Request for charter change

To: dromasca@avaya.com, rbonica@juniper.net

Subject: Request for charter change

Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:18:47 +0000 (GMT)

Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.de; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=rzoTYoYMIh6nq/5VR593ArQRn6fRguEaz/7Qc1ot21M3Xt909yCRo0VtFtRRgaN4UV7atX5sdU7PwraiE//ygpydVsnmmYwn+sMTARYKw7ENX9DDvTF2LeFD8op9QJdZqGvDAaZBdPh0EYisu5BPvdQC/Y0Vk+7COI7vTsVL+Hg=;

Dear ADs (and WG),

As new WG chairs, we have carefully studied the current WG charter
   http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netconf-charter.html

Although the date on the charter page states that it was last updated
on 2008-01-09, that update was only to list us as new WG chairs and
our new Security Advisor. The base text is from a while ago, and
in the meanwhile, some documents have completed, and some of the
text that has past tense or (future tense) is now better read as
being the present. We also adopted a set of WG documents which
were based on earlier individual I-Ds, and so we have completed
posting of revision 00 documents for our chartered WG work items.

We have clarified the text, cleaned it up a bit and we have marked
a few items as DONE. We made no substantial change (of course,
because that would require WG consensus forming first).

ADs, can you please approve that this cleanup charter text be posted
as our current WG charter page. Will you forward it to iesg-secretary,
or do we need to do so seperately (assuming you will approve)?

Bert and Mehmet

Attached is the new charter and a rfcdiff of old and new charter.
And here is the main body of the cleaned-up charter text:

Configuration of networks of devices has become a critical requirement
for operators in today's highly interoperable networks. Operators from
large to small have developed their own mechanisms or used vendor
specific mechanisms to transfer configuration data to and from a
device, and for examining device state information which may impact
the configuration. Each of these mechanisms may be different in
various aspects, such as session establishment, user authentication,
configuration data exchange, and error responses.

The NETCONF Working Group is chartered to produce a protocol suitable
for network configuration, with the following characteristics:

- Provides retrieval mechanisms which can differentiate between
configuration data and non-configuration data
- Is extensible enough so that vendors will provide access to all
configuration data on the device using a single protocol
- Has a programmatic interface (avoids screen scraping and
formatting-related changes between releases)
- Uses a textual data representation, that can be easily manipulated
using non-specialized text manipulation tools.
- Supports integration with existing user authentication methods
- Supports integration with existing configuration database systems
- Supports network wide configuration transactions (with features such
as locking and rollback capability)
- Is as transport-independent as possible
- Provides support for asynchronous notifications.

The NETCONF protocol is using XML for data encoding purposes, because
XML is a widely deployed standard which is supported by a large number
of applications.

The NETCONF protocol should be independent of the data definition
language and data models used to describe configuration and state
data.

However, the authorization model used in the protocol is dependent on
the data model. Although these issues must be fully addressed to
develop standard data models, only a small part of this work will be
initially addressed. This group will specify requirements for standard
data models in order to fully support the NETCONF protocol, such as:

- identification of principals, such as user names or distinguished names
- mechanism to distinguish configuration from non-configuration data
- XML namespace conventions
- XML usage guidelines

The initial work started in 2003 and has already been completed and was
restricted to following items:

a) NETCONF Protocol Specification, which defines the operational model,
     protocol operations, transaction model, data model requirements,
     security requirements, and transport layer requirements.
b) NETCONF over SSH Specification: Implementation Mandatory,
c) NETCONF over BEEP Specification: Implementation Optional,
d) NETCONF over SOAP Specification: Implementation Optional.

These documents define how the NETCONF protocol is used with each
transport protocol selected by the working group, and how it meets
the security and transport layer requirements of the NETCONF Protocol
Specification.

e) NETCONF Notification Specification, which defines mechanisms that
     provide an asynchronous message notification delivery service for
     the NETCONF protocol. NETCONF Notification is an optional
     capability built on top of the base NETCONF definition and
     provides the capabilities and operations necessary to support
     this service.

In the current phase of the incremental development of NETCONF the
workgroup will focus on following items:

1. Fine-grain locking: The base NETCONF protocol only provides a lock
   for the entire configuration datastore, which is not deemed to meet
   important operational and security requirements. The NETCONF working
   group will produce a standards-track RFC specifying a mechanism for
   fine-grain locking of the NETCONF configuration datastore.

2. NETCONF monitoring: It is considered best practice for IETF working
   groups to include management of their protocols within the scope of
   the solution they are providing. The NETCONF working group will
   produce a standards-track RFC with mechanisms allowing NETCONF
   itself to be used to monitor some aspects of NETCONF operation.

3. Schema advertisement: Currently the NETCONF protocol is able to
   advertise which protocol features are supported on a particular
   netconf-capable device. However, there is currently no way to discover
   which XML Schema are supported on the device. The NETCONF working
   group will produce a standards-track RFC with mechanisms making this
   discovery possible (this item may be merged with "NETCONF monitoring"
   into a single document).

4. NETCONF over TLS: Based on implementation experience there is a
   need for a standards track document to define NETCONF over TLS as an
   optional transport for the NETCONF protocol.

The following items have been identified as important but are currently
not considered in scope for re-chartering and may be candidates for work
when there is community consensus to take them on:

- General improvements to the base protocol
- Access Control requirements
- NETCONF access to SMI-based MIB data

Goals and Milestones:
Done    Working Group formed
Done    Submit initial Netconf Protocol draft
Done    Submit initial Netconf over (transport-TBD) draft
Done    Begin Working Group Last Call for the Netconf Protocol draft
Done    Begin Working Group Last Call for the Netconf over (transport-TBD)
          draft
Done    Submit final version of the Netconf Protocol draft to the IESG
Done    Submit final version of the Netconf over SOAP draft to the IESG
Done    Submit final version of the Netconf over BEEP draft to the IESG
Done    Submit final version of the Netconf over SSH draft to the IESG
Done    Update charter
Done    Submit first version of NETCONF Notifications document
Done    Begin WGLC of NETCONF Notifications document
Done    Submit final version of NETCONF Notifications document to IESG
          for consideration as Proposed Standard
Done    -00 draft for fine Grain Locking
Done    -00 draft for NETCONF over TLS
Done    -00 draft for NETCONF Monitoring
Feb 2008 -00 draft for Schema Advertisement
Mar 2008 Early Review of client authentication approach (for NETCONF over
          TLS) with the security community at IETF 71
Aug 2008 WG Last Call on NETCONF Monitoring after IETF72
Aug 2008 WG Last Call on Schema Advertisement after IETF72
Aug 2008 WG Last Call on Fine Grain Locking after IETF72
Aug 2008 WG Last Call on NETCONF over TLS after IETF72
Aug 2008 Send four documents to the IESG for consideration as proposed
          standards

neue Yahoo! Mail

Attachment: WGCharter-20080124.txt
Description: x-unknown/exe

Title: Diff: WGCharter-20080109.txt - WGCharter-20080124.txt

WGCharter-20080109.txt

WGCharter-20080124.txt

Network Configuration (netconf) Charter

Network Configuration (netconf)

In addition to this official charter maintained by the IETF Secretariat, there

is additional information about this working group on the Web at:

Additional NETCONF Web Page

Last Modified: 2008-01-09

Last Modified: 2008-01-24

Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/netconf

Chair(s):

Bert Wijnen <bertietf@bwijnen.net>

Mehmet Ersue <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>

Operations and Management Area Director(s):

Dan Romascanu <dromasca@avaya.com>

skipping to change at line 52

device, and for examining device state information which may impact

the configuration. Each of these mechanisms may be different in

various aspects, such as session establishment, user authentication,

configuration data exchange, and error responses.

The NETCONF Working Group is chartered to produce a protocol suitable

for network configuration, with the following characteristics:

- Provides retrieval mechanisms which can differentiate between

configuration data and non-configuration data

- Is extensible enough that vendors will provide access to all

- Is extensible enough so that vendors will provide access to all

configuration data on the device using a single protocol

- Has a programmatic interface (avoids screen scraping and

formatting-related changes between releases)

- Uses a textual data representation, that can be easily manipulated

using non-specialized text manipulation tools.

- Supports integration with existing user authentication methods

- Supports integration with existing configuration database systems

- Supports network wide configuration transactions (with features such

as locking and rollback capability)

- Is as transport-independent as possible

- Provides the following support for asynchronous notifications:

- Provides support for asynchronous notifications

- Specify the <hello> message (capability exchange) details to support

notifications.

- Specify the application mapping details to support notifications.

- Specify the protocol syntax and semantics of a notification message.

- Specify or select a notification content information model.

- Specify a mechanism for controlling the delivery (turn on/off) of

notifications during a session.

- Specify a mechanism for selectively receiving a configurable subset

of all possible notification types.

The NETCONF protocol will use XML for data encoding purposes, because

The NETCONF protocol is using XML for data encoding purposes, because

XML is a widely deployed standard which is supported by a large number

of applications. XML also supports hierarchical data structures.

of applications.

The NETCONF protocol should be independent of the data definition

language and data models used to describe configuration and state

data.

However, the authorization model used in the protocol is dependent on

the data model. Although these issues must be fully addressed to

develop standard data models, only a small part of this work will be

initially addressed. This group will specify requirements for standard

data models in order to fully support the NETCONF protocol, such as:

- identification of principals, such as user names or distinguished

- identification of principals, such as user names or distinguished names

names

- mechanism to distinguish configuration from non-configuration data

identification of principals, such as user names or distinguished names

- XML namespace conventions

- XML usage guidelines

It should be possible to transport the NETCONF protocol using several

The initial work started in 2003 and has already been completed and was

different protocols. The group will select at least one suitable

restricted to following items:

transport mechanism, and define a mapping for the selected protocol

(s).

The initial work (has completed) and was restricted to the following

items:

- NETCONF Protocol Specification, which defines the operational model,

a) NETCONF Protocol Specification, which defines the operational model,

protocol operations, transaction model, data model requirements,

security requirements, and transport layer requirements.

b) NETCONF over SSH Specification: Implementation Mandatory,

c) NETCONF over BEEP Specification: Implementation Optional,

d) NETCONF over SOAP Specification: Implementation Optional.

- NETCONF over SSH Specification: Implementation Mandatory; NETCONF

These documents define how the NETCONF protocol is used with each

over BEEP Specification: Implementation Optional; NETCONF over SOAP

transport protocol selected by the working group, and how it meets

Specification: Implementation Optional; These documents define how the

the security and transport layer requirements of the NETCONF Protocol

NETCONF protocol is used with each transport protocol selected by the

Specification.

working group, and how it meets the security and transport layer

requirements of the NETCONF Protocol Specification.

Additional Notification work (as described above) will now be

addressed since the initial work has been completed.

An individual submission Internet Draft has been proposed to the WG as

e) NETCONF Notification Specification, which defines mechanisms that

the starting point for the Notification work. The WG shall adopt the

provide an asynchronous message notification delivery service for

document identified as 'draft-chisholm-NETCONF-event-01.txt' as the

the NETCONF protocol. NETCONF Notification is an optional

starting point for this work.

capability built on top of the base NETCONF definition and

provides the capabilities and operations necessary to support

this service.

A second phase of incremental development of NETCONF will include the

In the current phase of the incremental development of NETCONF the

following items:

workgroup will focus on following items:

1. Fine-grain locking: The base NETCONF protocol only provides a lock

for the entire configuration datastore, which is not deemed to meet

important operational and security requirements. The NETCONF working

group will produce a standards-track RFC specifying a mechanism for

fine-grain locking of the NETCONF configuration datastore.

(The initial draft will be based on

draft-lengyel-ngo-partial-lock-00.txt barring additional contributions

from the community.)

2. NETCONF monitoring: It is considered best practice for IETF working

groups to include management of their protocols within the scope of

the solution they are providing. NETCONF does not provide this

the solution they are providing. The NETCONF working group will

capability. The NETCONF working group will produce a standards-track

produce a standards-track RFC with mechanisms allowing NETCONF

RFC with mechanisms allowing NETCONF itself to be used to monitor some

itself to be used to monitor some aspects of NETCONF operation.

aspects of NETCONF operation.

(The initial draft will be based on

draft-chisholm-netconf-monitoring-00.txt barring additional

contributions from the community.)

3. Schema advertisement: Currently the NETCONF protocol is able to

advertise which protocol features are supported on a particular

netconf-capable device. However, there is currently no way to discover

which XML Schema are supported on the device. The NETCONF working

group will produce a standards-track RFC with mechanisms making this

discovery possible.

discovery possible (this item may be merged with "NETCONF monitoring"

into a single document).

This item may be merged with "NETCONF monitoring" into a single

document.

(The initial draft will be based on

draft-scott-netconf-schema-query-00.txt barring additional

contributions from the community.)

4. NETCONF over TLS - based on implementation experience there is a

4. NETCONF over TLS: Based on implementation experience there is a

need for a standards track document to define NETCONF over TLS as an

optional transport for NETCONF

optional transport for the NETCONF protocol.

(The initial draft will be based on

draft-badra-tls-netconf-04.txt barring additional contributions from

the community.)

The following are currently not considered in scope for re-chartering

The following items have been identified as important but are currently

at this time, but may be candidates for work when there is community

not considered in scope for re-chartering and may be candidates for work

consensus to take them on. Individual submissions are being

when there is community consensus to take them on:

encouraged.

o Access Control requirements

- General improvements to the base protocol

o General improvements to the base protocol o NETCONF access to

- Access Control requirements

SMI-based MIB data o The Bill Fenner problem: Address real or

- NETCONF access to SMI-based MIB data

perceived issue that "giving SSH for NETCONF gives full SSH access to

the box"

Goals and Milestones:

Done Working Group formed

Done Submit initial Netconf Protocol draft

Done Submit initial Netconf over (transport-TBD) draft

Done Begin Working Group Last Call for the Netconf Protocol draft

Done Begin Working Group Last Call for the Netconf over (transport-TBD)

draft

Done Submit final version of the Netconf Protocol draft to the IESG

Done Submit final version of the Netconf over SOAP draft to the IESG

Done Submit final version of the Netconf over BEEP draft to the IESG

Done Submit final version of the Netconf over SSH draft to the IESG

Done Update charter

Done Submit first version of NETCONF Notifications document

Done Begin WGLC of NETCONF Notifications document

Dec 2006 Submit final version of NETCONF Notifications document to IESG

Done Submit final version of NETCONF Notifications document to IESG

for consideration as Proposed Standard

Dec 2007 -00 draft for NETCONF Monitoring

Done -00 draft for fine Grain Locking

Dec 2007 -00 draft for Schema Advertisement

Done -00 draft for NETCONF over TLS

Dec 2007 -00 draft for Fine Grain Locking

Done -00 draft for NETCONF Monitoring

Dec 2007 -00 draft for NETCONF over TLS

Feb 2008 -00 draft for Schema Advertisement

Mar 2008 Early Review of client authentication approach (for NETCONF over

TLS) with the security community at IETF 71

Aug 2008 WG Last Call on NETCONF Monitoring after IETF72

Aug 2008 WG Last Call on Schema Advertisement after IETF72

Aug 2008 WG Last Call on Fine Grain Locking after IETF72

Aug 2008 WG Last Call on NETCONF over TLS after IETF72

Aug 2008 Send four documents to the IESG for consideration as proposed

standards

Internet-Drafts:

End of changes. 23 change blocks.

80 lines changed or deleted

42 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/

Follow-Ups:

Re: Request for charter change
- From: Balazs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>
RE: Request for charter change
- From: "David B Harrington" <dbharrington@comcast.net>
RE: Request for charter change
- From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>