--- 1/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09.txt 2018-04-12 00:13:11.898116813 -0700
+++ 2/draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10.txt 2018-04-12 00:13:11.950118058 -0700
@@ -1,41 +1,42 @@
Network Working Group M. Bjorklund
Internet-Draft Tail-f Systems
Intended status: Standards Track L. Lhotka
-Expires: September 21, 2018 CZ.NIC
- March 20, 2018
+Expires: October 14, 2018 CZ.NIC
+ April 12, 2018
YANG Schema Mount
- draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-09
+ draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10
Abstract
- This document defines a mechanism to combine YANG modules into the
- schema defined in other YANG modules.
+ This document defines a mechanism to add the schema trees defined by
+ a set of YANG modules onto a mount point defined in the schema tree
+ in some YANG module.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
- This Internet-Draft will expire on September 21, 2018.
+ This Internet-Draft will expire on October 14, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
@@ -43,130 +44,132 @@
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Glossary of New Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- 2.2. Namespace Prefixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- 3. Schema Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+ 2.2. Tree Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+ 2.3. Namespace Prefixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+ 3. Schema Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Mount Point Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
- 3.2. Specification of the Mounted Schema . . . . . . . . . . . 7
- 3.3. Multiple Levels of Schema Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
- 4. Referring to Data Nodes in the Parent Schema . . . . . . . . 8
- 5. RPC operations and Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
+ 3.2. Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
+ 3.3. Specification of the Mounted Schema . . . . . . . . . . . 8
+ 3.4. Multiple Levels of Schema Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
+ 4. Referring to Data Nodes in the Parent Schema . . . . . . . . 9
+ 5. RPC operations and Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)
- Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
- 7. Implementation Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
- 8. Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
- 9. Schema Mount YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
- 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
- 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
- 12. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
- 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
- 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
- 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
- Appendix A. Example: Device Model with LNEs and NIs . . . . . . 19
- A.1. Physical Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
- A.2. Logical Network Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
- A.3. Network Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
- A.4. Invoking an RPC Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
- Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
+ Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
+ 7. Interaction with the Network Configuration Access Control
+ Model (NACM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
+ 8. Implementation Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
+ 9. Schema Mount YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
+ 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
+ 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
+ 12. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
+ 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
+ 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
+ 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
+ Appendix A. Example: Device Model with LNEs and NIs . . . . . . 21
+ A.1. Physical Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
+ A.2. Logical Network Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
+ A.3. Network Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
+ A.4. Invoking an RPC Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
+ Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1. Introduction
Modularity and extensibility were among the leading design principles
of the YANG data modeling language. As a result, the same YANG
module can be combined with various sets of other modules and thus
form a data model that is tailored to meet the requirements of a
specific use case. Server implementors are only required to specify
all YANG modules comprising the data model (together with their
revisions and other optional choices) in the YANG library data
([RFC7895], [I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis] and Section 5.6.4 of
[RFC7950]) implemented by the server. Such YANG modules appear in
the data model "side by side", i.e., top-level data nodes of each
module - if there are any - are also top-level nodes of the overall
data model.
- Furthermore, YANG has two mechanisms for contributing a schema
- hierarchy defined elsewhere to the contents of an internal node of
- the schema tree; these mechanisms are realized through the following
- YANG statements:
+ YANG has two mechanisms for contributing a schema hierarchy defined
+ elsewhere to the contents of an internal node of the schema tree;
+ these mechanisms are realized through the following YANG statements:
o The "uses" statement explicitly incorporates the contents of a
grouping defined in the same or another module. See Section 4.2.6
of [RFC7950] for more details.
o The "augment" statement explicitly adds contents to a target node
defined in the same or another module. See Section 4.2.8 of
[RFC7950] for more details.
With both mechanisms, the source or target YANG module explicitly
defines the exact location in the schema tree where the new nodes are
placed.
- In some cases these mechanisms are not sufficient; it is often
+ In some cases these mechanisms are not sufficient; it is sometimes
necessary that an existing module (or a set of modules) is added to
- the data model starting at a non-root location. For example, YANG
- modules such as "ietf-interfaces" [RFC8343] are often defined so as
- to be used in a data model of a physical device. Now suppose we want
- to model a device that supports multiple logical devices
+ the data model starting at locations other than the root. For
+ example, YANG modules such as "ietf-interfaces" [RFC8343] are defined
+ so as to be used in a data model of a physical device. Now suppose
+ we want to model a device that supports multiple logical devices
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model], each of which has its own instantiation
of "ietf-interfaces", and possibly other modules, but, at the same
time, we want to be able to manage all these logical devices from the
- master device. Hence, we would like to have a schema like this:
+ master device. Hence, we would like to have a schema tree like this:
+--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
| ...
- +--rw logical-device* [name]
+ +--rw logical-network-element* [name]
+--rw name
| ...
+--rw interfaces
+--rw interface* [name]
...
With the "uses" approach, the complete schema tree of
"ietf-interfaces" would have to be wrapped in a grouping, and then
this grouping would have to be used at the top level (for the master
- device) and then also in the "logical-device" list (for the logical
- devices). This approach has several disadvantages:
+ device) and then also in the "logical-network-element" list (for the
+ logical devices). This approach has several disadvantages:
o It is not scalable because every time there is a new YANG module
that needs to be added to the logical device model, we have to
update the model for logical devices with another "uses" statement
pulling in contents of the new module.
o Absolute references to nodes defined inside a grouping may break
if the grouping is used in different locations.
o Nodes defined inside a grouping belong to the namespace of the
module where it is used, which makes references to such nodes from
other modules difficult or even impossible.
o It would be difficult for vendors to add proprietary modules when
the "uses" statements are defined in a standard module.
With the "augment" approach, "ietf-interfaces" would have to augment
- the "logical-device" list with all its nodes, and at the same time
- define all its nodes at the top level. The same hierarchy of nodes
- would thus have to be defined twice, which is clearly not scalable
- either.
+ the "logical-network-element" list with all its nodes, and at the
+ same time define all its nodes at the top level. The same hierarchy
+ of nodes would thus have to be defined twice, which is clearly not
+ scalable either.
- This document introduces a new generic mechanism, denoted as schema
- mount, that allows for mounting one data model consisting of any
- number of YANG modules at a specified location of another (parent)
- schema. Unlike the "uses" and "augment" approaches discussed above,
- the mounted modules needn't be specially prepared for mounting and,
+ This document introduces a new mechanism, denoted as schema mount,
+ that allows for mounting one data model consisting of any number of
+ YANG modules at a specified location of another (parent) schema.
+ Unlike the "uses" and "augment" approaches discussed above, the
+ mounted modules needn't be specially prepared for mounting and,
consequently, existing modules such as "ietf-interfaces" can be
mounted without any modifications.
The basic idea of schema mount is to label a data node in the parent
schema as the mount point, and then define a complete data model to
be attached to the mount point so that the labeled data node
effectively becomes the root node of the mounted data model.
In principle, the mounted schema can be specified at three different
phases of the data model life cycle:
@@ -194,69 +197,89 @@
assume anything about the source of instance data for the mounted
schemas. It may be implemented using the same instrumentation as the
rest of the system, or it may be implemented by querying some other
system. Future specifications may define mechanisms to control or
monitor the implementation of specific mount points.
This document allows mounting of complete data models only. Other
specifications may extend this model by defining additional
mechanisms such as mounting sub-hierarchies of a module.
+ The YANG modules in this document conform to the Network Management
+ Datastore Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342].
+
2. Terminology and Notation
The keywords "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].
+ 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
+ capitals, as shown here.
The following terms are defined in [RFC7950] and are not redefined
here:
o action
o container
+ o data node
+
o list
o RPC operation
+ o schema node
+
+ o schema tree
+
The following terms are defined in [RFC8342] and are not redefined
here:
o client
o notification
-
o operational state
o server
- The following terms are defined in [RFC8343] and are not redefined
+ The following term is defined in [RFC8343] and are not redefined
here:
o system-controlled interface
- Tree diagrams used in this document follow the notation defined in
- [RFC8340]
+
+ The following term is defined in [I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis] and
+ are not redefined here:
+
+ o YANG library checksum
2.1. Glossary of New Terms
o mount point: container or list node whose definition contains the
"mount-point" extension statement. The argument of the
"mount-point" statement defines a label for the mount point.
- o parent schema (of a particular mounted schema): the schema that
- contains the mount point for the mounted schema.
+ o schema: collection of schema trees with a common root
- o top-level schema: a schema according to [RFC7950] in which schema
- trees of each module (except augments) start at the root node.
+ o top-level schema: schema rooted at the root node
-2.2. Namespace Prefixes
+ o mounted schema: schema rooted at a mount point
+
+ o parent schema (of a mounted schema): schema containing the mount
+ point
+
+2.2. Tree Diagrams
+
+ Tree diagrams used in this document follow the notation defined in
+ [RFC8340]
+
+2.3. Namespace Prefixes
In this document, names of data nodes, YANG extensions, actions and
other data model objects are often used without a prefix, as long as
it is clear from the context in which YANG module each name is
defined. Otherwise, names are prefixed using the standard prefix
associated with the corresponding YANG module, as shown in Table 1.
+---------+------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Prefix | YANG module | Reference |
+---------+------------------------+--------------------------------+
@@ -288,48 +311,71 @@
The argument of the "mount-point" extension is a YANG identifier that
defines a label for the mount point. A module MAY contain multiple
"mount-point" statements having the same argument.
It is therefore up to the designer of the parent schema to decide
about the placement of mount points. A mount point can also be made
conditional by placing "if-feature" and/or "when" as substatements of
the "container" or "list" statement that represents the mount point.
The "mount-point" statement MUST NOT be used in a YANG version 1
- module. Note, however, that modules written in any YANG version,
- including version 1, can be mounted under a mount point.
+ module [RFC6020]. The reason for this is that otherwise it is not
+ possible to invoke mounted RPC operations, and receive mounted
+ notifications. See Section 5 for details. Note, however, that
+ modules written in any YANG version, including version 1, can be
+ mounted under a mount point.
Note that the "mount-point" statement does not define a new data
node.
-3.2. Specification of the Mounted Schema
+3.2. Data Model
+
+ This document defines the YANG 1.1 module [RFC7950]
+ "ietf-yang-schema-mount", which has the following structure:
+
+ module: ietf-yang-schema-mount
+ +--ro schema-mounts
+ +--ro namespace* [prefix]
+ | +--ro prefix yang:yang-identifier
+ | +--ro uri? inet:uri
+ +--ro mount-point* [module label]
+ +--ro module yang:yang-identifier
+ +--ro label yang:yang-identifier
+ +--ro config? boolean
+ +--ro (schema-ref)
+ +--:(inline)
+ | +--ro inline!
+ +--:(shared-schema)
+ +--ro shared-schema!
+ +--ro parent-reference* yang:xpath1.0
+
+3.3. Specification of the Mounted Schema
Mounted schemas for all mount points in the parent schema are
- determined from state data in the "yangmnt:schema-mounts" container.
- Data in this container is intended to be as stable as data in the
- top-level YANG library.
+ determined from state data in the "/schema-mounts" container.
Generally, the modules that are mounted under a mount point have no
relation to the modules in the parent schema; specifically, if a
module is mounted it may or may not be present in the parent schema
and, if present, its data will generally have no relationship to the
data of the parent. Exceptions are possible and such needs to be
- defined in the model defining the exception, e.g., the interface
- module in [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model].
+ defined in the model defining the exception. For example,
+ [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model] defines a mechanism to bind interfaces to
+ mounted logical network elements.
- The "schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of
+ The "/schema-mounts" container has the "mount-point" list as one of
its children. Every entry of this list refers through its key to a
mount point and specifies the mounted schema.
If a mount point is defined in the parent schema but does not have an
entry in the "mount-point" list, then the mounted schema is void,
- i.e., instances of that mount point MUST NOT contain any data above
+ i.e., instances of that mount point MUST NOT contain any data except
those that are defined in the parent schema.
If multiple mount points with the same name are defined in the same
module - either directly or because the mount point is defined in a
grouping and the grouping is used multiple times - then the
corresponding "mount-point" entry applies equally to all such mount
points.
The "config" property of mounted schema nodes is overridden and all
nodes in the mounted schema are read-only ("config false") if at
@@ -339,47 +385,50 @@
o the "config" leaf in the corresponding entry of the "mount-point"
list is set to "false".
An entry of the "mount-point" list can specify the mounted schema in
two different ways, "inline" or "shared-schema".
The mounted schema is determined at run time: every instance of the
mount point that exists in the operational state MUST contain a copy
of YANG library data that defines the mounted schema exactly as for a
- top-level data model. A client is expected to retrieve this data
- from the instance tree, possibly after creating the mount point. In
- the "inline" case, instances of the same mount point MAY use
- different mounted schemas, whereas in the "shared-schema" case, all
- instances MUST use the same mounted schema.
+ top-level schema. A client is expected to retrieve this data from
+ the instance tree. In the "inline" case, instances of the same mount
+ point MAY use different mounted schemas, whereas in the
+ "shared-schema" case, all instances MUST use the same mounted schema.
+ This means that in the "shared-schema" case, all instances of the
+ same mount point MUST have the same YANG library checksum. In the
+ "inline" case, if two instances have the same YANG library checksum
+ it is not guaranteed that the YANG library contents are equal for
+ these instances.
-3.3. Multiple Levels of Schema Mount
+3.4. Multiple Levels of Schema Mount
YANG modules in a mounted schema MAY again contain mount points under
- which subschemas can be mounted. Consequently, it is possible to
- construct data models with an arbitrary number of schema levels. A
- subschema for a mount point contained in a mounted module can be
+ which other schemas can be mounted. Consequently, it is possible to
+ construct data models with an arbitrary number of mounted schemas. A
+ schema for a mount point contained in a mounted module can be
specified by implementing "ietf-yang-library" and
"ietf-yang-schema-mount" modules in the mounted schema, and
- specifying the subschemas exactly as it is done in the top-level
- schema.
+ specifying the schemas exactly as it is done in the top-level schema.
4. Referring to Data Nodes in the Parent Schema
A fundamental design principle of schema mount is that the mounted
- data model works exactly as a top-level data model, i.e., it is
- confined to the "mount jail". This means that all paths in the
- mounted data model (in leafrefs, instance-identifiers, XPath
- expressions, and target nodes of augments) are interpreted with the
- mount point as the root node. YANG modules of the mounted schema as
- well as corresponding instance data thus cannot refer to schema nodes
- or instance data outside the mount jail.
+ schema works exactly as a top-level schema, i.e., it is confined to
+ the "mount jail". This means that all paths in the mounted schema
+ (in leafrefs, instance-identifiers, XPath expressions, and target
+ nodes of augments) are interpreted with the mount point as the root
+ node. YANG modules of the mounted schema as well as corresponding
+ instance data thus cannot refer to schema nodes or instance data
+ outside the mount jail.
However, this restriction is sometimes too severe. A typical example
is network instances (NI) [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-ni-model], where each NI
has its own routing engine but the list of interfaces is global and
shared by all NIs. If we want to model this organization with the NI
schema mounted using schema mount, the overall schema tree would look
schematically as follows:
+--rw interfaces
| +--rw interface* [name]
@@ -438,65 +487,65 @@
The schema mount solution presented in this document is designed to
work both with servers that implement the NMDA [RFC8342], and old
servers that don't implement the NMDA.
Note to RFC Editor: please update the date YYYY-MM-DD below with the
revision of the ietf-yang-library in the published version of draft-
ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis, and remove this note.
Specifically, a server that doesn't support the NMDA, MAY implement
- revision 2016-06-21 of "ietf-yang-library" [RFC7950] under a mount
+ revision 2016-06-21 of "ietf-yang-library" [RFC7895] under a mount
point. A server that supports the NMDA, MUST implement at least
revision YYYY-MM-DD of "ietf-yang-library"
[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis] under the mount points.
-7. Implementation Notes
+7. Interaction with the Network Configuration Access Control Model
+ (NACM)
+
+ If NACM [RFC8341] is implemented on a server, it can be used to
+ control access to nodes defined by the mounted schema in the same way
+ as for nodes defined by the top-level schema.
+
+ For example, suppose the module "ietf-interfaces" is mounted in the
+ "root" container in the "logical-network-element" list defined in
+ [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model]. Then the following NACM path can be used
+ to control access to the "interfaces" container (where the character
+ '\' is used where a line break has been inserted for formatting
+ reasons):
+
+
+ /lne:logical-network-elements\
+ /lne:logical-network-element/lne:root/if:interfaces
+
+
+8. Implementation Notes
Network management of devices that use a data model with schema mount
can be implemented in different ways. However, the following
implementations options are envisioned as typical:
o shared management: instance data of both parent and mounted
schemas are accessible within the same management session.
o split management: one (master) management session has access to
instance data of both parent and mounted schemas but, in addition,
an extra session exists for every instance of the mount point,
having access only to the mounted data tree.
-8. Data Model
-
- This document defines the YANG 1.1 module [RFC7950]
- "ietf-yang-schema-mount", which has the following structure:
-
- module: ietf-yang-schema-mount
- +--ro schema-mounts
- +--ro namespace* [prefix]
- | +--ro prefix yang:yang-identifier
- | +--ro uri? inet:uri
- +--ro mount-point* [module label]
- +--ro module yang:yang-identifier
- +--ro label yang:yang-identifier
- +--ro config? boolean
- +--ro (schema-ref)
- +--:(inline)
- | +--ro inline!
- +--:(shared-schema)
- +--ro shared-schema!
- +--ro parent-reference* yang:xpath1.0
-
9. Schema Mount YANG Module
This module references [RFC6991].
- file "ietf-yang-schema-mount@2017-10-09.yang"
+ file "ietf-yang-schema-mount@2018-04-05"
module ietf-yang-schema-mount {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-schema-mount";
prefix yangmnt;
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types";
@@ -514,20 +563,22 @@
contact
"WG Web:
WG List:
Editor: Martin Bjorklund
Editor: Ladislav Lhotka
";
+ // RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with actual RFC number and
+ // remove this note.
description
"This module defines a YANG extension statement that can be used
to incorporate data models defined in other YANG modules in a
module. It also defines operational state data that specify the
overall structure of the data model.
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
@@ -539,21 +590,23 @@
The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL
NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'MAY', and
'OPTIONAL' in the module text are to be interpreted as described
in RFC 2119 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for
full legal notices.";
- revision 2018-03-20 {
+ // RFC Ed.: update the date below with the date of RFC publication
+ // and remove this note.
+ revision 2018-04-05 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC XXXX: YANG Schema Mount";
}
/*
* Extensions
*/
@@ -693,21 +746,27 @@
Section 10 of [RFC7950].
- The set of namespace declarations is defined by the
'namespace' list under 'schema-mounts'.
Each XPath expression MUST evaluate to a nodeset
(possibly empty). For the purposes of evaluating XPath
expressions whose context nodes are defined in the
mounted schema, the union of all these nodesets
together with ancestor nodes are added to the
- accessible data tree.";
+ accessible data tree.
+
+ Note that in the case 'ietf-yang-schema-mount' is
+ itself mounted, a 'parent-reference' in the mounted
+ module may refer to nodes that were brought into the
+ accessible tree through a 'parent-reference' in the
+ parent schema.";
}
}
}
}
}
}
10. IANA Considerations
@@ -780,21 +839,21 @@
o Eric Voit, Cisco,
13. References
13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-netconf-rfc7895bis]
Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "YANG Library", draft-ietf-netconf-
- rfc7895bis-05 (work in progress), February 2018.
+ rfc7895bis-06 (work in progress), April 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, .
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, .
@@ -817,20 +876,24 @@
.
[RFC7895] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG Module
Library", RFC 7895, DOI 10.17487/RFC7895, June 2016,
.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
.
+ [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
+ 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
+ May 2017, .
+
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, .
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
.
@@ -847,26 +910,26 @@
isis-yang-isis-cfg-19 (work in progress), November 2017.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-device-model]
Lindem, A., Berger, L., Bogdanovic, D., and C. Hopps,
"Network Device YANG Logical Organization", draft-ietf-
rtgwg-device-model-02 (work in progress), March 2017.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-lne-model]
Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D., and X.
Liu, "YANG Model for Logical Network Elements", draft-
- ietf-rtgwg-lne-model-09 (work in progress), March 2018.
+ ietf-rtgwg-lne-model-10 (work in progress), March 2018.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-ni-model]
Berger, L., Hopps, C., Lindem, A., Bogdanovic, D., and X.
Liu, "YANG Model for Network Instances", draft-ietf-rtgwg-
- ni-model-11 (work in progress), March 2018.
+ ni-model-12 (work in progress), March 2018.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
.
@@ -878,36 +941,42 @@
Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018,
.
Appendix A. Example: Device Model with LNEs and NIs
This non-normative example demonstrates an implementation of the
device model as specified in Section 2 of
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-device-model], using both logical network elements
(LNE) and network instances (NI).
- In these examples, the character "\" is used where a line break has
+ In these examples, the character '\' is used where a line break has
been inserted for formatting reasons.
A.1. Physical Device
The data model for the physical device may be described by this YANG
library content, assuming the server supports the NMDA:
{
"ietf-yang-library:yang-library": {
"checksum": "14e2ab5dc325f6d86f743e8d3ade233f1a61a899",
"module-set": [
{
"name": "physical-device-modules",
"module": [
{
+ "name": "ietf-datastores",
+ "revision": "2018-02-14",
+ "namespace":
+ "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
+ },
+ {
"name": "iana-if-type",
"revision": "2015-06-12",
"namespace": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type"
},
{
"name": "ietf-interfaces",
"revision": "2018-02-20",
"feature": ["arbitrary-names", "pre-provisioning" ],
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
@@ -943,26 +1012,20 @@
"name": "ietf-inet-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-inet-types"
},
{
"name": "ietf-yang-types",
"revision": "2013-07-15",
"namespace":
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-types"
- },
- {
- "name": "ietf-datastores",
- "revision": "2018-02-14",
- "namespace":
- "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
}
]
}
],
"schema": [
{
"name": "physical-device-schema",
"module-set": [ "physical-device-modules" ]
}
],