Internet-Draft | Get Datastore Differences | February 2022 |
Liu & Liu | Expires 25 August 2022 | [Page] |
- Workgroup:
- Network Working Group
- Internet-Draft:
- draft-liu-netconf-ext-obtain-ds-diff-00
- Published:
- Intended Status:
- Standards Track
- Expires:
NETCONF Extension for Datastore Differences
Abstract
This document defines a "datastore-diff" RPC that returns the differences between two datastores in an XML-based format.¶
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 August 2022.¶
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 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.¶
1. Introduction
NETCONF defines how to obtain startup ([RFC6241], section 8.7), candidate ([RFC6241], section 8.3) and running datastores to provide the ability to check the validity of the configuration before committing ([RFC6241], section 8.3.4.1).¶
However, such an approach can be non-optimal because the increment of configuration change cannot be directly obtained so as to all configuration change checks need to be manually compared. Therefore, this method is not very efficient and error-prone in many cases. The consequence of configuration error directly affects the service even if the wrong configuration is corrected quickly, it is unacceptable.¶
This document defines how to directly retrieve the differences between datastores by adding "datastore-diff" RPC to improve NETCONF usability and serviceability.¶
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174].¶
3. Extend NETCONF operation
The newly defined "datastore-diff" RPC accept input parameters to indicate source and target datastore, as described in Section 3.2.¶
3.1. Model Tree Diagram
The following figure illustrates the "ietf-netconf-ds-diff" module tree diagram [RFC8340]:¶
3.2. Parameters
/datastore-diff/target:¶
Name of the target datastore to be compared, can be either of startup, candidate and running.¶
/datastore-diff/source:¶
Name of the source datastore to be compared, can be either of startup, candidate and running.¶
Positive Response:¶
If the Network Element (NE) can satisfy the request, it sends an rpc-reply element containing a "data" element with the difference of requested datastores.¶
The compared output will use the XML-based data encoding for the differences, refer to Appendix A.¶
Negative Response:¶
An rpc-error element is included in the rpc-reply if the request cannot be completed for any reason.¶
4. Yang Model for Get Datastores Differences
The "ietf-netconf-ds-diff" module has normative references to [RFC6241], [RFC6243], [RFC6991], [RFC8342].¶
5. Security Considerations
This document extends the base operations for NETCONF [RFC6241] that are naturally protected by mandatory-to-implement secure transport Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242].¶
So there is no security problem or potential risk.¶
6. IANA Considerations
6.1. The "IETF XML" Registry
This document registers one URI in the "ns" subregistry of the IETF XML Registry [RFC3688] maintained at https://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/xml-registry.xhtml#ns.¶
Following the format in [RFC3688] to request following registration:¶
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-ds-diff¶
Registrant Contact: The IESG.¶
XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace.¶
6.2. The "YANG Module Names" Registry
This document registers one YANG module in the YANG Module Names registry [RFC6020] maintained at https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/yang-parameters.xhtml.¶
Following the format defined in [RFC6020], the following registration is requested:¶
name: ietf-netconf-ds-diff¶
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-ds-diff prefix: dsdiff RFC: XXXX¶
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Scott Mansfield for his reviews and feedback.¶
8. References
8.1. Normative References
- [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/info/rfc2119>.
- [RFC3688]
- Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
- [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/info/rfc6020>.
- [RFC6241]
- Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
- [RFC6242]
- Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
- [RFC6243]
- Bierman, A. and B. Lengyel, "With-defaults Capability for NETCONF", RFC 6243, DOI 10.17487/RFC6243, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6243>.
- [RFC6991]
- Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
- [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/info/rfc8174>.
- [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/info/rfc8342>.
8.2. Informative References
- [RFC8340]
- Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.