draft-ietf-netconf-udp-pub-channel-03.txt   draft-ietf-netconf-udp-pub-channel-04.txt 
NETCONF G. Zheng NETCONF G. Zheng
Internet-Draft T. Zhou Internet-Draft T. Zhou
Intended status: Standards Track A. Clemm Intended status: Standards Track A. Clemm
Expires: January 1, 2019 Huawei Expires: April 22, 2019 Huawei
June 30, 2018 October 19, 2018
UDP based Publication Channel for Streaming Telemetry UDP based Publication Channel for Streaming Telemetry
draft-ietf-netconf-udp-pub-channel-03 draft-ietf-netconf-udp-pub-channel-04
Abstract Abstract
This document describes a UDP-based publication channel for streaming This document describes a UDP-based publication channel for streaming
telemetry use to collect data from devices. A new shim header is telemetry use to collect data from devices. A new shim header is
proposed to facilitate the distributed data collection mechanism proposed to facilitate the distributed data collection mechanism
which directly pushes data from line cards to the collector. Because which directly pushes data from line cards to the collector. Because
of the lightweight UDP encapsulation, higher frequency and better of the lightweight UDP encapsulation, higher frequency and better
transit performance can be achieved. transit performance can be achieved.
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 1, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 22, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Solution Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Solution Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Transport Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Transport Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Dynamic Subscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. Dynamic Subscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Configured Subscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.2. Configured Subscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. UDP Transport for Publication Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. UDP Transport for Publication Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.1. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Data Format of the UPC Message Header . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. Data Format of the UPC Message Header . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.3. Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3.1. Reliability Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.3.1. Reliability Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3.2. Fragmentation Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3.2. Fragmentation Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4. Data Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.4. Data Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Using DTLS to Secure UPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Using DTLS to Secure UPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1. Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.2. Port Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.2. Port Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.3. DTLS Session Initiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.3. DTLS Session Initiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.4. Sending Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.4. Sending Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.5. Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.5. Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Congestion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. Congestion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8. A YANG Data Model for Management of UPC . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 13.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Streaming telemetry refers to sending a continuous stream of Streaming telemetry refers to sending a continuous stream of
operational data from a device to a remote receiver. This provides operational data from a device to a remote receiver. This provides
an ability to monitor a network from remote and to provide network an ability to monitor a network from remote and to provide network
analytics. Devices generate telemetry data and push that data to a analytics. Devices generate telemetry data and push that data to a
collector for further analysis. By streaming the data, much better collector for further analysis. By streaming the data, much better
performance, finer-grained sampling, monitoring accuracy, and performance, finer-grained sampling, monitoring accuracy, and
bandwidth utilization can be achieved than with polling-based bandwidth utilization can be achieved than with polling-based
skipping to change at page 4, line 17 skipping to change at page 4, line 23
natively supports the distributed data collection mechanism. natively supports the distributed data collection mechanism.
The transport described in this document can be used for transmitting The transport described in this document can be used for transmitting
notification messages over both IPv4 and IPv6 [RFC8200]. notification messages over both IPv4 and IPv6 [RFC8200].
While this document will focus on the data publication channel, the While this document will focus on the data publication channel, the
subscription can be used in conjunction with the mechanism proposed subscription can be used in conjunction with the mechanism proposed
in [I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] with extensions in [I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] with extensions
[I-D.zhou-netconf-multi-stream-originators]. [I-D.zhou-netconf-multi-stream-originators].
2. Terminology 2. Terminologies
Streaming Telemetry: refers to sending a continuous stream of Streaming Telemetry: refers to sending a continuous stream of
operational data from a device to a remote receiver. This provides operational data from a device to a remote receiver. This provides
an ability to monitor a network from remote and to provide network an ability to monitor a network from remote and to provide network
analytics. analytics.
Component Subscription: A subscription that defines the data from Component Subscription: A subscription that defines the data from
each individual telemetry source which is managed and controlled by a each individual telemetry source which is managed and controlled by a
single Subscription Server. single Subscription Server.
skipping to change at page 6, line 45 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
+ + + + + + + +
Fig. 2 Call Flow For Dynamic Subscription Fig. 2 Call Flow For Dynamic Subscription
In the case of dynamic subscription, the Receiver and the Subscriber In the case of dynamic subscription, the Receiver and the Subscriber
SHOULD be colocated. So UPC can use the source IP address of the SHOULD be colocated. So UPC can use the source IP address of the
Subscription Channel as it's destination IP address. The Receiver Subscription Channel as it's destination IP address. The Receiver
MUST support listening messages at the IANA-assigned PORT-X or PORT- MUST support listening messages at the IANA-assigned PORT-X or PORT-
Y, but MAY be configured to listen at a different port. Y, but MAY be configured to listen at a different port.
The Publication Channels MUST share fate with the subscription For dynamic subscription, the Publication Channels MUST share fate
session. In other words, when the delete-subscription is received or with the subscription session. In other words, when the delete-
the subscription session is broken, all the associated Publication subscription is received or the subscription session is broken, all
Channels MUST be closed. the associated Publication Channels MUST be closed.
4.2. Configured Subscription 4.2. Configured Subscription
For a Configured Subscription, there is no guarantee that the For a Configured Subscription, there is no guarantee that the
Subscriber is currently in place with the associated Receiver(s). As Subscriber is currently in place with the associated Receiver(s). As
defined in Sub-Notif, the subscription configuration contains the defined in Sub-Notif, the subscription configuration contains the
location information of all the receivers, including the IP address location information of all the receivers, including the IP address
and the port number. So that the data originator can actively send and the port number. So that the data originator can actively send
generated messages to the corresponding Receivers via the UPC. generated messages to the corresponding Receivers via the UPC.
skipping to change at page 11, line 34 skipping to change at page 12, line 17
The Fragmentation Option can help not Application layer can split the The Fragmentation Option can help not Application layer can split the
YANG tree into several leaves. Or table into several rows. But the YANG tree into several leaves. Or table into several rows. But the
leaf or the row cannot be split any further. Now we consider a very leaf or the row cannot be split any further. Now we consider a very
long path. Since the GPB and CBOR are so compact, it's easy to fit long path. Since the GPB and CBOR are so compact, it's easy to fit
into a UDP packet. But for JSON or XML, it is possible that even one into a UDP packet. But for JSON or XML, it is possible that even one
leaf will exceed the UDP boundary. leaf will exceed the UDP boundary.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-------------------------------------------------------------+-+ +-------------------------------------------------------------+-+
| Fagment Number |L| | Fragment Number |L|
+-------------------------------------------------------------+-+ +-------------------------------------------------------------+-+
Fig. 5 Fragmentation Option Format Fig. 5 Fragmentation Option Format
The Fragmentation Option is available in the message header when the The Fragmentation Option is available in the message header when the
fragmentation flag is set to 1. The option contains: fragmentation flag is set to 1. The option contains:
Fragment Number: indicates the sequence number of the current Fragment Number: indicates the sequence number of the current
fragment. fragment.
skipping to change at page 14, line 21 skipping to change at page 14, line 43
additional cipher suites are supported, then implementations MUST NOT additional cipher suites are supported, then implementations MUST NOT
negotiate a cipher suite that employs NULL integrity or negotiate a cipher suite that employs NULL integrity or
authentication algorithms. authentication algorithms.
Where privacy is REQUIRED, then implementations must either negotiate Where privacy is REQUIRED, then implementations must either negotiate
a cipher suite that employs a non-NULL encryption algorithm or else a cipher suite that employs a non-NULL encryption algorithm or else
achieve privacy by other means, such as a physically secured network. achieve privacy by other means, such as a physically secured network.
6.4. Sending Data 6.4. Sending Data
All UPC messages MUST be sent as DTLS "application data". It is All UPC messages MUST be sent as DTLS "application_data". It is
possible that multiple UPC messages be contained in one DTLS record, possible that multiple UPC messages be contained in one DTLS record,
or that a publication message be transferred in multiple DTLS or that a publication message be transferred in multiple DTLS
records. The application data is defined with the following ABNF records. The application data is defined with the following ABNF
[RFC5234] expression: [RFC5234] expression:
APPLICATION-DATA = 1*UPC-FRAME APPLICATION-DATA = 1*UPC-FRAME
UPC-FRAME = MSG-LEN SP UPC-MSG UPC-FRAME = MSG-LEN SP UPC-MSG
MSG-LEN = NONZERO-DIGIT *DIGIT MSG-LEN = NONZERO-DIGIT *DIGIT
SP = %d32 SP = %d32
NONZERO-DIGIT = %d49-57 NONZERO-DIGIT = %d49-57
DIGIT = %d48 / NONZERO-DIGIT DIGIT = %d48 / NONZERO-DIGIT
UPC-MSG is defined in section 5.2. UPC-MSG is defined in section 5.2.
skipping to change at page 15, line 29 skipping to change at page 16, line 5
mechanism. Because streaming telemetry can generate unlimited mechanism. Because streaming telemetry can generate unlimited
amounts of data, transferring this data over UDP is generally amounts of data, transferring this data over UDP is generally
problematic. It is not recommended to use the UDP based publication problematic. It is not recommended to use the UDP based publication
channel over congestion-sensitive network paths. The only channel over congestion-sensitive network paths. The only
environments where the UDP based publication channel MAY be used are environments where the UDP based publication channel MAY be used are
managed networks. The deployments require the network path has been managed networks. The deployments require the network path has been
explicitly provisioned for the UDP based publication channel through explicitly provisioned for the UDP based publication channel through
traffic engineering mechanisms, such as rate limiting or capacity traffic engineering mechanisms, such as rate limiting or capacity
reservations. reservations.
8. IANA Considerations 8. A YANG Data Model for Management of UPC
The YANG model defined in Section 9 has two leafs augmented into one
place of Sub-Notif [I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications], plus
one identities.
module: ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications
augment /sn:subscriptions/sn:subscription/sn:receivers/sn:receiver:
+--rw address? inet:ip-address
+--rw port? inet:port-number
9. YANG Module
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications@2018-10-19.yang"
module ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications";
prefix upcsn;
import ietf-subscribed-notifications {
prefix sn;
}
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
}
organization "IETF NETCONF (Network Configuration) Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <http:/tools.ietf.org/wg/netconf/>
WG List: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
Editor: Guangying Zheng
<mailto:zhengguangying@huawei.com>
Editor: Tianran Zhou
<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Editor: Alexander Clemm
<mailto:alexander.clemm@huawei.com>";
description
"Defines UDP Publish Channel as a supported transport for subscribed
event notifications.
Copyright (c) 2018 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 2018-10-19 {
description
"Initial version";
reference
"RFC XXXX: UDP based Publication Channel for Streaming Telemetry";
}
identity upc {
base sn:transport;
description
"UPC is used as transport for notification messages and state
change notifications.";
}
grouping target-receiver {
description
"Provides a reusable description of a UPC target receiver.";
leaf address {
type inet:ip-address;
description
"Ip address of target upc receiver, which can be IPv4 address or
IPV6 address.";
}
leaf port {
type inet:port-number;
description
"Port number of target UPC receiver, if not specify, system
should use default port number.";
}
}
augment "/sn:subscriptions/sn:subscription/sn:receivers/sn:receiver" {
description
"This augmentation allows UPC specific parameters to be
exposed for a subscription.";
uses target-receiver;
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
10. IANA Considerations
This RFC requests that IANA assigns three UDP port numbers in the This RFC requests that IANA assigns three UDP port numbers in the
"Registered Port Numbers" range with the service names "upc" and "Registered Port Numbers" range with the service names "upc" and
"upc-dtls". These ports will be the default ports for the UDP based "upc-dtls". These ports will be the default ports for the UDP based
Publication Channel for NETCONF and RESTCONF. Below is the Publication Channel for NETCONF and RESTCONF. Below is the
registration template following the rules in [RFC6335]. registration template following the rules in [RFC6335].
Service Name: upc Service Name: upc
Transport Protocol(s): UDP Transport Protocol(s): UDP
skipping to change at page 16, line 16 skipping to change at page 18, line 42
Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org> Assignee: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org> Contact: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
Description: UDP based Publication Channel (DTLS) Description: UDP based Publication Channel (DTLS)
Reference: RFC XXXX Reference: RFC XXXX
Port Number: PORT-Y Port Number: PORT-Y
9. Security Considerations IANA is requested to assign a new URI from the IETF XML Registry
[RFC3688]. The following URI is suggested:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document also requests a new YANG module name in the YANG Module
Names registry [RFC7950] with the following suggestion:
name: ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications
namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-upc-subscribed-notifications
prefix: upcsn
reference: RFC XXXX
11. Security Considerations
TBD TBD
10. Acknowledgements 12. Acknowledgements
The authors of this documents would like to thank Eric Voit, Tim The authors of this documents would like to thank Eric Voit, Tim
Jenkins, and Huiyang Yang for the initial comments. Jenkins, and Huiyang Yang for the initial comments.
11. References 13. References
11.1. Normative References 13.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2914] Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles", BCP 41, [RFC2914] Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles", BCP 41,
RFC 2914, DOI 10.17487/RFC2914, September 2000, RFC 2914, DOI 10.17487/RFC2914, September 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2914>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2914>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer [RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security", RFC 4347, DOI 10.17487/RFC4347, April 2006, Security", RFC 4347, DOI 10.17487/RFC4347, April 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4347>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4347>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
skipping to change at page 17, line 38 skipping to change at page 20, line 38
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
11.2. Informative References 13.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications] [I-D.ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications]
Voit, E., Clemm, A., Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., and Voit, E., Clemm, A., Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., and
A. Tripathy, "NETCONF Support for Event Notifications", A. Tripathy, "NETCONF Support for Event Notifications",
draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-09 (work in draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-13 (work in
progress), May 2018. progress), October 2018.
[I-D.ietf-netconf-notification-messages] [I-D.ietf-netconf-notification-messages]
Voit, E., Birkholz, H., Bierman, A., Clemm, A., and T. Voit, E., Birkholz, H., Bierman, A., Clemm, A., and T.
Jenkins, "Notification Message Headers and Bundles", Jenkins, "Notification Message Headers and Bundles",
draft-ietf-netconf-notification-messages-03 (work in draft-ietf-netconf-notification-messages-04 (work in
progress), February 2018. progress), August 2018.
[I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf-notif] [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf-notif]
Voit, E., Rahman, R., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., Clemm, A., and Voit, E., Rahman, R., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., Clemm, A., and
A. Bierman, "RESTCONF and HTTP Transport for Event A. Bierman, "RESTCONF Transport for Event Notifications",
Notifications", draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-notif-06 (work draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-notif-08 (work in progress),
in progress), June 2018. October 2018.
[I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] [I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]
Voit, E., Clemm, A., Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., and Voit, E., Clemm, A., Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., and
A. Tripathy, "Customized Subscriptions to a Publisher's A. Tripathy, "Customized Subscriptions to a Publisher's
Event Streams", draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed- Event Streams", draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-
notifications-13 (work in progress), June 2018. notifications-17 (work in progress), September 2018.
[I-D.zhou-netconf-multi-stream-originators] [I-D.zhou-netconf-multi-stream-originators]
Zhou, T., Zheng, G., Voit, E., Clemm, A., and A. Bierman, Zhou, T., Zheng, G., Voit, E., Clemm, A., and A. Bierman,
"Subscription to Multiple Stream Originators", draft-zhou- "Subscription to Multiple Stream Originators", draft-zhou-
netconf-multi-stream-originators-02 (work in progress), netconf-multi-stream-originators-03 (work in progress),
May 2018. October 2018.
11.3. URIs 13.3. URIs
[1] https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/ [1] https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/
Appendix A. Change Log Appendix A. Change Log
(To be removed by RFC editor prior to publication) (To be removed by RFC editor prior to publication)
A.1. draft-ietf-zheng-udp-pub-channel-00 to v00 A.1. draft-ietf-zheng-udp-pub-channel-00 to v00
o Modified the message header format. o Modified the message header format.
skipping to change at page 19, line 13 skipping to change at page 22, line 13
o Modified the fixed message header format. o Modified the fixed message header format.
o Add the fragmentation option for the message header. o Add the fragmentation option for the message header.
A.2. v03 A.2. v03
o Clarify term through the document. o Clarify term through the document.
o Add a section on DTLS support. o Add a section on DTLS support.
A.2. v04
o Add a section on UPC subscription model.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Guangying Zheng Guangying Zheng
Huawei Huawei
101 Yu-Hua-Tai Software Road 101 Yu-Hua-Tai Software Road
Nanjing, Jiangsu Nanjing, Jiangsu
China China
Email: zhengguangying@huawei.com Email: zhengguangying@huawei.com
 End of changes. 28 change blocks. 
46 lines changed or deleted 167 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/