Internet-Draft CORECONF July 2023
Veillette, et al. Expires 25 January 2024 [Page]
Workgroup:
CoRE
Internet-Draft:
draft-ietf-core-comi-15
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
M. V. Veillette, Ed.
Trilliant Networks Inc.
P. van der Stok, Ed.
consultant
A. P. Pelov
Acklio
A. Bierman
YumaWorks
C. Bormann, Ed.
Universität Bremen TZI

CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF)

Abstract

This document describes a network management interface for constrained devices and networks, called CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF). The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is used to access datastore and data node resources specified in YANG, or SMIv2 converted to YANG. CORECONF uses the YANG to CBOR mapping and converts YANG identifier strings to numeric identifiers for payload size reduction. CORECONF extends the set of YANG based protocols, NETCONF and RESTCONF, with the capability to manage constrained devices and networks.

About This Document

This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://core-wg.github.io/comi/draft-ietf-core-comi.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-comi/.

Discussion of this document takes place on the core Working Group mailing list (mailto:core@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/. Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core/.

Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/core-wg/comi.

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 25 January 2024.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [RFC7252] is designed for Machine to Machine (M2M) applications such as smart energy, smart city, and building control. Constrained devices need to be managed in an automatic fashion to handle the large quantities of devices that are expected in future installations. Messages between devices need to be as small and infrequent as possible. The implementation complexity and runtime resources need to be as small as possible.

This draft describes the CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF) which uses CoAP methods to access structured data defined in YANG [RFC7950]. This draft is complementary to [RFC8040] which describes a REST-like interface called RESTCONF, which uses HTTP methods to access structured data defined in YANG.

The use of standardized data models specified in a standardized language, such as YANG, promotes interoperability between devices and applications from different manufacturers.

CORECONF and RESTCONF are intended to work in a stateless client-server fashion. They use a single round-trip to complete a single editing transaction, where NETCONF needs multiple round trips.

To promote small messages, CORECONF uses a YANG to CBOR mapping [RFC9254] and numeric identifiers [I-D.ietf-core-sid] to minimize CBOR payloads and URI length.

1.1. Terminology

The following terms are defined in the YANG data modeling language [RFC7950]: action, anydata, anyxml, client, container, data model, data node, identity, instance identifier, leaf, leaf-list, list, module, RPC, schema node, server, submodule.

The following terms are defined in [RFC6241]: configuration data, datastore, state data.

The following term is defined in [I-D.ietf-core-sid]: YANG schema item identifier (YANG SID, often shortened to simply SID).

The following terms are defined in the CoAP protocol [RFC7252]: Confirmable Message, Content-Format, Endpoint.

The following terms are defined in this document:

data node resource:

a CoAP resource that models a YANG data node.

datastore resource:

a CoAP resource that models a YANG datastore.

event stream resource:

a CoAP resource used by clients to observe YANG notifications.

notification instance:

An instance of a schema node of type notification, specified in a YANG module implemented by the server. The instance is generated in the server at the occurrence of the corresponding event and reported by an event stream resource.

list instance identifier:

Handle used to identify a YANG data node that is an instance of a YANG "list", specified with the values of the key leaves of the list.

single instance identifier:

Handle used to identify a specific data node which can be instantiated only once. This includes data nodes defined at the root of a YANG module and data nodes defined within a container. This excludes data nodes defined within a list or any children of these data nodes.

instance-identifier:

List instance identifier or single instance identifier.

instance-value:

The value assigned to a data node instance. Instance-values are serialized into the payload according to the rules defined in Section 4 of [RFC9254]. In a yang-instances data item, the reference SID applying to the instance-value is provided by the SID in the corresponding instance-identifier.

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

1.2. Example syntax

CBOR is used to encode CORECONF request and response payloads. The CBOR syntax of the YANG payloads is specified in [RFC9254], based on [RFC8949] and [RFC8742]. The payload examples are notated in Diagnostic notation (defined in Section 8 of [RFC8949] and Appendix G of [RFC8610]), which can be automatically converted to CBOR.

2. CORECONF Architecture

This section describes the CORECONF architecture to use CoAP for reading and modifying the content of datastore(s) used for the management of the instrumented node.

SMIv2 specification (optional) (2) YANG specification (1) Client Server Request CoAP request(3) Indication Confirm CoAP response(3) Response (4) Security (7) Datastore(s) (5) Event stream(s) (6)
Figure 1: Abstract CORECONF architecture

Figure 1 is a high-level representation of the main elements of the CORECONF management architecture. The different numbered components of Figure 1 are discussed according to the component number.

(1) YANG specification:

contains a set of named and versioned modules.

(2) SMIv2 specification:

Optional part that consists of a named module which, specifies a set of variables and "conceptual tables". There is an algorithm to translate SMIv2 specifications to YANG specifications.

(3) CoAP request/response messages:

The CORECONF client sends request messages to and receives response messages from the CORECONF server.

(4) Request, Indication, Response, Confirm:

Processes performed by the CORECONF clients and servers.

(5) Datastore:

A resource used to access configuration data, state data, RPCs, and actions. A CORECONF server may support a single unified datastore or multiple datastores as those defined by Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342].

(6) Event stream:

A resource used to get real-time notifications. A CORECONF server may support multiple Event streams serving different purposes such as normal monitoring, diagnostic, syslog, security monitoring.

(7) Security:

The server MUST prevent unauthorized users from reading or writing any CORECONF resources. CORECONF relies on security protocols such as DTLS [RFC6347][RFC9147] or OSCORE [RFC8613] to secure CoAP communications.

2.1. Major differences between RESTCONF and CORECONF

CORECONF is a RESTful protocol for small devices where saving bytes to transport a message is very important. Contrary to RESTCONF, many design decisions are motivated by the saving of bytes. Consequently, CORECONF is not a RESTCONF over CoAP protocol, but differs more significantly from RESTCONF.

2.1.1. Differences due to CoAP and its efficient usage

  • CORECONF uses CoAP/UDP as transport protocol and CBOR as payload format [RFC9254]. RESTCONF uses HTTP/TCP as transport protocol and JSON or XML as payload formats.
  • CORECONF uses the methods FETCH and iPATCH to access data nodes. RESTCONF uses instead the HTTP method PATCH and the HTTP method GET with the "fields" Query parameter.
  • RESTCONF uses the HTTP methods HEAD, and OPTIONS, which are not supported by CoAP.
  • CORECONF does not support "insert" query parameter (first, last, before, after) and the "point" query parameter which are supported by RESTCONF.
  • CORECONF does not support the "start-time" and "stop-time" query parameters to retrieve past notifications.

2.1.2. Differences due to the use of CBOR

  • CORECONF encodes YANG identifier strings as numbers, where RESTCONF does not.
  • CORECONF also differs in the handling of default values, only 'report-all' and 'trim' options are supported.

2.2. Compression of YANG identifiers

In the YANG specification, items are identified with a name string. In order to significantly reduce the size of identifiers used in CORECONF, numeric identifiers called YANG Schema Item iDentifier (YANG SID or simply SID) are used instead.

2.2.1. Instance-identifiers

Instance-identifiers are used to uniquely identify data node instances within a datastore. This YANG built-in type is defined in Section 9.13 of [RFC7950]. An instance-identifier is composed of the data node identifier (i.e., a SID) and, for data nodes within list(s), the keys used to index within these list(s).

In CORECONF, instance-identifiers are carried in the payload of FETCH and PATCH requests. They are encoded in CBOR based on the rules defined in Section 6.13.1 of [RFC9254].

2.3. Media-Types

CORECONF uses Media-Types based on the YANG to CBOR mapping specified in [RFC9254].

The following new Media-Types based on CBOR sequences [RFC8742] are defined in this document:

application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq:

This Media-Type represents a CBOR YANG document containing a list of instance-identifiers used to target specific data node instances within a datastore.

FORMAT: CBOR sequence of instance-identifiers

The message payload of Media-Type 'application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq' is encoded using a CBOR sequence. Each item of this CBOR sequence contains an instance-identifier encoded as defined in Section 6.13.1 of [RFC9254].

application/yang-instances+cbor-seq:

This Media-Type represents a CBOR YANG document containing a list of data node instances. Each data node instance is identified by its associated instance-identifier.

FORMAT: CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of instance-identifier, instance-value

The message payload of Media-Type 'application/yang-instances+cbor-seq' is encoded using a CBOR sequence. Each item within this CBOR sequence contains a CBOR map carrying an instance-identifier and associated instance-value. Instance-identifiers are encoded using the rules defined in Section 6.13.1 of [RFC9254], instance-values are encoded using the rules defined in Section 4 of [RFC9254]. The reference SID applying to the instance-value is provided by the SID in the instance-identifier.

When present in an iPATCH request payload, this Media-Type carry a list of data node instances to be replaced, created, or deleted. For each data node instance D, for which the instance-identifier is the same as a data node instance I, in the targeted datastore resource: the value of D replaces the value of I. When the value of D is null, the data node instance I is removed. When the targeted datastore resource does not contain a data node instance with the same instance-identifier as D, a new instance is created with the same instance-identifier and value as D (unless the value of D is null).

The different Media-Type usages are summarized in the table below:

Table 1: Summary of Media-Type Usages
Method Resource Media-Type
FETCH request datastore application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq
FETCH response datastore application/yang-instances+cbor-seq
iPATCH request datastore application/yang-instances+cbor-seq
GET response event stream application/yang-instances+cbor-seq
POST request rpc, action application/yang-instances+cbor-seq
POST response rpc, action application/yang-instances+cbor-seq

2.4. Unified datastore

CORECONF supports a simple datastore model consisting of a single unified datastore. This datastore provides access to both configuration and operational data. Configuration updates performed on this datastore are reflected immediately or with a minimal delay as operational data.

Alternatively, CORECONF servers MAY implement a more complex datastore model such as the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) as defined by [RFC8342]. Each datastore supported is implemented as a datastore resource.

Characteristics of the unified datastore are summarized in the table below:

Table 2: Characteristics of the Unified Datastore
Name Value
Name unified
YANG modules all modules
YANG nodes all data nodes ("config true" and "config false")
Access read-write
How applied changes applied in place immediately or with a minimal delay
Protocols CORECONF
Defined in "ietf-coreconf"

3. CoAP Interface

This document specifies a Management Interface. CoAP endpoints that implement the CORECONF management protocol, support at least one discoverable management resource of resource type (rt): core.c.ds. The path of the discoverable management resource is left to implementers to select (see Section 5).

YANG data node instances are accessible by performing FETCH and iPATCH operations on the datastore resource.

CORECONF also supports event stream resources used to observe notification instances. Event stream resources can be discovered using resource type (rt): core.c.ev.

The description of the CORECONF management interface is shown in the table below:

Table 3: Resources, example paths, and resource types (rt)
CoAP resource Example path rt
Datastore resource /c core.c.ds
Default event stream resource /s core.c.ev

The path values in the table are example ones. On discovery, the server makes the actual path values known for these resources.

The methods used by CORECONF are:

Table 4: CoAP Methods in CORECONF
Operation Description
FETCH Retrieve specific data nodes within a datastore resource
iPATCH Idempotently create, replace, and delete data node(s) within a datastore resource
POST Invoke an RPC or action
GET Retrieve the datastore resource or event stream resource
PUT Create or replace a datastore resource
DELETE Delete a datastore resource

3.1. Data Retrieval

One or more data nodes can be retrieved by the client. The operation is mapped to the FETCH method defined in Section 2 of [RFC8132].

There are two additional query parameters for the FETCH method:

Table 5
query parameters Description
c Control selection of configuration and non-configuration data nodes (GET and FETCH)
d Control retrieval of default values.

3.1.1. Using the 'c' query parameter

The 'c' (content) option controls how descendant nodes of the requested data nodes will be processed in the reply.

The allowed values are:

Table 6: Values for the 'c' query parameter
Value Description
c Return only configuration descendant data nodes
n Return only non-configuration descendant data nodes
a Return all descendant data nodes

This option is only allowed for GET and FETCH methods on datastore and data node resources. A 4.02 (Bad Option) error is returned if used for other methods or resource types.

If this query parameter is not present, the default value is "a" (the quotes are added for readability, but they are not part of the payload).

3.1.2. Using the 'd' query parameter

The 'd' (with-defaults) option controls how the default values of the descendant nodes of the requested data nodes will be processed.

The allowed values are:

Table 7: Values for the 'd' query parameter
Value Description
a All data nodes are reported. Defined as 'report-all' in Section 3.1 of [RFC6243].
t Data nodes set to the YANG default are not reported. Defined as 'trim' in Section 3.2 of [RFC6243].

If the target of a GET or FETCH method is a data node that represents a leaf that has a default value, and the leaf has not been given a value by any client yet, the server MUST return the default value of the leaf.

If the target of a GET method is a data node that represents a container or list that has child resources with default values, and these have not been given a value yet,

  • The server MUST NOT return the child resource if d=t.

  • The server MUST return the child resource if d=a.

If this query parameter is not present, the default value is "t" (the quotes are added for readability, but they are not part of the payload).

3.1.3. FETCH

The FETCH method is used to retrieve one or more instance-values. The FETCH request payload contains the list of instance-identifiers of the data node instances requested.

The return response payload contains a list of data node instance-values in the same order as requested. A CBOR null is returned for each data node requested by the client, not supported by the server or not currently instantiated.

For compactness, indexes of the list instance identifiers returned by the FETCH response SHOULD be elided, only the SID is provided. This approach may also help reduce implementation complexity since the format of each entry within the CBOR sequence of the FETCH response is identical to the format of the corresponding GET response.

FORMAT:
  FETCH <datastore resource>
        (Content-Format: application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of instance-identifiers

  2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of SID, instance-value
3.1.3.1. FETCH examples

This example uses the current-datetime leaf from module ietf-system [RFC7317] and the interface list from module ietf-interfaces [RFC8343]. In this example the value of current-datetime (SID 1723) and the interface list (SID 1533) instance identified with name="eth0" are queried.

REQ: FETCH </c>
     (Content-Format: application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq)
1723,            / current-datetime (SID 1723) /
[1533, "eth0"]   / interface (SID 1533) with name = "eth0" /

RES: 2.05 Content
     (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)

{
  1723 : "2014-10-26T12:16:31Z" / current-datetime (SID 1723) /
},
{
  1533 : {
     4 : "eth0",              / name (SID 1537) /
     1 : "Ethernet adaptor",  / description (SID 1534) /
     5 : 1880,                / type (SID 1538), identity /
                              / ethernetCsmacd (SID 1880) /
     2 : true,                / enabled (SID 1535) /
    11 : 3             / oper-status (SID 1544), value is testing /
  }
}

3.2. Data Editing

CORECONF allows datastore contents to be created, modified and deleted using CoAP methods.

3.2.1. Data Ordering

A CORECONF server MUST preserve the relative order of all user-ordered list and leaf-list entries that are received in a single edit request. As per [RFC9254], these YANG data node types are encoded as CBOR arrays, so messages will preserve their order.

3.2.2. POST

The CoAP POST operation is used in CORECONF for the invocation of "ACTION" and "RPC" resources. Refer to Section 3.5 for details on "ACTION" and "RPC" resources.

3.2.3. iPATCH

One or multiple data node instances are replaced with the idempotent CoAP iPATCH method [RFC8132].

There are no query parameters for the iPATCH method.

The processing of the iPATCH command is specified by Media-Type 'application/yang-instances+cbor-seq'. In summary, if the CBOR patch payload contains a data node instance that is not present in the target, this instance is added. If the target contains the specified instance, the content of this instance is replaced with the value of the payload. A null value indicates the removal of an existing data node instance.

FORMAT:
  iPATCH <datastore resource>
         (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of instance-identifier, instance-value

  2.04 Changed
3.2.3.1. iPATCH example

In this example, a CORECONF client requests the following operations:

  • Set "/ietf-system:system/ntp/enabled" (SID 1755) to true.
  • Remove the server "tac.nrc.ca" from the "/ietf-system:system/ntp/server" (SID 1756) list.
  • Add/set the server "NTP Pool server 2" to the list "/ietf-system:system/ntp/server" (SID 1756).
REQ: iPATCH </c>
     (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
{
  1755 : true                   / enabled (SID 1755) /
},
{
  [1756, "tac.nrc.ca"] : null   / server (SID 1756) /
},
{
  1756 : {                      / server (SID 1756) /
    3 : "tic.nrc.ca",           / name (SID 1759) /
    4 : true,                   / prefer (SID 1760) /
    5 : {                       / udp (SID 1761) /
      1 : "132.246.11.231"      / address (SID 1762) /
    }
  }
}

RES: 2.04 Changed

A data node resource is deleted using an iPATCH with a null value, as seen in this example.

3.3. Full datastore access

The methods GET, PUT, POST, and DELETE can be used to request, replace, create, and delete a whole datastore respectively.

FORMAT:
  GET <datastore resource>

  2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/yang-data+cbor; id=sid)
  CBOR map of SID, instance-value
FORMAT:
  PUT <datastore resource>
      (Content-Format: application/yang-data+cbor; id=sid)
  CBOR map of SID, instance-value

  2.04 Changed
FORMAT:
  POST <datastore resource>
       (Content-Format: application/yang-data+cbor; id=sid)
  CBOR map of SID, instance-value

  2.01 Created
FORMAT:
  DELETE <datastore resource>

  2.02 Deleted

The content of the CBOR map represents the complete datastore of the server at the GET indication of after a successful processing of a PUT or POST request.

3.3.1. Full datastore examples

The example uses the interface list from module ietf-interfaces [RFC8343] and the clock container from module ietf-system [RFC7317]. We assume that the datastore contains two modules ietf-system (SID 1700) and ietf-interfaces (SID 1500); they contain the 'interface' list (SID 1533) with one instance and the 'clock' container (SID 1721). After invocation of GET, a CBOR map with data nodes from these two modules is returned:

REQ:  GET </c>

RES: 2.05 Content
     (Content-Format: application/yang-data+cbor; id=sid)
{
  1721 : {                      / Clock (SID 1721) /
    2: "2016-10-26T12:16:31Z",  / current-datetime (SID 1723) /
    1: "2014-10-05T09:00:00Z"   / boot-datetime (SID 1722) /
  },
  1533 : [
    {                           / interface (SID 1533) /
       4 : "eth0",              / name (SID 1537) /
       1 : "Ethernet adaptor",  / description (SID 1534) /
       5 : 1880,                / type (SID 1538), identity: /
                                / ethernetCsmacd (SID 1880) /
       2 : true,                / enabled (SID 1535) /
      11 : 3             / oper-status (SID 1544), value is testing /
    }
  ]
}

3.4. Event stream

Event notification is an essential function for the management of servers. CORECONF allows notifications specified in YANG [RFC5277] to be reported to a list of clients. The path for the default event stream can be discovered as described in Section 3. The server MAY support additional event stream resources to address different notification needs.

Reception of notification instances is enabled with the CoAP Observe [RFC7641] function. Clients subscribe to the notifications by sending a GET request with an "Observe" option to the stream resource.

Each response payload carries one or multiple notifications. The number of notifications reported, and the conditions used to remove notifications from the reported list are left to implementers. When multiple notifications are reported, they MUST be ordered starting from the newest notification at index zero. Note that this could lead to notifications being sent multiple times, which increases the probability for the client to receive them, but it might potentially lead to messages that exceed the MTU of a single CoAP packet. If such cases could arise, implementers should make sure appropriate fragmentation is available - for example the one described in Section 4.

The format of notifications is a CBOR sequence, where each item in the sequence is a single notification as described in Section 4.2.1 of [RFC9254]. (Accordingly, a notification without any content is an empty CBOR sequence, i.e., zero bytes.)

FORMAT:
  GET <stream-resource> Observe(0)

  2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of instance-identifier, instance-value

The sequence of data node instances may contain identical items which have been generated at different times.

An example implementation is:

  • Every time an event is generated, the generated notification instance is appended to the chosen stream(s). After an aggregation period, which may be limited by the maximum number of notifications supported, the content of the instance is sent to all clients observing the modified stream.

3.4.1. Notify Examples

Let suppose the server generates the example-port-fault event as defined below.

module example-port {
  yang-version 1.1;
  namespace "https://example.com/ns/example-port";
  prefix "port";

  notification example-port-fault {   // SID 60010
    description
      "Event generated if a hardware fault is detected";
    leaf port-name {                  // SID 60011
      type string;
    }
    leaf port-fault {                 // SID 60012
      type string;
    }
  }
}

In this example the default event stream resource path /s is an example location discovered with a request similar to Figure 3. By executing a GET with Observe 0 on the default event stream resource the client receives the following response:

REQ:  GET </s> Observe(0)

RES:  2.05 Content
      (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
      Observe(12)

{
  60010 : {             / example-port-fault (SID 60010) /
    1 : "0/4/21",       / port-name (SID 60011) /
    2 : "Open pin 2"    / port-fault (SID 60012) /
  }
},
{
  60010 : {             / example-port-fault (SID 60010) /
    1 : "1/4/21",       / port-name (SID 60011) /
    2 : "Open pin 5"    / port-fault (SID 60012) /
  }
}

In the example, the request returns a success response with the contents of the last two generated events. Consecutively the server will regularly notify the client when a new event is generated.

3.4.2. The 'f' query parameter

The 'f' (filter) option is used to indicate which subset of all possible notifications is of interest. If not present, all notifications supported by the event stream are reported.

When not supported by a CORECONF server, this option shall be ignored, all events notifications are reported independently of the presence and content of the 'f' (filter) option.

When present, this option contains a comma-separated list of notification SIDs. For example, the following request returns notifications 60010 and 60020.

REQ:  GET </s?f=60010,60020> Observe(0)

This is one place where SIDs are used in the URI. Do we want to replace this with FETCH as well?

3.5. RPC statements

The YANG "action" and "RPC" statements specify the execution of a Remote Procedure Call (RPC) in the server. It is invoked using a POST method to an "Action" or "RPC" resource instance.

The request payload contains the values assigned to the input container when specified. The response payload contains the values of the output container when specified. Both the input and output containers are encoded in CBOR using the rules defined in Section 4.2.1 of [RFC9254].

The returned success response code is 2.05 Content.

FORMAT:
  POST <datastore resource>
         (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of instance-identifier, instance-value

  2.04 (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)
  CBOR sequence of CBOR maps of instance-identifier, instance-value

3.5.1. RPC Example

This example is based on Section 3.6.1 of [RFC8040], abbreviated and annotated with SIDs as follows:

module example-ops {
  yang-version 1.1;
  namespace "https://example.com/ns/example-ops";
  prefix "ops";

  rpc reboot {                          // SID 61000
    description "Reboot operation.";
    input {                             // SID 61009
      leaf delay {                      // SID 61001
        type uint32;
        units "seconds";
        default 0;
        description
          "Number of seconds to wait before initiating the
           reboot operation.";
      }
    }
  }
}

This example invokes the 'reboot' RPC (SID 61000), of the server instance with name equal to "myserver".

REQ:  POST </c>
      (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)

{ 61000:
  {
    1 : 77
  }
}
RES:  2.04 Changed
      (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)

{ 61000:
  null
}

Is this the correct empty return for an RPC without output? Note that we always have to send a yang-instances (or at least a yang-identifiers) for the input side to find the right RPC.

3.5.2. Action Example

The example is based on the YANG action "reset" as defined in Section 7.15.3 of [RFC7950] and annotated below with SIDs.

module example-server-farm {
  yang-version 1.1;
  namespace "urn:example:server-farm";
  prefix "sfarm";

  import ietf-yang-types {
    prefix "yang";
  }

  list server {                        // SID 60000
    key name;
    leaf name {                        // SID 60001
      type string;
    }
    action reset {                     // SID 60002
      input {                          // SID 60008
        leaf reset-at {                // SID 60003
          type yang:date-and-time;
          mandatory true;
        }
      }
      output {                         // SID 60009
        leaf reset-finished-at {       // SID 60004
          type yang:date-and-time;
          mandatory true;
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

This example invokes the 'reset' action (SID 60002), of the server instance with name equal to "myserver".

REQ:  POST </c>
      (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)

{ [60002, "myserver"]:
  {
    0 : { / SID 60002 XXX does this need to be input? /
      1 : "2016-02-08T14:10:08Z09:00" / reset-at (SID 60003) /
    }
  }
}
RES:  2.04 Changed
         (Content-Format: application/yang-instances+cbor-seq)

{ [60002, "myserver"]:
  {
    0 : { / SID 60002 XXX does this need to be output? /
      2 : "2016-02-08T14:10:08Z" / reset-finished-at (SID 60004)/
    }
  }
}

4. Use of Block-wise Transfers

The CoAP protocol provides reliability by acknowledging the UDP datagrams. However, when large pieces of data need to be transported, datagrams get fragmented, thus creating constraints on the resources in the client, server and intermediate routers. The block option [RFC7959] allows the transport of the total payload in individual blocks of which the size can be adapted to the underlying transport sizes such as: (UDP datagram size ~64KiB, IPv6 MTU of 1280, IEEE 802.15.4 payload of 60-80 bytes). Each block is individually acknowledged to guarantee reliability.

Notice that the Block mechanism splits the data at fixed positions, such that individual data fields may become fragmented. Therefore, assembly of multiple blocks may be required to process complete data fields.

Beware of race conditions. In case blocks are filled one at a time, care should be taken that the whole and consistent data representation is sent in multiple blocks sequentially without interruption. On the server, values might change, lists might get re-ordered, extended or reduced. When these actions happen during the serialization of the contents of the resource, the transported results do not correspond with a state having occurred in the server; or worse the returned values are inconsistent. For example: array length does not correspond with the actual number of items. It may be advisable to use Indefinite-length CBOR arrays and maps, which are foreseen for data streaming purposes. (Note that the outer structure of yang-identifiers and yang-instances is a CBOR sequence, which already behaves similar to an indefinite-length encoded array.)

5. Application Discovery

Two application discovery mechanisms are supported by CORECONF, the YANG library data model as defined by [I-D.ietf-core-yang-library] and the CORE resource discovery [RFC6690]. Implementers may choose to implement one or the other or both.

5.1. YANG library

The YANG library data model [I-D.ietf-core-yang-library] provides a high-level description of the resources available. The YANG library contains the list of modules, features, and deviations supported by the CORECONF server. From this information, CORECONF clients can infer the list of data nodes supported and the interaction model to be used to access them. This module also contains the list of datastores implemented.

As described in [RFC6690], the location of the YANG library can be found by sending a GET request to "/.well-known/core" including a resource type (RT) parameter with the value "core.c.yl". Upon success, the return payload will contain the root resource of the YANG library module.

The following example assumes that the SID of the YANG library is 2351 (kv after encoding as specified in Section 2.2) and that the server uses /c as datastore resource path.

REQ: GET </.well-known/core?rt=core.c.yl>

RES: 2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/link-format)
</c/kv>;rt="core.c.yl"

5.2. Resource Discovery

As some CoAP interfaces and services might not support the YANG library interface and still be interested to discover resources that are available, implementations MAY choose to support discovery of all available resources using "/.well-known/core" as defined by [RFC6690].

5.2.1. Datastore Resource Discovery

The presence and location of (path to) each datastore implemented by the CORECONF server can be discovered by sending a GET request to "/.well-known/core" including a resource type (RT) parameter with the value "core.c.ds".

Upon success, the return payload contains the list of datastore resources.

Each datastore returned is further qualified using the "ds" Link-Format attribute. This attribute is set to the SID assigned to the datastore identity. When a unified datastore is implemented, the ds attribute is set to 1029 as specified in Appendix B. For other examples of datastores, see the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC7950].

link-extension    = ( "ds" "=" sid )
                    ; SID assigned to the datastore identity
sid               = 1*DIGIT

The following example assumes that the server uses /c as datastore resource path.

REQ: GET </.well-known/core?rt=core.c.ds>

RES: 2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/link-format)
</c>; rt="core.c.ds";ds=1029
Figure 2

5.2.2. Data node Resource Discovery

If implemented, the presence and location of (path to) each data node implemented by the CORECONF server are discovered by sending a GET request to "/.well-known/core" including a resource type (RT) parameter with the value "core.c.dn".

Upon success, the return payload contains the SID assigned to each data node and their location.

The example below shows the discovery of the presence and location of data nodes. Data nodes '/ietf-system:system-state/clock/boot-datetime' (SID 1722) and '/ietf-system:system-state/clock/current-datetime' (SID 1723) are returned. The example assumes that the server uses /c as datastore resource path.

REQ: GET </.well-known/core?rt=core.c.dn>

RES: 2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/link-format)
</c/a6>;rt="core.c.dn",
</c/a7>;rt="core.c.dn"

Without additional filtering, the list of data nodes may become prohibitively long. If this is the case implementations SHOULD support a way to obtain all links using multiple GET requests (for example through some form of pagination).

5.2.3. Event stream Resource Discovery

The presence and location of (path to) each event stream implemented by the CORECONF server are discovered by sending a GET request to "/.well-known/core" including a resource type (RT) parameter with the value "core.c.es".

Upon success, the return payload contains the list of event stream resources.

The following example assumes that the server uses /s as the default event stream resource.

REQ: GET </.well-known/core?rt=core.c.es>

RES: 2.05 Content (Content-Format: application/link-format)
</s>;rt="core.c.es"
Figure 3

6. Error Handling

In case a request is received which cannot be processed properly, the CORECONF server MUST return an error response. This error response MUST contain a CoAP 4.xx or 5.xx response code.

Errors returned by a CORECONF server can be broken into two categories, those associated with the CoAP protocol itself and those generated during the validation of the YANG data model constraints as described in Section 8 of [RFC7950].

The following list of common CoAP errors should be implemented by CORECONF servers. This list is not exhaustive, other errors defined by CoAP and associated RFCs may be applicable.

  • Error 4.01 (Unauthorized) is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client is not authorized to perform the requested action on the targeted resource (i.e., data node, datastore, rpc, action or event stream).
  • Error 4.02 (Bad Option) is returned by the CORECONF server when one or more CoAP options are unknown or malformed.
  • Error 4.04 (Not Found) is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client is requesting a non-instantiated resource (i.e., data node, datastore, rpc, action or event stream).
  • Error 4.05 (Method Not Allowed) is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client is requesting a method not supported on the targeted resource. (e.g., GET on an rpc, PUT or POST on a data node with "config" set to false).
  • Error 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) is returned by the CORECONF server if one or multiple blocks of a block transfer request is missing, see [RFC7959] for more details.
  • Error 4.13 (Request Entity Too Large) may be returned by the CORECONF server during a block transfer request, see [RFC7959] for more details.
  • Error 4.15 (Unsupported Content-Format) is returned by the CORECONF server when the Content-Format used in the request does not match those specified in Section 2.3.

The CORECONF server MUST also enforce the different constraints associated with the YANG data models implemented. These constraints are described in Section 8 of [RFC7950]. These errors are reported using the CoAP error code 4.00 (Bad Request) and may have the following error container as payload. The YANG definition and associated .sid file are available in Appendix A and Appendix B. The error container is encoded using the encoding rules of a YANG data template as defined in Section 5 of [RFC9254].

+--rw error!
   +--rw error-tag             identityref
   +--rw error-app-tag?        identityref
   +--rw error-data-node?      instance-identifier
   +--rw error-message?        string

The following 'error-tag' and 'error-app-tag' are defined by the ietf-coreconf YANG module, these tags are implemented as YANG identity and can be extended as needed.

  • error-tag 'operation-failed' is returned by the CORECONF server when the operation request cannot be processed successfully.

    • error-app-tag 'malformed-message' is returned by the CORECONF server when the payload received from the CORECONF client does not contain a well-formed CBOR content as defined in [RFC8949] or does not comply with the CBOR structure defined within this document.
    • error-app-tag 'data-not-unique' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'unique' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.
    • error-app-tag 'too-many-elements' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'max-elements' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.
    • error-app-tag 'too-few-elements' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'min-elements' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.
    • error-app-tag 'must-violation' is returned by the CORECONF server when the restrictions imposed by a 'must' statement are violated.
    • error-app-tag 'duplicate' is returned by the CORECONF server when a client tries to create a duplicate list or leaf-list entry.
  • error-tag 'invalid-value' is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries to update or create a leaf with a value encoded using an invalid CBOR datatype or if the 'range', 'length', 'pattern' or 'require-instance' constrain is not fulfilled.

    • error-app-tag 'invalid-datatype' is returned by the CORECONF server when CBOR encoding does not follow the rules set by the YANG Build-In type or when the value is incompatible with it (e.g., a value greater than 127 for an int8, undefined enumeration).
    • error-app-tag 'not-in-range' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'range' property fails.
    • error-app-tag 'invalid-length' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'length' property fails.
    • error-app-tag 'pattern-test-failed' is returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the 'pattern' property fails.
  • error-tag 'missing-element' is returned by the CORECONF server when the operation requested by a CORECONF client fails to comply with the 'mandatory' constraint defined. The 'mandatory' constraint is enforced for leafs and choices, unless the node or any of its ancestors have a 'when' condition or 'if-feature' expression that evaluates to 'false'.

    • error-app-tag 'missing-key' is returned by the CORECONF server to further qualify a missing-element error. This error is returned when the CORECONF client tries to create or list instance, without all the 'key' specified or when the CORECONF client tries to delete a leaf listed as a 'key'.
    • error-app-tag 'missing-input-parameter' is returned by the CORECONF server when the input parameters of an RPC or action are incomplete.
  • error-tag 'unknown-element' is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries to access a data node of a YANG module not supported, of a data node associated with an 'if-feature' expression evaluated to 'false' or to a 'when' condition evaluated to 'false'.
  • error-tag 'bad-element' is returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries to create data nodes for more than one case in a choice.
  • error-tag 'data-missing' is returned by the CORECONF server when a data node required to accept the request is not present.

    • error-app-tag 'instance-required' is returned by the CORECONF server when a leaf of type 'instance-identifier' or 'leafref' marked with require-instance set to 'true' refers to an instance that does not exist.
    • error-app-tag 'missing-choice' is returned by the CORECONF server when no nodes exist in a mandatory choice.
  • error-tag 'error' is returned by the CORECONF server when an unspecified error has occurred.

For example, the CORECONF server might return the following error.

RES:  4.00 Bad Request
     (Content-Format: application/yang-data+cbor; id=sid)
{
  1024 : {
    4 : 1011,        / error-tag (SID 1028) /
                     /   = invalid-value (SID 1011) /
    1 : 1018,        / error-app-tag (SID 1025) /
                     /   = not-in-range (SID 1018) /
    2 : 1740,        / error-data-node (SID 1026) /
                     /   = timezone-utc-offset (SID 1740) /
    3 : "maximum value exceeded" / error-message (SID 1027) /
  }
}

I don't quite know how to use application/yang-instances+cbor-seq here, if we don't have an instance?

7. Security Considerations

For secure network management, it is important to restrict access to configuration variables only to authorized parties. CORECONF re-uses the security mechanisms already available to CoAP, this includes DTLS [RFC6347][RFC9147] and OSCORE [RFC8613] for protected access to resources, as well as suitable authentication and authorization mechanisms, for example those defined in ACE OAuth [RFC9200].

All the security considerations of [RFC7252], [RFC7959], [RFC8132] and [RFC7641] apply to this document as well. The use of NoSec (Section 9 of [RFC7252]), when OSCORE is not used, is NOT RECOMMENDED.

In addition, mechanisms for authentication and authorization may need to be selected if not provided with the CoAP security mode.

As [RFC9254] and [RFC4648] are used for payload and SID encoding, the security considerations of those documents also need to be well-understood.

8. IANA Considerations

8.2. CoAP Content-Formats Registry

This document adds the following Content-Format to the "CoAP Content-Formats", within the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry.

Table 9
Media Type Content Coding ID Reference
application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq   TBD2 RFC XXXX
application/yang-instances+cbor-seq   TBD3 RFC XXXX

// RFC Ed.: replace TBD1, TBD2 and TBD3 with assigned IDs and remove this note. // RFC Ed.: replace RFC XXXX with this RFC number and remove this note.

8.3. Media Types Registry

This document adds the following media types to the "Media Types" registry.

Table 10
Name Template Reference
yang-identifiers+cbor-seq application/yang-identifiers+cbor-seq RFC XXXX
yang-instances+cbor-seq application/yang-instances+cbor-seq RFC XXXX

Each of these media types share the following information:

  • Subtype name: <as listed in table>
  • Required parameters: N/A
  • Optional parameters: N/A
  • Encoding considerations: binary
  • Security considerations: See the Security Considerations section of RFC XXXX
  • Interoperability considerations: N/A
  • Published specification: RFC XXXX
  • Applications that use this media type: CORECONF
  • Fragment identifier considerations: N/A
  • Additional information:
*  Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A

*  Magic number(s): N/A

*  File extension(s): N/A

*  Macintosh file type code(s): N/A
  • Person & email address to contact for further information: iesg&ietf.org
  • Intended usage: COMMON
  • Restrictions on usage: N/A
  • Author: Michel Veillette
  • Change Controller: IETF
  • Provisional registration? No

// RFC Ed.: replace RFC XXXX with this RFC number and remove this note.

8.4. YANG Namespace and Module Name Registration

This document registers the following XML namespace URN in the "IETF XML Registry", following the format defined in [RFC3688]:

URI: please assign urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-coreconf

Registrant Contact: The IESG.

XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace.

Reference: RFC XXXX

IANA is requested to register the following YANG module in the "YANG Module Names" registry [RFC6020]:

Name: ietf-coreconf

Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-coreconf

Prefix: coreconf

Reference: RFC XXXX

// RFC Ed.: please replace XXXX with RFC number and remove this note

9. References

9.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-core-sid]
Veillette, M., Pelov, A., Petrov, I., Bormann, C., and M. Richardson, "YANG Schema Item iDentifier (YANG SID)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-core-sid-20, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-core-sid-20>.
[I-D.ietf-core-yang-library]
Veillette, M. and I. Petrov, "Constrained YANG Module Library", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-core-yang-library-03, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-core-yang-library-03>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688]
Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3688>.
[RFC4648]
Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4648>.
[RFC5277]
Chisholm, S. and H. Trevino, "NETCONF Event Notifications", RFC 5277, DOI 10.17487/RFC5277, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5277>.
[RFC6020]
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6020>.
[RFC6241]
Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6241>.
[RFC6243]
Bierman, A. and B. Lengyel, "With-defaults Capability for NETCONF", RFC 6243, DOI 10.17487/RFC6243, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6243>.
[RFC7252]
Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252, DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7252>.
[RFC7641]
Hartke, K., "Observing Resources in the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7641, DOI 10.17487/RFC7641, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7641>.
[RFC7950]
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7950>.
[RFC7959]
Bormann, C. and Z. Shelby, Ed., "Block-Wise Transfers in the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7959, DOI 10.17487/RFC7959, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7959>.
[RFC8040]
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8040>.
[RFC8132]
van der Stok, P., Bormann, C., and A. Sehgal, "PATCH and FETCH Methods for the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 8132, DOI 10.17487/RFC8132, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8132>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8610]
Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8610>.
[RFC8742]
Bormann, C., "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Sequences", RFC 8742, DOI 10.17487/RFC8742, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8742>.
[RFC8949]
Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949, DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949>.
[RFC9254]
Veillette, M., Ed., Petrov, I., Ed., Pelov, A., Bormann, C., and M. Richardson, "Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG in the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)", RFC 9254, DOI 10.17487/RFC9254, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9254>.

9.2. Informative References

[RFC6347]
Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6347>.
[RFC6690]
Shelby, Z., "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Link Format", RFC 6690, DOI 10.17487/RFC6690, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6690>.
[RFC7317]
Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "A YANG Data Model for System Management", RFC 7317, DOI 10.17487/RFC7317, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7317>.
[RFC8342]
Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K., and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8342>.
[RFC8343]
Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8343>.
[RFC8613]
Selander, G., Mattsson, J., Palombini, F., and L. Seitz, "Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE)", RFC 8613, DOI 10.17487/RFC8613, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8613>.
[RFC9147]
Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 9147, DOI 10.17487/RFC9147, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9147>.
[RFC9200]
Seitz, L., Selander, G., Wahlstroem, E., Erdtman, S., and H. Tschofenig, "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments Using the OAuth 2.0 Framework (ACE-OAuth)", RFC 9200, DOI 10.17487/RFC9200, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9200>.

Appendix A. ietf-coreconf YANG module

<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-coreconf@2023-07-10.yang"

module ietf-coreconf {
  yang-version 1.1;

  namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-coreconf";
  prefix coreconf;

  import ietf-datastores {
    prefix ds;
  }

  import ietf-restconf {
    prefix rc;
    description
      "This import statement is required to access
       the yang-data extension defined in RFC 8040.";
    reference "RFC 8040: RESTCONF Protocol";
  }

  organization
    "IETF Core Working Group";

  contact
    "Michel Veillette
     <mailto:michel.veillette@trilliantinc.com>

     Alexander Pelov
     <mailto:alexander@ackl.io>

     Peter van der Stok
     <mailto:consultancy@vanderstok.org>

     Andy Bierman
     <mailto:andy@yumaworks.com>";

  description
    "This module contains the different definitions required
     by the CORECONF protocol.

     Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
     authors of the code.  All rights reserved.

     Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
     without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to
     the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set
     forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
     Relating to IETF Documents
     (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).

     This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX;
     see the RFC itself for full legal notices.";

  revision 2023-07-10 {
     description
      "Initial revision.";
    reference
      "[I-D.ietf-core-comi] CoAP Management Interface";
  }

  identity unified {
    base ds:datastore;
    description
      "Identifier of the unified configuration and operational
       state datastore.";
  }

  identity error-tag {
    description
      "Base identity for error-tag.";
  }

  identity operation-failed {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the operation request
       can't be processed successfully.";
  }

  identity invalid-value {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries
       to update or create a leaf with a value encoded using an
       invalid CBOR datatype or if the 'range', 'length',
       'pattern' or 'require-instance' constrain is not
       fulfilled.";
  }

  identity missing-element {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the operation requested
       by a CORECONF client fails to comply with the 'mandatory'
       constraint defined. The 'mandatory' constraint is
       enforced for leafs and choices, unless the node or any of
       its ancestors have a 'when' condition or 'if-feature'
       expression that evaluates to 'false'.";
  }

  identity unknown-element {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries
       to access a data node of a YANG module not supported, of a
       data node associated with an 'if-feature' expression
       evaluated to 'false' or to a 'when' condition evaluated
       to 'false'.";
  }

  identity bad-element {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the CORECONF client tries
       to create data nodes for more than one case in a choice.";
  }

  identity data-missing {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when a data node required to
       accept the request is not present.";
  }

  identity error {
    base error-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when an unspecified error has
      occurred.";
  }

  identity error-app-tag {
    description
      "Base identity for error-app-tag.";
  }

  identity malformed-message {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the payload received
       from the CORECONF client don't contain a well-formed CBOR
       content as defined in [RFC8949] or don't
       comply with the CBOR structure defined within this
       document.";
  }

  identity data-not-unique {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'unique' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.";
  }

  identity too-many-elements {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'max-elements' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.";
  }

  identity too-few-elements {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'min-elements' constraint of a list or leaf-list fails.";
  }

  identity must-violation {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the restrictions
       imposed by a 'must' statement are violated.";
  }

  identity duplicate {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when a client tries to create
       a duplicate list or leaf-list entry.";
  }

  identity invalid-datatype {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when CBOR encoding is
       incorect or when the value encoded is incompatible with
       the YANG Built-In type. (e.g., value greater than 127
       for an int8, undefined enumeration).";
  }

  identity not-in-range {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'range' property fails.";
  }

  identity invalid-length {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'length' property fails.";
  }

  identity pattern-test-failed {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the validation of the
       'pattern' property fails.";
  }

  identity missing-key {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server to further qualify a
       missing-element error. This error is returned when the
       CORECONF client tries to create or list instance, without all
       the 'key' specified or when the CORECONF client tries to
       delete a leaf listed as a 'key'.";
  }

  identity missing-input-parameter {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when the input parameters
       of a RPC or action are incomplete.";
  }

  identity instance-required {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when a leaf of type
       'instance-identifier' or 'leafref' marked with
       require-instance set to 'true' refers to an instance
       that does not exist.";
  }

  identity missing-choice {
    base error-app-tag;
    description
      "Returned by the CORECONF server when no nodes exist in a
       mandatory choice.";
  }

  rc:yang-data coreconf-error {
    container error {
      description
        "Optional payload of a 4.00 Bad Request CoAP error.";

      leaf error-tag {
        type identityref {
          base error-tag;
        }
        mandatory true;
        description
          "The enumerated error-tag.";
      }

      leaf error-app-tag {
        type identityref {
          base error-app-tag;
        }
        description
          "The application-specific error-tag.";
      }

      leaf error-data-node {
        type instance-identifier;
        description
          "When the error reported is caused by a specific data node,
           this leaf identifies the data node in error.";
      }

      leaf error-message {
        type string;
        description
          "A message describing the error.";
      }
    }
  }
}

<CODE ENDS>

Appendix B. ietf-coreconf .sid file

{
  "assignment-ranges": [
    {
      "entry-point": 1000,
      "size": 100
    }
  ],
  "module-name": "ietf-coreconf",
  "module-revision": "2023-07-10",
  "items": [
    {
      "namespace": "module",
      "identifier": "ietf-coreconf",
      "sid": 1000
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "bad-element",
      "sid": 1001
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "data-missing",
      "sid": 1002
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "data-not-unique",
      "sid": 1003
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "duplicate",
      "sid": 1004
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "error",
      "sid": 1005
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "error-app-tag",
      "sid": 1006
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "error-tag",
      "sid": 1007
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "instance-required",
      "sid": 1008
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "invalid-datatype",
      "sid": 1009
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "invalid-length",
      "sid": 1010
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "invalid-value",
      "sid": 1011
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "malformed-message",
      "sid": 1012
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "missing-choice",
      "sid": 1013
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "missing-element",
      "sid": 1014
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "missing-input-parameter",
      "sid": 1015
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "missing-key",
      "sid": 1016
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "must-violation",
      "sid": 1017
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "not-in-range",
      "sid": 1018
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "operation-failed",
      "sid": 1019
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "pattern-test-failed",
      "sid": 1020
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "too-few-elements",
      "sid": 1021
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "too-many-elements",
      "sid": 1022
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "unified",
      "sid": 1029
    },
    {
      "namespace": "identity",
      "identifier": "unknown-element",
      "sid": 1023
    },
    {
      "namespace": "data",
      "identifier": "/ietf-coreconf:error",
      "sid": 1024
    },
    {
      "namespace": "data",
      "identifier": "/ietf-coreconf:error/error-app-tag",
      "sid": 1025
    },
    {
      "namespace": "data",
      "identifier": "/ietf-coreconf:error/error-data-node",
      "sid": 1026
    },
    {
      "namespace": "data",
      "identifier": "/ietf-coreconf:error/error-message",
      "sid": 1027
    },
    {
      "namespace": "data",
      "identifier": "/ietf-coreconf:error/error-tag",
      "sid": 1028
    }
  ]
}

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to Bert Greevenbosch who was one of the original authors of the CORECONF specification.

Mehmet Ersue and Bert Wijnen explained the encoding aspects of PDUs transported under SNMP. Koen Zandberg's implementation input motivated massively simplifying (and fixing) the URI construction for GET/PUT/POST requests.

The draft has further benefited from comments (alphabetical order) by Rodney Cummings, Dee Denteneer, Esko Dijk, Klaus Hartke, Michael van Hartskamp, Tanguy Ropitault, Jürgen Schönwälder, Anuj Sehgal, Zach Shelby, Hannes Tschofenig, Michael Verschoor, and Thomas Watteyne.

Contributors

Ivaylo Petrov
Acklio
1137A avenue des Champs Blancs
35510 Cesson-Sevigne
France

Authors' Addresses

Michel Veillette (editor)
Trilliant Networks Inc.
610 Rue du Luxembourg
Granby Quebec J2J 2V2
Canada
Peter van der Stok (editor)
consultant
Alexander Pelov
Acklio
2bis rue de la Chataigneraie
35510 Cesson-Sevigne
France
Andy Bierman
YumaWorks
685 Cochran St.
Suite #160
Simi Valley, CA 93065
United States of America
Carsten Bormann (editor)
Universität Bremen TZI
Postfach 330440
D-28359 Bremen
Germany