The Computerate Specifying Paradigm
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-05
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 "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Marc Petit-Huguenin | ||
| Last updated | 2021-02-01 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specification | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-05
Network Working Group M. Petit-Huguenin
Internet-Draft Impedance Mismatch LLC
Intended status: Experimental 1 February 2021
Expires: 5 August 2021
The Computerate Specifying Paradigm
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-05
Abstract
This document specifies a paradigm named Computerate Specifying,
designed to simultaneously document and formally specify
communication protocols. This paradigm can be applied to any
document produced by any Standard Developing Organization (SDO), but
this document targets specifically documents produced by the IETF.
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 5 August 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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.
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 Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Private Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Private Specifications for New Documents . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Private Specifications for Existing Documents . . . . . . 10
5. Self-Contained Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. PDU Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1.1. PDU Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1.2. Calculations from PDU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.3. PDU Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2. State Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3. Proofs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.3.1. Wire Type vs Abstract Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.3.2. Data Format Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.3.3. Postel's Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.3.4. Implementability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.3.5. Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.3.6. Liveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6. Importing Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.1. Common Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.1.1. Generating AsciiDoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.1.2. Common Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.1.3. Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.1.4. Typed Petri Nets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.1.5. Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
6.1.5.1. Bit Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6.1.5.2. Message Sequence Charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6.2. Packages for Meta-Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6.2.1. Augmented BNF (ABNF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.2.2. Augmented Packet Header Diagrams (APHD) . . . . . . . 42
6.2.3. Cosmogol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.3. Packages for Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.3.1. Type Transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
6.3.2. Extended Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7. Exporting Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.1. Standard Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.2. Transclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
7.3. Exporting Types and Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
8. Standard Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
8.1. Internal Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
8.1.1. AsciiDoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
8.1.2. BitVector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
8.1.3. Unsigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
8.1.4. Dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
8.1.5. BitDiagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
8.1.6. Transform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
8.1.7. Tpn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
8.2. Meta-Language Packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
8.2.1. Augmented Packet Header Diagrams (APHD) . . . . . . . 56
8.2.2. RFC 5234 (ABNF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
8.3. Protocol Packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
8.3.1. RFC 791 (Internet Protocol) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
9. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Appendix A. Command Line Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
A.1. Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.1.1. Download the Docker Image . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.2. The "computerate" Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.2.1. Literate Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.2.2. Transclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.2.3. IdrisDoc Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.2.4. Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.2.5. Extended Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.2.6. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A.2.6.1. Internet-Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A.2.6.2. RFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.2.6.3. Email . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.2.6.4. IANA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.2.6.5. Web-Based Public Code Repositories . . . . . . . 66
A.3. Idris REPL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.4. Other Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.5. Source Repositories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.6. Modified Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.6.1. Idris2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.6.2. asciidoctor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
A.6.3. metanorma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
A.6.4. metanorma-ietf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
A.6.5. idris2-vim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.7. Bugs and Workarounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.8. TODO List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Appendix B. Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
B.1. Package computerate-specifying . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
B.1.1. Module ComputerateSpecifying.AsciiDoc . . . . . . . . 71
B.1.2. Module ComputerateSpecifying.BitDiagram . . . . . . . 72
B.1.3. Module ComputerateSpecifying.BitVector . . . . . . . 73
B.1.4. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Dimension . . . . . . . 74
B.1.5. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Tpn . . . . . . . . . . 76
B.1.6. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Transform . . . . . . . 77
B.1.7. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Unsigned . . . . . . . . 78
B.2. Package rfc5234 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
B.2.1. Module RFC5234.Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
B.2.2. Module RFC5234.Main . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
B.3. Package augmented-ascii-diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
B.3.1. Module AAD.Main . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
B.4. Package rfc791 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
B.4.1. Module RFC791.Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
B.4.2. Module RFC791.IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Appendix C. Errata Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
1. Introduction
If, as the unofficial IETF motto states, we believe that "running
code" is an important part of the feedback provided to the
standardization process, then as per the Curry-Howard equivalence
[Curry-Howard] (that states that code and mathematical proofs are the
same), we ought to also believe that "verified proof" is an equally
important part of that feedback. A verified proof is a mathematical
proof of a logical proposition that was mechanically verified by a
computer, as opposed to just peer-reviewed.
The "Experiences with Protocol Description" paper from Pamela Zave
[Zave11] gives three conclusions about the usage of formal
specifications for a protocol standard. The first conclusion states
that informal methods (i.e. the absence of verified proofs) are
inadequate for widely used protocols. This document is based on the
assumption that this conclusion is correct, so its validity will not
be discussed further.
The second conclusion states that formal specifications are useful
even if they fall short of the "gold standard" of a complete formal
specification. We will show that a formal specification can be
incrementally added to a document.
The third conclusion from Zave's paper states that the normative
English language should be paraphrasing the formal specification.
The difficulty here is that to be able to keep the formal
specification and the normative language synchronized at all times,
these two should be kept as physically close as possible to each
other.
To do that we introduce the concept of "Computerate Specifying" (note
that Computerate is a British English word). "Computerate
Specifying" is a play on "Literate Computing", itself a play on
"Structured Computing" (see [Knuth92] page 99). In the same way that
Literate Programming enriches code by interspersing it with its own
documentation, Computerate Specifying enriches a standard
specification by interspersing it with code (or with proofs, as they
are the same thing), making it a computerate specification.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Note that computerate specifying is not specific to the IETF, just
like literate computing is not restricted to the combination of Tex
and Pascal described in Knuth's paper. What this document describes
is a specific instance of computerate specifying that combines
[AsciiDoc] as formatting language and [Idris2] as programming
language with the goal of formally specifying IETF protocols.
2. Overview
The remaining of this document is divided in 3 parts:
After the Terminology (Section 3) section starts a tutorial on how to
write a specification. This tutorial is meant to be read in
sequence, as concepts defined in early part will not be repeated
later. On the other hand the tutorial is designed to present
information progressively and mostly in order of complexity, so it is
possible to start writing effective specifications without reading or
understanding the whole tutorial.
The tutorial begins by explaining how to write private specifications
(Section 4), which are specifications that are not meant to be
shared. Then the tutorial continues by explaining how to write an
self-contained specification (Section 5), which is a specification
that contains Idris code that relies only on the Idris Standard
Library. Writing self-contained specifications is difficult and
time-consuming, so the tutorial continues by explained how to import
specifications (Section 6) that contain reusable types and code. The
tutorial ends with explanations on how to design a exportable
specification (Section 7).
After the tutorial come the description of all the packages and
modules in the Computerate Specifying Standard Library (Section 8).
Appendix A explains how to install and use the associated tooling,
and Appendix B contains the reference manual for the standard
library.
3. Terminology
Computerate Specification, Specification: Literate Idris2 code
embedded in an AsciiDoc document, containing both formal
descriptions and human language texts, and which can be processed
to produce documents in human language.
Document: Any text that contains the documentation of a protocol in
the English language. A document is the result of processing a
specification.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Retrofitted Specification: A specification created after a document
was published such as the generated document coincides with the
published document.
In this document, the same word can be used either as an English word
or as an Idris identifier used inside the text. To explicitly
differentiate them, the latter is always displayed like "this". E.g.
"IdrisDoc" is meant to convey the fact that IdrisDoc in that case is
an Idris module or type. On the other hand the word IdrisDoc refers
to the IdrisDoc specification.
Similarly blocks of code, including literate code, are always
sandwiched between "<CODE BEGINS>" and "<CODE ENDS>". Code blocks
will be presented in their literate form only when necessary, i.e.
when mixed AsciiDoc and Idris are required. However, in a
computerate specification, Idris code must in fact be used in its
literate form.
By convention an Idris function that returns a type and types
themselves will always start with an uppercase letter. Functions not
returning a type start with a lowercase letter.
For the standard library, the types names are also formed by taking
the English word or expression, making the first letter of each word
upper case, and removing any symbols like underscore, dash and space.
Thus bitvector would become "Bitvector" after conversion as a type
name but bit diagram would become "BitDiagram".
4. Private Specifications
Nowadays documents at the IETF are written in a format named xml2rfc
v3 [RFC7991] but unfortunately making that format Computerable is not
trivial, mostly because there is no simple solution to mix code and
XML together in the same file. Instead, the [AsciiDoc] format forms
the basis for specifications as it permits the generation of
documents in the xmlrfc v3 format (among other formats) and also
because it can be enriched with code in the same file.
AsciiRFC [I-D.ribose-asciirfc] and [Metanorma-IETF] describe a
backend for the [Asciidoctor] tool that converts an AsciiDoc document
into an xml2rfc v3 document. The AsciiRFC document states various
reasons why AsciiDoc is a superior format for the purpose of writing
standards, so that will not be discussed further. Note that the same
team developed Asciidoctor backends [Metanorma] for other Standards
Developing Organizations (SDO), making it easy to develop computerate
specifications targeting the documents developed by these SDOs.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
The code in a computerate specification uses the programming language
[Idris2] in literate programming [Literate] mode using the Bird-
style, by having each line of code starting with a ">" mark in the
first column.
That same symbol is also used by AsciiDoc as an alternate way of
defining a blockquote [Blockquotes] way which is no longer available
in a computerate specification. Bird-style code will simply not
appear in the rendered document.
The result of Idris code execution can be inserted inside the
AsciiDoc part of a specification by inserting that code fragment
between the "{`" string and the "`}" strings. That code fragment
must return a value of a type that implements the "Show" interface.
A computerate specification is processed by an Asciidoctor
preprocessor that does the following:
1. Loads the whole specification as an Idris program, including
importing modules.
2. For each instance of an inline code fragment, evaluates that
fragment and replaces it (including the delimiters) by the result
of that evaluation.
3. Continues with the normal processing of the modified
specification.
For instance the following document fragment taken from the
computerate specification of [RFC8489]:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
> rto : Int
> rto = 500
>
> rc : Nat
> rc = 7
>
> rm : Int
> rm = 16
>
> -- A stream of transmission times
> transmissions : Int -> Int -> Stream Int
> transmissions value rto = value :: transmissions (value + rto)
> (rto * 2)
>
> -- A specific transmission time
> transmission : Int -> Nat -> Int
> transmission timeout i = index i $ transmissions 0 timeout
>
> a1 : Int
> a1 = rto
>
> a2 : String
> a2 = concat (take (rc - 1) (map (\t => show t ++ " ms, ")
> (transmissions 0 rto))) ++ "and " ++ show (transmission rto
> (rc - 1)) ++ " ms"
>
> a3 : Int
> a3 = transmission rto (rc - 1) + rto * rm
For example, assuming an RTO of {`a1`}ms, requests would be sent at
times {`a2`}.
If the client has not received a response after {`a3`} ms, the
client will consider the transaction to have timed out.
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 1
is rendered as
" For example, assuming an
RTO of 500ms, requests would be sent at times 0 ms, 500 ms, 1500 ms,
3500 ms, 7500 ms, 15500 ms, and 31500 ms. If the client has not
received a response after 39500 ms, the client will consider the
transaction to have timed out."
Figure 2
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
The Idris2 programming language has been chosen because its type
system supports dependent and linear types [Type-Driven], and that
type system is the language in which propositions are written. The
Idris2 programming also has reflection capabilities and support for
meta-programming, also known as elaboration.
Following Zave's second conclusion, computerate specifying is not
restricted to the specification of protocols, or to property proving.
There is a whole spectrum of formalism that can be introduced in a
specification, and we will present it in the remaining sections by
increasing order of complexity. Note that because the specification
language is a programming language, these usages are not exhaustive,
and plenty of other usages can and will be found after the
publication of this document.
At the difference of an RFC which is immutable after publication, the
types and code in a specification will be improved over time,
especially as new properties are proved or disproved. The latter
will happen when a bug is discovered in a specification and a proof
of negation is added to the specification, paving the way to a
revision of the standard.
A private specification is a specification that is not meant to be
shared. There is mostly two reasons for a specification to be kept
private, as explained in the next sections.
4.1. Private Specifications for New Documents
In the simplest case, writing a specification with the goal of
publishing the resulting document does not require sharing that
specification. This is quite similar to what was done with xml2rfc
before the IETF adopted RFC 7991 as the canonical format for
Internet-Drafts and RFCs; most people used xml2rfc to prepare their
document, but did not share the xml2rfc file beyond the co-authors of
the document.
In that case writing a specification is straightforward: write the
specification from scratch using AsciiDoc for the text and Idris for
the formal parts.
One effective rule to quickly discover that the Idris code and the
AsciiDoc document are diverging is to keep both of them as close as
possible to each other. This is most effectively done by having the
matching Idris code right after each AsciiDoc paragraph, such as it
is then easy to compare each to the other.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Idris itself imposes an order in which types and code must be
declared and defined, because it does not by default look for forward
references. Because, by the rule above, the text will follow the
order the Idris code is organized, the document generated by such
specification tends to be naturally easier to implement, because it
induces the same workflow than a software implementer will follow
when implementing the document.
[RFC8489] and [RFC8656] are examples of standards that are easy to
implement because are written in the order that a software developer
will develop each component.
4.2. Private Specifications for Existing Documents
A second reason to write a private specification is for the purpose
of doing a review of an existing document, most likely of an
Internet-Draft during the standardization process.
This is done by first turning the existing document into a
specification by converting it into an AsciiDoc document, which can
be done manually relatively easily. After this step, the
specification can be enriched by adding some Idris code and replacing
some of the text with the execution of Idris code fragments.
Comparing the original document with a document generated by
processing the specification permits to validate that the original
document is correct regarding the formalism introduced.
Documents that are not generated from a specification do not always
have a structure that follow the way a software developer will
implement it. When that is the case it will be difficult to add the
Idris code right after a paragraph describing its functionality,
because the final code may not type-check because of the lack of
support for forward references. It could be a signal that the text
needs to be reorganized to be more software-development friendly.
One alternative is to use a technique named self-inclusion, which is
the possibility to change the order of paragraphs in an AsciiDoc
document and thus keeping the Idris code in an order that type-
checks.
This is done by using tags to delimit the text that needs to be
moved:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
// tag::para1[]
Text that describes a functionality
> -- Code that implements that functionality.
// end::para1[]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 3
Then a self-include can move (instead of duplicating) the text inside
the tags to a different place, without changing the order of the
Idris code:
<CODE BEGINS>
include::Main.adoc[tag=para1]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 4
Note that the IETF Trust licences [TLP5] do not grant permission to
distribute an annotated Internet-Draft as a whole so redistributing
such specification would be a copyright license infringement. But as
in this case the specification is not meant to be distributed, there
is no infringement possible.
5. Self-Contained Specifications
A self-contained specification is a specification where the Idris
code does not use anything but the types and functions defined in its
standard library, thus not requiring to install anything but Idris2
itself.
A specification uses Idris types to specify both how stream of bits
are arranged to form valid Protocol Data Units (PDU) and how the
exchange of PDUs between network elements is structured to form a
valid protocol. In addition a specification can be used to prove or
disprove a variety of properties for these types.
5.1. PDU Descriptions
The PDUs in a communication protocol determines how data is laid out
before it is sent over a communication link. Generally a PDU is
described only in the context of the layer that this particular
protocol is operating at, e.g. an application protocol PDU only
describes the data as sent over UDP or TCP, not over Ethernet or Wi-
Fi.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
PDUs can generally be split into two broad categories, binary and
text, and a protocol PDU mostly falls into one of these two
categories.
PDU descriptions can be defined as specifications for at least three
reasons: the generation of examples that are correct by construction,
correctness in displaying the result of calculations, and correctness
in representing the structure of a PDU. Independently of these
reasons, a PDU description is a basic component of a specification
that will probably be needed regardless.
5.1.1. PDU Examples
Examples in protocol documents are frequently incorrect, which proves
to have a significant negative impact as they are too often misused
as normative text. See Appendix C for statistics about the frequency
of incorrect examples in RFC errata.
Ensuring example correctness is achieved by adding the result of a
computation (the example) directly inside the document. If that
computation is done from a type that is (physically and conceptually)
close to the normative text, then we gain some level of assurance
that both the normative text and the derived examples will match.
Generating an example that is correct by construction always starts
by defining a type that describes the format of the data to display.
The Internet Header Format in section 3.1 of [RFC0791] will be used
in the following sections as example.
In this section we start by defining an Idris type, using a
Generalized Algebraic Data Type (GADT). In that case we have only
one constructor ("MkInternetHeader") which is defined as a Product
Type that "concatenate" all the fields on the Internet Header. One
specific aspect of Idris types is that we can enrich the definition
of each field with constraints that then have to be fulfilled when a
value of that type will be built.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
data InternetHeader : Type where
MkInternetHeader :
(version : Int) -> version = 4 =>
(ihl : Int) -> ihl >= 5 && ihl < 16 = True =>
(tos : Int) -> tos >= 0 && tos <= 256 = True =>
(length : Int) -> length >= (5 * 4) && length < 65536 = True =>
(id : Int) -> id >= 0 && id < 65536 = True =>
(flags : Int) -> flags >= 0 && flags < 16 = True =>
(offset : Int) -> offset >= 0 && offset < 8192 = True =>
(ttl : Int) -> ttl >= 0 && ttl < 256 = True =>
(protocol : Int) -> protocol >= 0 && protocol < 256 = True =>
InternetHeader
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 5
where
version: This field is constrained to always contain the value 4.
ihl: Int is a builtin signed integer so it is constrained to contain
only positive integers lower than 16.
others: Same, all the fields are constrained to unsigned integers
fitting inside the number of bits defined in [RFC0791].
An Idris type where the fields in a constructor are organized like
the "InternetHeader" by ordering them in a sequence is called a Pi
type - or, when there is no dependencies between fields as there is
in "version = 4", a Product type. Although there is no equivalence
in most programming languages to a Pi type, Product types are known
as classes in Java and struct in C.
Another way to organize a type is called the Sum type, which is a
type with multiple constructors that act as alternative. Sum types
can be used in C with a combination of struct and union, and since
Java 14 by using sealed records.
Sum types have a dependent counterpart named a Sigma type, which is a
tuple in which the type of the second element depends on the value of
the first element. This is mostly returned by functions, with the
returned Sigma type carrying both a value and a proof of the validity
of that value.
From that point it is possible to define a value that fulfills all
the constraints. The following values are taken from example 1 in
[RFC0791] Appendix A.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
example1 : InternetHeader
example1 = MkInternetHeader 4 5 0 21 111 0 0 123 1
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 6
The "=>" symbol after a constraint indicates that Idris should try to
automatically find a proof that this constraint is met by the values
in the example, which it successfully does in the example above.
The following example, where the constraints defined in the
InternetHeader type are not met, will not type-check in Idris (an
error message will be generated) and thus can not be used to generate
an example.
<CODE BEGINS>
example1' : InternetHeader
example1' = MkInternetHeader 6 5 0 21 111 0 0 123 1
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 7
The next step is to define an Idris function that converts a value of
the type "InternetHeader" into the kind of bit diagram that is showed
in Appendix A of [RFC0791].
<CODE BEGINS>
Show InternetHeader where
show (MkInternetHeader version ihl tos length id flags offset
ttl protocol) = ?showPrec_rhs_1
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 8
Here we implement the "Show" interface that permits to define the
adhoc polymorphic function "show" for "InternetHeader", function that
will convert the value into the right character string. Idris names
starting with a question mark like in "?showPrec_rhs_1" are so-called
holes, which are placeholder for code to be written, while still
permitting type-checking.
After replacing the hole by the actual code, the following embedded
code can be used in the document to generate an example that is
correct by construction, at least up to mistakes in the specification
(i.e. the constraints in "InternetHeader") and bugs in the "show"
function.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
....
{`example1`}
....
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 9
will generate the equivalent AsciiDoc text:
<CODE BEGINS>
....
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Ver= 4 |IHL= 5 |Type of Service| Total Length = 21 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identification = 111 |Flg=0| Fragment Offset = 0 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Time = 123 | Protocol = 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
....
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 10
This generated example is similar to the first of the examples in
appendix A of RFC 791.
5.1.2. Calculations from PDU
The previous section showed how to define a type that precisely
describes a PDU, how to generates examples that are are values of
that type, and how to insert them in a document.
Our specification, which has the form of an Idris type, can be seen
as a generalization of all the possible examples for that type. Now
that we went through the effort of precisely defining that type, it
would be useful to use it to also calculate statements about that
syntax.
In RFC 791 the description of the field IHL states "[...]that the
minimum value for a correct header is 5." The origin of this number
may be a little mysterious, so it is better to use a formula to
calculate it and insert the result instead.
Inserting a calculation is easy:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
Note that the minimum value for a correct header is
is \{`sizeHeader `div` ihlUnit`}.
> sizeHeader : Int
> sizeHeader = 20
> ihlUnit : Int
> ihlUnit = 4
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 11
Here we can insert a code fragment that is using a function that is
defined later in the document because the Idris code is evaluated
before the document is processed.
Note the difference with examples: The number "5" is not an example
of value of the type "InternetHeader", but a property of that type.
Systematically using the result of calculation on types in a
specification makes it more resistant to mistakes that are introduced
as result of modifications.
5.1.3. PDU Representations
The layout of a PDU, i.e. the size and order of the fields that
compose it can be represented in a document in various forms. One of
them is just an enumeration of these fields in order, each field
identified by a name and accompanied by some description of that
field in the form of the number of bits it occupies in the PDU and
how to interpret these bits.
That layout can also be presented as text, as a list, as a table, as
a bit diagram, at the convenience of the document author. In all
cases, some parts of the description of each field can be extracted
from our Idris type just like we did in Section 5.1.2.
RFC 791 section 3.1 represents the PDUs defined in it both as bit
diagrams and as lists of fields.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
5.2. State Machines
A network protocol, which is how the various PDUs defined in a
document are exchanged between network elements, can always be
understood as a set of state machines. At the difference of PDUs,
that are generally described in a way that is close to their Idris
counterpart, state machines in a document are generally only
described as text.
Note that, just like an Idris representation of a PDU should also
contain all the possible constraints on that PDU but not more, a
state machine should contain all the possible constraints in the
exchange of PDUs, but not less.
This issue is most visible in one of the two state machines defined
in RFC 791, the one for fragmenting IP packets (the other is for
unfragmenting packets). The text describes two different algorithms
to fragment a packet but in that case each algorithm should be
understood as one instance of a more general state machine. That
state machine describes all the possible sequences of fragments that
can be generated by an algorithm that is compliant with RFC 791 and
it would be an Idris type that is equivalent to the following
algorithm:
* For a specific packet size, generate a list of all the binary
values {b0,.., bN} with N being the packet size divided by 8 and
rounded-up, and 0..N representing positional indexes for each of
the 8 byte chunks of the packet.
* For each binary value in that list, generate a list of values that
represents the number of consecutive bits of the same value (e.g..
"0x110001011" generates a "[2, 3, 1, 1, 2]" list), each such
sequence representing a given fragment
* Remove from that list of lists any list that contains a number
that, after multiplication by 8, is higher than the maximum size
of a fragment.
* For each remaining list in that list, generate the list of
fragments, i.e with the correct offset, length and More bit.
* Generate all the possible permutations for each list of fragments.
We can see that this state machine takes in account the fact that an
IP packet can not only be fragmented in fragments of various sizes -
as long as the constraints are respected - but also that these
fragments can be sent in any order.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Then the algorithms described in the document can be seen as
generating a subset of all the possible list of fragments that can be
generated by our state machine. It is then easy to check that these
algorithms cannot generate fragments lists that cannot be generated
by our state machine.
As a consequence, the unfragment state machine must be able to
regenerate a valid unfragmented packet for any of the fragments list
generated by our fragment state machine. Furthermore, the unfragment
state machine must also take in account fragment lists that are
modified by the network (itself defined as a state machine) in the
following ways:
* fragments can be dropped;
* the fragments order can change (this is already covered by the
fact that our fragment state machine generates all possible
orders);
* fragments can be duplicated multiple times;
* fragments can be delayed;
* fragments can be received that were never sent by the fragment
state machine.
Then the algorithm described in the document can be compared with the
unfragment state machine to verify that all states and transitions
are covered.
Defining a state machine in Idris can be done in an ad-hoc way
[Linear-Resources], particularly by using linear types that express
resources' consumption.
5.3. Proofs
Under the Curry-Howard equivalence, the Idris types that we created
to describe PDUs and state machine are formal logic propositions, and
being able to construct values from these types (like we did for the
examples), is proof that these propositions are true. These are also
called internal verifications [Stump16].
External verifications are made of additional propositions (as Idris
types) and proofs (as code for these types) with the goal of
verifying additional properties.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
One kind of proofs that one would want in a specification are related
to isomorphism, i.e. a guarantee that two or more descriptions of a
PDU or a state machine contain exactly the same information, but
there is others.
5.3.1. Wire Type vs Abstract Type
The Idris types that are used for generating examples, calculations
or representations are generally very close to the bit structure of
the PDU. But some properties may be better expressed by defining
more abstract types. We call the former Wire Types, and the latter
Abstract Types.
As example, the type in Section 5.1.1 is a wire type, because it
follows exactly the PDU layout. But fragmentation can be more easily
described using the following abstract type:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
data InternetHeader' : Type where
Full : (ihl : Int) -> ihl >= 5 && ihl < 16 = True =>
(tos : Int) -> tos >= 0 && tos <= 256 = True =>
(length : Int) -> length >= (5 * 4) &&
length < 65536 = True =>
(ttl : Int) -> ttl >= 0 && ttl < 256 = True =>
(protocol : Int) -> protocol >= 0 &&
protocol < 256 = True =>
InternetHeader'
First : (ihl : Int) -> ihl >= 5 && ihl < 16 = True =>
(tos : Int) -> tos >= 0 && tos <= 256 = True =>
(length : Int) -> length >= (5 * 4) &&
length < 65536 = True =>
(id : Int) -> id >= 0 && id < 65536 = True =>
(ttl : Int) -> ttl >= 0 && ttl < 256 = True =>
(protocol : Int) -> protocol >= 0 &&
protocol < 256 = True =>
InternetHeader'
Next : (ihl : Int) -> ihl >= 5 && ihl < 16 = True =>
(tos : Int) -> tos >= 0 && tos <= 256 = True =>
(length : Int) -> length >= (5 * 4) &&
length < 65536 = True =>
(offset : Int) -> length > 0 &&
length < 8192 = True =>
(id : Int) -> id >= 0 && id < 65536 = True =>
(ttl : Int) -> ttl >= 0 && ttl < 256 = True =>
(protocol : Int) -> protocol >= 0 &&
protocol < 256 = True =>
InternetHeader'
Last : (ihl : Int) -> ihl >= 5 && ihl < 16 = True =>
(tos : Int) -> tos >= 0 && tos <= 256 = True =>
(length : Int) -> length >= (5 * 4) &&
length < 65536 = True =>
(offset : Int) -> length > 0 &&
length < 8192 = True =>
(id : Int) -> id >= 0 && id < 65536 = True =>
(ttl : Int) -> ttl >= 0 && ttl < 256 = True =>
(protocol : Int) -> protocol >= 0 &&
protocol < 256 = True =>
InternetHeader'
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 12
First the "version" field is eliminated, because it always contains
the same constant.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Then the "flags" and "offset" fields are reorganized so to provide
four different alternate packets:
* The "Full" constructor represents an unfragmented packet. It is
isomorphic to a "MkInternetHeader" with a "flags" and "offset"
values of 0.
* The 'First' constructor represents the first fragment of a packet.
It is isomorphic to a "MkInternetHeader" with a "flags" value of 1
and "offset" value of 0.
* The 'Next' constructor represents a intermediate fragments of a
packet. It is isomorphic to a "MkInternetHeader" with a "flags"
value of 1 and "offset" value different than 0.
* Finally the 'Last' constructor represents the last fragment of a
packet. It is isomorphic to a "MkInternetHeader" with a "flags"
value of 0 and "offset" value different than 0.
One of the main issue of having two types for the same data is
ensuring that they both contains the same information, i.e. that they
are isomorphic. To ensure that these two types are carrying the same
information we need to define and implement four functions that, all
together, prove that the types are isomorphic. This is done by
defining the 4 types below, as propositions to be proven:
<CODE BEGINS>
total
to : InternetHeader -> InternetHeader'
total
from : InternetHeader' -> InternetHeader
total
toFrom : (x : InternetHeader') -> to (from x) = x
total
fromTo : (x : InternetHeader) -> from (to x) = x
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 13
Successfully implementing these functions will prove that the two
types are isomorphic. Note the usage of the "total" keyword to
ensure that these are proofs and not mere programs.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
5.3.2. Data Format Conversion
For documents that describe a conversion between different data
layouts, having a proof that guarantees that no information is lost
in the process can be beneficial. For instance, we observe that
syntax encoding tends to be replaced each ten years or so by
something "better". Here again isomorphism can tell us exactly what
kind of information we lost and gained during that replacement.
Here, for example, the definition of a function that would verify an
isomorphism between an XML format and a JSON format:
<CODE BEGINS>
isXmlAndJsonSame: Iso (XML, DeltaXML) (JSON, DeltaJson)
...
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 14
DeltaXML expresses what is gained by switching from XML to JSON, and
DeltaJson expresses what is lost.
5.3.3. Postel's Law
| Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
| others.
|
| -- Jon Postel - RFC 761
One of the downsides of having specifications is that there is no
wiggle room possible when implementing them. An implementation
either conforms to the specification or does not.
One analogy would be specifying a pair of gears. If one decides to
have both of them made with tolerances that are too small, then it is
very likely that they will not be able to move when put together. A
bit of slack is needed to get the gear smoothly working together but
more importantly the cost of making these gears is directly
proportional to their tolerance. There is an inflexion point where
the cost of an high precision gear outweighs its purpose.
We have a similar issue when implementing a specification, where
having an absolutely conform implementation may cost more money than
it is worth spending. On the other hand a specification exists for
the purpose of interoperability, so we need some guidelines on what
to ignore in a specification to make it cost effective.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Postel's law proposes an informal way of defining that wiggle room by
actually having two different specifications, one that defines a data
layout for the purpose of sending it, and another one that defines a
data layout for the purpose of receiving that data layout.
Existing documents express that dichotomy in the form of the usage of
SHOULD/SHOULD NOT/RECOMMENDED/NOT RECOMMENDED [RFC2119] keywords.
For example the SDP spec says that "[t]he sequence CRLF (0x0d0a) is
used to end a line, although parsers SHOULD be tolerant and also
accept lines terminated with a single newline character." This
directly infers two specifications, one used to define an SDP when
sending it, that enforces using only CRLF, and a second
specification, used to define an SDP when receiving it (or parsing
it), that accepts both CRLF and LF.
Note that the converse is not necessarily true, i.e. not all usages
of these keywords are related to Postel's Law.
To ensure that the differences between the sending specification and
the receiving specification do not create interoperability problems,
we can use a variant of isomorphism, as shown in the following
example (data constructors and code elided):
<CODE BEGINS>
data Sending : Type where
data Receiving : Type where
to : Sending -> List Receiving
from : Receiving -> Sending
toFrom : (y : Receiving) -> Elem y (to (from y))
fromTo : (y : Sending) -> True = all (== y) [from x | x <- to y]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 15
Here we define two data types, one that describes the data layout
that is permitted to be sent ("Sending") and one that describes the
data layout that is permitted to be received ("Receiving"). For each
data layout that is possible to send, there is one or more matching
receiving data layouts. This is expressed by the function "to" that
takes as input one Sending value and returns a list of Receiving
values.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Conversely, the "from" function maps a Receiving data layout onto a
Sending data layout. Note the asymmetry there, which prevents using
a standard proof of isomorphism.
Then the "toFrom" and "fromTo" proofs verify that there is no
interoperability issue by guaranteeing that each Receiving value maps
to one and only one Sending instance and that this mapping is
isomorphic.
All of this will provide a clear guidance of when and where to use a
SHOULD keyword or its variants, without loss of interoperability.
As an trivial example, the following proves that accepting LF
characters in addition to CRLF characters as end of line markers does
not break interoperability:
<CODE BEGINS>
data Sending : Type where
S_CRLF : Sending
Eq Sending where
(==) S_CRLF S_CRLF = True
data Receiving : Type where
R_CRLF : Receiving
R_LF : Receiving
to : Sending -> List Receiving
to S_CRLF = [R_CRLF, R_LF]
from : Receiving -> Sending
from R_CRLF = S_CRLF
from R_LF = S_CRLF
toFrom : (y : Receiving) -> Elem y (to (from y))
toFrom R_CRLF = Here
toFrom R_LF = There Here
fromTo : (y : Sending) -> True = all (== y) [from x | x <- to y]
fromTo S_CRLF = Refl
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 16
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Postel's Law is not limited to the interpretation of PDUs as a state
machine on the receiving side can also be designed to accept more
than than what a sending state machine can produce. A similar
isomorphism proof can be used to ensure that this is done without
loss of interoperability.
5.3.4. Implementability
When applied, the techniques described in Section 5.1 and Section 5.2
result in a set of types that represents the whole protocol. These
types can be assembled together, using another set of types, to
represent a simulation of that protocol that covers all sending and
receiving processes.
The types can then be implemented, and that implementation acts as a
proof that this protocol is actually implementable.
To make these pieces of code composable, a specification is split in
multiple modules, each one represented as a unique function. The
type of each of these functions is derived from the state machines
described in Section 5.2, by bundling together all the inputs of the
state machine as the input for that function, and bundling all the
outputs of the state machine as the output of this function.
For instance the IP layer is really 4 different functions:
* A function that converts between a byte array and a tree
representation (parsing).
* A function that takes a tree representation and a maximum MTU and
returns a list of tree representations, each one fitting inside
the MTU.
* A function that accumulates tree representations of an IP fragment
until a tree representation of a full IP packet can be returned.
* A function that convert a tree representation into a byte array.
The description of each function is incomplete, as in addition to the
input and the output listed, these functions needs some ancillary
data, in the form of:
* state, which is basically values stored between evaluations of a
function,
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
* an optional signal, that can be used as an API request or
response. As timers are a fundamental building block for
communication protocols, one common uses for that signal are to
request the arming of a timer, and to receive the indication of
the expiration of that timer.
5.3.5. Termination
Proving that a protocol does not loop is equivalent to proving that a
implementation of the types for that protocol does not loop either
i.e., terminates. This is done by using the type described in
Section 5.3.4 and making sure that it type-check when the "total"
keyword is used.
5.3.6. Liveness
A protocol may never terminate - in fact most of the time the server
side of a protocol is a loop - but it still can do some useful work
in that loop. This property is called liveness.
6. Importing Specifications
| NOTE: The code for the libraries described in that section is
| not yet ready to be published.
One of the ultimate goals of this document is to convince authors to
use the techniques described there to write their documents. Because
doing so requires a lot of efforts, an important intermediate goal is
to show authors that the benefits of Computerate Specifying are worth
learning and becoming proficient in these techniques.
The best way to reach that intermediate goal is to apply these
technique to documents that are in the process of being published by
the IETF and if issues are found, report them to the authors. Doing
that on published RFCs, especially just after their publication,
would be unnecessarily mean. On the other hand doing that on all
Internet-Drafts as they are published would not be scalable.
The best place to do a Computerate Specifying oriented review is when
a document enters IETF Last Call. These reviews would then be
indistinguishable from the reviews done by an hypothetical Formal
Specification Directorate. An argument can be made that, ultimately,
writing a specification for a document could be an activity too
specialized, just like Security reviews are, and that an actual
Directorate should be assembled.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Alas, it is clear that writing a specification from scratch (as in
Section 5) for an existing document takes far more time than the Last
Call duration would allow. On the other hand the work needed could
be greatly reduced if, instead of writing that specification from
scratch, libraries of code would be available for the parts that are
reusable between successive specifications. These libraries fall
into 3 categories:
* General types and common presentations. E.g., bit diagrams are a
very common way of presenting data, and so reusable types and
functions to generate and compare them would accelerate a
formalization. The libraries in that category are explained in
Section 6.1, in Section 8.1, and its associated reference in
Appendix B.
* Types and common representations for meta-languages. A few meta-
languages are used in documents to formalize some parts of them,
so having libraries to formalize these meta-languages also helps
accelerating their verification. The libraries in that category
are explained in Section 6.2, in Section 8.2, and its associated
reference in Appendix B.
* Types and common representation for common protocols. Most
documents are about modifying or defined new usages for existing
protocols, which is why it makes sense to establish libraries of
these existing protocols for reuse. The libraries in that
category are explained in Section 6.3, in Section 8.3, and its
associated reference in Appendix B.
Together these libraries form the Computerate Specifying Standard
Library (Section 8).
These libraries are in fact computerate specifications that, instead
of being private, are designed to export types and code and be
imported in other computerate specifications. Section 7 describes
how to build an specification that can be exported.
The types and code in a computerate specification form an Idris
package, which is a collection of Idris modules. An Idris module
form a namespace hierarchy for the types and functions defined in it
and is physically stored as a file.
Different types of specification can be combined, for instance an
exporting library may import from another specification, and this
recursively until importing specifications that are both self-
contained and exporting.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
For convenience each public computerate specification, including the
one behind this document, is available as an individual git
repository. There is exactly one Idris package per git repository.
Appendix A.5 explains how to gain access to these computerate
specifications.
6.1. Common Modules
This document is itself generated from a computerate specification
that contains data types and functions that can be reused in future
specifications, and as a whole is part of the standard library for
computerate specifying. The following sections describes the Idris
modules defined in that specification.
6.1.1. Generating AsciiDoc
The code described in Section 5 directly generates text that is to be
embedded inside an AsciiDoc document. This is fine for small
examples but AsciiDoc has quite a lot of escaping rules that are
difficult to use in a consistent manner.
For this reason the specification behind this document provides a
module named "AsciiDoc" that contains a set of types that can be used
to guarantee that the AsciiDoc text generated is compliant with its
specification. All these types implement the "Show" interface so
they can be directly returned by the embedded code.
So instead of implementing a show function, a function returning an
instance of one of the types can be executed directly as embedded
code:
<CODE BEGINS>
> example : InternetHeader -> Block
> example ih = ?example_rhs
{`example example1`}
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 17
In the example above, the "example" function converts an
"InternetHeader" value into an "AsciiDoc" block, which is
automatically serialized as AsciiDoc text.
The "AsciiDoc" module is not limited to generating examples, but can
be used to generate any AsciiDoc structure from Idris code. E.g.,
the tables in Appendix C are generated using that technique.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Section 8.1.1 provides a description of the "AsciiDoc" module.
| NOTE: Similarly the RFC Editor has rules on how to present
| source code and examples in a document, particularly about how
| lines longer than 72 characters should be folded. A module
| similar to the "AsciiDoc" module will be developed to apply
| these rules transparently.
Using an intermediary type will also permit to correctly generate
AsciiDoc that can generate an xmlrfc 3 file that supports both text
and graphical versions of a figure. This will be done by having
AsciiDoc blocks converted into <artwork> elements that contains both
the 72 column formatted text and an equivalent SVG file, even for
code source (instead of using the <sourcecode> element).
6.1.2. Common Data Types
The type in Section 5.1.1 seems a good representation of the
structure of the Internet Header, but the origin of a lot of the
values in the constraints does not seems very obvious, and as such
are still prone to errors. E.g., the calculation in Section 5.1.2
could be better if it was using the type itself as a source for the
calculated data.
It also may be more convenient to use types that already have some of
the properties we need, instead of having to add a bunch of
constraints to the "Int" type.
The truth of the matter is that the Idris standard library contains
very few predefined types that are useful to specify the syntax of
communication protocols. E.g., none of the builtin types ("Int",
"Integer", "Double", "Char", "String", etc) are really suitable to
describe a PDU syntax, and so should be avoided. For this reason, it
is preferable to use the types provided by the Computerate Specifying
standard library.
We are going to redefine the "InternetHeader" type, but using three
modules from the standard library:
BitVector: A sequence of bits, or bit-vector, is the most primitive
type with which a packet can be described. This module provides a
type "BitVector n" that represents a sequence of bit of fixed size
"n". The module also provides a set of functions that permits to
manipulate bit-vectors. See Section 8.1.2 for a description of
the "BitVector" module.
Unsigned: The "Unsigned" module provides a type "Unsigned n" that is
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
built on top of the "BitVector" module. In addition of the
properties of a bit-vector, an "Unsigned n" is considered a number
and so all the integer operations applies to it. See
Section 8.1.3 for a description of the "Unsigned" module.
Dimension: Some numbers (also called denominate numbers) are used in
conjunction with a so-called unit of measure. The "Dimension"
module provides a way to associate a dimension, in the form of a
unit of measure, to an Idris number, including to the numbers
defined in the "Unsigned" module. The "Dimension" module provides
two dimensions, Data (with bit, octet, etc, as units of
information) and Time (with second, millisecond, etc, as unit of
time). See Section 8.1.4 for a description of the "Dimension"
module.
A redefinition of the type in Section 5.1.1 using the types in these
modules would look like this:
<CODE BEGINS>
data InternetHeader : Type where
MkInternetHeader :
(version : BitVector 4) -> version = [O, I, O, O] =>
(ihl : (Unsigned 4, Data)) -> snd ihl = tetra =>
(tos : BitVector 8) ->
(length : (Unsigned 16, Data)) -> snd length = byte =>
(id : Unsigned 16) ->
(flags : BitVector 3) ->
(offset : Unsigned 13, Data)) -> snd offset = octa =>
(ttl : (Unsigned 8, Time)) -> snd ttl = second =>
(protocol : BitVector 16) ->
(checksum : BitVector 16) ->
(source : BitVector 32) ->
(dest : BitVector 32) ->
(options : List Option) ->
(padding : BitVector n) ->
InternetHeader
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 18
version: This is bit-vector, but it always contains the same value,
so a constraint states that. Because bit-vectors are not
integers, the value must be expressed by a list of "O" (for 0) and
"I" (for 1) constructors.
ihl: This is an unsigned integer with a size of 4 bits. It is
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
associated with a dimension, here the "Data" dimension, which is
constrained to use the "tetra" unit (32-bit words). Basically a
denominate number can only be added or subtracted with numbers
with the same dimension (but not necessarily with the same unit).
E.g. adding the "ihl" value with the "ttl" value will be rejected
by Idris, because that operation does not make sense. A
denominate number can also be divided or multiplied by a
dimensionless number.
tos, flags, protocol, source, dest: These are defined as bit-
vectors, because they are not really numbers - they do not need to
be compared, or be part of a calculation. The number in this type
(and all the others) is the number of bits allocated.
length: This is an unsigned number with a size of 16 bits, a "Data"
dimension and a "byte" unit (8 bits). After casting as denominate
numbers, subtracting "ihl" from "length" gives directly the size
of the payload, without risk of scaling error.
id: This is an unsigned integer. Comparisons and calculations are
possible on this field.
offset: This is an unsigned number with a length of 13 bits, a
"Data" dimension and an "octa" unit (64 bits). Again, adding or
subtracting this value after casting to another of the same
dimension is guaranteed to return the correct value.
ttl: This is a denominate number with "Time" as dimension and
"second" as unit.
options: This is a variable length field that contains a list of
options, which are defined in a separate type named "Option".
padding: This is a bit-vector whose length is variable.
The "byte", "wyde", "octa", and "tetra" units are precisely defined
in [TAOCP].
As we can see the noise in the definition of our type is greatly
reduced by using these specialized types, which in turn permits to
add even more constraints.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
We can even constrain the size of a field, like is done for the
"padding" field below. In that case the length is calculated in the
first constraint by calling the "pad" function, function that
calculates the number of bits needed to pad a value of a type that
implements the "Size" interface to a word boundary, here 32 bits.
The second constraint checks that whatever the length of the padding
field is, it is always equal to a zero-filled bit-vector, as returned
by the function "bitVector".
<CODE BEGINS>
data InternetHeader : Type where
MkInternetHeader :
(version : BitVector 4) -> version = [O, I, O, O] =>
(ihl : (Unsigned 4, Data)) -> snd ihl = tetra =>
(tos : Tos) ->
(length : (Unsigned 16, Data)) -> snd length = octet =>
(id : Unsigned 16) ->
(flags : Flags) ->
(offset : Unsigned 13, Data)) -> snd offset = octa =>
(ttl : (Unsigned 8, Time)) -> snd ttl = second =>
(protocol : BitVector 16) ->
(checksum : BitVector 16) ->
(source : BitVector 32) ->
(dest : BitVector 32) ->
(options : List Option) ->
(padding : BitVector n) ->
n = pad 32 options => padding = bitVector =>
InternetHeader
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 19
Dimensions can also be combined to seamlessly build more complex
dimensions. For example, all "length" values of sent packets can be
added up during a period of time, while keeping beginning and ending
times as denominate numbers: dividing the "length" sum by the
difference between the end time and the begin time gives us directly
the data speed in bits per second (or whatever unit we prefer), with
the guarantee that Idris will not let us mix oranges and apples.
Here's an example of Sum type that implements some of the variants
for an "Option" in an "InternetHeader":
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
data Option : Type where
Eoo : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [O] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, O, O] =>
Option
Noop : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [O] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, O] =>
Option
Security : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [I] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, O] =>
(length : Unsigned 8) -> length = 11 =>
(s : BitVector 16) ->
(c : BitVector 16) ->
(h : BitVector 16) ->
(tcc : BitVector 24) ->
Option
Lssr : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [I] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, I] =>
(length : Unsigned 8) ->
(pointer : Unsigned 8) -> pointer >= 4 = True =>
Option
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 20
6.1.3. Calculations
The imported types that we are using in the definition of our types
all implement the "Size" interface, which provides a definition for
the adhoc polymorphic function "size", function that returns the size
of a field as a dimensional number of dimension "Data". This
interface can be implemented for the type "InternetHeader" by making
its size the sum of the size of all its fields:
<CODE BEGINS>
Show InternetHeader where
size (MkInternetHeader version ihl tos length id flags offset ttl
protocol checksum source dest options padding) = size version +
size ihl +
...
size padding
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 21
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
We can then define a minimal header, and insert its size, using the
right unit, in the document:
<CODE BEGINS>
> minHeader : Data
> minHeader = size $ MkInternetHeader [O, I, O, O]
> (5, tetra)
> (MkTos 0 [O] [O] [O] [O, O])
> (1000, wyde)
> 0
> (MkFlags bitVector bitVector bitVector)
> (0, octa)
> (64, second)
> bitVector
> bitVector
> (A [O] bitVector bitVector)
> (A [O] bitVector bitVector)
> []
> []
Note that the minimum value for a correct header is
{`fromDenominate (size ih) tetra`}
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 22
6.1.4. Typed Petri Nets
A better solution than defining an adhoc type for our state machines,
as explained in Section 5.2, is to use Petri Nets. This
specification defines a DSL that permits describing a Typed Petri Net
(TPN) which is heavily influenced by Coloured Petri Nets [CPN] (CPN).
The original CPN adds some restriction on the types that can be used
in a Petri Net because of limitations in the underlying programming
language, SML. As the underlying programming used in TPN, Idris,
does not have these limitations, any well-formed Idris type
(including polymorphic, linear and dependent types) can be directly
used in TPN.
Here's an example of TPN from figure 2.10 in [CPN]:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
NO : Type
NO = Int
DATA : Type
DATA = String
NOxDATA : Type
NOxDATA = (NO, DATA)
PTS : Place
PTS = MkPlace "Packets To Send" NOxDATA (\() => [(1, "COL"),
(2, "OUR"), (3, "ED "), (4, "PET"), (5, "RI "), (6, "NET")])
NS : Place
NS = MkPlace "NextSend" NO (\() => [1])
A : Place
A = MkPlace "A" NOxDATA (\() => [])
input1 : Input
input1 = MkInput PTS (NO, DATA) pure
input2 : Input
input2 = MkInput NS NO pure
output1 : Output
output1 = MkOutput PTS (NO, DATA) pure
output2 : Output
output2 = MkOutput NS NO pure
output3 : Output
output3 = MkOutput A (NO, DATA) pure
sendPacket : Transition
sendPacket = MkTransition [input1, input2] [output1, output2,
output3] (\((n, d), n') => if n == n'
then pure ((n, d), n, (n, d))
else empty)
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 23
| NOTE: The DSL is being currently designed, so the example shows
| the generated values.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
From there it is easy to generate (using the non-deterministic monad
in Idris) an interpreter for debugging and simulation purposes:
<CODE BEGINS>
interpret : MS NOxDATA -> MS NO -> MS NOxDATA ->
ND (MS NOxDATA, MS NO, MS NOxDATA)
interpret pts ns a = do
(pts1, pts2) <- sel pts
(ns1, ns2) <- sel ns
i1 <- input input1 pts1
i2 <- input input2 ns1
(pts3, ns3, a3) <- transition sendPacket (i1, i2)
let o1 = output output1 pts3
let o2 = output output2 ns3
let o3 = output output3 a3
pure (o1 ++ pts2, o2 ++ ns2, o3 ++ a)
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 24
A Petri Net has the advantage that the same graph can be reused to
derive other Petri Nets, e.g., Timed Petri Nets (that can be used to
collect performance metrics) or Stochastic Petri Nets.
A TPN that covers a whole protocol (i.e. client, network, and server)
is useful to prove the properties listed in Section 5.3.4,
Section 5.3.5, and Section 5.3.6. But the TPN is also designed in a
way that each of these parts can be defined separately from the
others, making it a Hierarchical TPN.
6.1.5. Representations
Another usage of our Idris type would be to generate a textual
representation of that type.
Figure 4 in RFC 791 is a good example of a representation of a data
layout, here as a bit diagram. Because we already have an Idris type
which is describing exactly the same thing, the idea of syntax
representation is to convert that type into text, and insert it in
place of the bit diagram.
For each textual representation of a type, it is possible to write a
function that takes as parameter this type and generate an "AsciiDoc"
value that can then be inserted in the document.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Some document uses representations that are unique to this document
but often multiple documents share the same representation and so
that function can be also shared between them. A set of such
functions is available as part of the Computerate Specification
standard library,
6.1.5.1. Bit Diagrams
The bit diagram is one of the most frequently used representation of
a PDU specification in documents, so a function to convert an Idris
type into a bit diagram is provided as part of the standard library.
That function takes as parameters an Idris type, a structure
containing additional informations, and returns an "AsciiDoc" value
that can be inserted in the document.
The additional structure is a list of the properties associated to
each field that are needed to generate the bit diagram. For a bit
diagram the only property is a character string containing the name
of the field.
For our "InternetHeader" type, that additional structure would look
like this:
<CODE BEGINS>
names : Pdu
names = MkPdu `{{MkInternetHeader}} [
MkField "Version",
MkField "IHL",
MKField "Type of Service",
MkField "Total Length",
MkField "Identification",
MkField "Flags",
MkField "Fragment Offset",
MkField "Time to Live",
MkField "Protocol"]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 25
The Pdu type takes care of verifying that each name is unique in the
structure, and that each name length does not exceed "2 * (size
field) - 1", so it is guaranteed to fit in the bit diagram cell.
After that it is just a matter of inserting the function call in the
document (the "%runElab" keyword indicates that the Idris code is
using reflection elaboration, which is used to inspect a type).
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
{`%runElab toBitDiagram names`}
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 26
6.1.5.2. Message Sequence Charts
Message Sequence Charts are a common way to represent an example of
execution of a Petri Net, i.e. of the interactions between the
underlying state machines. Although sequence charts are often
implicitly used to describe a protocol, that description can only be
partial.
Nonetheless, this is a very common way to show state machine related
examples in a document, so a library will permit to specify an
execution in a Petri Net (i.e. a list of Transitions and their
Bindings), and convert it into a message sequence chart that can be
inserted into the document. Optionally the message sequence chart
generated can be followed by an ordered list of the messages
themselves.
6.2. Packages for Meta-Languages
When different representations of a specification share some common
characteristics, it is usual to generalize them into a formal
language.
One shared limitation of these languages is that they cannot always
formalize all the constraints of a specific data layout, so they have
to be enriched with comments. One consequence of this is that they
cannot be used as a replacement for the Idris types described in
Section 5.1.1 or Section 6.1.2, types that are purposely designed to
be as complete as possible.
Another consequence is the proliferation of these languages, with
each new formal language trying to integrate more constraints than
the previous ones. For that reason Computerate Specifying does not
favor one formal language over the others, and will try to provide
code to help use all of them.
Similarly to what was explained in Section 5.1 a set of types can be
designed and then used to type-check instance of that formal
language, and convert them into a textual representation. Most of
the formal languages used at the IETF already come with a set of
tools that permits to verify that the text representation in an RFC
is syntactically correct, so that type does not add much to that.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
On the other hand that type can be the target of a converter from an
ad-hoc type. This will ensure that the generated instance of the
formal language matches the specification, which is something that
external tools cannot do.
When a PDU is described with a formal language, we end up with two
descriptions, one using the Idris dependent type (and used to
generate examples) and the other using the formal language.
Proving isomorphism requires generating an Idris type from the formal
language instance, which is done using an Idris elaborator script.
In Idris, Elaborator Reflection [Elab] is a metaprogramming facility
that permits writing code generating type declarations and code
(including proofs) automatically.
For instance the ABNF language is itself defined using ABNF, so after
converting that ABNF into an instance of the Syntax type (which is an
holder for a list of instances of the Rule type), it is possible to
generate a suite of types that represents the same language:
<CODE BEGINS>
> abnf : Syntax
> abnf = MkSyntax [
> "rulelist" `Eq` (Repeat (Just 1) Nothing (Group (Altern
> (TermName "rule") (Group (Concat (Repeat Nothing Nothing
> (TermName "c-wsp")) (TermName "c-nl") [])) []))),
> ...
> ]
>
> %runElab (generateType "Abnf" abnf)
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 27
The result of the elaboration can then be used to construct a value
of type Iso, which requires four total functions, two for the
conversion between types, and another two to prove that sequencing
the conversions results in the same original value.
The following example generates an Idris type "SessionDescription"
from the SDP ABNF. It then proves that this type and the Sdp type
contain exactly the same information (the proofs themselves have been
removed, leaving only the propositions):
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
import Data.Control.Isomorphism
sdp : Syntax
sdp = MkSyntax [
"session-description" `Eq` (Concat (TermName "version-field")
(TermName "origin-field") [
TermName "session-name-field",
Optional (TermName "information-field"),
Optional (TermName "uri-field"),
Repeat Nothing Nothing (TermName "email-field"),
Repeat Nothing Nothing (TermName "phone-field"),
Optional (TermName "connection-field"),
Repeat Nothing Nothing (TermName "bandwidth-field"),
Repeat (Just 1) Nothing (TermName "time-description"),
Optional (TermName "key-field"),
Repeat Nothing Nothing (TermName "attribute-field"),
Repeat Nothing Nothing (TermName "media-description")
]),
...
]
%runElab (generateType "Sdp" sdp)
same : Iso Sdp SessionDescription
same = MkIso to from toFrom fromTo
where
to : Sdp -> SessionDescription
from : SessionDescription -> Abnf
toFrom : (x : SessionDescription ) -> to (from x) = x
fromTo : (x : Sdp) -> from (to x) = x
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 28
As stated in Section 5.3.1, the Idris type and the type generated
from the formal language are not always isomorphic, because some
constraints cannot be expressed in that formal language. In that
case isomorphism can be used to precisely define what is missing
information in the formal language type. To do so, the generated
type is augmented with a delta type, like so:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
data DeltaSessionDescription : Type where
...
same : Iso Sdp (SessionDescription, DeltaSessionDescription)
...
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 29
Then the DeltaSessionDescription type can be modified to include the
missing information until the same function type checks. After this
we have a guarantee that we know all about the constraints that
cannot be encoded in that formal language, and can check manually
that each of them are described as comments.
An interesting comment in [Momot16] states that if the input of an
application is too complex to be expressed in ABNF without adding
comments, it is too complex to be safe. The technique described in
this section can be used to evaluate the safety of such ABNF by
clearly specifying the impact of these additional comments.
Idris elaborator scripts will be developed for each formal languages.
The following sections describe how these formal languages have been
or will be themselves be converted into types with the goal of
importing them in computerate specifications.
6.2.1. Augmented BNF (ABNF)
Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234] is a formal language used
to describe a text based data layout.
An ABNF can be described by defining a value for the types from the
"RFC5234.Main" module:
<CODE BEGINS>
rulename : Rule
rulename = "rulename" `Eq` (Concat (TermDec 97 []) (TermDec 98 [])
[TermDec 99 []])
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 30
That value can then be inserted in a document, which will convert it
as a proper ABNF, so
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
[source,abnf]
----
{`rulename`}
----
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 31
is rendered as
rulename = %d97 %d98 %d99
Figure 32
See Section 8.2.2 for details on that package.
6.2.2. Augmented Packet Header Diagrams (APHD)
Augmented Packet Header Diagram (APHD)
[I-D.mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams] is a formal language used to
describe an augmented bit diagram in a machine-readable format.
It can be seen as an extension to the self-contained bit diagram in
Section 5.1.3, where more information are extracted from the Idris
type, and more properties are carried in the list of properties:
* From the Idris type:
- The size of a field in the Idris type is converted into the
field's width.
- The size constraints in Idris are converted into a variable
size field (Section 4.1).
- A constraint that reduces the possible values (like for the
version field) is converted into a constraint on field value
(Section 4.4).
- Alternative constructors (i.e., a Sum type) generate a presence
predicate (Section 4.2).
* From the additional structure:
- The name of the PDU.
- The name of each field
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
- The eventual short name for each field, with the same
constraint than in Section 5.
- The Bit unit to use to display the size for each field.
- The description for each field.
The description for each field is a value of "AsciiDoc" type, which
permits to correctly format it. In addition, it is possible to
insert calculation or even other type representation in the
description by using an "AsciiDoc" type that works similarly than
code embedding.
Reusing the type in Section 6.1.2, the conversion process would
partially look like this:
<CODE BEGINS>
> ipv4 : AphdPdu
> ipv4 = MkAphd `{{MkInternetHeader}} "IPv4 Header" [
> MkField "Version" (Just "V") Bit [(MkSentence "This is a" ++
> "fixed-width field, whose full label is shown in the " ++
> "diagram. The field's width --), MkCode(`(size version)),
> MkSentence(" bits -- is given in the label of the " ++
> "description list, separated from the field's label " ++
> "by a colon.")],
> ...
> ]
{`%runElab toAphd names`}
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 33
and is rendered as:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
An IPv4 Header is formatted as follows:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Version| IHL | DSCP |ECN| Total Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identification |Flags| Fragment Offset |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Time to Live | Protocol | Header Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Options ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| :
: Payload :
: |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
Version (V): 4 bits. This is a fixed-width field, whose full label
is shown in the diagram. The field's width -- 4 bits -- is given
in the label of the description list, separated from the field's
label by a colon.
...
Figure 34
6.2.3. Cosmogol
Cosmogol [I-D.bortzmeyer-language-state-machines] is a formal
language designed to define states machines. The Internet-Draft will
be retrofitted as a computerate specification to provide an internal
Domain Specific Language (DSL) that permits specifying an instance of
that language.
As a Petri Net can be seen as a set of state machines, it will be
possible to extract part of a Petri Net and generate the equivalent
state machine in Cosmogol format.
6.3. Packages for Protocols
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
6.3.1. Type Transformations
Protocols evolve over time, and the documents that standardize them
also need to evolve with them. Each SDO has a specific set of
methods to do so, from having the possibility of modifying a
document, to systematically releasing a complete new document when a
modification is needed. The IETF uses a combination of methods to
update the documents that define a protocol.
One such method is to release a new document that completely replaces
("obsoletes") an existing protocol. E.g., TLS 1.2 [RFC5246] was
completely replaced by TLS 1.3 [RFC8446] such as there is no need to
read RFC 5246 to be able to implement RFC 8446.
Alternatively only part of a protocol needs modification, so the
method used in that case is to issue a new document that only updates
that specific part. E.g., RFC 2474 updates only the definition of
the ToS field in the Internet Header defined in RFC 791, so reading
both documents is required to implement the Internet Protocol. These
two methods can be combined together, like was done for RFC 2474.
RFC 2474 obsoleted RFC 1349 and RFC 1349 was the original update for
RFC 791.
Systematically updating a protocol in new documents instead of
replacing it means that sometimes a lot of different documents has to
be read before implementing a modern implementation of a specific
protocol. E.g., the DNS was originally defined in RFC 1034 and 1035,
but was updated by more than 30 documents since, requiring to read
all of them to implement that protocol.
In the DNS example we are not even counting definitions of codepoints
as protocol updates. This is the third method used at the IETF to
evolve a standard, by defining new codepoints and their associated
data. That last method will be explored in more detail in
Section 6.3.2, so the remaining of this section can focus on the two
other methods.
Writing a computerate specification for a new document or a document
that obsoletes another one is straightforward, as the specification
will contain all the types that are needed to formalize it. On the
other hand it is less clear what should go into a specification that
updates another one.
A simplistic solution is to copy the whole Idris content from the
original specification into the new one and modify that new content,
but this creates a few problems:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Firstly the content from the original specification will have to be
copied again each time it was modified, as computerate specifications
are meant to evolve, even if the underlying document did not.
Secondly the size of the code should be roughly proportional to the
size of the document itself, so the actual update is made obvious
from the content.
So instead of manually copying the content, an Idris elaboration can
be used to copy it automatically and apply the minimal modifications
needed at the same time.
But first the specification that will be updated needs to be
prepared, by encapsulating the types in a function that will be used
to generate the types themselves:
<CODE BEGINS>
export
internetHeader : List Decl
internetHeader = `[
||| InternetHeader
export
data InternetHeader : Type where
MkInternetHeader :
(version : BitVector 4) -> version = [O, I, O, O] =>
(ihl : (Unsigned 4, Data)) -> snd ihl = tetra =>
(tos : Tos) ->
(length : (Unsigned 16, Data)) -> snd length = octet =>
(id : Unsigned 16) ->
(flags : Flags) ->
(offset : Unsigned 13, Data)) -> snd offset = octa =>
(ttl : (Unsigned 8, Time)) -> snd ttl = second =>
(protocol : BitVector 16) ->
(checksum : BitVector 16) ->
(source : BitVector 32) ->
(dest : BitVector 32) ->
(options : List Option) ->
(padding : BitVector n) ->
n = pad 32 options => padding = bitVector =>
InternetHeader
]
%runElab declare internetHeader
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 35
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
This code behaves exactly like the previous definition, with the
major difference that the documentation is not generated for that
type. Idris2 has been enhanced with the possibility to cache the
result of an elaboration directly in the source code, and to
automatically send a warning when the cache needs to be refreshed.
The interactive command ":gc <line>" automatically generates the code
followed by a "%cacheElab" line that indicates where the code
generated ends, something like this:
<CODE BEGINS>
%runElab declare internetHeader
export
||| InternetHeader
data InternetHeader : Type where
MkInternetHeader :
(version : BitVector 4) -> version = [O, I, O, O] =>
(ihl : (Unsigned 4, Data)) -> snd ihl = tetra =>
(tos : Tos) ->
(length : (Unsigned 16, Data)) -> snd length = octet =>
(id : Unsigned 16) ->
(flags : Flags) ->
(offset : Unsigned 13, Data)) -> snd offset = octa =>
(ttl : (Unsigned 8, Time)) -> snd ttl = second =>
(protocol : BitVector 16) ->
(checksum : BitVector 16) ->
(source : BitVector 32) ->
(dest : BitVector 32) ->
(options : List Option) ->
(padding : BitVector n) ->
n = pad 32 options => padding = bitVector =>
InternetHeader
%cacheElab 1506359842985480550 1506359842985480550
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 36
The numbers on the "%cacheElab" line are hashes of, respectively, the
elaboration code and the generated text and permit to detect if
either were modified since the last time the code was cached.
With that we can import the definition of the "InternetHeader" type
and clone in in our new specification:
<CODE BEGINS>
import RFC791.IP
%runElab declare internetHeader
<CODE ENDS>
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Figure 37
The modification needed by the new document can be done by replacing
the "ToS" field by the newly defined "DSField", using the "replace"
function:
<CODE BEGINS>
import RFC791.IP
import ComputerateSpecifying.Transform
dscp : List Decl
dscp = `[
public export
data Dscp : Type where
MkDscp : (dscp : BitVector 6) ->
(reserved : BitVector 2) -> reserved = bitVector =>
Dscp
]
%runElab declare dscp
%runElab declare (add mypath internetHeader dcp)
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 38
At this point using elaboration caching would permit to check that
the new type indeed uses the "Dscp" type instead of the old "Tos"
type.
6.3.2. Extended Registries
| NOTE: The mechanisms described in this section requires Type
| Providers that are not yet available in Idris2. Until then,
| the constants built by future type providers can be populated
| by hand.
At the difference of the previous section, that describes how to
formalize the unplanned evolution of a protocol, most protocols are
designed with the potentiality of evolution, also known as
extensibility. These potentialities are generally expressed as
values for some fields that will be later assigned to a new meaning.
The meaning for a new value will be defined in a new document, with
all the documents giving new meanings to a field easily locatable in
a registry.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Following up on our previous example, RFC 791 defines IP Options only
for values 0, 1, 7, 68, 131, 136, and 137. These values, together
with new values defined by other documents, are listed in the IP
Option Numbers IANA registry. E.g., that IANA registry also defines,
among others, value 25 in RFC 4782.
The values that are part of a registry are designed to be used with
the protocol that defined that registry, so it makes sense to
synthesise a Sum type of all these values in the computerate
specification for the document that defined that registry.
Building that Sum type can be done by applying transformations to the
original type, just like when modifying a protocol in a new
specification. The difference is that the list of types that will be
used in the Sum type needs be collected from the registry, and
updated each time the registry is updated.
Idris has a mechanism to read external data during type-checking (a
feature known as Type Provider), mechanism that could be used to read
the content of the registry. A registry generally contains the
codepoint that identifies a new value and the name of the document
that defines that value, but unfortunately the protocol registries do
not contain enough information to automatically find the Idris2 type
that matches a specific codepoint.
For instance IANA is the organization that is maintaining the
registries for the IETF. The "IP Option Numbers" is an example of a
registry that contains the list of all the IP Options that can be
carried by the Internet Protocol. E.g., in that registry RFC 1191
contains the description for multiple entries in the registry, and so
an additional mechanism is needed to find the Idris2 type for each of
them.
That additional mechanism is abstracted as an extended registry that
complements the existing registry, but for the sole purpose of
finding the exact type to use for each codepoint to generate that Sum
type.
Building an "InternetHeader" type that contains all the IP Options
defined at the time of type-checking looks like this;
<CODE BEGINS>
%provide (ipParameter : List (String, Decl)) with registry
("https://www.iana.org/assignments/ip-parameters/" ++
"ip-parameters.xhtml#ip-parameters-2")
%runELab traverse (add transform internetHeader Add) (type registry)
<CODE ENDS>
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Figure 39
The "%provide" statement reads both the IANA registry and its
associated extended registry and stores the result in the
"ipParameter" constant. Then the "%runElab" statement repetitively
adds the types retrieved to the "InternetHeader" type.
Instead of having to manually maintain the extended registries, they
can be automatically updated by information coming from the type-
checking of the types in the respective computerate specifications
that define new values, by binding a specific entry in a registry
with the type in the specification.
The mechanism used is also based on a type provider, but this time to
update the extended registry instead of reading from it:
<CODE BEGINS>
%provide (mtur: ()) with extendRegistry
("https://www.iana.org/assignments/ip-parameters/" ++
"ip-parameters.xhtml#ip-parameters-2")
"11" mtuR
%provide (mtut : ()) with extendRegistry
("https://www.iana.org/assignments/ip-parameters/" ++
"ip-parameters.xhtml#ip-parameters-2")
"12" mtuT
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 40
Here the statements bind the types defined in "mtuR" and "mtuT" to
codepoints 11 and 12 in the extended registry of IANA's IP Option
Numbers registry.
The next time the code in Figure 39 is type-checked, it will add
constructors for these two IP Options.
7. Exporting Specifications
| NOTE: The infrastructure for sharing the git repositories for
| exported packages is not ready yet.
7.1. Standard Library
Computerate specifications can formalize their content to make it
reusable as a building block for other specifications. A
specification that organizes its content along the guidelines
presented in this section can become a part of the Computerate
Specification Standard Library.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
To be part of the Standard Library, specifications must be organized
in 4 components:
Code: This is the formalization of the content of the standard as an
Idris package i.e., a set of Idris modules (i.e. files) that
exports some or all of the types and functions defined in it. The
code of these Idris modules is generally interspersed with the
content of the standard to form literate code.
Tutorial: This is a document section that guides the reader step by
step in the use of the Idris package in a Computerate
Specification. A tutorial may import the package itself to
validate the examples provided as part of the tutorial. This
section is considered informative.
Description: This is a document section that explains the Idris
package as a whole i.e, grouping explanations by feature.
Reference: This is a document section that is auto-generated from
the structured comments in the types and functions of the code
Idris package. It lists all the types and functions in alphabetic
order, including the comments on parameters.
This document is itself an Idris package that is part of the Standard
Library, Section 7 contains the tutorial part of that package,
Section 8.1 forms its description part, and Appendix B contains its
reference.
For a retrofitted document, the code will be mixed with the existing
standard to produce a Computerate Specification but the tutorial,
description and reference parts cannot be added to that standard, so
they have to be part of a separate document. It can be a new
specification written for the express purpose of documenting that
package. This is the case for this specification, which documents a
selection of retrofitted Computerate Specifications that are part of
the Standard Library. E.g., Section 6.2.1, and Section 8.2.2 are
respectively the tutorial and the description for [RFC5234].
For a new document, the four components should be part of it. E.g.,
in this document Section 6.1.5.1, Section 8.1.5, and Appendix B.1.2
are respectively the tutorial, description, and reference for the
"BitDiagram" module.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
7.2. Transclusions
RFCs, Internet-Drafts and standard documents published by other SDOs
did not start their life as computerate specifications, so to be able
to use them as Idris packages they will need to be progressively
retrofitted. This is done by converting the documents into an
AsciiDoc documents and then enriching them with code, in the same way
that would have been done if the standard was developed directly as a
computerate specification.
Converting the whole document in AsciiDoc and enriching it with code,
instead of just maintaining a library of code, seems a waste of
resources. The reason for doing so is to be able to verify that the
rendered text is equivalent to the original standard, which will
validate the examples and formal languages.
Retrofitted specifications will also be made available as individual
git repositories as they are converted.
Because the IETF Trust does not permit modifying an RFC as a whole
(except for translation purposes), a retrofitted RFC uses
transclusion, a mechanism that includes parts of a separate document
at runtime. This way, a retrofitted RFC is distributed as two
separate files, the original RFC in text form, and a computerate
specification that contains only code and transclusions.
Transclusions use are explained in Appendix A.2.2.
7.3. Exporting Types and Functions
Types and functions are exported by using the "export" keyword. Type
constructors, interface functions and type functions implementation
can be additionally exported by prepending the keyword "public" to
the "export" keyword.
Additionally, types that may be transformed should be declared as
explained in Section 6.3.2, i.e. by wrapping them first in a exported
function that uses a quote declaration, then generating them locally
using a "declare" elaboration.
8. Standard Library
| NOTE: The libraries described in that section are not yet
| available.
8.1. Internal Modules
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
8.1.1. AsciiDoc
The AsciiDoc module provides a way to programmatically build an
AsciiDoc document without having to worry about the particular
formatting details.
Note that, at the difference of the AsciiDoc rendering process that
tries very hard to render a document in any circumstances, the types
in this module are meant to only generate a correct document.
E.g., the string "this is {`N "*bold*""}bold` will be rendered as
"this is *bold*". If the intent was to render the "bold" word in
bold, then the string should have been "this is {`Bold "bold""}`.
8.1.2. BitVector
The Computerate Specifying Library provides a number of types and
functions aimed at defining and manipulating the data types that are
commonly found in Protocol Data Units (PDU). The most elementary
type of data is the bit-vector, which is a list of individual bits.
Bit-vectors are not always sufficient to describe the subtleties the
data types carried in a PDU, and several more precise types are built
on top of them. See Section 8.1.3 for unsigned integers.
"BitVector" is a dependent type representing a list of bits, indexed
by the number of bits contained in that list. The type is inspired
by Chapter 6 of [Kroening16] and by [Brinkmann02].
A value of type "BitVector n" can be built as a series of zeros
("bitVector") or can be built by using a list of "O" (for 0) and "I"
(for 1) constructors. E.g., "[O, I, O, O]" builds a bit-vector of
type "BitVector 4" with a value equivalent to 0b0100.
Bit-vectors can be compared for equality, but they are not ordered.
They also are not numbers and arithmetics operations cannot be
applied to them.
Bit-vectors can be concatenated ("concat"), a smaller bit-vector can
be extracted from an existing bit-vector ("extract"), or a bit-vector
can be extended by adding a number of zeros in front of it
("extend").
The usual unary bitwise ("shiftL", "shiftR", "not") operations are
defined for bit-vectors, as well as binary bitwise operations between
two bit-vectors of the same size ("and", "or", "xor")
Finally it is possible to convert the bit at a specific position in a
bit-vector into a "Bool" value ("test").
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
8.1.3. Unsigned
A value of type "Unsigned n" encodes an unsigned integer as a
"BitVector" of length "n".
8.1.4. Dimension
This module permits to manipulate denominate numbers, which are
numbers associated with a unit. Examples of denominate numbers are
"cast (5, meter / second)" (which uses a unit of speed), or "cast
(10, meter * meter * meter)" (which uses a unit of volume).
In this module a denominate number is a value of type "Denominate
xs". It carries one number as a fraction. Its type is indexed over
a list of dimensions, each associated with an exponent number. All
together this type can represent any unit that is based directly or
indirectly from the base dimensions defined in the "Dimension" type.
Denominate numbers are constructed by passing a tuple made of a
number (either an "Integer" or a "Double") and a unit to the "cast"
function. E.g., "cast (5, megabit)" will build the denominate number
5 with the "megabit" unit.
Dimensionless denominate numbers can be constructed by using the
"none" unit, as in "cast (10, none)"
Denominate numbers can be converted back into a tuple with the
"fromDenominate" function.
Denominate numbers can be added, subtracted or negated (respectively
"+", "-", and "neg"). All these operations can only be done on
denominate numbers with the same exact dimension, and the result will
also carry the same dimension. This prevents what is colloquially
known as mixing apples and oranges.
For the same reason, adding a number to a non-dimensionless
denominate number is equally impossible.
The "*", "/", and "recip" operations respectively multiply, divide
and calculate the reciprocal of denominate numbers. These operations
can be done on denominate number that have different types, and the
result dimension will be derived from the dimension of the arguments.
E.g. multiplying "cast (5, meter)" by "cast (6, meter)" will return
the equivalent of "cast (30, meter * meter)".
Also multiplying a denominate number by a (dimensionless) number is
possible e.g., as in multiplying "cast (5, meter)" by "cast (10,
none)", which will return the equivalent of "cast (50, meter)".
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Ultimately we want to insert in a computerate specification the value
of a denominate number, together with its unit, as text, which is
done by implementing the "Show" interface on a denominate number in
its tuple form. E.g. "fromDenominate (cast (5, meter / second))
(kilometer / hour)" can be directly inserted in a document and will
be substituted with the string "18 km/h".
For each dimension we define a list of constants that represents
units of that dimension. Units that uses a prefix are automatically
generated, which is the case for SI units for the "Time" dimension
(i.e., from "yoctosecond" to "yottasecond"), SI units (only positive
powers of 10) for the "Data" dimension (i.e., from "kilobit" to
"yottabit"), and IEC units (positive powers of 2) for the "Data"
dimension (i.e., from "kibibit" to "yobibit").
Additional constants like "minute", "hour", "day", "byte", "wyde",
"tetra", "octa", etc, complement the standard units. The "byte",
"wyde", "tetra", and "octa" units are defined in page 4 of [TAOCP].
8.1.5. BitDiagram
A bit diagram displays a graphical representation of a data layout at
the bit level.
The "BitDiagram" type is used to build BitDiagrams values.
The "toAsciiDoc" function converts a "BitDiagram" value into an
AsciiDoc Literal Block which can be inserted directly in the
document.
Adhoc types can also be used to generate a bit diagram, by passing
that type to the "toDiagram" function and the returned value to the
"toAsciiDoc" function. The "toDiagram" function will build a field
only for types that have an implementation for the "Size" interface.
The function "toDiagram" also takes an auxiliary Type "Names" that
associate names with these types.
8.1.6. Transform
This module permits to manipulate values that are in the very generic
form of trees. These manipulations consist of removing, or replacing
a selected value or values in that tree.
The values to manipulate are selected using a path, which is a series
of instructions used to move the focus of the manipulation up, down
and sideway in the tree and to apply a predicate until a set of
values are chosen.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
The values selected are then either removed or replaced by a new
value. The rest of the tree stays unmodified.
This mechanism is very generic and can be applied to any tree, but it
is meant to modify the types defined in the
"Language.Reflection.TTImp" and "Language.Reflection.TT" standard
modules, with the goal of generating types that are derived from
existing types.
8.1.7. Tpn
This module permits to build Petri Nets and then derive types from
that Petri net, types that can be used to ensure that a protocol
implementation follows that Petri Net.
8.2. Meta-Language Packages
8.2.1. Augmented Packet Header Diagrams (APHD)
The "augmented-ascii-diagram" Idris package provides a set of modules
that permits to generate parts of AsciiDoc documents that are conform
to the [I-D.mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams] specification.
The "AAD.Pdu" type is used to define a PDU.
8.2.2. RFC 5234 (ABNF)
TBD.
8.3. Protocol Packages
8.3.1. RFC 791 (Internet Protocol)
TBD.
9. Bibliography
[AsciiBib] "AsciiBib", <https://www.relaton.com/specs/asciibib/>.
[AsciiDoc] "AsciiDoc", <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AsciiDoc/>.
[Asciidoctor]
"Asciidoctor", <https://asciidoctor.org/docs/user-manual>.
[Blockquotes]
"Markdown-style blockquotes",
<https://asciidoctor.org/docs/user-manual/#markdown-style-
blockquotes>.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
[Brinkmann02]
Brinkmann, R. and R. Drechsler, "RTL-datapath verification
using integer linear programming", In Proceedings of the
2002 Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference.
IEEE Computer Society, 2002,
<http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=835389>.
[CPN] Jensen, K. and L. Kristensen, "Coloured Petri Nets:
Modelling and Validation of Concurrent Systems", Springer
Dordrecht ; New York, 2009.
[Curry-Howard]
"Curry-Howard correspondence",
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry-
Howard_correspondence>.
[Elab] Christiansen, D. and E. Brady, "Elaborator reflection:
extending Idris in Idris", In Proceedings of the 21st ACM
SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional
Programming. ACM Press-Association for Computing
Machinery, 2016, <https://research-repository.st-
andrews.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10023/9522/
elab_reflection_paper.pdf>.
[I-D.bortzmeyer-language-state-machines]
Bortzmeyer, S., "Cosmogol: a language to describe finite
state machines", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
bortzmeyer-language-state-machines-01, 1 November 2006,
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bortzmeyer-language-
state-machines-01>.
[I-D.mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams]
McQuistin, S., Band, V., Jacob, D., and C. Perkins,
"Describing Protocol Data Units with Augmented Packet
Header Diagrams", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams-06, 1 July 2020,
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mcquistin-
augmented-ascii-diagrams-06.txt>.
[I-D.ribose-asciirfc]
Tse, R., Nicholas, N., and P. Brasolin, "AsciiRFC:
Authoring Internet-Drafts And RFCs Using AsciiDoc", Work
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ribose-asciirfc-08, 1
April 2018, <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-
ribose-asciirfc-08.txt>.
[Idris2] "Idris2: A Language with Dependent Types",
<https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/>.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
[Knuth92] Knuth, D., "Literate Programming", Center for the Study of
Language and Information, 1992.
[Kroening16]
Kroening, D. and O. Strichman, "Decision Procedures: An
Algorithmic Point of View", Springer Berlin, 2017.
[Linear-Resources]
"Linear Resources",
<https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/app/linear.html>.
[Literate] "Literate Programming",
<https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference/
literate.html>.
[Metanorma]
"Metanorma", <https://www.metanorma.com/>.
[Metanorma-IETF]
"Metanorma-IETF",
<https://www.metanorma.com/author/ietf/>.
[Momot16] Momot, F., Bratus, S., Hallberg, S., and M. Patterson,
"The Seven Turrets of Babel: A Taxonomy of LangSec Errors
and How to Expunge Them.", In: 2016 IEEE Cybersecurity
Development (SecDev), 2016,
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7839788/>.
[RFC-Guide]
"RFC Style Guide",
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/>.
[RFC0761] Postel, J., "DoD standard Transmission Control Protocol",
RFC 0761, DOI 10.17487/RFC0761, January 1980,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc761>.
[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", RFC 0791,
DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791>.
[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>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234,
January 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
[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>.
[RFC7991] Hoffman, P., "The "xml2rfc" Version 3 Vocabulary",
RFC 7991, DOI 10.17487/RFC7991, December 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7991>.
[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>.
[RFC8489] Petit-Huguenin, M., Salgueiro, G., Rosenberg, J., Wing,
D., Mahy, R., and P. Matthews, "Session Traversal
Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 8489, DOI 10.17487/RFC8489,
February 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8489>.
[RFC8656] Reddy, T., Ed., Johnston, A., Ed., Matthews, P., and J.
Rosenberg, "Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN):
Relay Extensions to Session Traversal Utilities for NAT
(STUN)", RFC 8656, DOI 10.17487/RFC8656, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8656>.
[Stump16] Stump, A., "Verified Functional Programming in Agda", ACM
Books series, 2016.
[TAOCP] Knuth, D., "The Art Of Computer Programming", Addison-
Wesley Pearson Education, 2005.
[TLP5] "Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents",
<https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/IETF-TLP-5.htm>.
[Type-Driven]
Brady, E., "Type-Driven Development with Idris", Manning
Shelter Island, 2017.
[Zave11] Zave, P., "Experiences with Protocol Description",
Workshop on Rigorous Protocol Engineering (WRiPE'11),
2011, <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Pamela_Zave/pu
blication/266230560_Experiences_with_Protocol_Description/
links/56eaf9fb08ae9dcdd82a6590.pdf>.
Appendix A. Command Line Tools
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A.1. Installation
The computerate command line tools are run inside a Docker image, so
the first step is to install the Docker software or verify that it is
up to date (https://docs.docker.com/install/).
Note that for the usage described in this document there is no need
for Docker EE or for having a Docker account.
The following instructions assume a Unix based OS, i.e. Linux or
MacOS. Lines separated by a "\" character are meant to be executed
as one single line, with the "\" character removed.
A.1.1. Download the Docker Image
To install the computerate tools, the fastest way is to download and
install the Docker image using BitTorrent. The BitTorrent magnet URI
for the version distributed with this version of the document is:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:20d184da7a740dfecbb8b29464aa87610f95a316&dn=tools
-05.tar.xz
After this, the image can be loaded in Docker as follow:
docker load -i tools-05.tar.xz
Figure 41
Note that a new version of the tooling is released at the same time a
new version of this document is released, each time with a new
BitTorrent magnet URI.
A.2. The "computerate" Command
The Docker image main command is "computerate", which takes the same
parameters as the "metanorma" command from the Metanorma tooling:
docker run --rm -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -v $(pwd):/computerate \
computerate/tools computerate -t ietf -x txt <file>
Figure 42
The differences with the "metanorma" command are explained in the
following sections.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A.2.1. Literate Files
The "computerate" command can process Literate Idris files (files
with a "lidr" extension, aka lidr files), in addition to AsciiDoc
files (files with an "adoc" extension, aka adoc files). When a lidr
file is processed, all embedded code fragments (text between prefix
"{`" and suffix "`}") are evaluated in the context of the Idris code
contained in this file. Each code fragment (including the prefix and
suffix) are then substituted by the result of that evaluation.
The "computerate" command can process included lidr files in the same
way. The embedded code fragments in the imported file are processed
in the context of the included lidr file, not in the context of the
including file. Idris modules (either from an idr or lidr file) can
be imported the usual way.
The literate code (which is all the text that is starting by a ">"
symbol in column 1) in a lidr file will not be part of the rendered
document.
A.2.2. Transclusions
The "computerate" command can process transclusions, a special form
of AsciiDoc "include" that takes a range of lines as parameters:
<CODE BEGINS>
include::rfc5234.txt[lines=26..35]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 43
Here the "include" macro will be replaced by the content of lines 26
to 35 (included) of [RFC5234].
The "sub" parameter permits modifying the copied content according to
a regular expression. For instance the following converts references
into the AsciiDoc format:
<CODE BEGINS>
include::rfc5234.txt[lines=121..131,sub="/\[([^\]])\]/<<\1>>/"]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 44
In the following example, the text is converted into a note:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
include::rfc5234.txt[lines=151,sub="/^.*$/NOTE: \0/"]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 45
A.2.3. IdrisDoc Generation
The "computerate" can include in a document the result of the
generation of the IdrisDoc for a package. This is done by including
a line like this:
<CODE BEGINS>
include::computerate-specifying.ipkg[leveloffset=+2]
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 46
The "leveloffset" attribute is used to adjust the level of the
section generated, as the sections generated always have the level 2.
A.2.4. Outputs
Instead of generating a file based on the name of the input file, the
"computerate" command generates a file based on the ":name:"
attribute in the header of the document.
In addition to the "txt", "html", "xml", and "rfc" output formats
supported by "metanorma", the "computerate" command can also be used
to generate for the "pdf" and "json" formats by using these names
with the "-x" command line parameter.
If the type of document passed to the "computerate" command (options
"-t" or "--type") is one of the following, then the document will be
processed directly using "asciidoctor", and not "metanorma": "html,
"html5, "xhtml", "xhtml5", "docbook", "docbook5", "manpage", "pdf",
and "revealjs". The asciidoctor-diagram extension is available in
this mode with the following supported diagram types: "actdiag",
"blockdiag", "ditaa", "graphviz", "meme", "mscgen", "nwdiag",
"plantuml", and "seqdiag".
A.2.5. Extended Registry
| NOTE: More to come on the exact mechanism used to share the
| extended repositories.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A.2.6. Bibliography
Because most references are stable, there is not much point in
retrieving them each time the document is processed, even with the
help of a cache, so lookup of external references is disabled.
The following command can be used to fetch an RFC reference:
tools relaton fetch "IETF(RFC.2119)" --type IETF >ietf.xml
Figure 47
Then ietf.xml file needs to be edited by removing the first two
lines. After this the xml file can be converted into a AsciiDoc
document:
tools relaton convert ietf.xml -f asciibib
Figure 48
This will generate an ietf.adoc file that can be copied in the
bibliography section. Note that section level of the bibliographic
item needs to be one up the section level of the bibliography
section.
One exception is a reference to a standard document that is under
development, like an Internet-Draft.
In that case the best way is to have a separate script that fetch,
edit and convert Internet-Drafts as separate files. Then these files
can be inserted dynamically in the bibliography section using
includes.
The command to retrieve an Internet-Draft reference is as follow:
tools relaton fetch "IETF(I-D.bortzmeyer-language-state-machines)" \
--type IETF >bortzmeyer-language-state-machines.adoc
Figure 49
Additionally the following sections show how to manually format some
common types of bibliographic items, most of then adapted from
[RFC-Guide].
A.2.6.1. Internet-Draft
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
[%bibitem]
=== {blank}
id:: RFC-STYLE
title.content:: RFC Style Guide
contributor::
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: Heather Flanagan
contributor.role.type:: author
contributor::
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: Sandy Ginoza
contributor.role.type:: author
date.type:: published
date.on:: 2014-07-20
link::
link.type:: TXT
link.content:: https://www.ietf.org/.../draft-flanagan-style-03.txt
docid::
docid.type:: Work
docid.id:: in Progress
docid::
docid.type:: Internet-Draft
docid.id:: draft-flanagan-style-03
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 50
A.2.6.2. RFC
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
<CODE BEGINS>
[%bibitem]
=== {blank}
id:: RFC-STYLE2
title.content:: RFC Style Guide
contributor::
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: Heather Flanagan
contributor.role.type:: author
contributor::
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: Sandy Ginoza
contributor.role.type:: author
date.type:: published
date.on:: 2014-09
link::
link.type:: src
link.content:: http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7322
docid::
docid.type:: RFC
docid.id:: 7322
docid::
docid.type:: DOI
docid.id:: 10.17487/RFC7322
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 51
A.2.6.3. Email
<CODE BEGINS>
[%bibitem]
=== {blank}
id:: reftag
title.content:: Subject: Subject line
contributor::
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: A. Sender
contributor.role.type:: author
date.type:: published
date.on:: 2014-09-05
link::
link.type:: src
link.content:: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/.../Ed4OHwozljyjklpAE/
docid::
docid.type:: message to the
docid.id:: listname mailing list
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 52
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A.2.6.4. IANA
<CODE BEGINS>
[%bibitem]
=== {blank}
id:: IANA-IKE
title.content:: Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Attributes
contributor.person.name.completename.content:: IANA
contributor.role.type:: author
link::
link.type:: src
link.content:: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipsec-registry
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 53
A.2.6.5. Web-Based Public Code Repositories
<CODE BEGINS>
[%bibitem]
=== {blank}
id:: pysaml2
title.content:: Python implementation of SAML2
date.type:: published
date.on:: 2018-03-01
docid::
docid.type:: commit
docid.id:: 7135d53
link::
link.type:: src
link.content:: https://github.com/IdentityPython/pysaml2
<CODE ENDS>
Figure 54
A.3. Idris REPL
idr and lidr files can be loaded directly in the Idris REPL for
debugging:
docker run --rm -it -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -v $(pwd):/computerate \
computerate/tools idris2 <lidr-file>
Figure 55
It is possible to directly modify the source code in the REPL by
entering the ":e" command, which will load the file in an instance of
VIM preconfigured to interact with the REPL.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
The "idris2-vim" add-ons (which provides interactive commands and
syntax coloring) is augmented with a feature that permits to use both
Idris and AsciiDoc syntax coloring. To enable it, add the following
line at the end of all lidr file:
> -- vim:filetype=lidris2.asciidoc
Figure 56
A.4. Other Commands
For convenience, the docker image provides the latest version of the
xml2rfc, aspell, and idnits tools.
docker run --rm -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -v $(pwd):/computerate \
computerate/tools xml2rfc
docker run --rm -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -v $(pwd):/computerate \
computerate/tools idnits --help
docker run --rm -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -v $(pwd):/computerate \
computerate/tools aspell
Figure 57
The Docker image also contains a extended version of git that will be
used to retrieve the computerate specifications as explained in
Appendix A.5.
A.5. Source Repositories
| NOTE: More to come on the exact mechanism used to retrieve the
| source repositories.
A.6. Modified Tools
The following sections list the tools distributed in the Docker image
that have been modified for integration with the "computerate" tool.
A.6.1. Idris2
URL: https://github.com/idris-lang/Idris2.git
Version: 0.3.0 commit 05c9029
Modifications:
* The interactive command ":gc" permits to display the result of an
elaboration.
* The types in TTImp can carry the documentation for the types that
will be generated from them.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
* The "%cacheElab" directive permits to cache the result of an
elaboration in the source code instead of been regenerated at each
type-checking.
* A new idris2 wrapper sets the correct mappings for recursive
build.
* "--mkdoc <ipkg-file>" generates the package documentation in
AsciiDoc on stdout.
* Elaborations can be exported and documented.
* "package" and "depends" in ipkg file can use quoted strings.
* "--depends" lists the dependencies.
* "--map <package>=<dir>" maps between a package and a directory.
* "--paths" now displays the paths after modification.
* Fix boolean operators precedence.
* Replace the literate processor by a faster one. Remove support
for reversed Bird marks.
A.6.2. asciidoctor
URL: https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor.git
Version: 2.0.12
Modifications:
* Process lidr and lipkg files.
* Preprocessor for Idris literate source.
* Include processor for transclusions.
A.6.3. metanorma
URL: https://github.com/metanorma/metanorma
Version: 1.2.5
Modifications:
* Generate the filename from the name header attribute.
* Process files with lidr and lipkg extensions.
A.6.4. metanorma-ietf
URL: https://github.com/metanorma/metanorma-ietf
Version: 2.2.8
Modifications:
* Fix the content of the generated <sourcecode> so it is displayed
correctly in html and pdf outputs.
* Fix empty RFC number.
* Add generation of json file.
* Generates DOI, RFC and Internet-Draft references. Truncate the
date according to type.
* Do not add content in xrefs.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A.6.5. idris2-vim
URL: https://github.com/edwinb/idris2-vim
Version: commit 964cebe
Modifications:
* the "IdrisGenerateCache" command (mapped to <LocalLeader>_z) on a
"%runElab line" displays the result of the elaboration.
* Support for lidris2 files.
* Syntax colouring for document language in lidris2.
A.7. Bugs and Workarounds
Installation:
* The current version of Docker in Ubuntu fails, but this can be
fixed with the following commands:
sudo apt-get install containerd.io=1.2.6-3
sudo systemctl restart docker.service
Figure 58
Idris2:
* :gc is currently broken.
* Docstrings are not generated correctly.
* Interactive commands are missing or not working well with literate
code.
* Changing the installation prefix requires two installations.
* Documentation not generated for namespaces and records.
* Recursive build incomplete.
metanorma:
* RFC and I-D references are not correctly generated by relaton.
The workaround is to remove the IETF docid and to add the
following:
docid::
docid.type:: BCP
docid.id:: 37
docid::
docid.type:: RFC
docid.id:: 5237
Figure 59
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
computerate:
* code blocks escape a '>' in the first column. The workaround is
to insert a space before the '>'.
A.8. TODO List
Idris2:
* Add documentation support for all types in TTImp.
* ":gc!" should update the file.
* "%cacheElab" should check hashes.
* Add a way to generate a hole name.
* Literate ipkg to merge the Main.adoc and ipkg files.
metanorma:
* Merge bibliographies.
* Extract bibliography from computerate specification.
* Generate xml2rfc <contact> element.
* Generate .rfc.xml and err file with the same name.
* Generate rfc.xml as xml and xml under another extension so the
xml2rfc file can be directly submitted to the IETF secretariat.
computerate:
* Generate sourcecode blocks from existing code.
* Pass surrounding line for embedded code so the Asciidoc module can
process constrained elements.
* Implement self-inclusion to reorder a document.
* Backport embedded blocks from Coriander.
vim:
* Starting vim in docker often result in an invalid terminal size
when a file is loaded. Using the following command line solves
the problem:
docker run --rm -it -u $(id -u):$(id -g) -e COLUMNS=$(tput cols) \
-e LINES=$(tput lines) -v $(pwd):/computerate computerate/tools \
vim <lidr-file>
Figure 60
rfc2adoc:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 70]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
* This future tool will be able to convert an xml2rfc v3 file into
an AsciiDoc file. It will also be able to update an already
converted file without losing the Idris annotations.
Appendix B. Reference
| NOTE: The code for the libraries described in that section is
| not yet ready to be published.
B.1. Package computerate-specifying
The Builtin Computerate Specification Standard Library.
Version: 0.1
Author(s): Marc Petit-Huguenin
Dependencies: augmented-ascii-diagrams, rfc5234
B.1.1. Module ComputerateSpecifying.AsciiDoc
A module to generate valid AsciiDoc.
data Block : Type
A block of text
Implements Show.
Admonition : Block
Example : Block
Listing : Block
Literal : List String -> Block
Passthrough : Block
Quote : Block
Sidebar : Block
Source : (lang : Maybe String) -> List String -> Block
Stem : Block
Table : Block
Verse : Block
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 71]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Paragraph : (lines : List Line) -> length lines > 0 = True =>
Block
data Inline : Type
A type for inline text.
Lit : String -> Inline
Italic : List Inline -> Inline
Bold : List Inline -> Inline
Subscript : List Inline -> Inline
Superscript : List Inline -> Inline
Monospace : List Inline -> Inline
Highlight : List Inline -> Inline
Custom : String -> List Inline -> Inline
Attribute : String -> Inline
Link : (uri : String) -> (text : List Inline) ->
(attributes : List String) -> Inline
uri: The URI
text: The text
attributes: Additional attributes
Xref : String -> List Inline -> List String -> Inline
Code : String -> Inline
Embedded code.
data Line : Type
MkLine : (inlines : List Inline) ->
length inlines > 0 = True => Line
B.1.2. Module ComputerateSpecifying.BitDiagram
data BitDiagram : List String -> Type
Field : (name : String) -> (size : Nat) ->
size > 0 && size * 2 > length name = True =>
BitDiagram names -> elem name names = False =>
BitDiagram (name :: names)
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 72]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Last : (name : String) -> (size : Nat) ->
size > 0 && size * 2 > length name = True => BitDiagram [name]
data Names : Type -> Type
toAsciiDoc : BitDiagram names -> Block
toDiagram : (t : Type) -> Names t -> BitDiagram _
B.1.3. Module ComputerateSpecifying.BitVector
(++) : BitVector n -> BitVector m -> BitVector (n + m)
Concatene the second bit-vector after the first one.
data Bit : Type
O : Bit
I : Bit
data BitVector : Nat -> Type
A vector of bit that can be pattern matched.
Implements DecEq, Eq, Size.
Nil : BitVector Z
(::) : Bit -> BitVector n -> BitVector (S n)
and : (1 _ : BitVector m) -> (1 _ : BitVector m) -> BitVector m
Bitwise and between bit-vectors of identical size.
bitVector : {m : Nat} -> BitVector m
Build an empty bit-vector
extend : (n : Nat) -> BitVector m -> BitVector (plus n m)
Extend a bit-vector by n zero bits on the left side.
extract : (p : Nat) -> (q : Nat) -> (prf1 : p LTE q) =>
BitVector m -> (prf2 : q LTE m) => BitVector (q minus p)
Extract a bit-vector.
p: The position of the first bit to extract.
q: The position of the next to last bit to extract.
not : (1 _ : BitVector m) -> BitVector m
Bitwise not of a bit-vector.
or : (1 _ : BitVector m) -> (1 _ : BitVector m) -> BitVector m
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 73]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Bitwise or between bit-vectors of identical size.
shiftL : (n : Nat) -> BitVector m -> (prf : n LTE m) =>
BitVector (plus (minus m n) n)
Shift the bit-vector to the left by n bits, inserting zeros.
shiftR : (n : Nat) -> {m : Nat} -> BitVector m ->
(prf : n LTE m) => BitVector (plus (minus m n) n)
Shift the bit-vector to the right by n bits, inserting zeros.
test : (1 m : Nat) -> (1 _ : BitVector n) -> (prf : m LT n) =>
Bool
Return a boolean that is True if the bit at position m is set.
xor : (1 _ : BitVector m) -> (1 _ : BitVector m) -> BitVector m
Bitwise xor between bit-vectors of identical size.
B.1.4. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Dimension
A module that defines types, constants and operations on denominate
numbers.
(*) : Denominate xs -> Denominate ys -> Denominate (merge' xs ys)
The multiplication operation between denominate numbers.
(+) : Denominate xs -> Denominate xs -> Denominate xs
The addition operation between denominate numbers.
(-) : Denominate xs -> Denominate xs -> Denominate xs
The subtraction operation between denominate numbers.
(/) : Denominate xs -> Denominate ys ->
Denominate (merge' xs (recip' ys))
The division operation between denominate numbers.
Data : Type
The type of a denominate number for the data dimension.
data Denominate : List (Dimension, Int) -> Type
A denominate number.
MkDenominate : (x : Integer) -> (y : Integer) ->
{xs : List (Dimension, Int)} -> Denominate xs
Construct a denominate number as a fraction.
Dimensionless : Type
The type of a dimensionless denominate number
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 74]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
interface Size a
An interface to retrieve the size in bits of a type.
Implemented by List, (s, x).
size : a -> Data
Return the size of a in bit.
Time : Type
The type of a denominate number for the time dimension.
bit : Data
Bit, the base unit of data.
byte : Data
The byte unit, as 8 bits.
day : Time
The day, as unit of time.
fromDenominate : (value : Denominate xs) ->
(unit : Denominate xs) -> (Double, Denominate xs)
Convert a denominate number into a tuple made of the dimensionless
value (as a "Double") calculated after applying a unit, and that
unit.
value: the value to convert.
unit: the unit to use for the conversion.
elaboration generate bin "bit" "Data"
Generate all the IEC units based on the bit, from kibibit to
yobibit.
elaboration generate dec "bit" "Data"
Generate all the SI units based on the bit, from kilobit to
yottabit.
elaboration generate si "second" "Time"
Generates all the SI units based on the second, from yoctosecond
to yottasecond.
hour : Time
The hour, as unit of time.
minute : Time
The minute, as unit of time.
neg : Denominate xs -> Denominate xs
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 75]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
The negation operation of a denominate number.
none : Dimensionless
The unit for a dimensionless denominate number.
octa : Data
The octa unit, as 64 bits.
recip : Denominate xs -> Denominate (recip' xs)
The reciprocal operation of a denominate number.
second : Time
Second, the base unit of time.
tetra : Data
The tetra unit, as 32 bits.
wyde : Data
The wyde unit, as 16 bits.
B.1.5. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Tpn
A module that defines types for Petri Net.
Colour : Place -> Type
Retrieve the type of token that can be stored in the place.
data Input : Type
MkInput : (place : Place) -> (output : Type) ->
(inscription : Colour place -> ND output) -> Input
An input arc.
place: The place from which tokens are removed.
output: The type of the token extracted.
inscription: A function that chooses and converts the tokens
from the place.
InputType : List Input -> Type
Calculate the combined type of a list of inputs.
MS : Type -> Type
A multiset.
ND : Type -> Type
Non-determinism monad.
data Output : Type
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 76]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
MkOutput : (place : Place) -> (input : Type) ->
(inscription : input -> MS (Colour place)) -> Output
An output arc.
place: The place to which tokens are inserted.
inscription: a function that generates the tokens to be
inserted in the place.
OutputType : List Output -> Type
Calculate the combined type of a list of outputs.
data Place : Type
MkPlace : String -> (colour : Type) ->
(init : () -> MS colour) -> Place
A place.
colour: The type of the tokens stored in the place.
init: A function to initialize the place.
data Transition : Type
MkTransition : (inputs : List Input) ->
(outputs : List Output) ->
(transition : InputType inputs -> ND (OutputType outputs)) ->
Transition
A transition.
inputs: The list of inputs.
outputs: The list of outputs.
transition: A function that chooses and converts between a
tuple made of the type of all the inputs into a tuple made
of the type of all the outputs.
Types : List Type -> Type
Convert a list of types into a tuple of types.
B.1.6. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Transform
A module to transform values structured as trees, with specialization
to transform types via elaboration.
data Path : Type
A selection path
add : (tree : a) -> (path : Path) -> (added : b) -> a
Add a value as a sibling to values in a tree that are selected by
a path.
tree: The tree to modify.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 77]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
path: The path used to select the values.
added: The value to add
extendRegistry : (registry : String) -> (codepoint : String) ->
(type : Decl) -> IO (Provider ())
Add a binding between a codepoint and a type in an extended
registry
registry: The registry that needs to be extended.
codepoint: The codepoint to bind the type to.
type: The type associated with the codepoint
registry : (registry : String) ->
IO (Provider (List (String, Decl)))
Retrieve an extended registry content, as a list of tuples made of
a codepoint and a type.
registry: The registry to retrieve.
remove : (tree : a) -> (path : Path) -> a
Remove the values in a tree as selected by a path.
tree: The tree to modify.
path: The path used to select the values.
replace : (tree : a) -> (path : Path) -> (replacement : b) -> a
Replace values selected by a path on a tree.
tree: The tree to modify.
path: The path used to select the values.
replacement: The value to used as replacement.
B.1.7. Module ComputerateSpecifying.Unsigned
An unsigned number with a length.
data Unsigned : (m : Nat) -> Type
An unsigned integer is just a wrapper around a bit-vector of the
same size.
For sanity sake, this type always assumes that the value of a bit
is 2 ^ m - 1, with m the size of the unsigned int. In other words
the first bit is the MSB, the last bit (the closer to Nil) is the
LSB.
Implements Num, Integral, Eq, Ord, Size.
MkUnsigned : BitVector m -> Unsigned m
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 78]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
B.2. Package rfc5234
Version: 0.1
Author(s): Marc Petit-Huguenin
B.2.1. Module RFC5234.Core
The ABNF Core rules.
alpha : Rule
An ASCII alphabetic character.
bit : Rule
A "0" or "1" ASCII character.
char : Rule
Any ASCII character, starting at SOH and ending at DEL.
cr : Rule
A Carriage Return ASCII character.
crlf : Rule
A Carriage Return ASCII character, followed by the Line Feed ASCII
character.
ctl : Rule
Any ASCII control character.
digit : Rule
Any ASCII digit.
dquote : Rule
A double-quote ASCII character.
hexdig : Rule
Any hexadecimal ASCII character, in lower and upper case.
htab : Rule
A Horizontal Tab ASCII character.
lf : Rule
A Line Feed ASCII character.
lwsp : Rule
A potentially empty string of space, horizontal tab, or line
terminators, that last one followed by a space or horizontal tab.
octet : Rule
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 79]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
A 8-bit value.
sp : Rule
An ASCII space.
vchar : Rule
A printable ASCII character.
wsp : Rule
A potentially empty string of space, or horizontal tab.
B.2.2. Module RFC5234.Main
A module to generate a valid ABNF.
data Form : Type
Implements Show.
TermName : String -> Form
TermHex : Int -> List Int -> Form
TermDec : Int -> List Int -> Form
TermBin : Int -> List Int -> Form
TermString : String -> Form
Concat : Form -> Form -> List Form -> Form
Altern : Form -> Form -> List Form -> Form
TermHexRange : Int -> Int -> Form
TermDecRange : Int -> Int -> Form
TermBinRange : Int -> Int -> Form
Group : Form -> Form
Repeat : Maybe Int -> Maybe Int -> Form -> Form
Optional : Form -> Form
data Rule : Type
An ABNF rule.
Implements Show.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 80]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Eq : (name : String) -> (form : Form) -> Rule
Construct a rule.
Inc : String -> Form -> Rule
Construct an incremental rule.
data Syntax : Type
A list of rules.
Implements Show.
MkSyntax : List Rule -> Syntax
B.3. Package augmented-ascii-diagrams
Version: 0.1
Author(s): Marc Petit-Huguenin
Dependencies: rfc5234
B.3.1. Module AAD.Main
A module to generate augmented packet header diagrams.
data BoolExpr : List Name -> Type
A boolean expression
Implements ShowPrec, Show.
Equ : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Neq : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Gt : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Gte : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Lt : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Lte : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
And : BoolExpr xs -> BoolExpr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Or : BoolExpr xs -> BoolExpr ys -> BoolExpr (xs ++ ys)
Not : BoolExpr xs -> BoolExpr xs
data Expr : List Name -> Type
An expression
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 81]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Implements ShowPrec, Show.
Val : Nat -> Expr []
Var : (n : Name) -> Expr [n]
Mul : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
Div : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
Mod : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
Exp : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
Add : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
Sub : Expr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr (xs ++ ys)
ITE : BoolExpr xs -> Expr ys -> Expr zs ->
Expr (xs ++ ys ++ zs)
data Name : Type
A name
MkName : Maybe String -> String -> Name
B.4. Package rfc791
Version: 0.1
Author(s): Marc Petit-Huguenin
Dependencies: computerate-specifying
B.4.1. Module RFC791.Address
This module provides types for Internet Protocol Address.
data IP : Type
An IP address.
Implements Size.
A : (h : BitVector 1) -> h = [O] => (net : BitVector 7) ->
(host : BitVector 24) -> IP
A class A address.
B : (h : BitVector 2) -> h = [I, O] => (net : BitVector 14) ->
(host : BitVector 16) -> IP
A class B address.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 82]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
C : (h : BitVector 3) -> h = [I, I, O] =>
(net : BitVector 21) -> (host : BitVector 8) -> IP
A class C address.
B.4.2. Module RFC791.IP
Types for the Internet Protocol.
data Flags : Type
Flags.
Implements Size.
MkFlags : (reserved : BitVector 1) -> reserved = bitVector =>
(df : BitVector 1) -> (mf : BitVector 1) -> Flags
data InternetHeader : Type
Internet Protocol Header.
Implements Size.
MkInternetHeader : (version : BitVector 4) ->
version = [O, I, O, O] => (ihl : (Unsigned 4, Data)) ->
snd ihl = tetra => (tos : Tos) ->
(length : (Unsigned 16, Data)) -> snd length = wyde =>
(id : Unsigned 16) -> (flags : Flags) ->
(offset : (Unsigned 13, Data)) -> snd offset = octa =>
(ttl : (Unsigned 8, Time)) -> snd ttl = second =>
(protocol : BitVector 16) -> (checksum : BitVector 16) ->
(source : IP) -> (dest : IP) -> (options : List Option) ->
(padding : BitVector n) -> InternetHeader
data Option : Type
Internet Protocol Header Options.
Implements Size.
Eoo : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [O] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, O, O] => Option
End of Options.
Noop : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [O] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, O] => Option
No operation.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 83]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Security : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [I] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, O] =>
(length : Unsigned 8) -> length = 11 => (s : BitVector 16) ->
(c : BitVector 16) -> (h : BitVector 16) ->
(tcc : BitVector 24) -> Option
Security Option.
Lssr : (flag : BitVector 1) -> flag = [I] =>
(class : BitVector 2) -> class = [O, O] =>
(number : BitVector 5) -> number = [O, O, O, I, I] =>
(length : Unsigned 8) -> (pointer : Unsigned 8) ->
pointer >= 4 = True => Option
Loose Source and Record Route Option.
data Tos : Type
Type of Service
Implements Size.
MkTos : (precedence : Unsigned 3) -> (delay : BitVector 1) ->
(throughput : BitVector 1) -> (reliability : BitVector 1) ->
(reserved : BitVector 2) -> reserved = bitVector => Tos
internetHeader : List Decl
Appendix C. Errata Statistics
In an effort to quantify the potential benefits of using formal
methods at the IETF, an effort to relabel the Errata database is
under way.
The relabeling uses the following labels:
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 84]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
+==========+==============================================+
| Label | Description |
+==========+==============================================+
| AAD | Error in an ASCII bit diagram |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| ABNF | Error in an ABNF |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Absent | The errata was probably removed |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| ASN.1 | Error in ASN.1 |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| C | Error in C code |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Diagram | Error in a generic diagram |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Example | An example does not match the normative text |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Formula | Error preventable by using Idris code |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| FSM | Error in a State machine |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Ladder | Error in a ladder diagram |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Rejected | The erratum was rejected |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| Text | Error in the text itself, no remedy |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| TLS | Error in the TLS language |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
| XML | Error in an XML Schema |
+----------+----------------------------------------------+
Table 1
At the time of publication the first 1600 errata, which represents
25.93% of the total, have been relabeled. On these, 135 were
rejected and 51 were deleted, leaving 1414 valid errata.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 85]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
+=========+=======+============+
| Label | Count | Percentage |
+=========+=======+============+
| Text | 977 | 69.09% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| Formula | 118 | 8.34% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| Example | 112 | 7.92% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| ABNF | 71 | 5.02% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| AAD | 49 | 3.46% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| ASN.1 | 40 | 2.82% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| C | 13 | 0.91% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| FSM | 13 | 0.91% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| XML | 12 | 0.84% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| Diagram | 6 | 0.42% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| TLS | 2 | 0.14% |
+---------+-------+------------+
| Ladder | 1 | 0.07% |
+---------+-------+------------+
Table 2
Note that as the relabeling is done in in order of erratum number, at
this point it covers mostly older RFCs. A change in tooling (e.g.
ABNF verifiers) means that these numbers may drastically change as
more errata are relabeled. But at this point it seems that 31.89% of
errata could have been prevented with a more pervasive use of formal
methods.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Jim Kleck, Eric Petit-Huguenin, Nicolas Gironi, Stephen
McQuistin, and Greg Skinner for the comments, suggestions, questions,
and testing that helped improve this document and its associated
tooling.
Thanks to Ronald Tse and the Ribose team for the metanorma and
relaton tools and their diligence in fixing bugs and implementing
improvements.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 86]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
Contributors
Stephane Bryant
Email: stephane.ml.bryant@gmail.com
Changelog
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-05:
* Document:
- Update installation instructions for BitTorrent.
- Removed text related to the dat tool.
- Modifications following Stephane's review.
- Add XMPP address.
* Tooling:
- Fix idrisdoc when generating multiplicity.
- Upgrade asciidoctor to 2.0.12.
- Upgrade xml2rfc to 3.5.0.
- xml2rfc --validation option makes patch unnecessary.
- Upgrade metanorma (1.2.5) and dependencies.
- The tooling docker image is now distributed as a BitTorrent.
- Idnits upgraded to 2.16.05.
* Library:
- Use linear types in some BitVector functions.
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-04:
* Document:
- Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 have been completely reorganized,
edited, and extended as a tutorial.
- New Terminology section.
- Add a new Standard Library section, that contains the
description of all the Idris modules and external packages that
will be available for developing specifications.
- Improve bibliography.
- Extend the CLI section to cover:
o New features.
o Bibliography templates.
o Complete bugs and TODO lists.
- Generate IdrisDoc of standard library packages and modules as a
new appendix.
- Update errata stats.
- More compact changelog.
- Many modifications following Stephane's reviews.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 87]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
* Tooling:
- Additional metanorma features:
o Generate json file.
- Various bug fixes in metanorma and relaton.
- Additional Idris2 features:
o Generate elaboration cache command.
o Elaboration cache implementation.
o IdrisDoc generation.
o Some TTImp types can carry comments.
o Quoted package names in ipkg.
o List dependencies.
o Package mapping.
o Faster literate processing.
- Idris2 wrapper to load local packages.
- New include processor to generate IdrisDoc.
- Process multiple fragments on each line.
- Add support for asciidoctor outputs, including revealjs and
diagrams.
- Embedding code must now return a value that implements "Show".
String values are then stripped of their first and last double-
quotes.
- Fix bug where transcluded text is converted into ASCII art.
- Embedded code in examples in lidr files can now be escaped with
"\".
- Replace Idris with Idris2 version 0.2.1.
- Update metanorma to 1.1.4.
- Update metanorma-ietf to 2.2.2.
- Update xml2rfc to 3.0.0.
- Downgrade idnits to 2.16.04.
- Decommission the Docker image in dat://78f80c850af509e0cd3fd7bd
6f5d0dd527a861d783e05574bbd040f0502da3c6.
* Library:
- Decommission the RFC 5234 library for complete rewrite.
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-03:
* Document:
- Notes are now correctly displayed.
- Add "Implementations Oriented Standards" section.
- Add "Extended Registries" section and appendix.
- Add paragraph about hierarchical petri nets.
- Convert "Verified Code" section into a top level section, and
expand it.
- Add "Implementation-Oriented Standards" section.
* Tooling:
- Many bug fixes in metanorma-ietf.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 88]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
- Update xml2rfc to 2.40.1.
- Rebuilding text for an RFC with xml2rfc now uses pagination.
- Update metanorma-ietf to version 2.0.5.
- The "computerate" command can directly generate PDF files.
- Add support in xml2rfc for generating PDF files.
- Add asciidoctor-revealjs.
- Update metanorma to version 1.0.0.
- Update metanorma-cli to version 1.2.10.1.
* Library:
- No update
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-02:
* Document
- Switch to rfcxml3.
- Status is now experimental.
- Many nits.
- Fix incorrect errata stats.
- Move acknowledgment section at the end.
- Rewrite the APHD section (formerly known as AAD) to match
draft-mcquistin-augmented-diagrams-01.
- Fix non-ascii characters in the references.
- Intermediate AsciiDoc representation for serializers.
* Tooling
- xmlrfc3 is now the default extension.
- "docName" and "category" attributes are now generated, and the
"prepTime" is removed.
- Update xml2rfc to 2.35.0.
- Remove LanguageTool.
- Update Metanorma to version 0.3.17.
- Update Asciidoctor to 2.0.10.
- Update list of Working Groups.
* Library
- No update.
draft-petithuguenin-computerate-specifying-01:
* Document
- New changelog appendix.
- Fix incorrect reference, formatting in Idris code.
- Add option to remove container in all "docker run" command.
- Add explanations to use the Idris REPL and VIM inside the
Docker image.
- Add placeholders for ASN.1 and RELAX NG languages.
- New Errata appendix.
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 89]
Internet-Draft Computerate Specifying February 2021
- Nits.
- Improve Syntax Examples section.
* Tooling
- Update Metanorma to version 0.3.16
- Update MetaNorma-cli to version 1.2.7.1
- Switch to patched version of Idris 1.3.2 that supports remote
REPL in Docker.
- Add VIM and idris-vim extension.
- Remove some debug statements.
* Library
- No update
Author's Address
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Impedance Mismatch LLC
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
URI: hallway@jabber.ietf.org/MPH
Petit-Huguenin Expires 5 August 2021 [Page 90]