Diff: rfc9826v2.txt - rfc9826.txt

	rfc9826v2.txt	rfc9826.txt

	Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) D. Dhody, Ed.	Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) D. Dhody, Ed.
	Request for Comments: 9826 Huawei	Request for Comments: 9826 Huawei
	Category: Standards Track V. Beeram	Category: Standards Track V. Beeram
	ISSN: 2070-1721 Juniper Networks	ISSN: 2070-1721 Juniper Networks
	J. Hardwick	J. Hardwick

	J. Tantsura	J. Tantsura
	Nvidia	Nvidia

	July 2025	August 2025

	A YANG Data Model for the Path Computation Element Communication	A YANG Data Model for the Path Computation Element Communication
	Protocol (PCEP)	Protocol (PCEP)

	Abstract	Abstract

	This document defines a YANG data model for the management of the	This document defines a YANG data model for the management of the
	Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for	Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for
	communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a Path	communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a Path
	Computation Element (PCE), or between two PCEs.	Computation Element (PCE), or between two PCEs.

	skipping to change at line 155 ¶	skipping to change at line 155 ¶

	This document uses the following terms defined in [RFC7420]:	This document uses the following terms defined in [RFC7420]:

	PCEP entity: a local PCEP speaker	PCEP entity: a local PCEP speaker

	PCEP peer: a remote PCEP speaker	PCEP peer: a remote PCEP speaker

	PCEP speaker: term used when it is not necessary to distinguish	PCEP speaker: term used when it is not necessary to distinguish
	between local and remote.	between local and remote.


	Further, this document uses the following terms defined in [RFC8231]:	Further, this document uses the following terms defined in [RFC8051]:

	* Stateful PCE	* Stateful PCE

	* Passive Stateful PCE	* Passive Stateful PCE

	* Active Stateful PCE	* Active Stateful PCE

	* Delegation	* Delegation


		In addition, this document uses the following terms defined in
		[RFC8231]:

	* Revocation	* Revocation

	* Redelegation	* Redelegation

	* Path Computation LSP State Report (PCRpt) message	* Path Computation LSP State Report (PCRpt) message

	* Path Computation LSP Update Request (PCUpd) message	* Path Computation LSP Update Request (PCUpd) message

	* PLSP-ID (a PCEP-specific identifier for the LSP)	* PLSP-ID (a PCEP-specific identifier for the LSP)


	skipping to change at line 4692 ¶	skipping to change at line 4695 ¶

	If this mechanism is not supported, implementations must	If this mechanism is not supported, implementations must
	reset PCEP statistics individually by invoking the action	reset PCEP statistics individually by invoking the action
	for each peer and session.";	for each peer and session.";
	}	}
	}	}
	<CODE ENDS>	<CODE ENDS>

	9. Security Considerations	9. Security Considerations


	This section is modeled after the template described in Section 3.7	This section is modeled after the template described in Section 3.7.1
	of [YANG-GUIDELINES].	of [YANG-GUIDELINES].

	The "ietf-pcep" and "ietf-pcep-stats" YANG modules define data models	The "ietf-pcep" and "ietf-pcep-stats" YANG modules define data models
	that are designed to be accessed via YANG-based management protocols,	that are designed to be accessed via YANG-based management protocols,
	such as NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040]. These protocols	such as NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040]. These protocols
	have to use a secure transport layer (e.g., SSH [RFC4252], TLS	have to use a secure transport layer (e.g., SSH [RFC4252], TLS
	[RFC8446], and QUIC [RFC9000]) and have to use mutual authentication.	[RFC8446], and QUIC [RFC9000]) and have to use mutual authentication.

	The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]	The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341]
	provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or	provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or

	skipping to change at line 4765 ¶	skipping to change at line 4768 ¶
	sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.	sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.

	The YANG module defines a set of identities, types, and groupings.	The YANG module defines a set of identities, types, and groupings.
	These nodes are intended to be reused by other YANG modules. The	These nodes are intended to be reused by other YANG modules. The
	module by itself does not expose any data nodes that are writable,	module by itself does not expose any data nodes that are writable,
	data nodes that contain read-only state, or RPCs. As such, there are	data nodes that contain read-only state, or RPCs. As such, there are
	no additional security issues related to the YANG module that need to	no additional security issues related to the YANG module that need to
	be considered.	be considered.

	Modules that use the groupings that are defined in this document	Modules that use the groupings that are defined in this document

	should identify the corresponding security considerations.	should identify the corresponding security considerations. For
		example, reusing some of these groupings will expose privacy-related
		information (e.g., 'node-example').

	The actual authentication key data (whether locally specified or part	The actual authentication key data (whether locally specified or part
	of a key-chain) is sensitive and needs to be kept secret from	of a key-chain) is sensitive and needs to be kept secret from
	unauthorized parties; compromise of the key data would allow an	unauthorized parties; compromise of the key data would allow an
	attacker to forge PCEP traffic that would be accepted as authentic,	attacker to forge PCEP traffic that would be accepted as authentic,
	potentially compromising the TE domain.	potentially compromising the TE domain.

	The model describes several notifications; implementations must rate-	The model describes several notifications; implementations must rate-
	limit the generation of these notifications to avoid creating a	limit the generation of these notifications to avoid creating a
	significant notification load. Otherwise, this notification load may	significant notification load. Otherwise, this notification load may
	have some side effects on the system stability and may be exploited	have some side effects on the system stability and may be exploited
	as an attack vector.	as an attack vector.

	The "auth" container includes various authentication and security	The "auth" container includes various authentication and security
	options for PCEP. Further, Section 7.1 describes how to configure	options for PCEP. Further, Section 7.1 describes how to configure
	TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 for a PCEP session via this YANG module.	TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 for a PCEP session via this YANG module.

	The "ietf-pcep-stats" YANG module:	The "ietf-pcep-stats" YANG module:


	This document also includes another YANG module (called "ietf-pcep-
	stats") for maintaining the statistics by augmenting the "ietf-pcep"
	YANG module.

	There are no particularly sensitive writable data nodes.	There are no particularly sensitive writable data nodes.


	The readable data nodes in this YANG module may be considered	There are no particularly sensitive readable data nodes.
	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. The statistics could provide
	information related to the current usage patterns of the network.

	Some of the RPC or action operations in this YANG module may be	Some of the RPC or action operations in this YANG module may be
	considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It	considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It
	is thus important to control access to these operations.	is thus important to control access to these operations.
	Specifically, the following operation has particular sensitivities/	Specifically, the following operation has particular sensitivities/
	vulnerabilities:	vulnerabilities:

	* reset-pcep-statistics-all: The RPC is used to reset all PCEP	* reset-pcep-statistics-all: The RPC is used to reset all PCEP
	statistics across all peers and sessions. An unauthorized reset	statistics across all peers and sessions. An unauthorized reset
	could impact monitoring.	could impact monitoring.

	skipping to change at line 5099 ¶	skipping to change at line 5096 ¶
	(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,	(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,	DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.

	[RFC7420] Koushik, A., Stephan, E., Zhao, Q., King, D., and J.	[RFC7420] Koushik, A., Stephan, E., Zhao, Q., King, D., and J.
	Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol	Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
	(PCEP) Management Information Base (MIB) Module",	(PCEP) Management Information Base (MIB) Module",
	RFC 7420, DOI 10.17487/RFC7420, December 2014,	RFC 7420, DOI 10.17487/RFC7420, December 2014,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7420>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7420>.


		[RFC8051] Zhang, X., Ed. and I. Minei, Ed., "Applicability of a
		Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE)", RFC 8051,
		DOI 10.17487/RFC8051, January 2017,
		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8051>.

	[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,	[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
	and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture	and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
	(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,	(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.

	[RFC8751] Dhody, D., Lee, Y., Ceccarelli, D., Shin, J., and D. King,	[RFC8751] Dhody, D., Lee, Y., Ceccarelli, D., Shin, J., and D. King,
	"Hierarchical Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE)",	"Hierarchical Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE)",
	RFC 8751, DOI 10.17487/RFC8751, March 2020,	RFC 8751, DOI 10.17487/RFC8751, March 2020,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8751>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8751>.


	skipping to change at line 5980 ¶	skipping to change at line 5982 ¶
	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+
	\| pcep-session-peer-overload \|pcePcepSessPeerOverload \|	\| pcep-session-peer-overload \|pcePcepSessPeerOverload \|
	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+
	\| pcep-session-peer-overload-clear \|pcePcepSessPeerOverloadClear \|	\| pcep-session-peer-overload-clear \|pcePcepSessPeerOverloadClear \|
	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+	+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+

	Table 7: Relationship with PCEP MIB Notification	Table 7: Relationship with PCEP MIB Notification

	Acknowledgements	Acknowledgements


	The initial document is based on the PCEP MIB [RFC7420]. The authors	The initial draft version of this document was based on the PCEP MIB
	of this document would like to thank the authors of the above	[RFC7420]. The authors of this document would like to thank the
	document.	authors of [RFC7420].

	Thanks to Martin Bjorklund and Tom Petch for the detailed review.	Thanks to Martin Bjorklund and Tom Petch for the detailed review.
	Thanks to Mahesh Jethanandani and Jan Lindblad for the YANGDOCTOR	Thanks to Mahesh Jethanandani and Jan Lindblad for the YANGDOCTOR
	review. Thanks to Scott Kelly for the SECDIR review. Thanks to Gyan	review. Thanks to Scott Kelly for the SECDIR review. Thanks to Gyan
	Mishra and Matthew Bocci for the RTGDIR review.	Mishra and Matthew Bocci for the RTGDIR review.

	Contributors	Contributors

	Rohit Pobbathi	Rohit Pobbathi
	Nokia Networks	Nokia Networks

End of changes. 9 change blocks.
	16 lines changed or deleted	18 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48.