Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                           E. Voit
Request for Comments: 7923                                      A. Clemm
Category: Informational                               A. Gonzalez Prieto
ISSN: 2070-1721                                            Cisco Systems
                                                              June 2016


           Requirements for Subscription to YANG Datastores

Abstract

  This document provides requirements for a service that allows client
  applications to subscribe to updates of a YANG datastore.  Based on
  criteria negotiated as part of a subscription, updates will be pushed
  to targeted recipients.  Such a capability eliminates the need for
  periodic polling of YANG datastores by applications and fills a
  functional gap in existing YANG transports (i.e., Network
  Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) and RESTCONF).  Such a service can
  be summarized as a "pub/sub" service for YANG datastore updates.
  Beyond a set of basic requirements for the service, various
  refinements are addressed.  These refinements include: periodicity of
  object updates, filtering out of objects underneath a requested a
  subtree, and delivery QoS guarantees.

Status of This Memo

  This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
  published for informational purposes.

  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
  (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
  received public review and has been approved for publication by the
  Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
  approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
  Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7923.












Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 1]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2016 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
  (http://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.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction ....................................................3
  2. Business Drivers ................................................3
     2.1. Pub/Sub in the Interface to the Routing System (I2RS) ......4
     2.2. Pub/Sub Variants on Network Elements .......................5
     2.3. Existing Generalized Pub/Sub Implementations ...............6
  3. Terminology .....................................................6
  4. Requirements ....................................................7
     4.1. Assumptions for Subscriber Behavior ........................7
     4.2. Subscription Service Requirements ..........................8
          4.2.1. General .............................................8
          4.2.2. Negotiation .........................................9
          4.2.3. Update Distribution ................................10
          4.2.4. Transport ..........................................11
          4.2.5. Security Requirements ..............................11
          4.2.6. Subscription QoS ...................................13
          4.2.7. Filtering ..........................................14
          4.2.8. Assurance and Monitoring ...........................15
  5. Security Considerations ........................................15
  6. References .....................................................16
     6.1. Normative References ......................................16
     6.2. Informative References ....................................16
  Acknowledgments ...................................................17
  Authors' Addresses ................................................18











Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 2]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


1.  Introduction

  Applications interacting with YANG datastores require capabilities
  beyond the traditional client-server configuration of network
  elements.  One class of such applications are service-assurance
  applications, which must maintain a continuous view of operational
  data and state.  Another class of applications are security
  applications, which must continuously track changes made upon network
  elements to ensure compliance with corporate policy.

  Periodic fetching of data is not an adequate solution for
  applications requiring frequent or prompt updates of remote object
  state.  Applying polling-based solutions here imposes a load on
  networks, devices, and applications.  Additionally, polling solutions
  are brittle in the face of communication glitches, and have
  limitations in their ability to synchronize and calibrate retrieval
  intervals across a network.  These limitations can be addressed by
  including generic object subscription mechanisms within network
  elements, and allowing these mechanisms to be applied in the context
  of data that is conceptually contained in YANG datastores.

  This document aggregates requirements for such subscription from a
  variety of deployment scenarios.

2.  Business Drivers

  For decades, information delivery of current network state has been
  accomplished either by fetching from operations interfaces, or via
  dedicated, customized networking protocols.  With the growth of
  centralized orchestration infrastructures, imperative policy
  distribution, and YANG's ascent as the dominant data modeling
  language for use in programmatic interfaces to network elements, this
  mixture of fetch plus custom networking protocols is no longer
  sufficient.  What is needed is a push mechanism that is able to
  deliver object changes as they happen.

  These push distribution mechanisms will not replace existing
  networking protocols.  Instead they will supplement these protocols,
  providing different response time, peering, scale, and security
  characteristics.

  Push solutions will not displace all existing operations
  infrastructure needs.  And SNMP and MIBs will remain widely deployed
  and the de facto choice for many monitoring solutions.  But some
  functions could be displaced.  Arguably the biggest shortcoming of
  SNMP for those applications concerns the need to rely on periodic
  polling, because it introduces an additional load on the network and
  devices, because it is brittle if polling cycles are missed, and



Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 3]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  because it is hard to synchronize and calibrate across a network.  If
  applications can only use polling type interaction patterns with YANG
  datastores, similar issues can be expected.

2.1.  Pub/Sub in the Interface to the Routing System (I2RS)

  Various documents about the Interface to the Routing System (I2RS)
  highlight the need to provide pub/sub capabilities between network
  elements.  From [RFC7921], there are references throughout the
  document beginning in Section 6.2.  Some specific examples include:

  o  Section 7.6 of [RFC7921] provides high-level pub/sub
     (notification) guidance.

  o  Section 6.4.2 of [RFC7921] identifies "subscribing to an
     information stream of route changes" and "receiving notifications
     about peers coming up or going down".

  o  Section 6.3 of [RFC7921] notes that when Local Configuration
     preempts I2RS, external notification might be necessary.

  In addition, [USECASE] has relevant requirements.  A small subset
  includes:

  o  L-Data-REQ-12: The I2RS interface should support user
     subscriptions to data with the following parameters: push of data
     synchronously or asynchronously via registered subscriptions...

  o  L-DATA-REQ-07: The I2RS interface (protocol and instant messages
     (IMs)) should allow a subscriber to select portions of the data
     model.

  o  PI-REQ01: Monitor the available routes installed in the Routing
     Information Base (RIB) of each forwarding device, including near
     real-time notification of route installation and removal.

  o  BGP-REQ10: The I2RS client SHOULD be able to instruct the I2RS
     agent(s) to notify the I2RS client when the BGP processes on an
     associated routing system observe a route change to a specific set
     of IP Prefixes and associated prefixes.... The I2RS agent should
     be able to notify the client via the publish or subscribe
     mechanism.

  o  IGP-REQ-07: The I2RS interface (protocol and IMs) should support a
     mechanism where the I2RS Clients can subscribe to the I2RS Agent's
     notification of critical node IGP events.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 4]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  o  MPLS-LDP-REQ-03: The I2RS Agent notifications should allow an I2RS
     client to subscribe to a stream of state changes regarding the LDP
     sessions or LDP Label Switched Paths (LSPs) from the I2RS Agent.

  o  L-Data-REQ-01: I2RS must be able to collect large data sets from
     the network with high frequency and resolution, and with minimal
     impact to the device's CPU and memory.

  Also, Section 7.4.3 of [RFC7922] includes this pub/sub requirement:

  o  I2RS agents MUST support publishing I2RS trace log information to
     that feed as described in [this document].  Subscribers would then
     receive a live stream of I2RS interactions in trace log format and
     could flexibly choose to do a number of things with the log
     messages.

2.2.  Pub/Sub Variants on Network Elements

  This document is intended to cover requirements beyond I2RS.  Looking
  at history, there are many examples of switching and routing
  protocols that have done explicit or implicit pub/sub in the past.
  In addition, new policy notification mechanisms that operate on
  switches and routers are being specified now.  A small subset of
  current and past subscription mechanisms includes:

  o  Multicast topology establishment is accomplished before any
     content delivery is made to endpoints (IGMP, PIM, etc.).

  o  Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) allows
     subscription into devices, which may then push spontaneous changes
     in their configured hardware and software [SACMREQ].

  o  In MPLS VPNs [RFC6513], a Customer Edge router exchanges PIM
     control messages before Provider Edge (PE) Routing Adjacencies are
     passed [RFC6513].

  o  After OSPF establishes its adjacencies, Link State Advertisement
     will then commence [RFC2328].

  Worthy of note in the examples above is the wide variety of
  underlying transports.  A generalized pub/sub mechanism, therefore
  should be structured to support alternative transports.  Based on
  current I2RS requirements, NETCONF should be the initially supported
  transport due to the need for connection-oriented/unicast
  communication.  Eventual support for multicast and broadcast
  subscription update distribution will be needed as well.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 5]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


2.3.  Existing Generalized Pub/Sub Implementations

  TIBCO, RSS, Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), and
  other technologies all show precursor pub/sub technologies.  However,
  there are new needs (described in Section 4 below) that these
  technologies do not serve.  We need a new pub/sub technology.

  There are at least two widely deployed generalized pub/sub
  implementations that come close to current needs: Extensible
  Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) [XEP-0060] and Data
  Distribution Service (DDS) [OMG-DDS].  Both serve as proof-points
  that a highly scalable distributed datastore implementation
  connecting millions of edge devices is possible.

  Because of these proof-points, we can be comfortable that the
  underlying technologies can enable reusable generalized YANG object
  distribution.  Analysis will need to fully dimension the speed and
  scale of such object distribution for various subtree sizes and
  transport types.

3.  Terminology

  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].  Although
  this document is not a protocol specification, the use of this
  language clarifies the instructions to protocol designers producing
  solutions that satisfy the requirements set out in this document.

  A Subscriber makes requests for set(s) of YANG object data.

  A Publisher is responsible for distributing subscribed YANG object
  data per the terms of a subscription.  In general, a Publisher is the
  owner of the YANG datastore that is subjected to the subscription.

  A Receiver is the target to which a Publisher pushes updates.  In
  general, the Receiver and Subscriber will be the same entity.  A
  Subscription Service provides subscriptions to Subscribers of YANG
  data.

  A Subscription Service interacts with the Publisher of the YANG data
  as needed to provide the data per the terms of the subscription.

  A subscription request for one or more YANG subtrees (including
  single leafs) is made by the Subscriber of a Publisher and is
  targeted to a Receiver.  A subscription may include constraints that
  dictate how often or under what conditions YANG information updates
  might be sent.



Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 6]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  A subscription is a contract between a Subscription Service and a
  Subscriber that stipulates the data to be pushed and the associated
  terms.

  A datastore is defined in [RFC6241].

  An Update provides object changes that have occurred within
  subscribed YANG subtree(s).  An Update must include the current
  status of (data) node instances for which filtering has indicated
  they have different status than previously provided.  An Update may
  include a bundled set of ordered/sequential changes for a given
  object that have been made since the last update.

  A Filter contains evaluation criteria, which are evaluated against
  YANG object(s) within a subscription.  There are two types of
  Filters: Subtree Filters, which identify selected objects/nodes
  published under a target data node, and object element and attribute
  Filters where an object should only be published if it has properties
  meeting specified Filter criteria.

4.  Requirements

  Many of the requirements within this section have been adapted from
  the XMPP [XEP-0060] and DDS [OMG-DDS] requirements specifications.

4.1.  Assumptions for Subscriber Behavior

  This document provides requirements for the Subscription Service.  It
  does not define all the requirements for the Subscriber/Receiver.
  However in order to frame the desired behavior of the Subscription
  Service, it is important to specify key input constraints.

  A Subscriber SHOULD avoid attempting to establish multiple
  subscriptions pertaining to the same information, i.e., referring to
  the same datastore YANG subtrees.

  A Subscriber MAY provide subscription QoS criteria to the
  Subscription Service; if the Subscription Service is unable to meet
  those criteria, the subscription SHOULD NOT be established.

  When a Subscriber and Receiver are the same entity and the transport
  session is lost/terminated, the Subscriber MUST re-establish any
  subscriptions it previously created via signaling over the transport
  session.  That is, there is no requirement for the life span of such
  signaled subscriptions to extend beyond the life span of the
  transport session.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 7]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  A Subscriber MUST be able to infer when a Subscription Service is no
  longer active and when no more updates are being sent.

  A Subscriber MAY check with a Subscription Service to validate the
  existence and monitored subtrees of a subscription.

  A Subscriber MUST be able to periodically lease and extend the lease
  of a subscription from a Subscription Service.

4.2.  Subscription Service Requirements

4.2.1.  General

  A Subscription Service MUST support the ability to create, renew,
  time out, and terminate a subscription.

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to support and independently
  track multiple subscription requests by the same Subscriber.

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to support an add/change/delete
  of subscriptions to multiple YANG subtrees as part of the same
  subscription request.

  A Subscription Service MUST support subscriptions against operational
  datastores, configuration datastores, or both.

  A Subscription Service MUST be able support filtering so that the
  subscribed updates under a target node might publish only operational
  data, only configuration data, or both.

  A subscription MAY include Filters as defined within a subscription
  request, therefore the Subscription Service MUST publish only data
  nodes that meet the Filter criteria within a subscription.

  A Subscription Service MUST support the ability to subscribe to
  periodic updates.  The subscription period MUST be configurable as
  part of the subscription request.

  A Subscription Service SHOULD support the ability to subscribe to
  updates on-change, i.e., whenever values of subscribed data objects
  change.

  For on-change updates, the Subscription Service MUST support a
  dampening period that needs to be passed before the first or
  subsequent on-change updates are sent.  The dampening period SHOULD
  be configurable as part of the subscription request.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 8]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  A Subscription Service MUST allow subscriptions to be monitored.
  Specifically, a Subscription Service MUST at a minimum maintain
  information about which subscriptions are being serviced, the terms
  of those subscriptions (e.g., what data is being subscribed,
  associated Filters, update policy -- on change, periodic), and the
  overall status of the subscription -- e.g., active or suspended.

  A Subscription Service MUST support the termination of a subscription
  when requested by the Subscriber.

  A Subscription Service SHOULD support the ability to suspend and to
  resume a subscription on request of a client.

  A Subscription Service MAY at its discretion revoke or suspend an
  existing subscription.  Reasons may include transitory resource
  limitation, credential expiry, failure to reconfirm a subscription,
  loss of connectivity with the Receiver, operator command-line
  interface (CLI), and/or others.  When this occurs, the Subscription
  Service MUST notify the Subscriber and update the subscription
  status.

  A Subscription Service MAY offer the ability to modify a subscription
  Filter.  If such an ability is offered, the service MUST provide
  subscribers with an indication telling at what point the modified
  subscription goes into effect.

4.2.2.  Negotiation

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to negotiate the following terms
  of a subscription:

  o  The policy, i.e., whether updates are on-change or periodic

  o  The interval, for periodic publication policy

  o  The on-change policy dampening period (if the on-change policy is
     supported)

  o  Any Filters associated with a subtree subscription

  A Subscription Service SHOULD be able to negotiate QoS criteria for a
  subscription.  Examples of subscription QoS criteria may include
  reliability of the Subscription Service, reaction time between a
  monitored YANG subtree/object change and a corresponding notification
  push, and the Subscription Service's ability to support certain
  levels of object liveliness.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                     [Page 9]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  In cases where a subscription request cannot be fulfilled due to
  insufficient platform resources, the Subscription Service SHOULD
  include within its decline hints on criteria that would have been
  acceptable when the subscription request was made.  For example, if
  periodic updates were requested with update intervals that were too
  short for the specified data set, an alternative acceptable interval
  period might be returned from the Publisher.  If on-change updates
  were requested with too aggressive a dampening period, then an
  acceptable dampening period may be returned, or alternatively an
  indication that only periodic updates are supported for the requested
  object(s).

4.2.3.  Update Distribution

  For on-change updates, the Subscription Service MUST only send deltas
  to the object data for which a change occurred.  (Otherwise the
  subscriber might not know what has actually undergone change.)  The
  updates for each object MUST include an indication of whether it was
  removed, added, or changed.

  When a Subscription Service is not able to send updates per its
  subscription contract, the subscription MUST notify subscribers and
  put the subscription into a state indicating that the subscription
  was suspended by the service.  When able to resume service,
  subscribers need to be notified as well.  If unable to resume
  service, the Subscription Service MAY terminate the subscription and
  notify Subscribers accordingly.

  When a subscription with on-change updates is suspended and then
  resumed, the first update SHOULD include updates of any changes that
  occurred while the subscription was suspended, with the current
  value.  The Subscription Service MUST provide a clear indication when
  this capability is not supported (because in this case, a client
  application may have to synchronize state separately).

  Multiple objects being pushed to a Subscriber, perhaps from different
  subscriptions, SHOULD be bundled together into a single Update.

  The sending of an Update MUST NOT be delayed beyond the Push Latency
  of any enclosed object changes.

  The sending of an Update MUST NOT be delayed beyond the dampening
  period of any enclosed object changes.

  The sending of an Update MUST NOT occur before the dampening period
  expires for any enclosed object changes.





Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 10]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  A Subscription Service MAY, as an option, support a replay capability
  so that a set of updates generated during a previous time internal
  can be sent to a Receiver.

4.2.4.  Transport

  It is possible for updates coming from a Subscription Service to be
  pushed over different types of transports such as NETCONF, RESTCONF,
  and HTTP.  Beyond existing transports, this Subscription Service will
  be applicable for emerging protocols such as those being defined in
  [USECASE].  The need for such transport flexibility drives the
  following requirements:

  o  A Subscription Service SHOULD support different transports.

  o  A Subscription Service SHOULD support different encodings of a
     payload.

  o  It MUST be possible for Receivers to associate the update with a
     specific subscription.

  o  In the case of connection-oriented transport, when a transport
     connection drops, the associated subscription SHOULD be
     terminated.  It is up the Subscriber to request a new
     subscription.

4.2.5.  Security Requirements

  Some uses of this Subscription Service will push privacy-sensitive
  updates and metadata.  For privacy-sensitive deployments,
  subscription information MUST be bound within secure, encrypted
  transport-layer mechanisms.  For example, if NETCONF is used as
  transport, then [RFC7589] would be a valid option to secure the
  transported information.  The Subscription Service can also be used
  with emerging privacy-sensitive deployment contexts as well.  As an
  example, deployments based on [USECASE] would apply these
  requirements in conjunction with those documented within
  [I2RS-ENV-SEC] and [I2RS-PROT-SEC] to secure ephemeral state
  information being pushed from a network element.

  As part of the subscription establishment, mutual authentication MUST
  be used between the Subscriber and the Subscription Service.

  Subscribers MUST NOT be able to pose as the original Subscription
  Service.






Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 11]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  Versioning of any subscription protocols MUST be supported so that
  the capabilities and behaviors expected of specific technology
  implementations can be exposed.

  A subscription could be used to attempt to retrieve information to
  which a client has no authorized access.  Therefore, it is important
  that data being pushed based on subscriptions is authorized in the
  same way that regular data retrieval operations are authorized.  Data
  being pushed to a client MUST be filtered accordingly, just like if
  the data were being retrieved on demand.  For Unicast transports, the
  NETCONF Authorization Control Model applies.

  Additions or changes within a subscribed subtree structure MUST be
  validated against authorization methods before subscription updates,
  including new subtree information, are pushed.

  A loss of authenticated access to the target subtree or node SHOULD
  be communicated to the Subscriber.

  For any encrypted information exchanges, commensurate strength
  security mechanisms MUST be available and SHOULD be used.  This
  includes all stages of the subscription and update push process.

  Subscription requests, including requests to create, terminate,
  suspend, and resume subscriptions MUST be properly authorized.

  When the Subscriber and Receiver are different, the Receiver MUST be
  able to terminate any subscription to it where objects are being
  delivered over a Unicast transport.

  A Subscription Service SHOULD decline a subscription request if it is
  likely to deplete its resources.  It is preferable to decline a
  subscription when originally requested, rather than having to
  terminate it prematurely later.

  When the Subscriber and Receiver are different, and when the
  underlying transport connection passes credentials as part of
  transport establishment, then potentially pushed objects MUST be
  excluded from a push update if that object doesn't have read access
  visibility for that Receiver.











Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 12]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


4.2.6.  Subscription QoS

  A Subscription Service SHOULD be able to negotiate the following
  subscription QoS parameters with a Subscriber: Dampening,
  Reliability, Deadline, and Bundling.

  A Subscription Service SHOULD be able to interpret subscription QoS
  parameters, and only establish a subscription if it is possible to
  meet the QoS needs of the provided QoS parameters.

4.2.6.1.  Liveliness

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to respond to requests to verify
  the Liveliness of a subscription.

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to report the currently monitored
  Nodes of a subscription.

4.2.6.2.  Dampening

  A Subscription Service MUST be able to negotiate the minimum time
  separation since the previous update before transmitting a subsequent
  update for subscription.  (Note: this is intended to confine the
  visibility of volatility into something digestible by the receiver.)

4.2.6.3.  Reliability

  A Subscription Service MAY send Updates over Best Effort and Reliable
  transports.

4.2.6.4.  Coherence

  For a particular subscription, every update to a subscribed object
  MUST be sent to the Receiver in sequential order.

4.2.6.5.  Presentation

  The Subscription Service MAY have the ability to bundle a set of
  discrete object notifications into a single publishable update for a
  subscription.  A bundle MAY include information on different Data
  Nodes and/or multiple updates about a single Data Node.

  For any bundled updates, the Subscription Service MUST provide
  information for a Receiver to reconstruct the order and timing of
  updates.






Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 13]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


4.2.6.6.  Deadline

  The Subscription Service MUST be able to push updates at a regular
  cadence that corresponds with the Subscriber's specified start and
  end timestamps.  (Note: the regular cadence can drive one update, a
  discrete quantity of updates, or an unbounded set of periodic
  updates.)

4.2.6.7.  Push Latency

  The Subscription Service SHOULD be able to delay Updates on object
  push for a configurable period per Subscriber.

  It MUST be possible for an administrative entity to determine the
  Push latency between object change in a monitored subtree and the
  Subscription Service Push of the update transmission.

4.2.6.8.  Relative Priority

  The Subscription Service SHOULD support the relative prioritization
  of subscriptions so that the dequeuing and discarding of push updates
  can consider this if there is insufficient bandwidth between the
  Publisher and the Receiver.

4.2.7.  Filtering

  If no filtering criteria are provided, or if filtering criteria are
  met, updates for a subscribed object MUST be pushed, subject to the
  QoS limits established for the subscription.

  It MUST be possible for the Subscription Service to receive Filter(s)
  from a Subscriber and apply them to the corresponding object(s)
  within a subscription.

  It MUST be possible to attach one or more Subtree and/or object
  element and attribute Filters to a subscription.  Mandatory Filter
  types include:

  o  For character-based object properties, Filter values that are
     exactly equal to a provided string, not equal to the string, or
     containing a string.

  o  For numeric object properties, Filter values that are =, !=, <,
     <=, >, or >= a provided number.

  It SHOULD be possible for Filtering criteria to evaluate more than
  one property of a particular subscribed object as well as apply
  multiple Filters against a single object.



Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 14]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


  It SHOULD be possible to establish query match criteria on additional
  objects to be used in conjunction with Filtering criteria on a
  subscribed object.  (For example, if A has changed and B=1, then Push
  A.)  Query match capability may be done on objects within the
  datastore even if those objects are not included within the
  subscription.  This of course assumes that the subscriber has read
  access to those objects.

  For on-change subscription updates, an object MUST pass a Filter
  through a Filter if it has changed since the previous update.  This
  includes if the object has changed multiple times since the last
  update, and if the value happens to be the exact same value as the
  last one sent.

4.2.8.  Assurance and Monitoring

  It MUST be possible to fetch the state of a single subscription from
  a Subscription Service.

  It MUST be possible to fetch the state of all subscriptions of a
  particular Subscriber.

  It MUST be possible to fetch a list and status of all subscription
  requests over a period of time.  If there is a failure, some failure
  reasons might include:

  o  Improper security credentials provided to access the target node;

  o  Target node referenced does not exist;

  o  Subscription type requested is not available upon the target node;

  o  Out of resources, or resources not available;

  o  Incomplete negotiations with the Subscriber.

5.  Security Considerations

  There are no additional security considerations beyond the
  requirements listed in Section 4.2.5.











Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 15]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

  [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
             <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

  [RFC2328]  Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
             <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.

  [RFC6241]  Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
             and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
             (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
             <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.

  [RFC6513]  Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
             BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
             2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6513>.

  [RFC7589]  Badra, M., Luchuk, A., and J. Schoenwaelder, "Using the
             NETCONF Protocol over Transport Layer Security (TLS) with
             Mutual X.509 Authentication", RFC 7589,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC7589, June 2015,
             <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7589>.

  [RFC7921]  Atlas, A., Halpern, J., Hares, S., Ward, D., and T.
             Nadeau, "An Architecture for the Interface to the Routing
             System", RFC 7921, DOI 10.17487/RFC7921, June 2016,
             <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7921>.

  [RFC7922]  Clarke, J., Salgueiro, G., and C. Pignataro, "Interface to
             the Routing System (I2RS) Traceability: Framework and
             Information Model", RFC 7922, DOI 10.17487/RFC7922, June
             2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7922>.














Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 16]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


6.2.  Informative References

  [I2RS-ENV-SEC]
             Migault, D., Ed., Halpern, J., and S. Hares, "I2RS
             Environment Security Requirements", Work in Progress,
             draft-ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs-01, April 2016.

  [I2RS-PROT-SEC]
             Hares, S., Migault, D., and J. Halpern, "I2RS Security
             Related Requirements", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-i2rs-
             protocol-security-requirements-06, May 2016.

  [OMG-DDS]  Object Management Group (OMG), "Data Distribution Service
             for Real-time Systems, Version 1.2", January 2007,
             <http://www.omg.org/spec/DDS/1.2/>.

  [SACMREQ]  Nancy, N. and L. Lorenzin, "Security Automation and
             Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements", Work in
             Progress, draft-ietf-sacm-requirements-13, March 2016.

  [USECASE]  Hares, S. and M. Chen, "Summary of I2RS Use Case
             Requirements", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-i2rs-usecase-
             reqs-summary-02, March 2016.

  [XEP-0060] Millard, P., Saint-Andre, P., and R. Meijer, "Publish-
             Subscribe", XSF XEP-0060, July 2010,
             <http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html>.
























Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 17]

RFC 7923             YANG Subscription Requirements            June 2016


Acknowledgments

  We wish to acknowledge the helpful contributions, comments, and
  suggestions that were received from Ambika Tripathy and Prabhakara
  Yellai as well as the helpfulness of related end-to-end system
  context info from Nancy Cam Winget, Ken Beck, and David McGrew.

Authors' Addresses

  Eric Voit
  Cisco Systems

  Email: [email protected]


  Alexander Clemm
  Cisco Systems

  Email: [email protected]


  Alberto Gonzalez Prieto
  Cisco Systems

  Email: [email protected]


























Voit, et al.                  Informational                    [Page 18]