GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc8522

Independent Submission M. Stubbig Request for Comments: 8522 Independent Category: Informational February 2019 ISSN: 2070-1721

                     Looking Glass Command Set

Abstract

 This document introduces a command set standard to the web-based
 "Network Looking Glass" software.  Its purpose is to provide
 application programmers uniform access to the Looking Glass service
 and to analyze a standardized response.
 The interface is supposed to provide the same level of information as
 web-based interfaces, but in a computer-readable format.

Status of This Memo

 This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
 published for informational purposes.
 This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
 RFC stream.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
 its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
 implementation or deployment.  Documents approved for publication by
 the RFC Editor are not candidates for any level of Internet Standard;
 see 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://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8522.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
 document authors.  All rights reserved.
 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
 publication of this document.  Please review these documents
 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
 to this document.

Stubbig Informational [Page 1] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   1.1.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   1.2.  Syntax Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   1.3.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
 2.  Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.1.  Method Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.2.  Query Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.3.  Response  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
 3.  Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   3.1.  Diagnostic Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   3.2.  Informational Commands  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   3.3.  Organizational Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   3.4.  Extensible Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
 4.  Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
 5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   5.1.  Well-Known URIs Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
 6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   6.1.  Abuse Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   6.2.  Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   6.3.  Minimal Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
 7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
 Appendix A.  JSend  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
 Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20

1. Introduction

 Many Internet service providers (ISPs) and Internet exchange points
 (IXPs) offer a complimentary web-based service to their customers and
 the general public that gives insights to the backbone routing table,
 BGP neighbor information, or offered routes.  This service is known
 as a "Network Looking Glass".  Because they utilize a web-based
 interface, it is hard to automate access to the services and make
 that automation transferable between different service
 implementations.
 This document describes a common command set to provide application
 programmers uniform access to Looking Glass services.
 The commands are intended to provide the same level of information as
 available via web-based interfaces, but to do so in a computer-
 readable format.  The intention is that multiple implementers of
 Looking Glass services can provide access through these commands so
 that an application can make use of the different implementations.

Stubbig Informational [Page 2] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 The command set is split into the following categories: mandatory to
 support, optional, and additional.  The commands are extensible for
 new features and for value-add by implementations.
 The Looking Glass command set is described as a language-independent
 concept.  Consequently, any programming language that satisfies the
 commands listed in the following sections is acceptable.
 This work is not the output of the IETF and is presented in the hope
 that Looking Glass implementers will offer a common programmable
 interface.

1.1. Background

 The requirement of a uniform access to a Looking Glass service
 becomes important when multiple Looking Glasses are part of a
 monitoring system.  Implementing a web client and HTTP parser for
 every kind of web-based Looking Glass is a time-consuming workaround.
 However, the Looking Glass command set is a much more viable,
 compatible, and scalable solution.

1.2. Syntax Notation

 This specification uses the JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) of
 [RFC8259] arranged as JSend-compliant (Appendix A) responses.

1.3. Examples

 All URLs in this documentation use the reserved sample domain of
 "example.net" as defined in Section 6.5 of [RFC6761].
 The URLs further use the fixed [RFC5785] prefix of ".well-known/
 looking-glass" to prevent a collision in the domain's namespace.
 IPv4 addresses use the documentation block of 192.0.2.0/24 [RFC5737]
 and IPv6 addresses reside in the reserved prefix of 2001:DB8::/32
 [RFC3849].  BGP Autonomous System (AS) numbers are chosen from the
 private AS range defined in [RFC6996].
 The examples skip some required parameters for reasons of simplicity.

Stubbig Informational [Page 3] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

2. Operation

 A client issues a query using the HTTP GET method to request specific
 resources from the server.  The resource is a URI and can be
 informational or a command execution.  The client must present all
 necessary parameters for the server to execute the command on the
 selected router.  Every call is stateless and independent of the
 previous one.
 The path component of the resource URI must use the prefix of ".well-
 known/looking-glass" (see Section 5.1) to stay namespace neutral.
 The "call" is a request from the client that specifies a predefined
 operation ("function") that the server will execute on a selected
 router.  The "command" is a task executed on the router and initiated
 by the server on behalf of the client.  The type and scope of all
 commands are defined and limited by the server.  The client must not
 be able to execute random commands on the targeting router.  There
 must not be any direct communication between the client and the
 router.
 After the execution of the command on the selected router has
 finished, the server replies to the client if the operation has
 either succeeded, failed, or timed out.  The response is sent to the
 client in JSON format.  The communication protocol used between the
 server and router is not specified by this document; any method
 (e.g., Telnet, SSH, NETCONF, serial console) is acceptable.
 All parameters and their values are case insensitive.

2.1. Method Parameters

 Method parameters are mandatory components of the URI and are placed
 in the "path" section in terms of [RFC7320].  Basically, the method
 parameters specify the call and determine which command the client
 wants to be executed on the selected router.

Stubbig Informational [Page 4] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

2.2. Query Parameters

 Query parameters are optional components of the URI and are placed in
 the "query" section in terms of [RFC7320].  Generally, the query
 parameters are additional instructions for the requested command.
 protocol
    Restrict the command and method parameters to use the specified
    protocol and version.  Protocol is selected as "Address Family
    Identifier" [IANA-AFN] [RFC4760] and optionally as "Subsequent
    Address Family Identifier" [IANA-SAFI] separated by a comma.
    Default value is 1,1 (IP version 4, unicast).
    JSON datatype is String.
    Examples:
  • protocol=2,1 (IP version 6, unicast)
  • protocol=26 (MPLS, no SAFI used)
 router
    Run the command on the router identified by its name.  This is not
    necessarily the router's hostname as long as the Looking Glass
    software recognizes it.
    Default value is the first router in the list of available
    routers.
    JSON datatype is String.
    Example: router=rbgn06.example.net
 routerindex
    Run the command on this router identified by its position in the
    list of available routers.
    Default value is "0".
    JSON datatype is Number.
    Example: routerindex=8
 random
    Append a random string to prevent the client (or an intermediate
    proxy) from caching the response.  The server must ignore its
    value.
    No default value.
    JSON datatype is String.
    Example: random=517A93B50

Stubbig Informational [Page 5] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 vrf
    Run the command from the selected routing table.  This parameter
    is valid only on routers that support "Virtual Routing and
    Forwarding" (VRF).
    No default value.
    JSON datatype is String.
    Example: vrf=mgmt
 runtime
    Stop executing the command after the runtime limit (in seconds) is
    exceeded.  A value of 0 disables the limit.
    Default value is "30".
    JSON datatype is Number.
    Example: runtime=60
 format
    Request the server to provide the output (if any) in the selected
    format.  Specify multiple formats separated by a comma in
    descending order of preference.  See Section 3.3.2 for more
    details.
    Default value is "text/plain" (raw/unformatted output).
    JSON datatype is String.
    Example: format=application/yang,text/plain

2.3. Response

 The HTTP response header contains an appropriate HTTP status code as
 defined in [RFC7231] with the Content-Type set to "application/json".
 The HTTP body contains details and error descriptions.  The response
 text must comply with the JSON syntax specification JSend, which is
 briefly explained in Appendix A.  Consequently, every response must
 contain a "status" field of either "success", "fail", or "error" as
 explained in the following sections.

2.3.1. Success

 A successful response must set the "status" field to "success".  It
 must also contain a "data" object including the following
 information:
 performed_at
    Combined date and time in UTC ISO 8601 [iso8601] indicating when
    the operation finished.  This information must be present.
 runtime
    Amount of seconds (wallclock) used to run the command.  This
    information must be present.

Stubbig Informational [Page 6] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 router
    Name of the router that executed the command.  This information
    may be present.
 output
    Output of the command in a format that was requested by the
    client; it otherwise defaults to raw output as it appeared on the
    router's command-line interface (CLI).  It might even be blank if
    the command did not produce any output.  This information should
    be present.
 format
    Selected output format by the server.  The client might request
    multiple formats so that the "Looking Glass" server has to choose
    the best option and tell the client which format was selected.
    This information should be present (defaults to "text/plain" if
    missing).
 Adding more information to the response is permitted and must be
 placed inside the "data" object.
 The HTTP status code should be 200.
 Example:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 Content-Type: application/json
 {
   "status" : "success",
   "data" : {
     "router" : "route-server.lookingglass.example.net"
     "performed_at" : "2014-10-15T17:15:34Z",
     "runtime" : 2.63,
     "output" : [
       "full raw output from the observing router..."
     ],
     "format" : "text/plain"
   }
 }

2.3.2. Fail

 A status of "fail" indicates that the selected command was executed
 on the router but failed to succeed.  The response message must set
 the "status" field to "fail" and must contain the "data" object with
 command-specific content listed in Section 2.3.1.
 The HTTP status code should be 200.

Stubbig Informational [Page 7] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 Example:
 HTTP/2.0 200 OK
 {
   "status" : "fail",
   "data" : {
     "performed_at" : "2014-10-18T20:04:37Z",
     "runtime" : 10.37,
     "output" : [
       "Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.0.2.5",
       ".....",
       "Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)"
     ],
     "format" : "text/plain",
     "router" : "route-server.lookingglass.example.net"
   }
 }

2.3.3. Error

 The status "error" represents either that the command timed out or
 that an error occurred in processing the request.  The response
 message must set the "status" field to "error" and must contain the
 "message" key, which keeps a meaningful message, explaining what went
 wrong.
 The response may contain the "data" key with required values listed
 in Section 2.3.1.  It may also include a "code" field that carries a
 numeric code corresponding to the error.
 The HTTP status code should be 400 in case of a client-side error,
 500 in case of a server-side error, or 502 for errors occurring on
 the target router.  Code 504 should be used when a command timed out.
 Example:
 HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
 {
   "status" : "error",
   "message" : "Unrecognized host or address."
 }

Stubbig Informational [Page 8] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

3. Functions

 The Looking Glass command set provides functions that are either
 mandatory to support or optional to implement.  The same principle
 applies to the web-based Looking Glass.
 It is not possible for any function to modify the server's state.
 Therefore, all HTTP methods are GET operations.
 Variables are templated and expanded in accordance with [RFC6570].

3.1. Diagnostic Commands

3.1.1. Ping

 Send echo messages to validate the reachability of a remote host and
 measure round-trip time.  The host can be a name or address.
 Implementation of the ping command is mandatory.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/ping/{host}
 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/ping/2001:DB8::35?protocol=2,1
 Host: example.net
 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status" : "success",
   "data" : {
     "min" : 40,
     "avg" : 41,
     "max" : 44,
     "rate" : 100,
     "output" : [
       "Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 2001:DB8::35",
       "!!!!!",
       "Success rate is 100 percent (5/5)"
     ],
     "format" : "text/plain",
     "performed_at" : "2014-10-04T14:40:58Z",
     "runtime" : 0.77,
     "router" : "c2951.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

Stubbig Informational [Page 9] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

3.1.2. Traceroute

 Trace the path from the executing router to the destination host and
 list all intermediate hops.  The host can be a name or address.
 Implementation of the traceroute command is optional.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/
 traceroute/{host}
 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/traceroute/192.0.2.8?routerindex=5
 Host: example.net
 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status": "success",
   "data": {
     "output": [
       "Tracing the route to 192.0.2.8",
       "",
       "  1 198.51.100.77 28 msec 28 msec 20 msec",
       "  2 203.0.113.130 52 msec 40 msec 40 msec",
       "  3 192.0.2.8 72 msec 76 msec 68 msec"
     ],
     "format": "text/plain",
     "performed_at": "2018-06-10T12:09:31Z",
     "runtime": 4.21,
     "router": "c7206.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

3.2. Informational Commands

3.2.1. show route

 Retrieve information about a specific subnet from the routing table.
 Implementation of the "show route" command is mandatory.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/
 route/{addr}

Stubbig Informational [Page 10] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/      [multiline]
         route/2001:DB8::/48?protocol=2,1
 Host: example.net
 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status": "success",
   "data": {
     "output": [
       "S   2001:DB8::/48 [1/0]",
       "     via FE80::C007:CFF:FED9:17, FastEthernet0/0"
     ],
     "format": "text/plain",
     "performed_at": "2018-06-11T17:13:39Z",
     "runtime": 1.39,
     "router": "c2951.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

3.2.2. show bgp

 Display a matching record from the BGP routing table.  This should
 include networks, next hop, and may include metric, local preference,
 path list, weight, etc.
 Implementation of the "show bgp" command is optional.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/
 bgp/{addr}
 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/bgp/192.0.2.0/24
 Host: example.net

Stubbig Informational [Page 11] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status": "success",
   "data": {
     "output": [
       "BGP routing table entry for 192.0.2.0/24, version 2",
       "Paths: (2 available, best #2, table default)",
       "  Advertised to update-groups:",
       "     1",
       "  Refresh Epoch 1",
       "  Local",
       "    192.0.2.226 from 192.0.2.226 (192.0.2.226)",
       "      Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal",
       "[...]"
     ],
     "format": "text/plain",
     "performed_at": "2018-06-11T21:47:17Z",
     "runtime": 2.03,
     "router": "c2951.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

3.2.3. show bgp summary

 Print a summary of BGP neighbor status.  This may include the
 neighbor BGP ID, autonomous system number, duration of peering,
 number of received prefixes, etc.
 Implementation of the "show bgp summary" command is optional.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/bgp/
 summary
 Example:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/bgp/summary?     [multiline]
        protocol=2&routerindex=3
 Host: example.net

Stubbig Informational [Page 12] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status": "success",
   "data": {
     "output": [
       "BGP router identifier 192.0.2.18, local AS number 64501",
       "BGP table version is 85298, main routing table version 85298",
       "50440 network entries using 867568 bytes of memory",
       "[...]",
       "Neighbor        V       AS MsgRcvd MsgSent   TblVer  Up/Down",
       "2001:DB8:91::24 4    64500  481098  919095   85298   41w5d"
     ],
     "format": "text/plain",
     "performed_at": "2018-06-11T21:59:21Z",
     "runtime": 1.91,
     "router": "c2951.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

3.2.4. show bgp neighbors

 Provide detailed information on BGP neighbor connections.  Available
 details may include neighbor BGP ID, advertised networks, learned
 networks, autonomous system number, capabilities, protocol,
 statistics, etc.
 Implementation of the "show bgp neighbors" command is optional.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/bgp/
 neighbors/{addr}
 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/bgp/neighbors/192.0.2.226
 Host: example.net

Stubbig Informational [Page 13] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 Example response:
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 {
   "status": "success",
   "data": {
     "output": [
       "BGP neighbor is 192.0.2.226, remote AS 64500, internal link",
       "  BGP version 4, remote router ID 198.51.100.31",
       "  BGP state = Established, up for 01:24:06",
       "[...]"
     ],
     "format": "text/plain",
     "performed_at": "2018-06-11T21:41:17Z",
     "runtime": 1.87,
     "router": "c2951.lab.lg.example.net"
   }
 }

3.3. Organizational Commands

 The following organizational commands must be included in the
 implementation.

3.3.1. router list

 Provides a full list of routers that are available for command
 execution.  This list includes the router ID and its name.  It is
 equivalent to the common "router" HTML drop-down form element and
 contains the same information.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/routers
 Example response:
 {
   "status" : "success",
   "data" : {
     "routers" : [
       "route-server.lookingglass.example.net",
       "customer-edge.lookingglass.example.net",
       "provider-edge.lookingglass.example.net"
     ],
     "performed_at" : "2014-10-19T20:07:01Z",
     "runtime" : 0.73
   }
 }

Stubbig Informational [Page 14] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

3.3.2. router details

 Lists additional information about the selected router specified by
 its router index.  The response must contain the router's hostname
 and router index.  The response may contain more details like output
 format, country code, city, administrative contact, vendor, and
 model.
 Available output formats are specified by Internet media type as of
 [RFC6838] and listed in [IANA-MT].  If the routers support multiple
 formats, they are separated by a comma.
 The router might provide output formats that are not yet registered
 or listed in [IANA-MT].  For example, output in NETCONF format could
 use "text/x.netconf".  [RFC6838] provides a tree for unregistered
 subtypes.
 A missing output format defaults to "text/plain", which is a copy of
 the raw command-line output.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/
 routers/{number}
 Example query:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/routers/1
 Host: example.net
 Example response:
 {
   "status" : "success",
   "data" : {
     "id" : 1,
     "name" : "customer-edge.lookingglass.example.net",
     "format" : "text/plain,text/x.netconf",
     "country" : "de",
     "autonomous_system" : 64512
   }
 }

3.3.3. commands

 Provides a full list of commands that are available for execution.
 The list includes mandatory to support, optional, and additional
 (Section 3.4) commands.  It is equivalent to the "command" HTML drop-
 down or radio-button form element and contains the same information.

Stubbig Informational [Page 15] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 The list is formatted as a "commands" array containing one object per
 command.  This object contains informative strings about the current
 command: href, arguments, description, and command.
 Syntax: https://example.net/.well-known/looking-glass/v1/cmd
 Example response:
 {
   "status" : "success",
   "data" : {
     "commands" : [
       {
         "href" : "https://example.net/.well-known/     [multiline]
                           looking-glass/v1/show/route",
         "arguments" : "{addr}",
         "description" : "Print records from IP routing table",
         "command" : "show route"
       },
       {
         "href" : "https://example.net/.well-known/     [multiline]
                           looking-glass/v1/traceroute",
         "arguments" : "{addr}",
         "description" : "Trace route to destination host",
         "command" : "traceroute"
       }
     ]
   }
 }

3.4. Extensible Commands

 The list of commands discussed in Section 3.3.3 may be expanded as
 long as the principles of this document are observed.
 For example, a Looking Glass provider may not be offering BGP-related
 commands because of an OSPF-based network.
 The sample command might be:
 GET /.well-known/looking-glass/v1/show/ospf/database
 Host: example.net

4. Miscellaneous

 The network traffic sent by a "Looking Glass" is not appropriate when
 measuring Service Level Agreements or validating Quality of Service
 settings.

Stubbig Informational [Page 16] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

 If a monitoring system uses the Looking Glass command set for
 reachability checks, it should not rely on the HTTP status codes but
 on the "status" message field inside the HTTP body.

5. IANA Considerations

5.1. Well-Known URIs Registry

 This specification registers a Well-Known URI [RFC5785]:
 URI Suffix: looking-glass
 Change Controller: M. Stubbig
 Reference : This document, Section 2

6. Security Considerations

 The use of HTTPS is required to ensure a high level of security,
 privacy, and confidentiality during transit.

6.1. Abuse Potential

 The main goal of the Looking Glass command set is the automated usage
 of the Looking Glass service.  This allows the scripting of API
 calls, which could be used as a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS)
 attack.  It is recommended that implementers of the Looking Glass API
 take steps to mitigate the above described abuse.  The strategy can
 include blocking or rate-limiting by client IP address or target IP
 network.

6.2. Authentication

 Authentication is not a requirement because the current Looking Glass
 web services are usable without authentication.  Requests to the
 proposed API service may be authenticated by any method.  The
 decision is up to the implementer's security requirements.

6.3. Minimal Information

 Some of the described commands provide a detailed insight into the
 provider's network.  It is therefore up to the implementer's security
 policy to dismiss commands that are marked as "optional" or to
 restrict commands that are marked as "mandatory".

Stubbig Informational [Page 17] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

7. References

7.1. Normative References

 [IANA-AFN] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", <https://www.iana.org/
            assignments/address-family-numbers/>.
 [IANA-MT]  IANA, "Media Types",
            <https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/>.
 [IANA-SAFI]
            IANA, "Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFI)
            Parameters",
            <https://www.iana.org/assignments/safi-namespace/>.
 [JSend]    OmniTI Labs, "JSend", 2014,
            <https://labs.omniti.com/labs/jsend>.
 [RFC4760]  Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter,
            "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4760>.
 [RFC5785]  Nottingham, M. and E. Hammer-Lahav, "Defining Well-Known
            Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 5785,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC5785, April 2010,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5785>.
 [RFC6570]  Gregorio, J., Fielding, R., Hadley, M., Nottingham, M.,
            and D. Orchard, "URI Template", RFC 6570,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6570>.
 [RFC7231]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
            Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231>.
 [RFC8259]  Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
            Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.

Stubbig Informational [Page 18] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

7.2. Informative References

 [iso8601]  International Organization for Standardization, "Data
            elements and interchange formats - Information interchange
            - Representation of dates and times", December 2004.
 [RFC3849]  Huston, G., Lord, A., and P. Smith, "IPv6 Address Prefix
            Reserved for Documentation", RFC 3849,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC3849, July 2004,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3849>.
 [RFC5737]  Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks
            Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC5737, January 2010,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5737>.
 [RFC6761]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Special-Use Domain Names",
            RFC 6761, DOI 10.17487/RFC6761, February 2013,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6761>.
 [RFC6838]  Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type
            Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13,
            RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.
 [RFC6996]  Mitchell, J., "Autonomous System (AS) Reservation for
            Private Use", BCP 6, RFC 6996, DOI 10.17487/RFC6996, July
            2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6996>.
 [RFC7320]  Nottingham, M., "URI Design and Ownership", BCP 190,
            RFC 7320, DOI 10.17487/RFC7320, July 2014,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7320>.

Stubbig Informational [Page 19] RFC 8522 Looking Glass Command Set February 2019

Appendix A. JSend

 According to [JSend]:
    JSend is a specification that lays down some rules for how JSON
    responses from web servers should be formatted.  JSend focuses on
    application-level (as opposed to protocol- or transport-level)
    messaging which makes it ideal for use in REST-style applications
    and APIs.
 A basic JSend-compliant response must contain a "status" key and
 should contain "data", "message", and "code" keys dependent on the
 status value.  The following table lists the required and optional
 keys.
             +---------+-----------------+---------------+
             | Type    | Required keys   | Optional keys |
             +---------+-----------------+---------------+
             | success | status, data    |               |
             | fail    | status, data    |               |
             | error   | status, message | code, data    |
             +---------+-----------------+---------------+
               Table 1: Type and Keys in JSend Response

Author's Address

 Markus Stubbig
 Independent
 Germany
 Email: stubbig.ietf@gmail.com

Stubbig Informational [Page 20]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc8522.txt · Last modified: 2019/02/06 00:20 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki