RFC 9648: YANG Data Model for TCP
- M. Scharf,
- M. Jethanandani,
- V. Murgai
Abstract
This document specifies a minimal YANG data model for TCP on devices that are configured and managed by network management protocols. The YANG data model defines a container for all TCP connections and groupings of authentication parameters that can be imported and used in TCP implementations or by other models that need to configure TCP parameters. The model also includes basic TCP statistics. The model is compliant with Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) (RFC 8342).¶
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
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). Further information on Internet Standards is available in 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
https://
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 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://
1. Introduction
The Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) [RFC9293] is used by many applications in the Internet, including control and management protocols. As such, TCP is implemented on network elements that can be configured and managed via network management protocols such as Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040].¶
This document specifies a minimal YANG 1.1 [RFC7950] data model for configuring and managing TCP on network elements that support YANG, a TCP connection table, a TCP listener table containing information about a particular TCP listener, and an augmentation of the YANG data model for key chains [RFC8177] to support authentication. The YANG module specified in this document is compliant with Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342].¶
The YANG module has a narrow scope and focuses on a subset of
fundamental TCP functions and basic statistics. It defines a
container for a list of TCP connections that includes definitions from
"YANG Groupings
for TCP Clients and TCP Servers" [RFC9643]. The model adheres to
the recommendation in "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual
Private Networks (VPNs)" [RFC4364]. Therefore, it allows enabling of TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) [RFC5925] and accommodates the installed
base that makes use of MD5. The module can be augmented or
updated to address more advanced or implementation
This specification does not deprecate the Management Information Base (MIB) for the Transmission
Control Protocol (TCP) [RFC4022]. The basic statistics defined in this
document follow the model of the TCP MIB. A TCP extended
statistics MIB [RFC4898] is also available, but this document does
not cover such extended statistics. The YANG module also omits some
selected parameters included in TCP MIB, most notably Retransmission
Timeout (RTO) configuration and a maximum connection limit. This is a
conscious decision as these parameters hardly matter in a
state
There are other existing TCP-related YANG data models, which are orthogonal to this specification. Examples are:¶
1.1. Conventions
Various examples in this document use the XML
[W3C
Various examples in this document contain long lines that may be folded, as described in [RFC8792].¶
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
3. YANG Module Overview
3.1. Scope
TCP is implemented on different system architectures. As a
result, there are many different and often
implementation
As a result, there is no ground truth for setting certain TCP parameters, and generally different TCP implementations have used different modeling approaches. For instance, one implementation may define a given configuration parameter globally, while another one uses per-interface settings, and both approaches work well for the corresponding use cases. Also, different systems may use different default values. In addition, TCP can be implemented in different ways and design choices by the protocol engine often affect configuration options.¶
Nonetheless, a number of TCP stack parameters require configuration by YANG data models. This document therefore defines a minimal YANG data model with fundamental parameters. An important use case is the TCP configuration on network elements, such as routers, which often use YANG data models. The model therefore specifies TCP parameters that are important on such TCP stacks.¶
In particular, this applies to the support of the TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) [RFC5925] and the corresponding
cryptographic algorithms [RFC5926].
TCP-AO is
used on routers to secure routing protocols such as BGP. In that case,
a YANG data model for TCP-AO configuration is required. The model defined
in this document includes the required parameters for TCP-AO
configuration, such as the values of SendID and RecvID. The
key chain for TCP-AO can be modeled by the YANG
data model for key chains [RFC8177]. The groupings defined in this document
can be imported and used as part of such a preconfiguratio
Given an installed base, the model also allows enabling of the legacy TCP MD5 [RFC2385] signature option. The TCP MD5 signature option was obsoleted by TCP-AO in 2010. If current implementations require TCP authentication, it is RECOMMENDED to use TCP-AO [RFC5925].¶
Similar to the TCP MIB [RFC4022], this document also specifies basic statistics, a TCP connection list, and a TCP listener list.¶
This allows implementations of TCP MIB [RFC4022] to migrate to the YANG data model defined in this memo. Note that the TCP MIB does not include means to reset statistics, which are defined in this document. This is not a major addition, as a reset can simply be implemented by storing offset values for the counters.¶
This version of the module does not model details of Multipath TCP [RFC8684]. This could be addressed in a later version of this document.¶
3.2. Model Design
The YANG data model defined in this document includes definitions from
"YANG Groupings
for TCP Clients and TCP Servers" [RFC9643]. Similar to that model, this
specification defines YANG groupings. This allows reuse of these
groupings in different YANG data models. It is intended that these
groupings will be used either standalone or for TCP-based protocols as
part of a stack of protocol
3.3. Tree Diagram
This section provides an abridged tree diagram for the YANG module defined in this document. Annotations used in the diagram are defined in "YANG Tree Diagrams" [RFC8340]. A complete tree diagram can be found in Appendix B.¶
4. TCP YANG Data Model
This YANG module references "The TCP Authentication Option" [RFC5925], "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature Option" [RFC2385], and "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)" [RFC9293] and imports "Common YANG Data Types" [RFC6991], "Network Configuration Access Control Model" [RFC8341], and "YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers" [RFC9643].¶
5. IANA Considerations
5.1. The IETF XML Registry
IANA has registered the following URI in the "ns" registry defined in the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688].¶
5.2. The YANG Module Names Registry
IANA has registered the following in the "YANG Module Names" registry created by "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)" [RFC6020].¶
This is not an IANA maintained module; however, the URI and other details of the module are maintained by IANA.¶
6. Security Considerations
This section is modeled after the template defined in Section 3.7.1 of [RFC8407].¶
The "ietf-tcp" YANG module defines a schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via YANG-based management protocols, such as NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040]. These protocols have mandatory
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol operations and content.¶
There are a number of data nodes defined in this YANG module that are
writable
Some of the readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered
sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus
important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or
notification) to these data nodes. These are the subtrees and data nodes
and their sensitivity
Some of the RPC operations in this YANG module may be considered
sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus
important to control access to these operations. These are the
operations and their sensitivity
The module specified in this document supports MD5 to basically accommodate the installed BGP base. MD5 suffers from the security weaknesses discussed in Section 2 of [RFC6151] or Section 2.1 of [RFC6952].¶
7. References
7.1. Normative References
- [RFC2119]
-
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2119 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2119 - [RFC2385]
-
Heffernan, A., "Protection of BGP Sessions via the TCP MD5 Signature Option", RFC 2385, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2385 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2385 - [RFC3688]
-
Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3688 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3688 - [RFC4252]
-
Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH) Authentication Protocol", RFC 4252, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4252 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4252 - [RFC5925]
-
Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5925 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5925 - [RFC5926]
-
Lebovitz, G. and E. Rescorla, "Cryptographic Algorithms for the TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO)", RFC 5926, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5926 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5926 - [RFC6020]
-
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6020 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 , , <https:///RFC6241 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6241 - [RFC6991]
-
Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", RFC 6991, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6991 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6991 - [RFC7950]
-
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", RFC 7950, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7950 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7950 - [RFC8040]
-
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8040 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8040 - [RFC8174]
-
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8174 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8174 - [RFC8177]
-
Lindem, A., Ed., Qu, Y., Yeung, D., Chen, I., and J. Zhang, "YANG Data Model for Key Chains", RFC 8177, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8177 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8177 - [RFC8340]
-
Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8340 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8340 - [RFC8341]
-
Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8341 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8341 - [RFC8342]
-
Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K., and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8342 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8342 - [RFC8446]
-
Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8446 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8446 - [RFC9000]
-
Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9000 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9000 - [RFC9293]
-
Eddy, W., Ed., "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)", STD 7, RFC 9293, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9293 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9293 - [RFC9643]
-
Watsen, K. and M. Scharf, "YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers", RFC 9643, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9643 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9643
7.2. Informative References
- [BGP-MODEL]
-
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., Hares, S., and J. Haas, "YANG Model for Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-idr -bgp -model -17 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -idr -bgp -model -17 - [NSF-CAP-YANG]
-
Hares, S., Ed., Jeong, J., Ed., Kim, J., Moskowitz, R., and Q. Lin, "I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-i2nsf -capability -data -model -32 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -i2nsf -capability -data -model -32 - [NSF
-FACING -YANG] -
Kim, J., Ed., Jeong, J., Ed., Park, J., Hares, S., and Q. Lin, "I2NSF Network Security Function-Facing Interface YANG Data Model", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-i2nsf -nsf -facing -interface -dm -29 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -i2nsf -nsf -facing -interface -dm -29 - [RFC4022]
-
Raghunarayan, R., Ed., "Management Information Base for the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)", RFC 4022, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4022 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4022 - [RFC4364]
-
Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4364 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4364 - [RFC4898]
-
Mathis, M., Heffner, J., and R. Raghunarayan, "TCP Extended Statistics MIB", RFC 4898, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4898 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4898 - [RFC6151]
-
Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms", RFC 6151, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6151 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6151 - [RFC6643]
-
Schoenwaelder, J., "Translation of Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2) MIB Modules to YANG Modules", RFC 6643, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6643 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6643 - [RFC6952]
-
Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6952 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6952 - [RFC8259]
-
Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8259 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8259 - [RFC8407]
-
Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models", BCP 216, RFC 8407, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8407 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8407 - [RFC8512]
-
Boucadair, M., Ed., Sivakumar, S., Jacquenet, C., Vinapamula, S., and Q. Wu, "A YANG Module for Network Address Translation (NAT) and Network Prefix Translation (NPT)", RFC 8512, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8512 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8512 - [RFC8513]
-
Boucadair, M., Jacquenet, C., and S. Sivakumar, "A YANG Data Model for Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite)", RFC 8513, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8513 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8513 - [RFC8519]
-
Jethanandani, M., Agarwal, S., Huang, L., and D. Blair, "YANG Data Model for Network Access Control Lists (ACLs)", RFC 8519, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8519 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8519 - [RFC8684]
-
Ford, A., Raiciu, C., Handley, M., Bonaventure, O., and C. Paasch, "TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses", RFC 8684, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8684 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8684 - [RFC8783]
-
Boucadair, M., Ed. and T. Reddy.K, Ed., "Distributed Denial
-of , RFC 8783, DOI 10-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel Specification" .17487 , , <https:///RFC8783 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8783 - [RFC8792]
-
Watsen, K., Auerswald, E., Farrel, A., and Q. Wu, "Handling Long Lines in Content of Internet-Drafts and RFCs", RFC 8792, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8792 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8792 - [RFC9182]
-
Barguil, S., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Boucadair, M., Ed., Munoz, L., and A. Aguado, "A YANG Network Data Model for Layer 3 VPNs", RFC 9182, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9182 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9182 - [RFC9235]
-
Touch, J. and J. Kuusisaari, "TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) Test Vectors", RFC 9235, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9235 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9235 - [TAPS-INTERFACE]
-
Trammell, B., Ed., Welzl, M., Ed., Enghardt, R., Fairhurst, G., Kühlewind, M., Perkins, C., Tiesel, P., and T. Pauly, "An Abstract Application Layer Interface to Transport Services", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-taps -interface -26 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -taps -interface -26 - [W3C
.REC -xml -20081126] -
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg
-Mc , Maler, E., and F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation RECQueen, C.M. -xml , , <https://-20081126 www >..w3 .org /TR /2008 /REC -xml -20081126 /
Appendix A. Examples
A.1. Keepalive Configuration
This particular example demonstrates how a particular connection can be configured for keepalives.¶
A.2. TCP-AO Configuration
The following example demonstrates how to model a TCP-AO [RFC5925] configuration for the example in "TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) Test Vectors" [RFC9235]. The IP addresses and other parameters are taken from the test vectors.¶
Appendix B. Complete Tree Diagram
Here is the complete tree diagram for the TCP YANG data model.¶
Acknowledgements
Michael Scharf was supported by the StandICT.eu project, which is funded by the European Commission under the Horizon 2020 Programme.¶
The following persons have contributed to this document by reviews (in alphabetical order): Mohamed Boucadair, Gorry Fairhurst, Jeffrey Haas, and Tom Petch.¶