw local-address inet:ip-address | +--rw remote-address inet:ip-address | +--rw local-port inet:port-number | +--rw remote-port inet:port-number | +--rw common | +--rw keepalives! | | +--rw idle-time uint16 | | +--rw max-probes uint16 | | +--rw probe-interval uint16 | +--rw (authentication)? | +--:(ao) | | +--rw enable-ao? boolean | | +--rw send-id? uint8 | | +--rw recv-id? uint8 | | +--rw include-tcp-options? boolean | | +--rw accept-key-mismatch? boolean | +--:(md5) | +--rw enable-md5? boolean +--ro statistics {statistics}? +--ro active-opens? yang:counter32 +--ro passive-opens? yang:counter32 +--ro attempt-fails? yang:counter32 +--ro establish-resets? yang:counter32 +--ro currently-established? yang:gauge32 +--ro in-segments? yang:counter64 +--ro out-segments? yang:counter64 +--ro retransmitted-segments? yang:counter32 +--ro in-errors? yang:counter32 +--ro out-resets? yang:counter32 +---x reset +---w input | +---w reset-at? yang:date-and-time +--ro output +--ro reset-finished-at? yang:date-and-time Authors' Addresses Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 23] Internet-Draft YANG Model for TCP February 2022 Michael Scharf Hochschule Esslingen - University of Applied Sciences Flandernstr. 101 73732 Esslingen Germany Email: michael.scharf@hs-esslingen.de Mahesh Jethanandani Kloud Services Email: mjethanandani@gmail.com Vishal Murgai Samsung Email: vmurgai@gmail.com Scharf, et al. Expires 7 August 2022 [Page 24]