RFC 9645: YANG Groupings for TLS Clients and TLS Servers
- K. Watsen
Abstract
This document presents four YANG 1.1 modules -- three IETF modules and one supporting IANA module.¶
The three IETF modules are "ietf
The IANA module is "iana
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://
1. Introduction
This document presents four YANG 1.1 [RFC7950] modules -- three IETF modules and one IANA module.¶
The three IETF modules are "ietf
The groupings defined in this document are expected to be used in conjunction with the groupings defined in an underlying transport-level module, such as the groupings defined in [RFC9643]. The transport-level data model enables the configuration of transport-level values such as a remote address, a remote port, a local address, and a local port.¶
The IANA module is "iana
IANA used the script in Appendix A to generate the "iana
1.1. Regarding the Three IETF Modules
The three IETF modules define features and groupings to model "generic" TLS clients and TLS servers, where "generic" should be interpreted as "least common denominator" rather than "complete." Basic TLS protocol support is afforded by these modules, leaving configuration of advance features to augmentations made by consuming modules.¶
It is intended that the YANG groupings will be used by applications needing
to configure TLS client and server protocol stacks. For instance, these
groupings are used to help define the data model for HTTPS [RFC9110]
and clients and servers based on the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) over TLS [RFC7589] in [HTTP
The "ietf
Both TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 may be configured. TLS 1.2 [RFC5246] is obsoleted by TLS 1.3 [RFC8446] but is still in common use, and hence its "feature" statement is marked "status deprecated".¶
1.2. Relation to Other RFCs
This document presents four YANG modules [RFC7950] that are part of a collection of RFCs that work together to ultimately support the configuration of both the clients and servers of the NETCONF [RFC6241] and RESTCONF [RFC8040] protocols.¶
The dependency relationship between the primary YANG groupings defined in the various RFCs is presented in the diagram below. In some cases, a document may define secondary groupings that introduce dependencies not illustrated in the diagram. The labels in the diagram are shorthand names for the defining RFCs. The citation references for the shorthand names are provided below the diagram.¶
Please note that the arrows in the diagram point from referencer to referenced. For example, the "crypto-types" RFC does not have any dependencies, whilst the "keystore" RFC depends on the "crypto-types" RFC.¶
1.3. Specification Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
1.4. Adherence to the NMDA
This document is compliant with the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]. For instance, as described in [RFC9641] and [RFC9642], trust anchors and keys installed during manufacturing are expected to appear in <operational> (Section 5.3 of [RFC8342]) and <system> [SYSTEM-CONFIG] if implemented.¶
1.5. Conventions
Various examples in this document use "BASE64VALUE=" as a placeholder value for binary data that has been base64 encoded (per Section 9.8 of [RFC7950]). This placeholder value is used because real base64-encoded structures are often many lines long and hence distracting to the example being presented.¶
Various examples in this document use the XML [W3C
Various examples in this document contain long lines that may be folded, as described in [RFC8792].¶
2. The "ietf-tls-common" Module
The TLS common model presented in this section contains features
and groupings common to both TLS clients and TLS servers. The
"hello
Thus, in order to support both TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3, the cipher suites
part of the "hello
2.1. Data Model Overview
This section provides an overview of the "ietf
2.1.1. Features
The following diagram lists all the "feature" statements
defined in the "ietf
The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not defined in [RFC8340].¶
Please refer to the YANG module for a description of each feature.¶
2.1.2. Identities
The following diagram illustrates the relationship amongst the
"identity" statements defined in the "ietf
The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not defined in [RFC8340].¶
Comments:¶
2.1.3. Groupings
The "ietf
This grouping is presented in the following subsection.¶
2.1.4. Protocol-Accessible Nodes
The following tree diagram [RFC8340] lists all the
protocol
Comments:¶
2.2. Example Usage
The following example illustrates the "hello
The following example illustrates operational state data indicating the TLS algorithms supported by the server.¶
The following example illustrates the "generate
REQUEST¶
RESPONSE¶
3. The "ietf-tls-client" Module
This section defines a YANG 1.1 [RFC7950] module called
"ietf
3.1. Data Model Overview
This section provides an overview of the "ietf
3.1.1. Features
The following diagram lists all the "feature" statements
defined in the "ietf
The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not defined in [RFC8340].¶
Please refer to the YANG module for a description of each feature.¶
3.1.2. Groupings
The "ietf
This grouping is presented in the following subsection.¶
3.1.3. Protocol-Accessible Nodes
The "ietf
3.2. Example Usage
This section presents two examples showing the "tls
The following configuration example uses inline
The following configuration example uses central
4. The "ietf-tls-server" Module
This section defines a YANG 1.1 module called
"ietf
4.1. Data Model Overview
This section provides an overview of the "ietf
4.1.1. Features
The following diagram lists all the "feature" statements
defined in the "ietf
The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not defined in [RFC8340].¶
Please refer to the YANG module for a description of each feature.¶
4.1.2. Groupings
The "ietf
This grouping is presented in the following subsection.¶
4.1.3. Protocol-Accessible Nodes
The "ietf
4.2. Example Usage
This section presents two examples showing the "tls
The following configuration example uses inline
The following configuration example uses central
5. Security Considerations
The three IETF YANG modules in this document define groupings and will not be deployed as standalone modules. Their security implications may be context dependent based on their use in other modules. The designers of modules that import these grouping must conduct their own analysis of the security considerations.¶
5.1. Considerations for the "iana-tls-cipher-suite-algs" YANG Module
This section is modeled after the template defined in Section 3.7.1 of [RFC8407].¶
The "iana
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular users to a preconfigured subset of all available protocol operations and content.¶
This YANG module defines YANG enumerations, for a public IANA-maintained registry.¶
YANG enumerations are not security
This module does not define any writable nodes, RPCs, actions, or notifications, and thus the security considerations for such are not provided here.¶
5.2. Considerations for the "ietf-tls-common" YANG Module
This section is modeled after the template defined in Section 3.7.1 of [RFC8407].¶
The "ietf
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular users to a preconfigured subset of all available protocol operations and content.¶
Please be aware that this YANG module uses groupings from other YANG modules that define nodes that may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments. Please review the Security Considerations for dependent YANG modules for information as to which nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.¶
None of the readable data nodes defined in this YANG module are
considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.
The NACM "default
None of the writable data nodes defined in this YANG module are
considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.
The NACM "default
This module defines the "generate
This module does not define any actions or notifications, and thus the security considerations for such are not provided here.¶
5.3. Considerations for the "ietf-tls-client" YANG Module
This section is modeled after the template defined in Section 3.7.1 of [RFC8407].¶
The "ietf
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular users to a preconfigured subset of all available protocol operations and content.¶
Please be aware that this YANG module uses groupings from other YANG modules that define nodes that may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments. Please review the Security Considerations for dependent YANG modules for information as to which nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.¶
None of the readable data nodes defined in this YANG module
are considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.
The NACM "default
All the writable data nodes defined by this module may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments.
For instance, any modification to a key or reference to a key
may dramatically alter the implemented security policy. For
this reason, the NACM extension "default
This module does not define any RPCs, actions, or notifications, and thus the security considerations for such are not provided here.¶
5.4. Considerations for the "ietf-tls-server" YANG Module
This section is modeled after the template defined in Section 3.7.1 of [RFC8407].¶
The "ietf
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular users to a preconfigured subset of all available protocol operations and content.¶
Please be aware that this YANG module uses groupings from other YANG modules that define nodes that may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments. Please review the Security Considerations for dependent YANG modules for information as to which nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in network environments.¶
None of the readable data nodes defined in this YANG module are considered sensitive
or vulnerable in network environments. The NACM "default
Please be aware that this module uses the "key" and "private-key"
nodes from the "ietf
All the writable data nodes defined by this module may be
considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments.
For instance, any modification to a key or reference to a key
may dramatically alter the implemented security policy. For
this reason, the NACM extension "default
This module does not define any RPCs, actions, or notifications, and thus the security considerations for such are not provided here.¶
6. IANA Considerations
6.1. The IETF XML Registry
IANA has registered the following four URIs in the "ns" registry of the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688].¶
- URI:
- urn
:ietf :params :xml :ns :yang :iana -tls -cipher -suite -algs ¶ - Registrant Contact:
- The IESG¶
- XML:
- N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.¶
- URI:
- urn
:ietf :params :xml :ns :yang :ietf -tls -common ¶ - Registrant Contact:
- The IESG¶
- XML:
- N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.¶
6.2. The YANG Module Names Registry
IANA has registered the following four YANG modules in the "YANG Module Names" registry [RFC6020].¶
- name:
- iana
-tls -cipher -suite -algs ¶ - Maintained by IANA:
- Y¶
- namespace:
- urn
:ietf :params :xml :ns :yang :iana -tls -cipher -suite -algs ¶ - prefix:
- tlscsa¶
- reference:
- RFC 9645¶
- name:
- ietf-tls-common¶
- Maintained by IANA:
- N¶
- namespace:
- urn
:ietf :params :xml :ns :yang :ietf -tls -common ¶ - prefix:
- tlscmn¶
- reference:
- RFC 9645¶
6.3. Considerations for the "iana-tls-cipher-suite-algs" YANG Module
This section follows the template defined in Section 4.30.3.1 of [RFC8407BIS].¶
IANA used the script in Appendix A to generate the
IANA-maintained "iana
IANA has added the following note to the registry:¶
New values must not be directly added to the "iana-tls -cipher -suite -algs" YANG module. They must instead be added to the "TLS Cipher Suites" registry in the "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Parameters" registry group [IANA-CIPHER-ALGS].¶
When a value is added to the "TLS Cipher Suites" registry, a new "enum"
statement must be added to the "iana
- enum
- Replicates a name from the registry.¶
- value
- Contains the decimal value of the IANA-assigned value.¶
- status
- Include only if a registration has been deprecated or obsoleted. An IANA "Recommended" value "N" maps to YANG status "deprecated". Since the registry is unable to express a logical "MUST NOT" recommendation, there is no mapping to YANG status "obsolete", which is unfortunate given the moving of single-DES and International Data Encryption Algorithm (IDEA) TLS cipher suites to Historic [RFC8996].¶
- description
- Contains "Enumeration for the 'TLS_FOO' algorithm", where "TLS_FOO" is
a placeholder for the algorithm's name (e.g., "TLS
_PSK _WITH _AES _256 _CBC _SHA" ). ¶ - reference
- Replicates the reference(s) from the registry with the title of the document(s) added.¶
Unassigned or reserved values are not present in the module.¶
When the "iana
IANA has added the following note to the "TLS Cipher Suites" registry under the "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Parameters" registry group [IANA-CIPHER-ALGS].¶
When this registry is modified, the YANG module "iana-tls -cipher -suite -algs" [IANA -YANG ] must be updated as defined in RFC 9645.¶-PARAMETERS
7. References
7.1. Normative References
- [FIPS180-4]
-
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), "Secure Hash Standard (SHS)", FIPS PUB 180-4, DOI 10
.6028 , , <https:///NIST .FIPS .180 -4 nvlpubs >..nist .gov /nistpubs /FIPS /NIST .FIPS .180 -4 .pdf - [FIPS186-5]
-
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), "Digital Signature Standard (DSS)", FIPS 186-5, DOI 10
.6028 , , <https:///NIST .FIPS .186 -5 nvlpubs >..nist .gov /nistpubs /FIPS /NIST .FIPS .186 -5 .pdf - [RFC2119]
-
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2119 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2119 - [RFC4252]
-
Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH) Authentication Protocol", RFC 4252, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4252 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4252 - [RFC4279]
-
Eronen, P., Ed. and H. Tschofenig, Ed., "Pre-Shared Key Ciphersuites for Transport Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 4279, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC4279 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4279 - [RFC5280]
-
Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5280 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5280 - [RFC5288]
-
Salowey, J., Choudhury, A., and D. McGrew, "AES Galois Counter Mode (GCM) Cipher Suites for TLS", RFC 5288, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5288 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5288 - [RFC5289]
-
Rescorla, E., "TLS Elliptic Curve Cipher Suites with SHA-256/384 and AES Galois Counter Mode (GCM)", RFC 5289, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5289 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5289 - [RFC6020]
-
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6020 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6020 - [RFC6241]
-
Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6241 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6241 - [RFC6520]
-
Seggelmann, R., Tuexen, M., and M. Williams, "Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Heartbeat Extension", RFC 6520, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC6520 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6520 - [RFC7250]
-
Wouters, P., Ed., Tschofenig, H., Ed., Gilmore, J., Weiler, S., and T. Kivinen, "Using Raw Public Keys in Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)", RFC 7250, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7250 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7250 - [RFC7589]
-
Badra, M., Luchuk, A., and J. Schoenwaelder, "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Transport Layer Security (TLS) with Mutual X.509 Authentication", RFC 7589, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7589 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7589 - [RFC7950]
-
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language", RFC 7950, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7950 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7950 - [RFC8040]
-
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8040 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8040 - [RFC8174]
-
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8174 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8174 - [RFC8341]
-
Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8341 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8341 - [RFC8422]
-
Nir, Y., Josefsson, S., and M. Pegourie
-Gonnard , "Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) Cipher Suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS) Versions 1.2 and Earlier", RFC 8422, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC8422 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8422 - [RFC8446]
-
Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8446 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8446 - [RFC9000]
-
Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9000 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9000 - [RFC9640]
-
Watsen, K., "YANG Data Types and Groupings for Cryptography", RFC 9640, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9640 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9640 - [RFC9641]
-
Watsen, K., "A YANG Data Model for a Truststore", RFC 9641, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9641 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9641 - [RFC9642]
-
Watsen, K., "A YANG Data Model for a Keystore", RFC 9642, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9642 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9642
7.2. Informative References
- [HTTP
-CLIENT -SERVER] -
Watsen, K., "YANG Groupings for HTTP Clients and HTTP Servers", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-netconf -http -client -server -23 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -netconf -http -client -server -23 - [IANA
-CIPHER -ALGS] -
IANA, "TLS Cipher Suites", <https://
www >..iana .org /assignments /tls -parameters / - [IANA
-YANG -PARAMETERS] -
IANA, "YANG Parameters", <https://
www >..iana .org /assignments /yang -parameters - [NETCONF
-CLIENT -SERVER] -
Watsen, K., "NETCONF Client and Server Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-netconf -netconf -client -server -37 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -netconf -netconf -client -server -37 - [RESTCONF
-CLIENT -SERVER] -
Watsen, K., "RESTCONF Client and Server Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-netconf -restconf -client -server -38 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -netconf -restconf -client -server -38 - [RFC3688]
-
Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3688 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3688 - [RFC5056]
-
Williams, N., "On the Use of Channel Bindings to Secure Channels", RFC 5056, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5056 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5056 - [RFC5246]
-
Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5246 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5246 - [RFC8071]
-
Watsen, K., "NETCONF Call Home and RESTCONF Call Home", RFC 8071, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8071 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8071 - [RFC8259]
-
Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8259 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8259 - [RFC8340]
-
Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8340 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8340 - [RFC8342]
-
Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K., and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8342 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8342 - [RFC8407]
-
Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models", BCP 216, RFC 8407, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8407 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8407 - [RFC8407BIS]
-
Bierman, A., Boucadair, M., and Q. Wu, "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-netmod -rfc8407bis -17 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -netmod -rfc8407bis -17 - [RFC8996]
-
Moriarty, K. and S. Farrell, "Deprecating TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1", BCP 195, RFC 8996, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8996 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8996 - [RFC9110]
-
Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9110 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9110 - [RFC9257]
-
Housley, R., Hoyland, J., Sethi, M., and C. A. Wood, "Guidance for External Pre-Shared Key (PSK) Usage in TLS", RFC 9257, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9257 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9257 - [RFC9258]
-
Benjamin, D. and C. A. Wood, "Importing External Pre-Shared Keys (PSKs) for TLS 1.3", RFC 9258, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9258 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9258 - [RFC9643]
-
Watsen, K. and M. Scharf, "YANG Groupings for TCP Clients and TCP Servers", RFC 9643, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9643 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9643 - [RFC9644]
-
Watsen, K., "YANG Groupings for SSH Clients and SSH Servers", RFC 9644, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC9644 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc9644 - [SYSTEM-CONFIG]
-
Ma, Q., Wu, Q., and C. Feng, "System-defined Configuration", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft
-ietf , , <https://-netmod -system -config -09 datatracker >..ietf .org /doc /html /draft -ietf -netmod -system -config -09 - [W3C
.REC -xml -20081126] -
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg
-Mc , Maler, E., and F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth Edition)", W3C Recommendation RECQueen, C. M. -xml , , <https://-20081126 www >..w3 .org /TR /xml /
Appendix A. Script to Generate IANA-Maintained YANG Modules
This section is not normative.¶
The Python <https://
Run the script using the command 'python gen
Be aware that the script does not attempt to copy the "revision" statements
from the previous
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following for lively discussions on list and in the halls (ordered by first name): Alan Luchuk, Andy Bierman, Balázs Kovács, Benoit Claise, Bert Wijnen, David Lamparter, Dhruv Dhody, Éric Vyncke, Gary Wu, Henk Birkholz, Jeff Hartley, Jürgen Schönwälder, Ladislav Lhotka, Liang Xia, Martin Björklund, Martin Thomson, Mehmet Ersue, Michal Vaško, Murray Kucherawy, Paul Wouters, Phil Shafer, Qin Wu, Radek Krejci, Rob Wilton, Roman Danyliw, Russ Housley, Sean Turner, Thomas Martin, and Tom Petch.¶
Contributors
Special acknowledgement goes to Gary Wu who contributed the
"ietf