<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<!-- generate a ToC -->
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<!-- use symbolic references tags, i.e, [RFC2119] instead of [1] -->
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<!-- sort the reference entries alphabetically -->
<?rfc compact="no" ?>
<!-- do not start each main section on a new page -->
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" category="info" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-dtn-dtnma-01" submissionType="IETF" xml:lang="en" obsoletes="" updates="" tocInclude="true" symRefs="true" sortRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.13.0 -->
  <!-- ***** FRONT MATTER ***** -->
<front>
    <!-- The abbreviated title is used in the page header - it is only necessary if the
        full title is longer than 39 characters -->
   <title abbrev="DTNMA">DTN Management Architecture</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-dtn-dtnma-01"/>
    <author fullname="Edward J. Birrane" initials="E.J." surname="Birrane">
      <organization>Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory</organization>
      <address>
        <email>Edward.Birrane@jhuapl.edu</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Emery Annis" initials="E." surname="Annis">
      <organization>Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory</organization>
      <address>
        <email>Emery.Annis@jhuapl.edu</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Sarah E. Heiner" initials="S.E." surname="Heiner">
      <organization>Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory</organization>
      <address>
        <email>Sarah.Heiner@jhuapl.edu</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date month="July" day="10" year="2022"/>
    <!-- Meta-data Declarations -->
   <area>General</area>
    <workgroup>Delay-Tolerant Networking</workgroup>
    <keyword>DTN</keyword>
    <keyword>Network Management</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>
        This document describes the motivation for, and services required of,
        the management of devices deployed in a Delay-Tolerant Networking
        (DTN) environment. Together, this set of information outlines a
        conceptual DTN Management Architecture (DTNMA) suitable for deployment
        in any of the challenged and constrained DTN operational environments.
      </t>
      <t>
        The DTNMA is supported by two types of asynchronous behavior. First, 
        the DTNMA does not presuppose any synchronized transport behavior 
        between managed and managing devices. Second, the DTNMA does not 
        support any query-response semantics. In this way, the DTNMA allows 
        for operation in extremely challenging conditions, to include over 
        uni-directional links and cases where delays/disruptions prevent 
        operation over traditional transport layers. 
      </t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>
        The Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) architecture (as described in 
        <xref target="RFC4838" format="default"/>) has been designed to cope with data
        exchange in challenged networks. Just as the DTN architecture requires
        new capabilities for transport and transport security, special 
        consideration must be given for the management of DTN devices.
      </t>
      <t>
        This document describes the DTN Management Architecture (DTNMA) designed 
        to provide configuration, monitoring, and local control of both
        application and network services on a managed device operating either
        within or across a challenged network.
      </t>
      <t>
        The structure of the DTNMA is derived from the unique properties of 
        challenged networks are defined in <xref target="RFC7228" format="default"/>. These
        properties include cases where an end-to-end transport path may not 
        exist at any moment in time and when delivery delays may prevent timely 
        communications between a network operator and a managed device. These 
        challenges may be caused by physical impairments such as long signal 
        propagations and frequent link disruptions or by other factors such as 
        quality-of-service prioritizations, service-level 
        agreements, and other consequences of traffic management and scheduling.
      </t>
      <t>
        Device management in these environments must occur without human 
        interactivity, without system-in-the-loop synchronous function, and 
        without requiring a synchronous underlying transport layer. This means 
        that managed devices need to determine their own schedules for 
        data reporting, their own operational configuration, and perform their
        own error discovery and mitigation. Importantly, these capabilities 
        must be designed and implemented in a way that results in outcomes that
        are determinable by an outside observer as such observers may need to
        connect with a managed device after significant periods of 
        disconnectivity. 
      </t>
      <t>
        The desire to define asynchronous and autonomous device management 
        is not new. However, challenged networks (in general) and the DTN 
        environment (in particular) represent unique deployment scenarios and 
        impose unique design constraints. To the extent that these environments
        differ from more traditional, enterprise networks their management may
        also differ from the management of enterprise networks. Therefore,
        existing techniques may need to be adapted to operate in the DTN
        environment or new techniques may need to be created.
      </t>
      <t>
        Ultimately, the DTNMA is designed to leverage any transport, network, 
        and security solutions designed for challenged networks. However the 
        DTNMA is designed to be usable in any environment in which the Bundle 
        Protocol (BPv7) <xref target="RFC9171" format="default"/> may be deployed.
      </t>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Scope</name>
        <t>
            This document describes the motivation, services, desirable 
            properties, roles/responsibilities, logical data model, and system 
            model that form the DTNMA. These descriptions comprise a
            concept of operations for management in challenged networks
        </t>
        <t>
            This document is not a normative standardization of a physical data 
            model or any individual protocol. Instead, it serves as informative 
            guidance to authors and users of such models and protocols.
        </t>
        <t>
            The DTNMA is independent of transport and network layers. It does not,
            for example, require the use of BP, TCP, or UDP. Similarly, it does
            not pre-suppose the use of IPv4 or IPv6.
        </t>
        <t>
            The DTNMA is not bound to a particular security solution and does not
            presume that transport layers can exchange messages in a timely 
            manner.  It is assumed that any network using this architecture 
            supports services such as naming, addressing, routing, and security 
            that are required to communicate DTNMA messages as would be the case
            with any other messages in the network.
        </t>
        <t>
            While possible that a challenged network may interface with an 
            unchallenged network, this document does not specifically address 
            compatibility with other management approaches.     
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Requirements Language</name>
        <t>
            The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
            "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
            document are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119" format="default"/>.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Organization</name>
        <t>
            The remainder of this document is organized into the following
            seven sections, described as follows.
               
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
                Terminology - This section identifies those terms critical to 
                understanding DTNMA concepts. Whenever possible, these terms 
                align in both word selection and meaning with their analogs 
                from other management protocols.
              </li>
          <li>
                Motivation - This section provides an overall motivation for 
                this work, to include explaining why this approach is a useful 
                alternative to existing network management approaches.
              </li>
          <li> 
                Desirable Properties - This section identifies the properties
                that guide the definition of the system and logical models that
                comprise the DTNMA. 
              </li>
          <li>
                Services Provided - This section identifies and defines the 
                DTNMA services provided to network and mission operators. 
              </li>
          <li> 
                Roles and Responsibilities - This section identifies roles in 
                the DTNMA and their associated responsibilities. It provides the 
                context for discussing how services are provided for both
                managed and managing devices.
              </li>
          <li>
               	Logical Data Model - This section describes the kinds of data, 
                procedures, autonomy, and associated hierarchical structure 
                inherent to the DTNMA. 
              </li>
          <li> 
                System Model - This section describes data flows amongst 
                various defined DTNMA roles. These flows capture how the DTNMA 
                system works to manage devices across a challenged network. 
              </li>
        </ul>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Terminology</name>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
            Actor - A software service running on either managed or managing 
            devices for the purpose of implementing management protocols between 
            such devices. Actors may implement the "Manager" role, "Agent" role, 
            or both.
          </li>
        <li>
            Agent Role (or Agent) - A role associated with a managed device, 
            responsible for reporting performance data, accepting/performing 
            controls, error handling and validation, and executing any 
            autonomous behaviors. DTNMA Agents exchange information with 
            DTNMA Managers operating either on the same device or on a remote 
            managing device.
          </li>
        <li>
			      DTN Management - Management that does not depend on stateful 
            connections or real time delivery of management messages. Such
            management allows for asynchronous commanding to autonomous
            managers running on managed devices. This management is designed to
            run in any environment conformant to the DTN architecture and/or in
            any environment deploying a BPv7 network.
			    </li>
        <li>
            Externally Defined Data (EDD) - Information made available to a 
            DTNMA Agent by a managed device, but not computed directly by the 
            DTNMA Agent itself. 
          </li>
        <li>
            Variables (VARs) - Typed information that is computed by a DTNMA 
            Agent, typically as a function of EDD values and/or other Variables.
          </li>
        <li> 
            Constants (CONST) - A Constant represents a typed, immutable value 
            that is referred to by a semantic name. Constants are used in 
            situations where substituting a name for a fixed value provides 
            useful semantic information. For example, using the named 
            constant PI rather than the literal value 3.14159.
          </li>
        <li>
            Controls (CTRLs) - Procedures run by a DTNMA Actor to change the 
            behavior, configuration, or state of an application or protocol 
            being managed within a DTN. Controls may also be used to request 
            data from an Agent and define the rules associated with generation 
            and delivery.
          </li>
        <li>
            Literals (LITs) - A Literal represents a typed value without a 
            semantic name. Literals are used in cases where adding a semantic 
            name to a fixed value provides no useful semantic information. For 
            example, the number 4 is a Literal value. 
          </li>
        <li>
            Macros (MACROs) - A named, ordered collection of Controls and/or other
            Macros. 
          </li>
        <li>
            Manager Role (or Manager) - A role associated with a managing device 
            responsible for configuring the behavior of, and eventually receiving 
            information from, DTNMA Agents. DTNMA Managers interact with one or 
            more DTNMA Agents located on the same device and/or on remote devices 
            in the network.
          </li>
        <li>
            Operator (OP) - The enumeration and specification of a mathematical 
            function used to calculate variable values and construct 
            expressions to evaluate DTNMA Agent state.
          </li>
        <li>
            Report (RPT) - A typed, ordered collection of data values gathered 
            by one or more DTNMA Agents and provided to one or more DTNMA Managers. 
            Reports only contain typed data values and the identity of the 
            Report Template (RPTT) to which they conform.
          </li>
        <li>
            Report Template (RPTT) - A named, typed, ordered collection of data 
            types that represent the schema of a Report. This template is 
            generated by a DTNMA Manager and communicated to one or more
            other DTNMA Managers and DTNMA Agents.
          </li>
        <li>
            Rule - A unit of autonomous specification that provides a 
            stimulus-response relationship between time or state on an DTNMA Agent 
            and the actions or operations to be run as a result of that time or 
            state. A Rule might trigger actions such as updating a Variable, 
            producing a Report or a Table, and running a Control.
          </li>
        <li>
            State-Based Rule (SBR) - Any Rule triggered by the calculable 
            internal state of the DTNMA Agent. 
          </li>
        <li>
			      Synchronous Management - Management that assumes messages will be 
            delivered and acted upon in real or near-real-time. Synchronous 
            management often involves immediate replies of acknowledgment or 
            error status. Synchronous management is often bound to underlying 
            transport protocols and network protocols to ensure reliability or 
            source and sender identification.
	      </li>
        <li>
            Table (TBL) - A typed collection of data values organized in a 
            tabular way in which columns represent homogeneous types of data 
            and rows represent unique sets of data values conforming to
            column types. Tables only contain typed data values and the 
            identity of the Table Template (TBLT) to which they conform.  
          </li>
        <li>
            Table Template (TBLT) - A named, typed, ordered collection of 
            columns that comprise the structure for representing tabular data 
            values. This template forms the structure of a table (TBL).
          </li>
        <li>
            Time-Based Rule (TBR) - A time-based rule is a specialization, and 
            simplification, of a state-based rule in which the rule stimulus is 
            triggered by relative or absolute time on an Agent.
          </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Motivation</name>
      <t>
      Early work on the rationale and motivation for specialized management
      for the DTN architecture was captured in <xref target="BIRRANE1" format="default"/>,
      <xref target="BIRRANE2" format="default"/>, and <xref target="BIRRANE3" format="default"/>. Prototyping 
      work done in accordance with the DTN Research Group within the IRTF 
      as documented in <xref target="I-D.irtf-dtnrg-dtnmp" format="default"/> provides some 
      of the desirable properties and necessary adaptations for this proposed 
      management system for challenged networks.
      </t>
      <t>
      The unique nature and constraints that characterize challenged networks 
      require the development of new network capabilities to deliver expected 
      network functions. For example, the distinctive constraints of the DTN 
      architecture required the development of BPv7 <xref target="RFC9171" format="default"/> 
      for transport functions and the Bundle Protocol Security Extensions (BPSec) 
      <xref target="RFC9172" format="default"/> to provide end-to-end security. Similarly, 
      a new approach to network management and the associated capabilities 
      is necessary for operation in these challenged environments and when 
      using these new transport and security mechanisms.
      </t>
      <t>
      This section discusses the characteristics of challenged networks and 
      how they may violate the assumptions made by non-DTNMA 
      approaches about the operating environment.
      </t>
      <section anchor="CCN" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Constrained and Challenged Networks</name>
        <t>
        Constrained networks are defined as networks where 
        "some of the characteristics pretty much taken for granted with link 
        layers in common use in the Internet at the time of writing are not attainable." 
        (<xref target="RFC7228" format="default"/>). This broad definition captures a variety of 
        potential issues relating to physical, technical, or regulatory constraints 
        on message transmission. Constrained networks typically include nodes that regularly 
        reboot or are otherwise turned off for long periods of time, transmit at low 
        or asynchronous bitrates, or have very limited computational resources.
        </t>
        <t>  
        Separately, a challenged network is defined as one that "has serious 
        trouble maintaining what an application would today expect of the end-to-end 
        IP model" (<xref target="RFC7228" format="default"/>). This definition includes networks where 
        there is never simultaneous end-to-end connectivity, when such connectivity is 
        interrupted at planned or unplanned intervals, or when delays exceed those that 
        could be accommodated by IP-based transport. Links in such networks are often 
        unavailable due to attenuations, propagation delays, mobility, occultation, 
        and other limitations imposed by energy and mass considerations.
        </t>
        <t>
        These networks exhibit the following properties that impact the
        way in which the function of network management is considered. 

        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
             No end-to-end path is guaranteed to exist at any given time 
             between any two nodes.
          </li>
          <li>
             Round-trip communications between any two nodes within any given 
             time window may be impossible.
          </li>
          <li>
             Latencies on the order of seconds, hours, or days must be 
             tolerated.
          </li>
          <li>
             Links may be uni-directional.
          </li>
          <li>
             Bi-directional links may have asymmetric data rates.
          </li>
          <li>
             Dependence on external infrastructure, software, systems, 
		     or processes such as Domain Name Service (DNS) or Certificate
			 authorities (CAs) cannot be guaranteed.
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>
        Finally, it is noted that "all challenged networks are constrained 
        networks ... but not all constrained networks are challenged networks
        ...  Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) has been designed to cope with 
        challenged networks" (<xref target="RFC7228" format="default"/>).
        </t>
        <t>
        Challenged networks differ from other kinds of constrained networks, 
        in part, in the way that the topology and roles and responsibilities 
        of the network may evolve over time. From the time at which data is 
        generated to the time at which that data is delivered, the topology 
        of the network and the roles assigned to various nodes, devices, and 
        other actors may have changed several times. In certain circumstances, 
        the physical node receiving messages for a given logical destination 
        may have also changed. 
        </t>
        <t>
        Challenged networks cannot guarantee that a timely data exchange can 
        be maintained between managing and managed devices. The topological 
        changes characteristic of these networks can impact the path of messages, 
        requiring the transport to wait to establish the incremental connectivity 
        necessary to advance messages along their expected route. The BPv7 
        transport protocol implements this store-and-forward operation for DTNs.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Management of Challenged Networks</name>
        <t>
        When topological change impacts the semantic roles and responsibilities 
        of nodes in the network then local configuration and autonomy must be present 
        at the node to determine and execute time-variant changes. For example, 
        the BPSec protocol does not encode security destinations and, instead, 
        requires nodes in a network to identify themselves as security verifiers 
        or acceptors when receiving secured messages.
        </t>
        <t>
        When applied to network management, the semantic roles of Agent and Manager 
        may also change with the evolving topology of the network. Individual nodes 
        must implement desirable behavior without relying on a single configuration 
        oracle or other coordinating function such as an operator-in-the-loop and/or 
        supporting infrastructure. These mechanisms cannot be supported by an 
        asynchronous, challenged network.
        </t>
        <t>
        The support for changing roles implies that there MUST NOT be a defined 
        relationship between a particular manager and agent in a network. 
        A network management architecture for challenged networks must support 
        the association of multiple managers with a single agent, allow "control 
        from" and "reporting to" managers to function independent of one another, 
        and allow the logical role of a manager to be physically shared among assets 
        and change over time.
        </t>
        <t>
        Together, this means that a network management architecture suitable for
        challenged environments must account for certain operational situations.

        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Managed devices that are only accessible via a uni-directional
            link, or via a link whose duration is shorter than a single
            round-trip propagation time. 
          </li>
          <li>
            Links that may be significantly constrained by capacity or
            reliability, but at (predictable or unpredictable) times may offer 
            significant throughput. 
          </li>
          <li>
            Multi-hop challenged networks that interconnect two or more 
            unchallenged networks such that managed and managing devices exist
            in different networks.             
          </li>
          <li>
            Networks unable to support session-based transport. For example,
            when propagation delays exceed the Maximum Segment Lifetime (MSL)
            of the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP).
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>
        In these and related scenarios, managed devices need to operate with 
        local autonomy because managing devices may not be available within 
        operationally-relevant timeframes. Managing devices deliver instruction 
        sets that govern the local, autonomous behavior of the managed device. 
        These behaviors include (but are not limited to) collecting performance 
        data, state, and error conditions, and applying pre-determined 
        responses to pre-determined events. The goal is asynchronous and autonomous
        communication between the device being managed and the manager, at 
        times never expecting a reply, and with knowledge that commands and 
        queries may be delivered much later than the initial request.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Current Network Management Approaches and Limitations</name>
        <t>
        Several network management solutions have been developed for both 
        local-area and wide-area networks. Their capabilities range from 
        simple configuration and report generation to complex modeling of device 
        settings, state, and behavior. Each of these approaches are successful in 
        the domains for which they have been built, but are not all equally 
        functional when deployed in a challenged network.
        </t>
        <t>
        Generally, network management solutions that require managers and agents to push 
        and pull large sets of data may fail to operate in a challenged (and thus, constrained) 
        environment as a function of transmit power, bitrates, and the ability of the network to store and 
        forward large data volumes over long periods of time.
        </t>
        <t> 
        Newer network management approaches are exploring the application of 
        moe efficient message-based management, less reliance on end-to-end
        transport sessions, and increased levels of autonomy on managed devices.
        These approaches focus on problems different from those described above for
        challenged networks. For example, much of the autonomous network management work
        currently undertaken focuses more on well-resourced, unchallenged networks where devices 
        self-configure, self-heal, and self-optimize with other nodes in their vicinity.
        While an important and transformational capability, such solutions will not be
        deployable in a challenged network environment.
        </t>
        <t>
        This section describes some of the well-known, standardized protocols for 
        network management and contrasts their purposes with the needs of challenged 
        network management solutions.
        </t>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)</name>
          <t>
  		  Early network management tools designed for unchallenged networks 
  		  provide synchronous mechanisms for communicating locally-collected data 
  		  from devices to operators. Applications are managed using a "pull" mechanism, 
  		  requiring a manager to explicitly request the data to be produced and 
  		  transmitted by an agent. 
          </t>
          <t>
		  The de facto example of this architecture is the Simple Network 
          Management Protocol (SNMP) <xref target="RFC3416" format="default"/>. SNMP utilizes a 
          request/response model to set and retrieve data values such as host 
		  identifiers, link utilizations, error rates, and counters between 
		  application software on agents and managers.  Data may be 
          directly sampled or consolidated into representative statistics.
          Additionally, SNMP supports a model for unidirectional push notification 
          messages, called traps, based on predefined triggering events.  
          </t>
          <t>
		  SNMP managers can query agents for status information, send new configurations, 
		  and request to be informed when specific events have occurred. Traps and 
		  queryable data are defined in a data model known as Managed Information Bases 
		  (MIBs) which define the information for a particular data standard, protocol, 
		  device, or application.
          </t>
          <t> 
		  While there is a large installation base for SNMP, there are several aspects 
		  of the protocol that make it inappropriate for use in a challenged network. 
		  SNMP relies on sessions with low round-trip latency to support its "pull" 
		  model that challenged networks cannot maintain. Complex management can be 
		  achieved, but only through craftful orchestration using a series of real-time, 
		  end-to-end, manager-generated query-and-response logic that is not possible 
		  in challenged networks.
          </t>
          <t>
		  The SNMP trap model provides some low-fidelity Agent-side processing. Traps 
		  are typically used for alerting purposes, as they do not support an agent 
		  response to the event occurrence. In a challenged network where the delay 
		  between a manager receiving an alert and sending a response can be significant, 
		  the SNMP trap model is insufficient for event handling.
          </t>
          <t>
          Adaptive modifications to SNMP to support challenged networks and more complex 
          application-level management would alter the basic function of the protocol 
          (data models, control flows, and syntax) so as to be functionally incompatible
          with existing SNMP installations. This approach is therefore not suitable for use 
          in challenged networks.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>YANG Data Model and NETCONF, RESTCONF, and CORECONF</name>
          <section numbered="true" toc="default">
            <name>The YANG Data Model</name>
            <t>
  			Yet Another Next Generation (YANG) <xref target="RFC6020" format="default"/> is a data modeling 
  			language used to model configuration and state data of managed devices and 
  			applications. The YANG model defines a schema for organizing and accessing a 
  			device's configuration or operational information. Once a model is developed, it is 
  			loaded to both the client and server, and serves as a contract between the two. 
  			A YANG model can be complex, describing many containers of managed elements, 
  			each providing methods for device configuration or reporting of operational state.
            </t>
            <t>
           YANG supports the definition of parameterized Remote Procedure Calls (RPCs) 
           to be executed on managed nodes as well as the definition of push notifications 
           within the model. The RPCs are used to execute commands on a device, generating 
           an expected, structured response. However,  RPC execution is strictly limited to 
           those issued by the client. Commands are executed immediately and sequentially 
           as they are received by the server, and there is no method to autonomously 
           execute RPCs triggered by specific events or conditions.
            </t>
            <t>
  		    YANG defines the schema for data used by network management protocols such as 
  		    NETCONF <xref target="RFC6241" format="default"/>, RESTCONF <xref target="RFC8040" format="default"/>, 
            and CORECONF <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-comi" format="default"/>. These protocols 
            provide the mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the 
  			configuration of network devices. 
            </t>
          </section>
          <section numbered="true" toc="default">
            <name>YANG-Based Management Protocols</name>
            <t>
            NETCONF is a stateful, XML-based protocol that provides a RPC syntax to 
            retrieve, edit, copy, or delete any data nodes or exposed functionality 
            on the server. It requires that underlying transport protocols support 
            long-lived, reliable, low-latency, sequenced data delivery sessions. 
            NETCONF connections are required to provide authentication, data integrity, 
            confidentiality, and replay protection through secure transport protocols 
            such as SSH or TLS. A bi-directional NETCONF session must be established 
            before any data transfer can occur.
            </t>
            <t>
            NETCONF uses verbose XML files to provide the ability to update and fetch 
            multiple data elements simultaneously. These XML files are not easily or 
            efficiently compressed, which is an important consideration for challenged 
            networks.
            </t>
            <t>
            RESTCONF is a stateless RESTful protocol based on HTTP. RESTCONF configures 
            or retrieves individual data elements or containers within YANG data models 
            by passing JSON over REST. This JSON encoding is used to GET, POST, PUT, 
            PATCH, or DELETE data nodes within YANG modules. RESTCONF requires the use of 
            a secure transport such as TLS.
            </t>
            <t>          
            Unlike NETCONF, RESTCONF is stateless. However, the transfer of large data 
            sets, such as configuration changes of many data elements, or the collection 
            of information, depends greatly on the support of synchronous communication.
            </t>
            <t>
            CORECONF is stateless, as RESTCONF is, and is built atop the Constrained 
            Application Protocol (CoAP) <xref target="RFC7252" format="default"/> which defines a messaging 
            construct developed to operate specifically on constrained devices and networks 
            by limiting message size and fragmentation. CORECONF requires the use of DTLS 
            or Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE) 
            <xref target="RFC8613" format="default"/> to fulfil its security requirements. COAP supports a 
            store and forward operation similar to DTN; however, it operates strictly at the 
            application layer and requires specification of pre-determined proxies and 
            moments of bi-directional communication.
            </t>
            <t>
            CORECONF leverages the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) 
            <xref target="RFC8949" format="default"/> of YANG modules <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-yang-cbor" format="default"/>
            and provides further compressibility through the use of YANG Schema Item iDentifiers 
            (SIDs) <xref target="I-D.ietf-core-sid" format="default"/>. While these design choices offer reductions 
            in encoded data size, data compressibility is still dependent on underlying transport 
            protocols and limited by the organization of the YANG schema.  
            </t>
          </section>
          <section numbered="true" toc="default">
            <name>Limitations of YANG-Based Approaches</name>
            <t>
            YANG notifications are promising for challenged network management, defined as
            subscriptions to both YANG notifications <xref target="RFC8639" format="default"/>] and YANG PUSH 
            notifications <xref target="RFC8641" format="default"/>. In this model, a client may subscribe to 
            the delivery of specific containers or data nodes defined in the model, either 
            on a periodic or "on change" basis. The notification events can be filtered 
            according to XPath (<xref target="xpath" format="default"/>) or subtree (<xref target="RFC6241" format="default"/>)
            filtering as described in <xref target="RFC8639" format="default"/> Section 2.2.  
            </t>
            <t>
            While the YANG model provides great flexibility for configuring a homogeneous 
            network of devices, it becomes a burden in challenged networks where concise 
            encoding is necessary. The YANG schema provides flexibility in the organization 
            of data to the model developer. The YANG schema supports a broad range of data 
            types noted in <xref target="RFC6991" format="default"/>. All the data nodes within a YANG model 
            are referenced by a verbose, string-based path of the module, sub-module, 
            container, and any data nodes such as lists, leaf-lists, or leaves, without any 
            explicit hierarchical organization based on data or object type. 
            </t>
            <t>
            Recent efforts for compression of the YANG model have used CBOR and SIDs to 
            address YANG data nodes through integer identifiers. However, these compression 
            strategies lack a formal hierarchical structure. The manual mapping of SIDs to 
            YANG modules and data nodes limits the portability of these models and further 
            increases the size of any encoding scheme.
            </t>
          </section>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>The Future of Autonomous and Autonomic Network Management Solutions</name>
          <t>
			    The future of network operations requires more autonomous behavior including 
			    self-configuration, self-management, self-healing, and self-optimization. 
			    One approach to support this is termed Autonomic Networking <xref target="RFC7575" format="default"/>
			    and includes many recent efforts describe Autonomic architecture and protocols 
			    <xref target="RFC8993" format="default"/> as well as cite the gaps that exist between traditional 
			    and Autonomic Networking approaches <xref target="RFC7576" format="default"/>. Challenged networks 
			    require similar degrees of autonomy, however they lack the ability to depend on 
			    the complex coordination between nodes and the centralized and distributed 
			    supporting infrastructure that Autonomic networking proposes. 
          </t>
          <t>
			    Policy-based management is a well-established approach that uses business and 
			    operations support systems to monitor and manage devices and networks in real-time. 
			    These systems leverage various, existing network management protocols and their 
			    supporting features, such as the use of YANG module classification types 
			    <xref target="RFC8199" format="default"/>, to describe abstract services and support configuration 
			    of service level agreements. These services can then enact additional control over 
			    devices using network element modules. This approach is quite comprehensive but 
			    requires sufficient, supporting infrastructure and synchronous access, which 
			    cannot be provided by challenged networks.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Takeaways from Existing Network Management Protocols</name>
          <t>
		      While the protocols described above are useful and well-realized for different 
		      applications and networking environments, they simply do not meet the requirements 
		      for the management of challenged networks. However, that does not exclude features 
		      from each from contributing to the design of DTNMA. 
          </t>
          <t>
		      The concept of a data model for describing network configuration elements has 
		      been used by many protocols to ensure compliance between managing and managed 
		      devices. A data model provides error checking and bounds operations, which is 
		      necessary when controlling mission critical devices. 
          </t>
          <t>
		      The SNMP MIBs provide well-organized, hierarchical OIDs which support the 
		      compressibility necessary for challenged DTNs. YANG, NETCONF, and RESTCONF 
		      support notification abilities needed for DTN network management, but have 
		      limited features for describing autonomous execution and behavior. 
          </t>
          <t>
		      CORECONF provides CBOR encoding and concise reference abilities using SIDs, 
		      but lack a hierarchical structure or authoritative planning to allocation. While 
		      this approach will become too verbose and prove limiting in the future, the 
		      encoding considerations from CORECONF can be used to inform the design of the DTNMA.
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>A Network Management Approach for DTNs</name>
        <t>
	        The DTNMA is designed with consideration for the constraints discussed in 
	        section <xref target="CCN" format="default"/>. The 
	        DTNMA seeks to incorporate existing network management protocols and feature. 
	        However, there are core capabilities the DTNMA must provide in order to serve a
	        challenged network that are not supported by these approaches.
        </t>
        <t>
            The DTNMA proposes a data model that is that is designed for the compression 
            required for a challenged network. The efficiency of data encoding is limited by 
            the efficiency of the underlying data model. For this reason, naming schemes for 
            the DTNMA must be hierarchical and patternable, supporting the level of compressibility 
            needed by the resource-constrained devices that form a challenged network.
        </t>
        <t>
            Autonomous behavior is required for the management of a DTN, which is characterized 
            by link delays and disruptions. The constrained autonomy model of the DTNMA provides 
            the deterministic management necessary for managed devices to detect and respond to 
            events without intervention from an in-the-loop manager. The separation of remote 
            and local, autonomous managing devices supports autonomous behavior even when 
            synchronization is not feasible. 
        </t>
        <t>
            The sections below describe the desirable features of the DTNMA and build from e
            xisting protocols and mechanisms where possible, with adaptations made for the 
            challenged networking environment.
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Desirable Properties of an DTNMA</name>
      <t>
         This section describes those design properties that are desirable when defining
         an architecture that must operate across challenged links in a network. These properties 
         ensure that network management capabilities are retained even as delays and disruptions
         in the network scale. Ultimately, these properties are the driving
         design principles for the DTNMA.   
      </t>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Asynchronous, Dynamic, and Highly Logical Architecture</name>
        <t> 
			An DTNMA built to support DTN must be agnostic of the underlying physical topology, transport protocols, security 
			solutions, and supporting infrastructure. The DTNMA shall be limited to only the network management
			protocols, message structure, and information content, including but not limited to the type of 
			objects to manage and the expected behavior and interaction upon access or execution of those
			objects. There shall be no prescribed association between between a manager and an agent 
			other than those defined in the responsibilities associated with each in this document. There should be
			no limitation to the number of managers that can control an agent, the number of managers that an agent should 
			report to, or any requirement that a manager and agent relationship implies a pair.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Model-derived and Hierarchically Organized Definition of Information</name>
        <t> 
			A means to define a shared contract between agent and manager has long been an approach to network
			management solutions. A model is a schema that defines this contract and defines all sources of
			information that can be retrieved, configured, or executed, as well as the various functions for
			parameterization, filtering, or event driven behavior. A model gives way to concise representation 
			of information, intelligent suffixing, and patterning. The DTNMA model shall be designed with a 
			limited set of object and data types to allow and be organized hierarchally to provide for
			highly compressible and concise encoding. This allows the agents and managers to infer context
			with limited link utilization necessary in DTN.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Intelligent Push of Information</name>
        <t> 
            Pull management mechanisms require that a Manager send a query 
            to an Agent and then wait for the response to that query. This
            practice implies a control-session between entities and increases
            the overall message traffic in the network. Challenged networks cannot
            guarantee that the round-trip data-exchange will occur in a timely fashion. In extreme cases, networks
            may be comprised of solely uni-directional links which drastically increases the 
            amount of time needed for a round-trip data exchange. Therefore, pull mechanisms
            must be avoided in favor of push mechanisms.
        </t>
        <t>
            Push mechanisms, in this context, refer to the ability of Agents to 
			leverage rule-based criteria to determine when and what information
			should be sent to managers. This could be based solely off logic applied
			to existing VARs or EDDs, based off operations applied to data elements, or
			triggered as a function of relative time.
			Such mechanisms do not require round-trip communications
            as Managers do not request each reporting instance;
            Managers need only request once, in advance, that information be produced
            in accordance with a predetermined schedule or in response to a predefined
            state on the Agent. In this way information is "pushed" from Agents to 
            Managers and the push is "intelligent" because it is based on some
            internal evaluation performed by the Agent.   
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Minimize Message Size Not Node Processing</name>
        <t> 
            Protocol designers must balance message size versus message processing time at
            sending and receiving nodes. Verbose representations of data simplify node
            processing whereas compact representations require additional activities 
            to generate/parse the compacted message. There is no asynchronous management 
            advantage to minimizing node processing time in a challenged network. 
            However, there is a significant advantage to smaller message sizes in such networks.    
            Compact messages require smaller periods of viable transmission for 
            communication, incur less re-transmission cost, and consume less 
            resources when persistently stored en-route in the network. A DTN 
			Management Protocol (DTNMP) should minimize PDUs whenever practical,
            to include packing and unpacking binary data, variable-length fields,
            and pre-configured data definitions.    
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Absolute Data Identification</name>
        <t>
            Elements within the management system must be uniquely identifiable so
            that they can be individually manipulated. Identification schemes that
            are relative to system configuration make data exchange between
            Agents and Managers difficult as system configurations may change faster 
            than nodes can communicate. 
        </t>
        <t>   
            Consider the following common technique for approximating an associative array 
            lookup. A manager wishing to do an associative lookup for some key K1 will 
            (1) query a list of array keys from the agent, (2) find the key that matches
            K1 and infer the index of K1 from the returned key list, and (3) query the 
            discovered index on the agent to retrieve the desired data. 
        </t>
        <t>
            Ignoring the inefficiency of two pull requests, this 
            mechanism fails when the Agent changes its key-index mapping
            between the first and second query. Rather than constructing an artificial
            mapping from K1 to an index, an AMP must provide an absolute mechanism to
            lookup the value K1 without an abstraction between the Agent and Manager.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Custom Data Definition</name>
        <t>
            Custom definition of new data from existing data (such as through
            data fusion, averaging, sampling, or other mechanisms) provides the
            ability to communicate desired information in as compact a form as
            possible. Specifically, an Agent should not be required to
            transmit a large data set for a Manager that only wishes to
            calculate a smaller, inferred data set. These new defined 
			data elements could be calculated and used both as parameters 
			for local stimulus-response rules-based criteria or simply serve
			to populate custom reports and tables. Since the identification 
			of custom data sets is likely to occur in the context of a specific 
			network deployment, AMPs must provide a mechanism for their definition. 
        </t>
        <t>
			Aggregation of controls and custom formatting of reports
			and tables are equally important. Custom reporting provides the
			flexibility allowing the manager to define the desired format of all
			information to be sent over the challenged network from the agents, serving 
			to both save link capacity and increase the value of returned information.
			Aggregation of controls allows a manager to specify a set of controls to
			execute, specifying both the order and criteria of execution. This aggregate
			set of controls can be sent as a single command rather than a series of 
			sequential operands. In this case it is additionally possible to use outputs
			of one command to serve as an input to the next at the agent.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Autonomous Operation</name>
        <t> 
            DTNMA network functions must be achievable using only knowledge local to 
            the Agent. Rather than directly controlling an Agent, a Manager configures an
            engine of the Agent to take its own action under the
            appropriate conditions in accordance with the Agent's notion of
            local state and time.     
        </t>
        <t>     
           Such an engine may be used for simple automation of predefined tasks or
           to support semi-autonomous behavior in determining when to run tasks
           and how to configure or parameterize tasks when they are run. Wholly autonomous
           operations MAY be supported where required. Generally,
           autonomous operations should provide the following benefits.
                 
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
                     Distributed Operation - The concept of pre-configuration 
                     allows the Agent to operate without regular contact with
                     Managers in the system. The initial configuration (and periodic update) of the
                     system remains difficult in a challenged network, but an
                     initial synchronization on stimuli and responses drastically
                     reduces needs for centralized operations. 
                    </li>
          <li>
					 Deterministic Behavior - Such behavior is
					   necessary in critical operational systems where the actions 
					   of a platform must be well understood even in the absence of
					   an operator in the loop. Depending on the types of
					   stimuli and responses, these systems may be considered
					   to be maintaining simple automation or semi-autonomous behavior.
					   In either case, this preserves the ability of a frequently-out-of-contact Manager to 
					   predict the state of an Agent with more reliability than 
					   cases where Agents implement independent and fully autonomous systems.
                    </li>
          <li>
                       Engine-Based Behavior - Several operational systems are unable
                       to deploy "mobile code" based solutions due to network
                       bandwidth, memory or processor loading, or security concerns.
                       Engine-based approaches provide configurable behavior without 
                       incurring these types of concerns associated with mobile code.
                    </li>
          <li>
                       Intelligent authentication, authorization, accounting (AAA), and error checking - 
					   A means of autonomous AAA, error checking, and validation of data and controls will be 
					   be required in all cases where agents or managers are disconnected from the rest
					   of the network. In addition, there is a need to handle conflicts including messages
					   that arrive out of order, or at the same time from different managers whose controls
					   would otherwise conflict. The need to perform these operations still exists however 
					   they will need to be performed with context provided with controls sent or in 
					   accordance with pre-defined behavior and policy.
                    </li>
        </ul>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Services Provided by an DTNMA</name>
      <t>   
      The DTNMA provides a method of configuring DTNMA Agents with local, 
      autonomous management functions, such as rule-based execution of 
      procedures and generation of reports, to achieve expected behavior when 
      managed devices exist over a challenged network. It further allows for 
    dynamic instantiation and population of Variables and reports through local operations 
    defined by the manager, as well as custom formatting of tables and 
    reports to be sent back. This gives the DTNMA significant flexibility 
    to operate over challenged networks, both providing new degrees of 
    freedom over existing configuration based data models used in 
    synchronous networks and allowing for more concise formatting 
    over constrained networks. This architecture 
      makes very few assumptions on the nature of the network and allow for
      continuous operation through periods of connectivity and lack of
      connectivity. The DTNMA deviates from synchronous management approaches 
      because it never requires periods of bi-directional connectivity, and 
    provides the manager flexibility to describe agent behavior that 
    was unpredicted at the time of the data model creation. 
      </t>
      <t>
         This section identifies the services that a DTNMA would provide
		 for management of challenged network resources. These services 
		 include configuration, reporting, autonomous parameterized control, 
		 and administration. 
      </t>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Configuration</name>
        <t> 
            Configuration services update Agent data associated with managed 
            applications and protocols. Some configuration data might be defined
            in the context of an application or protocol, such that any network
            using that application or protocol would understand that data. Other
            configuration data may be defined tactically for use in a specific 
            network deployment and not available to other networks even if they use
            the same applications or protocols.  
        </t>
        <t> With no guarantee of round-trip data exchange,
            Agents cannot rely on remote Managers to correct erroneous or stale
            configurations from harming the flow of data through a challenged network.
        </t>
        <t>
            Examples of configuration service behavior include the following.
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>Creating a new datum as a function of other well-known data: </t>
            <t> C = A + B.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Creating a new report as a unique, ordered collection of known data: </t>
            <t> RPT = {A, B, C}.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Storing predefined, parameterized responses to potential future conditions: </t>
            <t> IF (X &gt; 3) THEN RUN CMD(PARM).</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Reporting</name>
        <t> 
            Reporting services populate report templates with values
            collected or computed by an Agent. The resultant reports are sent
            to one or more Managers by the Agent. The term "reporting" is used in place of the 
            term "monitoring", as monitoring implies a timeliness and regularity that cannot be
            guaranteed by a challenged network. Reports sent by an Agent provide best-effort 
            information to receiving Managers.            
        </t>
        <t>
            Since a Manager is not actively "monitoring" an Agent, the 
            Agent must make its own determination on when
            to send what Reports based on its own local time
            and state information. Agents should produce Reports of varying
            fidelity and with varying frequency based on thresholds and other
            information set as part of configuration services.
        </t>
        <t>
            Examples of reporting service behavior include the following.
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Generate Report R1 every hour (time-based production).</li>
          <li>Generate Report R2 when X &gt; 3 (state-based production).</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Autonomous Parameterized Procedure Calls</name>
        <t> 
            Similar to an RPC call, some mechanism MUST exist which allows a procedure
            to be run on an Agent in order to affect its behavior or otherwise change 
            its internal state. 
            Since there is no guarantee that a Manager will be in contact with an
            Agent at any given time, the decisions of whether and when a procedure
            should be run MUST be made locally and autonomously by the Agent. Two
            types of automation triggers are identified in the DTNMA: triggers based 
            on the internal state of the Agent and triggers based
            on an Agent's notion of time. As such, the autonomous execution of procedures
            can be viewed as a stimulus-response system, where the stimulus is the
            positive evaluation of a state or time based predicate and the response is
            the function to be executed.
        </t>
        <t>
            The autonomous nature of procedure execution by an Agent implies that the
            full suite of information necessary to run a procedure may not be known
            by a Manager in advance. To address this
            situation, a parameterization mechanism MUST be available so that
            required data can be provided at the time of execution on the Agent rather
            than at the time of definition/configuration by the Manager. 
        </t>
        <t>
            Autonomous, parameterized procedure calls provide a powerful 
            mechanism for Managers to "manage" an Agent asynchronously during
            periods of no communication by pre-configuring responses to events that may
            be encountered by the Agent at a future time.             
        </t>
        <t>
            Examples of potential behavior include the following.
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Updating local routing information based on instantaneous link analysis.</li>
          <li>Managing storage on the device to enforce quotas.</li>
          <li>Applying or modifying local security policy.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Authorized Administration, accounting, and error control</name>
        <t> 
       			Administration services enforce the potentially complex
            mapping of auhorization to configuration, reporting, and control 
            services amongst Agents and Managers in the network. Fine-grained 
            access control can specify which Managers may apply which services 
            to which Agents. This is particularly beneficial in networks that either deal 
            with multiple administrative entities or overlay networks that cross 
            administrative boundaries. Whitelists, blacklists, key-based infrastructures, or other 
            schemes may be used for this purpose.
        </t>
        <t>
            Other administrative services may place practical restrictions on the
            overall number of items that can be kept in a system. This includes
            items such as the number of rows kept by an Agent for a given table
            template or number of entries for a given report template. 
        </t>
        <t>
            Examples of administration service behavior include the following.
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Agent A1 only Sends reports for Protocol P1 to Manager M1.</li>
          <li>Agent A2 only accepts a configurations for Application Y from Managers M2 and M3.</li>
          <li>Agent A3 accepts services from any Manager providing the proper authentication token.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>
            Note that the administrative enforcement of access control is different from
            security services provided by the networking stack carrying such messages.
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>DTNMA Roles and Responsibilities</name>
      <t>
         By definition, Agents reside on managed devices and Managers reside on 
         managing devices. There is however no pre-supposed architecture that
		 connects managers and agents and therefore a single device could assume 
		 both roles. This section describes the responsibilities associated with
		 each role and how these roles participate in network management. 
      </t>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Agent Responsibilities</name>
        <dl newline="true" spacing="normal" indent="8">
          <dt>Manager Mapping</dt>
          <dd>
			      Agents must receive messages from managers that govern application
				  control, reporting, and autonomous behavior. Agents must maintain a list 
				  of managers which have delivered control messages along with a list
				  of "report to" managers. The list of requested reports must be mapped
				  to one or more managers.
				</dd>
          <dt>Application Support</dt>
          <dd>
                  Agents MUST collect all data, execute all controls, populate
                  all reports and run operations required by each application which the Agent 
                  manages. Agents MUST report supported applications by their data model so that Managers in 
                  a network understands what information is understood by what Agent.
               </dd>
          <dt>Local Data Collection</dt>
          <dd>
                  Agents MUST collect from local firmware (or other on-board mechanisms)
                  and report all data defined for the management of applications 
                  for which they have been configured. Agents must further use this information
				  in the computation of variable expressions and rules-based autonomy.
               </dd>
          <dt>Autonomous Control</dt>
          <dd>
                  Agents MUST determine, as previously prescribed by a manager, whether 
                  a procedure should be invoked.
               </dd>
          <dt>Autonomous Reporting</dt>
          <dd> 
                  Agents MUST determine, without real-time Manager intervention, whether and
                  when to populate and transmit a given report or table targeted to
                  one or more Managers in the network. 
               </dd>
          <dt>Custom Data Definition</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>
                  Agents MUST provide mechanisms for operators in the network to
                  use configuration services to create customized data definitions in the context 
                  of a specific network or network
                  use-case. Agents MUST allow for the creation, listing, and
                  removal of such definitions in accordance with whatever
                  security models are deployed within the particular network.
            </t>
            <t>
                  Where applicable, Agents MUST verify the validity of these definitions 
                  when they are configured and respond in
                  a way consistent with the logging/error-handling policies
                  of the Agent and the network.
            </t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Consolidate Messages</dt>
          <dd>
                  Agents SHOULD produce as few messages as possible when sending information.
                  For example, rather than sending multiple messages, each with one report to a
                  Manager, an Agent SHOULD prefer to send a single message
                  containing multiple reports.
               </dd>
          <dt>Error Checking and State Control</dt>
          <dd>
                  Agents should perform error checking and validation of incoming manager
				  messages as well as internally computed values. This includes but is not limited 
				  to validating the syntax of messages and controls according to the data model, 
				  preventing circular references in custom defined data, and verifying maximum nesting
				  levels or table lengths have not been exceeded. This also includes control of 
				  internal agent operations and state. Finally there must be a means to handle
				  conflicts such as messages that arrive out of order or messages from more than
				  one authorized manager.
               </dd>
          <dt>Authorized Administration and Accounting</dt>
          <dd>
				  The Agent shall provide authorized administration and accounting 
				  to restrict execution of controls, custom data definition, and reporting to only
				  those authorized nodes. Both nominal and exception events shall be logged where
				  applicable.
               </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Manager Responsibilities</name>
        <dl newline="true" spacing="normal" indent="8">
          <dt>Agent Capabilities Mapping</dt>
          <dd>
                  Managers must maintain a list of supported models and managed applications. 
				  Managers MUST understand what applications are managed by the various Agents with
                  which they communicate and maintain a list of those managed agents. Managers should not attempt to
                  request, invoke, or refer to application information for applications
                  not managed by an Agent. Agents must further maintain a list of all agents that
				  are reporting to this manager.
               </dd>
          <dt>Agent Messaging</dt>
          <dd>
                 Managers must generate and transmit control messages destined for agents. This
				 includes all the control types, configuration, and parameterization described 
				 in the logical data model.
               </dd>
          <dt>Data Collection</dt>
          <dd>
                  Managers MUST receive
                  information from Agents asynchronously upon the configuration and
                  production of reports by the local and other external managers,
                  collecting responses from Agents over time. Managers MAY
                  try to detect conditions where Agent information has not 
                  been received within operationally relevant time spans and
                  react in accordance with network policy.
               </dd>
          <dt>Custom Data Definitions</dt>
          <dd> 
                  Managers should provide the ability to define custom 
                  data definitions. Any custom definitions MUST be
                  transmitted to appropriate Agents and these definitions MUST
                  be remembered to interpret the reporting of these custom
                  values from Agents in the future.
               </dd>
          <dt>Data Fusion</dt>
          <dd> 
                  Managers MAY support the
                  fusion of data from multiple Agents with the purpose of
                  transmitting fused data results to other Managers within the
                  network. Managers MAY receive fused reports from other
                  Managers pursuant to appropriate security and administrative
                  configurations.
               </dd>
          <dt>Error Checking and State Control</dt>
          <dd>
                  Managers should perform error checking and validation of incoming agent
				  messages as well as internally configured controls for agents.
				  This includes but is not limited 
				  to validating the syntax of messages and controls according to the data model, 
				  preventing circular references in custom defined data, and verifying maximum nesting
				  levels or table lengths have not been exceeded. This also includes control of 
				  internal manager operations and state.
               </dd>
          <dt>Authorized Administration and Accounting</dt>
          <dd>
				  The Manager shall provide authorized administration and accounting and send controls to 
				  only those agents for which it is authorized. It shall additionally validate incoming agent reports
				  according to any defined restrictions. Both nominal and exception events shall be logged where
				  applicable.
               </dd>
        </dl>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Logical Data Model</name>
      <t>
         The DTNMA logical data model captures the types of information that should be collected
         and exchanged to implement necessary roles and responsibilities. 
         The data model presented in this section does not presuppose a specific mapping to
         a physical data model or encoding technique; it is included to provide a way to logically
         reason about the types of data that should be exchanged in a DTN managed network. 
      </t>
      <t>
         The  elements of the DTNMA logical data model are described as follows.
      </t>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Data Representations: Constants, Externally Defined Data, and Variables</name>
        <t>
               There are three fundamental representations of data in the DTNMA: (1) data whose values do
               not change as a function of time or state, (2) data whose values change as determined by
               sampling/calculation external to the network management system, and (3) data whose values
               are calculated internal to the network management system.
        </t>
        <t>
               Data whose values do not change as a function of time or state are defined as Constants (CONST).
               CONST values are strongly typed, named values that cannot be modified once they have been defined.
        </t>
        <t>
               Data sampled/calculated external to the network management system are defined
               as Externally Defined Data" (EDD). EDD values represent the most useful information
               in the management system as they are provided by the applications or protocols being managed
               on the Agent. It is RECOMMENDED that EDD values be strongly typed to avoid issues
               with interpreting the data value. It is also RECOMMENDED that the timeliness/staleness of the
               data value be considered when using the data in the context of autonomous action
               on the Agent. 
        </t>
        <t>
               Data that is calculated internal to the network management system is defined as a
               Variable (VAR). VARs allow the creation of new data values for use in the network management
               system. New value definitions are useful for storing user-defined information, 
               storing the results of complex calculations for easier re-use, and providing a mechanism
               for combining information from multiple external sources. It is RECOMMENDED that VARs
               be strongly typed to avoid issues with interpreting the data value. In cases where a VAR
               definition relies on other VAR definitions, mechanisms to prevent circular references MUST
               be included in any actual data model or implementation.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Data Collections: Reports and Tables</name>
        <t>
              Individual data values may be exchanged amongst Agents and Managers in the DTNMA. However,
              data are typically most useful to a Manager when received as part of a set of information.
              Ordered collections of data values can be produced by Agents and sent to Managers as a 
              way of efficiently communicating Agent status. Within the DTNMA, the structure of the ordered
              collection is treated separately from the values that populate such a structure. 
        </t>
        <t>
              The DTNMA provides two ways of defining collections of data: reports and tables. Reports are
              ordered sets of data values, whereas Tables are special types of reports whose entries have
              a regular, tabular structure. 
        </t>
        <section numbered="true" toc="default">
          <name>Report Templates and Reports</name>
          <t>
                 The typed, ordered structure of a data collection is defined 
                 as a Report Template (RPTT). A particular set of data
                 values provided in compliance with such a template is called 
                 a Report (RPT). 
          </t>
          <t>
                 Separating the structure and content of a report reduces the 
                 overall size of RPTs in cases where reporting structures 
                 are well known and unchanging. RPTTs can be synchronized 
                 between an Agent and a Manager so that RPTs themselves do 
                 not incur the overhead of carrying self-describing data. RPTTs 
                 may include EDD values, VARs, and also other RPTTs. In cases 
                 where a RPTT includes another RPTTs, mechanisms to prevent 
                 circular references MUST be included in any actual data model 
                 or implementation. 
          </t>
          <t>
                 Protocols and applications managed in the DTNMA may define 
                 common RPTTs. Additionally, users within a network may define 
                 their own RPTTs that are useful in the context of a particular 
                 deployment.
          </t>
          <t>
                  Unlike tables, reports do not exploit assumptions on the
                  underlying structure of their data. Therefore, unlike
                  tables, operators can define new reports at any time as
                  part of the runtime configuration of the network.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section numbered="true" toc="default">
          <name>Table Templates and Tables</name>
          <t>    
                Tables optimize the communication of multiple sets of data 
                in situations where each data set has the same syntactic 
                structure and with the same semantic meaning. Unlike reports, 
                the regularity of tabular data representations allow for the 
                addition of new rows without changing the structure of the 
                table. Attempting to add a new data set at the end of a report 
                would require alterations to the report template.
          </t>
          <t>
                The typed, ordered structure of a table is defined as a Table 
                Template (TBLT). A particular instance of values populating 
                the table template is called a Table (TBL).
          </t>
          <t>
                TBLTs describes the "columns" that define the table schema. 
                A TBL represents the instance of a specific TBLT that holds 
                actual data values. These data values represent the "rows" of
                the table.
          </t>
          <t> 
                 The prescriptive nature of the TBLT allows for the possibility 
                 of advanced filtering which may reduce traffic between Agents 
                 and Managers. However, the unique structure of each TBLT along
                 may make them difficult or impossible to change dynamically
                 in a network.
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Command Execution: Controls and Macros</name>
        <t>
               Low-latency, high-availability approaches to network management 
               use mechanisms such as (or similar to) RPCs
               to cause some action to be performed on an Agent. The DTNMA 
               enables similar capabilities without requiring that the Manager 
               be in the processing loop of the Agent. Command execution in the 
               DTNMA happens through the use of controls and macros.
        </t>
        <t>
               A Control (CTRL) represents a parameterized, predefined 
               procedure that can be run on an Agent. While conceptually
               similar to a "remote procedure call", CTRLs differ in that
               they do not provide numeric return codes. The concept of a
               return code when running a procedure implies a synchronous
               relationship between the caller of the procedure and the
               procedure being called, which is disallowed in an DTN
               management system. Instead, CTRLs may create reports which 
               describe the status and other summarizations of their operation,
               and these reports may be sent to the Manager(s) calling the
               CTRL. 
        </t>
        <t>
               Parameters can be provided 
               when running a command from a Manager, pre-configured as part of
               a response to a time-based or state-based rule on the Agent, or 
               auto-generated as needed 
               on the Agent. The success or failure of a control MAY be inferred 
               by reports generated for that purpose.
        </t>
        <t>
              NOTE: The DTNMA term control is derived in part from
              the concept of Command and Control (C2) where control implies the 
              operational instructions that must be undertaken to implement 
              (or maintain) a commanded objective. A DTN management
              function controls an Agent to allow it to fulfill its commanded
              purpose in a variety of operational scenarios. For example, 
              attempting to maintain a safe internal thermal environment for
              a spacecraft is considered "thermal control" (not "thermal 
              commanding") even though thermal control involves "commanding" 
              heaters, louvers, radiators, and other temperature-affecting 
              components. That said, CTRLs should be developed for specific
			  autonomous and deterministic behavior where possible. Some controls may be designed 
			  to set configuration parameters or load complex policies, but 
			  there should be no assumption that it will be executed in real time.
        </t>
        <t>
               Often, a series of controls must be executed in sequence to 
               achieve a particular outcome. A Macro (MACRO) represents an 
               ordered collection of controls (or other macros). In cases where 
               a MACRO includes another MACRO, mechanisms to prevent circular 
               references and maximum nesting levels MUST be included in
               any actual data model or implementation.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Autonomy: Time and State-Based Rules</name>
        <t>
            	The DTNMA data model contains EDDs and VARs that capture the 
              state of applications on an Agent. The model also contains 
              controls and macros to perform actions on an Agent. A mechanism 
              is needed to relate these two capabilities: to perform an action 
              on the Agent autonomously in response to the state of the Agent. This mechanism
              in the DTNMA is the "rule" and can be activated based on Agent internal
              state (state-based rule) or based on the Agent's notion of
              relative time (time-based rule). 
        </t>
        <section numbered="true" toc="default">
          <name>State-Based Rule (SBR)</name>
          <t>
                 State-Based Rules (SBRs) perform actions based on the Agent's
                 internal state, as identified by EDD and VAR values. An SBR
                 represents a stimulus-response pairing in the following form: 

                 
                     
                  IF predicate THEN response 

                  
                  
                The predicate is a logical expression that evaluates to true if 
                the rule stimulus is present and evaluates to false otherwise. 
                The response may be any control or macro known to the Agent.
          </t>
          <t> 
                An example of an SBR could be to initiate a thermal control self check
				if some internal temperature is greater than a threshold:

                 
                     
                IF (current_temp &gt; maximum_temp) THEN thermal_control_self_check

                 
          </t>
          <t>
                Rules may construct their stimuli from the full set of values
                known to the network management system. Similarly, responses 
                may be constructed from the full set of controls and macros that can
                be run on the Agent. By allowing rules to evaluate the variety of all known data
                and run the variety of all known controls, multiple applications can be monitored 
                and managed by one Agent instance. 
          </t>
        </section>
        <section numbered="true" toc="default">
          <name>Time-Based Rule (TBR)</name>
          <t>
                Time-Based Rules (TBR) perform actions based on the Agent's 
                notion of the passage of time. A possible TBR construct would
                be to perform some action at 1Hz on the Agent. 
          </t>
          <t>
                A TBR is a specialization of an SBR as the Agent's notion of
                time is a type of Agent state. For example, a TBR to perform
                an action every 24 hours could be expressed using some type
                of predicate of the form:  

                 
                IF (((current_time - base_time) % 24_hours) == 0) THEN ...
                 

                However, time-based events are popular enough that special
                semantics for expressing them would likely significantly 
                reduce the computations necessary to represent time functions
                in a SBR. 
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Calculations: Expressions, Literals, and Operators</name>
        <t>
               Actions such as computing a VAR value or describing a rule 
               predicate require some mechanism for calculating the value
               of mathematical expressions. In addition to the aforementioned
               DTNMA logical data objects, Literals, Operators, and 
               Expressions are used to perform these calculations. 
        </t>
        <t>
               A Literal (LIT) represents a strongly typed datum whose 
               identity is equivalent to its value. An example of a LIT value
               is "4" - its identifier (4) is the same as its value (4). 
               Literals differ from constants in that constants have an 
               identifier separate from their value. For example, the constant 
               PI may refer to a value of 3.14.  However, the literal 3.14159 
               always refers to the value 3.14159. 
        </t>
        <t>
               An Operator (OP) represents a mathematical operation in an 
               expression. OPs should support multiple operands based on the 
               operation supported. A common set of OPs SHOULD be defined for 
               any Agent and systems MAY choose to allow individual
               applications to define new OPs to assist in the generation of 
               new VAR values and predicates for managing that application. OPs 
               may be simple binary operations such as "A + B" or more complex 
               functions such as sin(A) or avg(A,B,C,D). Additionally, OPs 
               may be typed. For example, addition of integers may be defined
               separately from addition of real numbers.
        </t>
        <t>
                An Expression (EXPR) is a combination of operators and operands
                used to construct a numerical value from a series of other 
                elements of the DTNMA logical model. Operands include any DTNMA
                logical data model object that can be interpreted as a value, 
                such as EDD, VAR, CONST, and LIT values. Operators perform 
                some function on operands to generate new values. 
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>System Model</name>
      <t>
           This section describes the notional data flows and control
           flows that illustrate how Managers and Agents within an DTNMA
           cooperate to perform network management services.
      </t>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Control and Data Flows</name>
        <t>
           The DTNMA identifies three significant data flows: control
           flows from Managers to Agents, reports flows from Agents to Managers,
           and fusion reports from Managers to other Managers. These data flows
           are illustrated in <xref target="system_overview" format="default"/>.
        </t>
        <t keepWithNext="true">DTNMA Control and Data Flows</t>
        <figure anchor="system_overview">
          <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[    
 +---------+       +------------------------+      +---------+        
 | Node A  |       |         Node B         |      |  Node C |
 |         |       |                        |      |         |
 |+-------+|       |+-------+      +-------+|      |+-------+|
 ||       ||=====>>||Manager|====>>|       ||====>>||       ||
 ||       ||<<=====||   B   |<<====|Agent B||<<====||       ||
 ||       ||       |+--++---+      +-------+|      ||Manager||
 || Agent ||       +---||-------------------+      ||   C   ||              
 ||   A   ||           ||                          ||       ||
 ||       ||<<=========||==========================||       ||
 ||       ||===========++========================>>||       ||
 |+-------+|                                       |+-------+|
 +---------+                                       +---------+
             ]]></artwork>
        </figure>
        <t>
         In this data flow, the Agent on node A receives
         Controls from Managers on nodes B and C, and replies with
         Report Entries back to these Managers. Similarly, the Agent on node B
         interacts with the local Manager on node B and the remote Manager on
         node C. Finally, the Manager on node B may fuse Report Entries received
         from Agents at nodes A and B and send these fused Report Entries back to the
         Manager on node C.
        
         From this figure it is clear that there exist many-to-many relationships amongst
         Managers, amongst Agents, and between Agents and Managers. Note that
         Agents and Managers are roles, not necessarily different software
         applications. Node A may represent a single software application
         fulfilling only the Agent role, whereas node B may have a single
         software application fulfilling both the Agent and Manager roles. The
         specifics of how these roles are realized is an implementation matter.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section toc="default" numbered="true">
        <name>Control Flow by Role</name>
        <t>
           This section describes three common configurations of Agents
           and Managers and the flow of messages between them. These
           configurations involve local and remote management and data fusion.
        </t>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Notation</name>
          <t> The notation outlined in <xref target="ctrl_macros" format="default"/> 
          describes the types of control messages exchanged 
          between Agents and Managers.</t>
          <table anchor="ctrl_macros" align="center">
            <name>Terminology</name>
            <thead>
              <tr>
                <th align="center">Term</th>
                <th align="center">Definition</th>
                <th align="center">Example</th>
              </tr>
            </thead>
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td align="center">EDD#</td>
                <td align="center">EDD definition.</td>
                <td align="center">EDD1</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td align="center">V#</td>
                <td align="center">Variable definition.</td>
                <td align="center">V1 = EDD1 + V0.</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td align="center">DEF([ACL], ID,EXPR)</td>
                <td align="center">Define ID from expression. Allow managers
            in access control list (ACL) to request this ID.</td>
                <td align="center">DEF([*], V1, EDD1 + EDD2)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td align="center">PROD(P,ID)</td>
                <td align="center">Produce ID according to predicate 
            P. P may be a time period (1s) or an expression (EDD1 &gt; 10).</td>
                <td align="center">PROD(1s, EDD1)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td align="center">RPT(ID)</td>
                <td align="center">A report identified by ID.</td>
                <td align="center">RPT(EDD1)</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Serialized Management</name>
          <t>This is a nominal configuration of network management where a
          Manager interacts with a set of Agents. The control flows for this are
          outlined in <xref target="serial_mgmt_ctrl_flow" format="default"/>.</t>
          <t keepWithNext="true">Serialized Management Control Flow</t>
          <figure anchor="serial_mgmt_ctrl_flow">
            <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[    
 +----------+            +---------+           +---------+              
 |  Manager |            | Agent A |           | Agent B |
 +----+-----+            +----+----+           +----+----+
      |                       |                     |
      |-----PROD(1s, EDD1)--->|                     | (1)
      |----------------------------PROD(1s, EDD1)-->|                    
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     | (2)
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
                 ]]></artwork>
          </figure>
          <t keepWithPrevious="true">In a simple network, a Manager interacts with multiple
            Agents.</t>
          <t>
            In this figure, the Manager configures Agents A and B to produce
            EDD1 every second in (1). Upon receiving and configuring this message, Agents A and B then
            build a Report Entry containing EDD1 and send those reports back to the
            Manager in (2). This behavior then repeats this action every 1s without requiring other
            inputs from the Manager.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Challenged, DTN Management</name>
          <t>This is a challenged configuration of network management where Agent
			B temporarily looses connectivity between the agent and the Manager. Flows
			in this case are outlined in <xref target="challenged_serial_mgmt_ctrl_flow" format="default"/>.</t>
          <t keepWithNext="true">Challenged Management Control Flow</t>
          <figure anchor="challenged_serial_mgmt_ctrl_flow">
            <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[    
 +----------+            +---------+           +---------+              
 |  Manager |            | Agent A |           | Agent B |
 +----+-----+            +----+----+           +----+----+
      |                       |                     |
      |-----PROD(1s, EDD1)--->|                     | (1)
      |----------------------------PROD(1s, EDD1)-->|                    
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     | (2)
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<                                   RPT(EDD1)| (3)
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<                                   RPT(EDD1)|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<----------------RPT(EDD1, EDD1, EDD1)-------| (4)
      |                       |                     |
                 ]]></artwork>
          </figure>
          <t keepWithPrevious="true">In a challenged network, an agent must store and forward reports until links are available.</t>
          <t>
            In this figure, the Manager configures Agents A and B to produce
            EDD1 every second in (1). Upon receiving and configuring this message, Agents A and B then
            build a Report Entry containing EDD1 and send those reports back to the
            Manager in (2). At step (3) the connection between Agent B and Manager
			is not available. The agent still generates the reports and stores locally 
			using DTN protocols. At step (4) the link has been restored and all stored 
			reports are successfully delivered to the manager.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Consolidated Message Management</name>
          <t>This is a configuration of network management where Agent
			B has been configured to deliver two sets of data and demonstrates
			the Agent's responsibility to consolidate messages for transport. Flows
			in this case are outlined in <xref target="consolidated_mgmt_ctrl_flow" format="default"/>.</t>
          <t keepWithNext="true">Consolidated Management Control Flow</t>
          <figure anchor="consolidated_mgmt_ctrl_flow">
            <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[    
 +----------+            +---------+           +---------+              
 |  Manager |            | Agent A |           | Agent B |
 +----+-----+            +----+----+           +----+----+
      |                       |                     |
      |-----PROD(1s, EDD1)--->|                     | (1)
      |----------------------------PROD(1s, EDD1)-->|                    
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     | (2)
      |<----------------------------RPT(EDD1)-------|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |----------------------------PROD(1s, EDD2)-->| (3)
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     | (4)
      |<--------------------------RPT(EDD1,EDD2)----|
      |                       |                     |
      |                       |                     |
      |<-------RPT(EDD1)------|                     |
      |<--------------------------RPT(EDD1,EDD2)----|
      |                       |                     |
                 ]]></artwork>
          </figure>
          <t keepWithPrevious="true">In a challenged network, Agents shall consolidate messages where possible.</t>
          <t>
            In this figure, the Manager configures Agents A and B to produce
            EDD1 every second in (1). Upon receiving and configuring this message, Agents A and B then
            build a Report Entry containing EDD1 and send those reports back to the
            Manager in (2). At step (3), the manager configures Agent
			B to additionally report EDD2 every second. At step (4) Agent B proceeds to deliver EDD1 and EDD2 
			in the same report.
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Multiplexed Management</name>
          <t>
            Networks spanning multiple administrative domains may require
            multiple Managers (for example, one per domain). When a
            Manager defines custom Reports/Variables to an Agent, that definition may
            be tagged with an Access Control List (ACL) to limit what other
            Managers will be privy to this information. Managers in such
            networks should synchronize with those other Managers granted access
            to their custom data definitions. When Agents generate messages,
            they MUST only send messages to Managers according to these ACLs, if
            present. The control flows in this scenario are outlined in 
            <xref target="multi_mgmt_ctrl_flow" format="default"/>.
          </t>
          <t keepWithNext="true">Multiplexed Management Control Flow</t>
          <figure anchor="multi_mgmt_ctrl_flow">
            <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[    
 +-----------+            +-------+            +-----------+              
 | Manager A |            | Agent |            | Manager B |
 +-----+-----+            +---+---+            +-----+-----+
       |                      |                      |
       |---DEF(A,V1,EDD1*2)-->|<-DEF(B, V2, EDD2*2)--| (1)
       |                      |                      |
       |---PROD(1s, V1)------>|<---PROD(1s, V2)------| (2)
       |                      |                      |
       |<--------RPT(V1)------|                      | (3)
       |                      |--------RPT(V2)------>|
       |<--------RPT(V1)------|                      |
       |                      |--------RPT(V2)------>|
       |                      |                      |
       |                      |<---PROD(1s, V1)------| (4)
       |                      |                      |
       |                      |---ERR(V1 no perm.)-->|   
       |                      |                      |
       |--DEF(*,V3,EDD3*3)--->|                      | (5)
       |                      |                      |
       |---PROD(1s, V3)------>|                      | (6)
       |                      |                      |
       |                      |<----PROD(1s, V3)-----|
       |                      |                      |
       |<--------RPT(V3)------|--------RPT(V3)------>| (7)
       |<--------RPT(V1)------|                      |
       |                      |--------RPT(V2)------>|
       |<-------RPT(V3)-------|--------RPT(V3)------>|
       |<-------RPT(V1)-------|                      |
       |                      |--------RPT(V2)------>|
                 ]]></artwork>
          </figure>
          <t keepWithPrevious="true">Complex networks require multiple Managers interfacing
            with Agents.</t>
          <t>
            In more complex networks, any Manager may choose to define custom
            Reports and Variables, and Agents may need to accept such
            definitions from multiple Managers. Variable
            definitions may include an ACL that describes who may query and
            otherwise understand these definitions. In (1), Manager A
            defines V1 only for A while Manager B defines V2 only for B.
            Managers may, then, request the production of Report Entries containing
            these definitions, as shown in (2). Agents produce 
            different data for different Managers in accordance
            with configured production rules, as shown in (3). If a Manager
            requests the production of a custom definition for which the Manager 
             has no permissions, a response
            consistent with the configured logging policy on the Agent should be
            implemented, as shown in (4). Alternatively, as shown in (5), a
            Manager may define custom data with no access restrictions, allowing all
            other Managers to request and use this definition. This allows all
            Managers to request the production of Report Entries containing this
            definition, shown in (6) and have all Managers receive this and
            other data going forward, as shown in (7).
          </t>
        </section>
        <section toc="default" numbered="true">
          <name>Data Fusion</name>
          <t>
            Data fusion reduces the number and size of messages in the network 
            which can lead to more efficient utilization of networking resources. 
            The DTNMA supports fusion of NM reports
            by co-locating Agents and Managers on nodes and offloading
            fusion activities to the Manager. This process is illustrated in
            <xref target="fusion_ctrl_flow" format="default"/>.
          </t>
          <t keepWithNext="true">Data Fusion Control Flow</t>
          <figure anchor="fusion_ctrl_flow">
            <artwork align="center" name="" type="" alt=""><![CDATA[
               ---------------------------------------
               |                Actor B              |
               |                                     |
+-----------+  |    +-----------+      +---------+   |    +---------+
| Manager A |  |    | Manager B |      | Agent B |   |    | Agent C |
+---+-------+  |    +-----+-----+      +----+----+   |    +----+----+
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
    |------------------DEF(A,V0,EDD1+EDD2)->|        |         | (1)
    |------------------PROD(EDD1&EDD2,V0)-->|        |         |
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
    |          |          |--PROD(1s,EDD1)->|        |         | (2)
    |          |          |--------------------PROD(1s, EDD2)->|
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
    |          |          |<---RPT(EDD1)----|       |          | (3)
    |          |          |<--------------------RPT(EDD2)------|
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
    |<------------------RPT(A,V0)-----------|        |         | (4)
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
    |          |          |                 |        |         |
               |                                     |
               |                                     |
               ---------------------------------------
                 ]]></artwork>
          </figure>
          <t keepWithPrevious="true">Data fusion occurs amongst Managers in the
            network.</t>
          <t>
            In this example, Manager A requires the production of a Variable 
            V0, from node B, as shown in (1). The Manager role
            understands what data is available from what agents in the subnetwork
            local to B, understanding that EDD1 is available locally and EDD2 is
            available remotely. Production messages are produced in (2) and data
            collected in (3). This allows the Manager at node B to fuse the
            collected Report Entries into V0 and return it in (4). While a
            trivial example, the mechanism of associating fusion with the
            Manager function rather than the Agent function scales with fusion
            complexity, though it is important to reiterate that Agent and
            Manager designations are roles, not individual software components.
            There may be a single software application running on node B
            implementing both Manager B and Agent B roles.
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="IANA" toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>
         This protocol has no fields registered by IANA.
      </t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="Security" toc="default" numbered="true">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>
         Security within an DTNMA MUST exist in two layers: transport layer
         security and access control.
      </t>
      <t>
         Transport-layer security addresses the questions of authentication,
         integrity, and confidentiality associated with the transport of
         messages between and amongst Managers and Agents in the DTNMA. This 
         security is applied before any particular Actor in the system 
         receives data and, therefore, is outside of the scope of this document.
      </t>
      <t>
        Finer grain application security is done via ACLs which are defined
        via configuration messages and implementation specific.
      </t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->
  <back>
    <!-- -<references title="Normative References">
      
     
    </references> -->
  
  <references>
      <name>Informative References</name>
      <reference anchor="RFC3416" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3416" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3416.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Version 2 of the Protocol Operations for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)</title>
          <author initials="R." surname="Presuhn" fullname="R. Presuhn" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2002" month="December"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines version 2 of the protocol operations for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP).  It defines the syntax and elements of procedure for sending, receiving, and processing SNMP PDUs. This document obsoletes RFC 1905.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="62"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3416"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3416"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
          <author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="S. Bradner">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="1997" month="March"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification.  These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents.  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6241" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6241.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
          <author initials="R." surname="Enns" fullname="R. Enns" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="M." surname="Bjorklund" fullname="M. Bjorklund" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="J." surname="Schoenwaelder" fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Bierman" fullname="A. Bierman" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2011" month="June"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) defined in this document provides mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the configuration of network devices.  It uses an Extensible Markup Language (XML)-based data encoding for the configuration data as well as the protocol messages.  The NETCONF protocol operations are realized as remote procedure calls (RPCs).  This document obsoletes RFC 4741.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6241"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6241"/>
      </reference>
      <reference target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228" anchor="RFC7228" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7228.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Terminology for Constrained-Node Networks</title>
          <author fullname="C. Bormann" surname="Bormann" initials="C"/>
          <author fullname="M. Ersue" surname="Ersue" initials="M"/>
          <author fullname="A. Keranen" surname="Keranen" initials="A"/>
          <date year="2014" month="May"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Internet Protocol Suite is increasingly used on small devices with severe constraints on power, memory, and processing resources, creating constrained-node networks.  This document provides a number of basic terms that have been useful in the standardization work for constrained-node networks.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7228"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7228"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6020" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6020.xml">
        <front>
          <title>YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Bjorklund" fullname="M. Bjorklund" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2010" month="October"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration and state data manipulated by the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), NETCONF remote procedure calls, and NETCONF notifications. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6020"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6020"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8040" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8040.xml">
        <front>
          <title>RESTCONF Protocol</title>
          <author initials="A." surname="Bierman" fullname="A. Bierman">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="M." surname="Bjorklund" fullname="M. Bjorklund">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="K." surname="Watsen" fullname="K. Watsen">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2017" month="January"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes an HTTP-based protocol that provides a programmatic interface for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastore concepts defined in the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8040"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8040"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC4838" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4838" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4838.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Delay-Tolerant Networking Architecture</title>
          <author initials="V." surname="Cerf" fullname="V. Cerf">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="S." surname="Burleigh" fullname="S. Burleigh">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Hooke" fullname="A. Hooke">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="L." surname="Torgerson" fullname="L. Torgerson">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="R." surname="Durst" fullname="R. Durst">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="K." surname="Scott" fullname="K. Scott">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="K." surname="Fall" fullname="K. Fall">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="H." surname="Weiss" fullname="H. Weiss">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2007" month="April"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes an architecture for delay-tolerant and disruption-tolerant networks, and is an evolution of the architecture originally designed for the Interplanetary Internet, a communication system envisioned to provide Internet-like services across interplanetary distances in support of deep space exploration.  This document describes an architecture that addresses a variety of problems with internetworks having operational and performance characteristics that make conventional (Internet-like) networking approaches either unworkable or impractical.  We define a message- oriented overlay that exists above the transport (or other) layers of the networks it interconnects.  The document presents a motivation for the architecture, an architectural overview, review of state management required for its operation, and a discussion of application design issues.  This document represents the consensus of the IRTF DTN research group and has been widely reviewed by that group.  This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4838"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4838"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8639" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8639" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8639.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Subscription to YANG Notifications</title>
          <author initials="E." surname="Voit" fullname="E. Voit">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Clemm" fullname="A. Clemm">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Gonzalez Prieto" fullname="A. Gonzalez Prieto">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="E." surname="Nilsen-Nygaard" fullname="E. Nilsen-Nygaard">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Tripathy" fullname="A. Tripathy">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2019" month="September"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a YANG data model and associated mechanisms enabling subscriber-specific subscriptions to a publisher's event streams.  Applying these elements allows a subscriber to request and receive a continuous, customized feed of publisher-generated information.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8639"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8639"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8641" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8641" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8641.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Subscription to YANG Notifications for Datastore Updates</title>
          <author initials="A." surname="Clemm" fullname="A. Clemm">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="E." surname="Voit" fullname="E. Voit">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2019" month="September"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes a mechanism that allows subscriber applications to request a continuous and customized stream of updates from a YANG datastore.  Providing such visibility into updates enables new capabilities based on the remote mirroring and monitoring of configuration and operational state.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8641"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8641"/>
      </reference>
      <reference target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7252" anchor="RFC7252" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7252.xml">
        <front>
          <title>The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)</title>
          <author fullname="Z. Shelby" surname="Shelby" initials="Z"/>
          <author fullname="K. Hartke" surname="Hartke" initials="K"/>
          <author fullname="C. Bormann" surname="Bormann" initials="C"/>
          <date year="2014" month="June"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is a specialized web transfer protocol for use with constrained nodes and constrained (e.g., low-power, lossy) networks. The nodes often have 8-bit microcontrollers with small amounts of ROM and RAM, while constrained networks such as IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs) often have high packet error rates and a typical throughput of 10s of kbit/s. The protocol is designed for machine- to-machine (M2M) applications such as smart energy and building automation.</t>
            <t>CoAP provides a request/response interaction model between application endpoints, supports built-in discovery of services and resources, and includes key concepts of the Web such as URIs and Internet media types. CoAP is designed to easily interface with HTTP for integration with the Web while meeting specialized requirements such as multicast support, very low overhead, and simplicity for constrained environments.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7252"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7252"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9171" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9171" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9171.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Bundle Protocol Version 7</title>
          <author initials="S." surname="Burleigh" fullname="S. Burleigh">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="K." surname="Fall" fullname="K. Fall">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="E." surname="Birrane" fullname="E. Birrane">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="III" surname="" fullname="III">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2022" month="January"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document presents a specification for the Bundle Protocol, adapted from the experimental Bundle Protocol specification developed by the Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group of the Internet Research Task Force and documented in RFC 5050.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9171"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9171"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC9172" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9172" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9172.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Bundle Protocol Security (BPSec)</title>
          <author initials="E." surname="Birrane" fullname="E. Birrane">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="III" surname="" fullname="III">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="K." surname="McKeever" fullname="K. McKeever">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2022" month="January"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines a security protocol providing data integrity and confidentiality services for the Bundle Protocol (BP).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9172"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9172"/>
      </reference>
      <reference target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8949" anchor="RFC8949" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8949.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)</title>
          <author fullname="C. Bormann" surname="Bormann" initials="C"/>
          <author fullname="P. Hoffman" surname="Hoffman" initials="P"/>
          <date year="2020" month="December"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) is a data format whose design goals include the possibility of extremely small code size, fairly small message size, and extensibility without the need for version negotiation. These design goals make it different from earlier binary serializations such as ASN.1 and MessagePack.</t>
            <t>This document obsoletes RFC 7049, providing editorial improvements, new details, and errata fixes while keeping full compatibility with the interchange format of RFC 7049. It does not create a new version of the format.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8949"/>
        <seriesInfo name="STD" value="94"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8949"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7575" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7575" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7575.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Autonomic Networking: Definitions and Design Goals</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Behringer" fullname="M. Behringer">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="M." surname="Pritikin" fullname="M. Pritikin">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="S." surname="Bjarnason" fullname="S. Bjarnason">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Clemm" fullname="A. Clemm">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="B." surname="Carpenter" fullname="B. Carpenter">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="S." surname="Jiang" fullname="S. Jiang">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="L." surname="Ciavaglia" fullname="L. Ciavaglia">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2015" month="June"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Autonomic systems were first described in 2001.  The fundamental goal is self-management, including self-configuration, self-optimization, self-healing, and self-protection.  This is achieved by an autonomic function having minimal dependencies on human administrators or centralized management systems.  It usually implies distribution across network elements.</t>
            <t>This document defines common language and outlines design goals (and what are not design goals) for autonomic functions.  A high-level reference model illustrates how functional elements in an Autonomic Network interact.  This document is a product of the IRTF's Network Management Research Group.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7575"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7575"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8199" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8199" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8199.xml">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Module Classification</title>
          <author initials="D." surname="Bogdanovic" fullname="D. Bogdanovic">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="B." surname="Claise" fullname="B. Claise">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="C." surname="Moberg" fullname="C. Moberg">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2017" month="July"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications throughout the networking industry at large.  Many standards development organizations (SDOs), open-source software projects, vendors, and users are using YANG to develop and publish YANG modules for a wide variety of applications.  At the same time, there is currently no well-known terminology to categorize various types of YANG modules.</t>
            <t>A consistent terminology would help with the categorization of YANG modules, assist in the analysis of the YANG data modeling efforts in the IETF and other organizations, and bring clarity to the YANG- related discussions between the different groups.</t>
            <t>This document describes a set of concepts and associated terms to support consistent classification of YANG modules.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8199"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8199"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8993" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8993" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8993.xml">
        <front>
          <title>A Reference Model for Autonomic Networking</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Behringer" fullname="M. Behringer" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="B." surname="Carpenter" fullname="B. Carpenter">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="T." surname="Eckert" fullname="T. Eckert">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="L." surname="Ciavaglia" fullname="L. Ciavaglia">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="J." surname="Nobre" fullname="J. Nobre">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2021" month="May"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document describes a reference model for Autonomic Networking for managed networks. It defines the behavior of an autonomic node, how the various elements in an autonomic context work together, and how autonomic services can use the infrastructure.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8993"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8993"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC6991" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6991.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Common YANG Data Types</title>
          <author initials="J." surname="Schoenwaelder" fullname="J. Schoenwaelder" role="editor">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2013" month="July"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document introduces a collection of common data types to be used with the YANG data modeling language.  This document obsoletes RFC 6021.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6991"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6991"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7576" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7576" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7576.xml">
        <front>
          <title>General Gap Analysis for Autonomic Networking</title>
          <author initials="S." surname="Jiang" fullname="S. Jiang">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="B." surname="Carpenter" fullname="B. Carpenter">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="M." surname="Behringer" fullname="M. Behringer">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2015" month="June"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document provides a problem statement and general gap analysis for an IP-based Autonomic Network that is mainly based on distributed network devices.  The document provides background by reviewing the current status of autonomic aspects of IP networks and the extent to which current network management depends on centralization and human administrators.  Finally, the document outlines the general features that are missing from current network abilities and are needed in the ideal Autonomic Network concept.</t>
            <t>This document is a product of the IRTF's Network Management Research Group.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7576"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7576"/>
      </reference>
      <reference target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8613" anchor="RFC8613" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8613.xml">
        <front>
          <title>Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE)</title>
          <author fullname="G. Selander" surname="Selander" initials="G"/>
          <author fullname="J. Mattsson" surname="Mattsson" initials="J"/>
          <author fullname="F. Palombini" surname="Palombini" initials="F"/>
          <author fullname="L. Seitz" surname="Seitz" initials="L"/>
          <date year="2019" month="July"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This document defines Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE), a method for application-layer protection of the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), using CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE). OSCORE provides end-to-end protection between endpoints communicating using CoAP or CoAP-mappable HTTP. OSCORE is designed for constrained nodes and networks supporting a range of proxy operations, including translation between different transport protocols.</t>
            <t>Although an optional functionality of CoAP, OSCORE alters CoAP options processing and IANA registration. Therefore, this document updates RFC 7252.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8613"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8613"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="BIRRANE1">
        <front>
          <title>
            Management of Disruption-Tolerant Networks: A Systems Engineering 
            Approach
          </title>
          <author initials="E.B." surname="Birrane"/>
          <author initials="R.C." surname="Cole"/>
          <date year="2010"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="BIRRANE2">
        <front>
          <title>
            Defining Tolerance: Impacts of Delay and Disruption when Managing 
            Challenged Networks
          </title>
          <author initials="E.B." surname="Birrane"/>
          <author initials="S.B." surname="Burleigh"/>
          <author initials="V.C." surname="Cerf"/>
          <date year="2011"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="BIRRANE3">
        <front>
          <title>
            Delay-Tolerant Network Management: The Definition and Exchange of
            Infrastructure Information in High Delay Environments
          </title>
          <author initials="E.B." surname="Birrane"/>
          <author initials="H.K." surname="Kruse"/>
          <date year="2011"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="xpath">
        <front>
          <title>
               XML Path Language (XPath) Version 1.0 
          </title>
          <author initials="J.C." surname="Clark"/>
          <author initials="R.D." surname="DeRose"/>
          <date year="1999"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.irtf-dtnrg-dtnmp" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml-ids/reference.I-D.draft-irtf-dtnrg-dtnmp-01.xml" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-dtnrg-dtnmp-01.txt">
        <front>
          <title>Delay Tolerant Network Management Protocol</title>
          <author initials="E" surname="Birrane" fullname="Edward Birrane">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="V" surname="Ramachandran" fullname="Vignesh Ramachandran">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="December" day="31" year="2014"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This draft describes the Delay/Disruption Tolerant Network Management Protocol (DTNMP).  The DTNMP provides monitoring and configuration services between managing devices and managed devices, some of which may operate on the far side of high-delay or high-disruption links. The protocol is designed to minimize the number of transmitted bytes, to operate without sessions or (concurrent) two-way links, and to function autonomously when there is no timely contact with a network operator.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-irtf-dtnrg-dtnmp-01"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-core-yang-cbor" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml-ids/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-16.xml" target="https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-16.txt">
        <front>
          <title>CBOR Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Veillette" fullname="Michel Veillette">
            <organization>Trilliant Networks Inc.</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="I." surname="Petrov" fullname="Ivaylo Petrov">
            <organization>Google Switzerland GmbH</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Pelov" fullname="Alexander Pelov">
            <organization>Acklio</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="C." surname="Bormann" fullname="Carsten Bormann">
            <organization>Universität Bremen TZI</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="June" day="24" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document defines encoding rules for serializing configuration
   data, state data, RPC input and RPC output, action input, action
   output, notifications and the yang-data extension defined within YANG
   modules using the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, RFC
   8949).

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-16"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-core-sid" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml-ids/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-core-sid-16.xml" target="https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-core-sid-16.txt">
        <front>
          <title>YANG Schema Item iDentifier (YANG SID)</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Veillette" fullname="Michel Veillette">
            <organization>Trilliant Networks Inc.</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Pelov" fullname="Alexander Pelov">
            <organization>Acklio</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="I." surname="Petrov" fullname="Ivaylo Petrov">
            <organization>Google Switzerland GmbH</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="C." surname="Bormann" fullname="Carsten Bormann">
            <organization>Universität Bremen TZI</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="June" day="24" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   YANG Schema Item iDentifiers (YANG SID) are globally unique 63-bit
   unsigned integers used to identify YANG items.  This document defines
   the semantics, the registration, and assignment processes of YANG
   SIDs.  To enable the implementation of these processes, this document
   also defines a file format used to persist and publish assigned YANG
   SIDs.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-core-sid-16"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-core-comi" xml:base="https://xml2rfc.tools.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml-ids/reference.I-D.ietf-core-comi-11.xml" target="https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-core-comi-11.txt">
        <front>
          <title>CoAP Management Interface (CORECONF)</title>
          <author initials="M." surname="Veillette" fullname="Michel Veillette">
            <organization>Trilliant Networks Inc.</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="P." surname="Van der Stok" fullname="Peter Van der Stok">
            <organization>consultant</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Pelov" fullname="Alexander Pelov">
            <organization>Acklio</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="A." surname="Bierman" fullname="Andy Bierman">
            <organization>YumaWorks</organization>
          </author>
          <author initials="I." surname="Petrov" fullname="Ivaylo Petrov">
            <organization>Acklio</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="January" day="17" year="2021"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>   This document describes a network management interface for
   constrained devices and networks, called CoAP Management Interface
   (CORECONF).  The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is used to
   access datastore and data node resources specified in YANG, or SMIv2
   converted to YANG.  CORECONF uses the YANG to CBOR mapping and
   converts YANG identifier strings to numeric identifiers for payload
   size reduction.  CORECONF extends the set of YANG based protocols,
   NETCONF and RESTCONF, with the capability to manage constrained
   devices and networks.

            </t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-core-comi-11"/>
      </reference>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
