CDDL models for some existing RFCs

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 29 August 2023.¶

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2023 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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

(Please see abstract.) Add in [STD94] [STD90] [RFC8610] [RFC9165] [I-D.bormann-cbor-cddl-more-control]¶

2. CDDL definitions for (almost) published RFCs

This section is intended to have one subsection for each CDDL data model presented for an existing RFC. As a start, it is fleshed out with three such data models.¶

voucher-artifact = {
  "ietf-voucher:voucher": {
    created-on: yang$date-and-time
    ? (
        expires-on: yang$date-and-time
        ? last-renewal-date: yang$date-and-time
        //
        nonce: json-binary<bytes .size (8..32)>
      )
    assertion: assertion
    serial-number: text
    ? idevid-issuer: json-binary<bytes>
    pinned-domain-cert: json-binary<bytes>
    ? domain-cert-revocation-checks: bool
  }
}

assertion = "verified" / "logged" / "proximity"

yang$date-and-time = text .regexp cat3<"[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}T",
                            "[0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2}([.][0-9]+)?",
                            "(Z|[+-][0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2})">

cat3<A,B,C> = (A .cat B) .cat C

json-binary<T> = text .b64c T

sed -e s/ue=/uQ=/ -e s/'"true"'/true/ | cddl rfc8366.cddl vp -

problem-object = {
  ? type: ~uri
  ? title: text
  ? status: 100..599
  ? detail: text
  ? instance: ~uri
  * (text .regexp "\\*.*")
    .feature "standard-problem-object-extension" => any
  * text .feature "problem-object-extension" => any
}

sid-file = {
  "ietf-sid-file:sid-file": {
    module-name: yang$yang-identifier
    ? module-revision: revision-identifier
    ? sid-file-version: sid-file-version-identifier
    ? sid-file-status: "unpublished" / "published"
    ? description: text
    ? dependency-revision: [* dependency-revision]
    ? assignment-range: [* assignment-range]
    ? item: [*item]
  }
}

rep<RE>=cat3<"(", RE, ")*">
opt<RE>=cat3<"(", RE, ")?">
cat3<A,B,C> = (A .cat B) .cat C

id-re = "[a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9\\-_.]*"
yang$yang-identifier = text .regexp id-re
revision-identifier = text .regexp "[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}"
sid-file-version-identifier = uint .size 4
sid = text .decimal (0..9223372036854775807)
plus-id<Prefix> = Prefix .cat id-re
schema-node-re = cat3<plus-id<"/">, plus-id<":">, ; qualified
                      rep<plus-id<"/"> .cat       ; optionally
                          opt<plus-id<":">> > >     ; qualified
schema-node-path = text .regexp schema-node-re

dependency-revision = {
  module-name: yang$yang-identifier
  module-revision: revision-identifier
}

assignment-range = {
  entry-point: sid
  size: sid
}

item = {
  ? status: "stable" / "unstable" / "obsolete"
  (
    namespace: "module" / "identity" / "feature"
    identifier: yang$yang-identifier
  //
    namespace: "data"
    identifier: schema-node-path
  )
  sid: sid
}

3. IANA Considerations

This document makes no requests of IANA.¶

4. Security considerations

The security considerations of [RFC8610], [RFC9165], [I-D.bormann-cbor-cddl-more-control], [STD94] and [STD90] apply. This collection of CDDL models is not thought to create new security considerations. Errors in the models could -- if we knew of them, we'd fix those errors instead of explaining their security consequences in this section.¶

Acknowledgements

TBD¶

Author's Address