I2NSF Working Group S. Hares, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track J. Jeong, Ed.
Expires: 7 April 2022 J. Kim
Sungkyunkwan University
R. Moskowitz
HTT Consulting
Q. Lin
Huawei
4 October 2021
I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model
draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-20
Abstract
This document defines an information model and the corresponding YANG
data model for the capabilities of various Network Security Functions
(NSFs) in the Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF)
framework to centrally manage the capabilities of the various NSFs.
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 7 April 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
Hares, et al. Expires 7 April 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model October 2021
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. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Information Model of I2NSF NSF Capability . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Design Principles and ECA Policy Model . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Conflict, Resolution Strategy and Default Action . . . . 8
4. Overview of YANG Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. YANG Tree Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. Network Security Function (NSF) Capabilities . . . . . . 12
6. YANG Data Model of I2NSF NSF Capability . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Appendix A. Configuration Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.1. Example 1: Registration for the Capabilities of a General
Firewall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.2. Example 2: Registration for the Capabilities of a
Time-based Firewall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
A.3. Example 3: Registration for the Capabilities of a Web
Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.4. Example 4: Registration for the Capabilities of a VoIP/
VoLTE Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.5. Example 5: Registration for the Capabilities of a HTTP and
HTTPS Flood Mitigator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Appendix B. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Appendix C. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Hares, et al. Expires 7 April 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model October 2021
The cadence of meeting scheduling and the mix of mostly-in-person, hybrid and
fully online meetings going forward as well as the format of meetings, e.g.,
use of interims compared to components and length of the plenary meeting
(week). The working group is expected to document the expected future meeting
cadence and format as a BCP if consensus emerges to depart from the existing
cadence of three mostly-in-person meetings per year. Notably, any such
guidance will not become actionable until 3-4 years after it achieves
consensus, given the length of the IETF meeting planning cycle.
The work of SHMOO is expected to produce high-level principles, not detailed
operational plans. The goal is to produce guidelines for the IESG and the IETF
LLC to operationalize while ensuring they have substantial flexibility to
continue to deliver and evolve the IETF meeting experience to best serve IETF
participants and the Internet community at large. Specifications of details
concerning cancellation criteria, meeting technologies, and online meeting
agenda formats and content are out of scope. Aside from fee structure,
discussion of financial aspects of IETF meetings and changes to RFC 8713
are both out of scope. Scheduling guidance for interim meetings is out of scope.